Monday, May 20, 2013
Veterans Blast Shinseki For Disability Claims Backlog
WHITE HOUSE PETITION: www.MillionVetBacklog.com
End the #MillionVetBacklog & relieve Secretary Shinseki
Four years ago, both President Obama and VA Secretary Shinseki vowed to fix the VA disability claims backlog. Instead, it has increased by 2,000% — and is projected to soon reach one million veterans. A tragic milestone.
Military commanders are not allowed to fail for four years and keep their job. Nor should Secretary Shinseki. It's time for new VA leadership, and a bold vision for reform.
It is time for the White House to stop making excuses and start delivering results. Only Presidential leadership can end the #MillionVetBacklog. We urge the President to act now.
SIGN OUR WHITE HOUSE PETITION and JOIN THE MOVEMENT TO END THE #MILLIONVETBACKLOG. www.MillionVetBacklog.com
Sign up for email updates from Concerned Veterans for America, HERE: http://bit.ly/QXtuct
Stay connected...
http://www.ConcernedVeteransforAmeric...
http://www.Facebook.com/ConcernedVets...
http://www.Twitter.com/ConcernedVets
Sunday, May 19, 2013
100 Reasons Why President Obama Is NOT The Same As President Bush
1. Bush started the war in Iraq and Obama ended it.
2. Bush lowered taxes on the wealthy and Obama raised taxes on the wealthy.
3. Bush tried to give Social Security to Wall Street and Obama protected it.
4. Bush left office with a $1 trillion deficit and Obama has lowered it.
5. President Bush ignored the War in Afghanistan and Obama made it his focus.
6. Bush didn’t kill Osama Bin Laden; Obama did.
7. Bush sanctioned torture and Obama ended torture.
8. Bush opened the Gitmo prison and Obama is trying to close it.
9. Bush instituted the failed No Child Left Behind education program and Obama ended it.
10. Bush relied on military force while Obama has relied on diplomacy.
11. Bush nominated mostly men to the Supreme Court and Obama has focused on nominating women. (Bush nominated one woman, but she was totally unqualified for the position.)
12. Bush nominated white men to the Supreme Court while Obama has nominated a white woman and a Latina.
13. Bush was placed in office by a conservative-leaning Supreme Court in 2000 while Obama won each of his elections legitimately.
14. Bush took unilateral action in foreign policy while Obama has worked more with our allies.
15. Bush responded poorly to natural disasters like Katrina, while Obama has responded more than adequately to disasters like Irene and Sandy.
16. Bush detained terrorists without due process and Obama has had terrorists prosecuted successfully with due process.
17. Bush deregulated big banks and Obama reinstated some of those regulations.
18. Bush never signed an Equal Pay for women bill while Obama did. It was the first piece of legislation he signed.
19. Bush tarnished America’s reputation around the world and Obama is restoring it.
20. Bush invaded a country illegally while Obama has done no such thing.
21. Bush had a cooperative Congress for most of his administration, while Obama hasn’t.
22. Bush used fear to control the American public while Obama has not.
23. Obama instituted healthcare reform that covers millions of people; the topic was not on Bush’s agenda.
24. Obama ended ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’. President Bush continued it.
25. Obama supports marriage equality and Bush does not.
26. Bush supported anti-union policies while Obama supports unions.
27. Obama has expanded land and water conservation programs more than Bush.
28. Obama has provided generous subsides to alternative energy producers. Bush didn’t do this.
29. Obama instituted tough emissions standards for cars and factories. Bush did no such thing.
30. Obama believes in climate change and that mankind has played a big role in that change. Bush is a climate change denier.
31. Under Obama, the stock market has eclipsed 15,000 points. It never got that high under Bush.
32. Obama created the Consumer Financial Protection Agency to protect consumers from unfair banking practices. Bush allowed the banks to use unfair practices at will.
33. Obama is pursuing gun control laws in response to tragic mass shootings while Bush took a hands-off approach.
34. Obama has cut defense spending while Bush only increased it.
35. Obama is bringing clean energy to the armed forces. Bush did not.
36. Obama has created more private sector jobs than Bush did.
37. Obama is for reducing and eliminating all nuclear arsenals. Bush withdrew America from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty which is the opposite of Obama’s stance.
38. Obama supports Planned Parenthood while Bush did not.
39. Obama supports a woman’s right to choose while Bush does not.
40. Obama and Bush both support fighting the AIDS epidemic, but only Obama supports the use of condoms as part of the fight.
41. Obama hasn’t landed on an aircraft carrier to falsely declare mission accomplished. Bush did.
42. Obama has taken far less vacation days than Bush.
43. Obama has written personal checks to Americans in need. Bush never did that.
44. Obama isn’t being used as a puppet by his Vice-President. Bush kinda was.
45. Obama hasn’t used 9/11 as a political tool. Bush did that for nearly eight years.
46. Obama signed the American Recovery Act, also known as the stimulus, to save the economy. Bush chose to save the banks.
47. Obama is working to end the War in Afghanistan. Bush began the war and could have ended it sooner had he not focused on Iraq.
48. Obama did more to save the auto industry than Bush did.
49. Obama toppled Moammar Gaddafi without placing soldiers on the ground in harms way. Thousands of soldiers were killed in Bush’s quest to topple Saddam Hussein and he never got Bin Laden.
50. Obama kicked banks out of Federal Student Loans, something Bush never did.
51. Obama expanded Pell Grants for low-income students, which is another thing Bush didn’t do.
52. Obama created Race To The Top to reward states for education reform, something else Bush didn’t do.
53. Obama increased fuel efficiency standards for vehicles. Bush didn’t.
54. Obama signed a new GI bill for returning veterans. Bush didn’t.
55. Obama also expanded the budget of the Department of Veteran’s Affairs more than Bush did.
56. Obama tightened sanctions on Iran while, if Bush were still in office, America would probably be embroiled in another war in the Middle East.
