Category Archives: communications/media

Obama as a witch doctor…

by

…but I’m not racist.  Of course, Faux news is right there to defend this guy in saying there were death threats.  Was anyone arrested?  No?  Then I would question the validity of the person claiming there were death threats.  I mean, really, the guy is trying to play the victim here?  With someone who is in such denial about being a racist, I would question his claim of people threatening his life.
I just don’t see it.

 

Vandana Shiva

by

More from the organic farmers’s group–this article on Vandana Shiva, an intelligent, feminist activist who is a delight to watch whenever she appears on DN!   She doesn’t back down and she has sound arguments to all the corporate-speak.

From the article:

Why do you refer to the term seed slavery?

In another time, some people thought it was alright to own other people as slaves. In our times some corporations think it is alright to own life on earth through patents and intellectual property rights (IPR). Patents are granted for inventions, and life is not an invention. These IPR monopolies on seeds are also creating a new bondage and dependency for farmers who are getting trapped in debt to pay royalties. This is why 270,000 Indian farmers have committed suicide.

Word.

Be sure to click on the Puztai link.  Wow. This falls under  “if you have nothing to hide…”  then why are you trying to quash this information and silence a scientist who made such a discovery…?

 

Now here is a debate

by

DN! has a great segment that actually has a robust debate.  If this had been carried by the radio stations, I just might have stayed up to listen to it.  But with the lackluster “debate” with just Obama and Romney….meh.  The hype surrounding the debate is just that–hype.  Nothing to see here folks, move along.

So…I was glad to see a lively debate with the other two candidates and their raising of issues that the Repubs and Dems would just as soon not bring up–livable wages, for one, and the ceiling on the $100k for Social Security.  Unfortunately, I’m out of time and can’t listen to the whole debate.

Women of Togo March

by

…I guess the go-for-a-week-without-sex-thing didn’t work out so well.  No mention of it, anyway.

In other news, Koch Conservatives are urging women to keep their clothes on for other reasons….

You know, I’m almost disappointed that the election is coming up so soon…things are just starting to get interesting…

…chastity belts will be the next thing advocated by these groups…

The First Amendment in action….

by

Yes, sir!

From Cornell University’s website here.

First Amendment

First amendment: an overview

The First Amendment of the United States Constitution protects the right to freedom of religion and freedom of expression from government interference. See U.S. Const. amend. I. Freedom of expression consists of the rights to freedom of speech, press, assembly and to petition the government for a redress of grievances, and the implied rights of association and belief. The Supreme Court interprets the extent of the protection afforded to these rights. The First Amendment has been interpreted by the Court as applying to the entire federal government even though it is only expressly applicable to Congress. Furthermore, the Court has interpreted, the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as protecting the rights in the First Amendment from interference by state governments. See U.S. Const. amend. XIV.

Two clauses in the First Amendment guarantee freedom of religion. The establishment clause prohibits the government from passing legislation to establish an official religion or preferring one religion over another. It enforces the “separation of church and state.” Some governmental activity related to religion has been declared constitutional by the Supreme Court. For example, providing bus transportation for parochial school students and the enforcement of “blue laws” is not prohibited. The free exercise clause prohibits the government, in most instances, from interfering with a person’s practice of their religion.

The most basic component of freedom of expression is the right of freedom of speech. The right to freedom of speech allows individuals to express themselves without interference or constraint by the government. The Supreme Court requires the government to provide substantial justification for the interference with the right of free speech where it attempts to regulate the content of the speech. A less stringent test is applied for content-neutral legislation. The Supreme Court has also recognized that the government may prohibit some speech that may cause a breach of the peace or cause violence. For more on unprotected and less protected categories of speech see advocacy of illegal action, fighting words, commercial speech and obscenity. The right to free speech includes other mediums of expression that communicate a message.  The level of protection speech receives also depends on the forum in which it takes place.

Despite popular misunderstanding the right to freedom of the press guaranteed by the first amendment is not very different from the right to freedom of speech. It allows an individual to express themselves through publication and dissemination. It is part of the constitutional protection of freedom of expression. It does not afford members of the media any special rights or privileges not afforded to citizens in general.

