Obama Arizona Speech 011211

As Prepared for Delivery.

To the families of those we've lost; to all who called them friends; to the students of this university, the public servants gathered tonight, and the people of Tucson and Arizona: I have come here tonight as an American who, like all Americans, kneels to pray with you today, and will stand by you tomorrow.

There is nothing I can say that will fill the sudden hole torn in your hearts. But know this: the hopes of a nation are here tonight. We mourn with you for the fallen. We join you in your grief. And we add our faith to yours that Representative Gabrielle Giffords and the other living victims of this tragedy pull through.

As Scripture tells us:

There is a river whose streams make glad the city of God,
the holy place where the Most High dwells.
God is within her, she will not fall;
God will help her at break of day.

On Saturday morning, Gabby, her staff, and many of her constituents gathered outside a supermarket to exercise their right to peaceful assembly and free speech. They were fulfilling a central tenet of the democracy envisioned by our founders - representatives of the people answering to their constituents, so as to carry their concerns to our nation's capital. Gabby called it "Congress on Your Corner" - just an updated version of government of and by and for the people.

That is the quintessentially American scene that was shattered by a gunman's bullets. And the six people who lost their lives on Saturday - they too represented what is best in America.

Judge John Roll served our legal system for nearly 40 years. A graduate of this university and its law school, Judge Roll was recommended for the federal bench by John McCain twenty years ago, appointed by President George H.W. Bush, and rose to become Arizona's chief federal judge. His colleagues described him as the hardest-working judge within the Ninth Circuit. He was on his way back from attending Mass, as he did every day, when he decided to stop by and say hi to his Representative. John is survived by his loving wife, Maureen, his three sons, and his five grandchildren.

George and Dorothy Morris - "Dot" to her friends - were high school sweethearts who got married and had two daughters. They did everything together, traveling the open road in their RV, enjoying what their friends called a 50-year honeymoon. Saturday morning, they went by the Safeway to hear what their Congresswoman had to say. When gunfire rang out, George, a former Marine, instinctively tried to shield his wife. Both were shot. Dot passed away.

A New Jersey native, Phyllis Schneck retired to Tucson to beat the snow. But in the summer, she would return East, where her world revolved around her 3 children, 7 grandchildren, and 2 year-old great-granddaughter. A gifted quilter, she'd often work under her favorite tree, or sometimes sew aprons with the logos of the Jets and the Giants to give out at the church where she volunteered. A Republican, she took a liking to Gabby, and wanted to get to know her better.

Dorwan and Mavy Stoddard grew up in Tucson together - about seventy years ago. They moved apart and started their own respective families, but after both were widowed they found their way back here, to, as one of Mavy's daughters put it, "be boyfriend and girlfriend again." When they weren't out on the road in their motor home, you could find them just up the road, helping folks in need at the Mountain Avenue Church of Christ. A retired construction worker, Dorwan spent his spare time fixing up the church along with their dog, Tux. His final act of selflessness was to dive on top of his wife, sacrificing his life for hers.

Everything Gabe Zimmerman did, he did with passion - but his true passion was people. As Gabby's outreach director, he made the cares of thousands of her constituents his own, seeing to it that seniors got the Medicare benefits they had earned, that veterans got the medals and care they deserved, that government was working for ordinary folks. He died doing what he loved - talking with people and seeing how he could help. Gabe is survived by his parents, Ross and Emily, his brother, Ben, and his fiancée, Kelly, who he planned to marry next year.

And then there is nine year-old Christina Taylor Green. Christina was an A student, a dancer, a gymnast, and a swimmer. She often proclaimed that she wanted to be the first woman to play in the major leagues, and as the only girl on her Little League team, no one put it past her. She showed an appreciation for life uncommon for a girl her age, and would remind her mother, "We are so blessed. We have the best life." And she'd pay those blessings back by participating in a charity that helped children who were less fortunate.

Our hearts are broken by their sudden passing. Our hearts are broken - and yet, our hearts also have reason for fullness.

Our hearts are full of hope and thanks for the 13 Americans who survived the shooting, including the congresswoman many of them went to see on Saturday. I have just come from the University Medical Center, just a mile from here, where our friend Gabby courageously fights to recover even as we speak. And I can tell you this - she knows we're here and she knows we love her and she knows that we will be rooting for her throughout what will be a difficult journey.

And our hearts are full of gratitude for those who saved others. We are grateful for Daniel Hernandez, a volunteer in Gabby's office who ran through the chaos to minister to his boss, tending to her wounds to keep her alive. We are grateful for the men who tackled the gunman as he stopped to reload. We are grateful for a petite 61 year-old, Patricia Maisch, who wrestled away the killer's ammunition, undoubtedly saving some lives. And we are grateful for the doctors and nurses and emergency medics who worked wonders to heal those who'd been hurt.

These men and women remind us that heroism is found not only on the fields of battle. They remind us that heroism does not require special training or physical strength. Heroism is here, all around us, in the hearts of so many of our fellow citizens, just waiting to be summoned - as it was on Saturday morning.

Their actions, their selflessness, also pose a challenge to each of us. It raises the question of what, beyond the prayers and expressions of concern, is required of us going forward How can we honor the fallen? How can we be true to their memory?

You see, when a tragedy like this strikes, it is part of our nature to demand explanations - to try to impose some order on the chaos, and make sense out of that which seems senseless. Already we've seen a national conversation commence, not only about the motivations behind these killings, but about everything from the merits of gun safety laws to the adequacy of our mental health systems. Much of this process, of debating what might be done to prevent such tragedies in the future, is an essential ingredient in our exercise of self-government.

But at a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized - at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who think differently than we do - it's important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds.

Scripture tells us that there is evil in the world, and that terrible things happen for reasons that defy human understanding. In the words of Job, "when I looked for light, then came darkness." Bad things happen, and we must guard against simple explanations in the aftermath.

For the truth is that none of us can know exactly what triggered this vicious attack. None of us can know with any certainty what might have stopped those shots from being fired, or what thoughts lurked in the inner recesses of a violent man's mind.

So yes, we must examine all the facts behind this tragedy. We cannot and will not be passive in the face of such violence. We should be willing to challenge old assumptions in order to lessen the prospects of violence in the future.

But what we can't do is use this tragedy as one more occasion to turn on one another. As we discuss these issues, let each of us do so with a good dose of humility. Rather than pointing fingers or assigning blame, let us use this occasion to expand our moral imaginations, to listen to each other more carefully, to sharpen our instincts for empathy, and remind ourselves of all the ways our hopes and dreams are bound together.

After all, that's what most of us do when we lose someone in our family - especially if the loss is unexpected. We're shaken from our routines, and forced to look inward. We reflect on the past. Did we spend enough time with an aging parent, we wonder. Did we express our gratitude for all the sacrifices they made for us? Did we tell a spouse just how desperately we loved them, not just once in awhile but every single day?

So sudden loss causes us to look backward - but it also forces us to look forward, to reflect on the present and the future, on the manner in which we live our lives and nurture our relationships with those who are still with us. We may ask ourselves if we've shown enough kindness and generosity and compassion to the people in our lives. Perhaps we question whether we are doing right by our children, or our community, and whether our priorities are in order. We recognize our own mortality, and are reminded that in the fleeting time we have on this earth, what matters is not wealth, or status, or power, or fame - but rather, how well we have loved, and what small part we have played in bettering the lives of others.

That process of reflection, of making sure we align our values with our actions - that, I believe, is what a tragedy like this requires. For those who were harmed, those who were killed - they are part of our family, an American family 300 million strong. We may not have known them personally, but we surely see ourselves in them. In George and Dot, in Dorwan and Mavy, we sense the abiding love we have for our own husbands, our own wives, our own life partners. Phyllis - she's our mom or grandma; Gabe our brother or son. In Judge Roll, we recognize not only a man who prized his family and doing his job well, but also a man who embodied America's fidelity to the law. In Gabby, we see a reflection of our public spiritedness, that desire to participate in that sometimes frustrating, sometimes contentious, but always necessary and never-ending process to form a more perfect union.

And in Christina we see all of our children. So curious, so trusting, so energetic and full of magic.

So deserving of our love.

And so deserving of our good example. If this tragedy prompts reflection and debate, as it should, let's make sure it's worthy of those we have lost. Let's make sure it's not on the usual plane of politics and point scoring and pettiness that drifts away with the next news cycle.

