Dog Brothers Public Forum
Return To Homepage
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
September 02, 2014, 04:57:42 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
82149 Posts in 2247 Topics by 1047 Members
Latest Member: MikeT
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 82
151  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Immigration issues on: June 12, 2014, 10:03:21 AM
"Sixty-eight percent of Americans favor allowing immigrants living in the country illegally who were brought to the United States as children to gain legal resident status if they join the military or go to college."

Allowing people who come here illegally serve in the military for citizenship?  Talk about immoral.

Go to college?  We will pay for all that.  cry
152  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Immigration issues on: June 12, 2014, 09:45:22 AM
"Immigration reform is definitely dead".  Maybe maybe not.

In any case Obama is  encouraging the hoards of future Democrat voters to pour into the country.  And how convenient.  The Dems will point the finger at the GOP saying "they blocked reform.  It is their fault."

Obama clearly is fully intent on doing as much as he can to do his progressive bidding.

When we even hear left leaning Jeff Tobin admit there is a constitutional crises then we know at least a few more people are waking up to what we on this board have said even before this guy was elected in '08.

The damage is severe and will be really bad by the time he leaves power.   We will have 15 million new legal residents and they will bring in more hoards.

Even if the GOP takes the Senate they will not have 60.   Obama cannot be stopped.  The Framers certainly did not intend this.  Except maybe in wartime as "Commander in Chief".  But now every excuse possible to use that keeps this guy going.
153  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Iraq on: June 12, 2014, 09:36:18 AM
The Jihadists armored convoys consist of a bunch of Toyota pick up trucks with platoons of guys wearing black hoods and carrying Kalishnokov weapons.   A few jets scrambled could finish the whole thing off.  This is reminiscent of Herbert Bush encouraging Kurds to rise up against Saddam and then leaving them alone to be murdered.

Now we encouraged and supported moderate elements in Iraq only to abandon them when they need some help.

154  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The US Congress; Congressional races on: June 11, 2014, 07:33:10 AM
 I wonder why Brat was able to win against the money and name recognition when other were not.  The Mitch McConnell.

Was it the makeup of his constituency or he was simply a better candidate?

I don't know.
155  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Paper technology on: June 11, 2014, 07:30:06 AM
I didn't realize paper was invented by the Chinese between 100 and 200 AD.  Of course it really took off after the invention of type and printing press.  Martin Luther was the first bestseller ( a bit before the NYT):

http://www.economist.com/news/books-and-arts/21603411-cheap-portable-printable-invention-happy-find
156  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history on: June 11, 2014, 07:23:10 AM
"Mrs. Clinton, by contrast, doesn't really have a story to tell: Her book is an assemblage of anecdotes, organized geographically, held together by no overarching theme, or underlying analysis, or ultimate accomplishment. In April she was asked to name her proudest achievements as secretary"

This is the story of her entire life not just as Sec of State.   Her whole persona has been one of a defiant hippy in search of something to rebel against.
157  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Why can't the GOP get some better mouth pieces? on: June 11, 2014, 07:19:30 AM
The only reason I post this if because of this line:

" That was David Brat’s (that’s the guy who won) whole campaign: Cantor was a liberal who supported a path to citizenship for the swarthy illegals. (He didn’t say that, of course, at least the swarthy part.) Immigration reform is D-E-A-D. There is no chance the House will touch it. That means it’s dead for this Congress, which means that next Congress, the Senate would have to take the lead in passing it again."

Again the GOP allows the left media to control the way immigration is presented.  This is not about just Latinos coming in from south of the border although they of course are the great bulk of illegals.  Sure they are easier to spot.  But their are plenty from Europe, Middle East, Africa, Caribbean, Asia who are not here legally as well.   No matter where you come from we expect you to respect our laws.   That includes residence laws too.  The GOP has to make this clear.  Of course like nitwits they don't and of course the Dems can more easily turn this into a racial issue.  Which it is not.  Whether for or against amnesty for 15 million people and later many of their relatives and the millions more who will come again it is an economic issue.  It is about the money as always.


******By Michael Tomasky 10 hours ago The Daily Beast

Eric Cantor Loss Is an Earthquake

Here’s the thing: Eric Cantor did not fall asleep in this race. He spent around $5 million. He ran lots of TV ads. He knew this was going to be a close one. He campaigned. And he still got creamed.

And here’s the other thing: Cantor was not an enemy of the Tea Party. He was in fact the Tea Party’s guy in the leadership for much of the Barack Obama era. He carried the tea into the speaker’s office. And still he got creamed.

Creamed! Has a party leader ever lost a primary like this? Stop and take this in. Like any political journalist, I’m a little bit of a historian of this sort of thing, although I readily admit my knowledge isn’t encyclopedic. But I sure can’t think of anything. Tom Foley, the Democratic House speaker in the early 1990s, lost reelection while he was speaker, but that was in the general, to a Republican, which is a whole different ballgame. And he was the first sitting speaker to lose an election since…get this…1862! But a primary? The No. 2 man in the House, losing a primary?

So what happened here? Obviously, first, it’s about immigration. That was David Brat’s (that’s the guy who won) whole campaign: Cantor was a liberal who supported a path to citizenship for the swarthy illegals. (He didn’t say that, of course, at least the swarthy part.) Immigration reform is D-E-A-D. There is no chance the House will touch it. That means it’s dead for this Congress, which means that next Congress, the Senate would have to take the lead in passing it again. (The Senate’s passage of the current bill expires when this Congress ends.) And the Senate isn’t going to touch it in the next Congress, even if the Democrats hold on to the majority. Those handful of Republicans who backed reform last year will be terrified to do so. And it’s difficult to say when immigration reform might have another shot. Maybe the first two years of President Clinton’s second term. Maybe.

Second, the reports of the Tea Party’s death are…well, you know. Cantor’s loss is a huge disruption of the narrative that the Republican establishment had taken control this year. And throw in the coming Chris McDaniel-Thad Cochran runoff in the Mississippi Senate race, which many now expect Tea Partier McDaniel to win, and you have a narrative in which the Tea Party can say, “We’re still calling the shots.” Cantor also has spent the past couple of years talking about education, which, any Tea Party person knows, is code for black, city, unions. Other Republicans in the House won’t miss that message, and they won’t try to carve out any “interesting” legislative profiles for themselves.

Third, what does it mean for the country? Hard to say yet, but bad, surely. The House GOP wasn’t exactly ready to start cutting deals with Obama even with Cantor in the leadership. Now that he’s been beaten by a right-winger…no one, not a single Republican in the House will take a chance on anything. The legislative process, already shut down, will only be more so.

And Brat himself, fourth, is a star overnight. I’d hate to be his booker or scheduler. His Wednesday is going to be a roller-coaster ride from Rush Limbaugh to Fox to Laura Ingraham to who knows what. He is a hero to these people. Remember how Scott Brown attained wattage in 2009 by beating Democrat Martha Coakley in Massachusetts? Brown was a major star then. Brat is going to make Brown look like a nameless session guitar player.

I’m sure there’s ramification five, six, seven, and eight that I’m not even thinking of right now. We’ll see. But this is an earthquake. One of the most shocking electoral nights in American history. Did I really say that? I did. It’s true. And it’s bad.

Related from The Daily Beast**********
158  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Any good chemists here on: June 07, 2014, 09:18:23 AM
who understands why gaseous sulfur waste from carbon fuels cannot be recycled into something else:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfur
159  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / I wonder how much of this 250 million will mysteriously disappear on: June 07, 2014, 08:38:52 AM
Clintons Hit $200 Million for Endowment Before 2016 Race
 
By Jonathan Allen and Annie Linskey  Jun 6, 2014 12:00 AM ET 

Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton raised $200 million in 10 months for their foundation’s endowment, positioning the nonprofit to survive even if its cash-collecting namesakes engage in a 2016 presidential run.

With four-fifths of their $250-million target in the bank, they are also changing fundraising strategies to include small donors -- a tactic that would create a list that could be politically useful, as well.

The Clintons’ initial appeals for foundation money were to contributors who could give $1 million or more. Those answering that call included Irish cell phone billionaire Denis O’Brien, and Bill Austin, owner of Minnesota’s Starkey Laboratories. Others were charities founded by Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim Helu -- the world’s second richest man -- and one run by Chicago venture capitalist J.B. Pritzker and his wife.

“As with many of the nation’s leading non-profit organizations, an endowment will provide the Clinton Foundation with the permanent capacity to support established and new programs and responsibly plan for the future,” Craig Minassian, the group’s chief communications officer, said in an e-mail.

The race to build an endowment is a sign that the foundation is maturing, that 67-year-old former President Bill Clinton won’t always be able to serve as its chief rainmaker, and that the time for Hillary Clinton, 66, to settle the question of her presidential ambitions is running out, said three people involved in the endowment project who asked for anonymity because they weren’t authorized to speak publicly about the fundraising effort.

The foundation’s officials are compiling a list of investment management firms to maintain the fund, and will soon put out a request for proposals, a foundation official familiar with the strategy said.

Establishing and funding the endowment now is important because a return by the Clintons to the political stage will also require a shift from generating cash for the foundation to financing the campaign, said those involved in the current fundraising drive.

That shift in status, from private to public life, also would mean the couple could be subject to conflict-of-interest charges if foundation donations are sought from those with interests before the federal government.

Avoiding Conflicts

Also, raising an endowment prior to a presidential run will ensure the foundation doesn’t starve a potential Clinton super-political action committee, said Craig Holman, the government affairs lobbyist for Public Citizen, a Washington-based watchdog group. Super-PACs that can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money didn’t exist during Hillary Clinton’s failed 2008 bid for the Democratic presidential nomination.

“Historically, many of the people who could give to a Clinton Foundation would have maxed out to the Clinton campaign,” Holman said. “Now they can throw all that money at the candidate herself.”

U.S. law bans foreigners such as billionaires Slim and O’Brien from contributing to political campaigns, so a potential Clinton campaign wouldn’t be competing for their dollars.

During the 2008 presidential primary campaign, then-Senator Barack Obama tried unsuccessfully to pressure the Clinton Foundation to reveal its donors. As part of the deal struck for Hillary Clinton to join Obama’s administration as secretary of state, the foundation agreed to disclose its contributors.

Donor Disclosure

The backers of the endowment will be listed along with other supporters in annual public disclosures going forward, according to a foundation official.

At a minimum, the Clintons simply wouldn’t have the time to nurture the endowment or foundation in the midst of a presidential campaign. If she runs and wins, the foundation could be deprived of their fundraising prowess for a decade.

The fundraising drive will be a hot topic of hallway conversations today when top donors -- including some who wrote checks for the endowment -- gather at Goldman Sachs (GS) Group Inc. headquarters in Manhattan for the organization’s annual spring briefing on programs.

The Clintons’ urgency is evident in the speed at which they have been generating donations.

“Most small or medium foundations wouldn’t be able to raise that kind of money in a year,” said Reina Mukai, a research manager at the New York-based Foundation Center, which tracks philanthropy. “It’s fairly unique.”

