Users who Dugg This
generalbulldog
113 Followers
E Pluribus Unum
246 Followers
theghoulFeb 12, 2012
If this was his intent, that was a pretty smooth move.
I paraphrase:
Obama: Birth control should be free for employees of religious based organizations
GOP: What? Are you nuts, that's imposing on religious beliefs. You Muslim Kenyan commie!
Catholic Church: That's right! Contraception is evil even though 99.9 % of women used it. Just abstain from sex. Just say no. STOP ALL THAT LAUGHING!
Insurance companies: Uh..we're cool with this. Babies cost a s**t-ton of our money. We like our money and want to keep it.
Obama: OK, OK, stop all that bitching. Religious based organizations don't have offer free birth control, but, the insurance companies should be allowed to contact ladies directly. Religious based employers are off the hook.
Catholic Church: YaaaY! We win!
Insurance companies: Yes *you* won..(snickers). Time to print some literature saying "Babies cost money! Let us tell you about this cool thing called an IUD. Its Free! Get your party on". Get me the mass mailing department!
Ladies: Wait.. contraception is free? *snaps fingers*. Obama 2012!
Obama: I compromised for the good of all Americans (snickers).
GOP: What just happened? Why is Ashton Kutcher laughing over there?
vitriolandangstFeb 12, 2012
The result will be MORE birth control!
Before this ban by the churches, I'm pretty sure they would have found upon any employees taking advantage of such a service-- now, women get privately contacted and the church doesn't Kwon a thing about it!
So it looks like their gambit just bit these authoritarians in the ass! Score one for the good guys,
...so that's like: Fascists 2309 -- Progressives 2. Because we stopped SOPA from passing for a few weeks. Sure the score may look a bit stacked against us -- but a week ago that was 2308 to 0. liberty and justice are picking up steam!
vitriolandangstFeb 12, 2012
Crap, typing a lot on an iPad can take its toll on spelling -- I'm still getting used to the auto-correct!
Kwon should be know and found should be frown.... There almost as many spelling Nazis on Digg as real Nazis on Digg.
miklkitFeb 12, 2012
I spend a lot of time on European sites and I understood you just fine.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
2012 State Of The Union Address: Enhanced Version | http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zgfi7wnGZlE
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
'And the funny thing is, it's not about paying for it.
Any money paid to an insurance company will go in one big pot, so the only way out of paying is to not buy any health insurance.
But there is also the catch 22 on your taxes, which help fund government health care plans which will all include contraceptives in their coverage.
So regardless they are paying for them.'
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Whoopsadaisy! Citigroup has accidentally been charging many customers more than what they owe for months, with some of them not even realizing it was going on until the bank sent out a notification. Cit's bill-pay app for iPads was the culprit in many cases, charging customers twice what they owed for bills or mortgage payments.
The New York Times says the bug started in the iPad app around July but wasn't detected until December, after consumers' complaints about payments being off. Other mobile applications and the online bill payment system weren't affected, says Citi.
However, some customers who never even used an iPad to pay bill said they'd also been hit by double charges, something that hasn't been explained away yet. The bank is promising to reimburse customers and waive any fees incurred because of the extra charges, as well as give out a few points for its reward program.
"We take seriously the functionality of our products and services as well as the satisfaction of our clients," spokesman Andrew Brent said in a statement.
Users of Citibank Bill-Pay App Charged Twice [New York Times]Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
It’s not really why he signed up to be an astronaut, but like it or not, Mike Barratt and his eyes have become a science project.
The eye charts he reads, the red drops that turn his eyes yellow and the ultrasounds being performed on him could determine whether he or any other astronaut ever journeys into deep space or sets foot on other worlds.
NASA’s new priority is how to protect astronauts from going blind on the years-long trip to get wherever they are going.
“I absolutely agree that this is our number one priority,” Barratt said.
Why?
Because when Barratt blasted off to the international space station, he needed eyeglasses for distance. When he returned to Earth, his distance vision was fine, but he needed reading glasses. That was more than two years ago. And he’s not getting better.
“We really need to understand this. This is a critical point for understanding how humans adapt to spaceflight,” he said.
In the past few years, about half of the astronauts aboard the international space station have developed an increasing pressure inside their heads, an intracranial pressure that reshapes their optic nerve, causing a significant shift in the eyesight of male astronauts. Doctors call it papilledema.
Female space travelers have not been affected.
Some of the astronauts slowly recover. Others have not.
Space station astronauts typically spend about six months in orbit.
Barratt is one of 10 male astronauts, all older than 45, who have not recovered. Barratt returned from a six-month stint aboard the station in October 2009 and has experienced a profound change in his sight.
He used to be nearsighted. But now, the space veteran says he’s eagle-eyed at long distance but needs glasses for reading. There is no treatment and no answers as to why female space flyers are not affected.
CNN spent part of a day with Barratt, watching as doctors monitored his progress with high-resolution testing as they try to understand how the weightless environment of space is causing half of all space station astronauts to have this vision change. Today, space station astronauts fly with specially designed variable focus glasses to help combat the vision shift.
“The big benefit of these is that they allow us to adjust for significant prescription changes,” said Dr. Robert Gibson, a senior vision consultant, who was brought in to help study the problem.
Doctors have found that Barratt’s retinas have microscopic folds or wrinkles on them, and the back of his eye, the optic nerve, is no longer round but has flattened.
“I think this is showing that there are physiologic aspects of adaption to spaceflight we weren’t seeing before,” said Barratt.
This raises a red flag for all of NASA’s plans for long-duration human space flight. The space station is supposed to be the test bed for how humans would learn to live in space, but it opens profound questions on whether humans will ever venture to Mars or to an asteroid if they are unable to figure out how the outer-space environment is affecting the eyes.
“This has all of our attention,” said Terry Taddeo, the acting chief of space medicine at Johnson Space Center in Houston.
“It is a serious problem and one we are going to have to understand more about before we would be able to send somebody into a long-duration mission away from Earth, where they would be away for years,” he said.
Right now, the only data that doctors have are from six-month tours of duty on the space station.
NASA has begun doing extensive preflight and postflight eye exams, including high-resolution MRIs of the eyes. There have been anecdotes from some space shuttle astronauts who also complained about vision change, but it does not appear they had long-lasting effects from the much shorter space flights that typically lasted up to about three weeks.
“What we’re seeing appears to occur within the first couple of months of flight and appears to level off, plateau after about four to five months,” Gibson said.
“If it’s just a matter of giving them a stronger prescription, we can live with that,” he said. “But if there is an elevated intracranial pressure as the cause of this, we have to be concerned about other neurologic effects."
That means there could be other effects on the body that haven’t become apparent.
This is why a three-year mission to Mars is in question.
It would be humans' next great leap, and NASA is spending almost $18 billion over the next five years to develop a heavy lift rocket that would take astronauts to the Red Planet or even to an asteroid. They would travel in a new spacecraft, Orion.
But right now, a trip to Mars is still more science fiction than fact. No one is calling this vision problem a showstopper, yet the program’s price tag begs for a solution to be found fast so NASA won’t be building the world’s largest, fastest rocket to nowhere.
Dr. Bruce Ehni, a neurosurgeon at the VA Medical Center at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, has consulted with NASA and is the only neurosurgeon on their panel.
“If they can’t predict who is at risk ... they put his health in jeopardy. They put, possibly, the mission in jeopardy if he can’t see or do his job effectively,” he said.
But Barratt thinks that any deep space venture to Mars is still 20 years away. He’s hoping that spacecraft will be a whole lot faster than anything the space agency can fly now.
“You fly fast, and you don’t worry,” he said, with a grin.
“I’m still hopeful that in 20 years, we’ll have advanced propulsion capabilities that can get us there in a matter of weeks to a few months. Then, a lot of these problems go away,” he said.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
BSM_45Feb 12, 2012
You will be paying for it with higher insurance premiums.
geejayeFeb 12, 2012
Read the article: "contraception actually saves insurance companies money, since it's far cheaper than childbirth."
FrankLuskaFeb 12, 2012
Ya, read the article, saves insurance companies money = larger profits for the 1%. You liberals just don't get it, your suckered just as much as republicans.
Prove me wrong when your insurance goes Down,Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
pdpgtiFeb 12, 2012
I don't understand how republicans view the world sometimes. Aren't all republicans in that "save money for big businesses and it trickles down to us" boat?
Well insurance companies are big businesses
Contraceptives save them money
Less insurance premiums
That should be very easy to understand, even by YOUR faulty logic
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
downshiftdx: I don't disagree with your comment. I too think it is absurd that we even have to discuss human rights like this but I just wanted to point out I find it odd when people say things like "In our modern age" or "This is the 21st century! How can X still be happening?"
The truth is most of the world is not socially or culturally advancing at anywhere near the rates of change we are seeing in technology and collective human knowledge. Pockets of people in affluent educated areas are moving in the general direction we want to see thanks to an increasingly integrated and connected society, but cultural traditions and norms fight back hard and resist change.
The fact that we have to even consider whether human rights apply to gays or anyone else illustrates the point that we may be modern, in the sense that we are more advanced technically than our ancient ancestors but I don't think we are truly civilized yet.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on a government-provided social safety net, Americans of limited means had to hope for "support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups." Here is what the Heritage report has to say about Social Security and similar government programs:
Financial help for those in need has also changed profoundly. Local, community-based charitable organizations once provided the majority of aid, resulting in a personal relationship between those who received assistance and those who provided it. Today, Social Security and other government programs provide much or all of the income to low-income and indigent households. Nearly all the financial support that was once provided to temporarily unemployed workers by unions, mutual-aid societies, and local charities is now provided by federal income, food, and health programs.
This shift from local, community-based, mutual-aid assistance to anonymous government payments has clearly altered the relationship between the receiver and the provider of the assistance. In the past, a person in need depended on help from people and organizations in his or her local community. The community representatives were generally aware of the person's needs and tailored the assistance to meet those needs within the community's budgetary constraints. Today, housing and other needs are addressed by government employees to whom the person in need is a complete stranger, and who have few or no ties to the community in which the needy person lives.
Both cases of aid involve a dependent relationship. However, support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups aims to restore a person to full flourishing and personal responsibility, and, ultimately, to be able to aid another person in turn. This kind of reciprocal expectation does not characterize the dependent relationship with the political system.
And it's nostalgia for the good old days is just as strong when it comes to Medicare. The report says: "Regardless of whether the medical and financial results are better today, the relationship between the people who receive health care assistance and those who pay for it has changed fundamentally. Few would dispute that this change has affected the total cost of health care, and the relationships among patients, doctors, and hospitals, negatively."
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
It’s not really why he signed up to be an astronaut, but like it or not, Mike Barratt and his eyes have become a science project.
The eye charts he reads, the red drops that turn his eyes yellow and the ultrasounds being performed on him could determine whether he or any other astronaut ever journeys into deep space or sets foot on other worlds.
NASA’s new priority is how to protect astronauts from going blind on the years-long trip to get wherever they are going.
“I absolutely agree that this is our number one priority,” Barratt said.
Why?
Because when Barratt blasted off to the international space station, he needed eyeglasses for distance. When he returned to Earth, his distance vision was fine, but he needed reading glasses. That was more than two years ago. And he’s not getting better.
“We really need to understand this. This is a critical point for understanding how humans adapt to spaceflight,” he said.
In the past few years, about half of the astronauts aboard the international space station have developed an increasing pressure inside their heads, an intracranial pressure that reshapes their optic nerve, causing a significant shift in the eyesight of male astronauts. Doctors call it papilledema.
Female space travelers have not been affected.
Some of the astronauts slowly recover. Others have not.
Space station astronauts typically spend about six months in orbit.
Barratt is one of 10 male astronauts, all older than 45, who have not recovered. Barratt returned from a six-month stint aboard the station in October 2009 and has experienced a profound change in his sight.
He used to be nearsighted. But now, the space veteran says he’s eagle-eyed at long distance but needs glasses for reading. There is no treatment and no answers as to why female space flyers are not affected.
CNN spent part of a day with Barratt, watching as doctors monitored his progress with high-resolution testing as they try to understand how the weightless environment of space is causing half of all space station astronauts to have this vision change. Today, space station astronauts fly with specially designed variable focus glasses to help combat the vision shift.
“The big benefit of these is that they allow us to adjust for significant prescription changes,” said Dr. Robert Gibson, a senior vision consultant, who was brought in to help study the problem.
Doctors have found that Barratt’s retinas have microscopic folds or wrinkles on them, and the back of his eye, the optic nerve, is no longer round but has flattened.
“I think this is showing that there are physiologic aspects of adaption to spaceflight we weren’t seeing before,” said Barratt.
This raises a red flag for all of NASA’s plans for long-duration human space flight. The space station is supposed to be the test bed for how humans would learn to live in space, but it opens profound questions on whether humans will ever venture to Mars or to an asteroid if they are unable to figure out how the outer-space environment is affecting the eyes.
“This has all of our attention,” said Terry Taddeo, the acting chief of space medicine at Johnson Space Center in Houston.
“It is a serious problem and one we are going to have to understand more about before we would be able to send somebody into a long-duration mission away from Earth, where they would be away for years,” he said.
Right now, the only data that doctors have are from six-month tours of duty on the space station.
NASA has begun doing extensive preflight and postflight eye exams, including high-resolution MRIs of the eyes. There have been anecdotes from some space shuttle astronauts who also complained about vision change, but it does not appear they had long-lasting effects from the much shorter space flights that typically lasted up to about three weeks.
“What we’re seeing appears to occur within the first couple of months of flight and appears to level off, plateau after about four to five months,” Gibson said.
“If it’s just a matter of giving them a stronger prescription, we can live with that,” he said. “But if there is an elevated intracranial pressure as the cause of this, we have to be concerned about other neurologic effects."
That means there could be other effects on the body that haven’t become apparent.
This is why a three-year mission to Mars is in question.
It would be humans' next great leap, and NASA is spending almost $18 billion over the next five years to develop a heavy lift rocket that would take astronauts to the Red Planet or even to an asteroid. They would travel in a new spacecraft, Orion.
But right now, a trip to Mars is still more science fiction than fact. No one is calling this vision problem a showstopper, yet the program’s price tag begs for a solution to be found fast so NASA won’t be building the world’s largest, fastest rocket to nowhere.
Dr. Bruce Ehni, a neurosurgeon at the VA Medical Center at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, has consulted with NASA and is the only neurosurgeon on their panel.
“If they can’t predict who is at risk ... they put his health in jeopardy. They put, possibly, the mission in jeopardy if he can’t see or do his job effectively,” he said.
But Barratt thinks that any deep space venture to Mars is still 20 years away. He’s hoping that spacecraft will be a whole lot faster than anything the space agency can fly now.
“You fly fast, and you don’t worry,” he said, with a grin.
“I’m still hopeful that in 20 years, we’ll have advanced propulsion capabilities that can get us there in a matter of weeks to a few months. Then, a lot of these problems go away,” he said.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Thank you so much. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Please, be seated.
Mr. Speaker, Mr. Vice President, members of Congress, distinguished guests, and fellow Americans, last month I went to Andrews Air Force Base and welcomed home some of our last troops to serve in Iraq. Together, we offered a final, proud salute to the colors under which more than a million of our fellow citizens fought, and several thousand gave their lives.
We gather tonight knowing that this generation of heroes has made the United States safer and more respected around the world.
For the first time in nine years, there are no Americans fighting in Iraq.
For the first time in two decades, Osama bin Laden is not a threat to this country.
Most of Al Qaida’s top lieutenants have been defeated. The Taliban’s momentum has been broken. And some troops in Afghanistan have begun to come home.
These achievements are a testament to the courage, selflessness, and teamwork of America’s armed forces. At a time when too many of our institutions have let us down, they exceed all expectations. They’re not consumed with personal ambition. They don’t obsess over their differences. They focus on the mission at hand. They work together.
Imagine what we could accomplish if we followed their example.
Think about the America within our reach: a country that leads the world in educating its people; an America that attracts a new generation of high-tech manufacturing and high-paying jobs; a future where we’re in control of our own energy; and our security and prosperity aren’t so tied to unstable parts of the world. An economy built to last, where hard work pays off and responsibility is rewarded.
We can do this. I know we can, because we’ve done it before. At the end of World War II, when another generation of heroes returned home from combat, they built the strongest economy and middle class the world has ever known.
My grandfather, a veteran of Patton’s Army, got the chance to go to college on the G.I. Bill. My grandmother, who worked on a bomber assembly line, was part of a workforce that turned out the best products on Earth.
The two of them shared the optimism of a nation that had triumphed over a depression and fascism. They understood they were part of something larger, that they were contributing to a story of success that every American had a chance to share: the basic American promise that if you worked hard, you could do well enough to raise a family, own a home, send your kids to college, and put a little away for retirement.
The defining issue of our time is how to keep that promise alive. No challenge is more urgent. No debate is more important. We can either settle for a country where a shrinking number of people do really well, while a growing number of Americans barely get by, or we can restore an economy where everyone gets a fair shot, and everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Not true:
If you paid attention, you would understand that providing more birth control will *save* the insurance companies money -- and therefore those who pay for the premiums. Or it would if the insurance companies weren't so greedy. I doubt very much they'll actually pass on the savings.
