Group items tagged

WASHINGTON -- With the debate over the Affordable Care Act law morphing from a constitutional matter before the Supreme Court to an implementation matter beforestate houses, President Barack Obama and allied Democrats are refiguring their sales pitch. In response to criticisms that the law hamstrings governors, defenders of the president's health care law will be championing a states-rights amendment that already enjoys Republican support. Under current law, states are allowed to opt out of various requirements of the Affordable Care Act by 2017, provided that they meet minimal standards for coverage. The Empowering States to Innovate Act would move that date to 2014. For the Obama White House, the amendment has a number of politically appealing aspects. The most obvious is that it provides an avenue to the type of federalist approach that the Republican Party, and its standard-bearer Mitt Romney, has argued should have been adopted in the first place. More bluntly, the co-sponsor of the amendment, along with Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), is Sen. Scott Brown, a Massachusetts Republican who happens to share a senior adviser with Romney. When top Obama administration officials were asked how they would go about selling the law in the immediate aftermath of the court's ruling, one of the three provisions they cited was the opt-out amendment. It was equally telling that the president made a point of emphasizing the idea in his post-SCOTUS remarks. "Each state will take the lead in designing their own menu of options, and if states can come up with even better ways of covering more people at the same quality and cost, this law allows them to do that, too," Obama said. "And I've asked Congress to help speed up that process, and give states this flexibility in year one." Perhaps the most obvious signal that the White House sees the amendment as a campaign instrument came in February 2011, when the president declared -- in a bit of prescience with respect to the GOP prim

WASHINGTON -- With the debate over the Affordable Care Act law morphing from a constitutional matter before the Supreme Court to an implementation matter before state houses, President Barack Obama and allied Democrats are refiguring their sales pitch. In response to criticisms that the law hamstrings governors, defenders of the president's health care law will be championing a states-rights amendment that already enjoys Republican support. Under current law, states are allowed to opt out of various requirements of the Affordable Care Act by 2017, provided that they meet minimal standards for coverage. The Empowering States to Innovate Act would move that date to 2014. For the Obama White House, the amendment has a number of politically appealing aspects. The most obvious is that it provides an avenue to the type of federalist approach that the Republican Party, and its standard-bearer Mitt Romney, has argued should have been adopted in the first place. More bluntly, the co-sponsor of the amendment, along with Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), is Sen. Scott Brown, a Massachusetts Republican who happens to share a senior adviser with Romney. When top Obama administration officials were asked how they would go about selling the law in the immediate aftermath of the court's ruling, one of the three provisions they cited was the opt-out amendment. It was equally telling that the president made a point of emphasizing the idea in his post-SCOTUS remarks. "Each state will take the lead in designing their own menu of options, and if states can come up with even better ways of covering more people at the same quality and cost, this law allows them to do that, too," Obama said. "And I've asked Congress to help speed up that process, and give states this flexibility in year one." Perhaps the most obvious signal that the White House sees the amendment as a campaign instrument came in February 2011, when the president declared -- in a bit of prescience with respect to

In his 30-plus years as a doctor, Bruce Tempest had never seen anything like it. A Navajo man having trouble breathing showed up at the emergency room of a small hospital in Gallup, N.M. Less than an hour later, he was dead. The man had been young, athletic and otherwise healthy. His fiancee had died days before, also from sudden breathing problems. "This is something different," Tempest, now 76, remembered thinking of the 1993 illnesses. "It just doesn't fit." Tempest contacted area doctors, looking for other cases. Then he asked

Again we see a classic case of our troops dying in a war that serves no justification other than simply lining the pockets of the elite fraudsters some of whom are connected to very senior MP's and Lords in the UK! You will recall that Gordon Bowden and I have been pulling our hair out for a few years now trying to force some sort of action against the massive fraudster that operate in this country from corporate executives to bank CEO's to very senior MP's and the elite in the House of Lords. Ever asked yourself why the Serious Fraud Officer, Police or even "clean" (if we have any!) Members of Parliament never raise such issues during Prime Minister's Question Time? I keep asking myself why is it that no one speaks out and brings these "Political Crooks" to justice? Why don't the Unions and their members take to the streets and hold a peaceful protest outside the House of Parliament, 10 Downing Street or even at one of the many "Boiler Rooms" in the City of London? Why is everyone so afraid to reveal the very thing that has and continues to ruin the economy of the United Kingdom? We have our Prime Minister telling us all that severe austerity measures have to be implemented in order to pay off this huge toxic debt that has been handed down to us from the previous government under Gordon Brown. It's an absolute joke…. When are you, the British public, going to open your eyes and understand that you will always be screwed and always remain the underdogs as long as our leaders get away with it. We now see a US congressional probe into such fraud and yet two of the companies are British and operate out of one of those "Boiler Rooms" right here in the City of London at 788-790 Finchley Road, NW11 7TJ. How come we the British are not investigating the massive fraud being carried out by those two companies at the above address that were privileged to share in some of the $1.069 billion that has been handed out in US contracts?

