.
The Abortion Issue can be Resolved Now!
Special interest success is a strange but fair question when one looks at the hundreds of millions of dollars involved in the preservation of special interests and the propagation of their cause. In plain English, are they more interested in self-preservation than success?
Of course the more hotly debated and contested special interests are the social issues which have taken a back seat this election in order to keep the focus on the economy and the Obama record. A wise tactic indeed if you are a Republican.
For example, take the most volatile and controversial of all special social interests during any normal election cycle, the interests for and against abortion. They are invisible this election having been lost in debate over the Obama economic performance.
As the advocates remain silent we have now passed over 52 million legal abortions in America, and over 1 billion worldwide. That means there have been 15 million more abortions than the entire population of California, our largest state. That is equal to over 16% of the entire population of the United States. More than the population of most European nations.
Yet there is silence in the campaign and silence in the Halls of Congress. Perhaps that is a good thing as it is a dark cloud hanging over a nation dedicated to LIFE, LIBERTY and the pursuit of HAPPINESS of it's citizens. In truth it should not be debated as a matter of justice as neither side advocates the taking of human life.
However, the national debate has been positioned as a matter of being for or against abortion. But I have not found any pro-abortionists who advocate the death of human beings. Not even Roe versus Wade says a word about allowing for the legal deaths of infants though many people are confused about the issue.
No, Roe versus Wade only addresses WHEN LIFE BEGINS.
If we could agree on when life begins there would be no national debate, no polarization between liberals and conservatives, and no conflict between religions or political parties. Most important, there would be no systematic abortions of Black Americans at a rate almost three times higher than the percentage of population that is Black. You see, 75% of the US population is White while 12.4% is Black, yet 58% of abortions are White compared to 34% Black. Total legal Black abortions, 18 million, equals almost 50% of the total US Black population of about 37.6 million, while White abortions equal just 13% of the total White population.
When statistics become so skewed something is dreadfully wrong. Just as is this fact. For the record in America since passage of Roe versus Wade as of 2010 there have now been over 52 million legal abortions. For comparison purposes, the total people killed in all wars fought by the United States from the War of Independence through Iraq is about 1,316,000. In other words in the US there have been more than 39 TIMES AS MANY ABORTIONS IN 35 YEARS AS DEATHS FROM WARS IN 234 YEARS.
Roe versus Wade was a ruling by the Supreme Court that centrally held that a mother may abort her pregnancy for any reason, up until the "point at which the fetus becomes ‘viable'". The Court defined viable as being potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid. In 1973 viability usually occurred at about seven months (28 weeks) but might occur earlier, even at 24 weeks. Medical breakthroughs since the ruling and prenatal advances have demonstrated that the ability of the fetus to live outside the mother's womb can come at a much earlier time.
In fact just recently the youngest baby in history was delivered at 21 weeks and 6 days, survived and has now gone home to live a normal life. Amillia Sonja Taylor was born October 24, 2009 in Florida. She is living proof that Roe versus Wade is scientifically wrong, a baby can survive at 21 weeks, not 28 weeks.
Clearly the language of the law is flawed, so what should it be? Here is the test for all pro abortion groups who claim they really aren't advocating taking lives. There is one medical test widely accepted and upheld by the courts to establish that a human is legally alive or dead.
The Uniform Determination of Death Act, promulgated in 1980 and supported by the President’s Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research, has served as a model statute for the adoption of state legislation that defines death. The act asserts: “An individual, who has sustained either irreversible cessation of circulatory and respiratory functions, or irreversible cessation of all functions of the entire brain, including the brainstem, is dead. A determination of death must be made in accordance with accepted medical standards.”
Since brain activity is the legal measure for the cessation of life, then it must also be the legally accepted measure of the beginning of life. A fetus becomes a living baby when brain activity can be first measured. According to established science with the use of an electroencephalogram, or EEG, activity in the brain can be detected as early as six weeks gestational age (6). Whether brain activity begins at this time or started earlier but becomes detectable at this time is uncertain; it is known that neural connections begin forming as soon as neurons begin forming, as early as 14 days gestation.
A Constitutional lawyer like President Obama should embrace scientific advances that have proven when brain activity is detected, at six weeks, and since the courts accept brain activity as a reliable measure of death over life, then life can be scientifically proven at six weeks.