The loss of these wonderful people should make every one of us strive to be better in our private lives - to be better friends and neighbors, co-workers and parents. And if, as has been discussed in recent days, their deaths help usher in more civility in our public discourse, let's remember that it is not because a simple lack of civility caused this tragedy, but rather because only a more civil and honest public discourse can help us face up to our challenges as a nation, in a way that would make them proud. It should be because we want to live up to the example of public servants like John Roll and Gabby Giffords, who knew first and foremost that we are all Americans, and that we can question each other's ideas without questioning each other's love of country, and that our task, working together, is to constantly widen the circle of our concern so that we bequeath the American dream to future generations.

I believe we can be better. Those who died here, those who saved lives here - they help me believe. We may not be able to stop all evil in the world, but I know that how we treat one another is entirely up to us. I believe that for all our imperfections, we are full of decency and goodness, and that the forces that divide us are not as strong as those that unite us.

That's what I believe, in part because that's what a child like Christina Taylor Green believed. Imagine: here was a young girl who was just becoming aware of our democracy; just beginning to understand the obligations of citizenship; just starting to glimpse the fact that someday she too might play a part in shaping her nation's future. She had been elected to her student council; she saw public service as something exciting, something hopeful. She was off to meet her congresswoman, someone she was sure was good and important and might be a role model. She saw all this through the eyes of a child, undimmed by the cynicism or vitriol that we adults all too often just take for granted.

I want us to live up to her expectations. I want our democracy to be as good as she imagined it. All of us - we should do everything we can to make sure this country lives up to our children's expectations.

Christina was given to us on September 11th, 2001, one of 50 babies born that day to be pictured in a book called "Faces of Hope." On either side of her photo in that book were simple wishes for a child's life. "I hope you help those in need," read one. "I hope you know all of the words to the National Anthem and sing it with your hand over your heart. I hope you jump in rain puddles."

If there are rain puddles in heaven, Christina is jumping in them today. And here on Earth, we place our hands over our hearts, and commit ourselves as Americans to forging a country that is forever worthy of her gentle, happy spirit.

May God bless and keep those we've lost in restful and eternal peace. May He love and watch over the survivors. And may He bless the United States of America.

Taxpayers Funding Terrorists in Afghanistan

Healthcare, Financial Bailouts, Welfare, Terrorists. The Things YOU fund.

Hey folks,

Steny Hoyer just said this.

"We're lying to ourselves and our children if we say we can maintain our current levels of entitlement spending, defense spending and taxation without bankrupting our country,"

GO TELL YOUR BOSS Obama. YOU and your ilk ARE the ones spending us into oblivion.

YOU folks, YOU are paying for Obamacare, Financial Bailouts, Welfare, and soon to be for Cap and Tax. Now we learn that YOU, which includes me, are funding Terrorists. According to CNS - Taliban Extorting ‘Protection Payments’ From Taxpayer-Funded Private Security Contract Friday, June 25, 2010 By Edwin Mora

(CNSNews.com) - Some of the $2 billion in U.S. taxpayer funds spent on a Defense Department contract for the private security of “vital” U.S. military supplies in Afghanistan may be making its way to the Taliban as “protection payments for safe passage,” a House investigative report found.

The State Department confirmed that the Taliban continues to receive “protection money” when asked about the House report, which includes December 2009 testimony from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Clinton told a Senate panel, “one of the major sources for the Taliban is the protection money” for safe passage of U.S. supply convoys.

“Taliban continues to extort protection money as a source of revenue just like via the opium trade,” Darby Holladay, a spokesman for the State Department, the government agency that oversees U.S. civilian forces in Afghanistan, told CNSNews.com.

While testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Dec. 3, 2009, Secretary Clinton said, “Much of the corruption [in Afghanistan] is fueled by money that has poured into that country over the last eight years.”

She also said, “When we are so dependent upon long supply lines, as in Afghanistan, where everything has to be imported, it is much more difficult than it was in Iraq…”

“One of the major sources of funding for the Taliban is the protection money,” she later added.

So YOU are paying the terrorists. Whatever happened to seeking out and destroying the Enemy? Seriously folks, they will destroy us the first opportunity they get, and WE are FUNDING them to do so.

Holladay told CNSNews.com, “We have seen the House report and are reviewing it.”

The congressional report, which was put together by the House Oversight and Government Reform subcommittee on national security and foreign affairs, echoed Secretary Clinton’s comments about the Taliban receiving “protection money” from U.S. funds spent on Afghanistan.

The report focused on the $2.16-billion Host Nation Trucking (HNT) DOD contract that provides "over 70 percent of the total goods and material distributed to U.S. troops in the field, roughly 6,000 to 8,000 truck missions per month."

"The principal private security subcontractors on the HNT contract are warlords, strongmen, commanders, and militia leaders who compete with the Afghan central government for power and authority," the House subcommittee report said.

“Protection payments for safe passage are a significant potential source of funding for the Taliban,” the report stated as one of its main findings.

"Within the HNT contractor community, many believe that the highway warlords who provide security in turn make protection payments to insurgents to coordinate safe passage," the report explained.

“The Taliban regularly extort rents from a variety of licit and illicit industries, and it is plausible that the Taliban would try to extort protection payments from the coalition supply chain that runs through territory in which they freely operate,” the report added.

Why are they "freely operating" ANYWHERE? This is just insane.

Furthermore, the report said, “Trucking convoys have become favorite targets of the Taliban and other insurgents, who frequently stop convoys to demand money, set the trucks on fire, and kill or kidnap the drivers.”

The House panel that issued the report held a hearing on June 22 entitled “Investigation of Protection Payments for Safe Passage along the Afghan Supply Chain” in which members of Congress questioned DOD officials about the report’s findings.

After testifying at the hearing, Lt. Gen. William Phillips, the principal military deputy to the assistant secretary of the Army for acquisition, logistics, and technology, told CNSNews.com that the DOD takes the report's “allegations” about taxpayer money possibly funding Taliban insurgents “very seriously,” adding, “We have already taken action.”

He continued, “There is an ongoing investigation, so I think we should let the ongoing investigation also continue, because they’ll gather the facts and the evidence for us to take the appropriate actions.”

The House report noted, “When HNT contractors self-reported to the military that they were being extorted by warlords for protection payments for safe passage and that these payments were ‘funding the insurgency,’ they largely met with indifference and inaction.”

Nevertheless, during the committee, the DOD panel that was testifying emphasized that DOD takes the “allegations” in the House report “very seriously.”

The DOD witness panel besides Lt. Gen. Phillips included Gary Motsek, assistant deputy under secretary of defense for the office of program support, and Brig. Gen. John Nicholson, director of the Pakistan-Afghanistan coordination cell for the DOD Joint Staff.

In regards to the DOD officials’ reaction during the hearing to the report findings about taxpayer money being used as “protection payments” for warlords and even the Taliban, Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), ranking member of the panel holding the hearing, told CNSNews.com that the DOD has not been “sufficiently concerned with this issue.”

Rep. Flake added, “This investigation has been going on for six months now, and they seem only vaguely aware of it, and only last week did we get any response to the investigation at all. I think a lot more can be done.”

Regarding the DOD officials’ testimony, Rep. John Tierney (D-Mass.), chairman of the subcommittee that issued the report, told CNSNews.com, “I think I’m satisfied now that the attention has been focused on a very important issue.”

What the hell does that mean? He is satisfied that people found out about it and are talking about it? Is it still going on? Yes. But he is satisfied?

The report highlighted the need to use private contractors to deliver goods and materials to U.S. troops in Afghanistan.

According to the report, “the task of feeding, fueling, and arming American troops at over 200 forward operating bases and combat outposts sprinkled across a difficult and hostile terrain with only minimal road infrastructure is nothing short of Herculean.”

However, the report also recommended that the DOD “assume direct responsibility for supply chain security providers,” and that that the DOD “analyze effect of coalition contracting on Afghan corruption.”

The $2.16 billion trucking contract was “split among eight Afghan, American, and Middle Eastern companies,” according to the report.

“The [trucking] contract allows the United States to dedicate a greater proportion of its troops to other counterinsurgency priorities instead of logistics,” explained the report.

Another underhanded misuse of YOUR money by Liberal Loons? Paying off, supporting, the Enemy? I'm sorry folks, I know that some of you will not like this statement, but it is true. If someone attacks me, my home, my family, I will do any and everything to ensure that this never happens again. That means destroy their means to ever do it again, and or and up to KILLING them. If someone tells me, "I hate you. I hate your Family. I am building a bomb to blow up your house, I will destroy you." I will not give them the chance. I will take them out before they even think about carrying out their plan. I sure as hell would not be given them the money to do it.
Peter

Sources:
CNS - Taliban Extorting ‘Protection Payments’ From Taxpayer-Funded Private Security Contract

Hillary Backing Pelosi's "Chirica" Plan

Transcript of Hillary's ICPD Speech

Hey folks,

You really can't make this stuff up. I know, I know, it's Transcript Weekend here, but you have to hear this, and you HAD to understand what it really means. Hillary delivered a major speech Friday to mark the 15th anniversary of the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD). Here is Hillary.

