Trends by Mindbridge

An Argument for Pro-Choice Made to an Anti-Abortionist

noreply@blogger.com (Nancy from www.Mindbridge-loa.com) — Sat, 26 Feb 2011 14:42:00 +0000

I applaud your passion. I would like to encourage you to join me in fighting for the living child, who's already here and needing help.

Contraception is far preferable to abortion:

Every study shows that when contraception is shown in sex education classes, and when sex education is taught, teen birth rates go down. Every study shows that when women are more educated, the number of children they bare goes down. Any desire to reduce teen pregnancy or to reduce the number of poor children, would strive to increase sex education and college bound women.

I don't know why Christian conservatives seem to prefer preaching Abstinence rather than a more complete sex education especially since the latter is better at preventing teen pregnancy. I don't know why the GOP is reducing monies for higher education at this time, which will, statistically speaking, increase the birth rate at a time when we don't have enough jobs for the existing population. Decisions have consequences, as you point out. The GOP seems to be in favor of increasing the population among teenagers and less educated mothers.

Families cannot afford to be large anymore:

You said we have been an irresponsible society, and I absolutely agree. This has been especially so since the conservative upheaval/rebellion in 1980. This was the beginning of "Greed is GOOD" when the culture/society began to encourage those on top to take it all, without any regard for their neighbors, their employees, or their environment. This is when the good paying jobs for those without a college education began to diminish.This is when small corporations were bought out or sold out to large corporations who then fired 60% of the employees in order to increase profits. This is when those at the bottom of the middle class began to merge with the poor. And, in terms of our arguments, this is when the American family became less able to afford any additional child.

I went to Catholic school, and many of my friends had 10 to 13 children in their families and we had great times so I am not against large families, but that was in the 1950's when the average family income was more than it is now and most wives were able to stay at home to care for their children. This is no longer true. In the 1980's it cost $100,000 to raise a child. My sister had 2 children, and my brother had two children, and in both cases the husbands had vasectomies after the second child.

As a social worker, many of the families I see are headed by a single woman, often on Public Assistance. I remember hearing a nun talk about the pregnant teen girls she counsels, and she explained that most of them reported that they had a child to give them the love that they were missing from their own childhood. Sometimes the women I see are these teens grown up, and now they are living on public assistance with 4 or more children. Sometimes they are good moms, and sometimes they are overwhelmed and have no idea how to feed and clothe their children when each new birth pushed them further below the poverty line.

I salute you for being liberal about birth control, but these are the mothers who don't use contraception or have abortions, because they are hoping that each new man will become the man of their dreams and take care of his family. You can imagine, I'm sure, how many of these men actually stay to care for their child and the 3 or 4 previous children. And, how many of these men will have vasectomies to prevent additional births? Are we, as a society, going to make a commitment to their children? Obama is trying to make such a commitment to education so that these children will do better in spite of growing up in a housing project or shelter.

Families in Distress:

I am a social worker, so I see many families in distress. I would just like to introduce to the conversation, that pregnancy and birth are not always as beautiful and sacred as you describe. Sometimes a family becomes homeless through no fault of their own. Sometimes a husband leaves, or an educated mother finds that she has to leave her employment because a child is born with severe birth defects. Some of these families are heroic, but life for the children growing up in a shelter or an overcrowded situation where mom had to move her husband and 3 toddlers back into Mom's apartment with two bedrooms, and now 4 grownups and 2 teenagers.

And, then there is the educated, employed mom who gives birth to a child with a birth defect. The old medical insurance rules allowed private insurance companies to deny insurance to such a child. I have seen moms who were professional women have to quit their jobs so their family could go on Medicaid. One Mom had quadruplets for her first pregnancy; they were born premature, and two caught a life threatening infection, Staphylococcus Aurelius while in the NICU. Her private health insurance quickly ran out -- life time maximum for those two children, and mom had to put everyone on Medicaid.

Medicaid allows their child to have the operations or the care or the equipment necessary to keep him/her alive. Their husbands will have to leave so they can keep their beginning level jobs, pay their school loans, and continue to supply $$ to the Mom and her children. If the husband stays, the family earns too much to be eligible for Medicaid and the children will die.

The new HCR rules prevent private insurance companies from doing this. The mom could keep her job, and the husband could stay home to help with his family. But, if conservatives have their way, we will be back to the scenario above. Is there some reason that conservatives want families to be in distress?

YOU Choose between A Woman's Right to Choose an Abortion or a Society Choosing to Protect Living Children:

Many Republicans now claim the "personal responsibility" card and deny that society has any responsibility for poor or disabled children. Now, I am not arguing for abortion, but I am arguing for a woman's right to choose her health, and for the health of her family. I'm making this argument, because our society chooses to abandon the children who are born to unfortunate circumstances. We don't have national health care, so those who have children who need extraordinary care end up on Welfare with their whole family. Oh, they also end up without the dad who earns too much to allow his children to have Medicaid.

When we have national health care, and offer jobs for all, then I will agree that Roe v Wade can have very limited use. Until then, I will not require a Mom and Dad to choose to destroy their family to make up for one mistake, or one birth defect, or the illness of a parent.

When society chooses to have better schools, and to repair neighborhoods where half the children of the poor or jobless are not being killed before they are 20 years old, or developing PTSD from watching their cousins, brothers and friends be killed or sent to prison, then I will agree that Roe v Wade can have very limited use.

I applaud your passion. I would like to encourage you to join me in fighting for the living child, who's already here and needing help. Sometimes it takes more than a mother -- it takes a community to support a child. But, for that we all have to make the higher choice.

Tax Rates and Revenue: Putting Reaganomics to Bed Once and For All

noreply@blogger.com (Nancy from www.Mindbridge-loa.com) — Sat, 06 Nov 2010 14:57:00 +0000

THIRTY YEARS IN THE MAKING!

What About Population Growth?
Those who talk about tax revenue going up or down, or the GDP going up and down, never include population statistics. It makes all the other talk silly, because since 1947, the US population has more than doubled. It stands to reason, that this accounts for more jobs and more consumers, thus increasing GDP and tax revenue no matter what the government does. So, the best we can do is to look at relative changes, or where the trend was going before it changed. It should always go up at at least this rate of population growth.

When We Talk About Tax Revenue, Are We Talking About Personal Taxes or Corporate Taxes Or Both?

This also makes a difference. If we look at the difference that lowering personal income taxes has made from Reagan on, we see both ups and downs with most of the downs occurring in the last 10 years from GW Bush through the present. There is a flattening during Bush senior when he raised taxes to stop the growth of the Federal deficit, and then it improves again as a result of the Clinton era economic growth.

But, you will never see the GOP make the point that during Reagan's first 4 years, personal income tax revenue was flat to a little down between 1982 and 1983. Unemployment was at 9.5% in 1982. Reagan lowered the top tax rate from 70% to 50% in 1981, and lowered it again in 1986 to 28% which increased the National Debt far more than it increased revenue. We don't see any wondrous increase in the tax revenue in this graph, do we? Not until the Clinton years.

The National Debt went from 33% in 1980 to 51.9% of GDP by the end of 1988. And, to cover the debt, we increased borrowing from $700 billion to $3 trillion and went from being the world's largest creditor nation to being the world's largest debtor nation. This is far more evident in the graph below. This is the result of Reaganomics.

During Reagan's administration, it is recorded that Federal receipts grew at 8.2%, but since 2.5% of that was his increase in Social Security receipts, his income tax receipts grew at only 5.7% and his Federal outlays grew at 7.1%. This is why our National Debt increased. In Reagan's defense, most of this was an increase in Defense spending, bringing the defense budget back to where it had been at the end of the Vietnam conflict even though we weren't at war. Why do I say, "In Reagan's defense"? Because the GOP does not seem to count DOD expenses in the budget. When the GOP talks about reducing the Federal Budget, they are not talking about the DOD portion.

According to a United States Department of the Treasury economic study, the major tax bills enacted under Reagan, in the short term, significantly reduced (~-1% of GDP) government tax receipts. Separated out, however, it is clear that the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 was a massive (~-3% of GDP) decrease in revenues over the long term.

Corporate taxes were decreased during the Reagan era which not only contributed to the Federal deficit, but also shifted the Tax burden from almost 50% to 50%, individuals and corporations, to largely a burden on individuals. Note that the left side of this graph below are the Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson years.

The drop below 30% represents the Nixon, Ford, Carter to Reagan period. And, although the original Tea Party was a revolt against the secret deal between King George and the British East India Company, this Tea Party does not even know that it was conned by it's favorite president -- Reagan. Once corporate share of tax revenue dropped below 20%, only Clinton's boon got it back to a tiny bit over 20% again. Bush's war chest raised it above 20%, but wasn't that our billions, or, more correctly, China's billions which were lavished on the military industrial complex coming back in some tax revenue? I suspect that this is a large part of the distress felt by the members of the Neo-Tea Party. Individuals are now carrying the burden which was previously shared more equitably with Corporations.

The Shift From A Manufacturing Country to a Financial Country:

Reagan not only moved us from being a Creditor nation, to being a Debtor nation, but he made possible the transition from being a manufacturing and exporting nation, to being a financial and importing nation. It is this that allowed our banks to become "too big to fail." He encouraged the banks to offer credit cards, which increased their revenue stream, and gave consumers a way to increase their life style even though their wages were flat. This was the Reagan mystique. Middle class Americans felt they were in a boon time, when only the wealthiest 2% were actually doing better. There was no boon. There was an enormous increase in the debt of individual Americans which fueled business recovery at that time and our recent financial collapse.

This change from being a manufacturing and exporting country to being a financial and importing country is the reason we weren't able to add armor to our Hummers in Iraq. We aren't making steel any longer. We import it from China and Japan. Does this make you feel safe?

This change is also one of the reasons that our balance of trade is skewed in the wrong direction.

What Do We Need to Change?

Obama's investment in the research and development of green products: batteries, cars, solar and wind turbines and storage facilities is an attempt to create a new product line that can be manufactured in the USA. This may make up for any decrease in funding to the military-industrial complex.

This will not only create jobs when new products are ready to build, but it will increase revenue through both individual and corporate taxes, and will also help to correct our balance of trade. This will give us a way to correct the deficit that was launched by Reaganomics.

Tea Partiers, we welcome you to our side. Let's support policy that will move all of America forward rather than burying her beneath a mountain of debt to make the top 2% of Americans gluttonously wealthy. How much does a man need after the first billion dollars?

A billion dollars is $1,000,000,000, or enough to give away $1 million dollars, each month for 83 years and that is if the 1 billion isn't in a bank or invested in any way. They could buy 5 new Bentleys a month for as long as they lived. Or, they could pay all the expenses of Presidential candidate at the rate Barack Obama spent, for the next 10 presidential elections without a single other contributor.

