brief narrative VICTORY FOR OBAMA!

Posted: November 5th, 2008 | Author: | Filed under: Humor | 1 Comment »

Is it just me, or do you all have the feeling that we have finally taken our country back?

so I wanted to make it clear to all of you the joy that has seeped into what seemed at first like such a dry weather day. I got up parched, but before I thought of water I ran to the television set to see who had won the election. "Senator Barack Obama president elect" it read on the screen. yes! I was so excited! I woke up my family, I went to work, I read the news and saw that Florida passed the ban on gay marriage. :(

But there were victory donuts on the table so I ate away my sorrow. Then we played a joke on a coworker named Cynthia McKinney, who has a doppleganger in name only that ran for president. We signed a card and gave her a cake that said "McKinney 2012" in red icing. It was hilarious. I don’t think she thought it was as funny as us pranksters. whatever. it was still awesome.


sex on tv = teen pregnancy says study

Posted: November 4th, 2008 | Author: | Filed under: Women | 1 Comment »

girls can protect themselves if they’re educated. they do everything except mention sexual education in this article. I wonder what the correlation is between abstinence-only education and teen preganancy, don’t you?

http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/11/03/teen.pregnancy/index.html

Study links sexual content on TV to teen pregnancy

By Elizabeth Landau
CNN

(CNN) — Sexual content on television is strongly associated with teen pregnancy, a new study from the RAND Corporation shows.

Researchers at the nonprofit organization found that adolescents with a high level of exposure to television shows with sexual content are twice as likely to get pregnant or impregnate someone as those who saw fewer programs of this kind over a period of three years. It is the first study to demonstrate this association, RAND said.

A central message from the study is that there needs to be more dialogue about sex in the media, particularly among parents and their children, said Anita Chandra, the study’s lead author and a behavioral scientist at RAND.

"We know that parents are busy, but sitting down and watching shows together with their teen, talking about the character portrayals, talking about what they just witnessed, and really using it as a teachable moment is really, I think, a good recommendation from this research," Chandra said.

To measure exposure, the researchers used a method developed by another research group evaluating 23 shows for sexual content. Then, they asked teenagers how frequently they watched each of those shows, and developed a score based on exposure to the shows. Watch the results of the study »

"We know that if a child is watching more than an hour of TV a day, we know there’s a sexual scene in [the] content every 10 minutes, then they’re getting a fair amount of sexual content," Chandra said.

Melody Monroe of Norfolk, Virginia, who had her first child when she was 17, said she agrees that sex on television contributes to teen pregnancy. Monroe, who shared some of her views on iReport.com, recalls watching shows on Lifetime Television with her mother that were "almost soft porn," with kissing and bedroom scenes.

"Oh, the guy gets the girl, they fall in love, happily ever after, babies come, I thought that was one way of being loved," said Monroe, now 26. "Happily ever after doesn’t happen." iReport.com: Were you a teenage parent? Share your story

But Sandy Tomlinson of Glendale, Arizona, who had her son at age 15, said she doesn’t think television affects teen pregnancy — rather, teen pregnancy has to do with the way parents raise their children.

"I feel that if my parents would have been more involved in my life that I would have made different choices," said Tomlinson, now 27, who also shared her story with iReport.com. "It gets old hearing all these studies that blame everything and everybody but the parents."

The RAND study, published in the November edition of the journal Pediatrics, looked at the results of three surveys of about 2,000 adolescents ages 12 to 17 from 2001 to 2004. It focused on the results from more than 700 participants nationwide who had engaged in sexual intercourse by the third survey.

Researchers asked adolescents about a mix of sitcoms, dramas, animated shows and reality shows known to have sexual content. Chandra declined to name any specific programs, but said sexual content is "pretty pervasive."

While this is one of many factors that influence teen pregnancy, the study is compelling, given that adolescents spend a significant amount of time watching television, Chandra said. The information will help develop prevention programs for kids that focus on media literacy, she said.

Even when accounting for other related factors such as demographics and risk-taking behaviors, the correlation between televised sexual content and teen pregnancy persisted, she said.

The study also found that adolescents living in a two-parent household had a lower probability of pregnancy.

African-Americans, girls, and adolescents with behavioral problems had a higher likelihood of getting pregnant or impregnating someone, as did youths who intend to have children early, the study showed.

