TampaYankee

The Social Security Trust Fund keeps its own books. The government has borrowed heavily against it issuing Treasury bonds at the going rate against the borrowing just like any other creditor the government borrows from. Those bonds come due and are repaid just like any other creditor. So the treasury notes that document the borrowed funds are already part of the debt. Paying them off will not incur more debt but make for newer recycled debt unless tax receipts pick up to retire that debt. (Asumming interest rates are the same.) The government may reborrow the funds over again. It matters not to government debt whether the borrowing is from Peter or Paul. If it hadn't borrowed money from the Trust Fund then it would have had to borrow the same amount of dollars from China or who knows else. The debt is owed to the lender and must be repaid. Of course COngress could order the Treasury to default on debt to the Trust Fund but that would send shock waves through the world wide credit markets. Once Congress decided to default on one creditor who knows where it will stop, then or later. Not a confidence builder for the credit markets. If it didnt dry up lending it would certainly lower our credit rating and up the interest rates big time. That would cause a ballooning of the future debt from higher interest rates.

I know what you mean. California seems like the other side of the world to me.

I don't believe so but it is possible. I was creating a post with the article and noticed at the end that Rueters had a copyright notice appended. It is possible that previous to this I tried to do a preview and hit 'post' instead. If so then you would have caught it in a very brief window indeed, as I immediately changed the post to the current brief version. So it is possible but I do not recall an intentional post.

Don't kid yourself. This is an ideological fight. True we have spending problems -- short term and long term. They need to be addressed differently and not in a vacuum. Cutting alone will not do much if it kills jobs and the economy. The deficit cannot be fixed without a healthy government income which comes only from taxes. The healthier the economy the higher the tax receipts. The GOP is using this for an assualt on institutions and programs they have never liked and want to see dismantled, from labor unions to planned parenthood and even headstart. One perfect example is Social Security. This program does not contribute a penny to the deficit. Yet the GOP portrays it as a leading problem in deficit resolution. True there is a long term problem with sustaining Social Security 25-40 years down the road, but not now. That needs to be addressed, but separately as a solution to that narrow problem. Only a small adjustment will suffice to extend solvency to 75 years or more. The big deficit drivers are national costs of medical care and defense. Any other items cut generally fall into two categories: idedological targets and waste, fraud or abuse clean up. All of these 'other' programs can be cancelled and come nowhere near solving the short and long term deficit issues. There are two approaches to solving exploding medical cost growth: reform medical care practice to reign in the cost increases year after year or cut government support for medicare and medicaid. The latter approach solves government spending outlay but won't stop medical care from becoming prohibitively expensive for the private sector. It also doesnt explain how we will deal with an elderly and infirm population. Do we permit people to die on the streets or will we set up death hospices to sweep the dying and lingering from the streets. The GOP being ideologically against government services doesnt want to see successful government reforms that gain widespread popular support among the citizenry. The most striking examples of this are their determination to undermine Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Rather than pursue cooperarive efforts to reform programs that strengthen them and reduce costs, for them and for the private sector at large, they seek to weaken them and cut them at every turn. It is their ideology. As for cutting defense expenditures, we need to rethink our role in the world as the policemen. We cannot afford to maitain bases and 100,000 troops in Europe or fight two wars without paying for them or fight unneccessary wars for that matter. We need to maintain a world presence but we also need to lower our military profile. However, we cannot do that in a vacuum either. We need to reduce our dependence on foreign nations for our energy needs. I had high hopes we would start a serious alternative energy program but we have been unable to reach consensus for that. The GOP has little interest in getting us off the mideast and Latin American pipelines. We are missing the boat on that and ceding the next two decades of new energy technology to the Chinese. The GOP is happy to feather the nests of Big Oil and and send our armies to insure the pipelines stay open even though our dollars spent go to undermine our interests in wide ranging arenas. Bottom line: The GOP is the Party of Business As Usual. Presently they are benefitting from popular support because people are unhappy with the economy -- the economy that the GOP bears major responbility for putting in the crapper. Nevertheless, people express unhappiness with who is in power as they have no other alternative. Now with the GOP ideological assult on public unions it will be interesting to see how the people react to this. That and to ill-considered cuts in pubic employees. I suspect that many voters and those who failed to vote will come to appreciate what they have bargained for only after it is too late to do much about losing school teachers and fire and police personnel -- and maybe Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid benefits.

KYTOP, I too am sorry to hear about your daughter's nightmare. The problems are always so devastating to families. I can't speak to this case example other than to say it is very sad and I understand your very legitimate misgivings and uncertainty about the practice. This story gives pause for thought. There is certainly potential for abuse by patients and doctors alike. I would like to see more doctors held accountable for prescription abuse such as the Florida physicians who appear to run a meds-mill-opeartion. Based on the facts, my fault with the doctor was the willingness to prescribe heavy-duty meds on a first visit for an undetermined cause of pain. The facts of your case may be more complex than space permitted and no need to go any deeper. At this point is really doesn't matter. What does matter is the damage done to your family. It is always important to understand that there are many sides to an issue. Your perspective reminds us that there is the possibility of serious abuse with devasting fallout for innocents. Something good to keep in mind, for doctors too.

Maybe you could use your in with Buster to ask him to do batting pratice in a speedo and take some pics for posting here? I'm sure it will be a smashing hit. I, for one, would be grateful.

In my case I seriously doubt that.

I also go with the pain docs. It not only is about quality of life it is also about bearing to be able to live. I live pretty much in constant discomfort due to osteoarthritis. Nothing I can't tolerate with the help of OTC analgesics and herbs so I am better off than many. However, I know there are those who live with excruciating chronic pain. That is no way to endure life 24/7 no matter what busybodies may think, even physican busybodies. Nobody who doesn't walk in those shoes shouldn't presume to know what is best for another unless they have a truly effective alternative to offer. As long as the patient understands the side effects and potential consequences of treatment/meds it should be his/her choice. It is not unheard of that some resort to suicide when relief cannot be obtained. To leave them with that as the only alternative is a poor choice for society. I can't tolerate those who know what is best for others when they haven't walked in their shoes.

