Today, in the preview video by Buck McKeon, http://www.youtube.com/user/BuckMcKeon
McKeon, our local Congressional representative, said he would be watching for the following points in President Obama’s speech:
Hopefully Obama will provide the number of troops requested by General McCrystal.
Having spoken to McCrystal, McKeon said that 400,000 internal security force would be required to secure the country and that there was ½ that number in Afghanistan right now. This would put a lot of people to work.
Time is another consideration: How soon will we be able to get the troops there?
McCrystal said we needed additional troops in the area w/in 1 year. We are 3 months behind in momentum, so catch up is required.
Winning is also a consideration.
Will the President say that we will have troops exiting after “winning” or “exiting (whether we win or not) Afghanistan w/in the 18 months”, which direction are we going. What is the exit strategy?
Meantime, we can only hope that Obama’s speech covers these concerns and Buck McKeon will find Obama’s momentum favorable for all Americans including our fighting troops in Afghanistan.
Looking forward to Obama’s speech, we can only pray that consensus from the right and left is coming.
We need to work together, or we all loose. This has nothing to do with progressive, or conservative, your way, or their way, it has to do with us finally coming together to get health care reform on the table. Do you not think that the Republicans are watching. If we represent the President, then shouldn't we trust him and his decisions Who's divisive method of divide & conquer, by way of fear, are we using. We must keep in mind the bottom line, The Goal. Which is reform. If we don't, not one congressmen will listen. We must make a united front behind the President, in order to succeed in achieving real reform in Washington, just like we did during the campaign. Are we adult enough of a party to get past ourselves and support the man we asked to do the job at hand? For our children's sake, I hope so!!!!!!
October 8, 2008:
I was reminded last night watching the Obama McCain debate that Obama encourages national healthcare, especially for children. October is Breast Cancer Awareness Month. October 17th is Mammography day. And the more recent statistics according to the American Cancer Association indicate:
In 2006, 56% of women of screening age reported that they had a mammogram in the past year, compared to only 39% in 1987. However, a recent trend in mammography rates reflect as much as 4% decline nationwide. Poor women have shown the largest increase in mammography use, especially in recent years. Non-Hispanic black women were most likely to have been recently screened (68%), while screening among Hispanic, Non-Hispanic white, and Asian women lagged behind (59%, 62%, and 55% respectively).
So ladies and gentlemen (too) if you haven’t make an appointment to have your breasts checked.
As I was saying, last night as I watched the debate, I realized that Obama encourages national healthcare and an opportunity for Americans to improve their lives and increase the quality of their lives by having comparable healthcare that legislators and government officials already enjoy. McCain’s practice of being dismissive reminds me so much of the Bush Administration; on the other hand McCain only wants to emphasis the penalties that Obama was going to recommend to those who choose not to provide their children healthcare insurance. By the way does anyone know what those penalties are? You would think with McCain’s personal health issues, his first wife’s accident and health needs of any normal family that being a father and a husband, that he would not only encourage insurance but be the first to recommend health services as a leader.
Obama addressed healthcare again this afternoon at the rally in Indiana. It dawned on me how so many individuals who receive government sponsored benefits, grants and financial assistance are quick to tell the rest of us that we shouldn’t be concerned with government support intervention. Often they even refer to government assistance as some form of socialism. So if this is the case, why are these political leaders accepting the services? Is it me or are others also realizing that the government means our tax dollars providing the financial price, which means it is a “freebie” to political leaders?
Brian Williams of MCNBC in November 2007 produced a special detailing the risk factors for detecting breast cancer. He warned that in all the methodology to gather information on American women by doctors was questionable.