A strong association between sexual content on television and teen pregnancy is not surprising, said Dr. Yolanda Wimberly, an assistant professor of clinical pediatrics at the Morehouse School of Medicine and the medical director for the Center for Excellence in Sexual Health. Wimberly, who works in an adolescent clinic, was not involved in the study.

"You cannot expect to have a sexually saturated society with all of your media outlets, but then, at the same time, be surprised when this influences people and their behaviors," she said. "If you’re going to do it, then you need to make sure you follow it up with education that people need to make responsible decisions."

It’s crucial that parents and guardians talk to their kids about these topics and teach morals and values, but they can do only so much in limiting the amount of sexual content that their teenagers see on television, Wimberly said. Youths will have exposure to these programs outside of the home, such as at friends’ houses or on the Internet.

Experts say television shows rarely portray the risks of sex and often don’t mention contraception. But previous research from RAND showed that content that includes negative consequences, such as sexually transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancies, can be educational for teens.

Previous RAND research also showed that teens who watch a lot of television with sexual content are more likely to initiate intercourse the following year.

The National Institutes of Health reported in July that teen pregnancies rose in the United States from 2005 to 2006 for the first time since 1991.


almost a physicist

Posted: October 13th, 2008 | Author: | Filed under: Physics | 5 Comments »

I almost became a physicist. I didn’t because I disagreed with a large portion of it.

For one: they still use mathematical systems that don’t really work, and they know they don’t really work, but it’s close enough and they’re fucking lazy and won’t create a system that’s accurate.

Second: I disagree with the definition of gravity. holy crap, I know I sound crazy for saying so, but I do. It makes sense in context of other theories that just as electrons belong to an atom, we belong to our planet and have a space to occupy that isn’t supposed to escape. A little bit of escape is ok, just as a little bit of intake (meteorites) is ok. (ie, it’s not because earth is big and we’re small, it’s because we’re part of the earth, duh) Our planet is too complex in terms of chemicals for it to be a bubble. My thoughts take me along a route that I just can’t put in an lj entry.

Third: I just want to write. I’ll throw my ideas out there through literature and see if some self-hating scientist wants to pick it up.

Please to comment your thoughts


weekly watchathon

Posted: October 7th, 2008 | Author: | Filed under: Film | 1 Comment »

Let’s do it! Every week, we should all get together in Tallahassee and wherever everywhere to watch a really terrific, mindblowing documentary. It could even inform the theme of the paper magazines we’ll be pumping out. Every week a different one of us could write the review, or we could collaborate on the reviews, either way. Before the viewing, we could have our meetings and brainstorm. If everyone statewide watched the same movie at the same time, we would have an explosion of commentary on the website regarding the film, which would be a great boost as well.

Occasionally we could do something besides a documentary, too…like just really cool movies with a progressive themes, like Stranger Than Fiction. :) I’m ready to get excited! It’s autumn! Let’s go jump in a pile of leaves together and then write about it!


The real story of Russia’s attack on Georgia

Posted: August 20th, 2008 | Author: | Filed under: Current Events | No Comments »

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bernardhenri-levy/georgia-at-war-what-i-saw_b_120076.html

The first thing that strikes me as soon as we are out of Tbilisi is the strange absence of military force. I had read that the Georgian army, defeated in Ossetia, then routed in Gori, had withdrawn to the capital to defend it. I reach the outskirts of the city, moving forty kilometers on the highway that slices through the country from east to west. But I see almost no trace of the army which has supposedly regrouped in order to fiercely resist the Russian invasion. Here we see a police station. A little farther on, a handful of soldiers, their uniforms still too new. But no combat units. No anti-aircraft weaponry. Not even the trenches and zigzagging fortifications which, in all the besieged cities of the world, are set up to at least slightly impede the enemy’s advance. A dispatch received while we are driving announces that Russian tanks are now approaching the capital. The information is relayed by various radio stations and then finally denied, creating unspeakable chaos and making the few cars which had ventured outside the city turn back immediately. But the authorities, the powers that be, seem strangely to have given up.

