Tuesday, November 24, 2009
This foxnews story was about the most informative and interesting article I have read recently. It is about the human brain and the argument that the bigger the brain does not always mean the smarter the person. This argument is being carried out in the magazine called Current Biology by a variety of researchers on the subject of brains in comparison to the size of brains in animals.
I’ve always thought that the bigger the brain the more intelligent a person could be. But this article suggests that even though there are more neurons in the bigger brain that the only advantage that has been found is possibly memory might be better and not a persons thinking ability. How disappointing I think to be compared as one university professor did in this statement to a computer saying, "To use a computer analogy, bigger brains might in many cases be bigger hard drives, not necessarily better processors." "In bigger brains we often don't find more complexity, just an endless repetition of the same neural circuits over and over. This might add detail to remembered images or sounds, but not add any degree of complexity."
I don’t really have any opinions on this article as it is written very informative about the human brain and does not seem to have any bias written into it. I’m still wondering why some research says our brain is shrinking though, as this is not explained at all. I found it very interesting to think that insects have brains and are capable of thinking and even counting. I always thought that they were just hard wired for instinct and not thought processes. I’m wondering how the researchers also completed this study to learn that honeybees could count. The article does explain that maybe certain parts of a brain are the reason some animals are smarter than others. I guess that could account for the fact that some dogs are smart and other breeds like the cocker spaniel is quite dumb. I think the same could be for people even though our brains weigh about 3 pounds according to the article, some people might use their very tiny amount of neurons very well indeed and some may never use any neurons for thinking at all. This research also helps explain to me how you can develop a brain by exercising some neurons no matter what the size of brain. I had read something in the past about babies and how you could stimulate their brains and make them smarter by exposing them to things like tasting pickle juice in order to help nerve cells react and grow.
I really don’t care about brain size at all but this article was an interesting read and I will probably not try and strike up a conversation with a honeybee or anything. If I ever see a whale I’ll be thinking he only has a big brain to make his huge body work even though as a child I thought Moby Dick was extremely clever and must have been using every bit of his brain to get at that ship captain.
Friday, November 27, 2009
Friday, November 20, 2009
Wife of Cop Who Killed Himself Over Taser Death Sues NYPD
Saturday, November 14, 2009
This article on Foxnews is about a Mother who called the police because her grown son was acting strangely and she was afraid he was going to hurt himself. When the police arrived he ran out of his Mothers apartment and dashed around until he slipped out the fire escape and on to an overhanging platform all the while naked. Police were on the fire escape above him out of reach and also 10 feet below him on the ground. When the man picked up a long glass floreswcent light bulb and began pointing and jabbing with it, the supervising officer on the ground gave the order to another officer to tase the man. After being tased the man fell to the ground, where he hit his head and died. The supervising officer later commits suicide and the wife of the officer is suing the police departmant in order to clear her husbands name.
Wow, the wife of the dead police officer must really believe in her husband because after reading the article and the background information to the incident, it does seem to me that the police officer was in the wrong for his choice to tase the man. However I thought the whole article was riddled with choices.
The first choice was the Mother who called the police. She also had the choice of calling an ambulance. Her son was not doing anything criminal at the time, which is what the police are used to dealing with. Her son might have been helped by ambulance personel in his mental condition at the time. The second choice is when the supervisor of the police gave the order to tase the man. If he was worried about his officers safety he should have had them back off and not confront the man and certainly not tase a man standing on a 10 foot elevated ledge. And the officer who was given the order could have chosen to refuse the order to tase, which could have saved the man's life. The supervising officer who chose to kill himself after the incident, put his family through shame and scrutiny could have chose to live, clear his name or live and put his family through scrutiny and serve punishment. The wife of the dead policeman could have chosen to let the matter drop after the death of her husband and let the department take the heat for the victims death, but instead chose to clear her husbands name and now everything is going to come out and she may not be successful.
I'm suprised at why I focused on how many choices were presented in this article which prompted my 'what if' reaction. The most dumbfounding thing in the whole article was the very last line in which the author of the story wrote about the suicide note, "I love you all I'm sorry for the mess!!" he wrote to his family, signing the letter with careful, flowery script, "Michael Pigott." What in the world was the relevance to be biased in his description of the signature? Instead of just saying the note was signed, was I supposed to feel something about the man who killed himself leaving a flowery signed suicide note? I remain dumbfounded.
This article on Foxnews is about a Mother who called the police because her grown son was acting strangely and she was afraid he was going to hurt himself. When the police arrived he ran out of his Mothers apartment and dashed around until he slipped out the fire escape and on to an overhanging platform all the while naked. Police were on the fire escape above him out of reach and also 10 feet below him on the ground. When the man picked up a long glass floreswcent light bulb and began pointing and jabbing with it, the supervising officer on the ground gave the order to another officer to tase the man. After being tased the man fell to the ground, where he hit his head and died. The supervising officer later commits suicide and the wife of the officer is suing the police departmant in order to clear her husbands name.
Wow, the wife of the dead police officer must really believe in her husband because after reading the article and the background information to the incident, it does seem to me that the police officer was in the wrong for his choice to tase the man. However I thought the whole article was riddled with choices.
