First Private Deep Space Mission

Asteroid Hunters Announce First Private Deep Space Mission
By Matthew Rosenbaum | ABC News

Asteroid Hunters Announce First Private Deep Space Mission (ABC News)
Asteroids could be heading for Earth right now, and the world should not have to live in fear. At least that's the message of a group of scientists and former astronauts working on the issue. They announced plans today to launch the first privately funded deep space mission in history, a space telescope that would make sure the coast is clear for us.
The SENTINEL mission, announced by the B612 Foundation, would send a telescope into orbit around the sun in order to track small to mid-sized asteroids that could threaten Earth. NASA already works with a network of astronomers to track the most dangerous near-Earth asteroids, those more than two thirds of a mile across. They say they believe they have already identified nearly 90 percent of those deadly space rocks.
However, there is very little data on an estimated 500 million smaller objects that could do us harm - like whatever exploded over the Tunguska region of Siberia in 1908, leveling over 800 miles of forest. The chairman and CEO of the B612 Foundation, former astronaut Ed Lu, says this is a problem. He flew on the space shuttle, the International Space Station and Russian Soyuz spacecraft.
"We've identified and mapped only about one percent of these asteroids to date." Lu said at a press conference. "During its 5.5-year mission survey time, Sentinel will discover and track half a million Near Earth Asteroids, creating a dynamic map that will provide the blueprint for future exploration of our solar system, while protecting the future of humanity on Earth."
Don't expect that dynamic map anytime soon. Launch of the Sentinel telescope is targeted for 2017 or 2018 - if the project, which would cost several hundred millions of dollars, is able to find funding.
The B612 group is optimistic. A press release issued by the foundation said, "Advances in space technology, including advances in infrared sensing and on-board computing, as well as low-cost launch system, have opened up a new era in exploration where private organizations can now carry out grand and audacious space missions previously only possible by governments."
The B612 Foundation, based in Mountain View, Calif., is named after the home asteroid of the Earth-visiting prince in Antoine de Saint-Exupery's "The Little Prince." It was originally founded with a focus on deflecting a potential incoming asteroid. Ideas studied include sending an intercepting spacecraft, but none have been tested.
The group has since shifted its focus to this project, which will seek to identify asteroids rather than destroy them. However, the original mission is not far from their minds.
According to Rusty Schweickart, an Apollo astronaut and Chairman Emeritus of B612, "The nice thing about asteroids is that once you've found them and once you have a good solid orbit on them you can predict a hundred years ahead of time whether there is a likelihood of an impact with the Earth."
MTW- This is a great leap in protecting the Earth, the problem is, we are all still fighting each other for control of said planet. The jobs alone would be great, but what happened to NASA? That is right, the Government is BROKE; or, more than likely, we gave all of our money away to Coutries that hate us. Let us hope that it works as well as getting rid of Obama. No more Obama! Nobama-Nobiden in 2012!
GOD BLESS YOU ALL.
Posted by Michael T. Wayne- A Little Crazy

FDA Approved Weight Loss Pill Information

Should You Take the New FDA-Approved Weight-Loss Pill?
By Lisa Collier Cool
Jun 27, 2012
Certain dieters now have a new weapon to fight obesity. Wednesday the FDA approved Belviq (lorcaserin hydrochloride), the first new prescription drug for long-term weight loss in more than a decade.
The weight-loss pill is approved as an addition to exercise and cutting calories for people who are obese (a BMI of 30 or more) or overweight (a BMI of 27 or more) with at least one weight-related disorder, such as high blood pressure, type 2 diabetes, or high cholesterol.
How Does Belviq Work?
Belviq targets a brain area that influences appetite, called the serotonin 2C receptor. It’s the same receptor targeted by fenfluramine, the "fen" component of the infamous 1990s diet drug combo fen-phen.
However, Belviq is considered safer because it’s more selective—specifically targeting serotonin receptors linked to hunger, using a different brain pathway than fen-phen did. The new diet pill curbs appetite by boosting feelings of fullness and satiety, so people eat less.
How Effective is Belviq for Weight Loss?
In three randomized clinical trials involving nearly 8,000 overweight and obese adults, those who took Belviq for up to one year, in combination with cutting calories and exercise, dropped an average of 3 to 3.7 percent of their body weight. For a 200-pound person, that would be a loss of 6 to 7.4 pounds.
About 47 percent of patients without diabetes shed at least 5 percent of their starting weight—enough to significantly reduce their risk for diabetes and other health problems—compared to only 23 percent of those treated with a placebo. About 38 percent of diabetic patients treated with Belviq and 16 percent of placebo users lost at least 5 percent of their body weight. Diabetics who took the drug also had beneficial changes in blood sugar control.
NOTE: The FDA advises people who haven’t lost at least 5 percent of their body weight after taking Belviq for 12 weeks to stop the drug, since further treatment is unlikely to help them slim down.
Past Safety Concerns for Diet Drugs
The approval comes after a long line of safety concerns about prescription diet drugs,
such as the notorious two-drug weight-loss combination phen-fen, which was taken off the market in 1997 after the previously cocktail of phentermine and fenfluramine was linked to heart-valve problems in up to one in three users.
With America’s obesity rate nearing 35 percent of the adult population, doctors called upon the FDA to approve more weight-loss treatments. Previously, there was only one FDA-approved drug for long-term weight loss—Xenical, which is rarely prescribed due to unpleasant digestive side effects.
Four years ago Sanofi-Aventis SA halted studies of its highly anticipated weight-loss pill Acomplia, which turned out to have scary psychiatric side effects, including depression and suicidal thoughts.
In 2010, the FDA refused to approve Belviq, due to concern that it might cause similar damage. That year the FDA also shot down two other experimental diet drugs because of serious potential side effects. However, three clinical trials involving more than 8,000 people found no significant difference in the rate of heart-valve problems among those who took Belviq and people given a placebo.
The FDA issued a press release reporting that Belviq “does not appear to activate "a chemical pathway linked to the heart-valve problems seen with fen-phen.” Nor does it appear to have the problems associated with Accutrim, which was pulled from the market in 2000 due to its link to strokes.
Does Belviq Have Risks?
The FDA's 2010 refusal to approve Belviq also stemmed from a concern that it raised the rate of breast and brain tumors in rats given seven times the dosage recommended for people. New studies by the maker of Belviq found little risk for tumors in people.
The FDA reports that the most common side effects of Belviq in non-diabetic patients are headache, dizziness, fatigue, nausea, dry mouth, and constipation. In diabetic patients side effects include low blood sugar (hypoglycemia), headache, back pain,
cough, and fatigue.
The drug can have serious side effects, according to the FDA, which include serotonin syndrome, a potentially deadly (though rare) condition marked by such symptoms as confusion, restlessness, blood pressure changes, nausea, vomiting, and loss of muscle coordination. Risk goes up if you also take other medications that affect serotonin levels, such as certain common drugs for migraine or depression.
What Are the Benefits?
"The approval of this drug, used responsibly in combination with a healthy diet and lifestyle, provides a treatment option for Americans who are obese or are overweight and have at least one weight-related comorbid condition," said FDA's drug center director, Dr. Janet Woodcock, in a statement.
Who Should Avoid Belviq?
Belviq should only be used by overweight or obese people under a doctor's supervision.
Pregnant women should not use the new diet pill. People with heart failure should use it with caution, warns the FDA, due to preliminary evidence that it might have problematic effects.
The agency has ordered the drug’s manufacturer to conduct after-market studies to monitor people who use Belviq for any cardiovascular complications that might emerge with wider use of the new medication.
GOD BLESS YOU ALL.
Posted by Michael T. Wayne- A Little Crazy

Louisiana Gov Will Not Implement Obamacare

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal refuses to implement Obamacare despite Supreme Court ruling
By Chris Moody, Yahoo! News Political Reporter | The Ticket

