I guess Colorado has ignorant bigots, too.

 

Chenega-Blackwater Solutions, LLC

CBS, a joint venture between CSPS, the majority member, and Blackwater USA, the minority member, provides armed security services to protect critical infrastructure for the Department of Defense and federal government installations both domestically and abroad.

ANC Chenega is subcontractor to Wakenhut for NASA Agency-Wide Protective Services Contract

June 24, 2009

NASA Awards Wackenhut Agency-Wide Protective Services Contract   WASHINGTON -- NASA has announced the selection of Wackenhut Services Inc. of Palm Beach Gardens, Fla., to perform an agency-wide consolidated contract for protective services. The initial contract value for a possible 10-year period totals approximately $1.2 billion.

Wackenhut will provide fire services, security services, emergency management, export control, protective services training, and protective services information assurance and information technology security.

The contract is a performance-based, indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity contract enabling protective services to be provided to all NASA installations under a single agency-wide contract. This consolidated approach will promote coordinated and efficient operations throughout NASA.

It is anticipated that 14 firm-fixed priced task orders will be issued under the contract. Each task order will authorize work to be performed at NASA locations throughout the United States. The basic period of performance will be for five years. The contract will contain five one-year option periods. The contract also contains an option to increase the maximum value by 20 percent, if needed.

The major subcontractor for the contract is Chenga Security and Protective Services of Ashburn, Va.

This selection is pursuant to re-evaluation of the proposals and a new selection decision ordered by the U.S Court of Federal Claims directing NASA to take corrective action relative to its initial source selection decision. Pursuant to the court order, NASA appointed a reconstructed source evaluation board, appointed a new source selection official, issued reconsidered findings, and made a new selection decision.

For more information about NASA and agency programs, visit:

I've spent the morning reading...I don't even know if I should share the articles with you since I've found them so depressing, but the bottom line is, we're deluding ourselves into believing we can continue going down this same path thinking everything is going to be okay, and I'm wondering how long we can continue to keep the blinders on.

I'm reminded of a couple of stories that are the basis for my reputation of being the one in the family that will optimistically keep going until I run out of road. Settle down with a nice cup of coffee (or a beer) and bear with me here, I'll get into the politics part down the road a bit...

In the first, I'm heading for a party at a home I've never been to, in an area I'm unfamiliar with. Part of the instructions (now mind you, this is way before GPS, cell phones and Goolemaps) are that "it's a long way, but just keep going" and I did. Until I ran out of road...but I was going exactly the opposite direction I was supposed to be going. So I just turned around and went all the way to the other end of the road and arrived to the party as some were leaving.

In the second, years later but still in the dark ages, I was delivering a batch of girl scouts home after a trip rollerskating (some 75 miles away.) The last one lived out in the country off the paved roads.  I was in my station wagon with this last girl, and my daughter and son, then ages 6 and 7. It was a dark and stormy night (really! LOL!)  Getting to her house was no problem, because she was there to guide me. But once left to my own devices, I pulled out from  the dirt driveway and immediately took a wrong turn onto the dirt (now mud) road and set off. As the minutes ticked by, it was obvious I was lost, but what could I do besides keep moving? There were no landmarks, everything looked the same, no right angles...

The kids were getting nervous, but I assured them we would be fine. We just needed to find the road. Then, an hour or so later, I hit a particularly muddy spot and was stuck. The more I revved the engine, the stucker I got. We weren't going anywhere. Living in the mountains, we always carried a couple of blankets in the back of the car. I put the back seat down and made a little pallet for the kids so they could sleep. As my precious little son drifted off he said, "Don't worry Mommy. Dad will call the FBI and they will rescue us." I spent the night sitting in the front seat keeping vigil, and starting the engine every 1/2 hour or so to run the heater so the kids wouldn't get too cold.

Read more »

Hypothesis:

A friend/family member wants your opinon....

He/She has $100.00 to donate to either:

a.) a candidate's campaign for political office or
b.) the political party he/she supports or
c.) to the local foodbank or
d.) OR purchase a warm coat and mittens for a needy child. 

