Please consider reading Healthcare Fairness (yesterday's post). Please take action! It's important!
Please email any responses you receive to healthcarefairness@gmail.com
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ce29f/ce29f311028df26fb37afbee9a21a93107ba4d2b" alt="Share/Save/Bookmark"
Sick Around America
Healthcare Fairness
Health Care: A Call to Action
Thank You, from AKMuckraker.
28 03 2009As I sit here writing, there is a strange mixture of wind, snow and volcanic ash swirling around outside my windows. It’s tempting to yell, “The sky is falling!” and at times it has felt that way. If you had told me last week that a State Legislator would send me a threatening email telling me he was going to out me, and reveal my real identity on his official legislative newsletter, I’d have thought to myself, “Never in a million years would someone be so foolhardy.” But once again I have overestimated the common sense of Rep. Mike Doogan. And here we are.
I have to admit this has taken a bit of getting used to. I’m not one to crave the spotlight, and I generally enjoy my boring little life. So, I’m needing a little time to regroup. Thank you all for the understanding, and indulging this naturally private and introverted blogger who normally posts pretty frequently. Public figures choose a public life. Private citizens don’t necessarily choose that. The possibility is always there for a pseudonymous blogger to become public, but we’d like to think that this would be at the time and in the manner of that person’s choosing….without the unwanted help of a State Representative, who is, after all, supposed to be working for us.
In this stressful time, I have been absolutely overwhelmedby your messages of love and support. I have read every single comment on the blog, and at times I laughed, at times I was brought to tears of joy and grief, and at times I was stunned by the insight and clarity of your thinking and assessment of the situation. And I loved it all. Truly, you all gave me a soft cushion on which to ride this rocky road after being dragged out of my cave. For those of you who have sent emails, or messages on Facebook, I have not yet had the opportunity to read all of them, but I will.
I have not only appreciated the personal support for me and my family (and Brian the moose), but I appreciate that you all getthe big picture, and the most important issue, which is not me. The big picture, the thing that should outrage all of us, despite political party or affiliation, is this: an elected official in a position of power and authority utilized state resources to deliberately and with malice, knowing there would be negative consequences, impinged on the free speech and privacy rights of a private citizen.
Heartening as well, have been the emails and comments of support I have received from conservatives who love and respect the right to free speech as much as those further left on the political spectrum, and who also recognize the big picture. There have been messages of support from the conservative community that have made me hopeful for finding common ground, even with those with whom we thought it would be impossible. This is a good thing for all of us.
I am working on a new post. It was difficult to know quite where to begin. As a friend said, it’s a bit like losing your favorite instrument, and having to learn how to play a new one. But I’ve enjoyed some down time with family, and the challenge of learning to play this new and strange instrument and seeing what I can do with it. Because there’s no doubt, things are different. The next post will be one of my favorite kinds - a good story. We haven’t had one of those in a while. The ending is uncertain, but it’s one that should resonate with all of us.
Thank you, thank you again for your love and support. Even though I’m a “word person” I know I will never fully be able to express to you my deep and abiding gratitude for this community.
**************
*I’ll be putting up open threads as they are needed when the comments get clogged.
*The site will be down for a couple hours tonight, while ServerGuy outfits us with a brand new server! Thanks ServerGuy!
And yes, I’ll always be AKMuckraker.
Response/Thanks from AKMuckraker @ Mudflats
When Nancy Pelosi took impeachment off the table, I knew the idea of holding the Bush administration accountable for their crimes was probably a lost cause. The current administration doesn't seem very gung ho to investigate either.Spanish judge accuses six top Bush officials of torture
Legal moves may force Obama's government into starting a new inquiry into abuses at Guantánamo Bay and Abu Ghraib
- Julian Borger and Dale Fuchs in Madrid
- The Observer, Sunday 29 March 2009
- Article history
Criminal proceedings have begun in Spain against six senior officials in the Bush administration for the use of torture against detainees in Guantánamo Bay. Baltasar Garzón, the counter-terrorism judge whose prosecution of General Augusto Pinochet led to his arrest in Britain in 1998, has referred the case to the chief prosecutor before deciding whether to proceed.