Small-Donor Event

In September, the foundation will hold a $1,000-a-head reception at the Italian Embassy in Washington. For $25,000, a couple will be able to dine after the reception with Bill and Hillary Clinton at the Washington home they’ve kept. A check for $50,000 includes dinner and an invitation to the New York-based foundation’s next donor conference.

Bill Clinton, advised by longtime aide Doug Band, created the Clinton Foundation shortly after leaving the White House in 2001. In 2012, it took in $54.7 million in revenue and ended the year with $183.6 million in assets. Its endowment, though, was just $292,000.

In the past dozen years, the foundation sprouted 11 separate arms, from the Clinton Global Initiative to Hillary Clinton’s “Too Small To Fail” project, which was founded in 2013 to improve the health of children younger than 6 years old.

Whether or not Hillary Clinton runs for president, foundation officials said it makes sense to set up a mechanism for building the family’s legacy “in perpetuity.”

One Clinton confidant described a maturation process at the foundation that made an endowment a natural move.

Start-Up Tendencies

In its early years, this person said, the foundation was more like a start-up, trying to figure out how to make it each year. More recently, its officers have begun considering how to make sure it can endure for decades.

While the $250 million level may secure the operation of existing programs, it hardly puts the Clinton foundation in the same league as those with the names Ford, Gates or Rockefeller attached to them.

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, for example, reports having an endowment of $40.2 billion -- 160 times the size of the Clinton Foundation’s goal. At $32.7 billion, Harvard University ranks first on the list of major college endowments.

The Clinton goal compares more closely to the size of the endowment of former President Jimmy Carter’s Atlanta-based foundation, which reported having a $460 million endowment in 2011.

Foundation Turnaround

The success of the Clinton fundraising drive marks a turnaround for a foundation that, according to the New York Times, was rife with disorganization and incurred about $40 million in deficits in 2007 and 2008. Bill Clinton disputed the account.

Still, in 2011 the foundation contracted with the New York-based law firm Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett LLP to audit finances and policies. Recommendations included: hold regular staff meetings, review expense reports, and adopt a gift acceptance policy “to ensure that all donors are properly vetted.”

In July, the Clintons reorganized its staff, removing Chief Executive Officer Bruce Lindsey from day-to-day management and installing Eric Braverman from McKinsey & Company in his place.

As the foundation announced those changes, Bill Clinton added a request. “We need an endowment,” Clinton said in Aug. 13 open letter posted on the foundation’s website “which our family and friends are working to raise.”

To contact the reporters on this story: Jonathan Allen in Washington at jallen149@bloomberg.net; Annie Linskey in Washington at alinskey@bloomberg.net

To contact the editors responsible for this story: Jeanne Cummings at jcummings21@bloomberg.net Don Frederick
160  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: June 6, 1944 on: June 06, 2014, 10:47:03 PM
They're all at least 87 y.o. now.  I vaguely can remember when the last Civil War vet died I think in 1965.
Are any WW1 vets alive still?
161  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history on: June 06, 2014, 10:40:40 PM
"the end of the canned food"

 cheesy

Even worse if it canned spam!

I admit I am in the awkward position of hoping I lose the bet.  grin
162  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Video Clips of Interest on: June 05, 2014, 09:52:23 PM
I wouldn't do this myself let alone with a dog but from NatGeographic:

http://adventureblog.nationalgeographic.com/2014/05/27/video-when-dogs-fly-dean-potter/?utm_source=NatGeocom&utm_medium=Email&utm_content=inside_20140605&utm_campaign=Content
163  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history on: June 05, 2014, 09:36:56 PM
You make a good argument.  My position one can never underestimate the Clinton machine.   No matter how unbelievably dishonest Bill would be, let alone her, they would always manage to weasel out of trouble still on their feet.   shocked

I would like to place some heavy duty wagers with you:

1)  If she doesn't run I buy dinner.  If she does I get a dinner.

2)  If she doesn't win the Democratic nomination I buy lunch.  If she does you buy  lunch.

3) If she wins the Presidency I get breakfast.   IF not you do.

 grin
164  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The war on the rule of law on: June 05, 2014, 11:23:51 AM
He knows he could never be impeached.  He knows he has no more personal elections to play with after this November.

He is going to be unleashed.   What we have been seeing is just for openers.  We better win the Senate. 

We better win all three WH, C , and S by 2016.   And start packing all the courts with Conservatives - not just talent.  Cynical yes.  But practical and realistic too.

I hope Conservative Supremes have good doctors.  I hope Ginsberg stays alive till 2016 but I bet she retires if WH goes Republican in '16.
165  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history on: June 05, 2014, 11:18:44 AM
Doug,

"My cover all bases prediction was that she will not run, won't win the Dem nomination if she runs and won't win the Presidency if she runs and is nominated"

Well you do make three predictions here.

How are you so sure?

'Inside info' you can share here?

166  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The war on the rule of law on: June 05, 2014, 10:17:00 AM
Bamster:  no apologies.  We leave no soldier behind.

Yeah right.  Suddenly now this happens when this was all known going back to 2009.

Right after the VA scandal breaks.  We can see the WH is being run by Podesta, the Clinton fixer.

Same diversion tactics and rapid fill the news with spin.
167  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / AFter seeing this on: June 05, 2014, 09:47:05 AM
Putin is frightened:

http://news.yahoo.com/video/fitness-expert-breaks-down-president-141039080.html
168  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / It's official on: June 05, 2014, 08:31:47 AM
Cover of People. 

On,

her marriage
grandmother status
sleeping in to 8 AM
so involved
time to break the highest glass ceiling
post more botox and a quarter inch of makeup
saving the elephants
getting to know her [again]
the real Hillary behind the scenes
and of course an "oh my gosh"

http://www.people.com/article/hillary-clinton-2016-presidential-run-becoming-grandmother
169  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Reparations on: June 03, 2014, 07:25:52 AM
Well, we did fight a Civil War.  750,000 dead at a time when there were roughly 32 or 33 million people in the US (22 in the North and 9 in the South roughly 4 mill of them slaves .   That would be around 7.5 million deaths in today's numbers 300 mill + 30 mill illegals:

***Thursday, May 29, 2014 FULL SHOW | HEADLINES | PREVIOUS: "A Peace Warrior": Poet, Civil Rights Activist...

The Case for Reparations: Ta-Nehisi Coates on Reckoning With U.S. Slavery & Institutional Racism

African-American History, Race in America

"We Shall Overcome": Remembering Folk Icon, Activist Pete Seeger in His Own Words & Songs
Jan 28, 2014 | Story

Bill Moyers on Dark Money, the Attack on Voting Rights & How Racism Stills Drives Our Politics
Jan 27, 2014 | Story

SPECIAL: Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in His Own Words
Jan 20, 2014 | Story

An explosive new cover story in the June issue of The Atlantic magazine by the famed essayist Ta-Nehisi Coates has rekindled a national discussion on reparations for American slavery and institutional racism. Coates explores how slavery, Jim Crow segregation, and federally backed housing policy systematically robbed African Americans of their possessions and prevented them from accruing inter-generational wealth. Much of the essay focuses on predatory lending schemes that bilked potential African-American homeowners, concluding: "Until we reckon with our compounding moral debts, America will never be whole." Click here to watch Part 2 of this interview.":http://www.democracynow.org/2014/5/30/part_2_ta_nehisi_coateson

AMY GOODMAN: "The case for reparations. 250 years of slavery. Nine years of Jim Crow. 60 years of separate but equal. 35 years of racist housing policy. Until we reckon with our compounding moral debts, America will never be whole." So begins an explosive new cover story in the June issue of the Atlantic magazine by the famed essayist Ta-Nehisi Coates. The article is being credited for rekindling a national discussion on reparations for American slavery and institutional racism.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: In the essay, Ta-Nehisi Coates exposes how slavery, Jim Crow, segregation, and federally backed housing policy systematically robbed African Americans of their possessions and prevented them from accruing intergenerational wealth. Much of the piece focuses on predatory lending schemes that built potential African-American homeowners. This is a video that The Atlantic released a preview its new cover story, "The Case for Reparations."


*BILLY LAMAR BROOKS SR.: This area here represents the poorest of the poor in the city of Chicago.


MATTIE LEWIS: I’ve always wanted to own my own house, because I work for white people when I was in the South, and they had beautiful homes and I always said, one day I was going to have me one.


JACK MACNAMARA: White folks created the ghetto. It drives me crazy today even that we don’t admit that. This is the best example I can think of the institutional racism.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: To talk about "The Case for Reparations," we’re joined now by Ta-Nehisi Coates here in New York City. Welcome to Democracy Now! You start your article with one particular figure, Clyde Ross. Tell us his story and why you decided to begin with him.

TA-NEHISI COATES: Mr. Ross is really just emblematic of much of what has happened to African-Americans across the 20th century, and I emphasize 20th century. Mr. Ross was born in the Delta region of Mississippi. His family was not particularly poor, they actually quite prominent farmers. They had their land and virtually all of their possessions taken from them through a scheme around allegedly back taxes and were reduced to sharecropping. In the sharecropping system, there was no sort of assurances over what they might get versus what they actually picked. When I first met Mr. Ross, the first thing he said to me was he left Mississippi for Chicago because he was seeking the protection of the law. I didn’t quite understand what he meant by that. But, as he explained it to me, he said, listen, there were no black judges, no black prosecutors, no black police — basically, we had no law. We were outlaws and people could take from us whatever they wanted. That was very much his early life. He went to Chicago thinking things would be a little different. On the surface, they were. He managed to get a job, got married, had a decent life. He was basically looking for that one more emblem of the American middle class in the Eisenhower years, and that was the possession of a home. Unfortunately, due to government policy, Mr. Ross at that time, like most African-Americans, was unable to secure a loan due to policies or red-lining and deciding who deserved the loans and who doesn’t. There was a broad, broad consensus that African-Americans, for no other reason besides blatant racism, could not be responsible homeowners. Mr. Ross, as happens when people are pushed out of the legitimate loan market ended up in the illegitimate loan market and got caught up in the system of contract buying, which is essentially just a particularly onerous rent to own scheme for people looking to buy houses. Ended up purchasing a house, I believe at $27,000 he paid for it. The person who sold it to him had bought the house only six months before for $12,000. Mr. Ross later became an activist, helped formed the Contract Buyers League, and just fought on behalf of African American home owner on the west side of Chicago. I should add that it is estimated during this period that 85% of African-Americans looking to buy homes in Chicago bought through contract lending.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Let’s hear Clyde Ross and his onward speaking a in 1969 on behalf of the Contract Buyers League a coalition of black homeowners on Chicago’s South and West Sides from all of whom had been locked into the the same system of predatory lending.


CLYDE ROSS: They have cheated us out of more than money. We have been cheated out of the right to be human beings in a society. We have been cheated out of buying homes at a decent price. Now it’s time now, we got a chance. The Contract Buyers League has presented a chance for these people in this area to move out of this crippled society, to move up. Stand on your own two feet. Be human beings, fight for what you know is right. Fight.

AMY GOODMAN: Ta-Nehisi Coates, can you talk about this example and others in this remarkable piece and how you then talk about the bill for reparations that has been introduced by John Conyers year after year in the house, and what reparations would actually look like?

