Sunday, August 30, 2009

Y! Alert: The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Yahoo! Alerts
My Alerts

The latest from The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Byron Williams: Facts left the Health Care Debate Long ago, Emotion is the Driver Now! Top
As a Nation, do we like to be played for fools? Conservative talk radio has framed the creation of national health care as the end of America as we've come to know it. What exactly does that mean? The level of conversation is so debase people are now comparing President Barack Obama to Adolf Hitler. I recall several years ago taking issue with those who made similar comparison to George W. Bush, much to the chagrin of those on the left who also wanted to cling to cheap and inaccurate historical analogies. Anyone making linkages to the current president and the Fuhrer is not only historically ignorant and culturally insensitive, but have yet to compose a coherent thought as to why they are truly opposed to any impending health care legislation so they desperately resort to saying: "He's Hitler!" It's been a while since facts drove this debate. Emotion and fear are dominating the conversation and communism is now the derogatory term du jour. We bought in to the nonsense of the Iraq War, yet we seem abhorrent to the common sense of health care fearing that we might soon be dressed alike required to read Obama's "Little Red Book" during our state-sanctioned lunch breaks. Accusations of communism or socialism are simply a shorter way to say: "We don't have an intellectual leg to stand on in this debate." Throwing out the term communism has all the demagoguery of Sen. Joseph McCarthy and recalls a dark chapter in American history. Throughout the 1950s and 1960s, Southern politicians and the FBI labeled civil rights activists as communists in an effort to divert attention away from the central issue of the systematic application of second-class citizenship toward the many of the country's Negro citizens. By effectively labeling activists as communist, defenders of the status quo could easily stifle the organizing efforts of any group or individual. South Carolina moved to have the NAACP labeled as a Communist organization. In 1956, legislation was drafted forbidding anyone who was a member of the NAACP to be employed by state or local government. Southern politicians, along with organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan, and the White Citizens Council worked hard to suggest the civil rights movement in general, Martin Luther King in particular, was inspired and financed by communists seeking to overthrow capitalism and democracy in America. The irony of the fear-laden propaganda was the King-led movement was based on the deeply held values embedded in Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. But the fear was effective. Before President John F. Kennedy would endorse a civil-rights bill in 1963, he demanded that King fire Jack O'Dell as the director of voter registration for the Southern Christian Leadership Conference because of past communist ties. FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover labeled O'Dell and fellow SCLC member Stanley Levison, as dangerous communist operatives within the movement. Neither Levison nor O'Dell made their affiliation with the Communist Party in the 1950s a secret; and they were hardly dangerous as Hoover alleged. With O'Dell's affiliation, the civil rights legislation could be viewed by opponents as a communist bill, though it was simply guaranteeing the rights that every American was supposed to have at birth. O'Dell resigned and Kennedy endorsed civil rights legislation on June 11, 1963. This illustration indicates the power of fear as a political tactic. Fear robs us of any critical thinking. For as much as communism or socialism has been bantered about vis a vis the impending health care legislation, no one has argued for the dismantling of Social Security or Medicare. Wouldn't that be the logical next step? Are those programs not based on socialist principles? Many of the inflammatory rumors have been debunked from death panels to government takeover of the health care industry, largely to no avail. But the accuracy of facts is not what the current health care conversation is about. The current conversation has more to do with whose emotion is the strongest. If the emotion of health care proponents carries the day, the question that members of Congress will ask: "Will my vote put the country on the road to universal coverage?" If it's the detractors whose voice, saturated with fear, emotion and misinformation is what they hear, the question they will ask: "Will this vote cost me re-election in 2010?" Byron Williams is an Oakland pastor and syndicated columnist and blog-talk radio host. He is the author of Strip Mall Patriotism: Moral Reflections of the Iraq War. E-mail him at byron@byronspeaks.com or visit his Web site: byronspeaks.com
 