57. Obama issued new EPA regulations that will cut Mercury and other toxic pollution. Bush weakened the EPA.
58. Obama signed a major overhaul of the food safety system which desperately needed it after the Bush years.
59. Obama expanded national service by tripling the size of AmeriCorps, more than Bush ever did.
60. Obama has protected more wildlife areas than Bush.
61. Under Obama, the FDA now approves of making the morning after pill available over-the-counter to women as young as 15. Bush never did that.
62. Obama is pushing to make the federal government more energy-efficient. Bush didn’t.
63. Obama cut the Reagan-era missile defense budget, something Bush never did.
64. Obama is increasing programs to combat cyber warfare more than Bush did.
65. Obama is pushing for a new space shuttle and manned mission to Mars, whereas Bush wanted to go back to the moon where we have already gone before.
66. Obama is improving school nutrition despite Republican attempts to classify pizza as a veggie.
67. Obama is encouraging a national push to get fit and eat right to cut healthcare costs and prevent diseases. Bush didn’t do that.
68. Obama has expanded hate crime protections, especially for the LGBT community, something Bush largely ignored.
69. Obama has avoided scandal despite petty attempts by the GOP to make up scandals. Bush, on the other hand, was involved in scandal after scandal.
70. Obama forced BP to quickly compensate and set up a fund for victims of the Gulf oil spills, again proving he is better than Bush at responding to disaster.
71. The Obama Administration is more transparent than the Bush Administration.
72. Obama is spearheading a movement to bring broadband internet to every corner of America, also something Bush did not do.
77. Obama’s EPA declared carbon dioxide a pollutant for the first time in American history. Bush could have done this, but didn’t.
78. Obama supports funding of stem cell research and lifted the Bush ban on the research.
79. Obama aided South Sudan in declaring their independence. Bush didn’t.
80. Obama saved Americans $4 billion dollars by ending the F-22 program. Bush didn’t.
81. Obama has aided African-American and Native American farmers, something Bush didn’t do.
82. Obama dared to slash the salaries of bailed out bank executives, whereas Bush didn’t.
83. Obama hasn’t started any wars since becoming President. Bush involved America in two of the longest wars in our history.
85. Obama has lowered taxes on the middle class more than Bush.
86. Outsourcing skyrocketed under Bush; Obama is reversing this and now jobs are coming back to America.
87. Obama has been cool under pressure while Bush was more reactionary and indecisive.
88. Obama established a credit card bill of rights to better protect card holders. Bush did no such thing.
89. Obama established the White House Council on Women and Girls. There was no such council during the Bush Administration.
90. Obama ordered financial agencies to establish Offices of Women and Minorities to promote more diverse hiring. Again, Bush didn’t.
91. Obama increased minority access to capital, thus helping minorities in ways Bush never did.
92. Obama negotiated a deal with Swiss banks to permit the US government to gain access to records of tax evaders and criminals. Meanwhile, tax evaders had a field day under Bush.
93. Obama extended benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees, which Bush never did because he is anti-LGBT.
94. Obama protected gay and lesbian partners’ visitation/healthcare decision-making rights, which Bush also never did because he is anti-LGBT.
95. Bush was a child of privilege who had every advantage that money and social position could provide. Obama was a self-made man who crafted his success from his own efforts and abilities.
96. Obama is extremely strategic in his thinking and planning and seems able to look past the immediate moment and defer gratification to achieve a greater future good. Bush had no such skills or vision.
97. Obama understands the true personal and economic costs of warfare, unlike Bush, who involved us in two wars while deeply cutting taxes.
98. The 9/11 attacks occurred under Bush’s watch, not Obama’s.
99. Obama has a Nobel Peace Prize. Bush does not.
100. Bush is a conservative Christian and his decisions and actions were largely faith-based while Obama’s decision-making has a rational, scientific basis resulting from a consideration of facts, data, and logic.
Two men, two very different presidencies. Due to Republican obstruction in the Senate and Republican control of the House, Obama has been unable to dismantle much of the Bush legacy that has nearly destroyed this country. If Obama had a cooperative Congress like Bush had, they would be even more different from each other.
In fact, it’s likely a more liberal agenda would have been pursued by the Obama Administration, meaning the country would be stronger, healthier, and better than the nightmare that reigned during the Bush years.
It will take many more years to clean up the mess conservatives left for Obama. And if Americans turn Congress blue in 2014, the clean up effort will go a whole lot quicker.
All Three GOP Manufactured Scandals Falling Apart
By Egberto Willies
To be sure, there are problems with this administration in many areas. But, sadly, those areas like “support” for the Keystone pipeline, support for some sort of austerity, however minimal, and policies in general that are not progressive enough have not been the cause of GOP ire as much as those are the things they actually support.
I have been waiting for a real assessment on the scandals. Lo and behold, Lawrence O’Donnell finally did it: The IRS scandal did not occur in this President’s administration. It occurred in 1959. As explained by O’Donnell:
I stated from the beginning that all of the current scandals (Benghazi, IRS,
AP) afflicting the President at this time have been manufactured;
manufactured through lies, deception, and misinformation by the GOP.
Most importantly, the President and many liberals have found it
expedient to accept more responsibility than is necessary in the attempt
to “stop the bleeding.” This is no different from an innocent person
pleading guilty in order to get a deterministic sentence instead of an
unknown sentence that could be more or less than warranted.
To be sure, there are problems with this administration in many areas. But, sadly, those areas like “support” for the Keystone pipeline, support for some sort of austerity, however minimal, and policies in general that are not progressive enough have not been the cause of GOP ire as much as those are the things they actually support.
I have been waiting for a real assessment on the scandals. Lo and behold, Lawrence O’Donnell finally did it: The IRS scandal did not occur in this President’s administration. It occurred in 1959. As explained by O’Donnell:
Ezra Klein did one better. In his piece “The Scandals Are Falling Apart,” he goes through the autopsy of each scandal. His basic conclusion is as follows:The law defines such groups as “civic leagues or organizations not organized for profit but operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare.” Since 1959, the IRS has been reading “exclusively” as “primarily.”