TA-NEHISI COATES: What I try to establish in this piece is that there is a conventional way of talking about the relationship in America between the African-American community and the white community, and it is one that we are very comfortable with. I call it basically the lunch table view of the problem with racism in America is that black people want to sit at one table and white people want to sit at another lunch table. If we could just get black and white people to like each other, love each other, everything would be solved. In fact, even these terms that we’re using are inventions, and they’re inventions of racism. If you trace back the history back to 1619, a better way of describing the relationship between black and white people is one of plunder, the constant stealing, the taking from black people that extends from slavery up through Jim Crow policy. Slavery is obviously the stealing of people’s labor. In some cases the outright theft of people’s children, and the vending of people’s children, the taking of the black body for whatever profit you can wring from it, up through the Jim Crow South where you have a system of debt peonage, sharecropping — which really isn’t much different minus the actual selling of children you steal, exploiting labor and taking as much as you can from it. Into a system when you think about something like separate but equal. In the Civil Rights Movement, we traditionally picture colored only water fountains, white only restrooms. The thing people have to remember, if you take a state like Mississippi or anywhere in the deep South where you have a public university system, black people are paying into that. Black people are pledging their fealty to the state and yet, they aren’t getting the same return. This is theft. This is systemized. When we try to talk about the practicality of it, I spent 16,000 words almost just trying to actually make the case. At the end, what I come to is that the actionable thing right now is to support Representative John Conyers’ Bill H.R.40 for a study of what slavery has actually done, what the legacy of slavery has actually done to black people and what are remedies we might come up with. I did that not so much to dodge the question, but because I think to actually even sketch out what this might be would take another 16,000 words. We have to calculate what slavery was. We have to calculate what Jim Crow was. We have to calculate what we lost in terms of redlining and come to some sort of ostensible number and figure out whether we can actually pay it back. And if we can’t, what we might do in lieu of that.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: When you mentioned that the systemic plunder that occurred, I mean, this is not ancient history.

TA-NEHISI COATES: No, no.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: In the most recent economic crisis in the country, there was this enormous reduction in the wealth of African-Americans in the country as a result of the housing crisis, yet the narrative portrays it as the housing crisis was caused — the conservative narrative is — by affirmative action policies of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to make it easier for African-Americans with low credit to get loans. Talk about that and this enormous wealth loss that occurred recently.

TA-NEHISI COATES: Well, the great sociologist Douglas Massey has a very interesting paper out specifically about the foreclosure crisis as it should be rightly called that happened very, very recently. One of the things he demonstrates in the paper is the thing that made this possible, segregation was a driver of this. If you think about it, it makes perfect sense. The African-American community is the most segregated community in the country, and what you have in that community is a population of people who have been traditionally cut off from wealth building opportunities. So, anxious to get wealth-building opportunities. If you are a banker and you are looking sell a scheme to somebody and rip somebody off, well there your marks are, right there, right in the same place. That’s essentially what happened.

AMY GOODMAN: Ta-Nehisi Coates, I wanted to go to this issue of reparations and the examples you have seen, for example, after the Holocaust, Germany and the Jews. Can you talk about how those reparations took place?

TA-NEHISI COATES: It is very, very interesting. One of the reasons why I included that history, because as we know, reparations for African-Americans has all sorts of practical problems that we would have to deal with and fight about. I wanted to just demonstrate that even in the case of reparations to Israel, the one that’s most cited, this was not a sure thing. One thing that people often say about African-American reparations is, well, oh you’re just talking about savory, that was so long ago, as though if we were talking about a more proximate or more present case it would be much easier. But, in fact, the fact it was so close made it really, really hard for people, made it hard for some Israelis who did not want to feel like they were taking a buck off of folks’ mothers or brothers or sisters or grandmas who had just been killed. In Germany in fact, if we look at the public opinion surveys at the time, they were no more — Germans in the popular sense — were no more apt to take responsibility today than Americans are for slavery. So, it was a very, very difficult piece. What’s interesting and I think one of the lessons that can be learned from it, however, is the way it was structured. In fact, Germany did not just cut a check to Israel. What they actually did was they gave them vouchers. Those vouchers that were worth a certain amount of money, those vouchers had to be used with German companies. So, essentially, what they structured was a stimulus for West Germany while giving reparations to Israel at the same time. It gives us some clue that some sort of creative solutions we might have in the African-American community.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: One of the issues you also raise is that this reparations demand is not new in American history. You talk about Belinda Royall who in 1783 had been a slave for 50 years, became a freed woman. She petitioned the Commonwealth of Massachusetts for reparations.

TA-NEHISI COATES: Right, right, right, and I think people think of this as something that just sort of came up, you know 150 years — Black people — reparations is basically as old as this country is, and it’s not just, as you mention, Belinda Royall, people like that, but, it is also white people who understood at the time some great injury had been done. Many of the quaker meetings for instance — basically, they would excommunicate people who didn’t just free their slaves, but actually gave them something, you know, paid them reparations in return. We have the great quote from Timothy Dwight who was the president of Yale who said, to liberate these folks, to free these folks and to give them nothing would be to entail a curse upon them. Effectively, that is actually what happened upon African American and really, I would argue, upon the country at large. Many, many people of the Revolutionary generation, the generation that fought in the Revolutionary War, understood that slavery was somehow in contradiction to what America was saying it was. Many of those folks also at the very least gave land to African-Americans when they were liberated. Some of them educated them. But they understood to just cut somebody out into the wild, which is basically what happened to black people, would not be a good thing.

AMY GOODMAN: Ta-Nehisi Coates, we want to thank you very much for being with us. We’re going to do part two right after the show and we will post it online at democracynow.org. Ta-Nehisi Coates is a national correspondent of The Atlantic where he writes about culture, politics and social issues. He has just written a cover story called "The Case for Reparations." Ta-Nehisi Coates is also the author of the memoir "The Beautiful Struggle."***



170  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Men with Dogs corraled Mammoths? on: June 03, 2014, 07:19:15 AM

Dogs Helped Drive Mammoths To Their Graves, New Study Suggests
 
  | By David Grimm 
  Posted:  06/01/2014 10:11 am EDT    Updated:  06/01/2014 10:59 am EDT   
Print Article   
MAMMOTHS

  It’s known as the mammoth cemetery for good reason. Along the banks of a Siberian river not far from the Arctic Ocean lie thousands of bones, most of them belonging to the giant, shaggy relatives of today’s elephants. A new study argues that such mysterious graveyards were not the results of a natural catastrophe, but rather the work of early human hunters—who may have had help from some of the world’s first dogs.

“This is the first time that someone’s gone out on a limb and suggested something different than what we thought before,” says Angela Perri, a postdoctoral fellow at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, and an expert on dog domestication. “But it’s still very speculative at this stage.”

Study author Pat Shipman first became interested in what she calls “mammoth megasites” in 2009. About 30 such spots have been unearthed in central Europe and North Asia, some with tens of thousands of bones packed tightly on top of each other across areas as small as 60 square meters. The massive tusks and femurs of mammoths jut out among the remains of wild horses, deer, foxes, and other animals. “They’re crazy sites,” says Shipman, an anthropologist at Pennsylvania State University, University Park. “The sheer number of dead mammoths is astounding.” More than 160 of the tusked goliaths lie in the mammoth cemetery—a site known as Berelekh—alone.

How did they get there? Some scientists think it was an act of nature—perhaps a flood that swept dozens of animals to a particular spot, or an unlucky herd that fell through thin ice. But recent evidence has suggested that people may to be blame. Shipman says the mammoth megasites begin to appear about 44,000 years ago, just about the time that modern humans entered this part of the world. What’s more, archaeologists have found evidence of huts made of mammoth bones at some of these locations, as well as cuts and burn marks on the bones that could only have been made by people.

To get a clearer picture, Shipman combed through the literature on more than a dozen mammoth megasites, paying particular attention to the age and sex of the mammoths unearthed there. She then compared these demographics with those seen with the deaths of large numbers of elephants, the mammoth’s closest living relative. Natural disasters such as droughts kill the youngest and oldest elephants, but other sudden die-offs—such as a herd falling through ice or a cull of elephants to control their population—kill indiscriminately, leaving behind the carcasses of young and old, male and female. Elephant hunters, meanwhile, tend to kill each animal in a different place. “To my surprise, hardly anything matched these patterns,” Shipman says of the mammoth bones. What’s more, the dating on the bones indicated that they had been laid down over hundreds of years. That suggests that the animals were killed over and over in the same spot over many generations, she reports in Quaternary International. “There’s something that’s drawing them to that location.”

Shipman says the data point to a scenario in which humans killed the mammoths, but not in the way people do today. Instead of culling them or hunting them across vast plains, ancient peoples may have ambushed the creatures. The reason so many bones are found in the same location may be that these spots were ideal for such ambushes. Perhaps they were surrounded by thick brush, in which spear-hurling humans could hide, or maybe they lay along a commonly traveled migration route. Shipman also thinks the hunters may have had some help from dogs.

It’s still unclear exactly when or where dogs became domesticated, but some recent archaeological evidence suggests it may have happened around the same time and place as the mammoth megasites. A skull recovered from a cave in southern Belgium, for example, has both wolf- and doglike features, and it dates to about 32,000 years ago. Though genetic evidence indicates that this animal may not have been an ancestor of today’s dogs, the find suggests that the process of canine domestication could have begun tens of thousands of years ago. Significantly, Shipman says, similar skulls have been found among the mammoth bones at several megasites. Many of the skulls bear healed fractures, a possible indication that these animals were cared for by humans.

Shipman speculates that the mammoth megasites may be the first significant evidence of a cooperative relationship between man and dog. The canines could have corralled the mammoths at the ambush sites and held the prey in place while human hunters moved in for the kill, Shipman says. Once the mammoths were dead, the dogs could have protected the sites from scavengers. “All of that mammoth meat would have brought predators from miles around,” she says. In return, the humans may have provided these canines with food and protection. And slowly, a closer relationship may have begun to form.

Finding more large and strong doglike animals at these sites would support her hypothesis, Shipman says. Such finds will be necessary to convince archaeologists like Nicholas Conard that the new work is more than just a leap of faith. “I like it as an idea, but there’s no smoking gun,” says Conard, who works at the University of Tübingen in Germany and who has personally excavated mammoth megasites. Perri agrees. “We don’t know enough about what early dogs—or even the wolves of the time—looked like,” she says. “This is extrapolating from too few examples.” Still, Conard says, “there are so few ideas about how these sites formed, and what Shipman is arguing is possible and testable. It’s a move in the right direction.”

Original article:
http://news.sciencemag.org/archaeology/2014/05/did-dogs-help-drive-mammoths-their-graves
171  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Speaking of "bizarro" on: June 01, 2014, 09:49:09 PM
What does the board think of this discussion of liberalism.   After reading this I am more confused than ever about what is "LIBERALISM" .  According to this author it depends what age and what region and what country you are talking from.