I love Vancouver! I have visited a couple of times, always in the Summer. My only reservation about the city is the wet weather the rest of the year. I don't know how that would wear on me but I suspect I could endure it well enough. I cannot say it is the MOST livable simply because I have no first-hand knowledge of the runners up. But from what I know about Vancouver I would give it a go if I were younger with a more active lifestyle that comes with being younger. Eveyone ought to visit at least once but beware that it could become habit forming. The West End is a must for the gay crowd.

World's Most Liveable Cities Based on a combination of environment, health care, culture and infrastructure, Vancouver topped the list of the world's most liveable cities for the fifth straight year, according to a new report. As Reuters is reporting, the 2010 Winter Olympics host scored a whopping 98 percent in the 2011 Liveability Ranking and Overview by the Economist Intelligence Unit, which has ranked the Canadian west coast city at the top since 2007. Canada dominated the top 10 spots along with Australia, with Melbourne surpassing Vienna, Austria as the world's second most liveable city. "Mid-sized cities in developed countries with relatively low population densities tend to score well by having all the cultural and infrastructural benefits on offer with fewer problems related to crime or congestion," said Jon Copestake, editor of the report, in a statement. In 29th place, the top U.S. city was Pittsburgh, with Los Angeles moving up to 44th place and New York coming in at 56th. London moved up one place to 53rd while Paris came in at number 16. The top Asian city was Osaka at number 12, tying Geneva, Switzerland and beating out the Japanese capital of Tokyo, which came in at 18. View photos of the world's most liveable cities here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/21/worlds-most-liveable-cities_n_825964.html#s243568&title=10__Auckland

Good for her. I'd do the same. I'm against Big Brother Law Enforcement techniques. I have no desire to live in a constantly surveiled society and using a police substate to collect public revenues. I'm all for safety enforcement but have no truck for revenue enhancement through abuse of traffice law enforcement. Laws should be enforced by people and patrol cars showing the colors on the roads. That does muxh more to inhibit unsafe practices than surreptitous photographs of scofflaws with tickets that appear weeks later in the mail. That is strictly a revenue generator and it may dissuade one scofflaw. However it does not provide the multiplier effect that a flashing light and citation service has on tens or hundreds of drivers passing a traffic stop. This practice will stop only if citizens complain about it vehemently and in number. However, most people are sheep feeling that they can do nothing as an individual.

Due to copyright restrictions see the article at this link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/18/flash-crash-panel-calls-f_n_825274.html