And we expect you to abide by your assertion that no one should have to pay for other people's stuff. No public health for you, no access to publically funded highways, no using the airports the rest of us paid for. And go hire your own personal police department and fire department, because you can't use ours.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
salbatross: The better equivalent would be laws discouraging or banning left-handedness, as it's something innate and harmless. But all in all, you're right: it would be ludicrous, and it is ridiculous that we have to have these conversations in the modern world.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on a government-provided social safety net, Americans of limited means had to hope for "support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups." Here is what the Heritage report has to say about Social Security and similar government programs:
Financial help for those in need has also changed profoundly. Local, community-based charitable organizations once provided the majority of aid, resulting in a personal relationship between those who received assistance and those who provided it. Today, Social Security and other government programs provide much or all of the income to low-income and indigent households. Nearly all the financial support that was once provided to temporarily unemployed workers by unions, mutual-aid societies, and local charities is now provided by federal income, food, and health programs.
This shift from local, community-based, mutual-aid assistance to anonymous government payments has clearly altered the relationship between the receiver and the provider of the assistance. In the past, a person in need depended on help from people and organizations in his or her local community. The community representatives were generally aware of the person's needs and tailored the assistance to meet those needs within the community's budgetary constraints. Today, housing and other needs are addressed by government employees to whom the person in need is a complete stranger, and who have few or no ties to the community in which the needy person lives.
Both cases of aid involve a dependent relationship. However, support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups aims to restore a person to full flourishing and personal responsibility, and, ultimately, to be able to aid another person in turn. This kind of reciprocal expectation does not characterize the dependent relationship with the political system.
And it's nostalgia for the good old days is just as strong when it comes to Medicare. The report says: "Regardless of whether the medical and financial results are better today, the relationship between the people who receive health care assistance and those who pay for it has changed fundamentally. Few would dispute that this change has affected the total cost of health care, and the relationships among patients, doctors, and hospitals, negatively."
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Whoopsadaisy! Citigroup has accidentally been charging many customers more than what they owe for months, with some of them not even realizing it was going on until the bank sent out a notification. Cit's bill-pay app for iPads was the culprit in many cases, charging customers twice what they owed for bills or mortgage payments.
The New York Times says the bug started in the iPad app around July but wasn't detected until December, after consumers' complaints about payments being off. Other mobile applications and the online bill payment system weren't affected, says Citi.
However, some customers who never even used an iPad to pay bill said they'd also been hit by double charges, something that hasn't been explained away yet. The bank is promising to reimburse customers and waive any fees incurred because of the extra charges, as well as give out a few points for its reward program.
"We take seriously the functionality of our products and services as well as the satisfaction of our clients," spokesman Andrew Brent said in a statement.
Users of Citibank Bill-Pay App Charged Twice [New York Times]
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
It’s not really why he signed up to be an astronaut, but like it or not, Mike Barratt and his eyes have become a science project.
The eye charts he reads, the red drops that turn his eyes yellow and the ultrasounds being performed on him could determine whether he or any other astronaut ever journeys into deep space or sets foot on other worlds.
NASA’s new priority is how to protect astronauts from going blind on the years-long trip to get wherever they are going.
“I absolutely agree that this is our number one priority,” Barratt said.
Why?
Because when Barratt blasted off to the international space station, he needed eyeglasses for distance. When he returned to Earth, his distance vision was fine, but he needed reading glasses. That was more than two years ago. And he’s not getting better.
“We really need to understand this. This is a critical point for understanding how humans adapt to spaceflight,” he said.
In the past few years, about half of the astronauts aboard the international space station have developed an increasing pressure inside their heads, an intracranial pressure that reshapes their optic nerve, causing a significant shift in the eyesight of male astronauts. Doctors call it papilledema.
Female space travelers have not been affected.
Some of the astronauts slowly recover. Others have not.
Space station astronauts typically spend about six months in orbit.
Barratt is one of 10 male astronauts, all older than 45, who have not recovered. Barratt returned from a six-month stint aboard the station in October 2009 and has experienced a profound change in his sight.
He used to be nearsighted. But now, the space veteran says he’s eagle-eyed at long distance but needs glasses for reading. There is no treatment and no answers as to why female space flyers are not affected.
CNN spent part of a day with Barratt, watching as doctors monitored his progress with high-resolution testing as they try to understand how the weightless environment of space is causing half of all space station astronauts to have this vision change. Today, space station astronauts fly with specially designed variable focus glasses to help combat the vision shift.
“The big benefit of these is that they allow us to adjust for significant prescription changes,” said Dr. Robert Gibson, a senior vision consultant, who was brought in to help study the problem.
Doctors have found that Barratt’s retinas have microscopic folds or wrinkles on them, and the back of his eye, the optic nerve, is no longer round but has flattened.
“I think this is showing that there are physiologic aspects of adaption to spaceflight we weren’t seeing before,” said Barratt.
This raises a red flag for all of NASA’s plans for long-duration human space flight. The space station is supposed to be the test bed for how humans would learn to live in space, but it opens profound questions on whether humans will ever venture to Mars or to an asteroid if they are unable to figure out how the outer-space environment is affecting the eyes.
“This has all of our attention,” said Terry Taddeo, the acting chief of space medicine at Johnson Space Center in Houston.
“It is a serious problem and one we are going to have to understand more about before we would be able to send somebody into a long-duration mission away from Earth, where they would be away for years,” he said.
Right now, the only data that doctors have are from six-month tours of duty on the space station.
NASA has begun doing extensive preflight and postflight eye exams, including high-resolution MRIs of the eyes. There have been anecdotes from some space shuttle astronauts who also complained about vision change, but it does not appear they had long-lasting effects from the much shorter space flights that typically lasted up to about three weeks.
“What we’re seeing appears to occur within the first couple of months of flight and appears to level off, plateau after about four to five months,” Gibson said.
“If it’s just a matter of giving them a stronger prescription, we can live with that,” he said. “But if there is an elevated intracranial pressure as the cause of this, we have to be concerned about other neurologic effects."
That means there could be other effects on the body that haven’t become apparent.
This is why a three-year mission to Mars is in question.
It would be humans' next great leap, and NASA is spending almost $18 billion over the next five years to develop a heavy lift rocket that would take astronauts to the Red Planet or even to an asteroid. They would travel in a new spacecraft, Orion.
But right now, a trip to Mars is still more science fiction than fact. No one is calling this vision problem a showstopper, yet the program’s price tag begs for a solution to be found fast so NASA won’t be building the world’s largest, fastest rocket to nowhere.
Dr. Bruce Ehni, a neurosurgeon at the VA Medical Center at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, has consulted with NASA and is the only neurosurgeon on their panel.
“If they can’t predict who is at risk ... they put his health in jeopardy. They put, possibly, the mission in jeopardy if he can’t see or do his job effectively,” he said.
But Barratt thinks that any deep space venture to Mars is still 20 years away. He’s hoping that spacecraft will be a whole lot faster than anything the space agency can fly now.
“You fly fast, and you don’t worry,” he said, with a grin.
“I’m still hopeful that in 20 years, we’ll have advanced propulsion capabilities that can get us there in a matter of weeks to a few months. Then, a lot of these problems go away,” he said.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
It’s not really why he signed up to be an astronaut, but like it or not, Mike Barratt and his eyes have become a science project.
The eye charts he reads, the red drops that turn his eyes yellow and the ultrasounds being performed on him could determine whether he or any other astronaut ever journeys into deep space or sets foot on other worlds.
NASA’s new priority is how to protect astronauts from going blind on the years-long trip to get wherever they are going.
“I absolutely agree that this is our number one priority,” Barratt said.
Why?
Because when Barratt blasted off to the international space station, he needed eyeglasses for distance. When he returned to Earth, his distance vision was fine, but he needed reading glasses. That was more than two years ago. And he’s not getting better.
“We really need to understand this. This is a critical point for understanding how humans adapt to spaceflight,” he said.
In the past few years, about half of the astronauts aboard the international space station have developed an increasing pressure inside their heads, an intracranial pressure that reshapes their optic nerve, causing a significant shift in the eyesight of male astronauts. Doctors call it papilledema.
Female space travelers have not been affected.
Some of the astronauts slowly recover. Others have not.
Space station astronauts typically spend about six months in orbit.
Barratt is one of 10 male astronauts, all older than 45, who have not recovered. Barratt returned from a six-month stint aboard the station in October 2009 and has experienced a profound change in his sight.
He used to be nearsighted. But now, the space veteran says he’s eagle-eyed at long distance but needs glasses for reading. There is no treatment and no answers as to why female space flyers are not affected.
CNN spent part of a day with Barratt, watching as doctors monitored his progress with high-resolution testing as they try to understand how the weightless environment of space is causing half of all space station astronauts to have this vision change. Today, space station astronauts fly with specially designed variable focus glasses to help combat the vision shift.
“The big benefit of these is that they allow us to adjust for significant prescription changes,” said Dr. Robert Gibson, a senior vision consultant, who was brought in to help study the problem.
Doctors have found that Barratt’s retinas have microscopic folds or wrinkles on them, and the back of his eye, the optic nerve, is no longer round but has flattened.
“I think this is showing that there are physiologic aspects of adaption to spaceflight we weren’t seeing before,” said Barratt.
This raises a red flag for all of NASA’s plans for long-duration human space flight. The space station is supposed to be the test bed for how humans would learn to live in space, but it opens profound questions on whether humans will ever venture to Mars or to an asteroid if they are unable to figure out how the outer-space environment is affecting the eyes.
“This has all of our attention,” said Terry Taddeo, the acting chief of space medicine at Johnson Space Center in Houston.
“It is a serious problem and one we are going to have to understand more about before we would be able to send somebody into a long-duration mission away from Earth, where they would be away for years,” he said.
Right now, the only data that doctors have are from six-month tours of duty on the space station.
NASA has begun doing extensive preflight and postflight eye exams, including high-resolution MRIs of the eyes. There have been anecdotes from some space shuttle astronauts who also complained about vision change, but it does not appear they had long-lasting effects from the much shorter space flights that typically lasted up to about three weeks.
“What we’re seeing appears to occur within the first couple of months of flight and appears to level off, plateau after about four to five months,” Gibson said.
“If it’s just a matter of giving them a stronger prescription, we can live with that,” he said. “But if there is an elevated intracranial pressure as the cause of this, we have to be concerned about other neurologic effects."
That means there could be other effects on the body that haven’t become apparent.
This is why a three-year mission to Mars is in question.
It would be humans' next great leap, and NASA is spending almost $18 billion over the next five years to develop a heavy lift rocket that would take astronauts to the Red Planet or even to an asteroid. They would travel in a new spacecraft, Orion.
But right now, a trip to Mars is still more science fiction than fact. No one is calling this vision problem a showstopper, yet the program’s price tag begs for a solution to be found fast so NASA won’t be building the world’s largest, fastest rocket to nowhere.
Dr. Bruce Ehni, a neurosurgeon at the VA Medical Center at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, has consulted with NASA and is the only neurosurgeon on their panel.
“If they can’t predict who is at risk ... they put his health in jeopardy. They put, possibly, the mission in jeopardy if he can’t see or do his job effectively,” he said.
But Barratt thinks that any deep space venture to Mars is still 20 years away. He’s hoping that spacecraft will be a whole lot faster than anything the space agency can fly now.
“You fly fast, and you don’t worry,” he said, with a grin.
“I’m still hopeful that in 20 years, we’ll have advanced propulsion capabilities that can get us there in a matter of weeks to a few months. Then, a lot of these problems go away,” he said.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
A few weeks ago, the CEO of Master Lock told me that it now makes business sense for him to bring jobs back home.
Today, for the first time in 15 years, Master Lock’s unionized plant in Milwaukee is running at full capacity.
So we have a huge opportunity at this moment to bring manufacturing back. But we have to seize it. Tonight, my message to business leaders is simple: Ask yourselves what you can do to bring jobs back to your country, and your country will do everything we can to help you succeed.
We should start with our tax code. Right now, companies get tax breaks for moving jobs and profits overseas. Meanwhile, companies that choose to stay in America get hit with one of the highest tax rates in the world. It makes no sense, and everyone knows it.
So let’s change it. First, if you’re a business that wants to outsource jobs, you shouldn’t get a tax deduction for doing it.
That money should be used to cover moving expenses for companies like Master Lock that decide to bring jobs home.
Second, no American company should be able to avoid paying its fair share of taxes by moving jobs and profits overseas.
From now on, every multinational company should have to pay a basic minimum tax. And every penny should go towards lowering taxes for companies that choose to stay here and hire here in America.
Third, if you’re an American manufacturer, you should get a bigger tax cut. If you’re a high-tech manufacturer, we should double the tax deduction you get for making your products here. And if you want to relocate in a community that was hit hard when a factory left town, you should get help financing a new plant, equipment, or training for new workers.
So my message...
My message is simple. It is time to stop rewarding businesses that ship jobs overseas and start rewarding companies that create jobs right here in America. Send me these tax reforms, and I will sign them right away.
We’re also making it easier for American businesses to sell products all over the world. Two years ago, I set a goal of doubling U.S. exports over five years. With the bipartisan trade agreements we signed into law, we’re on track to meet that goal ahead of schedule.
And soon there will be millions of new customers for American goods in Panama, Colombia, and South Korea. Soon, there will be new cars on the streets of Seoul imported from Detroit, and Toledo, and Chicago.
I will go anywhere in the world to open new markets for American products. And I will not stand by when our competitors don’t play by the rules. We’ve brought trade cases against China at nearly twice the rate as the last administration, and it’s made a difference.
Over a thousand Americans are working today because we stopped a surge in Chinese tires. But we need to do more. It’s not right when another country lets our movies, music, and software be pirated. It’s not fair when foreign manufacturers have a leg up on ours only because they’re heavily subsidized.
Tonight, I’m announcing the creation of a Trade Enforcement Unit that will be charged with investigating unfair trading practices in countries like China. There will be more inspections...
laborerFeb 12, 2012
Harry Reid was a main supporter of SOPA.
A Democrat.
He still wants to go forward with it.
mlw4428Feb 12, 2012
Lamar Smith was THE main supporter (he was THE man who introduced it) of SOPA.
A Republican from Texas.
He still wants to go forward with it.
laborerFeb 12, 2012
Yet only the person denouncing the Democrat gets downvoted.
How simple it is to be subversive in the mind of a Liberal.
mlw4428Feb 12, 2012
You got buried because you're such a partisan hack that you IGNORED the fact that you Repukes brought this bill forward to begin with. Quit being a whiny little bitch; it's nap time and if you don't go to bed, cranky, you're going to get a time out.
laborerFeb 12, 2012
Harry Reid is a main co-hort of the bill, and Reid happens to be the Senate Majority leader of the US Congress.
Slightly worrying.
You cant handle the truth that Democrats have a history worse than even the Republicans, and they dont have a hope come November because they dont have a clue.
America needs pro-growth philosophy, not backwards looking historian/community organizers.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
smpaisnutrientsFeb 12, 2012
Funny thing is that tbe repugs have very little chance of winning the election and all evidence proves it. To say they dont have a hope shows that you dont do any research ane base your statement on mere opinion and partisan rhetoric. To continue the 'community organizer' insult shows how far behind you are.
Obama WILL win this year and there's not a thing you can do to change it. The repugs sold out to the fox tea party crazies for short term gain. It has cost you your political future. The tea party and repug's anti-american brinksmanship drove this nation to the edge of collapse and if you think we've forgotten that fact you are even furthur behind then you sound. Blame 'obammer' all you like, we aren't gonna slow down for you s**ts anymore. This nation and this world is moving forward, no time for your dusty old fairy tales, friendo.
smpaisnutrientsFeb 12, 2012
Funny thing is that the repugs have very little chance of winning the election and all evidence proves it. To say they dont have a hope shows that you dont do any research and base your statement on mere opinion and partisan rhetoric. To continue the 'community organizer' insult shows how far behind you are.
Obama WILL win this year and there's not a thing you can do to change it. The repugs sold out to the fox tea party crazies for short term gain. It has cost you your political future. The tea party and repug's anti-american brinksmanship drove this nation to the edge of collapse and if you think we've forgotten that fact you are even furthur behind then you sound. Blame 'obammer' all you like, we aren't gonna slow down for you s**ts anymore. This nation and this world is moving forward, no time for your dusty old fairy tales, friendo.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Funny thing is that tbe repugs have very little chance of winning the election and all evidence proves it. To say they dont have a hope shows that you dont do any research ane base your statement on mere opinion and partisan rhetoric. To continue the 'community organizer' insult shows how far behind you are.
Obama WILL win this year and there's not a thing you can do to change it. The repugs sold out to the fox tea party crazies for short term gain. It has cost you your political future. The tea party and repug's anti-american brinksmanship drove this nation to the edge of collapse and if you think we've forgotten that fact you are even furthur behind then you sound. Blame 'obammer' all you like, we aren't gonna slow down for you s**ts anymore. This nation and this world is moving forward, no time for your dusty old fairy tales, friendo.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Funny thing is that tbe repugs have very little chance of winning the election and all evidence proves it. To say they dont have a hope shows that you dont do any research ane base your statement on mere opinion and partisan rhetoric. To continue the 'community organizer' insult shows how far behind you are.
Obama WILL win this year and there's not a thing you can do to change it. The repugs sold out to the fox tea party crazies for short term gain. It has cost you your political future. The tea party and repug's anti-american brinksmanship drove this nation to the edge of collapse and if you think we've forgotten that fact you are even furthur behind then you sound. Blame 'obammer' all you like, we aren't gonna slow down for you s**ts anymore. This nation and this world is moving forward, no time for your dusty old fairy tales, friendo.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
It’s not really why he signed up to be an astronaut, but like it or not, Mike Barratt and his eyes have become a science project.
