Dan Rather on Super PACs

http://video.msnbc.msn.com/the-rachel-maddow-show/46018440#46018440

Homemade Lip Gloss and Lip Balm: From Simple Two Ingredient Recipes to The More Advanced

Homemade Lip Gloss and Lip Balm: From Simple Two Ingredient Recipes to The More Advanced

Another Reason to End the War on Drugs

Nearly everyday you can read about non-violent drug offenders being sent to prison or a police officer injured or killed trying to stop a drug-related crime, or a drive-bu shooting tied to warring gangs.

Today, the news is that more than 47,000 people have died from drug violence in Mexico in the past five years -- since President Felipe Calerdon began using the military to deal with drug cartels.

Not an American problem you say? If the war on drugs ceased in our country -- and if we decriminalized drug use -- who do you think would be clamoring to buy drugs from the Mexican drug cartels with the profit margin enjoyed by drug dealers in America?

Eliminate the profit margin in drug dealing...make it illegal for anyone other than government-approved sites to sell drugs...and the drug trade in our country will dry up.

But, oh my gosh, everyone in America will then be on drugs! Not so, at least not in countries who have already decriminalized drugs have found.

It is human nature to seek anything that is forbidden. When drugs are legally accessible, it removes some of the desire for it.

And let's be real. There are lots of people in America already doing drugs. If drugs were legalized and their manufacture and sale regulated, there would be fewer people using dirty needles or syringes. Dirty needles and syringes lead to HIV/AIDS infection and hepatitis.

I believe this is the common sense answer to the current drug problem. What are your thoughts? Have I gone off the deep end?


Here's a link to a news story provided by LEAP (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition) on the topic of drug war deaths.

Let's Start the Bandwagon Rolling to Repeal the Patriot Act

Repeal the Patriot Act Petition

The recent change in student loan payments, lessening the payback burden for recent graduates, began with a citizen's petition to request a change. That's power in the pen and the combined voices of like-thinking citizens.

Call me naive, but I want to believe the democratic process works, even in this time of politicians who are often unresponsive to the dictates of those who elect them.

I believe the Patriot Act should be repealed. I felt it was wrong when it originated and feel just as strongly that that is so today.

Even as our president at the time of the 9/11 attacks promised terrorists would not realize their goal of making Americans live in fear, the Patriot Act was being formulated. The very name of the law suggested anyone who opposed its passing was un-American.

The Patriot Act requires all citizens to give up some of their freedoms for the sake of national security. No one can guarantee that the forfeiture of such freedoms will make us any safer than without this intrusive act.

I've initiated a citizen's petition that will be delivered to the White House when enough signatures are gathered. If, like me, you believe the Patriot Act should be repealed, will you please electronically sign the petition? Will you consider forwarding it to at least 3 of your friends or family members for their consideration?

Repeal the Patriot Act Petition

The All American Store: The Antithesis of Walmart?

Brookville, Ohio may well go down in history as the birthplace of the store that put "Made in America" popular again. Brookville is the site of The All American Store, a corner store that harkens back to the day of the general store.

While Walmart and other big box stores sell products and goods made in China, The All American Store sells products and goods that are American-made -- or at the very least, American assembled. And the concept is working; the Brookville store saw a 15 percent increase in sales last quarter.

Wouldn't it be great to go back to the time when "Made in the USA" was something we could find on the items we buy?

I'm Trying to be a Pescatarian

The article linked to this post explains in depth what a pescatarian is and how one person is dealing with the change in her eating habits. As it turns out, a pescatarian is someone who eats everything except beef, pork, lamb and poultry.

I am giving this lifestyle choice a serious consideration because I believe it is a healthy way of eating. It is close to a Mediterranean style diet, a style I've researched to find has many health benefits. The big problem for me? Red meat. Not sure I can be satisfied never eating beef again.

Why don't you give the article a read and let me know your thoughts?