Penny Herscher: Ratcheting Up CEO Pay -- Or Competing For Talent? Top
If you were on the compensation committee of a public company board how would you set the CEO's pay? There is so much written about fat cat CEOs and their unfair pay packages that this is a question worth pondering (if you care). The really hard part about it is judging what is a) fair, b) necessary to get the talent you want and c) the market. One tool compensation committees use is the "peer group." This is the list of companies that are "like" your company. They are supposed to be similar in size, similar in market reach, something you can compare with to figure out what your CEO should be paid. But as the Wall Street Journal points out recently, the very use of the peer group can cause CEO pay to ratchet up. The problem goes like this. Most companies are planning to grow and want to have a CEO that can grow the company and make it larger and more competitive. As a result, they pick peer groups that, while they have some companies that are smaller, include many companies that are larger, and have higher paid CEOs than the current executive -- two studies cited by the Journal confirm this. (The SEC only started requiring companies to publish their peer groups in 2006, so there is now enough data for the pundits and researchers to start to dig.) At the same time, over 40 percent of companies say that they want to pay their CEO's above market average -- numbers like 60 percent and 75 percent of market are often used. So, if your peer group is larger companies where the CEO pay is higher, and you want to pay your CEO above market, you will take CEO pay up. It's a compounding phenomenon. Sounds like a conspiracy, right? Well, sitting on two very quality compensation committees, I can tell you from experience it isn't. It's a very real challenge for boards to figure out the right level of pay. High enough to attract a great CEO who can take the company on the growth journey you want (which takes both smarts and courage) and not so high that it hurts the financial results of the company or creates too great a gap to other executives and the employees. The good news is the peer group is just one tool we use. We also look carefully at internal executive pay to make sure we are not creating an internal problem, and more importantly at the job the CEO is doing and how he is conquering our strategic objectives. Most senior executives' compensation is now made up of three major components -- base salary, variable bonus based on company performance, and some form of stock (stock options or restricted stock grants). Having these levers allows the board to align the CEO's pay directly with the interest of the shareholders. This has happened to most technology companies over the last year -- there are very few bonuses being paid because performance hasn't been there as a result of the recession. Of course you do still see companies that offer their CEO compensation that doesn't seem very aligned to shareholder interest to me: use of the private jet, special health care, tax advice, golf club membership, etc. -- and even a key to the executive washroom. Something I don't understand, but I guess I am an egalitarian when it comes to building company culture.
 
Colorado Attorney General: State Should Investigate Top Pot-Subscribing Doctors Top
Two doctors account for more than a third of the patients on Colorado's medical-marijuana registry, and five doctors account for more than 50 percent of the patients, according to statistics from the state health department. In all, of the 10,000 medical-marijuana patients on the state's registry, 75 percent of those received their recommendations from one of only 15 doctors.
 
"Today Show" Hires Jenna Bush Top
NEW YORK — NBC's "Today" show has hired someone with White House experience as a new correspondent – former first daughter Jenna Bush Hager. Hager, a 27-year-old teacher in Baltimore, will contribute stories about once a month on issues like education to television's top-rated morning news show, said Jim Bell, its executive producer. The daughter of former President George W. Bush said she has always wanted to be a teacher and a writer, and has already authored two books. But she was intrigued by the idea of getting into television when Bell contacted her. "It wasn't something I'd always dreamed to do," she said. "But I think one of the most important things in life is to be open-minded and to be open-minded for change." She'll essentially work two part-time jobs as a correspondent and in her school, where she will be a reading coordinator this year. Bell said he got the idea after seeing Hager in two "Today" appearances. She was on the program two years ago to promote her book about an HIV-infected single mother, "Ana's Story: A Journey of Hope," and it went so well that a short interview was stretched to nearly a half hour. She and her mother, Laura Bush, also co-hosted an hour of "Today" around the time their picture book came out. She "just sort of popped to us as a natural presence, comfortable" on the air, Bell said. Hager will work out of NBC's Washington bureau. "I think she can handle it," he said. "I think she knows something about pressure and being under some scrutiny. When she came here for a handful of appearances, she knocked it out of the park." He expects her first story, most likely concerning education, to be on sometime next month. A first television job on "Today" is, in her father's world, sort of like a run for president as a first attempt at elective office. Hager said that people on the show "have always made me, whenever I've been there, feel very comfortable." Bell said Hager won't be covering politics. He said he didn't consider the job as a down payment for a future interview with her father, who has been living quietly in Texas since leaving office earlier this year. Attacks on NBC News by conservatives for the liberal bent of MSNBC also had nothing to do with it, he said. "I hope to focus on what I'm passionate about because I think I'd do them best job on them – education, urban education, women and children's issues and literacy," Hager said. What she doesn't plan to do is talk about her experiences as the daughter of a president. "I don't think it's that interesting," she said. "I'm pretty normal." More on NBC
 