The case is bound to threaten Spain's relations with the new administration in Washington, but Gonzalo Boyé, one of the four lawyers who wrote the lawsuit, said the prosecutor would have little choice under Spanish law but to approve the prosecution.
"The only route of escape the prosecutor might have is to ask whether there is ongoing process in the US against these people," Boyé told the Observer. "This case will go ahead. It will be against the law not to go ahead."
The officials named in the case include the most senior legal minds in the Bush administration. They are: Alberto Gonzales, a former White House counsel and attorney general; David Addington, former vice-president Dick Cheney's chief of staff; Douglas Feith, who was under-secretary of defence; William Haynes, formerly the Pentagon's general counsel; and John Yoo and Jay Bybee, who were both senior justice department legal advisers.
Court documents say that, without their legal advice in a series of internal administration memos, "it would have been impossible to structure a legal framework that supported what happened [in Guantánamo]".
Torture Investigation Finally!
Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2009 10:37:12
To:
Subject: AKMuckraker "outed" by Alaskan Politician
Hi everyone,
You may recall that some time ago Rep Mike Doogan was sending some crazy emails to people who emailed him and AKMuckraker was one of the bloggers involved in exposing his craziness.
Apparently this did not sit well with Rep Doogan. He has been trying to find out who AKMuckraker was for several months now and he has finally managed to do it. He then sent out a message to people on his mailing list via his official legislative newsletter, advising them of the real name of AKMuckraker.
Whether or not people support AKMuckrakers opinions, it seems most people support her right to remain anonymous. We feel it is a right that everyone on the internet is entitled to - people make the decision for their own reasons, some because they have been cyber stalked in the past, some to prevent being cyber-stalked in the future.
This may be the first known case of an anonymous blogger being cyber-stalked by a politician determined to find out their real identity and out them, though!
http://www.themudflats.net/2009/03/27/in-exposing-the-identity-of-mudflats-rep-mike-doogan-exposes-himself/
We are not certain at this stage but it is possible that Rep Doogan has broken the law, and there may be legal action that AKMuckraker can take. Whether or not AKMuckraker chooses to do that is another question and one I am sure she will consider this carefully over the coming days.
You can read posts from bloggers on this subject via the following links -
http://progressivealaska.blogspot.com/2009/03/mike-doogan-outs-mudflats.html
http://shannynmoore.wordpress.com/2009/03/27/my-friend-mudflats/
http://theimmoralminority.blogspot.com/2009/03/you-know-difference-between-rep-mike.html
http://mamadance.wordpress.com/2009/03/27/a-sad-day-mudflats-is-changed-forever/
http://palingates.blogspot.com/2009/03/doogan-broke-federal-law-by-outing.html
http://www.thinkalaska.com/2009/03/rep-mike-doogans-missuse-of-legislative.html
http://werenotthatstupid.blogspot.com/2009/03/epic-failmike-doogan-plays-god.html
We also have a thread on this on the forums, where you can feel free to add your comments.
http://www.themudflats.net/forum/index.php/topic,6675.0.html
Updates and possible calls for action will be posted in that thread, so make sure to check it regularly.. We will also try and keep up with links to posts on the subject - and possibly media stories.
You may find it difficult to access the mudflats blog and forums over the next few days - especially if the mainstream media pick up this story - until we move them to a server with a larger capacity. This will cost us around $200 a month but we feel that the demand for accessing the sites over the next few weeks will make it difficult for the usual mudflats readers to keep up to date, so we are biting the bullet and hoping that people will assist with donations.
You can donate to AKMuckraker via the paypal buttons found on both the blog and the forums.
You can also email messages of support to AKMuckraker at akmuckraker@yahoo.com - be aware that a lot of people are doing so at the moment so you may not get a reply but we feel it is important to let AKMuckraker know that she is supported.
