question: is your four-legged friend a family member?
Posted by Michelle Moquin on February 22nd, 2011
Answer: Then treat her or him like one! And if you’re not so kind to your family, well…I’m not gonna go there…but at least be kind to your pet. After all you may not have unconditional love for your family, but your pet has unconditional love for you, and deserves the best.
Good morning!
Josie: This one’s for you, and everyone else who loves their furry feline and
For many dog and cat owners, the continuing problem of widespread pet food recalls is cause for concern.
And I certainly agree the deadly contaminants turning up in commercial pet food formulas present a significant, immediate danger to your dog’s health.
But it is my belief the substandard ingredients found in the majority of affordable pet foods present an important, if longer-term threat to your beloved dog’s health as well.
It takes research and practice to make sense of pet food nutrition labels. Whether or not it’s deliberate, pet food companies seem to go out of their way to make ingredient labels confusing and even misleading.
Actual Product Label Comparison of a High Quality and a Poor Quality Dog Food
Raw, Sold Frozen
‘Premium’ Dry Dog Food
Guaranteed Analysis (as fed)
Guaranteed Analysis
Protein (not less than)
12%
Crude Protein (min)
25%
Fat (not less than)
8%
Crude Fat (min)
10%
Moisture (not more than)
71%
Moisture (max)
14%
Carbohydrate (not less than)
3.5%
Carbohydrate
??
Fiber (not more than)
0.5%
Crude Fiber (max)
4%
Ingredients
Ingredients
Free-Range Meat = 69%
chicken meat including bone, chicken gizzards, chicken hearts and chicken livers
Organic Vegetables = 29.3%
carrots, squash, yams, zucchini, celery, romaine, parsley, apple cider vinegar
Special Nutrient Mix = 1.7%
kelp, sea salt, inulin, zinc, copper and iron amino acid chelates, vitamin E
Ground yellow corn, corn gluten meal, whole wheat flour, animal fat preserved with mixed-tocopherols (form of Vitamin E), soy protein concentrate, soy flour, water, rice flour, pearled barley, sugar, tricalcium phosphate, propylene glycol, animal digest, dicalcium phosphate, salt, phosphoric acid, sorbic acid (a preservative), calcium carbonate, potassium chloride, L-Lysine monohydrochloride, dried spinach, dried apples, dried sweet potatoes, choline chloride, calcium propionate (a preservative), added color (Red 40, Yellow 5, Blue 2, Yellow 6), Vitamin E supplement, zinc sulfate, ferrous sulfate, manganese sulfate, niacin, Vitamin A supplement, copper sulfate, Vitamin B-12 supplement, DL-Methionine, calcium pantothenate, thiamine mononitrate, garlic oil, pyridoxine hydrochloride, riboflavin supplement, Vitamin D-3 supplement, calcium iodate, menadione sodium bisulfite complex (source of Vitamin K activity), folic acid, biotin, sodium selenite
As you can see, at first glance the guaranteed analysis doesn’t tell much of a story. The actual ingredients, and the order in which they appear, gives a better picture of the difference in quality of the two foods.
Noteworthy on the guaranteed analysis comparison, however, are a few items:
- The lack of carbohydrate content of the dry food. This is important information to have, because your dog has no biological requirement for carbs (notice the carb content of the raw food is less than four percent). Food with a high carb content is therefore not species-appropriate for your carnivorous canine. Chances are the carbs in the food are displacing some percentage of protein your dog’s body really needs.
- The use of the term ‘crude’ protein, fat and fiber on the dry food label. Crude can mean a lot of things. Shoe leather, for example, is a ‘crude’ protein. Bottom line: there’s no way to determine how much of an ingredient categorized as ‘crude’ is digestible or will provide nourishment to your pet’s body.
- The difference between the protein and moisture contents of the two foods. At first glance, it appears the raw food has less than half the protein of the dry food. This is misleading. It’s a comparison of apples to oranges.
In order to compare apples to apples, we need to calculate the guaranteed analysis ingredients on a dry matter basis using the following formula:
100 Percent – Percent Moisture = Percent Dry Matter (DM)
Using this formula, we can determine the percent dry matter (DM) of each food as follows:
Raw food has 71% moisture
100% – 71% = 29%
The raw food is 29% DM
Dry food has 14% moisture
100% – 14% = 86%
The dry food is 86% DM
Now that we know the dry matter content of each food, we can compare the true protein amounts with this formula:
Percent Protein / Percent DM = Percent Protein on a DM Basis
Using this formula, we can determine the percent protein of each food as follows:
Raw food: 12% protein, 29% DM
12% / 29% = 41%
Raw food has 41% DM protein
Dry food: 25% protein, 86% DM
25% / 86% = 29%
Dry food has 29% DM protein
You can use the same calculations to compare the other guaranteed analysis ingredients on a DM basis as follows:
Raw food: 8% fat
8% / 29% = 28%
Raw food has 28% DM fat
Dry food: 10% fat
10% / 86% = 12%
Dry food has 12% DM fat
Raw food: .5% fiber
.5% / 29% = .02%
Raw food has .02% DM fiber
Dry food: 4% fiber
4% / 86% = .05% fiber
Dry food has .05% DM fiber
As you can see by this apples-to-apples comparison, the raw food has significantly higher percentages of the three most important pet food ingredients: protein, fat, and moisture.
