What’s In Your Food Could Be Killing You

Posted by Michelle Moquin on October 5th, 2013

Good morning!

It’s been awhile since I blogged about what we are actually putting in our bellies when we eat. It’s getting harder and harder to make sure that what we eat is actually good for us and not doing us or the environment harm.

And then I was directed to this article, which I am forwarding along to you because it is about your health and the health of the environment. And the killer that is out there, more like “in there,” attacking our bodies, and the soil, and crops that we ingest to sustain ourselves, is an herbicide called Glyphosate.

And if you aren’t hiding your head in the sand when it comes to your health, then I have no doubt that you won’t be surprised when I tell you that the real perpetrator in this is not the herbicide, as toxic as it is, but the company who produces this deadly substance and sprays it on practically EVERYTHING that grows, is Monsanto.

If you want to read exactly what happens to the plants and our environment, and then what happens to our health, read on. Warning: It is not a pretty story. In fact it is frightening. But if you care about your health and the environment, then I suggest you read and do something to protect you and your family.

50% of Rats Given this Died – Why is it On Your Dinner Plate?

By Dr. Mercola
The first report was recently issued on ambient levels of glyphosate and its major degradation product, aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA), in air and rain. Glyphosate is the most widely used herbicide in the U.S.

Weekly air particle and rain samples were collected during two growing seasons in agricultural areas in Mississippi and Iowa. Rain was also collected in Indiana. The frequency of glyphosate detection ranged from 60 to 100 percent in both air and rain.

According to the report, as linked on the website Green Med Info:

“The frequency of detection and median and maximum concentrations of glyphosate in air were similar or greater to those of the other high-use herbicides observed in the Mississippi River basin, whereas its concentration in rain was greater than the other herbicides.”

Dr. Mercola’s Comments:

I’ve often said that chemical exposure in our environment is a pervasive threat, and the report of the herbicide glyphosate being detected in 60 to100 percent of air and rain samples is a perfect illustration of this sad truth.

Evidence now clearly shows that glyphosate is devastating crops, animal and human health around the world, even when the exposure is restricted to residues leftover in the soil. Clearly, its presence in air and rain water can only add to its destructive force.

Glyphosate—The World’s Most Popular Herbicide…

Genetically engineered crops have vastly increased the use of glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto’s nonselective broad-spectrum herbicide Roundup, and this product alone is now wreaking unimaginable havoc in our environment. According to Jeffrey Smith with the Institute for Responsible Technology, by 2004 farmers used an estimated 86 percent more herbicides on GM soy fields compared to non-GM fields.

So-called “Roundup Ready” soybean, cotton and corn crops became exceedingly popular because it allows farmers to spray Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide directly onto their fields without harming the crops. Ordinarily, if you were to spray Roundup, or any other glyphosate-based herbicide, onto a plant, it would rapidly die.

Since the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) stopped updating its pesticide use database in 2008, it’s becoming increasingly difficult to estimate how much glyphosate is actually used in the US, but the following 2006-2007 market usage estimates were reported by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) earlier this year:

Agricultural market used 180 to 185 million pounds of glyphosate
Home and garden market: 5 to 8 million pounds
Industry, commerce and government: 13 to 15 million pounds

Ambient Levels of Glyphosate in Air and Rain

The results of the first report on the ambient levels of glyphosate and AMPA in air and rain water were published in the journal Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry in March. The samples were collected during two growing seasons in Mississippi and Iowa. Glyphosate was detected in 60 to 100 percent of all air and rain samples. The following concentration ranges of glyphosate were found:

Air: 0.01 to 9.1 ng/m
Rain: 0.1 to 2.5 µg/L

According to the authors:

“It is not known what percentage of the applied glyphosate is introduced into the air, but it was estimated that up to 0.7 percent of application is removed from the air in rainfall. Glyphosate is efficiently removed from the air; it is estimated that an average of 97 percent of the glyphosate in the air is removed by a weekly rainfall ≥ 30 mm.”

The Environmental Dangers of Glyphosate

A couple of years ago, a French court found Monsanto guilty of falsely advertising its herbicide as “biodegradable,” “environmentally friendly” and claiming it “left the soil clean.” The truth is that Roundup is anything BUT environmentally friendly. Monsanto’s own tests showed that only two percent of the herbicide broke down after 28 days, which means it readily persists in the environment!

Glyphosate is the most commonly reported cause of pesticide illness among landscape maintenance workers in California, and researchers have now linked it to Sudden Death Syndrome (SDS), a serious plant disease, in many fields around the world. Numerous studies have also shown that glyphosate is contributing not only to the huge increase in SDS, but also to the outbreak of some 40 different plant and crop diseases! It weakens plants and promotes disease in a number of ways, including:

Acting as a chelator of vital nutrients, depriving plants of the nutrients necessary for healthy plant function
Destroying beneficial soil organisms that suppress disease-causing organisms and help plants absorb nutrients
Interfering with photosynthesis, reducing water use efficiency, shortening root systems and causing plants to release sugars, which changes soil pH
Stunting and weakening plant growth

The herbicide doesn’t destroy plants directly; instead, it creates a unique “perfect storm” of conditions that activates disease-causing organisms in the soil, while at the same time wiping out plant defenses against those diseases. So the glyphosate not only weakens plants, it actually changes the makeup of the soil and boosts the number of disease-causing organisms, which is becoming a deadly recipe for crops around the globe… A report from 1998 by the Environmental Monitoring & Pest Management Department of Pesticide Regulation on the environmental fate of glyphosate states that:

“Aerial drift of the herbicide will cause injury to nontarget plants… Minute quantities of mist, drip, drift or splash of glyphosate onto nontarget vegetation can cause severe damage or destruction to the plants or other areas on which treatment was not intended.”

So, what exactly is being done to vegetation everywhere, now that both air and rain is clearly contaminated with glyphosate?

Potential Health Hazards of Glyphosate

Usually, whatever toxins lurk in the environment has a tendency to find its way into animals’ bellies and onto your dinner plate, and this holds true for glyphosate as well. Some of the fungi promoted by glyphosate produce dangerous toxins that can end up in the food supply. Some of these have been linked to human toxicosis in Eastern Europe, esophageal cancer in southern Africa and parts of China, joint diseases in Asia and southern Africa, and a blood disorder in Russia.

Additionally:

Glyphosate is suspected of causing genetic damage, infertility and cancer.
It is also acutely toxic to fish and birds and can kill beneficial insects and soil organisms that maintain ecological balance.
Laboratory studies have identified adverse effects of glyphosate-containing products in all standard categories of toxicological testing. In one animal study, rats given 1,000 mg/kg of glyphosate resulted in a 50 percent mortality rate, and skeletal alterations were observed in over 57 percent of fetuses!
The surfactant ingredient in Roundup is more acutely toxic than glyphosate itself, and the combination of the two is even more toxic.

