sleight of hand is the name of their game

image…GOPer’s like McCain … Douche … Kyl … Flake … are licking their lip$ as deception and sleight of hand is the name of their game…

 

Arizona appeals ruling striking down regulation of independent expenditure committees

 

Earlier this month, U.S. District Court Judge James Teilborg struck down a provision of Arizona’s campaign finance laws, likely removing any regulation of independent expenditure committees in Arizona.Federal Judge voids independent expenditure committee campaign finance law.

 

The state of Arizona is now appealing his decision. In the meantime, I would recommend that the Arizona legislature amend the law to address the concerns of Judge Teilborg and to render this appeal moot. Try to do it right this time! Save the taxpayers some money.

The Arizona Capitol Times (subscription required) reported State appeals ruling on political committee law:    The state of Arizona is appealing a federal judge’s ruling that threw the state’s election laws into disarray by striking down the statutory definition of “political committee” as unconstitutional.

The Arizona Attorney General’s Office on Wednesday filed a notice of appeal with U.S. District Court Judge James Teilborg, informing him that the state is filing an appeal with the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The state is also awaiting Teilborg’s decision on a request to stay his Dec. 5 ruling.

Teilborg ruled that the state’s 183-word definition of “political committee” is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad. Election officials say this could bar the enforcement of all election laws that rely on that definition, which includes the bulk of registration and disclosure laws.

Fix it!

 

“Don’t ascribe to evil what can be attributed to well-intentioned stupidity.”
James A. Owen,
The Shadow Dragons

Remember it is solely your decision whether this information is sufficiently “vetted” & by whom

feel safer, right…?

…But you feel safer, right…?

$14 Million an Hour: The War on ‘Terror’ Has Cost $1.6 Trillion

By Alex Ellefson, AlterNet

A government research group estimates that post 9/11 war spending is a staggering tally. READ MORE»

 

“Do not imagine that the good you intend will balance the evil you perform” 
Norman Mac Donald

Remember it is solely your decision whether this information is sufficiently “vetted” & by whom

WeAreChange

How The Elite Stay in Power

WeAreChange

Watch video here…   https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=gGKogwbO240

Read article here…

http://www.forbiddenknowledgetv.com/videos/activism/how-the-elite-stay-in-power.html

“Even with the very best of intentions, even with the ambition of making the world a better place, when we cast judgment upon people whose lifestyles, beliefs, or predilections we dislike, we add to the emotional filth of hostility and make the world feel a little less safe for the folks we’re genuinely trying to help.”    Agnostic Zetetic

Remember it is solely your decision whether this information is sufficiently “vetted” & by whom…

likely is far too progressive

clip_image002…In a solid “red” state like Arizona … “choice” leading to departure from current cloistered political agenda likely is far too progressive…

 

Why we can’t have legal weed right now. because they’re anti-choicers.

 

He admits the plan is a political longshot.

But Rep. Mark Cardenas, D-Phoenix, hopes to convince colleagues to approve legalizing marijuana for recreational use by adults, if for no other reason than the alternative is having voters adopt their own plan. And if that happens, that locks lawmakers out of the process entirely.

His legislation, HB 2007, would make it legal for those 21 and older to possess up to an ounce of the drug…

…What might fare better is Cardenas’ backup plan: HB 2006 would decriminalize possession of up to an ounce of marijuana, imposing a civil penalty of no more than $100.

Now, possession of any amount is a felony, meaning more than a year in state prison.

But these are usually handled as misdemeanors. And a 1996 voter-approved law generally precludes incarceration for first and second offenses.

“I’m willing to look at that,” Farnsworth said. But he said any decision whether to even grant that a hearing depends on whether police and prosecutors believe such a change will impair their anti-drug efforts.  …..Continue reading 

 

“Do not imagine that the good you intend will balance the evil you perform” 
Norman Mac Donald

Remember it is solely your decision whether this information is sufficiently “vetted” & by whom

happened on our watch … we took our eye off the ball

…It happened on our watch … we took our eye off the ball … we allowed “them” to distract us with “stuff” … professional sports … dances with the stars … celeb lives … War … racism … War … poor education … War … poor health…

 

How Congress Has Already Cut Your Social Security Benefits

 

It’s not widely recognized, but the Social Security is gradually weakening. Still the most important source of retirement income for the vast majority, Social Security benefits have been chipped away, and will be roughly 24 percent lower for workers born after 1959.

Here’s why.  …..  In 1983 Congress passed legislation that included significant reductions in benefits. Very importantly, the 1983 legislation raised Social Security’s full retirement age from age 65 to 67, a change that is still being phased in. The 1983 amendments set the Social Security “full retirement age” at 66, gradually phased in for those born in 1943 through 1954. It will then gradually increase to age 67, fully phased in for those born after 1959.

For those not thoroughly immersed in how Social Security benefits are calculated, increasing Social Security’s “full” retirement age may sound like just a small, reasonable adjustment for changes in life expectancy. But that is not right. Rather than a single, fixed retirement age, it is more accurate to think of Social Security as having a band of ages. Workers may claim benefits as early as age 62. For every month they delay up until age 70, benefits are increased to take into account that they will be received for one month less.

Consequently, because of the way that Social Security benefits are calculated, raising the age defined in the Social Security Act as the “retirement age” by one year is mathematically indistinguishable from about a 6.5 percent cut in retirement benefits, whether one retires at age 62, 67, 70, or any age in between. Raising the statutorily defined retirement age sounds like it should mean that if you work longer, you will eventually get what you would have gotten. But you never actually do catch up. If the definition of retirement age is changed to be an older age, you always get less than you would have without the change.