[Source]
On Tuesday, it looked like we had three possible political scandals brewing. Two days later, with much more evidence available, it doesn’t look like any of them will pan out. There’ll be more hearings, and more bad press for the Obama administration, and more demands for documents. But — and this is a key qualification — absent more revelations, the scandals that could reach high don’t seem to include any real wrongdoing, whereas the ones that include real wrongdoing don’t reach high enough.America’s corporate-controlled mainstream media continues to allow the GOP and the right wing to distract Americans. They continue to run stories that are pushed by this faction in order to have Americans dissuaded from looking at real issues that materially affect their lives. They are then able to affect their will with policies that further pilfer the middle class without any political cost.
[Source]
Saturday, May 18, 2013
World-class political nincompoopism
Posted by Jim Hightower
Listen to this Commentary
My state of Texas seems to have an inordinate share of nincompoops in public office. But it's only fair that office holders from other states be considered before deciding which one is the nincompoopiest of all.
Give credit to Pennsylvania, for example, whose GOP governor, Tom Corbett, recently scored big nincompoop points by explaining why his state ranks 49th in job creation. "Many employers," the guv grumbled, during a radio interview, "say 'we're looking for people, but we can't find anybody that has passed a drug test'." Yes, the old my-constituents-are-a-bunch-of-drug-addicts dodge! That's world-class nincompoopery. Did I mention that Tom's voter approval rating is down to 38 percent?
But compare Corbett to one of the Lone Star State's congress critters, Steve Stockman. Steve's re-election campaign has put out a bumper sticker with this uplifting thought: "If babies had guns, they wouldn't be aborted." Wow – that's two nincompoopisms in only eight words!
Still, even Steve can't hold a candle to Rep. Louie Gohmert, the mouth that never shuts. Vice-chair of a House homeland security sub-committee, Gohmert recently revealed an astonishing piece of intelligence on the terrorist threat to the US of A. Al Qaeda, he informed the whole world, has set up radical Islamist camps on the "other side" of the Texas-Mexico border. Really? No. But the Islamist alarmist proceeded to tell us that Mexican drug gangs are teaching al Qaeda infidels how to cross the border into Texas, and they're also being trained "to act like Hispanics."
Hmmm, wondered many Latinos on "this side," how does Louie think one would "act" Hispanic? Sing "La Cucaracha," drive a low-rider, dress up as landscapers?
But "think" is not part of Gohmert's shticks. Which is what puts him atop the world of political nincompoops."
Listen to this Commentary
My state of Texas seems to have an inordinate share of nincompoops in public office. But it's only fair that office holders from other states be considered before deciding which one is the nincompoopiest of all.
Give credit to Pennsylvania, for example, whose GOP governor, Tom Corbett, recently scored big nincompoop points by explaining why his state ranks 49th in job creation. "Many employers," the guv grumbled, during a radio interview, "say 'we're looking for people, but we can't find anybody that has passed a drug test'." Yes, the old my-constituents-are-a-bunch-of-drug-addicts dodge! That's world-class nincompoopery. Did I mention that Tom's voter approval rating is down to 38 percent?
But compare Corbett to one of the Lone Star State's congress critters, Steve Stockman. Steve's re-election campaign has put out a bumper sticker with this uplifting thought: "If babies had guns, they wouldn't be aborted." Wow – that's two nincompoopisms in only eight words!
Still, even Steve can't hold a candle to Rep. Louie Gohmert, the mouth that never shuts. Vice-chair of a House homeland security sub-committee, Gohmert recently revealed an astonishing piece of intelligence on the terrorist threat to the US of A. Al Qaeda, he informed the whole world, has set up radical Islamist camps on the "other side" of the Texas-Mexico border. Really? No. But the Islamist alarmist proceeded to tell us that Mexican drug gangs are teaching al Qaeda infidels how to cross the border into Texas, and they're also being trained "to act like Hispanics."
Hmmm, wondered many Latinos on "this side," how does Louie think one would "act" Hispanic? Sing "La Cucaracha," drive a low-rider, dress up as landscapers?
But "think" is not part of Gohmert's shticks. Which is what puts him atop the world of political nincompoops."
Lawrence O'Donnell reminds politicians of the real IRS scandal
House Speaker John Boehner wants to know “who’s going to jail” over the recent IRS scandal, in which agents targeted Tea Party-related groups with unequal scrutiny. A far as MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell is concerned, “That may be the single stupidest thing ever said by a Speaker of the House.”
As O’Donnell has been saying since Monday, the so-called IRS scandal is only the consequence of an older and more basic problem with the organization’s reading of the tax code–specifically, with its reading of Section 501(c)(4), which exempts social welfare groups from paying taxes.
The law defines such groups as “civic leagues or organizations not organized for profit but operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare.” Since 1959, the IRS has been reading “exclusively” as “primarily.”
“By doing that they made IRS agents judges of political activity, investigators of political activity,” O’Donnell explained in the Rewrite Thursday. “IRS agents were then forced to evaluate just how political a given 501(c)(4) organization might be. And it is very clear that if the words “Tea Party” or the name of any political party at all appears in the title of your 501(c)(4) you absolutely do not qualify for 501(c)(4) status under the law.”
Some politicians, however, still don’t seem to understand the interplay between this law and how it’s enforced.
“We must pass a law that makes it much clearer that the so-called social welfare organizations must make their priority promoting social welfare rather than engaging in politics…From my standpoint they should not have any political purpose, and I would hope we could change the law on that,” said House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi Thursday.
“Now, I don’t expect Nancy Pelosi to be watching this show,” O’Donnell said, “but someone on her large staff should have picked up what I’ve been saying about this by now, and whispered something in her ear about it.”