A recent report from Earth Open Source has also revealed that Roundup herbicide not only causes birth defects, but that industry regulators have known this for years and did nothing about it. After reviewing industry studies and regulatory documents used to approve Roundup, they noted:

Industry (including Monsanto) has known since the 1980s that glyphosate causes malformations in experimental animals at high doses
Industry has known since 1993 that these effects could also occur at lower and mid doses
The German government has known since at least 1998 that glyphosate causes malformations

The EU Commission’s expert scientific review panel knew in 1999 — and the EU Commission has known since 2002 – that glyphosate causes malformations

What Do We Know about AMPA?

Aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA) is a byproduct of the degradation of glyphosate, and no one seems to know what the full environmental- and health impacts might be from this synthetic metabolite. However, according to a 2008 study in the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, AMPA is phytotoxic to plant species, although it’s less active than glyphosate. And the British Pesticide Properties DataBase (PPDB) lists it as being moderately toxic to fish, aquatic invertebrates and algae, and cites “probable liver and kidney toxicant” as a known human health issue.

Aside from those few nuggets, toxicology and safety data is glaringly absent.

This could spell trouble, depending on what the truth is about the health impact of this metabolite, as a previous report by the US Geological Survey, issued in 2007, found that AMPA was detected more frequently than glyphosate, and occurred at similar or higher concentrations than the parent compound.

Genetically Modified Crops May Contain Toxic Roundup Residues

It’s widely known that genetically modified (GM) Roundup Ready crops contain Roundup residues, and a 2009 study demonstrated just how toxic these residues may be to your health… Even when researchers tested formulations of Roundup that were highly diluted (up to 100,000 times or more) on human cells, the cells died within 24 hours!

They also found damage to cell membranes and DNA, along with an inhibition of cell respiration. Further, the researchers discovered that the mixture of components used as Roundup adjuvants actually amplified the action of the glyphosate. The researchers wrote:

“This work clearly confirms that the adjuvants in Roundup formulations are not inert. Moreover, the proprietary mixtures available on the market could cause cell damage and even death around residual levels to be expected, especially in food and feed derived from Roundup formulation-treated crops.”

Although Roundup isn’t used exclusively on genetically modified (GM) crops, these crops are some of the most prevalent in the US diet. So to drastically reduce your exposure, avoiding GM foods would be an obvious starting point.

How Do You Know if You’re Eating GM Foods?

According to the latest US Department of Agriculture (USDA) statistics, about 88 percent of all corn, 90 percent of all canola, and 94 percent all soy grown in the United States is genetically modified in one way or another (not all are the Roundup Ready variety), which means that virtually every processed food you encounter at your local supermarket that does not bear the “USDA Organic” label will contain one or more GM components.

Therefore, if you want to avoid GM foods (which have a variety of inherent health dangers over and above the hazards of Roundup residues), you’ll want to, first and foremost, avoid most processed foods, unless it’s labeled USDA 100% Organic. You can also avoid GM foods that are not found in processed foods, if you know what to look for. There are currently eight genetically modified food crops on the market:

Soy	Sugar from sugar beets
Corn	Hawaiian papaya
Cottonseed (used in vegetable cooking oils)	Some varieties of zucchini
Canola (canola oil)	Crookneck squash

More Tips on How to Decrease Your Exposure to Glyphosate

The potential health ramifications of these world-wide experiments with our food supply, using genetic engineering and vast amounts of toxic chemicals, are frightening to say the least. If you care about the health and future of your family, I strongly urge you to refuse to participate in this destructive trend.

In your own home, you can:

Avoid using glyphosate-containing weed killers on your lawn and garden, and

Buy organic foods to avoid both genetically modified crops and agricultural chemicals like glyphosate

*******

Readers: I realize that for many of you buying organic is not easy or affordable. And it certainly takes effort to grow your own food. I know that many of you have very busy lives and the easy way out is to buy prepared or processed foods. Although, cooking fresh vegetables and salads takes more time, it is usually less expensive, and better for you, than purchasing a lot of packaged foods that has so much bad stuff in their ingredients.

I am no expert nor am I giving advice on what to do, but I do encourage you to spend some time with your family to figure out ways to eat better and live healthier. I encourage you to read more labels and try to eat less but better quality foods. If you can just make a few small changes and then take on more as you can, at least you can begin to do something better and healthier for yourselves and your loved ones. After all, your body is the only one you’ve got.

Given with love…

Peace Out.

Lastly, greed over a great story is surfacing from my “loyal”(?) readers. With all this back and forth about who owns what, that appears on my blog, let me reiterate that all material posted on my blog becomes the sole property of my blog. If you want to reserve any proprietary rights don’t post it to my blog. I will prominently display this caveat on my blog from now on to remind those who may have forgotten this notice.

Gratefully your blog host,

michelle

Aka BABE: We all know what this means by now :)

If you love my blog and my writes, please make a donation via PayPal, credit card, or e-check, please click the “Donate” button below. (Please only donations from those readers within the United States. – International readers please see my “Donate” page)

Or if you would like to send a check via snail mail, please make checks payable to “Michelle Moquin”, and send to:

Michelle Moquin PO Box 29235 San Francisco, Ca. 94129

Thank you for your loyal support!

“Though she be but little, she be fierce.” – William Shakespeare Midsummer Night’s Dream

" Politics, god, Life, News, Music, Family, Personal, Travel, Random, Photography, Religion, Aliens, Art, Entertainment, Food, Books, Thoughts, Media, Culture, Love, Sex, Poetry, Prose, Friends, Technology, Humor, Health, Writing, Events, Movies, Sports, Video, Christianity, Atheist, Blogging, History, Work, Education, Business, Fashion, Barack Obama, People, Internet, Relationships, Faith, Photos, Videos, Hillary Clinton, School, Reviews, God, TV, Philosophy, Fun, Science, Environment, Design, The Page, Rants, Pictures, Church, Blog, Nature, Marketing, Television, Democrats, Parenting, Miscellaneous, Current Events, Film, Spirituality, Obama, Musings, Home, Human Rights, Society, Comedy, Me, Random Thoughts, Research, Government, Election 2008, Baseball, Opinion, Recipes, Children, Iraq, Funny, Women, Economics, America, Misc, Commentary, John McCain, Reflections, All, Celebrities, Inspiration, Lifestyle, Theology, Linux, Kids, Games, World, India, Literature, China, Ramblings, Fitness, Money, Review, War, Articles, Economy, Journal, Quotes, NBA, Crime, Anime, Islam, 2008, Stories, Prayer, Diary, Jesus, Buddha, Muslim, Israel, Europe, Links, Marriage, Fiction, American Idol, Software, Leadership, Pop culture, Rants, Video Games, Republicans, Updates, Political, Football, Healing, Blogs, Shopping, USA, Class, Matrix, Course, Work, Web 2.0, My Life, Psychology, Gay, Happiness, Advertising, Field Hockey, Hip-hop, sex, fucking, ass, Soccer, sox"

Posted in Health & Well Being, Journeys within, Long Live Planet Earth! | 19 Comments »

Flap Your Lips Friday

Posted by Michelle Moquin on October 4th, 2013

Good morning!