This piece originally appeared at TomDispatch. It's a policy fierce enough to cause great suffering among Iranians-and possibly in the long run among Americans, too. It might, in the end, even deeply harm the global economy and yet, history tells us, it will fail on its own. Economic war led by Washington (and encouraged by Israel) will not take down the Iranian government or bring it to the bargaining table on its knees ready to surrender its nuclear program. It might, however, lead to actual armed conflict with incalculable consequences. The United States is already effectively embroiled in an economic war against Iran. The Obama administration has subjected the Islamic Republic to the most crippling economic sanctions applied to any country since Iraq was reduced to fourth-world status in the 1990s. And worse is on the horizon. A financial blockade is being imposed that seeks to prevent Tehran from selling petroleum, its most valuable commodity, as a way of dissuading the regime from pursuing its nuclear enrichment program. Historical memory has never been an American strong point and so few today remember that a global embargo on Iranian petroleum is hardly a new tactic in Western geopolitics; nor do many recall that the last time it was applied with such stringency, in the 1950s, it led to the overthrow of the government with disastrous long-term blowback on the United States. The tactic is just as dangerous today. Iran's supreme theocrat, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has repeatedly condemned the atom bomb and nuclear weapons of all sorts as tools of the devil, weaponry that cannot be used without killing massive numbers of civilian noncombatants. In the most emphatic terms, he has, in fact, pronounced them forbidden according to Islamic law. Based on the latest U.S. intelligence, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta has affirmed that Iran has not made a decision to pursue a nuclear warhead. In contrast, hawks in Israel and the United States insist

This piece originally appeared atTomDispatch. It's a policy fierce enough to cause great suffering among Iranians-and possibly in the long run among Americans, too. It might, in the end, even deeply harm the global economy and yet, history tells us, it will fail on its own. Economic war led by Washington (and encouraged by Israel) will not take down the Iranian government or bring it to the bargaining table on its knees ready to surrender its nuclear program. It might, however, lead to actual armed conflict with incalculable consequences. The United States is already effectively embroiled in an economic war against Iran. The Obama administration has subjected the Islamic Republic to the most crippling economic sanctions applied to any country since Iraq was reduced to fourth-world status in the 1990s. And worse is on the horizon. A financial blockade is being imposed that seeks to prevent Tehran from selling petroleum, its most valuable commodity, as a way of dissuading the regime from pursuing its nuclear enrichment program. Historical memory has never been an American strong point and so few today remember that a global embargo on Iranian petroleum is hardly a new tactic in Western geopolitics; nor do many recall that the last time it was applied with such stringency, in the 1950s, it led to the overthrow of the government with disastrous long-term blowback on the United States. The tactic is just as dangerous today. Iran's supreme theocrat, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has repeatedly condemned the atom bomb and nuclear weapons of all sorts as tools of the devil, weaponry that cannot be used without killing massive numbers of civilian noncombatants. In the most emphatic terms, he has, in fact, pronounced them forbidden according to Islamic law. Based on the latest U.S. intelligence, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta hasaffirmed that Iran has not made a decision to pursue a nuclear warhead. In contrast, hawks in Israel and the United States insist t

This piece originally appeared at TomDispatch. It's a policy fierce enough to cause great suffering among Iranians-and possibly in the long run among Americans, too. It might, in the end, even deeply harm the global economy and yet, history tells us, it will fail on its own. Economic war led by Washington (and encouraged by Israel) will not take down the Iranian government or bring it to the bargaining table on its knees ready to surrender its nuclear program. It might, however, lead to actual armed conflict with incalculable consequences. The United States is already effectively embroiled in an economic war against Iran. The Obama administration has subjected the Islamic Republic to the most crippling economic sanctions applied to any country since Iraq was reduced to fourth-world status in the 1990s. And worse is on the horizon. A financial blockade is being imposed that seeks to prevent Tehran from selling petroleum, its most valuable commodity, as a way of dissuading the regime from pursuing its nuclear enrichment program. Historical memory has never been an American strong point and so few today remember that a global embargo on Iranian petroleum is hardly a new tactic in Western geopolitics; nor do many recall that the last time it was applied with such stringency, in the 1950s, it led to the overthrow of the government with disastrous long-term blowback on the United States. The tactic is just as dangerous today. Iran's supreme theocrat, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has repeatedly condemned the atom bomb and nuclear weapons of all sorts as tools of the devil, weaponry that cannot be used without killing massive numbers of civilian noncombatants. In the most emphatic terms, he has, in fact, pronounced them forbidden according to Islamic law. Based on the latest U.S. intelligence, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta has affirmed that Iran has not made a decision to pursue a nuclear warhead. In contrast, hawks in Israel and the United States insist

