The fact is that if you want to drain the swamp, take money away from bigtime… lobbyists, lose their power and influence.
But that was then and this is now, because John McCain has called Doug Goodyear, CEO of a consulting company that "earned $ 3 million last year lobbying for ExxonMobil, General Motors and other customers to manage in this summer's GOP convention. It gets better:
Potentially more problematic: the firm was paid $ 348000 in 2002 to represent the Burma military junta, which was strongly condemned by the State Department for its human rights record and remains in power today. Justice Department lobbying DCI are pushed to "initiate a political dialogue of reconciliation" with the regime. He also conducted a campaign of the junta PR burnish the image, a project diComunicati printing of the Burma praising efforts to curb drug trafficking and denouncing "falsehood" that the Bush regime engaged in rape and other abuses.
Comedy. The man who will execute the Convention on behalf John McCain as the Republican candidate George Bush to play the third term, is a lobbyist who once defended an oppressive military regime of George Bush calls a liar.
E 'in moments like this that you realize how difficult it is to be a straight talking maverick.
The public relations executive that Senator John McCain campaign used to run the Republican National Convention this summer resigned his post Saturday after a magazine reported that his company has pressed for the military junta that runs Myanmar. […]
A c McCainampaign official said that the campaign appreciated Mr. Goodyear's timely resignation, and his work for the convention. The official said that there was no word yet on a successor.
"And 'obviously a shame,''said the official," but we've just got to move forward. "
Maybe Jack Abramoff is out of prison in time to take in…
A month ago I raised the question of Hillary Clinton's campaign debt as a complicating factor is useless ending his search for the Democratic nomination. Time had published speculation by an assistant to Clinton campaign that mounting debt could create problems for Clinton, why should get more donations before it could begin uvag for his next Senate campaign.
The question of Clinton's campaign debt and what Obama may be able to do about it is causing confusion. The difficulty for most people in the sense of making the nuances of financing the campaign was compounded by some news reports and comments on this issue. For example, a few days ago Josh Marshall ruminated about how Obama donors would feel if their contributions went from Obama's campaign fund Clinton campaign fund.
It is not an argument worth ruminating, because it would be illegal for Obama's campaign fund to donate more than $ 2000 a Clinton campaign.
Unfortunately Steve Benen quoted Marshall's piece without noting that it is not permitted by law for Obama to donate money to erase the debt of Clinton. Others, including iltp: / / thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/09/obama-wont-rule-out-easing-clinton-campaign-debt / "> NYT, have confused the issue of not having clarified that Obama can not give more than $ 2,300 $ 2000 * from his campaign fund Clinton campaign.
We do this absolutely clear:
Money given to Obama campaign, both in the past or in the future, not end up in Clinton campaign fund.
OTE>
Obama what we can do is go to his donors and asking them to contribute to the campaign of Clinton. He could have his campaign to send e-mail appeal to small donors to help Clinton pay his debt.
Clinton To help pay its debt would not be a simple act of altruism of Obama. It would be Obama is the personal interest to help take the issue of debt off the table if facilitated his exit from the race and helped to avoid the distractions of delegate challenges and talk to "take to the Convention".
There is still the issue, however, what Obama could really raise for Clinton, and whether it is sufficient to obtain her out of the race. I am sceptical that the offer to help erase his campaign debt would amount to much. Its debt exceeds $ 10 million, and it is possible that the woman not to put more money is now to maintain its current marketing year. Such deals are usually made when the losing candidate had taken a divietok loan for the debt, or has done something like putting their house for the guarantee in order to secure a loan. These are acts of a candidate who can not afford to put their money, or simply refuses to pay for it themselves.
Hillary Clinton not borrow money for his campaign. He wrote in essence, a check from his personal account for his campaign. With their new wealth since Bill Clinton left the White House, $ 10 million is not really all that igrande a piece of change for Clinton. A candidate can not bring the debt from a campaign to the next, unless the debt is to themselves. So, Hillary Clinton could easily write the debt itself.