O’Donnell said he hopes someone at Friday’s Ways and Means Committee hearing on the IRS scandal will bring up the actual law defining 501(c)(4)s. His bet is Rep. Sander Levin (D-Mich.), older brother of Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), who has questioned the IRS about the exclusively/primarily discrepancy in the past.
Obama's record on civil liberties ‘has been worse than the Bush administration'
Guest host Mark Thompson, author David Cay Johnston, “The War Room”
contributor Brett Erlich, Ana Kasparian, and Jayar Jackson debate whether Barack
Obama’s time in office has been a “lost presidency” for protecting the civil
rights of American citizens. Kasparian says, “He was a constitutional law
professor, and his record on foreign policy and his record on civil liberties
has been a complete and utter disaster.”
Friday, May 17, 2013
Thursday, May 16, 2013
On-call shifts: The latest corporate shame
Posted by Jim Hightower
Step right up, folks, and take your chances in the Amazing New American Workplace. Constantly high unemployment! Low wages always! No employee bargaining power! A corporate paradise!
This paradise has enriched the already-rich investor elite and rewarded top executives with multimillion-dollar pay packages. It also lets corporations treat the masses of people in today's workforce like Kleenexes: Just use 'em and toss 'em – after all, they're cheap, plentiful... and disposable.
Indeed, taskmasters-in-suits have now redefined the term "hired" to mean that you're tethered to a corporation full-time, but you actually work and get paid for only the few hours a week when the boss calls.
This nefarious practice, known as "on-call shifts," is all the rage among national retail chains. Such giants as Abercrombie & Fitch, Gap, and Urban Outfitters require employees to work without set schedules and to be available to have their strings yanked at any time, day or night, even on weekends, with as little as two hours' notice.
Likewise, if customer traffic in a store is slow, retail workers who got dressed up, battled the morning commute, and reported on time, can simply be sent away after an hour or so – with no pay for their lost hours.
A recent survey of some 400 retail employees in New York City found that only 17 percent have a set schedule. Those with no set hours, also have no set income – and no life. If you're at the beck and call of the boss, what do you do with your children, how do you make a doctor's appointment, what if you're taking a class or trying to work a second job?
This shameful "on-call" practice says that the corporation owns you and that abuse of workers is a legitimate business practice in America. To help stop it, contact the Retail Action Project: www.RetailActionProject.org
Listen to this Commentary
Step right up, folks, and take your chances in the Amazing New American Workplace. Constantly high unemployment! Low wages always! No employee bargaining power! A corporate paradise!
This paradise has enriched the already-rich investor elite and rewarded top executives with multimillion-dollar pay packages. It also lets corporations treat the masses of people in today's workforce like Kleenexes: Just use 'em and toss 'em – after all, they're cheap, plentiful... and disposable.
Indeed, taskmasters-in-suits have now redefined the term "hired" to mean that you're tethered to a corporation full-time, but you actually work and get paid for only the few hours a week when the boss calls.
This nefarious practice, known as "on-call shifts," is all the rage among national retail chains. Such giants as Abercrombie & Fitch, Gap, and Urban Outfitters require employees to work without set schedules and to be available to have their strings yanked at any time, day or night, even on weekends, with as little as two hours' notice.
Likewise, if customer traffic in a store is slow, retail workers who got dressed up, battled the morning commute, and reported on time, can simply be sent away after an hour or so – with no pay for their lost hours.
A recent survey of some 400 retail employees in New York City found that only 17 percent have a set schedule. Those with no set hours, also have no set income – and no life. If you're at the beck and call of the boss, what do you do with your children, how do you make a doctor's appointment, what if you're taking a class or trying to work a second job?
This shameful "on-call" practice says that the corporation owns you and that abuse of workers is a legitimate business practice in America. To help stop it, contact the Retail Action Project: www.RetailActionProject.org
Why are homeless veterans in LA being blocked from using Brentwood land donated for their shelter?
Jon Wiener, contributing editor for The Nation, tells Current TV’s John
Fugelsang about an ACLU lawsuit involving a plot of Brentwood, Calif. land
donated to the Veterans Administration specifically to house disabled veterans
more than 100 years ago. The land is now used for a variety of purposes — the
site includes both a parking lot and a dog park —while more than 6,300 veterans
remain homeless in Los Angeles according to a Dec. 2012 Housing Department
report.
“The VA says that while they have an obligation to provide medical care for veterans, they have no obligation to provide housing even though this lawsuit is about severely mentally ill vets who are unable to get the medical treatment they need unless they’re provided with housing on site, basically,” Wiener says.
“It seems like the main reason the VA doesn’t want to house homeless vets on the Brentwood campus is that it’s a very upscale neighborhood – these are multimillion homes sort of down the block, around the corner, and in L.A. the homeowners groups have immense power.”
“The VA says that while they have an obligation to provide medical care for veterans, they have no obligation to provide housing even though this lawsuit is about severely mentally ill vets who are unable to get the medical treatment they need unless they’re provided with housing on site, basically,” Wiener says.
“It seems like the main reason the VA doesn’t want to house homeless vets on the Brentwood campus is that it’s a very upscale neighborhood – these are multimillion homes sort of down the block, around the corner, and in L.A. the homeowners groups have immense power.”
Wednesday, May 15, 2013
Tuesday, May 14, 2013
Bakersfield police seize eyewitness footage after allegedly beating a man to death
Mark Thompson, Ana Kasparian, Jayar Jackson, and The Young Turks producer Hermela Aregawi
break down the allegations that Bakersfield, CA police officers beated a man to
death, and forced witnesses to surrender recorded evidence.
Monday, May 13, 2013
Sunday, May 12, 2013
Saturday, May 11, 2013
$59,820 After Incorrect Terminal Illness Diagnosis
A judge in Montana has ordered a hospital to pay almost $60,000 to a man after incorrectly diagnosing him with brain cancer and telling him he had only a few months to live.