Roe versus Wade, adopted nearly four decades ago, is medically and scientifically obsolete in the determination that life begins at 28 weeks. Responsible members of Congress and the White House should advocate, in the interest of scientific accuracy, a change in the law to reflect the latest scientific advances. With 52 million abortions already performed, do we really want to keep terminating the lives of babies we know are living beings?
Yet there is a better way to implement this known scientific fact for the basis of when life begins and that is through the governors and their attorney generals. They have implemented and defended The Uniform Determination of Death Act and defended it in the courts. It would seem they could take action to extend the act to include when life begins since it is recognized by the courts as when life ends and it could be implemented by executive order, regulation or even legislation if necessary at the state level.
.
.
The following three article headlines tell us all we need to know about the Obama health care reform and the impact it has had on the cost of health care since it's passage. If ever there was a clearer signal of what is to come under Obamacare this is it.
The full text and source of the articles follow the headlines. Is there any doubt why the American voters are fed up?
Workers pay more for health costs, study finds
Malpractice liability costs U.S. $55.6 billion: study
Price of Brand-Name Drugs Soars
Full articles...
Workers pay more for health costs, study finds
Employees paying out additional $482 on average for family plans
Tony Pugh • MCT News Service • September 7, 2010 • From Lansing State Journal
WASHINGTON - A recently released annual survey says workers are paying about $482 more, on average, for job-based family health insurance this year.
That comes as companies force employees to shoulder more of the burden of health care costs.
The increase in premiums, up 14 percent from last year, means that workers are paying nearly all of a $495 increase in the average cost of family coverage this year.
Employers' contributions to family coverage showed no increase at all in 2010, according to the Employer Health Benefits Survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation and the Health Research & Educational Trust.
Drew Altman, the president and CEO of the Kaiser Family Foundation, said it was the first time he could remember employers - who provide coverage for about 157 million Americans - moving so boldly to shift health costs to workers.
"Added health costs for workers means added economic insecurity for working people in tough times," Altman said.
Over the past five years, workers' share of premiums has increased by $1,300, or 47 percent, Altman said, while overall coverage costs are up 27 percent. Over the same period, wages climbed 18 percent and general inflation rose 12 percent.
"If premiums and costs continue to be shifted to consumers, households will face difficult choices, like forgoing needed care or re-examining how they can best care for their families," said Maulik Joshi, president of Health Research and Educational Trust.
Family coverage now costs an average of $13,770 a year, up 3 percent from 2009, the survey found. Employers still absorb the bulk of the costs, paying an average of $9,773 toward the full premium amount. Workers typically pay about 27 percent of the cost for family coverage, but this year they're paying about 30 percent, or an average of $3,997. That's up from an average of $3,515 last year.
Workers with individual coverage are in the same boat. Their average annual premiums spiked more than 15 percent - from $779 to $899 - even though the average overall cost for single coverage rose only 5 percent, from $4,824 in 2009 to $5,049 this year.
Malpractice liability costs U.S. $55.6 billion: study
Tue Sep 7, 12:22 am ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Medical malpractice liability costs the U.S. healthcare system more than $55 billion a year, most of it in "defensive" medical practices such as extra tests and scans, according to a report released on Tuesday.
These costs, which also include administrative costs, payments to plaintiffs and lawyer fees, account for 2.4 percent of annual U.S. healthcare spending, Michelle Mello of the Harvard School of Public Health and colleagues reported.
So-called defensive medicine costs alone totaled an estimated $45.6 billion, Mello's team reported in the journal Health Affairs.
The issue of malpractice has repeatedly come up in discussions and debates over healthcare reform. Doctors often must carry hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in malpractice insurance.
The administration of President Barack Obama has made saving money a centerpiece of healthcare reform, Obama's signature domestic policy.
"We cannot debate the potential for medical liability reform to bring down health care costs in any meaningful way without realistic cost estimates," Mello said in a statement.
"Physician and insurer groups like to collapse all conversations about cost growth in health care to malpractice reform, while their opponents trivialize the role of defensive medicine," added Amitabh Chandra, a professor of public policy at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government who worked on the study.