This point is complicated and not well understood, even by some experts. Because the use of the phrase “full retirement age” lends to confusion, keep in mind that the important thing to understand about retirement age increases is that for every year that Social Security’s  “full retirement age” is raised, retirement benefits are cut by roughly 6.5 percent. It does not matter when someone first claims benefits—at 62 or 70, or somewhere in between. The 1983 enactment, which gradually phases in a two-year increase in the full retirement age from age 65 to age 67, has already lowered benefits by around 6.5 percent. When fully phased in, the change will cut the benefits of those born in 1960 or later by around 13 percent.

In addition to increasing the full retirement age, the 1983 legislation delayed the annual automatic cost of living adjustment by six months, from June to January. Again, it’s a bit complicated to understand without knowing the details of benefit calculations, but this delay translates into a 1.4 percent cut for everyone, now and in the future. Finally, decisions made in 1983 and 1993 to treat a growing portion of Social Security benefits as taxable income for an increasing number of retirees effectively will have lowered benefits (i.e., net after-tax benefit in- come) by 9.5 percent in about thirty-five years.

Prior to the 1983 legislation, Social Security benefits were tax-free. Since 1984, up to 50 percent of Social Security benefits have been counted as taxable income for individuals with incomes in excess of $25,000; $32,000 for couples. Since 1993, additionally, up to 85 percent of Social Security benefits have been taxed for individuals with incomes in excess of $34,000; $44,000 for couples. Because these thresholds are not adjusted for inflation, the reduction in effective benefits increases over time. The effective cut is, on average, 6 percent in 2012, 8.8 percent in 2030, and 9.5 percent in 2050.

The result of all these cuts together is that Social Security—by far the most important retirement asset that most working Americans have now and will have in the future —is on a trajectory to replace less and less pre-retirement earnings.  Even so, it remains the most widespread, effective, secure, and significant source of retirement income for today’s workers and those who will follow. This is why it is so important for Social Security’s retirement protections to be expanded, especially because, as we detail in Social Security Works!, the prospects for relief from other quarters are slim to none.

(Copyright © 2014 by Nancy J. Altman and Eric R. Kingson. This excerpt originally appeared inSocial Security Works! Why Social Security Isn’t Going Broke and How Expanding It Will Help Us All, published by The New Press in January 2015, and is used here with permission.)

Nancy J. Altman is the author of The Battle for Social Security, and a founding co-director of Social Security Works and co-chair the Strengthen Social Security Coalition.

Eric R. Kingson is a professor of social work at Syracuse University and a founding co-director of Social Security Works and co-chair the Strengthen Social Security Coalition.

 

http://www.alternet.org/books/how-congress-has-already-cut-your-social-security-benefits?akid=12633.23062.XM7ZBn&rd=1&src=newsletter1029524&t=17

“Intentions alone amount to nought. It’s in action, not inaction that we can become all we can be” 

 Constance Chuks Friday

Remember it is solely your decision whether this information is sufficiently “vetted” & by whom

It is truly not that difficult to correlate GMO modification to any plant likely will be transferred via wind, rain, climate to other plants and other parts of planet Earth … Thoughtful contemplation most likely will lead us to conclude that our robust profit motivated manipulation of “mother nature” has potentially dire consequences for life…

…It is truly not that difficult to correlate GMO modification to any plant likely will be transferred via wind, rain, climate to other plants and other parts of planet Earth … Thoughtful contemplation most likely will lead us to conclude that our robust profit motivated manipulation of “mother nature” has potentially dire consequences for life…

 

Despite Europe’s ban on GMO rapeseed, Monsanto and Bayer’s genetically modified plants have contaminated other crops, causing genetic pollution:
http://www.naturalnews.com/048161_GMO_ban_environmental_contamination_Europe.html

We judge others by their behavior. We judge ourselves by our intentions.” … Ian Percy

 

Remember it is solely your decision whether this information is sufficiently “vetted” & by whom

NEED A HINT … IT BEGINS WITH “M”

NEED A HINT … IT BEGINS WITH “M” …

Guess Which Miracle Drug Causes 75% Reduction in PTSD Symptoms? (Hint: It’s Federally Illegal)

 

PTSD affects tens of thousands of US Iraq and Afghan war veterans, and millions of other Americans, too.

Tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands of Afghanistan and Iraq war veterans suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). So do millions of other Americans. The Department of Veterans Affairs estimates that more than 5 million people suffer from PTSD in a given year.

New clinical research suggests there is something that can help: Marijuana. Yep, you read that right. The Journal of Psychoactive Drugs this week published results from a New Mexico study that found patients reported an average 75% reduction in all three areas of PTSD symptoms while using marijuana.

Patients in the study all met the diagnostic criteria for PTSD and were symptomatic. When they used marijuana, they reported significant relief from PTSD symptoms, as well as a lack of harm or problems functioning because of marijuana use. The study used a standard PTSD evaluation tool to rate the frequency and intensity of symptoms. 

"Many PTSD patients report symptom reduction with cannabis, and a clinical trial needs to be done to see what proportion and what kind of PTSD patients benefit, with either cannabis or the main active ingredients of cannabis," said George Greer, one of the researchers.

The study used smoked marijuana and was done with patients in New Mexico, which in 2009 became the first state to authorize the use of medical marijuana for PTSD. Since then, six other medical marijuana states have approved it. And in the four legal marijuana states and the District of Columbia, any adult can use marijuana for any reason.

 

“Do not imagine that the good you intend will balance the evil you perform” 
Norman Mac Donald

Remember it is solely your decision whether this information is sufficiently “vetted” & by whom