It is certain that Barbara Ann Radnofsky will be on the ballot for the Democrats in 2010; we don’t know who will be on the ballot for the Republicans. Radnofsky will formally announce her candidacy for Texas Attorney General and her December 3 filling for the primary election in a five-city tour.

Texas Republicans are in disarray, fearing rightwing assaults on one flank, losing membership down now to 40 percent in Texas, and outnumbered by Democrats on the other flank, according to the latest Gallup published polling.  Now, Republicans are uncertain what the most recent announcement from Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison means.  This is typified by a Quorum Report correction in its headline of November 14, 2009: “SREC Can Appoint Abbott to Replace Dewhurst and Cruz to Replace Abbott on Ballot.”

According to Barbara Ann Radnofsky, “Texas Republicans in disarray show they are more concerned about their political ambitions than the people of Texas.”

• The kick off event of her announcement tour will be a meet and greet for Republicans, Independents and Democrats at the home of Ed and Marie Malouf in Dallas on Tuesday, November 17 at 6:00 p.m.

• On Wednesday, November 18, Barbara Ann will attend and make a short announcement prior to the Democratic Gubernatorial Forum at Texas Christian University.

• To conclude her week-long trip and meetings in the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex, Barbara Ann will announce at the Mid Cities Democrats Birthday Bash on Friday, November 20 at 6:30 p.m.

Barbara Ann will continue with an announcement in Austin (December 1, 2009) and conclude her tour with an announcement in her home city of Houston (December 4, 2009).  She will file on the first day on December 3, 2009.   Details regarding the Houston and Austin announcements will follow.

Press are invited to attend.  Barbara Ann will be available for questions prior to and after her announcement speech.

Tuesday, November 17, 2009
6:00 p.m.
Home of Ed and Marie Malouf
6631 Norway Rd
Dallas, Texas 75230

Wednesday, November 18, 2009
6:30 p.m.
Tarrant County Young Democrats Gubernatorial Forum
Texas Christian University, Student Center
The Horned Frog Ballroom, 3rd Floor
2901 Stadium Drive
Fort Worth, Texas 76129

Friday, November 20, 2009
6:30 p.m.
Mid Cities Democrats Birthday Bash
Sheet Metal Workers Union Hall
1020 South Industrial Blvd
Euless, Texas 76040

Contribute now to Barbara Ann Radnofsky

The Texas Progressive Alliance is starting to feel an odd craving for can-shaped servings of cranberry sauce as it brings you this week’s highlights from the blogs.

TXsharon continues to follow the abuses of Aruba Petroleum in a Barnett Shale backyard and Wednesday the Wise County Messenger picked up the story. It’s all on Bluedaze: DRILLING REFORM FOR TEXAS.

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme is really p*ssed that some South Texas Democrats voted against women’s health care.

WhosPlayin posted an interview with Neil Durrance, the Democratic candidate seeking to unseat Michael Burgess in Congressional District 26.

A guest post from the ReEnergize Texas blog is the pick of the week over at Texas Vox, where we were quite disappointed that Georgetown City Council Snubbed Students over Nuclear Power.

WCNews at Eye On Williamson posts on some of the talk this past week about raising the statewide gas tax. All that being said there are only two options to pay for transportation in Texas, which will we choose Taxes or tolls?.

McBlogger takes a look at Sen. Hutchison’s decision not to resign from her Senate seat.

Off the Kuff looks at a threatened outbreak of homophobic behavior in the Houston Mayor’s race.

The War on Christmas starts early at The Texas Cloverleaf, complete with a beach landing at WalMart.

Sue Schechter announced for Harris County Clerk last week and PDiddie at Brains and Eggs caught the press release.

With Thanksgiving almost here, Neil at Texas Liberal ran a picture of a sultry pilgrim holding a turkey, and included in this post information about the status of women in Colonial New England.

To Dave Cashin Re: General Order Number One, Forbid Proselytizing

Before I answer all of Dave’s points, I will say that Humanitarian Missionary work has achieved wonderful results by helping people through hunger, poverty, education and displacement.  Whether they are victims of war or natural disaster, the efforts of those reaching out to help in person or by donation, this is the positive face of missionary work.  I do not lump these humanitarian contributions into the same class as the Missionaries described by Dave Cashin.  I address the Missionaries in the original post describing arrogant, proselytizing by military evangelists in direct defiance of US Military policy.   Warrior Missionaries as described in the 12^th Lausanne Covenent:

“We believe that we are engaged in constant spiritual warfare with the principalities and powers of evil, who are seeking to overthrow the Church and frustrate its task of world evangelization.”

Anyone who has decided that their own understanding of GOD trumps everyone else, is dangerous.  When they claim that others are seeking to overthrow them, they are demonstrating a paranoia.  What makes Abraham’s middle child so insecure?