America's Worst Speed Traps By Cindy Perman If you've ever been pulled over for speeding, you know it feels like you're a gazelle that just got taken down by a lion. And, while this recession, and the gaping budget holes that resulted, have turned most cities into a jungle for motorists, there are some cities that have far more speed traps than others. And automated traffic cams have only egged them on. Now, they can snag just as many motorists for speeding, if not more, with less manpower. It's hard to get this information from the police or the courts for two reasons: 1) Many tickets are negotiated in court and 2) speed limits, while originally designed to conserve fuel during the energy crisis of the 1970s, have grown into a cash cow for states and municipalities—and they don't want you to know how much they're making off of speeding tickets. "Speed limits are supposed to be based on factual studies of traffic and what the majority of motorists deem as a safe speed," said Chad Dornsife, director of the Highway Safety Group . "Now, the posted limit has become a revenue generator—not a safety device." The National Motorists Association, a drivers' rights group, estimates that speeding tickets are a $4.5 to $6 billion industry in America. To be clear, speeding tickets aren't just for lead foots: In some places, they'll ticket you for going one mile over the speed limit and others set the speed limits artificially low. "In some places, the average speed limit is set 10 to 15 miles below the actual safe speed for conditions," Dornsife said. "It makes technical violators out of people otherwise driving safely. 10. Los Angeles, California Speed traps: 151 Los Angeles is a great example of speed limits not matching at all what traffic patterns indicate is a safe speed—which is how they're supposed to be determined. Most of the speed traps are on the boulevards in the valley, my L.A.-based colleague Jane Wells, who writes the Funny Business blog, says. "The speed limit is 35 but if you actually drove that, you'd get mowed down!" Wells says. Fines and surcharges for speeding or failing to have proof of insurance can approach $1,400, the NMA reports. And good luck fighting a ticket in L.A. It's always been tough, but with the city teetering on the brink of bankruptcy, motorists don't have a chance. "If you walk into a courtroom, because of the massive deficits at every level, they can't let a breathing person walk out without taking their money!" Dornsife said. 9. Chicago, Illinois Speed traps: 153 Chicago now uses red-light cameras to nab motorists for running lights and speeding, which increases the city's ticketing power. And, while, speed limits are supposed to be determined by engineering studies, Dornsife notes that the last study on one red light speed trap here was done in 1994 and the Department of Transportation deemed the safest speed was 43 miles per hour. The posted limit? 30. Dorsnife notes two problems here: First, some of the traffic-control devices are 20 and 30 years old. And second, on the interstates, local politicians control the speed limits—and the enforcement in the courts. So, good luck fighting a ticket. Barnet Fagel, aka "The Ticket Doctor," noted one particularly tricky speed trap: Motorists have to drive at a snail's pace leading up to the entrance to Lake Shore Drive, which then opens up into a six-lane highway. A half-mile in is the speed trap, where the speed limit is 40 and police nab drivers just as they're starting to pick up speed. "Comparable divided highways carry higher speed limits by as much as 10 to 20 mph more," he said. 8. Dallas, Texas Speed traps: 156 Dallas is one of three Texas cities that made the top 10 for speed traps. "Here's what happens in Texas: We have these safety standards that you have to apply to make sure the speed limit is safe," Dornsife said. "They follow none of them! They have what's called "home rule," which means they don't have to follow federal law." Dornsife said it's not uncommon here for tickets to be issued for drivers going just a few miles over the speed limit, and they'll do things like set a "school zone" two miles away from the school. Also, good luck keeping up with fluctuations in the speed limit on a given road. Dornsife recalls being at a DOT speed-limit conference and a presenter from Dallas said there are sections of the freeway where the speed limit can change three to four times within a few miles. And speed limits can be changed arbitrarily: "Somebody stands up in a city council meeting … say, a police officer with no training in traffic engineering … and proposes a speed-limit change and they vote on it," Dornsife said. "Traffic engineers are supposed to decide what speed is safe—and law enforcement is supposed to enforce it," he said. "Half of these cities don't have traffic engineers." 7. Orlando, Florida Speed traps: 165 You're less likely to break the speed limit on your daily commute than you are on vacation, where you're in a strange place and don't know the laws or the speed traps, Dornsife says. So, Orlando, home of Disney World and Universal Studios and Sea World, benefits from a steady stream of tourists—and revenue from speeding tickets. "Orlando definitely has speed traps," said Amy Mariani, a former traffic reporter for Clear Channel Radio. Some of the worst ones, she said, are Colonial Drive (State Route 50), where the speed limit constantly changes, the Beachline (State Route 528) as motorists drive west from the airport (That's right, they get you straight from the airport!) and I-4, especially downtown near the Millenia Mall. Plus, Dornsife says, Orlando was one of the early adopters for red-light cameras—they were using them even before state laws allowed them to. In the first three months, he says, the cameras here generated 700 tickets. And, they're tough: One motorist noted on Speedtrap.org that officers on motorcycles often snag motorists in a short school zone for doing three to four miles over the speed limit. 6. Denver, Colorado Speed traps: 165 Colorado, like Texas, has "home rule," where cities don't have to comply with state laws. As a result, traffic on some roadways indicate 35 to 40 miles per hour is safe and yet the speed limit has been set at 25, or 55 is safe and yet the legal limit has been set at 40. One Denver driver said that many roadways have been designed far bigger than they need to be, which facilitates higher rates of speed. Then they post low speed limits and BAM! They can snag you for a speeding ticket. And they're tough: They have speed cameras everywhere, that resident said, and they'll even nail you for going an inch over the line at a light. Jayson Luber, the traffic reporter for 7News at ABC affiliate KMGH, said officers will even wait for drivers riding in the exit lane who dart back into other lanes at the last minute, and nab them for crossing a white line. He said holiday weekends are the worst but police are out in full force year round. 5. Jacksonville, Florida Speed traps: 175 Florida takes the prize for the state where motorists are most likely to get a speeding ticket, according to a survey last year by the NMA. One man told News4Jax.com that he wasn't surprised. "I probably passed 30 cops on the way down here, so they were sitting there waiting to get everybody that's for sure," he said. Jacksonville, in particular, is known for speed traps where multiple drivers are pulled over at once, often by unmarked police cars, and motorists can be charged for going 5 mph over the limit. And, they get low marks on informing motorists of the speed limits. "Many of their streets are horribly underposted," Dornsife said of Jacksonville. "Some of the signs they use there aren't even legal devices—they're supposed to be a particular size, format and shape," he said. 4. Colorado Springs, Colorado Speed traps: 186 Remember, Colorado has "home rule," where municipalities don't have to follow state laws, and Colorado Springs takes full advantage of it. To their credit, they fully disclose how tough they are: They state publicly that drivers will be penalized if they drive 1-4 miles over the speed limit, 5 to 9 miles over, 10 to 19 miles over, 20 to 39 miles over and 40 or more miles over (Literally, they break it down that far). They also state that "one's intent is irrelevant," which means they don't care if you didn't mean to speed, had a broken speedometer or have oversized tires. These situations are "Not a defense to speeding." Colorado Springs drivers write on Speedtrap.org that often police use unmarked vehicles. And, like Denver, wide roads are often slapped with a 25 mph limit and entering the city from the southeast, one motorist notes, the speed limit drops quickly from 55 to 25. 3. Las Vegas, Nevada Speed traps: 187 They say what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas and tourists find out all too soon that applies to speeding tickets as well! Speed traps are common on the highways heading into and out of Las Vegas, Dornsife said. Department of Transportation records indicate traffic could handle 80 mph but a 70 mph zone is strictly enforced. Even side streets have traffic stops, one motorist noted on Speedtrap.org. Another motorist said he passed by an officer when he was driving north on US-49 and the officer was going south. Three minutes later, the officer turned around and pulled him over, clocking him doing 59 in a 55 when the driver thought the speed limit was 60. The officer actually wrote him a ticket for 67, saying he'd seen the driver speed up to 67 after passing him by! Dornsife added that anytime there's a budget crisis, the number of tickets written out seems to go up. And, good luck trying to fight them in court, especially when the city is still struggling financially. 2. Austin, Texas Speed traps: 189 The second entry from Texas in the top 10 is Austin, which one motorist described as practically a police state. Remember that here, they have "home rule," so municipalities don't have to follow state laws—and it seems they've taken that invitation to go quite seriously off the script. That motorist said he was ticketed for going three to four miles per hour over the speed limit in a school zone, and when he was going 83 in an 80 mph zone. There are serious speed traps at the northern and southern city limits, motorists note on Speedtrap.org, with many noting that everyone they know seems to have a couple of tickets. One woman wrote that she received a ticket and took a driver's education course to eliminate it. A clerk called her a year later and said the ticket was now a warrant and the fine had been increased. Luckily, she had her paperwork to prove it had been eliminated. She also noted that she'd seen three cars pulled over at once. 1. Houston, Texas Speed traps: 373 And the winning city is from … Texas! Seriously, the speed traps in Texas are so bad, Dornsife said, "any place in Texas could be No. 1." Drivers note on Speedtrap.org that there are traps set at the Houston city limits and near attractions like the Astrodome. And, the speed limit can change rapidly and dramatically. One motorist wrote that entering the city on Highway 59 North, the speed limit dropped suddenly to 55 from 70. Just as the motorist noticed the speed-limit change on his GPS, BAM! There was a speed trap. The number of tickets was even more staggering when the economy was bad: In March of last year, KTRK Channel 13 found that Houston police officers wrote about 3,000 tickets per day, or 147 an hour! TrafficTicketSecrets.com says the average speeding ticket in the U.S. is about $150. Multiply that out and that's $450,000 a day—and $14 million for the month. See the original article at: http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/autos_content_landing_pages/1728/americas-worst-speed-traps/