What would be your advice and why? (And yes, these are your only options!)

 

I discovered the most informative time line regarding the history of tobacco litigation in this country. http://www.tobacco.org/resources/history/Tobacco_History20-2.html

In 1951 studies began to come to the fore demonstrating that smoking may be hazardous to your health. After a couple years following  publication of these epiphanies, the tobacco companies got together and attempted to stem the tide, so to speak. 

 

·  53-12-15: BUSINESS: Tobacco Execs Plan Counterattack on Smoking Studies. Plaza Hotel, New York City: Tobacco executives meet to find a way to deal with recent scientific data pointing to the health hazards of cigarettes. Participants included John Hill of Hill & Knowlton, his key aides, and the following tobacco company presidents: Paul D. Hahn (ATC), O. Parker McComas (PM), Joseph F. Cullman (B&H), J. Whitney Peterson, U.S. Tobacco Co. Here's the text of BACKGROUND MATERIAL ON THE CIGARETTE INDUSTRY CLIENT, the H&K memo covering the meeting, and here's the document in .pdf format, Minnesota Trial Exhibit 18905

·  1953-12-28: BUSINESS: Hill meets again with tobacco execs to report on his initial study of the smoking and health problem. 

Read more »

Ah, I remember.......

The place that was the TPM Cafe site
Where we could meet both day and night

A place for all to gather
Before it was so full of spam ads and noxious blather

We came together to laugh and vent
A haven for us all to connect

Politics, personal musings and even music was here
Always, we all knew a friend was near

But now it seems the Cafe's proprietors no longer care
If we converge here or elsewhere

When it was but a small, unknown cafe
They wanted us to stay

Now it appears we no longer matter
Where shall we go now to chatter?

Oh Josh, will you miss us when we are gone?
Or will you just be glad when this site is done?

It won't matter whether we go left or right
But doubt we will go quietly into the night!

Last week the Consortium News posted a blog here at the Cafe; it got no attention, possibly because many readers dislike cross-posts.  I found it really interesting.

Grit TV's Laura Flanders interviewed John Perkins (Confessions of an Economic Hit Man and Hoodwinked!) and Russ Baker, journalist and contributor to The Nation, Vanity A recent Café Blog by the Consortium News garnered no recommends or comments.  Fair, the Washington Post, New York Times, Village Voice, The New Yorker, and Esquire.  He is the founder of WhoWhatWhenWhy.com, and author of Family Secrets, about the Bush Dynasty.

 They discuss, among other subjects, the limitations to Presidents by the military, the CIA, FBI, and corporatocracy, global financial interests: resources, arms, and oil.  I've spent some time tracking down corroborating articles and books  as well as documentary evidence obtained by the National Archives as the result of their lawsuit against the CIA for documents in 1999, as well as Top Secret documents accidentally discovered in unlikely places. 

Read more »

Well, I guess there is a problem if the whole dang reader list is full of viagara ads.
Bummer.
I'm hoping the good folks that hang out in Muckracker and DC can help out here at the Cafe. Let's get blogging. Don't let these bully spammers push us around.
Thanks!

BLOGSTRIKE - This is a picket line.

We are regulars here at TPM Café. 
We represent a significant amount of the discussion traffic here, in both posts and comments.
Lately, we have seen a marked increase in spam posts.
Let it stop here.
We will not participate in any discussions, or post anything here, other than this text.  We will post this repeatedly, with the intent of crowding out the weeds.  We will recommend this, so it rises to the top, and stays, and then we will repost.
Spam does not belong here.  It is time for both the TPM community and the TPM management to take action.  Join our picket line and drive out these nuisances.  This community is worth standing up for, and we are taking our stand here.
Repost this, with comments disabled.

Thanks, Grouch.

Who can come up with the best Spam Ad for TPM?
Here's one:
Abraham Lincoln Vows to Fight Healthcare Overhaul
Oops, might have got that first name wrong.
=D
(Shuffles feet)
Spam TPM Stories, but make sure you post them as blogs. I'll rec every single one I see.
Thanks.
The chicken.