A Few Things You WANT to See on a Dog Food Label
- Human grade (USDA approved) ingredients. This can be a tricky area, because the Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO) has very effectively prohibited the use of the term ‘human grade’ on pet food packaging. As a result, very few pet food labels contain the phrase. According to TheBark.com:
AAFCO says “human-grade” is false and misleading, and constitutes misbranding, unless every ingredient in the product-and every processing method-meets FDA and USDA requirements for producing, processing and transporting foods suitable for consumption by humans, and every producer of the ingredients is licensed to perform those tasks. Few pet food companies can meet these criteria.
What you want to find out is whether the ingredients in the brand you buy are fit for human consumption. Despite the fact manufacturers can’t list ‘human grade’ on the ingredient panel, if they are using ingredients fit for human consumption, you’ll know by the information provided on the bag, as well as their marketing materials. The company will want you to know why their food is more expensive.
The better the brand (and higher the cost), the more likely it is the ingredients are human grade. If all else fails, you can visit the manufacturer’s website or call their toll free number to get your questions answered.
Even better is if the protein source is either free-range or pasture-raised and hasn’t been shot full of hormones and antibiotics.
- A whole food protein source at the top of the list of ingredients. The key here is to look for named meat, typically one-word descriptions of the protein in the formula, for example: beef, turkey, lamb, chicken, etc. Avoid any product with non-specific descriptions like ‘animal,’ ‘meat’ or ‘poultry.’
Most commercial pet foods also contain meat meal, which is fine as a secondary ingredient to a whole food protein source. Meal consists of meat with the moisture removed, with or without bones and has the right calcium/phosphorus balance. Like the primary whole food protein source, meal should be from a named, specific meat.
- Grain-free. Your carnivorous pooch has no biologic requirement for grains. Many grain-free formulas use potatoes instead, but potatoes or other starches should not be added in excess simply to offset meat content.
- AAFCO guarantee. AAFCO has established minimum standards for complete and balanced pet nutrition. Most of us concerned with animal health realize there’s room for improvement in the AAFCO guidelines. However, you can be reasonably sure a pet food meeting those guidelines will provide all the elements of nutrition your dog needs to sustain life. A formula without AAFCO certification will likely be deficient as a sole source of nutrition for your pet.
… And a Few Things You DON’T
- Meat by-products, digest. Meat by-products, especially those not specified as a certain kind of meat (chicken, beef, turkey, etc.), contain unsavory ingredients ground into the mix during processing like beaks, feathers, feet, hooves, hair, entrails – even tumors. The exception would be by-products derived from human grade organ meats like liver and kidney.
- Poor quality, incomplete proteins. These include corn gluten meal, wheat gluten meal, rice protein concentrate and soy protein.
- Formulas containing corn or soy. Corn is a cheap filler ingredient with no nutritional value. It is also a known allergenic. Soy is estrogenic and can wreak havoc on your dog’s endocrine system.
- BHT, BHA, ethoxyquin, propyl gallate. These are all artificial preservatives. Ethoxyquin is banned from use in human foods, but is used to preserve the fish meal found in many pet food formulas. You won’t find it on your pet food label because it is added before the fish meal arrives at the manufacturing facility. When considering dog foods containing fish, look for written manufacturer assurance on the label or web site that the fish meal does not contain ethoxyquin. Otherwise, assume that it does or contact the manufacturer directly to inquire.
Look for foods preserved with vitamins C and E, also called tocopherols.
- Artificial colors, flavors, sugars, sweeteners or propylene glycol.
How to Avoid Contaminated and Poor Quality Pet Food
The very best nutrition you can feed your dog won’t be found in a bag or can of processed food.
As I discussed in 13 Pet Foods – Ranked from Great to Disastrous, your best bet is to feed your dog a balanced, raw, species-appropriate, homemade diet. It’s really the only way to exercise complete control over what your pup eats.
If you’re tired of worrying about the next pet food recall and sick of trying to understand confusing pet food labels, maybe it’s time to consider making your dog’s meals from scratch right in your own kitchen. If so, I’ve co-authored a cookbook you should find useful,Real Food for Healthy Dogs and Cats.
This book explains how to buy and prepare fresh foods in quantity, and it also contains recipes – both raw and cooked – so you can fix worry-free, ultra-healthy meals for your favorite four-legged family member.
…………….
Readers: The banter’s been good. Keep it comin’….
PEACE OUT
Lastly, greed over a great story is surfacing from my “loyal”(?) readers. With all this back and forth about who owns what, that appears on my blog, let me reiterate that all material posted on my blog becomes the sole property of my blog. If you want to reserve any proprietary rights don’t post it to my blog. I will prominently display this caveat on my blog from now on to remind those who may have forgotten this notice.
Gratefully your blog host,
michelle
Aka BABE: We all know what this means by now :)
If you love my blog and my writes, please make a donation via PayPal, credit card, or e-check, please click the “Donate” button below. (Please only donations from those readers within the United States. – International readers please see my “Donate” page)
February 22nd, 2011 at 8:25 am
LUUUUCY!!! Such a love!
Michelle, such a nice response to your post yesterday, eh?! I matters not the approach, it matters that you continue. It has been shown, you matter, as if that was ever in question! Your words and blog are helping to give strength to revolutions throughout the world. One never knows the impact on the world one truly gives. The ripples of life continue throughout the universe, so continue being that change you wish to see in the world.
