Tag Archives: pur

This Bee-Killing Pesticide Is Terrible at Protecting Crops

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

In 2011, agrichemical giants Monsanto and Bayer CropScience joined forces to sell soybean seeds coated with (among other things) an insecticide of the neonicotinoid family. Neonics are so-called systematic pesticides—when the coated seeds sprout and grow, the resulting plants take up the bug-killing chemical, making them poisonous to crop-chomping pests like aphids. Monsanto rivals Syngenta and DuPont also market neonic-treated soybean seeds.

These products—buoyed by claims that the chemical protects soybean crops from early-season insect pests—have enjoyed great success in the marketplace. Soybeans are the second-most-planted US crop, covering about a quarter of US farmland—and at least a third of US soybean acres are grown with neonic-treated seeds. But two problems haunt this highly lucrative market: 1) The neonic soybean seeds might not do much at all to fight off pests, and 2) they appear to be harming bees and may also hurt other pollinators, birds, butterflies, and water-borne invertebrates.

Doubts about neonic-treated soybean seeds’ effectiveness aren’t new. In 2014, the Environmental Protection Agency released a blunt preliminary report finding that “neonicotinoid seed treatments likely provide $0 in benefits” to soybean growers. But the agrichemical industry likes to portray the EPA as an overzealous regulator that relies on questionable data, and it quickly issued a report vigorously disagreeing with the EPA’s assessment.

Now the seed/agrichemical giants will have to open a new front in their battle to convince farmers to continue paying up for neonic-treated soybean seeds. In a recent publication directed to farmers, a coalition of the nation’s most important Midwestern ag-research universities—Iowa State, Kansas State, the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, North Dakota State, Michigan State, the University of Minnesota, the University of Missouri, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, South Dakota State, and the University of Wisconsin—argued plainly that “for typical field situations, independent research demonstrates that neonicotinoid seed treatments for soybeans do not provide a consistent return on investment.”

The reason is that neonic-treated soybeans wield the great bulk of their bug-killing power for the first three weeks after the seeds sprout; the major pest that attacks soybean plants, the aphid, doesn’t arrive until much later, when the soybean plants are full-grown. “In other words,” the report states, aphid populations “increase to threshold levels weeks after the short window that neonicotinoid seed treatments protect plants.”

And not only are neonics useless against soybeans’ major field pest, aphids; they may actually boost the fortunes of another important one, the slug, which is “emerging as a key pest” in the soybean belt, according to the report. Pointing to a 2015 study from Penn State researchers, the report notes that slugs aren’t affected by neonics, so they can gobble neonic-treated soy sprouts at will, accumulating the chemical. But when insects called the ground beetle—which has a taste for slugs but not soybean plants—eat the neonic-containing slugs, they tend to die. So slugs transfer the poison from the crops to their natural predator, the ground beetle, and throw the predator balance out of whack, allowing slugs to proliferate. As a result, the Penn State researchers found, neonic seed treatments actually reduce yields in slug-infested fields.

Of course, the most celebrated “non-target” insect potentially affected by neonics is the honeybee. As I reported last week, the EPA recently released an assessment finding that one particular neonic that’s widely used on soybean seeds, imidacloprid, likely harms individual bees and whole bee colonies at levels commonly found in farm fields. That’s because plants from neonic-treated seeds don’t just carry the poison in their leaves and stalks; they also deliver it in bee-attracting nectar and pollen.

While cotton is the imidacloprid-treated crop most likely to hit bees hard, soybeans, too, may pose a threat, the EPA found. The agency couldn’t say for sure, because data on how much of the pesticide shows up in soybeans’ pollen and nectar are “unavailable,” both from Bayer and from independent researchers.

That information gap may be cold comfort for beekeepers, but the agrichemical industry will no doubt seize upon it to argue that its blockbuster chemical is harmless to bees. The rest of us can savor the bitter irony that this widely used pesticide may be more effective at slaying beneficial pollinators than it is at halting crop-chomping pests.

Visit site: 

This Bee-Killing Pesticide Is Terrible at Protecting Crops

Posted in alo, Anchor, ATTRA, FF, GE, Green Light, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Sprout, Uncategorized, Wiley | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on This Bee-Killing Pesticide Is Terrible at Protecting Crops

Fox Should Ask the GOP Candidates These Questions at Tonight’s Debate

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

On Thursday night, the Republican 2016 wannabes will once again gather for a debate, with the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary just weeks away. Though each of these candidates has been on the debate stage multiple times this campaign—and has occasionally granted interviews to reporters—there are still many questions that they have not had to address. So editors and reporters at Mother Jones have compiled a short list of queries that we’d put to the GOP candidates. Kudos to Fox Business Network if any of these get asked.

Donald Trump

* When you appeared on the talk show of conspiracy theory promoter Alex Jones, you told him that his “reputation is amazing” and added, “I will not let you down.” Jones has championed many conspiratorial notions, including that the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School never happened and that the attacks on the World Trade Center were an inside job. So what’s “amazing” about him?

* Why did you cut a deal with Amar Mammadov—an Azerbajani businessman accused of cronyism and profiting off his family’s ties to the government—to open a new Trump hotel in Baku?

* How many new government employee will be needed to implement your plan to bar Muslims from entering the nation? Given that any would-be terrorist who happens to be Muslim would likely lie about his or her religion to reach the United States, you couldn’t rely on the statements provided by foreigners trying to get into the United States. So then wouldn’t you need an army of federal workers to investigate each person coming into the United States? And how much would this anti-Muslim program cost?

* Can you now explain what the nuclear triad is?

Ted Cruz

* Your father, Rafael Cruz, who is an evangelical pastor, has often resorted to fiery, if not extremist, rhetoric. He has called the United States a “Christian nation,” and he has said that President Barack Obama is an “outright Marxist” who “seeks to destroy all concept of God” and should be sent “back to Kenya.” Most of us would not want to be judged on the basis of what a relative says. But you have extensively used your father as a campaign surrogate and to recruit religious leaders as supporters of your campaign. Would you disavow these comments?

* You have described Trump’s efforts to raise questions about you eligibility to be president—due to your birth in Canada—as a “silly” sideshow. But some of your own supporters, such as Rep. Steve King of Iowa, have questioned whether Obama was born in the United States and whether he is eligible to be president—even though, like you, his mother was indisputably a US citizen. Have King and other conservative birthers engaged in a silly sideshow?

* As a candidate, you have advocated tort reform—that is, imposing a cap of $750,000 on punitive damages that can be awarded in cases of malpractice or corporate malfeasance. Yet when you were a lawyer in private practice, you twice worked on cases to secure $50 million-plus jury awards in tort cases. Why the double standard?

