We hear so much today about the closings and struggles of soup kitchens, community centers for the needy, shelters for the homeless, and centers for helping children in our local areas. This should never be. The most immediate and powerful form of charity is that of direct help. This includes needed food, clothing and goods; money donations; volunteer services; and volunteering personal time to help. We should not just sit back and rely upon "the government" or think that some other wealthy people or organizations are going to provide the needed support for these organizations. IT SHOULD COME FROM US...ALL OF US, the everyday people and families of our own areas.
Today, more than ever, our personal help and support are desperately needed. The poor economy has pushed multitudes more into the needy category and these help centers are overwhelmed. Mother Teresa, winner of the Nobel Peace Prize for her charitable work, when asked by people who wanted to help in her work in Calcutta, would say, "Find your own Calcutta. Find the sick, the suffering, the lonely, right there where you are". (Right in your own area.)
Think about what she said. You don't have to go to far off lands...our Calcutta exists right in our own localities. Also think about if each region of our country, and those across the world, reached out to those right in their own areas, what a better world it would be. This does not exclude us from helping others in need in far off places, it simply says, start right at home.
We should NOT ALLOW these needy organizations to struggle, or even the thought of closing when so many today are in need of help. Particularly during this holiday season, we should re-commit ourselves to supporting these direct help organizations, through the very best form of our direct charity.
Thursday, November 25, 2010
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
AARP Betrayed Seniors, Betrayed America
If you can, forget for a moment what political party that you belong to. During the administration of George W. Bush he attempted to do something about Social Security knowing it was headed for sure failure. In 2005 the Wall Street Journal reported that Social Security would go broke by 2041. It may be much sooner than that with our current financial crisis. Whether the Bush plan was the right one or not is not the issue. The point is he tried to do something to avoid the failure. At that time AARP began to show their true colors, they went on an all out attack on Bush's Social Security efforts, even going to the extent of misrepresenting his plan.
This was an alert as to what AARP is all about. Nowhere, however, did AARP raise its' ugly head more than with Obamacare. Before it even became available, without even knowing what was in the plan, AARP gave it full support. When they were criticized for this they began to back off, well, sort of. One of the AARP executives appeared on Fox News and when asked he said that AARP was "neutral" on Obamacare. Yet that very same day if you went to the AARP web site they showed FULL support for Obamacare so effectively, he lied. Remember now, this was even before anybody knew what was in it ...they were offering "blind" support.
AARP is supposed to represent seniors. Yet when a plan was put forth to address Social Security, they vigorously fought off any change. Worse, Obamacare is particularly bad for seniors. First, members of Obama's healthcare advisory team specifically mentioned that expensive healthcare should be given only to those who were "most productive in society". Meaning NOT seniors...effectively rationing healthcare. This is further proven by the fact that the approved Obamacare takes $1/2 trillion from Medicare. Still further proof is that going into effect is a reduction of reimbursement to doctors of Medicare payments by over 20%! What will now happen is that doctors will refuse new (and maybe existing) seniors on Medicare. It will dramatically affect and be detrimental to seniors. Even MORE proof is that Obama appointed David Berwick, backdoor, during on "out of session" period of Congress as Head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Berwick CLEARLY favors rationing. In fact he stated when discussing the British rationing system, " I am romantic about the National Health Service. I love it".
Remember this came about by an organization that is supposed to represent seniors. There is even more, but it is readily evident that AARP is driven by a political agenda...NOT supporting seniors. In fact it is not an understatement to say that AARP HAS BETRAYED SENIORS; AARP HAS BETRAYED AMERICA. If a member, you are urged to rip up your AARP membership cards and discontinue membership immediately.
There are at least two other organizations that TRULY represent seniors...and just as importantly, they are true to America:
Generation America, and
Alliance, for Retirement Prosperity
This was an alert as to what AARP is all about. Nowhere, however, did AARP raise its' ugly head more than with Obamacare. Before it even became available, without even knowing what was in the plan, AARP gave it full support. When they were criticized for this they began to back off, well, sort of. One of the AARP executives appeared on Fox News and when asked he said that AARP was "neutral" on Obamacare. Yet that very same day if you went to the AARP web site they showed FULL support for Obamacare so effectively, he lied. Remember now, this was even before anybody knew what was in it ...they were offering "blind" support.
AARP is supposed to represent seniors. Yet when a plan was put forth to address Social Security, they vigorously fought off any change. Worse, Obamacare is particularly bad for seniors. First, members of Obama's healthcare advisory team specifically mentioned that expensive healthcare should be given only to those who were "most productive in society". Meaning NOT seniors...effectively rationing healthcare. This is further proven by the fact that the approved Obamacare takes $1/2 trillion from Medicare. Still further proof is that going into effect is a reduction of reimbursement to doctors of Medicare payments by over 20%! What will now happen is that doctors will refuse new (and maybe existing) seniors on Medicare. It will dramatically affect and be detrimental to seniors. Even MORE proof is that Obama appointed David Berwick, backdoor, during on "out of session" period of Congress as Head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Berwick CLEARLY favors rationing. In fact he stated when discussing the British rationing system, " I am romantic about the National Health Service. I love it".