Is the Georgian army there, but hiding? Ready to intervene but also invisible? Are we perhaps in the middle of one of those wars in which the supreme ruse is to let yourself be seen as little as possible, the way they did in the forgotten wars of Africa? Or has President Saakashvili deliberately chosen non-combat as a way to force us, the Europeans and Americans, to accept our responsibilities ("You claim to be our friends? You have said a hundred times that with our democratic institutions, our wish to become part of Europe, our government composed of — unique in the annals of history – an Anglo-Georgian Prime Minister, American-Georgian cabinet ministers, an Israelo-Georgian Minister of Defense – is the first in its Western class? Well, now is the time to step up and prove it."). I don’t know. The fact is that the first significant military presence we run into is a long Russian convoy, at least one hundred vehicles long, headed in the direction of Tbilisi, casually waiting to get gas. Then, forty kilometers outside the city, around Okami, we see a battalion, as usual Russian, attached to a unit of armored vehicles whose role is to stop journalists from going one direction and refugees from going the other.

One of them, a peasant, wounded in the forehead, still dazed and terrified, tells me the story of fleeing his village in Ossetia on foot, three days ago. The Russians arrived, and in their wake, Cossack and Ossetian gangs pillaged, raped and murdered. As they did in Chechnya, they rounded up the young men and drove them away in trucks, to unknown destinations. Fathers were killed in front of their sons. Sons were killed in front of their fathers. In the basement of a house which they blew up with propane cylinders they had collected, they came upon a family and stripped them of everything they had tried to hide and then forced the adults to kneel down and executed them with a single shot to the head. The Russian officer in charge at the check point listens to the story. But he doesn’t care. In any case he looks like he has been drinking too much and he just doesn’t care. For him, the war is over. No scrap of paper, a ceasefire, a five or six-point agreement- will change his victory. And this pathetic refugee can say whatever he wants.

II

As we approach Gori, the situation is different, the tension is suddenly palpable. Georgian jeeps are sprawled in the ditches on the sides of the road. Farther along is a burnt-out tank. Even farther along is a more important check point which completely blocks the group of journalists we have joined. And it is here that we are clearly told that we are no longer welcome, "You are in Russian territory now," barks an officer puffed up with importance. "Only those with Russian accreditation may go farther." Fortunately a car with diplomatic flags comes up. It belongs to the Estonian Ambassador, and is carrying the Ambassador and Alexander Lomaia, the Secretary of Georgia’s National Security Council, who is authorized to go behind the Russian lines to look for the wounded. He agrees to take me with him, as well as the European deputy Marie-Anne Isler-Béguin and Tara Bahrampour from the Washington Post. "I cannot guarantee anyone’s safety, is that clear?" Lomaia asks. Yes. It is clear. And we all pile into the Audi and head toward Gori.

After crossing through six new check points, one of which consists of a tree trunk hoisted up and down by a winch commanded by a group of paramilitaries, we arrive in Gori. We are not in the center of the city. But from where Lomaia has dropped us, before taking off in the Audi to collect his wounded, from this intersection dominated by an enormous tank as big as a rolling bunker, we can see fires burning everywhere. Rockets lighting up the sky at regular intervals, followed by short detonations. The emptiness. The slight odor of putrefaction and death. Most of all, the incessant rumbling of armored vehicles. Almost every other car is an unmarked car jammed with militia, recognizable because of their white armbands and their headbands. Gori does not belong to the Ossetia which the Russians claim they have come to "liberate." It is a Georgian town. And they have burned it down, pillaged it, reduced it to a ghost town. Emptied.

"It’s logical," explains General Vyachislav Borisov, as we stand in the stench and the night waiting for Lomaia to return. "We are here because the Georgians are incompetent, because their administration collapsed and the town was being looted. Look at this," showing me on his cell phone photographs of weapons of Israeli origin, which he emphasizes heavily, "Do you think we could leave all this lying around without supervision? And let me tell you," he struts around, striking a match to light a cigarette, startling the little blond tank gunner who had fallen asleep in his turret, "We summoned the Israeli Foreign Minister to Moscow. And he was told that if he continues to supply arms to the Georgians we would continue to supply Hezbollah and Hamas." We would continue? What an admission! Two hours go by. Two hours of bragging and threats. Sometimes a passing car would slow, but it would change its mind after noticing the tank and speed off. Finally Lomaia came back, bringing with him an old woman and the pregnant woman he had pulled from hell, and asked us to take them back to Tbilisi.