Marco Rubio

* You’ve supported background checks for gun purchases in the past. Now you’re attacking the president for a similar proposal. Why have you flip-flopped?

* In a recent campaign ad, you attacked Obama for spying on Israel. Do you believe the US government should never mount any intelligence-gathering operations regarding Israel and that the United States should not spy on Israel to detect possible Israeli intelligence actions aimed at the US government or American corporations?

Ben Carson

* More than half of every dollar your campaign has raised has gone into the bank accounts of the consultants you’ve hired to raise that money. Why should conservatives continue opening up their checkbooks for a cause that’s mainly enriching political professionals?

* In a 2013 book, you wrote that people who commit health care fraud should suffer “some very stiff penalties…such as loss of one’s medical license for life, no less than ten years in prison, and loss of all of one’s personal possessions.” Yet you are in business with a former dentist who pleaded guilty to health care fraud. How does a candidate who campaigns on honesty and integrity explain this?

* You are a Seventh-day Adventist, and in a talk you gave in 2014 you indicated that you accept the church’s belief that a time will come when Seventh-day Adventists will be imprisoned by the government and even put to death merely for observing the Sabbath on Saturday, not Sunday. Do you truly think the US government will one day round up, jail, and possibly execute Seventh-day Adventists?

* Please name your favorite surgeon general and explain your choice.

Jeb Bush

* Paul Wolfowitz, a deputy secretary of defense in your brother’s administration, was one of the architects of the Iraq War, and prior to the invasion he made a series of predictions about the war that were wildly inaccurate. Why did you sign him up as a foreign policy adviser for your campaign?

Chris Christie

* Your administration in New Jersey has vigorously fought open-records requests for a wide variety of government documents: your schedule, your travel records, and contracts you handed out following Superstorm Sandy. Do you have a problem with transparency?

John Kasich

* You’ve said, “When you die and get to the meeting with Saint Peter, he’s probably not going to ask you much about what you did about keeping government small. But he is going to ask you what you did for the poor. You better have a good answer.” But as governor you have decreased food aid for the poor in Ohio in a manner that disproportionately affects minority communities. What do you think Saint Peter will say to that?

Source article:

Fox Should Ask the GOP Candidates These Questions at Tonight’s Debate

Posted in Anchor, Casio, Citizen, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Fox Should Ask the GOP Candidates These Questions at Tonight’s Debate

The Happy Vegan – Russell Simmons & Chris Morrow

READ GREEN WITH E-BOOKS

The Happy Vegan

A Guide to Living a Long, Healthy, and Successful Life

Russell Simmons & Chris Morrow

Genre: Self-Improvement

Price: $10.99

Publish Date: November 3, 2015

Publisher: Penguin Publishing Group

Seller: Penguin Group (USA) Inc.


Master entrepreneur, original hip-hop mogul, and three-time New York Times bestselling author Russell Simmons offers an inspiring guide to the benefits of conscious eating and veganism In the New York Times bestseller Success Through Stillness , Russell Simmons shared how meditation can be used as a powerful tool to access potential in all aspects of life, having seen himself how achieving inner peace led to outward success. In The Happy Vegan , Simmons shares how once he started practicing yoga and meditation, he became more conscious of his choices, particularly the choices he made regarding his diet. Simmons first adopted a vegetarian and then vegan diet, and almost immediately began to experience the physical, mental, and emotional benefits of eating green and clean. He delves into research about mindful eating, the links between stress and poor eating habits, the importance of listening to your body, the well-documented problems associated with eating animal products and processed foods, along with tips on how to transition to a vegan diet. Drawing on his own experience, the experiences of others, and science and research on the health benefits of conscious eating and veganism, The Happy Vegan is an accessible and inspiring guide to help others make the move toward a vegan diet and a more successful, focused, and purposeful life.

Continue at source – 

The Happy Vegan – Russell Simmons & Chris Morrow

Posted in alo, FF, GE, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on The Happy Vegan – Russell Simmons & Chris Morrow

Here Is the Full Text of Obama’s State of the Union Address

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Read the text of President Obama’s final State of the Union speech:

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Vice President, Members of Congress, my fellow Americans:

Tonight marks the eighth year I’ve come here to report on the State of the Union. And for this final one, I’m going to try to make it shorter. I know some of you are antsy to get back to Iowa.

I also understand that because it’s an election season, expectations for what we’ll achieve this year are low. Still, Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the constructive approach you and the other leaders took at the end of last year to pass a budget and make tax cuts permanent for working families. So I hope we can work together this year on bipartisan priorities like criminal justice reform, and helping people who are battling prescription drug abuse. We just might surprise the cynics again.

But tonight, I want to go easy on the traditional list of proposals for the year ahead. Don’t worry, I’ve got plenty, from helping students learn to write computer code to personalizing medical treatments for patients. And I’ll keep pushing for progress on the work that still needs doing. Fixing a broken immigration system. Protecting our kids from gun violence. Equal pay for equal work, paid leave, raising the minimum wage. All these things still matter to hardworking families; they are still the right thing to do; and I will not let up until they get done.

But for my final address to this chamber, I don’t want to talk just about the next year. I want to focus on the next five years, ten years, and beyond.

I want to focus on our future.

We live in a time of extraordinary change — change that’s reshaping the way we live, the way we work, our planet and our place in the world. It’s change that promises amazing medical breakthroughs, but also economic disruptions that strain working families. It promises education for girls in the most remote villages, but also connects terrorists plotting an ocean away. It’s change that can broaden opportunity, or widen inequality. And whether we like it or not, the pace of this change will only accelerate.

America has been through big changes before — wars and depression, the influx of immigrants, workers fighting for a fair deal, and movements to expand civil rights. Each time, there have been those who told us to fear the future; who claimed we could slam the brakes on change, promising to restore past glory if we just got some group or idea that was threatening America under control. And each time, we overcame those fears. We did not, in the words of Lincoln, adhere to the “dogmas of the quiet past.” Instead we thought anew, and acted anew. We made change work for us, always extending America’s promise outward, to the next frontier, to more and more people. And because we did — because we saw opportunity where others saw only peril — we emerged stronger and better than before.

What was true then can be true now. Our unique strengths as a nation — our optimism and work ethic, our spirit of discovery and innovation, our diversity and commitment to the rule of law — these things give us everything we need to ensure prosperity and security for generations to come.
In fact, it’s that spirit that made the progress of these past seven years possible. It’s how we recovered from the worst economic crisis in generations. It’s how we reformed our health care system, and reinvented our energy sector; how we delivered more care and benefits to our troops and veterans, and how we secured the freedom in every state to marry the person we love.

