Segami

Segami's Journal

August 16, 2013

CNN Highlights How MARIJUANA PROHIBITION HARMS CHILDREN

"...PLEASE DON'T LET MY DAUGHTER DIE, GOVERNOR..."

“Think of the children,” is usually the rallying cry of opponents of drug legalization. But CNN on Thursday highlighted how marijuana prohibition was actually harmful to some children who were denied the potentially life-saving drug. In a segment on The Lead, CNN host Jake Tapper interviewed a man whose young daughter suffers from a rare form of epilepsy that causes her to have daily seizures. The condition has been treated with a special strain of marijuana, but the young girl is currently prohibited from using it under New Jersey state law. Brian Wilson recently confronted Gov. Chris Christie (R) about the issue.

“With Dravet Syndrome and all forms of severe epilepsy, these seizures can be life ending,” Wilson explained on CNN. “They’re extremely taxing on your heart, on your respiratory system, on your brain. Vivian has stopped breathing twice during the course of extended seizure. She has seizures that will last sometimes 45 to 60 minutes.” Without controlling her seizures through the use of marijuana, his daughter is constantly at risk of dying, Wilson said.

“So, her life is at risk every day. Kids die all the time from this. There was a week — there was a four-week period in April where four children with Dravet Syndrome died. So, it’s one of the realities we face unless we can get this under control.” CNN’s Dr. Sanjay Gupta added that children suffering from Dravet Syndrome did not have many options. If marijuana wasn’t available, children could be put on as many as seven different medications at one time. “This is one of those situations where we know what the options are and none of them really work, besides high CBD cannabis,” Gupta said.

cont'

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/08/15/cnn-highlights-how-marijuana-prohibition-harms-children/

August 15, 2013

Father IMPLORES Chris Christie On Medical Marijuana: ‘PLEASE DON'T LET MY DAUGHTER DIE ’

Two-year-old Vivian Wilson has a rare form of epilepsy that ravages her body with seizures so severe she is unable to function, and could prove fatal. In other states with medical marijuana laws, young children with Dravets Syndrome have seen their life transformed by a strain of medical marijuana that curbed the seizures like no other treatment, and with fewer debilitating side effects.

But New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) is sitting on a bill that would give Vivian and other minors access to the treatment. And on Wednesday, Vivian’s father Brian Wilson confronted him on the matter: “Please don’t let my daughter die, Governor,” Brian Wilson told him during a meet-and-greet at a local diner.“These are complicated issues,” Christie responded. But he committed to make a decision on whether to sign the bill by Friday.

New Jersey is already among the 20 states with medical marijuana laws, but it contains stringent limits for minors. A bill passed by the state legislature about two months ago would ease access to the drug for minors with conditions like Vivian’s, by permitting access to edible forms of marijuana, which are the only mechanism for consumption for a young child; and lifting a provision that allows only three strains of marijuana for medical consumption. The bill would also lower the number of required doctor recommendations from 3 to 1.

In a CNN documentary that aired Sunday, Colorado parents explained the battle they endured trying to find two doctors who would sign off on marijuana for their young child, and in finding a source to supply a special rare strain of marijuana that is low in the psychoactive component of marijuana, THC, and high in another component believed to alleviate seizures, CBD. But while they were limited by logistical obstacles and the federal prohibition on marijuana use for any purpose, Colorado’s medical marijuana bill permitted them access to the strain they needed, in edible form.

cont'

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/08/15/2473011/father-implores-chris-christie-on-medical-marijuana-please-dont-let-my-daughter-die/
.

August 15, 2013

"WE'RE BUILDING A DOMESTIC ARMY" -Marine Corps Colonel Speaks Out

Marine Corp Colonel speaks out at a local council meeting about the militarization of our police forces on 08/12/13 at 41 Green St, Concord, NH 03301.

"We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."

- President Obama, Colorado, July 2, 2008

August 13, 2013

Obama Wants U.S. "COMFORTABLE" with VAST SURVEILLANCE

Barack Obama pulled out the "we're not Big Brother" line again Friday in the ongoing to effort to bamboozle people alarmed about the vast National Security Agency surveillance of whole populations exposed by Edward Snowden. The important thing to him is not that the surveillance is curtailed, but that you feel comfortable with it. Tech Crunch outlined Obama's program to make you comfortable:

1) a new independent NSA review board that will publish recommendations on protecting civil liberties 2) a new website detailing the surveillance activities 3) changes to the Patriot Act authorizing the spying, and 4) a new public advocate to argue cases in the secret court that grants the NSA spying requests.

http://techcrunch.com/2013/08/09/press-corps-fails-to-ask-any-nsa-questions-at-obamas-nsa-press-conference/