U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy ordered the Fort Harrison VA Medical Center to compensate Mark Templin and his family for the distress they suffered because of Dr. Patrick Morrow's "negligent failure to meet the standard of care" in delivering the 2009 diagnosis.
Molloy decided Templin should receive an award of $500 per day for the initial period of severe mental and emotional distress immediately after the diagnosis.
After being told he was going to die, Templin quit his job, sold his pickup truck, celebrated a "last" birthday, contemplated suicide and even bought a prearranged funeral service. His son-in-law also constructed a box to hold his ashes.
As Templin began to feel better, he underwent more testing that eventually revealed that he had suffered several small strokes. The judge ordered that he receive $300 per day for that time period. Including repayment for cost of the birthday party and funeral, Templin was awarded $59,820, CBS Local reported.
"It is difficult to put a price tag on the anguish of a man wrongly convinced of his impending death," Molloy wrote in his decision. "Mr. Templin lived for 148 days ... under the mistaken impression that he was dying of metastatic brain cancer."
He added: “While under the impression that he was afflicted with metastatic brain cancer, Mr. Templin wondered each day whether it would be his last.”
Templin, who's in his 70's, was given two drugs to treat brain cancer. One of those drugs was not supposed to be prescribed to stroke patients.
He also was ordered to undergo hospice care.
Sources: CBS Local, The Independent Record
Thursday, May 9, 2013
Is the US already a complete surveillance state?
Cenk Uygur, journalist David Sirota, The Guardian reporter Glenn Greenwald, and
Buzzfeed’s Michael Hastings debate how seriously Americans should take claims
that every citizen is constantly being recorded by the US government.
‘Doomsday Preppers’ Are Prepared To Take Up Arms Against The Government
It started as a joke. One night, with not much else to watch on television, I turned on “Doomsday Preppers” on the National Geographic channel. Within a few minutes, I was hooked. People aren’t really this paranoid, right? I’d heard of being prepared for things like natural disasters, but these people were extremists. And extremists have always fascinated me.
I started looking into the movement and what I found is unsettling. Speaking, of course, in general (nothing is ever universal except for change), preppers are a very secretive bunch. Estimated to be about 3 million strong (but difficult to get a solid number since they are so well hidden), they actually look down on those who agree to be on the show. They say the Preppers who go on the show only make them all look like paranoid, tinfoil hat-wearing, gun-nut bigots with anti-government ideas.
But that’s not a fair depiction at all, they exclaim. After all, they are just God-fearing, Constitution-loving, traditional marriage-favoring, guns-are-for-keeping-government-tyranny-in-check patriots!
I’ve spent months lurking in their online forums. I am of the belief that the anonymity (or at least perception of it) of the Internet lets people speak more freely than they would in person. This is certainly true in these forums. In the safety of their online community, they show their true colors.
They hate everyone who isn’t white, Christian, and a Prepper. (Because if you aren’t a prepper, you’re going to die when the “SHTF” or “shit hits the fan.”) One of the most popular topics among Preppers is what will trigger TEOTWAWKI (tee-ought-wa-kee), or “the end of the world as we know it.” (Cue R.E.M!) Some think nuclear war, some think economic collapse, others think Obama is going to declare himself dictator and mandate martial law. Whatever they think the cause will be, one thing is agreed upon: the end is near, and societal collapse is inevitable.
But that isn’t the scary part. The scary part is that these people are excited about this. They are waiting for it. They look forward to it. They see the collapse of American society as “pressing the reset button on America.” They can’t wait. Some even see themselves as Noah, warning those around them of the coming flood and telling them to prepare. I call them “Prepper Preachers.” They relish in the idea of being the survivors, the only ones left to rebuild society in their ideal. It’s a romantic notion for them.
It is this anticipation of the end of the world that makes Preppers a dangerous bunch. Combine this with the rampant rumors of Obama banning guns and black powder via executive order, and you have an angry, irrational percentage of the U.S. population that are in a near frenzy. This group is very well armed, and more than willing to use force.
My fear is that this small, well-armed group is so desperately anticipating societal unrest that they will be the ones to bring it on. Yes, I believe that there will be another Civil War in this country, and this time it will be a fight over the 2nd Amendment. There is already talk among the online Prepper community about how they will protect their guns, using phrases and terms such as “NOMI” or “not one more inch,” and “Molon Labe,” a term meaning “come and take.”
Here is the promotional trailer for Doomsday Preppers Season 2:
They are ready. Are we?
Wednesday, May 8, 2013
Fat Ass Chris Christie Had Weight Loss Surgery In February
By STEVE PEOPLES, GEOFF MULVIHILL and KATIE ZEZIMA
05/07/13 10:00 PM ET EDT
NEWARK, N.J. — Gov. Chris Christie, who once famously called himself "the healthiest fat guy you've ever seen," disclosed Tuesday he had secretly undergone weight-loss surgery, a major new step by the potential Republican presidential contender to address both his health and a political vulnerability.
The stakes are high for Christie, with medical professionals and campaign strategists alike suggesting there is no more serious barrier to his personal well-being and national ambitions than his weight.
It's not about politics, he said. It's about turning 50 and wanting to be around as his children grow up.
"This is a hell of a lot more important to me than running for president," Christie, a father of four, said at a news conference in Newark. "This is about my family's future."
Christie, who appeared thinner than he did earlier this year, said he decided around the time of his birthday in September to have the surgery and initially planned to have it done in November. But Superstorm Sandy's destruction in New Jersey pushed back the procedure until February. In the operation, a band was surgically placed around his stomach to restrict how much food he could eat.
Christie has not previously disclosed his weight, and he didn't on Tuesday. But it has been an issue throughout his political career. Comedians have often made fun of it, and in interviews with David Letterman, Oprah Winfrey, Barbara Walters and others, Christie has both joked about the issue and said solemnly that he was trying to shed pounds.
During a February appearance on "The Late Show with David Letterman," the governor pulled out a doughnut and said his girth was "fair game" for comedians.