Bobby Jindal (Gerald Herbert/AP)
The Supreme Court upheld President Barack Obama's health care law on Thursday, but Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, a possible Republican vice presidential contender who has refused to establish a federally mandated health care exchange in his state, said Friday that he will continue to ignore it.
"We're not going to start implementing Obamacare," Jindal said during a conference call with Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell. "We're committed to working to elect Gov. Romney to repeal Obamacare."
Under the Affordable Care Act, states must set up a health insurance exchange program by Jan. 1, 2014, and will receive grants from the federal government to implement it.
Several Republican governors, including both Jindal and McDonnell, have put off setting up the exchanges in the hope that the law would be repealed or struck down by the court. Now that the law has been upheld, Jindal said he won't change course and is looking to presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney to lead the repeal effort if he takes office in 2013.
"Here in Louisiana we have not applied for the grants, we have not accepted many of these dollars, we're not implementing the exchanges," Jindal said. "We don't think it makes any sense to implement Obamacare in Louisiana. We're going to do what we can to fight it."
Despite the court ruling, there is still a chance that Republicans in Congress can repeal much of the law next year even if they don't have a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. Because Chief Justice John Roberts ruled that the mandate to purchase health insurance—one of the key provisions of the law—was a tax, Republicans can use a procedure called "budget reconciliation" to pass a repeal bill that requires only a simple majority to pass. But this scenario relies on the Republicans' ability to win the White House, keep the majority in the House and gain enough seats in the Senate.
On the same conference call on Friday, McDonnell, also considered a contender to become Romney's running mate, said he would "evaluate" his options in Virginia now that the court has upheld the law.
"We don't even know exactly what that federal exchange would look like, so there's still some uncertainty at this point as to what the right course is, and in the next days and weeks we're going to be evaluating the case as well as the options for Virginia," McDonnell said. "I think each state is going to have to weigh that and look at the time frame to determine what to do. But I agree absolutely that the priority right now is to elect a new president and a new Senate so this law can be repealed."
McDonnell, the chairman of the Republican Governors Association, added that he has not yet polled fellow state executives in the GOP about how they plan to proceed after the ruling, but said that most are looking to the election in November for guidance.
MTW- I hope that this is not the only Governor with the balls to do this. No More Obama! Nobama-Nobiden in 2012!
GOD BLESS YOU ALL.
Posted by Michael T. Wayne- A Little Crazy

What Obama Care Means For Your Taxes

The sweeping health-care law, upheld today by the Supreme Court, includes changes for next year.
By Bill Bischoff | SmartMoney
President Obama's Affordable Care Act, which was deemed constitutional Thursday by the Supreme Court, includes some major tax changes that will take effect next year. Here's a refresher course on how sweeping health-care reform will impact individual taxpayers like you.
Medicare Tax
Right now, the Medicare tax on salary and/or self-employment (SE) income is 2.9%. If you're an employee, 1.45% is withheld from your paychecks, and the other 1.45% is paid by your employer. If you're self-employed, you pay the whole 2.9% yourself.
Starting in 2013, an extra 0.9% Medicare tax will be charged on: (1) salary and/or SE income above $200,000 for an unmarried individual, (2) combined salary and/or SE income above $250,000 for a married joint-filing couple, and (3) salary and/or SE income above $125,000 for those who use married filing separate status. For self-employed individuals, the additional 0.9% Medicare tax hit will come in the form of a higher SE bill.
Medicare Tax on Investment Income
Right now, the maximum federal income tax rate on long-term capital gains and dividends is only 15%. Starting in 2013, the maximum rate on long-term gains is scheduled to go up to 20% and the maximum rate on dividends is scheduled to increase to 39.6% as the so-called Bush tax cuts expire.
But that's not all. Also starting in 2013, all or part of the net investment income,
including long-term capital gains and dividends, collected by higher-income folks can get socked with an additional 3.8% "Medicare contribution tax." Therefore, the maximum federal rate on long-term gains for 2013 and beyond will actually be 23.8% (versus the current 15%) and the maximum rate on dividends will be a whopping 43.4% (versus the current 15%). Yikes!
The additional 3.8% Medicare tax will not apply unless your adjusted gross income (AGI) exceeds: (1) $200,000 if you're unmarried, (2) $250,000 if you're a married joint-filer, or (3) $125,000 if you use married filing separate status.
The additional 3.8% Medicare tax will apply to the lesser of your net investment income or the amount of AGI in excess of the applicable threshold. Net investment income includes interest, dividends, royalties, annuities, rents, income from passive business activities, income from trading in financial instruments or commodities, and gains from assets held for investment like stock and other securities. (Gains from assets held for business purposes are not subject to the extra tax.)
For example, a married joint-filing couple with AGI of $265,000 and $60,000 of net investment income would pay the 3.8% tax on $15,000 (the amount of excess AGI). If the same couple has AGI of $350,000, they would pay the 3.8% tax on $60,000 (the entire amount of their net investment income).
$2,500 Cap on Health-Care FSA Contributions
Right now, there's no tax-law limit on contributions to your employer's healthcare flexible spending account (FSA) plan (although many plan impose their own limits).
Amounts you contribute to the FSA plan are subtracted from your taxable salary. Then you can use the funds to reimburse yourself tax-free to cover qualified medical expenses. Good deal! Starting in 2013, however, the maximum annual FSA contribution for each employee will be capped at only $2,500.
Higher Threshold for Itemized Medical Expense Deductions
Right now, you can claim an itemized deduction for medical expenses paid for you, your spouse, and your dependents, to the extent the expenses exceed 7.5% of AGI. Starting in 2013, the hurdle is raised to 10% of AGI. However, if either you or your spouse is age 65 or older at yearend, the 10%-of-AGI threshold will not take effect until 2017.
That said, the fate of these four ObamaCare-related tax increases may hinge on what the Supreme Court decides next month. So maybe you have more reasons to be interested in that decision than you initially thought. Stay tuned. I'll keep you posted.
MTW-It sounds like a tax increase to me. The sooner we vote this moron out of office, the better. I am still in shock that the Supreme Court passed this Un-Constitutional bunch of Obama BS, as it goes hand in hand with everything else he has done that is contrary to the Constitution, and the good of the American Citizen. It is so confusing on its face, that they think they can slide some taxing by without us knowing. No more Obama! Nobama-Nobiden in 2012!
GOD BLESS YOU ALL.
Posted by Michael T. Wayne- A Little Crazy

Holder In Contempt

House votes to hold Eric Holder in contempt of Congress
By Rachel Rose Hartman, Yahoo! News Political Reporter | The Ticket

Holder (Susan Walsh/AP)
The full House of Representatives voted on Thursday to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress over the Justice Department's decision to withhold documents related to the failed Fast and Furious gun walking operation.
By a vote of 255 to 67, House members voted to hold Holder in contempt, disregarding a protest walkout led by the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC).
"This is a sad day for the House of Representatives. It is an irresponsible day for the House of Representatives," House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (Md.) said on the House floor prior to the vote. "It is a day in which the majority party asked us to take an action that has never been taken in the history of America."
Thursday's vote was the first time a sitting Cabinet officer was held in contempt.
Hoyer noted that Congress has issued previous contempt citations to other officials,
but that the average time between committee action and consideration was 87 days. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee voted just last week to advance the measure to the full House.
A total of 108 Democrats out of protest on Thursday chose not to vote on the measure,
with 1 lawmaker voting present.
Earlier Thursday, the House Democratic caucus voted unanimously to endorse the walkout. Just prior to the vote, Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) and Hoyer joined with the CBC, members of the Hispanic, Asian Pacific American and Progressive Caucuses as well as other lawmakers to exit the House floor in protest, filing out of the chamber in a slow-moving and crowded line.
"The Republican Leadership has articulated no legislative purpose for pursuing this course of action," the Caucus stated in a letter they previously circulated to colleagues encouraging them to join the walkout. "For these reasons we cannot and will not participate in a vote to hold the Attorney General in contempt. We adamantly oppose this partisan attack and refuse to participate in any vote that would tarnish the image of Congress or of an Attorney General who has done nothing but work tirelessly to protect the rights of the American people."
Thursday's vote marked the culmination of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee's push to hold the government accountable for the failings of Fast and Furious, a scheme which oversaw the sale of firearms to Mexican drug cartels, though the majority of the weapons went missing.
The committee opened an investigation into the operation to determine what the government knew and when, especially in light of a Feb. 4, 2011 letter, which the Justice Department later retracted. The letter incorrectly stated that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives "makes every effort to interdict weapons that have been purchased illegally and prevent their transportation to Mexico."
The Justice Department refused to hand over many of the documents subpoenaed by the committee citing internal deliberations contained in the materials. President Barack Obama backed the decision and personally exerted executive privilege over the documents last week.
Democrats argue that the Justice Department has been compliant to the extent it is able and that Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) and other Republican lawmakers are simply playing politics by targeting Holder.
"The Congress should be embarrassed about the conduct of this investigation and the charade that brings us to the floor today," Democratic Rep. Chaka Fattah of Pennsylvania said on the House floor prior to the vote.
"The Attorney General can't provide these documents-- the president has protected them under... executive privilege." Fattah added that Republicans have "lost their way" and because of them, Congress is held in high contempt.
Democrats argue that Issa is woefully ignoring gunwalking operations conducted during President George W. Bush's administration.
But Republicans maintain that they are fulfilling their duty to hold the government accountable and offered the Justice Department many opportunities to comply.
"The Justice Department did not provide the facts and the information we requested,"
House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said on the House floor. In addition, Boehner said, the government "admitted to misleading Congress."
On Thursday, Republicans rejected the Democratic assertion that their fight is simply political in nature.
"I hear the stuff about witch hunt and about politics and it gets me sick," Florida Republican Rep. Rich Nugent said on the House floor. "As a former law enforcement officer, we should be more worried about what lousy policies that Attorney General Holder is covering up that caused the death of one of our own in protecting this country." Nugent invoked the name of border patrol agent Brian Terry, who was killed on Dec. 2010. Weapons related to Fast and Furious were found at his murder scene.
The National Rifle Association, which contends the government used the operation to promote stricter gun control laws, inserted itself into Thursday's vote by warning lawmakers last week that it will use the contempt vote to rate lawmakers. The organization's decision placed added pressure on House Democrats in gun-friendly districts. Hoyer conceded that some members would change their votes accordingly.
The vote had 17 Democrats joining with 238 Republicans to hold the attorney general in contempt.
MTW-I cannot believe it is taking so long to find out what this man did. He needs to go as bad as the ENTIRE OBAMA ADMIONISTRATION. No more Obama! Nobama-Nobiden in 2012!
GOD BLESS YOU ALL.
Posted by Michael T. Wayne- A Little Crazy