Reviews, public advocates, and a website (!) all with the intention of making you accept the illegal busting down of virtual walls breaking any remaining protection promised by the Fourth Amendment. Obama straight up lied when saying that

all these steps are designed to ensure that the American people can trust that our efforts are in line with our interests and our values. And to others around the world, I want to make clear once again that America is not interested in spying on ordinary people.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/photos-and-video/video/2013/08/09/president-obama-holds-press-conference#transcript

Obama was especially pissed off that Snowden's revelations continue to be published via Glenn Greenwald in The Guardian, and in other media. These include irrefutable evidence -- from the horse's mouth -- of ongoing NSA programs which collect all metadata from very large sections of people, including Stellar Wind, Boundless Informant, and X-KEYSCORE.

Plainly put by The Guardian:

Nothing Obama announced Friday is likely to materially alter the NSA's ongoing mass collection of phone data and surveillance of internet communications in the short term.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/09/obama-nsa-surveillance-reforms-press-conference

The Wall Street Journal, which mostly supports Obama's spying, spoke plainly to Obama's chief goal; to

gain public trust in the NSA programs and engage in a national debate about surveillance. But he also has said he was comfortable with the current programs. So he could say he spurred a debate and tried to address privacy concerns even if no changes result.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323446404579007082781710154.html

The New York Times editorialized, mildly, against the spying, apparently not satisfied with Obama's sales effort:

The programs themselves are the problem, not whether they are modestly transparent. As long as the N.S.A. believes it has the right to collect records of every phone call -- and the administration released a white paper Friday that explained, unconvincingly, why it is perfectly legal -- then none of the promises to stay within the law will mean a thing.

Exactly ZERO prisoners have been released since his comments.

cont'

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Obama-Wants-U-S--Comforta-by-Debra-Sweet-130813-53.html

August 13, 2013

Administration DELAYS Patient COST-SAVINGS Rule

Now this is unfortunate. Last February, the administration released a new rule under Obamacare that delays a key part of the "Affordable" in the Affordable Care Act: caps on patients' out-of-pocket costs. The rule was "obscured in a maze of legal and bureaucratic language that went largely unnoticed" until The New York Times health reporter Robert Pear dug it up.

Under the policy, many group health plans will be able to maintain separate out-of-pocket limits for benefits in 2014. As a result, a consumer may be required to pay $6,350 for doctors’ services and hospital care, and an additional $6,350 for prescription drugs under a plan administered by a pharmacy benefit manager.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/13/us/a-limit-on-consumer-costs-is-delayed-in-health-care-law.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

The delay doesn't apply to all insurers or employers and will not harm many consumers. But it can harm some of the most vulnerable, as Kaiser Health News reports. People with devastating and chronic illnesses—cancer, AIDS, lupus, epilepsy—who have the highest drug and doctor bills will be disproportionately hurt. It's a relatively small patient population, but it's the patient population that arguably needs the cap the most. The administration and its defenders argue that it was necessary because some employers and plans don't have the capacity to determine those costs easily and need another year to put those systems in place. You could argue that the the businesses have had plenty of damned time to put those systems in place since the law passed.

The most frustrating part of the law is that it will have the most expensive impact on the people who are the sickest. The second most frustrating thing about it is that it's giving more fodder to Republicans, like House Speaker John Boehner, who said: “Once again the president is giving a break to big businesses struggling with his health care law while individuals and families unfairly remain stuck under its mandates." No, Boehner doesn't give a shit about the individuals and families, and yes, he's on the side of big business. Boehner's hypocrisy aside, giving the GOP more ammunition in their argument that Obamacare is a train wreck is just politically stupid.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/08/13/1230965/-Administration-delays-patient-cost-savings-rule

.

August 13, 2013

Best Healthcare In The World? Insurance Company ALMOST Lets NJ Dad DIE......OVER 26 CENTS!

A New Jersey garbage truck driver almost saw his life slip away from him over 26 cents. Thirty-three-year-old Sergio Branco took a three month leave of absence (thanks to the Family and Medical Leave Act) from his job with Russell Reid, a waste management company, after finding out that he had fast-spreading type of leukemia. Soon, his doctors informed him that he would need a bone marrow transplant to save his life. Luckily, they were able to find him a donor with a perfect match and scheduled the transplant for August 16th. A $500,000 transplant. Thank goodness for health insurance.

Or maybe not.

