Nano Technologies Are Here And Can Improve All Our Lives

There are incredible technologies on the very near horizon that can change the world in very dynamic ways. Everything from near free energy and energy independence at the user level, potable water from sea water at a very low energy cost, grabbing RF energy from the air and converting it to usable power, more advanced robotics and artificial intelligent with the ability to understand the abstract, which in turn can basically replace humans in most labor functions.

TED is an incredible program that we all should follow in order to save the planet and mankind. This is a clip of one TED presentation dealing with nano technology. Please watch.



However as exciting as these prospects of the near future are, there is a dark side to what is being developed. How can there be a dark side to such amazing technologies? You ask.

The dark side is that as these technologies come online, there is less need for humans to produce the product and services we all need. Therefore the demand for human labor will be very small and those who do work will have incredibly high technical and engineering skills and the scientists who continue to explore our universe. All others will be out of work.

How do all these non-employed human survive? How do they earn enough money or whatever to exchange for the goods and services they need. Some suggest that the cost of these goods and services will fall to such a low level that it will take very little money to purchase what a person needs, because the core costs to make it is so little with very long lasting, self repairing and self design improvement informatics and robotics. But still how does a person create some form of value that can be used in exchange for currency?

After all that is what employment has all been about, you perform some task of value to create a product or provide some service that can be sold for something of value, that you use in exchange for products and services you need. However if automation replaces the human value, then they are the ones of value to any enterprise, not a human.

But they don't consume at the same level as humans, so there is still demand for goods and services by humans who have no value to exchange for it. No one has an answer to this very complex problem as we are already witnessing the escalation of this dilemma in the first decade of the 21st century.

Neil DeGrasse Tyson On Religion taught in schools

 The audio is a little poor, but he is saying is very interesting.



I understand his final statement in his letter to the editor and I agree that such ignorant teacher should not be teaching a science class, but I still state that it was also a violation of the separate Church and State.

I wonder if this teacher was fired or nothing happened to her.

Intelligent Design is Stupid:

Creationists End Civilization:

 

A Brief History of Time:

Parallel Universes, Galaxies, Stars, Planets and Black Energy:  This is not the work of a God.

The universe is so massive and expansive that it is impossible to accept that a all knowing and perfect God would "CREATE" all this in our universe for what purpose, if Earth is the only planet that has humans living on it in some scheme of redemption to then return to "Heaven," the place he resides and be among him and all spirits, who are worthy, that live with him. And then there is HELL and where is that located among this vast Universe?  The Mormons claim that God live on a planet named KOLOB. But they  don't explain how KOLOB was created and when relative to the rest of the Universe and were it is out in the universe.

But if you open  you mind and watch the video with the great music compliment, you will see the incredible interactions of what we call physics and the cosmos, this in a sense living and changing so rapidly that we are only seeing what took place millions and billions of Earth years ago, and only with the most advanced technology of the last few decades. We are at the tip of the iceberg relative to your knowledge and understanding of this magnificent universe, and we know a lot. I'm too old to be around when humans finally stop killing Earth and eliminate all religions and begin the new age of enlightenment and knowledge, venturing out into this vast universe to explore this ever changing frontier, Star Trek if you will.

When you realize that our little planet Earth is but like a speck of one little grain of sand in the great Sahara sand dunes stretching across the northern African continent, then you realize how insignificant we are in that universe. However we are very significant relative to our planet. And since this is the only one we have found that can sustain human life, we better make it last longer by making it healthier for humans to live on it.

TO DO NOTHING AND THINK THAT THIS INVISIBLE GOD WILL PROVIDE AND SUSTAIN THE PLANET AS WE POLLUTE IT AND TAKE FROM IT ALL THE RESOURCES AND RICHES CONTAINED WITHIN IT FOR OUR OWN GREED BECAUSE OF SOME ANCIENT TEXT THAT SAYS WE CAN IS INSANITY.

STOP PROFIT OVER PLANET!!!

Richard Dawkins expresses dismay over slave owner ancestor story

 
Richard Dawkins has put down as 'surreal' a Sunday Telegraph article linking his ancestor with the slave trade. Photograph: Murdo Macleod

Sunday 19 February 2012

 

Evolutionary biologist and atheist calls 'surreal' Sunday Telegraph article citing 18th-century forefather

Richard Dawkins, evolutionary biologist and prominent atheist, is used to criticism from those who do not share his views on religion or the origins of mankind.

But he has expressed surprise at the latest attack, which claims the scientist faces awkward questions because some of his ancestors were slave owners.

The Sunday Telegraph reported that Henry Dawkins had amassed more than 1,000 slaves in Jamaica by the time of his death in 1744, and quoted campaigners calling on Dawkins to pay reparations.

But Dawkins hit back on his blog, describing the interview and subsequent article as "surreal".

"At the end of a week of successfully rattling cages, I was ready for yet another smear or diversionary tactic of some kind," said Dawkins, who clashed on the BBC Today programme with Giles Fraser, formerly canon chancellor of St Paul's cathedral, on Tuesday. "But in my wildest dreams I couldn't have imagined the surreal form this one was to take."

Dawkins said a reporter had called him and named a number of his ancestors who he said were slave owners.

After the reporter quoted the biblical verse about the Lord "visiting the sins of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation" Dawkins said he ended the conversation.