Bath Salts Killer Not High On Bath Salts

Cannabis cannibal? Pot, not ‘bath salts,’ found in Miami face-eating killer’s system
By Dylan Stableford, Yahoo! News Senior Media Reporter Yahoo! News | The Lookout

Rudy Eugene (Miami-Dade Police Department)
Rudy Eugene—the Florida man who was suspected to be high on "bath salts" last month when he was shot and killed by police after refusing to stop chewing a homeless man's face—was not on "bath salts" after all.
According to the Miami-Dade County medical examiner's office, toxicology tests performed on Eugene found marijuana in his system, but no street drugs, prescription drugs or alcohol. Eugene also tested negative for adulterants commonly mixed with street drugs.
"The department has also sought the assistance of an outside forensic toxicology reference laboratory, which has confirmed the absence of 'bath salts,' synthetic marijuana and LSD," the medical examiner said.
But that doesn't necessarily mean cannabis was the cause of cannibalism.
"There is an almost infinite number of chemical substances out there that can trigger unusual behavior," Bruce Goldberger, professor and director of toxicology at the University of Florida, told the Associated Press. "There are many of these synthetic drugs that we currently don't have the methodology to test on, and that is not the fault of the toxicology lab. The challenge today for the toxicology lab is to stay on top of these new chemicals and develop methodologies for them, but it's very difficult and very expensive. There is no one test or combination of tests that can detect every possible substance out there."
Ronald Poppo, the 65-year-old homeless victim, remains hospitalized following the May 26 attack.
According to the American Association of Poison Control Centers, the use of "bath salts" appears to be on the rise, with poison control centers fielding 20 times as many calls related to the "drug" in 2011 as they did in 2010. And "bath salts" have been linked to a string of bizarre crimes in the United States in recent months.
On June 3, police in Illinois said a 37-year-old man admitted to using "bath salts" before a robbery attempt in which he "dismantled a fan, plugged in a hair dryer,
pulled out wires from a furnace, toyed with a hatchet and managed to pour gasoline on himself." Officers used a stun gun to subdue him.
But other drugs have been linked to bizarre behavior, too. On Wednesday, a Texas judge revoked bond for a 22-year-old man who allegedly killed and began eating his roommate's dog "after chasing a neighbor on his hands and knees while growling."
Police say the man had taken K-2, a form of synthetic marijuana, before the attack.
MTW- Oh, alright then. Potheads are cannibals now? THC does stay in you system for a while, and in the past, I have done my own personal tests on various drugs; never had the urge to munch on someone's face though. He had taken K2, which I know nothing of, but did he also smoke Salvia? I have not and never will try that stuff. Talk about something that should be a controlled substance, that is one for sure. (K2 as well I think) God only knows why he went to chomping. Munchies?
GOD BLESS YOU ALL.
Posted by Michael T. Wayne- A Little Crazy

What Obamacare Ruling Means For You

What the Supreme Court's Ruling Means for Consumers
By Louise Radnofsky | The Wall Street Journal
The Supreme court said Congress was acting within its powers under the Constitution when it required most Americans to carry health insurance or pay a penalty. It upheld the mandate as a tax, in an opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts.
But the justices found fault with part of the health-care law's expansion of Medicaid,
a joint federal-state insurance program for the poor. The justices made some changes to the Medicaid portion of the law.
Q: Does this mean the health overhaul law is in place for good?
A: The decision effectively upholds the law for now, but its future depends on which party controls the White House and Congress after elections in November. President Barack Obama and most Democrats consider the law a signature achievement and want to move forward implementing it. Republicans, including presumptive presidential nominee Mitt Romney, have pledged to overturn it. They say they would offer an alternative proposal but haven't been specific about what it would include.
Q: What happens to any benefits I already get because of the law?
A: They will stay in place for now. Parents will still be able to keep their children on their insurance plans up to age 26, and Medicare recipients will keep getting discounts on prescription drugs to close a gap in coverage known as the "doughnut hole." New levies under the law, such as the 10% tax on tanning services, also stay put.
Q: When will I see the big changes from the law?
A: Most of the mandates don't start until 2014. That is when most Americans will be required to carry insurance or pay the penalty at issue in the Supreme Court case. The penalty will start at $95 a year or up to 1% of a person's income, whichever is greater.
Tens of millions of Americans are expected to get insurance coverage under the system that starts in 2014. Some of the poorest Americans will become newly qualified to enroll in the federal-state Medicaid program—although the court appeared to make some changes to how that program will work. Another batch of people who earn more but still have low incomes will get tax credits to offset their insurance costs. Consumers will be able to comparison shop for policies in newly created exchanges that will operate like popular online travel websites.
Insurance companies will have to sell coverage to everyone, regardless of their medical history, and will have to restrict how much they vary premiums based on age. Companies with 50 workers or more will be required to offer insurance to their workers or pay a penalty.
Q: What if I already have insurance?
A: You may see changes to your plan. Unless your employer has "grandfathered" your insurance benefits' structure, your plan will have to meet new regulations under the law, such as covering more preventive services without out-of-pocket costs. There has been speculation that some employers will stop offering coverage and funnel workers toward exchanges once they open, but most companies say they have no immediate plans to do that.
Q: What will happen to my insurance premiums?
A: Most consumers can expect to keep seeing increases in premiums and co-payments because the underlying cost of health care is expected to rise. The law contains a few mechanisms to curb premiums, but it also requires that many insurance providers make their benefits more generous, which will raise their cost. Older people could see their premiums go down because of the new age rating rules insurers will face. People who buy policies without the help of an employer could get a better deal by being able to shop on the exchanges, where comparing plans will be easier than before.
MTW- I had questions, so I figured some of you may have some as well. This gives some information which is useful, but it just sounds like a way to tax us to me. I believe this will merely inflate our debt, as some are uninsured and unemployed. How does this help poor people? No more Obama! Nobama-Nobiden in 2012!
GOD BLESS YOU ALL.
Posted by Michael T. Wayne- A Little Crazy

Apple Suppliers In China Breaking Labor Laws

Rights group says Apple suppliers in China breaking labor laws
By Lee Chyen Yee | Reuters

A woman uses an iPhone as she and other pedestrians walk past an Apple store in Beijing June 28, 2012. REUTERS/David Gray