The eye charts he reads, the red drops that turn his eyes yellow and the ultrasounds being performed on him could determine whether he or any other astronaut ever journeys into deep space or sets foot on other worlds.
NASA’s new priority is how to protect astronauts from going blind on the years-long trip to get wherever they are going.
“I absolutely agree that this is our number one priority,” Barratt said.
Why?
Because when Barratt blasted off to the international space station, he needed eyeglasses for distance. When he returned to Earth, his distance vision was fine, but he needed reading glasses. That was more than two years ago. And he’s not getting better.
“We really need to understand this. This is a critical point for understanding how humans adapt to spaceflight,” he said.
In the past few years, about half of the astronauts aboard the international space station have developed an increasing pressure inside their heads, an intracranial pressure that reshapes their optic nerve, causing a significant shift in the eyesight of male astronauts. Doctors call it papilledema.
Female space travelers have not been affected.
Some of the astronauts slowly recover. Others have not.
Space station astronauts typically spend about six months in orbit.
Barratt is one of 10 male astronauts, all older than 45, who have not recovered. Barratt returned from a six-month stint aboard the station in October 2009 and has experienced a profound change in his sight.
He used to be nearsighted. But now, the space veteran says he’s eagle-eyed at long distance but needs glasses for reading. There is no treatment and no answers as to why female space flyers are not affected.
CNN spent part of a day with Barratt, watching as doctors monitored his progress with high-resolution testing as they try to understand how the weightless environment of space is causing half of all space station astronauts to have this vision change. Today, space station astronauts fly with specially designed variable focus glasses to help combat the vision shift.
“The big benefit of these is that they allow us to adjust for significant prescription changes,” said Dr. Robert Gibson, a senior vision consultant, who was brought in to help study the problem.
Doctors have found that Barratt’s retinas have microscopic folds or wrinkles on them, and the back of his eye, the optic nerve, is no longer round but has flattened.
“I think this is showing that there are physiologic aspects of adaption to spaceflight we weren’t seeing before,” said Barratt.
This raises a red flag for all of NASA’s plans for long-duration human space flight. The space station is supposed to be the test bed for how humans would learn to live in space, but it opens profound questions on whether humans will ever venture to Mars or to an asteroid if they are unable to figure out how the outer-space environment is affecting the eyes.
“This has all of our attention,” said Terry Taddeo, the acting chief of space medicine at Johnson Space Center in Houston.
“It is a serious problem and one we are going to have to understand more about before we would be able to send somebody into a long-duration mission away from Earth, where they would be away for years,” he said.
Right now, the only data that doctors have are from six-month tours of duty on the space station.
NASA has begun doing extensive preflight and postflight eye exams, including high-resolution MRIs of the eyes. There have been anecdotes from some space shuttle astronauts who also complained about vision change, but it does not appear they had long-lasting effects from the much shorter space flights that typically lasted up to about three weeks.
“What we’re seeing appears to occur within the first couple of months of flight and appears to level off, plateau after about four to five months,” Gibson said.
“If it’s just a matter of giving them a stronger prescription, we can live with that,” he said. “But if there is an elevated intracranial pressure as the cause of this, we have to be concerned about other neurologic effects."
That means there could be other effects on the body that haven’t become apparent.
This is why a three-year mission to Mars is in question.
It would be humans' next great leap, and NASA is spending almost $18 billion over the next five years to develop a heavy lift rocket that would take astronauts to the Red Planet or even to an asteroid. They would travel in a new spacecraft, Orion.
But right now, a trip to Mars is still more science fiction than fact. No one is calling this vision problem a showstopper, yet the program’s price tag begs for a solution to be found fast so NASA won’t be building the world’s largest, fastest rocket to nowhere.
Dr. Bruce Ehni, a neurosurgeon at the VA Medical Center at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, has consulted with NASA and is the only neurosurgeon on their panel.
“If they can’t predict who is at risk ... they put his health in jeopardy. They put, possibly, the mission in jeopardy if he can’t see or do his job effectively,” he said.
But Barratt thinks that any deep space venture to Mars is still 20 years away. He’s hoping that spacecraft will be a whole lot faster than anything the space agency can fly now.
“You fly fast, and you don’t worry,” he said, with a grin.
“I’m still hopeful that in 20 years, we’ll have advanced propulsion capabilities that can get us there in a matter of weeks to a few months. Then, a lot of these problems go away,” he said.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
FrankLuskaFeb 12, 2012
Ever get the idea THEY are both corrupt as Hell.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on a government-provided social safety net, Americans of limited means had to hope for "support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups." Here is what the Heritage report has to say about Social Security and similar government programs:
Financial help for those in need has also changed profoundly. Local, community-based charitable organizations once provided the majority of aid, resulting in a personal relationship between those who received assistance and those who provided it. Today, Social Security and other government programs provide much or all of the income to low-income and indigent households. Nearly all the financial support that was once provided to temporarily unemployed workers by unions, mutual-aid societies, and local charities is now provided by federal income, food, and health programs.
This shift from local, community-based, mutual-aid assistance to anonymous government payments has clearly altered the relationship between the receiver and the provider of the assistance. In the past, a person in need depended on help from people and organizations in his or her local community. The community representatives were generally aware of the person's needs and tailored the assistance to meet those needs within the community's budgetary constraints. Today, housing and other needs are addressed by government employees to whom the person in need is a complete stranger, and who have few or no ties to the community in which the needy person lives.
Both cases of aid involve a dependent relationship. However, support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups aims to restore a person to full flourishing and personal responsibility, and, ultimately, to be able to aid another person in turn. This kind of reciprocal expectation does not characterize the dependent relationship with the political system.
And it's nostalgia for the good old days is just as strong when it comes to Medicare. The report says: "Regardless of whether the medical and financial results are better today, the relationship between the people who receive health care assistance and those who pay for it has changed fundamentally. Few would dispute that this change has affected the total cost of health care, and the relationships among patients, doctors, and hospitals, negatively."Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on a government-provided social safety net, Americans of limited means had to hope for "support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups." Here is what the Heritage report has to say about Social Security and similar government programs:
Financial help for those in need has also changed profoundly. Local, community-based charitable organizations once provided the majority of aid, resulting in a personal relationship between those who received assistance and those who provided it. Today, Social Security and other government programs provide much or all of the income to low-income and indigent households. Nearly all the financial support that was once provided to temporarily unemployed workers by unions, mutual-aid societies, and local charities is now provided by federal income, food, and health programs.
This shift from local, community-based, mutual-aid assistance to anonymous government payments has clearly altered the relationship between the receiver and the provider of the assistance. In the past, a person in need depended on help from people and organizations in his or her local community. The community representatives were generally aware of the person's needs and tailored the assistance to meet those needs within the community's budgetary constraints. Today, housing and other needs are addressed by government employees to whom the person in need is a complete stranger, and who have few or no ties to the community in which the needy person lives.
Both cases of aid involve a dependent relationship. However, support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups aims to restore a person to full flourishing and personal responsibility, and, ultimately, to be able to aid another person in turn. This kind of reciprocal expectation does not characterize the dependent relationship with the political system.
And it's nostalgia for the good old days is just as strong when it comes to Medicare. The report says: "Regardless of whether the medical and financial results are better today, the relationship between the people who receive health care assistance and those who pay for it has changed fundamentally. Few would dispute that this change has affected the total cost of health care, and the relationships among patients, doctors, and hospitals, negatively."Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on a government-provided social safety net, Americans of limited means had to hope for "support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups." Here is what the Heritage report has to say about Social Security and similar government programs:
Financial help for those in need has also changed profoundly. Local, community-based charitable organizations once provided the majority of aid, resulting in a personal relationship between those who received assistance and those who provided it. Today, Social Security and other government programs provide much or all of the income to low-income and indigent households. Nearly all the financial support that was once provided to temporarily unemployed workers by unions, mutual-aid societies, and local charities is now provided by federal income, food, and health programs.
This shift from local, community-based, mutual-aid assistance to anonymous government payments has clearly altered the relationship between the receiver and the provider of the assistance. In the past, a person in need depended on help from people and organizations in his or her local community. The community representatives were generally aware of the person's needs and tailored the assistance to meet those needs within the community's budgetary constraints. Today, housing and other needs are addressed by government employees to whom the person in need is a complete stranger, and who have few or no ties to the community in which the needy person lives.
Both cases of aid involve a dependent relationship. However, support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups aims to restore a person to full flourishing and personal responsibility, and, ultimately, to be able to aid another person in turn. This kind of reciprocal expectation does not characterize the dependent relationship with the political system.
And it's nostalgia for the good old days is just as strong when it comes to Medicare. The report says: "Regardless of whether the medical and financial results are better today, the relationship between the people who receive health care assistance and those who pay for it has changed fundamentally. Few would dispute that this change has affected the total cost of health care, and the relationships among patients, doctors, and hospitals, negatively."Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
asfinktersezwutFeb 12, 2012
Harry Reid is a cancer upon the Democratic party. It boggles my mind that Democrats cannot see what idiots Pelosi and Reid are - amazing what they might have accomplished without those two fools.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on a government-provided social safety net, Americans of limited means had to hope for "support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups." Here is what the Heritage report has to say about Social Security and similar government programs:
Financial help for those in need has also changed profoundly. Local, community-based charitable organizations once provided the majority of aid, resulting in a personal relationship between those who received assistance and those who provided it. Today, Social Security and other government programs provide much or all of the income to low-income and indigent households. Nearly all the financial support that was once provided to temporarily unemployed workers by unions, mutual-aid societies, and local charities is now provided by federal income, food, and health programs.
This shift from local, community-based, mutual-aid assistance to anonymous government payments has clearly altered the relationship between the receiver and the provider of the assistance. In the past, a person in need depended on help from people and organizations in his or her local community. The community representatives were generally aware of the person's needs and tailored the assistance to meet those needs within the community's budgetary constraints. Today, housing and other needs are addressed by government employees to whom the person in need is a complete stranger, and who have few or no ties to the community in which the needy person lives.
Both cases of aid involve a dependent relationship. However, support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups aims to restore a person to full flourishing and personal responsibility, and, ultimately, to be able to aid another person in turn. This kind of reciprocal expectation does not characterize the dependent relationship with the political system.
And it's nostalgia for the good old days is just as strong when it comes to Medicare. The report says: "Regardless of whether the medical and financial results are better today, the relationship between the people who receive health care assistance and those who pay for it has changed fundamentally. Few would dispute that this change has affected the total cost of health care, and the relationships among patients, doctors, and hospitals, negatively."Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Thank you so much. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Please, be seated.
Mr. Speaker, Mr. Vice President, members of Congress, distinguished guests, and fellow Americans, last month I went to Andrews Air Force Base and welcomed home some of our last troops to serve in Iraq. Together, we offered a final, proud salute to the colors under which more than a million of our fellow citizens fought, and several thousand gave their lives.
We gather tonight knowing that this generation of heroes has made the United States safer and more respected around the world.
For the first time in nine years, there are no Americans fighting in Iraq.
For the first time in two decades, Osama bin Laden is not a threat to this country.
Most of Al Qaida’s top lieutenants have been defeated. The Taliban’s momentum has been broken. And some troops in Afghanistan have begun to come home.
These achievements are a testament to the courage, selflessness, and teamwork of America’s armed forces. At a time when too many of our institutions have let us down, they exceed all expectations. They’re not consumed with personal ambition. They don’t obsess over their differences. They focus on the mission at hand. They work together.
Imagine what we could accomplish if we followed their example.
Think about the America within our reach: a country that leads the world in educating its people; an America that attracts a new generation of high-tech manufacturing and high-paying jobs; a future where we’re in control of our own energy; and our security and prosperity aren’t so tied to unstable parts of the world. An economy built to last, where hard work pays off and responsibility is rewarded.
We can do this. I know we can, because we’ve done it before. At the end of World War II, when another generation of heroes returned home from combat, they built the strongest economy and middle class the world has ever known.
My grandfather, a veteran of Patton’s Army, got the chance to go to college on the G.I. Bill. My grandmother, who worked on a bomber assembly line, was part of a workforce that turned out the best products on Earth.
The two of them shared the optimism of a nation that had triumphed over a depression and fascism. They understood they were part of something larger, that they were contributing to a story of success that every American had a chance to share: the basic American promise that if you worked hard, you could do well enough to raise a family, own a home, send your kids to college, and put a little away for retirement.
The defining issue of our time is how to keep that promise alive. No challenge is more urgent. No debate is more important. We can either settle for a country where a shrinking number of people do really well, while a growing number of Americans barely get by, or we can restore an economy where everyone gets a fair shot, and everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
asfinktersezwutFeb 12, 2012
A rather longwinded statement which I'm not certain has much of anything to do with Pelosi and Reid. Stating my opinion on either of those two idiots has nothing to do with healthcare or Obama - just a sad fact of reality that if those two fools hadn't dicked around in the first year of Obama's Presidency, the Democrats could have gotten more done.
laborerFeb 12, 2012
He caved. Because he couldnt get it right the first time.
mlw4428Feb 12, 2012
He's not quite caving, he just removed the ONE thing the Repukes were bitching about. Now if ONLY they could be faithful in marriages and actually LIVE UP to all that religious sludge they spew from their anus-mouths.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
It’s not really why he signed up to be an astronaut, but like it or not, Mike Barratt and his eyes have become a science project.
The eye charts he reads, the red drops that turn his eyes yellow and the ultrasounds being performed on him could determine whether he or any other astronaut ever journeys into deep space or sets foot on other worlds.
NASA’s new priority is how to protect astronauts from going blind on the years-long trip to get wherever they are going.
“I absolutely agree that this is our number one priority,” Barratt said.
Why?
Because when Barratt blasted off to the international space station, he needed eyeglasses for distance. When he returned to Earth, his distance vision was fine, but he needed reading glasses. That was more than two years ago. And he’s not getting better.
“We really need to understand this. This is a critical point for understanding how humans adapt to spaceflight,” he said.
In the past few years, about half of the astronauts aboard the international space station have developed an increasing pressure inside their heads, an intracranial pressure that reshapes their optic nerve, causing a significant shift in the eyesight of male astronauts. Doctors call it papilledema.
Female space travelers have not been affected.
Some of the astronauts slowly recover. Others have not.
Space station astronauts typically spend about six months in orbit.
Barratt is one of 10 male astronauts, all older than 45, who have not recovered. Barratt returned from a six-month stint aboard the station in October 2009 and has experienced a profound change in his sight.
He used to be nearsighted. But now, the space veteran says he’s eagle-eyed at long distance but needs glasses for reading. There is no treatment and no answers as to why female space flyers are not affected.
CNN spent part of a day with Barratt, watching as doctors monitored his progress with high-resolution testing as they try to understand how the weightless environment of space is causing half of all space station astronauts to have this vision change. Today, space station astronauts fly with specially designed variable focus glasses to help combat the vision shift.
“The big benefit of these is that they allow us to adjust for significant prescription changes,” said Dr. Robert Gibson, a senior vision consultant, who was brought in to help study the problem.
Doctors have found that Barratt’s retinas have microscopic folds or wrinkles on them, and the back of his eye, the optic nerve, is no longer round but has flattened.
“I think this is showing that there are physiologic aspects of adaption to spaceflight we weren’t seeing before,” said Barratt.
This raises a red flag for all of NASA’s plans for long-duration human space flight. The space station is supposed to be the test bed for how humans would learn to live in space, but it opens profound questions on whether humans will ever venture to Mars or to an asteroid if they are unable to figure out how the outer-space environment is affecting the eyes.
“This has all of our attention,” said Terry Taddeo, the acting chief of space medicine at Johnson Space Center in Houston.
“It is a serious problem and one we are going to have to understand more about before we would be able to send somebody into a long-duration mission away from Earth, where they would be away for years,” he said.
Right now, the only data that doctors have are from six-month tours of duty on the space station.
NASA has begun doing extensive preflight and postflight eye exams, including high-resolution MRIs of the eyes. There have been anecdotes from some space shuttle astronauts who also complained about vision change, but it does not appear they had long-lasting effects from the much shorter space flights that typically lasted up to about three weeks.
“What we’re seeing appears to occur within the first couple of months of flight and appears to level off, plateau after about four to five months,” Gibson said.
“If it’s just a matter of giving them a stronger prescription, we can live with that,” he said. “But if there is an elevated intracranial pressure as the cause of this, we have to be concerned about other neurologic effects."
That means there could be other effects on the body that haven’t become apparent.
This is why a three-year mission to Mars is in question.
It would be humans' next great leap, and NASA is spending almost $18 billion over the next five years to develop a heavy lift rocket that would take astronauts to the Red Planet or even to an asteroid. They would travel in a new spacecraft, Orion.
But right now, a trip to Mars is still more science fiction than fact. No one is calling this vision problem a showstopper, yet the program’s price tag begs for a solution to be found fast so NASA won’t be building the world’s largest, fastest rocket to nowhere.
Dr. Bruce Ehni, a neurosurgeon at the VA Medical Center at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, has consulted with NASA and is the only neurosurgeon on their panel.
“If they can’t predict who is at risk ... they put his health in jeopardy. They put, possibly, the mission in jeopardy if he can’t see or do his job effectively,” he said.
But Barratt thinks that any deep space venture to Mars is still 20 years away. He’s hoping that spacecraft will be a whole lot faster than anything the space agency can fly now.
“You fly fast, and you don’t worry,” he said, with a grin.