However, he said the reporter rang back and suggested Dawkins may have inherited a "slave supporting" gene from his distant relative.

"'You obviously need a genetics lesson,' I replied," Dawkins wrote on his blog. "Henry Dawkins was my great great great great great grandfather, so approximately one in 128 of my genes are inherited from him (that's the correct figure; in the heat of the moment on the phone, I got it wrong by a couple of powers of two)."

The article in the Sunday Telegraph went on to state that the "Dawkins family estate, consisting of 400 acres near Chipping Norton, Oxfordshire, was bought at least in part with wealth amassed through sugar plantation and slave ownership."

However, Dawkins said the estate was now a small working farm struggling to survive and "worth peanuts".
Dawkins added: "As it happens, my ancestry also boasts an unbroken line of six generations of Anglican clergymen, from the Rev William Smythies (born 1635) to his great great great grandson the Rev Edward Smythies (born 1818). I wonder if [the reporter] thinks I've inherited a gene for piety too.

"I can't help wondering at the quality of journalism which sees a scoop in attacking a man for what his five-greats grandfather did. Is there really nothing more current going on?"

The Sunday Telegraph declined to comment.

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
MY THOUGHTS:

As one can see, even in England the battle by Christians against science is showing itself in what should be objective journalism. In an attempt to discredit Mr. Dawkin by way of his ancestry from hundreds of years ago is so feeble to even be called journalism. The shear ignorance of the reporter and of the editor who approved the story printed in the Sunday Telegraph is also a prime indicator of how journalism has declined in the

Western nations since large corporations have purchased them. The objective now is not seeking the truth in an event, but to create sensationalism to draw readers and then advertising revenue for profit. Yes, of course there has always been a level of this since advertising was introduce into newspapers not long after Gutenberg created the printing press and the printers needed more revenue than what the price of the newspaper could bring in.

And yes, newspapers have always had their biases when reporting political stories. But there was a big shift in the 20th century to create an ethic of objective reporting, not necessarily balanced, but to be as factual as possible.  Today however, we are witnessing the return of the bias of the editor, the owner and of the reporters reflected in the stories and much of it without any fact checking and out right lies, such as with Rupert Murdock's media empire. This includes the famously false reporting by his "Fox News Channel" in the US.

We are witnessing the effects of the Conservative party in England of Margaret Thatcher that has paralleled the conservative movement in the US. Part of this is because of the influence and power of non other than Rupert Murdock. He would make or break anyone running for Parliament in his newspapers in England.

Also part of that parallel is aligning with the Christian religious faction to impose Christian, this time Anglican Law, onto the people. Again this is partially related to Rupert's personal strong Christian belief.

England has experienced the terror of church control of the state, and yes even today, the Anglican Church has great influence in governmental affairs, especially in the smaller villages. Also their royalty must be christened by the church.

Since England does not have a Constitution as such, but more "Common Law" and laws established by parliament, but not guaranteed, they can be changed by any parliament vote or court ruling.

Rick Santorum, IN HIS OWN WORDS!

The words of Rick Santorum:

This is a long interview and hard to hear at times, but it is very telling about this man and how he is basing his entire public policies on the Canon Law of the Catholic Church, which he wants to make as American Law.

Right to privacy:

Our past Roosevelt Presidents Views On America

President Franklin Roosevelt - Democrat 

President: Teddy Roosevelt  - Republican

Did the Stimulus work or a failure? Check this out.

The Republicans and Mitt Romney are continuing to claim that the Stimulus that Pres. Obama had passed, with the help of a few nervous Republican Senators, was a big waste of money. Mitt even claims that Pres. Obama has even made the economy worse.

One might argue of the stimulus bill worked or was it just coincidence that the economy started to turn around, not get worse as Mitt claims.

Watch his video and you decide?

The Most Ridiculous Mockery Of Justice We've Seen All Week

This photo is from Rep. Darrell Issa's Congressional hearing on Birth Control.

When pulling together a panel for a Congressional hearing on birth control, wouldn’t you think it would have at least one woman on it? Come on! This is what Rep. Darrell Issa, the House Oversight Committee Chairman, said when turning away the sole female voice that would have been heard:

“As the hearing is not about reproductive rights and contraception but instead about the Administration’s actions as they relate to freedom of religion and conscience, he believes that Ms. Fluke is not an appropriate witness.”

Ms. Fluke was to testify about limited access to contraception and how it has affected her life as a college student. So there were no females at all to discuss what effect any legislation governing their reproductive health care would have on them. Instead they had plenty of clergy there to talk about freedom religion trumps a woman's rights to access their needed health care services and products.

Bill Maher's take on TV reality shows of the wealthy

Bill Maher nails it right on.



This is what surprises me about the average Republican Conservative voter who is not part of the top 1% or even the top 10%, but they act like they are and vote against their self best interest under some illusions that they will be part of the top 1% because they have faith in the Free Market Capitalists system that if they work real hard and come up with the best idea since the cell phone, they will be part of that private club.

The reality is that unless they win the mega lottery, the probability entering that private club is nearly so remote that they better resign themselves to a lower status and prepare for a difficult retirement.

Many state they are against entitlements and government spending, of which they are currently receiving government assistance with their income tax mortgage interest deduction, dependent allowance deduction, charitable giving deduction, energy improvement of their home deduction, health insurance and medical care payment deduction and so on. But they want the government to spend less and tax less, but don't touch my deductions or my Medicare and Social Security.