Dave Cashin:   I find it strange that Christian efforts to reach Muslims with a message of love in Jesus Christ is attacked as something evil.

Response:  If religious propaganda is perceived as “evil”, then so be it.  Anti-Islamic and xenophobic views are at the core of “bringing Jesus to” Muslims.   Burning and defacing Korans are not a “message of love”.  Knowing, in advance, that missionary activity defies and disrespects Islamic Law in an Islamic land.  If “Missionaries” or Christian propagandists are really Democratic, they must give equal time to the Imams.

It is about “domination” wrapped in a “message of love” without regard to consequences or damages.  Remind yourself to review the methodology of the Europeans who “conquered” the indigenous population of the Americas, and justified genocide, by calling them heathens.  Christian Missionaries and Muslim Missionaries are neck and neck in that race.  The intolerant side of Islam and the intolerant side of Christianity are both “evil”.

Dave Cashin:   This is essentially the Islamic viewpoint.

Response:  No, this is essentially the viewpoint of all who disrespect the right of individuals to enjoy the spiritual path of their own choosing.

Dave Cashin:   The author is hereby defending the law of Islam that forbids Muslims from turning away from Islam. Here the author also blames the victims.

Response:  Where do you see me blaming the victims?  I blame the perpetrators.  It is sad that you really believe that.  Despite regulations by the US military’s Central Command that expressly forbid “proselytising of any religion, faith or practice”,  US soldiers have been encouraged to spread the message of their Christian faith among Afghanistan’s predominantly Muslim population.  Encouraging someone to defy the US military regulation, the laws of another country and their religion is corruption. Criminal defiance of US Law is not to be trumped by any religion.  Historically, both Christianity and Islam expanded by conquest and conversion.  Religious conversion by force is well documented throughout history.  Why do you think this is so wonderful?

Dave Cashin:   It is terrible that Muslims who turn to Christ are viciously persecuted, but then Russians who rejected communism were also sent to the gulags. Do we then blame the democracy advocates for the unspeakable “crime” of telling Russians about the advantages of democracy and human rights?

Response:  No one is making a comparison between Russia and Democracy, how do you make that leap? Are you confusing religion and national governance?  All the children of Abraham have shown, historically, a mean streak and posture themselves morally superior to one another.

Dave Cashin:   Missionaries are evil because their sharing of the message of Christ gets Muslims who seek to leave Islam into trouble? Wouldn’t it be better to stand for freedom of speech and freedom of religion rather than advocating views that ultimately reject both?

Response:  The evil is, knowing in advance that by preaching Christianity to a Muslim, in a Muslim country, can get that Muslim, and maybe his family, killed.  Unless, of course, it is the ultimate goal to force potential converts to choose between family and faith.

Dave Cashin:   Wouldn’t it be better to condemn the intolerant Islam than to blame those who suffer under it, or who try to provide another perspective on life in opposition to it?

Response:  It would be better to condemn the intolerant features of both religions.  Do you forget that there are as many variations of Islam as there are of Christianity?  Your words show me that you do not distinguish the details and differences inside these religions.  Not all Islam is violent, just as not all Christianity is violent.  You are lumping generalities together.

Do you not see the dark side of these religions is holding their respective faiths hostage?  No one is above God.  Anyone who claims a personal right to speak FOR God intrudes on God’s right to speak for himself.  Those who pretend that privilege are false prophets themselves.

You have the religious, political and secular angles mixed together with vague generalities.  This is very destructive.  Religion is a personal right. Not a political agenda!

If someone is attracted to your faith, they will seek to learn more about it.  If you are satisfied with your faith, you will be annoyed and maybe insulted if someone approaches you and starts bragging about how their religion is better than yours.

Dave Cashin:   This blog’s view is not a solution to the problem. Everyone needs to advocate for freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Christians are completely free to convert to Islam. Muslims should be completely free to convert to Christianity if they want.

Response:  This blog does not pretend to have all the answers.  This blog seeks to offer a wider viewpoint, to look at the whole forest instead of grinding people’s noses into a tree.  There will always be condemnation by those who disagree.  There will always be subjective unfairness in the world.  The application of common sense and mutual respect is what I would like to see more of.  Respect for one another is a rare commodity with any proud religious extreme.

Dave Cashin:   Have you read Wafa Sultan’s book “A God Who Hates”? She is now suffering many death threats. Is she to be condemned for rocking the boat by showing what Islam is at the core?

Response:  No, I do not need to remind myself that others perceive God differently than I do.  Sorry, if she is being condemned for thinking for herself.  Have you read any books revealing the Dark Side of Christianity?  Salman Rushdie also received death threats.

Dave Cashin:   If we tell people they are not allowed to share about their faith, then even the atheist will eventually be told to shut up!

