but I am not sure how the link will work. Let's see. fib
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
The Obama administration on Tuesday proposed spending more than $3 billion to settle claims dating back more than a century that American Indian tribes were swindled out of royalties for oil, gas, grazing and other leases.
A group of Native American inmates has filed a federal lawsuit against the South Dakota Department of Corrections, saying a new prison policy that bans the use of tobacco during religious ceremonies is discriminatory.
Helicopters were used to make welfare checks on several isolated ranches on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation following severe weather.
One of the 395 or so American Indian children forcibly adopted into white families as part of a national social experiment conducted from 1958 through 1967 has written a book about the experiences of those swept up in the Indian Adoption Project.
Life on this spit of soggy land 6 miles from the Gulf of the Mexico may soon be impossible for the interrelated families with French, Choctaw, Houma, Biloxi and Chitimacha bloodlines that go back 170 years.
I just did. I have included a personal message and even a picture of a huge redwood tree in Santa Cruz mountains with little me, fib, sitting on its roots in a red dress. That's California. Now is your turn. Thank you! FIB
From Nancy Pelosi:
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
As we celebrate the holiday season, I wanted to say thank you for making 2009 a year for the history books when it comes to America's progress.This holiday season, let's show President Obama that we support him just as strongly as we did on Inauguration Day.Please sign our Holiday Card to President Obama and the First Family and forward it to five of your friends. You can also include a personal message and upload a photograph of your own family.
Washington, DC – Chevron has retained at least twelve public relations firms and lobbyists to discredit claims of Amazon indigenous groups on the eve of an expected multi-billion dollar judgment against the oil giant in an environmental lawsuit in Ecuador, according to representatives of the tribes in the U.S.
Although Chevron is near the top of the list of highest-spending lobbyists in Washington, the campaign seems to be backfiring. Politico, one of the most influential publications on Capitol Hill, reported this week that Chevron's lobbying was "drawing fire from environmentalists, media ethicists, state pension funds, New York's attorney general, members of Congress, and even Barack Obama when he was a Senator."
The article also quoted Rep. Linda Sanchez (D - CA) as calling Chevron's lobbying "clumsy" and "very heavy handed". Sanchez - who on Tuesday characterized the Chevron lobbying as "extortion" in testimony before Congress – said she plans to write three letters to Members of Congress, blasting what she called the oil giant's "misguided approach" to dealing with the lawsuit from the indigenous groups.
Separately, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo is investigating the company to determine if it is misleading its own shareholders about the financial risk from the Ecuador case, where damages are assessed at up to $27.3 billion, Politico reported.
An American legal advisor to the plaintiffs, Steven Donziger, criticized the public relations and lobbying effort. "Chevron is paying huge fees to lobby the U.S. government to inappropriately quash a legal case brought by indigenous tribes in the country where Chevron asked for the trial to be held," said Donziger, who has been working on the matter since it was filed in U.S. federal court in 1993.
The case, which alleges Texaco dumped billions of gallons of toxic waste in the Amazon from 1964 to 1990, was transferred from U.S. federal court to Ecuador in 2002 at Chevron's request. The oil giant filed 14 expert affidavits in the U.S. court praising Ecuador's court system, but later began a campaign to discredit those same courts once the evidence in the Ecuador trial pointed to its culpability.
The public relations firms working for Chevron include Hill & Knowlton, which represented the tobacco industry and – as it did in the debate over tobacco and cancer – has tried to deny a link between oil contamination and cancer; Edelman Worldwide, which is believed to be preparing a Wal-Mart-style political campaign against the indigenous groups in anticipation of an adverse court judgment; Sard Verbinnem, which handles financial press in an effort to stem a budding shareholder revolt against Chevron management for its handling of the case; Robinson Lerer Montgomery, a well-highly connected New York-based agency; Sam Singer and Associates, which handles the matter in the San Francisco area, where Chevron is located; and the Washington-based CRC Public Relations, which helped create a pro-Chevron video by former CNN correspondent Gene Randall to counteract a highly unflattering 60 Minutes segment on the legal case that broadcast earlier in the year.
The Randall video, which did not mention that it was paid for by Chevron, was blasted by the Columbia Journalism Review for "blurring the line between public relations and journalism." The President of CRC, Greg Mueller, spearheaded the Swift Boat campaign against John Kerry and is a former senior aide to Pat Buchanan.
atimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-indian-settlement9-2009dec09,0,6296252.story latimes.com
U.S. settles Indian trust account lawsuit
The government will pay $3.4 billion to end a battle over claims that it mismanaged tribal royalties for more than a century. The settlement is the largest Native Americans have received from the U.S.