III
President Saakashvili, accompanied by his counselor Daniel Kunnin, listens to my story. We are in the Presidential residence of Avlabari. It is two AM but the noria of his counselors is working as it would during business hours. He is young. Very young. With a youthfulness which can be seen in the impatience of his movements, the intensity of his gaze, his abrupt laughter, even the way he guzzles cans of Red Bull as if it were Coca-Cola. All of these people in fact are very young. All these ministers and counselors were students sponsored by various Soros-type foundations, whose studies at Yale, Princeton and Chicago were interrupted by the Rose Revolution. He is a francophile and speaks French. Keen on philosophy. A democrat. A European. A liberal in both the American and European senses of the word. Of all the great resistance fighters I have met in my life, of all the Massouds and Izetbegovics I have had occasion to defend, he is the one who is the most unfamiliar with war, its rites, its emblems, its culture – but he is dealing with it.

"Let me make one thing clear," he interrupts me, with a sudden gravity. "We cannot let them say that we started this war … It was early August. My ministers were on vacation, as I was too, in Italy, at a weight-loss spa, getting ready to go to Beijing. Then in the Italian press I read, "War preparations are under way in Georgia." You understand me. Here I was just hanging out in Italy and I read in the paper that my own country is preparing for a war! Realizing that something was wrong, I rushed back to Tbilisi. And what did my intelligence services tell me?" He makes the face of someone who has posed a difficult riddle and is waiting for you to find the answer, "That the Russians at the exact moment they are showering the press corps with this garbage are also emptying Shrinvali of its inhabitants, they’re massing troops and troop transports, positioning fuel trucks on Georgian soil, and finally, sending columns of tanks through the Roky tunnel which separates the two Ossetias. Now, suppose you are the leader of the country and you hear this, what do you do?" He gets up to answer two cell phones which are ringing at the same time on his desk, comes back, stretching out his long legs … "After the hundred and fiftieth tank lines itself up facing your cities, you are forced to admit that the war has begun, and despite the disproportion in the forces opposing us, you no longer have a choice."

"With the agreement of your allies?" I asked. "With the members of NATO who have more or less slammed the door in your face?" "The real problem," he says, sidestepping, "is the stakes involved in this war. Putin and Medvedev were looking for a pretext to invade. Why?" He begins counting on his fingers, "Number one, we are a democracy and incarnate an alternative to Putinism as an exit from communism. Two, the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan [oil] pipeline goes through our country, such that if we fall, if Moscow replaces me with an employee of Gazprom, you, the Europeans, would be 100% dependent on the Russians for your energy supply. "And number three," as he takes a peach from the fruit basket which is brought to him by his assistant–"She’s Ossentian, mind you!"–and then resumes, "Number three, look at the map. Russia is an ally of Iran. Our Armenian neighbors are also not far from Iran. Now imagine a pro-Russian government installed in Tbilisi. You would have a geostrategic continuum stretching from Moscow to Tehran which I seriously doubt would be doing business with the free world. I hope NATO understands this."

IV

Friday morning. I, along with Raphaël Gluksmann, Gilles Hertzog and Marie-Anne Isler-Béguin, the European deputy, decided to return to Gori which, according to the ceasefire agreement written by French President Nicolas Sarkozy and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, the Russians would have begun evacuating, and where we are supposed to meet with the Orthodox Patriarch of Tbilisi who is himself on his way to an Ossetian village where hundreds of Georgian corpses have reportedly been left for the dogs and pigs. But the Patriarch is nowhere to be found. And the Russians have not evacuated Gori. And this time we are blocked twenty kilometers short of Gori when a car is held up in front of us by a squadron of irregulars, who, under the placid gaze of a Russian officer, haul the journalists out of the car and take their cameras, money, personal objects, and finally even their car. So it was a false report, part of that habitual ballet of false reports at which the artisans of Russian propaganda seem to be past masters. So off we go toward Kaspi, halfway between Gori and Tbilisi, where the interpreter for the deputy has family, and where the situation is in theory calmer – but two other surprises await us there.