The Christianist Infiltration of America's Public Schools

THIS IS A MUST VIEW VIDEO.



WE HAVE SEVERAL CULTURE WARS IN AMERICA. THIS IS ONE MAJOR ISSUE.

This is absolutely frightening. As you listen to these speakers, you will start to relate to events at your local schools, laws being passed by conservative legislators and governors, school boards, and what your children are saying about these groups.

As one stated, I think in New York, the court issued a ruling that schools can be used by religious organizations as houses of worship, without paying rent or taxes. I feel that tax payers have been subsidizing religious institutions far too long.

They pay no income tax, sales tax, property tax, franchise tax, or any other tax. They use public services paid for by tax payers, such as taking land and buildings out of the tax rolls, consuming public water, using public sewer service, law enforcement services, the courts, both civil and criminal, public roadways for their members to reach their facilities much more.

Religions should support themselves and pay taxes as well, there is no reason that they don't. Especially if they continue to invade the political and public policy arenas.

This movement to Christianize the political process and governance of this nation is very alarming. What we are seeing is the plan that Jerry Farwell's Moral Majority group that merged with Pat Robertson's 700 Club to form the Christian Coalition that hired Ralph Reed to run. They, together with the Koch brothers, the John Birch Society, that is renamed the Tea Party, and using ALEC to educate, train and plant these Christinists in all levels of governance, starting at the lowest committee, to school boards, city councils, county commissions, state legislators, governors, and then federal offices. In the nearly 30 years they have been working this program, they are now in a position to capture significant control.

We can see this in the several states that elected Tea Party candidates in 2010, like Scott Walker in Wisconsin, who are destroying public education, eliminate labor unions of public employees, and in some cases even private enterprise labor unions, voter restrictions, restrictions on peaceful demonstrations, and in Michigan's case, appointing an emergency manger of a town or school district that can eliminate the power of the elected officials, so being an absolute ruler or emperor.

Has this take over gone so far as to prohibit a peaceful revolt to return the country back to a sectarian, open and free representative democracy?

A Church We Can Believe In

By: Sally Kohn  02/15/2012

Archbishop Timothy Dolan

At a time when the influence of the Catholicism is in decline, there’s nothing like a “war on religion” to rally your troops.

Before Archbishop Timothy Dolan becomes a cardinal next weekend, he will deliver a speech to the Pope and other Vatican luminaries regarding “evangelization and lapsed Catholics.” Back in the United States, Dolan has led the charge against the Obama administration’s decision to require that hospitals, universities, and other institutions that serve the general public but have a religious charter grant their employees access contraception. Dolan’s choice of speech topics in Rome suggests what may really be motivating his decision back home is to stir the contraception controversy. At a time when the scale and influence of the Catholic Church in America is in rapid decline, there’s nothing like a “war on religion” to rally your troops.

None other than Pat Buchanan outlined the decline of Catholicism in America. In 1965, there were 58,000 priests in America. By 2020, it’s projected there will be only 31,000 left, most over the age of 70. In 1965, only 1 percent of parishes didn’t have a priest. In 2002, 15 percent of parishes were priest-less. Almost half of Catholic high schools in the United States have closed since 1965 and parochial school attendance has fallen from 4.5 million in 1965 to below two million in 2002.

And those numbers all came out before the clergy sex-abuse scandal hit the front pages. In a 2010 poll, 58 percent of Catholics (and 66 percent of the general public) said they felt the Church was doing a “poor” job handling the scandals. According to the same poll, one in five Catholics said the Vatican’s handling of the situation left them feeling more negatively about the Church. Only 4 percent felt more positive. 

Meanwhile, on February 2, lawyers filed claims representing over 550 alleged abuse victims in the Milwaukee Archdiocese—which had already filed for bankruptcy from the previous inundation of claims. The following day, Dolan and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops released one of its first public statements opposing the original contraception mandate. Of course, this is just a coincidence, but one that illustrates the incredible convenience for the Church of stoking this particular controversy at a time when a much more grave controversy keeps threatening the Church’s very existence.

Although deeply misguided, it’s clear why Republicans are trying to score political points by accusing Obama of launching a “war on religious freedom." The GOP has hung its electoral hopes on taking Obama’s widely popular policy measures and economic achievements and misrepresenting through associations with unpopular notions. Catholics, however, generally support Obama. Archbishop Dolan has had a warm, if not always aligned, relationship with the president (for example, see below). So to read the Catholic leadership’s pushback on contraception as merely alignment with party politics is mistaken. It goes without saying that a significant motivation for the clergy are deeply held concerns about the morality of contraception. But the Church has plenty such concerns. Why go to the mat on this one? The Catholic Health Association and Catholic Charities, two of the main Catholic groups that will be affected by the decision, accepted the compromise. Why is the Church still fighting?

As a former community organizer, I can’t help but look at what the Catholics are doing here less through the lens of base building. As an organization, the Catholic Church is in decline. And there’s nothing like feeling (or creating a feeling of being) under attack to revive the bonds of association.

And, citing Pat Buchanan writings on the matter, a majority of Catholics believe that a woman can have an abortion and still remain a good Catholic. And as other studies have shown, 98 percent of Catholic women of reproductive age have used contraception, directly going against Church teachings. And now, by large margins—including a two-to-one margin among women—Catholics support the president’s “accommodation” with religious groups. Through the eyes of the Church, this is not just a threat to the sanctity of life. This is a threat to the authority of the Catholic Church in America.