The final insult, is that those earning a billion dollars are too often not producing anything. The top 12 hedge fund managers last year EACH earned more than a billion dollars and the top man earned more than $7 billion. This did nothing for our balance of trade, or our unemployment. Nothing was produced. Nothing was built. Nothing was discovered. Yet, 12 men now have the power to buy 10 presidents. Buying a few Congressmen was just the beginning.

The New Health Insurance Bill is Starting

noreply@blogger.com (Nancy from www.Mindbridge-loa.com) — Sat, 10 Jul 2010 11:58:00 +0000

What is it about the health care bill that you don't like? People keep hollering about it, but it doesn't do anything that wasn't needed.

1 All Americans will have to have health care insurance. If private insurance is so good (as tea Party argued when I was fighting it) then won't the prices go down when more consumers enter the market? This is a rule of capitalism isn't it? When the market expands, the product becomes more efficient and the prices go down. This will make life a little easier for everyone.

2 Insurance companies must honor their contracts. If they sell health insurance, and a consumer (who has been paying faithfully for years and years) gets sick, they must cover the medical costs within the bounds of their contract. (Ins. companies have always had some procedures or wackado treatments that they didn't cover, and they will still be able to refuse to cover those procedures). This will lower costs of hospitalizations and doctors because they won't be stuck with unpaid health treatments.

3 Businesses need to either pay for their employees insurance, or face a tax penalty. This will insure that corps don't start cutting their employees health coverage just because there will now be a low cost list of insurance companies for those who are currently uninsured.

4 Those who are currently uninsured cost everyone else $$ because they use hospital ER's when they need to, even though they don't have health insurance. I took an older brother without insurance in Miami -- to Jackson Memorial I think it was called. And, we waited from 8 in the morning until 10 at night because there were so many uninsured people who needed health care. (My sister Trish and cousin Leslie, who have always had insurance, were with me and couldn't believe what they were seeing.) The cost of all those people is shared by taxes in the local community, and health ins companies are charged more by the hospitals who must cover those costs and you know who reimburses the insurance company costs -- the consumer of health insurance.

So, when some of those who have to buy insurance because of the new law can't afford it, the government will help them to do so. This will use some tax revenue. Americans have been paying the secret cost through increased insurance premiums anyway, so it really won't be any additional $$. It will make the uninsured at least partially responsible (something Tea Partiers and Libertarians are always advocating) for his family or himself, and it will move the added fiscal responsibility from the hospitals and insurance companies to the Federal Government. This should lower the cost of hospitalization by capitalistic standards since all visits will now be fully paid for.

So, when all is said and done, the costs of medical care should come down if the rules of capitalism are followed. However, if we find that insurance companies and/or hospitals and MDs prefer to add their savings to their profits rather than reimbursing the consumer, then those who have advocated for single payer or socialized medicine will have additional data to add to their arguments. Either way, we will have moved closer to a better health care system.

The Problem with the US Oil Policy

noreply@blogger.com (Nancy from www.Mindbridge-loa.com) — Sat, 26 Jun 2010 15:06:00 +0000

Since the Tea-party and Libertarians on Twitter have been talking about "Barak Petroleum Company", I thought I would look into what that would mean.

For-Profit Major Oil Companies vs National Oil Companies

The major private oil companies control only 10% of the world’s existing oil and gas resource base according to the Baker Institute Energy Forum (http://www.rice.edu/energy/research/nationaloil/index.html).

Also, according to the Baker study, current producing countries are getting more favorable financial arrangements from national oil companies that look not to profit, but to future geopolitical and strategic aims factored into investments. Thus it is more likely that Asian and Russia national oil companies will be more successful in resource development in the Middle East, and that India’s ONGC and IOC; China’s Sinopec, CNPC, and Malaysia’s Petronas will continue to be more successful in Iran and Africa.

Perhaps it is time for the US to be thinking about a national oil company?

For-Profit Strategy

As an example of holding on to resources rather than developing them, major oil companies including Exxon held on to leases in Alaska at Point Thomson (believed to hold 25% of the known gas reserves in the state) for 31 years and when Alaska sought to reclaim the leases, Exxon sued. BP had attempted to cap Deepwater Horizon rather than putting it online as a producing well. Cementing problems were associated with 18 of 39 blowouts between 1992 and 2006, and 18 of 70 from 1971 to 1991. Oil companies seem to be having trouble with cementing and Deepwater Horizon is the most current and most horrific example of what can go wrong, going wrong.

Why would an oil company sit on an oil reserve rather than developing it? The reason behind any decision made by any international corporation is profit. Clearly it makes sense to hold on to some abundant resources until the price of oil goes up. This is simple supply and demand economics. If oil companies produce all that they can now, the supply will increase more than the demand and the price (and profit) will fall. If oil companies produce just enough now to hold the prices steady enough to keep the world addicted to oil, they will extend demand into the future. If on the other hand, oil companies reduce the supply, causing world prices to increase, the last big consuming countries will find it more economical to finance the research and the changeover to the next source of energy, whether it is solar, wind, thermal or hydrogen.

According to Forbes, of the top four producing reserves in the world today Iraq holds 3. The first on the Forbes list is Ghawar in Saudi Arabia and produces 4.5 million barrels per day. And these Middle Eastern sources are easy to reach without requiring the danger of deep water drilling or the costliness and dirtiness of cleaning Canadian oil sands. Clearly, higher profits are to be had from these easy to produce oil fields. And, these oil fields can produce at a lower cost, thus keeping the cost of oil from these regions low. This is why the "for-profit" oil companies would rather buy from these areas than pump their own oil from US or Canadian oil fields.

The National Policy of the US

Does the US have a national policy? A (secret) policy was developed by Dick Cheney and (secret) associates during the Bush presidency. But, no matter who was there, as long as private international corporations control our oil production we don't have an oil policy controlled by national interests. If, for any reason, the US needs extra oil, there is no way to control the flow. The private oil companies have no reason to do the bidding of either a Democratic President, or a Republican one. The price of oil climbed during the George Bush and Dick Cheney Presidency. (http://www.treehugger.com/oil-price-graph-12423.jpg)

The only way to have a national oil policy that takes national defense, the natural environment and national growth into consideration is to have a national oil company. (BP has the current contract with the US Pentagon to supply our troops.) The only way to insure safety and thoughtful production is to have and enforce a national oil policy.

“Quality is never an accident; it is always the result of high intention, sincere efforts, intelligent direction and skillful execution. Such was the case with the World National Oil Companies Congress”

H.E. Nematzadeh, Ex-Deputy Minister of Petroleum, IRAN and President, NIORDC

BP's liabilities are likely to exceed $20 billion – factoring in the Justice Department's criminal probe , which could bring heavy fines, as well as a gusher of class-action lawsuits. Some estimates have reached as high as $40 billion, and are based on assumptions that the leak continues through the end of the summer, possibly worsened by hurricanes. Oil experts agree that BP may only survive if it takes on a partner; possibly a Chinese partner.

Even if BP makes a sincere effort to restore the Gulf, it cannot restore the livelihood of the fishermen and the seafood restaurants and the charter boats and it cannot replace the lost fish, amphibians, reptiles, mammals and birds. These creatures will have lost habitat and breeding grounds and breeding stock that will affect the environment for years and years to come from the Gulf, up the eastern coast and across the Atlantic to Ireland and England where the Gulf stream tempers the climate that would otherwise be harsh and damp.

The Tea Party Movement

noreply@blogger.com (Nancy from www.Mindbridge-loa.com) — Sun, 28 Mar 2010 12:02:00 +0000

Mindbridge has been interviewing and discussing politics with Tea Partiers for a few years now, although, I used to call them Republicans. The traditional Republicans aren't angry. They were as upset with Bush for his lack of fiscal responsibility as the rest of the country and so they weren't surprised when a Democratic landslide took away their power. Many of them even voted for Obama.

The angry Republicans are the Tea Partiers. These are the Republicans and Independents who listen to the news blaming Obama for the deficit and job loss. These are Republicans and Independents who have bought into the idea that Democratic and Liberal are the same, and that they are also Socialist and sometimes Fascist.

I argued for years, and now I understand the positions of the Tea Party. Here are the definitions according to the Tea Partiers:

If you ever wanted to help someone else, or to have someone help out your family or friends, your neighbors or those who are unemployed, you are Socialist.
If you ever thought a law should force such generosity, you are a Fascist.
If you ever thought that there should be a law to protect the public from corporations that spew toxic sludge into the drinking water, you are a liberal Commie and a Fascist. Why? Because you are costing the Tea Partiers more for the product and there might be job loss because you are restricting the "free market".

The Five Segments of the Tea Party Movement

The Tea Party Movement has 5 distinct segments. It's members are sometimes in one segment, and sometimes in several. Each segment is powerfully fueled by angry emotions.

The fiscal Movement started in the late 80's. There was distress about the growing deficit which was sometimes blamed on Democratic spending, but started with the tax cuts and Reaganomics or Voodoo economics. This was the ignition of Ross Perot's electoral movement. There are multiple reasons for this distress. There was a frightening inflation in the late 70's which lowered middle and lower income people's buying power. The height of buying power for minimum wage jobs was at its zenith in the 60's and has been going down ever since. The reductions in manufacturing jobs started in the 60's, which meant that those non-college educated people have had fewer and fewer middle class jobs to support them. This part of the Tea Party protest is angry about their own fiscal struggles.
There is racism. Racists have targeted liberals and Democrats and "big Government" since Kennedy and Johnson brought the force of the Federal Government against racism in the 60's. More recently, there is the racism that is targeting the Black American who holds the highest position in the Nation, and this makes the Tea Partiers experience rage. Their grotesque depictions of President Obama in social media have shown their disrespect and disdain of the person whom over 64% of the population put in office, and still support.
The birthers are an offshoot of the racists, but have a fake birth certificate to try to prove that Obama was born in Kenya rather than Hawaii. This birth certificate is actually an altered Australian birth certificate. See the two below.
There are anti-abortionists who have targeted any politician who sought to defend the law of the land which allows abortion or who are allowing the Hyde Amendment to insure that no federal money is used to pay for abortion. They want abortions to be stopped altogether.
There are the NRA anti-Gun Control people who have been distressed by increasing gun control, primarily in urban areas where guns crimes are prevalent and public defenders such as police are shot down by automatic weapons. These are the people who are raging with epithets such as RELOAD, CLEAN YOUR GUNS NOW. These are the ones who have caused a shortage on ammunition because they think there's going to be a government confiscation of their weapons.

Failure of the News Media:

The TV news media doesn't earn new listeners by explaining away public distress and helping to create calm. They increase their audience when they show conflict. Public news used to have the mandate to tell the whole truth, and they were never meant to be part of the profits of their corporation. But, since this has changed, we now have the news media covering the greatest conflict because it makes money for their corporate owners and bosses.

During the Bush years, there were peaceful anti-war protests that were not covered in spite of having thousands of protesters. More recently, the Tea Party protests have been covered although they only sport hundreds of protesters because they are loud and misbehaved. Last week there was a protest in DC which had tens of thousands of protesters seeking legislation regarding undocumented immigrants. This was not covered by a single TV news station in spite of the large numbers of protesters. Yet, the few Tea Party members who have advocated violence against Democrats who voted for health insurance reform have gotten a great deal of publicity and notoriety.