By Nicholas Riccardi
December 9, 2009
Reporting from Denver
The Obama administration on Tuesday announced it would pay Native Americans $3.4 billion to settle a class-action lawsuit that claimed the federal government cheated tribes for more than a century of royalties for oil, mineral and other leases.The settlement ends a 13-year legal battle that led to 3,600 filings, millions of pages of discovery documents and 11 separate appellate decisions. It is the largest settlement Native Americans have ever received from the federal government, eclipsing the sum of all previous settlements, according to the plaintiff's lawyers.The dispute stemmed from a 19th century decision to grant parcels of land to individual Indians and place the properties in trust accounts. For more than a century, the plaintiffs contended, the account holders were cheated out of their share of revenues that the federal government collects for leasing that land. "We are here to right a past wrong," Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said Tuesday at a Washington, D.C., news conference to announce the settlement, which still must be approved by Congress and the courts. He was joined by Atty. Gen. Eric H. Holder Jr. and Elouise Cobell, the lead plaintiff in the class-action lawsuit."I expected this settlement 10 years ago," Cobell said. "Today we have an administration that is listening to us, an administration that is willing to admit the errors of the past."The plaintiffs had estimated they were owed as much as $47 billion. Congress had considered, but did not pass, a nearly $8-billion settlement as recently as 2006.Cobell said she had to weigh the possibility of winning a greater sum against the tough situations faced by many of the plaintiffs."Time takes a toll, especially on elders living in abject poverty," Cobell said. "Many of them died as we continued our struggle to settle this suit. Many more would not survive long to see a financial gain, if we had not settled now."President Obama had specifically directed his Cabinet to settle the matter when he took office, Salazar said. The president issued a statement Tuesday praising the deal and urging Congress to swiftly finalize it and "correct this long-standing injustice.""As a candidate, I heard from many in Indian country that the Cobell suit remained a stain on the nation-to-nation relationship I value so much," Obama said. "I pledged my commitment to resolving this issue, and I am proud that my administration has taken this step today."The settlement, finalized Monday night after months of intense negotiations, provides a $1,000 cash payment to every individual who has a trust account and $2 billion for the federal government to buy back the land parcels, some of which have been subdivided so much over the decades as to become almost worthless.The government would consolidate the parcels and then return them to tribes. It would also provide up to $60 million for scholarships for Native American children.Salazar said he was also creating a commission to recommend how to manage the trusts in the future.The trusts date back to the 1887 Dawes Act, which attempted to erode the tribal system by granting parcels of land to individual Native Americans. The Indians were not allowed to control their new property. Instead, the land was placed in trust and the government promised to pay the owners royalties for oil and gas, grazing or recreational leases. For more than a century, however, Indians received little or no payment. In the 1990s, Cobell, a banker and rancher in the Blackfoot Nation in Montana, decided to do something about it and filed a class-action suit, funded partly by nonprofit groups.Now, the government and the plaintiffs will have to determine who gets paid and whose land can be bought. The records are in such disarray it is not clear how many individuals are affected by the settlement -- estimates range from 300,000 to 500,000 people.Those affected are mainly in the western United States, with the greatest concentration in the Great Plains and Montana, attorneys said.In Washington, both Salazar and Cobell said they hoped the settlement could help create a more trusting relationship between tribes and the government.Carl W. Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond in Virginia, noted that Native American distrust of the government long predates the tough stance the Department of Justice took in litigating the lawsuit.Still, he said, the settlement could change attitudes."The Obama administration has made an effort to reach out to Native Americans in a number of ways," he said. "In modern times, this is probably the biggest piece of litigation" against the government over mistreatment of Indians."In that way, this has a lot of symbolic impact," he said.nicholas.riccardi@latimes.com
AMERICAS, AMERICAS!...................................................
ps. I refuse to buy the "anti-American" verbage in some of the articles below. FIB
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
Bolivia's Mor...
BBC News
Morales Heade...
New York Times
Press TV
Evo Morales c...
Times Online
Exit polls pr...
Bolivia elect...
Morales reach...
Aljazeera.net
Evo Morales o...
guardian.co.uk
In Bolivia vo...
The Associated P...
Morales highl...
AFP
Bolivia's ant...
Bolivia prepa...
Bolivian lead...
Morales coast...
Washington Times
Bolivia Voted...
Hamsayeh.Net
Morales reele...
Voting begins...
Landslide vic...
MercoPress
euronews
Through a Gla...
Salem-News.Com
Bolivians Pre...
AS/COA Online
Bolivia to se...
RIA Novosti
Bolivian pres...
Irish Times
Assassination...
Evo Morales C...
Periódico 26
Colombia Reports
... means not only the dignity for seniors and people with disabilities. It means "JOBS NOW" for the poorest and most deserving workers (like me) who will spend this mony TODAY. This program is billions of dollars in savings on institutional solutions that are never as good as staying home. Why not? I've been in this business for quite a few years, and really had many reasons to think about it. Trust me! Joe, where would you like to be when you get old? Because you will one day soon...
Finally something out there that made me really happy!
Merry Season, everyone! FIB
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
Senate preserves long-term care program
By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR (AP) – 22 hours ago
WASHINGTON — Keeping faith with the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, the Senate voted Friday to preserve a new long-term care insurance program to help seniors and the disabled in its health overhaul bill.
But the vote exposed the difficulties Democratic leaders face in persuading their own moderates to stay united behind the sweeping legislation they hope to deliver to President Barack Obama. Eleven Democrats switched and voted with Republicans, warning that the program would turn into a drain on the federal budget and saddle future generations with even more debt.
Republicans fell short in a bid to strike the voluntary insurance plan on a 51-47 vote. They needed 60 votes to prevail. Two leading Democrats who shaped the health care bill, Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus of Montana and Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad of North Dakota, voted with the GOP — underscoring the gravity of the fiscal concerns.