Please be advised that if you continue posting in an abusive vein then your posts will be reassigned to the sandbox.

South Dakota Moves To Legalize Killing Abortion Providers A bill under consideration in the Mount Rushmore State would make preventing harm to a fetus a "justifiable homicide" in many cases. — By Kate Sheppard Tue Feb. 15, 2011 3:00 AM PST This article has been updated. A law under consideration in South Dakota would expand the definition of "justifiable homicide" to include killings that are intended to prevent harm to a fetus—a move that could make it legal to kill doctors who perform abortions. The Republican-backed legislation, House Bill 1171, has passed out of committee on a nine-to-three party-line vote, and is expected to face a floor vote in the state's GOP-dominated House of Representatives soon. "The bill in South Dakota is an invitation to murder abortion providers."The bill, sponsored by state Rep. Phil Jensen, a committed foe of abortion rights, alters the state's legal definition of justifiable homicide by adding language stating that a homicide is permissible if committed by a person "while resisting an attempt to harm" that person's unborn child or the unborn child of that person's spouse, partner, parent, or child. If the bill passes, it could in theory allow a woman's father, mother, son, daughter, or husband to kill anyone who tried to provide that woman an abortion—even if she wanted one. Jensen did not return calls to his home or his office requesting comment on the bill, which is cosponsored by 22 other state representatives and four state senators. UPDATE: Jensen spoke to Mother Jones on Tuesday morning, after this story was published. He says that he disagrees with this interpretation of the bill. "This simply is to bring consistency to South Dakota statute as it relates to justifiable homicide," said Jensen in an interview, repeating an argument he made in the committee hearing on the bill last week. "If you look at the code, these codes are dealing with illegal acts. Now, abortion is a legal act. So this has got nothing to do with abortion." Jensen also aggressively defended the bill in an interview with the Washington Post's Greg Sargent on Tuesday morning. We have more on Jensen's position here. "The bill in South Dakota is an invitation to murder abortion providers," says Vicki Saporta, the president of the National Abortion Federation, the professional association of abortion providers. Since 1993, eight doctors have been assassinated at the hands of anti-abortion extremists, and another 17 have been the victims of murder attempts. Some of the perpetrators of those crimes have tried to use the justifiable homicide defense at their trials. "This is not an abstract bill," Saporta says. The measure could have major implications if a "misguided extremist invokes this 'self-defense' statute to justify the murder of a doctor, nurse or volunteer," the South Dakota Campaign for Healthy Families warned in a message to supporters last week. The original version of the bill did not include the language regarding the "unborn child"; it was pitched as a simple clarification of South Dakota's justifiable homicide law. Last week, however, the bill was "hoghoused"—a term used in South Dakota for heavily amending legislation in committee—in a little-noticed hearing. A parade of right-wing groups—the Family Heritage Alliance, Concerned Women for America, the South Dakota branch of Phyllis Schlafly's Eagle Forum, and a political action committee called Family Matters in South Dakota—all testified in favor of the amended version of the law. Jensen, the bill's sponsor, has said that he simply intends to bring "consistency" to South Dakota's criminal code, which already allows prosecutors to charge people with manslaughter or murder for crimes that result in the death of fetuses. But there's a difference between counting the murder of a pregnant woman as two crimes—which is permissible under law in many states—and making the protection of a fetus an affirmative defense against a murder charge. "They always intended this to be a fetal personhood bill, they just tried to cloak it as a self-defense bill," says Kristin Aschenbrenner, a lobbyist for South Dakota Advocacy Network for Women. "They're still trying to cloak it, but they amended it right away, making their intent clear." The major change to the legislation also caught abortion rights advocates off guard. "None of us really felt like we were prepared," she says. Sara Rosenbaum, a law professor at George Washington University who frequently testifies before Congress about abortion legislation, says the bill is legally dubious. "It takes my breath away," she says in an email to Mother Jones. "Constitutionally, a state cannot make it a crime to perform a constitutionally lawful act." South Dakota already has some of the most restrictive abortion laws in the country, and one of the lowest abortion rates. Since 1994, there have been no providers in the state. Planned Parenthood flies a doctor in from out-of-state once a week to see patients at a Sioux Falls clinic. Women from the more remote parts of the large, rural state drive up to six hours to reach this lone clinic. And under state law women are then required to receive counseling and wait 24 hours before undergoing the procedure. (Click here for an interactive map of abortion restrictions.) Before performing an abortion, a South Dakota doctor must offer the woman the opportunity to view a sonogram. And under a law passed in 2005, doctors are required to read a script meant to discourage women from proceeding with the abortion: "The abortion will terminate the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being." Until recently, doctors also had to tell a woman seeking an abortion that she had "an existing relationship with that unborn human being" that was protected under the Constitution and state law and that abortion poses a "known medical risk" and "increased risk of suicide ideation and suicide." In August 2009, a US District Court Judge threw out those portions of the script, finding them "untruthful and misleading." The state has appealed the decision. The South Dakota legislature has twice tried to ban abortion outright, but voters rejected the ban at the polls in 2006 and 2008, by a 12-point margin both times. Conservative lawmakers have since been looking to limit access any other way possible. "They seem to be taking an end run around that," says state Sen. Angie Buhl, a Democrat. "They recognize that people don't want a ban, so they are trying to seek a de facto ban by making it essentially impossible to access abortion services." ..South Dakota's legislature is strongly tilted against abortion rights, which makes passing restrictions fairly easy. Just 19 of 70 House members and 5 of the 35 state senators are Democrats—and many of the Democrats also oppose abortion rights. The law that would legalize killing abortion providers is just one of several measures under consideration in the state that would create more obstacles for a woman seeking an abortion. Another proposed law, House Bill 1217, would force women to undergo counseling at a Crisis Pregnancy Center (CPC) before they can obtain an abortion. CPCs are not regulated and are generally run by anti-abortion Christian groups and staffed by volunteers—not doctors or nurses—with the goal of discouraging women from having abortions. A congressional investigation into CPCs in 2006 found that the centers often provide "false or misleading information about the health risks of an abortion"—alleging ties between abortion and breast cancer, negative impacts on fertility, and mental-health concerns. "This may advance the mission of the pregnancy resource centers, which are typically pro-life organizations dedicated to preventing abortion," the report concluded, "but it is an inappropriate public health practice." In a recent interview, state Rep. Roger Hunt, one of the bill's sponsors, acknowledged that its intent is to "drastically reduce" the number of abortions in South Dakota. House Bill 1217 would also require women to wait 72 hours after counseling before they can go forward with the abortion, and would require the doctor to develop an analysis of "risk factors associated with abortion" for each woman—a provision that critics contend is intentionally vague and could expose providers to lawsuits. A similar measure passed in Nebraska last spring, but a federal judge threw it out it last July, arguing that it would "require medical providers to give untruthful, misleading and irrelevant information to patients" and would create "substantial, likely insurmountable, obstacles" to women who want abortions. Extending the wait time and requiring a woman to consult first with the doctor, then with the CPC, and then meet with the doctor again before she can undergo the procedure would add additional burdens for women—especially for women who work or who already have children. The South Dakota bills reflect a broader national strategy on the part of abortion-rights opponents, says Elizabeth Nash, a public policy associate with the Guttmacher Institute, a federal reproductive health advocacy and research group. "They erect a legal barrier, another, and another," says Nash. "At what point do women say, 'I can't climb that mountain'? This is where we're getting to." Due to an editing error, an earlier, updated version of this article that was briefly available online stated that exemptions had been added to the bill after Mother Jones inquired about the legislation. That was wrong. Sorry. People for the American Way, a major progressive advocacy group, has issued a statement condemning the judiciary committee's version of 1171. Kate Sheppard covers energy and environmental politics in Mother Jones' Washington bureau. See original article at:http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/02/south-dakota-hb-1171-legalize-killing-abortion-providers?page=2