Over the next few days, he was asked repeatedly about his weight. At one point, he said he had a plan. "Whether it's successful or not," he said, "you'll all be able to notice."
The next day, he responded angrily to comments from a former White House physician who said she hoped he would run for president but worried about him dying in office. The governor said the doctor should "shut up."
Ten days after that, on Feb. 16, Christie had the surgery. He said the operation lasted 40 minutes and he was home the same afternoon. He was back at work on Feb. 19 for a full day of events.
Christie, who is in the midst of a re-election campaign, said he has been eating less because he hasn't been as hungry. He also has been working out with a personal trainer.
He said he had told only a few top staffers – not his communications office or campaign staff – and his communications director was caught by surprise Monday when a New York Post reporter asked directly if he'd had the procedure. The Post first reported the surgery on Tuesday. Christie said he'd used an alias at the hospital.
Christie said he never intended to make a public announcement and that he was "not going to be the guy who writes a book" about losing weight. The Republican, who has been a fixture in the national media spotlight, said the scrum of reporters at his news conference was "silly" and "ridiculous" at a time when there are other things going on.
He said he tried other ways to lose weight for years, but none seemed to work.
"It's not a career issue for me; it's a long-term health issue for me," he said.
Still, it's a way to confront a significant hurdle in his indisputable quest to emerge as a key leader in the Republican Party. He's in the top tier of those considered potential contenders for the presidential nomination in 2016.
Weeks after the surgery, Christie launched an aggressive national fundraising tour, fueling speculation that he's laying the groundwork for a White House bid.
In a country facing an obesity epidemic, more than 220,000 stomach-reducing procedures of various types are performed each year. Gastric bypass, sometimes called stomach stapling, is the most common, where surgeons shrink the stomach's size and reroute food to the small intestine. Christie had gastric band surgery. It's best known by the brand name Lap-Band, and is a less invasive alternative in which an adjustable ring is placed over the top of the stomach and tightened to restrict how much food can enter.
The adjustable Lap-Band has been available in the U.S. since 2001 for the most obese patients, and in 2011 the Food and Drug Administration expanded approval to somewhat less obese patients.
Candidates for gastric banding must have a body mass index of between 30 and 40 – plus a weight-related medical condition, such as diabetes or high blood pressure – or a BMI of 40 and higher. They also must have previously attempted to lose weight through diet and exercise.
"If you eat appropriately and chew your food, it works nicely," said Dr. Christina Li, a bariatric doctor at Sinai Hospital of Baltimore. She said Christie has the resources to have people help him eat right and get exercise. While the band is removable, she said patients are told to adjust to having it for the rest of their lives.
Li said risks include infection, and that it does not work for all patients.
Dr. Jaime Ponce, who practices in Dalton, Ga., and is president of the American Society for Metabolic & Bariatric Surgery, said people who have the procedure Christie had often lose 1 to 2 pounds per week.
Christie's procedure was performed by Dr. George Fielding, head of NYU Medical Center's Weight Management Program, who did the same procedure for New York Jets coach Rex Ryan three years ago.
"It basically teaches you how to eat like a human," Ryan said of the device in an interview last week with The Associated Press. "The Lap-Band goes: `No, no. You're only going to eat this or that,' and it trains your body how to eat right," said Ryan, who said he has lost 115 pounds from his pre-surgery weight of 348.
Few significantly overweight presidential candidates have succeeded in the modern political era, when television became a major factor in shaping voter attitudes. There are disputed reports that President William Howard Taft couldn't fit in a White House bathtub a century ago, but only a handful of presidents since have been considered obese. President Bill Clinton struggled at times with his weight, but he was substantially slimmer than the New Jersey governor.
"This has nothing to do with politics," said Christie adviser Bill Palatucci. "He said that he's doing this for his family and that's the right reason."
Backers publicly argue that Christie answered any questions about his weight's political impact in 2009, when he beat Gov. Jon Corzine despite the Democrat's reference in an ad to Christie "throwing his weight around" to get out of traffic tickets. Supporters say Christie's openness about his struggle is part of an authenticity people admire in him.
The governor's allies, medical professionals and even history suggest that his weight presents both practical and political problems.
"Gov. Christie's weight is an issue the same way that any candidate or official's health is an issue," said Michael Dennehy, a New Hampshire-based Republican strategist and veteran of presidential politics. "Anyone running for president will need to comfort Americans with an overall healthy picture for their future."
Mulvihill reported from Haddonfield, N.J., and Peoples from Providence, R.I. AP Medical Writer Lauran Neergaard in Washington, AP writers Thomas Beaumont in Des Moines, Iowa, and AP Sports Writer Dennis Waszak in New York contributed to this report.
Chris Christie, you donut eating fat tub of lard, no amount of surgery will get rid of that spare tire that you are carrying around your waist. I find your 30 chins terrible to behold. dlevere.
NEWARK, N.J. — Gov. Chris Christie, who once famously called himself "the healthiest fat guy you've ever seen," disclosed Tuesday he had secretly undergone weight-loss surgery, a major new step by the potential Republican presidential contender to address both his health and a political vulnerability.
The stakes are high for Christie, with medical professionals and campaign strategists alike suggesting there is no more serious barrier to his personal well-being and national ambitions than his weight.
It's not about politics, he said. It's about turning 50 and wanting to be around as his children grow up.
"This is a hell of a lot more important to me than running for president," Christie, a father of four, said at a news conference in Newark. "This is about my family's future."
Christie, who appeared thinner than he did earlier this year, said he decided around the time of his birthday in September to have the surgery and initially planned to have it done in November. But Superstorm Sandy's destruction in New Jersey pushed back the procedure until February. In the operation, a band was surgically placed around his stomach to restrict how much food he could eat.
Christie has not previously disclosed his weight, and he didn't on Tuesday. But it has been an issue throughout his political career. Comedians have often made fun of it, and in interviews with David Letterman, Oprah Winfrey, Barbara Walters and others, Christie has both joked about the issue and said solemnly that he was trying to shed pounds.