I just sent off this complaint:

There was a historic vote this weekend, and I for one am fed up with the lack of coverage by our so-called news stations. Do they not have an obligation to the public? When do you plan on enforcing those obligations?

The lot of them deserve to lose their licenses unless they commit to keeping us informed. I find out more about important matters by listening to the BBC, and that is UNACCEPTABLE.

It is YOUR responsibility to see that the best interests of the public are served. Get busy and get to it. Did you miss that people think a comedian does a better job of informing the American people than the so-called News Stations? Didn't that set off a few red flags?

Fines would be a good start. If they don't start acting responsibly, yank their licenses. There are plenty of small local operators that will take their responsibility seriously. Maybe it's time to put these corporations out of business, their model doesn't work, and they are letting us all down.

Thank you.

Keep in mind as few as 100 letters on a subject is enough to get their attention. Do us all a favor and shoot off a complaint here:

Complaints

Form 2000E-General Media Complaint.
It's time to start pushing back.
Thanks!

WASHINGTON - By the skin of their teeth, Senate Democrats voted to begin formal debate on the Health Care Reform bill that would guarantee medical coverage for nearly all Americans. All Senate Republicans voted to shelve the bill.

Seconds after the vote, the dead began rising from their graves and started walking amongst the living, meeting at Capitol Hill for an impromptu protest. When interviewed, the Zombies said they believed health care reform would lead to a New World Order, create "Death Panels," and force both men and women to have abortions.

"Braaaiiinnnsss," said one Zombie.

"We know that Americans oppose this bill," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said, referring to a Washington Post-Los Angeles Times poll which found Americans split on the bill, and a CBS News Poll that found that Americans overwhelmingly support a health care reform bill with a public option. "We think the Zombies prove it."

Despite their grandiose reputation as unstoppable brain-eaters, however, the Zombies seemed confused, stalking in circles and fighting amongst each other. Many of the Zombies held signs demanding that President Barack Obama release his real birth certificate, while others seemed more interesting in a first-strike nuclear assault on Iran. The vast majority of the Zombies apparently showed up for the reported Free Brain Buffet and round-trip transportation, and seemed to have no non-brain opinions.

Lobbyist Dick Armey, whose non-profit FreedomWorks organization sponsored the Zombie rally, said that it was yet more proof that Americans - both dead and alive - want less government control in their lives and don't want to pay any taxes whatsoever for any reason outside of war.

"Braaaiiinnss," said Armey.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said that - while the Zombies were clearly an annoyance - he didn't anticipate that they would be able to stop the push for health care reform.

"We've been dealing with zombies for a while, we're sort of immune to them by now," said Reid. "Ironically, the vast majority of these Zombies would benefit from true health care reform."

-WKW

There were a lot of people and a lot of institutions that qualified as LOSERS this week.   (And by LOSER, I mean people who had a significant and a negative impact upon the political discourse for the week.)   

Starting in the "Just Say NO" division, Tea Party candidate for Orlando City Council, Ezell Harris gets the nod for LOSER by campaigning on a platform that calls for stricter oversight of prescription drugs.   Said Harris when he announced his candidacy at a Tea Party Rally earlier this year, "Prescription drugs have replaced cocaine and other illicit substances as the leading cause of drug abuse deaths in Florida, a new study says. Despite this, the state has no prescription drug monitoring program".   Mr. Harris was arrested this week for trafficking in hydrocodone, dispensing illegal drugs without a license, unlawful use of a two-way radio, and possession of drug paraphernalia.  Anyone want to bet he got an endorsement from Rush Limbaugh?

And since we're talking Florida Tea Parties, let's also nominate the Florida chapter of ACT NOW to STOP WAR AND END RACISM (ANSWER).   During a Ft. Lauderdale Tea Party, two members of the Tea Party walked through the counter protest being held by ANSWER.   They started a verbal argument with ANSWER members, one of whom hit a 62 year old Tea Partier over the head with his sign.   It then degenerated into a street brawl!  Now some would say that these two got what they deserve for walking through a counter protest, but the fact remains that before you "STOP WAR" you should first learn NOT to hit old men over the head in the street no matter how obnoxious they seem to be.  