"Our study demonstrates that both these simplifications are wrong -- the amount of defensive medicine is not trivial, but it's unlikely to be a source of significant savings."
Many groups have suggested tort reform as a solution, including caps on damages to be paid in successful malpractice suits, but Mello's team said such reforms would be unlikely to cut overall healthcare spending much.
Total malpractice indemnity payments were $5.72 billion a year in 2008 dollars, Mello's team found -- about $5 billion in actual damages and less than $2 million in punitive damages.
But they noted there is no comprehensive system for tracking such damages, either. "The source that comes closest is the National Practitioner Data Bank of the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA)," they wrote.
They used that databank, with estimates from other sources, for their report. They used published studies for other numbers in the report.
"Notably missing from this list are malpractice insurance premiums," Mello's team noted.
"Premiums represent insurers' best estimates of their indemnity costs and defense costs, plus additional amounts to cover other operating expenses, reinsurance costs, and profits or surplus building. It would be double counting to include both malpractice premium costs and indemnity and administrative costs."
(Reporting by Maggie Fox; Editing by Eric Beech)
Price of Brand-Name Drugs Soars
Over the Past Five Years, Prices Rose 41.5 Percent, Hurting Americans on Medicare
By RON CLAIBORNE and JESSICA HOPPER
Aug. 25, 2010
The cost of the most popular brand-name drugs used by older Americans soared 8.3 percent in 2009, according to a new report by the AARP.
Researchers examined 217 brand-name drugs, including popular drugs like Nexium, which is used to treat acid reflux.
They found that even though consumer prices overall declined by 0.4 percent last year, the cost of brand-name drugs went up. The price of those same medications rose 7 percent in 2008.
The AARP report said the retail price of brand-name drugs rose 41.5 percent from 2004 to 2009, far outpacing the increase in the consumer price index which increased by 13.3 percent during that same period.
That means someone who takes three brand-name drugs pays an average of $1,900 dollars more each year for medicine.
"Something is out of whack here about no increases in the rest of the economy and very substantial [increases] with pharmaceuticals," AARP's John Rother said.
The pharmaceutical industry group, Pharma, declined ABC News' request for an on-camera interview and did not answer questions we submitted in writing. However, in a written statement, Pharma called the AARP report "distorted and misleading" for not including cheaper generic equivalents which account for 75 percent of prescriptions filled.
Reserchers from the AARP said that for most of the 217 medications they looked at, there was no generic version because the brand-name drug is still under patent.
Soaring Drug Prices Hurt Elderly
Higher prescription drug prices are especially hard on elderly Americans living on fixed incomes, many of whom are on the Medicare prescription drug plan, which leaves them uncovered after they spend $2,830 on medications in one year. The coverage kicks back in only after they have spent $4,550.
"They bear the full cost out of pocket when they reach that coverage limit, and that's why this is particularly sensitive to older persons," Rother said.
Generic Drugs Are Cheaper Alternative
The report did contain some good news. More and more Americans are turning to generic equivalents.
Yet, many Americans still choose the more expensive brand name medicines even when the exact same drug is available as a generic.
Dr. Keshav Chander, a cardiologist in St. George, Utah said many of his patients mistakenly assume the generic drug cannot be as good as the brand name because it is so much less expensive.
"When we buy drugs, we cannot believe that something that is 10 times more expensive than the other product is not going to be better," said Dr. Keshav Chander, a cardiologist.
.
.
The article below is pretty neutral, ...not anti republican or democrat.
Charlie Reese, a retired reporter for the Orlando Sentinel has hit the nail directly on the head, defining clearly who it is that in the final analysis must assume responsibility for the judgments made that impact each one of us every day.
It's a short but good read. Worth the time. Worth remembering!
545 vs. 300,000,000
EVERY CITIZEN NEEDS TO READ THIS AND THINK ABOUT WHAT THIS JOURNALIST HAS SCRIPTED IN THIS MESSAGE. READ IT AND THEN REALLY THINK ABOUT OUR CURRENT POLITICAL DEBACLE.