“I’m still hopeful that in 20 years, we’ll have advanced propulsion capabilities that can get us there in a matter of weeks to a few months. Then, a lot of these problems go away,” he said.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
It’s not really why he signed up to be an astronaut, but like it or not, Mike Barratt and his eyes have become a science project.
The eye charts he reads, the red drops that turn his eyes yellow and the ultrasounds being performed on him could determine whether he or any other astronaut ever journeys into deep space or sets foot on other worlds.
NASA’s new priority is how to protect astronauts from going blind on the years-long trip to get wherever they are going.
“I absolutely agree that this is our number one priority,” Barratt said.
Why?
Because when Barratt blasted off to the international space station, he needed eyeglasses for distance. When he returned to Earth, his distance vision was fine, but he needed reading glasses. That was more than two years ago. And he’s not getting better.
“We really need to understand this. This is a critical point for understanding how humans adapt to spaceflight,” he said.
In the past few years, about half of the astronauts aboard the international space station have developed an increasing pressure inside their heads, an intracranial pressure that reshapes their optic nerve, causing a significant shift in the eyesight of male astronauts. Doctors call it papilledema.
Female space travelers have not been affected.
Some of the astronauts slowly recover. Others have not.
Space station astronauts typically spend about six months in orbit.
Barratt is one of 10 male astronauts, all older than 45, who have not recovered. Barratt returned from a six-month stint aboard the station in October 2009 and has experienced a profound change in his sight.
He used to be nearsighted. But now, the space veteran says he’s eagle-eyed at long distance but needs glasses for reading. There is no treatment and no answers as to why female space flyers are not affected.
CNN spent part of a day with Barratt, watching as doctors monitored his progress with high-resolution testing as they try to understand how the weightless environment of space is causing half of all space station astronauts to have this vision change. Today, space station astronauts fly with specially designed variable focus glasses to help combat the vision shift.
“The big benefit of these is that they allow us to adjust for significant prescription changes,” said Dr. Robert Gibson, a senior vision consultant, who was brought in to help study the problem.
Doctors have found that Barratt’s retinas have microscopic folds or wrinkles on them, and the back of his eye, the optic nerve, is no longer round but has flattened.
“I think this is showing that there are physiologic aspects of adaption to spaceflight we weren’t seeing before,” said Barratt.
This raises a red flag for all of NASA’s plans for long-duration human space flight. The space station is supposed to be the test bed for how humans would learn to live in space, but it opens profound questions on whether humans will ever venture to Mars or to an asteroid if they are unable to figure out how the outer-space environment is affecting the eyes.
“This has all of our attention,” said Terry Taddeo, the acting chief of space medicine at Johnson Space Center in Houston.
“It is a serious problem and one we are going to have to understand more about before we would be able to send somebody into a long-duration mission away from Earth, where they would be away for years,” he said.
Right now, the only data that doctors have are from six-month tours of duty on the space station.
NASA has begun doing extensive preflight and postflight eye exams, including high-resolution MRIs of the eyes. There have been anecdotes from some space shuttle astronauts who also complained about vision change, but it does not appear they had long-lasting effects from the much shorter space flights that typically lasted up to about three weeks.
“What we’re seeing appears to occur within the first couple of months of flight and appears to level off, plateau after about four to five months,” Gibson said.
“If it’s just a matter of giving them a stronger prescription, we can live with that,” he said. “But if there is an elevated intracranial pressure as the cause of this, we have to be concerned about other neurologic effects."
That means there could be other effects on the body that haven’t become apparent.
This is why a three-year mission to Mars is in question.
It would be humans' next great leap, and NASA is spending almost $18 billion over the next five years to develop a heavy lift rocket that would take astronauts to the Red Planet or even to an asteroid. They would travel in a new spacecraft, Orion.
But right now, a trip to Mars is still more science fiction than fact. No one is calling this vision problem a showstopper, yet the program’s price tag begs for a solution to be found fast so NASA won’t be building the world’s largest, fastest rocket to nowhere.
Dr. Bruce Ehni, a neurosurgeon at the VA Medical Center at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, has consulted with NASA and is the only neurosurgeon on their panel.
“If they can’t predict who is at risk ... they put his health in jeopardy. They put, possibly, the mission in jeopardy if he can’t see or do his job effectively,” he said.
But Barratt thinks that any deep space venture to Mars is still 20 years away. He’s hoping that spacecraft will be a whole lot faster than anything the space agency can fly now.
“You fly fast, and you don’t worry,” he said, with a grin.
“I’m still hopeful that in 20 years, we’ll have advanced propulsion capabilities that can get us there in a matter of weeks to a few months. Then, a lot of these problems go away,” he said.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Thank you so much. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Please, be seated.
Mr. Speaker, Mr. Vice President, members of Congress, distinguished guests, and fellow Americans, last month I went to Andrews Air Force Base and welcomed home some of our last troops to serve in Iraq. Together, we offered a final, proud salute to the colors under which more than a million of our fellow citizens fought, and several thousand gave their lives.
We gather tonight knowing that this generation of heroes has made the United States safer and more respected around the world.
For the first time in nine years, there are no Americans fighting in Iraq.
For the first time in two decades, Osama bin Laden is not a threat to this country.
Most of Al Qaida’s top lieutenants have been defeated. The Taliban’s momentum has been broken. And some troops in Afghanistan have begun to come home.
These achievements are a testament to the courage, selflessness, and teamwork of America’s armed forces. At a time when too many of our institutions have let us down, they exceed all expectations. They’re not consumed with personal ambition. They don’t obsess over their differences. They focus on the mission at hand. They work together.
Imagine what we could accomplish if we followed their example.
Think about the America within our reach: a country that leads the world in educating its people; an America that attracts a new generation of high-tech manufacturing and high-paying jobs; a future where we’re in control of our own energy; and our security and prosperity aren’t so tied to unstable parts of the world. An economy built to last, where hard work pays off and responsibility is rewarded.
We can do this. I know we can, because we’ve done it before. At the end of World War II, when another generation of heroes returned home from combat, they built the strongest economy and middle class the world has ever known.
My grandfather, a veteran of Patton’s Army, got the chance to go to college on the G.I. Bill. My grandmother, who worked on a bomber assembly line, was part of a workforce that turned out the best products on Earth.
The two of them shared the optimism of a nation that had triumphed over a depression and fascism. They understood they were part of something larger, that they were contributing to a story of success that every American had a chance to share: the basic American promise that if you worked hard, you could do well enough to raise a family, own a home, send your kids to college, and put a little away for retirement.
The defining issue of our time is how to keep that promise alive. No challenge is more urgent. No debate is more important. We can either settle for a country where a shrinking number of people do really well, while a growing number of Americans barely get by, or we can restore an economy where everyone gets a fair shot, and everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
craig1958Feb 12, 2012
Yup, that was an impressive piece of politics. It would have been more impressive if his opponents weren't complete idiots; but you can't have everything.
I wonder if this was the plan from the begining, or if they made it up as they went along; I guess it doesn't really matter.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
The result will be MORE birth control!
Before this ban by the churches, I'm pretty sure they would have found upon any employees taking advantage of such a service-- now, women get privately contacted and the church doesn't Kwon a thing about it!
So it looks like their gambit just bit these authoritarians in the ass! Score one for the good guys,
...so that's like: Fascists 2309 -- Progressives 2. Because we stopped SOPA from passing for a few weeks. Sure the score may look a bit stacked against us -- but a week ago that was 2308 to 0. liberty and justice are picking up steam!
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
It’s not really why he signed up to be an astronaut, but like it or not, Mike Barratt and his eyes have become a science project.
The eye charts he reads, the red drops that turn his eyes yellow and the ultrasounds being performed on him could determine whether he or any other astronaut ever journeys into deep space or sets foot on other worlds.
NASA’s new priority is how to protect astronauts from going blind on the years-long trip to get wherever they are going.
“I absolutely agree that this is our number one priority,” Barratt said.
Why?
Because when Barratt blasted off to the international space station, he needed eyeglasses for distance. When he returned to Earth, his distance vision was fine, but he needed reading glasses. That was more than two years ago. And he’s not getting better.
“We really need to understand this. This is a critical point for understanding how humans adapt to spaceflight,” he said.
In the past few years, about half of the astronauts aboard the international space station have developed an increasing pressure inside their heads, an intracranial pressure that reshapes their optic nerve, causing a significant shift in the eyesight of male astronauts. Doctors call it papilledema.
Female space travelers have not been affected.
Some of the astronauts slowly recover. Others have not.
Space station astronauts typically spend about six months in orbit.
Barratt is one of 10 male astronauts, all older than 45, who have not recovered. Barratt returned from a six-month stint aboard the station in October 2009 and has experienced a profound change in his sight.
He used to be nearsighted. But now, the space veteran says he’s eagle-eyed at long distance but needs glasses for reading. There is no treatment and no answers as to why female space flyers are not affected.
CNN spent part of a day with Barratt, watching as doctors monitored his progress with high-resolution testing as they try to understand how the weightless environment of space is causing half of all space station astronauts to have this vision change. Today, space station astronauts fly with specially designed variable focus glasses to help combat the vision shift.
“The big benefit of these is that they allow us to adjust for significant prescription changes,” said Dr. Robert Gibson, a senior vision consultant, who was brought in to help study the problem.
Doctors have found that Barratt’s retinas have microscopic folds or wrinkles on them, and the back of his eye, the optic nerve, is no longer round but has flattened.
“I think this is showing that there are physiologic aspects of adaption to spaceflight we weren’t seeing before,” said Barratt.
This raises a red flag for all of NASA’s plans for long-duration human space flight. The space station is supposed to be the test bed for how humans would learn to live in space, but it opens profound questions on whether humans will ever venture to Mars or to an asteroid if they are unable to figure out how the outer-space environment is affecting the eyes.
“This has all of our attention,” said Terry Taddeo, the acting chief of space medicine at Johnson Space Center in Houston.
“It is a serious problem and one we are going to have to understand more about before we would be able to send somebody into a long-duration mission away from Earth, where they would be away for years,” he said.
Right now, the only data that doctors have are from six-month tours of duty on the space station.
NASA has begun doing extensive preflight and postflight eye exams, including high-resolution MRIs of the eyes. There have been anecdotes from some space shuttle astronauts who also complained about vision change, but it does not appear they had long-lasting effects from the much shorter space flights that typically lasted up to about three weeks.
“What we’re seeing appears to occur within the first couple of months of flight and appears to level off, plateau after about four to five months,” Gibson said.
“If it’s just a matter of giving them a stronger prescription, we can live with that,” he said. “But if there is an elevated intracranial pressure as the cause of this, we have to be concerned about other neurologic effects."
That means there could be other effects on the body that haven’t become apparent.
This is why a three-year mission to Mars is in question.
It would be humans' next great leap, and NASA is spending almost $18 billion over the next five years to develop a heavy lift rocket that would take astronauts to the Red Planet or even to an asteroid. They would travel in a new spacecraft, Orion.
But right now, a trip to Mars is still more science fiction than fact. No one is calling this vision problem a showstopper, yet the program’s price tag begs for a solution to be found fast so NASA won’t be building the world’s largest, fastest rocket to nowhere.
Dr. Bruce Ehni, a neurosurgeon at the VA Medical Center at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, has consulted with NASA and is the only neurosurgeon on their panel.
“If they can’t predict who is at risk ... they put his health in jeopardy. They put, possibly, the mission in jeopardy if he can’t see or do his job effectively,” he said.
But Barratt thinks that any deep space venture to Mars is still 20 years away. He’s hoping that spacecraft will be a whole lot faster than anything the space agency can fly now.
“You fly fast, and you don’t worry,” he said, with a grin.
“I’m still hopeful that in 20 years, we’ll have advanced propulsion capabilities that can get us there in a matter of weeks to a few months. Then, a lot of these problems go away,” he said.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Reply
generalbulldog1 day 9 hr ago
+27 diggs
DiggBury
Well played, Mr. President.
Reply1 Reply - Top reply has 3 diggs
Rizing_Son34 min ago
+3 diggs
DiggBury
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on a
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.
assassyn360Feb 12, 2012
Hahahaha!
generalbulldogFeb 11, 2012
Well played, Mr. President.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on a government-provided social safety net, Americans of limited means had to hope for "support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups." Here is what the Heritage report has to say about Social Security and similar government programs:
Financial help for those in need has also changed profoundly. Local, community-based charitable organizations once provided the majority of aid, resulting in a personal relationship between those who received assistance and those who provided it. Today, Social Security and other government programs provide much or all of the income to low-income and indigent households. Nearly all the financial support that was once provided to temporarily unemployed workers by unions, mutual-aid societies, and local charities is now provided by federal income, food, and health programs.
This shift from local, community-based, mutual-aid assistance to anonymous government payments has clearly altered the relationship between the receiver and the provider of the assistance. In the past, a person in need depended on help from people and organizations in his or her local community. The community representatives were generally aware of the person's needs and tailored the assistance to meet those needs within the community's budgetary constraints. Today, housing and other needs are addressed by government employees to whom the person in need is a complete stranger, and who have few or no ties to the community in which the needy person lives.
Both cases of aid involve a dependent relationship. However, support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups aims to restore a person to full flourishing and personal responsibility, and, ultimately, to be able to aid another person in turn. This kind of reciprocal expectation does not characterize the dependent relationship with the political system.
And it's nostalgia for the good old days is just as strong when it comes to Medicare. The report says: "Regardless of whether the medical and financial results are better today, the relationship between the people who receive health care assistance and those who pay for it has changed fundamentally. Few would dispute that this change has affected the total cost of health care, and the relationships among patients, doctors, and hospitals, negatively."
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.
cherwilcoFeb 12, 2012
sorry generalbulldog for the comment hijack but this needs to be near the top:
hey digg staff, if all someone has to do when the don't like a topic is turn on their bot and destroy the comments page then whats the use of digg?
please clean house willya?
Rizing_Son
qntmdnmcs
heliosPR1M3
WTF?
mortventFeb 12, 2012
And the funny thing is, it's not about paying for it.
Any money paid to an insurance company will go in one big pot, so the only way out of paying is to not buy any health insurance.
But there is also the catch 22 on your taxes, which help fund government health care plans which will all include contraceptives in their coverage.
So regardless they are paying for them.
cowicideFeb 12, 2012
FTA:
" ... Insurance companies are down with the plan, because ... contraception actually saves insurance companies money, since it's cheaper than abortion and far cheaper than childbirth ... "
TaliscatFeb 12, 2012
I think from his past posts he means the Catholics are paying for contraception regardless of having to offer it in a company plan
mortventFeb 12, 2012
Gee, guess you missed the point. The issue was them having to offer the option offer the extra coverage, and have to help pay for the birth control if they were a catholic owned business.
But they got rendered mute by an opt-out that lets the insurance company offer it.
And regardless they are caught having to pay for contraceptives one way or another.
cowicideFeb 12, 2012
mortvent, I wasn't picking a fight or disagreeing with you.
I was just adding that in the end it's a cost savings to the insurance companies so they're happy to pick up the bill for contraception anyway (despite religious people who live in the dark ages or otherwise).
And, needless medical procedures and unwanted pregnancies costs us all in the end one way or another.
It was a very smart move on the Obama administration's part. Very well played and it benefits everyone except some morons here and there.
I hope to see more of this from Obama. Use the GOP's own stupidity against them while benefiting the American public at large.
lordharvestFeb 12, 2012
Insurance companies love it, the Catholics don't because women can get birth control cheaper... and part of their insurance premiums and as pointed out taxes go towards paying for them.
so don't see why you are getting dug up, it isn't about the insurance companies, but the catholic's dislike for the option
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
It’s not really why he signed up to be an astronaut, but like it or not, Mike Barratt and his eyes have become a science project.
The eye charts he reads, the red drops that turn his eyes yellow and the ultrasounds being performed on him could determine whether he or any other astronaut ever journeys into deep space or sets foot on other worlds.
NASA’s new priority is how to protect astronauts from going blind on the years-long trip to get wherever they are going.
“I absolutely agree that this is our number one priority,” Barratt said.
Why?
Because when Barratt blasted off to the international space station, he needed eyeglasses for distance. When he returned to Earth, his distance vision was fine, but he needed reading glasses. That was more than two years ago. And he’s not getting better.
“We really need to understand this. This is a critical point for understanding how humans adapt to spaceflight,” he said.
In the past few years, about half of the astronauts aboard the international space station have developed an increasing pressure inside their heads, an intracranial pressure that reshapes their optic nerve, causing a significant shift in the eyesight of male astronauts. Doctors call it papilledema.
Female space travelers have not been affected.
Some of the astronauts slowly recover. Others have not.
Space station astronauts typically spend about six months in orbit.
Barratt is one of 10 male astronauts, all older than 45, who have not recovered. Barratt returned from a six-month stint aboard the station in October 2009 and has experienced a profound change in his sight.
He used to be nearsighted. But now, the space veteran says he’s eagle-eyed at long distance but needs glasses for reading. There is no treatment and no answers as to why female space flyers are not affected.
CNN spent part of a day with Barratt, watching as doctors monitored his progress with high-resolution testing as they try to understand how the weightless environment of space is causing half of all space station astronauts to have this vision change. Today, space station astronauts fly with specially designed variable focus glasses to help combat the vision shift.
“The big benefit of these is that they allow us to adjust for significant prescription changes,” said Dr. Robert Gibson, a senior vision consultant, who was brought in to help study the problem.
Doctors have found that Barratt’s retinas have microscopic folds or wrinkles on them, and the back of his eye, the optic nerve, is no longer round but has flattened.