Remember this came about by an organization that is supposed to represent seniors. There is even more, but it is readily evident that AARP is driven by a political agenda...NOT supporting seniors. In fact it is not an understatement to say that AARP HAS BETRAYED SENIORS; AARP HAS BETRAYED AMERICA. If a member, you are urged to rip up your AARP membership cards and discontinue membership immediately.
There are at least two other organizations that TRULY represent seniors...and just as importantly, they are true to America:
Generation America, and
Alliance, for Retirement Prosperity
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Time to Review United Nations
The latest outrage concerning the United Nations involves a suspected war criminal who allegedly played a key role in the slaughter of 40,000 civilians in Sri Lanka and has recently landed a cushy job at the UN with full diplomatic immunity. Shavendra Silva, 46, a top ex-military commander, was named Sri Lanka's deputy permanent U.N. representative in August and now resides in New York.
The United States should call for a review of the United Nations, as well as our involvements and commitments as a member of the United Nations. The United Nations is currently out of control, has demonstrated incompetence, is corrupt, and obviously anti-American. There should be no support by the United States for any form of global governance by the United Nations, or any legal or international court jurisdiction over the American people. The United Nations should not be allowed to interfere with the governance or impose any rules or laws affecting the United States. The functions of the United Nations should be limited solely to peace keeping and humanitarian purposes, helping poor and impoverished countries and people throughout the world, and in helping those struck with disasters. The United Nations needs to be limited.
Our sovereignty as a nation is sacred and must be protected at all costs. Under no circumstances should the United States give away our sovereignty as a nation to any international organization, or subject the American people to international courts, or commit financial support without the approval of the American people and Congress. We should be a responsible member of the international community, but not subject to ANY form of international governance other than treaties and agreements, for good reason, as provided for in the US Constitution.
The United States should call for a review of the United Nations, as well as our involvements and commitments as a member of the United Nations. The United Nations is currently out of control, has demonstrated incompetence, is corrupt, and obviously anti-American. There should be no support by the United States for any form of global governance by the United Nations, or any legal or international court jurisdiction over the American people. The United Nations should not be allowed to interfere with the governance or impose any rules or laws affecting the United States. The functions of the United Nations should be limited solely to peace keeping and humanitarian purposes, helping poor and impoverished countries and people throughout the world, and in helping those struck with disasters. The United Nations needs to be limited.
Our sovereignty as a nation is sacred and must be protected at all costs. Under no circumstances should the United States give away our sovereignty as a nation to any international organization, or subject the American people to international courts, or commit financial support without the approval of the American people and Congress. We should be a responsible member of the international community, but not subject to ANY form of international governance other than treaties and agreements, for good reason, as provided for in the US Constitution.
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Marijuana MORE Harmful Than Tobacco
During the 1950's, over 50 years ago, teenagers knew that smoking was both addictive and harmful to your health. In recent times it is treated as some new revelation and the tobacco companies have been attacked, with lawsuits and fines totaling hundreds of billions of dollars, and smoking has been banned from many venues. More recently there is a movement to put even more graphic labels on cigarettes..."Warning, Smoking Can Kill You", etc. Although one can argue how far the government needs to control and impose actions, few would argue about the harms of smoking tobacco.
It is extremely hypocritical, however, when it comes to marijuana, where there is a push to make it more legal and accessible. Hypocritical because marijuana is even MORE harmful than tobacco! The medical profession has been relatively silent on this as well as books and literature on the subject...all because it is politically correct to accept marijuana, not criticize it. This in itself is a sad statement.
The effects on most users of marijuana is that they experience an increase in heart rate, redness of the eyes, and dryness of the mouth and throat. Studies show that the drug temporarily impairs short term memory, alters the sense of time, and reduces the ability to perform tasks requiring concentration, swift reactions, and coordination. (Like driving a car or operating machinery.) Feelings of euphoria, relaxation, altered state of body image, and bouts of exaggerated laughter also are commonly reported.
Scientists believe that marijuana can be particularly harmful to lungs through the deep inhalation process. Marijuana smoke has been found to have more cancer causing agents then are found with cigarette smoke. Marijuana can increase heart rate by as much as 50% and can bring on chest pain in some individuals. Many in the medical field feel that people with heart conditions are at a high risk of further heart ailments through the use of marijuana. Findings also suggest that regular use may reduce fertility in women. Further, scientists believe marijuana, which crosses the placental barrier, may have a toxic effect on embryos and fetuses.
Many from personal experience, have sadly witnessed relatives and friends who have used marijuana and other "harmless recreational drugs" that later on in life experience serious medical difficulties such as heart attacks, strokes, kidney failures, and even death. Some at a relatively early age. The point is that the long term effects of these drugs are not known, but you can logically conclude that they won't be positive.
It is not politically correct today to say that marijuana is harmful to people. The sad reality is, however, it is more harmful than smoking tobacco. Yet many states, like Massachusetts, California, and others, are looking to make marijuana more legal and accessible. This is very hypocritical, as well as being illogical.