Williams offered, “the misinformation in past breast cancer models are especially taking their toll on African American women”, and he continued with a report by Dr. Nancy Snyderman, the chief medical editor of NBC News. Why? Because the largest studies ever done did not include African American (AA) women at all. I’m sure you can agree with me, that it is usually devastating and scary to hear the words “cancer”. Since 2001, millions of younger AA women being diagnosed with breast cancer are increasing. Awareness by AA women is causing more checking and looking for tell tale signs. More talk show hosts are talking about breast cancer and how to check one’s self. Even Ophra Winfrey has been doing frequent segments on prevention and survivor stories to stress the level of serious care and concern that needs to be taken often inviting celebrities, high profile career profession as well as the lady next door to share their experiences.
On the NBC special when a woman was 36 years old was diagnosed to having the disease, the woman looking wide-eyed and confused thought hearing the words “cancer was so unreal”, she assumed that such a disease only happened to older women, not someone young like herself.
Surreal to me is knowing current statistics on AA women are showing that AA are less likely than Whites to get breast cancer but this is based on an old 1989 study where AA weren’t even used. So finding a new model using African-American women in an initial study on breast cancer is deeply needed. To date these findings are showing AA are usually younger, under the age of 40 years old and the breast cancer is a lot more aggressive than that in their white counterparts. Based on a University of Chicago Medical study, more than 50% AA diagnosed do not live beyond two years. There is question as to whether or not medical detection is less noticeable to AA women or that it is possible that breast cancer in of itself just simple effects black women more harshly and more aggressively. Is it possible that it is a completely different disease in how it spreads in AA women in particular? The jury is still out.
There is question as to whether or not African ancestry is a higher genetic propensity based on Dr. Lisa Newman, leading an ongoing five-year Ghana study, that cancer in black women operates much differently than it does in other women.
As I understand it, African American women under 40 years of age are being asked in the Journal of National Cancer Institute study that introduces updated science that more black women are need to make some definitive questions answered. If anyone knows anything differently, please let me know, williamsminerva20@yahoo.com. AA in particularly, are being asked to consult with their doctors to become volunteers to enter the National Institute’s Cancer study. Early detection in all women is being encouraged. To all women it is recommended that yearly mammograms are taken.
I would recommend visiting the following web sites also: http://www.cancer.org/docroot/LRN/LRN_0.asp
American Cancer Society- www.cancer.org
California Cancer Registry- www.ccrcal.org
National Cancer Institute- www.cancer.gov
Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program- www.seer.cancer.gov
Centers for Disease Control- www.cdc.gov
California Dialogue on Cancer- www.cdoc-online.org
California Department of Public Health- www.cdph.ca.gov
Locally, go visit: Santa Clarita Valley Unit 25020 W Avenue Stanford Unit 170 Valencia, CA 91355 Map Phone: (661)298-0886 Fax: (661)775-9853
AFLAC and other progressive insurance companies have special health events breast cancer programs encouraging early detection. If your insurance company doesn’t inquire at AFLAC (“yes, the duck insurance company”). Women who know they have a high family history of breast cancer are especially asked to take wellness measures by altering their diets, increasing exercise, watching their lifestyle stress levels and early detection.
We are making a music video to Get Out the Vote for Obama and give the people of Los Angeles an opportunity to have their voices heard.
The theme of the music video is that with Individual Voices coming together we can inspire people to overcome fear and take action for a better tomorrow. The music video will feature citizens of LA holding homemade signs saying what HOPE, PEACE or CHANGE means to them.
We have an amazing song that has been produced by a grammy-winning producer and an experienced team of film makers.
We need VOLUNTEERS who would like to participate in this community effort.
Please email us at yesyoucanvideo@yahoo.com if you:
With the election coming up, we need to move on this fast. So please get back to us by Sunday, Oct 5th at 8pm. YesYouCanVideo@yahoo.com
THANK YOU!
So its September 11th again.
Seven years ago today, I learned a handful of my finest friends were dead.
I knew my accountant was on United Flight 93 to San Francisco that morning.
It crashed over a lonely field thanks to a handful of determined Saudi criminals.
My roommate and best friend emailed me from the Borders Books at the World Trade Center the night of September 10th, 2001, saying he'd be back in the building at 7 AM to get an email address he needed from me on the computer he was paying to use there. He and his mom were on vacation.