Should this pass expect a stay to be issued by a Federal Court which will be followed by the law being stricken down on Consitututional grounds. All this speaks to the crazies out there from the murders to the crazy legislatures and the Birch-izing of the GOP. South Dakota is now trying to legalize the killing of abortion doctors and support personnel. The scary thing is that they can do it. Sure the Feds can prosecute murders as Civil Rights violations but how many crazies will be fanned to acting based on the State sanctioning the action. I never thought I'd live to see such crazy times and crazy actions by people that I thought were reasonable and rational at earlier points in time.

Shawna Forde, Anti-Immigration Vigilante, Convicted Of Killing Nine-Year-Old Girl And Her Father In Arizona Elise Foley HuffPost Reporting elise@huffingtonpost.com WASHINGTON -- An Arizona anti-illegal immigration activist was convicted on Monday of killing two Latinos during a 2009 raid: nine-year-old Brisenia Flores and her father, Raul Flores. The killer, Shawna Forde, is a member of the Minutemen, which patrols the southern border vigilante-style to detect illegal entry into the country. Although the shootings were never classified as a hate crime, Latino groups argue the murders reflect growing anti-immigrant sentiment within the United States. The details are chilling: Forde and two others entered the Flores home, allegedly looking for a million-dollar drug stash that never materialized, and shot both of Brisenia Flores' parents before turning the gun on the child. As her mother played dead, Brisenia Flores said, "Please don't shoot me," before being shot twice in the head. A jury convicted Forde of planning and executing the raid that led to the deaths of Raul and Brisenia Flores, and of the attempted murder of Gina Gonzales, the child's mother (she survived the attack). Forde was also convicted on two counts of aggravated assault and counts of burglary, armed robbery and aggravated robbery. The jury will announce Forde's sentence on Thursday; her alleged accomplices, Albert Robert Gaxiola and Jason Eugene Bush, still await trial. Joaquin Guerra, campaign director for Latino activism group Presente.org, told HuffPost the conviction is "justice for a little girl whose death was ignored by the mainstream media." The case largely escaped the notice of major news outlets until a few weeks ago, when a number of national news sources covered Forde's trial. Few politicians spoke out against the murders, which occurred in a state that later passed the hotly-contested SB1070 immigration law and is now considering a bill that would deny citizenship to children born to undocumented immigrants. Latinos organized to bring attention to the Flores killings, including a campaign by Presente.org to shed light on the case. "What we have shown is that Latinos are watching, and if people and parties want the Latino vote, they will have to speak out against things like this," Guerra said. "We hope her death wasn't in vain and that it serves as an example of what can happen when the types of conditions that are in Arizona are allowed to go unchecked and are legitimated as serious policy issues." See original story at:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/14/shawna-forde-convicted_n_823206.html

Not to worry. I hear it is an open marriage.