Known as the CLASS Act, short for Community Living Assistance Services and Supports Act, the program would help seniors and disabled people stay in their own homes and avoid going into nursing homes. It had been a long-sought priority for Kennedy, the Massachusetts lawmaker who died this summer of brain cancer.
Workers would pay a modest monthly premium during their careers. If they become disabled, they would get a cash benefit of at least $50 a day. That can help pay for a home care attendant, for supplies and equipment, to make home improvements such as new bathroom railings, or defray nursing home costs. A version of the program is also in the health care legislation passed by the House. The Obama administration supports it.
Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., who led the effort to cut the long-term care plan from the bill, said it would add another unaffordable commitment to a government swamped with debt — and taxpayers would eventually get the bill.
"The CLASS Act is the same old Washington, same old smoke and mirrors, same old games," said Thune. "We are locking in future generations to deficits and debts as far as the eye can see."
But Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., said the program is projected to be fiscally sound for 75 years, based only on the premiums that workers would pay. As a further safeguard, the Senate voted to ensure that funds collected under the plan would only be used to pay out benefits — and not to cover other government obligations.
"This is a very creative idea of using individuals' money to contribute to their own long-term financial security if they're faced with disabilities," said Dodd. "It is a solid program that can make a huge difference for millions of Americans, allowing them to lead independent lives with dignity."
Sen. Joe Lieberman, the Connecticut independent who Democrats are counting on to support the final bill, also voted to strip the long-term care program from the bill.
Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
'Barack Obama: Son of Promise, Child of Hope' by Nikki Grimes
Illustrated by Bryan Collier
$16.99
Buy From Amazon
Why give your kids yet another video game when you can open their minds? Nikki Grimes’s children’s book about President Obama comes with an educational guide and colorful illustrations. (Simon & Schuster Children’s Publishing, $16.99)
WEST POINT, N.Y. – Declaring "our security is at stake," President Barack Obama ordered an additional 30,000 U.S. troops into the long war in Afghanistan Tuesday night, nearly tripling the force he inherited as commander in chief. He promised an impatient public he would begin bringing units home in 18 months.
The buildup to about 100,000 troops will begin almost immediately — the first Marines will be in place by Christmas — and will cost $30 billion for the first year alone.
In a prime-time speech at the U.S. Military Academy, the president told the nation his new policy was designed to "bring this war to a successful conclusion," though he made no mention of defeating Taliban insurgents or capturing al-Qaida terrorist leader Osama bin Laden.
"We must deny al-Qaida a safe haven," Obama said in spelling out U.S. military goals for a war that has dragged on for eight years. "We must reverse the Taliban's momentum. ... And we must strengthen the capacity of Afghanistan's security forces and government."
The president said the additional forces would be deployed at "the fastest pace possible so that they can target the insurgency and secure key population centers."
Their destination: "the epicenter of the violent extremism practiced by al-Qaida."
"It is from here that we were attacked on 9/11, and it is from here that new attacks are being plotted as I speak," the president said.
It marked the second time in his young presidency that Obama has added to the American force in Afghanistan, where the Taliban has recently made significant advances. When he became president last January, there were roughly 34,000 troops on the ground; there now are 71,000.
After the speech, cadets in the audience — some of whom could end up in combat because of Obama's decision — climbed over chairs to shake hands with their commander in chief and take his picture.
Obama's announcement drew less-wholehearted support from congressional Democrats. Many of them favor a quick withdrawal, but others have already proposed higher taxes to pay for the fighting.
Republicans reacted warily, as well. Officials said Sen. John McCain, who was Obama's Republican opponent in last year's presidential campaign, told Obama at an early evening meeting attended by numerous lawmakers that declaring a timetable for a withdrawal would merely send the Taliban underground until the Americans began to leave.
As a candidate, Obama called Afghanistan a war worth fighting, as opposed to Iraq, a conflict he opposed and has since begun easing out of.
A new survey by the Gallup organization, released Tuesday, showed only 35 percent of Americans now approve of Obama's handling of the war; 55 percent disapprove.
He made no direct reference to public opinion Tuesday night, although he seemed to touch on it when he said, "The American people are understandably focused on rebuilding our economy and putting people to work here at home."
"After 18 months, our troops will begin to come home," he said flatly.
In eight years of war, 849 Americans have been killed in Afghanistan, Pakistan and neighboring Uzbekistan, according to the Pentagon.
In addition to beefing up the U.S. presence, Obama has asked NATO allies to commit between 5,000 and 10,000 additional troops. The war has even less support in Europe than in the United States, and the NATO allies and other countries currently have about 40,000 troops on the ground.
He said he was counting on Afghanistan eventually taking over its own security, and he warned, "The days of providing a blank check are over." He said the United States would support Afghan ministries that combat corruption and "deliver for the people. We expect those who are ineffective or corrupt to be held accountable."
As for neighboring Pakistan, the president said that country and the United States "share a common enemy" in Islamic terrorists. "We are in Afghanistan to prevent a cancer from once again spreading through that country. But this same cancer has also taken root in the border region of Pakistan. That is why we need a strategy that works on both sides of the border."
The speech before an audience of cadets at the military academy ended a three-month review of the war, triggered by a request from the commanding general, Stanley McChrystal, for as many as 40,000 more troops. Without them, he warned, the U.S. risked failure.