But such progress is not inevitable. It is the result of choices we make together. And we face such choices right now. Will we respond to the changes of our time with fear, turning inward as a nation, and turning against each other as a people? Or will we face the future with confidence in who we are, what we stand for, and the incredible things we can do together?

So let’s talk about the future, and four big questions that we as a country have to answer — regardless of who the next President is, or who controls the next Congress.

First, how do we give everyone a fair shot at opportunity and security in this new economy?

Second, how do we make technology work for us, and not against us — especially when it comes to solving urgent challenges like climate change?

Third, how do we keep America safe and lead the world without becoming its policeman?

And finally, how can we make our politics reflect what’s best in us, and not what’s worst?

Let me start with the economy, and a basic fact: the United States of America, right now, has the strongest, most durable economy in the world.

We’re in the middle of the longest streak of private-sector job creation in history. More than 14 million new jobs; the strongest two years of job growth since the ’90s; an unemployment rate cut in half. Our auto industry just had its best year ever. Manufacturing has created nearly 900,000 new jobs in the past six years. And we’ve done all this while cutting our deficits by almost three-quarters.

Anyone claiming that America’s economy is in decline is peddling fiction. What is true — and the reason that a lot of Americans feel anxious — is that the economy has been changing in profound ways, changes that started long before the Great Recession hit and haven’t let up. Today, technology doesn’t just replace jobs on the assembly line, but any job where work can be automated. Companies in a global economy can locate anywhere, and face tougher competition. As a result, workers have less leverage for a raise. Companies have less loyalty to their communities. And more and more wealth and income is concentrated at the very top.

All these trends have squeezed workers, even when they have jobs; even when the economy is growing. It’s made it harder for a hardworking family to pull itself out of poverty, harder for young people to start on their careers, and tougher for workers to retire when they want to. And although none of these trends are unique to America, they do offend our uniquely American belief that everybody who works hard should get a fair shot.

For the past seven years, our goal has been a growing economy that works better for everybody. We’ve made progress. But we need to make more. And despite all the political arguments we’ve had these past few years, there are some areas where Americans broadly agree.

We agree that real opportunity requires every American to get the education and training they need to land a good-paying job. The bipartisan reform of No Child Left Behind was an important start, and together, we’ve increased early childhood education, lifted high school graduation rates to new highs, and boosted graduates in fields like engineering. In the coming years, we should build on that progress, by providing Pre-K for all, offering every student the hands-on computer science and math classes that make them job-ready on day one, and we should recruit and support more great teachers for our kids.

And we have to make college affordable for every American. Because no hardworking student should be stuck in the red. We’ve already reduced student loan payments to ten percent of a borrower’s income. Now, we’ve actually got to cut the cost of college. Providing two years of community college at no cost for every responsible student is one of the best ways to do that, and I’m going to keep fighting to get that started this year.

Of course, a great education isn’t all we need in this new economy. We also need benefits and protections that provide a basic measure of security. After all, it’s not much of a stretch to say that some of the only people in America who are going to work the same job, in the same place, with a health and retirement package, for 30 years, are sitting in this chamber. For everyone else, especially folks in their forties and fifties, saving for retirement or bouncing back from job loss has gotten a lot tougher. Americans understand that at some point in their careers, they may have to retool and retrain. But they shouldn’t lose what they’ve already worked so hard to build.

That’s why Social Security and Medicare are more important than ever; we shouldn’t weaken them, we should strengthen them. And for Americans short of retirement, basic benefits should be just as mobile as everything else is today. That’s what the Affordable Care Act is all about. It’s about filling the gaps in employer-based care so that when we lose a job, or go back to school, or start that new business, we’ll still have coverage. Nearly eighteen million have gained coverage so far. Health care inflation has slowed. And our businesses have created jobs every single month since it became law.

Now, I’m guessing we won’t agree on health care anytime soon. But there should be other ways both parties can improve economic security. Say a hardworking American loses his job — we shouldn’t just make sure he can get unemployment insurance; we should make sure that program encourages him to retrain for a business that’s ready to hire him. If that new job doesn’t pay as much, there should be a system of wage insurance in place so that he can still pay his bills. And even if he’s going from job to job, he should still be able to save for retirement and take his savings with him. That’s the way we make the new economy work better for everyone.

I also know Speaker Ryan has talked about his interest in tackling poverty. America is about giving everybody willing to work a hand up, and I’d welcome a serious discussion about strategies we can all support, like expanding tax cuts for low-income workers without kids.

But there are other areas where it’s been more difficult to find agreement over the last seven years — namely what role the government should play in making sure the system’s not rigged in favor of the wealthiest and biggest corporations. And here, the American people have a choice to make.
I believe a thriving private sector is the lifeblood of our economy. I think there are outdated regulations that need to be changed, and there’s red tape that needs to be cut. But after years of record corporate profits, working families won’t get more opportunity or bigger paychecks by letting big banks or big oil or hedge funds make their own rules at the expense of everyone else; or by allowing attacks on collective bargaining to go unanswered. Food Stamp recipients didn’t cause the financial crisis; recklessness on Wall Street did. Immigrants aren’t the reason wages haven’t gone up enough; those decisions are made in the boardrooms that too often put quarterly earnings over long-term returns. It’s sure not the average family watching tonight that avoids paying taxes through offshore accounts. In this new economy, workers and start-ups and small businesses need more of a voice, not less. The rules should work for them. And this year I plan to lift up the many businesses who’ve figured out that doing right by their workers ends up being good for their shareholders, their customers, and their communities, so that we can spread those best practices across America.

In fact, many of our best corporate citizens are also our most creative. This brings me to the second big question we have to answer as a country: how do we reignite that spirit of innovation to meet our biggest challenges?

Sixty years ago, when the Russians beat us into space, we didn’t deny Sputnik was up there. We didn’t argue about the science, or shrink our research and development budget. We built a space program almost overnight, and twelve years later, we were walking on the moon.

That spirit of discovery is in our DNA. We’re Thomas Edison and the Wright Brothers and George Washington Carver. We’re Grace Hopper and Katherine Johnson and Sally Ride. We’re every immigrant and entrepreneur from Boston to Austin to Silicon Valley racing to shape a better world.

And over the past seven years, we’ve nurtured that spirit.

We’ve protected an open internet, and taken bold new steps to get more students and low-income Americans online. We’ve launched next-generation manufacturing hubs, and online tools that give an entrepreneur everything he or she needs to start a business in a single day.