Thank you very much. (Applause.) Thank you all. Thank you. Thank you all very much.

My goodness, thank you. Wow, this is a wonderful occasion. Several of us were quite nervous when we saw the snow start last night, so I’m delighted the sun is out and shining on all of you here as we gather for this commemoration of the 15th anniversary of the groundbreaking gathering and agreement in Cairo.

When I think about that and the thousands of people who were part of it who came together to declare with one voice that reproductive healthcare is critical to the health of women, and that women’s health is essential to the prosperity and opportunity of all, to the stability of families and communities, and the sustainability and development of nations, it makes me nostalgic for conferences that are held that actually produce results – (laughter) – and give us a framework for moving forward. There is no doubt in my mind that the work that was done and the commitments that were made in Cairo are still really the bulwark of what we intend to be doing and are expected to do on behalf of women and girls.

The year 2015 is the target year. Part of the reason we wanted to have this commemoration is not only to look backwards, but to look forward. What is it we will do between now and 2015? Remember what was expected of us. All governments will make access to reproductive healthcare and family planning services a basic right. We will dramatically reduce infant, child, and maternal mortality. We will open the doors of education to all citizens, but especially to girls and women.

OK STOP! Translation, ABORTION. Continue

It is somewhat hard to believe in retrospect that Cairo was the first ever global forum that recognized the connection between women’s health, the quality of women’s lives, and human progress on a broader scale. So I am delighted to join you in marking this landmark event, but more importantly, to asking you to join with us in rededicating ourselves to the goals that we embraced 15 years ago. They remain critical and they remain unfilled.

We have not made it a Legal RIGHT for Women to get abortions at will, at any time, for any reason. Funding for Abortions is still in Obamacare folks.

I’ve had the honor and privilege as I look around this audience of knowing many of you, some of you for a very long time. And I know how committed many of you have been and continue to be. We have made measurable progress since 1994 in improving the health and the lives of women and children, especially girls. For example, the use of modern contraceptives worldwide has increased from under 10 percent in the 1960s to 43 percent in 2008. We have greater access to neo-natal care, including medicines that prevent the spread of HIV from mother to child. We’ve significantly increased child survival rates. The number of girls enrolled in schools around the world has gone up. And we’ve come closer to a less measurable but still critical goal: The integration of gender into a range of global programs, including our efforts through the United Nations to bring an end to sexual and gender-based violence in places of conflict.

However, vast inequities remain. Too often, still today in 2010, women and girls bear the burdens of regional and global crises, whether it’s an economic downturn or climate change or political instability. They still are the majority of the world’s poor, unschooled, unhealthy, and underfed. They are rarely the cause of violent consequences, but increasingly – of violent conflicts, but increasingly they bear the consequences of such conflicts. We’ve seen that from the Congo to Bosnia to Burma. And 15 years after the Cairo conference, far too many women still have little or no access to reproductive health services, including family planning and maternal healthcare.

Sounds good, but they do not really care about these Women's daily lives, with the exception of Abortion. Why? I'll get to that in a second.

When we look at this deficit in healthcare for women, we can see what it means in terms of lost productivity, lost resources, and lost lives. Nearly half the women in the developing world deliver their babies without a nurse, a midwife, a doctor, or access to crucial medical care. Global rates of maternal mortality remain perilously high; one woman dies every minute of every day in pregnancy or childbirth, and for every woman who dies, another 20 suffer from injury, infection, or disease every minute.

Sounds compassionate. Doesn't it?

More than 215 million women worldwide lack access to the modern forms of contraception, and this contributes to the nearly 20 million unsafe abortions that take place very year. Sexually transmitted diseases, of course including, but not limited to, HIV and AIDS, claim millions of lives annually among women. Fistula destroys the lives of millions, and it is often the result of pregnancies that occur when a girl is too young. An estimated 70 million – that is 70 million women and girls worldwide – have been subjected to female genital cutting, a procedure that is not only painful and traumatic but is also the source of infections and increased risks of injury during childbirth.

Now, as those of us gathered in the Ben Franklin Room on the eight floor of the State Department know very well, the topic of reproductive health is subject to a great deal of debate. But I think we should all agree that these numbers are not only grim, but after 15 years, they are intolerable. For if we believe that human rights are women’s rights and women’s rights are human rights, then we cannot accept the ongoing marginalization of half the world’s population. We cannot accept it morally, politically, socially, or economically. (Applause)

So we’re here today to examine the distance that remains to be traveled before the world fully realizes the ICPD goals. This is a journey that the Obama Administration and the United States Government will travel with you. But we need to travel quickly, because we only have five years to meet our original goals.

For the health statistics that I just mentioned point to a broader impact. There’s a direct connection between a woman’s ability to plan her family, space her pregnancies, and give birth safely, and her ability to get an education, work outside the home, support her family, and participate fully in the life of her community.

Typical Feminist Liberation BS. Women are to important to give Birth. It is BAD to be a Mother. It hinders Women. ETC. But that's not it.

When a girl becomes a mother before she becomes literate, when a woman gives birth alone and is left with a permanent disability, when a mother toils daily to feed her large family but cannot convince her husband to agree to contraception, these struggles represent suffering that can and should be avoided. They represent potential that goes unfulfilled. And they also represent an opportunity to extend critical help to women worldwide and the children who depend on them.

Investing in the health of women, adolescents, and girls is not only the right thing to do; it is also the smart thing to do. That is why we are integrating women’s issues as key elements of our foreign policy agenda and in, especially, our Global Health Initiative and our Global Food Security Initiative. That is why we saw the first appointment of an ambassador for global women issues, and it didn’t take me long to decide who should fill that position. It is why we are launching women’s entrepreneurial efforts through Pathways to Prosperity in Latin America, to ensure that prosperity is spread more broadly, including to women. It is why we are working with religious leaders in Afghanistan and Pakistan to increase access to information about family planning and preventive healthcare.

We are doing all of these things because we have seen that when women and girls have the tools to stay healthy and the opportunity to contribute to their families’ well-being, they flourish and so do the people around them.

Consider this one story from Uganda, where USAID works with the International Planned Parenthood Federation to provide reproductive health services, education, and skills training to low-income women. Among their clients are a group of teenage girls who call themselves the “Moonlight Stars.” Their parents are dead, leaving them the sole providers for their younger brothers and sisters, without any other options, they were working as prostitutes. Through this USAID-funded program, they gained access to condoms and comprehensive sex education to protect themselves from disease and pregnancy. They also began taking classes in sewing and knitting and other kinds of skills that could be used to help support their siblings without endangering their physical or emotional well-being. And thanks to this job training and the support that accompanied it, many of the Moonlight Stars have left prostitution behind and embarked on a new path of opportunity for themselves and their families.

Which is GREAT.

While investing in women lifts many lives, the inverse is also true. In societies where women’s rights and roles are denied, girls are forbidden from attending school or they pay a very heavy price to try to do so. Few have the right to decide whether or when to get married or become mothers. Poverty, political oppression, and even violent extremism often follow.

Maternal and child health are particularly important indicators of broader progress. In recent years, we’ve learned more about the conditions that accompany political unrest. It turns out that one of the most constant predictors for political upheaval is the rate of infant mortality. In places where the rate of infant mortality is high, the quality of life is low because investment in and access to healthcare are often out of reach. And that breeds the kind of frustration, hopelessness, and anger that we’ve seen. We also know that child mortality is closely connected with maternal mortality. When a mother dies, her children are at much greater risk of dying as well.

These struggles can’t be separated, and neither can their solutions. In the Obama Administration, we are convinced of the value of investing in women and girls, and we understand there is a direct line between a woman’s reproductive health and her ability to lead a productive, fulfilling life. And therefore, we believe investing in the potential of women and girls is the smartest investment we can make. It is connected to every problem on anyone’s mind around the world today. (Applause.)

Again, Motherhood is bad. Doesn't come right out and say it, but that is exactly what she means.

So we are rededicating ourselves to the global efforts to improve reproductive health for women and girls. Under the leadership of this Administration, we are committed to meeting the Cairo goals. We’re committed to working in partnership with all of you. One of President Obama’s first actions in office was to overturn the Mexico City policy, which greatly limited our ability to fund family planning programs. (Applause.)