People crowd outside a factory owned by Wintek, the Taiwanese company making touch screens on contract for Apple, in Suzhou, Jiangsu province in this February 18, 2011 file photo. REUTERS/Aly Song/Files
HONG KONG (Reuters) - Apple Inc's suppliers in China have violated local labor laws when they imposed excessive overtime and skimped on insurance, a New York-based labor rights group said.
Apple and its suppliers such as Taiwanese tycoon Terry Gou's Foxconn Technology Group have been the target of labor rights groups, which say the world's most valuable technology company are making iPhones and iPads in massive sweat shops.
"From our investigations we found that the labor rights violations at Foxconn also exist in virtually all other Apple supplier factories, and in many cases, are actually significantly more dire than at Foxconn," China Labor Watch said in a 133-page report released on Thursday.
A four-month investigation through April showed workers work up to 180 hours of overtime a month during peak periods, exceeding the legal limit of 36 hours per month,
the group said, citing Riteng, a unit of Taiwan's Pegatron Corp, as an example.
Some factories also omit medical insurance as required by the law while workers are exposed to hazardous conditions, according to the report.
China Labor Watch interviewed 620 workers at 10 factories run by Apple suppliers,
including Toyo Precision Appliance and BYD Electronic (International) Co.
The group also spoke with workers at factories run by units of Quanta Computer Inc,
Wintek Corp and U.S.-listed Jabil Circuit Inc.
The companies couldn't be immediately reached for comment.
"As part of our ongoing supplier responsibility program, our team has conducted thorough audits at every facility in China Labor Watch's report," Kristin Huguet, an Apple spokeswoman based in Cupertino, California, said in an e-mail.
"In some places, our auditors found issues similar to those described by China Labor Watch, including overtime violations," she said, when asked to comment on the report.
DISMAL CONDITIONS
The report singled out Riteng for dismal work conditions, saying workers work almost 12 hours a day, longer than 10 hours a day at Foxconn, Apple's main supplier.
Half of Riteng's workers described safety conditions as "bad," more than Foxconn's 2 percent, according to the report.
The average hourly wage at Riteng is 8.2 yuan ($1.29), well below the average rate 10.2 yuan at Foxconn.
The Pegatron unit was not immediately available for comment.
Labor groups say wages have generally been on the rise, though the growth has been slower than inflation.
"Wages are certainly going up, but they are still a very long way from what you consider a decent wage because inflation in the major cities in southern China is going up all the time," said Geoffrey Crothall of China Labor Bulletin.
"It's generally better at the larger factories, but the problem with Foxconn and a lot of the other Taiwanese, Hong Kong-owned manufacturers, the management culture there is still very authoritarian, quite dictatorial. People say it's quasi-military."
James Wu, a spokesman for Catcher Technology Co, which was also mentioned in the report, said the proportion of short-term labor it employs without having to provide severance compensation was actually lower than that described by China Labor Watch.
"Our dispatch rate is 20-30 percent, lower than the rate of around 80 percent mentioned in the report," Wu said.
Catcher also put their workers through a three-day training program to prepare them for their jobs.
"In summary, our company provides benefits for workers that exceed basic requirements," Wu said.
MAKING CHECKS
Apple said it had been making checks at its supply chain partners and regularly publishes reports on workers' situation on its website
(http://www.apple.com/supplierresponsibility/).
The company, which monitors worker hours of more than 700,000 workers in its supply chain, said it had been following up to make sure suppliers comply with its labor standards.
Workers typically have little legal representation in China, where labor laws are sometimes not strictly enforced. Unions are also often not effective in providing feedback to management, labor rights groups said.
Following a spate of critical reports detailing unsafe factory practices at Foxconn plants that triggered worker deaths and suicides, Apple this year allowed the U.S.-based Fair Labor Association (FLA) to conduct a high-profile probe of Foxconn's factories in China.
"The process of change in our company continues, and competitive wages, improved living conditions and the abolition of the use of dispatched workers by our company are some examples of this," Foxconn said in an e-mailed statement.
"Our considerable investment in this process will change our industry through the positive example we are setting for other companies." ($1 = 6.3554 Chinese yuan)
(Additional reporting by Clare Jim in TAIPEI, Sisi Tang in HONG KONG and Tim Kelly in TOKYO; Editing by Ryan Woo)
MTW-That is why I personally BOYCOTT APPLE PRODUCTS. Are these out-sourced jobs, in whole or part? If so, I understand why they sent the work there if they are permitted to work people that hard, with such horrible conditions, pay and benefits. Americans would not stand for that, any of it. Is that why we are losing our available jobs to China? Keep going, there is a picture of the lovely fresh air in Beijing. No more Obama! Nobama-Nobiden in 2012!

Fresh!

The Sharing Of Marriage

The sharing of marriage .......
The old man placed an order for one hamburger, French fries and a drink.
He unwrapped the plain hamburger and carefully cut it in half, placing one half in front of his wife.
He then carefully counted out the French fries, dividing them into two piles and neatly placed one pile in front of his wife.
He took a sip of the drink, his wife took a sip and then set the cup down between them. As he began to eat his few bites of hamburger, the people around them were looking over and whispering.
Obviously they were thinking, 'That poor old couple - all they can afford is one meal for the two of them.'
As the man began to eat his fries a young man came to the table and politely offered to buy another meal for the old couple. The old man said, they were just fine - they were used to sharing everything.
People closer to the table noticed the little old lady hadn't eaten a bite. She sat there watching her husband eat and occasionally taking turns sipping the drink.
Again, the young man came over and begged them to let him buy another meal for them.
This time the old woman said 'No, thank you, we are used to sharing everything.'
Finally, as the old man finished and was wiping his face neatly with the napkin, the young man again came over to the little old lady who had yet to eat a single bite of food and asked 'What is it you are waiting for?'
She answered --
'THE TEETH.'
Posted by Michael T. Wayne- A Little Crazy

US Navy Seal Dies At 38- A REAL Seal

Gunnar, the U.S. Navy seal, dies at age 38
By Eric Pfeiffer, Yahoo! News Reporter | The Sideshow

Gunnar, the U.S. Navy seal (Mehgan Murphy/AFP)
He was a U.S. Navy seal best known for learning to use a screwdriver. And now Cold War veteran Gunnar has passed away on Monday. He was 38-years-old at the time of his death and enjoying some quiet living in Washington DC's National Zoo.
To be clear, Gunnar was not a U.S. Navy SEAL, the elite military group that took out Osama bin Laden. Rather, Gunnar was an actual seal, used by the Navy during the Cold War to fetch items from the ocean floor at depths of nearly 500 feet.
"In his career as a navy seal, Gunnar learned how to insert and remove equipment, use a screwdriver and turn a large wheel valve," the National Zoo said in a statement.
And despite his military experience, Gunnar actually outlived the typical male seal lifespan by about eight years.
Gunnar spent the last 33 years at the zoo, when he arrived there in January 1979 after being transferred from the Naval Oceans Systems Center in San Diego, California, where he was part of the Navy's Marine Mammal Program. Born in Iceland, Gunnar could reportedly hold his breath under water for 20 minutes at a time.
Gunnar fathered two female pups, Kara and Kjia, who now live at the Adventure Aquarium in New Jersey.
MTW-Animals can certainly do some remarkable things. Rest in peace Gunnar, although you were an animal, you are an American Hero, too.
GOD BLESS YOU ALL.
Posted by Michael T. Wayne- A Little Crazy

Military Wives Strip Down For PTSD Awareness

Military Wives Strip Down to Raise Awareness About PTSD: Battling Bare
By Sarah B. Weir, Yahoo! blogger
courtesy battlingbare.org
Ashley Wise's husband Rob is about as tough as they come. The career soldier spent 8 years in the Marines before joining the Army after 9/11 and serving on two tours of duty in Iraq, but in April this year, he hit a wall. He locked himself in a hotel room with guns and alcohol and told his wife "he might do something stupid."
Thankfully, he came back home alive. Ashley reached out to the Family Advocacy Service at Fort Campbell, Kentucky, where they are currently stationed, and discovered that,
like many other soldiers who are suffering from mental anguish or who might have Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), finding the help he needed without putting his career in jeopardy would be a struggle. When Wise, believing her conversation to be confidential, divulged to a counselor that Rob had once become physical with her, an MP was immediately brought in. Husband and wife were not allowed contact for 72-hours and Rob now faces domestic assault charges (which Wise is trying to have dropped).
"The last thing a soldier needs is to be separated from his wife," Wise tells Yahoo! Shine. "Guys kill themselves because they think they are such a burden to their families." Wise says soldiers avoid telling anyone they are feeling depressed, angry,
or even suicidal for fear of being dishonorably discharged. "Take the number of men who actually report having PTSD and multiply that by 50."
That evening, Wise told a girlfriend, "I want to streak across the 101st command building, because then maybe the general or someone would listen to what I'm saying."
Instead she grabbed an eyeliner pencil and had her friend write these words on her back:
"Broken by battle,
Wounded by war,
I love you forever,
To you this I swore:
I will quiet your silent screams,
Help heal your shattered soul
Until once again, my love, you are whole."
Wise posted a picture of her naked back on Facebook, invited other military wives to share images of themselves, and the organization Battling Bare was born. "Our initial intent was to take Facebook by storm," says Wise. She says, at heart, she simply wanted families to be able to enjoy normal things together like "eating at Chuck E. Cheese's or going to the fireworks." When she spoke to other women and "realized how big the problem is, we knew we had to do something."
Now, just two months later, Wise is working with seven other military wives to launch a non-profit organization to raise awareness about PTSD and the impact it has on spouses and children. In three years, they aim to have a chapter in every state in place to support military families and hold workshops based on a model developed by Operation Restored Warrior.
While some people are critical of their bold approach--she says she's had some ugly feedback and got a call from a stranger who called her "an attention grabbing whore"--the military isn't asking them to take their website or Facebook page down. Wise tells Shine that Battling Bare is "on the Pentagon's radar," and when she spoke to Colonel William Gayler,

Fort Campbell's Chief of Staff, he assured her, "I want to fix this."
Posted by Michael T. Wayne- A Little Crazy
UPDATE: Bill O' Reilly of Fox News has had an amazing impact on those Soldiers in need of special tracked electric wheel chairs. I will be contacting him with hopes that some kind of program could be identified to aid those of our Bravest who have a Traumatic Brain Injury- TBI, and those also suffering with PTSD or both. I do not know if this will work, for I am not a "somebody" with any importance or power, yet I will try. Thank you to all of our Brave Men and Women in Uniform, many still in harm's way. You are all in my prayers. God bless you.