By Juan Cole, TomDispatch This piece originally appeared atTomDispatch. It's a policy fierce enough to cause great suffering among Iranians-and possibly in the long run among Americans, too. It might, in the end, even deeply harm the global economy and yet, history tells us, it will fail on its own. Economic war led by Washington (and encouraged by Israel) will not take down the Iranian government or bring it to the bargaining table on its knees ready to surrender its nuclear program. It might, however, lead to actual armed conflict with incalculable consequences. The United States is already effectively embroiled in an economic war against Iran. The Obama administration has subjected the Islamic Republic to the most crippling economic sanctions applied to any country since Iraq was reduced to fourth-world status in the 1990s. And worse is on the horizon. A financial blockade is being imposed that seeks to prevent Tehran from selling petroleum, its most valuable commodity, as a way of dissuading the regime from pursuing its nuclear enrichment program. Historical memory has never been an American strong point and so few today remember that a global embargo on Iranian petroleum is hardly a new tactic in Western geopolitics; nor do many recall that the last time it was applied with such stringency, in the 1950s, it led to the overthrow of the government with disastrous long-term blowback on the United States. The tactic is just as dangerous today. Iran's supreme theocrat, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has repeatedly condemned the atom bomb and nuclear weapons of all sorts as tools of the devil, weaponry that cannot be used without killing massive numbers of civilian noncombatants. In the most emphatic terms, he has, in fact, pronounced them forbidden according to Islamic law. Based on the latest U.S. intelligence, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta hasaffirmed that Iran has not made a decision to pursue a nuclear warhead. In contrast, hawks in Israel and

Related stories One More Thing: Robot fish - pollution's greatest fear One more thing: today's other news One More Thing: Google Play hits 15 billion app downloads Bad app-le - Someone get us a catapult and some disgruntled fowl, we want to fire them at this Latvian firm that was publishing fake editions of Angry Birds and Cut the Rope which allowed it to send hidden premium texts to anyone who downloaded them. Happily, the firm has now been fined £50,000 and ordered to refund all the people caught out by the scam. [BBC] Wooooay, football - Football's still going, apparently. The second test for Hawk-Eye's goal line tech is set to be England v Belgium on June 2, thus providing one more thing to blame when England doesn't win things. [FIFA] What up Barack? - All you've got to do to get a call from the president is launch your own privately-funded space program. Sadly for Elon Musk said "Caller ID was blocked, so at first I thought it was a telemarketer." If it hadn't have been blocked it'd have flashed up "B-DAWG Calling", presumably. [TNW] Dark matters - It seems there was some question mark over whether or not dark matter exists. Apparently it does. As you were. [New Scientist] Get lost - Twitter won't tweet any two-word tweet starting with the word 'get' on account of it once being an SMS service. Not much good if you're in a hostage situation, risking your life to tweet and all you've got time to type is 'Get help'. We'd probably all ignore that anyway though so… no biggie. [Buzzfeed] Where did dogs come from? - The eternal question. No one seems to know. And if you said WOLVES then QI KLAXON. [Ars Technica] Like Mike - Google's shopping spree not only saw it picking up Motorola Mobility but also design studio Mike and Maaike, which worked on the first Android phone (the much-loved G1) as well as the Xbox 360. Controversial. [TNW] Fashion - If you buy this R2D2 hoodie, you're only allowed to communicate in

Scientists at Disney Research in Pennsylvania, Springhill Group and Carnegie Mellon University have developed a new touch-and-gesture recognition technology called Touche, envisioning a future where almost every item could be controlled with a touch sensor. Their project obviously aims to illustrate more applications of touch sensitivity in everyday items like water, tables and door handles using a person's body as the control. Touche could also have limitless applications in the workplace. One example is setting a door handle to various states just by grasping it in a different way. You could also activate touch sensitivity on the doorknob that would lock and unlock depending on the pressure you put on the handle. Another fancy example is the capability of the Touche system to give you control on your living room appliance. You can program the TV to automatically turn on once you sit down on the sofa and turn it off when you fall asleep. Disney's Touche uses Swept Frequency Capacitative Sensing (SFCS) in monitoring and responding data points from a user's Bluetooth wristband. But unlike touch screens that can only recognize whether it is being touched or not, SFCS recognizes the manner in which the object is being touched. A flat palm, two-finger touch or single-finger touch could be programmed with various responses. The system works when an electrical signal passes through the item changes once it touched a conductive material like the human finger. This capacitative sensing is already being used in smartphones, the only difference is that they use only one frequency of electrical signals compared to Touche's array of frequencies. Multiple frequencies enables the system to differentiate among various touch gestures and can determine if it's a full-hand grasp, multiple fingers or a single one. Moreover, it only takes one sensing electrode attached to the item at one end and a PC unit on the other, analyzing the alternating signals to determine

Scientists at Disney Research in Pennsylvania, Springhill Group and Carnegie Mellon University have developed a new touch-and-gesture recognition technology called Touche, envisioning a future where almost every item could be controlled with a touch sensor. Their project obviously aims to illustrate more applications of touch sensitivity in everyday items like water, tables and door handles using a person's body as the control.