After Sergio’s three month leave of absence was up, his company fired him. Unsurprised, his family at least took heart in the knowledge that they could continue their health insurance coverage through COBRA (Consolidated Omnibus Reconciliation Act). They’d have to pay the whole premium, but it was better than paying the full $500,000 for the transplant. Soon after Sergio was fired, a letter arrived letting them know they had until June 30 to decide whether or not they wanted the coverage. Of course they did, so on May 24, Sergio’s wife Mara sent in her check for $518 to pay for the first month of coverage for Sergio.

But she forgot the 26 cents.

Whatever the reason–she was preoccupied with the kids, her sick husband, supporting the family, etc–the bill for $518.26 wasn’t paid in full. So, despite the fact that they were still within the time allowed to pay before the option for coverage was gone, and despite the fact that the check Mara sent in was cashed, Sergio’s coverage was terminated, leaving him unable to pay for the transplant. It wasn’t until the hospital notified them that the Branco family found out about the cancellation. When Mara contacted the company handling the insurance coverage, Paychex, to find out what happened, they told her about the 26 cents. When she tried to pay it, Paychex wouldn’t accept payment, saying that Russell Reid, Sergio’s old company, told them to accept no more payments from them. Mara called Russell Reid, and they denied the accusation. She was soon left with no choice but to get the Department of Labor involved, who also got the run-around from both companies involved–all while a man’s life hung in the balance. Finally, at the beginning of July, they received written notification that Sergio’s insurance was cancelled. Their payment of $518 was sent back to them.

Finally, the Branco’s had no choice but to get a lawyer.

The lawyer changed everything. The law says insurance coverage cannot be cancelled over a “de minimis amount,” not to mention that Paychex never sent the appropriate notices under the law. Soon, Paychex and Russell Reid had no choice but to reinstate Sergio Branco’s insurance coverage. His transplant is still on track for August 16.

cont'

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/08/12/insurance-company-scam-over-26-cents/

August 12, 2013

What Would YOU Have the President Do?

There were varying reactions to the President’s recent speech at Knox College this week. My reaction was that the speech was deeply dishonest in light of the President’s previous policies, actions, and results, and I intended to do a critique, but Michael Hudson and Yves Smith beat me to it. In a fine post at Naked Capitalism, entitled “Michael Hudson Shreds Obama’s Orwellian Speech On Middle Class Prosperity,” Michael Hudson, with occasional added comments from Yves, deconstructs the speech paragraph by paragraph, and sometimes line-by-line, pointing out disingenuous assertions and outright dishonesty. In her introduction Yves remarks on the context:

The worst is that Obama apparently plans a series of Big Lie speeches on his “vision for rebuilding an economy that puts the middle class — and those fighting to join it – front and center.” That’s at best an afterthought, since he’s given the economy over to an at best indifferent and at worst predatory elite that have no interest in giving it back.

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2013/07/michael-hudson-shreds-obamas-orwellian-speech-on-middle-class-prosperity.html

The reaction to the post was vigorous with most of the discussion supporting and amplifying the views presented. However, there was one comment which said:

Have you mentioned the fact that he’s right on every issue mentioned?

Would you rather have a FDR, or Truman or Johnson as our president? These men, while great, are not that much different from the current President.

What would u have him do? Enact single-payer health care, small class sizes and the best teachers imaginable, a minimum wage at $21.00 an hour and an average wage at $40 (where it should be), and a lower private debt burden across the board with a wave of one of his “Hope and Change” wands?

I am proud to have voted for this man. He can’t do it alone. And going after him while offering no positive alternatives yourself to me is the height of contemptibility.

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2013/07/michael-hudson-shreds-obamas-orwellian-speech-on-middle-class-prosperity.html#comment-1317998

Of course, that persistent rationalization offered by the world’s Obamabots is my cue. What I want him to do falls into two major categories. First, there are necessary first moves he can probably get done which will facilitate passing all the other policies I propose. Second, there are the policies that will restore prosperity to poor and middle class over time.

Get rid of the filibuster

He can start by convening Congressional Democrats: House and Senate, and telling them that the middle class and American Democracy are simultaneously threatened and that he can’t save the situation and ensure a Democratic victory in 2014, unless, as a first step, the Democrats in the Senate agree to get rid of the filibuster entirely, and immediately, and accept majority rule in the Senate on all matters not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution. Of course, the House Democrats have nothing formally to say about what the Senate does. But their presence is important for impressing upon the Senators the importance to the national party of doing this, and then going on offense against the Republicans, so that the Democrats can retain control of the Senate and enable them to once again get something to run on, so they can get a majority in the House. In saying this, I’m not saying that returning Democrats to power will get us to Democracy. Far from it. But I do think that it will slow the evolution toward plutocratic fascism, and create opportunities for enacting new and helpful policies provided the right Democrats are elected. I know, I know. That’s an awfully big qualification. But people certainly can work for that result.

cont'

http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/18100-what-would-you-have-the-president-do

August 11, 2013

THIS IS WHAT A POLICE STATE LOOKS LIKE! "YOU Open The Door When We Come To YOUR F*cking House!"