Abortions.

We have pledged new funding, new programs, and a renewed commitment to achieve Millennium Development Goal Five, namely a [three-fourths] reduction in global maternal mortality, and universal access to reproductive healthcare. This goal is, again, critical to and interconnected with every other millennium development goal. But the world has made less progress toward fulfilling that goal than any other.

This year, the United States renewed funding of reproductive healthcare through the United Nations Population Fund, and more funding is on the way. (Applause.) The U.S. Congress recently appropriated more than $648 million in foreign assistance to family planning and reproductive health programs worldwide. That’s the largest allocation in more than a decade – since we last had a Democratic president, I might add. (Applause.)

That's $648 Million of YOUR money to pay for Abortions in other Countries.

In addition to new funding, we’ve launched a new program that will be the centerpiece of our foreign policy, the Global Health Initiative, which commits us to spending $63 billion over six years to improve global health by investing in efforts to reduce maternal and child mortality, prevent millions of unintended pregnancies, and avert millions of new HIV infections, among other goals. This initiative will employ a new approach to fighting disease and promoting health. It will address interrelated health challenges together, for example, by integrating family planning, maternal health services, and HIV/AIDS screening and treatment, so that women receiving reproductive care will also receive HIV counseling, and will be referred to an HIV clinic if they need one.

Another $63 BILLION of your money. That we do not have.

We’re now seeing the rise of the largest youth generation in the history of the world. They need and deserve to know how to stay healthy, and through this initiative, we will be providing critical information to them. The Global Health Initiative will also focus on helping countries strengthen their own health systems. We want to build sustainable health systems in countries. And it will ensure that all of our global health programs, including nutrition, malaria, TB, HIV/AIDS are designed to meet the needs of women and girls, including by taking into account the many social and economic factors that have an impact on their health from sexual coercion to domestic violence to pervasive gender inequities.

You know that HIV/AIDS is now morphing into a women’s disease, and increasingly younger and younger women in many, many poor countries are infected. We know that expanding access to contraception helps only if women are empowered to use it, that protecting oneself from HIV is harder when one’s life depends on staying in a man’s good favor, and that all the prenatal care in the world won’t protect a mother and child from an abusive home. Promoting women’s health and children’s health means improving the quality of their lives on many levels, and it also means reaching out to men and boys to encourage them to become advocates and allies.

So we have our work cut out for us, but we have an excellent roadmap in the Cairo program of action and a worthy target in the Millennium Development Goal Number Five. And we’re going to need your help. In everything that we’re doing in the Department and at USAID, we are injecting the needs and the roles of women and girls. We’re asking for how women and girls can play more of a role in their societies, be more involved in peacemaking and peacekeeping, assist in mitigating against and preventing climate change. Just across the board, we are making it clear that there has to be special attention paid to the needs of women and girls. It’s in America’s national security interests to do so.

OK. HERE is the real meaning behind all this. I know we are going to go REAL Long here. Sorry to all my friends out there that love to repost. You have to pay attention to the following.

I want to close with the story of one woman whose life was transformed by the work that the people in this room do every single day. Caroline Ditina is a young woman from the Democratic Republic of Congo who for years endured the shame and ostracism caused by obstetric fistula. Eventually, she found her way to a clinic supported by the UN Population Fund, and she finally received the surgery, care, and emotional support she needed to heal. Then she started speaking out about her experience to fight the stigma and to let other women know that even in isolated places, treatment is possible.

Her message has traveled the world. Two years ago, she came to Washington and urged members of Congress to support maternal health programs worldwide. And today, the United States is proud once again to support the work of the UN Population Fund. But one advocate, even one with such passion and commitment, can only do so much. Every woman everywhere deserves high-quality care not only at her most vulnerable hour, but at every single stage of life. That’s our goal and that’s our responsibility.

Our responsibility? UN Population Fund?

It is also a matter of simple equity and fairness. I’ve been in many places in many parts of the world where the rich, the educated, the well off, the connected, the powerful, the elite had access to every single form of healthcare. And yet it was denied – denied by law, denied by culture, denied by taboo, denied by regulation, denied by resources to the vast majority of women in the same societies. That is unacceptable.

So part of what we need to do is not only provide services to those who need them, but to change the minds and attitudes of those who can be responsible for delivering those services in countries around the world. I have said in many different settings on, I guess, every continent except Antarctica that the rights that women who have a position in society are able to command cannot, therefore, be denied to the women who live down the street or care for their children or clean their homes or plant their crops, and that we have to do a better job of making the equity argument on behalf of girls and women, and particularly on behalf of the Cairo agenda.

I’m very optimistic and very committed that we can do this together, and I am very grateful for what so many of you have done for so many years. You have ridden the ups and you have survived the downs. You have worked in favorable political environments and unfavorable ones. You have seen the Mexico City policy come and go, and you have stayed true. You’ve stayed true to your commitment, your passion, your belief that every single child in this country – boy or girl – deserves a chance to live up to his or her God-given potential.

I just want to urge that we do not grow weary. I don’t about you, but sometimes it can seem a little bit hard to take. It is also self-evident; it seems so obvious to the rest of us that this needs to be done, and we keep encountering obstacles of every shape and size. But please, stay with us and let’s try to create institutional and structural change that does not get wiped away when the political winds blow. Let’s try to create markets for these goods and ways of funding them and educational and instructional programs along with our commitment to serve that will give women everywhere a chance to take their own lives and their own futures into their own hands.

It is now my great pleasure – you’ve met two of my wonderful team members. I want to introduce two more whom I see. One is Raj Shah, Dr. Raj Shah, our new superb Administrator of USAID. (Applause.) Raj, come here. Come here, Raj. (Applause.)

We want you to get to meet him if you don’t know him. We want you to support him as he makes the changes that are necessary to put USAID back in the forefront of world development agencies.

And now it’s my honor to introduce our Under Secretary Maria Otero. And maybe, Maria, you and Raj could say a few words to close out the program. (Applause.)

Blah, blah, blah. It sounds great doesn't it? But it's really only about one thing here. Abortion. Why? It will save Governments money, and it will save the Planet. Of course the ICPD is happy.

WASHINGTON, Jan. 8 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton delivered a major speech today to mark the 15th anniversary of the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD). Her strong message showed top-level U.S. Government support for the ICPD and other such UN goals, including the Millennium Development Goals, by 2015. These include achieving universal access to reproductive healthcare (RH) and education (especially for girls), and reductions in maternal and child mortality.

But Secretary Clinton's address today indicated much more - a commitment to women and girls' health and progress worldwide, which in turn relates to development and climate change. "It signals a critical five-year window to not only achieve the ICPD objectives, but also make tremendous gains on global environmental and climate sustainability," said Vicky Markham, Director of the Center for Environment and Population (CEP).

Are you getting this?

This is because the world's environment and development issues are inextricably linked so new, strong U.S. commitment to the ICPD's principles is also critical to achieving environmental sustainability worldwide. Now, changes to global climate, water and forest resources, species' habitat and biological diversity are all occurring in unprecedented ways from human activities. "Strong, clear U.S. leadership to achieve the ICPD goals for women's health and equality is one sure way to maintain an important balance between people and nature on our finite planet," said Ms. Markham.

Secretary Clinton paved the way for renewed U.S. leadership on the ICPD for the development reasons mentioned above and as a viable means to achieving environmental sustainability - that is, to help curb climate change, provide clean water to the 1 billion that lack access to it, restore forests as "carbon sinks" and habitat to numerous plants and animals, and begin to alter land use and rapid sprawling development which leads to increased use of fossil fuels and climate change.

While many international forums have reaffirmed the ICPD "Cairo Consensus", including the 1995 Fourth World Conference on Women and the UN Millennium Development Goals, the U.S. has fallen behind in its leadership on these reproductive health issues. Paralleled with this is the lack of strong U.S. leadership on key environmental treaties on climate, water and biodiversity.

But, change is in the air. Secretary Clinton's compelling support now indicates the U.S. is poised to take a leadership role on critical RH/FP, education and maternal and child health issues. The U.S. needs to show similar leadership on global climate, water, forests and biodiversity issues. "When combined, U.S. leadership on the ICPD and major environmental treaties and commitments to sustainability are all mutually reinforcing, representing renewed commitment to these cornerstones of population and development policies for the international community," said Ms. Markham.

Recent polls show that a majority of Americans across the ideological spectrum strongly support the principles in the worldwide consensus reached at the ICPD, including providing voluntary family planning and reproductive health services. Likewise, polls show they support environmental sustainability.