First, there is the destruction. Here too. But this time it is destruction which has apparently targeted neither houses nor people. What have they destroyed instead? The bridge. The train station. The train tracks, which are already being repaired by a team of logisticians who are being supervised by the head mechanic from his room because of a severe hip wound. And the electronic command system of the Heidelberg cement factory, built with German capital, which was hit by a laser-guided missile. "There were 650 workers here," the factory director, Levan Baramatze, tells me. "Only 120 were able to come in today. Our production machine is broken." In Poti, the Russians sank the Georgian war ships. They even hit the BTC pipeline at three different points. Here in Kaspi, they deliberately took out the vital centers upon which the region and the country both depend. In other words, targeted terrorism. The will to bring this country to its knees.

Then there is the second surprise, the tanks. I repeat, we are standing at the outskirts of the capital. Condoleezza Rice is at this exact moment giving her press conference. Yet out of the blue comes one of those combats helicopters whose appearance always signals the worst, flying at low altitude just above the treetops. And suddenly the few people still in Kaspi find themselves in the street, first in their own doorways, then jammed ten at a time into old Lada cars, screaming at everyone and especially at our drivers that the Russians are coming and we must get out. At first we don’t believe it. We figure it’s like the false rumor we heard the day before yesterday. But no, the tanks are there. Five of them. And a field engineering unit digging trenches. The message is clear. With or without Condoleezza Rice, the Russians have moved in. They move around Georgian lands as if it were conquered terrain. This isn’t exactly like Prague in 1968, it’s the 21st century version of the coup, slow, bit by bit, with blows of humiliation, intimidation, panic.

V

This time the meeting is at four AM. Saakashvili has spent the end of the day with Rice, the day before with Sarkozy. He is grateful to both for their efforts, for the trouble they took and the friendship they demonstrated, which no one can doubt – didn’t he call "Nicolas" "tu"? And the Republican Presidential Candidate John McCain, "close to Ms. Rice," – hasn’t he been calling three times a day since the beginning of this crisis? But this time, I find he has a melancholy air unlike that first night. Maybe it’s fatigue, so many sleepless nights, the continuing setbacks, the grumbling which he can feel rising in the country and which we, alas, must to confirm: "What if Misha is incapable of protecting us? And if our ebullient young President only attracts more of the same? What if in order to survive we will have to accept the wishes of Putin and his puppet?" All of that must figure in the melancholy of the President. Plus something else on top of it, something cloudier and that applies to how to say, his friends’ strange attitude.

For example, the ceasefire agreement which his friend Sarkozy brought and which had been written by four hands in Moscow with Medvedev. He recalls the French President, here in this same office, impatient for him to sign it, raising his voice, almost yelling, "You have no other choice, Misha. Be realistic, you don’t have a choice. When the Russians come to overthrow you, not one of your friends will lift a finger to save you." And finally what a strange reaction when he, Misha Saakashvili, got them to call Medvedev but Medvedev sent word that he was asleep – it was only nine o’clock, but apparently he was already asleep, and would be unreachable until the following morning at 9 AM – here the French President got antsy again; his French yet again didn’t want to wait–in a rush to go home? too sure that signing was what mattered, regardless of what was being signed? This is not how you negotiate, thinks Misha. This is also not how you act with your friends.

I have seen the document. I have seen the written annotations by the two Presidents, the Georgian and the French. I saw the second document, again signed by Sarkozy and given to Condoleeza Rice in Brégançon, for her to give to Saakashvili. And finally I saw the memorandum of remarks, written during the evening by the Georgians, a vital piece in their eyes. They managed to cross out – and this is by no means negligible – all allusions to the future "status" of Ossetia. They also got it to be specified – again, not a small detail – that the "reasonable perimeter" in which the Russian troups would be authorized to patrol to protect the security of the Russian-speaking population of Georgia be a perimeter of a "few kilometers." The territorial integrity of Georgia, however, is mentioned nowhere in either document. As for the argument of legitimate aid for the Russian-speaking people – we tremble to think what could happen if we consider the Russian-speakers in the Ukraine, the Baltic countries or in Poland, who may one day decide that they too have been threatened by a "genocidal" will.