MikeVanderboegh published this blog posting: "To all modern Sons of Liberty: THIS is your time. Break their windows. Break them NOW.”

Vanderboegh is a member of an Alabama militia group who is headlining an open-carry gun rally in Northern Virginia next month. He has time to organize this because he once worked as a warehouse manager but now lives on government disability checks. He said he receives $1,300 a month because of his congestive heart failure, diabetes and hypertension. The news media doesn't mention that this Tea Partier who is against gun legislation and against health insurance reform is living off government health care and government income for his disability.

The news media fans the flames of dissent. Showing the anger of a few Tea Party members (3 to 3000) and allowing them to air their views without correcting their facts implies to their listeners that these views are true and worth listening to.

The right wing radio and TV commentators all air their talking points taken directly from the right wing think tanks' daily press releases. They consistently promote Ayn Rands idea of "Free Market Capitalism". They hide the fact that when the market was "free" in America, we had a Great Depression which followed the Age of the Robber Barrons. The Free Market rewards big and bigger business and squashes local small business, and it promotes lower and lower wages and does nothing to protect the environment or the local populations from the costs of the waste of this business run in this manner.

The Truth of the Free Market Corporation

The purpose of any corporation is to increase profits. It is not in business to benefit society. It is not in business to offer good wages to workers. It is not in business to protect the environment.

It is the responsibility of government to balance the health of the corporation with the health of society. If the government officials are more influenced by donations of big business than by the needs of society, then we have corporatism. This is the backbone of fascism.

The media is part of the free market, not of government. They also have the fiduciary responsibility to increase profit rather than to protect society. Formerly, there were laws (in exchange for access to the public airwaves) that required their news arms to portray the truth so that the public would have access to accurate information at the local, state and national levels. This accurate information is necessary for an informed electorate who can then make informed decisions when they vote.

This is not what we have now because those laws restricting the media have been removed. As foretold by the movie Network, the news arms of TV Corporations are now required to produce profit. As we all know, conflict and discord produce more profit than peace and calm. Charlie Rose will never have more listeners than Bill O'Reilly or Jerry Springer or Howard Stern, no matter how important their information is. Who then is the more informed voter? What then becomes the public interest?

And, then there is the power of the advertiser. The interests of the advertiser is enforced by their abundance or their withdrawal of advertising. This has a huge effect on the Corporate decisions and on their programming. Phil Donohue had great ratings for MSNBC, but was taken off the air when his anti-war shows opposed the corporate interests of General Electric whose profits would soar from the coming war against Iraq.

Jon Stewart was able to tell the truth of the war against Iraq because he was on Comedy Central and not part of a major network owned by a member of the military industrial complex. When invited to move to another network, he refused.

Not only does the free market internalize profits and externalize costs, it controls the media which controls the facts that the voting population hears. It does this via coordinating its information from the American Enterprise Institute, Informing Corporate Policy and the News Media since the 1970's.

Government Shutdown by Republicans

noreply@blogger.com (Nancy from www.Mindbridge-loa.com) — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 18:21:00 +0000

Why is Senator Jim Bunning Blocking an Extension of Unemployment Benefits to 500,000, Transportation Programs that Employ others, and Medicare Payments to Docs?

This is the grossest misuse of the filibuster. In this case, Bunning was the sole Senator objecting to the bill. His stated objection is that it was not paid for.... Interesting that his party voted down the "Pay as You Go" bill proposed by the Democrats which would have required that equivalent cost cutting or program cutting accompanies each bill.

Rumors are that he also wanted another tax reduction for the wealthiest Americans which is not a bill being brought to the Senate floor. Some think that his filibuster is meant to force the Democrats to give him the tax cuts he wants.

Whatever his reasons, this is not the majority rule that the Republicans demanded between 2000 and 2008 -- an "up or down vote." He has just caused 100,000 Americans to lose their benefits immediately. About 400,000 more will lose their unemployment benefits in two weeks according to the Department of Labor.

If they lose their federal benefits now, even if an extension bill goes through, they might have to reapply which will delay their next check by 3 weeks to 2 months in some states. Many of these are people with families to support.

Senator Dick Durbin proposed making the Senator actually perform his filibuster by standing and talking from Thursday until whenever he would give up.
Many young Senators were prepared to attend the all-night session. This was started on Thursday February 25th, but the unprepared Senator Banning resorted to yelling obscenities at other lawmakers.

Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee took his defense and reminded the others in attendance that Senator Bunning was 87 years old. Senator Durbin agreed to end the session shortly before midnight, perhaps before Bunning would have a serious health crisis of his own.

Meanwhile, the Republican Senators don't seem to care about an additional 500,000 jobless people will lose ther health insurance subsidies under the Cobra program during the month of March. I wonder if Senator Bunning has considered that there might be some children awaiting life saving surgeries? He is so determined to make his point....

This bill also blocks an extension of Medicare pay increases to docs, which will lower their reimbursements by 21%. Many docs will simply stop seeing Medicare patients which will mean that many seniors will be without the docs they have come to know and to trust. -- Wasn't it the Republicans who keep voting against all the Health Reform bills because "We want Americans to be able to keep their insurance and to keep their docs!" And, didn't they scream out in the late summer, "We don't want our seniors to have their benefits cut!"

Well, all Americans should know that it is the Republicans who are voting against Medicare reimbursement to doctors and voting against the extension of Unemployment, but this is not all.

There is also an extension of the Highway Trust Fund which employs 2,000 employees. These employees have been furloughed since Monday without pay and without the ability to sign up for Unemployment since they are still, technically, employed. The association of State Highway and Transportation officials said states are losing more than $153 million a day in federal reimbursements.

This is only one case, but Republicans this last year have used the filibuster (see chart on cloture voting) more than any other administration. To give you an idea of the changes involved, Democrats held up a total of 10 of George Bush's judicial appointees. Last year one Senator held up 50 of President Obama's appointees because he objected to the President's consideration of Boeing for government contracts. This is Senator Richard Shelby of Lockheed Martin Corporation, oh, excuse me, of Alabama.

Cloture Voting chart thanks to Yglesias of Think Progress. Note that last year Republicans almost doubled even the blockade used during the Bill Clinton presidency. Politics is one thing, but this is affecting millions of Americans in a very harmful way. Those who lose unemployment benefits may have no where to go. The children and seniors who have no health providers to go to may suffer or die.

Perhaps this is a reason to ask for impeachment, not because some political leader cheated on his wife -- but for those who cheat on the American people!

The Frodo Baggins Diet, and Disturbing Food Additive No. 2

noreply@blogger.com (Nancy from www.Mindbridge-loa.com) — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 23:38:00 +0000

Letting Go of Weight Right Away

We mentioned in the last article that there are additives that the food industry is including in their recipes. For us, this is a recipe for disaster. As we give them up we can lose belly fat without really dieting. The first is the worst and if you avoid it you will lose weight.

I learned of these recently and have taken two out of my diet and changed the way that I eat in order to repair the damage done. I have already lost 7 pounds in 5 days. I don't believe that this is just water weight. I have given up two addictive substances that were preventing normal sugar and fat processing.

What do the Food Additives Do?

There are addictive food additives that are placed in foods to make them taste better, and as it happens, they all prevent our natural hormones from telling our brain that we have had enough to eat. All 7 of these products cause bloating and inflammation as well as the storing of fat. The worst and most prevalent of these is High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS). It excites the pancreas and insulin is dispensed into the blood stream to remove the excess sugar. This quick release of insulin causes a quick change of the sugar into fat. This fat is then stored for future energy needs.

I have found, as many have, that every time I dieted, I lost weight but afterward I gained more than I had ever lost. Part of this is that any low calorie or low carb or low fat diet will signal to your body that you are starving. Your body responds by slowing your metabolism. This makes it harder to lose weight. So, we are not advocating any starvation. We advocate just the opposite as you will see below.

Now, I don't eat much food from the inside aisles, such as cereals or crackers and cookies, or cakes and boxed deserts. But, even so, I have had to work hard to avoid HFCS. It is far harder I know for families with young children who want those sweet snacks.

I do eat apple sauce. I thought that apples were safe and healthy. But, once I found out about HFCS, I found that practically every applesauce has this as an ingredient. This in one ingredient that causes bally fat! And, a natural apple has a low glycemic level which means that it doesn't cause insulin to be released. Once insulin is released, the sugar is converted into fat. And, if HFCS has been added, the pancreas becomes active and the fat is placed on your belly or around your heart or liver or pancreas. So, although something like Applesauce which should be a harmless and healthy snack becomes a fat loading, body bloating snack.

Avoiding the First Two Additives will help You to Let Go of Weight

The first of these harmful additives, High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) has even been added to pet foods. It is highly addictive and shuts down your leptin, which is the hormone that tells you brain that you've had enough to eat. Note what a good idea this is from the standpoint of the Food Industry. We will eat more donuts and more cookies and more soda or fruit juice than we planned or than we need.

Without leptin, you might keep eating until you can't physically push any more food into your stomach. If you have ever come close to finishing a cake or bag of cookies by yourself, you know what I'm talking about.

The second is coffee. Sorry, but the caffeine in coffee prevents fat metabolism. Because of this, coffee drinkers have a harder time breaking down their fat and have to diet or workout even harder than others to drop the same weight.

I am a lifelong coffee lover. I tried to give it up when I heard that US chemical companies didn't stop producing DDT when it was outlawed here. They simply sent it to Latin America where it was sprayed on the coffee harvest.... I weakened and started drinking it again. But this time I think I can do it and stick with it. I just don't like the idea that it keeps the fat on me and harms the farmers who spray the trees and the environment of those trees and probably exposes you to DDT residue.

What is the Frodo Baggins Diet?

The four things I did first:

Eating more frequently, five times a day or every three hours as in the Frodo Baggins Diet will allow leptin to be released when it should be. This will also offset the habitual insulin release when we overeat or when we eat HFCS.
Avoid HFCS
Eat smaller meals balanced with protein (1/2 cup) and low glycemic carbohydrates (1 cup) five times a day and your own natural system will start to let go of fat.
Stop coffee caffeine because this prevents fat processing. Changing to green tea reverses the process and encourages your body to break down fat for energy.

This is not a low calorie or low carb or low fat diet. This is simply spreading out your appropriate calories and carbs throughout the day so that you don't experience hunger. This all day "grazing" will keep your pancreas quiet and your body satisfied. Without hunger or sugar surges, you will stop storing the food you eat. And, eating uses calories. If you are eating 5 times a day, you will use calories to process that food.

Your stomach will shrink back to a normal, healthy size. We tend to overeat when we eat only three times a day and this stretches our stomach. Then, we want to eat until we feel "full." This cycle is stopped the minute we spread our fuel out to 5 times a day.