Regards,
Snoskred
On behalf of The Mudflats Team.
http://www.themudflats.net/forum/index.php
This email is being sent to all members of The Mudflats forums, even if you have chosen not to receive announcements. We apologise if you did not wish to receive it. We felt this was important news that all would want to be alerted to.
Supporting AK Muckraker & the Mudflats
Freedom to Blog?
Proper heating was not assured, cleaning was an afterthought, all that was important was filling more and more orders. Instead of destroying products that tested positive for Salmonella, it was common for the company to send out a separate sample."Stewart Parnell hailed from Lynchburg, Va., and had aspirations for his new acquisition. Workers wilted under pressure to produce.
“Under the old boss, we’d do 100,000 pounds [of nuts] a week and he’s happy,” said Bobby Mallard, 59, a production line supervisor with 17 years at the plant. “But Stewart ran a bigger operation. He preferred to get out 100,000 pounds a day.”
Parnell dispensed with filling small jars and cans, preferring 30-pound boxes that could be cranked out quickly. He added a granulation line, which produced small chopped nuts to be used as a topping or ingredient. And in 2004, the company heralded the introduction of its own peanut butter.
Producing larger volumes and more products, Peanut Corp. enticed food giants such as the Kellogg Co., Sara Lee and King Nut. Annual sales jumped 66 percent, from $15 million in 2005 to $25 million last year, according to business researchers Dun & Bradstreet."
"It’s not possible, however, to “retest away a positive result,” said Charles T. Deibel, president of Deibel Labs, one of at least two used by Peanut Corp. “If you tested 50 samples for a given lot and 49 of those were negative and one was positive,” Deibel said, “that one positive must trump the 49 negatives.”Unfortunately, that's exactly what happened. On September 26th, 2008 a tanker truck filled with 45,000 pounds of contaminated peanut paste was unleashed on consumers and manufactures.
These are the people that we are trusting to create our food?"The leaky roof is suspect because there’s one thing needed most for salmonella to grow, spread and thrive: Water.
Some theorize that when it rained, water could have entered the plant and multiplied any existing salmonella or even introduced the salmonella into the plant.
“That is a likely culprit for the problem,” said Michael Hansen, a senior scientist at the watchdog group Consumers Union."
The Peanut Problem
Department of Redundancy Department
This type of activity is nothing more than economic profiling. People are poor, obviously they are on dope, right?
According to the Drug War Chronicle, six states (not including Kansas) have taken up this issue. Their justification is the 1996 Welfare Reform Act that authorized these tests. Michigan instituted a drug testing law in 1999 for all Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) applicants. Three and a half years later,the US 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that this type of blanket testing without probable cause violated the 4th Amendment protection against unlawful searches and seizures.
"This ruling should send a message to the rest of the nation that drug testing programs like these are neither an appropriate or effective use of a state's limited resources," said the ACLU Drug Policy Litigation Project head Graham Boyd at the time.
According to the ACLU's now-renamed Drug Law Reform Project, which had intervened in the Michigan case, the other 49 states had rejected drug testing for various reasons. At least 21 states concluded that the program "may be unlawful," 17 states cited cost concerns, 11 gave a variety of practical or operational reasons, and 11 said they had not seriously considered drug testing at all (some states cited more than one reason).
Random drug testing of welfare recipients has also been rejected by a broad cross-section of organizations concerned with public health, welfare rights, and drug reform, including the American Public Health Association, National Association of Social Workers, Inc., National Association of Alcoholism and Drug Abuse Counselors, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence, Association of Maternal and Child Health Programs, National Health Law Project, National Association on Alcohol, Drugs and Disability, Inc., National Advocates for Pregnant Women, National Black Women's Health Project, Legal Action Center, National Welfare Rights Union, Youth Law Center, Juvenile Law Center, and National Coalition for Child Protection Reform."