[Charley Reese has been a journalist for 49 years, reporting on everything from sports to politics. From 1969–71, he worked as a campaign staffer for gubernatorial, senatorial and congressional races in several states. He was an editor, assistant to the publisher, and columnist for the Orlando Sentinel from 1971 to 2001. He now writes a syndicated column which is carried on LewRockwell.com. Reese served two years active duty in the U.S. Army as a tank gunner.]
545 PEOPLE--By Charlie Reese
Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.
Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?
Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?
You and I don't propose a federal budget. The president does.
You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.
You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.
You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.
You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.
One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.
I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.
I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a president to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.
Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.
What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits.
The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.
The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House? Nancy Pelosi. She is the leader of the majority party. She and fellow House members, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.
It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.
If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.
If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red.
If the Army & Marines are in IRAQ , it's because they want them in IRAQ.
If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.
There are no insoluble government problems.
Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power.
Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation," or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.
Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.
They, and they alone, have the power.
They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses.
Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees.
We should vote "all" of them out of office and clean up their mess!
Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper.
What you do with this article now that you have read it......... Is up to you.
The following might be funny if it weren't so darned true. Be sure to read all the way to the end:
Tax his land, Tax his bed, Tax the table, At which he's fed.
Tax his tractor, Tax his mule, Teach him taxes Are the rule.
Tax his work, Tax his pay, He works for peanuts Anyway!
Tax his cow, Tax his goat, Tax his pants, Tax his coat.
Tax his ties, Tax his shirt, Tax his work, Tax his dirt.
Tax his tobacco, Tax his drink, Tax him if he Tries to think.
Tax his cigars, Tax his beers, If he cries, Tax his tears.
Tax his car, Tax his gas, Find other ways To tax his ass.
Tax all he has Then let him know That you won't be done Till he has no dough.
When he screams and hollers; Then tax him some more, Tax him till He's good and sore.
Then tax his coffin, Tax his grave, Tax the sod in Which he's laid.
Put these words Upon his tomb, 'Taxes drove me to my doom'.
When he's gone, Do not relax, It's time to apply The inheritance tax.
Sales Tax
School Tax
Liquor Tax
Luxury Tax
Excise Taxes
Property Tax
Cigarette Tax
Medicare Tax
Inventory Tax
Real Estate Tax
Well Permit Tax
Fuel Permit Tax
Inheritance Tax
Road Usage Tax
CDL license Tax
Dog License Tax
State Income Tax
Food License Tax
Vehicle Sales Tax
Gross Receipts Tax
Social Security Tax
Service Charge Tax
Fishing License Tax
Federal Income Tax
Building Permit Tax
IRS Interest Charges
Hunting License Tax
Marriage License Tax
Corporate Income Tax
Personal Property Tax
Accounts Receivable Tax
Recreational Vehicle Tax
Workers Compensation Tax
Watercraft Registration Tax
Telephone Usage Charge Tax
Telephone Federal Excise Tax
Telephone State and Local Tax
IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax)
State Unemployment Tax (SUTA)
Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax
Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax
Gasoline Tax (currently 44.75 cents per gallon)
Utility Taxes Vehicle License Registration Tax
Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Taxes
Telephone Recurring and Nonrecurring Charges Tax
STILL THINK THIS IS FUNNY?
Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, & our nation was the most prosperous in the world.
We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids.
What in the hell happened? Can you spell 'politicians?' I hope this goes around THE USA at least 100 times!!! YOU can help it get there!!!
GO AHEAD - - - BE AN AMERICAN!!!
P.S. If you do the right thing and pass this on - which is entirely up to you - please do the right thing and highlight and delete any addresses you receive with it.
Thank You
.
.
It is difficult but we are still reporting as hurricane Earl drifts up the eastern seaboard. Contrary to news reports that the storm has lost it's intensity, you can see things are more than a little intense.
Here you can see our local town crier, as we have no other means of communicating among towns folk, sidetracked on his daily mission by the hurricane winds.
I tried to get to the Post Office to pick up my mail but the conditions made it a little difficult. Still it is better than sitting at the typewriter cranking out stories while trying to keep the pages dry.
I checked on the neighbor next door but no one seemed to be home so I just drifted back to my house and on the way passed more neighbors taking the storm much too lightly. I mean I have guitars too but I'm not about to get them wet like that ukulele.