That is COMPLETELY untrue. Completely untrue.

Millions of lives have been improved and saved through effective and affordable reproductive health programs, which have proven to prevent the deaths of women and children, reduce the spread of HIV/AIDS, grow economies, and preserve natural resources.

"Secretary Clinton today provided a much needed boost to a decade's lag on promoting women's and girl's issues as key components of international development and environmental stability. Now let's join her, and take it down the home stretch to 2015," Ms. Markham said.

For more information go to www.ICPD2015.org and www.cepnet.org.

Reuters had a story Fri Sep 18, 2009, Contraception vital in climate change fight: expert This is what Liberal REALLY think.

Leo Bryant, a lead researcher on a World Health Organisation study on population growth and climate change, said the stigma attached to birth control in both developing and developed countries was hindering vital progress.

"We are certainly not advocating that governments should start telling people how many children they can have," said Bryant, an advocacy manager at the family planning group Marie Stopes International, who wrote a commentary in the Lancet medical journal on Friday.

You would LOVE to. Pelsoi even said so. It will save money if these poor and undesirable people would just stop having kids. Now we learn, it will also save the planet.

"The ability to choose your family size...is a fundamental human right. But lack of access to family planning means millions of people in developing countries don't have that right," he told Reuters.

Bryant's study of climate change adaptation plans by governments in the world's 40 poorest countries showed that almost all of them link rapid population growth to environmental impact, but only six had proposed steps to tackle it.

"Acknowledgement of the problem is widespread, but resolve to address seems to be very much a minority sport," he said.

Bryant said 200 million women across the world want contraceptives, but cannot get them. Addressing this need would slow population growth and reduce demographic pressure on the environment.

In most countries with good access to birth control, average family sizes shrink dramatically within a generation, he said. But policymakers in rich donor nations are wary of talking about contraception for fear of being accused of advocating draconian ideas like sterilization or one-child policies.

Bryant's comments echo those by the head of Britain's science academy Martin Rees, who told Reuters this month that the stigma holding women back from getting access to birth control must be removed to reduce the impact of rising populations on climate change.

The world's population is forecast to rise by one third to more than 9 billion people by 2050, with 95 percent of this growth in developing countries.

In a study to be published in the WHO Bulletin in November, Bryant and colleagues said that population growth in poorer nations was unlikely to increase global warming significantly, as their carbon emissions are relatively low. But overpopulation combined with climate change would worsen living conditions by degrading natural resources, they said.

Climate change can also not only cause more natural disasters such as storms, but force people to live in areas at risk of floods, drought and disease.

Bryant said health policies targeting family planning must be combined projects to educate people about sustainable farming and land management.

"Then the gains that you make in environmental sustainability in the immediate term are going to be protected in the long term against a rapidly growing population," he said.

"Chirica" Population Control, Pelosi's Stimulus Idea?

Here is a brief history of the Chinese Population Control Program

August 1956, vigorous propaganda support was given to the Ministry of Public Health's mass birth control efforts. These efforts, however, had little impact on fertility. After the interval of the Great Leap Forward, Chinese leaders again saw rapid population growth as an obstacle to development, and their interest in birth control revived. In the early 1960s, propaganda, somewhat more muted than during the first campaign, emphasized the virtues of late marriage. Birth control offices were set up in the central government and some provinciallevel governments in 1964. The second campaign was particularly successful in the cities, where the birth rate was cut in half during the 1963-66 period. The chaos of the Cultural Revolution brought the program to a halt, however.

In 1972 and 1973 the party mobilized its resources for a nationwide birth control campaign administered by a group in the State Council. Committees to oversee birth control activities were established at all administrative levels and in various collective enterprises. This extensive and seemingly effective network covered both the rural and the urban population. In urban areas public security headquarters included population control sections. In rural areas the country's "barefoot doctors" distributed information and contraceptives to people's commun members. By 1973 Mao Zedong was personally identified with the family planning movement, signifying a greater leadership commitment to controlled population growth than ever before. Yet until several years after Mao's death in 1976, the leadership was reluctant to put forth directly the rationale that population control was necessary for economic growth and improved living standards.

Population growth targets were set for both administrative units and individual families. In the mid-1970s the maximum recommended family size was two children in cities and three or four in the country. Since 1979 the government has advocated a one child limit for both rural and urban areas and has generally set a maximum of two children in special circumstances. As of 1986 the policy for minority nationalities was two children per couple, three in special circumstances, and no limit for ethnic groups with very small populations. The overall goal of the one-child policy was to keep the total population within 1.2 billion through the year 2000, on the premise that the Four Modernizations program would be of little value if population growth was not brought under control.

The one-child policy was a highly ambitious population control program. Like previous programs of the 1960s and 1970s, the one child policy employed a combination of propaganda, social pressure, and in some cases coercion. The one-child policy was unique, however, in that it linked reproduction with economic cost or benefit.

Under the one-child program, a sophisticated system rewarded those who observed the policy and penalized those who did not. Couples with only one child were given a "one-child certificate" entitling them to such benefits as cash bonuses, longer maternity leave, better child care, and preferential housing assignments. In return, they were required to pledge that they would not have more children. In the countryside, there was great pressure to adhere to the one-child limit. Because the rural population accounted for approximately 60 percent of the total, the effectiveness of the one-child policy in rural areas was considered the key to the success or failure of the program as a whole.

In rural areas the day-to-day work of family planning was done by cadres at the team and brigade levels who were responsible for women's affairs and by health workers. The women's team leader made regular household visits to keep track of the status of each family under her jurisdiction and collected information on which women were using contraceptives, the methods used, and which had become pregnant. She then reported to the brigade women's leader, who documented the information and took it to a monthly meeting of the commune birth-planning committee. According to reports, ceilings or quotas had to be adhered to; to satisfy these cutoffs, unmarried young people were persuaded to postpone marriage, couples without children were advised to "wait their turn," women with unauthorized pregnancies were pressured to have abortions, and those who already had children were urged to use contraception or undergo sterilization. Couples with more than one child were exhorted to be sterilized.

The one-child policy enjoyed much greater success in urban than in rural areas. Even without state intervention, there were compelling reasons for urban couples to limit the family to a single child. Raising a child required a significant portion of family income, and in the cities a child did not become an economic asset until he or she entered the work force at age sixteen. Couples with only one child were given preferential treatment in housing allocation. In addition, because city dwellers who were employed in state enterprises received pensions after retirement, the sex of their first child was less important to them than it was to those in rural areas.

Numerous reports surfaced of coercive measures used to achieve the desired results of the one-child policy. The alleged methods ranged from intense psychological pressure to the use of physical force, including some grisly accounts of forced abortions and infanticide. Chinese officials admitted that isolated, uncondoned abuses of the program occurred and that they condemned such acts, but they insisted that the family planning program was administered on a voluntary basis using persuasion and economic measures only. International reaction to the allegations were mixed. The UN Fund for Population Activities and the International Planned Parenthood Association were generally supportive of China's family planning program. The United States Agency for International Development, however, withdrew US$10 million from the Fund in March 1985 based on allegations that coercion had been used.

Here is Speaker of the House Pelosi. The following exchange between Pelosi and George Stephanopoulos came on Sunday morning last week, during ABC's THIS WEEK:

STEPHANOPOULOS: Hundreds of millions of dollars to expand family planning services. How is that stimulus?

PELOSI: Well, the family planning services reduce cost. They reduce cost. The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now and part of what we do for children's health, education and some of those elements are to help the states meet their financial needs. One of those - one of the initiatives you mentioned, the contraception, will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So no apologies for that?

PELOSI: No apologies. No. We have to deal with the consequences of the downturn in our economy.

Not only would Pelosi and the Libs HERE love to enact something like this in America, they want to do it around the world. {Laughing} Want to save the Planet? Wear a Condom, or if need be, get an Abortion. What ever you do, just do not have any more kids. Don't worry, if you can't, others will pay for it. Even if you live in another country.
Peter

Sources:
White House Press Office
Center for Environment and Population
Reuters - Contraception vital in climate change fight: expert

Danger in the Bottle and Can

Health and Science For Sunday 010310

Hey folks,

No I'm not talking about Alcohol. I'm not talking about Energy Drinks, or even High Fructose Corn Syrup. As a matter of fact, I'm not talking about what is IN the Bottle or the Can at all. I am talking about the Bottle and Can themselves.

You drink Diet Pop? Regular Pop? All those Energy Drinks, Coffee Drinks? What about that Bottle of Water you drink at the Gym? Or for other "Social Reasons." What about the Baby?