That next Sept. 11 morning I heard a radio report of fire inside Borders Books, where trapped people beat helplessly against reinforced glass walls. I was on my way home from a store where people were fighting over bottles water and canned beans.
I had to pull over.
I just heard this slogan, "CAN VERSUS CON!" on Air America when a caller suggested the campaign use it. I believe this is a brilliant slogan that is emotive and rich with the kind of simple imagery that sticks in people's minds.
Three words that can win the race. "CAN VERSUS CON!!!"
Please blog about this and use it!
January 20, 2009 Well, we lost, again.
Maybe McCain won't be so bad afterall. Maybe he'll actually do a few of the things he says he's going to do. Maybe he'll actually let a few Democrats into his cabinet or something so we won't feel left out.
Oh, and y'know what, after four years of McCain, maybe Palin will not be such a bad President. Afterall, she'l have four, maybe eight years to gain valuable experience. She too will be ready on day one by the time she takes office.
Its really too bad that we never, as a party, developed a good half dozen talking points about why we should vote for Obama and why McCain/Palin would have been a disaster. A half dozen blunt, often repeated talking points would really have won the election for us. Too bad Obama and Biden didn't bother to do that. I guess they got too caught up in their intellect and forgot that emotion, not intellect, wins elections.
They had it all going for them, the war, the morgage crisis, McCain and Palins' own words used against them, but they never took the shot. They forgot that on the highroad, sometimes its better to have some bumps just to remind yourself that you're still at the wheel.
They ignored the bumps, didn't own them and make others realize they were there. And they lost. Remember way back when the lack of passion by Senator Obama and Senator Biden on the national Sunday talk shows, right after Palin became v.p., the weekend after the GOP convention, sunk their campaign? It was like they were just grinning and bearing it as reality was twisted before their noses. It was like they were saying, "What bumps?" instead of calling the damn road service and raising hell about it.
Joe Biden even complimented Sarah Palin on being a good politician and giving a great speech. Yep, that was the beginning of the end. There were at least twenty lies in that speech. I guess Joe was asleep at the wheel. He must not have noticed the bumps in the road.
As I was watching that fated Sunday morning, flipping back and forth from Biden on Meet the Press to Barack with Stephanopolis on two different channels, seeing the very low key nature of both interviews, I kept telling myself that they were both up to something, that they were simply playing possum. Lord, I hoped so at the time. But I guess history proved that I was wrong. And we lost.
We lost because we got caught up in the details. We went inward instead of outward. We played to facts, figures and lofty ideas, but we forgot about the emotion. We did the same thing Democrats always do. We lost. I sure wish somebody, Biden, Obama, heck even Hillary Clinton, would have simply said at that pivotal moment in history, "John McCain, Sarah Palin, and the rest of the GOP are bald faced lying to you. They lied all week. They're habitual liars. They're hooked on lying because lies are all they got."
That would have been something. Big news. Would have really caused a stir. Probably would have led to a lot of fact checking that would have put more voters in the Obama/Biden camp once voters realized the truth of the allegations. That would have grabbed the headlines and momentum away from McCain's spin machine. Maybe voters would have stopped talking about Sarah Palin's make up and gone back to realizing what was at stake.
Its not enough that the NYT writes an article pointing out misstatements made by Mrs. Palin and Mr. McCain regarding the issues and the records in question. Don't Democrats realize that people don't read the newspapers? I guess Obama and Biden expected John Stewart to do all their dirty work.
Too bad Obama and Biden never got the fundemental truth that voters respect leaders who do their own dirty work as much or more than they respect a politician on the highroad. A crying shame they didn't realize sooner that the two concepts aren't mutually exclusive. Why, if Obama and Biden would have swung their elbows a bit sooner, the grassroots wouldn't have got caught up in the weeds. They would have taken the cue to start playing to emotion the way the GOP does so well. Why, if that had happened, we may have won.