It was back to the safety of Park Place, my house, and I looked out back where I saw Hillbilly Joe trying to get to his truck and I just knew I was safer here in the comfort of the second floor. Why it looked like the storm blew most of his clothes off.
I could see the park across the street and sure enough, the Watermen from Coltons Point, having given up any hope for fishing, crabbing, oystering or clamming were settling in to a game of soccer in spite of the high tide and weather.
So much for Earl, by the time he made it past North Carolina there was not much left in him. Still, there are two more storms barreling across the Atlantic so maybe we will keep the emergency supplies handy for the next wave.
.
.
Rahm Emanuel, Obama's fiery tongued Chief of Staff, was recruited into the president's inner sanctum because of his Wall Street connections and his ruthless negotiating skills and in the first two years his success at extracting money from special interests was near legendary.
As a result the Obama administration became the most expensive money could buy shattering campaign spending records, nearly a billion dollar cost to get elected, and shaking down corporate and special interests after getting elected at a pace never seen in our nation's capitol before.
From the Wall Street bankers to health care industries the special interest money poured into campaign coffers after the election and most went to the Democrat majority controlling the business of our nation the Obama, Pelosi, Reid and Democratic party campaign committees. In fact, the federal lobbyists in 2009 spent the following money lobbying our government officials and feeding campaign funds.
Open Secrets.org - Center for Responsive Government
2009 Expenditures
Pharmaceutical/Health Care - $267,853,947
Business Associations - $183,498,730
Oil & Gas - $175,079,824
Insurance - $164,411,830
Electric Utilities - $145,691,753
Computers/Internet - $119,370,418
Misc Manufacturing & Distribution - $110,769,964
Hospitals/Nursing Homes - $107,892,681
TV/Movies/Music - $107,496,953
Education - $99,816,801
Securities & Investment - $94,135,458
Health Professionals - $84,284,513
Air Transport - $83,876,931
Civil Servants/Public Officials - $83,861,329
Health Services/HMOs - $74,234,045
Of course the two major legislative bills pushed by Obama were health care reform and financial reform, both of which were managed by Emanuel and passed this year. Deals were made between Rahm and the pharmaceutical boys with details yet to be disclosed. If we add the total health spending lobbying in 2009 to the spending in the first half of 2010 we see $1 billion was spent by the industry to get what they wanted.
A similar astounding spending spree went into financial reform by the business community as the total 2009 and 2010 spending totaled $472 million to get a watered down financial reform bill. Industry by industry the Obama administration, who pledged to get rid of special interest influence in Washington, set records in sucking money into the campaign coffers.
The payoff to the lobbyists can be equally staggering. The pharma companies were able to increase the cost of major drugs by over 8% last year while the inflation rate for America was under 1% yet there was no outcry on behalf of the people by the White House or Obama people. And as for Wall Street, the administration complained of the billions of dollars in executive bonuses yet did nothing to stop them.
Money controls our nation's capitol and the Obama administration played politics as usual better than anyone in history. This fall the people of America have the chance to rate the performance of the Obama and Democratic majority and the outcome will not be pretty.
Perhaps, the outsiders and new faces can get in office and start the road to recovery with meaningful campaign reform and limitations on the ability of special interests to buy our government.
.
.
As Earl closes in on North Carolina sometime tonight (Thursday) the Maryland Chesapeake Tidal Basin will get the first impact as it moves up the east coast. So far the President has issued an emergency declaration and the Governor has issued an emergency declaration for our area. The National Weather Service has issued a coastal flood warning for the area.
Just before nightfall the sky filled with the advancing clouds of Earl, still a couple of hundred miles away. It is a foreboding sky but we should be just beyond the real danger area. Here at the Potomac basin the tides should be effected when the hurricane winds pass offshore later tonight.
Any flooding should hit by morning and the rains should be less severe than normal hurricanes on the east coast because the hurricane keeps speeding up. It was moving at a speed of 18 miles an hour earlier today and by morning is expected to accelerate to 35 miles per hour, much faster than storms already bigger than the entire state of Florida.
The pictures show the likely path, speed, and shape from various radar and satellite imaging. Just above you can see the two storms following Earl that will be the next threat. Note the comparison below between the satellite image of Katrina and Earl.