The first choice was the Mother who called the police. She also had the choice of calling an ambulance. Her son was not doing anything criminal at the time, which is what the police are used to dealing with. Her son might have been helped by ambulance personel in his mental condition at the time. The second choice is when the supervisor of the police gave the order to tase the man. If he was worried about his officers safety he should have had them back off and not confront the man and certainly not tase a man standing on a 10 foot elevated ledge. And the officer who was given the order could have chosen to refuse the order to tase, which could have saved the man's life. The supervising officer who chose to kill himself after the incident, put his family through shame and scrutiny could have chose to live, clear his name or live and put his family through scrutiny and serve punishment. The wife of the dead policeman could have chosen to let the matter drop after the death of her husband and let the department take the heat for the victims death, but instead chose to clear her husbands name and now everything is going to come out and she may not be successful.
I'm suprised at why I focused on how many choices were presented in this article which prompted my 'what if' reaction. The most dumbfounding thing in the whole article was the very last line in which the author of the story wrote about the suicide note, "I love you all I'm sorry for the mess!!" he wrote to his family, signing the letter with careful, flowery script, "Michael Pigott." What in the world was the relevance to be biased in his description of the signature? Instead of just saying the note was signed, was I supposed to feel something about the man who killed himself leaving a flowery signed suicide note? I remain dumbfounded.
Report: Push Back Age of Cervical Cancer Tests
Friday, November 20, 2009
This article found on Fox news Fox news is about new guidelines for cervical cancer screening. The new guidelines are for women to start getting Pap smears at the age of 21 years old and then they do not need annual screening after that. These guidelines are put out by the reputable American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and is intended to benefit women by eliminating the need for certain procedures that now are seen as needless. The guidelines go on to say "Women younger than 30 should undergo cervical cancer screening once every two years instead of an annual exam. And those age 30 and older can be screened once every three years."
Amazing how if you don't go to the doctor, they won't do anything to you isn't it? I do find that doctors seem to want to perform things that will be compensated for such as testing and procedures albeit benign, but in the best interest of screening for health concerns. However if the 'shoe doesn't fit' they can't wear it anymore and this is how I acquaint this new evidence, which indicates early treatment of abnormal Pap smears is actually causing problems later in life with pregnancy and preterm deliveries as reported by the chairman of the ACOG in this article.
I like the way the author of this article brought up the recent change in breast cancer screening guidelines, in comparison to the guidelines put out by the ACOG on cervical screening. Apparently the American Cancer Society did not like whoever put out the breast cancer screening information from the quote in the article by the deputy chief medical officer, he said "The guidelines …. were largely based on computer projections." showing that it is necessary to make changes in medicine only on evidenced based science. This article included the reason that causes cervical cancers in a very nonjudgmental way, which I thought, was pretty decent. It involves a sexually transmitted disease called HPV. One medical expert explained "Women do not get cervical cancer first. They acquire HPV, the sexually transmitted virus that causes precancerous abnormalities of the cervix and cervical cancer. It takes years to progress from an HPV-infection to full-blown cervical cancer." So really nothing has changed about getting Pap smears. It sounds like women can start at any age or get screened as often as a woman wants, except what has changed is there will not be any more "Overdiagnosing and overtreating adolescents and very young women" as stated by another medical expert.
Though I'm involved in health care. I am also a healthcare consumer and have a bit of skepticism when new information is put out to follow as best advice. I think the author for this article reported fairly, with ethical bias on the relevancy of this information. This was achieved by the use of competent sources and melding of different types of information in common with the topic of cervical screening such as the HPV information. Bottom line, I found this news story credible and helpful.
This article found on Fox news Fox news is about new guidelines for cervical cancer screening. The new guidelines are for women to start getting Pap smears at the age of 21 years old and then they do not need annual screening after that. These guidelines are put out by the reputable American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and is intended to benefit women by eliminating the need for certain procedures that now are seen as needless. The guidelines go on to say "Women younger than 30 should undergo cervical cancer screening once every two years instead of an annual exam. And those age 30 and older can be screened once every three years."
Amazing how if you don't go to the doctor, they won't do anything to you isn't it? I do find that doctors seem to want to perform things that will be compensated for such as testing and procedures albeit benign, but in the best interest of screening for health concerns. However if the 'shoe doesn't fit' they can't wear it anymore and this is how I acquaint this new evidence, which indicates early treatment of abnormal Pap smears is actually causing problems later in life with pregnancy and preterm deliveries as reported by the chairman of the ACOG in this article.
I like the way the author of this article brought up the recent change in breast cancer screening guidelines, in comparison to the guidelines put out by the ACOG on cervical screening. Apparently the American Cancer Society did not like whoever put out the breast cancer screening information from the quote in the article by the deputy chief medical officer, he said "The guidelines …. were largely based on computer projections." showing that it is necessary to make changes in medicine only on evidenced based science. This article included the reason that causes cervical cancers in a very nonjudgmental way, which I thought, was pretty decent. It involves a sexually transmitted disease called HPV. One medical expert explained "Women do not get cervical cancer first. They acquire HPV, the sexually transmitted virus that causes precancerous abnormalities of the cervix and cervical cancer. It takes years to progress from an HPV-infection to full-blown cervical cancer." So really nothing has changed about getting Pap smears. It sounds like women can start at any age or get screened as often as a woman wants, except what has changed is there will not be any more "Overdiagnosing and overtreating adolescents and very young women" as stated by another medical expert.