But we can do so much more. Last year, Vice President Biden said that with a new moonshot, America can cure cancer. Last month, he worked with this Congress to give scientists at the National Institutes of Health the strongest resources they’ve had in over a decade. Tonight, I’m announcing a new national effort to get it done. And because he’s gone to the mat for all of us, on so many issues over the past forty years, I’m putting Joe in charge of Mission Control. For the loved ones we’ve all lost, for the family we can still save, let’s make America the country that cures cancer once and for all. Medical research is critical. We need the same level of commitment when it comes to developing clean energy sources.

Look, if anybody still wants to dispute the science around climate change, have at it. You’ll be pretty lonely, because you’ll be debating our military, most of America’s business leaders, the majority of the American people, almost the entire scientific community, and 200 nations around the world who agree it’s a problem and intend to solve it.

But even if the planet wasn’t at stake; even if 2014 wasn’t the warmest year on record — until 2015 turned out even hotter — why would we want to pass up the chance for American businesses to produce and sell the energy of the future?

Seven years ago, we made the single biggest investment in clean energy in our history. Here are the results. In fields from Iowa to Texas, wind power is now cheaper than dirtier, conventional power. On rooftops from Arizona to New York, solar is saving Americans tens of millions of dollars a year on their energy bills, and employs more Americans than coal — in jobs that pay better than average. We’re taking steps to give homeowners the freedom to generate and store their own energy — something environmentalists and Tea Partiers have teamed up to support. Meanwhile, we’ve cut our imports of foreign oil by nearly sixty percent, and cut carbon pollution more than any other country on Earth.

Gas under two bucks a gallon ain’t bad, either.

Now we’ve got to accelerate the transition away from dirty energy. Rather than subsidize the past, we should invest in the future — especially in communities that rely on fossil fuels. That’s why I’m going to push to change the way we manage our oil and coal resources, so that they better reflect the costs they impose on taxpayers and our planet. That way, we put money back into those communities and put tens of thousands of Americans to work building a 21st century transportation system.

None of this will happen overnight, and yes, there are plenty of entrenched interests who want to protect the status quo. But the jobs we’ll create, the money we’ll save, and the planet we’ll preserve — that’s the kind of future our kids and grandkids deserve.

Climate change is just one of many issues where our security is linked to the rest of the world. And that’s why the third big question we have to answer is how to keep America safe and strong without either isolating ourselves or trying to nation-build everywhere there’s a problem.

I told you earlier all the talk of America’s economic decline is political hot air. Well, so is all the rhetoric you hear about our enemies getting stronger and America getting weaker. The United States of America is the most powerful nation on Earth. Period. It’s not even close. We spend more on our military than the next eight nations combined. Our troops are the finest fighting force in the history of the world. No nation dares to attack us or our allies because they know that’s the path to ruin. Surveys show our standing around the world is higher than when I was elected to this office, and when it comes to every important international issue, people of the world do not look to Beijing or Moscow to lead — they call us.

As someone who begins every day with an intelligence briefing, I know this is a dangerous time. But that’s not because of diminished American strength or some looming superpower. In today’s world, we’re threatened less by evil empires and more by failing states. The Middle East is going through a transformation that will play out for a generation, rooted in conflicts that date back millennia. Economic headwinds blow from a Chinese economy in transition. Even as their economy contracts, Russia is pouring resources to prop up Ukraine and Syria — states they see slipping away from their orbit. And the international system we built after World War II is now struggling to keep pace with this new reality.
It’s up to us to help remake that system. And that means we have to set priorities.

Priority number one is protecting the American people and going after terrorist networks. Both al Qaeda and now ISIL pose a direct threat to our people, because in today’s world, even a handful of terrorists who place no value on human life, including their own, can do a lot of damage. They use the Internet to poison the minds of individuals inside our country; they undermine our allies.

But as we focus on destroying ISIL, over-the-top claims that this is World War III just play into their hands. Masses of fighters on the back of pickup trucks and twisted souls plotting in apartments or garages pose an enormous danger to civilians and must be stopped. But they do not threaten our national existence. That’s the story ISIL wants to tell; that’s the kind of propaganda they use to recruit. We don’t need to build them up to show that we’re serious, nor do we need to push away vital allies in this fight by echoing the lie that ISIL is representative of one of the world’s largest religions. We just need to call them what they are — killers and fanatics who have to be rooted out, hunted down, and destroyed.

That’s exactly what we are doing. For more than a year, America has led a coalition of more than 60 countries to cut off ISIL’s financing, disrupt their plots, stop the flow of terrorist fighters, and stamp out their vicious ideology. With nearly 10,000 air strikes, we are taking out their leadership, their oil, their training camps, and their weapons. We are training, arming, and supporting forces who are steadily reclaiming territory in Iraq and Syria.

If this Congress is serious about winning this war, and wants to send a message to our troops and the world, you should finally authorize the use of military force against ISIL. Take a vote. But the American people should know that with or without Congressional action, ISIL will learn the same lessons as terrorists before them. If you doubt America’s commitment — or mine — to see that justice is done, ask Osama bin Laden. Ask the leader of al Qaeda in Yemen, who was taken out last year, or the perpetrator of the Benghazi attacks, who sits in a prison cell. When you come after Americans, we go after you. It may take time, but we have long memories, and our reach has no limit.

Our foreign policy must be focused on the threat from ISIL and al Qaeda, but it can’t stop there. For even without ISIL, instability will continue for decades in many parts of the world — in the Middle East, in Afghanistan and Pakistan, in parts of Central America, Africa and Asia. Some of these places may become safe havens for new terrorist networks; others will fall victim to ethnic conflict, or famine, feeding the next wave of refugees. The world will look to us to help solve these problems, and our answer needs to be more than tough talk or calls to carpet bomb civilians. That may work as a TV sound bite, but it doesn’t pass muster on the world stage.

We also can’t try to take over and rebuild every country that falls into crisis. That’s not leadership; that’s a recipe for quagmire, spilling American blood and treasure that ultimately weakens us. It’s the lesson of Vietnam, of Iraq — and we should have learned it by now.
Fortunately, there’s a smarter approach, a patient and disciplined strategy that uses every element of our national power. It says America will always act, alone if necessary, to protect our people and our allies; but on issues of global concern, we will mobilize the world to work with us, and make sure other countries pull their own weight.

That’s our approach to conflicts like Syria, where we’re partnering with local forces and leading international efforts to help that broken society pursue a lasting peace.

That’s why we built a global coalition, with sanctions and principled diplomacy, to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran. As we speak, Iran has rolled back its nuclear program, shipped out its uranium stockpile, and the world has avoided another war.

That’s how we stopped the spread of Ebola in West Africa. Our military, our doctors, and our development workers set up the platform that allowed other countries to join us in stamping out that epidemic.

That’s how we forged a Trans-Pacific Partnership to open markets, protect workers and the environment, and advance American leadership in Asia.