During a February appearance on "The Late Show with David Letterman," the governor pulled out a doughnut and said his girth was "fair game" for comedians.
Over the next few days, he was asked repeatedly about his weight. At one point, he said he had a plan. "Whether it's successful or not," he said, "you'll all be able to notice."
The next day, he responded angrily to comments from a former White House physician who said she hoped he would run for president but worried about him dying in office. The governor said the doctor should "shut up."
Ten days after that, on Feb. 16, Christie had the surgery. He said the operation lasted 40 minutes and he was home the same afternoon. He was back at work on Feb. 19 for a full day of events.
Christie, who is in the midst of a re-election campaign, said he has been eating less because he hasn't been as hungry. He also has been working out with a personal trainer.
He said he had told only a few top staffers – not his communications office or campaign staff – and his communications director was caught by surprise Monday when a New York Post reporter asked directly if he'd had the procedure. The Post first reported the surgery on Tuesday. Christie said he'd used an alias at the hospital.
Christie said he never intended to make a public announcement and that he was "not going to be the guy who writes a book" about losing weight. The Republican, who has been a fixture in the national media spotlight, said the scrum of reporters at his news conference was "silly" and "ridiculous" at a time when there are other things going on.
He said he tried other ways to lose weight for years, but none seemed to work.
"It's not a career issue for me; it's a long-term health issue for me," he said.
Still, it's a way to confront a significant hurdle in his indisputable quest to emerge as a key leader in the Republican Party. He's in the top tier of those considered potential contenders for the presidential nomination in 2016.
Weeks after the surgery, Christie launched an aggressive national fundraising tour, fueling speculation that he's laying the groundwork for a White House bid.
In a country facing an obesity epidemic, more than 220,000 stomach-reducing procedures of various types are performed each year. Gastric bypass, sometimes called stomach stapling, is the most common, where surgeons shrink the stomach's size and reroute food to the small intestine. Christie had gastric band surgery. It's best known by the brand name Lap-Band, and is a less invasive alternative in which an adjustable ring is placed over the top of the stomach and tightened to restrict how much food can enter.
The adjustable Lap-Band has been available in the U.S. since 2001 for the most obese patients, and in 2011 the Food and Drug Administration expanded approval to somewhat less obese patients.
Candidates for gastric banding must have a body mass index of between 30 and 40 – plus a weight-related medical condition, such as diabetes or high blood pressure – or a BMI of 40 and higher. They also must have previously attempted to lose weight through diet and exercise.
"If you eat appropriately and chew your food, it works nicely," said Dr. Christina Li, a bariatric doctor at Sinai Hospital of Baltimore. She said Christie has the resources to have people help him eat right and get exercise. While the band is removable, she said patients are told to adjust to having it for the rest of their lives.
Li said risks include infection, and that it does not work for all patients.
Dr. Jaime Ponce, who practices in Dalton, Ga., and is president of the American Society for Metabolic & Bariatric Surgery, said people who have the procedure Christie had often lose 1 to 2 pounds per week.
Christie's procedure was performed by Dr. George Fielding, head of NYU Medical Center's Weight Management Program, who did the same procedure for New York Jets coach Rex Ryan three years ago.
"It basically teaches you how to eat like a human," Ryan said of the device in an interview last week with The Associated Press. "The Lap-Band goes: `No, no. You're only going to eat this or that,' and it trains your body how to eat right," said Ryan, who said he has lost 115 pounds from his pre-surgery weight of 348.
Few significantly overweight presidential candidates have succeeded in the modern political era, when television became a major factor in shaping voter attitudes. There are disputed reports that President William Howard Taft couldn't fit in a White House bathtub a century ago, but only a handful of presidents since have been considered obese. President Bill Clinton struggled at times with his weight, but he was substantially slimmer than the New Jersey governor.
"This has nothing to do with politics," said Christie adviser Bill Palatucci. "He said that he's doing this for his family and that's the right reason."
Backers publicly argue that Christie answered any questions about his weight's political impact in 2009, when he beat Gov. Jon Corzine despite the Democrat's reference in an ad to Christie "throwing his weight around" to get out of traffic tickets. Supporters say Christie's openness about his struggle is part of an authenticity people admire in him.
The governor's allies, medical professionals and even history suggest that his weight presents both practical and political problems.
"Gov. Christie's weight is an issue the same way that any candidate or official's health is an issue," said Michael Dennehy, a New Hampshire-based Republican strategist and veteran of presidential politics. "Anyone running for president will need to comfort Americans with an overall healthy picture for their future."
Mulvihill reported from Haddonfield, N.J., and Peoples from Providence, R.I. AP Medical Writer Lauran Neergaard in Washington, AP writers Thomas Beaumont in Des Moines, Iowa, and AP Sports Writer Dennis Waszak in New York contributed to this report.
Chris Christie, you donut eating fat tub of lard, no amount of surgery will get rid of that spare tire that you are carrying around your waist. I find your 30 chins terrible to behold. dlevere.
Saturday, May 4, 2013
Boycotts Against Rush Limbaugh Thriving – Clear Channel Hit With Millions In Losses
Clear Channel, the parent company of nationally boycotted radio host, Rush Limbaugh, is feeling the Bain – I mean the pain. Yesterday after the stock market closed, the media giant released its 1st quarter earnings report, showing a tremendous loss.
Pittman and Sykes would have to be living in another world to miss the massive public outrage against Rush Limbaugh’s show: Especially after Limbaugh called then unknown,college student, Sandra Fluke, a ‘slut’ and ‘prostitute’ when she was advocating for insurance-paid birth control. (See Limbaugh’s attack on Sandra Fluke at the bottom of this story)
Since Clear Channel and the FCC, have opted to ignore the general public, as well as Limbaugh’s hate speech, Americans decided to take matters into their own hands, using their greatest weapon of all – the almighty dollar. They would go after Limbaugh and Clear Channel’s main lifeline. The buying consumers went after the sponsors.
