Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
LOL good one
MBA students in Canada and the United States are more likely to cheat than students in other disciplines because they believe it is how the business world operates — and because they believe their peers cheat, according to a new study.
sounds about right to me... sadly. I had the President of a company I worked for years ago brag... yes brag... about cheating his way through Harvard Business School... he was one of the most compulsive liars I've ever met.
Denis Waitley... name sounds familiar... think I went to one of his seminars a while back.
just saw this and was going to post it... glad to see that it will also be heard in the upcoming term... could be very interesting.
how about Cal Davis for ag?
creative problem solving... that's exactly what we need
it goes to the top... Bush and Rumsfeld are responsible and IMO should be tried for war crimes
that's a great example
one of the best things to focus on are secretary of state positions... in the state of california I am strongly supporting Debra Bowden because she is making the voting machine issue one of her top issues... here there are listed several others:
Debra Bowen, Jennifer Brunner, Mark Ritchie, and Deb Markowitz
The best way to protect our vote is to elect responsible, ethical leaders to the office of Secretary of State. When people like Ken Blackwell and Katherine Harris control the election process it should be no surprise that voters are disenfranchised and that our democracy is undermined.
Democracy for America is supporting four great Secretary of State candidates that will start restoring fairness to our elections. These candidates all support verifiable paper ballots and strong protections for voter rights. They all have a great chance to win, but they need your help to put their campaigns over the top. Please read more and help them in any way you can:
http://www.democracyforamerica.com/sos
Debra Bowen
Debra Bowen -- California. Debra is a State Senator, Chair of the Senate Elections Committee, and a good-government watchdog. As Secretary of State, Debra will ensure California properly certifies all of its voting equipment -- particularly the new electronic voting machines. She will also establish an appropriate auditing mechanism to guarantee the results of every election are 100% accurate. Join Democracy for America, California for Democracy, and EMILY's List in supporting Debra Bowen for California's Secretary of State.
Jennifer Brunner
Jennifer Brunner -- Ohio. Jennifer is a former Franklin County, OH Judge. Before being elected to the bench, Jennifer served as Legislative Counsel of the Ohio Secretary of State's Office. She is a former member of the Franklin County Board of Elections and has over thirteen years of experience in election law representing citizen groups, labor unions, and candidates for state offices. Brunner has promised to make all Ohio elections "free, fair, open, and honest" and to oversee a process that can be "audited and verified." Please join Democracy for American, Emily's List, the Women's Campaign Forum, and we can win this seat and end the corruption in Ohio's election process.
Mark Ritchie
Mark Ritchie -- Minnesota. Mark emerged as a national leader on voting rights issues in 2004 when he headed the National Voice Coalition. This nonpartisan Get Out the Vote campaign that coordinated the work of over 1000 groups nationwide and resulted in 5 million new registered voters. Mark is a champion in the fight against voter suppression, and is an ardent proponent of a voter verified paper trail. As Secretary of State, he will be a leader in removing unfair and discriminatory barriers to civic participation.
Deb Markowitz
Deb Markowitz -- Vermont. Deb is serving her 8th year in office as Vermont's Secretary of State. She is currently the president of the NASS (National Association of Secretaries of State) and serves on the Board of Advisors to the Federal Elections Assistance Commission. As Secretary of State Deb has been a progressive voice for transparency in elections administration and the elimination of unnecessary barriers to voting. She has implemented an ambitious election reform agenda in Vermont and her voter education and outreach programs are being used as a model for other states. Please join EMILY's List, the Women's Campaign Fund and Democracy for America in supporting Deb Markowitz's efforts to win another term in office.
Debra Bowen, Jennifer Brunner, Mark Ritchie, and Deb Markowitz are strong candidates who will fight for change. But they need your help in gaining support and building a strong grassroots network. Please help them today:
http://www.democracyforamerica.com/sos
These four candidates are critical in the fight to ensure fair elections in our country. I urge you to get involved and help them in any way you can.