Jim Jaffe: Obama, Public Differ on Diagnosis Top
Because politicians are sensitive to how quickly the window of opportunity can slam shut, they try to seize the moment and move quickly when they can. One cost of this strategy involves attempting to impose a remedy before the patient really understands the diagnosis. That's one explanation for the problems President Obama's health reform initiative is now confronting. The President accepts bipartisan expert analysis that our system is costly and inefficient because there's an enormous amount of waste - perhaps as much as 30% -- when patients are provided with services that are less than optimal - and sometimes seem totally inappropriate - to deal with their problems. Getting rid of that waste means eliminating many tests, procedures and even visits with specialist physicians. A provocative, but less than helpful, word to describe efforts to reduce such waste is rationing. Many members of the public are fearful of this strategy because they view the problem differently. They believe the system needs to be fixed because people are being denied services they need that could allow them to lead healthier lives. Let's quickly stipulate here that his happens. But data suggests those not getting what they need is a significantly smaller group than those receiving excessive care. The contrasting perceptions have been repeatedly documented Bridging them is an ongoing problem. Suffice to say that the experts, who spend ample time talking with one another, have done an inadequate job of educating the public. The media, which understandably finds stories of the uninsured denied needed care more compelling - and easier to get to - than those of the insured who are overserved, hasn't always helped. Our President, who is nothing if not a deft communicator, attempts to avoid confronting these competing visions by carefully choosing his language, regularly reassuring voters that they'll receive the care they need (which he carefully does not italicize) while carefully avoiding any promise that they'll receive all the care they or their doctors want. This was reasonably easy to do during the campaign when cost (to the government) was less of an issue, allowing a focus on making care more accessible to individuals. Recall the debate about whether the Obama or Clinton proposal more quickly approved universal coverage. But governing requires greater specificity than politicking and record deficits inhibit generosity for new spending. Another way of papering over the challenge is to carefully define waste. There's general agreement bloated administrative costs imposed by insurance and alleged big profits for insurers and drug firms should be slimmed. Reducing paperwork and duplication is a universal worthy goal, but that's a far different thing than construing an extra x-ray, pill or surgical procedure that doctor and patient want as unneeded. This quest to limit profits and administrative costs lends support to a government-run plan like Medicare, which has low administrative costs, or a similar new public plan. The resulting debate generates a lot of heat, but ignores the fact that Medicare is on the brink of bankruptcy, already imposes limits on tests and procedures that are available (just as private insurers do) and is every bit as tolerant of inappropriate and expensive care as other coverage is. The debate seems more partisan than it actually is. In reality there's a split within each party on the overconsumption issue. Experts within the Republican Party think that backing away from employer-provided coverage would force individuals to make more prudent economic decisions that would reduce overconsumption. Among Democrats, few believe that market forces can do the job in this area where supply basically creates its own demand. Those with less expertise in both parties prefer to argue that everyone can get anything they want if only forces of evil (viewed as capitalistic insurers and drug makers by one group and malpractice lawyers by the other) can be tamed. In the past, reformers have opted for the ever-popular dessert plan which provides more coverage in the short run and balances it with a promise to somehow make the system more efficient (by providing less care) in the long run. The long-running debate about reducing Medicare's physician reimbursement suggests, were any added proof required, that the long run never quite arrives. Today's debate seems to be the latest chapter in the contest between progressives who want to delegate the big decisions (like what tests and drugs are worth paying for) to disinterested experts and the populists who demand that the voters be provided with what they want at a price they can afford by lowering the boom on the big, powerful and profitable institutions who set prices. In past decades, they logic they now would apply to drug and insurance companies was directed toward railroads and banks. Until now, the American people haven't found either approach totally satisfactory and their continued ambivalence will probably require yet another compromise that papers over the difference. That's what the centrists on Capitol Hill are groping toward. (This case is made in greater detail at Centeredpolitics.com, where this piece was initially posted.)
 
