news


Miss Virginia Nikki Poteet is innocent until proven guilty.
But sheesh.
When many people are confirming that you went on a drunken tirade breaking furniture and using homophobic slurs, a serious investigation is needed.
I encourage everyone to call requesting Miss USA investigate these allegations seriously.
(212) 373-4986
pr@missuniverse.com

About Nikki Poteet:
http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2011/11/01/358324/poteet-homophobic-slurs/
http://missvirginiausa.com/titleholders.php?id=2010110809525094586

Hypocritical and corrupt regimes cannot stand against non-violent, sustained, allied democratic movements.

Scott Walker’s attack on Labor Rights has nothing to do with budget and has everything to do with
depriving working families of the American Dream and funneling more cash to the very rich and
big corporations.

This video is of Congresswoman Gwen Moore exposing Walker’s gambit:

 

Hillary Clinton broke through a door at a press conference in Washington DC this morning, roaring and holding a donkey’s jawbone.
“Honesty will never prevail.” She said in her prepared response to the most recent WikiLeaks release of diplomatic cables.

Addressing WikiLeaks spokesperson Julian Assange directly, Clinton bemoaned “We’re trying to spin a web of lies over here. And you just angered the spider. To be perfectly clear: I have a venom producing gland.”

The diplomatic cables have been upsetting to some nations around the world as they contain such statements from US embassies and diplomatic envoys as: “You hear about the King of Sweden? Yeah, he totally stuffs!” and “Dude, you know that little island country in the Mediterranean? Is it Malta? Is Malta in the Mediterranean? Anyway. Dude, the club scene there is kicking!”

At the closing of Clinton’s press conference, she promised: “We will never stop lying to you, world. We will never stop hiding information from you. Our covert missions and our backdoor dealings and our deceit will never end. That I can promise you. I will make that bad bad WikiLeaks pay.”

By voting “No” on Proposition 23 this November we can solidify California’s position as our nation’s industry and
conservation leader.
A “No” on Prop 23 will support our already impressive movement towards energy independence, spur job growth, and prove to the rest
of the U.S. that we can all move beyond dirty and wasteful energy.
More and more, the engine of industry is smart ideas and California is a hot bed of those.
That’s why the horribly conceived Prop 23 (a Texas import) is just smart for our state.

California is feeling the bite of the economy and job drought like everyone else, but we historically have been our nation’s economic powerhouse and
that doesn’t need to change. Part of our success has been and will continue to be remaining ahead of the curve in development, R&D, and wise land use.
A “No” on Prop 23 would send a message to oil magnates who would stagnate our growth for private gain that California is a leader, not a follower. We want cheap energy, clean neighborhoods, a competitive market in which to raise our children, and a corner in the hugely prosperous renewable energy market.

When California passed AB 32 in 2006 with Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s support, we stated that we would lead the nation’s charge to economic recovery and smart development. By rejecting Prop 23 now, we will ensure that AB 32 stays in place and its crucial energy stipulations will be effective as soon as possible.

California’s committment to clean energy has been a help to us in these dire economic straits. In just one year (2008) venture capitalists poured 3.3 Billion dollars into our state. A “No” vote on Prop 23 would encourage these investors to keep the long term smart growth investments coming. Rather than frantically looking for the next oil fix (will it come from an off-shore drill near your family?) we can watch investors settle their businesses here for the next wave of clean energy.

Its said that one doesn’t “mess with Texas” so it is peculiar that Proposition is being backed by primarily by two Texan oil companies (Valero and Tesero) and our Governor has credited the proposition’s motivation with “self serving greed”. 

Our state has the largest clean energy economy in the nation and leaders at the recent Clean Energy Summit agreed that California should not take a step backwards into the oily energy policies of last century.

The future is green. The economy favors technological savvy. Our children deserve clean air, lakes, and beaches. “No” on Prop 23 is the clear choice for our families and economy.

Vam Jones and Jorge Madrid
http://www.alternet.org/economy/148177/no_on_california_prop_23%3A_halting_climate_policy_is_the_real_job_killer/
Daniel Farber and Richard Frank
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/oct/04/opinion/la-oe-farber-prop23-20101004

In 2010, the biggest health insurance companies have given three times the cash to Republican lawmakers than Democrats.
They’re also paying hundreds of thousands of dollars to lobbyists closest to Republicans.

Why the love?

Insurance companies like the new health care law which states that individuals have to pay a fine to opt out of having insurance.
(That opt out will cost 95$ in 2014 and 695$ in 2016)
That’s not the issue. The companies just want the opt out to cost more.

Insurance companies like that more folks will be covered with health insurance.
That’s not the issue. The companies just want to deny your children coverage, quit coverage when you get sick, and pay very little if you’re sick for a long time.

Writes Noam Levey, “Insurers in the past have been able to count on the GOP, which often helped shape the market to the industry’s specifications…With the help of GOP legislation, insurers also have increasingly shifted costs to consumers through high-deductible plans…And Republicans have pushed to allow insurance companies to sell their plans across state lines, avoiding state regulations.”