Response:  Where is your claim for freedom of speech?  Why do you even care about atheists?  They are just being themselves.  The have the right to make just as much noise as any religion.  Why would you want to tell an atheist to shut up?  Do you seek a shouting match with an atheist?  What a waste of time and energy.  Time and energy can be put to better use, like feeding the homeless.

Dave Cashin:   Everyone needs to advocate for freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Christians are completely free to convert to Islam. Muslims should be completely free to convert to Christianity if they want. Any other position than that is working in favor of the jihadists. Any other position than that is an institutionalized set of double-standards. This is simply celebrating tyranny.

Response:  I agree we all need to advocate for freedom of speech, religion and conversion.  How do conclude positions other than your own, are related to jihadists?  Jihad and the Crusades represent the same legacy of hatred.  Crusades were a series of religiously-sanctioned military campaigns waged by much of Christian Europe to restore Christian control of the Holy Land.

Please, if you or anyone is going to make a case for changing someone’s personal belief system, do your homework first.  Understand your own views and how you would feel if I came to you and preached that my views were better.   Wouldn’t it be better if you saw some positive trait in me, and you would want to learn more about it?  Instead, we see “The Whole Church taking the Whole Gospel to the Whole World” or   “The Evangelical Manifesto”.

The Texas Progressive Alliance hopes everyone had a happy Election Day last week, and is already looking forward to the next one. Here are this week’s highlights.

TXsharon continues to report from a backyard in the Barnett Shale. Despite all the local and national press on drilling related toxins, carcinogens and neurotoxins in our air, Aruba Petroleum Refuses a Simple Step to Improve Barnett Shale Air and thereby recklessly and willfully endangers public health and safety. Read it on Bluedaze: DRILLING REFORM FOR TEXAS.

refinish69 announces his endorsement for the Democratic nominee for Texas governor at Doing My Part For The Left. The progressive choice has to be Hank Gilbert with his policy issues and especially his strong stance on GLBT issues. Hank Gilbert for Texas Governor was the only choice refinish69 could make.

Justin at Asian American Action Fund Blog has a thorough take on the results of election day in Houston.

The Texas Cloverleaf provides an election night roundup of some of DFW’s races you never heard of, and some national ones you have.

If you dislike Rep. Dennis Kucinich as much as Mayor McSleaze, there’s probably something right with you.

quizas of South Texas Chisme notes that Galveston medical facilities are among those not notifying about rules for the poor, while CouldBeTrue notes South Texas Democrats join Republicans in shafting poor women. Shame on them.

BossKitty at TruthHugger Let me ‘dis’ the local Austin TV news media who gets around to breaking the Health Care Reform Bill news TWO and a half hours later. Hooray for the House Austin just lives in a bubble.

Over at BlueBloggin, nytexan takes a long look at another disgusting practice of our medical insurance industry. We Have One Twisted Health System, Living Organ Donors Beware. The organ donor’s family is never charged for donating. The family is charged for the cost of all final efforts to save your life, and those costs are sometimes misinterpreted as costs related to organ donation. Surprise for organ donors: unexpected medical bills. Austin man who gave kidney to co-worker is one of many who have faced health complications, billing problems.

Bay Area Houston says Hispanics, the largest voting block in Texas, are not voting.

WhosPlayin learned of an illegal meeting of Lewisville ISD trustees this past Thursday and Friday, and has video of trustees mentioning this blogger when discussing whether to implement video recording of trustee meetings.

Vince at Capitol Annex takes a look at an interesting story about Judge Sharon Keller of Court of Criminal Appeals that was eclipsed by the tragedy at Fort Hood.

Off the Kuff has six questions for the runoffs in Houston.

Harris County Clerk Beverly Kaufman toes the ethical line with her active promotion of an assistant for her job, and the local media thinks that’s just fine. Get the details in PDiddie’s Brains and Eggs.

At TexasKaos, Libby Shaw has news for Cornyn and Sessions about the Republican Resurgence. As she notes:

I wouldn’t gloat too much, boys. Your job in Washington just got a lot harder. Meanwhile, back here at home, in case you boys forgot that Houston is the largest city in Texas, three progressive Democrats and one Republican ran for mayor. The Republican dude and the old white guy with boatloads of bucks lost. The run-off race is between a gay woman and an African American male.

See the rest here: I have news for John Cornyn and Pete Sessions

WCNews at Eye On Williamson reports on the local toll authority’s latest shenanigans, CTRMA to jack up tolls on 183-A, add automatic annual increases.

Neil at Texas Liberal bought Thanksgiving cards drawn by a young person with cancer who is being treated at Houston’s M.D. Anderson Cancer Center. The design Neil bought is both bleak and hopeful.

There was much rejoicing this week at Texas Vox and among the environmental community at large when it was announced that Dr. Al Armendariz was named new Region 6 Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. A Texas EPA administrator that “embodies the ‘Principles for Environmental Leadership and Real Change’”? You better believe it.

