What were $28 an hour jobs w benefits have been slashed in half (benefits slashed as well). $14 an hour jobs will not save the middle class. If you increase jobs by cutting one decent job in half and making two jobs out of it, how the fuck is that helpful? This article is interesting in that it does touch on cutting hourly rates for jobs a bit. And so much more. But to me losing good paying jobs and gaining minimum wage jobs or jobs that don't pay enough for one person to afford to live on their own, never mind support a family on, isn't a gain at all. As the government begins to tell us how there are more jobs available let us be mindful of what kind of jobs they are talking about.

Who Really Rescued the Big Three?
The Deal That Saved Detroit and Banned Strikes
by LAURA FLANDERS

President Obama is, as AP puts it, “wearing his decision to rescue General Motors and Chrysler three years ago as a badge of honor” on his reelection campaign. It saved jobs and working communities, brought the US auto industry back from the brink. In January, U.S. auto sales were up eleven percent over a year ago, and a proud president was cooing to the college students of Ann Arbor, Michigan:

“The American auto industry was on the verge of collapse and some politicians were willing to let it just die. We said no… We believe in the workers of this state.”

You’re going to be hearing a lot about the deal that saved Detroit in the next few months, not least because likely opponent Mitt Romney was against it. Then Governor Romney wrote in the fall of 2008 that if the big three auto companies received a bailout “we can kiss the American auto industry goodbye.” Romney bad; Obama good; Big Three back. The Deal with Detroit story is gold dust for Democrats. Reality is a bit more complicated.

For one thing, it was Republican President Bush, not the Democrats’ Barack Obama, who originally decided not to stand by as the auto makers died. The deal saved an industry – US cars are still being made in the US — but it came at such a high price that in many ways it’s a whole new industry. The American auto industry that built middle class lives as well as cars — that one we kissed good-bye, and it may be a while before we see it back again.

To review: in the fall of 2008, President George W Bush announced a $17.billion loan, split into $13.4 billion at once and another $4 billion in February. The billions for Detroit were tied tight with all the string that had not been attached to the trillions simply given away to Wall St. The Treasury never forced the financial industry to hand over majority shareholder control in exchange for access to the Troubled Asset Relief Program. No CEO of AIG or Bank of America or Well Fargo had to shrink a wage or skimp on a pension. (Far from it, the Government Accountability Office found that the “standard agreement between Treasury and the participating institutions does not require that these institutions track or report how they plan to use, or do use, their capital investments.”)

Big bucks for the Big Three, by contrast, came with all sorts of ties – mostly around the neck of the United Auto Workers and their members. When the deal was finally worked out, under Obama’s “Car Tsar” (a man with zero manufacturing experience but oodles of admiration from NY developer Steve Rattner and Lawrence Summers) the worker’s concessions amounted to a slash in all-in labor costs from around $76 per worker-hour in 2006 to just over $50. Abandoning decades of principle, the UAW approved a two-tier wage structure in which new hires start at t$14/hr — roughly half the pay and benefits of more senior line workers. To top things off, Treasury demanded — just one more teeny thing – a strike ban. The pièce de no résistance! Under the government’s agreement with the companies, any strike by workers is grounds for forfeiting the loan.

The timing couldn’t be more poignant. Seventy-five years ago, in the winter of 1936-37, it was a strike at General Motors that won the first victory for the one-year-old UAW, and won for organized labor the respect that made it possible to negotiate for those middle-class auto-makers’ lives. Late on December 30, 1936, autoworkers in Flint occupied a General Motors plant launching a strike that within less than a month, involved 135,000 workers in 35 cities across the country. When the union called for support in early January, 150,000 people showed up at Detroit’s Cadillac Square in a show of solidarity.

The Sit-Down Strike as it came to be known, ended on Feb. 11, 1937 with a defeat for GM, but for forty-four days, the company used ever tactic to end the occupation. (Take courage Occupy Wall St!) In the dead of winter, owners turned off the heat to the occupied plants. Knowing the strikers’ depended on “solidarity kitchens,” they cut off food delivery. When police moved in on one of the plants in Flint in January, workers pelted officers with engine parts and police fired back tear gas and bullets, sending 28 injured workers to the hospital. Women formed an Emergency Women’s Brigade. The next time police threatened to storm the plant gates, they found their way blocked by women locking arms — the indominatble “Rolling Pin Army.”