Return of swine flu: What's ahead for Americans? Top
WASHINGTON — The alarm sounded with two sneezy children in California in April. Just five months later, the never-before-seen swine flu has become the world's dominant strain of influenza, and it's putting a shockingly younger face on flu. So get ready. With flu's favorite chilly weather fast approaching, we're going to be a sick nation this fall. The big unknown is how sick. One in five people infected or a worst case – half the population? The usual 36,000 deaths from flu or tens of thousands more? The World Health Organization predicts that within two years, nearly one-third of the world's population will have caught it. "What we know is, it's brand new and no one really has an immunity to this disease," Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius says. A lot depends on whether the swine flu that simmered all summer erupts immediately as students crowd back into schools and colleges – or holds off until millions of vaccine doses start arriving in mid-October. Only this week do U.S. researchers start blood tests to answer a critical question: How many doses of swine flu vaccine does it take to protect? The answer will determine whether many people need to line up for two flu shots – one against swine flu and one against the regular flu – or three. The hopeful news: Even with no vaccine, winter is ending in the Southern Hemisphere without as much havoc as doctors had feared, a heavy season that started early but not an overwhelming one. The strain that doctors call the 2009 H1N1 flu isn't any deadlier than typical winter flu so far. Most people recover without treatment; many become only mildly ill. Importantly, careful genetic tracking shows no sign yet that the virus is mutating into a harsher strain. We're used to regular flu that, sadly, kills mostly grandparents. But the real shock of swine flu is that infections are 20 times more common in the 5- to 24-year-old age group than in people over 65. That older generation appears to have some resistance, probably because of exposure decades ago to viruses similar to the new one. Worldwide, swine flu is killing mostly people in their 20s, 30s and 40s, ages when influenza usually is shrugged off as a nuisance. Especially at risk are pregnant women. So are people with chronic conditions such as asthma, diabetes, heart disease and neuromuscular diseases including muscular dystrophy. Some countries report more deaths among the obese. Still, some of the people who've died didn't have obvious health risks. "People who argue we're seeing the same death rates miss the point – they're in young adults. To me, that shouldn't happen," said one infectious disease specialist, Dr. Richard P. Wenzel of Virginia Commonwealth University. He spent the past few months visiting South American hospitals to help gauge what the Northern Hemisphere is about to face. Children, however, are the flu's prime spreaders. Already, elementary schools and colleges are reporting small clusters of sick students. For parents, the big fear is how many children will die. Panicked crowds flooded India's hospitals in August after a 14-year-old girl became that country's first death. In the U.S., regular flu kills 80 to 100 children every winter, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has reports of about three dozen child deaths from swine flu. Even if the risk of death is no higher than in a normal year, the sheer volume of ill youngsters means "a greater than expected number of deaths in children is likely," said Dr. Anne Schuchat, director of the CDC's National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases. "As a society, that's something that's much harder for us." ___ Swine flu quietly sickened hundreds in Mexico before U.S. researchers stumbled across two children in San Diego who had the same mystery illness. A world already spooked by the notorious Asian bird flu raced to stem the spread of this surprising new virus. Mexico closed schools and restaurants, and barred spectators from soccer games; China quarantined planeloads of tourists. But there was no stopping the novel H1N1 – named for its influenza family – from becoming the first pandemic in 41 years. Well over 1 million Americans caught swine flu in spring and summer months when influenza hardly ever circulates; more than 500 have died. In July, England was reporting more than 100,000 infections a week. Argentina gave pregnant women 15 paid days off last month at the height of its flu season, hoping that staying home would prove protective. In Saudi Arabia, people younger than 12 and older than 65 are being barred from this November's hajj, the pilgrimage to holy cities that many Muslims save up their whole lives to make. And in Australia – closely watched by the U.S. and Europe as a predictor for their own coming flu seasons – hospitals set up clinics outside the main doors to keep possible flu sufferers from entering and infecting other patients. "While this disease is mild for most people, it does have that severe edge," said Australia's health minister Nicola Roxon, who counted over 30,000 cases in a country of nearly 22 million. That's comparable to its last heavy flu season in 2007. Cases are dropping fast as winter there ends. But Australia still plans to start the world's first large-scale vaccinations next month in case of a rebound, inoculating about 4 million high-risk people. Most amazing to longtime flu researchers, this new H1N1 strain seems to account for about 70 percent of all flu now circulating in the world. In Australia, eight of every 10 people who tested positive for flu had the pandemic strain. That begs the question: Do people still need to bother with regular flu vaccine? Definitely, stressed CDC's Schuchat, who plans to get both kinds. There's still enough regular flu circulating to endanger people, especially the 65-and-older generation. Notably, South Africa is having a one-two punch of a flu season, hit first with a seasonal strain known as H3N2 and now seeing swine flu move in. ___ Wash your hands, sneeze into your elbow, stay home so you don't spread illness when you're sick. That's the mantra until vaccine arrives. This week brings a key milestone. Hundreds of U.S. adults who rolled up their sleeves for a first shot in studies of the swine flu vaccine return for a blood test to see if they seem protected. It will take government scientists a few weeks to analyze results, but the volunteers get a second vaccine dose right away, in case the first wasn't enough. The vaccine, merely a recipe change from the usual flu vaccine, seems safe. Federal authorities two weeks ago gave the go-ahead to start children's vaccine trials. "It's been a piece of cake," said Kate Houley of Annapolis, Md., who jumped at the chance to enroll her three sons, ensuring that if the vaccine really works, they'll have some protection as school gets started. Eleven-year-old Ethan was among the first to be vaccinated by University of Maryland researchers and didn't even report the main side effect – a sore arm. In the U.S., Britain and parts of Europe, vaccinations are set to begin in mid-October, assuming those studies show they work. First in line: _Pregnant women. Despite accounting for about 1 percent of the U.S. population, they've been accounting for 6 percent of the swine flu deaths. _Children and young adults from 6 months to 24 years. Babies younger than 6 months can't get flu vaccine, so their parents and other caregivers should be inoculated to protect the infant. _Health care workers. _Younger adults with risky health conditions. Schools around the U.S. are preparing to inoculate children in what could be the largest campus vaccinations since the days of polio. The government has bought 195 million doses and will ship them a bit at a time, starting with 45 million doses or so in October, to state health departments to dispense. The Association of State and Territorial Health Officials is negotiating with pharmacists to help perform those vaccinations. Massachusetts even is deputizing dentists to help give swine flu vaccine, and passed emergency regulations to encourage more health care workers to get either the shot or a nasal spray version. What if people not on the priority list show up? The idea is for pharmacists to gently encourage them to come back a few weeks later, said the association's executive director, Dr. Paul Jarris. A concern is whether enough people are worried about swine flu to get vaccinated. "Complacency is a big challenge," said CDC's Schuchat. "We are trying to strike a balance between complacency and alarm." Ten-year-old Isabella Nataro had a cousin sent home from summer camp because of an outbreak, and she readily agreed when her mother, a University of Maryland vaccine researcher, signed her and her brothers up for a study of the new shot. (The store gift card that participating kids receive after each blood test was a bonus.) "I'm kind of worried about my friends if swine flu does come to our school," the suburban Baltimore girl said. "I hope everybody else at my school gets a chance to get it." ___ Associated Press writers Kristen Gelineau in Sydney and Michael Warren in Buenos Aires, Argentina, contributed to this report. ___ On the Net: CDC background on swine flu: http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/ More on Swine Flu
 