@ Lill, I have sung at 3 weddings in my life, one of which was my own, and another I sang an original song! I always enjoy doing that, and FREE FOOD! Another perk I always enjoy! ;-) Ah, the little things in life…
February 22nd, 2011 at 8:55 am
Chewing Gum Makes You Smarter
David Grotto, RD, LDN
Nutrition Housecall, LLC
We all know to eat a healthy diet, but some brain-boosting foods may surprise you…
BRAIN BOOSTERS
Chewing gum. OK, it’s not exactly a food, but it’s more than just something to keep your mouth occupied.
Researchers at Northwestern University found that people who chew gum have increased blood flow to the brain — and a corresponding increase in cognitive performance.
People who chew gum also report a reduction in stress, which protects brain cells from stress-related hormones.
Recommended: Chew gum when you are stressed or have challenging mental work to do. Opt for sugarless.
Frozen berries.
Raspberries, blueberries and strawberries are among the best sources of brain-protecting antioxidants.
Researchers at the Jean Mayer USDA Human Nutrition Research Center on Aging at Tufts University found that animals given blueberries showed virtually no evidence in the brain of the cell-damaging effects of free radicals — and they did better on cognitive tests.
Frozen berries typically contain more antioxidants than fresh berries because they’re picked and processed at the peak of ripeness.
Recommended: One-and-a-half cups of frozen or fresh berries at least two to three times a week. Darker berries contain the most antioxidants.
Turmeric. It’s one of the most potent anti-inflammatory spices. People who eat turmeric several times a week can have significant drops in C-reactive protein, a substance that indicates inflammation in the brain and other tissues.
A study that looked at more than 1,000 participants (average age 68.9) found that those who often or occasionally ate turmeric performed better on mental-status evaluations than those who rarely or never ate it.
Recommended: Add at least one-quarter teaspoon of turmeric to recipes several times a week. (Turmeric is one of the spices in curry.)
Hazelnuts. These contain the highest concentration of folate of all the tree nuts (including walnuts, almonds and pecans).
Low levels of folate have been associated with poor cognition and depression. Other foods rich in folate include spinach, beans, oranges, avocados and wheat germ.
Recommended: A handful of hazelnuts several times a week.
Cilantro. This herb, also known as coriander and Chinese parsley, has long been used in Iranian folk medicine for stress relief.
Stress has been linked to a speeding up of the aging process of the brain. Modern research also has revealed the benefits of cilantro — an animal study demonstrated that cilantro eased stress.
Recommended: One tablespoon of fresh cilantro several times a week. It’s often used in salsa and guacamole and to top tacos, chili, stews and soups.
THREE “GOOD” VICES
You may have heard that certain “bad foods,” such as coffee, red wine and chocolate, are good for the heart. They also are good for the brain…
Coffee. A Finnish study of more than 1,400 participants found that regular coffee drinkers were less likely to develop dementia than those who didn’t drink coffee.
Those who drank moderate amounts of coffee in midlife (three to five cups daily) had the lowest risk, probably because the antioxidants in coffee inhibit age-related brain damage.
The caffeine in coffee — a five-ounce serving of coffee typically contains 30 milligrams (mg) to 150 mg, depending on how it is prepared — also improves mental abilities.
Studies of university students have shown that when students drink coffee before a test, they score higher than when they abstain.
Recommended: One to three cups daily. If coffee gives you the jitters, try green tea, which also is good for the brain but has slightly less caffeine.
Red wine. Red wine contains resveratrol, a polyphenol, that helps prevent inflammation and oxidation of brain tissue.
People who drink moderate amounts of red wine have lower risks for stroke and dementia.
Laboratory studies indicate that red wine can reduce the accumulation of beta-amyloid, the substance found in the brains of Alzheimer’s patients. (In a healthy brain, beta-amyloid is broken down and eliminated.)
White wine also contains polyphenols but in lower concentrations than reds.
Recommended: Up to two glasses of wine daily for men and one glass daily for women. Moderation is important because too much alcohol has been linked to increased risk for dementia.
Alcohol-free option: Concord grape juice. Some studies suggest that it may be just as healthy as red wine when it comes to improvement in cognitive skills. Aim for one cup a day.
Chocolate. The cocoa flavonols in chocolate inhibit free radicals. Flavonols also relax the linings of blood vessels. This helps reduce high blood pressure, a leading cause of dementia.
One study, conducted at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, found that participants who drank one cup of high-flavonol cocoa daily had, after two weeks, an average increase in brain circulation of about one-third.
Chocolates with a high percentage of cocoa don’t necessarily have a high concentration of flavonols — processing techniques can destroy the protective compounds.
Recommended: Look for products that advertise a high flavonol content on the label (60% to 85%). One ounce is enough to get the benefits without unnecessary sugar and calories.
DON’T FORGET FISH
You probably have heard that fish is “brain food,” but we couldn’t do a brain-boosting article without mentioning it.
A study of 3,660 adults age 65 and older found that those who ate omega-3-rich fish three times a week or more were 25% less likely to have silent infarcts, blockages in blood vessels that can cause dementia.
Bottom Line/Personal interviewed David Grotto, RD, LDN, registered dietitian and founder and president of Nutrition Housecall, LLC, a consulting firm that provides nutrition communications, lecturing and consulting services along with personalized, at-home dietary services, Chicago.
He is advisory board chair for the Produce for Kids and PBS Kids health initiatives and author of 101 Optimal Life Foods (Bantam).