So, the wellness party is short lived.  The Senate is drunk with its own power … regardless of the fact there are millions  in health care distress.  Senators are so busy posturing in front of cameras, to get elected.  They continue to sabotage the current administration, ignoring millions of voices in the process.  The naysayers are only beholden to the easily persuaded, koolaide drinking patriots who can be stirred into hateful frenzies.  This roller-coaster is scheduled to derail so the Republicans can redirect those resources back to starting wars.  That’s where their money is.  Without a compliant, pliable audience, these senators would not be able to get away with further disenfranchising such a large portion of the population.

It is all in the hands of the US Senate, now.  If there was ever a time to contact your senator, it is now.  For or against, make your voice be heard.  After all you hired your senator by voting … didn’t you?  Your senator IS your employee, your taxes pay their salary, perks and whatever they choose to admit to.

“The House bill is dead on arrival in the Senate,“ Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said on CBS’ “Face the Nation,” noting that 39 Democrats “bailed out” on the bill Saturday night. “It was a bill written by liberals for liberals. … So the House bill is a non-starter in the Senate.”

The Senate is not considering the House bill at the moment. The chamber has its own version of the legislation, which includes a different version of a government-backed health insurance plan, or “public option,” and different funding mechanisms. But the differences between the two bills would have to be reconciled should the Senate approve its proposal.

Waxman Says ‘No Guarantee’ Amendment Prohibiting Abortion Funding Will Be Retained in Final Version of Health-Care Bill

Abortion an obstacle to health-care bill Some Democrats vow to block final passage if amendment stays

Tough fight in Senate awaits health care bill

“Given the heated and often misleading rhetoric surrounding this legislation, I know that this was a courageous vote for many members of Congress,” Obama said Sunday in a Rose Garden appearance, “and I’m grateful to them and for the rest of their colleagues for taking us this far.

“Now it falls on the United States Senate to take this baton and bring this effort over the finish line,” he said.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., is hoping to bring the issue before the Senate in a week or so, but he has yet to put the finishing touches on the bill that will be the starting point of debate — a blend of versions produced by two committees.

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell on Sunday highlighted the fact that the 39 House Democrats who voted against the bill — mostly conservatives and lawmakers from Republican-leaning districts — represented 1 in 7 Democrats in the House caucus.

“It should serve as a stark reminder that Americans don’t want a 2,000-page, trillion-dollar government experiment,” said McConnell.

Senate Republicans do not expect to derail the legislation entirely, but they do have more latitude than the House GOP to offer amendments that could change the bill — or at least put political pressure on moderate and conservative Democrats.

Even though an abortion amendment was approved, its opponents swallowed hard before voting for final passage.

“Getting the best possible bill that doesn’t pass isn’t legislation,” said Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., who opposed the abortion amendment but voted for the bill. “That’s a therapy session.”

Opponents of House Health Reform Bill Received 15 Percent More in Health Industry Contributions Than Supporters

The U.S. House of Representatives narrowly passed its version of a landmark health insurance reform bill Saturday night, 220-215, and opponents of the measure have received an average of 15 percent more from health industry and health insurance interests over the past 20 years, a Center for Responsive Politics analysis has found.

All but one of the 177-member caucus of the Republican Party opposed the bill, as did 39 members of the Democratic Party. The Center for Responsive Politics found that these members of Congress received an average of $502,650 from health industry and health insurance companies and employees since 1989.

Opposition to the health and well being of Americans is all about money.  Whether it is American Taxpayers or Corporate profits, money will drive the success or failure of American survival.  Americans sit by and watch their collected taxes handed over to “too big to fail” corporations who find it necessary to bribe their ‘financial gurus’ with outlandish bonuses.  But, Americans do not deserve reliable health coverage when they are unable to work.  The operative word is UNABLE.  Opponents target emotional issues to justify discriminating against the unemployed and unable who cannot get insurance.  Abortion is their topic of choice to build their ‘brick wall’.

I find an eerie coincidence that the media hype about 2012 points to  a survival of the species scenario.  There are actually those who are determined to become survivors at the expense of others.  The fewer mouths to feed, the better.  Why continue fanning the flames of wars, allowing hundreds of thousands to die of starvation, like Darfur, unless it is to reduce earth’s population?  This segment of survivors encourage religious stories of Armageddon … End of Days, etc., blame God!  This is a sleight of hand that too many religions have bought in to.  Deceive everyone with rapture so they will perish willingly.  Convince everyone that “it is written” so don’t fight it.  Reduce earth’s population so the ‘few’ can re-populate it.  Sounds like an old sci-fi movie, doesn’t it?  .