Natalia Rose: A Nation of Addicts Top
Why does it seem that everyone we know is taking antidepressants or some other substance to suppress emotional pain? Why are we numbing ourselves, and why is it accepted as normal? What is the common denominator here? A slow but steady detour away from the independent values that made our country great two hundred years ago has landed us in a nation of addicts: land of the numb, mind-controlled, programmed masses. As a people, we have lost our consciousness, and with it a tremendous amount of wisdom. We have confused what is considered desirable with what is life-generating. We have lost touch with our true emotions--that voice within which speaks for inner balance and self-knowledge. Too many of us sleepwalk through life following a set of social norms that can only lead to ruin: physical, mental, and emotional. The hard fact is that just about everyone is an addict today because a sinister social conditioning has quietly snuck its way into "normal" living: the consumption of foods unfit for the human body. These foods are profoundly harmful and highly addictive. That's right: the most insidious addiction today is not to recreational drugs, but to grains, sweeteners, food additives, and preservatives (including hormones and antibiotics, just for starters) in the mainstream diet. Addiction, therefore, is a problem for every human being who isn't highly aware of what he or she consumes. But here's the gem: the cause and cure of addiction hinge on the same all-important factor--consciousness. We can understand addiction as a loss of consciousness. In today's diet-lifestyle, it poisons the biochemistry of the blood and ravages the intestine, cells, and tissues. Yet, we keep eating and living according to the customs that have been programmed into us by the so-called authorities, the market, the media, and the influence of our peers. We have become little better than a nation of addicts. When our inner voice knows better and rises up to question the status quo, to resist the whole program, we are quickly labeled "depressed" or "chemically imbalanced" and written a prescription. In the meantime, the dictates of our culture urge us to silence our distress with "comfort foods," alcohol, drugs, and other mind-numbing diversions. After all these millennia of medical achievements, we have missed the obvious universal law of nature: when there is pain, it is a call for change, not a call for suppression! Social norms dictate not only how we should live, but also how we should feel. We are taught to avoid "negative" emotions and embrace only the "positive" ones--and we do so routinely, without even knowing it. These repressed emotions are the harbingers of addiction. All the spiritual leaders and great minds of history--including the Buddha, Christ, Socrates, and Jung--emphasized the importance of awareness. And contemporary teachers like Eckhart Tolle have made the concept more familiar to people today. However, there remains a great chasm between the desire to practice consciousness and the actual application of it. For most people, living in the present is so hard to do. Nonetheless, it is the single most essential tool of personal liberation available to us. Any set of social expectations that fails to honor a person's spirit and allow for its honest expression is an agent of repression, and is therefore antithetical to life. The emotions of pain, anger, and fear arise to tell us to pay attention. They come to us as friends, to pull our hand away from the flame. In heeding rather than repressing them, we can let them go, and also let go of our addictions. Soon, we can bring awareness to any situation with a penetrating power of discernment. We can see through the clutter of social expectation and ask ourselves: "Is that a social conditioning or a life-generating truth?" We are a nation of addicts because too many widely accepted norms are destructive to our bodies, minds, and spirits. Our authority figures perpetuate the madness by creating more drugs for more illnesses and building more infrastructures to keep the vicious cycle alive. Frittering away personal power, we get ever more lost in the quagmire, blind to the road signs of our emotions. Addiction feels like a normal life experience rather than an aberration of nature. The modern ethos is to pacify feelings with all that glitters and sells. "Don't feel this," our culture whispers in our psyches. "You don't need to feel sad. Here, take this instead. Have a donut and a latte. There, there. Now, isn't that better?" The cure for depression and countless physical ailments may be far simpler than we ever realized. It is time we (a) correct our biochemical imbalances through cleansing, and (b) expose destructive social norms for what they are and cultivate the power of conscious choice. It's time we wake up to what we are really made of--as fully empowered human beings who know our own authentic needs and desires, not mindless automatons of an addiction-fueled society. We all want to lead great lives, but a life of worldly achievement is only possible through a healthy, balanced, and beautiful inner life. Let us feel deeply and allow our emotions to nourish our personal growth through smart, life-enhancing choices.
 