February 22nd, 2011 at 9:43 am
Any man might consider himself very fortunate to be loved by a lady who spoke the language of goddesses and could find her way among the stars
February 22nd, 2011 at 9:47 am
Howie:
Great post.
Thanks for the info. I signed.
Renee
February 22nd, 2011 at 12:45 pm
Hi Mischa, love this…I get accused of spoiling ‘that dog’ – why, I cook for you all, why shouldn’t my girlie dog get the best, too. I give her protein food, it’s special and has glucosamine in it, no crude protein bc I hate ‘parts is parts’ protein, nope…I made all her food for years based on a recipe you gave me, would love to return to that soon, she’s getting older and I think it’s in her best interests to do that so I know exactly what’s in there.
Rani & Doug, Kurzwell is one interesting individual, more fun to watch on Ted.com though, not quite so monotine as his youtube vid.
Alycedale, I was with you for a while but you left a few things undefined and I think it is much to the female detriment that you did, just my opinion, those definitions are: a woman who thinks ‘like a man’ firstly let’s take a look at what that means as opposed to immediately taking offense to it. men (not all and just generally speaking, which is all we can do here, out of the millions of males on the planet there are sure to be differences but overall, is this enough of a disclaimer, good….let’s move on) tend to think in a pragmatic (def: realistic, balanced in practicality way, mostly bc they must, women really run a lot of the show they jusyt don’t readily admit that, ever) that is NOT too say women don’t, some do, though often they invoke more emotion into their pragmatism (this is NOT a bad thing, it just is, we women are more intuitive regarding the affect of our words on others and tend to want to state things in a way that will get through as opposed to a pragmatic blurt session which males sometimes do indulge in)
- to make a point, and your choice of words is interesting as well, you state that – I’m paraphrasing – women ‘when they get shrill, men are put off by the words, just words…’ and then you equate such shrillness to entering a first grade class and being booed, what’s to be intimidated by men…? Hhmm, that’s where you lost me. Shrill means ‘harshly vivid’ and high-pitched keening sound, why would you want that word to have anything to do with women voicing their opinions? Anyway, the analogy of the first graders was funny, I’ll tell you why men (or women with any sense) wouldn’t want to face those words that way: first grader classes shouting anything is fucking annoying and yes, shrill…would anyone want to listen to anything at that point? I’d just want to get the hell away form the shrill noises.
You made some valid points and then you went back in and created distance to both men and women with your choice of words. Words are powerful and I think you were probably writing stream of consciousness (as I am now) so whatever, just wanted to get in my two bc I am never offended nor do I find ego gratification in male approval about my thinking or when I hear it about another person, (that they think like a man), I take that commentary in this way: that I just take a more objective and compartmentalized view overall. MOst females I know will talk long enough to get there but usually start off quite subjective and emotional (that’s NOT a put down, it just is), and it is also just an observation of mine, I like to play observer when I can. : ) and here’s my other disclaimer: Maybe I’m dead wrong… : )
Luv, Zen Lill
February 22nd, 2011 at 1:04 pm
I’d like to take back that part about how women run everything but men will never cop to it…it doesn’t apply in most parts of the world, sorry about that, and in the parts where it does women give their power back to men all the time. I don’t, not anymore, that was my younger version before I got hip to the underpinnings of male thinking ‘keep em’ insecure’ or keep em religious, either one works very well. That’s it…
Also, sorry I often speak parenthetically so much but I do and so that’s the best explanation I can offer, I make perfect sense in person : ) (I think)
About weight and acceptance – I was telling someone that I was helping a friend lose 20 lbs, both males (at different times) said, oh good luck with that, that’ll require eating only meat and veggies and 45 mionutes a day of cardio, and they were both adamant about that. wait what…? I’m not trying to vilify or deprive her, I’m trying to assist her with weight loss, so first, acceptance. YOu didn’t get 20 extra lbs overnight, so it won’t go away overnight, and you’re fine, living and bvreathing just as you are, in fact, this person dresses well and you wouldn’t find fault with her personality at all either. So love thy self bc you are more, much more than your number. Next, I cleaned out all the funkyt processed foods and went shopping and gave her a notebook, change nothing (although something will change without all that garbage in the cupboard) and just write down what you do eat for a few days/week…that’s it, oh and go for a 10 minute thinking walk everyday. So if you are just starting out today to want to lose with ‘Bella’ try just what I wrote above, soon you’ll be power walking and exercising and all that tightening up and losing, but just enough to get you feeling fit and your clothing to fit better, no skinny bitch over the top losses, no need, just be healthy, that’s it…
Luv, Zen Lill
February 22nd, 2011 at 3:29 pm
After more than a week of side stepping the issue and telling the state NAACP and others that he would not denounce the notion of recognizing the racist confederate general Nathan B. Forrest Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour, who has presidential aspirations, seems to have felt the political heat and yesterday stated for the first-time that he would veto any measure that seeks to honor General Forrest, a co-founder of the Ku Klux Klan infamous for leading his rebels in a massacre of black Union soldiers, with an official Mississippi license plate.
“The bureaucracy denied it, the legislature won’t pass it and if the legislature passes it, it won’t become law because I won’t sign it,” Barbour told the Associated Press in an interview. Up until yesterday’s statement, Barbour had steadfastly declined to take a definitive position against the proposed measure, saying he doesn’t believe in “denouncing” people.
