Tony Horton - In two rounds of P90, Alicia lost 64lbs and saw her...: "Wanna see a magic trick? Behold! The disappearing woman! Seriously though. This is what 180 days on P90 did for me. The picture on the left I was 218 pounds. The picture on the right I am 154 pounds. The abs are me. The arms are me. This is all me. Strong is the new skinny and I am so happy that I am STRONG! If you want to hear about my journey, tune in to my live chat with Tony Horton today at 7pmE and 4pmP. If you have any questions, please feel free to shout out and I will be happy to answer anything I can. #itsyourturn #p90"
America. Freedom. Think the government must convict you of a crime before it can punish you for it? Think again. - The Washington Post: "Most Americans probably believe that the government must first convict you of a crime before it can impose a sentence on you for that crime. This is incorrect: When federal prosecutors throw a bunch of charges at someone but the jury convicts on only some of those charges, a federal judge can still sentence the defendant on the charges for which he was acquitted. In fact, the judge can even consider crimes for which the defendant has never been charged. Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear Jones v. U.S., a case that would have addressed the issue... Interestingly, an unlikely lineup of Supreme Court justices filed a rare dissent to the Court’s refusal to hear Jones. Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the dissent, and was joined by Justice Clarence Thomas and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg."
Also, a Kardashian marriage is probably worse for you.
My calendar is pretty much booked for the next half decade.
Vote all you want. The secret government won’t change. - Ideas - The Boston Globe: "The voters who put Barack Obama in office expected some big changes. From the NSA’s warrantless wiretapping to Guantanamo Bay to the Patriot Act, candidate Obama was a defender of civil liberties and privacy, promising a dramatically different approach from his predecessor. But six years into his administration, the Obama version of national security looks almost indistinguishable from the one he inherited. Guantanamo Bay remains open. The NSA has, if anything, become more aggressive in monitoring Americans. Drone strikes have escalated. Most recently it was reported that the same president who won a Nobel Prize in part for promoting nuclear disarmament is spending up to $1 trillion modernizing and revitalizing America’s nuclear weapons. Why did the face in the Oval Office change but the policies remain the same? Critics tend to focus on Obama himself, a leader who perhaps has shifted with politics to take a harder line. But Tufts University political scientist Michael J. Glennon has a more pessimistic answer: Obama couldn’t have changed policies much even if he tried...
Though it’s a bedrock American principle that citizens can steer their own government by electing new officials, Glennon suggests that in practice, much of our government no longer works that way. In a new book, “National Security and Double Government,” he catalogs the ways that the defense and national security apparatus is effectively self-governing, with virtually no accountability, transparency, or checks and balances of any kind. He uses the term “double government”: There’s the one we elect, and then there’s the one behind it, steering huge swaths of policy almost unchecked. Elected officials end up serving as mere cover for the real decisions made by the bureaucracy...
Glennon’s critique sounds like an outsider’s take, even a radical one. In fact, he is the quintessential insider: He was legal counsel to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a consultant to various congressional committees, as well as to the State Department. “National Security and Double Government” comes favorably blurbed by former members of the Defense Department, State Department, White House, and even the CIA. And he’s not a conspiracy theorist: Rather, he sees the problem as one of “smart, hard-working, public-spirited people acting in good faith who are responding to systemic incentives”—without any meaningful oversight to rein them in...
The presidency itself is not a top-down institution, as many people in the public believe, headed by a president who gives orders and causes the bureaucracy to click its heels and salute. National security policy actually bubbles up from within the bureaucracy. Many of the more controversial policies, from the mining of Nicaragua’s harbors to the NSA surveillance program, originated within the bureaucracy. John Kerry was not exaggerating when he said that some of those programs are “on autopilot.
IDEAS: Couldn’t Obama’s national-security decisions just result from the difference in vantage point between being a campaigner and being the commander-in-chief, responsible for 320 million lives?
GLENNON: There is an element of what you described. There is not only one explanation or one cause for the amazing continuity of American national security policy. But obviously there is something else going on when policy after policy after policy all continue virtually the same way that they were in the George W. Bush administration.
IDEAS: This isn’t how we’re taught to think of the American political system.
GLENNON: I think the American people are deluded, as Bagehot explained about the British population, that the institutions that provide the public face actually set American national security policy. They believe that when they vote for a president or member of Congress or succeed in bringing a case before the courts, that policy is going to change. Now, there are many counter-examples in which these branches do affect policy, as Bagehot predicted there would be. But the larger picture is still true—policy by and large in the national security realm is made by the concealed institutions.
DEAS: Do we have any hope of fixing the problem?
GLENNON: The ultimate problem is the pervasive political ignorance on the part of the American people. And indifference to the threat that is emerging from these concealed institutions. That is where the energy for reform has to come from: the American people. Not from government. Government is very much the problem here. The people have to take the bull by the horns. And that’s a very difficult thing to do, because the ignorance is in many ways rational. There is very little profit to be had in learning about, and being active about, problems that you can’t affect, policies that you can’t change."