Victoria Kennedy: Senate Replacement For Husband Ted Kennedy? Top
Ted Kennedy married Victoria Anne Reggie in 1992. Kennedy and his closest friends called his decision to ask her out "the smartest move of his life." From the New York Times : The senator proposed to her in January 1992 at a performance of "La Boheme" at the Metropolitan Opera in New York -- a love of opera was a passion they shared. They married that July at his home in McLean, Va., in front of about 30 family members. And that was the beginning of the extraordinary relationship -- a love story as well as a political partnership -- that would define the final years of Kennedy's life, both personally and professionally. It brought him a happiness, his friends said, that had long eluded him, seeing him through until the end, and even now, as Vicki Kennedy presides at the first of his public memorials in Boston and prepares for his burial at Arlington National Cemetery. Vicki Kennedy also had a savvy political mind that was a valuable asset for her husband, the Times writes : Mrs. Kennedy was instrumental in the campaign's creation of a series of devastating advertisements that challenged Mr. Romney's proclamations about his record as a venture capitalist in creating jobs in recession-battered Massachusetts. The spots focused on the workers at the Ampad stationery factory in Marion, Ind., where Mr. Romney's company, Bain Capital, had eliminated jobs, reduced wages and discarded the union contract. Two of the late Ted Kennedy's best friends in the Senate said on Sunday that the Massachusetts senator's widow, Victoria Kennedy, would make a great replacement for him. "She is a very brilliant lawyer," said Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) on CNN's State of the Union. "She's a very solid individual. She certainly made a difference in Ted's life, let me tell you. And I have nothing but respect for her." Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) echoed that sentiment: "We talk frequently. Whatever Vicki wants to do, I'm in her corner," said Dodd. "She knows that. She has expressed to me her own reluctance to do that. But she could change her mind. And if she did I'm for it. I think she'd be great, I think Orrin's right, she brings talent and ability to it... we can certainly use her in the Senate. But leave it up to her. She has a lot on her mind right now. And, frankly, I leave it up to her decision-making process." Vicki Kennedy has reportedly said she doesn't want to succeed her late husband, though observers say the seat is hers should she change her mind. From Time Magazine : The question is what Vicki wants. Victoria Reggie Kennedy, the Senator's widely admired widow, is from a Louisiana political family. She has stayed out of Massachusetts politics, and word leaked during the Senator's illness that she wasn't interested in succeeding him. But she would be an overwhelming favorite for the seat if she wanted it, and until she publicly makes her wishes clear, nothing will be clear. Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick, who may get a chance to appoint a temporary successor, said on Friday that Vicki Kennedy would not be a candidate. "She is not interested," he said, according to the Associated Press . "She is grieving the loss of her husband and the leader of that extraordinary family." Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter! More on Ted Kennedy
 
Attackers Use Health Care Ploy To Rob Home, Shoot 2 Top
NEW YORK — Police say attackers used health care reform as a ruse to approach their victims and then shot two and pistol-whipped another in a Long Island home. Suffolk County police said Saturday that a 26-year-old woman was arrested on attempted murder and burglary charges in the attack Friday in Huntington. Two men were arrested on the same charges earlier. Information on the suspects' arraignments wasn't immediately available Saturday night. Police say the three told the home's residents they were selling insurance, referring to President Barack Obama's push to overhaul America's health care system. Police say the suspects then forced their way in, demanded money and attacked the victims. The victims' conditions weren't immediately available. More on Health Care
 