Anton, Thanks for the eyeopening post and link. Food for thought.

Now if they could direct you to a exciting venue where it could be worn...

Ahston has grown into a real hot boytoy hunk. Just caught him in the movie Spread (2009) on cable. Several hot nudes scenes showing lots of skin although brief. Nice ass. I never cared much for him before. To me he was a bit gangly and immature looking. Head never quite fit the body. Time has been very good to him evening out his features, strengthening his jaw line and giving a bit of manliness to him. Count me as a fan now. I love to do an overnight with him.

Right now it looks like the next GOP Presidential Primary will be reminiscent of the 1980 Primary starring Regan and the Seven Dwarves but this time without a Regan. The only unmitigated disaster in the present bunch, as it looks now, is probably Romney. At least he can run a corporation and clean up the Olympics and I don't think he has lost contact with reality as the others have, although he is trying to convice CPAC and the Tea Party that he has. Add Pawlenty to that column as well. Both these guys are shilliing for themselves and it is downright embarassing. Neither of them can make the sale to the Tea Party. It will be interesting to see what the general electorate will think of the GOP offering this next go-around. Seven (or however many) dwarves running to the neo-Birchers on the right and then back to the center for the general election, alienating all the the neo-Birchers who will then sit on their asses realizing they brought a whore to the Prom. Or will the general electorate pick a real nut? That would be best for the congressional Dems in the following midterm but not good for the country. Will is weak field actually insure the reelection of a President when unemployment has remained north of 8% for nearly four years? That would be an historic event not seen since FDR I believe.

Rise and kiss my ring. What do you mean which one?