Maybe instead of preparing a speech lecturing lapsed Catholics about their spiritual infidelity, Archbishop Dolan should examine his faith’s lack of fidelity to the modern needs of its followers. A religion that seems more interested in protecting abstract beliefs about conception than the very real health and well-being of women, that seems far more faithful to doctrine than science, that protects abusive priests while preaching against the sexual freedom of others, might feel marginalized not by any presidential administration but rather by its own narrow theology. The Catholic Church attempting to reassert its authority by hammering on the very sort of antiquated, anti-contraception dogma that has alienated so many people of faith is about as strategic as trying to win an election by alienating women voters.

 * * * * * * * * * * * * * *  * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Obama Woos N.Y. Bishop During Private Meeting At The White House

January 2012
People & Events

President Barack Obama sought to smooth over a troubled relationship with the Roman Catholic hierarchy by holding a private meeting with influential Archbishop Timothy M. Dolan recently.

Dolan, the powerful archbishop of New York City, met with Obama at the White House Nov. 8. The two reportedly discussed a range of issues, including the church’s request for broad exemptions from several provisions of the new health-care law, reported The New York Times.

“I found the president of the United States to be very open to the sensitivities of the Catholic community,” Dolan, who is president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, said later. “I left there feeling a bit more at peace about this issue than when I entered.”

Dolan and other church prelates have been critical of the Obama administration over several issues, most notably same-sex marriage, legal abortion and the provision of contraceptives in health-care plans.

In August, the Department of Health and Human Services announced new regulations mandating that all health-insurance policies cover contraception at no extra cost. Although the rules include an exemption for religious groups, the bishops say it is too narrow. They are lobbying the White House for a much broader exemption.

But advocates of church-state separation say an exemption that is too broad threatens the rights of others.

Americans United is asking the administration to retain the current proposal. In an alert sent to members and supporters, AU asserted that if the exemption is too broad, it will deny women access to necessary services.

“After meeting with the Conference of Catholic Bishops earlier this month, President Obama is weighing his options and unsure of whether he will ask HHS to create sweeping exemptions that could exempt a huge number of employers from offering their employees insurance coverage for contraceptives,” wrote AU. “If HHS were to greatly expand the exemption, it could easily end up swallowing the rule, denying women access to necessary medical services.”

As this issue of Church & State went to press, the White House had yet to issue its decision on the matter.

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

MY THOUGHTS:

This is yet another example of the destruction of the separation of Church and State. There should never be negotiations about public policy with any religious organization, period.

The only area that must be protected by our constitution is the right of religious people to "practice their faith" as they desire, and that meaning within their temples, chapels, synagogues, mosques, sweat lodges, kivas, and their private homes.

With that said, when such religious organizations enter into the public sector in providing services to the public and they hire people who are not of that faith or adhere to that religion's rules, then the public policy regarding everything from discrimination, minimum wage, safety, and health insurance must be adhered to.

If a religious organization wants to remain pure to their faiths rules, then hire only those who are adhere to those rules as a matter of faith. So Catholics should hire obedient Catholics to work in their charitable organizations, hospitals, universities, and parochial schools. If they do that and do not hire anyone else, then they could receive a conditional exemption for such thing as birth control access. However, as soon as they hire a non observant individual as an employee, that conditional waiver is voided and they must then comply with pubic policy.

It is not fair to the employees who are not followers of that faith to be discriminated against and denied a benefit or other mandate of public policy just because their employer has a religious conflict with the policy.

I also suspect the Timothy Dolan has used this issue to further his move up to Cardinal in the Catholic Church. After all Church organizations are as political as government and corporation cultures.

The entire issue of women's health and reproductive services is no concern of Government to control. It is part of their health care needs and whatever medical services are available to them must be provided to them, no different than any male regarding their much simpler reproductive organs. Men don't die from child birth, or have long term medical problems like Polsy, diabetes, stroke, and many other issues.

Sex Worker and Mother, It Saved Me From The Homeless Shelter

How I support my family as a sex worker 

Identity Guestpost by Anonymous on February 15, 2012

Photo by -Benedikt-, used under Creative Commons license.

I think I'm a pretty typical mom. I have three adorable kids. I wear comfy jeans to parent involvement meetings at school. I use cloth diapers, amber teething necklaces, and have a Beco, a Moby, and two Ergos (which obviously means I'm way into baby wearing!).

For all intents and purposes I have the perfect suburban mommy resume. With one enormous exception. I keep a huge secret from my family, neighbors, and friends. After a long day of story time at the library, playing with moon sand, and finger painting… I go to work. I don't have a typical mom job. Not by a long shot.

I'm an escort.

Not an escort of the Ford Motor Co. variety. But an honest to goodness escort. The sort they make jokes about whenever Eliot Spitzer's name comes up.

I have sexual contact with men and am paid for the time I spend with them.

Scoop those jaws up off of the floor, moms and dads, because it's true. And it could happen to you.
I don't mean you'll be trafficked into sex work by some skeevy creeper on the internet — I mean that you may some day be in a position you never dreamed you'd be in doing things you never saw yourself doing in order to make ends meet.

Let me rewind to the beginning.