Tim Giago: Health Care through the Eyes of an Independent Top
Health Care through the Eyes of an Independent By Tim Giago (Nanwica Kciji) © 2009 Native Sun News August 31, 2009 Let me define my position on health care for all Americans by saying that I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican. I am instead a Conservative Independent with a clear view of what is happening on the left and the right of me because, for the most part, I sit squarely in the middle. Two of the largest ethnic voting blocs in America are the African Americans and the Hispanics. Two of the largest groups of people without health insurance of any kind are African Americans and Hispanics. Therefore I find it puzzling that the Republican Party would dramatically alienate these two large voting blocs by its unhealthy stand on health insurance. Both parties realize there is something seriously wrong with America's health care system. In an effort to undermine most of the proposals offered by the Democrats, the Republicans denigrated the Indian Health Service by attempting to use it as an example of a failed health care system. South Dakota's lone Congressional Representative, Stephanie Herseth Sandlin defended the I.H.S. saying, "This is like comparing apples and oranges." What is it the Republicans find so abhorrent in the health care proposals now on the table? The single-payer system is a government-run health care delivery system that covers all citizens and it is paid for by tax dollar. The two countries now under attack by those opposed to what they label as Obamacare are England and Canada. There are no proposals under serious consideration the advocate a single payer plan. It is easy for a media standing to the right to find individuals opposed to the systems used in England, Canada and in the Indian Health Service, but if they dug deeper they would soon find that the majority of the people favor their own systems by about 90 percent. In fact a recent news report indicates that the people of Canada can expect to live two years longer than the average American citizen. The fact that Native Americans have one of the shortest life expectancies in America, if taken at face value, would definitely jeopardize the position of the Indian Health Service. But it cannot be taken at face value because there are so many underlying causes for the shorter life expectancies of American Indians. Many of the problems can be placed at the doorstep of deep social and economic problems such as lack of adequate housing, extreme cases of alcoholism and drug addiction, chronic depression caused by lack of self-esteem and self-respect leading to an extremely high incidence of suicide especially among teenagers, the vicious cycle of abuse as remnants of the boarding schools where the abused children grew up and became the abusers, the consistent shortage of funds for the Indian Health Service that generated the saying, "Don't get sick after June" because the funds usually run out by then, four months before the new fiscal year, unemployment rates as high as 80 percent on some reservations, and the sheer isolation of Indian reservations that makes it hard to recruit good doctors. Most Americans fail to understand that the Indian health care is guaranteed to the tribes that had it written into the treaties they signed as sovereign nations with the United States of America. In exchange the Indian tribes surrendered millions of acres of some of the most prime land to be found anywhere, land that helped to make the United States on of the richest nations in the world. However, Indian Health Service was also extended to Indian tribes that had never had this guarantee written into their treaties, if they had treaties with the United States at all. Some so-called "treaty tribes" feel that his is why the services guaranteed to them in treaties, services such as health, education, housing, government and jobs, have become so deluded. And so things are not always as they appear. The Indian Health Service and the single-payer systems of England and Canada have some problems, but for the most part, they are working. All of the systems now under discussion need to be addressed and whether it is a single-payer, pooling, public option, health-insurance cooperative, individual mandate, portability, rescission or employer mandate, there is something is each of these proposals that merit discussion. People are suffering and dying because of the health care mess we now have in America and you can take that to the bank. So, as an Independent, I watch the shouting matches, the misinformation, and the outright lies passing across the health care argument scene and I am bothered by most of it. It has brought out the meanness in too many otherwise good Americans and it must stop. Health care reform is badly needed and that is the bottom line. (Tim Giago, an Oglala Lakota, is the publisher of Native Sun News. He was the founder and first president of the Native American Journalists Association, the 1985 recipient of the H. L. Mencken Award, and a Nieman Fellow at Harvard with the Class of 1991. Giago was inducted into the South Dakota Newspaper Hall of Fame in 2008. He can be reached at editor@nsweekly.com)
 
The Economist: America's New Antitrust Policy: Return Of The Trustbusters Top
THE new head of the antitrust division of America's Department of Justice, Christine Varney, sees Thurman Arnold, a predecessor who took office in 1938, as a model. Arnold's appointment created an uproar. His book, "The Folklore of Capitalism", published a year earlier, was widely seen as a satire on the inadequacy of the country's antitrust laws. He was, in his own words, "responsible for the first sustained programme of antitrust enforcement on a nationwide scale." This vigorous approach, in Ms Varney's view, was an important part of "that era's legacy for modern economic policy". In other words, Ms Varney means business.
 
Evernote: Using A 'Free' Product To Turn A Profit Top
GIVING away a product has always been a great marketing concept. Even an unsavvy consumer can see a benefit in snatching free products. Free has also become a mantra for business gurus who advocate giving Web start-ups a shot at fast growth by bringing the price of most of their wares to zero. More on Personal Finance
 
Harry Reid To Nevada Paper: "I Hope You Go Out Of Business" Top
On Wednesday, before he addressed a Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce luncheon, Reid joined the chamber's board members for a meet-'n'-greet and a photo. One of the last in line was the Review-Journal's director of advertising, Bob Brown, a hard-working Nevadan who toils every day on behalf of advertisers. He has nothing to do with news coverage or the opinion pages of the Review-Journal. Yet, as Bob shook hands with our senior U.S. senator in what should have been nothing but a gracious business setting, Reid said: "I hope you go out of business."
 