Those Democrats, they lost because they played nice. They minced words. They turned the other cheek and hoped voters would admire their good natures and subtle jibes. In the war of emotional imagery, that was no good. I guess they just never realized, there's a time to turn your cheek, and another time to face forward and stare hard.
I guess they never realized that if you don't speak bluntly and speak fast, you eventually lose your right to speak at all.
"They lie!" Two little words that could have changed the world. But didn't.
Who would have thought that when Obama was forced to put away his soapbox for good, 59 days after that first fatal misstep on that Sunday morning, that he could have changed it all by saying TWO LITTLE WORDS on national t.v. one Sunday morning. Two words, combined with maybe six little talking points the grassroots could have used to chop out the weeds, could have changed history.
Well, maybe we'll have a better shot at it next time. If there is one.
How Cuba will determine the 2008 Election.
Whether you are pro-Cuba or anti-Cuba, the debate may continue for centuries. One thing is certain. The nearly fifty year old, U.S. Embargo on Cuba has not worked, does not work and will not work. In stating so, we are not acknowledging, supporting or condoning Cuba’s current government.
We are saying it’s time for some of America’s voters, politicians and media to evolve with Cuba, perhaps more than any other issue. It could be said; how politicians act and vote towards the five decade old failed U.S. policies with Cuba is a clear reflection on their character.
We are saying that continuing the anti Cuba embargo policies is a clear reflection of a persons character. Whether running for President of the United States, Senate, Congress or any government leadership position; a person should demonstrated the ability to change course, try new directions and see different points of view. Especially if the policy they supported has failed for fifty years.
The anti-Cuba politicians, lobby and community is a small percentage of all populations, including the Cuban population itself. Yet the anti-Cuba movement has controlled the presidency of the United States and both political houses; including this elections Republican candidate John McCain for nearly fifty years. John McCain is anti-Cuba, while Barack Obama is pro-Cuba.
Why would any politician, business person and human continue enforcing on themselves, and worse others; a failed Cuba policy that the majority of people in America, the world and mostly the island of Cuba itself do not want? See the Election 08 FREE CUBA FILM SERIES and you will find out.
Then it’s up to you to decide when you cast your vote on “Election Moment”, if you are voting for character.
Election moment is the truest moment in any election when you, the voter stand there in the privacy of your own mind right before you vote. Only you will know if you cast a vote for character, and only you can determine the issues that reflect a person’s character. Cuba is one of those clear character issues.
Election 08 FREE CUBA FILM SERIES, is committed to bring the real Cuba to America. We’ve selected three diverse films that provide audiences with a modern day love story set in Havana, Cuba. A film that gives you a glimpse into the future with the childhood version of The Buena Vista Club, and lastly, an impacting documentary that brings to life, the hidden true history of Cuban terrorism, the U.S. Politicians directly related to Fidel Castro who continued to master mind the anti Cuba movement in the U.S. and the political families who continue to enforce their historically failed policies against Cuba on the world through violence, economics and political warfare.
Will you vote for a person who is pro-Cuba and promises to create a powerful future for America uniting the world.
Or will you vote for a person who is anti-Cuba and promises to bend history to make sure America stays the current course isolating the world.
Only you will know on your “Election Moment.”
Luis Moro
www.EveryThingCuba.com
Now is the time for the Democratic Party to show their integrity.
Now is the hour for the Delegates to show the People of this United States of America that we have a Party of Honor, Honesty, and Integrity that will commit themselves to Senator Barack Obama without question.
Now is the minute for Those "supers" to show us, the People, that they have Integrity, and that they will never support a nominee who stands behind racial divides, supports negativity, and lies in the name of politics as usual.
Now is the second to stand up for Senator Barack Obama as the Presidential Nominee of the Democratic Party who can best bring our country and our world together with empathy, integrity, and honor for Change and Unity!
Right now, This Day, This Hour, This Minute, This Second We Have the Oppportunity That comes Around only once in-a-lifetime!
Stand up and Show Us, the American People, What Is Strength of Character and What Democrats Stand For!