Let me ‘dis’ the local Austin television news media.  The 10PM (Austin time) news proclaimed “congress is still debating Health Care” and repeats old news.  But, CSPAN shows the vote passed at 8:15PM (Austin time).  Austin still lives in a bubble.  We are very well versed about the Texas football dramas and Austin icon Leslie,  but US news effecting every American takes a back seat.

Wait … Breaking news at 10:44 PM (Austin time) “the House has passed the Health Care Reform Bill…”  OK, better late news than never …

CSPAN  House Passes health reform legislation

MSNBC BREAKING NEWS: House approves Democrats’ bill to overhaul nation’s health insurance system

CBS  House Passes Health Care Reform Bill, 220 – 215

CNN House pases health care reform bill

Washington Post The House of Representatives on Saturday night passed a sweeping health care bill bya vote of 220-215.

NPR House Passes Health Care Bill

November 7, 2009

I am writing you on this Saturday night from Washington.  It has been a momentous day.  Finally, after decades of debating how to reform our nation’s health care system, with my strong support, the House of Representatives has just approved the Affordable Health Care for America Act (HR 3962) by a narrow vote of 220 to 215.  As a member of the Ways and Means Health Subcommittee, improving access to affordable health care has been one of my top priorities. Now, we are closer to ensuring that in a country as rich as ours, no American will be denied essential care.

The House bill I helped pass offers important new protections for the insured and important improvements to Medicare.  It enjoys the support of AARP, the American Medical Association, the American Cancer Society, the American Nurses Association, and the Consumers Union.  The uninsured are offered a choice of both a public Medicare-type health insurance plan and private insurance. The public option alternative and some of the other provisions are weaker than what I sought, but it is far superior to the Senate opt-out version. The latter would authorize the State of Texas to deny its uninsured families the right to voluntarily select Medicare-type public insurance as an alternative to private insurance monopolies.

But until President Obama has a strong bill on his desk, hard work remains. The Senate is still a challenge because we really do not have a consistent 60 vote Democratic margin to overcome Republican filibusters. Portions of the bill that are already weak, might yet become weaker.

On this historic occasion, there was so much that I wanted to say on your behalf, but the leadership asked me to use the brief time allocated to rebut Republican claims and their phony substitute.  In short, Republicans would do nothing for 95% of the uninsured and permit insurance monopolies to continue denying coverage for pre-existing conditions. To hear my remarks on the House floor today urging my colleagues to reject their bill and support our historic legislation, click here.

Sincerely,
Lloyd Doggett

Healthcare measure faces tough path in Senate

“Take this baton and bring this effort to the finish line,” Obama urged senators on Sunday in an appearance at the White House, saying passage of healthcare reform would represent “their finest moment in public service.”

Democrats have no margin for error — they control exactly 60 seats in the 100-member Senate. Some moderate Democrats have rebelled at Reid’s plan to include a new government-run insurance program, known as the “public option,” in the bill.

BILL Synopsis [click here]

Polarization.  Watching it happen is watching history repeat itself.  American media is focusing on Hasan’s religion more than the cause for his meltdown.   The negligence of the American military to adhere to the precepts of their own American Constitution, First Amendment and take the human condition seriously seems to be ignored by the pre-programmed media. If Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press … then the US Military has failed Congress and the people of the United States.  The American Military Complex is equally responsible for the environment that caused the unnecessary tragedy at Ft Hood.  Failing to enforce the American motto of “Liberty and Justice for All”

Troops’ mental health in spotlight

Civilization has experimented with polarization to achieve goals sought by it’s leaders throughout history. Today, the children of Abraham reach for their ’self-fulfilling’ moment as described by their prophets.  They seek Armageddon to vindicate themselves.  They reach for it using terror.  Pointing their fingers at every crime, associating it with a specific religion allow their followers to fan the flames of hatred.  Each side feels they have exclusive possession of God. Each side feels divinely justified to suppress or destroy in the name of their prophet.  Whatever tipped Hasan over the edge, he just used his religion to justify his actions.  Tragedies don’t JUST happen.  We see Christians harass people every day, especially Muslims.  Anything to justify making another person’s life miserable, demeaning their means of worship, ethnicity, heritage or preference. Abraham is the common patriarch of Judaism, Islam, and Christianity. The infighting among Abraham’s children will make Armageddon happen, as long as each sibling insists it will justify their abominable behavior.

The United States Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed …”  No where in the Declaration or Constitution does it permit radical, self proclaimed “warriors of Jesus” to be exempt from law or the rules founding this country.  Each sibling challenges and taunts the other without regard for collateral damage or consequences.  This is what took place in Kileen Texas.  Bible toting preachers have rallied thoughtless behavior from their congregations and given blessings, in the name of Jesus, to break America’s laws of equal rights.  Conversely, Imams have rallied equally radical behavior in the name of Muhammad.  Rabbis have justified the exclusion of non-jews from the land of their fathers, by quoting old scriptures claiming rights to disputed land from thousands of years ago.  Each child of Abraham has soiled it’s beginnings with extremism, corruption, and flaunting contradictions as truth.

