Day: December 20, 2008

Equality For Everyone?

This a statement issued by the Green Party.

If President-elect Barack Obama calls himself a “fierce advocate for equality” for gay people, why has he invited Rev. Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at Barack Obama’s inauguration?

The choice of Pastor Warren signals that Mr. Obama may repeat the Clinton Administration’s approach to gay rights.  President Clinton, taking gay support for granted, signed the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act into law and authorized the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ military policy.

Mr. Obama said he opposed the passage of Proposition 8 in California, which outlawed same-sex marriage.  But he also opposes full same-sex marriage rights, demonstrating that he does not believe in full and equal rights for gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people.  While Mr. Obama has said that Americans must “come together” even when they disagree on social issues, his choice of Rev. Warren suggests that gay people don’t have a place in his vision for America, or are, at best second-class citizens.

Pastor Warren, who supported Proposition 8 in California and promoted its passage, asserts that “in the hierarchy of evil… homosexuality is not the worst sin,” an admission that he thinks gay people are evil because they are gay.

He has said that allowing same-sex marriage is like allowing “a brother and sister be together and call that marriage” and added that he is “opposed to an older guy marrying a child and calling that a marriage.”  Pastor Warren thus compares same-sex marriage and homosexuality to incestuous relationships and pedophilia, which are crimes.  He has also said that homosexuality is “not the natural way….  Certain body parts are meant to fit together.”  Would he invalidate heterosexual marriages in which the husband and wife engaged in sex outside of vaginal sexual intercourse?

Mr. Obama’s choice of Rev. Warren for the inaugural prayer coincides with a declaration introduced by 66 countries in the UN calling for universal decriminalization of homosexuality.  The US is the only major western nation that has refused to sign on, even though a Supreme Court decision has invalidated US laws against sodomy.  Will the new Obama Administration maintain the Bush policy and refuse to have the US sign the declaration after Mr. Obama’s inauguration?

The Green Party remains the option for those who believe that gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people deserve all the rights, including marriage and the ability to raise a family that all other Americans enjoy.  Support for such rights is enshrined in the Green Party’s national platform — unlike the Democratic and Republican parties.

Obama has asked Robert Gates to stay on as Secretary of Defense, not only continuing the Bush Administration’s disastrous policy of military aggression around the world, but also the targeting of gay members of the armed forces for investigation and discharge.  The Obama Cabinet appointments have proven disappointing to those who looked forward to genuine change when they voted for Barack Obama.  Mr. Obama’s invitation to Pastor Warren is especially frustrating for gay people who voted for him and contributed to his campaign.

For those who have had enough bipartisan retreats from promises of human rights and justice, the Green Party remains the party of real change in America.

The Green Party needs you help. Please send this message to anyone you know who cares about equal rights for all; and please support the party which will stand up for equal rights.

The Promise Of Health Care

The Congressional Budget Office said Thursday that many of the health care proposals championed by President-elect Barack Obama and other Democrats would carry a high price tag and would generate only modest savings.

The budget office, an influential voice in the work of Congress, analyzed 115 options, including proposals to expand coverage and slow the growth of health spending.

Some of the options, including proposals to increase taxes on cigarettes and nondiet soft drinks, are sure to meet stiff political opposition.

One bright spot in a generally bleak picture was the estimate of potential savings from a requirement for doctors and hospitals to use health information technology, including electronic medical records, as a condition of participating in Medicare.

Such a requirement could save the federal government $7 billion in the first five years and a total of $34 billion over 10 years, by reducing medical errors and avoiding unnecessary tests and procedures, the budget office said. It “would also lower health insurance premiums in the private sector,” the report said.

Without action by Congress, the report said, health costs will continue to soar, the number of people without insurance will rise by nearly one million a year, to a total of 54 million in 2019, and spending on health care will increase to 25 percent of the gross domestic product in 2025, up from 16 percent in 2007.

But Mr. Obama and other Democrats have not been precise about the cost of their proposals, nor have they said in detail how they would pay for them. One of the Democrats’ favorite proposals, rolling back tax cuts for high-income people, is already scheduled to occur in 2011, so, under the bookkeeping rules used by Congress, it would not produce a windfall of new revenue.

Mr. Obama and many other Democrats want the government to negotiate with drug manufacturers to get lower prices for Medicare beneficiaries.

The Congressional Budget Office said such negotiations “would produce small if any savings” because the government would not have enough leverage to secure significant discounts beyond those already obtained by private insurance companies that manage the Medicare drug benefit.

But the budget office said Medicare could save $110 billion in the next 10 years if Congress simply imposed a form of price controls, requiring drug makers to provide the government with a 15 percent rebate, or discount, on brand-name drugs covered by the new Part D of Medicare.

The federal government could save $12 billion in the next decade if it established a procedure for approval of generic versions of expensive biotechnology drugs, the report said. It did not estimate the additional savings for consumers and employers, which could be substantial.

So, health care voters, will you get the “universal” system anytime soon?  Do not look for it or hpld your breath.

Acts Of Violence

This is just scary stuff.

In the early 1960s, Yale University psychologist Stanley Milgram shocked America when he demonstrated that ordinary people will commit acts of violence that conflict with their personal conscience and moral convictions if instructed to do so by an authority figure.