.
.
Christian Science Monitor headline: Vanity Fair publishes 18-page attack on Sarah Palin
NEWSWEEK WONDERS: WHY DON’T THE HIT PIECES WORK ANYMORE?
ANSWER: MORE AMERICANS TRUST SARAH PALIN THAN TRUST NEWSWEEK
The latest Sarah Palin bashing is nothing new for the magazine Vanity Fair Editor in Chief Graydon Carter and writer Michael Joseph Gross but readers should be forewarned that neither could ever be described as an objective journalist.
In a story titled Defending Graydon Carter in 2004 Jack Shafer said the following:
"What's more, Carter hasn't pretended to be the sort of objective journalist who occupies a cubicle at the New York Times since the '70s and '80s when he worked at Life, TV Cable Week, and Time—assuming that he did then. He was a cheap-shot artist (accent on "artist") at Spy, which he co-founded in the late '80s. In his latest incarnation, he's a radical journalist who loves nothing more than to kick off each issue with a rabble-rousing denunciation of the war in Iraq and the Bush administration that's more Susan Sarandon than Leonard Downie Jr. "
Carter has hated Bush since 2002 and used all his resources since to capitalize on it in Hollywood and through the media. He has used scandal and celebrity access to generate circulation and journalistic standards have little to do with the stories.
The Canadian born Carter has identified himself as a libertarian: "I don't vote. I find both parties to be appalling and OK at the same time. I find it harder for anybody as they get older to feel 100 per cent strongly behind one party. There's lots more grey than when I was younger. I'm a libertarian."
It is only natural for a Bush hater to extend his attitude to those like John McCain and Sarah Palin who backed the war efforts of the previous president.
The Associated Press says of Carter and VANITY FAIR, "dishing on celebrity foibles and excesses is what Canadian journalist GRAYDON CARTER does best."
AP said Vanity Fair lives and dies by its celebrity covers - a fact Carter is perfectly brutal about. "It's a global magazine . . . Each place has their own sports stars, literary stars, statesmen or scientists. The only universal language is movies so you're stuck with the situation."
So an ego based editor of a fashion magazine turned exploiter of celebrity scandal would naturally seem to focus his extreme bias on pro-war Sarah Palin, the non-celebrity politician headliner from backwoods Alaska. His many articles trashing Palin have helped keep his magazine in business.
Then there is the author of the Vanity Fair article Michael Joseph Gross. Long short on journalistic standards and author of many Palin bashing articles, what is his problem with Palin? Could it have anything to do with the fact he has advocated on gay rights in the military and all walks of life for years in his stories while Palin has firmly opposed any extension of gay rights in the military or anywhere else?
Gross even won journalism awards for his reporting on gay issues.
The National Lesbian & Gay Journalists Association today announced the recipients of its Excellence in Journalism Awards and the newest inductees to its LGBT Journalists Hall of Fame.
The organization will honor Journalist of the Year winner James Kirchick and Sarah Pettit Memorial Award for Excellence in LGBT Media winner Ryan Lee as part of plenary events at "Breaking Stories, Breaking Waves," NLGJA's 2007 National Convention & 4th Annual LGBT Media Summit. Winners in the competition's other categories will participate as panelists on breakout sessions designed to give convention attendees the chance to learn about the behind-the-scenes work that went into the award-winning stories, Web sites and photographs.
NLGJA Excellence in Feature Writing
Sponsored by Hearst Newspapers
First Place Presented to "Queens of the Desert," Michael Joseph Gross, Out Magazine
Second Place Presented to "When in Rome," Michael Joseph Gross, Out Magazine
Could a gay bias against Palin have been responsible for the brutal bashing he gave her in his latest Vanity Fair attack? Based on his portfolio it stands to reason. Other journalists have questioned his reporting credentials and motives.
What to make of it all? Politico's Ben Smith questioned many of the anecdotes used by Gross and concluded that "you can really write anything about Palin."
The Alaska Dispatch online magazine found the media bubble around Palin newsworthy itself: "A reporter (Gross) followed Palin around on a speaking tour through four Midwestern states with apparent back-stage access, wrote more than 10,500 words about his experience, and his story doesn't feature a single new comment from or interview with his subject ..... it's very unusual."
