Tuesday, December 11, 2012
New Medicare Tax
Wednesday, December 5, 2012
Are Psychoactive Drugs a Hoax?
Monday, March 26, 2012
The Healthcare Debate
Oral arguments about the constitutionality of the individual healthcare mandate are being heard by the Supreme Court this week. The administration argues that the mandate is not severable from the law's other provisions which contravenes the Supreme Court's natural inclination to favor severability, meaning that if one part of the law is struck down, the rest of it remains intact. This is a risky "all or nothing" proposition because proponents for the law would probably rather see the rest of the law survive if it is ruled that the mandate is unconstitutional. However the question remains whether or not one provision can be excised from the law without making the entire thing untenable.
Hilary Clinton- Charitable Feats
Hilary Clinton has played a large role in empowering women all over the world to make a difference. Dedicated to challenging the status quo and affording the less fortunate equal opportunities, she supports several charities and humanitarian causes including: American India Foundation, Clinton Foundation, Clinton Global Initiative, Friends of the High Line, Heifer International, HELP USA, Human Rights Campaign, It Gets Better Project, My Good Deed, Stop Global Warming, The Trevor Project, US Doctors for Africa, and Vital Voices.
Thursday, March 15, 2012
Oil Prices
According to several sources and the US Energy Department, the US is drilling more oil domestically. Our oil exports have exceeded our oil imports for the first time since 1949, and we have more oil and natural gas drilling rigs than in any other part of the world. So why are gas prices reaching record highs? Many argue that our impending crisis with Iran is contributing to the rise in oil and it could get worse if matters escalate, but if we are producing so much domestically why should Iran make a difference?
Sunday, March 4, 2012
A WELL FUELED BODY FIGHTS TO KEEP YOU HEALTHY. IT IS MIRACULOUS!
We all want to be Heart Disease and Cancer FREE?
How do you feel about including the following foods in your eating routine: almonds, olive oil, steamed asparagus, oatmeal, beans, blueberries, red tomato sauce, avocado, dark chocolate, orange juice, mushrooms, onions and green vegetables everyday or at least 5 days a week? Let us know how you feel after eating these foods for three months? Do not smoke and cut down on salt intake. WHEN YOU ARE HEALTHY AND HAPPY...YOU ARE BEAUTIFUL. Check with your doctor before starting any new routines in eating and exercising. Let's work TOGETHER for good health!
Friday, January 13, 2012
Electronic Cigarettes: Healthier Alternative
A Healthier and More Cost-Effective Alternative to Smoking: The Electronic Cigarette
You can still enjoy the pastime of smoking without bringing havoc to your lungs and wallet. For those who have tried the nicotine patches to no avail, this is your chance to be good to your body.
An E-cigarette contains no carcinogens or other toxins- no tobacco, carbon monoxide, nicotine, tar, arsenic, cyanide, butane, and other harmful chemicals which are all found in traditional cigarettes. It contains small doses of nicotine which is given off through a water vapor mechanism. When exhaling, only water vapor is released, making it perfectly safe for others. One can opt for the disposable e-cigarettes for one time use or the rechargeable e-cigarettes with nicotine cartridges that need to be either refilled or changed.
E-cigarettes are legal for use in public areas such as airports, restaurants, bars, and even airplanes. Many employers now are allowing their employees to smoke e-cigarettes in the office! There is no unpleasant odor. No need to worry about bad breath or contaminated clothes and hair.
With the average pack of cigarettes costing around $6-7, one saves at least around 50% equaling $1,000-$2,000 in savings a year on smoking. There are many brands of e-cigarettes and amounts and prices differ but at around $2, each cartridge will last up to around 250 puffs (equivalent to about 1 pack of cigarettes) and the battery will last through one cartridge before recharging is needed.
You can still enjoy the pastime of smoking without bringing havoc to your lungs and wallet. For those who have tried the nicotine patches to no avail, this is your chance to be good to your body.
An E-cigarette contains no carcinogens or other toxins- no tobacco, carbon monoxide, nicotine, tar, arsenic, cyanide, butane, and other harmful chemicals which are all found in traditional cigarettes. It contains small doses of nicotine which is given off through a water vapor mechanism. When exhaling, only water vapor is released, making it perfectly safe for others. One can opt for the disposable e-cigarettes for one time use or the rechargeable e-cigarettes with nicotine cartridges that need to be either refilled or changed.
E-cigarettes are legal for use in public areas such as airports, restaurants, bars, and even airplanes. Many employers now are allowing their employees to smoke e-cigarettes in the office! There is no unpleasant odor. No need to worry about bad breath or contaminated clothes and hair.
With the average pack of cigarettes costing around $6-7, one saves at least around 50% equaling $1,000-$2,000 in savings a year on smoking. There are many brands of e-cigarettes and amounts and prices differ but at around $2, each cartridge will last up to around 250 puffs (equivalent to about 1 pack of cigarettes) and the battery will last through one cartridge before recharging is needed.
Saturday, January 7, 2012
Hillary Clinton: Forbes Most Powerful
Hillary Clinton makes # 2 on the list of the world's 100 most powerful women by Forbes magazine. Michelle Obama, Oprah Winfrey, Michele Bachmann, Lady Gaga, and Beyonce Knowles also on the list.
New Immigration Policy
Obama’s DREAM Act has been ratified through the back door by
an executive ICE memo, after being rejected by Congress twice.