The battles of 75 years ago forced GM negotiators to recognize the union as the bargaining agent for the workers, and for a while at least, factory owners across the country negotiated in fear of a sit-down. Seventy-five years later Obama and the Democrats are cheerleading the deal that saved Detroit – and did away with the right to strike, at least temporarily. Now US auto sales are on the rise and with unemployment what it is, the companies say there’s a line around the block for those $14/hour entry-level jobs .

“On the plus side we still have US based auto production,” says Ed Ott, former chair of the New York Central Labor Council. What are union rights going to be like going forward? “The unions say we’ll build back up. Let’s hope they’re right.”

A more likely scenario is $14/hour auto jobs are here to stay. If the US wages low enough, they may draw jobs back from where they’ve gone to. As long as no one here is looking to increase taxes on the factory owners, offshore wages right here save employers the trouble and cost of off-shoring. What’s it mean for those workers’ families? Unless their low-wage lives are subsidized by more taxpayer-dollars in the form of free or low cost public services and help they’re in for pretty lean years. UAW President Bob King (praised for his “flexibility” ) is hopeful union strength will build back up. Heaven knows how.

Lucky us. We missed it the first time. Now, it looks as if we get to experience the Gilded age all over again – and in another half century or so, some auto worker may decide to sit down and occupy a factory.

Just received via email from MoveOn.org...
 

Breaking news: Susan G. Komen for the Cure announced that it is reversing its decision to ban grants to organizations under politically motivated investigation. The bad news is that it's not clear that it will continue funding Planned Parenthood.1 We'll keep up the pressure until it does.

1. "Komen caved. Or did it?" The Washington Post, February 3, 2012

Komen - Huff Post article
 

4 men sentenced to 4 years for the murder of a South African Lesbian. Some sense of justice from the tragedy...


http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/02/world/...html?hpt=hp_t2

Hyp, Hyp, Hypocracy!!!
 

Interesting... maybe this will tke care of the recall efforts!

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/0...th-prosecutors

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has hired two lawyers in advance of a meeting with the Milwaukee County district attorney, whose office is conducting investigation into members of Walker's staff.

Charges have already been made against four Walker staffers and appointees as part of this investigation. Two former aides were charged with using public resources for Republican political campaigns, while the others are accused of, as Giles goat Boy put it:

A Walker appointee, a Walker campaign aide, and a child molester embezzled money that was intended for disabled veterans.Walker claims the upcoming meeting with prosecutors is voluntary. He better hope these chitchats stay that way.


----------------

One Million Moms to JC Penney: fire Ellen, she's gay

LOS ANGELES (TheWrap.com) - One Million Moms -- a project of the American Family Association -- is very angry at JC Penney.

No, not because it sells sweater vests (heck, Rick Santorum is a fan of those), but because the Texas-based department store has hired Ellen DeGeneres as a spokeswoman.

And DeGeneres is -- cue the scary music -- gay, and open about it.

"Funny that JC Penney thinks hiring an open homosexual spokesperson will help their business when most of their customers are traditional families," the million (or so) moms write on their website. "DeGeneres is not a true representation of the type of families that shop at their store. The majority of JC Penney shoppers will be offended and choose to no longer shop there."

One Million Moms is asking people to call JC Penney to complain.

With this campaign, One Million Moms, which claims to be "the most powerful tool you have to stand against the immorality, violence, vulgarity and profanity the entertainment media is throwing at your children," is going after one of the country's most-beloved television hosts.

The moms want JC Penney "to replace Ellen DeGeneres as their new spokesperson immediately and remain neutral in the culture war."

Fat chance, says the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Discrimination.

"A vast majority of Americans today support Ellen as well as their LGBT friends and family members," Herndon Graddick, a GLAAD spokesman said in a written statement. "Selecting an out performer who has inspired and entertained millions, is not only a smart business practice, but a reflection of how LGBT Americans today are an integral and valued part of the fabric of our culture."

DeGeneres' daytime talk show has more viewers than the American Family Association has moms. Between January 16 and January 22, "Ellen" averaged 3.38 million viewers -- or 2.38 million more people than the AFA has moms.

American Family Association did not return a request for comment.

(Editing by Chris Michaud)


================


............... And ... now I have even more of an excuse to buy those new boots I want ... at JC Penney ;)

Yup! Going to take a look at JCP for some new jeans & T's. Haven't shopped them in awhile, but, hey!!

Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria Found in 37 U.S. States:
Drug-resistant bacteria can kill more than half of infected patients

By Jason Koebler
January 31, 2012 RSS Feed Print

Half a world away, doctors in India are fighting outbreaks of bacterial infections that are resistant to more than 15 types of antibiotics. But closer to home, a similarly scary bug is making the rounds in intensive care and other long-term units of American hospitals. In at least 37 states, Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico, doctors have identified bacteria, including E. coli, that produce Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase, or KPC—an enzyme that makes bacteria resistant to most known treatments. It's much more prevalent in America than bacteria that produce NDM-1, the enzyme that has Indian doctors "hell scared," and, according to Alexander Kallen, a medical officer at the Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta, the final outcome isn't much different: superbacteria that are hard to kill.

"It's got a slightly different structure than [NDM-1]," he says of KPC. "But the bottom line is they're two different ways to produce bacteria that are resistant to a wide range of antibiotics."

[Hospital Rooms Crawling With Drug-Resistant Germs.]

That's bad news for infected patients—the mortality rate for patients infected with KPC-producing bacteria has been estimated to be as high as 50 percent. Doctors are advised to do their best to keep the bacteria from spreading, which explains why the problem is most prevalent in hospitals and other close-quarter medical units. Infected patients are often isolated. KPC has been seen in a wide range of bacteria, including E. coli, Salmonella, and K. pneumonia, which often affects hospitalized patients. These superbugs are resistant to nearly every weapon doctors can throw at them, including carbapenems, a class of antibiotic that the CDC calls the "last line of defense" against infections that are resistant to other types of antibiotics. There are a couple antibiotics that have been shown to kill these superbugs, but often at great risk to patients. In fact, the FDA has associated the use of these effective antibiotics with an "increased risk of death" in patients with pneumonia.

That leaves many doctors scratching their heads. KPC-bacteria often grow on medical equipment such as catheters and ventilators, so doctors can sometimes remove that equipment or perform surgery to try to eliminate the infection from a patient's body.

[Are Kids Brown-Bagging Bacteria?]

CDC researchers, including Kallen, say that hospitals who haven't been vigilant about isolating patients with KPC-producing bacteria may have missed their chance. According to a paper co-authored by Kallen released last year, "failure to recognize CRE infections when they first occur in a facility has resulted in a missed opportunity to intervene before these organisms are transmitted more widely." The good news is that, at least for now, KPC-producing bacteria generally only infects people who already have compromised immune systems. "It can move into the wider community," says Kallen, "but we haven't seen much of that yet."


jkoebler@usnews.com

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/...n-37-us-states

Virginia Anti-Gay Adoption Rule Passed By State Lawmakers


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1253125.html

The folks at JCP have already told the Million Ignorant Homophobic Moms to blow it out their ass - they're sticking with Ellen. I wrote JCP to say thanks and actually got a reply! They are thrilled to have Ellen working with them. Turns out that she's a former JCP associate, too.

One Town's War on Gay Teens

long read....important issue



http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...teens-20120202

I love Farm Aid.
 

Get Your Organic Chili At the Super Bowl

SustainableBusiness.com News

Football fans at the Super Bowl this weekend will be treated to the first organic foods served at the event. Farm Aid, probably best known for one of its founders, Willie Nelson, is headed to the Super Bowl with its homegrown chili.

Their commitment is to provide a fair price to farmers that produce local or organic food and engage in ecological practices such as grass-fed meat or GMO-free food. They serve the food in compostable or recyclable packaging.

Since 2007, Farm Aid's annual concert has distinguished itself as the first major concert event to serve family farm food in concessions and backstage. More than 100,000 concert goers have eaten this food, including organic hot dogs, local burgers, and farm-fresh corn on the cob. Willie Nelson, Neil Young and John Mellencamp organized the first Farm Aid concert in 1985 to raise awareness about the loss of family farms and to raise funds to keep farm families on their land. Since then, Farm Aid has raised more than $39 million to promote a strong and resilient family farm system of agriculture.

http://www.bluestemprairie.com/.a/6a...7647970d-300wi

This article reminds me of this article.
 

World Understands Need to Prevent a Nuclear Iran, Barak Says
February 06, 2012, 6:53 AM EST

http://www.businessweek.com/news/201...arak-says.html


Obama Freezes Iranian Government, Central Bank Assets
February 06, 2012, 1:05 PM EST

http://www.businessweek.com/news/201...nk-assets.html

The Lie Of The Century
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHART...tury_text.html

Contaminant in Drinking Water Linked to Mental Illness
 

From Medscape Medical News > Psychiatry
Megan Brooks

January 30, 2012 — Prenatal and early childhood exposure to the organic solvent tetrachloroethylene (PCE) may raise the risk of certain psychiatric illnesses, particularly bipolar disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and schizophrenia, later in life, new research shows.