“I think this is showing that there are physiologic aspects of adaption to spaceflight we weren’t seeing before,” said Barratt.
This raises a red flag for all of NASA’s plans for long-duration human space flight. The space station is supposed to be the test bed for how humans would learn to live in space, but it opens profound questions on whether humans will ever venture to Mars or to an asteroid if they are unable to figure out how the outer-space environment is affecting the eyes.
“This has all of our attention,” said Terry Taddeo, the acting chief of space medicine at Johnson Space Center in Houston.
“It is a serious problem and one we are going to have to understand more about before we would be able to send somebody into a long-duration mission away from Earth, where they would be away for years,” he said.
Right now, the only data that doctors have are from six-month tours of duty on the space station.
NASA has begun doing extensive preflight and postflight eye exams, including high-resolution MRIs of the eyes. There have been anecdotes from some space shuttle astronauts who also complained about vision change, but it does not appear they had long-lasting effects from the much shorter space flights that typically lasted up to about three weeks.
“What we’re seeing appears to occur within the first couple of months of flight and appears to level off, plateau after about four to five months,” Gibson said.
“If it’s just a matter of giving them a stronger prescription, we can live with that,” he said. “But if there is an elevated intracranial pressure as the cause of this, we have to be concerned about other neurologic effects."
That means there could be other effects on the body that haven’t become apparent.
This is why a three-year mission to Mars is in question.
It would be humans' next great leap, and NASA is spending almost $18 billion over the next five years to develop a heavy lift rocket that would take astronauts to the Red Planet or even to an asteroid. They would travel in a new spacecraft, Orion.
But right now, a trip to Mars is still more science fiction than fact. No one is calling this vision problem a showstopper, yet the program’s price tag begs for a solution to be found fast so NASA won’t be building the world’s largest, fastest rocket to nowhere.
Dr. Bruce Ehni, a neurosurgeon at the VA Medical Center at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, has consulted with NASA and is the only neurosurgeon on their panel.
“If they can’t predict who is at risk ... they put his health in jeopardy. They put, possibly, the mission in jeopardy if he can’t see or do his job effectively,” he said.
But Barratt thinks that any deep space venture to Mars is still 20 years away. He’s hoping that spacecraft will be a whole lot faster than anything the space agency can fly now.
“You fly fast, and you don’t worry,” he said, with a grin.
“I’m still hopeful that in 20 years, we’ll have advanced propulsion capabilities that can get us there in a matter of weeks to a few months. Then, a lot of these problems go away,” he said.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.
cherwilcoFeb 12, 2012
what in the? who is digging you up? the rest of your comments are like a copy paste from random parts of digg comment pages? dude go away
jdog7117Feb 12, 2012
I really had to check twice to make sure this title wasn't for the Onion.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on a government-provided social safety net, Americans of limited means had to hope for "support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups." Here is what the Heritage report has to say about Social Security and similar government programs:
Financial help for those in need has also changed profoundly. Local, community-based charitable organizations once provided the majority of aid, resulting in a personal relationship between those who received assistance and those who provided it. Today, Social Security and other government programs provide much or all of the income to low-income and indigent households. Nearly all the financial support that was once provided to temporarily unemployed workers by unions, mutual-aid societies, and local charities is now provided by federal income, food, and health programs.
This shift from local, community-based, mutual-aid assistance to anonymous government payments has clearly altered the relationship between the receiver and the provider of the assistance. In the past, a person in need depended on help from people and organizations in his or her local community. The community representatives were generally aware of the person's needs and tailored the assistance to meet those needs within the community's budgetary constraints. Today, housing and other needs are addressed by government employees to whom the person in need is a complete stranger, and who have few or no ties to the community in which the needy person lives.
Both cases of aid involve a dependent relationship. However, support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups aims to restore a person to full flourishing and personal responsibility, and, ultimately, to be able to aid another person in turn. This kind of reciprocal expectation does not characterize the dependent relationship with the political system.
And it's nostalgia for the good old days is just as strong when it comes to Medicare. The report says: "Regardless of whether the medical and financial results are better today, the relationship between the people who receive health care assistance and those who pay for it has changed fundamentally. Few would dispute that this change has affected the total cost of health care, and the relationships among patients, doctors, and hospitals, negatively."Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
mortventFeb 12, 2012
Got to love how spam bots come out in force now when a topic hits a sore spot, so they break the comment system.
skews13Feb 12, 2012
Dear digg staff: It's time to put an end to this charade that are the digg patriots, and their spam bots.
cherwilcoFeb 13, 2012
I went to the contact us page and linked to this mess of a comments section to tell them the same thing. apparently there not working on the weekend though so it looks like the scammers silenced this one for the time being
solitaireroseFeb 12, 2012
The fact that Obama got three of the four Republican candidates to come out against birth control is pretty amazing. I'd bet if he came out in favor of cute kitten, Santorum would say that they are evil, Gingrich would run over a few to show how much he hates them, and Romney would strap them to the roof of his car and drive a few thousand miles.
emkaysmithFeb 12, 2012
To quote the late great George Carlin, "Caught them cats napping, man."
FrankLuskaFeb 12, 2012
Speaking of ol' George, you do know, that he knew, that ALL of Government is corrupt, can you give us all a date when the savings the insurance company receives will be transferred to the one percent-ers bank accounts, they sure aren't going to lower anyone's rates.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
The GOP are the biggest group of pretenders ever.
One of the most expensive residential parts of the United States capital city is called Georgetown. It floods. it is home of the university by the same name where politicians and diplomats are schooled to learn their craft.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington,_D.C.#Climate
One of the other pricier places to live in the same region is Old Town Alexandria.
As you might have guessed, people have been living there a long time! And, it has been flooding a long time.
It is built along the river and as you read in the article above, the river floods a lot. It is right at sea level.
http://oldtownalexandria.patch.com/articles/old-town-alexandria-recovers-from-hurricane-irene
The Mississippi river you might have heard floods a lot too. Yet still people settle there. Why? Rich farm land thanks to the fertile soil that has been deposited in the area by of all things, the floods, for millions of years. Also, the river is a handy source of transportation.
California has fault lines and earthquakes all over the place. Kansas, tornadoes. Texas and California, wildfires. Northeastern US, blizzards and floods. L.A., California has a shortage of water. But other parts of the state suffer from chronic mudslides. Malibu, California, favored by the rich is constantly eroding and houses are built on the eroding cliff/hill edges nevertheless. New York and New Jersey, tons of man made pollutants -- which you can smell from your car as you drive through parts of them. Arkansas, nonstop earthquakes compliments of fracking which actually did stop when the state temporarily suspended fracking authorization and resumed with the state dropped the suspension. In Minnesota, you have heavy penetration of West Nile Virus among the mosquito population. Violent, organized crime gangs in the last decade or two have settled across the major US cities, outlying suburbs, and where there is meat packing or poultry industries in the rural areas as well. In Arizona and other states with lots of dessert, not many clouds, you could be looking at an extra high risk of skin cancer as well as future water shortages.
The very geographic forces that created extra useful places to live in the US make them extra dangerous. And in the areas that were well off in one way or another but not dangerous, crime gangs moved into.
I don't think it would be hard to pick any part of the country where people live and make at least one argument that it was "stupid" to live there.
Odds are, it will be better in many ways than a lot of other places too.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Bachus is a typically corrupt GOP bastard and this has been a long time coming... Check out these direct quotes from the pig:
"In an interview where he spoke about the outlook he would bring to his chairmanship of the Financial Services Committee, Bachus received criticism for suggesting that it was government's role to "serve the banks". To the Birmingham News, Bachus said "In Washington, the view is that the banks are to be regulated, and my view is that Washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks." Bachus later clarified his words by saying that he meant that regulators should set guidelines for banks but not micromanage them."
Yeah, right...Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
vitriolandangstFeb 12, 2012
If Obama did this brilliant bit of Judo on a wider scale... My fantasy is that January 2013, Rove Rumsfeld Bush Cheney -- and a few dozen others get jailed and tried by the anti constitutional tyranny they helped to create.
What if all this time Obama was pretending to play ball -- he was actually using his Domestic spying powers to gather evidence on the neocons and fifth-columnists like the Koch brothers?
We probably aren't this lucky, but a guy can dream, can't he?
bluenose2Feb 12, 2012
We could also have the Audacity to Hope your dream will come true.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
If Obama did this brilliant bit of Judo on a wider scale... My fantasy is that January 2013, Rove Rumsfeld Bush Cheney -- and a few dozen others get jailed and tried by the anti constitutional tyranny they helped to create.
What if all this time Obama was pretending to play ball -- he was actually using his Domestic spying powers to gather evidence on the neocons and fifth-columnists like the Koch brothers?
We probably aren't this lucky, but a guy can dream, can't he?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
If Obama did this brilliant bit of Judo on a wider scale... My fantasy is that January 2013, Rove Rumsfeld Bush Cheney -- and a few dozen others get jailed and tried by the anti constitutional tyranny they helped to create.
What if all this time Obama was pretending to play ball -- he was actually using his Domestic spying powers to gather evidence on the neocons and fifth-columnists like the Koch brothers?
We probably aren't this lucky, but a guy can dream, can't he?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
If Obama did this brilliant bit of Judo on a wider scale... My fantasy is that January 2013, Rove Rumsfeld Bush Cheney -- and a few dozen others get jailed and tried by the anti constitutional tyranny they helped to create.
What if all this time Obama was pretending to play ball -- he was actually using his Domestic spying powers to gather evidence on the neocons and fifth-columnists like the Koch brothers?
We probably aren't this lucky, but a guy can dream, can't he?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
laborerFeb 12, 2012
???
Damn, America, you scary.
----------
FDR locked up Japanese Americans after Pearl Harbor. Internment based on race.
After 9/11, Bush did /NOT/ intern Arab Americans.
He also presided during a period of rampant growth of the worlds largest free and open information network.
Quit being sensational.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
If Obama did this brilliant bit of Judo on a wider scale... My fantasy is that January 2013, Rove Rumsfeld Bush Cheney -- and a few dozen others get jailed and tried by the anti constitutional tyranny they helped to create.
What if all this time Obama was pretending to play ball -- he was actually using his Domestic spying powers to gather evidence on the neocons and fifth-columnists like the Koch brothers?
We probably aren't this lucky, but a guy can dream, can't he?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
If Obama did this brilliant bit of Judo on a wider scale... My fantasy is that January 2013, Rove Rumsfeld Bush Cheney -- and a few dozen others get jailed and tried by the anti constitutional tyranny they helped to create.
What if all this time Obama was pretending to play ball -- he was actually using his Domestic spying powers to gather evidence on the neocons and fifth-columnists like the Koch brothers?
We probably aren't this lucky, but a guy can dream, can't he?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
If Obama did this brilliant bit of Judo on a wider scale... My fantasy is that January 2013, Rove Rumsfeld Bush Cheney -- and a few dozen others get jailed and tried by the anti constitutional tyranny they helped to create.
What if all this time Obama was pretending to play ball -- he was actually using his Domestic spying powers to gather evidence on the neocons and fifth-columnists like the Koch brothers?
We probably aren't this lucky, but a guy can dream, can't he?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
It’s not really why he signed up to be an astronaut, but like it or not, Mike Barratt and his eyes have become a science project.
The eye charts he reads, the red drops that turn his eyes yellow and the ultrasounds being performed on him could determine whether he or any other astronaut ever journeys into deep space or sets foot on other worlds.
NASA’s new priority is how to protect astronauts from going blind on the years-long trip to get wherever they are going.
“I absolutely agree that this is our number one priority,” Barratt said.
Why?
Because when Barratt blasted off to the international space station, he needed eyeglasses for distance. When he returned to Earth, his distance vision was fine, but he needed reading glasses. That was more than two years ago. And he’s not getting better.
“We really need to understand this. This is a critical point for understanding how humans adapt to spaceflight,” he said.
In the past few years, about half of the astronauts aboard the international space station have developed an increasing pressure inside their heads, an intracranial pressure that reshapes their optic nerve, causing a significant shift in the eyesight of male astronauts. Doctors call it papilledema.
Female space travelers have not been affected.
Some of the astronauts slowly recover. Others have not.
Space station astronauts typically spend about six months in orbit.
Barratt is one of 10 male astronauts, all older than 45, who have not recovered. Barratt returned from a six-month stint aboard the station in October 2009 and has experienced a profound change in his sight.
He used to be nearsighted. But now, the space veteran says he’s eagle-eyed at long distance but needs glasses for reading. There is no treatment and no answers as to why female space flyers are not affected.
CNN spent part of a day with Barratt, watching as doctors monitored his progress with high-resolution testing as they try to understand how the weightless environment of space is causing half of all space station astronauts to have this vision change. Today, space station astronauts fly with specially designed variable focus glasses to help combat the vision shift.
“The big benefit of these is that they allow us to adjust for significant prescription changes,” said Dr. Robert Gibson, a senior vision consultant, who was brought in to help study the problem.
Doctors have found that Barratt’s retinas have microscopic folds or wrinkles on them, and the back of his eye, the optic nerve, is no longer round but has flattened.
“I think this is showing that there are physiologic aspects of adaption to spaceflight we weren’t seeing before,” said Barratt.
This raises a red flag for all of NASA’s plans for long-duration human space flight. The space station is supposed to be the test bed for how humans would learn to live in space, but it opens profound questions on whether humans will ever venture to Mars or to an asteroid if they are unable to figure out how the outer-space environment is affecting the eyes.
“This has all of our attention,” said Terry Taddeo, the acting chief of space medicine at Johnson Space Center in Houston.
“It is a serious problem and one we are going to have to understand more about before we would be able to send somebody into a long-duration mission away from Earth, where they would be away for years,” he said.
Right now, the only data that doctors have are from six-month tours of duty on the space station.
NASA has begun doing extensive preflight and postflight eye exams, including high-resolution MRIs of the eyes. There have been anecdotes from some space shuttle astronauts who also complained about vision change, but it does not appear they had long-lasting effects from the much shorter space flights that typically lasted up to about three weeks.
“What we’re seeing appears to occur within the first couple of months of flight and appears to level off, plateau after about four to five months,” Gibson said.
“If it’s just a matter of giving them a stronger prescription, we can live with that,” he said. “But if there is an elevated intracranial pressure as the cause of this, we have to be concerned about other neurologic effects."
That means there could be other effects on the body that haven’t become apparent.
This is why a three-year mission to Mars is in question.
It would be humans' next great leap, and NASA is spending almost $18 billion over the next five years to develop a heavy lift rocket that would take astronauts to the Red Planet or even to an asteroid. They would travel in a new spacecraft, Orion.
But right now, a trip to Mars is still more science fiction than fact. No one is calling this vision problem a showstopper, yet the program’s price tag begs for a solution to be found fast so NASA won’t be building the world’s largest, fastest rocket to nowhere.
Dr. Bruce Ehni, a neurosurgeon at the VA Medical Center at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, has consulted with NASA and is the only neurosurgeon on their panel.
“If they can’t predict who is at risk ... they put his health in jeopardy. They put, possibly, the mission in jeopardy if he can’t see or do his job effectively,” he said.
But Barratt thinks that any deep space venture to Mars is still 20 years away. He’s hoping that spacecraft will be a whole lot faster than anything the space agency can fly now.
“You fly fast, and you don’t worry,” he said, with a grin.
“I’m still hopeful that in 20 years, we’ll have advanced propulsion capabilities that can get us there in a matter of weeks to a few months. Then, a lot of these problems go away,” he said.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
jaketyson85Feb 12, 2012
Good for Obama. Population and famine out of control around the world, religion proven to BS to anyone with even half a rational brain - take your birth control already and don't sweat it. I promise you that Jesus/Jehovah/Allah is not going to banish you to a place of eternal hellfire for it.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
This is too good and bears repeating:
theghoul 8 hr 10 min ago:
If this was his intent, that was a pretty smooth move.
I paraphrase:
Obama: Birth control should be free for employees of religious based organizations
GOP: What? Are you nuts, that's imposing on religious beliefs. You Muslim Kenyan commie!
Catholic Church: That's right! Contraception is evil even though 99.9 % of women used it. Just abstain from sex. Just say no. STOP ALL THAT LAUGHING!
Insurance companies: Uh..we're cool with this. Babies cost a s**t-ton of our money. We like our money and want to keep it.
Obama: OK, OK, stop all that bitching. Religious based organizations don't have offer free birth control, but, the insurance companies should be allowed to contact ladies directly. Religious based employers are off the hook.
Catholic Church: YaaaY! We win!
Insurance companies: Yes *you* won..(snickers). Time to print some literature saying "Babies cost money! Let us tell you about this cool thing called an IUD. Its Free! Get your party on". Get me the mass mailing department!
Ladies: Wait.. contraception is free? *snaps fingers*. Obama 2012!
Obama: I compromised for the good of all Americans (snickers).
GOP: What just happened? Why is Ashton Kutcher laughing over there?
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
If Obama did this brilliant bit of Judo on a wider scale... My fantasy is that January 2013, Rove Rumsfeld Bush Cheney -- and a few dozen others get jailed and tried by the anti constitutional tyranny they helped to create.
What if all this time Obama was pretending to play ball -- he was actually using his Domestic spying powers to gather evidence on the neocons and fifth-columnists like the Koch brothers?