Since the money would not be necessary to protect the viability of Clinton for future campaigns, donations to retire debt Clinton would really contributions directly to personal and private wealth of Hillary and Bill Clinton. I do not see many Obamadonatori to take money from their personal pocket and putting in a pocket personal Hillary Clinton, especially not after the Clinton campaign has managed and continues to run against Obama.
Thus, people fear that the money was donated in the past or you can donate in the future to Barack Obama could go to Hillary Clinton, relax. If one of your money goes to Hillary Clinton will be your decision. If desired, none of your money will end up in the Hill and Bill's pIggy bank.
*[The personal contribution limit increased from $ 2000 to $ 2300 for this campaign cycle, but the limit of contribution to a campaign committee campaign committee contribution has remained limited to $ 2000.]
A Wednesday afternoon, the Assembly has just voted, 412 to 0, go H. Res. 1113, "Celebrating the role of mothers in the United States and supporting the goals and ideals of Mother's Day", when Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.), rose in protest.
"Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote," he announced.
Rep. Kathy Castor (D-Fla.), who has two young daughters, moved to table the request Tiahrt, the establishment of a revote. This time, 178 Republicans cast their votes against mothers.
It has long been used to compare a popular piece of legislation to motherhood and apple pie. Obviously, that is no longer the standard. Worse yet, Republicans are now facing a John Kerry-esque situation: in fact voted in favour of motherhood before they voted against it.
Republicans, with the unfortunate democraticiic majority, was used for this procedure as this tactic throughout the week to bring the Parliament to a standstill, but the assault in May mothers have gone too far. House Minority Leader John Boehner, asked yesterday to explain why he and 177 of his colleagues switched their vote, he replied: "Oh, we wanted to make sure that everyone was to record in support of Mother's Day."
By voting against it?
Mother's Day, colleague memorial services, nothing is sacred with Boehner and crew.
If you're a conservative or a climate change denier, undoubtedly there were as follows efforts underway to officially declare Ursus maritimus (also known as polar bear) listed as an endangered species, the United States under Endangered Species Act.
In 2005, the Center for Biological Diversity petitions for polar bear protection, based on research done climate and wildlife experts worldwide (ammals / polar_bear / index.html "> pdf). There is no international scientific agreement that the polar bear is heading toward extinction unless protected (details here). Finally, in 2006, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has responded to the petition of the Centre, and proposed </ a> that polar bears be listed as threatened with extinction.
Predictably, those who are more interested in the welfare of fossil fuels than in the survival of polar bears were doing their best to prevent the door to be protected.
To make a long story short, there was unfa4ef-802nd-23ad-445f-e4d88bad74b1 "> initial Senate hearing in which Senator James Inhofe and a choice of" expert "did their best to confuse the issue; nity was follow-up hearing investigating the Bush administration's foot-dragging (to which a senior official did not even bother to show up). Finally, a federal judge put down his order and the Department of Interior to make a final decision dedicated May 15, 2008.
Which brings us to the latest attempt to legislators to keep the door off the list endangered. If science proves something that you do not like because, you pay scientists to come to conclusions that correspond to your business interests.
A $ 2 million program funded with little debate by the legislature last month calls for using state money to finance an "academic-based" conference highlights that contrarian scientific research on global warming. Legislators hope to undermine the perception of a widespread consensus among scientists that the polar bear global warming temperatures and melting Arctic ice threatens polar bears' survival.
Republican legislative leaders say federal decision to declare the polar bears "threatened" by climate change would have worrying effects on oil Article development and the state's economic future.
[…]
Legislative leaders said they are frustrated that researchers skeptical of doomsday scenario to get marginalized as crackpots or industry shills in the media and scientific bodies."We want to have the money to hire scientists to answer the Interior (Department) scientists," House Speaker John Harris, R-Valdez, said last week.
