This is one of the most ridiculous stories I have ever read. Morehouse institutes a dress code and people became outraged! Here are some of the rules: No hats indoors, No pajamas in public, No cross dressing of any kind. Really! What an out rage! Just who do they think they are! What are they trying to do draw a line between the appropriate and not appropriate! I am out raged that an institution of higher learning cares enough to expect a classroom to be a classroom and not a play ground for buffoons and clowns. I am out raged that a university is trying to take adolescents and form them into someone that is viable to the work place. I am out raged that the university is stepping in a playing the part of the parent in preparing these very young and naïve men for the tough challenges that await them. Give me a break!
Morehouse, unlike most universities, expect their students to act in an appropriate manner and they expect their students to uphold the traditions of the community. They believe in holding their students to a high standard and expect them to hold themselves to a higher standard. Wearing a do-rag with baggy pants and your underwear showing is not appropriate at any level of intelligent behavior. It shows sloppiness and sloppiness breeds inefficiency. And please give me a break, of all the people saying that it is taking away from your individualism, because everyone is doing it. You can’t go any where with someone’s pants hanging off their butt and if everyone is doing it how can it be an individual thing? Trust me that’s not being an individual that being part of and idiot movement. Even in the NBA they have to adhere to a dress code, because they are representing the NBA. I’m not even going to touch the cross dressers. That in itself is troubling.
Don’t fool yourselves there are to many people walking around with degrees that didn’t get the proper training to do the job. Part of your training is proper edicate and now they are working in retail.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Public Option or no reform
Maybe it's me, but I just don't get it. The Health care industry has had a monopoly on the industry for too long; it’s time for a change. How do we put a price on a human life? This shouldn’t even be a debate, but it is because of the inherit stupidity of people. Most of the people arguing against a public option they would benefit from. That’s pretty dumb. The rest of the people arguing against it have never had a problem with health insurers yet (with the emphasis on yet) so they think they are immune. Well I hate to break your bubble but the word insured isn’t going to mean anything if we do not get a public option. We will see and hear of more and more people with insurance being denied coverage.
Health reform without a public option is not an option. The public option is essential to have any viable health reform. The health companies played their hand, they said that prices will go up. Why don't we believe them? There is no reason not to believe them they have all the cards in the deck, so they can play and hand they want too. The only way to control prices is to have the option to go to someone cheaper or to someone who is providing the service you are paying for. Right now millions of Americans are paying into their insurance, feeling good about their insurance with-out a care in the world. But when they get sick, go to the doctor and the insurance company drops them or will not cover the cost of what they need, then they will be screaming foul. But it will be too late, for there will be no one listening.
Now, I have heard and I'm sure you have too, the ramblings of Palin and Limbaugh and the rest of the crazy so called conservatives talking about death panels, Socialism, Communism, Fascism (YAWN) Nazis well you get the point. It is so easy to yell nonsense when you don’t have an argument for the proposed bill. Then you have the religious right who only care about abortion, it doesn’t matter how many people die without health insurance at least they couldn’t get an abortion. If we want to have an intellectual conversation some jack ass will yell abortion and we are back at square one.
Now back to the matter at hand. We need an option to protect the people from the insurance cartels that are conspiring to keep us owning them. There only consern is there bottom line. So I ask you what is more important a human life or money? We no what the insurance companies think, but what do you think? I think we have three options: Do nothing, Health reform with a public option or regulate the hell out of them. I know how much Republicans love the word, regulate so I think that one is out. The bottom line is I believe we shouldn't have to choose if wewant to live. We shouldn’t have to want to be healthy. We shouldn’t have to want anything that has to do with health; health care should be accessible to everyone.
Health reform without a public option is not an option. The public option is essential to have any viable health reform. The health companies played their hand, they said that prices will go up. Why don't we believe them? There is no reason not to believe them they have all the cards in the deck, so they can play and hand they want too. The only way to control prices is to have the option to go to someone cheaper or to someone who is providing the service you are paying for. Right now millions of Americans are paying into their insurance, feeling good about their insurance with-out a care in the world. But when they get sick, go to the doctor and the insurance company drops them or will not cover the cost of what they need, then they will be screaming foul. But it will be too late, for there will be no one listening.
Now, I have heard and I'm sure you have too, the ramblings of Palin and Limbaugh and the rest of the crazy so called conservatives talking about death panels, Socialism, Communism, Fascism (YAWN) Nazis well you get the point. It is so easy to yell nonsense when you don’t have an argument for the proposed bill. Then you have the religious right who only care about abortion, it doesn’t matter how many people die without health insurance at least they couldn’t get an abortion. If we want to have an intellectual conversation some jack ass will yell abortion and we are back at square one.