The Government's Case Against Julian Assange Is Falling Apart Jason Linkins HuffPost Reporting jason@huffingtonpost.com With popular uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt spinning along, each with a certain amount of world-reshaping potential, there's been a lot of new attention focused on the role that WikiLeaks has played in these events. Ian Black, the Middle East editor of The Guardian, one of the key newspapers disseminating diplomatic cables from WikiLeaks' trove, told NPR last night that he didn't feel the leaked cables were the primary driver of these uprisings. Nevertheless, WikiLeaks seems to have helped to remove the people now demonstrating on the streets from their isolation by providing a "confirmation of what people in these countries know and feel intuitively," about the conditions under which they have lived. If you spend any time at all reading about Bradley Manning, the young U.S. Army private who stands accused of providing WikiLeaks with massive amounts of intelligence pulled from the Secret Internet Protocol Router Network used by the Pentagon and the State Department, the picture that emerges is one of a young man who also felt isolated, one who saw WikiLeaks as a means of ameliorating that feeling. Manning remains in custody -- a particularly brutal form of solitary confinement, actually -- at the Marine Corps brig in Quantico, Va. Manning still faces charges of his own, but he's played a larger role in the tensions between U.S. government officials and WikiLeaks, in that he is seen as the key figure in building a larger criminal case against WikiLeaks founder and figurehead Julian Assange. That Manning willingly provided WikiLeaks with classified information does not appear to be in dispute. The issue, rather, is one of "did Manning jump or was he pushed?" U.S. officials have been gamely attempting to make the case that Assange induced Manning to provide WikiLeaks with government documents. Now, according to the Wall Street Journal's Julian Barnes and Evan Perez, that case has cratered: New findings suggest Pfc. Bradley Manning, the intelligence analyst accused of handing over the data to the WikiLeaks website, initiated the theft himself, officials said. That contrasts with the initial portrait provided by Defense Department officials of a young man taken advantage of by Mr. Assange. Further denting the push by some government officials to prosecute Mr. Assange, the probes have found little to link the two men, though others affiliated with WikiLeaks have been tied to Pfc. Manning, officials said. For the U.S. to bring its preferred case against Mr. Assange of inducing the leak, it would have to show that the WikiLeaks founder specifically encouraged Mr. Manning to hand over the documents, which included thousands of State Department cables, as well as low-level intelligence reports on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Federal Bureau of Investigation agents and Justice Department lawyers continue to gather evidence for a possible conspiracy charge against Mr. Assange, but that's a harder case to make, government officials said. This is not going to come as any surprise to Jane Hamsher and Marcy Wheeler of Firedoglake, or Glenn Greenwald of Salon, who have been arguing that such a case against Assange could not be made for weeks. This case against Assange -- that he had pursued Manning, with the intention of inducing the soldier into proving WikiLeaks with thousands of classified diplomatic cables -- relied heavily on the word of Adrian Lamo, a high-profile hacker-turned-"threat analyst," to whom Manning reached out in May of 2010, revealing that he had taken classified material and leaked it to Assange. Lamo reported this to authorities, and provided the contents of his chat logs with Manning to Wired Magazine. In a December 15, 2010 article in the New York Times, Lamo told Charlie Savage that the case against Assange could be made by studying his chat logs with Manning: Adrian Lamo, an ex-hacker in whom Private Manning confided and who eventually turned him in, said Private Manning detailed those interactions in instant-message conversations with him. He said the special server's purpose was to allow Private Manning's submissions to "be bumped to the top of the queue for review." By Mr. Lamo's account, Private Manning bragged about this "as evidence of his status as the high-profile source for WikiLeaks." Wired magazine has published excerpts from logs of online chats between Mr. Lamo and Private Manning. Mr. Lamo described them from memory in an interview with The Times, but he said he could not provide the full chat transcript because the F.B.I. had taken his hard drive, on which it was saved. Since WikiLeaks began making public large caches of classified United States government documents this year, Justice Department officials have been struggling to come up with a way to charge Mr. Assange with a crime. Among other things, they have studied several statutes that criminalize the dissemination of restricted information under certain circumstances, including the Espionage Act of 1917 and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986. But the chat logs that Wired made available to the public were heavily redacted and fell well short of the mark in terms of bolstering Lamo's claim. That's when Greenwald and Firedoglake opened up a two-front attack on this allegation. Greenwald waged a high-profile battle with Wired on journalistic grounds. Meanwhile, Hamsher and Wheeler dived into the available information in an attempt to ascertain what could be divined from it. Wheeler -- whose preternatural gift for taking massive amounts of data and synthesizing a throughline helped to earn her a Hillman Award for investigative journalism -- immediately starting picking holes in the government's case. Through this work Hamsher and Wheeler were able to construct a definitive timeline of events concerning Lamo's dealings with and about Manning, and -- lo and behold -- what they found were a ton of inconsistencies. In turn, that spurred Greenwald to demand that Wired release the remaining chat logs between Manning and Lamo. Wired responded in oozingly self-serving fashion, in a two-pronged attack on Greenwald that Greenwald subsequently took apart in meticulous fashion. The final upshot on all of this? Wired admitted to BoingBoing's Sean Bonner and Rob Beschizza that "the chat logs in fact contained no unpublished references to Assange or private servers" for Manning's use. And in terms of making the case that Assange was actively trying to induce or assist Manning in leaking classified information, that was, as they say, the whole shooting match. As Bonner and Beschizza point out: that left "no new smoking guns in the unpublished portion or the logs, and little to suggest the degree of collaboration between Pvt. Manning and Wikileaks that prosecutors may need to pursue charges." As for what evidence there was to be had in the previously published portions of the chat logs, Bonner very deftly takes it apart. (Forgive the lengthy blockquote coming, it's important for clarity.) Per Bonner: Given that those logs have been public for months now, anything incriminating in them has already been seen and noted a bajillion times over-- that's my assumption, anyway. There is some confusion about the already-published reference to an FTP server, and some people suggest that this backs up Lamo's claim. But I read these logs very carefully before making any comment, and didn't come to that conclusion. The section in question is as follows: (02:48:52 PM) Lamo: How long between the leak and the publication? (02:49:18 PM) Manning: some time in february (02:49:25 PM) Manning: it was uploaded (02:50:04 PM) Lamo: uploaded where? how would i transmit something if i had similarly damning data (02:51:49 PM) Manning: uhm... preferably openssl the file with aes-256... then use sftp at prearranged drop ip addresses (02:52:08 PM) Manning: keeping the key separate... and uploading via a different means (02:52:31 PM) Lamo: so i myself would be SOL w/o a way to prearrange (02:54:33 PM) Manning: not necessarily... the HTTPS submission should suffice legally... though i'd use tor on top of it... (02:54:43 PM) Manning: but you're data is going to be watched (02:54:44 PM) Manning: *your (02:54:49 PM) Manning: by someone, more than likely (02:54:53 PM) Lamo: submission where? (02:55:07 PM) Manning: wl.org submission system (02:55:23 PM) Lamo: in the massive queue? (02:55:54 PM) Manning: lol, yeah, it IS pretty massive... (02:55:56 PM) Manning: buried (02:56:04 PM) Manning: i see what you mean (02:56:35 PM) Manning: long term sources do get preference... i can see where the "unfairness" factor comes in (02:56:53 PM) Lamo: how does that preference work? (02:57:47 PM) Manning: veracity... the material is easy to verify... (02:58:27 PM) Manning: because they know a little bit more about the source than a purely anonymous one (02:59:04 PM) Manning: and confirmation publicly from earlier material, would make them more likely to publish... i guess... (02:59:16 PM) Manning: im not saying they do... but i can see how that might develop (03:00:18 PM) Manning: if two of the largest public relations "coups" have come from a single source... for instance (03:02:03 PM) Manning: you yeah... purely *submitting* material is more likely to get overlooked without contacting them by other means and saying hey, check your submissions for x... I've bolded the two parts I believe are relevant. In the first part, people are citing Manning's answer to Lamo's question as evidence, but this ignores the fact that Lamo's question is hypothetical. The question is presented as hypothetical, so I read the answer as hypothetical, too. Taking the answer out of context makes it sound like Manning is saying he used that system, when in fact he's merely suggesting the the type of system Lamo might use if he was in this situation. That's how I read it, anyway. The second bit is worth noting because it suggests Manning was submitting files somewhere also used by other submitters‐ hence the queue they might get lost in-- and the reference to after submitting something, someone needs to take further steps to let Wikileaks know about it. To me, that doesn't sound like a preferential setup, or a private or secret FTP server setup for someone specific. That said, I didn't talk to Manning or Lamo, and I only have these logs to go on. Your interpretation may be different. But I don't see this conversation as evidence of anything special or preferential as Lamo has suggested, which is why I said the logs don't back up Lamo's claims. The more you shine sunlight on this matter, the more the case that Assange induced Manning to provide WikiLeaks with classified information, or otherwise assisted in the procurement of same, falls apart. So last night's news that investigators have failed to "uncover evidence that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange induced an Army private to leak government documents to his website," is pretty unsurprising. But this definitively vindicates the arguments that have heretofore been made by Greenwald, Hamsher, and Wheeler. See original article at:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/09/julian-assange-case-falling-apart_n_820790.html