Abortion, Big Money In Elections, And Eleven Other Huge Cases The Supreme Court Will Hear Next Term

BY IAN MILLHISER AND NICOLE FLATOW ON SEPTEMBER 18, 2013 AT 10:02 AM

It’s become a cliché at the beginning and end of each Supreme Court term to comment on how important the term is or will be, and how the justices are hearing a myriad of major cases. And certainly after two terms featuring high profile cases on health care, immigration, voting rights and marriage equality — in addition to under the radar decisions blasting worker and consumer rights — there can be little doubt of the Court’s immense power to do harm (and its less frequently exercised power to do good).

The term that begins this fall, however, has the potential to be even more significant that the previous two. By this time next year, fair housing law could be neutered, unions could be hobbled, billionaires could be free to spend millions to put their favorite candidates in office, and the right to choose an abortion could be meaningless. With a wave of their hand, five conservative justices could achieve outcomes that Scott Walker, Rick Perry and Sheldon Adelson could never dream of accomplishing even at the height of their power.

Here’s a taste of what’s at stake in the next Supreme Court term:

Abortion

The Supreme Court has not heard a major abortion case since 2007, when the conservative justices limited reproductive freedom in part because “some women come to regret their choice to abort.” Next term, they could hear two. The first, McCullen v. Coakley, concerns a Massachusetts law that prohibits people who don’t have business at a “reproductive health care facility” — most often, abortion protesters — from congregating within a buffer zone around the clinic’s entrance, exit or driveway. In what the lower court labeled an argument that “elevates hope over reason,” abortion opponents claim that the buffer zones violate Citizens United and a bevy of other First Amendment decisions. If five justices ultimately agree with this argument, it could not only wipe out the Massachusetts law, but also potentially endanger a federal law ensuring women can access clinics without intimidation, depending on the breadth of the Court’s decision.

While McCullen concerns how much harassment a woman may be subjected to before they can obtain an abortion, another case potentially strikes at the core of the right to choose. Although the specific issue at stake in Cline v. Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice concerns whether states can ban off-label use of abortion drugs, the case tees up the issue of how far states can go in restricting abortions by enacting laws ostensibly directed at making them safer. The Constitution quite correctly permits states to enact laws ensuring abortions are performed safely — otherwise, a state could not require surgical abortions to be performed by trained surgeons or ensure that operating rooms are sterile. Abortion foes, however, routinely use this power as a fig leaf to enact laws that can be spun as safety regulations, but which really exist for the sole purpose of restricting abortion. Common examples are bills requiring clinics have extra-wide hallways or to only employ doctors with irrelevant credentials. Extreme examples could force doctors to complete a 10,000 hour course before they can perform an abortion, or forbid an abortion clinic from operating unless it also qualifies as a level I trauma center.

Because of an unusual procedural issue involving a question the justices want the Oklahoma Supreme Court to answer, it is possible that the justices will not ultimately decide this case. Should they do so, however, they could potentially permit abortion foes to enact laws that make it literally impossible for abortion clinics to operate.

Campaign Finance

The Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision allowing corporations to spend unlimited money to shape the outcomes of elections is widely viewed as the high water mark in the justices’ willingness to allow big money to influence elections. Yet, after the Court hands down its opinion in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission — a case whose plaintiffs’ include the Republican National Committee — Citizens Unitedcould look quaint.

Although Citizens United permits unlimited donations to third-party groups such as SuperPACs which are ostensibly separate from candidates or political parties, the conservative justices have not yet struck a six-figure cap on total donations to candidates, political party committees and similar organizations. As the lower court explained in upholding this cap, “Eliminating the aggregate limits means an individual might, for example, give half-a-million dollars in a single check to a joint fundraising committee . . . because party committees may transfer unlimited amounts of money to other party committees of the same party, the half-a-million-dollar contribution might nevertheless find its way to a single committee’s coffers.” In other words, this case could conceivably allow billionaires to launder massive dollar donations to single candidates — who would no doubt feel very grateful to those billionaires should they win their election.

Separation of Church and State

Retired Justice Sandra Day O’Connor long provided the fifth vote to strike down government efforts to promote religious views. As she warned in one of her final opinions on the bench, due to the “violent consequences of the assumption of religious authority by government . . . Those who would renegotiate the boundaries between church and state must therefore answer a difficult question: Why would we trade a system that has served us so well for one that has served others so poorly?”

In Town of Greece v. Galloway, the Supreme Court’s new majority will have the opportunity to trade a system that has served us so well for one that has served others so poorly. Justice O’Connor’s opinions relied on her view that government can neither endorse a religious view nor convey a “message of endorsement to the reasonable observer.”Galloway, however, tees up the question of whether such endorsements will now be permissible because O’Connor is no longer around to protect her legacy.

Housing Discrimination

Discrimination is often subtle. Indeed, discrimination lawsuits rarely uncover a smoking gun document where the defendant announces a racist intent. Nevertheless, there can be little doubt that race discrimination exists. In the housing sphere, a recent study on behalf of the Department of Housing and Urban Development found that black and Asian homeseekers are shown or told about 15 to 19 percent fewer homes than whites with similar credit qualifications and housing interests. During the subprime lending boom, African Americans with good credit scores were 3.5 times as likely as whites with good credit scores to receive higher-interest-rate loans, and Latinos were 3.1 times as likely to receive such loans. And the Federal Reserve found that in 2009, African Americans were twice as likely to be denied a loan, even controlling for income and other qualifying criteria.

These disproportionate impacts have become increasingly crucial to policies and legal challenges that seek to address housing discrimination, and proving discrimination through “disparate impact” has beenaccepted by all nine federal appeals courts to consider the question. This past January, HUD even issued a regulation interpreting the Fair Housing Act as allowing claims of disparate racial impact. But the Township of Mount Holly, New Jersey is now asking the Supreme Court to reverse all of that — a risk given the Roberts Court’s hostility to the Voting Rights Act, affirmative action, and other means for rooting out racial discrimination.

In 2011, future Secretary of Labor Tom Perez averted a Supreme Court ruling on this issue by asking the city of St. Paul, Minn. drop its appealafter and preserve existing precedent. Once again, this case may not make it to a Supreme Court ruling, as the parties are reportedly close to a potential settlement.

Affirmative Action

Last term, the justices surprised many court-watchers by leaving affirmative action jurisprudence in place, but not before warning that lower court judges better apply a whole lot of scrutiny in analyzing any race-based college admissions policy. This term, they have another opportunity to take a cut at policies that diversify universities and workplaces — and at least two U.S. Supreme Court precedents on race. While the justices last term considered whether universities can considerrace in selection, they will this time consider whether states can banconsideration of race in university admissions.