Though I'm involved in health care. I am also a healthcare consumer and have a bit of skepticism when new information is put out to follow as best advice. I think the author for this article reported fairly, with ethical bias on the relevancy of this information. This was achieved by the use of competent sources and melding of different types of information in common with the topic of cervical screening such as the HPV information. Bottom line, I found this news story credible and helpful.
Accident Victim Fitted With 'Bionic Bottom'
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
This article on Fox news is about a man who was in a motor cycle accident that seriously injured his abdomen and he was repaired by having a colostomy procedure and the use of a colostomy bag to collect his bowel movements. The accident victim named Galvin, lives in England and is only 55 and was self-conscious and did not like having to manage emptying and changing the bag. In this article it referenced the New York Daily News as saying the man had "an operation called the Electrically Stimulated Gracilis Neosphincter, which ultimately gave him a "pacemaker-like stimulator to activate the opening and closing of (his) sphincter muscle for bowel movements." Also he is known as the "the man with the bionic bottom" by the British press as reported in this article.
I did not believe this story when I first read it as I had heard of many new approaches to colostomy care and have never heard of this as an alternative option. Being in the healthcare field I need to check this out in case I ever have to consider it a viable option. I am very happy for this gentleman in his efforts for achieving a better quality of life and many more like him could benefit. I had an uncle who had a colostomy for a while and he was a different man. Until his was reversed we barely saw him, after he was back to normal he was his old humorous self again.
Since I thought this might be a bogus article my first reaction was to dismiss the idea that it could be true except in this article it also referenced the ABC news report on the doctor who invented the surgical procedure. It describes how the technique is performed where the doctor "cut Galvin’s leg muscle from the groin to the knee and wrapped it around Galvin’s anus. A device was also implanted - complete with a remote control – and that controls the muscles." "There are lots of people in the same situation as me that potentially this operation could help," Galvin said. "It changed my life." After reading about the remote control I started thinking of all the worst-case scenarios that might happen to the remote control. Apparently when this guy wants to go to the bathroom he pushes a button on the remote control. What would happen if he lost his remote, or the batteries went dead or a toddler finds it, or he forgot to lock it and he rolled over on it in his pocket? And what if he is in an athletic event and he pulls a muscle?
I see great advances in technology all the time in healthcare and should not be surprised by this device, but I admit that I am mildly shocked by this invention. Who would have ever thought that the remote could be used for more than just the garage door opener and the entertainment set?
This article on Fox news is about a man who was in a motor cycle accident that seriously injured his abdomen and he was repaired by having a colostomy procedure and the use of a colostomy bag to collect his bowel movements. The accident victim named Galvin, lives in England and is only 55 and was self-conscious and did not like having to manage emptying and changing the bag. In this article it referenced the New York Daily News as saying the man had "an operation called the Electrically Stimulated Gracilis Neosphincter, which ultimately gave him a "pacemaker-like stimulator to activate the opening and closing of (his) sphincter muscle for bowel movements." Also he is known as the "the man with the bionic bottom" by the British press as reported in this article.
I did not believe this story when I first read it as I had heard of many new approaches to colostomy care and have never heard of this as an alternative option. Being in the healthcare field I need to check this out in case I ever have to consider it a viable option. I am very happy for this gentleman in his efforts for achieving a better quality of life and many more like him could benefit. I had an uncle who had a colostomy for a while and he was a different man. Until his was reversed we barely saw him, after he was back to normal he was his old humorous self again.
Since I thought this might be a bogus article my first reaction was to dismiss the idea that it could be true except in this article it also referenced the ABC news report on the doctor who invented the surgical procedure. It describes how the technique is performed where the doctor "cut Galvin’s leg muscle from the groin to the knee and wrapped it around Galvin’s anus. A device was also implanted - complete with a remote control – and that controls the muscles." "There are lots of people in the same situation as me that potentially this operation could help," Galvin said. "It changed my life." After reading about the remote control I started thinking of all the worst-case scenarios that might happen to the remote control. Apparently when this guy wants to go to the bathroom he pushes a button on the remote control. What would happen if he lost his remote, or the batteries went dead or a toddler finds it, or he forgot to lock it and he rolled over on it in his pocket? And what if he is in an athletic event and he pulls a muscle?
I see great advances in technology all the time in healthcare and should not be surprised by this device, but I admit that I am mildly shocked by this invention. Who would have ever thought that the remote could be used for more than just the garage door opener and the entertainment set?
Friday, November 13, 2009
Virginia Family Claims H1N1 Vaccine Sickened Son
Friday, November 13, 2009
A Foxnews article reports that a 14 year old boy in Virginia, who was given the H1N1 vaccine is now experiencing a deterioration in health soon after receiving the shot. Doctors are trying to diagnose and find out why the youth is having symptoms of muscle weakness. The family claims the boys failing health is due to receiving the H1N1 shot or commonly called swine flu shot.