Now back to the matter at hand. We need an option to protect the people from the insurance cartels that are conspiring to keep us owning them. There only consern is there bottom line. So I ask you what is more important a human life or money? We no what the insurance companies think, but what do you think? I think we have three options: Do nothing, Health reform with a public option or regulate the hell out of them. I know how much Republicans love the word, regulate so I think that one is out. The bottom line is I believe we shouldn't have to choose if wewant to live. We shouldn’t have to want to be healthy. We shouldn’t have to want anything that has to do with health; health care should be accessible to everyone.
Saturday, October 10, 2009
OH the Irony!
This is very ironic that a man who once said "the NFL all too often looks like a game between the Bloods and the Crips without any weapons." whose racist beliefs know no bounds, would attempt to buy into the first integrated team in the modern NFL, the St. Louis Rams. Just a few weeks ago Limbaugh was talking about segregating school buses, now he wants to be associated with a sport where there are more blacks then whites. I can see it now segregated bathrooms, segregated buses, colored’s only drinking fountains. Oh well I’m sure he will come up with some more garbage. On a brighter note at least he knows where to find the best drugs to supply his team.
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Obama's War
Afghanistan can make or break Obama’s Presidency and I don’t think there is an easy solution. Let’s face it, if he orders troops out and we have another terrorist attack, he will be the President that was soft and didn’t protect us. And if he stays and it drags out, which it will, he will loss the public’s confidence. So politically he is in a quagmire.
With the Right yelling send more troops into Afghanistan and the left saying bring an end to the wars, it seems he should be caught in the middle, correct! Nope. Not even close, Obama first of all isn’t a Liberal and he isn’t thinking about leaving. So get ready for a long stay. As Defense Secretary Roberts Gates said "We are not leaving Afghanistan" before a meeting with key members of Congress. Obama’s reasoning for inviting select members of Congress (both Democrats and Republicans) was to get their support for the new strategy in Afghanistan. If Obama had any intentions of and exit strategy he would have invited Russ Feingold or Bernie Sanders two men who have called for an end to this war.
Russ Feingold, senator from Wisconsin, is on the Intelligence Committee and the Foreign Relations Committee and he wasn’t asked to attend? I find it interesting that the President wouldn’t invite a man that might have some important incite as to how we can end this debacle. Instead of the change that we need it’s ironic that Obama is limiting his dialogue with the status quo.
Here is my problem with this war and the Iraqi war. The terrorist have no home. When asked about Afghanistan national security adviser James Jones said "The good news that Americans should feel at least good about in Afghanistan is that the al Qaeda presence is very diminished," He went on to say, the maximum estimate of al Qaeda militants operating in Afghanistan was "less than 100 ... No bases. No buildings to launch attacks on either us or our allies."
So this is what we need 40,000 more troops for. I think not, what we need to do is let the Iraq government and the Afghani governments take back their countries. Build better relations with the people of these regions. Open up fair trade in the region. Keep our military and the intelligence agencies strong so we do not let our guard down again.
With the Right yelling send more troops into Afghanistan and the left saying bring an end to the wars, it seems he should be caught in the middle, correct! Nope. Not even close, Obama first of all isn’t a Liberal and he isn’t thinking about leaving. So get ready for a long stay. As Defense Secretary Roberts Gates said "We are not leaving Afghanistan" before a meeting with key members of Congress. Obama’s reasoning for inviting select members of Congress (both Democrats and Republicans) was to get their support for the new strategy in Afghanistan. If Obama had any intentions of and exit strategy he would have invited Russ Feingold or Bernie Sanders two men who have called for an end to this war.
Russ Feingold, senator from Wisconsin, is on the Intelligence Committee and the Foreign Relations Committee and he wasn’t asked to attend? I find it interesting that the President wouldn’t invite a man that might have some important incite as to how we can end this debacle. Instead of the change that we need it’s ironic that Obama is limiting his dialogue with the status quo.
Here is my problem with this war and the Iraqi war. The terrorist have no home. When asked about Afghanistan national security adviser James Jones said "The good news that Americans should feel at least good about in Afghanistan is that the al Qaeda presence is very diminished," He went on to say, the maximum estimate of al Qaeda militants operating in Afghanistan was "less than 100 ... No bases. No buildings to launch attacks on either us or our allies."
So this is what we need 40,000 more troops for. I think not, what we need to do is let the Iraq government and the Afghani governments take back their countries. Build better relations with the people of these regions. Open up fair trade in the region. Keep our military and the intelligence agencies strong so we do not let our guard down again.
Message from Congressman Israel
This is a letter from my Congressman, I think it is very important to reach out to our elected officials to let them know what we are thinking.
Dear:
Knowing of your interest in the environment, I thought you would be interested in my recent efforts regarding Long Island Sound.
As a member of the House Appropriations Committee, I am proud to have passed $15 million in funding for the preservation and protection of Long Island's greatest asset, the Sound.
Protecting the Sound has been one of my top priorities in Congress--not simply for aesthetic or environmental reasons, but also because the Sound contributes more than $8 billion to our region every year through fishing, recreation, and tourism.
Below, please find a copy of an article recently published in Newsday on this topic.