Former Vice-President Dick Cheney makes the LOSER list for saying that President Obama was showing "weakness" by bowing to the Japanese Emperor during his recent trip to Asia.   Mr. Cheney needs to understand that you can't call out a seated president as weak for bowing when your former boss has been photographed kissing a Saudi King on the mouth and walking hand-in-hand with him on the Crawford ranch afterward.

Almost-Vice-President Sarah Palin started her book tour this week.   It brought out the LOSER in a lot of people.   We start with MSNBC News host, Dylan Ratigan, who showed photo-shopped images of the former governor without telling viewers that they were photo-shopped.   (Bad enough to show them at all on a news show, but to let people think they're real?   LOSER!)   Then there was Newsweek Magazine which did a serious story on Palin but put a picture originally taken for Runners World of Palin in VERY short running shorts and pig tails on the cover.   (Will next week's cover feature a shot of Levi Johnston taken for his recent Playgirl shoot?)   But the biggest media LOSER in covering the Palin book tour was FOX NEWS.   They not only showed video footage of McCain/Palin rallies from earlier this year and tried to pass them off as the book tour, but they also showed the book, GOING ROUGE (a collection of essays critical of Palin that came out on the same day as her book, GOING ROGUE) twice while talking about her ghost-written best seller.   (Somebody needs to learn to read at Fox!)

And Palin herself gets named LOSER for her treatment of fans during a book signing stop in Nobelsville, Indiana.    Hundreds of people waited for hours in lousy weather after purchasing a copy of her book from Borders Books.   Each was told that as long as they had the book, the receipt for the book and a wristband given them when they bought the book, that Ms. Palin would personally autograph the book for them.   Instead, she stopped signing halfway through and gave the other half of the crowd a pre-printed autograph sticker that could be affixed to the inside cover of their book.   The crowd was NOT happy!    Palin issued a statement later that said "It had been brought to her attention" that these people didn't get their promised autograph.    Considering how vocal the crowd was, if it had to be "brought to her attention", she needs to get a hearing aid!   So who was the biggest LOSER?   Always eager to quit, Sarah Palin?  Or the crowd that paid full price for a book that's already 30% off in most stores?

The Obama administration makes the LOSER list for their website, recovery.org.    Designed to track job gains and stimulus spending by state, it was discovered by ABC News that some of the districts listed DIDN'T exist!   The administration explained that the errors were caused by the individual districts reporting the information incorrectly and I find that believable, but the fact remains...if it's your website, you're responsible for its accuracy!   Perhaps the administration could put a few more people to work by fact checking their own information.

ACORN related LOSERS include Tea Party candidate from NY-23, Doug Hoffman who is threatening to challenge the results because "ACORN workers stole the election".   Now ACORN had NO workers on the ground in NY-23 and even local Republican officials laugh at Hoffman's claims of "vote tampering".    

And right wing activist and would-be "pimp" James O'Keefe finally released the tape of his visit to LA's ACORN office.  Previously his partner had insisted that NO ACORN office had refused to help her & O'Keefe obtain a house to run a prostitution ring from.    Now we have a tape from LA proving that to be a lie and we know that at least two other offices called the police after they had left.   It seems strange that FOX News hasn't spent much time covering this considering their 24/7 coverage of the initial story.   (And we still wonder if the ACORN workers were helping them because they wanted the "business" as O'Keefe alleges or because they thought it was a big joke?   And if you've seen the video of O'Keefe dressed as a pimp, you will understand why that is a question.   O'Keefe looked like a college student dressed for a frat Halloween party who had watched too many SuperFly films!)

Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) gets recognition for his about face on a proposed amendment that would require an audit of the Federal Reserve Bank.   First he was for it and then he was against it!   It seems strange in this supposed era of "transparency in government" that Congressman Frank would oppose such a move.