The population-based, retrospective birth-cohort study showed that children in Cape Cod who were exposed to drinking water contaminated with PCE, which was used to line municipal water pipes, had almost a 2-fold increased risk for bipolar disorder compared with the general population.

The study was published online January 20 in Environmental Health.

Used widely in industry and to dry clean clothes, PCE is a well-known neurotoxin, Ann Aschengrau, ScD, and colleagues from Boston University School of Public Health in Massachusetts note in their report.

PCE readily crosses the blood-brain barrier and has a high affinity for the lipophilic tissues in the central nervous system. The exact mechanisms for its neurotoxic effects remain unclear but include peroxidation of cell membrane lipids, alterations in the fatty acid profile of the brain, and loss of myelin and interactions with neuronal receptors.

Exposure to PCE has been shown to cause mood changes, anxiety, and depression in people who work with it. To date, the long-term effect of this chemical on children exposed to PCE has been less clear, although there is some evidence that children of people who work in the dry cleaning industry have an increased risk for schizophrenia.

To investigate further, the Boston team studied individuals born between 1969 and 1983 to married women who lived in towns in Cape Cod, Massachusetts, that had vinyl-lined asbestos-cement water pipes.

Dose Response

These pipes were installed by public water companies from the late 1960s through early 1980 to solve alkalinity problems in dead-end sections of their distribution systems. The liner was applied by spraying a mixture of vinyl resin and PCE. More than a decade elapsed before officials discovered that large quantities of PCE were leaching into the public water supplies.

Surveys conducted in 1980 found that drinking water supplies in Cape Cod had PCE levels ranging from 1.5 to 7750 μ/L. Because replacing the pipes was prohibitively expensive, systematic flushing and bleeding were used to reduce levels below 40 μ/L, which was the maximum recommended level at the time. The maximum contaminant level for PCE is now set at 5 μ/L.

The Cape Cod cohort included 1512 individuals. The participants included 831 persons with both prenatal and early childhood exposure to PCE and 547 persons who had not been exposed. Participants provided information on mental illnesses, demographic and medical characteristics, other sources of solvent exposure, and places of residence from the time of their birth through 1990.

PCE exposure from the vinyl-liner water distribution pipes was assessed using water distribution system modeling software that incorporated a leaching and transport algorithm, the authors explain.

The researchers did not see any meaningful increase in the risk for depression with prenatal and childhood PCE exposure (risk ratio [RR], 1.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.9 - 1.4). This finding was "both surprising and maybe reassuring," Dr. Aschengrau told Medscape Medical News, given that earlier research in PCE-exposed adults suggested an increased risk for depressive disorders.

However, the researchers did find that individuals with any exposure during gestation and early childhood were at increased risk for bipolar disorder (RR, 1.8; 95% CI, 0.9 - 3.5) and PTSD (RR, 1.5; 95% CI, 0.9 - 2.5). Further increases in risk were observed for bipolar disorder (RR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.3 - 5.6) and PTSD (RR,1.7; 95% CI, 0.9 - 3.2) among persons with the highest exposure levels.

The risk of schizophrenia was also elevated among exposed individuals (RR, 2.1; 95% CI, 0.2 - 20.0), but the number of cases was too small to draw reliable conclusions, the authors note.

"Risk Remains Real"

The researchers note, however, that a study published in 2007 in Schizophrenia Research found a 3.4-fold increased risk for schizophrenia (95% CI, 1.3 - 9.2) among the offspring of parents who worked as dry cleaners. Adjusting for confounding factors did not appreciably alter the finding.

Mary Perrin, DrPH, assistant professor of psychiatry and environmental medicine from the New York University Langone Medical Center in New York City, worked on that study. Medscape Medical News asked her for her thoughts on the Cape Cod study.

"No one epidemiological study is going to prove anything. You have to build evidence, and my personal opinion is that it's another brick in the wall showing that we really need tighter regulation of these substances in the environment. The animal literature is quite clear on this," said Dr. Perrin.

She added that the Cape Cod study is "methodologically a good study. The authors articulated the limitations of the study, which you can't ignore, and did not overstate the results, which are very interesting."