It cuts 18,000 taxes on products Made in America, and supports more good jobs. With TPP, China doesn’t set the rules in that region, we do. You want to show our strength in this century? Approve this agreement. Give us the tools to enforce it.

Fifty years of isolating Cuba had failed to promote democracy, setting us back in Latin America. That’s why we restored diplomatic relations, opened the door to travel and commerce, and positioned ourselves to improve the lives of the Cuban people. You want to consolidate our leadership and credibility in the hemisphere? Recognize that the Cold War is over. Lift the embargo.

American leadership in the 21st century is not a choice between ignoring the rest of the world — except when we kill terrorists; or occupying and rebuilding whatever society is unraveling. Leadership means a wise application of military power, and rallying the world behind causes that are right.

It means seeing our foreign assistance as part of our national security, not charity. When we lead nearly 200 nations to the most ambitious agreement in history to fight climate change — that helps vulnerable countries, but it also protects our children. When we help Ukraine defend its democracy, or Colombia resolve a decades-long war, that strengthens the international order we depend upon. When we help African countries feed their people and care for the sick, that prevents the next pandemic from reaching our shores. Right now, we are on track to end the scourge of HIV/AIDS, and we have the capacity to accomplish the same thing with malaria — something I’ll be pushing this Congress to fund this year.

That’s strength. That’s leadership. And that kind of leadership depends on the power of our example. That is why I will keep working to shut down the prison at Guantanamo: it’s expensive, it’s unnecessary, and it only serves as a recruitment brochure for our enemies.

That’s why we need to reject any politics that targets people because of race or religion. This isn’t a matter of political correctness. It’s a matter of understanding what makes us strong. The world respects us not just for our arsenal; it respects us for our diversity and our openness and the way we respect every faith. His Holiness, Pope Francis, told this body from the very spot I stand tonight that “to imitate the hatred and violence of tyrants and murderers is the best way to take their place.” When politicians insult Muslims, when a mosque is vandalized, or a kid bullied, that doesn’t make us safer. That’s not telling it like it is. It’s just wrong. It diminishes us in the eyes of the world. It makes it harder to achieve our goals. And it betrays who we are as a country.

“We the People.”

Our Constitution begins with those three simple words, words we’ve come to recognize mean all the people, not just some; words that insist we rise and fall together. That brings me to the fourth, and maybe the most important thing I want to say tonight.

The future we want — opportunity and security for our families; a rising standard of living and a sustainable, peaceful planet for our kids — all that is within our reach. But it will only happen if we work together. It will only happen if we can have rational, constructive debates.

It will only happen if we fix our politics.

A better politics doesn’t mean we have to agree on everything. This is a big country, with different regions and attitudes and interests. That’s one of our strengths, too. Our Founders distributed power between states and branches of government, and expected us to argue, just as they did, over the size and shape of government, over commerce and foreign relations, over the meaning of liberty and the imperatives of security.

But democracy does require basic bonds of trust between its citizens. It doesn’t work if we think the people who disagree with us are all motivated by malice, or that our political opponents are unpatriotic. Democracy grinds to a halt without a willingness to compromise; or when even basic facts are contested, and we listen only to those who agree with us. Our public life withers when only the most extreme voices get attention. Most of all, democracy breaks down when the average person feels their voice doesn’t matter; that the system is rigged in favor of the rich or the powerful or some narrow interest.

Too many Americans feel that way right now. It’s one of the few regrets of my presidency — that the rancor and suspicion between the parties has gotten worse instead of better. There’s no doubt a president with the gifts of Lincoln or Roosevelt might have better bridged the divide, and I guarantee I’ll keep trying to be better so long as I hold this office.

But, my fellow Americans, this cannot be my task — or any President’s — alone. There are a whole lot of folks in this chamber who would like to see more cooperation, a more elevated debate in Washington, but feel trapped by the demands of getting elected. I know; you’ve told me. And if we want a better politics, it’s not enough to just change a Congressman or a Senator or even a President; we have to change the system to reflect our better selves.

We have to end the practice of drawing our congressional districts so that politicians can pick their voters, and not the other way around. We have to reduce the influence of money in our politics, so that a handful of families and hidden interests can’t bankroll our elections — and if our existing approach to campaign finance can’t pass muster in the courts, we need to work together to find a real solution. We’ve got to make voting easier, not harder, and modernize it for the way we live now. And over the course of this year, I intend to travel the country to push for reforms that do.

But I can’t do these things on my own. Changes in our political process — in not just who gets elected but how they get elected — that will only happen when the American people demand it. It will depend on you. That’s what’s meant by a government of, by, and for the people.

What I’m asking for is hard. It’s easier to be cynical; to accept that change isn’t possible, and politics is hopeless, and to believe that our voices and actions don’t matter. But if we give up now, then we forsake a better future. Those with money and power will gain greater control over the decisions that could send a young soldier to war, or allow another economic disaster, or roll back the equal rights and voting rights that generations of Americans have fought, even died, to secure. As frustration grows, there will be voices urging us to fall back into tribes, to scapegoat fellow citizens who don’t look like us, or pray like us, or vote like we do, or share the same background.

We can’t afford to go down that path. It won’t deliver the economy we want, or the security we want, but most of all, it contradicts everything that makes us the envy of the world.

So, my fellow Americans, whatever you may believe, whether you prefer one party or no party, our collective future depends on your willingness to uphold your obligations as a citizen. To vote. To speak out. To stand up for others, especially the weak, especially the vulnerable, knowing that each of us is only here because somebody, somewhere, stood up for us. To stay active in our public life so it reflects the goodness and decency and optimism that I see in the American people every single day.

It won’t be easy. Our brand of democracy is hard. But I can promise that a year from now, when I no longer hold this office, I’ll be right there with you as a citizen — inspired by those voices of fairness and vision, of grit and good humor and kindness that have helped America travel so far. Voices that help us see ourselves not first and foremost as black or white or Asian or Latino, not as gay or straight, immigrant or native born; not as Democrats or Republicans, but as Americans first, bound by a common creed. Voices Dr. King believed would have the final word — voices of unarmed truth and unconditional love.

They’re out there, those voices. They don’t get a lot of attention, nor do they seek it, but they are busy doing the work this country needs doing.
I see them everywhere I travel in this incredible country of ours. I see you. I know you’re there. You’re the reason why I have such incredible confidence in our future. Because I see your quiet, sturdy citizenship all the time.

I see it in the worker on the assembly line who clocked extra shifts to keep his company open, and the boss who pays him higher wages to keep him on board.

I see it in the Dreamer who stays up late to finish her science project, and the teacher who comes in early because he knows she might someday cure a disease.