Bingo! You could have seen that coming. As in the past, infant and child vaccines have been the target of scrutiny over whether they have caused perfectly normal children to develop autism and other such ailments including even death, so this article does not surprise me one bit. I have been a skeptic of sorts about the whole hyped swine flu drama in the first place and I do not think we have a pandemic of sorts waiting to happen. At least I'm not worried this year, maybe next year or the year after that when the virus has gone through a few mutations.
I would have liked to have read a little more about this story, but the additional link in the story would not open up for me. The story reports the boy was given his usual seasonal flu vaccine as well as the H1N1 vaccine, but the father blames the boy’s symptoms on the H1N1 vaccine because he has not had any problems with the seasonal flu vaccine on previous occasions times four. The article describes the boy as “An avid young athlete who was unable to walk without the aid of a walker just one day after getting his flu shots. A doctor who has examined the boy is trying to determine if the boy is indeed suffering from Guillain-Barre syndrome which has on occasion caused paralysis in some victims of the disease. I have heard of this syndrome being blamed on numerous things with one being the preservative used in the vaccine and not the vaccine component itself. I think it is a preservative that only some will react to and others do not have any problems with it when added to vaccines. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention say in the article “About 1 in 1 million people who receive seasonal flu vaccines will be infected with GBS. The CDC adds that GBS is a condition that strikes people who have never received a flu vaccine.” The boy’s father finds this announcement hard to believe because his son has had the regular flu vaccine several times with out problems.
I knew there would probably be controversy over this H1N1 vaccine if someone who received it, got sick, because it was certainly rushed though approval by the government with changing stories from health officials about how many vaccines would be needed in a series in order to gain protection from the swine flu. Apparently there are five cases of reported Guillain-Barre syndrome in patients that have received the vaccine so far. By the time the CDC have figured out the connection between the H1N1 vaccine and health problems of people receiving the shot, it will be too late to do anything but attend the feeding frenzy the lawyers will be having.
A Foxnews article reports that a 14 year old boy in Virginia, who was given the H1N1 vaccine is now experiencing a deterioration in health soon after receiving the shot. Doctors are trying to diagnose and find out why the youth is having symptoms of muscle weakness. The family claims the boys failing health is due to receiving the H1N1 shot or commonly called swine flu shot.
Bingo! You could have seen that coming. As in the past, infant and child vaccines have been the target of scrutiny over whether they have caused perfectly normal children to develop autism and other such ailments including even death, so this article does not surprise me one bit. I have been a skeptic of sorts about the whole hyped swine flu drama in the first place and I do not think we have a pandemic of sorts waiting to happen. At least I'm not worried this year, maybe next year or the year after that when the virus has gone through a few mutations.
I would have liked to have read a little more about this story, but the additional link in the story would not open up for me. The story reports the boy was given his usual seasonal flu vaccine as well as the H1N1 vaccine, but the father blames the boy’s symptoms on the H1N1 vaccine because he has not had any problems with the seasonal flu vaccine on previous occasions times four. The article describes the boy as “An avid young athlete who was unable to walk without the aid of a walker just one day after getting his flu shots. A doctor who has examined the boy is trying to determine if the boy is indeed suffering from Guillain-Barre syndrome which has on occasion caused paralysis in some victims of the disease. I have heard of this syndrome being blamed on numerous things with one being the preservative used in the vaccine and not the vaccine component itself. I think it is a preservative that only some will react to and others do not have any problems with it when added to vaccines. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention say in the article “About 1 in 1 million people who receive seasonal flu vaccines will be infected with GBS. The CDC adds that GBS is a condition that strikes people who have never received a flu vaccine.” The boy’s father finds this announcement hard to believe because his son has had the regular flu vaccine several times with out problems.
I knew there would probably be controversy over this H1N1 vaccine if someone who received it, got sick, because it was certainly rushed though approval by the government with changing stories from health officials about how many vaccines would be needed in a series in order to gain protection from the swine flu. Apparently there are five cases of reported Guillain-Barre syndrome in patients that have received the vaccine so far. By the time the CDC have figured out the connection between the H1N1 vaccine and health problems of people receiving the shot, it will be too late to do anything but attend the feeding frenzy the lawyers will be having.
Humans Still Evolving as Our Brains Shrink
Friday, November 13, 2009
BY Charles Q. Choi
I think this story reported on by Foxnews from LiveScience is full of fallacy, however it does have a cool looking picture of a brain which is what the article is about. The author is reporting that our brains are shrinking as we evolve as humans. The research is based on skull measurements which are getting smaller which suggest that our brains are shrinking and has been occurring for over 5,000 years. The research also suggests that our genes have been changing for the past 10,000 years during human evolution. John Hawks is a paleoanthropologist at the University of Wisconsin and he says, "When it comes to recent evolutionary changes, we currently maybe have the least specific details with regard the brain, but we do know from archaeological data that pretty much everywhere we can measure — Europe, China, South Africa, Australia — that brains have shrunk about 150 cubic centimeters, off a mean of about 1,350. That's roughly 10 percent."
Any story on evolution is a fictional story, so it goes with out saying what I think of evolution. And this very emotional reaction I have to this story and any other story like it concerning evolution will never change. Forgive me if I do not seem to understand this story very well.