Is It Lies, Myths, and Tearing the Party Apart ?
Or is it the Strength to Uphold Change and Integrity to Support Senator Barack Obama for President of the United States of America?
We the People Stand For Change and Integrity, only Barack Obama for President!
Please watch this hillarious spoof "Mrs. C", created by a team of Obama supporters and award-winning Hollwyood professionals. Very short, but to the point, we feel!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQh8__dCxeE
Then let me know what you thought! Thanks!
Here's a snippet from article I wrote for Robert Parry over at Consortium News:
Texas, Hillary won 65 delegates in the primary. Obama earned 61 delegates. But in the caucuses, with 48 percent of the caucus results reported as of early Thursday morning, per the Texas Democratic Party’s Web site, Obama has won approximately 56 percent of the caucus votes, leaving Clinton with just under 44 percent.When you apply these percentages to the 67 delegates, Obama gets 37 delegates from the caucuses, and Clinton gets 30.If you add the primary and caucus delegates together, Clinton gets 95 delegates, but Obama gets 98, a net gain of three.If current trends hold, Obama will win Texas by earning the overall delegate victory.
Texas, Hillary won 65 delegates in the primary. Obama earned 61 delegates.
But in the caucuses, with 48 percent of the caucus results reported as of early Thursday morning, per the Texas Democratic Party’s Web site, Obama has won approximately 56 percent of the caucus votes, leaving Clinton with just under 44 percent.
When you apply these percentages to the 67 delegates, Obama gets 37 delegates from the caucuses, and Clinton gets 30.
If you add the primary and caucus delegates together, Clinton gets 95 delegates, but Obama gets 98, a net gain of three.
If current trends hold, Obama will win Texas by earning the overall delegate victory.
Read the full article here.
I'm stealing this from someone else - please visit the original site and poster to give him credit. This was too good not to share!
SCENE: An emergency room operating theater. Lots of medical beeps and noises. A woman wearing scrubs, a Hillary Clinton haircut and a surgical mask finishes washing up and backs into the ER, where a clock on the wall says 2:59. MRS C: Is the patient prepped? NURSE: Wait a minute, you can't be in here! ANESTHESIOLOGIST: Mrs. C, what are you doing here? You can't be in the operating room! MRS C: Of course I can. I know how it's done! My husband was head of surgery here for eight years! I used to watch him all the time. ANESTHESIOLOGIST: Your husband retired eight years ago. I'm sorry -- (continues in background as we) CUT TO NURSE ON (red) PHONE: Security to ER One stat! ANESTHESIOLOGIST (in background) but just watching your husband operate -- CUT TO ANESTHESIOLOGIST: doesn't qualify you to be a surgeon. MRS C: I was co-surgeon! I'm ready to operate on day one! Hand me that sharp pointy thing and . . . those funny scissors! (RED PHONE rings as clock on wall reaches 3:00) MRS C: Is someone going to get that?
SCENE: An emergency room operating theater. Lots of medical beeps and noises. A woman wearing scrubs, a Hillary Clinton haircut and a surgical mask finishes washing up and backs into the ER, where a clock on the wall says 2:59.
MRS C: Is the patient prepped? NURSE: Wait a minute, you can't be in here!
ANESTHESIOLOGIST: Mrs. C, what are you doing here? You can't be in the operating room!
MRS C: Of course I can. I know how it's done! My husband was head of surgery here for eight years! I used to watch him all the time.
ANESTHESIOLOGIST: Your husband retired eight years ago. I'm sorry -- (continues in background as we)
CUT TO
NURSE ON (red) PHONE: Security to ER One stat!
ANESTHESIOLOGIST (in background) but just watching your husband operate --
ANESTHESIOLOGIST: doesn't qualify you to be a surgeon.
MRS C: I was co-surgeon! I'm ready to operate on day one! Hand me that sharp pointy thing and . . . those funny scissors!
(RED PHONE rings as clock on wall reaches 3:00)
MRS C: Is someone going to get that?