And also in the category of "about faced LOSERS", we have Rep. Mark Kirk (R-IL) who voted last month in support of a bill that would allow Obama to move the Guantanamo Bay detainees to the US and now that Thomson, Illinois is one of the proposed sites to move them to...he's against it!   "Not-In-My-Backyard" Kirk makes the LOSER list.

A not so new argument is being made on MSM concerning the new Health care legislation as the Senate decides today whether or not THEY CAN EVEN DEBATE THE GODDAMN THING. (blesses himself and as he curses all repubs in the Senate)

That it is nothing new is evident in an article in the WSJ in December of last year:

Americans will not put up with such limits, nor will our elected representatives. Mr. Daschle himself proves this. He punts the hard decisions about rationing to an unelected board. Yet his main proposals are not only about expanding subsidized programs to cover more people but about adding the massively expensive benefit categories of mental health, which has a strong lobby behind it, and long-term care, which is important to the broad middle class. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123060332638041525.html

The article was attacking Senator Daschle who was spear heading the health care reform front for the incoming White House crew. I found this new take on the same crap in a conservative blog today:

 

For those who are hoping that Congress will deliver health care reform that includes a government run option, be careful what you wish for.

Despite the constant drum beat from Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and other Democrats who declare that a government run health care option would not result in a rationing of services, this notion simply seems to defy logic.

Why would anyone believe that it is possible to provide quality health care coverage to an additional 31 million people, without an increase to the number of doctors and while decreasing the cost of health care? The most logical conclusion that can be reached is that the government must begin to ration services, and the quality of our health care will be impacted in a very negative way. 

In fact, this is exactly what has happened in other countries that have already been down this road. Rationing of health care has been well documented in Great Britain and in Canada. long waits to receive vaccinations and some have even been turned away.

http://www.examiner.com/x-28541-Kissimmee-Conservative-Examiner~y2009m11d19-Health-care-reform-has-not-yet-been-passed-but-has-rationing-already-begun

As the Chicago Tribune put it a couple months ago:

Left unsaid by those who raise fears of rationing by any "government-run" or government-related health care is how much rationing the insurance industry does now.

For decades, experts writing in The New England Journal of Medicine and elsewhere have concluded that we do "ration" health care. We just do it through gross disparities in race, sex, age, regions, income and education. http://archives.chicagotribune.com/2009/aug/09/health/chi-oped0809pageaug09

You can google and discover stories of individuals denied proper medical care after they had paid premiums for health insurance coverage individually or through their employer. http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/denied_coverage/index.html

You can find hundreds upon hundreds of links. Or you can read blogs right here at TPM.

The death panels have been operating in this country forever. Haley Barber or some other repub asshole opined recently that if Congress wanted to get rid of pre-existing condition clauses in insurance contracts the bill would pass 400 to 35 in the House with a similar percentage voting for the provision in the Senate.

This is a goddamn lie and it enrages me because the repubs would have done it nine years ago. It is a statement made that is false and that the speaker knows is false as he makes the statement and it is done with one purpose in mind:  Derail the health care package and help insurance companies make more money than ever.

There have been times in our country when we came close to egalitarianism. But the possibility of a true democratic republic embodying the promises contained in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution never came as close to becoming a reality as it did during World War II.

It was a time when the American People were looking for fairness.

With the Masters of War making money hands over fists and millionaires like Joe Kennedy strutting in suits that cost as much as a working man could make in a year, Roosevelt actually proposed a 100% tax on all incomes over $25,000.00.  Probably about half a million dollars today.

Many controls were put on the economy. The most important were price controls, imposed on most products and monitored by the Office of Price Administration. Wages were also controlled. In addition, the military imposed priorities that largely shaped industrial production.[1][2] wiki

 

There has never been enough of anything in this country to 'go around', never.  The percentage of people who have certain commodities available to them shifts depending upon whether or not the repubs are in control or not.

But rationing was instituted in WWII in order to 'equal things out' so to speak:

Rationing is often instituted during wartime for civilians as well. For example, each person may be given "ration coupons" allowing him or her to purchase a certain amount of a product each month. Rationing often includes food and other necessities for which there is a shortage, including materials needed for the war effort such as rubber tires, leather shoes, clothing and gasoline. Towards the end of the First World War, panic buying in the United Kingdom prompted rationing of first sugar, then meat, for the rest of the war. During World War II rationing existed in many countries including the United Kingdom and the United States.