The last word will belong to the American Richard Holbrooke, a ranking diplomat close to Barack Obama whom I meet in the bar of our hotel at the tail end of the night: "There is floating in this affair a bad smell of appeasement." He is right. Either we are capable of raising our voice and saying STOP to Putin in Georgia. Or the man who went, in his own words, "down into the toilets" to kill the civilians in Chechnya will feel he has the right to do the same thing to any one of his neighbors.

Is this how we will build Europe, peace and the world of tomorrow?

Translated from the French by Sara Sugihara

Russia Georgia War

Bernard-Henri Levy
Georgia At War: What I Saw


Oil’s big dirty secret

Posted: August 12th, 2008 | Author: | Filed under: Environment | No Comments »

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/raymond-j-learsy/oils-dirty-big-secret-as_b_118380.html

According to news reports yesterday, members of OPEC alone glommed in $645 Billion (Euro 430 Billion) for the first six months of this year. Not only have oil consumers been gorged to the hilt, we have been reduced to being supplicants of the oil producers. Every day we are being fed the unceasing lesson from the same hymnal, that oil is running out "tomorrow," come and get it while you still can, not unlike 1855 when Samuel Kier’s Rock Oil patent medicine made from Pennsylvania crude oil touted to cure everything from diarrhea, rheumatism, ringworm to deafness, solemnly cautioning buyers, "Hurry Before This Wonderful Product is Depleted from Nature’s Laboratory." This while The Peak Oil Pranksters are ever ready to carry the message for the oil patch both here and everywhere working near overtime to heighten our anxieties about oil supply, programming us to pay ever more to the oil barons and sheiks.

But wait, suppose, just suppose they are wrong and willfully misleading us. That oil’s origins are not, to repeat, not biological, according to the gospel we have been taught to believe. That in effect oil originates from deep carbon deposits dating to the very beginnings of the Earth’s formation in quantities vastly greater than commonly thought. The very presence of methane in the solar system is cited as one of the key underpinnings of this theory’s seriousness. Then by seepage through the earth’s mantle, Abiotic oil becomes in essence a renewing resource migrating toward the Earth’s crust until it escapes to the surface (i.e. Canada’s tar sands as theorized by some) or trapped by impermeable strata forming petroleum reservoirs.

Much research has been done on Abiotic Theory by a bevy of Russian and Ukranian geologists starting during the Soviet era, most especially by Nikolai Alexandrovich Kurdryavtsev who proposed the modern Abiotic Theory of Petroleum in 1951.

Among Kurdryavtsev’s colleagues was Professor V.A. Krayushkin, chair of the Dept. of Petroleum Exploration at the Ukranian Academy of Sciences and leader of the DneiperDonets Basin Exploration project in the Ukraine, an area that has yielded eleven giant oil fields holding at least 65 billion barrels of oil and some 100 billion cubic meters of recoverable gas, comparable to the North Slope of Alaska . The area had previously been designated as having no potential for petroleum production whatsoever. Exploration, according to a paper by Richard Heinberg, was conducted entirely according to the "perspective of the modern Russian Ukranian theory of abyssal, abiotic petroleum origins".

Question, how often have you heard of M. King Hubbert and his peak oil theories dating to 1949 and how often have you heard of Kurdryavtsev or Krayushkin? Certainly, for those having some interest in Peak Oil jargon, Hubbert’s name comes up endlessly, while Kurdryavtsev and Krayushkin probably never, or rarely if at all. But then again Hubbert was Chief Consultant for Shell Oil’s Production Research Division and his theories served their Marketing Department well. His predictions first made in 1949 that the fossil fuel era would be of very short duration made him, with help of the fine hand of oil industry flacks, probably the best known geophysicist of his time.

Is the theory of abiotic oil viable? I am not a geologist so I cannot begin to answer authoritatively. It is certainly worth exploring with far greater seriousness than has been the case to date. But I have come to learn the oil industry and its minions. One can rest assured that if abiotic oil is a true challenge to current theory and most especially in the dimension it is purported to be, the oil patch will do all in its power to divert our attention elsewhere. Were we to learn that the supply of oil is limitless, the emperor’s clothes would evaporate and the price of oil would collapse.