Your metabolism will speed up because in a few days your body will realize that it is no longer being starved.

However, there is more to it if you are interested. For more on the Frodo Baggins diet, visit here: Mindbridge-LOA

If you want to check out another source, this was a presidential study.

Nancy J. Stremmel is the co-owner and developer of: Mindbridge-LOA, the compendium of information on the Law of Attraction. She is a writer, licensed Social Worker, educator, artist and therapist. She believes that everyone can make the Law of Attraction work for them.

Other Articles by Author: Ezines

Which Food Companies are Raising Their Profits by Putting Your Health at Risk?

noreply@blogger.com (Nancy from www.Mindbridge-loa.com) — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 20:55:00 +0000

The Toyota Motor Corporation is about to go on trial. They were accused of hiding the failure of their acceleration system and putting their customers at risk. Yet, there are obesity additives added to most products on your supermarket shelves. This is done on purpose whereas Toyota suffered a failure in engineering. They didn't intend their customers to have accidents.

Why aren't these food corporations being tried for additives that cause their customers to gain weight, and particularly to gain belly fat?

Why is Belly Fat so Bad for Your Health?

Belly fat has been identified as the most harmful placement of fat. It has been linked to diabetes, breathing problems and heart disease. There is also evidence that it is connected to liver and pancreatic cancer. If a man has a waist size of 40 inches, or if a woman has a waist measuring 35 inches or more, the health problems are close at hand.

How is it that Food companies contribute to the belly fat of their customers? They do it in the same way that the tobacco companies increased the tobacco addiction of their customers. They add addictive substances to their food products and many of these products have been associated with belly fat in numerous studies.

The studies aren't being shown in the national media because the advertising dollars are too powerful. All you have to do is to reduce these additives to drop 30 or more pounds and 12 inches in 12 weeks, largely of your belly fat.

You don't even have to give up your favorite pizza or Mexican foods. Simply change brands if yours has been loading you up with the addictive or belly fat increasing food additives.

What do the Food Additives Do?

All 7 of the major culprits are addictive. All 7 of these products cause bloating and inflammation.

I found that every time I dieted, I lost weight but afterward I gained more than I had ever lost. And, I don't eat much food from the inside aisles, such as cereals or crackers and cookies, or cakes and boxed deserts. But, even so, I have had to work hard to avoid these additives.

I do eat apple sauce. I thought that apples were safe and healthy. But, once I found out about the food additives, I found that practically every applesauce has at least one of these ingredients. These are the ingredients that cause belly fat! And, a natural apple has a low glycemic level which means that it doesn't cause insulin to be released. Once insulin is released, the sugar is converted into fat. If it's one of these dastardly 7 additives, the fat is placed on your belly or around your heart or liver or pancreas.

How Do We Avoid these 7 Additives?

The first of these ingredients is High Fructose Corn Syrup. If you try to avoid this ingredient it is very difficult. You will see that it is even added to pet foods. It is highly addictive and shuts down your leptin, which is the hormone that tells you brain that you've had enough to eat. Note what a good idea this is from the standpoint of the Food Industry.

Without this hormone, you could keep eating until you can't physically push any more food into your stomach. If you have ever come close to finishing a cake or bag of cookies by yourself, you know what I'm talking about. Eating more frequently as in the Frodo Baggins Diet, will allow leptin to be released when it should be.

For more on the 7 deadly food additives, watch here, and here.

Thanks, and we'll be back soon.

Is There any Truth in Media?

noreply@blogger.com (Nancy from www.Mindbridge-loa.com) — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 20:44:00 +0000

Some tell me to get over it. The media is out to make money just like any other corporation.

But, the Media is Not Like any Other Corporation

You and I own the airwaves.... We do not own any patents or oil. But, we do, collectively own the air waves.

This is the reason that news, was once regulated, and could be again if corporations didn't own too many American politicians. The FCC is charged with insuring that the "public" airwaves show only what's appropriate....

The same media that yells and screams about how we are losing our freedoms is at the same time happily internalizing the rewards and profits of using the public airwaves to dupe the public!

Is this what you want? Just because it has happened doesn't mean you have to allow it to continue.

The FCC

issues licenses and
coordinates telecommunications policy efforts with industry and with other governmental agencies — federal, tribal, state and local — in serving the public interest.

In exchange for those licenses, they used to require some period of time each day that was for truth, rather than profit.

Isn't it in the interest of a democracy to have some period of truth available each day.

If all the media is free to tell whatever lies they chose to tell, how can the public ever know who to vote for?

I am not ready to give it up to the corporations just yet. I would like to see the American public make some demands in exchange for using the airwaves and in exchange for having their vote as they have done in Europe.

Sherman Anti-trust Laws

There are laws to allow competition and to give a fighting chance to the little guy. Are you writing to your Congressmen and Senators to enforce the anti-trust laws?

Since we're talking about the media, the ownership of media outlets (tv stations, radio stations, newspapers and magazines) used to be regulated so that there could not be a concentration if a few hands. In Italy, one man just bought up most of the outlets and then tried to get himself elected "God".

In the US, there were hundreds of owners of TV stations, with many local owners. Now, there are 7 corporate o wners I believe.

The internet is, right now, free. But, now that corps can put unlimited funds into politicians' reelection efforts, how long do you think the FCC (the only control we have) is going to protect the freedom of the internet?

Bectel owns all the water rights in Iraq.

As Steve Pavlina says, "I am here to wake you up."

"Too Big to Fail

noreply@blogger.com (Nancy from www.Mindbridge-loa.com) — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 20:07:00 +0000

I decided to take a look at the history of this....

The first major bank to fail in the US since the FDIC was established was United States National Savings Bank, worth $1.5 billion. Shortly thereafter, on October 8, 1974, the Franklin National Bank in New York also failed. -- This was not a bailout but the FDIC insured depositors. Caused by mismanagement and fraud, it was at the time the largest bank failure in the history of the U.S. Out of the debacle came disgrace and jail sentences for several bankers, a suicide in Italy, huge losses for the bank's stockholders -- but not its depositors -- and a black eye for the federal bank regulatory system. A couple of months after Franklin was declared insolvent on Oct. 8, 1974, most of its assets were taken over by European-American (now known as EAB).

The United States Congress granted all thrifts in 1980, including savings and loan associations, the power to make consumer and commercial loans and to issue transaction accounts. This was the beginning of bank deregulation. Those regulations had kept us from another great depression.

In the 1980's there were increasing bailouts. In early May, 1984 Continental Illinois National Bank and Trust was seized by the US government as "too big to fail". Lytle later pleaded guilty to a count of defrauding Continental of $2.25 million and receiving $585,000 in kickbacks for approving risky loan applications. Lytle was sentenced to three and a half years in a federal prison. The US government remained in control until 10 years later when it was acquired by what is now Bank of America.

Lincoln Savings and Loan

The Lincoln Savings led to the Keating five political scandal, in which five US senators were implicated in an influence-peddling scheme. It was named for Charles Keating, who headed Lincoln Savings and made $300,000 as political contributions to them in the 1980s. Three of those senators—Alan Cranston (D-CA), Don Riegle (D-MI), and Dennis DeConcini (D-AZ)—found their political careers cut short as a result. Two others—John Glenn (D-OH) and John McCain (R-AZ)—were rebuked by the Senate Ethics Committee for exercising "poor judgment" for intervening with the federal regulators on behalf of Keating.

Silverado Savings and Loan

Silverado Savings and Loan collapsed in 1988, costing taxpayers $1.3 billion. Neil Bush, son of then Vice President of the United States George H. W. Bush, was Director of Silverado at the time. Neil Bush was accused of giving himself a loan from Silverado, but he denied all
wrongdoing.

The US Office of Thrift Supervision investigated Silverado's failure and determined that Neil Bush had engaged in numerous "breaches of his fiduciary duties involving multiple conflicts of interest." Although Bush was not indicted on criminal charges, a civil action was brought against him and the other Silverado directors by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; it was eventually settled out of court, with Bush paying $50,000 as part of the settlement, the Washington Post reported.

As a director of a failing thrift, Bush voted to approve $100 million in what were ultimately bad loans to two of his business partners. And in voting for the loans, he failed to inform fellow board members at Silverado Savings & Loan that the loan applicants were his business partners.

Neil Bush paid a $50,000 fine and was banned from banking activities for his role in taking down Silverado, which cost taxpayers $1.3 billion.

If you are interested in the numbers rather than in some of the details, this site has the numbers from 1930 to now.

You will see the big increase during the 1980's and again in 2008 and 2009.

Note that the "Too big to fail" expression was only coined by the Reagan government. Before that FDIC protected depositors, but not investors or officers. In the 1980's the process of protecting officers and investors began.

This was not the intention of the original bank regulations. Of course this would lead investors to want to invest in banks that are "too big to fail." -- This was the beginning of our present troubles and can be reversed....

Oh, please note also that when the US government managed Continental Illinois National Bank and Trust, no one was screaming about Socialism. It was smarter than to leave the crooks in charge as Bush and Obama did this time.

And, BTW, Neil Bush, brother of George W Bush, was the first banker convicted of fraud who didn't go to jail. -- Prior to that, when fraud was uncovered, Bankers paid for their costs to the US Taxpayer....

Americans Don't Feel Health Care Reform Goes Far Enough

noreply@blogger.com (Nancy from www.Mindbridge-loa.com) — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 18:24:00 +0000

Listen up Congress and Senate!

In a new CBS poll , most Americans believe that the Health Care Reform doesn't go far enough, with the next highest marks going to those who believe it goes too far and the least number believing that it is about right. When asked about how it does in controlling costs, the greatest number believe it does not go far enough with the second highest number believing it goes too far and the least again believing that it is about right. The numbers break out the same way when asked whether the current legislation is regulating health insurance costs as it should.

When asked about their support of Democrats or Republican handling of health care reform, the Democrats come out a little better with 57% disapproving of their handling while 61% disapprove of how the Republicans are handling it.

This Industry Does NOT Honor It's Contracts

Some Americans have been caught up in the "anti-government" modality and I honor their commitment, but the health insurance industry testified before Congress that they had the right, and would not give up the right, to cancel the contracts of those who got sick. This they call Rescission of Coverage. Fancy name or not, it means they won't pay your bills if they don't want to.

This industry does not deserve to be supported by government, but yet, there are many Republican and Democratic Blue Dog politicians, and one Independent (Lieberman) who have supported them. Americans are sick and tired of taking second place to Corporations. The poll above shows that although some are cautious of Government regulations, more are fed up with the health insurance industry in the US. The question about regulating this industry had the highest "not far enough" ranking of all the questions above.