Now most of you know, or have at least heard of BPA in Baby Bottles. Well, do you even really understand what that is? We are going to take a look at BPA today in our first Health and Science Segment of 2010.

BPA - Bisphenol A

Discovery and Use

Background

Bisphenol A (BPA) is an important industrial chemical that is used primarily to make polycarbonate plastic and epoxy resins, both of which are used in a wide variety of applications. For example, polycarbonate is used in eyeglass lenses, medical equipment, water bottles, digital media (e.g. CDs and DVDs), cell phones, consumer electronics, computers and other business equipment, electrical equipment, household appliances, safety shields, construction glazing, sports safety equipment, and automobiles1. Among the many uses for epoxy resins are industrial floorings, adhesives, industrial protective coatings, powder coatings, automotive primers, can coatings and printed circuit boards.

First Synthesis of Bisphenol A

The first reported synthesis of BPA was from Thomas Zincke of the University of Marburg, Germany. Zincke acknowledged in his paper that the synthesis of BPA, from phenol and acetone, was based on chemical reactions previously reported by others as well as unpublished work (from thesis dissertations) conducted at the University of Marburg. His paper reporting the synthesis of BPA and a number of related compounds was published in 19052. Zincke reported key physical properties of BPA (e.g., molecular composition, melting point, solubility in common solvents) but did not propose any application or use for BPA or the other materials he synthesized.

Commercial Production and Use of Bisphenol A

In 1953, Dr. Hermann Schnell of Bayer in Germany and Dr. Dan Fox of General Electric in the United States independently developed manufacturing processes for a new plastic material, polycarbonate, using BPA as the starting material. Polycarbonate plastic was found to have a unique combination of very useful properties, in particular optical clarity, shatter-resistance and high heat-resistance, which have made polycarbonate an important part of everyday life in a wide variety of applications. Commercial production began in 1957 in the United States and in 1958 in Europe. About this same time, epoxy resins were developed with the versatility to meet a wide range of industrial and consumer needs. Commercial production of BPA began in the 1950’s when large-scale uses for polycarbonate plastic and epoxy resins were developed and has grown worldwide along with the continued growth of the uses for these materials.

So, what is the danger? It is a synthesised Human Hormone. It occurs naturally in the body. So it has been tested right? Well, it is one of the most tested compounds in history. However, the FDA do not do their own testing and must rely on the Creators of Chemicals to submit reports. But, I’m sure that the Manufacturers would let us know if it was unsafe. Right? (Yeah right).

But it is not just those Baby Bottles and Water Bottles. Fox News did a story on this. According to Fox News - Study Finds Plastic Chemical BPA in Name-Brand Canned Foods Wednesday, November 04, 2009

In its December issue, Consumer Reports tested soups, juice, tuna and green beans, and found that 19 name-brand foods contain some amount of BPA, which is used in the plastic lining in many canned foods. And organic foods were not exempt — they didn't always have lower levels of BPA than non-organic foods. Some labels also declared their cans BPA-free, but this claim wasn't always true either.

Consumer Reports found that the highest levels of bisphenol-A were found in Del Monte Fresh Cut Green Beans Blue Lake, Progresso Vegetable Soup and Campbell's Condensed Chicken Soup.

The study also found much-maligned BPA in Similac Advance Infant Formula and Nestle Juicy Juice in a can.

"The BPA levels in our samples of Nestle Juicy Juice, at about 9 parts per billion, were not among the highest in the foods we tested. However, considering how many servings of juice young children may consume daily, a child still could exceed a level that Consumers Union thinks would provide an adequate margin of safety," said Dr. Urvashi Rangan, director of Technical Policy, at Consumers Union, the nonprofit publisher of Consumer Reports.

"The lack of any safety margin between the levels that cause harm in animals and those that people could potentially ingest from canned foods has been inadequately addressed by the FDA to date," he added.

Current FDA guidelines put the upper limit of safe exposure to BPA at 50 micrograms of BPA for each kilogram of body weight. But the guidelines were based on studies done in the 1980s. The FDA is expected to issue new guidelines on what levels of BPA are safe for human consumption in the near future.

Again, based on what they are TOLD by those that profit from it's use. I found THIS very interesting. If you really want to know how to avoid BPA? Where can you go? The following is from King County Hazardous Waste Management. Yup. Not the EPA, not the FDA. A local Waste Management Company out of the State of Washington. They even tell you how much, and where to get BPA Free Products. King County Hazardous Waste Management - Bisphenol A (BPA), Plastic Bottles, Canned Goods, and You

Easy ways to avoid bisphenol A in everyday products.

Recent scientific reviews and news reports on the use of polycarbonate plastics containing bisphenol A and potential human health problems are worrying and confusing consumers.

The Local Hazardous Waste Management Program in King County is committed to protecting the public’s health and the environment by reducing exposure to potentially harmful chemicals. Given the current scientific understanding of biological effects of bisphenol A or BPA, there is good reason for concerned consumers to reduce their exposure to bisphenol A -containing products, especially for infants, children, and women who are pregnant or planning to become pregnant.

Infants and young children are at greater risk because of their small size and developing bodies. Studies of laboratory animals or cultured human cells have shown exposure to bisphenol A can cause neural and behavioral changes, precancerous growths in breast and prostate tissues, early onset puberty and other effects at very low doses. In addition, bisphenol A crosses the placenta and has been found in amniotic fluid and umbilical cord tissue, showing that there is no prenatal protection from a mother’s exposure.

Recent reports from the National Institute for Environmental Health conclude that there is concern for neural and behavioral effects in fetuses, infants, and children at current levels of exposure to BPA. Presently, there are no recommended minimum exposure limits for infants or children. More research is also needed to understand all the health effects that may be associated with exposure to Bisphenol A.

There are easy ways to reduce the risk of exposure to BPA for children. Many of the ‘new’ ways are a return to earlier safe food storage practices.

Easy ways to avoid bisphenol A in everyday products

For infants and children

Breastfeeding is the best way to feed newborns and infants. Follow the tips here and on the links to reduce bisphenol A in an infant’s and nursing mom’s diet.

If you use infant formula:

•the first choice is dry powdered formula packaged in non-metal cans
•liquid formulas sold in plastic, mostly polyethylene and polypropylene (#1, 2, or 5) which do not contain any bisphenol A
•concentrated liquid formulas (diluted)
•avoid ready-to-eat liquid formulas in metal cans; they are lined with bisphenol A epoxy resin (sealant)
Use glass baby bottles or plastic bag inserts, which are made of polyethyelene, or switch to polypropylene bottles (labeled #5) that come in solid colors or are milky white, not clear.

Other resources and shopping suggestions *Adapted from National Geographic’s Green Guide Baby bottle choices

Baby Bottles (#5 Plastic)
Gerber Fashion Tints ($4.99 for 3-9 oz. bottles; http://www.thebabyoutlet.com/)
Medela Breastmilk Storage and Feeding Set ($18.99; http://www.target.com/) glass baby bottles
BornFree Vented Glass Bottles ($37.99/2-9 oz. bottles; http://www.newbornfree.com/)
Evenflo Classic Glass Nursers ($8 for 3-4 oz. or 8 oz. bottles; http://www.ingeling.com/)
Sippy Cups Klean Kanteen 12 oz. stainless steel bottle with sippy adaptor ($17.95; http://www.kleankanteen.com/)

For your family
For food storage and drinking use glass or stainless steel water bottles without plastic linings. Avoid plastic containers labeled with a 3, 6, or 7 (inside the recycle symbol). Not all number 7 plastics contain bisphenol A, but they are not separately labeled.

Dispose of cracked or scratched plastic bottles in the garbage.

When buying new bottles take along the shopper’s card: www.thegreenguide.com/doc/BGG2/saferplastics.
For descriptions of plastics and the symbols: www.thegreenguide.com/products/Kitchen/Plastic_Containers.

Foods packaged in juice boxes or cardboard "brick" cartons, by Tetra Pak and SIG Combibloc, are made of safer layers of paper, aluminum and polyethylene (#2) and are also recyclable.

Reduce your use of canned foods by using fresh or frozen foods or foods packaged in other containers like glass or cardboard brick cartons. Save canned foods for convenience or emergencies. Almost all food cans are lined with bisphenol A epoxy resin (sealant) and industry studies confirm that BPA is in canned foods and beverages.

Learn to preserve your own foods using glass containers. The WSU Cooperative Extension offers canning tips and instructions at http://foodsafety.wsu.edu/. Find a Farmer’s market with Puget Sound Fresh Food at: http://www.pugetsoundfresh.org/.