The U.S. Supreme Court made clear in several previous cases that states cannot force minorities to jump through special hoops to pass laws that benefit them as a group. The state ban does just that. Because it is a constitutional amendment, it requires nothing less than a second constitutional amendment to repeal — a burden that places affirmative action advocates on unequal footing. As the appeals court judges explained it, this means that a student seeking to be admitted because family member is an alumnus of the school could appeal directly to the university, while a minority student seeking to reinstate affirmative action has no other choice but to “attempt to amend the Michigan Constitution—a lengthy, expensive, and arduous process—to repeal the consequences of Proposal 2.” The lower court’s opinion continued: “The existence of such a comparative structural burden undermines the Equal Protection Clause’s guarantee that all citizens ought to have equal access to the tools of political change.”

The Future of Unions

Until last July, the most important case facing the justices this term appeared to be National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning, a case that could have potentially rendered much of federal labor law unenforceable and left the right to organize completely toothless. The National Labor Relations Board has exclusive authority to enforce much of the law protecting workers and unions, and a series of decisions by conservative court of appeals judges declaring President Obama’s recess appointments to this board unconstitutional threatened to shut the board down. In July, Senate Republicans agreed to stop preventing anyone from being confirmed to this Board thanks to Democrats’ threat to invoked the so-called “nuclear option,” effectively removing the risk that American labor law would shut down entirely for as long as the Board’s current members sit. Nevertheless, an important remaining question in the Noel Canning case is whether the decisions reached by Obama’s recess appointees before Republicans lifted their blockade on confirmations are valid. If the Court holds that they are not, literallyhundreds of decisions could be invalidated and would need to be relitigated.

With Noel Canning somewhat defanged by the confirmation of new NLRB board members, the most important labor case facing the justices this term is probably Unite Here Local 355 v. Mulhall. Unite Here concerns the future of “neutrality agreements,” agreements where an employer agrees to remain neutral on a union’s attempt to organize its workforce, and sometimes provide other concessions to the union, rather than face a potentially contentious process that can divide a workforce and generate animosity with the union that may ultimately represent its workers. Non-union shops are notoriously difficult to organize under existing federal labor law, so the presence of a neutrality agreement often determines whether a unionization effort will be successful. According to a 2007 paper examining neutrality agreements, less than one-fifth of newly organized employees were unionized under the NLRB elections process that typically applies in the absence of an agreement. By contrast, “the Service Employees, the Needletrades, textile, Hotel and Restaurant Employees, and the Autoworkers all report that a plurality or majority of newly organized members have come” after a contractual agreement with the employer to remain neutral.

Several years ago, anti-union advocates developed a legal argument that could potentially shut these agreements down, or, at least, limit the ability of unions and employers to reach such agreements. Citing an anti-bribery law enacted in 1947, which forbids employers from paying “any money or other thing of value” to a labor union seeking to represent its workers, these advocates claim that neutrality agreements violate this ban on companies bribing unions. Initially, this argument did not meet with much success. Indeed, then-Judge Michael Chertoff, who later became Homeland Security Secretary under President George W. Bush, wrote that anti-union advocates are “unable to provide any legal support for the remarkable assertion that entering into a valid labor agreement governing recognition of a labor union amounts to illegal labor bribery.” That all changed last year, however, when the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit embraced the anti-union advocates’ reading of federal anti-bribery law, at least in some cases. If the Supreme Court sides against neutrality agreements in this case, it could eliminate the single most potent vehicle many unions can utilize to organize new workplaces.

Clean Air

Environmental regulation is the epitome of interstate and even inter-country regulation. Pollution to the air, water, and soil of one state inevitably runs into others, and not always the way we’d expect it to. Because of wind patterns, there are some states whose pollution contributes more to poor air quality in other states. Addressing this issue, and aiming to prevent 34,000 premature deaths and 400,000 asthma attacks each year, the Environmental Protection Agency imposed a rule to require 28 “upwind” states to not only ensure that their own air quality complies with federal standards, but also to mitigate their contribution to pollution in other downwind states.

Even the conservative U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has made clear that this sort of regulation is needed. In fact, the D.C. Circuit ruled in 2008 that old EPA rules did not sufficiently protect downwind states from pollution. But they have since swung the other way, in what has been dubbed a “Goldilocks Conunudrum.” Last year, the D.C. Circuit ruled that EPA’s newest solution regulates downwind pollution too much and doesn’t defer enough to states’ own proposals for solving the problem. This is the ruling the Supreme Court will review this time around.

Versions of these rules have been wending their way through the courtsfor decades, during which time pollution has been regulated under outdated, ineffective standards, even though the court and EPA agree that the Cross State Air Pollution plan would be more effective. A U.S. Supreme Court ruling upholding the latest D.C. Circuit opinion would send EPA back to the drawing board yet again, and “seriously impede the EPA’s ability to deal with a grave public health problem.” It would also conveniently continue to spare the most polluting businesses from compliance. But don’t be surprised if the court’s five conservative justices who sometimes espouse judicial restraint reach out to question the judgment of an agency in fulfilling its own mandate.

Human Rights v. Corporate Immunity

Last term, the U.S. Supreme Court struck a blow to both human rights and corporate accountability when it narrowed the scope of a 200-year-old statute intended to address egregious human rights violations abroad. Shortly after that ruling, the court announced it would take another case dealing with the same statute.

The plaintiffs in this case allege that car manufacturer DaimlerChrysler acted in cahoots with the Argentine military during the “dirty war” in arresting and detaining workers, some of whom disappeared. They are seeking to hold DaimlerChrysler accountable for this alleged life-threatening exploitation of workers through the Alien Tort Statute, which allows lawsuits by “aliens” — meaning non-U.S. parties. Even under this statute, however, parties have to meet general court rules about jurisdiction, meaning they must have some connection to the United States. Federal court decisions before last term’s Kiobel ruling allowed lawsuits that challenged torture abroad by two foreign actors to proceed in U.S. courts because the defendants had lived or were living in the United States. DaimlerChrysler has claimed that the plaintiffs do not have jurisdiction to sue them in the United States, because DaimlerChrysler is based in Germany and is suing over actions in Argentina. But the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that DaimlerChrysler’s California subsidiary was sufficient to establish jurisdiction in California.

The ruling could clarify the scope of last term’s ruling, and whether many corporations with a major presence in the United States who profit from exploiting more permissive countries will be even better insulated from liability. Some commentators wonder whether the Supreme Court took this case to narrow the scope of U.S. Courts’ jurisdiction over corporations more generally, and not just under this one statute.

Whether Treaties Can Be Enforced

As President Obama struggles to enforce international norms forbidding the use of chemical weapons in Syria, the justices will turn their eyes to a much smaller violation of those norms. A vengeful spouse named Carol Anne Bond stole toxic chemicals from her employer and applied them to her husband’s mistress’ mailbox, car doors, and her house’s doorknob in an attempt to poison the mistress. This violated the federal law implementing the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention, which makes it a crime to “receive, stockpile, retain, own, possess, use, or threaten to use” a chemical weapon.