The speech was still under way when the general issued a statement from Kabul. "The Afghanistan-Pakistan review led by the president has provided me with a clear military mission and the resources to accomplish our task," it said. McChrystal is expected to testify before congressional committees in the next several days.
Obama referred to a deteriorating military environment, but said, "Afghanistan is not lost."
The length of the presidential review drew mild rebukes from normally amiable NATO allies. There was sharper criticism from Republicans led by former Vice President Dick Cheney, who said the president was dithering rather than deciding.
Obama rebutted forcefully.
"Let me be clear: There has never been an option before me that called for troop deployments before 2010, so there has been no delay or denial of resources necessary for the conduct of the war," he told his audience of more than 4,000 cadets seated in Eisenhower Hall.
Most of the new forces will be combat troops. Military officials said the Army brigades were most likely to be sent from Fort Drum in New York and Fort Campbell in Kentucky; and Marines primarily from Camp Lejeune in North Carolina.
Officials said the additional 30,000 troops included about 5,000 dedicated trainers, underscoring the president's emphasis on preparing Afghans to take over their own security.
These aides said that by announcing a date for beginning a withdrawal, the president was not setting an end date for the war.
But that was a point on which McCain chose to engage the president at a pre-speech meeting with lawmakers before Obama departed for West Point. "The way that you win wars is to break the enemy's will, not to announce dates that you are leaving," McCain said later.
Obama's address represents the beginning of a sales job to restore support for the war effort among an American public grown increasingly pessimistic about success — and among some fellow Democrats in Congress wary of or even opposed to spending billions more dollars and putting tens of thousands more U.S. soldiers and Marines in harm's way.
Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., and liberal House Democrats threatened to try to block funding for the troop increase.
Sen. Carl Levin, the Michigan Democrat who chairs a military oversight panel, said he didn't think Democrats would yank funding for the troops or try to force Obama's hand to pull them out faster. But Democrats will be looking for ways to pay for the additional troops, he said, including a tax increase on the wealthy although that hike is already being eyed to pay for health care costs. Another possibility is imposing a small gasoline tax that would be phased out if gas prices go up, he said.
The United States went to war in Afghanistan shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, al-Qaida terrorist attacks on the United States.
Bin Laden and key members of the terrorist organization were headquartered in Afghanistan at the time, taking advantage of sanctuary afforded by the Taliban government that ran the mountainous and isolated country.
Taliban forces were quickly driven from power, while bin Laden and his top deputies were believed to have fled through towering mountains into neighboring Pakistan. While the al-Qaida leadership appears to be bottled up in Pakistan's largely ungoverned tribal regions, the U.S. military strategy of targeted missile attacks from unmanned drone aircraft has yet to flush bin Laden and his cohorts from hiding.
___
Steven R. Hurst reported from Washington. AP White House Correspondent Jennifer Loven and National Security Writer Anne Gearan contributed to this report.
December 1, 2009, 6:47 pm
Live Blogging Obama’s Afghan Speech
By JEFF ZELENY
Ruth Fremson/
The New York Times West Point cadets waited for President Obama to speak on Tuesday.
Setting the Scene | 7:11 p.m. Sheryl Gay Stolberg, who is on site at West Point, reports:
Many speeches have been delivered at the military academy, but never before have cadets heard orders directly from a commander-in-chief who could send them into a war zone.
There is a sense of anticipation in the air. A West Point official brought a handful of carefully selected cadets – seniors with impressive resumes – to speak to reporters.
Alexandra Rosenberg, 22, of Manhattan, is a Rhodes and Truman Scholar with plans of becoming a doctor. Eric Bernau, 21, of Rochester Minn., is the cadet public affairs officer, who spent a semester studying in China. And Tyler Gordy, 26, came to West Point after serving as an infantryman and getting wounded in Iraq. He is First Captain, supervising 4,000 cadets.
The New York Times One cadet was reading “The Kite Runner,” a novel set in Afghanistan, while he waited for the president to speak.
The three will be among those seated behind the secretary of state and secretary of defense for Mr. Obama’s speech, which Mr. Bernau described as “the most momentous day in our four years of the academy.”
“I mean, he’s the commander in chief, he’s our boss,” Mr. Bernau said. “It’s kind of like a shareholders meeting where you hear the strategy of the company.”
These cadets will graduate as second lieutenants and platoon leaders.
While Ms. Rosenberg will go to Oxford in the fall, the other two fully expect to be deployed, and have chosen the infantry as where they want to serve.
“This doesn’t make me nervous, it doesn’t scare me or anything,” Mr. Gordy said. “I have known this for five years now. What it does is give me a sense of direction.”
Speech Preparations | 6:47 p.m. President Obama’s address to the nation from the United States Military Academy at West Point will begin at 8 p.m. He left the White House after a daylong series of calls to foreign leaders, followed by a late-afternoon briefing to Congressional leaders.
By now, broad outlines of the speech are known: 30,000 more American troops will be sent to Afghanistan; the goal for beginning to withdraw the first wave of forces will be July 2011; the strategy is aimed at preventing Al Qaeda from returning to Afghanistan, where the Sept. 11 attacks were planned.
It is the president’s burden, of course, to explain why he believes the war in Afghanistan should be escalated.(...)"
It's been a while that I watched BMJ. When I began watching tonight in the middle of the program I entered into President Johnson's conversation in 1965 with McNamara on escalation of the war, when the troops there were in the range of 45 thousands. I sat pinned down to my chair till the end of the program.