Petitions were started by single citizens, as well as large activist organizations. Boycott groups evolved all over Facebook, and a Rush Limbaugh sponsor StopRush Database, was created for the average person to find contact information and air dates of sponsors. Even a ThinkContext browser app/extension is now available to see sponsoring companies, while searching the internet. It’s massive. And it has much to do with the hard work of radio monitors and reporters who track ads on Rush Limbaugh shows throughout the country. Women’s rights organization, UniteWomen.org, and large progressive sites like Daily Kos, AddictingInfo.org, Being Liberal, and Media Matters have fully supported and helped the movement.
At first, about 100 sponsors left after the Sandra Fluke attack. Then a few more left. Some like Angie’s List and Legal Zoom went back to Limbaugh’s show probably thinking the public outcry would die down and people would move on. Instead, the national movement grew and gained in momentum. Everyday citizens, as well as activists, continue to join Facebook groups like Boycott-Rush-Limbaughs-Sponsors-to-SHUT-HIM-DOWN (which now has 54,000+ followers) and Flush Rush. Consumers are taking time to tell sponsors they will not buy from a company that supports Rush Limbaugh.
Sponsors react to that, and over 2,600 companies have pulled their ads due to the boycotts and petitions. Hundreds of more advertisers silently have slipped out. Now we see big losses for Clear Channel. Cumulus Radio has already admitted to losing millions due to the Limbaugh boycotts. It’s doubtful Clear Channel will admit it, but the proof is in the pudding, I mean earnings.
Not only is it clear to Clear Channel and Rush Limbaugh, that the public means business, they are finding out the public IS business.
(The author, Leslie Salzillo, is a political commentator, activist, diarist, and a visual artist. She writes diaries in Daily Kos and began contributing to AddictingInfo.org in March 2013)
Wall Street Journal, May 3, 2012: CC Clear Channel …reported a loss of $203 million, versus a year-ago loss of $143.6 million. (The Limbaugh boycotts began last year in the first quarter) Revenue fell 1.3% to $1.34 billion. Revenue from media and entertainment, the company’s largest segment, was down 2.2%, Operating expenses dropped 3.5%.This is very bad news for Clear Channel CEO, Bob Pitman, and President, John Sykes. Surely while frolicking among their good will charities, taking in high salaries, and handing out massive Clear Channel employee layoffs, they saw this coming.Yet they allowed blatant racism, sexism, gay-hatred and bigotry to air on their 600 radio stations. I wonder if all the liberal friends of Pittman and Sikes know the two Clear Channel execs oversee right-wing extreme hate radio with not only Rush Limbaugh, but also Glenn Beck and Shaun Hannity. And I wonder if the hundreds of artists like Justin Timerberlake, Elton John, Pink, Taylor Swift, Greeday, Band Perry… know that, through Limgbauh’s ‘all American’ sister company, iheart radio/iheart Festivals, they are indirectly helping to support Limbaugh’s hate and lies? I would bet those artists don’t know.
Clear Channel Media, is the vehicle used by private-equity firms Bain Capital LLC.
Pittman and Sykes would have to be living in another world to miss the massive public outrage against Rush Limbaugh’s show: Especially after Limbaugh called then unknown,college student, Sandra Fluke, a ‘slut’ and ‘prostitute’ when she was advocating for insurance-paid birth control. (See Limbaugh’s attack on Sandra Fluke at the bottom of this story)
(Sandra Fluke/Planned Parenthood)
Since Clear Channel and the FCC, have opted to ignore the general public, as well as Limbaugh’s hate speech, Americans decided to take matters into their own hands, using their greatest weapon of all – the almighty dollar. They would go after Limbaugh and Clear Channel’s main lifeline. The buying consumers went after the sponsors.
Petitions were started by single citizens, as well as large activist organizations. Boycott groups evolved all over Facebook, and a Rush Limbaugh sponsor StopRush Database, was created for the average person to find contact information and air dates of sponsors. Even a ThinkContext browser app/extension is now available to see sponsoring companies, while searching the internet. It’s massive. And it has much to do with the hard work of radio monitors and reporters who track ads on Rush Limbaugh shows throughout the country. Women’s rights organization, UniteWomen.org, and large progressive sites like Daily Kos, AddictingInfo.org, Being Liberal, and Media Matters have fully supported and helped the movement.
At first, about 100 sponsors left after the Sandra Fluke attack. Then a few more left. Some like Angie’s List and Legal Zoom went back to Limbaugh’s show probably thinking the public outcry would die down and people would move on. Instead, the national movement grew and gained in momentum. Everyday citizens, as well as activists, continue to join Facebook groups like Boycott-Rush-Limbaughs-Sponsors-to-SHUT-HIM-DOWN (which now has 54,000+ followers) and Flush Rush. Consumers are taking time to tell sponsors they will not buy from a company that supports Rush Limbaugh.
Sponsors react to that, and over 2,600 companies have pulled their ads due to the boycotts and petitions. Hundreds of more advertisers silently have slipped out. Now we see big losses for Clear Channel. Cumulus Radio has already admitted to losing millions due to the Limbaugh boycotts. It’s doubtful Clear Channel will admit it, but the proof is in the pudding, I mean earnings.
Not only is it clear to Clear Channel and Rush Limbaugh, that the public means business, they are finding out the public IS business.
Thank You, Richard Myers. We Are Finishing This. Rest In Peace.To Get Involved In The Anti-Rush Limbaugh movements (in addition to the links above): http://www.dailykos.com/…
And/or you can sign this Petition To Clear Channel & Limbaugh Sponsors
Video from Think Progress
(The author, Leslie Salzillo, is a political commentator, activist, diarist, and a visual artist. She writes diaries in Daily Kos and began contributing to AddictingInfo.org in March 2013)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)