With the onset of World War II, numerous challenges confronted the American people. The government found it necessary to ration food, gas, and even clothing during that time. Americans were asked to conserve on everything. With not a single person unaffected by the war, rationing meant sacrifices for all. In the spring of 1942, the Food Rationing Program was set into motion. Rationing would deeply affect the American way of life for most. The federal government needed to control supply and demand. Rationing was introduced to avoid public anger with shortages and not to allow only the wealthy to purchase commodities

While industry and commerce were affected, individuals felt the effects more intensely. People were often required to give up many material goods, but there also was an increase in employment. Individual efforts evolved into clubs and organizations coming to terms with the immediate circumstances. Joining together to support and maintain supply levels for the troops abroad meant making daily adjustments. Their efforts also included scrap drives, taking factory jobs, goods donations and other similar projects to assist those on the front. Government-sponsored ads, radio shows, posters and pamphlet campaigns urged the American people to comply. With a sense of urgency, the campaigns appealed to America to contribute by whatever means they had, without complaint. The propaganda was a highly effective tool in reaching the masses.

Rationing regulated the amount of commodities that consumers could obtain. Sugar rationing took effect in May 1943 with the distribution of "Sugar Buying Cards." Registration usually took place in local schools. Each family was asked to send only one member for registration and be prepared to describe all other family members. Coupons were distributed based on family size, and the coupon book allowed the holder to buy a specified amount. Possession of a coupon book did not guarantee that sugar would be available. Americans learned to utilize what they had during rationing time.

http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1674.html

The only downside to all of this was the black market. Big deal. The percentages of abuse were small and never compared to say prohibition. 

But there has always been and will always be rationing of health care services in one form or another. That is a fact of life.

If you are in need of a kidney transplant, you are put on a list by the hospital. The death panel decides whether or not you are going to die.

I pointed out before the terrible case of Mickey Mantle when he received a liver transplant. A no good drunk people screamed at the time. He was, after all, put at the top of some list. Personally, I would have put that man at the top of just about any list. The point here is that there will always be arguments, petty or otherwise, that someone received a life giving organ and someone else did not. Priorities are set on the basis of age, relative health, etc.http://www.unos.org/

Right now, insurance companies decide who will live and who will die just considering the needs OF THEIR OWN INSUREDS.

And as the Chicago Tribune article points out, 45 million people are told to do the best they can waiting in line at ER;s across the country.

We were a different country when we fought World War II, fighting two fronts simultaneously. There was no unemployment. There was under employment. Did you know that we actually used POW's to help us take up the slack in parts of our economy including agriculture?

We came together as a country. We sacrificed together. We shared what we had.

Sometimes I do not much like the country I live in today.

Reading the preceding, I realized that Dickday had passed a wealth of wisdom to each of us readers. Yet,he forced me to further consider our health care quandary:

What "IS" rational when we speak of illness or the terminally ill?
For the health insurance provider: It's get well fast or die quickly -- minimize losses.
For hospitals: Treat the patient, utilize as many of the hi-tech medical devices as can be justified and release said patient within the number of days specified by the treatment payee.
Doctors: Must manage the the case and attempt to heal or help the patient plus... do no harm. Follow-up visits to principle physicians are, usually, required. Let us not forget Big Pharma as our patient progresses or digresses, as the case may be.
Every step of the healing process is closely monitored by the payee...Before or after the fact. Each entity is acting in a manner that appears to be rational in relationship to the patient.
Under the microscope, the system is actually a tug-of-war for revenue! In this game there is only one looser -- if those directly involved can not come to an agreement, the patient owes the difference!
I have read that 50% of an individuals' health care costs are spent in the last two years of a persons' life.
Under the present health care system, the patients' recovery is implied to be the ultimate goal. Rationally speaking, the ultimate goal is the desire to maximize profit.
Yes, we do have our death panels. Check into the organ transplant systems. Someone is prioritizing those lists. How many hours do doctors spend writing letters of justification to health insurance companies in order to get authorization for procedures they wish to perform?
One act that can bring some rationality into this health vs. profit fiasco is what the Republicans call the "Kill Grandma" clause...I call it the Living Will. This document should be mandatory for all citizens over the age of 21.