Now, a replication of that famous experiment is uncovering some of the same findings and controversy.

In the original experiment, Milgram asked ordinary people to administer painful — and in some cases, even fatal — shocks to other people posing as research subjects. The maximum voltage they could administer was 450 volts — enough to cause permanent damage or even death to the study subject.

In reality, the “research subjects” were not receiving any shock. But the act of inflicting harm on another individual was still very much real to the people administering the voltage.

Just watch the news, there is evidence to the conclusions everywhere.

New “Conscience” Rule

An 11th-hour ruling from the Bush administration gives health care workers, hospitals, and insurers more leeway to refuse health services for moral or religious reasons.

The rule, issued today, becomes effective in 30 days. Its main provisions widen the number of health workers and institutions that may refuse, based on “sincere religious belief or moral conviction,” to provide care or referrals to patients.

“This rule protects the right of medical providers to care for their patients in accord with their conscience,” says Health and Human Services Secretary Michael O. Leavitt in a statement.

Previous rules allow health care workers to refuse to provide abortion or sterilization services to which they are morally opposed. The new rulings give individuals and institutions much greater leeway in refusing to provide services to which they are morally opposed.

The ruling, issued by the Department of Health and Human Services, covers an estimated 571,947 “entities” including doctors’ offices, pharmacies, hospitals, insurers, medical and nursing schools, diagnostic labs, nursing homes, and state governments.

Each of these entities is required to certify in writing that they will comply with the ruling. Failure to comply may be punished with loss of federal funding.

A pathetic plan from a pathetic president.  So you can be denied service if one of these self-righteous a/holes objects.  Is stupidity a medical condition?  Since I find stupid people objectionable, I do not have to deal with them any longer?

The Bush Auto Plan

The package announced by Mr Bush on Friday does not need Congressional approval, as it is part of the existing $700bn financial bail-out programme.

All car firms have announced production cuts as the economic slowdown has slashed car sales.

Detroi’s Big Three carmakers, Chrysler, Ford and GM, have repeatedly warned that millions of jobs could be lost if the government does not agree to a package of loans to support the industry.

“These loans were desperately needed before the end of December, because the situation for the automakers is so critical,” said Dennis Virag at Automotive Consulting Group.

Meanwhile, US Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson urged Congress to authorise the use of the second half of the $700bn Wall Street bail-out, as the first $350bn had already been committed.

President George W Bush said allowing the US car industry to fail would not be “a responsible course of action”.

General Motors will get $9.4 billion and Chrysler $4 billion before the end of the year. A further $4bn will be provided later.

Continuing Saga Of Madoff

U.S. regulators, trying to unravel the breadth of Bernard Madoff’s alleged $50 billion fraud, have found evidence of misconduct stretching back to at least the 1970s, two people familiar with the inquiry said.

Madoff’s investment advisory business, where he allegedly operated the biggest Ponzi scheme in history, is now estimated to have had more than 4,000 customers, the people said, declining to be identified because the inquiry isn’t public. An advisory unit Madoff registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission claimed in a January filing to have no more than 25 clients. People familiar with the probe said Dec. 14 he also ran a secret unregistered business.

The Madoff case is fueling efforts by President-elect Barack Obama and Congress to overhaul oversight of brokerages and investment advisers. The SEC will likely also examine whether hedge funds investing with Madoff performed the due diligence promised to clients, two people familiar with the agency’s concerns said.

SEC Chairman Christopher Cox said Dec. 16 the agency failed to act on “credible, specific” allegations about Madoff dating back at least to 1999. Madoff had kept several sets of books, and provided misinformation about his advisory business to investors and regulators, Cox noted.

In its 1992 lawsuit, the SEC claimed accountants Frank Avellino and Michael Bienes began raising money in 1962 and placing it with Madoff while promising investors returns of 13.5 percent to 20 percent, according to court documents obtained by Bloomberg. As of October 1992, their firm, Avellino & Bienes, had issued $441 million in unregistered notes to 3,200 people and entities, court papers say. They invested solely with Madoff, who opened his business in 1960.

Interesting how this scheme went undetected, but yet they can spot a crook a mile off when he is in the middle class.  Funny how that works, huh?

Another Cuban Missile Crisis?

Russian warships have entered Cuban waters for the first time since the end of the Cold War.

A Russian destroyer and two support ships sailed into Havana Bay on their way home from joint exercises with the Venezuelan navy.

It is the latest sign of improved ties between Moscow and communist-run Cuba, which were allies during Soviet days.

Russia has been angered by US plans for a missile defence system in Europe, and its support for Georgia in the recent conflict with Russia.

The Russian embassy in Cuba told the AFP news agency that the ships were on a friendly, working visit designed to “develop” relations and “co-operation” between the two countries.

But analysts say Moscow is sending a symbolic message to the US about the consequences of Washington’s activity in regions that Russia regards as its sphere of influence.

Cuba’s communist leadership was closely allied to Moscow during the Cold War, but relations have weakened since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991.

This situation might need to be watched closely….or the possiblity of another missile crisis could be in the making.