That "while" wiyhout BMJ was a wasted while. God bless Bill Moyers of the USA! fib
This week on the JOURNAL, Bill Moyers looked back some four decades to his experience as a member of President Lyndon Johnson’s administration. At the time, Johnson made a series of fateful decisions to escalate the war in Vietnam, where eventually over two million American military personnel would serve. Estimates indicate that nearly 60,000 U.S. troops – and more than a million Vietnamese – were killed during the course of the conflict.
With an eye on President Obama’s deliberations on whether to deploy more U.S. troops in addition to the 68,000 already in Afghanistan, Moyers presented a montage of recorded conversations and his personal memories of President Lyndon Johnson’s decisions to escalate the war in Vietnam. He said:
“Our country wonders this weekend what is on President Obama’s mind. He is apparently about to bring months of deliberation to a close and answer General Stanley McChrystal’s request for more troops in Afghanistan. When he finally announces how many, why, and at what cost, he will most likely have defined his presidency, for the consequences will be far-reaching and unpredictable. As I read and listen and wait with all of you for answers, I have been thinking about the mind of another President – Lyndon B. Johnson. I was 30 years old, a White House assistant, working on politics and domestic policy. I watched and listened as LBJ made his fateful decisions about Vietnam... Barack Obama is not Lyndon Johnson, Afghanistan is not Vietnam and this is now, not then. The situation is different. But listen – and you will hear echoes and refrains that resonate today.”
The nation is divided about America’s mission in Afghanistan. In a new WASHINGTON POST – ABC News poll, 55% of respondents expressed confidence that President Obama will pick a strategy that will work, but 52% said that the war in Afghanistan has not been worth fighting given the costs versus the benefits.
What do you think?
I say hang'em!
It is human, silent and unobtrusive. I say, ban the mow-blow-and-go "gardeners"- they are not. One of the special pleasures of travel in Central America are the old fashioned loundry rituals. There, it is not question of choice. Laundry is done by women's hands and is hang outside, watched carefuly, hastily carried inside when rain comes. For many women it is the only source of income. These women, I once thought, should also be awarded all those big green prizes that go to somebody else.
I think more hanging laundry would make our USA neighborhoods safer. Perhaps the sight of children playing ouside would return with it. fib
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
November 18, 2009 | 1 comments
U.S. residents fight for the right to hang laundry
Carin Froehlich has help from her granddaughter Ava as they hang some laundry in the front yard of her residence in Perkasie, Pennsylvania, November 12, 2009. REUTERS/Tim Shaffer
PERKASIE, Pennsylvania (Reuters) - Carin Froehlich pegs her laundry to three clotheslines strung between trees outside her 18th-century farmhouse, knowing that her actions annoy local officials who have asked her to stop.
Froehlich is among the growing number of people across America fighting for the right to dry their laundry outside against a rising tide of housing associations who oppose the practice despite its energy-saving green appeal.
Although there are no formal laws in this southeast Pennsylvania town against drying laundry outside, a town official called Froehlich to ask her to stop drying clothes in the sun. And she received two anonymous notes from neighbors saying they did not want to see her underwear flapping about.
"They said it made the place look like trailer trash," she said, in her yard across the street from a row of neat, suburban houses. "They said they didn't want to look at my 'unmentionables.'"
Froehlich says she hangs her underwear inside. The effervescent 54-year-old is one of a growing number of Americans demanding the right to dry laundry on clotheslines despite local rules and a culture that frowns on it.
Their interests are represented by Project Laundry List, a group that argues people can save money and reduce carbon emissions by not using their electric or gas dryers, according to the group's executive director, Alexander Lee.
Widespread adoption of clotheslines could significantly reduce U.S. energy consumption, argued Lee, who said dryer use accounts for about 6 percent of U.S. residential electricity use.
Florida, Utah, Maine, Vermont, Colorado, and Hawaii have passed laws restricting the rights of local authorities to stop residents using clotheslines. Another five states are considering similar measures, said Lee, 35, a former lawyer who quit to run the non-profit group.
'RIGHT TO HANG'
His principal opponents are the housing associations such as condominiums and townhouse communities that are home to an estimated 60 million Americans, or about 20 percent of the population. About half of those organizations have 'no hanging' rules, Lee said, and enforce them with fines.
Carl Weiner, a lawyer for about 50 homeowners associations in suburban Philadelphia, said the no-hanging rules are usually included by the communities' developers along with regulations such as a ban on sheds or commercial vehicles.
The no-hanging rules are an aesthetic issue, Weiner said.
"The consensus in most communities is that people don't want to see everybody else's laundry."
He said opposition to clotheslines may ease as more people understand it can save energy and reduce greenhouse gases.
"There is more awareness of impact on the environment," he said. "I would not be surprised to see people questioning these restrictions."
For Froehlich, the "right to hang" is the embodiment of the American tradition of freedom.
"If my husband has a right to have guns in the house, I have a right to hang laundry," said Froehlich, who is writing a book on the subject.
Besides, it saves money. Line-drying laundry for a family of five saves $83 a month in electric bills, she said.
Kevin Firth, who owns a two-bedroom condominium in a Dublin, Pennsylvania housing association, said he was fined $100 by the association for putting up a clothesline in a common area.