Nearly a century ago, the Supreme Court held that, when the United States enters into a valid treaty, “there can be no dispute about the validity of the statute [implementing the treaty] under Article 1, Section 8, as a necessary and proper means to execute the powers of the Government.” Bond now asks the Roberts Court to repudiate this holding, or at least to limit it enough to allow her to avoid prosecution for her use of the stolen poison under the statute implementing the chemical weapons treaty. If the justices take her up on this request, they could potentially curtail America’s ability to meet its treaty obligations to a significant degree.

If they do reach such a result, it would not be the first time the Roberts Court cut into our nation’s ability to meet our international obligations. In 2008 — in a case argued by future Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) — the Court held that Texas could ignore a treaty requiring foreign nationals arrested within the United States to be informed of their right “to request assistance from the consul of his own state.” Even North Korea honored this treaty in 2009 when it took two American journalists captive, although Texas did not.

Privacy And The Police

With new-technology questions swirling about the ability of the Fourth Amendment to protect against secret surveillance, a case next term will answer a more fundamental question about police power to search the home of a suspect. The home has always been particularly sacrosanct under the Fourth Amendment, but one of the ways police can get around the usual search warrant requirement is by getting consent to search a suspect’s home. Under current case law, if the police come to your door without a warrant and you’re not home, your roommate can give an officer consent to perform a search of the home on your behalf. But what if you have previously told the police that they are not authorized to search your home? Can they come back later when you’re not home and try again? In this case, police took advantage of that scenario. They came to the defendant Walter Fernandez’s apartment, and Fernandez said they had no right to search his home. Recognizing a tattoo on Fernandez as matching that of a burglary suspect, they arrested Fernandez. They visited the apartment an hour later — with a guarantee that Fernandez would no longer be there to decline the search — and Fernandez’s girlfriend gave her consent for police to search the home.

There are obvious reasons to worry about allowing others to waive your Fourth Amendment rights. But this concern is heightened where a suspect has explicitly rejected a search, and police are incentivized to arrest that suspect simply to gain access to that person’s home. With surveillance tactics threatening to collect even more from the Internet than police might find in someone’s home, questions about consent may also tell us how willing the justices will be to defend our privacy from government intrusion.

*S*C*A*R*Y*S*T*A*R*K

Readers: It’s Friday…you know what to do. Blog me.

Trish: I wondered what inspired you to write in. I bet it is frustrating not being able to hang with your honey when he is the love of your life. I could say that it is better than nothing or not finding the love of your life at all, but I doubt those words would ease your situation. I can only HOPE that you get more time with your sweetie, and that he doesn’t end up leaving like Vicki’s did. Love to both of your girls.

Howie: How the heck are you? Long time since you have said a word here. I will check out your link this weekend. I HOPE you’ll stick around for awhile.

Gratefully your blog host,

michelle

Aka BABE: We all know what this means by now :)

Or if you would like to send a check via snail mail, please make checks payable to “Michelle Moquin”, and send to:

Michelle Moquin PO Box 29235 San Francisco, Ca. 94129

Thank you for your loyal support!

“Though she be but little, she be fierce.” – William Shakespeare Midsummer Night’s Dream

" Politics, god, Life, News, Music, Family, Personal, Travel, Random, Photography, Religion, Aliens, Art, Entertainment, Food, Books, Thoughts, Media, Culture, Love, Sex, Poetry, Prose, Friends, Technology, Humor, Health, Writing, Events, Movies, Sports, Video, Christianity, Atheist, Blogging, History, Work, Education, Business, Fashion, Barack Obama, People, Internet, Relationships, Faith, Photos, Videos, Hillary Clinton, School, Reviews, God, TV, Philosophy, Fun, Science, Environment, Design, The Page, Rants, Pictures, Church, Blog, Nature, Marketing, Television, Democrats, Parenting, Miscellaneous, Current Events, Film, Spirituality, Obama, Musings, Home, Human Rights, Society, Comedy, Me, Random Thoughts, Research, Government, Election 2008, Baseball, Opinion, Recipes, Children, Iraq, Funny, Women, Economics, America, Misc, Commentary, John McCain, Reflections, All, Celebrities, Inspiration, Lifestyle, Theology, Linux, Kids, Games, World, India, Literature, China, Ramblings, Fitness, Money, Review, War, Articles, Economy, Journal, Quotes, NBA, Crime, Anime, Islam, 2008, Stories, Prayer, Diary, Jesus, Buddha, Muslim, Israel, Europe, Links, Marriage, Fiction, American Idol, Software, Leadership, Pop culture, Rants, Video Games, Republicans, Updates, Political, Football, Healing, Blogs, Shopping, USA, Class, Matrix, Course, Work, Web 2.0, My Life, Psychology, Gay, Happiness, Advertising, Field Hockey, Hip-hop, sex, fucking, ass, Soccer, sox"

Posted in Health & Well Being, Human Rights and Equality, Political Powwow | 4 Comments »

Inequality For All

Posted by Michelle Moquin on October 3rd, 2013

Good morning!

Coming To A Theatre Near You!

BY CAP ACTION WAR ROOM ON SEPTEMBER 27, 2013 AT 4:38 PM

Inequality for All: Coming To A Theatre Near You

Today, opening in theaters across the country is a new documentary Inequality for All that explores the widening income gap in America. Narrated by former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich, the film profiles people from different walks of life – Costco employees, wealthy venture capitalists and middle class professionals – to demonstrate how our economy is set up to work for the wealthy few but not for all of us.

From Secretary Reich: “This movie is critically important. It exposes the heart of our continuing economic problem. The problem has been growing for over thirty years, but we’re coming to a tipping point. The problem is widening inequality. We’re still in the gravitational pull of the biggest economic slump since the Great Depression because so much of the nation’s income and wealth are going to the top. The vast middle class doesn’t have the purchasing power to get the economy back on track.”

Inequality today is as extreme as it was right before the Great Depression. The valley in between those two peaks of inequality, which shows up repeatedly on screen in Inequality For All, represents a time of broad prosperity from which the country can draw lessons. The Great Recession has not produced the same kind of policy shift Reich points to as a key to that prosperity, and inequality is only getting worse. Eroding investments in education and children undermine the future workforce, low union membership undermines present-day workers, and weak financial industry oversight allow the sector that drives inequality and creates economic crises to regain its footing while leaving the middle class behind.

inequality-graph

To find theaters and times near you, click here.

Watch the trailer here.

Facts on Income Inequality:

The top 5 percent made $191,157 or more in 2012, while the bottom fifth made $20,599 or less.

The top 10 percent of earners took home half of the country’s income, the largest amount on record.

The gap between the employment rate for the highest income Americans and the lowest income ones is the widest in a decade.

Income for households in the top five percent of American earners have grown by more than five percent over the past three years.