For example, does this make any sense at all of what we think liberalism is in this country in this day and age:

"Unlike conservatives, who fear change, liberals welcome it because they believe that changing societies can be stable. Unlike socialists, who think the advent of Utopia needs to be administered, liberals aim to create the conditions in which each person can thrive in his or her own way unburdened by dictatorship."

If you ask me I think of liberals as just the opposite.  That is more akin to statism.   

Anyway, please read on and get confused:


*****Liberal thought

On the barricades

An eloquent study of a belief under siege
 May 24th 2014  | From the print edition

Liberalism: The Life of an Idea. By Edmund Fawcett.Princeton University Press; 468 pages; $35 and £24.95. Buy from Amazon.co.uk (ISBN=unknown)

SOMETIMES it seems as if liberalism is slowly caving in. Western democracies are battered by partisanship and populism. Inequality is undermining social cohesion. Governments are unconvincingly shoring up expensive welfare states that have failed to match their promise. Meanwhile, the running is being made by places such as Turkey, which has an intolerant majority, and China and Russia, where power cannot be contested. “Liberalism” by Edmund Fawcett is not only a gripping piece of intellectual history, it also equips the reader to understand today’s threats—and how they might be withstood.

“Liberal” in the vocabulary of Mr Fawcett, for many years on the staff of The Economist, does not mean Democratic in the American sense, fanatically free-market in the French, or bearded and sandals-wearing in the British. Instead liberalism is a protean set of beliefs—in progress, scepticism towards authority and respect for individuals—that have been central to the formation of modern Western democracy. Neither is Mr Fawcett setting out to write directly about today. Instead, he traces the evolution of liberalism from its roots in the Enlightenment. The result is a scrapbook, assembled out of thumbnail biographies and historical vignettes, interleaved with philosophical argument and snippets of economics. Mr Fawcett’s erudition and his voluminous list of sources attest to a lifetime’s engagement with liberalism, both in the academy and at the hustings.

Though the sketches are sometimes tantalisingly brief, the scrapbook method gives the book two distinctive traits. One is that France and Germany feature almost as much as Britain and America. John Stuart Mill and James Madison have to share a berth with François Guizot, the French statesman and historian who, long before Lord Acton, articulated the liberal conviction that power corrupts, and Franz Hermann Schulze-Delitzsch, the German who founded the first credit unions. Mr Fawcett tears the blinkers off the view that liberal thought was essentially Anglo-Saxon—and that, correspondingly, France and Germany even today are not truly liberal.

The other distinction, following from this, is the book’s sheer scope, which ranges from monetary theory to social Darwinism and from the drafting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to the contrasts between anarchy and dissent. Mostly, these juxtapositions shed light on the adaptability of liberalism—of how, as Mr Fawcett writes, it has “no Marx-Engels Standard Edition”. Occasionally, though, the bedfellows jar; it is odd to find the British Conservative Michael Oakeshott in the same tent as the French Marxist Jean-Paul Sartre.

Adaptability is one reason for thinking that liberalism can withstand today’s challenges. Mr Fawcett argues that it was born not just out of a desire for liberty, but also to cope with the violent revolutions unleashed at the end of the 18th century. Unlike conservatives, who fear change, liberals welcome it because they believe that changing societies can be stable. Unlike socialists, who think the advent of Utopia needs to be administered, liberals aim to create the conditions in which each person can thrive in his or her own way unburdened by dictatorship.

However, as liberalism has spread, these impulses have become silted over. What remains is often a diminished combination of elections and a narrow, market-based version of freedom. Mr Fawcett provides a timely reminder that liberalism is much richer—more concerned with those who lose elections than those who win them, wary of concentrated power wherever it may be found, and committed to the intrinsic worth of every individual.

Liberalism is indeed under siege. Those who would fortify the walls would do well to study the foundations. Mr Fawcett’s book offers an admirable archaeology.
172  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Presidential Pardon on: June 01, 2014, 06:06:41 PM
How is it that the President has this kind of unchecked power?   I would dispute the numbers.   Reagan is obviously champion pardoner in chief when he pardoned 3 million illegals.  The record is soon to be smashed.   

******About Presidential Pardons
 
By Shelley Moore, eHow Contributor

The president of the United States has nearly unlimited power to grant pardons and override the criminal-justice system at his sole discretion. The power is granted by Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, which gives the president "power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment." The presidential power to pardon cannot be limited by any other branch of government. Have a question? Get an answer from a lawyer now!

 Original Purpose

To the framers of the Constitution, the power to pardon was probably a natural inclusion, as they were accustomed to this power being used by the king of England to correct injustices. In England, even minor offenses could carry a death sentence, and a royal pardon was the only way to avoid this punishment. The framers of the Constitution also saw a presidential pardon as being useful during war and rebellion, when a pardon could induce rebels to reconcile. As noted by Alexander Hamilton, an offer of a pardon "to the insurgents or rebels may restore the tranquility of the commonwealth."

Full Pardons and Commutations

Although a full pardon completely overturns a conviction, it does not imply that the conviction was in error. The full pardon reinstates a person's ability to apply for jobs that do not allow criminal convictions, such as law-enforcement positions, and to regain certain privileges, such as carrying a firearm. Presidents also can reduce a criminal sentence rather than issuing a full pardon, called a commutation of sentence. It is common for presidents to issue many pardons during their last month in office.

Recent Numbers

The pardon power is controversial, especially when a president pardons numerous people, as Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan did. Clinton pardoned 395 people during his eight years in office, and Reagan pardoned 393. George H.W. Bush, in contrast, pardoned only 75 in his four-year term, and George W. Bush 171 in eight years.

A Famous Pardon

Pardons often are used more for political reasons than for an offender's atonement or any type of judicial error. Perhaps the most famous pardon was Gerald Ford's pardon of former president Richard Nixon in 1974, when Nixon had not even been formally charged with a crime. Although Ford lost a great deal of favor after the pardon, with people cynically referring to him as "Nixon's man," many historians indicate he might have done the right thing by allowing the nation to move on and heal after the Watergate scandal.

Another Controversial Pardon

Ironically, Jimmy Carter, who beat Ford in the next election perhaps partly because of the Nixon pardon, almost immediately issued a controversial pardon when he took office. Carter pardoned all those who avoided serving in the Vietnam War by leaving the country or not registering for the draft.********

Read more: http://www.ehow.com/about_4928054_presidential-pardons.html#ixzz33QoRzEBq
173  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history on: June 01, 2014, 05:28:11 PM
Mayb e add;

1)  Tell us exactly when you learned the video had NOTHING to do with the attack and why you still refuse to admit that.

2)  Tell us why you were blaming a video as an acceptable excuse to attack our embassy and kill 4 Americans and it was necessary to almost apologize to and excuse the actions of terrorists on behalf of our country.

3)  Why are you qualified to be President when you cannot be hones and level with Americans?
174  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Corruption on: June 01, 2014, 09:29:12 AM
Goddam America!

I suppose this was entrapment just to get a minority wink
175  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / playing cash games with the liitle people on: June 01, 2014, 09:27:01 AM
There is something about this that is reminiscent of Nero throwing coins off the balcony to the 'little' people:

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2014/05/31/hidden-cash-man-buries-cash-in-angry-bird-eggs-at-la-beaches/
176  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Dinesh D'Souza on: May 31, 2014, 11:43:12 AM
Dinesh D'Souza Exposes What Obama Doesn't Want You to Know 

Has anyone read any of his books?  Mostly I agree with him.  However, he got his proverbial behind kicked on Bill Maher recently.  I came off as conciliatory and Maher mostly they no completely repeatedly got him to make concessions and look silly.   Plus I absolutely disagree with Dinesh who frames Obamas philosophy as being simply anti-colonialism.   While that is true clearly Obama's total record is that it is also is far more then that.   He is anti white anti Jew anti America anti capitalism and possibly anti Christian (yes I know he goes to Church) and probably anti religion altogether.  It is NOT simply colonialism that is the enemy of Obama.  Dinesh is absolutely wrong about that and that IS what he was reiterating on Maher's show recently.  Perhaps this new book expands more to the truth about Bamster.   As far as Maher, he is a hypocrite fraud who has done very well in our society.  Just another Jew who goes around false preaching about how discriminatory this country is yet is as rich as anyone.   Not that he doesn't deserve it or that he earned it but just don't he turn around and preach to us.    I wonder if Blacks are offended by the Hollywood Jews who are so fond of reminding them and the world how much Jews and Blacks have in common.  The descendants of the Hollywood Jews who literally took advantage of Blacks  years ago making them all servants and Black face and look like ignoramuses in their early movies.   How about how they robbed the likes of Joe Louis and other Black sports greats?  I hear no apologies about that.    Recently that other Jewish comedian was on the one night tribute to DOn Rickles was so fond of bringing up the 2000 years of persecution that Jews and Blacks share.   Then he cracked both are out to get white men.  Not funny.  The audience didn't laugh either.
 
****Townhall   

Today at 11:01 AM 

Dinesh D'Souza Takes on America
   Dinesh D'Souza is making national headlines for being a conservative. Why? Because Obama can't sleep at night, fearful of what D'Souza could tell the American people. After spending years investigating the current administration, D'Souza compiled a book Obama doesn't want you to read.


Get Dinesh D’Souza’s new book – FREE with Townhall Magazine!


 In the book, he details how Progressives are working tirelessly to forever change our nation. They are infiltrating our schools, our entertainment and now shaping the policies of the executive office.


Get Dinesh D’Souza’s new book – FREE with Townhall Magazine!


 Dinesh D'Souza first made Obama nervous with his film 2016: Obama's America and especially after it became the second highest grossing political documentary of all time. Now, he is being targeted for his patriotic efforts (just as this administration previously used the IRS to target conservatives). Obama is terrified of what D'Souza has to say to America and would do anything to stop him.


Get Dinesh D’Souza’s new book – FREE with Townhall Magazine!


 You will not want to miss his latest book! The book takes an in-depth look at the progressive agenda and how it is ruining our beloved country. And seeks to find answers to the thought-provoking questions facing our country today.


Get Dinesh D’Souza’s new book – FREE with Townhall Magazine!


 D’Souza thoroughly investigated the NSA scandal knowing "the Obama administration is collecting private information on every American, for reasons that have nothing to do with terrorism." If you aren't worried - you simply aren't paying attention.


Get Dinesh D’Souza’s new book – FREE with Townhall Magazine!


 His latest books is both provocative in its analysis and stunning in its conclusions. Without a doubt Dinesh D'Souza's America will be the most talked about book of the year. And Obama won't want you to read it.


Get Dinesh D’Souza’s new book – FREE with Townhall Magazine!
177  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Dr. Ben Carson on: May 31, 2014, 11:03:43 AM
One never knows.   He seems to have a brilliant mind and is likely a fast learner and obviously has proven himself to be a great student and teacher.

Though I agree with your previous post about him having no executive experience would make me think he is not ready to be VP either.

He did say he doesn't have the fire in the belly to run.  I hope more minorities will warm up to him.  If only he could win them over.  Why can't he reach them?   Supporting democrats is only making their lot worse not better.  Now with immigrants flooding the country and  a Presidential pardon all but certain I would ask all minorities - how does THIS help YOU?  