Is Nadal Malik Hasan’s Religion Relevant? by Amy Sullivan

In general, conservatives have held up the shooting as a “we told you so” moment and lectured liberals about the dangers of trusting Muslims, especially in the armed forces. For their part, liberals have insisted Hasan was simply a lunatic whose rampage was unrelated to his religious affiliation and decry attempts to draw a connection as “double standards.”

Religious extremism: the good, the bad, and the deadly Laurence R. Iannaccone Department of Economics, George Mason University, Eli Berman Department of Economics, University of California at San Diego’ Prepared for a special issue of Public Choice on the Political Economy of Terrorism, edited by Charles Rowley.

Adam Smith laid the foundation for the economic analysis of religion in 1776. In The Wealth of Nations, Smith (1965, pp. 740-766) argued that self-interest motivates clergy just as it does secular producers; that market forces constrain churches just as they constrain secular firms; and that the benefits of competition, the burdens of monopoly, and the hazards of government regulation are as real for religion as for any other sector of the economy.

The political economy of freedom, democracy and terrorism PETER KURRILD-KLITGAARD, MOGENS K. JUSTESEN & ROBERT KLEMMENSEN,  Dept. of Political Science and Public Management, University of Southern Denmark

Social Fractionalization, Political Instability, and the Size of Government ANTHONY ANNETT (IMF) Working Paper No. 00/82 Published:  April 1, 2000

This paper explores the relationship between the degree of division or fractionalization of a country’s population (along ethnolinguistic and religious dimensions) and both political instability and government consumption, using a neoclassical growth model. The principal idea is that greater fractionalization, proxying for the degree of conflict in society, leads to political instability, which in turn leads to higher government consumption aimed at placating the opposition. There is also a feedback mechanism whereby the higher consumption leads to less instability as government consumption reduces the risk of losing office. Empirical evidence based on panel estimation supports this hypothesis. [JEL E62, 023]

When countries are heavily divided along ethnic, religious, communal, and regional lines, they are likely to experience bouts of political violence and are prone to the frequent breakdown of law and order. Clearly, serious conflict between competing groups, especially violent conflict, would be harmful to economic growth and the process of development. In such a divided country, can the government use expenditure to appease the competing groups and will this contain the potential conflict?

On The Roots of Religious Fractionalization by Murat Iyigun

RELIGIOUS EXTREMISM – RELIGIOUS RIGHT article collection compiled by Sheila Musaji

A very illuminating series by Professor Steven Yates

• The Four Cardinal Errors That Almost Destroyed America, Part 4, 10-1-09
• The Four Cardinal Errors That Almost Destroyed America, Part 3, 9-17-09
• The Four Cardinal Errors That Almost Destroyed America, Part 2, 9-27-09
• The Four Cardinal Errors That Almost Destroyed America, Part 1, 9-13-09

Looking to Other Religions, and to Atheism, for Clarity in Faith

Colin Powell speech at the University of Oklahoma: “What is the greatest threat facing us now?” Powell asked. “People will say it’s terrorism. But are there any terrorists in the world who can change the American way of life or our political system? No. … The only thing that can really destroy us is us.

We shouldn’t do it to ourselves, and we shouldn’t use fear for political purposes—scaring people to death so they will vote for you, or scaring people to death so that we create a terror-industrial complex.”

We’re spending an enormous amount of money on homeland security, and I think we should spend whatever it takes. But I think we have to be careful that we don’t get so caught up in trying to throw money at the terrorist and counter-terrorist problem that we’re essentially creating an industry that will only exist as long as you keep the terrorist threat pumped up. … Let’s make sure that we are spending money on the right things and not spending money just to spend money.”

The original model for Powell’s statements — President Eisenhower’s 1961 farewell address — was primarily concerned with the threat to a free society of granting “unwarranted influence” over US policy to a “military-industrial complex” of defense contractors and national security think-tanks that might “endanger our liberties or democratic processes.”

Don’t forget Timothy McVeigh was a radical Christian who prayed before he set off the bomb in Oklahoma City.

Shooting Violence: A Reason Why?

The status quo for health insurers is minimalist investment in customers, maximum investment into political influence.  Greasy palms are the face of public health insurance in congress.  Genuine discussion about cost effectiveness and practical application take a back seat to the fears of equity in overall health of this country’s population.

Surprise for organ donors: unexpected medical bills

Austin man who gave kidney to co-worker is one of many who have faced health complications, billing problems.

There is a great big gap in credibility here. Insurance companies play god based on computer models and cost basis.  Whoever you pray to seldom drops money in your hand to pay for life giving treatment.  Unless you are self healing, the miracles of medical technology are for sale only.