From 2009 to 2012, income for the 1 percent grew by 31.4 percent, while everyone else only saw it grow by 0.4 percent.

Income inequality in the U.S. is worse here than in Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen, the Ivory Coast, Pakistan, and Ethiopia.

Through the 2000s, the richest 20 percent of Americanssaw their incomes grow by $2,550, while the bottom 20 percent just saw $1,330 in growth.

The top 10 percent now has 15.9 times the income of the bottom.

The progressive plan to grow the economy from the middle class out stands in marked contrast to the failed and even dangerous “trickle down” tax cut and draconian austerity spending plans championed by conservatives. Conservatives want to cut even more from education, medical research and infrastructure in order to give even more tax cuts to the rich and huge corporations in the hopes that it trickles down to the rest of us.

Instead of continuing the trickle down policies that created income inequality in the first place it is time to put policies in place that will create an economy that works for everyone.

Policies to grow the economy from the middle class out:

Investments in growing the middle class: Investing in education, infrastructure, energy, and innovation boosts the economy today and helps create the job creators and strong middle class that will fuel economic growth tomorrow.

Everyone paying their fair share: Tax cuts for the wealthy and huge corporations don’t grow the economy. If the wealthy aren’t paying their fair share, we simply cannot afford to make the investments in the middle we need to in order to grow the economy.

Minimum wage: Nobody who works full time in America should have to live in poverty. Raising the minimum wage will lift people out of poverty and create more consumers to help fuel the economy.

Health security: Millions of Americans will soon have access to quality, affordable health care for the first time and the 85 percent of Americans who already have health insurance are seeing new benefits and better coverage as a result of Obamacare.

Retirement security: We need to strengthen both Social Security and our private retirement system so middle-class Americans can afford to retire and live with dignity, a promise beyond the reach of too many.

Affordable housing: The housing market is recovering, but we need to implement additional policies and reforms to help those who are still underwater and the millions who can’t get a loan to buy a home today.

*******

Readers: Hey there…thoughts? What’s up? Let me know if you go and see this and then blog me your opinion.

Social Butterfly: Done. Thanks.

Aurora: Right on sister. I admire her too.

Zen Lill: Yes he does. Too funny.

Peace out baby.

Gratefully your blog host,

michelle

Aka BABE: We all know what this means by now :)

Or if you would like to send a check via snail mail, please make checks payable to “Michelle Moquin”, and send to:

Michelle Moquin PO Box 29235 San Francisco, Ca. 94129

Thank you for your loyal support!

“Though she be but little, she be fierce.” – William Shakespeare Midsummer Night’s Dream

" Politics, god, Life, News, Music, Family, Personal, Travel, Random, Photography, Religion, Aliens, Art, Entertainment, Food, Books, Thoughts, Media, Culture, Love, Sex, Poetry, Prose, Friends, Technology, Humor, Health, Writing, Events, Movies, Sports, Video, Christianity, Atheist, Blogging, History, Work, Education, Business, Fashion, Barack Obama, People, Internet, Relationships, Faith, Photos, Videos, Hillary Clinton, School, Reviews, God, TV, Philosophy, Fun, Science, Environment, Design, The Page, Rants, Pictures, Church, Blog, Nature, Marketing, Television, Democrats, Parenting, Miscellaneous, Current Events, Film, Spirituality, Obama, Musings, Home, Human Rights, Society, Comedy, Me, Random Thoughts, Research, Government, Election 2008, Baseball, Opinion, Recipes, Children, Iraq, Funny, Women, Economics, America, Misc, Commentary, John McCain, Reflections, All, Celebrities, Inspiration, Lifestyle, Theology, Linux, Kids, Games, World, India, Literature, China, Ramblings, Fitness, Money, Review, War, Articles, Economy, Journal, Quotes, NBA, Crime, Anime, Islam, 2008, Stories, Prayer, Diary, Jesus, Buddha, Muslim, Israel, Europe, Links, Marriage, Fiction, American Idol, Software, Leadership, Pop culture, Rants, Video Games, Republicans, Updates, Political, Football, Healing, Blogs, Shopping, USA, Class, Matrix, Course, Work, Web 2.0, My Life, Psychology, Gay, Happiness, Advertising, Field Hockey, Hip-hop, sex, fucking, ass, Soccer, sox"

Posted in Health & Well Being, Human Rights and Equality | 13 Comments »

A Fair Shot

Posted by Michelle Moquin on October 2nd, 2013

Good morning!

Readers: My opinion on the government shut down is this…Yes, we can blame the republicans because they are the ones that refuse to work with the dems and their biggest goal is to make Obama fail and take over the White House. However, the dems are really the ones to blame because if we hadn’t gloated over Obama’s win in 2008 and got lazy at the last midterms, and basically handed the keys over to the repubs because dems didn’t show up at the polls, we would’t be in this position.

Now…since we are here, I HOPE this shut down lasts until at least the 17th of this month so that people can really feel the negative affects of this. And when they do, then…perhaps they will smart up and not do the same same thing during these next very important midterms.

Now…onto today’s topic. This is a girls blog so here’s a write about us girls:

A Fair Shot

BY CAP ACTION WAR ROOM ON SEPTEMBER 25, 2013 AT 4:58 PM

Women and Families Deserve a Fair Shot to Get Ahead and Not Just Get By

There is no question that the role of women in the United States has changed dramatically over the past few decades. More and more women have entered the workforce, won public office, earned victories for their health rights, and accomplished many other advancements. But substantial inequalities remain in all of these areas. As we rebuild our economy and seek to rise to the challenges of the future, we cannot afford to leave women behind.

With that in mind, last week our friends at the Center for American Progress, Planned Parenthood Action Fund, Service Employees International Union, and American Women joined together to launch theFair Shot Campaign: A Plan for Women and Families to Get Ahead. The campaign focuses on three interrelated goals:

1. Economic security: 40 percent of women are breadwinners, yet women still earn 77 cents for every dollar a man earns. Women deserve a fair chance to succeed in the workplace, and deserve to have workplaces that are more responsive to the needs of working families.

2. Leadership: Women hold 52 percent of all professional-level jobs, but only 4.2 percent of Fortune 500 CEOs and 18 percent of Congress members are women. It’s time to promote women’s leadership in the workplace, government, and elsewhere.

3. Health: It’s been 40 years since Roe v. Wade, but women still contend with restrictive laws, rules, and regulations meant to challenge their rights and freedoms. And far too many women remain uninsured. Women deserve laws, led by the Affordable Care Act, that protect their rights and make affordable health care more accessible.

Women nationwide face inequalities, but there is also wide variance in how women fare across the 50 states. A new CAP report out todaydetails these disparities. The report ranks all 50 states along 36 factors related to women’s economic security, leadership, and health. Check out the interactive map below to see how your state stacks up:

BOTTOM LINE: An overwhelming majority of people–women and men, Republicans and Democrats–support policies such as equal pay, paid sick days, and paid family leave that would increase the opportunity for women and families to get a fair shot at success. So what are we waiting for?