I was a well-educated stay-at-home mom. My husband didn't make millions but he made enough that if we lived frugally, we were comfortable without an additional income. Then one day, he pulled the rug out from under me. He informed me that he had fallen in love with another woman. And then he left. Just like that.

Years of marriage down the drain. Three children, a dog, and a cat together. None of that was enough to make him stay.

So there I was, a young single mom with three children, an apartment, and pets to provide for. I tried getting jobs, but nothing worked. The salary was never high enough and the hours were never acceptable. I have one school-aged child, a toddler, and an infant. I could have put the youngest two into daycare, but there would be nobody to walk my school-aged child to and from school safely. I have no family, no close friends, no support network, no church, no friendly neighbors, absolutely nothing.

I tried to go to the government, but there was no help there. Every job I could find made enough to disqualify me from welfare programs (no Food Stamps, no Temporary Assistance, no Daycare Assistance, nothing) but never enough to make ends meet. My biggest problem was my student loans. None of those public assistance organizations take student loan repayment into account. I spend more on repaying my student loans than all of my other bills COMBINED. If I default on those, I'll never be able to get ahead. The interest and penalties will continue to build, and I'll be financially sunk. I don't get to file bankruptcy on student loans.

Then one day I bumped into an old college girlfriend at the grocery store. We spent some time catching up and I asked her, out of the blue, if she was still in the escorting business. You see, she put herself through college without a single loan, and without having to work her fingers to the bone in order to make ends meet.

She did it by escorting. When I asked her back then how she did it, and she told me, I was horrified. I still adored her, I just couldn't believe how a person could do such a thing.
My, how I have changed in the few years that have passed.

Here I spent all of these years of marriage living frugally and getting an education while raising my little family, and it all blew up in my face.

So my friend from college gave me the contact info that I needed to get involved with her coordinator in the business. I researched. I made calls. I read blogs. I lurked on forums. I was so afraid. But already the collections calls were coming in, my pantry was empty and I knew if I was going to make it, I was going to have to do something that horrifies most people — something that used to horrify me, too.

And you know what? It's not horrible. I don't hate my life. In fact, sometimes I think I have it better than most American moms. I work on the evenings and weekends the kids are at their father's place (a total of two weekends on four weekdays every month). They never even know I'm gone. Then when they are with me, I get to be a devoted single stay-at-home mom.

I'm very careful to have various safeguards in place and I work with a top-notch company that caters to extremely wealthy clients. I don't put ads on the internet, I don't hook up with people on Craigslist, nothing like that. I'm about as safe as I can possibly be in the unsafe world of a sex worker.

It's not an easy job, it's not glamorous, and I know that most people reading this will be looking down their noses just SURE that they would never do anything so demeaning or degrading.

It's not an easy job, it's not glamorous, and I know that most people reading this will be looking down their noses just SURE that they would never do anything so demeaning or degrading. But I'm happy that I am able to provide for my kids. I'm glad we're not living in a homeless shelter, begging in the streets. I'm glad they are warm, I'm glad they have food in their bellies, and I'm relieved that I can provide them with the basics that they need, and a few extra goodies when they've been especially well-behaved.

Being a parent is hard work. If it weren't for my kids, I'm not sure what I'd be doing right now. One thing is certain: when I say that I would do anything for my kids….I mean it.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

MY THOUGHTS:

This story has been played out by a lot of women, especially since the Great Recession of 2007 to present.

What would be better for these women is that their profession be decriminalized, establish licensed and inspected bordellos and licensed escorts, require frequent STD and other communicable disease screenings to protect the public, and create a central provider/john health screening database that can be accessed through biometrics so that provider can check on john and visa versa.

If the sex worker doesn't fear being arrested for her profession, then if a John is being inappropriate or violent in some way, the sex worker can report the problem to the appropriate authorities. If John's know this is highly likely if they misbehave, then they will me less likely to harm the sex worker. This is especially true in bordellos where there are body guards.

Not only are women turning to escorting, but they are also becoming strippers at the local gentleman's club.  Not only can they earn fairly good money, they stay very athletically toned.

If either one of them stays of the drugs and smokes, they can earn good money and keep it.

One thing they don't need are vice cops constantly setting up sting operation to arrest them and the john or if the stripper does something wrong, like show too much in some cities or get a little too friendly in the VIP room. Once you take it out of the under ground world, it is much easier to make sure things are done in a safe way.

Where did the John Birch Society go? It became the Tea Party, thanks to the Koch Brothers.

The John Birch Society was an organization that most Americans thought was just a fringe group of nuts, but have now become a compelling movement that is shaping our national and state politics. They changed their operational name to the "Tea Party." Back in the 50s and 60s we paid little attention to these people, but we must pay attention now. The following three videos are by Claire Conner who was raised in a John Birch Society home, more than just a member, her father and mother were part of the originators of the movement along with the Koch brother's father. That is why her story is important to hear.







~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
MY THOUGHTS:

As a kid in the 50's & 60's I recall the John Birch Society. When I lived in Tacoma, WA, there was this older man who had a handyman business and he would come to my shop to have work done for him. We would talk and he complained about the the government, but I just passed it off as an eccentric man. One Christmas after my divorce, he invited me to his home for dinner. Well, the pamphlets came out and the talk turned to some of the most bizarre topics.  I actually was a bit afraid of this guy. So I figured I must play along with him until I get out of there and try to keep the relationship business only at the shop.