Chip Berlet: Ted's Watching Us - Time to Raise Hell Top
We buried Senator Ted Kennedy yesterday, but a new morning gives us hope and purpose, as it does every new day of our lives. Yesterday we heard the speeches, prayers, and sacred text. Today Ted is watching us. It's time to raise some hell. Not literally raise hell, since for those of us who are Christians that's more than just a creepy scene from Buffy the Vampire Slayer. We need to raise hell in the time-honored progressive tradition of standing up , pushing back , and being militant . Not mean spirited, but joyous...and not afraid of causing a ruckus. Not a threat, but a promise. Ted is watching us in so many ways--from sacred to mundane. Last night after his coffin passed by many miles of people paying their last respects we saw Ted laid to rest at Arlington National Cemetery next to his two brothers. White roses were placed on his coffin ...and also at the flickering flame marking the grave of his brother Jack. As the sunlight faded the children and grandchildren were solemn silhouettes and the half-staff cemetery flag was illuminated with lightning bolts. If you don't believe in omens, at least embrace the metaphors. Ted is watching us through the eyes of every child who is hungry or cold. He is watching us through the eyes of every undocumented immigrant forced to work long hours in unspeakable conditions for inadequate wages. Ted is watching us through the eyes of every person ever vilified, spat on, or assaulted because they are Black, Mexican, Asian, Jewish, Muslim, immigrant, or gay. He is watching us through eyes that are dimmed with age, clenched in pain, or blinded and dark. Ted is watching us through the eyes of every sick person battling an insurance company bureaucrat for a needed treatment or medicine. He is watching us through the eyes of every poor panicked parent rushing their child with a high fever to an emergency room because they have no other option. People deserve quality healthcare as a basic human right . It doesn't matter if you are a Democrat or a Republican, or an Independent. It doesn't matter if you think the two parties are annoying twins slavishly protecting the ruling class. The time is now. Get some backbone and stand up and speak out. Speak to your family, your friends, your neighbors in the supermarket check-out line. Ted's grave was but a few paces away when he tugged at our sleeves one more time with a reminder to keep his promise--the promise he passed on to President Barack Obama. The priest read portions of a letter from Ted carried to the Pope by our President. Ted confessed he had failings and sins, but was proud to have followed spiritual mandates to champion the dignity of the poor and workers, and the idea that quality healthcare is a basic human right for all. And we are worrying about taking the time to make a phone call or spending an hour at a rally? It's time to stop whining about how unfair the right-wing attacks are. It's time to get up off our butts and take action. It can range from writing a letter to an elected representative to non-violent civil disobedience. For starters, there are rallies and vigils across America this week by Move On and SEIU . Other events will follow . I will be there. So should you. Bring your family and friends. President Barack Obama praised Ted for modeling how to struggle intensely against your opponents, but never stooping to demonize or denounce them. Be loud. Be Raucous. Be militant. But be civil. In the Sunday Washington Post two veteran activists write a prescription for more audacity on the part of our President. We should defend Obama against the vicious and racist attacks from the reactionary political right; but we can have Obama's back while we are kicking his butt. This is not a contradiction. Speak truth to power . This was a slogan of the Civil Rights Movement and is now the mantra of the global human rights movement . This is what successful progressive social movements do to forge real change out of raw hope . We may lose this skirmish, but as progressives at least we will be able to look at ourselves in the mirror in the morning and respect what we see. To paraphrase the poet Robert Frost, favored by Ted and quoted by Ted's son Patrick at the funeral service in Boston...we have promises to keep, and miles to go before we sleep... ===     The author's blog posts solely reflect his views and not those of any organization for which he works or volunteers.   More on Health Care
 
Michael Pollan Denounces Whole Foods Boycott Top
Omnivore's Dilemma Author Michael Pollan has decided to weigh in on the Whole Foods health care fight, stating he will not boycott the company. Whole Foods customers around the country were outraged in recent weeks with the company's CEO wrote op-ed in the Wall Street Journal opposing Obama's health care reform efforts. Many, including some unions , have called for a boycott. Pollan writes on New Majority : So Mackey is wrong on health care, but Whole Foods is often right about food, and their support for the farmers matters more to me than the political views of their founder. Read more here.
 

CREATE MORE ALERTS:

Auctions - Find out when new auctions are posted

Horoscopes - Receive your daily horoscope

Music - Get the newest Album Releases, Playlists and more

News - Only the news you want, delivered!

Stocks - Stay connected to the market with price quotes and more

Weather - Get today's weather conditions




You received this email because you subscribed to Yahoo! Alerts. Use this link to unsubscribe from this alert. To change your communications preferences for other Yahoo! business lines, please visit your Marketing Preferences. To learn more about Yahoo!'s use of personal information, including the use of web beacons in HTML-based email, please read our Privacy Policy. Yahoo! is located at 701 First Avenue, Sunnyvale, CA 94089.
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)