*****

Well? Good question. What are we waiting for? Blog me your thoughts.

Thanks for being here with me!

Peace & Love…

Gratefully your blog host,

michelle

Aka BABE: We all know what this means by now :)

Or if you would like to send a check via snail mail, please make checks payable to “Michelle Moquin”, and send to:

Michelle Moquin PO Box 29235 San Francisco, Ca. 94129

Thank you for your loyal support!

“Though she be but little, she be fierce.” – William Shakespeare Midsummer Night’s Dream

" Politics, god, Life, News, Music, Family, Personal, Travel, Random, Photography, Religion, Aliens, Art, Entertainment, Food, Books, Thoughts, Media, Culture, Love, Sex, Poetry, Prose, Friends, Technology, Humor, Health, Writing, Events, Movies, Sports, Video, Christianity, Atheist, Blogging, History, Work, Education, Business, Fashion, Barack Obama, People, Internet, Relationships, Faith, Photos, Videos, Hillary Clinton, School, Reviews, God, TV, Philosophy, Fun, Science, Environment, Design, The Page, Rants, Pictures, Church, Blog, Nature, Marketing, Television, Democrats, Parenting, Miscellaneous, Current Events, Film, Spirituality, Obama, Musings, Home, Human Rights, Society, Comedy, Me, Random Thoughts, Research, Government, Election 2008, Baseball, Opinion, Recipes, Children, Iraq, Funny, Women, Economics, America, Misc, Commentary, John McCain, Reflections, All, Celebrities, Inspiration, Lifestyle, Theology, Linux, Kids, Games, World, India, Literature, China, Ramblings, Fitness, Money, Review, War, Articles, Economy, Journal, Quotes, NBA, Crime, Anime, Islam, 2008, Stories, Prayer, Diary, Jesus, Buddha, Muslim, Israel, Europe, Links, Marriage, Fiction, American Idol, Software, Leadership, Pop culture, Rants, Video Games, Republicans, Updates, Political, Football, Healing, Blogs, Shopping, USA, Class, Matrix, Course, Work, Web 2.0, My Life, Psychology, Gay, Happiness, Advertising, Field Hockey, Hip-hop, sex, fucking, ass, Soccer, sox"

Posted in Health & Well Being | 7 Comments »

Shut Down

Posted by Michelle Moquin on October 1st, 2013

Good morning!

Well…I guess the republicans did it again – the government has been shut down.

Here’s the write from CNN:

U.S. government shuts down as Congress can’t agree on spending bill

Washington (CNN) – The U.S. government shut down at 12:01 a.m. ET Tuesday after lawmakers in the House and the Senate could not agree on a spending bill to fund the government.

The two sides bickered and blamed each other for more than a week over Obamacare, the president’s signature health care law. House Republicans insisted the spending bill include anti-Obamacare amendments. Senate Democrats were just as insistent that it didn’t.

Federal employees who are considered essential will continue working. But employees deemed non-essential — close to 800,000 — will be furloughed.

Most furloughed federal workers are supposed to be out of their offices within four hours of the start of business Tuesday.

President Barack Obama issued a statement early Tuesday to military members and Department of Defense employees about the outcome of the shutdown.

“Those of you in uniform will remain on your normal duty status,” the president said. “Congress has passed, and I am signing into law, legislation to make sure you get your paychecks on time. And we’ll continue working to address any impact this shutdown has on you and your families.”

“To all our DOD civilians—I know the days ahead could mean more uncertainty, including possible furloughs,” the president added. “And I know this comes on top of the furloughs that many of you already endured this summer. You and your families deserve better than the dysfunction we’re seeing in Congress. … That’s why I’ll keep working to get Congress to reopen our government and get you back to work as soon as possible.”

The final hours

The shutdown appeared inevitable Monday night as House Republicans acknowledged they couldn’t overcome Senate objections to a proposal that includes provisions aimed at derailing Obamacare.

They planned to have another vote that would request a conference with the Senate to work out their differences. But the move, which would not have averted a shutdown, was dismissed by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

“We will not go to conference with a gun to our head,” Reid said.

Democratic Rep. Chris Van Hollen said the reason there wasn’t a budget deal is because Republicans refused to negotiate months ago.

“They want to go to conference with 45 minutes left,” Van Hollen said late Monday night. “That is a recipe for a government shutdown.”

Legislative ping pong

For the second time Monday, the Senate rejected a House Republican effort to derail Obamacare by linking it to a proposal that would avert the shutdown.

The Senate voted to table House amendments that would have delayed the individual mandate in the health care law and eliminated health insurance premium subsidies for members of Congress, their staffs and the president.

In the latest volley of legislative ping pong over a short-term spending plan needed to avoid the shutdown, House Republicans were expected to meet to discuss their next steps.

Earlier, Senate Democrats had rejected a House proposal by a 54-46 vote, strictly along party lines.

Obama made a previously unscheduled statement to reporters on Monday afternoon, blasting the attempts by House Republicans to undermine Obamacare that he said threaten to harm the economy with a shutdown.

“You don’t get to extract a ransom for doing your job, for doing what you’re supposed to be doing anyway, where just because there’s a law there that you don’t like,” the president said.

Obama later called Boehner and other party leaders in the House and Senate, the White House said, but a Boehner spokesman indicated there was no breakthrough.

Moderate GOP revolt against Boehner?

GOP sources told CNN that moderate House Republicans were trying to galvanize what would amount to a rebellion against Boehner and their tea party colleagues by defeating the latest proposed spending plan with attached anti-Obamacare provisions.

However, a procedural vote on the measure passed with only six Republicans voting “no.”

Without congressional approval of new spending legislation, parts of the federal government will begin shutting down when the current fiscal year ends at midnight, forcing agencies to furlough thousands of workers and curtail some services until there is a resolution.

“I feel sad about it. We expect more from our Congress,” said Vick Temple, a worker for the Federal Aviation Administration who said he faced being furloughed in a shutdown.

Polls show public opposition to a shutdown, and stocks ended lower Monday on Wall Street due to concerns over the economic impact.

The blame game

Photos: Key players in the shutdown debate

Republican Rep. Renee Ellmers of North Carolina said on CNN’s “New Day” that her party continues to be deeply concerned about Tuesday’s scheduled opening of Obamacare health insurance exchanges and “keeping the checkbook out of Barack Obama’s hands and the damage can be done there.”

Get up to speed on the showdown

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Shultz, D-Florida, appearing alongside Ellmers, characterized the Republican strategy of tying overall government operations to at least a delay in health care changes as “irrational.”

“It jeopardizes the economy and it makes no sense,” she said.

Weeks of hot potato

Last week, the Senate voted down a House GOP plan to eliminate funding for Obamacare in a short-term spending plan to keep the government running in the new fiscal year that begins Tuesday.