The Fillibuster is to Fight Corruption, not to Foster it.

noreply@blogger.com (Nancy from www.Mindbridge-loa.com) — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 16:23:00 +0000

Senate Republicans and Senator Joe Lieberman have forgotten that they are in Washington to serve America. They voted against:

Guaranteed affordable health care ( such as the public option or lowering the Medicare age limit that would offer price protection through competition)
Legislation protecting the insurance customer from being dropped from their insurance
Legislation protecting the insurance customer from arbitrary financial lifetime limits
Legislation protecting the insurance customer from Government interference in their insurance plan (limiting what the private insurance companies cover, such as abortion)

Let's look at it another way. The Republican Senators, and Joe Lieberman voted for:

Forcing 30 million more Americans onto the private health insurance plans without any price protections
Allowing insurance companies to continue to defraud customers into paying premiums when there is no intention to actually pay for their health care
Allowing insurance companies to declare any financial limits as to coverage that they choose
Limiting the type of coverage that private insurance companies can offer (preventing them from paying for legal procedures such as abortion).

Every single Republican Senator voted for the above abuses of the American people. Luckily for us, they lost the vote!

Truth from a Fellow American

noreply@blogger.com (Nancy from www.Mindbridge-loa.com) — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 20:46:00 +0000

Yesterday, I was at the IGA grocery store, and got to talking to the grocery manager who was stocking the shelves behind me. I was looking at the tea, which wasn't on my list. We like an assortment of black and green teas, as well as flavored teas for after dinner, and I was trying to remember which ones we had recently finished. I must have been there long enough that he thought I might be interested in a conversation.

"My wife just called from Walmart" he said, "and whatever they might say about the recession, she says the store is empty."

This triggered my thoughts about Walmart, and as I was shopping at my local store, and he was employed by my local store, I thought it was worth a mention. He seemed to read my mind, because he continued.

"I know what they say about Walmart," he responded, "but they have the lowest prices, and several of he (Mr. Walmart) loses money on several of his products just because he promises to have to lowest prices."

I admitted that they had the lowest prices, and reminded him that I usually shopped locally so that local merchants would stay near where I lived. (The Walmart was 30 miles away.) I then explained the movie about Walmart which he hadn't seen. A couple had an invention and they wanted Walmart to pick it up because that would insure their financial success. Walmart told them the price they wanted to pay for it. This price was much lower than the couple's original plan, and they eventually found that they could only produce it at that price if they had it manufactured in China. They did, and Walmart agreed to sell it for them.

Overseas Manufacturing is Hurting Us

He agreed that it was a shame that US goods were being manufactured overseas, but that if they were the least expensive....

I suggested that the big corporations would do well to remember that if they didn't hire US workers, that there would be an ever shrinking market. If there is no one to buy, there won't be those great big profits for them.

He then told me a story that you would only hear from someone who had been in the grocery business for years and years.

Corporate Greed has Increased Since Owners Have Sold to CEO-run Corporations

He used to work at Waldbaum, when it was owned by Mr. Waldbaum. They marked up their goods about 15%. There were 75,000 full time employees. Mr. Waldbaum paid good wages and took care of his employees as well as his customers. He was a millionaire and his stores did a large business.

A&P then bought the chain. They fired 65,000 full time employees. They increased the markup to 30%. This increased profits greatly, but the chain's revenue dropped to half of what it had been. My grocery manager, Larry, explained that this kind of greed was happening everywhere. We didn't have business owners anymore, but CEO's. And, he added, CEO's don't care about anything but profit and they don't care about anyone but themselves.

He said that when he was young, people were paid well for what they did. He bought his home when he was still in his 20's as many of his friends did. It was a shame that wages were so low for most people these days that they couldn't afford to pay rent, energy, phone and insurance and feed a family and that the CEO's were earning billions. "They will never understand what it's like for most people who have to worry about how to pay their heating bill" he added.

Before Ronald Reagan, corporate CEO's earned no more than 25 times the salary of their lowest paid employee. If the receptionist earned $7/hour, the CEO would earn no more than $175/hour. William McGuire of United Health Group is paid $234 a minute or $14040/hour. There are people in America earning less in a year than he earns in an hour.

Those who are paid these exorbitant salaries are people who can fire 65,000 Americans in a minute and people who can cut off a woman just diagnosed with breast cancer from health insurance for mistating her weight 5 years ago.... These are rare people. These are psychopaths who have no feelings for other people.

There are Solutions:

Larry had some solutions:

Restore the Tariff, so that it will NOT save money to manufacture overseas
Return Taxes on those earning more than $500,000 per year to 90% as it was during Eisenhower's presidency.

Christmas, HR3962 and Stupak

noreply@blogger.com (Nancy from www.Mindbridge-loa.com) — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 21:55:00 +0000

Those who want the Stupak Amendment added to HR3962 are against the "killing of innocent children" no matter whether they are already dead or would be born without a heart or a brain.

We all agree that the killing of healthy innocents is wrong, although some of us think it matters how many cells a zygote has and whether or not that zygote would be able to live after birth. Yet, these same anti-abortion Christians/Jews don't support the public option. I have tried to point out that once those children are born, their families might need support. They then tell me that it is the woman's "personal responsibility".

I have pointed out that the woman was accepting her responsibility when she made the difficult choice to have an abortion, and it was the Christian/Jew who took away her ability to make that decision. Therefore, it becomes the Christian/Jew's responsibility, at least in part I think, to insure that she has the means to properly care for that child.

"No" says the Christian/Jew. She should have kept her pants zipped. (Let's not get into the dress code here....) I pointed out that the man could have kept his pants zipped.... The Christian/Jew answers, that it is their personal responsibility also.

Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness

A person can only be responsible if s/he has life and liberty, and authority over his/her own life.

When the founders wrote the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence, they lived in a land that had water with abundant fish, and in a land with abundant game and timber. Any healthy person with some skills could live abundantly. If a family was large, you simply chopped down a few trees and built an addition to your home. It was more hands for fishing, farming or for cooking. This gave people authority over their own lives.

This is not so true today. For a person living in poverty, it's very difficult to provide for a family. The larger a family becomes, the more stress is put on the family economy. This stress forces a family to make decisions between buying health insurance, or paying the mortgage, or between after school activities and private school, or even Mom's medication and food for dinner. Many upper and middle class men are choosing to have vasectomies to limit family growth.

But, what about the woman whose boyfriend or husband doesn't have a vasectomy? Should she allow all her children to suffer if she becomes pregnant? We certainly can't answer this here, but it is not such a simple problem once a pregnancy has started.

Let's talk a little more about authority over one's life

In urban areas, there is a strong correlation between living or working near a power plant, and respiratory disease. As you probably know, power plants are not generally put in the wealthy areas where people have health insurance. They are built in the poorer areas where people have low paying jobs that don't come with health insurance.

These families without private health insurance take their asthmatic children or elders to the nearest hospital ER or free health clinic. These are costly visits for the US government and are partly responsible for the rapidly increasing costs of Medicare/aid.

Those Christians/Jews who speak so easily of preventing abortions are not accounting for the environmental illnesses that are part of living in a poor area. The poor have less access to clean air, a stress-free environment and fresh vegetables. This contributes to an increased incidence of asthma and other illnesses.

These families do not have the freedom to move to a better location, far from power plants. However, Medicare for all would give these families greater authority over their lives. They would have access to a family physician who could help with preventive care and family planning as well as consistent palliative care.

Community Responsibility

One might expect that the Christian/Jew who insists on preserving life would also seek to protect those lives. This is not the case. Those who speak against abortions do not generally accept the principle of community responsibility. They call this "communism" or "socialism". They speak against community responsibility as an affront to their "freedom".

It is alright for a private health insurance executive to earn a salary of millions of dollars, yet, they are blind to any connection between this salary and the high cost of health insurance. This is "free enterprise". They blame increasing health costs on the government.

In every other country that has government health care, costs are lower and outcomes are better. Their argument is easily refuted, but the anti-abortionists are arguing from principle rather than from fact or history.

So, the anti-abortionist insists that they have the right to prevent a woman from exercising free choice over her family size but that the woman does not have the right to expect any responsible assistance from them.

Right to Life

This is the most absurd phrase in the American political lexicon. Those who identify with this term generally:

Believe in preventing abortions (thus forcing more births) but not in taking care of those children
Believe that most Moslems are political extremists and terrorists and should be killed
Believe that the US has the right to kill and that the soldier can do no wrong until s/he comes home and needs health care and benefits because s/he can't work to support him or herself
Believe that Capital Punishment is a deterrent to murder, and that state sanctioned murder is fine
Believe that doctors who care for women seeking abortions can (or should) be murdered because they murder fetus'
Believe that wealthy CEO's who cause the deaths or illness of other Americans through extreme pollution or rescission of health insurance are not murderers but "free market capitalists" which is somehow close to godliness or sainthood.
Believe that government officials who seek to provide christian charity to those who can't provide for themselves, are anti-American

I have to admit that I can't see the logic in this position. This is a lot of killing for someone who claims to believe in the "right to life." Can anyone explain this to me? Please comment and I promise I will write you back.

Motorola Droid Review

noreply@blogger.com (Nancy from www.Mindbridge-loa.com) — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 17:37:00 +0000

The Newest, thinnest, sliding phone for $199, and with a two year contract you get a $100 rebate! Whoo, hoo.

Great Features:

The Screen is beautiful! It has a very clear display, more clear than the IPhone. A simple tap zooms in or out of an app. And, you can scroll through your contacts on the screen.

The keys on the keyboard are close together and this takes a little practice if you have heavy thumbs.... The virtual keyboard is easier to use and has a nice little vibration when you strike a key.

The Google Maps application is fabulous. You can easily scroll across the map directly on the screen With this phone, you won't need another nav system. It gives perfect directions, quite loudly, and quickly recalculates if you take a different turn.

It allows on screen widgets for easy access. This will please busy Twitter or Facebook users. When the Droid is "on" you are notified immediately of any new Twitter updates. If the Droid is "off" with a dark screen, there's an LED light in the upper right hand corner that flashes different colors for different applications, such as email, or Twitter.

Not So Great...

The Facebook sync is a little tedious as it has no way of separating the "bob"s or the "Trish"s, but you can do this ahead of time by renaming your contacts to match their facebook id's which will be unique.

If you like downloading music, you can copy from your computer by mounting the SD card into your USB and copy the files manually. Or, you can get Sailing Media (WIndows/Mac) to copy ITunes playlists.

As with any Bluetooth phone with a WIFI radio, or any phone that keeps apps up and running, this uses power. Some owners have complained about a short runtime battery. This can be fixed by turning off apps that you aren't using. One user who bought it on Friday, has found that without special treatment, his charge lasts from 8am to 7pm, which is before he generally gets home. One other site set the screen lightness to max, set the media app to "repeat all songs" and the screen to "never sleep". They used 1 hour of Google navigation. They got 7 hours of battery life.

The camera is not the strength of the Droid as many users have complained, but at this time there are only 2 camera apps in the Android marketplace so this will likely get better when there has been more innovation in this area.