America's Most Miserable Cities, 2011 Kurt Badenhausen, Forbes.com Feb 2, 2011 Arnold Schwarzenegger was sworn in as the governor of California at the end of 2003 amid a wave of optimism that his independent thinking and fresh ideas would revive a state stumbling after the recall of Gov. Gray Davis. The good vibes are a distant memory: The Governator exited office last month with the state facing a crippling checklist of problems including massive budget deficits, high unemployment, plunging home prices, rampant crime and sky-high taxes. Schwarzenegger's approval ratings hit 22% last year, a record low for any sitting California governor. California's troubles helped it land eight of the 20 spots on our annual list of America's Most Miserable Cities, with Stockton ranking first for the second time in three years. Located in the state's Central Valley, Stockton has been ravaged by the housing bust. Median home prices in the city tripled between 1998 and 2005, when they peaked at $431,000. Now they are back to where they started, as the median price is forecast to be $142,000 this year, according to research firm Economy.com, a decline of 67% from 2005. Foreclosure filings affected 6.9% of homes last year in the Stockton area, the seventh-highest rate in the nation, according to online foreclosure marketplace RealtyTrac. Stockton's violent crime and unemployment rates also rank among the 10 worst in the country, although violent crime was down 10% in the latest figures from the FBI. Jobless rates are expected to decline or stay flat in most U.S. metro areas in 2011, but in Stockton, unemployment is projected to rise to 18.1% in 2011 after averaging 17.2% in 2010, according to Economy.com. "Stockton has issues that it needs to address, but an article like this is the equivalent of bayoneting the wounded," says Bob Deis, Stockton city manager. "I find it unfair, and it does everybody a disservice. The people of Stockton are warm. The sense of community is fantastic. You have to come here and talk to leaders. The data is the data, but there is a richer story here." There are many ways to gauge misery. The most famous is the Misery Index developed by economist Arthur Okun, which adds unemployment and inflation rates together. Okun's index shows the U.S. is still is in the dumps despite the recent gains in the economy: It averaged 11.3 in 2010 (blame a 9.6% unemployment rate and not inflation), the highest annual rate since 1984. Our list of America's Most Miserable Cities goes a step further: We consider a total of 10 factors, things that people gripe about around the water cooler every day. Most are serious issues, including unemployment, crime and taxes. A few we factor in are not as critical, but still elevate people's blood pressure, like the weather, commute times and how the local sports team is doing. One of the biggest issues causing Americans angst the past four years is the value of their homes. To account for that we tweaked the methodology for this year's list and considered foreclosure rates and the change in home prices over the past three years. Click here for a more detailed rundown of our methodology. Florida and California have ample sunshine in common, but also massive housing problems that have millions of residents stuck with underwater mortgages. The two states are home to 16 of the top 20 metros in terms of home foreclosure rates in 2010. The metro area with the most foreclosure filings (171,704) and fifth-highest rate (7.1%) last year is Miami, which ranks No. 2 on our list of Most Miserable Cities. The good weather and lack of a state income tax are the only things that kept Miami out of the top spot. In addition to housing problems (prices are down 50% over three years), corruption is off the charts, with 404 government officials convicted of crimes this decade in South Florida. Factor in violent crime rates among the worst in the country and long commutes, and it's easy to understand why Miami has steadily moved up our list, from No. 9 in 2009 to No. 6 last year to the runner-up spot this year. California cities take the next three spots: Merced (No. 3), Modesto (No. 4) and Sacramento (No. 5). Each has struggled with declining home prices, high unemployment and high crime rates, in addition to the problems all Californians face, like high sales and income taxes and service cuts to help close massive budget shortfalls. The Golden State has never looked less golden. "If I even mention California, they throw me out of the office," says Ron Pollina, president of site selection firm Pollina Corporate Real Estate. "Every company hates California." Last year's most miserable city, Cleveland, fell back to No. 10 this year despite the stomach punch delivered by LeBron James when he announced his exit from Cleveland on national television last summer. Cleveland's unemployment rate rose slightly in 2010 to an average of 9.3%, but the city's unemployment rank improved relative to other cities, thanks to soaring job losses across the U.S. Cleveland benefited from a housing market that never overheated and therefore hasn't crashed as much as many other metros. Yet Cleveland was the only city to rank in the bottom half of each of the 10 categories we considered. Two of the 10 largest metro areas make the list. Chicago ranks seventh on the strength of its long commutes (30.7 minutes on average--eighth-worst in the U.S.) and high sales tax (9.75%---tied for the highest). The Windy City also ranks in the bottom quartile on weather, crime, foreclosures and home price trends. President Obama's (relatively) new home also makes the cut at No. 16. Washington, D.C., has one of the healthiest economies, but problems abound. Traffic is a nightmare, with commute times averaging 33.4 minutes--only New York is worse. Income tax rates are among the highest in the country and home prices are down 27% over three years. And it does not get much more miserable than the sports scene in Washington. Beltway fans should be grateful for the NHL's Capitals, their only major pro team to finish out of the basement in the last two seasons. The Nationals (MLB), Redskins (NFL) and Wizards (NBA) have all finished in last place in their respective divisions the past two years. America's Five Most Miserable Cities No. 5: Sacramento, Calif.No state taxes $50,000 of income like California, with a rate of 9.55% for that middle-class tax bracket. Sacramento is a one-team sports town, and that team has been awful in recent years. The NBA's Kings have won just 26% of their games the past two-plus seasons. No. 4: Modesto, Calif. The median home was valued at $275,000 in 2006; today it is $95,000. And don't leave your car on the street in Modesto, where 3,712 vehicles were stolen in 2009, making for the second-highest auto theft rate in the country. It ranked first in four of the previous five years. No. 3: Merced, Calif. The economic downturn and busted housing market hit Merced harder than any other area in the country. Average unemployment of 16.2% since 2008 is the highest in the U.S., as is the city's 64% drop in median home prices. No. 2: Miami, Fla. The sun and lack of a state income tax are the only things keeping Miami out of the top spot. Foreclosures hit one in 14 homes last year. Corruption is also off the charts, with 404 government officials convicted of crimes this decade in South Florida. No. 1: Stockton, Calif. Unemployment has averaged 14.3% the past three years, which is third worst in the country among the 200 largest metro areas. The housing market collapsed as well, with home prices down 58% over the same time. All the California cities on the list are struggling with the inherent problems the state is facing, including high sales and income taxes and service cuts to help close massive budget shortfalls. See the original article at: http://realestate.yahoo.com/promo/americas-most-miserable-cities-2011.html