Dr. Aschengrau and colleagues say the limitations of their study include the possibility of exposure misclassification and a lack of data on water consumption and bathing habits; self-reported mental illness data; and possible residual confounding as a result of missing data on several risk factors for mental illness.

The low response rate is another limitation. It is possible that individuals with mental illnesses preferentially ignored requests to participate, the investigators note. This would have reduced the number of cases in the final sample. However, available evidence suggests that this did not introduce selection bias, the authors say.

Dr. Aschengrau also noted that it is not possible to calculate the exact amount of PCE the participants in the study were exposed to.

"Levels of PCE were recorded as high as 1550 times the currently recommended safe limit. While the water companies flushed the pipes to address this problem, people are still being exposed to PCE in the dry cleaning and textile industries and from consumer products, and so the potential for an increased risk of illness remains real," she said.

Dr. Aschengrau and her colleagues added that independent investigations of similarly exposed populations are needed to corroborate their findings.

The study was supported by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. Study investigator David Ozonoff, MD, PhD, is Co-Editor-in-Chief of Environmental Health. Dr. Ozonoff recused himself from all decisions regarding acceptance and publication of the manuscript. In 1980, he served as a witness in bankruptcy court in a suit against the Johns-Manville Corporation, manufacturers of the vinyl-lined asbestos-cement water pipes. He has also testified in personal injury and property damage cases involving exposure to tetrachloroethylene and trichloroethylene. Three years ago, Dr. Aschengrau served as a consultant in a personal injury case involving chlorinated solvent contamination. None of the parties in any litigation supported, reviewed, or had knowledge of this study. The other authors of this study have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

Environmental Health. 2012;11:2. Published online January 20, 2012. Abstract

Medscape Medical News © 2012 WebMD, LLC
Send comments and news tips to news@medscape.net.

latest on Powell case
 

latest on Powell case..As of tonight

I wish this man would have lived to pay for his crimes is all I am gonna say!


http://www.fox13now.com/news/nationw...,5978729.story

We shall see....
 

Gay marriage ruling Tuesday likely a step toward U.S. Supreme Court

http://www.mercurynews.com/samesexma...426?source=rss
By Howard Mintz


hmintz@mercurynews.com

Posted: 02/06/2012 03:38:01 PM PST
Updated: 02/06/2012 09:07:17 PM PST

Feb 6:
California gay wedding ban ruling due Tuesday in Proposition 8 case.

A federal appeals court on Tuesday will hand down its long-awaited ruling on the legality of Proposition 8, California's voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage.

It is likely to be a crucial step toward pushing the gay marriage issue to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will decide whether to agree with former San Francisco Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, who declared the law unconstitutional in 2010. The court also will consider a move by Proposition 8 backers to set aside Walker's ruling because he did not disclose he was in a long-term same-sex relationship while handling the case.

Here are some of the basic questions surrounding Tuesday's outcome:

Q If the court strikes down Proposition 8, will same-sex couples be allowed to marry immediately in California?

A Little to no chance of that happening right away. The 9th Circuit is likely to put its ruling on hold while the legal battle continues, as there are several more steps before the case is final. In fact, the 9th Circuit refused to allow same-sex marriages to proceed after Walker invalidated Proposition 8 in 2010, putting his decision on hold while the appeal proceeds.

Q What are the basic arguments on both sides of the case?

A Same-sex couples say that Proposition 8 violates their federal equal protection rights, depriving them of the legal right to marry in California, which heterosexual couples have. And they contend there is no social or legal justification for denying those rights, other than a discriminatory intent against gays and lesbians. Gay marriage opponents say there is a state interest in preserving the traditional definition of marriage, particularly the importance of procreation in heterosexual marriage.

Q Who are the 9th Circuit judges deciding the case?

A While the 9th Circuit is generally considered liberal, the panel is an ideological mix. It includes Judge Stephen Reinhardt, one of the nation's most liberal judges, but also Judge N. Randy Smith, a conservative appointee of former President George W. Bush. The third judge is Michael Daly Hawkins, a former Arizona U.S. attorney and appointee of President Bill Clinton.

Q What is the expected outcome in the 9th Circuit?

A Based on arguments in December 2010, the judges appeared inclined to uphold Walker's ruling. Even Smith appeared skeptical of the Proposition 8 attorney's arguments.

Q What is likely to happen after the 9th Circuit rules Tuesday?