General Review by Mobile Tech

Peace is Coming! It's Election Day in the USA

noreply@blogger.com (Nancy from www.Mindbridge-loa.com) — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 17:45:00 +0000

And, health care is coming too, because those of us who want what's good are now focusing on what we want rather than what we don't want. This was a big mistake we made in 2004. I pray that we continue today with the insights that we had in 2008. The article here is one that I just wrote for Ezine Articles. It seemed appropriate for today as well.

Now, take notice of the beautiful blue artwork to the left. This Blog Blast for Peace is the work of Please join if you have a blog. The idea is to flood the blog-world with Dona Nobis Pacem.... But, let Mimi tell you. Click on her artwork to the left.

__________________________________________

According to Universal Law and Ho'oponopono, I'm 100% Responsible For Everything in My Life, and so Are You for Your Life

I'm Sorry. Please forgive me.

This is Ho'oponopono. I am responsible for everything in my life. I can clear, clear, clear by saying, "I love you. I'm sorry. Please forgive me." This simple prayer has cured physical illnesses and mental illnesses. Dr. Hew Len, PhD. learned about it from Morrnah Nalamaku Simeona who healed his child from a life long skin disorder. He studied and became a master of the method and used this cleansing prayer to cure an entire hospital for the criminally insane in Hawaii. Dr. Hew Len explains that it works because once you cure/clean the error in yourself, then those around you who are expressing your error are cured. As he says, "You never saw a psychologist with healthy clients, did you?"

I have been practicing Ho'oponopono since August, 2007 when Joe Vitale's book, Zero Limits came out. I have seen it create change in the lives around me as I take more and more responsibility. The Buddhists, I believe, were the first to notice that we are all One. We are all connected to the One. To give you an example, if I am sorry for my frustrated feelings, ask that they be removed and replace them with love, the crying, screaming child in front of me calms and laughs. If I am feeling frustration at the traffic, and ask to be forgiven, and then replace those feelings with compassion for my fellow drivers and faith that Divinity will get me to wherever I'm going when I need to be there, the traffic almost always improves -- but I do always get to my appointment on time whether or not it does.

How Does this Fit with the Law of Attraction?

What we think about comes about is one of the principles of the Law of Attraction. It's a matter of putting your energy and your attention on to some wanted or unwanted result. It doesn't matter which. If you are attending enthusiastically to your business, and expect to see customers finding you, they will come. If you are worried about your business, and keep looking to see whether or not customers are coming, they will not come.

When Mother Teresa was asked to join an "Anti-War March, she refused. She asked to be invited when they had a "Peace March." This is a story told by Jack Canfield who explains that she understood the Law of Attraction. Of course she did. Look at what she did with nothing! She knew that being positive was the only way to achieve your goals.

This also works with politics:

We watched in 2004 when an unpopular war and an unpopular presidency was elected for two reasons:

What we think about comes about and those who wanted President Bush and Vice President Cheney defeated, could hardly think about anything else.
John Kerry, who was running against them, was not clear about his goals, except to overturn what President Bush and Vice President Cheney had done. He was doing just what his supporters were doing and was thinking about the other guy!

Thus, what we were all thinking about in 2004, the election of President Bush and Vice President Cheney, came about. This is also a principle of advertising. "Say whatever you want about me, but spell my name correctly."

Our reality begins with our thought. Thought moves into vision which might inspire action and vision makes us feel. Feelings change our vibration. This is the Law of Attraction. This is cause and effect.

Ho'oponopono and Cleansing Correction
In 2008, I remembered to think about what I want, rather than what I don't want. In 2000, 2004, and 2008, I didn't want Dick Cheney or torture or Gitmo or Abu Grabbe. I was so passionate about not wanting any of this, that they were re-elected in 2004. By 2008, I had remembered to focus on what I did want, and so did almost 70% of other voters. I did Ho'oponopono and took responsibility.

I focused on my vision of the United States. I chose another dream. I'm sorry. I love you. Many of us did this. We reminded ourselves of what we love about our country. I took responsibility for violence and torture. Ho'oponopono. I'm sorry. I love you. Please forgive me. Thank you.

The new dream was of a fair man who had been raised (because I was getting tired of the fear) in Hawaii, the only state in the union where they still pass a stress test as unstressed. (This is well documented in the book, The Heart's Code.) I remembered that in the United States we dream and work together and don't let our neighbors suffer.

The Acts after the Great Depression:

The Wagner Act of 1935, mandated unions when 51% of the workers voted for them,
The Social Security Act (Act of August 14, 1935) [H. R. 7260] An act to provide for the general welfare by establishing a system of Federal old-age benefits, and by enabling the several States to make more adequate provision for aged persons, blind persons, dependent and crippled children, maternal and child welfare, public health, and the administration of their unemployment compensation laws; to establish a Social Security Board; to raise revenue; and for other purposes and
Fair Labor Standards Act, 1938 - 2009 set a minimum wage and standards regarding overtime and child labor and record keeping.

I remembered that in the United States, there is not a huge difference between the rich and poor. (Prior to President Reagan in 1980, corporations voluntarily held the top salaries of their executives to no more than 25 times the salary of the lowest paid employee.) I remembered that in the United States, a poor boy who has a great dream can become a great man (President Lincoln being a notable example). I remembered that in the United States we appreciate people with different ideas (such as Steve Jobs, adopted as a child, and subsequent travel to India and study of Buddhism and Calligraphy which lead to his development of Apple Computer) because those ideas add to the creativity of our solutions. I remembered that in North America, we have honored Mother Earth (so that in the 1700's, the trees were 200 feet high at the end of Long Island, and the top soil in the Great Plains was 40 inches deep) and learned to live within her tolerances and can do so again.

My new thoughts created a new reality. I had not remembered this in 2004 when I was filled with sadness and distress. My strong feelings for the changes in the land I loved overwhelmed my support of John Kerry, and I caused George Bush and Dick Cheney to be re-elected. I'm sorry. Please forgive me. But, in 2008, I remembered in the nick of time.

Our Ideal, and Our Heartfelt Desires will Always Manifest

This is the Law of Attraction. Take 100% responsibility for this. Ho'oponopono. I love you. Thank you.

I desired a man who was intelligent, calm, kind, articulate and would have the courage to speak to foreign leaders as equals without bullying them.

Our ideas, if connected to strong feelings and strong belief, will always manifest. And, it seems, many people had the same idea. Enough was enough with the torture and disregard of Habeus Corpus. Perhaps we could elect a man who seemed to respect others.

And, like Dwight Eisenhower, President Obama is not afraid to put the corporations in their place (in his proposition to having a Public Option in the health reform bill and laws to ensure that the insurance companies keep to their contracts). Like John F. Kennedy, he has a vision of an innovative America that is not afraid to take risks in order to lead the world to a bright new future (in his support of clean energy).

Let's focus on peace, good health and abundance for all. Let's stop focusing on war. Ho'oponopono. Take 100% responsibility. When you heal the war inside you, and I heal the war inside me, we will have peace.

_______________________________________________________________

Nancy J. Stremmel is the co-owner and developer of: http://www.Mindbridge-LOA.com the compendium of information on the Law of Attraction. She is a writer, licensed Social Worker, educator, artist and therapist. She believes that everyone can make the Law of Attraction work for them.

This was a show of the practical effects of taking 100% responsibility. For more serious studies of the Law of Attraction, I have given access to core historical teachings here. http://www.mindbridge-loa.com/law-of-attraction-theory.html

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Nancy_Stremmel

Medical Bankruptcies

noreply@blogger.com (Nancy from www.Mindbridge-loa.com) — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 21:20:00 +0000

This is great. Al Franken schools Hudson Institute Senior Fellow Diana Furchtgott-Roth about medical bankruptcies.Our bankruptcies in the US are caused about 62% of the time (according to the American Journal of Medicine) by medical costs. And, of those, nearly 78% of the people had medical insurance.

Whoo. How could that happen? I always thought that if you had medical insurance you had access to the greatest medical system in the world! Well, it happens because there is such a thing as "lifetime limit" and if the insurance company can find one mistake in your application (which could be as small as your weight or treatment for acne or asthma when you were ten years old) then they can rescind your application and cancel previous as well as current liabilities.

This was a hearing held the other day in the Senate Judiciary Committee on medical bankruptcies. If you haven't seen it, it's well worth watching.

How Bad is the Deficit?

noreply@blogger.com (Nancy from www.Mindbridge-loa.com) — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 17:48:00 +0000

Are we simply at the precipice before it all is so much easier?

There has been a lot of worry about the deficit, and this is a problem because it adds to the National Debt. The interest on the National Debt is one of the largest items in recent Federal budgets. Just as this is a problem when it's true in a family budget, it's true at the National level. This is something we must deal with or soon it will be the only thing in the budget....

But, there have been some really frightening estimates and proclamations of the catastrophic results of current spending. We wish to allay those fears based on data analyzed by the Congressional Budget Office.

The deficit is dependent on the government's income. This is dependent on taxes. When millions of people are falling off the tax roles and onto the unemployment compensation roles, it makes the deficit bigger and bigger every day. This is not because spending is increasing every day, but because the income is decreasing. This is not the current administration's fault but because the economy exploded in 2008.

It is, however, something this administration must live with, and we have done this before. When Bush took office, the deficit was a surplus of $431 billion each of the prior 3 years before W. This was achieved because Clinton had to live with a pay-as-you-go law passed by Congress. In the past, administrations assumed that this was the way to run a government, but that had been forgotten in the 1980's. This Congress has remembered, in part, because things got so our of control in the last 8 years after the law had lapsed.

According to the Congressional Budget Office, Bush's deficit in 2008 was $459 billion. Now, since this is a budget deficit, and the wars were never in the budget, doesn't that mean that his deficit was even greater?

From the AP

"The deficit will hit $482 billion in the 2009 budget year that will be inherited by Democrat Barack Obama or Republican John McCain, the White House estimated Monday. That figure is sure to rise after adding the tens of billions of dollars in additional Iraq war funding it doesn't include, and the total could be higher yet if the economy ..."

Obama put the wars in the budget. And, when that was written by the AP, they didn't know that the economy would take such a serious and debilitating dive. However, in spite of all this, there is hope in our future.

From the CBO

"CBO estimates that, as the economy recovers, if current
laws and policies remained in place, the deficit would
shrink but remain above $500 billion per year, or more
than 3 percent of GDP....As the economy improves and spending related to the financial rescue and the economic stimulus package tails off, the deficit is projected to gradually diminish; by 2013, it would amount to 3.2 percent of GDP (about the same level as in 2008), under the assumption that various tax provisions expire as scheduled and that discretionary spending rises at the rate of inflation. Between 2013 and 2019, deficits are projected to range from 3.1 percent to 3.4 percent of GDP, well above the 2.4 percent of GDP that they have averaged over the past 40 years."

CBO Summary of Budget 2009, page 6.

According to CBO estimates above, in 4 years, the deficit is going to be at about the same as it was in 2008, 3% of the GDP. Isn't that what even Republicans said was good?