The Christian Science Monitor summed it up best: "If you are trying to sell books or magazines or get clicks for your website, Republican Party star Sarah Palin is the gift that keeps giving."
Newsweek has an article on its website on Sarah Palin titled Why No Amount of Reporting Can Hurt Sarah Palin by author Ravi Somaiya. He says:
"The headline is mostly correct even as the rest of the piece fails.
Michael Joseph Gross’s stories, headlined “Sarah Palin: the Sound and the Fury” and “Sarah Palin’s Shopping Spree: Yes, There’s More …” are filled with the kind of detail that sets the political press frothing (with outrage or glee, depending on the outlet). She’s a bad tipper, he reports; she abuses staff and throws things; she is vengeful, perhaps “unhinged”; her aides are amateurish and vindictive; she displays signs of paranoia. Gross found, he says, a “sad and moldering strangeness” as soon as he looked under the surface of her world."
Somaiya admits that “It is hard to know whether what Gross reports is true—many of his assertions are based on opinions, and anonymous ones at that.” But that doesn’t stop Somaiya from dutifully repeating what he doesn’t know to be true and expanding upon it."
Of course one must question Newsweek as an objective source of Palin stories as well. Newsweek fell on hard times, lost readers and was managed horribly, because it long ago squandered its credibility by producing Obama propaganda and attacking those it disagreed with ideologically, and Sarah Palin was one of it's favorite targets and she bolstered sales.
As reported about Gross and his efforts to bash Palin, “Vanity Fair's Michael Joseph Gross stood in the presence of greatness and knew it not. What a shame and a waste! Real people identify with Palin, liberal coastal elitists not so much.”
Perhaps we should let Michael Joseph Gross explain his opinions in his own words. In an online story August 7, 2008, he offered the following HomoQuotable quote:
"As a normative way of socializing for gay men, online cruising is a disaster. We need to recognize its effects -- including its tendency to isolate us, encourage objectification, and diminish our sense of life’s nonsexual possibilities -- as disasters. We need to recognize that too many of us, too much of the time, are cruising online because it is easier and feels safer than thinking about the love we are missing and the power we do not have. Too many of us, too much of the time, are cruising online because it’s easier and feels safer than mustering the courage, patience, discipline, and imagination required to help ourselves and each other become the men that, in our strongest moments, we want to be."
Now, give me one reason why anyone would believe that Vanity Fair's Graydon Carter or Michael Joseph Gross ever had any intention of telling the truth about Sarah Palin. Sometimes things just aren't what they seem. Sometimes it is the messenger whose bias colors the story we read.
I suspect, as Newsweek reported, no amount of unsubstantiated trashing of her, her life, her political views and her success will tarnish the image middle America has of Sarah because she is not the celebrity the media normally trash but a Main Street woman who is far stronger than those who hate her for being so strong.
.
.
For those of you safely tucked away from the Atlantic Ocean Hurricane Earl is just another storm somewhere else but here in Coltons Point on the waterfront, just a few miles from the point where the Potomac River reaches the Chespeake Bay and about 100 miles from the Atlantic Ocean, we sit in the area covered by Emergency Hurricane warnings from the National and State of Maryland emergency offices.
Just 7 years ago Hurricane Isabel made a direct hit here with the eye of the hurricane passing right over Coltons Point. If Earl shifts just a few miles it could hit here again. If it takes the current projected path we could have hurricane force or tropical storm force winds as right now hurricane force winds reach out 90 miles from the eye of the storm and tropical force winds reach 200 miles.
That means winds of up to 145 miles per hour are already within reach. We sit just a few feet above sea level leaving us also subject to tidal surges which reached up to 8 feet during Isabel. In fact many old trees were uprooted and the streets along the river were literally ripped out of the ground.
Access to Coltons Point was limited to boats and amphibious vehicles during Isabel and that storm was much less severe than Earl. So we will be reporting live and in person from my front porch as the storm makes it's approach over the next 24-36 hours.
Stay tuned as we find out how accurate the Weather Service projected path might be. We will keep reporting live as long as Internet access allows but if the winds are as severe as projected there is a good chance the lines and electricity will be wiped out.
.
.jpg)