A The losing side can ask the 9th Circuit to rehear the case with an 11-judge panel, a process known as en banc review. A majority of the 9th Circuit's two dozen full-time judges must vote to rehear a case en banc, but this often occurs in high-profile cases where there is disagreement within the court. The losing side has 14 days to ask for such a rehearing. If the 9th Circuit refuses to grant the request, the next step is the U.S. Supreme Court.

Q How long will all this take?

A The legal fight over Proposition 8 isn't likely to be concluded anytime soon. If the 9th Circuit rehears the case with an 11-judge panel, that appeal is likely to stretch through this year. And whatever the outcome in the 9th Circuit, the U.S. Supreme Court is almost certain not to get a look at the case before the upcoming presidential election.

Q What would be the impact of a 9th Circuit ruling declaring California's gay marriage ban unconstitutional? Would it legalize gay marriage in all nine Western states covered by the 9th Circuit?

A It depends. The court can take a narrower approach and apply its ruling only to California, finding that Proposition 8 violates the rights of same-sex couples because it stripped away a previous right established in a California Supreme Court ruling in 2008 (Proposition 8 wiped that ruling off the books). Or the court can issue a more sweeping ruling that finds any such state ban unconstitutional, which would extend the ruling's reach.

U.S. 9th Circut Court of Appeals Rules Proposition 8 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!!


US Supreme Court here we come!

What would the Supremes do with Prop 8?
 

The question is, will the Supreme Court uphold the unconstitutionality of Prop 8?

In ten of the last eleven appointments, the new justice was more conservative than the one replaced.

Current Members

Name Date of Accession Appointed by Title General ideology

Antonin Scalia September 26, 1986 Ronald Reagan Associate Justice conservative

Anthony Kennedy February 18, 1988 Ronald Reagan Associate Justice moderate/swing

Clarence Thomas October 23, 1991 George H. W. Bush Associate Justice
conservative

Ruth Bader Ginsburg August 10, 1993 Bill Clinton Associate Justice liberal

Stephen Breyer August 3, 1994 Bill Clinton Associate Justice
liberal

John Roberts September 29, 2005 George W. Bush Chief Justice conservative

Samuel Alito January 31, 2006 George W. Bush Associate Justice conservative

Sonia Sotomayor August 6, 2009 Barack Obama Associate Justice liberal

Elena Kagan August 7, 2010 Barack Obama Associate Justice
liberal
******************************

From Huff Post, July 2011:

WASHINGTON — Democrats and liberals have a nightmare vision of the Supreme Court's future: President Barack Obama is defeated for re-election next year and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, at 78 the oldest justice, soon finds her health will not allow her to continue on the bench.

The new Republican president appoints Ginsburg's successor, cementing conservative domination of the court, and soon the justices roll back decisions in favor of abortion rights and affirmative action.

I was talking to a friend last night about the Prop 8 ruling yesterday. This friend is a national activist for Same Sex Marriage and has been very active and written books about it. She told me that if this case does make it to the US Supreme Court whatever happens will be a very narrow ruling. She said this particular case coming out of California would not address same sex marriage through out the entire USA. Whatever ruling may come out of the US Supreme Court would be pertinent only to California.

I am not an attorney. I have never heard of such a thing if the US Supreme Court rules on a matter, I thought it becomes the "Law of the Land." Does anyone here have any knowledge of what I am asking about? Thanks.

Funding Earmarks for Groups Affiliated with Relatives
 

This is an Investigative Journalism piece done by the Washington Post. It is a long read but very informative. It explains in some detail how these earmarks are done within sometimes a very fine line of what is considered to be legal.

The U.S. Congress has less stringent guidelines for earmarks. The Executive Branch and the U.S. Senate also have guidelines and appear to be more successful in keeping the earmarks at a lesser amount in volume which could benefit their family members and/or personal property values.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...dxQ_story.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...ate-interests/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...-the-earmarks/

I thought this was an interesting piece about taxes..........

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/08/op...-tax.html?_r=1

OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR

The Zuckerberg Tax

By DAVID S. MILLER
Published: February 7, 2012

WHEN Facebook goes public later this year, Mark Zuckerberg plans to exercise stock options worth $5 billion of the $28 billion that his ownership stake will be worth. The $5 billion he will receive upon exercising those options will be treated as salary, and Mr. Zuckerberg will have a tax bill of more than $2 billion, quite possibly making him the largest taxpayer in history. He is expected to sell enough stock to pay his tax.