Jimmy Carter On Drone Strikes

Jimmy Carter Accuses U.S. of 'Widespread Abuse of Human Rights'
By Amy Bingham | ABC News

Jimmy Carter Accuses U.S. of 'Widespread Abuse of Human Rights' (ABC News)
A former U.S. president is accusing the current president of sanctioning the "widespread abuse of human rights" by authorizing drone strikes to kill suspected terrorists.
Jimmy Carter, America's 39th president, denounced the Obama administration for "clearly violating" 10 of the 30 articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, writing in a New York Times op-ed on Monday that the "United States is abandoning its role as the global champion of human rights."
"Instead of making the world safer, America's violation of international human rights abets our enemies and alienates our friends," Carter wrote.
While the total number of attacks from unmanned aircraft, or drones, and the resulting casualties are murky, the New America Foundation estimates that in Pakistan alone 265 drone strikes have been executed since January 2009. Those strikes have killed at least 1,488 people, at least 1,343 of them considered militants, the foundation estimates based on news reports and other sources.
In addition to the drone strikes, Carter criticized the current president for keeping the Guantanamo Bay detention center open, where prisoners "have been tortured by waterboarding more than 100 times or intimidated with semiautomatic weapons, power drills or threats to sexually assault their mothers."
The former president blasted the government for allowing "unprecedented violations of our rights to privacy through warrantless wiretapping and government mining of our electronic communications."
Want more off-the-cuff politics? Check out OTUS on Facebook and follow us on Twitter @OTUSNews.
He also condemned recent legislation that gives the president the power to detain suspected terrorists indefinitely, although a federal judge blocked the law from taking effect for any suspects not affiliated with the September 11 terrorist attacks.
"This law violates the right to freedom of expression and to be presumed innocent until proved guilty, two other rights enshrined in the declaration," Carter said.
While Carter never mentioned Obama by name, he called out "our government" and "the highest authorities in Washington," and urged "concerned citizens" to "persuade Washington to reverse course and regain moral leadership."
MTW-Damn, I think former President Carter has said it all, and I have something else to add; Mr. Carter, when he was President, went through the Three Mile Island Catastrophy. He himself, a Nuclear Physisist, WENT to that stricken Nuclear Reactor, placing his own life in jeopardy. He fixed the problem, saving COUNTLESS lives. His Presidency was marred by the Iranian Hostage situation;(not to mention Billy Carter) then Military screwed up the desert rescue, and he was left to take the blame. Reagan was then a guarantee to beat him in the next election. Iran coerced OUR election. The Iranians hated him, and waited for Reagan, to release the hostages, just to be assholes. Look now, at what we are going through with Iran. We should have taken them out THEN. He is one fine man, and smart as well. He cares about the Constitution, and is one Democrat whom I admire greatly. No More Obama! Nobama-Nobiden in 2012!
GOD BLESS YOU ALL.
Posted by Michael T. Wayne- A Little Crazy

North Korea Condemns Something Again

North Korea condemns ‘grave’ use of flag during U.S.-South Korea war games
By Dylan Stableford, Yahoo! News Senior Media Reporter | The Lookout

In this photo taken Tuesday, June 19, 2012, smoke rises from explosions near the North Korean flag during South Korea-U.S. joint military live-fire drills at Seungjin Fire Training Field in Pocheon, South Korea, near the border with North Korea. The drills were held in a show of combat readiness ahead of the 62nd anniversary of the start of the Korean War on June 25. (AP Photo/Lee Jin-man)

In this photo taken Tuesday, June 19, 2012, smokes are seen as heavy armored vehicles wait during a South Korea-U.S. joint military live-fire drills at Seungjin Fire Training Field in Pocheon, South Korea, near the border with North Korea. The drills were held in a show of combat readiness ahead of the 62nd anniversary of the start of the Korean War on June 25. (AP Photo/Lee Jin-man)

In this photo taken Tuesday, June 19, 2012, a U.S. AH-64 Apache helicopter flies near the North Korean flag during South Korea-U.S. joint military live-fire drills at Seungjin Fire Training Field in Pocheon, South Korea, near the border with the North Korea. The drills were held in a show of combat readiness ahead of the 62nd anniversary of the start of the Korean War on June 25. (AP Photo/Lee Jin-man)
North Korea publicly condemned the use of its flag by U.S. and South Korean forces during a war simulation as a "grave" provocation—and further justification for its nuclear program.
"It is an extremely grave military action and politically-motivated provocation to fire live bullets and shells at the flag of a sovereign state without a declaration of war," the North Korean foreign ministry said in a statement on state-run media on Sunday.
Approximately 2,000 U.S. and South Korean troops took part in Friday's simulation, according to Agence France-Presse—the "largest single-day joint live-fire exercise," timed to mark the 62nd anniversary of the start of the Korean War. The joint military drills took place at a training field in Pocheon, South Korea, near the North Korean border. U.S. and South Korean forces are also staging a three-day naval drill in the Yellow Sea.
According to the news agency, it was unclear whether the flag was hit during the exercise.
North Korea said the drills are evidence of U.S. hostility and justify North Korea's nuclear buildup. The country "will further bolster up its nuclear deterrent for self-defense as long as the U.S., the world's biggest nuclear weapons state, persists in its hostile policy," a foreign ministry spokesman said, according to The Associated Press.
South Korea, which said it was the first time North Korea's flag was used during war games, was unapologetic.
"We used it to show our determination to strongly respond to any provocations by North Korea," a South Korean spokesman told AFP.
In April, North Korea attempted to launch a long-range missile but failed. The United States and its allies denounced the attempt as "provocative."
"Animosity between North and South Korea, as well as between Pyongyang and Washington,
has deepened" ever since, the Guardian said. "Seoul and Washington called the launch a cover for a test of banned long-range missile technology. North Korea said the rocket,
which broke apart shortly after liftoff, was designed to put a satellite into orbit."
Despite the failure of its attempted missile launch, "North Korea's provocative action threatens regional security, violates international law and contravenes its own recent commitments," White House press secretary Jay Carney said in a statement. "The President has been clear that he is prepared to engage constructively with North Korea. However, he has also insisted that North Korea live up to its own commitments,
adhere to its international obligations and deal peacefully with its neighbors."
MTW- A target is a target. We have illegal immigrants desecrating our flag outside of a courthouse in Arizona, and the cops will not let us stop them. North Korea, I cannot speak for the rest of the World, but you should just start shutting the hell up; and you are now on the "F" list. F-North Korea. Most of your Citizens are suffering, while the BRAT you have in charge, and the upper class?, if there is one, are a tiny pimple on our ass. Find a Rocket that could hit us, and talk tough then. (try not using Chinese parts) We have South Korea's back, by the way, as I am sure you talk to China like young lovers. I will say whatever I want about you, and I will tweet about China and their nasty ass poluted air, no matter what the two of you demand. YOU, North Korea, started all of this with you rocket test- and failure. Nobama-Nobiden in 2012!
GOD BLESS YOU ALL.
Posted by Michael T. Wayne- A Little Crazy