I don't think that is good enough, and neither does Obama, which is why this Democratic Congress passed the pay-as-you-go bill in April. As the economy recovers, this will put us in a position to begin to pay down the National Debt.

We can keep the pressure on our representatives. There is no reason that the Public Option, if a buy in to Medicare, can't support the costs of the seniors even better than private for-profit insurance supports those members who are using their health benefits with those who don't need to use theirs but are continuing to pay premiums.

This could be a win-win!

The National Debt and TARP - Your Money?

noreply@blogger.com (Nancy from www.Mindbridge-loa.com) — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 19:02:00 +0000

Back to serious matters. There have been so many questions about the banks and the bailout money and the Federal Deficit -- your money?

First, since there is such attack on Obama and Democrats right now, I'd like to talk about the national debt in graphic form. If you look right now at the graph of the National Debt from 1940 to the present, you'll see a modest increase during WWII, and then it's almost flat until the Viet Nam War. From 1975 to 1980, it begins to go up. This is the period of Gerald Ford to Jimmy Carter. Gerald Ford came into office during double digit inflation (topping 12% in 1974), high oil prices, and low confidence in government as a result of post Viet Nam, and post Watergate and Richard Nixon's resignation. By March of 1980, inflation and interest rates were topping 18%. Even so, the debt went up moderately, and if you look at the other chart comparing it to GDP, the debt continued a down trend through Carter's presidency.

Then, came Reaganomics, and top-down Supply Side Economics, and huge tax cuts for the rich. Look at the two big rises in National Debt as compared against GDP. Both rises were during the big tax cuts of Reagan and both Bush's. Clinton took back some of the giveaway and reduced the budget still constrained by pay-as-you-go, and the National Debt was greatly curbed. Compared against GDP, it was reduced.

At the beginning of Reagan's term, the National Debt was about $1 trillion. By the time a Democrat was back in the White House, it had climbed to over $3 trillion. Clinton kept it below $6 trillion, tapering off significantly during his last 4 years. Bush lowered taxes again, raising the National Debt to $10.6 trillion by the time he left office.

Now, let's look at the National Debt as compared to GDP, and you'll see that the differences are even more pronounced. National Debt goes down during Democratic control, and up during Reaganomics and the Bush eras.

Finally, the graph from Emmanuel Saez (below) showing the income share of the top .01% of earners, that Paul Krugman published in August of this year. As Thom Hartman keeps saying, tax breaks for the rich result in bubbles which inevitably pop. The dot-com bubble caused by the excitment of a new industry increased incomes across the board, but also created some tremendously wealthy entrepreneurs. The stock market decrease approaching 2000, the end of Clinton's term, lowered the top income from 5% to 3% of total income share and lower than it was in 1986 when Reagan lowered the income tax for the top incomes from 50% to 28% and raised the lower level taxes from 11% to 15%.

George Bush came into office and again lowered taxes every chance he got until we have another serious recession, bordering on depression, and the highest spread of income ever -- at 6%. The peak in 1928-29 resulted in the Great Depression. A peak in 1986 was followed in 1987 by Black Monday and a stock market crash. Again, as Thom Hartmann points out, tax reductions for the rich results in a bubble that pops. This was repeated in 2000 when the stock market crashed again after the .com bubble.

And, this has come to that: The Bank Bailout

There's a list of recipient banks here: at CNN
which shows that about $200 billion was borrowed and about $70 billion has been paid back so far.

Now, where did the money come from in the first place? It was called the Capital Purchase Program and the effort was to prop up capital and make available additional money for lending. It didn't come from the taxpayer. It was part of TARP.

The TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program) allowed the US Treasury Department to buy preferred (non-voting) shares of hundreds of banks. The US taxpayer was told that there would be a modest return including a 5% quarterly dividend. To date, we've seen better than expected profits of 15% or a total of $334 million in profit from the large banks who have repaid their debts and an additional $35 million from 14 smaller banks.

However, to stay realistic, Citigroup and Bank of America are still troubled, and neither is going to repay their bailout money soon. Their stocks have surged this summer, but they are both still sitting on mortgages that don't look good.

Will the Paybacks happen soon enough?

The US Treasury is subject to a Congressional debt limit. In February it was raised to $12.1 trillion. It currently stands at $11.7 trillion and was scheduled to hit the limit in mid-October. There are steps it can take short term to free up cash but none of them are long term solutions. Some of them are an avoidance of investing in Federal employees pension or G fund, or in the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund. Payments to this fund are normally $5.63 billion every month.

The Fed has been one of the biggest buyers of US Treasury's and government backed mortgage debt. What does this mean? The regional banks comprising the Federal Reserve System have agreed to buy the debt of their weaker brothers. In the second quarter, the Fed bought $164 billion of the $339 billion in new Treasurys. The Fed has been buying upward of 80% of the bonds issued by Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. This has propped up the Real Estate market, but in October the Fed is scheduled to stop buying those bonds.

Luckily, US Households have been buying US Treasurys at an unusual rate. Is this because they are unsure about their local banks? This week, the government is auctioning a record $112 billion in debt. If the US citizen continues to buy our national debt, we can at least keep our debt out of foreign hands.

US Debt of George Bush: From $5.6 trillion to $10.6 trillion 1/20/09.

US Debt during year 2009: From $10.6 trillion to $11.8 trillion.

Obama has returned to pay-as-you-go which created the dip in National Debt that we saw during the Clinton years. Please support this practice as it seems to be the only way to constrain the lawmakers. Additionally, the top tax rates are now below what they were during the 1950's and the Eisenhower presidency. This is not helpful. A return even to the Reagan tax rates would greatly reduce the National Debt.

There is a myth being perpetrated that Republicans handle the Nation's money better. Not so. It would seem that they handle their money and our money better while the Nation goes deeper into debt!

People of Walmart

noreply@blogger.com (Nancy from www.Mindbridge-loa.com) — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 16:05:00 +0000

It's a holiday weekend, so we're going to set you up with the funniest web sites. Be the first, or 100,000th on your block depending on where you live, to visit these sites. The first is People of Walmart.

People of Walmart is not easy to get in to, but it is well worth the try. This is one of the hottest, and newest sites (with an Alexa rating of 59,037 in it's first month.) Three friends set it up, Andrew, his brother Adam and their friend Luke. In their own words:

“People of Walmart was founded in August of 2009 by three friends and roommates after an international trip to Walmart. Let’s face it; we all have seen the people who obviously don’t have mirrors and/or family and friends to lock them in a basement, and they all seem to congregate at Walmart. It’s not everywhere that you can shop for milk at 10 a.m. next to a 400lb mother of 6 wearing a pink tube top, leopard tights, and hooker heels.”

You can find the site here: http://peopleofwalmart.com

Race Day: Get there early to get a good seat!

Photos are up by date, and you are allowed to browse the previous day for the best in hairdo's, outfits, cars and pets! It's a "don't miss" from Mindbridge Trends!

They are asking for photos, so grab your camera on your next trip to Walmart if you haven't got anything better to do! Oh, one thing, there is a disclaimer:

"We would also like to stress that we are in no way liable if you get your ass beat by Bubba when he catches you taking his picture. Be discrete, have fun, and Enjoy!"

Once a Flower Child, Always A Flower Child....

Ha. Good heads up. Maybe you should avoid weekends....

Senator Edward Kennedy Remembered

noreply@blogger.com (Nancy from www.Mindbridge-loa.com) — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 20:47:00 +0000

Senator Kennedy always made me cry from pride and hope. Perhaps because he was a lion, and courage makes me cry.

Joe Hill, labor activist convicted of murder, on the day before his execution made a suggestion to his supporters: "Don't Mourn, organize!"

This would be an appropriate way to remember Ted Kennedy. Senator Edward Kennedy did this after burying his 3 brothers who all died serving this country. In his honor, we will do this to help to get the first American health care reform bill passed with a public option.

We can't talk about someone who lived so much of his life in the US Senate without a good by from an old friend, Vice President Joe Biden. In the following video he explains that with Ted as a colleague, idealism was infectious and most recently, they had more hope and faith than they did when they were young.

At this time, when most lawmakers are beholden to fundraisers and their funders, Senator Edward Kennedy was fortunate to come from family wealth. This enabled him to stand tall, and sometimes to stand alone or almost so as when he voted against funds for the war in Iraq. Senator Kennedy never forgot that he was a liberal and that his party was the party of working families rather than the home of lobbyists.

The millions of dollars spent by insurers,and hospitals have already defeated any chance for single payer, but perhaps Senator Kennedy's memory will help to empower the supporters of the public option.

This is a nice 8:22 minute video of Teddy sailing with his family, and about him as spoken by many of his friends from the Senate.

Now, what can an individual do in these last few days before the lawmakers come back?

Learn about the law from the Whitehouse: http://bit.ly/bYAu5
Sign the petition by Schumer/Leahy/Durbin http://www.citizensforapublicoption.com/ This is at 96,571 and it would be far more effective if we pushed it over 1 million. -- Send it to everyone you know! Let's see how fast we can build these numbers.
Call or write to your Congressional Representatives, and your Senators, several times is fine. They are being bombarded, I promise you, by the right wingers who have been fed a stinking sack of poop that they believe is truth. We have to let them know that we are out here, and we are reasonable, and we are watching. https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml Put in your information, and the name of your rep will come up with telephone numbers. Click on the name, and you will get a form for writing an email. http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm This is the Senate site, and you can contact your Senators from here.
Repeat as often as possible....

Glenn Beck's Advertisers Head for the Hills!

noreply@blogger.com (Nancy from www.Mindbridge-loa.com) — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 18:11:00 +0000

There are companies in America which are pulling back their advertising support of right wing hate speech.

They deserve our business. This is wonderful news.

How did it happen? Color of Change.org members have successfully mobilized in one of the fastest and most effective campaigns I have ever seen. Thousands of phone calls were placed and thousands of letters were sent to company executives.

According to Mediamatters.org, and an August 24th, Color of Change press release:

"By the end of the week, three of these companies - Clorox, Lowe's and Sprint - had pledged not to run additional ads; Red Lobster and Vonage have not yet responded.

The new companies distancing themselves from Beck include Airware Inc. (makers of Brez anti-snoring aids), Ancestry.com, AT&T, Blaine Labs Inc., Campbell Soup Company, Clorox, Ditech, The Elations Company, Experian (creator of FreeCreditReport.com), Farmers Insurance Group, Johnson & Johnson (makers of Tylenol), Lowe's, NutriSystem, Sprint, The UPS Store and Verizon Wireless. They join twenty other companies who previously pledged not to run additional ads on Glenn Beck. The moves come after the Fox News Channel host called President Obama a "racist" who "has a deep-seated hatred for white people" during an appearance on Fox & Friends."

The first companies to respect the request to correct their advertising include: Allergan (maker of Restasis), Ally Bank (a unit of GMAC Financial Services), Best Buy, Broadview Security, ConAgra, CVS, GEICO, Lawyers.com, Men’s Wearhouse, Procter & Gamble, Progressive Insurance, RadioShack, Re-Bath, Roche, SC Johnson, Sanofi-Aventis, Sargento, State Farm Insurance, Travelocity and Wal-Mart.