So, it seems that Republican candidates and lawmakers are good on their promises: “You pay us enough money and we’ll get you a profit.”

If affordable and effective health insurance is what you want for your family, does the GOP deserve your vote?

From:
Noam N. Levey “Health Insurers Pour Money Into GOP Campaings, Hoping To Limit New Regulations”
Los Angeles Times. Tuesday October 5th 2010
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-health-politics-money-20101005,0,4869233.story

The Human Rights Council has concluded that Israel violated the Geneva Conventions when it descended upon
the humanitarian aid ship Mavi Marmara.

In a report from the Human Rights Council, Israel was found to have committed:
willful killing
torture or inhuman treatment
sexual humiliation
willfully causing great suffering

and arbitrary execution.

Furkan Dogan, a 19 year old American civilian who was aboard the Mavi Marmara when the Israeli forces attacked the ship in international waters was found to be executed at point blank range by the Israeli special forces.

Furkan was videotaping the event when he was shot a number of times including the head, back, and leg. Forensic evidence reveals that he was laying on his back in a semi-conscious state when he was shot point blank in the face.

Five others were killed execution style.

The question must be asked: will the U.S. stand idly by as Israel breaches international law and executes one of its citizens? What kind of reaction would North Korea or any other country receive from the U.S. if they illegally boarded a humanitarian aid boat and executed an unarmed U.S. citizen? When will the U.S. decide that unquestioning support for Israel is obviously untenable at this time until great recourse has been made in this matter?


http://www.groundreport.com/Politics/Israel-Found-Guilty-of-Massacre/2929381
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/may/25/gaza-flotilla-aid-attempt
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/29/un-factfinding-mission-sa_n_743873.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mavi_Marmara_Massacre#Legal_assessments

You may have seen the population bumper stickers around: “Zero Population Growth”, “Population Forecast: Increased Crowdiness” or something of the like. You may have been at a dinner party where someone was making the ‘sensible’ argument that “we need to start talking seriously about population control!” out of concern for ‘sustainability’ or ‘so we don’t overrun the planet!’.

I am now inviting everyone to never have the population control discussion again. We can place it gently to sleep as not only a Red Herring but a hurtful and culturally insensitive line of inquiry.

The issue for our planet, our global neighbors, and our shared future is not how many people there are but the quality of life and equality in access for each individual to reach their potential. In this spirit, I will move ‘population conversations’ towards women’s health and liberty.

First, I’ll give reason why I don’t believe that population per se is a profitable conversation. There is, I believe, no suggested or perfect number of people for our planet. If there were as little as one hundred or as many as 30 billion there is nothing to say that one is necessarily ‘better’ for the world (at the time of this posting, world population is estimated at nearly 7 billion). Evolution has given no prescription for how many humans there should be. Our morals and values have however given us strong motivations to aid each other, feel compassion with, and share alongside others in our common humanity and this should remain our focus.

Michelle Goldberg, author of “The Means of Reproduction: Sex, Power, and The Future of The World” writes in the May 17th, 2009 L.A. Times that women, if given education, access to healthcare, ability to work, social protection, and contraception, will themselves make choices that benefit them, their children, and their families. Whatever balance of growth occurs will then be coming from empowered women in their local contexts, not from outside voices.

This brings me to how ‘population control’ discussion can be hurtful. When folks around me in often middle class U.S. settings talk about ‘having only the children you can take care of’ they are coming from the privilege of knowing about condoms and having access to them without fear. They have access to safe, legal, and accessible abortion. They have social security and healthcare to aid them in age and sickness. I sometimes feel as if some feel that having more than 2.5 children is a character flaw or a moral weakness rather than part of a complex web of societal influences.

Population control is often framed negatively rather than positively, to its detriment. It is given as a “no more people!” frame rather than a “yes to social justice and women’s health!” Positive statements and affirming political and moral statements always achieve greater results.

So what is at stake?

The UN Population Fund and the Alan Guttmacher Institute found that if we could just get condoms and effective contraception into women’s hands that need it, those women could avoid:
23 million unplanned births
22 million induced abortions
142,000 pregnancy related deaths

Social stability, upward mobility, and political voice effectively give women better chances at creating healthier families.

Writes Goldberg, “In developing countries, lower social status for women is associated with higher fertility, but once societies become highly industrialized and women taste a certain amount of freedom, the reverse is true.”

Goldberg puts it simply: “The ethical and effective way to counter rapid population growth is to bolster women’s rights and imporve their access to family planning.” Goldberg also emphasizes education and contraception. Goldberg points to unsafe abortions accounting for 13% of maternal mortality as portraying women’s desperation for birth control.

Even if the world was right now able to easily sustain billions of new children, we would still be called to the higher moral standards of working towards all children being wanted and cherished. We would strive for their mothers to be healthy and with access to education and fulfilling work.

Let’s stop talking numbers and start talking compassionately about women’s lives.

Goldberg, Michelle. “Skirting The Issue” Los Angeles Times, May 17th 2009.

Next Page »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.