Romney On States' Rights

Romney: States have right to secure their borders
By JACK GILLUM | Associated Press
SCOTTSDALE, Ariz. (AP) — Mitt Romney on Monday said states have a duty and a right to secure their borders even as he declined to address the merits of the Supreme Court's decision to strike down key parts of Arizona's tough immigration enforcement law.
The likely Republican nominee instead used Monday's ruling as an opportunity to criticize President Barack Obama for inaction on immigration reform until recently.
Romney called for a bipartisan national immigration strategy.
"This represents yet another broken promise by this president. I believe that each state has the duty — and the right — to secure our borders and preserve the rule of law, particularly when the federal government has failed to meet its responsibilities," Romney said in a written statement released before he left Salt Lake City Monday morning to fly to a planned fundraiser in Arizona.
The Supreme Court decision upholds Arizona's "show me your papers" requirement for the moment. But the decision prohibits police officers from arresting people on minor immigration charges, taking the teeth out of the law's enforcement.
The court struck down three major provisions: requiring all immigrants to obtain or carry immigration registration papers; making it a state criminal offense for an illegal immigrant to seek work or hold a job; and allowing police to arrest suspected illegal immigrants without warrants.
Campaign spokesman Rick Gorka told reporters Monday "the governor supports the states' rights to craft immigration laws when the federal government had failed to do so." He repeatedly declined to answer questions about whether Romney agreed with the ruling or whether the former Massachusetts governor would support the kind of laws the high court found mostly unconstitutional.
Romney has worked to soften his rhetoric on immigration policy since becoming the presumptive Republican nominee for president. During the Republican primary, Romney never endorsed Arizona's immigration law.
Asked in February during a GOP primary debate in Arizona whether he supported tough immigration enforcement that includes arrests, Romney said: "I think you see a model in Arizona." He then mentioned the federal E-Verify program that requires businesses to check the legal status of their employees as one way to reduce the number of illegal immigrants in a particular state.
Romney then addressed the Arizona law: "So going back to the question that was asked,
the right course for America is to drop these lawsuits against Arizona and other states that are trying to do the job Barack Obama isn't doing," he said.
The Obama administration sued to block the Arizona law soon after its enactment two years ago.
Protestors greeted Romney Monday at his fundraiser in Scottsdale, a wealthy enclave near Phoenix. The court's immigration ruling "leaves us with a bittersweet victory," said Carlos Galindo, an Obama supporter and the president of the Phoenix-area Immigrant Advocacy Foundation.
MTW- Mitt Romney is not at all ignorant of Arizona's situation, as Mr. Obama seems to be. I am sure he has a plan. I am with him. Obama sued Arizona 2 years ago, and did nothing to reform immigration in that time. On another note, Rick Perry has called the President's use of Executive Privilege "Nixonian". I agree with him. No more Obama! Nobama-Nobiden in 2012!
GOD BLESS YOU ALL.
Posted by Michael T. Wayne- A Little Crazy

Scalia Blasts Obama's Deportation Policies

In Arizona dissent, Scalia blasts Obama’s deportation stay, immigration policies By Liz Goodwin, Yahoo! News National Affairs Reporter | The Ticket

A sketch of the Supreme Court justices on Monday. Scalia is fourth from the left. (Dana Verkouteren/AP)
In a stinging, 22-page dissent to Monday's decision striking down most of Arizona's tough anti-illegal immigration law, Justice Antonin Scalia criticized President Barack Obama's announcement earlier this month that he would stay the deportation of young illegal immigrants and suggested that the federal government does not want to enforce its immigration laws.
"The president said at a news conference that the new program is 'the right thing to do' in light of Congress's failure to pass the administra­tion's proposed revision of the Immigration Act," Scalia, a Reagan appointee, wrote in his dissent. "Perhaps it is, though Arizona may not think so. But to say, as the Court does, that Arizona contradicts federal law by enforc­ing applications of the Immigration Act that the President declines to enforce boggles the mind."
Scalia went on to write:
Arizona bears the brunt of the country's illegal immigration problem. Its citizens feel themselves under siege by large numbers of illegal immigrants who invade their property, strain their social services, and even place their lives in jeopardy.
Federal officials have been unable to remedy the problem,and indeed have recently shown that they are unwilling to do so. Thousands of Arizona's estimated 400,000 illegal immigrants—including not just children but men and women under 30—are now assured immunity from en­forcement, and will be able to compete openly with Ari­zona citizens for employment.
Scalia also repeatedly referenced Obama's policy of prosecutorial discretion, which directs Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to prioritize deporting the illegal immigrants who are frequent border crossers, have committed crimes, or recently entered the country illegally. The Obama administration has deported a record number of illegal immigrants, but its prosecutorial discretion policy still draws the ire of illegal immigration hawks.
Scalia directly referred to Obama's immigration enforcement policy as "lax" at one point.
"Must Arizona's ability to protect its borders yield to the reality that Congress has provided inadequate funding for federal enforcement—or, even worse, to the executive's unwise targeting of that funding?" Scalia asked. Later, he added: "What I do fear—and what Arizona and the States that support it fear—is that 'federal policies' of non-en­forcement will leave the States helpless before those evil effects of illegal immigration."
The federal government "does not want to enforce the immigration laws as written, and leaves the States' borders unprotected against immigrants whom those laws would exclude," Scalia alleged.
MTW-I have nothing to add. Justice Scalia has said it all. No more Obama! Nobama-Nobiden in 2012!
GOD BLESS YOU ALL.
Posted by Michael T. Wayne- A Little Crazy

A Close Friend's Take On Immigration

An email I received from a friend- worth sharing

My Grandfather watched as his friends died in WW I...
My Father watched as his friends died in WW II and Korea ...
I watched as my friends died in Vietnam ....
None of them died for the Mexican Flag...
Everyone died for the U.S. flag...
In Texas , a student raised a Mexican flag on a school flag pole; another student took it down.
Guess who was expelled.. the kid who took it down.
Kids in high school in California were sent home last year on Cinco de Mayo because they wore T-shirts with the American flag printed on them.
Enough is enough.
The below e-mail message needs to be viewed by every American; and every American needs to stand up for America ..
We've bent over to appease the America-haters long enough...
I'm taking a stand...
I'm standing up because the hundreds of thousands who died fighting in wars for this country, and for the U.S. flag can't stand up...
And shame on anyone who tries to make this a racist message...
Let me make this perfectly clear!
THIS IS MY COUNTRY!
And, because I make This statement DOES NOT mean I'm against immigration!!!
YOU ARE WELCOME HERE, IN MY COUNTRY!
Welcome!
To come through legally:
1. Get a sponsor!
2. Get a place to lay your head!
3. Get a job!
4. Live By OUR Rules!
5. Pay YOUR Taxes!
And
6. Learn the LANGUAGE like immigrants have in the past!!!
AND
7. Please don't demand that we hand over our lifetime savings of Social Security Funds to you.
When will AMERICANS STOP giving away THEIR RIGHTS???
We've gone so far the other way...
bent over backwards not to offend anyone...
But it seems no one cares about the AMERICAN CITIZEN that's being offended! WAKE UP America !!!
IN GOD WE TRUST
God Bless America
MTW-I agree with this whole-heartedly. I could not have said it better. Well, maybe better writing, but the SAME message. Obama recently stopped 800,000 deportations. Why? Votes from the Latino Community. Do not fall for it. He has had 4 years to start his form of "change" to immigration reform. His answer seems to be promise it, act like it, and get reelected by using you. Do not fall for it. We do not mind your being here if you would just do it legally, and pay taxes! No more Obama! Nobama-Nobiden in 2012!
GOD BLESS YOU ALL.
Posted by Michael T. Wayne- A Little Crazy

Supreme Court Rules In Arizona Case

Supreme Court upholds key part of Arizona immigration law, strikes down rest
By Liz Goodwin, Yahoo! News National Affairs Reporter | The Ticket