When you visit these companies, let them know that you appreciate their removal of support from Glenn Beck and Fox Network.

You can join and support the campaign to stop sponsorship of Glenn Beck.

Thank you.

Jon Stewart Explains the Health Care Reform Bill

noreply@blogger.com (Nancy from www.Mindbridge-loa.com) — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 23:26:00 +0000

The Health Care Debate?

This explains it all….

From August 17th…..

Part 1

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart

Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c

Exclusive - Betsy McCaughey Extended Interview Pt. 1

www.thedailyshow.com

Daily Show
Full Episodes

Political Humor

Healthcare Protests

Part 2 August 20th

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart

Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c

Exclusive - Betsy McCaughey Extended Interview Pt. 2

www.thedailyshow.com

Daily Show
Full Episodes

Political Humor

Healthcare Protests

She insists that patients are under treated 46% of the time, and only over treated 11% of the time. How can she make that statement, and then suggest that we don’t need this bill?

She could not find anything wrong with paying for a consultation that would cover all end of life choices including the “creation and adherence to orders for life sustaining treatment”. She tried to insist that doctors would get paid less if the patients or their families changed their plans at the last minute, and Jon agreed that would be wrong but that this was not in any way what the bill says.

Jon pointed out that the health insurance companies have already rationed care, and she tried to say that there would be too little money in Medicaid for seniors….. What? Seniors get Medicare, not Medicaid.

She was suggesting a plan that would offer a debit card to uninsured Americans, $1000 to $2000 per year for health insurance. Jon pointed out that the average health care plan costs $5000. Her comment was that he was good at math….

The Return of Feudalism in America

noreply@blogger.com (Nancy from www.Mindbridge-loa.com) — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 20:24:00 +0000

The attack on this public option is a serious and focused attack on the Middle Class in America.

Thom Hartmann reminds us that the rise of a middle class is not natural in a "free and unfettered" economy. It has happened accidentally, only a couple of other times in the history of the world.

It happened after the plague, the black death because there was a sudden change in population and resources were then freed. The increasing demand for labor drove up the price of labor. Many historians, Thom reminds us, credit this emergence of a middle class with the Renaissance.
400 years later, when the wealth of America was "discovered" by Europeans, the increasing wealth balanced by a stable population produced a second middle class. This emerging middle class brought about the Enlightenment and the American Revolution.

As the population in America increased, pushing back the Native Americans into small "reservations", the middle class again decreased. At the time of the Republican Great Depression, President Franklin Roosevelt tackled the question for the first time, "How to create a middle class without killing off a third of the population, or discovering gold in a distant land?"

Previously, capitalism had been uncontrolled. He developed the controls that "saved American capitalism from itself."

The Wagner Act of 1935, mandated unions when 51% of the workers voted for them.

The Social Security Act (Act of August 14, 1935) [H. R. 7260]

An act to provide for the general welfare by establishing a system of Federal old-age benefits, and by enabling the several States to make more adequate provision for aged persons, blind persons, dependent and crippled children, maternal and child welfare, public health, and the administration of their unemployment compensation laws; to establish a Social Security Board; to raise revenue; and for other purposes.

Fair Labor Standards Act, 1938 - 2009 set a minimum wage and standards regarding overtime and child labor and record keeping.

He also instituted government employment through the WPA, CCC, etc. and invested money in roads, bridges, dams, hospitals and schools. These improvements on infrastructure are investments, and not simply expenses as are bombs and other munitions that disappear when used.

The Weimar-style Hyperinflaton, or The 2nd Great Depression:

Ronald Reagan came into office and set about undoing FDR's New Deal, and we have heard more about this from the right wing pundits. Rush Limbaugh never tires of saying, "Roosevelt is dead!"

Ronald Reagan began to lower income taxes, and he lowered the cost of government as well, but this practice was not followed by either of the Bush's. They continued to lower taxes while increasing costs. Borrowing from Saudi Arabia and China, rather than taxing Americans kept the costs of the wars against Iraq and Afghanistan hidden from the concerns of the American taxpayer.

If we look at this chart we can see that the height of the minimum wage in America was in 1968. Since then, we have had an almost steady decline in real wages due to inflation, and a lack of Congressional support for minimum wage increases. There was a recent increase in 2006 after the longest stagnant period since the first minimum wage.

The government is supposed to provide a stable currency to make markets possible. As the Weimar Government failed to do this, so the recent conservatives have failed. The court system should enforce the contracts that make markets possible. Yet, health insurance companies are allowed to rescind customers who develop any ongoing condition, without access to the courts. Congress was appalled during their testimony, but they refused to change their policies.

An educated workforce, through public education, should be able to travel to work on public roads, or over public bridges or through tunnels or on public railroads or buses. These costs have gone up, and the maintenance has gone down. There has not been a major improvement in the public transit system since, well, the 1950's.

If you Google "bridge collapse", there is the Tacoma collapse in 2006, the Indiana collapse in 2009, and the Minneapolis collapse in August 2007. That year, in April, Bob Herbert wrote for The New York Times that

President Truman had signed the Marshall Plan which rebuilt Europe. He pointed out at that time that a half century later, the US couldn't even rebuild New Orleans. He added that the American Society of Civil Engineers claimed that the US infrastructure was in such bad shape that it would take more than $1.5 trillion over a five year period to bring it back to reasonably adequate condition.

Obama's entire stimulus package was only $787 billion, and still the complaints are unrelenting.

New York City raised its own alarm in the 1970's when the West Side Highway, a raised highway in Manhattan collapsed. Afterwards, studies for the city showed that the entire highway system, the bridges, the drinking water system, and the subway system were all seriously and dangerously deteriorated. In the 1980's, iron workers attending to the Manhattan Bridge were given hazardous duty pay because the iron was so rusted in many areas that they could put a finger through the structural iron.

This has been an ongoing project in New York City, with the city absorbing most of the costs. Mr. Felix Rohatyn explains that

"Since the beginning of the republic," he said, "transportation, infrastructure and education have played a central role in advancing the American economy....Politics and ideology are the main reasons that government has turned away from public investment over the past several years. Zealots marching under the banner of small government have been remarkably effective in thwarting efforts to raise taxes or borrow substantial sums for the kind of public investment that has always been essential to a dynamic economy."

Meanwhile, Herbert points out, China and India are racing to develop the infrastructure and education optimal for competition in the contemporary world. Felix Rohatyn explains:

"It has been shown that the productivity of an economy is related to the quality of its infrastructure. For example, if you don't have enough schools to teach your kids, or your kids are taught in schools that have holes in the ceilings, that are dilapidated, they're not going to be as educated and as competitive in a world economy as they need to be."

The economic conservatives for 26 years have managed to undermine the middle class and to empower the wealthy elite while transferring from investment in infrastructure to expensing for war. Even the little bit that Obama scheduled for the infrastructure in his stimulus bill was attacked.

This is not new. Thomas Jefferson first warned of free market corporatists:

"Those seeking profits,were they given total freedom, would not be the ones to trust to keep government pure and our rights secure. Indeed, it has always been those seeking wealth who were the source of corruption in government....I am not among those who fear the people. They, and not the rich, are our dependence for continued freedom. ... We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude."

And, this is why the attacks on Obama and the "health care reform" are so poisonous.

Changing the Tax Structure:

Progressive taxation, was another part of FDR's stimulus plan -- giving workers more to spend and thus stimulating demand for goods and services. In this case, restoring the tax on the upper class in order to insure payment for the public option part of the health care reform, would give more to the middle class to spend.

It is not uncommon for a small business/entrepreneur to pay as much as $26,000/person/year for health insurance. This is the down payment on a house! What other uses would the middle class put this money to if not on health insurance?

As Jefferson said in a 1785 letter to James Madison, "Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise."

Thom Hartmann adds,

As Jefferson realized, and FDR proved, with no government "interference" by setting the rules of the game of business and fair taxation, there will be no middle class.

And as history around the world proves, when the middle class vanishes, democracy often goes with it.

Thom explains in another article : "The policies of "free and open markets" will naturally produce a small and powerful wealthy class, a small "middle" merchant class, and a huge and terrified worker class, traditionally called "serfs". A free market will create a "Dickens-era" state where the working poor are kept in constant fear and anxiety.

Aren't we approaching this today? In this time of recession, as the unemployment figures continue to climb, those yelling at the Town Hall meetings are afraid and angry. They just don't know why. They are not seeing that their real wages have been shrinking since 1968, but they are feeling the pressure.

Who is the REAL ENEMY?

They don't realize that the middle class is under attack when government began to renege on its function to set the rules of business:

in such a way that working people must receive a living wage, labor has the power to organize into unions just as capital can organize into corporations, and domestic industries are protected from overseas competition

Jefferson realized that a strong central Congress would be needed to help to regulate the commerce of the States. Meanwhile, conservatives then, as now, believed in the trickle down theory and that government was the problem not the solution.

Still, they can't explain why the series of tax cuts by the Hoover administration, preceded the Great Depression, and then raising taxes to provide for government intervention, and the protection of labor rights through the 1930's, 1940's and 1950's, led to a golden age for the American Middle Class.

In the 1930's the top tax rate was 25%, and before Reagan began to dismantle it, it held at 70% for decades. As the top tax rate fell, it caused bubbles (in the stock market and housing) and the middle class fell in proportion. It seems that tax cuts to the upper 10% harm our economy, while tax cuts to the bottom 25%, as Jefferson predicted, are good for the economy.

Between Lincoln's death, and the Great Depression, conservative economics and the Gilded Age brought about a return of feudalism, a disparity between those with great wealth and the growth of the working poor. It took 2 generations before Franklin Roosevelt returned to Lincoln's policy of protecting the rights of labor and the founders' tariffs to protect domestic industries and workers.

We must learn the lessons of the past. To do this, I think we have to listen to each other and stop listening to the corporate megaphone. We had a saying in the 1960's -- "Don't trust anyone over 30 years old." Today, I think we can change it a bit to "Don't trust anyone making over $1 million." These guys are not in the Middle Class, and it's not the Middle Class who are paying them. In other words, they do not share our interests or concerns!

Rush Limbaugh -- $400 million (More than Katie Couric, Brian Williams, Charlie Gibson and Diane Sawyer, combined!)
Glenn Beck -- $50 million over 5 years.
Howard Stern -- $500 million
Sean Hannity -- $100 million
Bill O'Reilly -- $9 million

We have a congress and a President who have taken on the $6 Trillion health insurance industry and are doing their best to give the American worker the health care we need at an affordable price. This is not a pretty fight.

Our government needs our help if they will be able to protect our interests.

Who is Responsible for the Deficit?

noreply@blogger.com (Nancy from www.Mindbridge-loa.com) — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 21:33:00 +0000