We probably aren't this lucky, but a guy can dream, can't he?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
If Obama did this brilliant bit of Judo on a wider scale... My fantasy is that January 2013, Rove Rumsfeld Bush Cheney -- and a few dozen others get jailed and tried by the anti constitutional tyranny they helped to create.
What if all this time Obama was pretending to play ball -- he was actually using his Domestic spying powers to gather evidence on the neocons and fifth-columnists like the Koch brothers?
We probably aren't this lucky, but a guy can dream, can't he?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
If Obama did this brilliant bit of Judo on a wider scale... My fantasy is that January 2013, Rove Rumsfeld Bush Cheney -- and a few dozen others get jailed and tried by the anti constitutional tyranny they helped to create.
What if all this time Obama was pretending to play ball -- he was actually using his Domestic spying powers to gather evidence on the neocons and fifth-columnists like the Koch brothers?
We probably aren't this lucky, but a guy can dream, can't he?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
BSM_45Feb 12, 2012
It is not really about birth control it is about freedom! I for one am tired of being told what to do & how to do it. I have had freedom for a long time now, so I would know what I am going to miss. Look back in history & see what this country was built on. Then if you still think it is ok for the prez & his cronies in the news & DC to tell us what to do, we may be able to have a conversation that makes sense.
roguegeniusFeb 12, 2012
Pretty much. I'm wondering if the brilliant Obama had anything to do with Santorum's surge. He has to be delighted.
particleman420Feb 12, 2012
"Santorum" and "Surge" are just wrong together
vitriolandangstFeb 12, 2012
It's not as bad as "Santorum" and "foamy".
/winces in pain from mental image.
countess666Feb 12, 2012
frothy and foamy are pretty simular right?
but a surge of frothy... that's FAR more disturbing.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on a government-provided social safety net, Americans of limited means had to hope for "support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups." Here is what the Heritage report has to say about Social Security and similar government programs:
Financial help for those in need has also changed profoundly. Local, community-based charitable organizations once provided the majority of aid, resulting in a personal relationship between those who received assistance and those who provided it. Today, Social Security and other government programs provide much or all of the income to low-income and indigent households. Nearly all the financial support that was once provided to temporarily unemployed workers by unions, mutual-aid societies, and local charities is now provided by federal income, food, and health programs.
This shift from local, community-based, mutual-aid assistance to anonymous government payments has clearly altered the relationship between the receiver and the provider of the assistance. In the past, a person in need depended on help from people and organizations in his or her local community. The community representatives were generally aware of the person's needs and tailored the assistance to meet those needs within the community's budgetary constraints. Today, housing and other needs are addressed by government employees to whom the person in need is a complete stranger, and who have few or no ties to the community in which the needy person lives.
Both cases of aid involve a dependent relationship. However, support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups aims to restore a person to full flourishing and personal responsibility, and, ultimately, to be able to aid another person in turn. This kind of reciprocal expectation does not characterize the dependent relationship with the political system.
And it's nostalgia for the good old days is just as strong when it comes to Medicare. The report says: "Regardless of whether the medical and financial results are better today, the relationship between the people who receive health care assistance and those who pay for it has changed fundamentally. Few would dispute that this change has affected the total cost of health care, and the relationships among patients, doctors, and hospitals, negatively."Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
What’s at stake aren’t Democratic values or Republican values, but American values. And we have to reclaim them.
Let’s remember how we got here. Long before the recession, jobs and manufacturing began leaving our shores. Technology made businesses more efficient, but also made some jobs obsolete. Folks at the top saw their incomes rise like never before, but most hard- working Americans struggled with costs that were growing, paychecks that weren’t, and personal debt that kept piling up.
In 2008, the house of cards collapsed. We learned that mortgages had been sold to people who couldn’t afford or understand them. Banks had made huge bets and bonuses with other people’s money. Regulators had looked the other way, or didn’t have the authority to stop the bad behavior.
It was wrong. It was irresponsible. And it plunged our economy into a crisis that put millions out of work, saddled us with more debt, and left innocent, hard-working Americans holding the bag.
In the six months before I took office, we lost nearly 4 million jobs. And we lost another 4 million before our policies were in full effect. Those are the facts.
But so are these. In the last 22 months, businesses have created more than 3 million jobs.
Last year, they created the most jobs since 2005. American manufacturers are hiring again, creating jobs for the first time since the late 1990s. Together, we’ve agreed to cut the deficit by more than $2 trillion. And we’ve put in place new rules to hold Wall Street accountable, so a crisis like this never happens again.
The state of our union is getting stronger, and we’ve come too far to turn back now.
As long as I’m president, I will work with anyone in this chamber to build on this momentum. But I intend to fight obstruction with action, and I will oppose any effort to return to the very same policies that brought on this economic crisis in the first place.
No, we will not go back to an economy weakened by outsourcing, bad debt, and phony financial profits. Tonight, I want to speak about how we move forward and lay out a blueprint for an economy that’s built to last, an economy built on American manufacturing, American energy, skills for American workers, and a renewal of American values.
This blueprint begins with American manufacturing.
On the day I took office, our auto industry was on the verge of collapse. Some even said we should let it die. With a million jobs at stake, I refused to let that happen.
In exchange for help, we demanded responsibility. We got workers and automakers to settle their differences. We got the industry to retool and restructure. Today, General Motors is back on top as the world’s number-one automaker.
Chrysler has grown faster in the U.S. than any major car company. Ford is investing billions in U.S. plants and factories. And together, the entire industry added nearly 160,000 jobs.
We bet on American workers. We bet on American ingenuity. And tonight, the American auto industry is back.
What’s happening in Detroit can happen in other industries. It can happen in Cleveland and Pittsburgh and Raleigh. We can’t bring every job back that’s left our shore. But right now, it’s getting more expensive to do business in places like China. Meanwhile, America is more productive.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on a government-provided social safety net, Americans of limited means had to hope for "support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups." Here is what the Heritage report has to say about Social Security and similar government programs:
Financial help for those in need has also changed profoundly. Local, community-based charitable organizations once provided the majority of aid, resulting in a personal relationship between those who received assistance and those who provided it. Today, Social Security and other government programs provide much or all of the income to low-income and indigent households. Nearly all the financial support that was once provided to temporarily unemployed workers by unions, mutual-aid societies, and local charities is now provided by federal income, food, and health programs.
This shift from local, community-based, mutual-aid assistance to anonymous government payments has clearly altered the relationship between the receiver and the provider of the assistance. In the past, a person in need depended on help from people and organizations in his or her local community. The community representatives were generally aware of the person's needs and tailored the assistance to meet those needs within the community's budgetary constraints. Today, housing and other needs are addressed by government employees to whom the person in need is a complete stranger, and who have few or no ties to the community in which the needy person lives.
Both cases of aid involve a dependent relationship. However, support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups aims to restore a person to full flourishing and personal responsibility, and, ultimately, to be able to aid another person in turn. This kind of reciprocal expectation does not characterize the dependent relationship with the political system.
And it's nostalgia for the good old days is just as strong when it comes to Medicare. The report says: "Regardless of whether the medical and financial results are better today, the relationship between the people who receive health care assistance and those who pay for it has changed fundamentally. Few would dispute that this change has affected the total cost of health care, and the relationships among patients, doctors, and hospitals, negatively."Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on a government-provided social safety net, Americans of limited means had to hope for "support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups." Here is what the Heritage report has to say about Social Security and similar government programs:
Financial help for those in need has also changed profoundly. Local, community-based charitable organizations once provided the majority of aid, resulting in a personal relationship between those who received assistance and those who provided it. Today, Social Security and other government programs provide much or all of the income to low-income and indigent households. Nearly all the financial support that was once provided to temporarily unemployed workers by unions, mutual-aid societies, and local charities is now provided by federal income, food, and health programs.
This shift from local, community-based, mutual-aid assistance to anonymous government payments has clearly altered the relationship between the receiver and the provider of the assistance. In the past, a person in need depended on help from people and organizations in his or her local community. The community representatives were generally aware of the person's needs and tailored the assistance to meet those needs within the community's budgetary constraints. Today, housing and other needs are addressed by government employees to whom the person in need is a complete stranger, and who have few or no ties to the community in which the needy person lives.
Both cases of aid involve a dependent relationship. However, support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups aims to restore a person to full flourishing and personal responsibility, and, ultimately, to be able to aid another person in turn. This kind of reciprocal expectation does not characterize the dependent relationship with the political system.
And it's nostalgia for the good old days is just as strong when it comes to Medicare. The report says: "Regardless of whether the medical and financial results are better today, the relationship between the people who receive health care assistance and those who pay for it has changed fundamentally. Few would dispute that this change has affected the total cost of health care, and the relationships among patients, doctors, and hospitals, negatively."Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on a government-provided social safety net, Americans of limited means had to hope for "support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups." Here is what the Heritage report has to say about Social Security and similar government programs:
Financial help for those in need has also changed profoundly. Local, community-based charitable organizations once provided the majority of aid, resulting in a personal relationship between those who received assistance and those who provided it. Today, Social Security and other government programs provide much or all of the income to low-income and indigent households. Nearly all the financial support that was once provided to temporarily unemployed workers by unions, mutual-aid societies, and local charities is now provided by federal income, food, and health programs.
This shift from local, community-based, mutual-aid assistance to anonymous government payments has clearly altered the relationship between the receiver and the provider of the assistance. In the past, a person in need depended on help from people and organizations in his or her local community. The community representatives were generally aware of the person's needs and tailored the assistance to meet those needs within the community's budgetary constraints. Today, housing and other needs are addressed by government employees to whom the person in need is a complete stranger, and who have few or no ties to the community in which the needy person lives.
Both cases of aid involve a dependent relationship. However, support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups aims to restore a person to full flourishing and personal responsibility, and, ultimately, to be able to aid another person in turn. This kind of reciprocal expectation does not characterize the dependent relationship with the political system.
And it's nostalgia for the good old days is just as strong when it comes to Medicare. The report says: "Regardless of whether the medical and financial results are better today, the relationship between the people who receive health care assistance and those who pay for it has changed fundamentally. Few would dispute that this change has affected the total cost of health care, and the relationships among patients, doctors, and hospitals, negatively."Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on a government-provided social safety net, Americans of limited means had to hope for "support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups." Here is what the Heritage report has to say about Social Security and similar government programs:
Financial help for those in need has also changed profoundly. Local, community-based charitable organizations once provided the majority of aid, resulting in a personal relationship between those who received assistance and those who provided it. Today, Social Security and other government programs provide much or all of the income to low-income and indigent households. Nearly all the financial support that was once provided to temporarily unemployed workers by unions, mutual-aid societies, and local charities is now provided by federal income, food, and health programs.
This shift from local, community-based, mutual-aid assistance to anonymous government payments has clearly altered the relationship between the receiver and the provider of the assistance. In the past, a person in need depended on help from people and organizations in his or her local community. The community representatives were generally aware of the person's needs and tailored the assistance to meet those needs within the community's budgetary constraints. Today, housing and other needs are addressed by government employees to whom the person in need is a complete stranger, and who have few or no ties to the community in which the needy person lives.
Both cases of aid involve a dependent relationship. However, support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups aims to restore a person to full flourishing and personal responsibility, and, ultimately, to be able to aid another person in turn. This kind of reciprocal expectation does not characterize the dependent relationship with the political system.
And it's nostalgia for the good old days is just as strong when it comes to Medicare. The report says: "Regardless of whether the medical and financial results are better today, the relationship between the people who receive health care assistance and those who pay for it has changed fundamentally. Few would dispute that this change has affected the total cost of health care, and the relationships among patients, doctors, and hospitals, negatively."Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on a government-provided social safety net, Americans of limited means had to hope for "support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups." Here is what the Heritage report has to say about Social Security and similar government programs:
Financial help for those in need has also changed profoundly. Local, community-based charitable organizations once provided the majority of aid, resulting in a personal relationship between those who received assistance and those who provided it. Today, Social Security and other government programs provide much or all of the income to low-income and indigent households. Nearly all the financial support that was once provided to temporarily unemployed workers by unions, mutual-aid societies, and local charities is now provided by federal income, food, and health programs.
This shift from local, community-based, mutual-aid assistance to anonymous government payments has clearly altered the relationship between the receiver and the provider of the assistance. In the past, a person in need depended on help from people and organizations in his or her local community. The community representatives were generally aware of the person's needs and tailored the assistance to meet those needs within the community's budgetary constraints. Today, housing and other needs are addressed by government employees to whom the person in need is a complete stranger, and who have few or no ties to the community in which the needy person lives.
Both cases of aid involve a dependent relationship. However, support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups aims to restore a person to full flourishing and personal responsibility, and, ultimately, to be able to aid another person in turn. This kind of reciprocal expectation does not characterize the dependent relationship with the political system.
And it's nostalgia for the good old days is just as strong when it comes to Medicare. The report says: "Regardless of whether the medical and financial results are better today, the relationship between the people who receive health care assistance and those who pay for it has changed fundamentally. Few would dispute that this change has affected the total cost of health care, and the relationships among patients, doctors, and hospitals, negatively."Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
laborerFeb 12, 2012
Liberals are so f**king mature.
You guys are like little children, associating disgusting s**t to someones name laughing your heads off like the bored schoolkids you are.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
mlw4428Feb 12, 2012
I'm sorry, wasn't it you Repukes who ran around on Digg equating OWS with s**tting in public?
Pot, meet kettle. Now STFU.
laborerFeb 12, 2012
Because an OWS protester didnt s**t on a police car?
I dont believe Rick Santorum asked anyone to put that stuff on Google.
mistermysterFeb 12, 2012
Santorum outright insulting the LGBT community made him open season. He has no one to blame but himself over his everlingering Google problem.
It's not those liberals' fault that you are so incredibly thin-skinned.
laborerFeb 12, 2012
Hey, they can do what they want.
It only reflects on themselves how immature & disrespectful their tactics are. Everything sorts out in the end.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
The result will be MORE birth control!
Before this ban by the churches, I'm pretty sure they would have found upon any employees taking advantage of such a service-- now, women get privately contacted and the church doesn't Kwon a thing about it!
So it looks like their gambit just bit these authoritarians in the ass! Score one for the good guys,
...so that's like: Fascists 2309 -- Progressives 2.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
The result will be MORE birth control!
Before this ban by the churches, I'm pretty sure they would have found upon any employees taking advantage of such a service-- now, women get privately contacted and the church doesn't Kwon a thing about it!
So it looks like their gambit just bit these authoritarians in the ass! Score one for the good guys,
...so that's like: Fascists 2309 -- Progressives 2.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
The result will be MORE birth control!
Before this ban by the churches, I'm pretty sure they would have found upon any employees taking advantage of such a service-- now, women get privately contacted and the church doesn't Kwon a thing about it!
So it looks like their gambit just bit these authoritarians in the ass! Score one for the good guys,
...so that's like: Fascists 2309 -- Progressives 2.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
particleman420Feb 12, 2012
you should read your comments before you start dictating what other people are, mr. kettle
laborerFeb 12, 2012
Says the guy who quotes a crude internet joke that has to do with the quality of the word 'frothy' and anal sex.
Take a hike.
particleman420Feb 12, 2012
i dont have to be mature to point out that you are being hypocritical and immature.
and i didnt say anything about any of that. you inferred it. what kind of disgusting mind do you have? I was just talking about how horrible it would be to have Santorum Surging in the polls. i just fear for my country if he were to win. But you had to take it to the first thing on your mind, Frothy fecal matter and lube pertaining to anal sex.
laborerFeb 12, 2012
Right.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
It’s not really why he signed up to be an astronaut, but like it or not, Mike Barratt and his eyes have become a science project.
The eye charts he reads, the red drops that turn his eyes yellow and the ultrasounds being performed on him could determine whether he or any other astronaut ever journeys into deep space or sets foot on other worlds.
NASA’s new priority is how to protect astronauts from going blind on the years-long trip to get wherever they are going.
“I absolutely agree that this is our number one priority,” Barratt said.
Why?
Because when Barratt blasted off to the international space station, he needed eyeglasses for distance. When he returned to Earth, his distance vision was fine, but he needed reading glasses. That was more than two years ago. And he’s not getting better.
“We really need to understand this. This is a critical point for understanding how humans adapt to spaceflight,” he said.
In the past few years, about half of the astronauts aboard the international space station have developed an increasing pressure inside their heads, an intracranial pressure that reshapes their optic nerve, causing a significant shift in the eyesight of male astronauts. Doctors call it papilledema.
Female space travelers have not been affected.
Some of the astronauts slowly recover. Others have not.
Space station astronauts typically spend about six months in orbit.
Barratt is one of 10 male astronauts, all older than 45, who have not recovered. Barratt returned from a six-month stint aboard the station in October 2009 and has experienced a profound change in his sight.
He used to be nearsighted. But now, the space veteran says he’s eagle-eyed at long distance but needs glasses for reading. There is no treatment and no answers as to why female space flyers are not affected.
CNN spent part of a day with Barratt, watching as doctors monitored his progress with high-resolution testing as they try to understand how the weightless environment of space is causing half of all space station astronauts to have this vision change. Today, space station astronauts fly with specially designed variable focus glasses to help combat the vision shift.
“The big benefit of these is that they allow us to adjust for significant prescription changes,” said Dr. Robert Gibson, a senior vision consultant, who was brought in to help study the problem.
Doctors have found that Barratt’s retinas have microscopic folds or wrinkles on them, and the back of his eye, the optic nerve, is no longer round but has flattened.
“I think this is showing that there are physiologic aspects of adaption to spaceflight we weren’t seeing before,” said Barratt.