Calling the police on the police!

August 11, 2013

9/11 In The Academic Community

--Coming this Fall of 2013--Please support the film at 911inAcademia.com and distribute widely-- A Winner of the 2011 University of Toronto Film Festival, the film examines the academic community's treatment of critical perspectives on 9/11 by exploring the taboo that shields the American government's narrative from scholarly examination. Through a powerful reflection on intellectual courage and the purpose of academia, the film aims at changing intellectual discourse on 9/11 and the War on Terror.

August 9, 2013

The MYTH Of SOCIALISM

Since President Obama took the oath of office it has become the rhetoric of the GOP that anything that doesn’t agree with them is “socialist” or “leading us towards socialism.” It seems, historically, that this is the tactic of the Republicans every time the Democrats propose policies (mainly health care reform) that they don’t agree with. The fallacy of their statements is that they have made them repeatedly throughout history, and America is still not a Socialist nation. Any time that the Republicans do not hold the Presidency, and cannot push their agenda, they resort to McCarthyism. Never once in our history has a President advocated for the complete Government take-over of all private industries. I have friends that identify as Socialist and they can’t believe that they are being so grossly misrepresented by the right-wing media. To Republicans, the term “Socialist” or “moving towards Socialism” has come to mean ANY industry involved with the Government. Republicans are also arguing that if you support any type of Government-run agency then you must be a socialist who supports a “nanny-state.” It’s very easy to compile a list of Presidents called “socialist” by their enemies for policies which did not agree with the Republicans.

* President Obama is called a “socialist” for wanting to raise taxes on the wealthy, bailing out the auto-industry and for his health care bill.

* President Clinton was called a “socialist” for wanting to take 60% of the budget surplus over the course of 15 years and put it towards Social Security, while investing a portion in the private sector. He was also a “socialist” for wanting to raise taxes and expand health care.

*President Carter was called a “socialist” for creating the Department of Energy and the Department of Education, and for wanting to expand health care.

* President Johnson and President Kennedy were called “socialist” for introducing The Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act, with President Johnson also a “socialist” for establishing Medicare and Medicaid.

* President Truman was called a “socialist” for supporting “The Fair Deal”, and “The New Deal”, and for wanting to expand health care. His health care reform ideas have since been acknowledged as the inspiration for Medicare and Medicaid.

* President Franklin Delano Roosevelt was called a “socialist” for introducing “The New Deal”, and for proposing universal health care as part of the Social Security Act.

Are you starting to see a pattern here? When I started to realize this pattern emerging that seems to target the Democratic leadership, I started wondering; “what do Republicans think socialism means?” So I decided to find out. I asked some Republicans how they personally define “socialism”. Here are some of the answers I got:

“it’s everyone working as hard, or little as they choose, to contribute to a fund that everyone deserves an entitlement to by law, regardless of how much of a contribution they have made” – Robert

“It’s my understanding that if someone is a “Socialist” it merely means that person has the belief that government has to be and do everything for its people. For example in a socialist government you would find that radio, television, and newspapers would be government owned and operated. Foods, healthcare, and many (if not all) services are provided by a socialist government. If you can imagine every private business in the United States, taken over by government, that would be an example of Socialism. If you can think of our recent bailouts, a socialist acted occurred. No matter how innefficient a business could act, it was funded by government to stay alive. If capitalism would have been allowed to happen, these business would have been bankrupt and forced to close their doors. So, someone who is a socialist would support the ideal of the government providing all. I think that’s the best way I can respectfully explain what a socialist is.” – John

“Socialism is a system in which the government controls companies and industries. GM is a good example. Healthcare insurance is another example coming in the future” – Brian

“Socialism to me is government using regulations/ rules/ laws/ oppression to control it’s citizens and treat them like stupid peasants. Every time the government writes a law that makes a decision for the people, it dumbs the citizens down a little more. I’d say that today’s socialism is about controlling the people.” – Douglas

“To me my vision (not definition)of socialism comes from the UK in the 1960s and 70s. Essentially this:

A decaying and decrepit society. Lack of competition, lack of drive on the part of the populace, gov’t bureaucrats running everyone’s life. Labor strife, companies owned by the govt, unproductive and uncompetitive. Achievement punished, innovation crushed.” – Emil

cont'

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/08/01/the-myth-of-socialism-2/

Profile Information

Member since: Tue May 13, 2008, 03:07 AM
Number of posts: 14,923

« Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next »