There are hundreds of various Advanced  Directive forms available at clinics, hospitals and doctors' offices.  I copied and pasted this information fro the Mayo Clinic informational  URL.

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/living-wills/HA00014

Advance directives: More than just living wills
Advance directives are written instructions regarding your medical care preferences. Your family and doctors will consult your advance directives if you're unable to make your own health care decisions. Having written instructions can help reduce confusion or disagreement. Anyone age 18 or older may prepare advance directives.
Advance directives include:
· Living will. This written, legal document spells out the types of medical treatments and life-sustaining measures you do and don't want, such as mechanical breathing (respiration and ventilation), tube feeding or resuscitation. In some states, living wills may be called health care declarations or health care directives.
· Medical power of attorney (POA). The medical POA is a legal document that designates an individual -- referred to as your health care agent or proxy -- to make medical decisions for you in the event that you're unable to do so. A medical POA is sometimes called a durable power of attorney for health care. However, it is different from a power of attorney authorizing someone to make financial transactions for you.
· Do not resuscitate (DNR) order. This is a request to not have cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) if your heart stops or if you stop breathing. Advance directives do not have to include a DNR order, and you don't have to have an advance directive to have a DNR order. Your doctor can put a DNR order in your medical chart.
How to plan for end-of-life issues
Injury, illness and death aren't easy subjects to talk about, but by planning ahead you can ensure that you receive the type of medical care you want, to take the burden off your family of trying to guess at what you'd want done. Start by having a conversation with your loved ones. Let them know you're creating advance directives and explain your feelings about medical care and what you'd want done in specific instances.
If you want to encourage parents or other family members to create advance directives, explain that it's important for you and the family to know how they would want to be treated. It's generally best to approach the subject in a matter-of-fact and reassuring manner.
Keep in mind that a living will cannot cover every possible situation. Therefore, you may also want a medical POA to designate someone to be your health care agent. This person will be guided by your living will but has the authority to interpret your wishes in situations that aren't described in your living will. A medical POA may also be a good idea if your family is opposed to some of your wishes or is divided about them.
Choosing a health care agent
Choosing a person to act as your health care agent is possibly the most important part of your planning. You need to trust that this person has your interests at heart, understands your wishes and will act accordingly. He or she should also be mature and levelheaded, and comfortable with candid conversations. Don't pick someone out of feelings of guilt or obligation.
Your health care agent doesn't necessarily have to be a family member. You may want your health care decision maker be different from the person you choose to handle your financial matters. It may be helpful, but it's not necessary, if the person lives in the same city or state as you do.
What treatments would you want?
In determining your wishes, think about your values, such as the importance to you of being independent and self-sufficient, and what you feel would make your life not worth living. Would you want treatment to extend life in any situation? Would you want treatment only if a cure is possible? Would you want palliative care to ease pain and discomfort if you were terminally ill?
Although you can't predict what medical situations will arise, be sure to discuss the following treatments. It may help to talk with your doctor about these, especially if you have questions.
· Resuscitation. Restarts the heart when it has stopped beating (cardiac death). Determine if and when you would want to be resuscitated by cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) or by a device that delivers an electric shock to stimulate the heart.
· Mechanical ventilation. Takes over your breathing if you're unable to do so. Consider if, when and for how long you would want to be placed on a mechanical ventilator.
· Nutritional and hydration assistance. Supplies the body with nutrients and fluids intravenously or via a tube in the stomach. Decide if, when and for how long you would want to be fed in this manner.
· Dialysis. Removes waste from your blood and manages fluid levels if your kidneys no longer function. Determine if, when and for how long you would want to receive this treatment.