On the face of it, it is SO stupid.  Blacks have gone on for four hundred years being the victims and now just as they are finally achieving the status they should have, what do they do?   Support to the death a scumbag who is giving THEIR country away to the world.  If this wasn't so crazy and terrible and tragic for them as well as the rest of America I would be LOL.
178  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Corruption on: May 31, 2014, 10:55:39 AM
Sadly I own Arch Col shares cry.   Rumors allege this kind of kickback stuff is rampant is some groups of doctors too.   Doctors taking covert like payments from pharmaceutical companies or illegal kickbacks from each other via referrals.   Corruption really is everywhere. 

****Feds: Arch Coal workers took $2M in kickbacks

Feds: Arch Coal workers at West Virginia mine accused of taking $2M in kickbacks from vendors

Associated Press
By Jonathan Mattise, Associated Press 18 hours ago

CHARLESTON, W.Va. (AP) -- Arch Coal employees at a West Virginia mine are charged with pocketing almost $2 million from vendors in a pay-to-play kickback scheme, federal prosecutors said Friday.

U.S. Attorney Booth Goodwin said the widespread setup required vendors to pay kickbacks to Arch Coal employees to do business with the coal company.

Four employees at Arch Coal's Mountain Laurel mining complex in Logan County are accused of taking kickbacks from 2007 to 2012. Prosecutors said the mine's former general manager, David E. Runyon, was at the center of the setup.

Prosecutors said some companies spent more than $400,000 to maintain lucrative contracts with Arch Coal, one of the biggest coal producers and marketers worldwide.

Ten people in all have been charged, with vendors, contractors and four Arch employees among them. The employees are no longer with the company.

Companies knew Arch Coal would sever their contracts if the side payments stopped. Likewise, Runyon knew losing the contracts would hurt the companies, according to court documents.

"This kind of pay-to-play scheme hurts honest coal industry vendors who refuse to pay bribes as a way to get customers," Goodwin said in a news release Friday.

Arch Coal has mines in Wyoming, Colorado, Illinois, West Virginia, Kentucky, Virginia and Maryland. Its Mountain Laurel facility employs more than 350 in underground and surface mining. Mountain Laurel produced 2.9 million tons in sales last year, according to the company's website.

The St. Louis-based company has previously said it reached out to the U.S. attorney for help investigating possible misconduct. The company issued a statement Friday thanking investigators for their quick response.

"While it was extremely disappointing to find that former employees had failed to live up to our trust in them, we are pleased and relieved to have this issue behind us," the company said.

Runyon, a 45-year-old from Delbarton, faces up to 25 years in prison and $500,000 in fines if convicted of extortion and tax evasion.

Runyon's charges show a variety of contracts dependent on kickbacks, from mine machine repair to contracted mine labor.

Two employees at Tri-State Mining Service Inc. shelled out nearly $425,000 over five years to keep their contract, prosecutors said. An unnamed Arch Coal worker helped fix the bidding process, which requires three bids, by securing other vendors to place bids that couldn't win, court documents say.

Quality Oil Inc., then doing business as Southern Construction of Logan, directly paid Runyon $400,000 in kickbacks through its owner, Alvis R. Porter, prosecutors said.

Porter, a 61-year-old from Holden, is a former Logan County Circuit Court clerk. He was charged with failing to collect, account for and pay over trust fund taxes for an employee.

In another instance, prosecutors said, the owner of MAC Mine Service Inc. paid $340,000 for more than three years to keep Runyon from terminating a contract for mine labor.

Another vendor that refurbishes mine shuttle cars gave Runyon and a former maintenance manager at least $250,000 in kickbacks, prosecutors said.

"If they are willing to pay upwards of $2 million in total to keep them, you can imagine how big these contracts are," Goodwin said.

Court documents and officials did not discuss specifics of the contracts.

Other Arch employees and vendors face various charges, from mail fraud to structuring cash withdrawals.

Goodwin said the investigation is ongoing and he anticipates other significant developments.*****
179  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Always best to say thanks or I love you on: May 31, 2014, 10:33:31 AM
I recall my sixth grade teacher.   He pointed out a famous picture in our history book showing the two trains connecting from the East and West Coasts and people sitting on the trains waving bouquets of flowers.   Celebrating the first complete trans America railroad.   He told us something I didn't know or realize.  He said this picture is a drawing from a real photograph.    Well one can google the real photo.  The people are not waving flowers.  They are waving whiskey bottles.  I recall he was irritated about the dishonesty in our textbooks. 

I later found out he was gay.  So I suppose he had an emotional axe to grind so to speak.  That said he was without a doubt the very best grade school teacher I ever had.  He taught us things I still vividly remember today.  Architecture, Civil War history, Russian Revolution history, and more.   I think I saw him once back in the early eighties at a Fourth of July fireworks.  I wish I had gone up to him to verify it was him so I could tell him he was the best teacher of my life.   I am sure that would have meant something for him.  My sister is a teacher and I've seen previous students and parents of students of hers do that.   I know she feels great.


This sort of reminds me many years ago I was living away from home and I got intoxicated one night and started thinking how much I loved my father and I was going to tell him the next day.   When the next day came I sobered up and then decided not to tell him that.  It seemed so corny I guess.

A few weeks later my brother-in-law called me tell me my father was dead.

Naturally I regretted changing my mind.  This is one case wherein being drunk helped me think more "clearly".  I told this story to others in my family and some close friends.  I know it impacted them because they all remembered this and probably learned to tell their loved ones their feelings.

Maybe by posting on this board I can help assure people it is always better to be 'corny'. 
180  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history on: May 31, 2014, 10:27:04 AM
"The Americana Creed is a magnificent one.  It does poorly now because we have not taught it."

That is certainly part of it.   The educators today at least at the University level spend too much time making us ashamed than proud as it was when I grew up.

I recall my sixth grade teacher.   He pointed out a famous picture in our history book showing the two trains connecting from the East and West Coasts and people sitting on the trains waving bouquets of flowers.   Celebrating the first complete trans America railroad.   He told us something I didn't know or realize.  He said this picture is a drawing from a real photograph.    Well one can google the real photo.  The people are not waving flowers.  They are waving whiskey bottles.  I recall he was irritated about the dishonesty in our textbooks.  

I later found out he was gay.  So I suppose he had an emotional axe to grind so to speak.  That said he was without a doubt the very best grade school teacher I ever had.  He taught us things I still vividly remember today.  Architecture, Civil War history, Russian Revolution history, and more.   I think I saw him once back in the early eighties at a Fourth of July fireworks.  I wish I had gone up to him to verify it was him so I could tell him he was the best teacher of my life.   I am sure that would have meant something for him.  My sister is a teacher and I've seen previous students and parents of students of hers do that.   I know she feels great.

Any way I am going way off topic.

Back to the bigger less personal topic at hand.  Yes children growing up being taught to hate America is a travesty.  Especially from a population of people whose alternative is total totaliarism.    But that is only part of it.   There is still other causes like bribing voters with other peoples' monies, people coming in from countries who do not believe in capitalism, and are quite happy to have endless benefits.  

The racial and gender divides......

Look at the Pope from Argentina.   Look at the liberal Jews who descended from fascist, socialist Europe.   Their warped answers to everything is a bigger and more powerful state.  These people have no clue what the founders understood.  Indeed they now admonish our founders as just a bunch of rich white Christain men....... cry
181  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Dr. Ben Carson on: May 31, 2014, 10:09:26 AM
I lived in West Palm.  Across the water from Mar a Lago.   Indeed Trump's young wife at the time almost smashed into me making a turn in my direction while I was waiting at red light.   She was driving the largest heaviest Mercedes made.

I would have loved to go and purchase Ben's book and shake his hand.

As Objectivist points out Ben did say on Levin he would like to travel and be a spokesperson rather than a candidate for conservativism.

Alas I foolishly live in the crap state of Jersey now.  Getting fleeced every way imaginable by the Democrat thugs.  Christy hasn't helped much.   OTOH how much can he do against an entrenched corrupt system?
182  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history on: May 30, 2014, 09:52:23 PM
"as a contribution to the defense of our Republic"

Yes Crafty.  *You* have contributed immensely.

But their is something that has gone rotten about our Republic.

The corruption on display from these people in Washington and those who are happy to look the other way for varieties of reasons is just plain depressing.

To me all those things you posted to cheer up Conservatives means nothing if we can't expect our leaders to be honest and forthright and to stop playing with our heads.
183  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Pope on: May 30, 2014, 09:45:18 PM
The Pope's correction of Netanyahu's point about Jesus speaking to other Jews in Hebrew and Pope Francis 'correction' of him claiming it was Aramaic didn't really offend me much but his all too easy and convenient populist criticism of capitalism and the wealthy rather did offend me.  What about the responsibility of the poor to better themselves?  What about their responsibility to not live off handouts?   This is not virtuous living.   It is not the job of the successful to spend their lives working to support others.  

It is reasonable to say a job of the powerful is to provide as level a playing field as possible so everyone can have a chance.  

[BTW, I also hope I didn't offend anyone in my short but succinct diatribe against the Pope the other day.   If I did I apologize.]
 
In any case one persons interpretation of the Pope:

****The Pope's Criticism Of Capitalism Has One Wealthy Donor Very Upset
 
CNBC    | By Michelle Caruso-Cabrera  
   Posted:  12/31/2013 8:45 am EST      
            
  Pope Francis' critical comments about the wealthy and capitalism have at least one wealthy capitalist benefactor hesitant about giving financial support to one of the church's major fundraising projects.

At issue is an effort to raise $180 million for the restoration of St. Patrick's Cathedral in New York being spearheaded by billionaire Ken Langone, the investor known for founding Home Depot, among other things.

Langone told CNBC that one potential seven-figure donor is concerned about statements from the pope criticizing market economies as "exclusionary," urging the rich to give more to the poor and criticizing a "culture of prosperity" that leads some to become "incapable of feeling compassion for the poor."

More On CNBC:
 --  Blunt Pope Francis targets free-market economics
 -- The World’s most powerful person
 -- Best opportunities in Europe in 2014

Langone said he's raised the issue more than once with Cardinal Timothy Dolan, archbishop of New York, most recently at a breakfast in early December at which he updated him on fundraising progress.

"I've told the cardinal, 'Your Eminence, this is one more hurdle I hope we don't have to deal with. You want to be careful about generalities. Rich people in one country don't act the same as rich people in another country,' " he said.



 
Some of the statements in question are from Francis' first teaching, or "exhortation," a 224-page document issued in late November. In it, the pontiff criticizes what he calls "an economy of exclusion and inequality," blaming ideologies that "defend the absolute autonomy of the marketplace and financial speculation."

Dolan told CNBC that he had heard from Langone and said, " 'Well, Ken, that would be a misunderstanding of the Holy Father's message. The pope loves poor people. He also loves rich people.' ... So I said, 'Ken, thanks for bringing it to my attention. We've gotta correct to make sure this gentleman understands the Holy Father's message properly.' And then I think he's gonna say, 'Oh, OK. If that's the case, count me in for St. Patrick's Cathedral.' "

Neither Langone or Dolan revealed the name of the potential donor. The cardinal said he didn't know the person's identity, and Langone declined to name him, saying only that the individual was upset about the pope's comments about the rich being insensitive to the poor.