He went on and on as Claire Conner has stated in her 3 videos. He said Ike was a communist, as well as Kennedy and Johnson. He spewed such hatred for blacks, Jews and liberals.

Now we see the Republican Party that has been slowly infiltrated by this John Birch Society ideologues and well financed by the Koch family, we are now seeing this libertarian, anti-socialism movement attempting to crush our social safety nets by holding the American people hostage every time a bill is needed to finance the continuation of our government.

I hope people will take the time to educate themselves on what this ideology really means to their lives and family, both today and for future generations.

This is a very serious point in our countries path, will the majority follow the JBS direction to anarchy or will we move to a balanced approach to capitalism and socialism?

WE THE PEOPLE will make that choice by the people we vote for this November.

Virginia Ultrasound Bill & Person-Hood Bill: Republican Lawmakers Calls Abortion 'Lifestyle Convenience' -- ALSO A Fertalized Egg is Now A Person.

REPUBLICANS SCREAM THEY WANT SMALL GOVERNMENT AND THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD STAY OUT OF PEOPLES LIVES. BUT a woman is not a person I guess.

Why? Because the Virginia Republican controlled Legislature and Governor are pushing several laws that forces government to probe actually into the body cavity of a female, and eliminate most forms of Birth Control.

Republican Trans-Vaginal Ultrasound Probe Transducer, twist and turn to obtain the best image

SO THESE REPUBLICANS LIKES BIG BROTHER GOVERNMENT:

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
HUFFINGTON POST: 02/14/2012

A top Republican legislative leader in Virginia described abortion as a "lifestyle convenience" during the floor debate on a controversial measure to require trans-vaginal ultrasounds before a woman can get an abortion. This type of ultrasound requires a probe, like a dildo, must be inserted into the vagina of the female and held there while it creates an image. This is forced on them by law, without consent.

State Del. C. Todd Gilbert (R-Woodstock) made the comment midday Tuesday as the House of Delegates took up consideration of the ultrasound bill. The bill -- which then passed the House 63 to 36 -- would require any woman seeking an abortion in the state to receive an ultrasound first. As an external ultrasound is not able to produce a necessary picture early in pregnancy, a trans-vaginal ultrasound would be needed to produce an image of the fetus.

While addressing the debate, Gilbert, the House's deputy majority leader, took to the floor to support the bill. The Shenandoah Valley lawmaker used his floor statement to describe most abortions as a "lifestyle convenience" for women. Witnesses said that Gilbert did not clarify which abortions he does not consider to be "lifestyle conveniences."

Within minutes of Gilbert's statement, two Democratic lawmakers -- Del. Mark Keam (D-Fairfax County) and Del. David Englin (D-Alexandria) -- both sent out the remarks on Twitter. Englin, who commented "Wow" in his Tweet about Gilbert's floor statement, said that Gilbert's exact words were "a matter of lifestyle convenience."

Gilbert has not returned a call from The Huffington Post for comment on his statement. Aides to Gilbert said the lawmaker was on the House floor and then in meetings off the floor following adjournment of today's session.

Debate on the bill ended shortly after Gilbert's statement, preventing Democratic lawmakers from responding. The bill's passage followed the state Senate's approval of a similar bill earlier this month. Virginia legislators are expected to pass final versions of the ultrasound bill before the legislative session ends in March. Lawmakers also passed the state's personhood bill today.

During the ultrasound bill debate, Englin offered an amendment requiring a woman's consent to the trans-vaginal ultrasound procedure, which was rejected by the Republican-controlled House.

Democrats have criticized Gilbert's floor statement, and Englin said that the statement is in line with previous Republican comments on the issue. He noted he had a conversation with one GOP lawmaker regarding his amendment where the lawmaker had told him that women had already made the decision to be "vaginally penetrated when they got pregnant."

"For him to be so dismissive of women to control their own reproductive decisions is shocking," Englin said. "This is not abortion as contraception this about women facing difficult circumstances. It is unfortunate that he used that language."

Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) is expected to sign the ultrasound bill.

The Republican/Tea Party War On Mass Transit

The Republican/Tea Party War On Mass TransitLink to Salon.com  The Tea Party’s war on mass transit

(Credit: iStockphoto/Peterfactors)

In the week since House Republicans introduced their proposed transportation bill, one thing has become clear: It has virtually nothing to do with fiscal responsibility.

The Tea Party soared to power on the notion that it was the antidote to wasteful government spending. It’s now clear that reigniting the culture wars was a top priority, too. From guns to abortion, the extremist wing of the Republican Party has fought to turn back the clock on many socially progressive ideals.

Mass transit is its newest target.

“Federal transportation and infrastructure policy has traditionally been an area of strong bipartisan agreement,” says Aaron Naparstek, a Loeb Fellow at Harvard University’s Graduate School of Design and founder of Streetsblog.org. “Now, it seems, Republicans want to turn cities into a part of the culture wars.

Now it’s abortion, gay marriage and subways.”

House Republicans seek to eliminate the Mass Transit Account from the federal Highway Trust Fund. The Mass Transit Account is where public transportation programs get their steady source of funding. Without it, transit would be devastated, and urban life as we know it could become untenable.