My beliefs in Integrity and Honesty for our "United" States of America have made me believe in the Obama power of Hope and Change for our broken country. Never did I ever believe just "how" broken the "United" part of our nation actually is until now.
My naivete and true love for my country made me actually think that our government represented us, the American people, for the purposes of following the Constitution and protecting our "inalienable rights" as well as telling the Truth, "so help me God."
The actions and words of some political candidates obviously have a different purpose in mind, perhaps for the specific purposes of winning the Presidency at any cost - even dishonesty and corruption and certainly, for control.
The following blog writings are from J. Grant Dys: http://jgdys.blogspot.com/2006/10/constitution-not-subject-to-evolution.html
Sunday, October 29, 2006 "Constitution not Subject to Evolution"
In the fall of 2006 "Justice Antonin Scalia of the Supreme Court of the United States addressed the annual membership conference of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). In a conversation that included Justice Scalia and Nadine Strossen, the topic of whether the U.S. Constitution was a living (or evolving) document arose. Countering Strossen’s point that the Constitution was, in fact, evolving, Justice Scalia said the following:Once you say it evolves and it doesn’t depend on what the people thought they were doing when they adopted it, somebody’s going to have to decide how it evolves. Why in the world would you want nine people from a very uncharacteristic class of society – to wit, lawyers – to decide how the Constitution evolves? Commentators much smarter than I have bandied about these arguments with greater eloquence than my fingers can type. In general terms, usually those of a liberal persuasion view the Constitution as a living, breathing document that evolves with our society and culture. In contradistinction, often those of a more conservative persuasion argue that the Constitution has a specific meaning, one that cannot be changed by society’s evolution. What if "the Constitution is a living and breathing document, capable of changing meaning as our culture evolves. Which liberties are protected? If the Constitution changes its meanings as society becomes more enlightened, do we ever actually retain any of our 'inalienable rights'?If you hold to Justice Scalia’s point of view, you might be accused of being an originalist or, worse, an absolutist. If the Constitution does not evolve to meet the needs of our developing culture, then did the Founding Fathers contemplate including a bazooka in our Second Amendment right to bear arms? The debate between the two jurisprudential philosophies reflects, much the more, the debate about truth: is it relative or is it absolute? Taking our cue from Pontius Pilate’s rhetorical question to Jesus, we must also ask, “What is truth?”
Does truth change depending upon the circumstances? Upon a culture’s evolution? Whether it is relativism or originalism I dare say we cannot allow our answer to simply be,“It depends.” If we were to do so, the rights we once thought were inalienable could become rather . . . well . . . alienable. Our legislature keeps our laws in lock-step with our so-called, 'cultural evolution.'
But, it is necessary that we maintain a document that is of immovable stock, defining with a modicum of finality that which we as a nation consent to be governed.
Left to redefinition by a committee of nine (and lawyers at that!), I suspect our Constitution would go much the way that Justice Scalia predicts:
“It would mean whatever they think it ought to mean.”
http://jgdys.blogspot.com/2006/10/constitution-not-subject-to-evolution.html
BARACK OBAMA:That is the true genius of America, a faith in the simple dreams of its people, the insistence on small miracles. That we can say what we think, write what we think, without hearing a sudden knock on the door. That we can have an idea and start our own business without paying a bribe or hiring somebody's son. That we can participate in the political process without fear of retribution, and that our votes will be counted -- or at least, most of the time.BARACK OBAMA:The true test of the American ideal is whether we’re able to recognize our failings and then rise together to meet the challenges of our time. Whether we allow ourselves to be shaped by events and history, or whether we act to shape them. Whether chance of birth or circumstance decides life’s big winners and losers, or whether we build a community where, at the very least, everyone has a chance to work hard, get ahead, and reach their dreams.
BARACK OBAMA:What Washington needs is adult supervision.
BARACK OBAMA:If the people cannot trust their government to do the job for which it exists - to protect them and to promote their common welfare - all else is lost.