In a speech in Brazil in July, Francis appealed "to those in possession of greater resources," saying that they should "never tire of working for a more just world, marked by greater solidarity. No one can remain insensitive to the inequalities that persist in the world."

It was unclear when Dolan may speak with the individual donor.

Langone, who describes himself as a devout Catholic who prays every morning, said he has told the cardinal that "you get more with honey than with vinegar." He said he also wants to make clear that wealthy Americans are some of the biggest donors in the world.

"There is no nation on earth that is so forthcoming, so giving," he said, adding that he hopes the pope can "celebrate a positive point of view rather than focusing on the negative."

The United States ranks No. 1 in the Charities Aid Foundation's most recent World Giving Index, with proportionally more Americans giving than the population of any other country.

Dolan said that the pope has expressed gratitude for American philanthropy.

"In the one long sit-down that I had with him, the Holy Father told me that he has a lot of gratitude for the generosity of the Catholic Church in the United States. He's aware of our help to the missions, to the poor of the world, to international development, to peace and ... justice," he said. "So, I know that he's very grateful for the ... legendary generosity of the Catholic Church in the United States."

Langone said he is also on a campaign to explain "the vast difference between the pope's experience in Argentina and how we are in America."

Francis is from Argentina, a country that suffered tremendous economic upheaval in early 2001 in what was then the largest sovereign default in history. Poverty rates skyrocketed overnight when the country refused assistance from the International Monetary Fund.

Arthur Brooks, head of the American Enterprise Institute, a think tank that promotes free markets, said he agrees that the pope's beliefs are likely informed by his Argentine heritage.

"In places like Argentina, what they call free enterprise is a combination of socialism and crony capitalism," he said.

Brooks, also a practicing Catholic who has read the pope's exhortation in its original Spanish, said that "taken as a whole, the exhortation is good and right and beautiful. But it's limited in its understanding of economics from the American context." He noted that Francis "is not an economist and not an American."

"For American Catholics and Americans in general, we have a moral responsibility to the poor to spread the word of true free enterprise around the world," Brooks said. "By doing that, we have the best shot of meeting the Holy Father's objectives, which are good objectives."

He also thinks some of the English translation of the exhortation is inaccurate. For example, in one of its most talked-about passages about trickle-down economics, the Spanish version is softer than the English-language one.

The quote in English reads, "In this context, some people continue to defend trickle-down theories which assume that economic growth, encouraged by a free market, will inevitably [italics CNBC's] succeed in bringing about greater justice and inclusiveness in the world."

A better translation, Brooks said, would be "economic growth, encouraged by a free market alone, will succeed in bringing about greater justice." (This author speaks Spanish and agrees.)

"Of course a free market alone won't do the trick," he said.

A number of people, from Republican Sen. John McCain to conservative radio commentator Rush Limbaugh, have weighed in on Francis' statements, with the latter calling it "pure Marxism."

Dolan calls the Marxist label "hyperbole," telling CNBC that the pope thinks "money in itself is morally neutral. Money, our wealth, is a gift from God. And the morality comes in the way we use it.

"If it becomes a god, if it becomes an idol, Pope Francis is saying, then it's wrong. Because there is only one God. If we use it for our own selves and our families, for a secure and a safe present and future, if we use it to reinvest in the community, to help others, and if we share with the poor, then it's morally good," Dolan said.*****
184  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Just unbelievable how low this low life is on: May 30, 2014, 09:00:53 PM
Clinton writes that she takes responsibility for the deaths, but adds that there has been "a regrettable amount of misinformation, speculation and flat-out deceit" by some in politics and the media.

"I will not be a part of a political slugfest on the backs of dead Americans. It's just plain wrong, and it's unworthy of our great country," Clinton writes. "Those who insist on politicizing the tragedy will have to do so without me."

Can anyone think of anything more infuriating than this?   IS this the best America can do?  A shyster lying slob.  The corruption is mind boggling.
185  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential on: May 30, 2014, 06:18:15 AM
"Just to be perfectly clear, are we talking the nomination or the presidency here?"

I meant the Democratic nomination.

As for the Presidency, at this point there is no one on the right who appears to have what it will take to beat her. 

And the Republicans party as a whole is wandering in the wilderness.   I fear we will have another Dole, McCain, or Romneyesque like underwhelming candidate.

Compare the Republican party hodgepodge patchwork to the Democrat/Clinton machine.

She will win big the women vote.  Don't believe that then think Black vote and Obama.  No matter how bad Obama is the Blacks are married to him.  Same for the gals and Hillary.  Especially most younger women and definitely ***all*** single mothers.
186  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential on: May 29, 2014, 10:25:03 AM
"It won't be Hillary"

Doug,

I propose a bet.  I think it will be Hillary.

 
187  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Cognitive Dissonance of His Glibness on: May 29, 2014, 10:23:10 AM
" Obama is campaigning for himself to be UN Secretary General"

Yup. Fits his megalomania.   Fits his one world government goal.   With him at top.   THIS is his true colors. 

"  which I think could put him directly at odds with US President Marco Rubio on world issues"

Not only that but it puts him at odds with US interests.   He is giving our country away.

Was anyone else really offended by seeing this guy, standing in front of a sea of troops along with a giant American flag wearing a replica WW2 bomber jacket to deflect from the VA scandal?

To think that this guy, the son of an American hating Communist, a pre hippy hippy who disliked America, spent his whole life hanging wth American hating radicals would have the nerve to stand there in a bomber jacket.   When Bush did it we knew he loved America.  When Reagan did it with the flag we knew he loved America.   When Bush senior would do that we knew he WAS a WW2 hero pilot.

When this guy does it we know he is a lying fraud.  WW2 vets would and should be rolling in their graves or in their nursing homes taking massive heartburn meds.

This fraud standing their like this while he does everything he can get away with giving the country away.  He mocks this country.
188  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Dr. Ben Carson on: May 29, 2014, 10:14:42 AM
Dr. Carson was on Levin's radio show recently and when asked about running he said he would rather not;  and said something like, 'who in their right mind would?'
Yet he wouldn't rule it out in order to serve.

My opinion is not now for the highest office but maybe in the future or how about a lower office first?
189  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Cognitive Dissonance of the left on: May 28, 2014, 09:00:20 PM
http://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=60467
190  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Duck Dynasty at GOP conference on: May 28, 2014, 07:14:39 PM
I hope at least he doesn't dress up in his clown suit and actually wears a suit and tie but I doubt it.  Look he may be a very smart business man and entertaining to those so inclined but give me a break.  Are people really going to take this seriously?   And Donald Trump again?  He must have paid an arm and a leg.   I don't have anything against Trump but at this point he is not a serious spokesperson for Americans.  OTOH hand the left had their promiscuous BCP champion.....

*******Duck Dynasty's Robertson To Address GOP Conference

Happy, happy, happy!

News
 |
 Larry O'Connor |

The Republican Leadership Conference has announced their speakers for this weekend's conference in New Orleans, LA and the list includes reality television star Phil Robertson and Donald Trump.

Phil Robertson, patriarch of the Robertson family and star of the series “Duck Dynasty,” will address the 2014 Republican Leadership Conference, Thursday May 29th at 6pm. Also speaking on Thursday evening are RNC Chairman Reince Priebus, Gov. Bobby Jindal, Sen. Ron Johnson and Ben Sasse.
 Other Speakers at the 2014 Republican Leadership Conference include Governor Rick Perry, Governor Phil Bryant, US Senators Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, & David Vitter; Donald Trump, Newt Gingrich, Herman Cain, Rick Santorum, Michele Bachmann and Allen West! The Republican Leadership Conference in New Orleans has become one of the premier political events in the country.

Robertson was a target of gay rights activists in December 2013 after comments regarding homosexual behavior were published in an interview with GQ magazine. At the time, A & E, the network his show Duck Dynasty appears on, suspended him. After an intense and vocal response from the show's loyal fans, and an overwhelming petition drive here at Truth Revolt, he was reinstated.********* 
191  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Cognitive Dissonance of the left on: May 28, 2014, 06:31:48 PM
Thursday, May 19, 2011



   
USS Cesar Chavez? Why not the USS Saul Alinsky?





 Incredibly, the U.S. Navy has decided to name a cargo ship after the guy who came up with the Obama campaign slogan, "Yes, we can!" That man is the late labor agitator and community organizer Cesar Chavez. Chavez's union, the United Farm Workers, used the saying he coined as its official motto. (In Spanish, "¡Sí se puede!")

 The decision to name a Navy ship after this radical is remarkable not only because President Obama's teleprompter has the phrase "Yes, we can!" burnt into it from the phrase's overuse, but because the far-left leader was a disciple of communist sympathizer Saul Alinsky. Chavez, who died in 1993, worked for the Community Service Organization from 1952 to 1962. CSO was a pressure group created by Alinsky's Industrial Areas Foundation. Chavez has been lionized by the left because he hated capitalism and shared Alinsky's contempt for the American system. The man even sounded like Alinsky, insisting he loved America while working to undermine its institutions. Chavez said

Until the chance for political participation is there, we who are poor will continue to attack the soft part of the American system - its economic structure. We will build power through boycotts, strikes, new union - whatever techniques we can develop. These attacks on the status quo will come, not because we hate, but because we know America can construct a humane society for all its citizens - and that if it does not, there will be chaos.
"There will be chaos?" Prediction or threat? You decide.

 Chavez is also connected to ACORN founder Wade Rathke, a fact I reported in my new book, Subversion Inc.: How Obama's ACORN Red Shirts are Still Terrorizing and Ripping Off American Taxpayers.

 When Rathke was employed as an organizer at ACORN's parent organization, the National Welfare Rights Organization (NWRO), he was trained by a man named Bill Pastreich who had studied Alinsky’s in-your-face organizing techniques. Pastreich had also been employed by Chavez's United Farm Workers.

 Is it just a matter of time before the Obama administration commissions the USS Saul Alinsky? No doubt it will be a destroyer.

Follow me on Twitter and check out my new book Subversion Inc.: How Obama’s ACORN Red Shirts are Still Terrorizing and Ripping Off American Taxpayers.

192  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Israel, and its neighbors on: May 28, 2014, 07:49:51 AM
I'll post more on the Pope later.  Let me read more about him and what he says.  But he insulted my country, my way of life, my belief system and as a result me.

I won't just sit and allow him to do this.

Morality works in many ways.  Not his or the highway.
193  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Israel, and its neighbors on: May 28, 2014, 07:32:48 AM
Well this Pope has already lost me with his Communism remarks.   

If everyone was forced (that's right - forced) to have what they earn confiscated and doled out we would still be in the stone age.

I mean absolutely no disrespect to Catholics.  But this guy is a quack.

His sense of morality is in outer space.