I see it in the American who served his time, and dreams of starting over — and the business owner who gives him that second chance. The protester determined to prove that justice matters, and the young cop walking the beat, treating everybody with respect, doing the brave, quiet work of keeping us safe.

I see it in the soldier who gives almost everything to save his brothers, the nurse who tends to him ’til he can run a marathon, and the community that lines up to cheer him on.

It’s the son who finds the courage to come out as who he is, and the father whose love for that son overrides everything he’s been taught.

I see it in the elderly woman who will wait in line to cast her vote as long as she has to; the new citizen who casts his for the first time; the volunteers at the polls who believe every vote should count, because each of them in different ways know how much that precious right is worth.
That’s the America I know. That’s the country we love. Clear-eyed. Big-hearted. Optimistic that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word. That’s what makes me so hopeful about our future. Because of you. I believe in you. That’s why I stand here confident that the State of our Union is strong.

Thank you, God bless you, and God bless the United States of America.

View original article:  

Here Is the Full Text of Obama’s State of the Union Address

Posted in alo, Citizen, Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, ONA, PUR, Safer, solar, Ultima, Uncategorized, wind power | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Here Is the Full Text of Obama’s State of the Union Address

How a Loophole in US Law Helps Drug Cartels Sneak Guns Into Mexico

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The same routes that Mexico’s drug cartels use to smuggle drugs into the United States are also used to run American guns into Mexico, according to a new report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO).

The report, commissioned by Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.) and published yesterday, reveals that 70 percent—more than 73,000—of the guns recovered from crime scenes in Mexico and traced by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) from 2009 to 2014 originated in the United States. These weapons have fueled the ongoing war among the drug cartels and between the cartels and Mexican security forces, contributing to the more than 100,000 killings in the country since 2007.

The cartels’ weapons of choice are high-caliber rifles, including AR-15 and AK-47-type semiautomatic rifles, which can be easily converted into fully automatic machine guns. The cartel’s gunrunners often buy firearms legally in the United States, either at gun shops, gun shows, or in private sales. The firearms are then illegally shipped across the border.

But increasingly, the cartels are shipping weapons parts into Mexico to be assembled into finished firearms. It’s a discreet process that is especially difficult to detect. Firearm manufacturers or importers in the United States are not required to stamp serial numbers on gun parts. Retailers do not have to report when they buy and sell parts kits with everything needed to complete a gun except a receiver. Receivers, which house the mechanical components of a firearm, like trigger groups and magazine feeds, can be purchased separately. To avoid detection, gunrunners will often use unfinished, or “80-percent” receivers—receivers that are mostly complete but require some further machining to be functional.

As I previously reported when I attended a gun building party in California, unfinished receivers are not classified as firearms. They don’t require serial numbers and generally have no markings, which makes firearms assembled with them untraceable. “They are also easy to conceal,” the GAO report noes, “making it more challenging for customs authorities to detect illicit shipments of such parts.” As Rep. Engel noted in a statement, the ATF has discretion over how it defines a receiver. Yet, as Engel puts it, “far too often, unfinished gun receivers are minimally modified to avoid regulation.”

The ATF has long been hindered by a lack of funds and agents, a problem that President Obama addressed in the executive action he announced last week that includes adding 200 new ATF agents and investigators. Engel said Congress could do more to “stop the illegal flow of guns across the U.S.-Mexico border” but accused his Republican colleagues of being “much more concerned with loosening already lax gun regulations than protecting citizens in both of our countries from gun violence.”

The GAO report also notes that collaboration between American and Mexican authorities is fraught. In 2012, joint US-Mexico efforts to stem firearms trafficking were scaled down when Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto sharply limited law enforcement collaboration. In the past year, US officials reported to the GAO that collaboration is gaining momentum, but concerns over corruption among Mexican officials is still a problem. The report notes that Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials in the United States “are concerned about sharing information with ICE officials based in Mexico, fearing that the information may unintentionally reach corrupt Mexican authorities and compromise their investigations.”

Originally posted here: 

How a Loophole in US Law Helps Drug Cartels Sneak Guns Into Mexico

Posted in Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on How a Loophole in US Law Helps Drug Cartels Sneak Guns Into Mexico

If Money Is Speech, the First Amendment Is a Billionaire’s Dream

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The argument for a union shop is pretty straightforward: even if you hate your union, they perform collective bargaining for everyone, including you. Since you benefit from that bargaining, you should be required to pay union dues. After all, if dues are optional, why would anyone pay? Why not just let all the other suckers pay while you reap the benefits free of charge?

There’s another version of this argument that’s even more straightforward: if union shops are illegal—as they are in so-called “right to work” states—it’s all but impossible to set up a union. This is why the Chamber of Commerce and pretty much all Republicans are great fans of the open shop. It basically destroys the ability of unions to operate.

But what about public employee unions? What if you object to your union’s political views and don’t want to sponsor them? The answer, in many states, is that you can partially opt out of union dues, paying only an “agency fee” specifically designated for collective bargaining activities.

Problem solved? Not quite. What if you think that even collective bargaining is inherently a political stance when you’re bargaining with the government? Should you be allowed to opt out of union dues entirely? Today the Supreme Court heard arguments on this, and it didn’t go well for union supporters:

The justices appeared divided along familiar lines during an extended argument over whether government workers who choose not to join unions may nonetheless be required to help pay for collective bargaining. The court’s conservative majority appeared ready to say that such compelled financial support violates the First Amendment.

Collective bargaining, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy said, is inherently political when the government is the employer, and issues like merit pay, promotions and classroom size are subject to negotiation.

The best hope for a victory for the unions had rested with Justice Antonin Scalia, who has written and said things sympathetic to their position. But he was consistently hostileon Monday. “The problem is that everything that is bargained for with the government is within the political sphere,” he said.

In one sense, there’s nothing new to say about this. The liberal-conservative split on the Supreme Court has hardened over the past couple of decades, and we simply don’t see very much principled opposition to party lines anymore. Conservatives hate unions, so conservative Supreme Court justices are going to rule against unions whenever and wherever possible. They’ll make up the reasons afterward.

But there’s another sense in which this is interesting: it’s yet another step in the evolution of the conservative Supreme Court’s insistence that money is speech. In Citizens United and subsequent cases, they’ve all but wiped out any possible regulation of campaign finance on the grounds that campaign donations fund campaign speech. So if you can’t regulate political speech, you can’t regulate political money either.

Now they seem set to do the same for unions. If collective bargaining is inherently political speech, then you can’t force people to fund it. That’s a prima facie violation of the First Amendment.