The Obama administration is suspending the deportations of
thousands of illegal immigrants and helping their families gain legal status to
bolster Latino support in the 2012 election.
The new policy interprets “family” to include partners of
lesbian, gay and bisexual people.
Under current law, an illegal immigrant whose parent or
spouse in an American citizen can apply for a green card but the immigrant must
apply in the his/her home country and is not permitted to return to the US until
three years, sometimes 10 years. In sympathetic situations, the illegal
immigrant can request a waiver, which usually takes about 6 months for
approval.
The new policy allows illegal’s to get waiver approval in
advance, reducing the time they’d have to spend out of the country.
Friday, January 6, 2012
Clinton Foundation
Former President Bill Clinton is doing remarkable work through his foundation to empower those around the world to "meet challenges of global interdependence", focusing on areas such as health, economy, leadership, and other global initiatives.
Thursday, January 5, 2012
The SOPA
The
goal of SOPA (and its Senate counterpart, the PROTECT-IP Act) is well
intentioned to fight copyright violators and counterfeiters who run
sites beyond the jurisdiction of US courts. However it’s an overly
aggressive attempt (and a costly one) by the government to censor the
internet and poses serious concerns about preserving free speech.
These bills empower the attorney general to seek orders mandating thousands of (ISPs)Internet service providers to block customers from visiting purported infringing
websites, compelling search engines to redact their results, excluding
the targeted site, and requiring ad networks and payment processors to
terminate business with the alleged site.
It
expands the President’s authority to police the internet and derogates
the ability of the judiciary and federal courts to handle intellectual
property enforcement which they have done effectively for decades.
Essentially,
ISPs, could, for instance, implement tactics used by the Chinese
Firewall to target traffic going to a blacklisted site and simply block
it.
What the bill can't do
is block numeric IP addresses, so you could still access the censored
site, if you know the numeric IP address which defeats the whole purpose
of the bill. So this bill will not forestall piracy but will censor
any web site that facilitates or promotes pirated content. This includes
sites like Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Tumblr, and many more. Something
as minor as posting a copyrighted image to your Facebook page can
warrant a violation. One can submit an appeal, which is ineffective most
of the time, within five days, but it’s better sense to remove the
questionable content to avoid expensive legal proceedings.
Understanding the NDAA
The NDAA seems to reaffirm law that was already put in place with a few disconcerting changes that may give more flexibility and rights to accused terrorists and increased culpability to US citizens.
Section 1021 expands the President’s authority beyond
anything that current law or court precedent now gives him. While the
AUMF may imply the authority of the President to indefinitely detain US
citizens accused of perpetrating or facilitating an act of terror in the
context of war, the definition of those who can be detained is very
narrow and lucid, targeting two kinds of
people–those who helped with the 9/11 attacks and those who harbored
people who did.
Section 1021 targets the same people pending disposition
under the law of war and then adds an entirely new category: those
who were a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United
States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed
a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of
such enemy forces.
It goes on to say that “Nothing in this
section is intended to limit or expand the authority of the President or
the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force” and that
“nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or
authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful
resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are
captured or arrested in the United States.” If this were true, why did
they feel the need to add those extra ambiguous words to the definition
of covered persons? Why wouldn’t the AUMF be sufficient? This is very
confusing.
One of the reasons the President decided to sign the recent version of the bill was because it authorized him to
grant a waiver issuing an exemption to military detention for a
particular prisoner so he could be brought to trial in a civilian court.
The original version of the 2012 NDAA
prohibited the use of civilian courts in prosecuting Al Qaeda suspects.
It allowed for the use of exceptions to military detention, requiring
approval by the President, the Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State,
and the Director of National Intelligence. However, President Obama
insisted this provision be changed to allow the President to issue these
national security waivers on his own. So the President can now
decide unilaterally whether a suspected terrorist should be held in
civilian custody or military custody. US citizens are exempt from
mandatory military detention since the requirement only applies to a
particular subset of covered persons, which
includes members of al Qaeda or its associated forces; however, they
are not precluded from the possibility. Under the definition of “covered
persons” anyone suspected can potentially be detained by the armed
forces pending disposition under the law of war. However this
requirement is not so mandatory since the President can issue waivers
for exemption that no longer need the approval of other departments.
Disposition under the law of war can
include: detention under the law of war without trial until the end of
the hostilities, a trial by military commission, trial by “an
alternative court such as civilian trial, or competent tribunal having
lawful jurisdiction,” or be transferred to another country.
Theoretically, a US citizen accused of committing a belligerent act,
whatever that may be, can be deported to another country.
Section 1024 grants additional rights to any unprivileged enemy belligerent
held in long-term military detention and who is not already subject to
habeas corpus review, such as those detainees in Afghanistan, by
affording them the right to a military lawyer and a proceeding before a
military judge to contest their grounds for detention. They already have
access to the Detainee Review Board screening process, which is quite
sufficient. Now lawyers and judges have been included in the list of
benefits for those who attack Americans with human shields.
The NDAA continues to uphold the prohibition on the transfer of detainees to the US and forbids the use of any funds toward building an alternate site. Any Guantanamo detainees that may be freed must be transferred to other countries.
Essentially the NDAA empowers the President
by officially granting him the authority he always claimed to have had
but technically didn’t under law. This congressional affirmation could
open the door to vulnerabilities down the road and may be an invitation
for abuse.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)