I'm Trying to be a Pescatarian

FDA Backs Off On Preventing Antibiotic Use In Animals for Human Consumption

As an American citizen, I'd like to believe that governmental agencies are working for the best interests of myself and millions of other Americans just like me. When I read information such as the fact that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has reversed its stand on disapproving the use of antibiotics in food-producing animals, I have to wonder just who is being protected and why.

Just a year and a half ago, the FDA took the stance that it would act on withdrawing its approval of the use of antibiotics in these animals because of the preponderance of evidence available that this use of medications is creating antibiotic-resistant organisms in the meat that is then passed to humans.

I have to think that big-money interests have influenced the decision of the FDA on this matter -- and that idea is repugnant to me. Without the FDA providing replicated scientific studies that refute the fact that the use of antibiotics in animals is not detrimental to the health of humans, I cannot think of any other plausible reason for this federal agency back-pedaling on this issue.

I may not have all the facts, so I'd like to know your thoughts on this issue. Do you have strong feelings on the use of antibiotics in animals in our food supply or is this a non-issue for you?

Obama Backs Off on Veto Promise

President Barack Obama had promised to veto the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 -- that is until wording in some statutes were changed. I thought the president and I and many other concerned Americans were on the same page on this issue.

I thought the president's concern was about the wording addressing the indefinite detention of American citizens by the military in the absence of charges or a trial. Turns out that wording doesn't bother the man who is also a constitutional lawyer. It was other wording, wording that the Commander-in-Chief felt threatened the Oval Office's powers to deal with terrorists.

Despite the president's change of heart in using his veto power on the Congressionally-approved NDAA, I have still written the White House with my concerns about what I see as provisions that place American civil liberties at risk.

Don't take my word for what this legislation entails. Read Glenn Greenwald of Salon.com who details the three myths about indefinite detention of American citizens on U.S. soil.

Where do you stand on this issue?

Politics As Usual...And They Stink

It never ceases to amaze me what our elected officials choose to find important at any given moment. Right now, Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH)has decided to arm wrestle the president into an untenable position on the payroll tax cut Obama has been lobbying for.

The payroll tax cut would be a continuation of the decrease in Social Security taxes that those employed pay from the usual 6.2 percent to 4.2 percent. The current tax cut is set to expire on December 31 unless a new measure is signed into law.

Members of the House have tied additional issues into the measure, seeking to force the president to sign the legislation that would also give the go-ahead for the controversial Keystone XL Pipeline project. President Obama has wanted a different route created for the proposed pipeline, set to carry crude oil from Canada to the Mississippi gulf. The president's hesitance has to do with concerns of underground water being adversely affected by the current route. House Republicans are poo-pooing such concerns, saying it's time for the pipeline now.

Also added to the payroll tax cut measure by the House Republicans include removing EPA restrictions on emissions from boilers and small incinerators, a move the EPA reports will cause over 8,000 premature deaths each year.

Obama has promised to veto the payroll tax cut bill if the pipeline go-ahead is attached to the measure, causing Congress to work into its intended holiday recess.

It's my hope that the Senate will be the voice of reason in this issue; few believe that will happen. If it does not, I support the president if he carries through the veto he has promised.

What are your feelings on the issues? Do you support the Keystone XL pipeline project as it is? What about the payroll tax cut continuation? How about the politics of the whole she-bang?

Obama Must Fulfill Promise of Veto

Former FBI Special Agent Coleen Rowley: Obama Should Veto Empire Over Republic

More Thoughts on Indefinite Detention of American Citizens

Bruce Bowers blog entry on the National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2012.

Medicare Adds Preventive Services for Obesity

Today the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services announced today that it will begin covering payment of screening for obesity, a nutritional assessment for those who qualify and counseling services through primary care providers.

Obesity is a large problem in the United States (no pun intended) and unabated can lead to many chronic illnesses, not the least of which are heart attack, stroke and diabetes. This preventive program is another measure via the Affordable Care Act and is a good weapon to have in the preventive services arsenal.

Like so many things in life, prevention of illness or disability is preferred to treatment of the same. Motivated obese Medicare recipients will likely reap the most health benefit from these newly covered services.