Thanks if you signed the petition
/SB
February 22nd, 2011 at 3:35 pm
Dear MoveOn member,
Moments like these don’t come along often.
Newly-elected Tea Party governor Scott Walker thought he could slash the Wisconsin state budget and dismantle 50 years of workers’ rights without a fight, but boy was he wrong.
Hundreds of thousands of regular Wisconsinites—teachers, firefighters, police officers, students—have taken to the streets of Madison. They’ve occupied the capitol building for the last 7 days and nights.
But this isn’t just about Wisconsin. In state capitals across the country, and in Washington, D.C., Republicans are using the wrecked economy as an excuse to slash vital programs and hurt workers. The American Dream itself is under attack.
So we’re helping lead an emergency call for rallies in every state capital this Saturday at noon to support folks in Wisconsin and oppose these attacks, wherever they occur.
We have only 4 days to organize, so we’re trying something unusual—asking thousands of individuals and local groups to add their names to this call to action. Will you share the call with your personal network—plus get any groups you’re part of to sign on? Clicking here will add your name:
Start getting the word out about this Saturday’s rallies
We’re finalizing the details and we’ll get back to you to sign up soon, but we have to start spreading the word right now if Saturday is going to be huge.
Here’s the call to action:
50-State Mobilization to Save the American Dream
Calling all students, teachers, union members, workers, patriots, public servants, unemployed folks, progressives, and people of conscience:
In Wisconsin and around our country, the American Dream is under fierce attack. Instead of creating jobs, Republicans are giving tax breaks to corporations and the very rich, and then cutting funding for education, police, emergency response and vital human services. The right to organize is on the chopping block. The American Dream is slipping out of reach for more and more Americans, and we have to fight back.
We call for emergency rallies in front of every statehouse this Saturday at noon to stand in solidarity with the people of Wisconsin. Demand an end to the attacks on workers’ rights and public services across the country. Demand investment, to create decent jobs for the millions of people who desperately want to work. And demand that the rich and powerful pay their fair share.
We are all Wisconsin.
We are all Americans.
Add your endorsement and this Saturday we will stand together to save the American Dream.
Clicking below will add your name so you can start spreading the word:
http://pol.moveon.org/callforaction/o.pl?id=26218-17389115-Ym077.x&t=4
Thanks for all you do.
–Daniel, Lenore, Joan, Justin, and the rest of the team
P.S. In addition to allies like PCCC, Color of Change, CREDO Action, Democracy for America, Campaign for Community Change, National People’s Action, TrueMajority, US Action, Progressive Majority, and Courage Campaign, green jobs visionary Van Jones has joined this call to action as well. His inspiring words from The Huffington Post this morning are worth quoting:
“In the past 24 months, those of us who longed for positive change have gone from hope to heartbreak. But hope is returning to America—at last—thanks largely to the courageous stand of the heroes and heroines of Wisconsin.
Reinvigorated by the idealism and fighting spirit on display right now in America’s heartland, the movement for “hope and change” has a rare, second chance. It can renew itself and become again a national force with which to be reckoned.
Over the next hours and days, all who love this country need to do everything possible to spread the “spirit of Madison” to all 50 states. This does not mean we need to occupy 50 state capitol buildings; things elsewhere are not yet that dire. But this weekend, the best of America should rally on the steps of every statehouse in the union.”
Van’s full piece is worth reading. To check it out and pass it on, click here.
Want to support our work? We’re entirely funded by our 5 million members—no corporate contributions, no big checks from CEOs. And our tiny staff ensures that small contributions go a long way. Chip in here.
AL
February 22nd, 2011 at 4:18 pm
Michelle:
This came from info@barackobama.com ORGANIZING FOR AMERICA
KNOW ANY GOOD ORGANIZERS?
This summer, Organizing for America will train a new team of summer organizers. The Summer Organizing Fellowship is a grassroots program that aims to put boots on the ground and help foster a new generation of leaders — not just to help win elections, but to strengthen our democracy in communities across the country.
We’re reminded nearly every day of the power of organizing — of people standing up and speaking out in their communities. And that kind of effective organizing doesn’t happen in a vacuum. It takes commitment, time, and hard work to build a movement around a cause.
That’s exactly what our team of summer organizers will do.
They will be trained in the basic principles that have always built and powered effective grassroots movements, and will be assigned to a specific community where they’ll work to organize supporters street by street, neighborhood by neighborhood. They’ll recruit volunteers, run events, knock on doors, and do what it takes to support the President’s agenda. And, in the end, their work will take our grassroots power to an impressive new level.
Apply now to be a summer organizer, or pass this email along to anyone else you know who might be interested.
Folks who trained in programs like this one have gained important skills that have since helped them in careers with OFA and beyond. And they had a good time doing it.
Becca Siegel, a student at Stanford University, spent the past two summers organizing in Colorado — and she loved it. “Working as a summer organizer certainly taught me a diverse set of skills in a fast-paced environment. Each day brought new opportunities and challenges: a meeting with a local activist followed by voter registration at an outdoor concert, or a conference call with other organizers from around the country followed by volunteering at a community health clinic.”
When she graduates from college later this year, Becca will take the skills she learned at OFA to a new job in South Africa.
You don’t have to be a student, like Becca, or a recent graduate to be a summer organizer. Nikki Giancola, now a regional field director for OFA Illinois, was a middle school teacher for four years before becoming a summer organizer. “I will never forget the day the Affordable Care Act passed,” she says. “It was a feeling like no other — I had played a part in helping millions of people, and the summer organizer program gave me the chance to do so.”