And there’s the rub. “The Tea Party leaders and the Republicans who pander to them do not care about cost-effectiveness in the slightest,” wrote blogger Alon Levy in a comment about the bill on the Transport Politic. “They dislike transit for purely cultural and ideological reasons.” To the Tea Party, transit smacks of the public sector, social engineering and alternative lifestyles.

How do we know this is a cultural battle and not an economic one? Because transit spending is far more fiscally fair than spending on roads and highways. Transit riders subsidize roads to a greater degree than drivers subsidize transit. And cities, which are the chief engines behind the American economy, rely on buses and trains to function. “The economic future for states hinges largely on the performance of their metropolitan economies,” determined a recent Brookings Institution study.

Tea Party leaders know all of this. But they also knew that defunding NPR wouldn’t help balance the budget, and they voted to do it anyway. They knew that by law no federal money can go toward abortion services, yet they voted to defund Planned Parenthood too. The Tea Party is superb at disguising cultural battles as the pursuit of responsible thrift. And mass transit exists at the vortex of many of their No. 1 ideological targets. It’s brilliant, when you think about it.

Defunding transit is how you smack down urbanites, environmentalists, and people of color, all in one fell swoop. It’s how you telegraph a disdain for all things European. It’s how you show solidarity with swing-state suburbanites who don’t understand why their taxes are going toward subways they don’t even use. And it’s how you subtly reassure your base that you’re not concerned about the very poor.

Republicans haven’t pretended to care about cities for decades. In January, none of the candidates showed up to the annual Conference of Mayors. (Two of them didn’t even RSVP.) And even just a month ago, you could argue, as this website did, that “today cities are more ignored than attacked” by Republicans. But the calculus just changed. The transportation bill sends an aggressive message: “Tea Party to Cities: Drop Dead.”

It doesn’t matter to the Tea Party that Ronald Reagan, in 1982, created the Mass Transit Account that Republicans now want to kill. Reagan was no friend to cities. But even he earned a respectable share of the vote in New York, Philadelphia and San Francisco. Things hadn’t yet gotten so personal.

That era is over. Over the past couple of decades, the GOP has found that bashing “elites” can translate into victory at the polls. And by “elites” they don’t mean folks with Chevy Tahoes and McMansions in the exurbs. They mean urbanites, no matter what their net worth. When they tar Nancy Pelosi as a San Francisco liberal, or Barack Obama as a Chicago politician, they’re not just referencing those cities’ stereotypes. They’re referencing the stereotypes of city culture itself: full of swindlers and gays and blacks and other suspect types. Calling Obama the “food stamp president” conjures up images of housing projects.

Sarah Palin calling small-town folks “real America” states unequivocally that urbanites aren’t real Americans.

The offensiveness of that statement still boggles the mind.

The Tea Party plan to decimate transit is no less explicit a statement. “House Republicans are, essentially, declaring war on cities in the federal transportation bill,” tweeted Naparstek. It’s not just that they know they can’t expect many votes from urban dwellers — that at least would be political calculus. It’s that they despise cities in general. They see “smart growth” principles as a U.N. plot, gun control as fascist, and funding for transit not just as wasteful, but un-American. Don’t like it? Get a car like the rest of us.

The House transportation bill will not become law, but that doesn’t make it benign. Like the debt ceiling battle, it could become a political bargaining chip, or reframe the national debate: Maybe cities are getting more than their fair share? Are we overspending on transit? Why should I help fund some faraway bus system? It plants these questions in voters’ minds.

This is why transit advocates are apoplectic, and why Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood (a former Republican congressman) called it “the worst transportation bill I’ve ever seen in 35 years of public service.” If conservatives have truly decided that transit is next on their culture war hit list, anyone who believes in the importance of cities had better start firing back right now.

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

My Thoughts:

Again, this is another example of how crazy the Republican Party has become with the infiltration of the Tea Party caucus and the Religious theocracy caucus.

So why does these politician want to remove funding for the operation of Mass Transit? IT IS SOCIALIST! Don't you know that mass transit is just another Socialist plan brought over from Socialist Europe to take the American people's freedom of movement away. 

I think every one of these politician should wear a tinfoil hat as they stand on the floor of the House or Senate to debate this subject. These people are insane. There is absolutely no reasoning with them and they use absolutely no reasoning in their thought process regarding their position on legislation. They are strictly ideologues out for one thing, eliminate every government service and supported service.

Why do people vote for these idiots? What objective do the people in these states and districts want? I know, less taxes, but do they understand what they will be giving up in return?

Total Health Care Costs Fall When Poor Are Provided Insurance: Study

Nancy Pelosi, a supporter of the Affordable Care Act, tours a health clinic.

First Posted: 02/10/2012 9:06 am Updated: 02/10/2012 9:06 am

The concept of support for universal health care is taboo among Republicans who scrutinize the Affordable Care Act -- dubbing it the "Job-Killing Health Care Law Act" -- and call for its repeal. But a new UC Irvine study challenges the GOP argument that the health care law is too costly, with data illustrating that health care costs on the whole fall when poorer, uninsured patients are provided with insurance.

"In a case study involving low-income people enrolled in a community-based health insurance program, we found that use of primary care increased but use of emergency services fell, and -- over time -- total health care costs declined," David Neumark, a co-author of the study, said in a release accompanying the findings.