What I think is unfortunate is that the medical aspect of obesity treatment is not being linked to the mental health aspect of it. The way the system is currently designed, payment for these services will only be provided when a person goes through a primary care practitioner, which means a physician, nurse practitioner, physician assistant or clinical nurse specialist in a family medicine, internal medicine, or geriatric medicine.

I entrust my health care to practitioners in these specialties. In fact, I have always chosen a family practitioner because of their broad knowledge base. But I think counseling, even for obesity, belongs in the realm of mental health. The problem of obesity is a complicated one and, it seems to me, to call for the integrated services of a medical practitioner and a mental health practitioner for the most positive outcome for the individual.

As a taxpayer, I understand that the cost of mental health services in some areas may be cost prohibitive at this time. As an individual who understand you don't change a lifetime of habits overnight, I lament this well-meaning but inadequate decision.

How do you feel about these newly covered services?

American Citizens May Soon Find "Battlefield" Is Their Own Home

I'll be the first to admit I don't always agree with stands the American Civil Liberties Union takes, but I am still open to learning their ideas. In today's news the ACLU has made public proposed legislative changes to the National Defense Authorization Act.

The proposed changes would allow the military to indefinitely confine persons suspected of violations of the NDAA without charges or trial any where in the world -- including American soil.

What is now under the authority of the Department of Justice would be transferred to the jurisdiction of the military including custodial and prosecutorial authority. The provisions, section 1031 and 1032 of the NDAA for 2012, were proposed in secret and passed through a closed-door committee meeting without a single hearing.

It's frightening enough the powers the police have at times without enabling the military to be able to wield its authority on civilians.

You can check out more information here at the ACLU site and contact your senators on this issue if you wish directly through this link.

To read more about this issue, visit here.

Learning About Mental Health From an Experienced Source

There are a fair number of illnesses and conditions who have overcome public stigma, such as epilepsy and leprosy. Attitudes toward mental illness have softened somewhat over time, but there is still much misunderstanding and fear surrounding those people who are diagnosed with a mental illness.

The misunderstanding of mental health issues by the general public isn't surprising; this is one area of medical science where there remain more questions than answers. The fear that people feel about those with mental illness is borne of the same misunderstandings and misinformation that used to surround minority groups of people.

With understanding often comes acceptance, so it is understanding of mental health conditions that we must seek.

The New York Times is in the midst of a series of articles about people with major mental illness diagnoses. The articles provide insight from these people who have come forward to share their experiences in a positive light.

There is no better way to overcome stereotypes and misunderstanding than to hear information straight from those who know mental illness best -- and that would be those who are living their lives with the conditions.

What word comes to mind first when you think of mental illness?

I Believe in the American System of Government

I believe in the democratic process in general and believe it can and does work in the American government. I believe it is a system that can work. Call me naive or uninformed; it's okay with me.

The political system in the United States may be hobbling on a bad leg these days, but it is yet fixable. First of all, people who are eligible to vote need to do so. Few nations have as poor a voter turn-out as America does. Voting is a right, but its also a privilege not afforded to some citizens in other parts of the world.

Women and people of color, I would think, would fill voting booths in droves. These groups are the ones who most recently gained the right to vote. Put it to good use.

In addition to using your voting power, contact your elected officials once they are in office. Use the phone, email, or the good ole United States Postal Services to mail a letter -- it doesn't matter which form you use -- just keep your representatives apprised of your views on issues.

Stay abreast of current issues or pending legislation. Voice whatever your views are in a courteous and matter-of-fact manner. Rants aren't likely to be taken as seriously as well-thought-out reasoning. Even when you agree with the way an elected official is doing something, take a moment to say so to him/her. Positive messages are as important as dissenting or negative messages.

For some reason, presidential elections have a better voter turn-out than more locally-based elections. No doubt the media hoopla for a least 12 months preceding a presidential election spurs voters to action, but the truth is, local elections affect your life in more upfront and personal ways. Don't discount their importance.

In summation, it doesn't matter what your politics are -- or if you have any at all. As a citizen with voting privileges it is your duty to make this democracy work -- as much, if not more, than the elected officials.