If you use plastics for food storage, follow these safety tips.

If you are using polycarbonate bottles like Nalgene (labeled #7 on the bottom), wash them by hand with mild dishwashing soap and not in the dishwasher. Harsh chemicals and heat degrade the plastic and increase leaching of bisphenol A into foods and liquids.

Avoid using plastic containers to heat food in microwaves because chemicals leach out into the food faster when heated. Ceramic, glass, and other microwaveable dishware are good alternatives.

Others links
Canned food study: www.ewg.org/reports/bisphenola
Consumer tips www.ewg.org/node/20944
Plastic Products at a Glance Chart www.checnet.org/healthehouse/pdf/plasticchart.pdf

I do not know about you, but this has got me thinking about being a bit more careful in my choices I make while shopping and the advice I am about to give my friend who is do to give birth in April. As with anything, the more we know, the better off we are. Do your own research into BPA, and make your own choice. I think I may start leaning on the side of caution and reduce my, and my families exposure.
Peter

Sources:
Bisphenol A - Website
Fox News - Study Finds Plastic Chemical BPA in Name-Brand Canned Foods
King County Hazardous Waste Management - Bisphenol A (BPA), Plastic Bottles, Canned Goods, and You

IWA For Sunday 120609

Along with a Possible NEW Award, at the same time.

Hey folks,

That's right, it's Sunday, so time for the IWA. However, this week, not only am I awarding the Idiot of the Week, I may be adding a NEW Award, the DLA. The Display of Logic Award.

OK. So we know that the LWL {Left Wing Loons} are on a quest for tyranny. There is NO doubt about that. The are throwing so many things out there that they are hoping most will not be able to keep up. This will cause at least SOME of the garbage to stick with no one watching.

Seriously, Obamacare, Cap and Tax, more regulation in PRIVATE Industries, Bigger Government, Stem Cell Research, which the got by the way, in case you missed it, and everything else they are working on behind the scenes. Fairness Doctrine, Cut in Nursing Home, Medicare, Hospital Funding, Term Limits review, ETC. They are throwing their Socialistic agenda at us from EVERY direction HOPING that they can get some stuff through before anyone can notice, and AFTER it is to late to do anything about it. That will not happen as long as people like ME, and the rest of the New Media is watching. It's hard to keep up with these Idiots, I'll give them that.

This is why they want to SHUT DOWN the New Media. They want to silence Talk Radio, control the Internet, and keep YOU from discovering what they are actually doing. The only thing that has stopped them from doing, well, uh, ANYTHING, is YOU. YOU finding out the TRUTH of what they are TRYING to do, and YOU stopping them. YOU are not learning this from the State Run Media. The MMD {Mass Media Drones} YOU are learning it from the New Media. Talk Radio, Blogs, The Internet in general. Conservative Papers {Which are surging in business while the Senate debates using YOUR tax money to FUND Liberal Rags like the New York Times}are actually printing the TRUTH about what they are doing. Not the NYT, Or LAT. Cable News IS reporting the TRUTH. But not the Nightly News. Not CNN, NBC, ABC. Blogs post the TRUTH, but not those "highly trained and ethical unbiased Journalist" working for major News Outlets, or those "Blogs" funded with Millions of dollars from people like Soros.

Here is the type of thing I'm talking about. Even when they report something, they SPIN it to be good, further push the agenda in a positive light, yet fail to actually look into FACTS and TRUTH about if it is even Constitutional.

According to the AP- Senate takes aim at insurance executive pay By ERICA WERNER, Associated Press Writer Erica Werner, Associated Press Writer – 9 mins ago

WASHINGTON – Democratic senators are taking aim at insurance industry executive pay as they jockey for advantage in a rare weekend session to debate President Barack Obama's health care overhaul.

Republicans are showcasing the bill's cuts to Medicare, seeking to undermine support for the legislation among seniors and others as partisan debate rages over the sweeping remake of one-sixth of the nation's economy.

That is all true. We KNOW that they want to take over Healthcare, AKA, "one-sixth of the nation's economy" and THEY want to control every aspect of your life from Cradle to the Grave. They can't run the programs they have now.

Both sides were bracing for more grueling and unpredictable debates and negotiations Saturday, with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., racing the clock to complete action on the 2,000-plus page bill by Christmas.

A GREAT Christmas present to give America, would be to KILL this Bill!

The nearly $1 trillion {Uh, NO. That would be TWO Trillion or more. Senator Reid said so} legislation would provide insurance coverage to more than 30 million {No, 10 million} more people over the next decade with a new requirement for nearly everyone to purchase insurance. New insurance purchasing marketplaces would be set up, lower-income people would get subsidies, the federal-state Medicaid program for the poor would be expanded and unpopular insurance company practices such as yanking coverage when someone gets sick would be banned.

None of that is true.

The biggest problem for Reid: getting agreement among his own Democrats on the divisive issues of abortion and a government insurance plan to compete against the private market.

He needs all 60 members of his caucus to agree, but several moderates are balking.

"Abortion and public option are really the major obstacles at this point," said the No. 2 Senate Democrat, Dick Durbin of Illinois.

Yeah, not to mention a VAST Majority in this country are HAPPY with their Healthcare NOW. They do not want ANY of this garbage.

Talks to find common ground on those issues are happening behind the scenes, but coloring the public action. Democratic leaders were giving the spotlight Saturday to Sen. Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark. — a key moderate with a difficult re-election next year — to propose an amendment that would limit insurance executives' tax deductible salaries to the same amount the U.S. president makes — currently $400,000.

The bill already includes a limit of $500,000 added by Lincoln earlier, so the new amendment doesn't represent a major change, though it does add a provision directing the expected $650 million in revenue to the Medicare trust fund.

It also gives Lincoln something to brag about as her poll numbers sag back home.

Yup. Our Idiot of the Week. Sen. Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark. Here we go again folks. The Federal Government attempting to dictate to PRIVATE Industries what they can PAY their own people. They think this is cause for BRAGGING, and they think this will get them reelected. Right from the Lib. Playbook. Class Warfare 101. Problem is, neither the Senate, NOR the President, have a Constitutional RIGHT to do any of this. Here is our Idiot herself.

"Without this change every Arkansas taxpayer and every U.S. taxpayer subsidizes these big insurance executives' unlimited salaries and compensation packages at the same time the companies are denying coverage to hardworking Americans," Lincoln said.

Shut up. It is Obama and the Crew, like YOU Senator, that are forcing and attempting to force EVERY American to pay YOU. To pay for YOUR insane and out of control agendas. YOU and Obama and the rest of the Crew, are attempting to FORCE people to pay for Abortion, Illegals, and everyone who may not even WANT Insurance to begin with. It is YOU that are putting our children, and their children in debt. NOTHING has worked so far with all that spending. NOTHING. Yet YOU want people to believe YOU care? No wonder you are facing "a difficult re-election next year." You ALL should be thrown out of office. Freedom SHOULD prevail.

Lincoln is among a few senators whose votes are uncertain but necessary for Reid. She reiterated her opposition Thursday to the government-run insurance plan in the bill, and despite numerous talks among liberals and moderates to find a compromise, Lincoln said she hadn't seen anything she could support yet.

Although the Idiot, she KNOWS, as many do, that if she Votes for it, she will be out without a doubt about it.

Republicans again devoted their Saturday radio address to criticizing the legislation, this week over a topic debated earlier — preventive care for women. That became an issue after a government advisory panel recommended against regular mammograms for women in their 40s. One of the votes the Senate cast this week was to safeguard coverage of mammograms.

Let's not forget about the Pap Smears as well folks. Those are not important anymore either. According to the LWL. And HERE is our DLA Winner. Our first ever "Display of Logic Award" Winner.

Carly Fiorina, a former Hewlett-Packard Co. chief executive, breast cancer survivor and a Republican candidate running for the U.S. Senate seat from California now held by Democrat Barbara Boxer, delivered the address. She said that the recommendation on mammograms was an early taste of what could happen under the Democrats' plan.

"We wonder if we are heading down a path where the federal government will at first suggest and then mandate new standards for prevention and treatment," Fiorina said. "Do we really want government bureaucrats rather than doctors dictating how we prevent and treat something like breast cancer?"

YES. Thank you. I hope she beats the hell out of Boxer in the Polling both. WE NEED intelligent, brave, and SANE people Voted into Office next year, instead of the LWL we have now.

Now here is something I found interesting. They keep telling us that this Bill will not cut Medicare. It will not effect Seniors. Blah, blah, blah. However?