Summer organizer Paras Patel had a similarly unforgettable experience — meeting President Obama at an event in Detroit. “He shook my hand and told me that he was proud of me and appreciated the work I was doing. I didn’t know what to expect when I started at OFA, but meeting the President was definitely a surprise and something I will never forget!”
Successful movements have always been built and grown by ordinary people who take responsibility for organizing their fellow citizens to make their voices heard. We’re looking for folks who are ready to work hard to support the President’s agenda and lay new groundwork to carry this movement forward for years to come.
Click here to apply for the OFA summer organizers program or pass it on to a friend — no experience is needed to apply:
http://my.barackobama.com/Summer-Organizers
Thanks for all you do,
Jeremy
Jeremy Bird
Deputy Director
Organizing for America
February 22nd, 2011 at 6:31 pm
I sorry to inform you Zen Lill but you are one of those psychologically damaged women who can never be helped.
Some recognize it in you and make non aggressive comments like “you needed a strong mother figure.”
But since I like you in every way except when your male psychosis appears I am going to be honest. Grab this if you can.
You take pleasure and pride in being compared to a man because you actually think they are better than women.
But your psychosis hides it from you and you think you can say “they think like a man), I take that commentary in this way: that I just take a more objective and compartmentalized view overall. MOst females I know will talk long enough to get there but usually start off quite subjective and emotional (that’s NOT a put down, it just is), and it is also just an observation of mine, I like to play observer when I can. : ) and here’s my other disclaimer: Maybe I’m dead wrong… : )”
No, Zen Lill that statement is not “just is.” It is a put down of women.
One men used for years to justify not allowing women to enter the sciences, be a doctor, enter politics, and (still) be President of the United States of America.
Yet, you would consider a man who runs from one bankruptcy to another and a proven womanizer as a possible candidate i.e. the Donald.
The only difference between this guy and the Sarah is that she didn’t get a $multimillion TV show to rescue her form debt.}
Women can’t be objective – ever heard of Madam Curie, Mrs. Clinton, your OBGYN, etc, etc.)
Women are just as objective as men, they just are given credit for it as often as men are. That is explainable because men always claim to be better.
Oh, and on that subjective part. Have you heard the Supreme Court justices lately?
Since when is it objective to discriminate based on race, creed, sexual preferences or gender. Things men have done since the dawn of time and still do every day. That is SUBJECTIVE thinking.
If men ACTUALLY thought more objectively the world would be a better place because a little objective thinking would tell them NOT to pollute where they have to live.
Men use SUBJECTIVE thinking to arrive at the logic that making money is more important than the lives of others; human or animal and the environment.
Perhaps if they added a little of the other thing you feel is a negative, EMOTION, they would arrive at a different conclusion.
Men are not on top because of their objective thinking, men are on top because of their willingness to use violence to settle an issue.
Men aren’t more compartmentalized than women. That is something a woman suffering from the need to be accepted by men says to justify her feeling complimented because someone says she thinks like a man.
Has it ever occurred to you that when a non male says it to you she is saying you have stupid opinions and like most men you excuse your negative behavior with callous disregard for other people’s feelings.
You do talk like a man here because you imply inferiority to “subjective and emotional” thought when conveying thought or opinions.
Men use that excuse when they come up with words like “collateral damage,” or “he was wacked,” or “extreme option.”
The republican party is full of those nice compartmentalized words that remove the emotional content of the action so as to avoid anyone associating the horrific impact upon human life the deed they are executing has.
Perhaps if men were forced to use “he was killed” rather than “he was wacked” we would not romanticize thugs in shows that feature mobsters, and other cruel behavior by the protagonist.
Let’s not compartmentalize the deed. Let’s take it through its full ramifications to the individuals and society that has to be associated with the deed.
So when a man says “I had my way with her.” The emotional horror that would have arisen had he said I raped her is avoided. Why are we giving men this out?
You again talk like a man. Being “shrill”is so terrible. So are you telling us that you would prefer the fist of a man smashing you in the head rather than the shrillness of a voice chastising you for the same action?
How quickly, like a man, you looked over the key point of my argument which was the only weapon a woman has is her voice against the strength of a man.
Notice your psychosis sent you immediately to the defense of the man. You, like the male, jumped on the “shrillness” of a woman. How TERRIBLE! She was shrill!
But the violence that the male exposes women to on a daily basis. Did you notice it was not present in your analysis.
Why, because it is indefensible. And you are about defending males. You find ways to show how fair you are to males to get their approval. So you looked over the violence and when directly to what you hear men complain about all the time, a woman’s shrillness.
To you as to a man it is a negative. Did you get the part about “if the only thing a woman had to fear from a man was his shrillness she would thank god every day?”
Zen Lill this is not going to help you. I am not a shrink and your daddy’s girl psychosis involves deep denial issues about your relationship with men.
You can not help reflexively defending men. Any statement about the negatives of men will prompt you to make a comment about how you are aware a similar situation in women.
All of your criticism was about the only weapon a woman has against the physical violence option a man has, words.
You reflexively went to the defense of the males with “words are powerful.” Yes but can you grasp violence kills.
It would be ludicrous for me to be discussing the comparison of a woman using words against a man using physical violence with anyone but a person with your psychological damage.
