MANDATORY HEALTH CARE FOR SMALL BUSINESS CHALLENGED AS TO CONSTITUTIONALITY

An article on WebMD talks about the lawsuit by a national group representing small businesses which has signed onto a federal lawsuit filed by officials from 20 states that challenges the constitutionality of the new healthcare reform law, particularly its mandate for individuals to obtain insurance coverage.

An amended complaint adds the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) to the list of plaintiffs. Two other new plaintiffs, the owner of an auto repair shop in Florida and a resident of Washington State, both objecting to the requirement to carry health insurance beginning in 2014, according to the complaint.   It asserts:  "The individual and employer mandates, onslaughts of new taxes, and onerous paperwork requirements in this unconstitutional law will devastate small businesses," the NFIB stated. It added that the individual mandate is "the first time the government is telling individuals they have to do something simply because they are alive."

"The plaintiffs are the attorneys general of Alabama, Alaska, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Louisiana, Michigan, Nebraska, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, and Washington and the governors of Arizona, Georgia, Mississippi, and Nevada. In addition, the attorney general of Virginia has filed a similar suit in a Virginia federal court. All of the state officials are Republicans except for James Caldwell, the attorney general of Louisiana, who is a Democrat."

Of particular interest are some reasons hot-headed AGs might have considered such as no one has yet been injured.  The law has not been put into effect and won't be until 2014.  The individual law will not apply to a state; only an individual can bring up a suit.

For the complete article by  Robert Lowes, click here.  This is certainly a case of planning ahead, is it not?

IS THE GUN IN THIS AD 'FREE SPEECH'?

free speech:  n  The right to express any opinion in public without censorship or restraint by the government. My tendency to take things literally assumes speech is oral production, but apparently the definition has been expanded to incorporate all kinds of behaviors as well.

Dale Peterson  is a Republican in Alabama who is running for Agricultural Commissioner.  To see his political ad, click here.

OK, if you've seen his ad, it would be nice to share your opinions of it.  I will share mine.  He throws a rifle over his shoulder and states, "We take no prisoners."  Since when does the Agricultural Commissioner 'take prisoners'?  The ad sounds like he is talking about 'the powerful position the job is', spoken with this very authoritative voice after he speaks of having been in the Marines, and sounded angry and antagonistic to me.  It is my impression that this faction of the Republican party is threatening our Constitution, our democracy, and sounds more vigilante than usual non-violent appointments such as the Agricultural Commissioner would encourage.

Does he really believe he can prove that electing him will save three lost farms a day?  He, in my opinion, has not discussed the real reasons those farms are closing down.  If he is a Republican, then he has been supporting the agricultural conglomerates that are putting the little farms out of business. However, it is unlikely the Alabama voters will all hear the truth and will be encouraged by the power he exudes.

THE ART OF RANTING

Rant:    Violent or extravagant speech or writing

There are few days during which I would have difficulty something to rant about; the poor economy, the terrorists on the loose all over the world; the feeling of anonymity and helplessness so many of us feel.  What is more difficult than ever before is to find people with the patience and tolerance to listen.  I've often wondered what is the commonality (if there is one) among ranters. 

Ways to recognize a rant early might be when someone starts with a high pitched tone and usually more audible.  The early words might be, "I cannot believe....!"; 'What could that S.*..B. have been thinking of?"; "I'm really pi**ed off!", :and the list could go on and on depending on the context of the rant.


Of key import to make a rant successful, the ranter must hold the attention of the listener.  The rant must be relevant, not emotionally off-putting, delivered with few tangents, and must  be clear that the ranter is not asking the listener to solve the problem presented.

Whether you are talking to yourself, out loud, or whether you are so angry you wish to spread the rage over others, ranting is here to say if for no more reason than it is easier to do today than a few decades ago.  You can rant on forums, by blog, op-ed columns, email, telephone, letters to the Editor, writing you political representative, and many other sources which those of you who have ranted will readily think of.  Rant on, America...someone will be sure to eventually hear your voice and, who knows, enough voices out there ranting may actually get some needed changes made in our country. 

WHOM DO SANCTIONS REALLY EFFECT?

The UN has recently been tackling the subject of effective sanctions for Iran.  China and Russia have ridden their white stallions into the fray to help back the decisions made at the UN.

	From Al Jazeera:  UN discusses Iran sanctions deal "Members of the UN security council have agreed on a package of strong new sanctions to impose on Iran over its disputed nuclear programme, Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, announced. The draft resolution was passed to all 15 members of the UN security council by the permanent five on Tuesday" For the complete article, read here.

LIFE AND HOPE ARE STILL VISIBLE---JUST NOT IN CONGRESS MUCH

On an abandoned street in Brooklyn, artists have chosen to fill the empty shop windows that made for desolate feelings that kept people from walking them.  This lowered the customer rate at a local deli and a pharmacy on either end of the empty block of stores.  Check the video after the commercial by clicking here.