Sincerely,
Jim Dean
Chair
<< from an email >>
interesting that at the end he quoted Edward R. Morrow
Last time I stayed at Paris Paris which was nice. Over the years I've stayed at quite a few places there, but never at the Bellagio or Venetian... would like to though!
IMO, this should be THE number issue... because if our votes aren't counting, it severly handicaps what pressure we can put on our representatives to make changes happen.
many medicines are a derivative of herbs... therefore, it's kind of ludicrous for main stream medicine to try to convince us that herbal supplements are without merrit. it's really all about money... money for the pharmaceutical industry.
it's similiar to what they've done over the years to food... food processed and packaged is much more profitable than natural foods... it's no wonder they tried to convince us that margarine was better for us... or low fat milk... or low fat foods... and yet look at the results on society... where fatter and more unhealthy than ever!
it's encouraging that those videos are on youtube... I'm hoping that means that a wider audience is becoming aware and efforts to get the word out are finally taking effect
FOX News Exposes Princeton / Diebold Vote-Reversal Story
be very worried,...
coming to a neighborhood near you,...
Fantastic post!
The only thing I don't understand is why people didn't pay attention years ago when Bev Harris did the same thing on TV and then was ignored. We should have been demanding voting reform and fixing this problem long before just weeks before the next important election
I'm really curious, because I think there is a lot of truth to what he says and I could see how mainstream medicine would like to squelch him... however, he is a bit extreme at times as well, so I could see how he may have pushed the envelope.
well... I might have left a few comments in the code that might raise a few ebrows :)
you so cavalierly cast aside such important/wise voices
The largest gathering of Nobel peace laureates ever on U.S. soil...
I'll definitely have to try it next time I'm traveling. I'm hoping to go to vegas this fall sometime.
"We just torment the truth" ROFL!
The largest gathering of Nobel peace laureates ever on U.S. soil took a sharp political turn Saturday when several prize winners denounced U.S. foreign policy and President Bush while urging U.S. and Israeli leaders to open lines of communication with terrorist groups.
...
As part of this weekend's PeaceJam youth conference, the Nobel winners unveiled a United Nations-style "global call" to fight what they identified as the core evils of the world - poverty, racism, a lack of clean water, the degradation of the environment and the obsession with nuclear weapons.
The failure to address those evils, they said, are the root causes of suicide bombers and hijackers of airplanes.
This is allowed to continue because of the complicity of governments, especially rich countries' governments, which turn a blind eye to the appalling human suffering associated with the proliferation of weapons.
and we are shamefully one of the biggest contributors to this suffering. why isn't this covered in our mainstream media? why isn't it a campaign issue? how can our government officials sleep at night knowing they are turning a blind eye to this?
very cool... it must not be getting much press because this is the first I've heard of it.
I highly recommend St. Lucia... I was there in June.
I went there about two years ago... it was nicer than I thought, weather was good and the bay was pretty nice. It's supposed to have a reputation as a big party town. I don't know that I'd go there again. I prefer mountains and trees to beach and desert.
please tell us why he was banned... I'm really curious.
I read... errr tried to read one of his books and I could finish it.
that's a little too true LOL
LOL... it's was so tempting to put something like that in one of my programs LOL
didn't know that... interesting
LOL
Buried alive: In 19th-century Europe there was so much anecdotal evidence that living people were mistakenly declared dead that cadavers were laid out in "hospitals for the dead" while attendants awaited signs of putrefaction.
Didn't they all put a string down to the coffin that attached to a bell above ground in case they woke up?
They also said the rule violates the Clean Air Act by failing to place stringent controls on a dangerous pollutant that especially threatens women and children.
I think I need to do a little more research into this, but maybe there is some overlap with the Mercury rule and the Clean Air Act. Maybe the mercury rule was more specific, but there was some coverage under the Clean Air Act that was not specific to mercury but covered it as a "toxin".
I'm willing to say I'm not sure about the discrepance, but I maintain my stance that the Bush admin favored industry over the health and wellbeing of people and most likely skewed it's finding to make the new rule look ok when it could be much better.