There is something megalomanic about him.
194  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Murdered by the gay mafia; conspiracy theory on: May 26, 2014, 09:14:04 AM
By/Stephanie Condon/CBS News/May 12, 2014, 5:35 PM

Keith Crisco, Clay Aiken's congressional opponent, dies
 
Keith Crisco, the North Carolina congressional candidate running in a Democratic primary election against Clay Aiken, was found dead in his home Monday. Crisco, 71, died from injuries sustained from a fall, WRAL reports.

The textile entrepreneur was running against the former American Idol star for the Democratic nomination in North Carolina's 2nd district. Crisco and Aiken both garnered about 40 percent of the vote in last Tuesday's primary. Aiken won just a 369-vote lead, leaving open the possibility of a recount or a runoff election. The winner of the primary would face off against Rep. Renee Ellmers, R-N.C.

Aiken said in a statement that is "stunned and deeply saddened" by Crisco's death and will suspend all campaign activities "as we pray for his family and friends."

"Keith came from humble beginnings," Aiken said. "No matter how high he rose - to Harvard, to the White House and to the Governor's Cabinet - he never forgot where he came from. He was a gentleman, a good and honorable man and an extraordinary public servant. I was honored to know him."

Democratic strategist Brad Crone said that he spoke with Crisco earlier in the day and that the candidate planned to concede the race Tuesday.

"This is a shocking day," Crone said in a statement to CBS News. "At Keith's instructions, I called Gary Pearce, an advisor to Mr. Aiken, to convey that Keith was going to concede the election tomorrow morning and would be calling Mr. Aiken to congratulate him."

The North Carolina board of elections said in a statement, "The State Board of Elections is saddened to hear of the passing of Keith Crisco. A native of North Carolina, we are grateful for Mr. Crisco's service to our state and his community through the years. Our thoughts and prayers are with the Crisco family during this difficult time."

Ellmers released a statement Monday saying her thoughts and prayers are with Crisco's family and friends.

"I am deeply saddened by this sudden and painful tragedy and wish God's blessings for Keith's family through the coming days," she said. "His kindness and dedication to his principles were models we should all strive toward, and he will be dearly missed."
.
© 2014 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
195  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics on: May 22, 2014, 10:17:20 AM
Doug writes,

" The area where far left and right should find agreement is to stop giving special favors to the powerful"

Agreed.  But I never hear this from the Right.   Nothing wrong with getting rich honestly.   But to enhance the advantages they already have just makes it worse.

You even begin to level the playing field with petty minimum wage regulations.  I don't understand why the NAACP is marching into McDonald's headquarters screaming for an increase in chump change.  Who in their right mind goes to work for McDs serving burgers as a career?  You either try to move up to better management positions or go to school or some other endeavor with a real future. 

The NAACP should be marching into the "f" White House demanding the ONE to stop allowing people to flood into our country driving down wages for those already here.

Of course wages are a few bucks an hour.  Every single fast food place around here has people with accents.  So yea, big companies love this.

But the NAACP?   
196  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Immigration issues on: May 22, 2014, 10:09:31 AM
Doug,

Beautifully summarized dilemma Conservatives are in.   We are really boxed in.  The left knows it so it is putting the pressure on this issue.

I will be absolutely shocked if Obama doesn't simply pardon everyone in the end.  We see every day how he doesn't believe in America.

He is happy to give it away for his liberal agenda.

I agree with you Rubio's heart was in the right place.


 

197  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / War on saturated fat, just a money making scam? on: May 22, 2014, 09:59:49 AM
I frankly am not sure what to make of this except that I am thinking of going out and buying a plate of (without the bread) corn beef, roast beef, and pastrami, and yes tongue!

In general I suggest to patients just to keep the calories down as much as possible.  Diets, low fat, low carb, low this low that.  Just low calories with some obvious healthy foods with fiber and nutrients like fruits and vegetables.

I included some of the comments posted in response to the article.   

******Heart Association’s Junk Science Diet

By Barbara H. Roberts, MD 4 hours ago The Daily Beast
 
Heart Association’s Junk Science Diet
   
The dogma that saturated fat causes heart disease is crumbling.

A recent Cambridge University analysis of 76 studies involving more than 650,000 people concluded, “The current evidence does not clearly support guidelines that [recommend]… low consumption of total saturated fats.”

Yet the American Heart Association (AHA), in its most recent dietary guidelines, held fast to the idea that we must all eat low fat diets for optimal heart health. It’s a stance that—at the very best—is controversial, and at worst is dead wrong. As a practicing cardiologist for more than three decades, I agree with the latter—it’s dead wrong.

Why does the AHA cling to recommendations that fly in the face of scientific evidence?

What I discovered was both eye opening and disturbing. The AHA not only ignored all the other risk factors for heart disease, but it appointed someone with ties to Big Food and bizarre scientific beliefs to lead the guideline-writing panel—just the type of thing that undermines the public’s confidence in the medical community.

The AHA guidelines warrant that saturated fat make up no more than 5 to 6 percent of daily calories for adults because this will lower “bad” (LDL) cholesterol. And, for those people who need blood pressure control, the guidelines also suggest lowering sodium (salt) intake to no more than a teaspoon (2,300 mg) daily.

Despite many other known risk factors for heart disease, salt and fat were, astonishingly, the only two considered by the AHA panel writing the guidelines. There are many other recognized risk factors the AHA ignored, including blood sugar level, low “good” (HDL) cholesterol, insulin levels, and body weight—all of these are influenced by diet.

In fact, most people who have heart attacks don’t have elevations in bad cholesterol. They are much more likely to have metabolic syndrome—a condition that puts you at high risk for diabetes and heart disease. Metabolic syndrome is defined when you have three of the following: high triglycerides (blood fats), high blood sugar, high blood pressure, low “good” cholesterol (HDL-C), and a large abdomen measurement (abdominal obesity).

Interestingly enough, blood triglycerides do not go up with eating fat—they go up if you eat a diet high in processed grains, starches, and sugar. Unfortunately for the proponents of high carbohydrate diets, high blood triglycerides are a major risk factor for heart disease. In addition, low fat/high carb diets lower protective “good” cholesterol and raise insulin. These diets are implicated in the development of diabetes, which is a potent risk factor for developing heart disease.

The writers of the 2013 statin guidelines based their recommendations on studies that looked at the reduction in the risk of events like heart attacks in people treated with statins, compared to people on placebo. The AHA dietary guidelines do not cite any diet studies that looked at whether following a specific diet lowered the risk of developing cardiac events—yet they are giving dietary advice. Why?

There might be two plausible reasons. One is the AHA’s moneymaking “Heart Check Program.” The second is the conflict of interest (and curious beliefs) of Robert Eckel—the co-chair of the panel that wrote the guidelines.

The AHA introduced the Heart Check Program in 1995 and it has been quite the moneymaker, as the AHA sells the Heart Check stamp-of-approval to food manufacturers. Food companies shell out between $1,000 and $7,500 to be certified by the Heart Check Program—and then there are yearly renewal fees. The program currently endorses 889 foods as “heart-healthy.”

And the Heart Check Program is not the only way the AHA benefits from Big Food companies. In their annual report for 2012-2013, the AHA lists among its lifetime donors of $1 million or more Conagra, Quaker Oats, and Campbell Soups, among others.

Forty-five percent of these “heart healthy” foods—over 400 of them—are meat; 92 are processed meats—which have been shown to have either neutral or negative effects on heart health.

Even more problematic are the foods containing added sugar. The AHA recommends that women consume less than 6 teaspoons (100 calories) of sugar a day and less than 9 teaspoons (150 calories) for men. Yet there are items that get the nod of approval from the Heart Check program despite being near or at the sugar limit, like Bruce’s Yams Candied Sweet Potatoes and Healthy Choice Salisbury Steak. Indeed, until 2010, the Heart Check imprimatur was stamped on a drink called Chocolate Moose Attack, which contained more sugar per ounce than regular Pepsi.

And until this year, Heart Check approved many foods with trans-fats, which raise bad cholesterol and lower good cholesterol, among other deleterious effects on health, like increasing inflammation and the laying down of calcium in arteries.

Like the dietary guidelines, the AHA Heart Check Program appears to address only the effect of foods on cholesterol level and blood pressure. Meanwhile, since the 1970s, our yearly sugar consumption has skyrocketed along with the incidence of diabetes and obesity.

This brings us to Dr. Robert H. Eckel, the co-chair of the Working Group. He is a consultant for Foodminds, which specializes “in food, beverage, nutrition, health and wellness.”  Foodminds works with more than 30 leading food, beverage, and nutrition to offer a “one stop shop of…consulting…to guide food and beverage companies in navigating the complexities around the upcoming FDA Nutrition Facts label overhaul.”  In other words, Foodminds is a lobbying firm for “Big Food.”

And then there is this:

Dr. Eckel describes himself as “a scientist and professing six-day creationist and a member of the technical advisory board of the Institute for Creation Research…” Many scientists are religious. This is not to question Dr. Eckel’s religious beliefs, but to question his ability to think scientifically. He believes there is scientific proof that the world was created in six days and that evolution does not exist. This should at least raise eyebrows when the co-chair of an influential panel charged with giving scientifically sound dietary advice has a financial conflict of interest and proselytizes for beliefs that are anti-scientific.

Practice guidelines affect both public policy and medical practice. We should expect professional medical organizations —like the American Heart Association—to examine all the evidence relating to diet and heart disease risk.

The American people should be able to trust that only impartial scientists write guidelines. We should be confident that those experts are not working to advance corporate interests and that they do not espouse beliefs that are well outside the scientific mainstream. An avowed creationist who consults for a food lobby hardly seems an appropriate choice to fulfill these criteria.

READ MORE The Truth About Salt

For the last several decades, the AHA has promoted a low fat high carbohydrate diet as a cornerstone of heart health. It has taken a very public position that saturated fats are a major driver of heart disease risk and the mounting tide of evidence that this is dead wrong must put them it in a very uncomfortable position. And yet a fundamental requirement of science—as opposed to propaganda—is that when evidence that contradicts a hypothesis is replicated over and over again, that hypothesis must be abandoned.

The idea that eating high amounts of saturated fat causes hardening of the arteries—the so-called “diet-heart hypothesis”— deserves to be jettisoned along with other discredited belief systems. Creationism comes to mind. Will the AHA step up to the plate?

The American Heart Association had not returned an inquiry for comment at the time of publishing. 


 ...



.
10 Comments  .


Ernesto 1 hour ago


two years ago, I realized that the AHA did NOT need my donation. It seemed to me that most of their donations may come from the food and pharmaceutical industry so, they really don't need either my participation on the heart day walk. Their statistics show that during the past 30 years their guidelines and recommendations are linked to a double fold increase of heart disease in the U.S. And the sad part is that doctors, specifically cardiologists, and health insurances either promote or follow these inept guidelines. Recently, I almost purchase a food brand deli turkey which it showed a heart check on the label. I decided to read the ingredients to find out that the processed meat contained too much sodium and phosphates. Both ingredients are bad for the heart. AFP RELAXNEWS Wednesday, May 7, 2014, 10:39 AM
 Phosphates, which are also found in Parmesan, colas and baking soda, may stimulate the production of the hormone FGF23, which puts a strain on the heart and can lead to high blood pressure and cardiovascular disease, researchers said.....