The organ donor’s family is never charged for donating. The family is charged for the cost of all final efforts to save your life, and those costs are sometimes misinterpreted as costs related to organ donation. Costs for organ removal go to the transplant recipient.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Advisory Committee on Organ Transplantation

ACOT further recommends that the following Standards of Disclosure: Elements of Informed Consent be incorporated in the informed consent document given to the potential live organ donor, with specific descriptions that would ensure the donor’s awareness of:

• the purpose of the donation
• the evaluation process — including interviews, examinations, laboratory tests, and other procedures — and the possibility that the potential donor may be found ineligible to donate
• the donation surgical procedure
• the alternative procedures or courses of treatment for potential donor and recipient
• any procedures which are or may be considered to be experimental
• the immediate recovery period and the anticipated post-operative course of care
• the foreseeable risks or discomforts to the potential donor
• the potential psychological effects resulting from the process of donation
• the reported national experience, transplant center and surgeon-specific statistics of donor outcomes, including the possibility that the donor may subsequently experience organ failure and/or disability or death
• the foreseeable risks, discomforts, and survival benefit to the potential recipient
• the reported national experience and transplant center statistics of recipient outcomes, including failure of the donated organ and the possibility of recipient death
• the fact that the potential donor’s participation is voluntary, and may be withdrawn at any time
• the fact that the potential donor may derive a medical benefit by having a previously undetected health problem diagnosed as a result of the evaluation process
• the fact that the potential donor undertakes risk and derives no medical benefit from the operative procedure of donation
• the fact that unforeseen future risks or medical uncertainties may not be identifiable at the time of donation
• the fact that the potential donor may be reimbursed for the personal expenses of travel, housing, and lost wages related to donation
• the prohibition against the donor otherwise receiving any valuable consideration (including monetary or material gain) for agreeing to be a donor
• the fact that the donor’s existing health and disability insurance may not cover the potential long-term costs and medical and psychological consequences of donation
• the fact that the donor’s act of donation may adversely affect the donor’s future eligibility for health, disability, or life insurance
• additional informational resources relating to live organ donation (possibly through the establishment of a separate resources center, as separately recommended)
• the fact that Government approved agencies and contractors will be able to obtain information regarding the donor’s health for life and
• the principles of confidentiality, clarifying that:
  • communication between the donor and the transplant center will remain confidential;
  • a decision by the potential donor not to proceed with the donation will only be disclosed with the consent of the potential donor;
  • the transplant center will share the donor’s identity and other medical information with entities involved in the procurement and transplantation of organs, as well as registries that are legally charged to follow donor outcomes; and
  • confidentiality of all patient information will be maintained in accord with applicable laws and regulations.

Financial Information for Living Donors

The sad state of health service in America overturns national pride and arrogance.  The dream country of the world flaunts its flushing toilets, Walmarts and gas guzzlers while neglecting its public wellness.  The contradictions are glaring and ignored by insurance corporations.  Make the maze of health care so complicated that actual diagnosis and treatment is just out of reach for the retired, unemployed and recently victimized by mortgage con artists.  The America we see today is a land of the lucky and unlucky trying to balance honesty and virtue against survival.  The virtue of organ donation is now marred by the shuffling of “who’s paying for all of this”, not us.  The system has cannibalized itself.  Insurance is the holy grail for Americans who are honest enough to understand that the toxic world we live in makes staying healthy a challenge.  Those lucky enough to have genetics strong enough, to hide potential catastrophic illnesses from insurance scrutiny, will then face the inquisition of combing through life histories looking for “pre-existing conditions” worthy of denial.

This is a different America we face today.  Citizens are no longer in charge.  Media, owned by corporations, imaged by marketers is what feeds information to Americans.  Today, the best advertiser wins.  Right now, it appears the advertisers own more Republicans than Democrats … but that gap is closing.  Yes, any solution will be expensive.  More importantly, an inadequate solution will cost even more.  America’s ability to claim world leadership is being undermined by the fading vestiges of the corporate grabfest.  Corporate executives have the funds to insure their future is paved with gold, along with their personal politicians.  Is this really class warfare?  Why does it look more and more like class warfare?  There are whole segments of American society that still have no clue that they have a role in their own future.  That role was bought and paid for long ago by America’s founding fathers.  Without passing judgement on why America has clueless segments of society, they are the tools used by special interests, because they are easily manipulated, bought or coerced.  The system is rotting from the inside out.  Sick social ethic, sick country.  Other countries see how America treats it’s own.  Other countries see through the deception.  America right now is watching it’s future being played out like a ball game.  Each team has its fans.  But, the stakes are too high.

Coast Guard to review exercise after Potomac security scare

Security incident on Potomac River prompted by “training exercise,” two police sources say Coast Guard told them.