"It made me angry and upset," said Firth, a 27-year-old carpenter. "I like having the laundry drying in the sun. It's something I have always done since I was a little kid."
(Editing by Mark Egan and Paul Simao)
Sez Me at 05:41 PM on 11/18/09
Some time ago we said good bye to Duston who told us he would be going back to Kabul. So he went. Usually when incidents like the most recent Kabul bombing happen, one thinks of one's friends that could be there, in danger. And so I did as well, thinking he must be well anyway, most likely. Kabul is big (I thought). Not so. It is a small world after all. This is what came yesterday. fib
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
Hibiscus Tea and Honey in Berlin
"Dear Friends,
At first, I should offer a quick explanation of this letter: I have not yet read any email replies you may have sent me since my last correspondence back around mid October or so. I am currently drinking Hibiscus Tea sweetened with a little honey in an Army Hospital in Berlin Germany. My Laptop Computer has not had internet for two weeks:
October 28th, 2009 began with a loud bang at exactly 6 AM Kabul time. Actually an explosion at the front gate to the Guesthouse where I was living. I don’t know if it was an RPG or Suicide Bomber, and will truly never know for a fact which one it was. The first explosion was followed by machine gun firing and then an RPG hit the front of the building. The Taleban killed the exterior gate residence guards, entered the front house and proceeded to kill as many UN Election Employees as possible before the Police arrived. A long and intense gun-battle ensued over the next hour and a half and the attackers were eventually killed around 7:30 AM. Some of my friends, and some employees, of the Guesthouse were also killed and many wounded during this incident.
I escaped physically unharmed within 90 seconds of the first sound of the attack.
The media incorrectly portrayed the building as the “UN Guesthouse” whereas technically it was a privately run guesthouse, and I referred to it in earlier email to you as the “Zoo”, because it had lots of animals and birds on the property. I do not know who survived other than I have a “story” of the massacre as I experienced it. I ended up with a large group of UN Election Employees who also survived as we hid together in the neighboring courtyard while the Taleban shot it out with the surviving guards, burned down the place and then shot it out again with the Police.
Around 7:40 AM , I was transferred by the Police to a temporary safe location, and then the Bank security man found me and I was taken to the big famous Hotel ( The Serena ) which is heavily guarded in downtown Kabul. Immediately after I arrived, I was standing in the Hotel Lobby , on the cell phone, calling the Germans who I work for, when a mortar round or RPG hit the Lobby. The glass exploded , and once again, I was not injured and everyone ran to the Hotel bunker to wait for the All Clear sign. The Hotel suffered nothing but broken glass and some jittered nerves, but for me, it was the second attack in less than two hours and I withdrew into my own little brain…..telling myself that no place was safe as it seemed like the terror was following me around that morning in Kabul.
Since then, I have stayed in German Army Hospitals except for the plane rides to Germany where I am now. I am receiving treatment for Psychological Trauma and am getting better quickly. I hope to be released to Outpatient within about 4 days. And then about a month more of Outpatient therapy and then final release back into the employment world when I will be able to totally navigate on my own. The goal is to prevent and reduce the long term possibility or impact of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder ( “PTSB”) which we all heard of with the Korean and Vietnam War Veterans and other traumatic incident survivors.
I shall not assign my survival that day to my training, skills, experience and quick thinking ( although I am told by many that it was a critical part of my actions and movement within the first minute of the attack ). I have been given yet another chance on the Planet by my Higher Power. I am no more “religious” today than I was a minute before 6 AM on October 28th; however I have grown substantially. My spirituality is stronger now than ever; and I am convinced that God has a Plan for me, I just need to follow the Steps and listen for His guidance on a daily basis.
Only once since then have I wanted or seriously thought of taking a drink, and I asked to be relieved of that notion, and it was granted. I take some light weight sleeping medication and hope to reduce the strength soon, then be totally free of it within two more weeks or so depending on what the Doctors say. I am receiving excellent medical care here in Germany, with three Doctors and a bevy of Nurses. I see a Trauma Specialist MD every other day and I am recuperating well.
My employment contracts ends in February so money is temporarily not a problem, and I have good insurance for the hospital expenses. So, for today, all I ask for is another chance to be free of my Weaknesses and Character Defects and look for the next path I am to take.
I totally and unconditionally TRUST.
Work the Steps. Turn it over to God. Clean House. Help Others.
With ALL my Love,
Duston"
Honduras' Carlos Pavon, right, and Donis Escuber hug after defeating El Salvador 1-0 and classifying for the 2010 World Cup at the end of a qualifying soccer match in San Salvador, Wednesday, Oct. 14, 2009. (AP Photo/Claudio Cruz)
s ago
TEGUCIGALPA, Honduras — A soccer victory that clinched Honduras' first trip to the World Cup in almost 30 years is giving its people an exhilarating distraction from the divisive political crisis that has gripped the country for the last 3 1/2 months.
Negotiators are continuing talks on whether to reinstate ousted President Manuel Zelaya. But right now Hondurans are more interested in celebrating Wednesday night's 1-0 defeat of neighboring El Salvador.
Thursday was declared a national holiday and hundreds of thousands of people celebrated outside, many welcoming the team at the airport and others lining the streets to a church where the players attended Mass.
Next year's World Cup in South Africa will be Honduras' first since 1982.