Republicans planned to use the sixth day of debate on the bill to offer the third in a series of amendments highlighting the legislation's more than $400 billion in cuts in projected Medicare spending to private insurance companies, hospitals and other providers.

This time Sen. Mike Johanns, R-Neb., will try to eliminate $42 billion in cuts in Medicare payments to home health agencies. The retirees group AARP supports the overall Medicare cuts as getting at inefficiencies and overpayments in the program, so Democrats have political cover to keep them in the bill.

That's why MILLIONS of people are LEAVING AARP. They are nothing but a front Group for the Libs. That is why NEW Over 50 groups are sprouting up all over the place. Soon the AARP will be just like the NYT, they will; need funding from the Government just to continue to exist and they will cater to a small group of Liberals, and the ignorant.

Nonetheless, Republicans are doing all they can to force Democrats to cast politically risky votes.

GOOD!

On Friday, Republicans tried to restore $120 billion in cuts to Medicare Advantage, the private insurance plan that provides seniors with better benefits than the traditional program. Democrats say the government is wasting money overpaying the plans, and the effort failed 57-41.

Separately, the Senate turned back a Republican effort to eliminate a long-term care insurance program to help seniors and the disabled, but the vote exposed the difficulties Democratic leaders face in persuading their own moderates to remain united. Eleven Democrats voted with Republicans, who warned that the new program would turn into a drain on the federal budget.

It would also include the "End of year consulting" AKA Death Panel.

Folks, I know some of you actually believe that there is no difference in our Health Insurance companies telling you want you can and can't get in medical treatments, and the Government making those decisions. BIG Mistake.

First, and the biggest, if your Insurance Company tells you no, you can find another way to get it anyway. Pay for it yourself, do a fundraiser, payment plan with Doc Directly, or whatever. If the Government controls every aspect of Healthcare, you have NO choice.

Second, your Insurance Company is figuring against the cost of thousands. The Government will be figuring you into about 308 million. What may not be to expensive for your Private Health Insurer, WILL be to expensive for the Government. I know, I know, that goes against the conventional wisdom. "Well the more people that are paying into it the more there will be to pay for things." Problem is, Many of those MILLIONS will NOT be paying into it. YOU will be. Along with the Taxes on EVERYTHING else they want to steal from you.

Third, it will then become the Governments Job to set the standards. Not varying Companies. Some cover this but not that. Others cover that but not this. Allowing YOU to shop for the best that meets YOUR individual needs. There will be only ONE, and THEY will have a one size fits all approach.

So congratulations to BOTH our Winners. First, Sen. Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark, our Idiot of the Week for thinking that the Federal Government should control the PAY of yet another Private industry. Then Congratulation to our first ever DLA Winner, Carly Fiorina, for showing us that there really are Sane and Logical people, who are bold enough to tell the truth, and seek office at the same time. Let's hope this will translate to Bye Bye Boxer.

Have a great day folks. See ya soon.
Peter

Sources:
AP- Senate takes aim at insurance executive pay

Flu Vaccine Trials to Include Pregnant Women

Is there a better way to test this? What happens if this is BAD?

Hey folks,

In this week's Health and Science Segment, I want to ask an honest question. I understand that Swine Flu, Bird Flu, just the average Flu is out there. I understand, and may have even contracted some form a Flu in Miami. I have been sick since Thursday afternoon. I'm just now starting to feel better. It was horrible.

So I understand why people want the Flu Shot. As we talked about last week. I'm all for a new Flu Shot to protect against Swine, or H1N1. But I want to make sure it is safe. So how do we test it? Well, according to US News and World Report - Flu Vaccine Trials to Include Pregnant Women by Deborah Kotz. Is THIS really a good idea?

As predicted, pregnant women are, indeed, on the government's list of the first folks to be vaccinated against the H1N1 "swine flu" virus. The panel of experts convened by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended yesterday that the new vaccine be provided first to pregnant women and adults with compromised immune systems, who face a greater risk of complications, and others, like children and health-care workers, who are at higher risk of becoming infected, says Anne Schuchat, director of the CDC's National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases. Some 159 million people fall into these high-priority groups, and whether there will be enough vaccine for all of them when it first becomes available isn't known.

In the event that there are shortages, the panel also came up with a superhigh-priority list of those who should be vaccinated--some 41 million individuals. Once again, pregnant women are on this list. Just how many of them will rush out to get vaccinated, however, remains a mystery. Studies suggest that fewer than 15 percent of expectant moms currently get the seasonal flu vaccine, but more may be willing to get the H1N1 vaccine--and their doctors may push harder for them to have it--given the latest data showing that pregnant women infected with H1N1 are more likely to develop severe complications.

The trouble is, many pregnant women are extremely cautious about getting any shots or medicines because of the potentially harmful effects that these agents could have on a developing fetus. In fact, vaccines that contain live weakened viruses, like measles, aren't administered during pregnancy because of the possibility that they could cause a high fever in the woman--raising the risk of birth defects--or an infection in the fetus. The seasonal flu and H1N1 shots, however, contain dead viruses that don't pose either of these problems. Still, many experts agree, the H1N1 vaccine should be tested in pregnant women before it's licensed for use during pregnancy. (Studies have already established that seasonal flu vaccine is safe and effective to use at any stage of pregnancy.)

The National Institutes of Health is set to begin testing the vaccine in pregnant women in the next month or two. "We're still awaiting word from our institutional review board [which signs off on all clinical trials], so we don't yet know who will be included," says Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which is part of NIH. Although he says there's no reason not to include pregnant women at the earliest stage of pregnancy, the review board could "out of an abundance of caution" limit the trials to women who are beyond the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. Unfortunately, he adds, safety and efficacy data won't be available from those pregnant women trials when the vaccine initially becomes available in late October.

One question the trials may address is at what stage during pregnancy the vaccine should be given. Swine flu complications tend to be much worse when women get infected near the end of pregnancy as opposed to during the first 12 weeks. And there's always the possibility--no matter how remote--that something administered during those early weeks when a fetus's organs are still developing could cause birth defects. "This is a new vaccine, so we can't say whether it's safer to give during one period of pregnancy or another," says Mark Steinhoff, director of the global health center at Cincinnati Children's Hospital, who has researched the use of seasonal flu vaccine in pregnant women.

By and large, there's no reason to think that the H1N1 vaccine will pose any problems for pregnant women since it's being produced in exactly the same fashion as the seasonal flu vaccine. What's more, Steinhoff adds, pregnant women who get vaccinated will probably also confer antibody protection to their newborns who are too young to be vaccinated themselves. This could prove lifesaving if H1N1 infections become extremely widespread or the virus mutates into a deadlier strain.

Pregnant women are also advised to get Tamiflu if they experience symptoms of swine flu like high fever, sore throat, and a cough. But some experts are concerned over the lack of research on the use of this drug in pregnant women infected with H1N1. "We are hugely concerned that we don't know what the right dose is for pregnant women," says Ruth Faden, director of the Berman Institute of Bioethics at Johns Hopkins University. "While it may be that the standard dose of Tamiflu is perfectly appropriate, it's at least possible that it's an insufficient dose for pregnant women at a given stage in pregnancy." That's because pregnant women's kidneys clear drugs faster from the body, which means that certain drugs may not enter the bloodstream at therapeutic levels. (This has been demonstrated with some antibiotics, but Tamiflu hasn't been tested in pregnant women.) "I think the message we should be getting out is that pregnant women should be vaccinated," she says, and that those who get infected and treated with Tamiflu should be studied in clinical trials to see if the drug is given at an effective dose. "This is a tough situation. I wish we weren't in it."

So basically that answer that I have been asking for two weeks is "We do not know." "We do not know if it is safe, but we are in an emergency situation and must give the shot now and hope for the best?"

I'm not a Doctor folks. I do not even pretend to be one on TV. But if Laura {My Wife} was pregnant, or my Son Joshua was getting the sniffles, until I see some study somewhere about the SAFETY of this Shot, I would not be having them take it. Remember what happened in the 70s?

Like I said, I have been EXTREMELY ill since Thursday. I am just now, Sunday, starting to feel a bit better. I've been taking decongestants, natural cold relief, Tea, drinking lots of OJ and a ton of water, at night, Equate Nite Time to sleep. I do not recommend that you do as I do, I would recommend that you go to your Doctor to get checked out if you do not feel well, but when it comes to untested, disease filled Vaccines, unless you are willing to be a Ginni Pig, I'm not sure I would recommend that either.
Peter

Sources:
US News and World Report - Flu Vaccine Trials to Include Pregnant Women