The right to assemble allows people to gather for peaceful and lawful purposes. Implicit within this right is the right to association and belief. The Supreme Court has expressly recognized that a right to freedom of association and belief is implicit in the First, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments. This implicit right is limited to the right to associate for First Amendment purposes. It does not include a right of social association. The government may prohibit people from knowingly associating in groups that engage and promote illegal activities. The right to associate also prohibits the government from requiring a group to register or disclose its members or from denying government benefits on the basis of an individual’s current or past membership in a particular group. There are exceptions to this rule where the Court finds that governmental interests in disclosure/registration outweigh interference with first amendment rights. The government may also, generally, not compel individuals to express themselves, hold certain beliefs, or belong to particular associations or groups.

The right to petition the government for a redress of grievances guarantees people the right to ask the government to provide relief for a wrong through the courts (litigation) or other governmental action. It works with the right of assembly by allowing people to join together and seek change from the government.

 

Definition from Nolo’s Plain-English Law Dictionary

The amendment to the U.S. Constitution that guarantees freedom of religion, freedom of expression (including speech, press, assembly, association, and belief), and freedom to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Definition provided by Nolo’s Plain-English Law Dictionary.

~~~~~~

And to the First Amendment, goes the Fourth Amendment, which I came up against recently:

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

~~~~~~~

 

 

The coal debate

by

I about fell off my chair when I heard the radio ad that Barack Obama “approves this message”.  I thought it sounded too much like an Onion spoof…but, alas…

The message?  He approves of coal…and fracking as viable energy sources.  Well, not that it’s a surprise that he *still* supports “clean coal”…but I thought that he at least had sense not to endorse fracking…I was apparently wrong.

Story here:  http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2012/09/obama_campaign_says_romney_not.html

Look at the faces of the miners–blackened with coal dust that contains mercury, lead, arsenic, and on...

91% of those children had respiratory problems–what more does it take?!  A 100%??

From the article:

But according to Stephen Lester, science director of the Virginia-based Center for Health, Environment, and Justice, the air quality tests done at Marsh Fork were “extremely limited” and “provide meaningless information” since they did not test specifically for heavy metals like nickel, lead, arsenic, and mercury found in coal dust.  Rather, they conducted standard state tests for mold, air flow, and air filter upkeep

What a joke.  See, if you don’t acknowledge there’s a problem…then they don’t have to do something about it.  And the chemical industry/coal industry/nuclear industry…and on…can continue doing what they do without being held accountable.

A miner’s viewpoint here.

Environmental Working group has this from 2004.  And this from 2001:  the revolving door phenomenon.

This woman is a walking toxic dump.   Good Grief.  This a testament to our body’s ability to withstand a toxic beating and still try to correct the situation…but even the miracle of one’s body has its limits.

The problem with the situation is that as the above article states, scientists are testing folks for toxins in their systems, but they don’t know what it means–it doesn’t mean the presence of disease, but also doesn’t mean there’s no damage done.

From the article:

“Just because it’s there doesn’t mean it’s going to hurt you,” says Bruce Caswell, senior manager of environmental health and safety with the Canadian Chemical Producers Association. But it doesn’t mean it’s not hurting you either. We experience a constant barrage of synthetic stuff, even in the womb. Doses differ as do genetic and physiological vulnerabilities. “None of this belongs in our bodies. Period,” says Riina Bray, a family physician at Women’s College Hospital’s Environmental Health Clinic. Researchers suspect these toxic chemicals have links to a number of cancers, including breast, testicular and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, not to mention reproductive disorders and learning disabilities.

I wonder about the toxin drift as highlighted in this article with David Masty testing positive.  I think the bizarre actions of folks in the last decade or so are related to how toxic our environment is–that we’ve reached our limits of how much our bodies can take before we crash–and the result isn’t always physical, but mental.  This was one of the most surprising aspects of toxic poisoning that I’ve learned on this odyssey I’m on–I had no idea that toxins affected one’s mental abilities.  The medical profession has always treated mental issues as if they were exclusively a problem with the brain–not a likely result of toxic exposure.

And the children being born polluted…it should be enough to make every adult sit up and take notice….

Related to this is the EWG filing suit after Cuomo refuses to release all requested documents.

In my case, although there are numerous red flags, the FDA refuses to recognize that dental amalgams poison people–even though most folks on the mercury support group became sick within a year of amalgam placement.  And I know that living near a coal-burning power plant in the 70s also contributed to my mercury/lead/arsenic load.  Truly, it was when I first had mercury symptoms–only they were minor annoyances that would be misdiagnosed or ignored.

And the USDA is still recommending a diet that is heavily grain based, even though this may mean it is opening the door for mercury/heavy metal poisoning for Celiacs.

…and then the poor sap that falls ill will be met with the “you don’t have a right to food or shelter…”