(This version CORRECTS that it will be Honduras' first trip to World Cup in almost 30 years, sted 30 years)
TUESDAY, Oct. 6 (HealthDay News) -- Expanding health coverage to adults may result in later savings from reduced Medicare spending on these individuals after they turn 65, especially for the uninsured with cardiovascular disease, diabetes or severe arthritis, according to research published online Oct. 6 in the Annals of Internal Medicine.
J. Michael McWilliams, M.D., of Harvard Medical School in Boston, and colleagues analyzed data from 2,951 adults who were continuously insured before the age of 65, and another 1,616 who were continuously or sometimes uninsured before this age. They assessed annual Medicare spending after age 65 for each participant.
The researchers found that total annual Medicare spending was $1,023 higher for the previously uninsured, which was a significant difference. The previously uninsured had higher annual hospitalization rates for complications related to cardiovascular disease or diabetes (9.1 versus 6.4 percent) and joint replacement (2.5 versus 1.3 percent).
"There are good reasons to believe that insurance coverage in the pre-Medicare years would reduce expenditures during the Medicare years, and health reform advocates will certainly take heart from the authors' conclusions. Unfortunately, because the data and methods used in this study are not capable of supporting causal interpretations, the savings to Medicare are unlikely to be as large as this study suggests," writes the author of an accompanying editorial.
The study was supported by the Commonwealth Fund. Several co-authors reported relevant consulting work and legislative testimony.
AbstractFull TextEditorial
Copyright © 2009 ScoutNews, LLC. All rights reserved.
Adviser Soapbox
Capitalist Case For Nonprofit Health Insurance
John E. Girouard 10.12.09, 7:09 PM ET
If you want to know what went wrong with our health care system and the best way to fix it, all you have to do is look back a few decades to a time when health care was a community concern, considered as essential as any public utility. It should be again, not just because it makes sense but also because it's the most profitable way to go.
The irony in the current debate over a "public option" health plan is that we once had a form of socialized medicine. Blue Cross, the most recognizable name, began in 1929 as a tax-exempt insurer covering a community of teachers in Dallas. Blue Shield was started as a tax-exempt insurer to cover employees of mining and lumber companies in the Pacific Northwest, with a group of local doctors providing care through a service bureau.
We lost the positive aspects of affiliation health insurance starting in the 1960s and through the 1980s when Wall Street discovered there was money to be made turning nonprofit health insurers, hospitals and nursing homes into investor-owned companies. What we got was a massive conflict-of-interest--profit vs. public good--that has culminated in a dysfunctional health delivery system that has undermined our economy, reduced our national wealth and torn our social fabric.
One might argue whether our estimated 47 million uninsured is a moral shame, but there is no argument that millions of people clogging our emergency rooms and other social services because it's their only option is a crime against our economy, both in direct costs and loss of productivity.
A solution that would have something for everyone and meets the test of minimum government intervention would have three tiers of coverage:
1. Primary Care Community Nonprofits: States, regional groups, hospital consortiums and communities would be encouraged to form nonprofit health insurance companies guaranteeing at reduced premiums a primary level of care--ambulatory, emergency room, routine physicals, and so on. Every citizen would be required to be covered.
This would immediately add 47 million new customers generating premium payments into the pool of available revenue. There would be no qualifying exam nor any discrimination based on pre-existing conditions.
Those who paid their mandatory premiums could deduct them on their income- tax returns. Those who failed to pay their premiums might be subject to a minimum tax penalty or some other mechanism to encourage compliance.
These nonprofits might then, like municipalities, be able to turn to the financial markets to raise capital for building projects and other needs, perhaps issuing tax-exempt bonds.
2. Reinsure Catastrophic Risk: Community nonprofits would be required to do what large companies do when self-insuring. They set aside enough reserves to cover their employees up to a set threshold above which they reinsure themselves. Nonprofits could do the same thing, passing risk on to for-profit companies against a financial disaster from big-ticket losses that could result from a single disaster, a disease outbreak, or just having a high percentage of elderly patients needing extensive care.
The for-profit reinsurance business ought to be highly profitable if well-managed. The number of transactions they would have to handle would be vastly reduced, driving down costs. But for this to work, these companies would need to be reinsured as well, much as banks are. That's where government steps in, just as it does in the banking industry.
3. Create a Federal Health Insurance Corporation: Just as we regulate the banking industry because it is essential, requiring banks to pay insurance premiums to guarantee deposits, the role of the federal government would be to act as the insurer of last resort. Such an agency would guarantee claims above a set amount, allowing private reinsurers to calculate their risks more accurately and set competitive, profitable premium rates.
This is not a public option, it is a public imperative. It is what we expect from government after a hurricane or other natural disaster. It seems logical that in the event of a health insurance disaster, Uncle Sam should be ready to step in for the public good. And it seems equally logical that the federal government should be in the business of setting standards and regulating an industry that provides a public service, just as we regulate water, power and public transportation companies.
This three-tiered approach contains elements that should appeal to most interest groups. The nonprofit primary care level eliminates the conflict of interest that currently exists between profit and the rendering of a crucial public service. Insurance companies would go back to doing what they are supposed to, managing risk instead of managing care.