Demonstrators stand outside the Supreme Court in Washington, Monday, June 25, 2012. (Evan Vucci/AP)
The Supreme Court upheld a key part of Arizona's tough anti-illegal immigration law in a 5-3 decision on Monday that allows police officers to ask about immigration status during stops. That part of the law, which never went into effect because of court challenges, will now immediately be enforced in Arizona. Other parts of the law,
including a provision that made it a state crime for illegal immigrants to seek work,
will remain blocked, as the justices affirmed the federal government's supremacy over immigration policy.
Justice Anthony Kennedy, the court's swing vote, wrote the opinion, and was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor.
Conservative Justices Antonin Scalia, Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas partially dissented, saying the entire law should have been upheld.
In the opinion, Justice Kennedy wrote that the federal government's "power to determine immigration policy is well settled." But he also showed concern for what he described as Arizona's outsize burden in dealing with illegal immigration, seeming to sympathize with their decision to butt in on immigration enforcement. "Arizona bears many of the consequences of unlawful im­migration," he wrote. "Hundreds of thousands of deportable aliens are apprehended in Arizona each year." But, ultimately, the justices found that Arizona cannot mete out their own state punishments for federal immigration crimes.
"Arizona may have under­standable frustrations with the problems caused by illegal immigration while that process continues, but the State may not pursue policies that undermine federal law," Kennedy writes in the opinion's conclusion.
The police immigration checks are allowed, however, because state police would simply flag federal authorities if they find an illegal immigrant. Kennedy did not rule out that these checks may be implemented in an illegal way, which means more lawsuits may be forthcoming.
Nevertheless, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer is casting the decision as a "victory" for the state. "I am confident our officers are prepared to carry out this law responsibly and lawfully. Nothing less is acceptable," she said in a statement, adding that officers have been trained not to racially profile in their stops. Meanwhile Erika Andiola, an activist and undocumented immigrant in Arizona, says that the Latino community will not be happy with the decision, as the immigration checks portion of the law was most unpopular with them. "It's another message to the Latino community that if you look brown you're a perfect target for the police," she said.
The Obama administration sued to block Arizona's law, called SB1070, shortly after it passed two years ago, saying it interfered with federal authority over immigration.
The law made it a state crime for illegal immigrants to seek work or fail to carry proper immigration papers. It also requires police officers to check immigration status and make warrantless arrests for immigration crimes in some cases. A federal judge prevented those aspects of the law from going into effect, but the law became a lightning rod around the country, sparking boycotts and counter-boycotts and opening up a debate about the nation's illegal immigrant population.
In oral arguments in April, many of the justices seemed deeply skeptical of the government's argument that local police officers would interfere with federal authority over immigration law if they began asking people about their immigration status during stops. Though much of the debate around the law has focused on "racial profiling"--whether Hispanic people would be stopped and questioned by police based on their ethnicity--the government did not even mention those words in their case against the law, instead focusing on the federal government's supremacy in immigration matters. Justices repeatedly criticized the government's argument against immigration checks. Even Sonia Sotomayor, part of the court's liberal wing, said she was "terribly confused" by the government's argument against the checks.
But the liberal justices showed much more hesitation over the parts of the law that made federal immigration crimes into state crimes, which have all now been struck down. Sotomayor singled out the state law against illegal immigrants seeking work,
noting that Congress had explicitly rejected a similar law in their immigration legislation, instead choosing to target employers who hire unauthorized workers.
Five states followed Arizona's lead and passed similar laws last year, while similar bills failed in more than two dozen other state legislatures. The decision suggests that any state laws that make federal immigration offenses into state crimes will not stand. But it remains to be seen if the outcome will encourage more states to pass laws that make local police officers check immigration status.
The law also became an issue in the presidential race, with Mitt Romney bringing on the law's author, Kris Kobach, as an immigration adviser, and embracing the law's purpose, "self deportation," as his immigration enforcement strategy. He said in February that he would drop the suit against the law.
In Arizona v. U.S., Justice Elena Kagan recused herself because she was solicitor general when the Obama administration filed suit against the law. If the court had split 4-4, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' decision blocking the four major provisions of the law would have stood.
MTW-Thank you, Justice Kagan, for recusing yourself, allowing Arizona at least one simple ability to check someone's status as a Citizen. However, what happens after the illegals found are turned over to the Federal Government to not be deported? It would seem a pyric victory. The whole thing should have passed, but still, it shows how pissed off the Supreme Court is at Obama for the State of the Union thing. I sometimes think Obama would give them all Citizenship just to get their vote. Maybe if they at the very least paid the taxes they owe. No More OBAMA! Nobama-Nobiden in 2012!
GOD BLESS YOU ALL.
Posted by Michael T. Wayne- A Little Crazy

Police Rescue Malnourished Girl

By SYDNEY LUPKIN | ABC News
Police Resue Malnourished Girl From Closet In Kanses City

Police Rescue Malnourished Girl From Closet in Kansas City (ABC News)
A Kansas City, Mo., mother is behind bars, accused of keeping her 10-year-old daughter locked in a closet, not letting her come out to eat, sleep or even go to the bathroom.
The girl weighed just 32 pounds, and hospital records indicated that she has only gained 6 pounds since she was 4 or 5 years old, according to a police probable cause statement. The girl also suffers from "multiple healing skin injuries and failure to thrive," the statement said.
"She weighed a little over a third of what a 10-year-old should weigh," Kansas City Police Capt. Steve Young said. "We don't know how long or how frequently she's been in there [the closet], but it's clear she'd spent a significant amount of time in there."
Kansas City police met Missouri Children's Division workers outside the apartment building Friday morning after the division received a hotline call about a girl who was locked up and unable to eat or use the restroom.
When a division worker told two women outside the apartment that three children lived in the apartment, the neighbors said they had never seen the third child even though they'd lived there for "several years."
"We never knew of her the whole three years we've been down here," Kimberly Kelley, another neighbor, told ABC's affiliate in Kansas City, KMBC-TV. "She told us she only had two kids."
Officers learned the mother, Jacole Prince, 29, was out with her two younger children, but maintenance let law enforcement inside, according to the probable cause statement.
The second floor smelled strongly of urine, and when officers noticed a crib pushed against a closet door that was tied off with rope, they asked, "Is anyone in here?"
A child's voice answered, "Yes."
The girl was found standing in the closet, according to the statement. She told officers "the closet was her room," and she couldn't go to breakfast with her mother and sisters because she "messes herself." She also sleeps there, she said.
At the hospital, the child told detectives she had not been let out of the closet for two days, and she does not eat every day. She said her mother gets mad and "punches her on the back" because she "keeps peeing on herself."
She is not allowed to play outside like her sisters, and instead has to play behind the couch, the girl said.
That night, police arrested the girl's mother and her boyfriend. The mother allegedly admitted to locking her child up in part because she knows she would get in trouble if anyone saw how malnourished the girl had become, according to the statement.
Her boyfriend denied knowing the mother ever locked the 10-year-old in a closet. The girl's mother was charged with assault in the first degree, child abuse, and endangering the welfare of a child in the first degree, according to the criminal complaint. All three charges are felonies.
MTW- Hello? Jesse? Al? Got any input for us on this despicable act, perpetrated by a Black Mother on her Black daughter? Where is the outrage? A 32 pound 10 year old. No money in this one? I have an opinion. She needs to go to prison. That is all. Nobama-Nobiden in 2012!
GOD BLESS YOU ALL.
Posted by Michael T. Wayne- A Little Crazy

Darrell Issa Is All Over Obama's Privilege

Darrell Issa: President's Executive Privilege Claims 'Simply Wrong'
By Jake Tapper | ABC News

Darrell Issa: President's Executive Privilege Claims 'Simply Wrong' (ABC News)
Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif. said this morning on "This Week" that he will send a letter to President Obama today or tomorrow that "breaks down the points" of why the president's executive privilege claims are "overbroad" or "simply wrong" concerning documents related to the botched "Fast and Furious" operation.
"There cannot be executive privilege over criminal cover-up or cover-up of crime. Lying to Congress is a crime. We have every right to see documents to say, 'did you know, when did you know, what did you know,' including even the president," said Issa, who heads the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.
Issa outlined this morning that before the House committee he leads voted to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt, he tried to reach an agreement with Holder.
"They came with nothing. Not even an offer in a form of a piece of paper. What they said orally was 'we will brief you. We will then give you the information we believe supports that briefing, but you have to first agree to dismiss your subpoenas and your contempt," said Issa. "You can't play liar's poker when you're looking for who killed somebody, when you're looking into this kind of a crime, and when you're looking into the cover-up. Remember, it was deny, delay, and recuse."
Issa said he is specifically seeking access to a memo or email produced by Jason Weinstein, Deputy Assistant Attorney General at the Justice Department. The memo, confirmed to exist, is an evaluation of what happened during the "Fast and Furious" operation and, according to Issa, could answer crucial questions relating to his investigation.
On Wednesday, President Obama invoked executive privilege for the first time during his term in office just before a House committee headed by Issa voted to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress for failing to provide documents related to the failed "Fast and Furious" operation that were subpoenaed more than 8 months ago. The use of executive privilege, while a rarity for the Obama administration, was used 14 times by Bill Clinton and six times by George W. Bush.
Holder is the first Obama administration official to be held in contempt of Congress. For his part, Holder called the contempt vote "extraordinary, unprecedented and entirely unnecessary." The full House of Representatives plans to vote on whether to hold Holder in contempt of Congress in coming days. If the full House finds Holder in contempt, the matter would be handed over to the Justice Department and Holder could eventually be prosecuted.
Guns lost in the "Fast and Furious," operation, which was originally meant to track the flow of firearms between the United States and Mexican drug cartels, were found near the scene of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry's killing in 2010, which sparked outrage.
MTW- I hope that they catch Holder in a lie, with knowledge and responsibility for Brian Terry’s death. I want the exact same thing found out about Obama. Seems to me he knows something. Why else would he wait 3 1/2 years to use Executive Privilege? How many other times, with his multitude of disastrous plans, such as Obamacare, or stopping deportations, could he have used that? I am surprised he has not used it to try and remove Constitutional Amendments- but he has certainly broken a few. I may not know the rules regarding this Privilege, yet covering up a murder? I know that that is wrong. If he did so knowingly, he and Holder deserve the same fate. Holder at the very least needs to be held accountable; but who does he answer to? This debacle infuriates me to no end. Obama needs to go down in history as our worst President. It does not matter what the color of his skin is. He is full of shit. Nobama-Nobiden in 2012!
GOD BLESS YOU ALL.
Posted by Michael T. Wayne- A Little Crazy

Kids Cannot Hold Hands In Tennessee?