I wonder how far this can go? After all, you can make a case that spending money is nearly always implicit speech: my purchase of a Snickers bar is a public declaration that Snickers bars are delicious, and my company’s dodgy advertising claims are a declaration of deeply held corporate emotions. So much for regulation of sugary snacks or false advertising.

Money is speech. Speech can’t be regulated. Therefore, money can’t be regulated. It’s a pretty simple syllogism. And, possibly, a pretty handy one.

Read More:  

If Money Is Speech, the First Amendment Is a Billionaire’s Dream

Posted in alo, Citizen, Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on If Money Is Speech, the First Amendment Is a Billionaire’s Dream

4 Tips for Green Cleaning Your Wallpaper

Green cleaning has been a hot topic in the design world for quite some time. From nontoxic cleaning supplies to less-abrasive chemical alternatives, eco-friendly and safe products are now more important than ever to homeowners. Whether you have little ones, pets or just want to create a healthy environment for yourself, green cleaning is an effective alternative to everyday soaps and suds.

Weve come up with a few simple ways to green clean your wallpaper without using harmful chemicals or ruining the wall covering.

Dust It Off

Its no surprise that wall coverings gather dust, just like the rest of your home. Because your eye is trained to see only your beautiful wall covering, you probably arent looking close enough to notice the dust bunnies attacking your wallpaper.

A quick, green way to instantly refresh your wallpaper is by dusting or lightly vacuuming it. While it may seem odd to vacuum the wall, it easily and effectively gets rid of surface debris and dust that have collected overtime, and there are no chemicals involved.

If you have flat, non-textural wall coverings, use a microfiber cloth and start at the top of the panel, then gently work your way down, trapping dust as you go. For more intricate wall coverings, use a vacuum with a soft-bristled brush attachment and gently sweep downwards. Be careful of cobwebs along the way!

Dough-It-All

Back when wallpaper was uncovered and made from, well, actual paper, wallpaper dough was used to clean dust mites and pesky stains. If you have a particularly fragile or intricate wall covering, consider using wallpaper dough to help maintain its beauty.

Take a ball of dough out of the container, roll it between your hands, and roll the ball downwards to pick up dirt. If you cant find store-bought wallpaper dough, its a simple DIY recipe to make at home: some salt, a pinch of corn starch, a sprinkle of baking soda, and a dot of natural dishwasher detergent. When the outside of the dough ball gets dirty, simply knead the dirty part towards the center to expose a clean, fresh surface.

Spectacular Spot Cleaning

For tougher stains that are splashed on your wall covering, you may have to toughen your cleaning regimen. Vinyl wallpaper (found most often in kitchens and bathrooms) is made to withstand stains and the scrubbing that ensues, but always start by using a dry, soft cellulose sponge to wipe in small circles. Most of the time, dry scrubbing works for surface stains. However, if a sticky smudge has been on your wall covering for a while, we suggest combining warm water with a dollop of mild, natural cleanser to gently apply to the stain. Use your soft sponge to wipe in small, circular strokes, and continue until the spot comes off. Let dry and repeat if its a particularly stubborn stain.

Avoid Harsh Cleansers

While you may be ready to reach for some pretty abrasive cleaning supplies to rid yourself of wallpaper smudges and stains, think twice. Modern wallpaper is strong and durable, but still susceptible to scratches and smears. Read the manufacturer label before you fight fire with fire, and always start gently with mild cleaners and sponges. Never use scouring powders or scrubbing cleansers to attack wall covering stainsyou may end up rubbing the wallpaper right off!

To ensure youre cleaning with green products, always check the label. Ask your local home goods salesperson for their favorite eco-friendly products, and which would work best with your particular type of wallpaper. Be sure to arm yourself with sponges, microfiber cloths and plenty of patience before you start green cleaning your wall coverings!

California interior designerKerrie Kellyhas a keen “green home” awareness which she incorporates with her clients whenever possible.Kerrie’s wallpaper cleaning tips are designed to keep your home’s wall in great shape. To review Home Depot’swallpaper selection, including styles Kerrie writes about, you can visitwww.homedepot.com.

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

Continue reading: 

4 Tips for Green Cleaning Your Wallpaper

Posted in alo, Bunn, eco-friendly, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on 4 Tips for Green Cleaning Your Wallpaper

5 Eco Escapes to Warm Weather This Winter

If you’re dreading the next three or four months of cold winter weather, perhaps it’s time to consider cashing in your miles or shopping the air fare sales so you can head to warmer climes at least for a week or two. Here are five of my favorite destinations, all of which have allowed me to lower my carbon footprint by camping when I get there or staying in a low-impact eco-lodge, anddoing some volunteer work.

1) Cinnamon Bay Campground, St. John, U.S. Virgin Islands – Our family started going here when my children were literally toddlers (including one in diapers), and we returned several years in a row, usually in February, when the kids had a nice long break from school.St. John is considered a temperate rain forest; it also has the mountainous terrain that once-active volcanoes left behind, in addition to gorgeous beaches and fantastic snorkeling and scuba diving. Plus, much of the island is a national park, and the U.S. Park Service offers all kinds of activities for young and old alike. We always take their mountain-to-beach hike, which walks us past petroglyphs and around the three-dimensional webs that golden orb weaver spiders weave. Bring your own tent for “bare site” camping, or rent one of theirs, which includes clean sheets, picnic tables, and a barbecue. You can also rent a “cottage,” which is really two cement walls and two screened and curtained walls, but also some electricity. All showers and bathrooms are communal, but that never bothered any of us. Lower your carbon footprint by flying direct to St. Thomas, and then taking a ferry to St. John.

2) Whale Watching and Sea Kayaking, Baja California – February and March are the perfect times to go whale watching around Mexico’s Baja peninsula. This finger of land separates the Sea of Cortez from the Pacific Ocean; its sandy cliffs strike a gorgeous contrast to the deep blue ocean below and the robin’s egg blue sky above. You’ll kayak around Espiritu Santo Island, then head to Magdalena Bay and the safety of motorized skiffs, which will put you right in the middle of pods of 40-foot long migrating gray whales. Camp on the dunes above the beach, stargaze at night, and enjoy whales breaching in the bay while you eat breakfast in the morning.

3) Birding, Biking and Shelling on Sanibel Island, FL – If you’ve never been to Sanibel, you’re in for a treat. Located in Florida’s Gulf Coast, about an hour’s drive from Tampa/Fort Myers, this is the beach that’s famous for the billions of pale pink shells that cover its shores. It’s paradise for nature lovers, too, especially birders. The J.N. “Ding” Darling National Wildlife Refuge hosts abundant bird life; if you go December through March, you’ll see the most birds, though I was there Memorial Day week one year and wasn’t disappointed. There are several hiking and biking trails where you might spot alligators and birds like the white ibis. There are also two designated kayak/canoe launch sites, and places to fish for snook and spotted sea trout. Enjoy a sunset sail out of Captiva, Sanibel’s “sister” city. There are plenty of camp grounds on Sanibel and in the Fort Myers area as well.