With the nation already on edge and somewhat paranoid on September 11 each year, what is the LAST thing you want to do?  Hold a training exercise and fire shots for an audience of passersby, near one of the casualties of the real 9/11 sites.  CNN:

• Story Highlights
• Obama reportedly left Pentagon about the time incident began
• Coast Guard tries to prevent boat from entering Potomac River secure zone
• Incident occurs near Pentagon, where president was observing 9/11 anniversary
• Coast Guard fires 10 shots, unconfirmed reports say

This distraction would have been a great opportunity for a real terrorist with a real target to go unchallenged.  Interesting that CNN was the only network on top of the story while it was breaking news.

CONGRESSMAN BACHUS STATEMENT ON PRESIDENT OBAMA’S HEALTH CARE ADDRESS

Fines proposed for going without health insurance

WASHINGTON – Americans would be fined up to $3,800 for failing to buy health insurance under a plan that circulated in Congress on Tuesday as divisions among Democrats undercut President Barack Obama’s effort to regain traction on his health care overhaul.

Just as auto coverage is now mandatory in nearly all states, Baucus would require that all Americans get health insurance once the system is overhauled. Penalties for failing to do so would start at $750 a year for individuals and $1,500 for families. Households making more than three times the federal poverty level — about $66,000 for a family of four — would face the maximum fines. For families, it would be $3,800, and for individuals, $950.

Baucus would offer tax credits to help pay premiums for households making up to three times the poverty level, and for small employers paying about average middle-class wages. People working for companies that offer coverage could avoid the fines by signing up.

The fines pose a dilemma for Obama. As a candidate, the president campaigned hard against making health insurance a requirement, and fining people for not getting it.

Is Spencer Bachus a “birther”?

As Obama talked strategy with Democratic leaders at the White House, the one idea that most appeals to his party’s liberal base lost ground in Congress. Prospects for a government-run plan to compete with private insurers sank as a leading moderate Democrat said he could no longer support the idea.

The fast-moving developments put Obama in a box. As a candidate, he opposed fines to force individuals to buy health insurance, and he supported setting up a public insurance plan. On Tuesday, fellow Democrats publicly begged to differ on both ideas.

Congressman Spencer Bachus (R-Alabama) predicts that the Social Security Trust Fund could be running a deficit as early as next year.

“[This development comes] at a time when…the federal government is having to constantly increase spending for [Medicare]; when we’ve expanded SCHIP, which is a children’s healthcare program; when we’ve added new healthcare benefits for the unemployed, all of which jeopardize those who are paying into Medicare and their benefits,” he points out.

Myths and Falsehoods About Health Care Reform

Five myths about health care around the world

Mandatory Health Insurance

The individual mandate is a requirement that all Massachusetts residents over the age of 18, for whom available health insurance is affordable, obtain and maintain health insurance that meets minimum coverage requirements beginning July 1, 2007.

Individuals who cannot show proof of health insurance coverage by Dec. 31, 2007, will lose their personal income tax exemption when filing their 2007 income taxes.   The 2006 personal exemption is $3,850 for an individual, which translates into a tax savings of approximately $204 for an individual (5.3 percent of $3,850).

Failure to meet the requirement in 2008 will result in a fine for each month the individual does not have coverage. The fine will equal 50 percent of the least costly, available insurance premium that meets the standard for creditable coverage.

As long as the hatred of Obama drives the Republican Party, critical issues will never be given a serious debate or consideration.  The hate mongers, so popular during the Bush era, are flailing their arms and blowing fire at real governance.  They shout socialism and communism accusations to blow life back into the embers of the cold war, hoping to  rekindle their own credibility.  They are no longer credible.  Time has passed their relevancy by.  The new terror is the misinformation and disinformaton they spew to plant doubt onto truth.  Truth is always ellusive, but dissing it before it can be vetted is just like the mis informed comment most often told is that in 1899 the head of the U.S. Patent Office sent his resignation to President McKinley urging the closing of the office because “everything that could be invented has been invented.” It’s been told and retold so often that even President Reagan used it in a speech. US patent office closing rumour was a hoax at best and misquote at worst. But as an urban legend it was a hit.  Republicans love to invent legends and claim they are true.  This is what they are doing right now to “get rid of Obama”.  Republicans have put their craziest, most radical, most hateful foot forward again.  Regardless who suffers the most, they just want the “old days” back where whites were supreme and entitled to more than anyone else.  To hell with the rest of us.

Rumor had it that, back in 1899, U.S. Commissioner of Patents Charles H. Duell declared that everything that could be invented had been invented. In actuality, Duell’s supposed comment and his recommendation that the Patent Office be closed down proved an urban myth. Of course, that didn’t prevent the metaphor from being abused by pundits or by presidential speechwriters.