 

The first thing I did this morning when I got up was check the web for news about the health care bill in The Senate.

I use Safari, which shows small images of my "favorite pages," that are periodically updated to reflect the content on each page.

The tiny image of the New York Times page had a nice headline, readable even at postage-stamp size:

Senate Votes to Open Health Care Debate

Whew. So I went to read the article. But the page now had it's current headline, not the one cached from earlier:

Enthusiasm for Palin, and Echoes of 2008 Divide

Top story! (It has already been replaced by another if you go looking for it... it's still on the home page, just not the featured main story)

Naturally I thought "Ha, some "liberal media," as I'm sure most socialists do. But there was even more!

The Palin article was pretty much what you'd expect from The Times, more or less: just the facts.

I'm sure I'm missing the subtle subtext here, somehow "undermining" or "attacking" her greatness. It was filed under "Politcs" (we'll get to that).

But today was a twofer in liberal media denial!

ANOTHER front-page article featured GLEN BECK! I had to put down my latté for fear of spitting some on my lentil sprouts. This was awesome!

What sort of coddling was Mr. Beck going to get from the Grey Lady? And how much fun will I get to have rubbing it in the faces of conservatives?

I have to admit that this article disturbed me.

Not because it was easy on Beck, mind you, that's what I wanted to see. Liberal media, schmiberal schmedia. Take THAT, conservatives!!

No, I was disturbed for journalism itself.

The article on Glen Beck's "activism" NEVER MENTIONS his "9/12 Project" or the anti-healthcare reform rallies he promoted on (and organized through) Fox News. This would be sloppy for NewsMax, but The Times?

All jokes aside, what the hell is this?

An even cursory look at Beck's site has articles like this:

Fringe Media cover Glenn protest

A protest is "activism" isn't it? Calling it a "Glen" protest would imply authorship, no? This one is dated from September 29th.

(I'd provide a permalink but the site is so poorly designed there is no way to do so; search for the article title)

Has Brain Stelter been so conditioned to not appear critical to people on the right that he ignores basic facts about his subject matter? Does he just not know? More importantly, how does an article like this even get by the editors? (this one's under "Media & Advertsing," BTW)

"Mr. Beck, having used his television and radio pulpit to lay out his list of the country's impending problems -- deficit spending, health care legislation that will "destroy" the economy, a dearth of "personal responsibility" -- says he now wants to also provide solutions.

(my emphasis)

OK, so your "reporting" is, in effect: here is what Glen Beck SAYS.

No fact-checking, and more oddly, no apparent knowledge of recent Beck history. Either that, or a DECISION to ignore it.

Which is it Brian?

Later he elaborates on what Beck is "already" doing:

"Already, Mr. Beck's page on FoxNews.com features what it calls "In or Out 2010," a "simple challenge" for lawmakers. It includes a pledge to back a freeze in government spending; oppose all tax increases "until our economy has rebounded"; and support stricter immigration enforcement."

Wow, good to know you are on top of his "activism." And Amy's doing a great job too.

Unfortunately, it's all too clear what the authors know and what they are choosing to ignore in this little snippet:

"The media figures' roles may exacerbate the ideological feuds that are already roiling the party. For the diffuse tea party movement that taps into anti-government sentiments, "the media guys are the closest things we even have to a leader," said Adam Brandon, the vice president for communications at FreedomWorks, a conservative advocacy group."

(my emphasis)

So Beck's role as a leader is passive, by default, not of his choosing. Or at least it WAS, until I wrote this article. The tea party movement is grass-roots, evolving naturally with no help from Fox or Beck or Hannity; any "leadership" is merely an ideological ACCIDENT.

That every shred of factual information indicates otherwise, in fact Beck's OWN declarations indicate otherwise, is dispatched by a quote from a conservative advocacy group (they don't have an agenda!!).

This "article" is a glorified press release.

There is NOTHING "biased" or partisan about honestly reporting what he has DONE ALREADY in an article about Beck's "activism."

I'd submit that ignoring it is MORE SO.

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

PS. The article on the Senate vote is in the "Money & Policy" section. God help us all.