These comments are not in any way meant to encourage the increased and continued use of oil and carbon-based energy. Issues of greenhouse warming and climate change are far too primordial for us in any way not to continue down the path of a fossil/carbon-free society. But that will take time and in the meanwhile we must wrest back our economic bearings from the rapaciousness of the oil producers and one way to begin doing that is to dismantle the received shibboleths being used to hold us in their grasp. It is time to begin dealing with them as consumers free to make our choices just as we would with any other product or supplier. If we don’t like attitudes or pricing policies or loyalty, as in customer relations we should once again be able to turn to another provider of comparable goods and we, as the buying public, or for that matter the nation in its own strategic interests, take our trade elsewhere. Seems far-fetched today? Just wait.

sidenote from Jen: check out www.huffingtonpost.com

they are full of brilliant editorials such as this one! I love themmmmm!!!!!


who killed the electric car?

Posted: July 27th, 2008 | Author: | Filed under: Film | 5 Comments »

Do whatever it takes to go see the documentary film "Who killed the Electric car?"

We recently got Netflix and Jeremy requested it. The movie came today and we spent the better part of the evening watching it, placing it on pause to discuss it, rewinding and replaying and absorbing all of the maddening details.

This film made me never want to buy another car unless it is electric and run from solar energy.

I don’t want to have anything to do with the automotive industry and the oil/hydrogen industry any more.

This is another motivator to keep me on the right path and make most of the time that I have alive. I hope that you will all take my suggestion seriously! I’m so sick of corporate imperialism. I am still optimistic that a better world is possible.

I want a car that I can put an Om sticker on and not feel like a hypocrite. I’m sure all of you would too.


are your tax dollars taking away your choices?

Posted: July 17th, 2008 | Author: | Filed under: Women | 2 Comments »

I want you all to write a letter.

Here is my letter:

I am opposed to President Bush’s proposed rule to allow federal funding that is specifically designed to prevent unintended pregnancy and promote reproductive health to now be used for anything but that.

A women deserves the right to be provided unbiased information in regards to her choices in the case of an unwanted pregnancy, and as the law allows for equality and choice this should be extended to include all facilities responding to women’s healthcare needs. Furthermore, having been duped personally by one of these women’s centers that poses as a healthcare center, I know such centers operate under the guise that they offer options to women that they do not in fact offer. They also advertise being a medical facility, which they are not! Women in need of medical care in response to a pregnancy, whether or not it is wanted, should never need to worry about the facility they are entering having the capability to properly address their needs.

These are my tax dollars, my body, and my choices. I will not let you choose for me.

HERE IS HOW: http://www.ppaction.org/campaign/spp08adv2/uxug6urpi3bd6n?source=spp08e1appol

HERE IS WHY
We have just received news that President Bush is trying to sell-out women’s health in the most unbelievable way. Here’s how:

The Bush administration is about to release a rule that will make it possible for federal funding that is specifically designed to prevent unintended pregnancy and promote reproductive health to now be used for anything but that.

If it happens, it will be a massive betrayal of women and families, and we must stop it. Jennifer, we need you to speak out. Please let President Bush know that this change is very wrong.

A little background on this outrageous situation…

We’ve known for some time that anti-choice extremists have wanted President Bush to deliver them some sort of "gift" before he leaves office. This rule change is just that gift. And here’s what one of the most egregious results could be:

Right now, anti-choice groups run so-called "crisis pregnancy centers" in communities all around the country — often a block or two away from Planned Parenthood affiliate health centers. These facilities look like health centers, but in reality are run by anti-choice zealots who deliver only the reproductive health care options that fit their agenda. No birth control, no abortion — and no choice for women and families who need it.

If this rule takes effect, they’re likely to receive a massive influx of our tax dollars to expand their deceptive operations and to attract hundreds of thousands of women who think they’ll be getting medical care but instead will receive a large dose of anti-choice ideology.
I believe that tricking women when they are most vulnerable is wrong — and the federal government shouldn’t pay people to do it.

It gets worse. The rule would also require entities that receive family planning funding, like Planned Parenthood, to certify that we will not refuse to hire nurses and other providers who object to abortion and even certain types of birth control. Between deceptive "crisis pregnancy centers" delivering woefully incomplete care and legitimate health centers with extremely limited funding, hundreds of thousands of women are at enormous risk.