It is extremely hypocritical, however, when it comes to marijuana, where there is a push to make it more legal and accessible. Hypocritical because marijuana is even MORE harmful than tobacco! The medical profession has been relatively silent on this as well as books and literature on the subject...all because it is politically correct to accept marijuana, not criticize it. This in itself is a sad statement.
The effects on most users of marijuana is that they experience an increase in heart rate, redness of the eyes, and dryness of the mouth and throat. Studies show that the drug temporarily impairs short term memory, alters the sense of time, and reduces the ability to perform tasks requiring concentration, swift reactions, and coordination. (Like driving a car or operating machinery.) Feelings of euphoria, relaxation, altered state of body image, and bouts of exaggerated laughter also are commonly reported.
Scientists believe that marijuana can be particularly harmful to lungs through the deep inhalation process. Marijuana smoke has been found to have more cancer causing agents then are found with cigarette smoke. Marijuana can increase heart rate by as much as 50% and can bring on chest pain in some individuals. Many in the medical field feel that people with heart conditions are at a high risk of further heart ailments through the use of marijuana. Findings also suggest that regular use may reduce fertility in women. Further, scientists believe marijuana, which crosses the placental barrier, may have a toxic effect on embryos and fetuses.
Many from personal experience, have sadly witnessed relatives and friends who have used marijuana and other "harmless recreational drugs" that later on in life experience serious medical difficulties such as heart attacks, strokes, kidney failures, and even death. Some at a relatively early age. The point is that the long term effects of these drugs are not known, but you can logically conclude that they won't be positive.
It is not politically correct today to say that marijuana is harmful to people. The sad reality is, however, it is more harmful than smoking tobacco. Yet many states, like Massachusetts, California, and others, are looking to make marijuana more legal and accessible. This is very hypocritical, as well as being illogical.
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
Mass. Republican Party is Inept
The Following was sent to the "Executive" leadership of the Massachusetts Republican Party. The Letter to the Editor was submitted to the Boston Globe, the Boston Herald, and the Springfield Republican.
What you did in this recent election is unforgivable. FYI, Following is my Letter to the Editor that was submitted to several publications. Until you come down from your elitism, LISTEN to the people of the state, and take on a DRAMATIC new direction and new leadership the Massachusetts Republican Party will be destined for continuing failure. As just one example I had sent a proposal and letters to your Chairman, Jennifer Nassour. I did not even receive the courtesy of a response. Unfortunately this is all too typical and reflects how out of touch that you are.
Letter to the Editor
It was a major failure of the Massachusetts Republican Party not to be able to defeat an unpopular Deval Patrick for governor. In fact the entire state-wide Republican ticket and the nine Congressional challengers lost while Republicans across the nation made huge gains. Charlie Baker was a "hybrid" candidate and did not give the people of the state a clear and distinct choice. He stated that he was "to the left of Obama on social issues" and then campaigned that way as a "Republican"! In addition to that, there were serious questions about his past involvement with the Big Dig financing plan, as well his involvement with the healthcare insurance industry.
The election of Scott Brown as US Senator showed that not only Republicans in the state of Massachusetts, but traditional Democrats, Independents, and Libertarians, were open for a change. The mood of the nation was also crying for a change and it did happen throughout the country in the recent elections. Not in Massachusetts. Primarily due to the ineptness of the Massachusetts Republican Party who sit in isolation in their ivory tower in Boston, the state remains in the quagmire of a one party state. Until there is a dramatic change in both the direction and leadership of the Massachusetts Republican Party the state is destined to remain a one party state.
What you did in this recent election is unforgivable. FYI, Following is my Letter to the Editor that was submitted to several publications. Until you come down from your elitism, LISTEN to the people of the state, and take on a DRAMATIC new direction and new leadership the Massachusetts Republican Party will be destined for continuing failure. As just one example I had sent a proposal and letters to your Chairman, Jennifer Nassour. I did not even receive the courtesy of a response. Unfortunately this is all too typical and reflects how out of touch that you are.
Letter to the Editor
It was a major failure of the Massachusetts Republican Party not to be able to defeat an unpopular Deval Patrick for governor. In fact the entire state-wide Republican ticket and the nine Congressional challengers lost while Republicans across the nation made huge gains. Charlie Baker was a "hybrid" candidate and did not give the people of the state a clear and distinct choice. He stated that he was "to the left of Obama on social issues" and then campaigned that way as a "Republican"! In addition to that, there were serious questions about his past involvement with the Big Dig financing plan, as well his involvement with the healthcare insurance industry.
The election of Scott Brown as US Senator showed that not only Republicans in the state of Massachusetts, but traditional Democrats, Independents, and Libertarians, were open for a change. The mood of the nation was also crying for a change and it did happen throughout the country in the recent elections. Not in Massachusetts. Primarily due to the ineptness of the Massachusetts Republican Party who sit in isolation in their ivory tower in Boston, the state remains in the quagmire of a one party state. Until there is a dramatic change in both the direction and leadership of the Massachusetts Republican Party the state is destined to remain a one party state.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)