Now because there is other information in this story to be read, it is probably not fair to just stop at the word 'evolution' and judgmentally dismiss the research as thinking it is about the theory of evolution. It reports some things that are attributed to the development of human conditions, or changes that occur, if you will, in the human brain. The silliest thing in the article is the thought that “Evolution in humans is commonly thought to have essentially stopped in recent times.” You think? I should have developed gills by now so I could swim like a fish as much time as I spend in the water at the lake. Now this article suggests that the “Human race is still evolving, and even accelerating.” Here is what the article goes on to say, "As to why is it shrinking, perhaps in big societies, as opposed to hunter-gatherer lifestyles, we can rely on other people for more things, can specialize our behavior to a greater extent, and maybe not need our brains as much." Wow, and I thought the hunter gatherers were the simple types. Now I know it is the scientist who came up with this article’s research who is the simple type. I’m so glad that is cleared up.
The article goes on to babble about the body’s defenses and mutations against malaria. That is just our immune system working as installed with the original model that God guarantees. And the evolutionary change explained about lactose intolerance is crazy. Please, somebody explain it to me, this whole genome theory and what that has to do with the human brain shrinking. Our discovery of all the wonders of the human body and what it is capable of, is not evidence of evolution, but just a greater understanding of how wonderfully we were put together by an awesome Creator.
BY Charles Q. Choi
I think this story reported on by Foxnews from LiveScience is full of fallacy, however it does have a cool looking picture of a brain which is what the article is about. The author is reporting that our brains are shrinking as we evolve as humans. The research is based on skull measurements which are getting smaller which suggest that our brains are shrinking and has been occurring for over 5,000 years. The research also suggests that our genes have been changing for the past 10,000 years during human evolution. John Hawks is a paleoanthropologist at the University of Wisconsin and he says, "When it comes to recent evolutionary changes, we currently maybe have the least specific details with regard the brain, but we do know from archaeological data that pretty much everywhere we can measure — Europe, China, South Africa, Australia — that brains have shrunk about 150 cubic centimeters, off a mean of about 1,350. That's roughly 10 percent."
Any story on evolution is a fictional story, so it goes with out saying what I think of evolution. And this very emotional reaction I have to this story and any other story like it concerning evolution will never change. Forgive me if I do not seem to understand this story very well.
Now because there is other information in this story to be read, it is probably not fair to just stop at the word 'evolution' and judgmentally dismiss the research as thinking it is about the theory of evolution. It reports some things that are attributed to the development of human conditions, or changes that occur, if you will, in the human brain. The silliest thing in the article is the thought that “Evolution in humans is commonly thought to have essentially stopped in recent times.” You think? I should have developed gills by now so I could swim like a fish as much time as I spend in the water at the lake. Now this article suggests that the “Human race is still evolving, and even accelerating.” Here is what the article goes on to say, "As to why is it shrinking, perhaps in big societies, as opposed to hunter-gatherer lifestyles, we can rely on other people for more things, can specialize our behavior to a greater extent, and maybe not need our brains as much." Wow, and I thought the hunter gatherers were the simple types. Now I know it is the scientist who came up with this article’s research who is the simple type. I’m so glad that is cleared up.
The article goes on to babble about the body’s defenses and mutations against malaria. That is just our immune system working as installed with the original model that God guarantees. And the evolutionary change explained about lactose intolerance is crazy. Please, somebody explain it to me, this whole genome theory and what that has to do with the human brain shrinking. Our discovery of all the wonders of the human body and what it is capable of, is not evidence of evolution, but just a greater understanding of how wonderfully we were put together by an awesome Creator.
Tea Party organizer vows to burn pelosi and Perriello in effigy
Posted: November 13th, 2009
From CNN Political Producer Peter Hamby
In this article on CCN I usually steer away from anything too political but found the title interesting. I also tend to steer away from protest, but this was an article about a Tea Party organizer who borders on the edge of desperation by planning to burn the likeness of two House Representatives and one of them is the House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. This will all take place in Virginia and the organizer thinks about one hundred people will be showing up to participate in the demonstration. The protest is against the health care legislation that is being pushed through the house against the peoples will.
I love the thought of being able to speak out against the government in this free country with out the fear of repercussions. In any other country the threat of being run over by a tank is real and here protest is a form of free speech. I especially like the idea this man had of burning the image of Pelosi because I have to change the channel on the TV every time I see her goofy face with her mouth open and speaking words of nonsense and lies.
I consider this organizer a genius as he is still protesting peacefully and he is not anti- American like the flag burners. Flag burning protesters are despicable. This man is just anti-stupid, anti-immoral, anti-unethical, anti- unconstitutional and he explains himself rather well in his statement, “We're not going to actually set Perriello on fire or Mrs. Pelosi on fire," Coleman said. "But we have been trying for months to get our point across just how vehemently we are opposed to this health care legislation. For the House vote to come so close and to know that Mr. Perriello is on the other side, it's a kick in the stomach that a lot of people couldn't take." Coleman's weekend rally is to protest mainly the Democrats in their efforts to fix the healthcare system. The article included the reaction of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Chris Van Hollen who condemned the plans as "shocking and despicable." But I agree with Coleman when he rebutted, "Something shocking and despicable is how they've handled this health care legislation," "Going behind closed doors, writing a bill that is going to fundamentally change what America is. More people are going to be killed by this health care legislation than this bonfire."