To you it is a valid comparison and worthy of discussing because words can hurt a man. And you reflexively defend men for their acknowledgement and approval.
Since you were lost on the first graders comparison, let me attempt to clear it up for you.
The point I was making is. Men have as much to fear from a woman’s vocal rantings as they do from the boos of a class of first graders.
Neither involves violence.
That would be the conclusion of a mentally healthy woman. But to a woman suffering from a Daddy’s Girl psychosis she can only hear the suffering of a male forced to have to listen to a woman rant.
Why, because that gives her something to defend. Her reward, the men will thank her with bouquets of “you think like a man Zen Lill, you see both sides, etc, etc.
You get the picture or you would if your were not in denial.
The comparison was between the man’s use of violence to make his point or to defuse a situation with a woman – and the woman’s use of shrillness to make her point or defuse the same situation.
An easy point to discern unless you were bent on finding a way to defend the male point of view.
Then the best thing to do is to ignore the ability and inclination of men to use violence to resolve their differences and focus on the fact that women raise their voices to resolve the same issues.
Hence the quote “I’d just want to get the hell away form the shrill noises.”
My point was whether you could escape those “shrill noises” or not, you would not be in any physical danger.
However if you were a woman in the same situation with a man the possibility of being physically assaulted is always present.
Then your quote revised would take on a whole new meaning. “I’d just want to get the hell away form the possibility of getting physically hurt.”
And that was my point. While men are worrying about getting away from an annoyance, women are fleeing for the lives.
A woman who suffers from psychological need for male approval would miss that entirely.
You did.
I hope you don’t take this too personally. It was not meant to attack you. It is only an observation to explain those women who always find a way to see the man’s point of view. You’ve heard some. i.e “yes, he smacked her but maybe she deserved it.”
Bogie, and many other male actors have made super stardom on “manhandling” women. How about calling it what it really is physically assaulting women?
Men compartmentalize and don’t use that description. If they did do you think women would consider them the “tough guys” men portray them as for beating up women.
Examine making the male lead of the Sopranos a star. His character kills people and forces women into prostitution. But hey, compartmentalize it and it’s okay.
Isn’t she so proud to be able to think like a man? My question is if she weren’t suffering from her psychosis, would she? I think not.
You contribute in so many wonderful ways to this blog. You are one of the reasons that I continue to come back. I love the way you write it is endlessly entertaining.
My only issue is when you defend men with weak stuff like – “all I can tell you is there has been a good bit of mind control used upon women here, men haven’t escaped totally either…”
Men didn’t need that defense. You did it automatically, without thought. It was another opportunity to get some approval recognition from a man. That pat on the head from daddy for being a good girl or even better daddy’s girl.
That rankles me. Otherwise you are one of my favorite entertainers on this blog. The girls who follow your tight buns routines with me probably won’t speak to me for what I have said to you.
But I hope I have not been offensive. It wasn’t my intention. I was just making an observation about your propensity to defend men when there doesn’t appear to be a valid reason for it.
Love
Alycedale
February 22nd, 2011 at 6:43 pm
Al and Howie.
You guys are wonderful!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I will sign and I will help put this boot on the ground.
Lucy
February 22nd, 2011 at 7:05 pm
7) ELDERLY
?While working for an organization that delivers lunches to elderly shut-ins, I used to take my 4-year-old daughter on my afternoon rounds.
She was unfailingly intrigued by the various appliances of old age, particularly the canes, walkers and wheelchairs.
One day I found her staring at a pair of false teeth soaking in a glass.
As I braced myself for the inevitable barrage of questions, she merely turned and whispered, ‘The tooth fairy will never believe this!’?
February 22nd, 2011 at 7:08 pm
Any woman might consider herself very fortunate to be loved by a man who wielded the power of the gods and could find his way among the stars
February 22nd, 2011 at 7:09 pm
Any woman might consider herself very fortunate to be loved by a man who wielded the power of the gods and could find his way among the stars
February 22nd, 2011 at 7:34 pm
Alycedale,
You say you have no professional qualifications to make such an assertion and analysis of Zen Lill, so why the long comment?
You do not make one bit of sense. By your own admission you have no qualifications what so ever to be making any observations about anybody.
February 22nd, 2011 at 8:25 pm
I said it first.
February 22nd, 2011 at 8:26 pm
Yeah, but I said it better.
February 22nd, 2011 at 8:26 pm
???????????????????????????
February 22nd, 2011 at 8:28 pm
I guess the military here on Guam is taking that alien talk seriously.
==========================
During this security exercise, the Navy will practice a response to multiple terrorist threats at home. The exercise will incorporate lessons learned during the bombing of the USS Cole and the Fort Hood shooting, among other incidents.
The Navy said the annual exercise, involving more than 250 scenarios, isn’t a response to a specific threat, but will help identify where its forces are vulnerable.
============================
Unless we are supposed to believe that an island of less that 90,000 needs all this security.
Hafa Adai
Brad
February 22nd, 2011 at 8:33 pm
So let me get this straight, anonymous 15. One can not make an observation unless they are a specialist in that which they are observing?
If you took the time to analyze what she was saying it was pretty logical form where I sit.
You have heard of the Daddy’s Girl syndrome, haven’t you?
Glen
February 22nd, 2011 at 8:38 pm
Anonymous 15:
I think you are over reacting. I can see the logic behind Alycedale’s premise.
I don’t think that ZL is necessarily aware of her defending males so often on this blog. But I don’t see that as a bad thing.