But how much income tax will Mr. Zuckerberg pay on the rest of his stock that he won’t immediately sell? He need not pay any. Instead, he can simply use his stock as collateral to borrow against his tremendous wealth and avoid all tax. That’s what Lawrence J. Ellison, the chief executive of Oracle, did. He reportedly borrowed more than a billion dollars against his Oracle shares and bought one of the most expensive yachts in the world.

If Mr. Zuckerberg never sells his shares, he can avoid all income tax and then, on his death, pass on his shares to his heirs. When they sell them, they will be taxed only on any appreciation in value since his death. <snip>

In order for same-sex marriage to become the "law of the land" it has to pass the meaning of "supreme law" (Magna Carta) based upon due process. A SC ruling on the Prop 8 case would only apply to the proposition as it applies to the state constitution in CA becuase it was written as only applying to CA.

Both the proposition itself and rulings thus far just don't pass the federal due process test to be considered "supreme law" (law of the land). A key piece in getting a federal due process ruling establishing same-sex marriage as constitutional would be states all having to recognize and uphold these marriages from all other states, for example.

The best way to make same-sex marriage the "law of the land" would be via a federal constitutional amendment- which is exactly how opponents want to stop it! Actually amending the constutution to include specific gender language concerning marriage!

There has to be a case certed and decided by the SC that actually points to or applies to the federal constitutional definition of marriage in order for a law of the land decision. And with the conservative majority of our SC, this could go either way. Frankly, I would much rather have even this decision remain outside of the SC at this point in time.

There are several ways legal scholars look at this in terms of constitionality at the federal level. Some only feel that an actual amendment to the constitution clearlt stating that women and women and men and men can marry will do the trick. Then, there is even some more discussion on applications for transgendered people too because of state by state legality on just birth certificate changes.

I really wish we had the Canadian option here- deemed national law and that's it.!

Absolutely! We all have some rungs on the federal to climb in order for there to be marriage equality for all. And I mean all. I don't trust what lurks behind state's rights conservatives one bit!

I had the same question as you and spoke with a friend who is a lawyer and this is the explanation I was given.

Even though it would be a Supreme Court ruling and even though the 9th circuit ruled on this which is more than just California this is still in regards to Prop 8 which is a California issue. Now the the good thing about the Supreme Court ruling is that even though it will not be a set standard it will have a set precedence especially considering the narrow ruling that is anticipated.

And it is a good thing that there are more and more precedent setting marriage equality decisions in other states, too. A good body of arguments is being produced for this long battle to a final victory.

This ruling was a 3 judge panel and it could be appealed to the entire 9th Circuit Court. before going to the SCOTUS.

The other thing that could happen is SCOTUS decides not to hear the case and the 9th Circuit ruling will stand......which I think it the very best scenario.

I tend to agree with you. A Supreme Court ruling, especially when the conservatives are on a general election rampage, as well as a Court that makes so many 5-4 decisions, may end up kicking us in the butt on this.

DOMA repealed, more ducks in a row with sound legal rulings for marriage equality from more states and our very own queer populations joining forces just feels better to me before a SC ruling right now. Afterall, Prop 8 was initiated and supported by a lot of out of state (mainly LDS backed) millions in CA. Frankly, I want to see Obama re-elected and have an opportunity to appoint another SC justice first. Bader-Ginsburg can't stay on all that much longer.

Social worker's 911 call from Josh Powell's home
 

I read this stuff and I am just speechless. This makes me ashamed of my profession. This person was obviously not the least bit prepared to protect these kids. And, I cant even deal with the 911 operators bullshit. Sorry I am just pissed about this entire thing.


http://news.yahoo.com/social-workers...184948545.html

I definitely agree due to the conservative status of the SC but then there is the other part of me that really feels a SC victory is what is needed for this issue to really take proper standing. Plus to have a SC precedence is a pretty good accomplishment for future rulings.

I realize if this goes to SC it could end not in our favor however I think if this was brought to the SC they are pretty limited on their angles to deny. They would have a hard time validating their decision to uphold Prop 8.

I think that the error was allowing "supervised visits" in the home. Here they are always in supervised visit centers so that safety issues aren't a concern.

Kobi - I don't see how any amount of training could have prepared a social worker for this. What am I missing here? Also, where you are, is it common to have supervised visits in the home of the person who isn't trusted to be alone with a particular child?