I rather enjoy the spunk this man has for getting the attention of the Democratic leaders as Democrats do not seem to respond to the American people until it starts to get personal. Then it is all about them as victims of outrage and they turn their focus to making the offender look bad, instead of focusing on what the offender is trying to get them to pay attention to, like the Healthcare Reform bill and how it will not work and will be actually damaging to the entire American system. I only hope the expected number of attendees to this rally will be in the thousands and not just a hundred.
From CNN Political Producer Peter Hamby
In this article on CCN I usually steer away from anything too political but found the title interesting. I also tend to steer away from protest, but this was an article about a Tea Party organizer who borders on the edge of desperation by planning to burn the likeness of two House Representatives and one of them is the House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. This will all take place in Virginia and the organizer thinks about one hundred people will be showing up to participate in the demonstration. The protest is against the health care legislation that is being pushed through the house against the peoples will.
I love the thought of being able to speak out against the government in this free country with out the fear of repercussions. In any other country the threat of being run over by a tank is real and here protest is a form of free speech. I especially like the idea this man had of burning the image of Pelosi because I have to change the channel on the TV every time I see her goofy face with her mouth open and speaking words of nonsense and lies.
I consider this organizer a genius as he is still protesting peacefully and he is not anti- American like the flag burners. Flag burning protesters are despicable. This man is just anti-stupid, anti-immoral, anti-unethical, anti- unconstitutional and he explains himself rather well in his statement, “We're not going to actually set Perriello on fire or Mrs. Pelosi on fire," Coleman said. "But we have been trying for months to get our point across just how vehemently we are opposed to this health care legislation. For the House vote to come so close and to know that Mr. Perriello is on the other side, it's a kick in the stomach that a lot of people couldn't take." Coleman's weekend rally is to protest mainly the Democrats in their efforts to fix the healthcare system. The article included the reaction of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Chris Van Hollen who condemned the plans as "shocking and despicable." But I agree with Coleman when he rebutted, "Something shocking and despicable is how they've handled this health care legislation," "Going behind closed doors, writing a bill that is going to fundamentally change what America is. More people are going to be killed by this health care legislation than this bonfire."
I rather enjoy the spunk this man has for getting the attention of the Democratic leaders as Democrats do not seem to respond to the American people until it starts to get personal. Then it is all about them as victims of outrage and they turn their focus to making the offender look bad, instead of focusing on what the offender is trying to get them to pay attention to, like the Healthcare Reform bill and how it will not work and will be actually damaging to the entire American system. I only hope the expected number of attendees to this rally will be in the thousands and not just a hundred.
Friday, November 6, 2009
Fake Cops Wanted in Fast-Food Robberies Sought in Rape of Wendy's Worker
Thursday, November 05, 2009
I found this story on Foxnews about men who disguised themselves as fake police officers in order to gain entrance to fast food restaurants in order to rob them. The story now reports that the criminals have escalated to raping a victim as well. The story has a link in it with more information and even a video to show the robberies. They have struck at least three times and are waiting until the restaurants close and then follow the employee as they go to their cars and flash police like lights. The victim is then forced to go back to the restaurant and open the door so they can rob the safe.
My response to this story is “see I told you so” because I was once followed home just yards from my home by a sheriff deputies car and read the riot act for not pulling over. I was not going to pull over until I felt safe in my driveway where I knew my husband would be greeting me.
I was ending an 11pm shift at the hospital and was just arriving home at 1: 30 am on a country road with in sight of my driveway when a car passed me going the opposite direction. I saw the car turn around and came speeding up to my tailgate and then it turn on flashing lights. Being a woman and knowing I had done nothing wrong I proceeded on at a slow rate and turned on my turn signal and slowly entered my driveway and did not stop until I was parked in front of my garage with my husband opening the garage door. I stayed in the truck until the officer exited his car and proceeded to chew me out about not pulling over. I calmly explained that at 1:30 am on a dark country road and knowing I had no moving violation and so close to my driveway I would pull over as indicated by my turn signal and slow speed and find out whatever it was when I was safely near my husband. I told him I knew of a recent fake pullover in a neighboring town where a girl had been raped and I was concerned for my safety. He admonished me as that only happens rarely and I should have pulled over because he did not know what to expect coming up my driveway to which I told him, his safety was not my concern. After he went back to his car and canceled ‘back up’ he must have settled down because he came back and talked to my husband and I (still sitting in the truck) and explained that someone had called in a description of a blue truck sitting sideways in a road. I was unfortunate to have been driving a blue truck. He could see I was in scrubs and went on to talk about his wife also working late shifts at a hospital.
I’m glad the article reported that this type of criminal incidents are still happening and all young persons aught to not blindly succumb to visuals associated with law enforcement such as flashing lights. I just wish I could have had a news article to show the sheriffs deputy in my case.