This system is close to what members of Congress refer to as "the same health insurance we have." Once a year federal employees get to choose who their health insurer is from a list of a dozen or so approved providers. A covered employee with a chronic disease can switch insurers if he or she decides a different company offers a better plan, without an exam and regardless of pre-existing conditions.
This system should appeal to both sides of the "public option" argument.
Liberals who want to see everyone covered and the profit motive taken out of medical decisions would see their aims met as more citizens would likely seek out and receive preventive care instead of waiting until they need to be rushed to an emergency room at enormous expense.
Conservatives who want government to spend less and do more to stimulate the flow of capital and the creation of wealth would achieve their goals in the form of the private financing of nonprofit insurers and in the presumed net reduction in the cost to taxpayers of providing emergency and social services to the uninsured.
John E. Girouard of Washington, D.C., is a financial writer and the author of "The Ten Truths of Wealth Creation."
No comment. fib
Leading Cuban dissidents cheer Obama's Nobel prize (AP) – 8 hours ago HAVANA
— Many of the 75 activists jailed in a 2003 Cuban government crackdown on political dissent are congratulating Barack Obama for winning the Nobel Peace Prize. In a letter released Monday to international journalists, 29 of those imprisoned six years ago said Obama "has become a global symbol, especially for us who, under difficult conditions, are defending Cubans' right to democracy."
In another letter, 21 of their wives, mothers and other female relatives also cheered Obama. Fifty-four dissidents remain imprisoned on allegations they conspired with the U.S. to topple Cuba's government. Those freed were granted medical parole or forced into exile in Spain. One was released after completing a six-year sentence.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jOSU7Ew6j4vlEn0d_L0eXG0A1w1gD9B9M09G0
Zimbabwe News.Net
Sunday 11th October, 2009
Former Cuban president, Fidel Castro, has said he was obliged to acknowledge the Nobel Prize given to US President, Barack Obama, was a "positive measure," and especially important considering the "genocidal policies" of some former US presidents. He also said the decision was good compensation for the fact that the US had been defeated in Copenhagen when Rio de Janeiro was picked as a site for 2016 Olympic Games. In an article titled "Reflections," published on the Internet, 83-year-old Castro said while he did not always share the views of those who award the Nobel, Obama’s prize was "an appeal for peace and a search for solutions that lead to the survival of species." In his comments, he said: "Many will say that Obama has not yet earned the right to receive such a distinction. We prefer to see the decision as not so much a prize for the president of the US, but as a criticism of the genocidal policies pursued by a few presidents of that country, who led the world to the crossroads it is at today."
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
http://www.zimbabwenews.net/story/553184
"Dedicated to the seven generations that came before usand the children of Indian Country today,so their innocence and laughter may develop into wisdomas they become the leaders of tomorrow."
American Indian and Alaska Native cultureshold children in a special place of honor. Childrenare the gift of the Creator. The birth of a child iscelebrated and honored. Each tribe has its ownworld view that tells the children their placein the cosmos through stories and ceremonies.The community has a sacred obligation toinstill in them the traditional knowledge of pastgenerations so their innocence and laughter maydevelop into wisdom as they become the leadersof the future.
For countless generations cradleboards wereused by Indian mothers to keep their infantssecure. Most cradleboards carry an umbilicalcord amulet to connect the child with past andfuture generations throughout their life. Weknow that in the same way, safe and nurturingIndian communities enable Native children tofully achieve their potential so we can honor andcontinue the culture and traditions of the pastseven generations.
Unfortunately, all too often Native childrenare born into circumstances that may be richin culture and love, but fail to meet their basicneeds of health, shelter, safety and education.Every Indian child should have the right tocommunity-based, culturally appropriateservices that help them grow up safe, healthy,and spiritually strong – free from abuse, neglectand poverty. Our communities – tribal leaders,parents, grandmothers, grandfathers, aunts,uncles and families – have a vision of a restored,safer, healthier Indian Country for our children.Creating safe and supportive tribal communitiesfor our children today honors our ancestors aswell as the generations to come.
This FY 2009 Tribal Budget Request highlights keyaspects of the vision tribal leaders have expressedto create a safe and healthy Indian Country for ourchildren. In developing these recommendations, werecognize that addressing the years of under-fundingand backlogs that plague Indian Country will beaccomplished over time. The requests that follow donot reflect the full need in Indian Country, but ratherare achievable first steps that we believe Congressand the President should be able to support this year.
I always liked Senator Clair McCaskill. fib
I feel that I’m in an alternative universe. For eight years some people called anyone who disagreed with the President’s foreign policy or war in Iraq unpatriotic. Then in the course of two weeks, those same people cheer when the United States does not get selected for the Olympics and boo when our President is the unanimous choice for the Nobel Peace Prize. Go figure.
Congratulations Mr. President for standing up to the scorn and derision of your opponents in the election when you firmly stood for the proposition that strength meant being willing to talk to your enemies, not just your allies. Thank you for the confidence and wisdom to say that a hand will be extended when their fist is unclenched. And thank you for understanding that our national security rests on our principles, the example we set for the world, and our alliances along with the excellence and strength of our military, rather than exclusively the latter. God Bless America.
http://clairecmc.tumblr.com/post/208582433/the-twilight-zone
I notice that the entire site has problems. There is no access to blogs of ANY group.
Hope it is some re-organization. Below is an URL to Chris Hass. fib
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/group/OrganizingforHealthCareBlog