 Definitely, the AHA doesn't need my two cents... I don't need their two cents either.

 


oh well 55 minutes ago


Dr. is correct as she is wrong in her approach. Levels of cholesterol and other lipids are a result for most people higher than normal weight values and excessive intake of fats and sugars. High blood pressures can be influenced by amount of salt intake, however salt in itself is not the only culprit: kidney disease, stress and release of catecholamines contribute to arterial injury as does smoking: the latter being a virtual do not enter area for heart
 patients and their families. Exercise to help control weight, increase HDL and help in lowering levels of glucose and stress hormones all contribute to a healthier person who feels better and sees the world in a better light which influences attitude and heart health and brain health as well..

 In essence balance is a key for most people but be careful of those heavy meals and overdoing it whether at the gym or the table.....

 Have a nice day.


Sandra 2 hours ago

I did a research paper for school a couple of years ago that validates what this article is saying about saturated fats. Not sure why the author finds it necessary to back up her view by bringing Dr. Eckel's belief in creationism as some kind of evidence to back up the idea? There is enough material available on diet and heart disease to prove the point. I don't believe in the 6 day creationism story either, but don't see how it can discount someone as a scientist.


MrHersch11 49 minutes ago

I was rolling right along, agreeing with each of Dr Roberts' points, and then she throws in the creationism thing. That's a whole separate issue, and her use of that issue tends to make you forget all the valid points she made throughout the rest of the article. She'd have been better off making her points about AHA and diet, and then shutting up.

Sam 51 minutes ago

Being stupid is relevant.


Seldom Wrong 20 minutes ago

Sugar and grain based foods do far more damage than meat and dairy. After 60 years of pushing an unhealthy diet, the American Heart Association has succeeded in making us all fat and sick. When are they going to own up to their guilt and change their recommendations? If they keep pushing the same lies, they don't deserve anyone's support.

Candy 1 hour ago

So is this article attacking the diet that the AHA backs up or is it attacking creationism and Dr. Eckel?
 
Lothar F 39 minutes ago

The AHA, and the AMA as well, have sold us, the public, down the river to big business interests. People need to use common sense and stick to a traditional diet that does not contain any processed or refined foods.
 
Sam 44 minutes ago

How does a nutball end up in any scientific position?

 My clinic recommends one third fat for most diets.

JohnW 1 hour ago

I'm so glad this is finally coming out. Dr. Atkins said this for years. People's health would greatly benefit it they would cut out the cookies and pop.


Lynne 2 hours ago

If true, this is all fairly damning. Shame on the AHA for allowing it.

198  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / The next step towards single payer government run health care on: May 22, 2014, 09:33:03 AM
Most employers could shift healthcare coverage to exchanges by 2020, report says
Switch from employer to individual plans could save businesses $3.25 trillion

Publish date: MAY 15, 2014
Print


By: Rachael Zimlich
 
A new report is gaining attention for its prediction that U.S. companies could save trillions of dollars over the next decade by using the Affordable Care Act's (ACA) healthcare exchanges, and eliminating employee health plans.

The report, prepared for the financial services industry by S&P Capital IQ Global Markets Intelligence, predicts that companies could shift 90% of their workers from employer-based healthcare to individual coverage on insurance marketplaces by 2020. If all U.S. companies with 50 or more employees transferred coverage for their employees to the marketplace, they could save $3.25 trillion by 2025, the report predicts. If only Standard & Poor’s (S&P) 500 companies did so, they would save between $690 billion and $800 billion over the same period.

The premise of the ACA is to shift the responsibility for healthcare insurance to employees. This will put corporate America in a position to redefine its role in healthcare, the report states.

S&P 500 companies employ about 138 million people, or 20% of the American workforce. So when S&P companies adopt a practice, it often indicates the start of a new, large-scale trend among employers.

The report predicts that when the switch from employer to individual insurance begins, it won’t take long to complete, with 10% of S&P companies expected to begin transferring coverage to workers by 2016, 30% by 2017, 70% by 2019 and 90% by 2020. Low- and middle-income employees, entry-level workers or new college graduates, and part-time employees will be pushed into individual coverage first and will receive federal subsidies to help afford their new plans. Higher-income workers will follow later, likely with stipends to help cover the cost of their coverage, the report predicts. Those stipends will eventually become part of employee pay, completing the transition to a complete corporate abandonment of providing healthcare coverage.

But with all that money saved, someone is going to have to pay more, whether it is employees or the government. According to the report, employees moved to the exchange would pay nearly $2,800 more for their health benefits in 2016 compared with what they paid under an employer-provided insurance plan, or an increase of about 50%. But many low-wage, and even some middle-wage, employees will be eligible for a government subsidy to offset the cost of their their premiums which will also increase the financial burden of subsidizing healthcare for the federal government, the report predicts.

On the other hand, the more individuals that purchase healthcare coverage through the exchanges, the more affordable and competitive the market will become, the report explains. Purchasing individual coverage also will reduce the stress caused by changing jobs, because coverage won’t change with the employment. Overall, the shift could give employees more control over their healthcare coverage and more stability, but could also result in higher premiums for anyone not eligible for federal subsidies or offered stipends from their employers.

The report predicts that employee costs for healthcare will more than double by 2025, although they will be paying the same percentage—about 26%—of their premiums over that period. Employers’ share of premiums will drop from roughly 70% to 33%, while the government’s share is predicted to jump from less than 4% to about 41%.

 
199  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / "Obama Republicans" on: May 21, 2014, 10:03:54 PM
I can't post under "future of Republican party"  ; it is locked.

So I post here.  Good lead article on Breitbart today:

Rise of the 'Obama Republicans'



 
 

 394

 2

 804

 8


 


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Email ArticlePrint articleSend a Tip
by Craig Shirley  21 May 2014, 10:48 AM PDT 710  post a comment 

The 1980 campaign brought about the dissolution of the old New Deal Coalition and the rise of the Reagan Democrat, a phrase coined by Newsweek political writer Peter Goldman after that historic election.
Yet all campaigns cannot be viewed as isolated incidents but rather as a river flowing from one through the next. Conservative Democrats broke with Adlai Stevenson in 1952 to support Eisenhower and many broke with Hubert Humphrey in 1968 to support Republican Richard Nixon or George Wallace, another Democrat.

By 1972, many conservative Democrats supported Nixon over George McGovern so at least in presidential campaigns, culturally conservative Democrats were already moving away from their historic home. Only the election of Jimmy Carter in 1976, a southern populist reformer--and Watergate--and Betty Ford’s liberalism--forestalled the inevitable.

The Gipper’s massive victory in 1980 was fueled by more that 30 percent of Democrats nationwide, who took a powder on Carter after he moved to the left. Reagan received the same amount in the 1984 election in part because he’d done nothing to disappoint them and the liberal establishment nominated Walter Mondale, a good man who was trapped in a New Deal past.

Reagan ran again as the anti-establishment candidate of the future and swamped the lifetime Democrat, ironically with the help of Democrats. Yet the Establishment Republicans simply could not abide by the realigning elections of 1980, 1984, and 1994.

By the final years of the last century, some inside the GOP wanted the Reagan Revolution to be over, thus the phrase “compassionate conservative.” George W. Bush ran and lost the popular vote in 2000 without once ever calling for a spending cut or the elimination of one single wasteful federal program. After that, the GOP would continue to embrace the persona of Reagan--they had little choice--but no longer would they embrace the American conservative philosophy of the Gipper.

Hence, the stirrings of the Obama Republicans.

What has altered the storyline in the past several years is not the emergence of the Tea Party but rather the permanent entrenchment of Big Government Republicans, aka Obama Republicans. President Obama has had that much effect on the national debate, which has had a direct effect on the national Republicans.

The last gasp of principled conservatism may have come in 2010 with the rise of the Tea Party, but this also gave rise to the countervailing force of the Obama Republicans, resulting in the nomination of Mitt Romney in 2012.

In spite of losing five of the previous six presidential contests, it is the Obama Republicans who now rule the party apparatus of the GOP. Obama Republicans have also spread out among the state bureaucracies, the academies, Wall Street, Detroit, and nearly all of corporate America.

They have bought into Obama’s Oligarchy of big business and big government doing business together, at the expense of the little guy.

Obama supported TARP. Bush supported TARP. The ruling classes supported TARP. Wall Street supported TARP. Therefore, $750 billion--initially--was taken from the rest of the country to “rescue” the corrupt elites of Wall Street.

And never one prosecution or investigation. The greatest wealth transfer in American history and the elites of both parties were in on the score. The Republicans pulled of the heist and the Democrats drove the getaway car.

Other examples abound.

The new Obama Republicans are members of the bureaucratic classes, are pro-government, pro-gay marriage, pro-abortion, pro-NSA, and pro-amnesty. They are sophisticated, urban, and have utterly nothing in common with the Tea Party Reaganites. Indeed, they are culturally closer to Obama’s and Romney’s view of the world than Reagan’s.

Power is everything. Power vindicates all. The shady forces of the national GOP party committees supported a pro-abortion, pro-Obamacare stalker in Oregon’s senate primary because she is a) a woman and b)…? The national GOP plays the very same identity politics that Obama and the Democrats have played for years by embracing one victim group after another. (Shirley & Banister assisted Jason Conger in Oregon’s GOP primary because he was the ethical conservative candidate.)

The Obama Republicans are fueled in part by old Bush speechwriters and neocons and High Tories who sometimes make a pass at talking about conservatism but that is mainly to keep the yokels at the grass roots guessing. Mostly though, they spend their time bashing the Tea Party Reaganites.

There is a dialectic to American presidential politics which occurs every generation or two. From Jefferson’s “New American Revolution” to Jackson’s “Democratic Populism” to Lincoln and the rise of the Republican reformers to Teddy Roosevelt and then to FDR’s “New Deal” and two generations later to Reagan’s “New Federalism,” and now to Obama, 28 years after Reagan--right on schedule--we may be witnessing a paradigm shift again in American politics.

It should be no surprise that the Republicans on Capitol Hill offer nothing of opposition to Obama. They can best be labeled the “Rollover Caucus.” Oh, they will run commercials and mouth platitudes to fool conservative voters to get their money and their votes for this fall, but everybody knows they’ve signed on to Obamacare because their corporate masters in the insurance companies and pharmaceutical industries told them to do so. They have always supported immigration reform because, again, their corporate masters told them to do so.

The Administrative state is here to stay, as long as the status quo holds. The only question now is how long the Tea Party Reaganites stay with a party which is fundamentally opposed to them and despises them.

200  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / 2 nd post today on: May 21, 2014, 08:07:46 AM
I haven't the time this AM to review this site.  Looks like it might give us more info on illegal immigration.  A colleague told me he heard illegals commit crimes way out of proportion to their numbers but when I did a very quick search this AM I find one review titled something to the effect that their crimes are blown way out of proportion and another that says their crimes are quite scary.  So finding the truth among the agendas is not easy.  And of course no one is really counting anyway.  The Feds under this WH can not be counted on to tell us the truth about what they at least really think is going on.

This might be helpful. 

http://www.illegalimmigrationstatistics.org/
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 82
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!