I found this story on Foxnews about men who disguised themselves as fake police officers in order to gain entrance to fast food restaurants in order to rob them. The story now reports that the criminals have escalated to raping a victim as well. The story has a link in it with more information and even a video to show the robberies. They have struck at least three times and are waiting until the restaurants close and then follow the employee as they go to their cars and flash police like lights. The victim is then forced to go back to the restaurant and open the door so they can rob the safe.
My response to this story is “see I told you so” because I was once followed home just yards from my home by a sheriff deputies car and read the riot act for not pulling over. I was not going to pull over until I felt safe in my driveway where I knew my husband would be greeting me.
I was ending an 11pm shift at the hospital and was just arriving home at 1: 30 am on a country road with in sight of my driveway when a car passed me going the opposite direction. I saw the car turn around and came speeding up to my tailgate and then it turn on flashing lights. Being a woman and knowing I had done nothing wrong I proceeded on at a slow rate and turned on my turn signal and slowly entered my driveway and did not stop until I was parked in front of my garage with my husband opening the garage door. I stayed in the truck until the officer exited his car and proceeded to chew me out about not pulling over. I calmly explained that at 1:30 am on a dark country road and knowing I had no moving violation and so close to my driveway I would pull over as indicated by my turn signal and slow speed and find out whatever it was when I was safely near my husband. I told him I knew of a recent fake pullover in a neighboring town where a girl had been raped and I was concerned for my safety. He admonished me as that only happens rarely and I should have pulled over because he did not know what to expect coming up my driveway to which I told him, his safety was not my concern. After he went back to his car and canceled ‘back up’ he must have settled down because he came back and talked to my husband and I (still sitting in the truck) and explained that someone had called in a description of a blue truck sitting sideways in a road. I was unfortunate to have been driving a blue truck. He could see I was in scrubs and went on to talk about his wife also working late shifts at a hospital.
I’m glad the article reported that this type of criminal incidents are still happening and all young persons aught to not blindly succumb to visuals associated with law enforcement such as flashing lights. I just wish I could have had a news article to show the sheriffs deputy in my case.
Amateur Treasure Hunter Finds Iron Age 'Bling'
Thursday, November 05, 2009
This story on Foxnews is another one of those good luck stories about a man who took up the hobby of metal detecting and upon his first real try at treasure hunting, actually pulled in a rare treasure worth approximately 1.65 million dollars. The find was four gold necklaces that date between 300BC and 100BC which is pretty much described as the Iron Age. This was all found on private land in Stirlingshire Scotland.
My first thought was lucky dog, but he may not receive anything for it because apparently he told the local museum about it and they are taking possession of the necklaces. “Under Scots law, the Crown has the right to claim any find, with any payments made at their discretion.” Now I’m thinking the trouble he may have caused himself by reporting it will be evident when he has to hire a lawyer in the future in order to be compensated. That’s just a guess because I’m thinking the Museum of Scotland will probably try to cheat him out of anything. After all he is just a recreational hobbyist and not a professional of any kind. He also is only 35 years old and only a game warden with a safari park. I’m sure they are not familiar with the phrase ‘finders keepers’. Sounds like they are more comfortable with ‘you find, we keep’, but we’ll let you look at it anytime you come to the museum.
I thought the story was nice on the part of describing how the man found the jewelry. I’m all for those people who come into good fortune because it has got to be the most wonderful feeling in the world. I’m sure this has been a life changing event for him. I’m sure many people have taken up the hobby of metal detecting, but how many of them took it up and in five days after getting used to the equipment, take it out and find a fortune on the first try? "I found it by accident," he said. "I had a field in mind, so set off there. I walked seven steps from where I parked my jeep and that's when I discovered them. It was just sheer luck.”
I like lucky stories because there is still a chance for every person out there to appreciate that this could happen to me…..probably not, but it still could. Even if this man does not get paid for the worth of the jewelry, he hopefully will get paid enough to change his life economically. At his age this could really do things for him. If it were an old man, possibly just receiving the notoriety of finding the treasure might be rewarding enough but if it were me I would want the money. He did look on the internet to see what this type of jewelry was worth so I know he is interested in money. I just think he made a big mistake by emailing a picture of his find to the museum.
This story on Foxnews is another one of those good luck stories about a man who took up the hobby of metal detecting and upon his first real try at treasure hunting, actually pulled in a rare treasure worth approximately 1.65 million dollars. The find was four gold necklaces that date between 300BC and 100BC which is pretty much described as the Iron Age. This was all found on private land in Stirlingshire Scotland.
My first thought was lucky dog, but he may not receive anything for it because apparently he told the local museum about it and they are taking possession of the necklaces. “Under Scots law, the Crown has the right to claim any find, with any payments made at their discretion.” Now I’m thinking the trouble he may have caused himself by reporting it will be evident when he has to hire a lawyer in the future in order to be compensated. That’s just a guess because I’m thinking the Museum of Scotland will probably try to cheat him out of anything. After all he is just a recreational hobbyist and not a professional of any kind. He also is only 35 years old and only a game warden with a safari park. I’m sure they are not familiar with the phrase ‘finders keepers’. Sounds like they are more comfortable with ‘you find, we keep’, but we’ll let you look at it anytime you come to the museum.