This raises a red flag for all of NASA’s plans for long-duration human space flight. The space station is supposed to be the test bed for how humans would learn to live in space, but it opens profound questions on whether humans will ever venture to Mars or to an asteroid if they are unable to figure out how the outer-space environment is affecting the eyes.
“This has all of our attention,” said Terry Taddeo, the acting chief of space medicine at Johnson Space Center in Houston.
“It is a serious problem and one we are going to have to understand more about before we would be able to send somebody into a long-duration mission away from Earth, where they would be away for years,” he said.
Right now, the only data that doctors have are from six-month tours of duty on the space station.
NASA has begun doing extensive preflight and postflight eye exams, including high-resolution MRIs of the eyes. There have been anecdotes from some space shuttle astronauts who also complained about vision change, but it does not appear they had long-lasting effects from the much shorter space flights that typically lasted up to about three weeks.
“What we’re seeing appears to occur within the first couple of months of flight and appears to level off, plateau after about four to five months,” Gibson said.
“If it’s just a matter of giving them a stronger prescription, we can live with that,” he said. “But if there is an elevated intracranial pressure as the cause of this, we have to be concerned about other neurologic effects."
That means there could be other effects on the body that haven’t become apparent.
This is why a three-year mission to Mars is in question.
It would be humans' next great leap, and NASA is spending almost $18 billion over the next five years to develop a heavy lift rocket that would take astronauts to the Red Planet or even to an asteroid. They would travel in a new spacecraft, Orion.
But right now, a trip to Mars is still more science fiction than fact. No one is calling this vision problem a showstopper, yet the program’s price tag begs for a solution to be found fast so NASA won’t be building the world’s largest, fastest rocket to nowhere.
Dr. Bruce Ehni, a neurosurgeon at the VA Medical Center at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, has consulted with NASA and is the only neurosurgeon on their panel.
“If they can’t predict who is at risk ... they put his health in jeopardy. They put, possibly, the mission in jeopardy if he can’t see or do his job effectively,” he said.
But Barratt thinks that any deep space venture to Mars is still 20 years away. He’s hoping that spacecraft will be a whole lot faster than anything the space agency can fly now.
“You fly fast, and you don’t worry,” he said, with a grin.
“I’m still hopeful that in 20 years, we’ll have advanced propulsion capabilities that can get us there in a matter of weeks to a few months. Then, a lot of these problems go away,” he said.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
A few weeks ago, the CEO of Master Lock told me that it now makes business sense for him to bring jobs back home.
Today, for the first time in 15 years, Master Lock’s unionized plant in Milwaukee is running at full capacity.
So we have a huge opportunity at this moment to bring manufacturing back. But we have to seize it. Tonight, my message to business leaders is simple: Ask yourselves what you can do to bring jobs back to your country, and your country will do everything we can to help you succeed.
We should start with our tax code. Right now, companies get tax breaks for moving jobs and profits overseas. Meanwhile, companies that choose to stay in America get hit with one of the highest tax rates in the world. It makes no sense, and everyone knows it.
So let’s change it. First, if you’re a business that wants to outsource jobs, you shouldn’t get a tax deduction for doing it.
That money should be used to cover moving expenses for companies like Master Lock that decide to bring jobs home.
Second, no American company should be able to avoid paying its fair share of taxes by moving jobs and profits overseas.
From now on, every multinational company should have to pay a basic minimum tax. And every penny should go towards lowering taxes for companies that choose to stay here and hire here in America.
Third, if you’re an American manufacturer, you should get a bigger tax cut. If you’re a high-tech manufacturer, we should double the tax deduction you get for making your products here. And if you want to relocate in a community that was hit hard when a factory left town, you should get help financing a new plant, equipment, or training for new workers.
So my message...
My message is simple. It is time to stop rewarding businesses that ship jobs overseas and start rewarding companies that create jobs right here in America. Send me these tax reforms, and I will sign them right away.
We’re also making it easier for American businesses to sell products all over the world. Two years ago, I set a goal of doubling U.S. exports over five years. With the bipartisan trade agreements we signed into law, we’re on track to meet that goal ahead of schedule.
And soon there will be millions of new customers for American goods in Panama, Colombia, and South Korea. Soon, there will be new cars on the streets of Seoul imported from Detroit, and Toledo, and Chicago.
I will go anywhere in the world to open new markets for American products. And I will not stand by when our competitors don’t play by the rules. We’ve brought trade cases against China at nearly twice the rate as the last administration, and it’s made a difference.
Over a thousand Americans are working today because we stopped a surge in Chinese tires. But we need to do more. It’s not right when another country lets our movies, music, and software be pirated. It’s not fair when foreign manufacturers have a leg up on ours only because they’re heavily subsidized.
Tonight, I’m announcing the creation of a Trade Enforcement Unit that will be charged with investigating unfair trading practices in countries like China. There will be more inspections...Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
cherwilcoFeb 12, 2012
hey digg staff, if all someone has to do when the don't like a topic is turn on their bot and destroy the comments page then whats the use of digg?
please clean house willya?
Rizing_Son
qntmdnmcs
heliosPR1M3
WTF?
ascadianFeb 12, 2012
If birth control is cheaper then child birth do you folks really think the insurance companies would pass on the savings to us lol? IMHO they will just have an even higher profit margin.
cherwilcoFeb 13, 2012
who ever said that's what this is about? its about getting birth control to women.
deomo899Feb 12, 2012
If you are a woman, you should not be voting republican. Plain and simple.
analogkid1Feb 12, 2012
Hook. Line. Sinker.
rixar13Feb 12, 2012
"Obama finally announced what the White House is proposing an accomodation of religiously affiliated employers who don't want to offer birth control coverage as part of their insurance plans. In those situations, the insurance companies will have to reach out directly to employees and offer contraception coverage for free, without going through the employer. "
Problem solved.... wink ;-)
stobbesFeb 12, 2012
Everybody who supports this should watch this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U73xKgbXh68
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
If this was his intent, that was a pretty smooth move.
I paraphrase:
Obama: Birth control should be free for employees of religious based organizations
GOP: What? Are you nuts, that's imposing on religious beliefs. You Muslim Kenyan commie!
Catholic Church: That's right! Contraception is evil even though 99.9 % of women used it. Just abstain from sex. Just say no. STOP ALL THAT LAUGHING!
Insurance companies: Uh..we're cool with this. Babies cost a s**t-ton of our money. We like our money and want to keep it.
Obama: OK, OK, stop all that bitching. Religious based organizations don't have offer free birth control, but, the insurance companies should be allowed to contact ladies directly. Religious based employers are off the hook.
Catholic Church: YaaaY! We win!
Insurance companies: Yes *you* won..(snickers). Time to print some literature saying "Babies cost money! Let us tell you about this cool thing called an IUD. Its Free! Get your party on". Get me the mass mailing department!
Ladies: Wait.. contraception is free? *snaps fingers*. Obama 2012!
Obama: I compromised for the good of all Americans (snickers).
GOP: What just happened? Why is Ashton Kutcher laughing over there?
cherwilcoFeb 13, 2012
so you would rather pay for an uncovered mother in her third trimester to give birth at an already insurance company inflated rate? I would hope that you are an intelligent enough of a person to realize that preventative medicine is exponentially cheaper than the alternative.
but my guess is you are one of the "I dont want to pay for ANYTHING" people and if so I encourage you to not use public highways, libraries, fire dept, police and military protection ok!
stobbesFeb 13, 2012
Oh, really? If this is going to save money why is it being forced upon the insurance companies by the government? If it was really going to save them money the insurance companies would have enacted this policy themselves. Affordability is not a issue with birth control. If you work a job that comes with health insurance then you make enough to afford birth control. People just choose not to use it, be it for religious reasons or they just plain don't like it.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
cherwilcoFeb 13, 2012
"if this is going to save money why is it being forced upon the insurance companies by the government?" ~stobbes
"Insurance companies are down with the plan, because as Matt Yglesias explained at Moneybox, contraception actually saves insurance companies money, since it's cheaper than abortion and far cheaper than childbirth." ~the article you didn't read
also the second half of your uneducated rant is pointless as no one is being forced to take birth control and as the tax payers don't have to pay for it because the ins companies are happy to pay for it. (remember it saves them money) then people who don't like it still don't have to pay for it!
so now what are you going to be faux outraged about?
stobbesFeb 13, 2012
Answer my damn question: "If this will save insurance companies money, why does it have to be enforced at gunpoint by the government? Why would they have not made the decision, themselves, to give away free contraception a long time ago?"Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
cherwilcoFeb 13, 2012
its not enforced you f**king dolt!
" "INSURANCE COMPANIES ARE DOWN WITH THE PLAN, because as Matt Yglesias explained at Moneybox, contraception actually saves insurance companies money, since it's cheaper than abortion and far cheaper than childbirth." ~the article you didn't read" ~from the reply you obviously didn't read either!
emphasis added for the reading impaired
and if you still think its being enforced then f**king cite a source that is based in reality to prove your point....THEN you can try asking your damn question
stobbesFeb 13, 2012
In reply to your comment below:
It is f**king enforced. Do you honestly think this is just a modest suggestion by the federal government? Do you think they're just politely asking insurance companies to give people free birth control? It's part of Obamacare, which is a law, an enforceable law. If you can't realize this simple fact than arguing with your delusional ass isn't worth my time.
cherwilcoFeb 13, 2012
so you can't prove it, wow big surprise. another fine example of a simple minded conservative inventing something to be faux outraged over.
stobbesFeb 13, 2012
http://www.healthcare.gov/law/resources/regulations/womensprevention.html
here ya go buddy, straight from the government website. look at the chart. didn't realize i had to "prove" the contraception mandate was part of obamacare, pretty much thought it was common knowledge. I fear for the future of this country when people like you can vote. while you're on the website, you should read the rest of the bill. maybe you'll come to your senses.
cherwilcoFeb 13, 2012
lol so to answer your question why is it being enforced.....
drumroll please....
because we voted on it and it passed! (except this bill doesnt start till 2014 whereas what your president just did and what this article is about is happening right now....FUN)
but maybe now you can find me a list of insurance companies that would rather pay for childbirth than contraception....GO!
crashdvisFeb 12, 2012
Rut ro lefties. You might want to stop patting yourselves on the back. Looks like it's going to get bad for The One again:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203646004577217181415407806.html?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTTopStories
FrankLuskaFeb 12, 2012
Sure to be the downfall of his reelection.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
No, its so obvious Obama is taking it Nov. COme on.
"So, this really about more more money in the health insurance companies pocket. See, i told you Liberals catered to Big Business just as much as the GOP.
And Liberals are rejoicing that they got to cater to Big Business instead of the Republicans.
Weeeeeeeeeeeeee. How does it feel to keep being fooled all the time."
Nope.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Bachus is a typically corrupt GOP bastard and this has been a long time coming... Check out these direct quotes from the pig:
"In an interview where he spoke about the outlook he would bring to his chairmanship of the Financial Services Committee, Bachus received criticism for suggesting that it was government's role to "serve the banks". To the Birmingham News, Bachus said "In Washington, the view is that the banks are to be regulated, and my view is that Washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks." Bachus later clarified his words by saying that he meant that regulators should set guidelines for banks but not micromanage them."
Yeah, right...Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Closed AccountFeb 12, 2012
Really? HE took a major hit on this. Pissed off a huge segment of the voting population, and then flip flopped and pissed off another, while not doing enough ti win back all the ones hie pissed off the first time.
Good old slate still thinking it is 2000 and people read them anymoreComment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
"Really? HE took a major hit on this. Pissed off a huge segment of the voting population, and then flip flopped and pissed off another, while not doing enough ti win back all the ones hie pissed off the first time.
Good old slate still thinking it is 2000 and people read them anymore"
Dream on.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
It’s not really why he signed up to be an astronaut, but like it or not, Mike Barratt and his eyes have become a science project.
The eye charts he reads, the red drops that turn his eyes yellow and the ultrasounds being performed on him could determine whether he or any other astronaut ever journeys into deep space or sets foot on other worlds.
NASA’s new priority is how to protect astronauts from going blind on the years-long trip to get wherever they are going.
“I absolutely agree that this is our number one priority,” Barratt said.
Why?
Because when Barratt blasted off to the international space station, he needed eyeglasses for distance. When he returned to Earth, his distance vision was fine, but he needed reading glasses. That was more than two years ago. And he’s not getting better.
“We really need to understand this. This is a critical point for understanding how humans adapt to spaceflight,” he said.
In the past few years, about half of the astronauts aboard the international space station have developed an increasing pressure inside their heads, an intracranial pressure that reshapes their optic nerve, causing a significant shift in the eyesight of male astronauts. Doctors call it papilledema.
Female space travelers have not been affected.
Some of the astronauts slowly recover. Others have not.
Space station astronauts typically spend about six months in orbit.
Barratt is one of 10 male astronauts, all older than 45, who have not recovered. Barratt returned from a six-month stint aboard the station in October 2009 and has experienced a profound change in his sight.
He used to be nearsighted. But now, the space veteran says he’s eagle-eyed at long distance but needs glasses for reading. There is no treatment and no answers as to why female space flyers are not affected.
CNN spent part of a day with Barratt, watching as doctors monitored his progress with high-resolution testing as they try to understand how the weightless environment of space is causing half of all space station astronauts to have this vision change. Today, space station astronauts fly with specially designed variable focus glasses to help combat the vision shift.
“The big benefit of these is that they allow us to adjust for significant prescription changes,” said Dr. Robert Gibson, a senior vision consultant, who was brought in to help study the problem.
Doctors have found that Barratt’s retinas have microscopic folds or wrinkles on them, and the back of his eye, the optic nerve, is no longer round but has flattened.
“I think this is showing that there are physiologic aspects of adaption to spaceflight we weren’t seeing before,” said Barratt.
This raises a red flag for all of NASA’s plans for long-duration human space flight. The space station is supposed to be the test bed for how humans would learn to live in space, but it opens profound questions on whether humans will ever venture to Mars or to an asteroid if they are unable to figure out how the outer-space environment is affecting the eyes.
“This has all of our attention,” said Terry Taddeo, the acting chief of space medicine at Johnson Space Center in Houston.
“It is a serious problem and one we are going to have to understand more about before we would be able to send somebody into a long-duration mission away from Earth, where they would be away for years,” he said.
Right now, the only data that doctors have are from six-month tours of duty on the space station.
NASA has begun doing extensive preflight and postflight eye exams, including high-resolution MRIs of the eyes. There have been anecdotes from some space shuttle astronauts who also complained about vision change, but it does not appear they had long-lasting effects from the much shorter space flights that typically lasted up to about three weeks.
“What we’re seeing appears to occur within the first couple of months of flight and appears to level off, plateau after about four to five months,” Gibson said.
“If it’s just a matter of giving them a stronger prescription, we can live with that,” he said. “But if there is an elevated intracranial pressure as the cause of this, we have to be concerned about other neurologic effects."
That means there could be other effects on the body that haven’t become apparent.
This is why a three-year mission to Mars is in question.
It would be humans' next great leap, and NASA is spending almost $18 billion over the next five years to develop a heavy lift rocket that would take astronauts to the Red Planet or even to an asteroid. They would travel in a new spacecraft, Orion.
But right now, a trip to Mars is still more science fiction than fact. No one is calling this vision problem a showstopper, yet the program’s price tag begs for a solution to be found fast so NASA won’t be building the world’s largest, fastest rocket to nowhere.
Dr. Bruce Ehni, a neurosurgeon at the VA Medical Center at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, has consulted with NASA and is the only neurosurgeon on their panel.
“If they can’t predict who is at risk ... they put his health in jeopardy. They put, possibly, the mission in jeopardy if he can’t see or do his job effectively,” he said.
But Barratt thinks that any deep space venture to Mars is still 20 years away. He’s hoping that spacecraft will be a whole lot faster than anything the space agency can fly now.
“You fly fast, and you don’t worry,” he said, with a grin.
“I’m still hopeful that in 20 years, we’ll have advanced propulsion capabilities that can get us there in a matter of weeks to a few months. Then, a lot of these problems go away,” he said.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
kalvinbFeb 12, 2012
Obama just dug his hole deeper. It is a blatant attack on religious freedom. What's the difference between forcing religious organizations pay for contraception and forcing them to cover abortions?
It's funny how the left is all about "separation of church and state" unless it suits their goals.
cherwilcoFeb 13, 2012
you realize that the free birth control being provided as a result of this is NOT tax-payer funded don't you? the health care providers are on board with giving it away to their customers as it SAVES them money. (just like all preventative medicine does)
bottom line if its not tax payer funded then the people in these religions that you feel are being attacked are actually not helping to pay for this at all!
if you think you still have an argument left you might want to educate yourself on the subject first
FrankLuskaFeb 12, 2012
So, this really about more more money in the health insurance companies pocket. See, i told you Liberals catered to Big Business just as much as the GOP.
And Liberals are rejoicing that they got to cater to Big Business instead of the Republicans.
Weeeeeeeeeeeeee. How does it feel to keep being fooled all the time.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Bachus is a typically corrupt GOP bastard and this has been a long time coming... Check out these direct quotes from the pig:
"In an interview where he spoke about the outlook he would bring to his chairmanship of the Financial Services Committee, Bachus received criticism for suggesting that it was government's role to "serve the banks". To the Birmingham News, Bachus said "In Washington, the view is that the banks are to be regulated, and my view is that Washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks." Bachus later clarified his words by saying that he meant that regulators should set guidelines for banks but not micromanage them."