Critics blast Tennessee's 'no holding-hands bill'
By LUCAS L. JOHNSON II | Associated Press

In this Wednesday, April 18, 2012, file photo, Rep. Jim Gotto seeks recognition during a House Education Committee meeting in Nashville, Tenn. Tennessee recently enacted a pro-abstinence sex education law that is among the strictest in the nation. The most debated section of the bill bars educators from promoting so-called "gateway sexual activity." But supporters seemed too squeamish during floor debate to specify what that meant, so critics soon labeled it the "no holding-hands bill." (AP Photo/Erik Schelzig)
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — Spurred by a classroom demonstration involving a sex toy, Tennessee recently enacted a pro-abstinence sex education law that is among the strictest in the nation.
The most debated section of the bill bars educators from promoting "gateway sexual activity." But supporters seemed too squeamish during floor debate to specify what that meant, so critics soon labeled it the "no holding-hands bill."
One thing missing from the debate in the Legislature was a discussion of whether the law signed by Republican Gov. Bill Haslam last month really would help reduce Tennessee's high teenage pregnancy rate. Experts say it won't and warn that it leaves teenagers inadequately educated about sexuality and prevention of pregnancy and disease.
Tennessee's pregnancy rate among girls 15 to 17 has dropped steadily since the first abstinence-focused sex education curriculum was put in place in the 1990s, according to figures from the state Commission on Children and Youth. In 2009, the latest data available, there were 29.6 pregnancies per 1,000 girls, down from a rate of 48.2 in 1998.
Yet the state's teen pregnancy rate remains one of the highest in the nation, according to the New York-based Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive health research organization.
Elizabeth Nash, state issues manager for the institute, said state lawmakers across the country began considering more comprehensive sex education programs that talked about abstinence, but also included contraception, about 10 years ago.
Despite declining pregnancy rates around the country, Nash said, there's been a shift by states over the past two years to promote abstinence-only education. A Utah bill that would have prohibited any discussion of contraception or homosexuality in sex education classes passed the Legislature but was vetoed by the governor.
"Our perspective is that comprehensive sex education is appropriate and necessary for young people," she said.
"What we know ... from the research is that comprehensive sex education works. It delays sexual activity, it reduces the number of partners teens have, and it increases contraceptive use. There is very little in the way of any rigorous research that shows that abstinence education has any of these long-term benefits."
Barry Chase, president of Planned Parenthood Greater Memphis Region, agreed.
"This bill ties the hands of educators in Tennessee and will prevent them from providing the comprehensive education that students want and need and their parents expect," he said.
Rep. Jim Gotto, who sponsored the legislation, disputed the way the bill is being characterized.
"It's not abstinence-only education," said the Nashville Republican. "I'm so sick of people trying to spin it as that ... because they don't like it. The law does specify that the curriculum has to be abstinence-focused, but they can talk about contraception."
Proponents contend abstinence is the most reliable way to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. Tennessee education officials have said abstinence is already defined in the state's statute, and Haslam said he decided to sign the bill after they assured him it changed little.
But Sen. Jack Johnson, a Franklin Republican who sponsored the bill in his chamber, said the old law was too vague.
"We put in tighter definitions, more clearly defined what abstinence-centered and abstinence-based meant," Johnson said.
The sex ed law now uses the criminal statute on sexual assault to specify acts — such as groping or fondling — that fall under "gateway sexual activity." It also says family life curriculum must not "display or conduct demonstrations with devices specifically manufactured for sexual stimulation." If such incidents do occur, then a parent can sue and a fine can be imposed of at least $500.
Before the current law, Nashville parent Rodrick Glover thought about legal action in 2010 when he found out an anti-AIDS group had visited his 17-year-old daughter's class and demonstrated safe oral sex with a sex toy and a condom.
"I teach my child the power of abstinence," said Glover, whose complaint spurred the drafting of the legislation. "When you start bringing sex toys in, at a point you're stimulating the kids to have sex."
The leader of the group whose presentation concerned Glover agrees the material was inappropriate for a high school audience. He said the incident led to new procedures to adhere to school protocols.
"And we've had no problems for two years," said Joseph Interrante, president of Nashville CARES.
Valerie Huber, executive director of the National Abstinence Education Association, said Tennessee is ahead of most other states and has closed a loophole.
"I think that is unique in that rather than this legislation just saying there needs to be an emphasis on abstinence education, it also prohibits too explicit sex education from being either put in schools under the guise of abstinence education, or in opposition to an abstinence education program," she said.
Democratic Rep. John Deberry supported the new limits on what can be covered in sex ed class as a way to help teenagers from going too far.
"When individuals are touching one another's intimate parts ... this is sexual activity that has its ultimate goal of penetration," said the Memphis Democrat and minister.
Student Josiah Pegues, 14, of Nashville said he's already made up his mind about sex — for now, at least.
"It's best to abstain," said the ninth-grader who aspires to be an FBI agent. "You don't want to get anyone pregnant or get an STD. It could mess up your future."
MTW- Alright, you show them, explicitely, how to have sex. Then you say do not do it. Hello! These are teen aged kids; they do what you tell them not to do. Fact. Abstain, even though we have taught you about condoms, and you are wondering why the pregnancy rate is up? Seriously? Every young couple in their late teens, who believe that they are committed to each other and have sex, with a condom think that they will never love anyone else, and have sex; frequently enough that- oops! the condom breaks. They do not have another, and as they are virgins and decide they cannot catch anything from each other, just be careful not to get pregnant, decide to risk it. Then they find out how sex feels with no condom. Yep. Better, right? What can you do, but preach condom use? But, to deprive some 13 or 14 year olds from that feeling, of your heart beating so fast, that it may just jump out of your chest from the adrenaline, or some other hormone. The butterflies in the stomach; such a feeling! Simply from holding somebody's hand. Wow! I still remember. I long to feel that way once more. Taking that away from them is the act of a cold, emotionless person. Sorry, but you are an idiot. Figure out another way to make them use condoms, abstinence, or something. Holding hands is not the "gateway" to having sex. It is what you did when you were young. Some of us still do. I do not only bash Democrats. I am not beholding to either of you, Republican or Democrat. I am a regular American, and I believe in compromise- the antonym of Congress. I believe Gotto is a homophobe; however, I agree with very many of Mr. Johnson's views, just not this. Nobama-Nobiden in 2012!
GOD BLESS YOU ALL!
Posted by Michael T. Wayne- A Little Crazy

Here Comes The Lies

Obama calls Romney an ‘outsourcing pioneer’ — and not in a good way
By Olivier Knox, Yahoo! News | The Ticket
President Barack Obama (Carolyn Kaster/AP)
President Barack Obama mocked Mitt Romney on Friday as an "outsourcing pioneer" who shipped jobs overseas to places like China and India. Obama's assault borrowed the words of a Washington Post report that Bain Capital, which the former Massachusetts governor founded and ran for 15 years, invested in companies that specialized in hiring low-wage workers abroad to do jobs once done by Americans.
"We do not need an outsourcing pioneer in the Oval Office," Obama told some 3,000 cheering supporters at a rally at Hillsborough Community College's Dale Mabry Campus in Tampa, Fla.
"We need a president who will fight for American jobs and fight for American manufacturing. That's what my plan will do, that's why I'm running for a second term,"
he said. "Let's stop giving tax breaks to businesses that ship jobs and factories overseas, let's reward companies that create jobs and manufacturing right here in the United States of America."
The Obama campaign hit the same theme in an online ad and in a conference call with top strategist David Axelrod, who warned that Romney would be "outsourcer in chief" if he wins in November. The strategy appeared aimed at courting voters angry at the sputtering economic recovery -- the president's biggest political vulnerability, and the central argument of the former Massachusetts governor's bid for the White House.
In a response to Obama's speech, Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul charged that the president was "running a campaign based on distractions, not solutions."
Romney "has a decades-long record of job creation, both in the private sector and as governor, when the unemployment rate in Massachusetts fell to 4.7% on his watch," she said in a statement. "If President Obama had even half of Mitt Romney's record on jobs, he'd be running on it."
The Washington Post noted that Romney has vowed to get American jobs back and take on China — a frequent election-year villain portrayed by politicians of both parties as guilty of unfair competition.
But "during the nearly 15 years that Romney was actively involved in running Bain, a private equity firm that he founded, it owned companies that were pioneers in the practice of shipping work from the United States to overseas call centers and factories making computer components, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission."
MTW- Well everybody, it is now time for us, this election year, to put on the rubbers boots so we do not step in the bullshit. Obama's "Jobs Czar" Jeff Immelt, CEO of GE, has outsourced thousands of jobs himself. Of course, when you have- I do not know for sure- 30 or more Czars, I suppose Obama has created 30 overpaying jobs as well as finally passing Russia in the number of Czars we have. If the voters have not made up their minds by now, something is wrong. EVERY politician lies, or tells undecided voters whatever they want to hear. We merely have to wade through 4 months more of bs. Nobama-Nobiden in 2012!
GOD BLESS YOU ALL.
Posted by Michael T. Wayne- A Little Crazy