I thought the story was nice on the part of describing how the man found the jewelry. I’m all for those people who come into good fortune because it has got to be the most wonderful feeling in the world. I’m sure this has been a life changing event for him. I’m sure many people have taken up the hobby of metal detecting, but how many of them took it up and in five days after getting used to the equipment, take it out and find a fortune on the first try? "I found it by accident," he said. "I had a field in mind, so set off there. I walked seven steps from where I parked my jeep and that's when I discovered them. It was just sheer luck.”
I like lucky stories because there is still a chance for every person out there to appreciate that this could happen to me…..probably not, but it still could. Even if this man does not get paid for the worth of the jewelry, he hopefully will get paid enough to change his life economically. At his age this could really do things for him. If it were an old man, possibly just receiving the notoriety of finding the treasure might be rewarding enough but if it were me I would want the money. He did look on the internet to see what this type of jewelry was worth so I know he is interested in money. I just think he made a big mistake by emailing a picture of his find to the museum.
China Bans Beatings After Death at Web-Addict Camp
Friday, November 06, 2009
I found this story on Fox news and it is eerily similar to the hard love camps for troubled teens in the U.S. where they submit them to tough treatment such as hiking in the desert ect. However this story is about Chinese teens addicted to the web. Apparently the Chinese beat their young campers to cure the internet addiction and now it is receiving attention by the media because one of the teenagers has died. Also in July, the Chinese government had banned electric shock treatments used on teenagers because of a “controversial psychiatrist” and his practice. Now also the government has banned punishment beatings.
And I thought the Chinese were so smart with all the attention to education and everything. I would think utilization of the booming internet resources would be adventitious to excelling in this world. Instead the parents of these teens choose to send their kids to over 200 organizations “set up across the country to "treat" adolescents obsessed with the world wide web. "Patients" are forced to substitute time spent staring at a monitor with strenuous physical exercise — or even more extreme forms of "therapy."
I think there is more to this story than is being reported but still think it is outrageous to think this is a beneficial treatment method for this type of problem. I’ve got an easy treatment. Just take the computer away from the child. There is no reason a 15 year old boy should be dead just hours after checking in to a camp. That is just plain murder. What parent would put their child into an institution without checking on the practices of the institution first? Apparently the government has issued new guidelines telling these camps to “be more careful with their patients.” This was issued after another teen “was taken to hospital with water in the lungs and kidney failure following time spent” in one of the camps. "When intervening to prevent improper use of the internet, we should... strictly prohibit restriction of personal freedom and physical punishments," the health ministry said in a draft guideline for Internet use by minors.” "The goal of intervention is... to urge the target people to use the Internet in a healthy way," they said. "It's not to stop them from using the Internet."
OK, now we are getting somewhere with the story that should continue here, but did not. I would be interested in knowing what they think improper use of the internet is, and why parents are choosing to send their kids to these torture camps instead of just taking the computer away, or supervising the use of the computer. There has got to be more to this story such as is this a cultural thing? What could be so improper in the use of the internet that you could not discipline your own child yourself? The Chinese government does so many improper things themselves, I would think the parents would want to protect their children instead of willingly send them to a camp that emulates the cruelty of their own regime.
I found this story on Fox news and it is eerily similar to the hard love camps for troubled teens in the U.S. where they submit them to tough treatment such as hiking in the desert ect. However this story is about Chinese teens addicted to the web. Apparently the Chinese beat their young campers to cure the internet addiction and now it is receiving attention by the media because one of the teenagers has died. Also in July, the Chinese government had banned electric shock treatments used on teenagers because of a “controversial psychiatrist” and his practice. Now also the government has banned punishment beatings.
And I thought the Chinese were so smart with all the attention to education and everything. I would think utilization of the booming internet resources would be adventitious to excelling in this world. Instead the parents of these teens choose to send their kids to over 200 organizations “set up across the country to "treat" adolescents obsessed with the world wide web. "Patients" are forced to substitute time spent staring at a monitor with strenuous physical exercise — or even more extreme forms of "therapy."
I think there is more to this story than is being reported but still think it is outrageous to think this is a beneficial treatment method for this type of problem. I’ve got an easy treatment. Just take the computer away from the child. There is no reason a 15 year old boy should be dead just hours after checking in to a camp. That is just plain murder. What parent would put their child into an institution without checking on the practices of the institution first? Apparently the government has issued new guidelines telling these camps to “be more careful with their patients.” This was issued after another teen “was taken to hospital with water in the lungs and kidney failure following time spent” in one of the camps. "When intervening to prevent improper use of the internet, we should... strictly prohibit restriction of personal freedom and physical punishments," the health ministry said in a draft guideline for Internet use by minors.” "The goal of intervention is... to urge the target people to use the Internet in a healthy way," they said. "It's not to stop them from using the Internet."
OK, now we are getting somewhere with the story that should continue here, but did not. I would be interested in knowing what they think improper use of the internet is, and why parents are choosing to send their kids to these torture camps instead of just taking the computer away, or supervising the use of the computer. There has got to be more to this story such as is this a cultural thing? What could be so improper in the use of the internet that you could not discipline your own child yourself? The Chinese government does so many improper things themselves, I would think the parents would want to protect their children instead of willingly send them to a camp that emulates the cruelty of their own regime.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)