Rush Limbaugh, on the other hand, (pun intended) chose to bypass insignificant problems like terrorism, bigots, racists, homophobes, unemployment, Americans dying from lack of health care, children malnourished, and other more trivial complaints from those less fortunate than he, and makes his great cause:  "The objective is to stop liberalism wherever it is"  For those who have had too much of Rush and stopped watching or listening to him but want to see just how far some of our country's folk have descended, click here.,

However, not all people are as generous and objective as Rush (said most sarcastically) such as Minnestoa's Bridge to Benefits Program.  We need more of these.  Click here for details.

When all we hear from the media are hours of endless loop on the oil spill or any tragedy du jour, it would be nice for someone to think of a show that focuses on the many attempts by working people to make life easier for brethren.  Admittedly, even some rich people indulge in similar personal gratification.  Helping people might just surprise some as to how good one can feel to see others given some hope for the future and some faith that they are not all alone in the world.

AS THE WORLD TURNS

Asfandayar says insurgency in Pakistan defeated, but terrorism challenge remains 

NEW YORK, May 16 (APP): "Awami National Party leader Asfandyar Wali Khan said on Saturday night that intense efforts of the Pakistani political forces and the army’s operations have broken the back of insurgency in the country, but acts of terrorism still pose a grave challenge. “The defeat of insurgency is great success,” the ANP leader told members of the Pakistani community at a function organized by the Pakistan League of America, a non-political body.

Pakistan’s image abroad will not improve unless terrorism in all its forms and manifestation was eliminated, he said, while lamenting the fact that the terrorists were killing their own countrymen. Asfandyar is here to address a conference being held tonight in Brooklyn, a borough of New York City, honouring his grandfather, Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan."  For the whole article, click here.  Too many Americans are too young to realize that  Pakistan and India were a united country until they split a few decades ago.  Politically the US has tried to remain friendly with both Nations but, admittedly, our drone attacks which are killing civilians, has raised hackles. This week's FBI raids only confirms that there are many who hold a very large grudge about it all.  We can count ourselves lucky that the Suburban in Times Square packed with bombs did not cause a disaster. 

Meanwhile BBC News reports that Chilean authorities have arrested a Pakistani student arrested at the US embassy in Chile after triggering a bomb detector has been charged with illegal possession of explosives.  For that full story, click here.  It seems the Americans are not in good favor anywhere in the world, does it not?  Can it be that we have gone about it wrong in the Bush years of divisiveness and belligerence?  Was our ridiculous foreign policy posturing off-putting to the rest of the world?  It certainly seems to be though Obama and Secretary Clinton hve come a long way on the path to better world relations.  Let's face it, like the Republicans, some people just aren't going to like us no matter what we do.

 

40 YEARS OF WAR ON DRUGS HAS FAILED

Tony Newman,. Director of Media Relations at the Drug Policy Alliance Network, wrote a commentary on what he called an AP Bombshell.   The AP accused the US war on drugs as not having met any of its goals in the 40 years it has been fighting.  Nixon's first drug-fighting budget was $100 million. Now it's $15.5 billion, in Obama's 2011 budget, 31 times Nixon's amount even when adjusted for inflation.  For anyone who wants to know where the money goes, click here for the whole AP article.

The AP article wrote:  "Religious movements led the crusades against drugs: In 1904, an Episcopal bishop returning from a mission in the Far East argued for banning opium after observing "the natives' moral degeneration." In 1914, The New York Times reported that cocaine caused blacks to commit "violent crimes," and that it made them resistant to police bullets. In the decades that followed, Mena said, drugs became synonymous with evil."

Many programs have been started and failed.  Rather than do away with ineffective programs, the government has just been pouring more and more dollars into them.  AP further writes: "$450 billion to lock those people up in federal prisons alone. Last year, half of all federal prisoners in the U.S. were serving sentences for drug offenses. At the same time, drug abuse is costing the nation in other ways. The Justice Department estimates the consequences of drug abuse — "an overburdened justice system, a strained health care system, lost productivity, and environmental destruction" — cost the United States $215 billion a year."  

Folks, 'cost the United States' is a euphemism for 'cost the taxpayers', most of whom are we, the middle class..Many organizations have been fighting drug prohibition, as yet unsuccessful because there is too much money involved and many moralists believe it to be sinful, just as people thought alcohol was going to turn us into a land of alcoholics. Here is one organization trying to fight the prohibition.

The United States should stop wasting this money, look at the data available as to the lack of success, stop pandering to the few righteous-without-facts people, and legalize drugs.  As a non drug user, I see no point in wasting so much money on a losing proposition.  If 40 years of the 'War' hasn't proven it is not the way to go...then what does it take for reality to set in when it stares you in the face?