Even considering all this information our “wonderful” elected officials decided to spend even more valuable legislative time on doing stupid things that will probably either be vetoed or struck down by a court later. We should all be proud.
This little jewel in the Fiscal Note on the bill...just makes me realize how insane these people are.
"Federal law prohibits the use of random drug testing in determining eligibility for Food Assistance and Medical Assistance. The Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services(SRS), the agency that administers the programs affected by this legislation, states that other public assistance programs to which HB 2275 could be applied are Temporary Assistance for Families, General Assistance, and Child Care Assistance. The agency also states that in Child Care Assistance, federal law stipulates that the primary beneficiary is the child, not the parents. HB 2275 would require these children to submit to random drug testing." (My Emphasis Added)
Drug Testing, Really?
In Remembrance
I've been trying to get to the bottom of the Employee Free Choice Act. Everything I've heard about it suggests that it's a weakening of workers' rights, just cleverly titled.
So what's the deal?
Is it the end of secret ballots? Is it a great leap for workers' rights? I'll let you decide.
Current law: 30% of employees must sign a card certifying their wish to unionize. At that time the employer has the right to either accept the union or request a secret ballot to certify the wishes of the workers to organize. If a secret ballot is requested, a majority of the workers must agree to unionize. If that happens, the National Labor Relations Board will certify that the union will the representation for the workers for collective bargaining. (Courtesy of Wikipedia, it was the most concise explanation lol)
EFCA: If enacted, the NLRB would certify a union for bargaining if the majority signed union cards. Now, employees could request a secret ballot, if 30% agree to it.
On this point, it seems that it shifts the decision to the workers, which in theory should make it easier to unionize. Now as far as the secret ballot thing, it seems like they are splitting hairs. The “card check” has always been a part of it, so why is it an issue now? As I understand it, the difference would be instead of a 30% card check triggering a secret ballot at the employers' request, now a 50%+1 card check would result in a union, unless 30% of the employees' requested a secret ballot.
So maybe that isn't the real issue, maybe they are using it as a distraction for something in the bill that they really don't want. Ya know, preying on the fear of workers thinking that they wouldn't have the protection of secrecy if they agreed to unionization.
Let's see what else is there, according to the EFCA Exposed:
It opens the workers, not wishing to sign up publicly, to intimidation.
It mandates harsher penalties on companies, based on highly subjective judgements.
It damages American business by implementing mandatory mediation if an agreement is not reached 90 days after union certification, and mandatory arbitrations 30 days after that.The majority of federal arbitrators have never written a labor contract in their lives and most have come from academia or government jobs. Yet they will be setting the wages, hours and benefits structures. (Emphasis Added)
Now the AFL-CIO says that they are just trying to punish the companies that refuse to bargain, fire employees for even talking about a union (Wal-Mart for example), and simplifying the certification process.
I really don't know what to think about all this. To me, it seems like the “secret ballot” thing is a red herring. What they are really concerned about is the bargaining and the penalties. Seeing as the American people are not exactly in a forgiving mood when it comes to perceived greedy businessmen, it was a brilliant maneuver.
Is It the Word "Choice" They Don't Like?
"In particular, I would like to speak directly to the people and leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran. […] The United States wants the Islamic Republic of Iran to take its rightful place in the community of nations. You have that right — but it comes with real responsibilities."In contrast the message from President Peres:
“[I suggest] you don’t listen to [Iranian President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad, it is impossible to preserve a whole nation on incitement and hatred, the people will become tired of it. […] I think that the Iranian people will topple these leaders…these leaders who don’t serve the people, in the end the people will realize that.”While I can see the point that Peres is trying to raise, I have to question the timing. The closest ally of Israel is extending an olive branch to the sworn enemy of Israel. So what does the President of Israel do? Put out a statement DIRECTED at the people of Iran and basically tell them that they should overthrow their government. Yeah...great plan, well great plan if you really have no interest in a lasting peace.
Who's Side is Shimon Peres On?
AIG and other madness
Facebook Responses