The suit alleges that full implementation of the Clean Air Act would reduce annual mercury pollution from 48 tons to 5 tons, whereas the EPA's new rule will permit 15 tons per year.
so to sum it up, this administration via the EPA has weakened the regulations for mercury pollution.
States sue EPA over new mercury rule
March 29, 2005: Nine states have filed suit against the Environmental Protection Agency over a mercury emissions rule they say is less protective of public health than current law. The lawsuit accuses the EPA of violating the Clean Air Act by exempting coal-fired power plants from the law's "maximum available control technology" requirement for cutting pollutants. The suit alleges that full implementation of the Clean Air Act would reduce annual mercury pollution from 48 tons to 5 tons, whereas the EPA's new rule will permit 15 tons per year. The new rule also pushes back deadlines for compliance from 2008 to 2018, with controls not taking full effect until 2026. Moreover, the attorneys general representing the states -- California, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York and Vermont -- argue in their suit that the agency's cap-and-trade approach to mercury control would create toxic "hotspots" in communities near polluting plants.
"The EPA's mercury rule does too little, too late," said John Walke, director of NRDC's clean air program. "Public health is not served by allowing power plants to delay pollution cuts for a more than a decade, requiring lower reductions in mercury emissions than the Clean Air Act, and then letting companies pay to keep polluting."
http://www.nrdc.org/bushrecord/health.asp
EPA weakens mercury reduction requirements for power plants
March 15, 2005: A new rule issued by the Environmental Protection Agency institutes a controversial cap-and-trade approach (effective in 2010), which is intended to cut mercury pollution from the nation's coal-fired power plants by 70 percent beginning in 2018. Environmental groups criticized the rule as giving electric utilities a free pass from controlling their mercury pollution for more than a decade. They also said the rule violates the Clean Air Act by failing to place stringent controls on a dangerous pollutant that especially threatens women and children.
Like lead, mercury is a dangerous poison. It is toxic to infants' developing nervous systems, and several studies have linked mercury exposure to cardiovascular disease. At least 44 states have issued warnings urging residents to avoid or limit their consumption of certain fish caught in local waters. Meanwhile, the federal government has issued warnings recommending children and women of childbearing age to avoid certain fish altogether, and to limit their fish consumption to two meals of low-mercury fish per week. Recognizing mercury's health risks, the public's widespread exposure to it, and the fact that power plants are the largest remaining unregulated source of mercury pollution, the EPA in 2000 found that "mercury emissions from electric utility steam generating units are considered a threat to public health and the environment," and decided to require maximum achievable controls by 2008.
The EPA's new rule overturns that prior determination, according to critics. In place of stringent controls, the agency has created a pollution trading scheme -- the first ever such market for a toxin -- that the EPA predicts will only reduce pollution by 50 percent in 2020. The agency could not even provide a date after 2020 when power plants would actually achieve the EPA's 70 percent reduction goal, a cut the agency could easily require now. (In December, 2001, EPA staff reached a preliminary determination that requiring maximum achievable mercury emissions reduction would result in a 90 percent cut within three years, from approximately 50 tons to 5 tons annually. The new rule will permit power plants to emit 38 tons of mercury until 2018.)
"The EPA's rule is illegal, irresponsible and breaks the promise the agency made five years ago to slash hazardous pollutants, including mercury, from coal-burning power plants. It also puts into place a pollution trading scheme that will allow power plants to emit far more mercury for much longer than the law permits," said John Walke, director of NRDC's clean air program. "Essentially, the agency adopted a 'do-nothing' approach to mercury for the next 12 years."
http://www.nrdc.org/bushrecord/health.asp
Congressional watchdog agency concludes EPA distorted mercury analysis
March 07, 2005: The Environmental Protection Agency skewed the analysis of its controversial plan to regulate mercury pollution from coal-fired power plants in order to bolster an approach supported by the Bush administration, according to the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office. The EPA compared two approaches to limiting emissions of the dangerous neurotoxin, which poses a public health risk, especially for children and pregnant women.