Democrats have pressured Boehner to give up a losing fight over Obamacare forced by tea party conservatives and instead hold a vote on a “clean” spending plan that includes no provisions seeking to undermine the health care reforms.

Wasserman Schultz predicted that such a measure would pass easily with support from all Democrats and more moderate Republicans.

Some Republicans expressed frustration Monday with the tactics of their congressional colleagues. Veteran GOP Sen. John McCain of Arizona noted that any attempt to repeal Obamacare would fail because of Obama’s veto, which would require a two-thirds majority in the Senate to overcome.

“There’s not 67 votes in the United States Senate, therefore, ergo, we’re not going to repeal Obamacare,” McCain said. “OK? That’s it. We may do this for a day. We may do it for a week. We may do it for a month. It’s going to end up the same way. “

GOP Rep. Charlie Dent of Pennsylvania told CNN Chief Congressional Correspondent Dana Bash that whichever party was to blame, a shutdown will make everyone look bad.

10 ways the shutdown would affect you

Obamacare still a GOP focus

Obama and Democrats reject what they call Republican efforts to use the threat of a government shutdown to force negotiations on the president’s signature health care reforms.

Noting that the 2010 Affordable Care Act has been upheld by the Supreme Court, they say it is settled law that voters endorsed last year by re-electing Obama over GOP candidate Mitt Romney, who campaigned on repealing it.

A new CNN/ORC poll shows that Americans are not happy about the prospect of a shutdown, which is happening because Congress has been unable to pass a budget for the new fiscal year that begins Tuesday.

A game of chicken between Dems, GOP

According to the poll, 68% of Americans think shutting down the government for even a few days is a bad idea, while 27% think it’s a good idea.

And it appears most Americans would blame congressional Republicans for a shutdown: Sixty-nine percent said they agreed with the statement that the party’s elected officials were acting like “spoiled children.”

Democrats, however, weren’t far behind: Fifty-eight percent of respondents said they too were acting like spoiled kids.

A poll later showed public support for Congress at record low levels.

Stock traders also seemed solidly against a shutdown. The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell by more than 120 points, or nearly 1 percent, and the other two major indexes also closed lower.

Among major economic issues that could result from a shutdown: delays in processing FHA housing loan applications — a potential drag on the housing recovery — and the potential loss of government spending that’s helping prop up the economy, said Christine Romans, host of CNN’s “Your Money.”

“You’ve got an economy right now that’s very tied to government spending and government contracts, so that could have a ripple effect all across Main Street,” she said on CNN’s “New Day.”

If the government does shut down, it would be the first time it has happened in more than 17 years. That previous shutdown, sparked by a budget battle between Democratic President Bill Clinton and a Republican Congress, lasted for 21 days.

CNN Poll: GOP would bear the brunt of shutdown blame

While the military will remain on duty, as will many essential public safety, health and welfare operations, many government offices will close. About a quarter of the federal government’s 3.3 million employees — those frequently referred to as “nonessential” — will be told to stay home from work until the shutdown is over.

Attorney General Eric Holder and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said essential crime prevention and military services would continue, but some workers would be furloughed. Holder said he would cut his pay by the same amount as the most severely affected Justice Department employees because “we are all in this together.”

***

Sigh…. what’s next?

Blog me.

Gratefully your blog host,

michelle

Aka BABE: We all know what this means by now :)

Or if you would like to send a check via snail mail, please make checks payable to “Michelle Moquin”, and send to:

Michelle Moquin PO Box 29235 San Francisco, Ca. 94129

Thank you for your loyal support!

“Though she be but little, she be fierce.” – William Shakespeare Midsummer Night’s Dream

" Politics, god, Life, News, Music, Family, Personal, Travel, Random, Photography, Religion, Aliens, Art, Entertainment, Food, Books, Thoughts, Media, Culture, Love, Sex, Poetry, Prose, Friends, Technology, Humor, Health, Writing, Events, Movies, Sports, Video, Christianity, Atheist, Blogging, History, Work, Education, Business, Fashion, Barack Obama, People, Internet, Relationships, Faith, Photos, Videos, Hillary Clinton, School, Reviews, God, TV, Philosophy, Fun, Science, Environment, Design, The Page, Rants, Pictures, Church, Blog, Nature, Marketing, Television, Democrats, Parenting, Miscellaneous, Current Events, Film, Spirituality, Obama, Musings, Home, Human Rights, Society, Comedy, Me, Random Thoughts, Research, Government, Election 2008, Baseball, Opinion, Recipes, Children, Iraq, Funny, Women, Economics, America, Misc, Commentary, John McCain, Reflections, All, Celebrities, Inspiration, Lifestyle, Theology, Linux, Kids, Games, World, India, Literature, China, Ramblings, Fitness, Money, Review, War, Articles, Economy, Journal, Quotes, NBA, Crime, Anime, Islam, 2008, Stories, Prayer, Diary, Jesus, Buddha, Muslim, Israel, Europe, Links, Marriage, Fiction, American Idol, Software, Leadership, Pop culture, Rants, Video Games, Republicans, Updates, Political, Football, Healing, Blogs, Shopping, USA, Class, Matrix, Course, Work, Web 2.0, My Life, Psychology, Gay, Happiness, Advertising, Field Hockey, Hip-hop, sex, fucking, ass, Soccer, sox"

Posted in Political Powwow | 8 Comments »

« Previous Entries

Next Entries »

Creative Discussions, Inspiring Thoughts, Fun Adventures, Love & Laughter, Peaceful Travel, Hip Fashions, Cool People, Gastronomic Pleasures, Exotic Indulgences, Groovy Music, and more!

Hello!

Copyright Protected

Let Michelle Style YOU!

© Copyright 2008-2023

In Pursuit Of…

Madaline Speaks

Contact Your Representatives and Senators Here!

On The Issues

Don’t Believe The Lies – Get The Facts

Who’s Paying Who?

Blog Rules of Conduct

*********

Meta

Looking For A Personal Stylist?

Recent Posts

Michelle’s E-mail:

Care To Twitter? Come Tweet Me!

Disclaimer: Adult Blog

Medical Disclaimer:

Legal Disclaimer:

Fair Use Notice Disclaimer

Dr. Mercola’s Comments:

Glyphosate—The World’s Most Popular Herbicide…

Ambient Levels of Glyphosate in Air and Rain

The Environmental Dangers of Glyphosate

Potential Health Hazards of Glyphosate

What Do We Know about AMPA?

Genetically Modified Crops May Contain Toxic Roundup Residues

How Do You Know if You’re Eating GM Foods?

More Tips on How to Decrease Your Exposure to Glyphosate

Abortion

Campaign Finance

Separation of Church and State

Housing Discrimination

Affirmative Action

The Future of Unions

Clean Air

Human Rights v. Corporate Immunity

Whether Treaties Can Be Enforced

Privacy And The Police

Inequality for All: Coming To A Theatre Near You

Women and Families Deserve a Fair Shot to Get Ahead and Not Just Get By