It appears that neither does Alycedale. She was just making an observation she noticed ZL does it a lot.
You if we knew who you were probably have your preferences too.
No sin there.
February 22nd, 2011 at 8:46 pm
Anon15
Sorry, I agree with Alycedale on this one. And why shouldn’t she be allowed to post her observation)s)?
I would think you would appreciate the long comment as it showed her assertion and analysis was not made frivolously.
ZL is a honored guest of this blog. We all love her wit and willingness to share her thoughts and help with us.
Even here in Israel her exercises and gift for gab is appreciated.
I think ZL can take it. And who needs qualifications to observe.
I have girl friends with all the traits you brought to the argument Alycedale. And they do need the approval of a man to feel special.
Ahava
February 22nd, 2011 at 8:52 pm
So what if she is? She’s still our favorite.
Maple
February 22nd, 2011 at 8:53 pm
We love you Zen Lill
February 22nd, 2011 at 8:54 pm
I like men too so what?
February 22nd, 2011 at 8:56 pm
I think some women on this blog are just jealous of the relationship Zen Lill has with the males.
just an observation
Finley
February 22nd, 2011 at 8:59 pm
Typical male response. Always trying to make something about him.
Maybe we women are just having a conversation among ourselves.
February 22nd, 2011 at 9:55 pm
Any Two might consider themselves very fortunate to be loved by each other and loved by the gods and those among the stars
February 23rd, 2011 at 6:35 am
I would be happy to just find someone who loved me for me.
February 23rd, 2011 at 6:41 am
Grass always seems greener on the other side
Through the eyes of some I meet.
But I’ve never seen eyes as green as the eyes
of my lady and she’s so very sweet.
February 23rd, 2011 at 7:00 am
Pain Relievers Linked to Hearing Loss
Sharon Curhan, MD
Harvard Medical School
Among 27,000 men who were tracked for 18 years, those age 60 and older who used acetaminophen (Tylenol) or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), such as ibuprofen (Advil) or naproxen (Aleve), two or more times weekly were 16% more likely to develop hearing loss than those who did not.
Regular aspirin users had no increased risk. Theory: Acetaminophen depletes glutathione, an antioxidant that protects the ears, and NSAIDs reduce blood flow to them.
Health interviewed Sharon Curhan, MD, clinical researcher, department of medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston.
February 23rd, 2011 at 7:07 am
I tune in after a few missed days and I find that you jealous crones are jumping on Zen Lill because she Blonde, Tall, Beautiful, and she has an intelligent conversation for men.
EAT YOUR HEARTS OUT.
Larry
February 23rd, 2011 at 7:26 am
It has been rumored here that the 13 females imprisoned to be stoned to death for infidelity have been freed.
Their whereabouts is not known. It is said that Madaline’s beef with Gaddafi is over. She has no desire to help the men of Lydia because they are some of the cruelest to their females.
I am a Libyan but I could not agree more. Our condition as women will not be any better if the men get relief. This as everything in the Middle East is about them.
Thank you for your help Madaline.
Basmah
February 23rd, 2011 at 7:34 am
Thanks Michelle, I didn’t know that buying dog food could be so complicated. Is there anything they are not poisoning for a quick profit?
Rita
February 23rd, 2011 at 8:29 am
The eyes are brown of me and mine
The blood, it still runs red
The love we share is very fine
and expansive when we’re in bed
February 23rd, 2011 at 10:21 am
Today the Obama Administration announced it won’t continue its defense of the so-called “Defense of Marriage Act” (DOMA) in court. DOMA denies federal recognition and benefits to legally married same-sex couples and purports to allow states to deny recognition to those couples as well.
“This is a monumental decision for the thousands of same-sex couples and their families who want nothing more than the same rights and dignity afforded to other married couples,” said HRC President Joe Solmonese. “As the President has stated previously, DOMA unfairly discriminates against Americans and we applaud him for fulfilling his oath to defend critical constitutional principles.”
HRC has engaged in an effort to encourage the administration to abandon its defense of the statute for years, including writing to the President directly and encouraging our members and supporters to contact the administration as well.
Under federal law, the Department of Justice must report to Congress its intent not to defend the statute and it is likely that anti-LGBT leaders in Congress will take up its defense.
“Congressional leaders must not waste another taxpayer dollar defending this patently unconstitutional law,” said Solmonese. “The federal government has no business picking and choosing which legal marriages they want to recognize. Instead Congress should take this opportunity to wipe the stain of marriage discrimination from our laws.”
DOMA, passed in 1996, denies married same-sex couples over 1,000 rights, benefits and responsibilities tied to marriage under federal law. These include Social Security survivors’ benefits, family and medical leave, equal compensation as federal employees, and immigration rights, among many others.
November 4th, 2011 at 7:49 pm
PHILOSOAPHY…
[...]Michelle Moquin's "A day in the life of…" » Blog Archive » question: is your four-legged friend a family member?[...]…
November 7th, 2011 at 5:21 am
short hair styles for men…
[...]Michelle Moquin's "A day in the life of…" » Blog Archive » question: is your four-legged friend a family member?[...]…
June 26th, 2014 at 5:33 pm
I am extremely impressed with your writing skills and also
with the layout on your weblog. Is this a paid theme or did you modify
it yourself? Either way keep up the excellent quality writing,
it is rare to see a great blog like this one nowadays.
my webpage – e functin efz503