In other words, they want some good climanegazionisti change to present "evidence" that the Interior Department scientists are wrong.
House Speaker both Harris and Senate President Lyda Green underlying the request for $ 2 million. In particular, Green was one of the promoters of a 2007 Senate resolution to oppose listing the polar bear as threatened.
At least Harris is honest about their motivations, nd what he thinks of scientists:
But the point is not to seek some non-biased measure of scientific truth. The point, said Harris, is to provide a forum for scientists whose views back Alaska interests.
"You know me as that scientists are like lawyers," said Harris.
Rick Steiner is a conservation scientist at the University of Alaska. For months, it statodi groped to obtain Alaska state officials to make public the scientific reasons that have to prevent the protection of polar bears:
[He said] "This is truly the conference in anything," […]
Friday [May 2, 2008], Steiner released a long chain of e-mail correspondence, saying the state first promised to send internal documents and then refused. The Department of rule of law is now reviewing the internal memo from scientists to see if it can be released under tegli been open records laws.
"And 'stunningly hypocritical that the state will spend $ 2 million to convene a scientific conference on this theme, but will not release its own scientific analysis," said Steiner.
At the end of the Anchorage Daily News article, there is a summary of a conference call (with Harris and green). Note the part that I highlighted in bold:
The project will include research methodologies such as computer modeling and perceived consensus. The research must be non-biased specific groups' opinion and fact scientifically based results.
Not flawed? Since when were the climate change sceptics "non-biased"? By definition, this conference is being paid for and convened to challenge a search shows that polar bears are in danger, to provide a platform for quelli71, filter.all / pub_detail.asp "> denier tired old ideas for discussion with whom we are so familiar .
Stay tuned. I'm sure we'll see soon enough that the "experts" to be called are not exactly "non-biased".
— sabidega at 17:49Classified: Warnings profits - sabidega at 17:49
Segnalo the birth of the blog: http://sabidega.wordpress.com An unusual point of view: those who suffer.
Sabina (Sabidega, that is, I) is simply an Italian, "potential customer of those who deal with disturbances d 'Anxiety", without degrees in medicine, psychiatry or psychology. He does not want to replace the figures working in the field "mental or psychological, but only wants to share his experience of life.
A practical example is the first article: "Other side effects (not medical) of a Panic Attack": where mentions of Unemployment, Travel of hope, Incomprensione and Solitude.
A hug to all those who suffer or have suffered due to this issue.
— francy587 at 22:13Classified: 1 - francy587 at 22:13
The Regional brands based in ancon authorized Services pharmacy bodies hospital dell'Inrca Zone and territorial Asur to ensure the delivery of pharmaceutical use cannabis to be borne by the regional health department. Currently there are no commercial formulations in Italy catalogued, based on principles active in derivatives and synthetic cannabinoid. These medicines are available only in certain European countries and North Americans in Israel and South Africa. The Ministry of Health has included last year derived some natural or synthetic cannabinoid in the new division of droghe.Ciò causes hospital pharmacy is acconsentita the importation of such drugs as long as they are provided the prescription, taking responsibility Doctor of import and authorisation granted by the Central Narcotic Drugs, Ministry of Health. The use of these medicines is shown in spasticity less than neurological diseases, in repugnance to food and vomiting not sufficiently controlled induced by chemotherapy or radiotherapy, in chronic neuropathic pain. They may be imported only in cases where those already available have shown ineffective or have not shown effectiveness at the therapeutic needs of the patient. L 'medical certificate is valid for six months and prescription (recipe not repeatable) thirty days. The route offered therapeutic stipulates that the start-up phase of treatment can be achieved in hospital, as the expected outcomes are conditioned by personal response. In this case, the drugs can be bought from the hospital pharmacy and places to be borne by the regional health department. The patient in chronic therapy may continue therapy at home by showing hospital pharmacy involved each month a new prescription written by the specialist.