The agency's analysis supported a "cap-and-trade" approach -- favored by the administration and industry -- in which pollution credits are traded among power plants over a "technology-based" approach -- favored by environmentalists -- that would cap mercury pollution at every plant. Blasting the agency for its lack of "transparency," the GAO report said that the EPA failed to adequately address mercury's harmful effects on brain development and other neurological functions, and overestimated the benefits of the cap-and-trade approach. Other critics accused the EPA of distorting its analysis in order to enhance the political prospects of the president's "Clear Skies" legislation. The GAO's report follows an equally critical report by the EPA's inspector general that suggested that agency scientists were pressured to back the industry-preferred mercury reduction proposal.
"Shame on the EPA for putting politics before science and jeopardizing the health of the American people," said John Walke, director of NRDC's clean air program. "No matter how you slice it, the president's mercury pollution plan is deeply flawed and downright dangerous."
http://www.nrdc.org/bushrecord/health.asp
White House scraps workshop on cardiovascular effects of mercury
February 11, 2005: The Environmental Protection Agency, facing a March 15 deadline to issue a new toxic pollution control rule for power plants, has inexplicably put off a workshop on the cardiovascular benefits of mercury reduction. EPA scientists say the decision to postpone the January 31 meeting confirms their long-standing suspicions about the Bush administration's commitment to fully examining the benefits of regulating the toxic pollutant. Critics concur, accusing officials of scuttling a review that would have justified requiring more stringent controls on mercury pollution from power plants.
"The Bush administration doesn't want to face facts about the need to crack down on power plants' harmful mercury pollution," said Jon Devine, a health attorney at NRDC.
http://www.nrdc.org/bushrecord/health.asp
EPA mercury proposal favors industry, says agency's inspector general
February 03, 2005: In devising its new rules on power-plant mercury emissions, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency violated agency protocol and ignored scientific evidence in order to meet a predetermined goal that favors industry, concluded a report by EPA Inspector General Nikki Tinsley. "Everything about this rule was decided at a political level," said one EPA staff member present at meetings between administrators and staff. "The political level made the decisions, and the staff did what they were told." The EPA is expected to issue its final mercury rule in mid-March.
"We now know why the new mercury rules ended up exactly in line with those proposed in Bush's so-called Clear Skies legislation," said John Walke, director of NRDC's clean air program.
http://www.nrdc.org/bushrecord/health.asp
EPA balks at recommended mercury reduction technology
November 17, 2004: The Environmental Protection Agency is saying "thanks, but no thanks" to a mercury emissions technology -- activated carbon injection -- that it views as an ineffective tool to deliver major pollution cuts from coal-burning power plants. The agency's main objection is that the technology will not be available to all plants until 2010. The Bush administration's preferred air pollution proposal, the Clear Skies initiative, relies on a "cap-and-trade" program that requires power plants to reduce their mercury emissions by 70 percent by 2018.
Critics point out that the EPA's own projections, however, show that mercury emissions in the air will not be reduced by that amount under Clear Skies until some time after 2025, due to industry's ability to exceed the cap by drawing upon "banked" pollution credits. They also take issue with the fact that the EPA's own mercury advisory panel recommended the ACI technology, which could reduce mercury emissions by 90 percent, if widely applied. Unfortunately, the EPA disbanded that panel and has refused to analyze the more protective clean-up scenarios recommended by all members of the panel. However, the EPA's own mercury proposal used verbatim language crafted by utility industry lobbyists, according to news accounts.
"Too bad the EPA is pushing for the plan that preserves the greatest profits for industry[\b] instead of one that provides the greatest protections for the American people," said John Walke, senior attorney with NRDC's clean air program.
More than 630,000 infants are born in the United States every year with unsafe mercury levels in their blood, according to the EPA. The agency is expected to finalize its mercury reduction rule by March 15, 2005.
http://www.nrdc.org/bushrecord/health.asp