Jason Momoa finally talks about being cast as Aquaman, calls Zack Snyder a genius - Batman News: "After months of having to dodge questions and give vague answers, Jason Momoa has finally opened up about being cast as Aquaman. Momoa was on a panel over the weekend at the Walker Stalker Con in Atlanta and addressed his secrecy about the role. “Listen, I was asked to play it. You know, you audition and stuff like that, but the fact is you’ve just got to keep it quiet. You know what I mean, I was just trying to respect Warner Bros. and everyone’s wishes. I’m really, really happy that I don’t have to be quiet anymore, because that’s really hard for me,” he told the crowd. "
10/20 - press, btn press/push press, seated db press, side swings, plate front raise, plate halos, side/rear lateral combo, treadmill intervals, stretch
"Forget all the fad equipment. The barbell is king, the dumbbell is queen, and everything else is a court jester."— Jim Wendler
LIFT-RUN-BANG: The Lifer Series Part 9 - I will cut off emotional leeches and vagrants: "Failures in life are not only inevitable, but a requirement for getting better. Anyone who tells you otherwise is a liar. Period. Unless you are a prodigy, everything you do in life will come with some success, and some failure. It's what you do with that failure that defines whether you get bitter, or better.
Learning how to be happy with who you are is most often about what to do with those failures. A failure could be something that steers you away from something you shouldn't have been doing in the first place. Like a job, or a relationship, or MMA fighting, or smoking crack. It may not be evident at that moment, and may not reveal itself until later, but if you dwell on the "failure" aspect of the present, instead of looking to the future, you will stay mired in the sludge and quicksand.
If you are ever to eradicate the blackness that envelopes you, you must come to terms with the fact that crawling out of the depths of it means your hands will become blistered and torn. At times the climb will be incredibly painful, and you will question if it's really worth it. However you have to focus on the goal. The goal is to climb up and rise out. Not to do so unscathed. The blisters and blood and pain is all part of the climb, not part of "failing".
Death is winning... At the end of the day, we are all inevitably carcasses on the safari planes we call life. Do the winds echo your name with a whisper of respect, dignity, strength, honesty, and integrity? Do they whisper that you were a coward, backstabber, leech, and liar? Or do they not even whisper you were here at all? Build your body to make it strong. You cannot protect or provide for anything or anyone, if you are weak and feeble. Be responsible for your decisions, and don't pass the buck. You get all of the power in regards to your own actions. No one can MAKE you feel anything. You decide that for yourself. Cut off emotional vagrants and leeches. You must learn how to let go of a hand that is attached to someone that desires the abyss. Cast out backstabbers, and liars. You have no reason to keep anyone who fits this description in your life. Most important, don't become either of the two. Stop caring what others are doing that have no matter in your life. Your own accomplishments and purpose should be at the forefront of what your energy is going into. Have specific goals in lifting and life. Your next minute or hour is not promised to you. Don't drift aimlessly in the pit of iron or in life, not knowing what you are doing. Find your purpose, accept the responsibilities that come with it, and harden the fuck up."
Dmitry Klokov is Awesome. LIFT-RUN-BANG: Montreal overview: "Dmitry was BIG on getting the muscles stronger in order to build the lifts. This had me nodding in agreement a lot. It's something I don't see a lot of powerlifters doing in their offseason when not training for a competition. That is, they are still in "build the lift" mode and not in "make the muscle bigger and stronger mode". The latter will carryover directly into the former. What's funny is, the old timers knew this but it seems to be lost on a large portion of the guys lifting today. I see guys not training for a meet still trying to hit 1 rep maxes in the gym the whole offseason. I honestly believe this is due to youtube, and I'm not even kidding. Spend your offseason trying to get bigger, and get the muscles involved with the lift stronger via reps. Not "testing". I've harped on this so many times, but it was great to hear that Dmitry had the exact same philosophy. ..
Dmitry doesn't like foam rollers. He likes to use the barbell for that. He has a bunch of ways to use the bar like most people use the foam roller. And he does this a lot. He puts the bar in the rack at waist height and then puts his low back on it, and goes up and down. Then sits on it and does hamstrings. He will lay sideways on a bench, and run the bar up and down his body. Basically, he used the barbell for all the ways most people use foam rolling. He thought foam rolling was silly when all this time you had a barbell to be doing this shit on...
On day 1 of Dmitry being there, after he was done with his Olympic stuff and the class cleared out for lecture he asked him to go train with him. Well how am I going to say no to that? So I asked him what we would do. He wanted to bench press, oddly enough. All he did was 5 sets of 12-15 at 225. Very smoothly and controlled. While we were benching, he looked around at the massive gym we were in and goes..."I don't understand all of these machines?" "You mean, you don't know how to use them or don't like them?" I said. He hesitated for a moment then said "Both." I laughed and then he said, "Everything you want to do, can be done with barbell. Just barbell. In Russia just barbell only. And everything can be done. If injured, then yes, I can see using them some that, but otherwise, barbell only...
I have too many Dmitry jokes to list. So for some of them..... I told Dmitry a joke..."what's red and bad for your teeth? A brick." He didn't laugh. The next day at lunch he looks at me and goes "I think about joke....red...brick....teeth. It's very funny. I like it...
His preferred training music is hip hop. NOT RAP. He was very adamant there was a difference in rap and hip hop."