Newsday: More funding urged for Long Island Sound cleanup
October 6, 2009
WASHINGTON - More money, better coordination and a more involved public are needed to continue the restoration of Long Island Sound, officials and advocates told a House panel Tuesday.
Cleanup efforts so far have resulted in decreasing discharges of nitrogen, toxic contaminants and pathogens into the Sound, said Mark Tedesco, head of the Long Island Sound Office of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
But, he said, storm-water pollution, sea-level rises and warming temperatures continue to be problems - resulting in summer shutdowns of beaches and fishing - that will require money and coordination of efforts in the region.
Tedesco presented that snapshot of the Sound's condition and recommendations on its restoration to the House Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment, as the panel took stock of federal law and the Long Island Sound Study.
Money continues to be a key issue, especially as states face tightened budgets.
Rep. Tim Bishop (D-Southhampton), a subcommittee member, asked about the outlook for state funding in Connecticut and New York.
"Connecticut is quite committed to clean water even in these tight times," said Connecticut Environmental Protection Commissioner Amey Marrella, noting it had $145 million in bond issues this year for sewage plant fixes and updates.
Peter Scully, LI director of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, said there is no indication the state "is going to back away from funding for Long Island Sound." But he said, "I can't really say what the situation will be like in the days and weeks ahead."
Scully urged the federal government to step up its funding.
The House has appropriated $15 million for the Sound, the largest amount ever, said Bishop, who credited Rep. Steve Israel (D-Huntington), an Appropriations Committee member.
But the Senate appropriated just $3 million, the same as last year. Sens. Charles Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand, both New York Democrats, are urging the Senate-House conference committee to raise the final amount to $15 million.
Adrienne Esposito of the nonprofit Citizens Campaign for the Environment told lawmakers year-to-year budgeting has become a "roadblock" to long-term projects because of uncertainty about funding. She recommended a three- to five-year budget.
She also stressed the need for a broad public campaign to inform people of steps to take to help the Sound.
Thank you again for contacting me. Please do not hesitate to do so again on any matter of concern. You can also visit my website (http://house.gov/israel) to learn more about the issues important to you and to sign up for my e-mail updates.
Sincerely,
STEVE ISRAEL
Member of Congress
Dear:
Knowing of your interest in the environment, I thought you would be interested in my recent efforts regarding Long Island Sound.
As a member of the House Appropriations Committee, I am proud to have passed $15 million in funding for the preservation and protection of Long Island's greatest asset, the Sound.
Protecting the Sound has been one of my top priorities in Congress--not simply for aesthetic or environmental reasons, but also because the Sound contributes more than $8 billion to our region every year through fishing, recreation, and tourism.
Below, please find a copy of an article recently published in Newsday on this topic.
Newsday: More funding urged for Long Island Sound cleanup
October 6, 2009
WASHINGTON - More money, better coordination and a more involved public are needed to continue the restoration of Long Island Sound, officials and advocates told a House panel Tuesday.
Cleanup efforts so far have resulted in decreasing discharges of nitrogen, toxic contaminants and pathogens into the Sound, said Mark Tedesco, head of the Long Island Sound Office of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
But, he said, storm-water pollution, sea-level rises and warming temperatures continue to be problems - resulting in summer shutdowns of beaches and fishing - that will require money and coordination of efforts in the region.
Tedesco presented that snapshot of the Sound's condition and recommendations on its restoration to the House Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment, as the panel took stock of federal law and the Long Island Sound Study.
Money continues to be a key issue, especially as states face tightened budgets.
Rep. Tim Bishop (D-Southhampton), a subcommittee member, asked about the outlook for state funding in Connecticut and New York.
"Connecticut is quite committed to clean water even in these tight times," said Connecticut Environmental Protection Commissioner Amey Marrella, noting it had $145 million in bond issues this year for sewage plant fixes and updates.
Peter Scully, LI director of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, said there is no indication the state "is going to back away from funding for Long Island Sound." But he said, "I can't really say what the situation will be like in the days and weeks ahead."
Scully urged the federal government to step up its funding.
The House has appropriated $15 million for the Sound, the largest amount ever, said Bishop, who credited Rep. Steve Israel (D-Huntington), an Appropriations Committee member.
But the Senate appropriated just $3 million, the same as last year. Sens. Charles Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand, both New York Democrats, are urging the Senate-House conference committee to raise the final amount to $15 million.
Adrienne Esposito of the nonprofit Citizens Campaign for the Environment told lawmakers year-to-year budgeting has become a "roadblock" to long-term projects because of uncertainty about funding. She recommended a three- to five-year budget.
She also stressed the need for a broad public campaign to inform people of steps to take to help the Sound.
Thank you again for contacting me. Please do not hesitate to do so again on any matter of concern. You can also visit my website (http://house.gov/israel) to learn more about the issues important to you and to sign up for my e-mail updates.
Sincerely,
STEVE ISRAEL
Member of Congress
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