The study -- which focused on uninsured people in Richmond, Virginia who fell 200 percent below the poverty line -- found that over three years, health care costs fell by almost 50 percent per participant, from $8,899 in the first year to $4,569 in the third after they received insurance. Participants who enrolled in health coverage made fewer trips to the emergency room, which are notorious for running up patient bills.

Instead, insured participants went for more primary care visits.

"A lot of the debate about health care reform surrounds the issue of whether we're setting up something that's going to cost us more by increasing use of medical services or something that will cut costs through more appropriate and timely use of medical services," Neumark said in the release. "[O]ver time, costs can be reduced through increased use of primary care and reductions in emergency-department visits and hospital admissions, but it may take several years of coverage for substantive savings to occur."

Health care spending in the U.S. has been on the rise for years. Americans spent more than three times on health care in 2008 than they spent in the 18 years before, according to a Kaiser report.

Low-income, uninsured individuals tend to rack up exorbitant health-care bills because they often rely on emergency room visits instead of primary care. In the long run, these bills are paid by taxpayers. The Affordable Care Act "is set to extend Medicaid benefits to about 16 million uninsured, low-income adults and children by the end of 2014," according to the study.

In an extreme example of the societal cost of leaving some uninsured, New Yorker writer Malcolm Gladwell once chronicled the medical costs of a homeless man in Nevada who "used more health-care dollars, after all, than almost anyone in the state."

"It would probably have been cheaper to give him a full-time nurse and his own apartment," Gladwell wrote.
Mandatory health care already saw some success in Massachusetts last decade, when current GOP presidential candidate and then-Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney signed a health care law that inspired the Affordable Care Act. Today, Massachusetts has the highest percentage of insured residents of any state.
Though he initially supported the plan, Romney's rival, GOP candidate Newt Gingrich, continues to slam Romney for enacting the health care law.

"Your plan essentially is one more big-government, bureaucratic high-cost system." Gingrich said. Gingrich's views are reflective of a majority of Americans who say they are in favor of repealing the health care law.
A repeal of the act could potentially add "at least a trillion dollars to the deficit," according to HealthCare.gov.

Also on HuffPost:

Healthcare costs decrease over time when low-income uninsured are provided coverage

10/02/2012 02:28:00

Study co-authored by UCI’s David Neumark indicates results of newly enacted reforms

Irvine, Calif.  — Enrollment of uninsured patients in a program with benefits comparable to those offered under the Affordable Care Act of 2010 resulted in significant healthcare cost savings, a new study finds. 

 

Published in the February issue of Health Affairs, the research sheds light on the potential outcomes of newly enacted healthcare reforms. 

 

“In a case study involving low-income people enrolled in a community-based health insurance program, we found that use of primary care increased but use of emergency services fell, and – over time – total healthcare costs declined,” said study co-author David Neumark, UC Irvine Chancellor’s Professor of economics and director of UCI’s Center for Economics & Public Policy study.

Working with researchers from the Virginia Commonwealth University Health System, Neumark tracked the emergency room, inpatient, outpatient and primary-care service utilization of about 26,000 previously uninsured Richmond residents between 2000 and 2007 whose household incomes fell 200 percent  below the federal poverty level. Qualified enrollees were granted health insurance and assigned a primary-care provider for one year. They were required to proactively re-enroll for subsequent annual coverage.

The demographics of these participants paralleled those of the population that will be affected by changes under the Affordable Care Act of 2010, Neumark said. The legislation is set to extend Medicaid benefits to about 16 million uninsured, low-income adults and children by the end of 2014.

The study found that primary-care visits for patients who enrolled continuously over three years rose from 1.06 in year one to 1.60 annually, while emergency-room visits fell from 1.02 in year one to 0.74 by year three. Costs per visit for both inpatients and outpatients also decreased, as did the length of inpatient stays.

On average, total healthcare costs per enrollee per year for this subset were cut nearly in half – from $8,899 in year one to $4,569 in year three. Overall costs per enrollee per year for all participants with at least one year of enrollment declined from $7,604 to $4,726.

“A lot of the debate about healthcare reform surrounds the issue of whether we’re setting up something that’s going to cost us more by increasing use of medical services or something that will cut costs through more appropriate and timely use of medical services,” Neumark said. “Our research shows that, over time, costs can be reduced through increased use of primary care and reductions in emergency-department visits and hospital admissions, but it may take several years of coverage for substantive savings to occur.”

Co-authors of the study include Cathy Bradley, professor and chair of healthcare policy & research at Virginia Commonwealth University; Sabina Gandhi, who earned a doctorate in economics at UCI and is now a VCU assistant research professor; Sheryl Garland, vice president of health policy and community relations at the VCU Health System; and Dr. Sheldon Retchin, VCU professor of internal medicine, gerontology and health administration and CEO of the VCU Health System.

About the University of California, Irvine: Founded in 1965, UCI is a top-ranked university dedicated to research, scholarship and community service. Led by Chancellor Michael Drake since 2005, UCI is among the most dynamic campuses in the University of California system, with nearly 28,000 undergraduate and graduate students, 1,100 faculty and 9,000 staff. Orange County’s second-largest employer, UCI contributes an annual economic impact of $4 billion. For more UCI news, visit www.today.uci.edu.

News Radio: UCI maintains on campus an ISDN line for conducting interviews with its faculty and experts. Use of this line is available for a fee to radio news programs/stations that wish to interview UCI faculty and experts. Use of the ISDN line is subject to availability and approval by the university.