4) Camping, Rock Climbing and Hiking in Joshua Tree National Park, California – If you’ve never been to Joshua Tree, you’re in for a real treat. This national park, located in southern California, encompasses two deserts: the higher Mojave, and the lower Colorado. The Little San Bernardino Mountains hug the park’s southwest edge, giving you many different ecosystems to choose from. The park takes its name from the unusual looking Joshua trees you’ll find there, but there are plenty of juniper, pinon pine, and various kinds of desert oaks, as well. The rock outcroppings, formed more than 100 million years ago as magma cooled beneath the surface, give the place an otherworldly feel. Camp in any one of the nine campgrounds on park grounds, though be aware that only three offer water and flush toilets. NOTE: Temperatures during the winter range in the 60s, but it does get down to freezing at night, so if you decide to camp, bring cold weather gear. Hiking ranges from natural trails to back country roads that are more rugged and challenging. There are thousands of rock climbing routes, too.

5) Canoeing and Kayaking on the Rio Grande – The Rio Grande sounds magical, and it can be. It follows the southern boundary of Big Bend National Park in west Texas for 118 miles. If you go the distance, you’ll see three major canyons: Santa Elena, Mariscal, and Boquillas. Take a half-day float trip, or extend your visit to seven days. Bring your own canoe, kayak, or raft, or sign on to a guide service. There are plenty of local outfitters that will provide guides, rent you equipment and give you up-to-date information on the river. You’ll have to bring your own water as well as food – and a passport if you plan to get out of your boat and step onto the Mexican side of the waters. If you have the time, spend a few days hiking and camping in the park’s back country, where you’ll find primitive campsites, some of which you can drive into on dirt roads that are best traversed with a four-wheel drive vehicle.

Do you have a favorite winter get-away? Please share!

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

Original article:  

5 Eco Escapes to Warm Weather This Winter

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Paradise, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on 5 Eco Escapes to Warm Weather This Winter

Slim for Life – Jillian Michaels

READ GREEN WITH E-BOOKS

Slim for Life

My Insider Secrets to Simple, Fast, and Lasting Weight Loss

Jillian Michaels

Genre: Health & Fitness

Price: $1.99

Publish Date: February 12, 2013

Publisher: Potter/TenSpeed/Harmony

Seller: Random House, LLC


Stop battling your weight and slim down for life with this no-nonsense, insider’s plan from America’s health, wellness, and weight-loss guru: Jillian Michaels. She has helped millions lose weight and feel great, and now she can help you, too.   Bestselling author and Biggest Loser trainer Jillian Michaels swore she’d never write another diet book. But she realized that with all of the conflicting, overly complicated information being thrown at you each day, what you need is a clear, simple plan that cuts through all the confusion to deliver amazing results, fast. This book distills all she’s learned about diet, fitness, and a healthy lifestyle to provide anyone seeking to be slim, strong, and healthy with an easier path to achieving dramatic body transformation.   You’ll learn to: * Utilize Jillian’s insider secrets for optimizing your fat-burning potential * Dispel myths and avoid diet trends that will damage your metabolism and make it harder for you to lose weight * Banish self-sabotage, build support, and cultivate lasting motivation * Navigate and circumvent every possible pitfall presented by any situation or circumstance you could come up against—from weight-loss plateaus to travel, budget, and time constraints * Eat, move, and live in manageable, and even enjoyable, ways that facilitate a slim, sexy physique * Supplement strategically, manage stress, and even purchase the proper home and beauty products—all to help ignite your metabolism No nonsense, no gimmicks, just actionable advice that gets incredible results fast!

Continue reading here:

Slim for Life – Jillian Michaels

Posted in FF, GE, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Slim for Life – Jillian Michaels

Rubio Slams Obama on Guns—But He Once Backed "Reasonable Restrictions" on Firearms

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

On Tuesday, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) slammed President Barack Obama’s new executive actions aimed at enhancing gun safety—but the GOP candidate was attacking an approach to guns that he once supported as a candidate in Florida, when he endorsed “reasonable restrictions” on firearms.

After Obama announced the series of new gun-control steps, Rubio exclaimed, “Barack Obama is obsessed with undermining the Second Amendment…Now this executive order is just one more way to make it harder for law-abiding people to buy weapons or to be able to protect their families.” And in a campaign ad, Rubio went further in assailing the president: “His plan after the attack in San Bernardino: take away our guns.”

Obama’s new measures would not take away guns; the most prominent executive action is aimed at limiting the number of gun sales that occur without background checks by requiring more gun sellers to register as dealers and vet their customers. And background checks is a policy that Rubio has supported in the past.

When Rubio first ran for the Florida state House in 2000, he told the Miami Herald that he supported “reasonable restrictions” on guns, including background checks and waiting periods for gun purchases. Ten years later, this comment was used against Rubio during his Senate primary campaign against then-Republican Charlie Crist. The Crist camp, pointing to Rubio’s 2010 statement, accused him of supporting gun limits. Rubio’s spokesman dismissed the significance of Rubio’s earlier statement, saying, “It’s basically a restatement of his support for the current law.”

During his eight years in the Florida legislature, Rubio backed much of the National Rifle Association’s agenda. He co-sponsored the state’s Stand Your Ground law, which became the subject of a nationwide debate following the shooting death of Trayvon Martin. And, as a senator, Rubio recently received an A rating from the NRA. But Rubio has a few times wavered from the NRA’s hardline. In the Florida legislature, he drew the organization’s ire when he took a tepid approach to supporting a bill allowing Floridians to bring firearms to work if they leave them in their cars. (He ultimately voted for the measure). And after the Sandy Hook shooting in December 2012, he flirted with supporting measures to prevent convicted felons and the mentally ill from obtaining firearms—actions the NRA opposed. He voted against the background-check bill that ultimately came to the Senate floor the following spring.

As a presidential candidate, Rubio has positioned himself as an ardent champion of gun rights and does not talk about the need to preserve or enhance “reasonable restrictions” on guns. His campaign website states that “new gun laws will do nothing to deter criminals from obtaining firearms.” Asked whether he still supports “reasonable restrictions,” Rubio’s campaign did not respond.

View original:  

Rubio Slams Obama on Guns—But He Once Backed "Reasonable Restrictions" on Firearms

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Ultima, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Rubio Slams Obama on Guns—But He Once Backed "Reasonable Restrictions" on Firearms