We have a chance to stop it. So, beginning right now and with your help, we are:

launching a massive public outcry against the president’s rule
raising as much money as we possibly can
One more thing — Planned Parenthood Federation of America has been standing up for and serving women, men, and families in this country for more than 90 years. The next few days and weeks will be an immense challenge, but know this: We are here for this fight. We need you here with us.

Thank you in advance. More soon.

Sincerely,

Cecile Richards, President
Planned Parenthood Federation of America


Bush: worst president ever

Posted: July 15th, 2008 | Author: | Filed under: Current Events | 1 Comment »

Seriously now, why doesn’t he push for more research into environmentally sustainable energy sources? Oh, that’s right, because he’s a tyrannical imperialist under the sway of oil giants whose whores suck his dick.

and in this article, he reminds me of Earl’s dimwitted brother in the sitcom "My Name is Earl." Women are different from men because they’re women. and I am a man, and I like women. You’ll see.

ahem. the article my dears: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/15/bush.oil/index.html

and below:

WASHINGTON (CNN) — President Bush on Tuesday pressed lawmakers to lift a ban on offshore oil drilling, saying "the only thing standing between the American people and these vast oil resources is action from the U.S. Congress."

On Monday, the president lifted an executive order that prohibited offshore drilling. A 1981 law barring the practice remains in effect, however, and Congress would have to vote to repeal the law before any drilling could occur. Congressional Democrats have opposed efforts to repeal the ban.

"The sooner Congress lifts the ban, the sooner we can get these resources from the ocean floor to the refineries, to the gas pump," the president said.

"Democratic leaders have been delaying action on offshore exploration, and now they have an opportunity to show that they finally heard the frustrations of the American people," Bush said. "They should match the action I have taken, repeal the congressional ban and pass legislation to facilitate responsible offshore exploration." Watch Bush say ‘it’s time to get it done’ »

Congressional Republicans joined the president in pressing the Democrats to repeal the drilling ban.

House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, accused congressional Democrats of standing "in the way of more American-made energy" and pushed for legislation that would not only permit offshore drilling but also allow oil exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) in Alaska and the processing of oil-containing sand in the West. Democrats have repeatedly blocked oil exploration in ANWR, arguing that it would damage the fragile Arctic environment.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, said "four-dollar-a-gallon gasoline is unacceptable to the American people and unacceptable to the Republicans in Congress, and we want to do something about it. And doing something about it involves both finding more and using less. We need to do both." See how gas prices have gone up across the country »

But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, resisted the Republicans’ calls for an expansion of offshore drilling, saying it would do little to reduce prices at the pump in the near term.

What the president should do immediately to lower gas prices, Pelosi said, is release oil from the 700 million barrels in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Bush has resisted that move because, he says, it would hurt national security.

"The president said … that drilling offshore would not have an impact on the price at the pump, and I’m glad he’s finally admitted that to the American people," Pelosi said. "Our message back to the president is, ‘Its the economy, Mr. President.’ " Watch how drilling will not lower the price at the pump »

Officials in coastal states, including Florida and California, have also expressed opposition to Bush’s push to expand offshore drilling.

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, issued a statement Monday afternoon, saying, "I know people are frustrated with the soaring price of gas, and I welcome the national debate on solutions to lower our energy costs, but in California, we know offshore drilling is not the answer. We will continue to foster a market for alternative energies, because choice is the only way we will ultimately bring down fuel costs."

But Bush on Tuesday said lifting the ban would "send a signal that we’re willing to explore for… oil here at home."

"I fully understand this is… a transition period away from hydrocarbons," he said. "But we ought to be wise about how we … use our own resources."

The potential damage drilling could cause to reefs has been a major reason driving opposition to an expansion of offshore drilling, but Bush said new technology would allow companies to explore for oil without damaging coastal reefs.

"I’m concerned about the reefs. I’m a fisherman. I like to fish. Reefs are important for fisheries," Bush said.

"But the technology is such that you can protect the reefs," he said, noting that new techniques allow for companies to drill vertically far from a reef, then drill horizontally to oil reserves that are under sensitive reef environments.


fox does it again: let them know you’re pissed

Posted: July 15th, 2008 | Author: | Filed under: Current Events | No Comments »

http://foxattacks.com/michelle?utm_source=moveon

watch this video and sign the petition!

spread the love, my dears. spread it like butter on fox’s cornbread ass.