Earthquakes in Oklahoma?

You've got to be kidding me. Who ever heard of earthquakes in Oklahoma, of all places.

To paraphrase a song from The Music Man: "I say there's trouble right here in Oklahoma. Trouble with a capital T. That rhymes with E and that stands for earthquakes." "T" of course, is for tornadoes, that windy spectacle of Mother Nature's glory. Folks here in the Red Man state expect a bustling tornado season each year and many have taken precautions for safety from the twisters.

Earthquakes, now -- that's another story. It seems the state has something like an average of 50 earthquakes a year, but they've generally been small by quake standards and only noticed by people near the epicenters. The weekend of November 5th and 6th changed all that with a introductory tremblor of 4.7 magnitude in the wee hours of Saturday night and then the "big one," a 5.6 quake late Saturday night. Ten or more aftershocks were felt throughout Sunday.

The bigger earthquake established a record here in the state, and wasn't far behind the magnitude of the August 2011 quake on the East Coast that produced cracks in the Washington Monument.

Fortunately, there was only one reported injury in connection with the quakes, and sadly, that was of a man who was scrambling to get outside his house and tripped and hit the wall.

Minor damage has been reported to some homes and buildings and Highway 62 buckled in three places. It turns out a conventional home owners insurance policy doesn't cover earthquake damage. A separate earthquake policy or addendum is required, as with flood insurance. Tulsa area insurance companies reported they were inundated with earthquake insurance calls. I can only begin to guess the price on it after these sizable quakes.

Seismologists have no explanation as to why these quakes occurred, so it would seem they won't be able to predict future tremblors with accuracy either. Common sense dictates that Oklahomans become familiar with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Disaster Preparedness for Earthquakes.

Graphic Pictures on Cigarette Labels Banned...For Now

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, in its wisdom and aching desire to rid the nation of cigarette smoke, had issued new guidelines for warnings required on cigarette packages and advertisement, set to go into effect September 2012. The guidelines require the inclusion of graphic images on packaging and advertising material of the effects of smoking, including a body in the morgue, a mouth with cancer and a man with a tracheotomy.

I applaud the underlying goals of the graphic image warnings: to keep kids from smoking and encouraging smokers to quit. I think the method chosen to do this is inappropriate. Today, U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon agreed, blocking the measure from going into action until a lawsuit brought by tobacco makers can be heard.

Tobacco companies have filed a lawsuit against the requirement for graphic images based on the First Amendment's right to free speech.

Imagine if every bottle, can or pitcher of alcohol contained graphic pictures, such as mangled cars and bodies. Would Twinkies and other junk food soon contain pictures of obese people, clogged arteries and fatty livers?

Whatever your stance is on tobacco smoking, how do you feel about the use of graphic images on packaging?

Killing People to Save Money?

Okay, "killing" is a strong word; it would be better to say "allowing to go undiagnosed and untreated for conditions that often result in death." Who is doing this, you ask? The United States Preventive Services Task Force, a part of Health and Human Services. Sounds fishy? I wish it were so. Steve Forbes of Forbes has already explained it succinctly in an editorial here. I've had my suspicions about what the government and insurance industries were going to do with the millions of baby boomers now reaching their senior years. I suspected euthanasia might become legal and suggested for that generation. It seems that the first step is to suggest folks not get important tests for early diagnosis of prostate and breast cancer. Yep, that would reduce the senior population in pretty short order.

Southern-Style Smoked Pork Loin Recipe

Southern-Style Smoked Pork Loin Recipe

Myth Busting Campaign Promises

These candidates are certainly not the first to "talk trash" during a campaign; politic hopefuls from both parties and even independent parties make promises based in fiction.

It's interesting that most of the mainstream media who cover these candidates, "news" anchors and talk hosts are not pointing out the factual error of anyone's promises.

As citizens, we can either stay mum and allow the politicians to believe we accept blatant false promises as being okay, or we can make our voices heard that this type of behavior and grandstanding is unacceptable. On which side of the issue do you stand? How do we let the political machine know our thoughts on the subject?