Yeah, right...
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Bachus is a typically corrupt GOP bastard and this has been a long time coming... Check out these direct quotes from the pig:
"In an interview where he spoke about the outlook he would bring to his chairmanship of the Financial Services Committee, Bachus received criticism for suggesting that it was government's role to "serve the banks". To the Birmingham News, Bachus said "In Washington, the view is that the banks are to be regulated, and my view is that Washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks." Bachus later clarified his words by saying that he meant that regulators should set guidelines for banks but not micromanage them."
Yeah, right...Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Bachus is a typically corrupt GOP bastard and this has been a long time coming... Check out these direct quotes from the pig:
"In an interview where he spoke about the outlook he would bring to his chairmanship of the Financial Services Committee, Bachus received criticism for suggesting that it was government's role to "serve the banks". To the Birmingham News, Bachus said "In Washington, the view is that the banks are to be regulated, and my view is that Washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks." Bachus later clarified his words by saying that he meant that regulators should set guidelines for banks but not micromanage them."
Yeah, right...Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
kantspelwriteFeb 12, 2012
Isn't Obama lucky his mother didn't "choose" abortion?
countess666Feb 12, 2012
he's mother, like yours hopefully, CHOSE to have a child. and that's they way it should always be.
kantspelwriteFeb 12, 2012
Yes, my mother didn't have me torn limb by limb from her womb and have my skull crushed and my brains sucked out of my cranium because she didn't believe in abortion. She believed that all human life is precious.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
emkaysmithFeb 12, 2012
Too bad she didn't take a more rational approach to population control. Instead, she chose to drag down the national average IQ by another .01% of a point.
n0diggityFeb 12, 2012
Actually, the average IQ will stay the same by definition :)
Just the average intelligence will be lower
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
If this was his intent, that was a pretty smooth move.
I paraphrase:
Obama: Birth control should be free for employees of religious based organizations
GOP: What? Are you nuts, that's imposing on religious beliefs. You Muslim Kenyan commie!
Catholic Church: That's right! Contraception is evil even though 99.9 % of women used it. Just abstain from sex. Just say no. STOP ALL THAT LAUGHING!
Insurance companies: Uh..we're cool with this. Babies cost a s**t-ton of our money. We like our money and want to keep it.
Obama: OK, OK, stop all that bitching. Religious based organizations don't have offer free birth control, but, the insurance companies should be allowed to contact ladies directly. Religious based employers are off the hook.
Catholic Church: YaaaY! We win!
Insurance companies: Yes *you* won..(snickers). Time to print some literature saying "Babies cost money! Let us tell you about this cool thing called an IUD. Its Free! Get your party on". Get me the mass mailing department!
Ladies: Wait.. contraception is free? *snaps fingers*. Obama 2012!
Obama: I compromised for the good of all Americans (snickers).
GOP: What just happened? Why is Ashton Kutcher laughing over there?
kantspelwriteFeb 12, 2012
Abortion is taking an innocent life, plain and simple. You can't seem to defend your position in any other way than to attack the messenger. I don't expect anything less from the the liberals. I hope you rethink your position and think of an unborn child as a human being and worthy of your protection and kindness.
emkaysmithFeb 12, 2012
And you don't seem to recognize sarcasm when you hear it. I don't expect anything less from religious extremists.
Angry_MuppetFeb 12, 2012
Brilliant strategy Barack. Stir up controversy, fuel some more hatred, capitulate and then act like it was all some big prank.
Leadership at it finest, I can't wait to wave this empty suited waste of space bye, bye.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Whoopsadaisy! Citigroup has accidentally been charging many customers more than what they owe for months, with some of them not even realizing it was going on until the bank sent out a notification. Cit's bill-pay app for iPads was the culprit in many cases, charging customers twice what they owed for bills or mortgage payments.
The New York Times says the bug started in the iPad app around July but wasn't detected until December, after consumers' complaints about payments being off. Other mobile applications and the online bill payment system weren't affected, says Citi.
However, some customers who never even used an iPad to pay bill said they'd also been hit by double charges, something that hasn't been explained away yet. The bank is promising to reimburse customers and waive any fees incurred because of the extra charges, as well as give out a few points for its reward program.
"We take seriously the functionality of our products and services as well as the satisfaction of our clients," spokesman Andrew Brent said in a statement.
Users of Citibank Bill-Pay App Charged Twice [New York Times]
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Whoopsadaisy! Citigroup has accidentally been charging many customers more than what they owe for months, with some of them not even realizing it was going on until the bank sent out a notification. Cit's bill-pay app for iPads was the culprit in many cases, charging customers twice what they owed for bills or mortgage payments.
The New York Times says the bug started in the iPad app around July but wasn't detected until December, after consumers' complaints about payments being off. Other mobile applications and the online bill payment system weren't affected, says Citi.
However, some customers who never even used an iPad to pay bill said they'd also been hit by double charges, something that hasn't been explained away yet. The bank is promising to reimburse customers and waive any fees incurred because of the extra charges, as well as give out a few points for its reward program.
"We take seriously the functionality of our products and services as well as the satisfaction of our clients," spokesman Andrew Brent said in a statement.
Users of Citibank Bill-Pay App Charged Twice [New York Times]
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Whoopsadaisy! Citigroup has accidentally been charging many customers more than what they owe for months, with some of them not even realizing it was going on until the bank sent out a notification. Cit's bill-pay app for iPads was the culprit in many cases, charging customers twice what they owed for bills or mortgage payments.
The New York Times says the bug started in the iPad app around July but wasn't detected until December, after consumers' complaints about payments being off. Other mobile applications and the online bill payment system weren't affected, says Citi.
However, some customers who never even used an iPad to pay bill said they'd also been hit by double charges, something that hasn't been explained away yet. The bank is promising to reimburse customers and waive any fees incurred because of the extra charges, as well as give out a few points for its reward program.
"We take seriously the functionality of our products and services as well as the satisfaction of our clients," spokesman Andrew Brent said in a statement.
Users of Citibank Bill-Pay App Charged Twice [New York Times]
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Whoopsadaisy! Citigroup has accidentally been charging many customers more than what they owe for months, with some of them not even realizing it was going on until the bank sent out a notification. Cit's bill-pay app for iPads was the culprit in many cases, charging customers twice what they owed for bills or mortgage payments.
The New York Times says the bug started in the iPad app around July but wasn't detected until December, after consumers' complaints about payments being off. Other mobile applications and the online bill payment system weren't affected, says Citi.
However, some customers who never even used an iPad to pay bill said they'd also been hit by double charges, something that hasn't been explained away yet. The bank is promising to reimburse customers and waive any fees incurred because of the extra charges, as well as give out a few points for its reward program.
"We take seriously the functionality of our products and services as well as the satisfaction of our clients," spokesman Andrew Brent said in a statement.
Users of Citibank Bill-Pay App Charged Twice [New York Times]
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Whoopsadaisy! Citigroup has accidentally been charging many customers more than what they owe for months, with some of them not even realizing it was going on until the bank sent out a notification. Cit's bill-pay app for iPads was the culprit in many cases, charging customers twice what they owed for bills or mortgage payments.
The New York Times says the bug started in the iPad app around July but wasn't detected until December, after consumers' complaints about payments being off. Other mobile applications and the online bill payment system weren't affected, says Citi.
However, some customers who never even used an iPad to pay bill said they'd also been hit by double charges, something that hasn't been explained away yet. The bank is promising to reimburse customers and waive any fees incurred because of the extra charges, as well as give out a few points for its reward program.
"We take seriously the functionality of our products and services as well as the satisfaction of our clients," spokesman Andrew Brent said in a statement.
Users of Citibank Bill-Pay App Charged Twice [New York Times]
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.
BSM_45Feb 12, 2012
No-one has the right to demand that someone pay for their birth control or anything else. I don't see anywhere in the CONSTITUTION where it says it is my responsibility to pay for others "stuff." All of the people who have medical insurance will now have to pay more, is that fair, or will the cost just go to those that want the birth control? I doubt it. I believe in birth control & sterilzation, I just don't want to finance others lives. DO you?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
emkaysmithFeb 12, 2012
If you paid attention, you would understand that providing more birth control will *save* the insurance companies money -- and therefore those who pay for the premiums. Or it would if the insurance companies weren't so greedy. I doubt very much they'll actually pass on the savings.
And we expect you to abide by your assertion that no one should have to pay for other people's stuff. No public health for you, no access to publically funded highways, no using the airports the rest of us paid for. And go hire your own personal police department and fire department, because you can't use ours.
FrankLuskaFeb 12, 2012
You got it, they will not pass the savings on, this is just more money for the one percent brought to everyone from the left.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Bachus is a typically corrupt GOP bastard and this has been a long time coming... Check out these direct quotes from the pig:
"In an interview where he spoke about the outlook he would bring to his chairmanship of the Financial Services Committee, Bachus received criticism for suggesting that it was government's role to "serve the banks". To the Birmingham News, Bachus said "In Washington, the view is that the banks are to be regulated, and my view is that Washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks." Bachus later clarified his words by saying that he meant that regulators should set guidelines for banks but not micromanage them."
Yeah, right...Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
If you paid attention, you would understand that providing more birth control will *save* the insurance companies money -- and therefore those who pay for the premiums. Or it would if the insurance companies weren't so greedy. I doubt very much they'll actually pass on the savings.
And we expect you to abide by your assertion that no one should have to pay for other people's stuff. No public health for you, no access to publically funded highways, no using the airports the rest of us paid for. And go hire your own personal police department and fire department, because you can't use ours.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Reply
generalbulldog1 day 9 hr ago
+27 diggs
DiggBury
Well played, Mr. President.
Reply1 Reply - Top reply has 3 diggs
Rizing_Son34 min ago
+3 diggs
DiggBury
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on a
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
If you paid attention, you would understand that providing more birth control will *save* the insurance companies money -- and therefore those who pay for the premiums. Or it would if the insurance companies weren't so greedy. I doubt very much they'll actually pass on the savings.
And we expect you to abide by your assertion that no one should have to pay for other people's stuff. No public health for you, no access to publically funded highways, no using the airports the rest of us paid for. And go hire your own personal police department and fire department, because you can't use ours.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Reply
generalbulldog1 day 9 hr ago
+27 diggs
DiggBury
Well played, Mr. President.
Reply1 Reply - Top reply has 3 diggs
Rizing_Son34 min ago
+3 diggs
DiggBury
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on aComment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
If you paid attention, you would understand that providing more birth control will *save* the insurance companies money -- and therefore those who pay for the premiums. Or it would if the insurance companies weren't so greedy. I doubt very much they'll actually pass on the savings.
And we expect you to abide by your assertion that no one should have to pay for other people's stuff. No public health for you, no access to publically funded highways, no using the airports the rest of us paid for. And go hire your own personal police department and fire department, because you can't use ours.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Reply
generalbulldog1 day 9 hr ago
+27 diggs
DiggBury
Well played, Mr. President.
Reply1 Reply - Top reply has 3 diggs
Rizing_Son34 min ago
+3 diggs
DiggBury
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on aComment is buried, click here to see the rest.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
I paraphrase:
Obama: Birth control should be free for employees of religious based organizations
GOP: What? Are you nuts, that's imposing on religious beliefs. You Muslim Kenyan commie!
Catholic Church: That's right! Contraception is evil even though 99.9 % of women used it. Just abstain from sex. Just say no. STOP ALL THAT LAUGHING!
Insurance companies: Uh..we're cool with this. Babies cost a s**t-ton of our money. We like our money and want to keep it.
Obama: OK, OK, stop all that bitching. Religious based organizations don't have offer free birth control, but, the insurance companies should be allowed to contact ladies directly. Religious based employers are off the hook.
Catholic Church: YaaaY! We win!
Insurance companies: Yes *you* won..(snickers). Time to print some literature saying "Babies cost money! Let us tell you about this cool thing called an IUD. Its Free! Get your party on". Get me the mass mailing department!
Ladies: Wait.. contraception is free? *snaps fingers*. Obama 2012!
Obama: I compromised for the good of all Americans (snickers).
GOP: What just happened? Why is Ashton Kutcher laughing over there?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Thank you so much. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Please, be seated.
Mr. Speaker, Mr. Vice President, members of Congress, distinguished guests, and fellow Americans, last month I went to Andrews Air Force Base and welcomed home some of our last troops to serve in Iraq. Together, we offered a final, proud salute to the colors under which more than a million of our fellow citizens fought, and several thousand gave their lives.
We gather tonight knowing that this generation of heroes has made the United States safer and more respected around the world.
For the first time in nine years, there are no Americans fighting in Iraq.
For the first time in two decades, Osama bin Laden is not a threat to this country.
Most of Al Qaida’s top lieutenants have been defeated. The Taliban’s momentum has been broken. And some troops in Afghanistan have begun to come home.
These achievements are a testament to the courage, selflessness, and teamwork of America’s armed forces. At a time when too many of our institutions have let us down, they exceed all expectations. They’re not consumed with personal ambition. They don’t obsess over their differences. They focus on the mission at hand. They work together.
Imagine what we could accomplish if we followed their example.
Think about the America within our reach: a country that leads the world in educating its people; an America that attracts a new generation of high-tech manufacturing and high-paying jobs; a future where we’re in control of our own energy; and our security and prosperity aren’t so tied to unstable parts of the world. An economy built to last, where hard work pays off and responsibility is rewarded.
We can do this. I know we can, because we’ve done it before. At the end of World War II, when another generation of heroes returned home from combat, they built the strongest economy and middle class the world has ever known.
My grandfather, a veteran of Patton’s Army, got the chance to go to college on the G.I. Bill. My grandmother, who worked on a bomber assembly line, was part of a workforce that turned out the best products on Earth.
The two of them shared the optimism of a nation that had triumphed over a depression and fascism. They understood they were part of something larger, that they were contributing to a story of success that every American had a chance to share: the basic American promise that if you worked hard, you could do well enough to raise a family, own a home, send your kids to college, and put a little away for retirement.
The defining issue of our time is how to keep that promise alive. No challenge is more urgent. No debate is more important. We can either settle for a country where a shrinking number of people do really well, while a growing number of Americans barely get by, or we can restore an economy where everyone gets a fair shot, and everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
I paraphrase:
Obama: Birth control should be free for employees of religious based organizations
GOP: What? Are you nuts, that's imposing on religious beliefs. You Muslim Kenyan commie!
Catholic Church: That's right! Contraception is evil even though 99.9 % of women used it. Just abstain from sex. Just say no. STOP ALL THAT LAUGHING!
Insurance companies: Uh..we're cool with this. Babies cost a s**t-ton of our money. We like our money and want to keep it.
Obama: OK, OK, stop all that bitching. Religious based organizations don't have offer free birth control, but, the insurance companies should be allowed to contact ladies directly. Religious based employers are off the hook.
Catholic Church: YaaaY! We win!
Insurance companies: Yes *you* won..(snickers). Time to print some literature saying "Babies cost money! Let us tell you about this cool thing called an IUD. Its Free! Get your party on". Get me the mass mailing department!
Ladies: Wait.. contraception is free? *snaps fingers*. Obama 2012!
Obama: I compromised for the good of all Americans (snickers).
GOP: What just happened? Why is Ashton Kutcher laughing over there?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
FrankLuskaFeb 12, 2012
You are correct, but if Liberals and most of the Republicans have their way, the 99% will pay for everything.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
I paraphrase:
Obama: Birth control should be free for employees of religious based organizations
GOP: What? Are you nuts, that's imposing on religious beliefs. You Muslim Kenyan commie!
Catholic Church: That's right! Contraception is evil even though 99.9 % of women used it. Just abstain from sex. Just say no. STOP ALL THAT LAUGHING!
Insurance companies: Uh..we're cool with this. Babies cost a s**t-ton of our money. We like our money and want to keep it.
Obama: OK, OK, stop all that bitching. Religious based organizations don't have offer free birth control, but, the insurance companies should be allowed to contact ladies directly. Religious based employers are off the hook.
Catholic Church: YaaaY! We win!
Insurance companies: Yes *you* won..(snickers). Time to print some literature saying "Babies cost money! Let us tell you about this cool thing called an IUD. Its Free! Get your party on". Get me the mass mailing department!
Ladies: Wait.. contraception is free? *snaps fingers*. Obama 2012!
Obama: I compromised for the good of all Americans (snickers).
GOP: What just happened? Why is Ashton Kutcher laughing over there?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
I paraphrase:
Obama: Birth control should be free for employees of religious based organizations
GOP: What? Are you nuts, that's imposing on religious beliefs. You Muslim Kenyan commie!
Catholic Church: That's right! Contraception is evil even though 99.9 % of women used it. Just abstain from sex. Just say no. STOP ALL THAT LAUGHING!
Insurance companies: Uh..we're cool with this. Babies cost a s**t-ton of our money. We like our money and want to keep it.
Obama: OK, OK, stop all that bitching. Religious based organizations don't have offer free birth control, but, the insurance companies should be allowed to contact ladies directly. Religious based employers are off the hook.
Catholic Church: YaaaY! We win!
Insurance companies: Yes *you* won..(snickers). Time to print some literature saying "Babies cost money! Let us tell you about this cool thing called an IUD. Its Free! Get your party on". Get me the mass mailing department!
Ladies: Wait.. contraception is free? *snaps fingers*. Obama 2012!
Obama: I compromised for the good of all Americans (snickers).
GOP: What just happened? Why is Ashton Kutcher laughing over there?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Reply
generalbulldog1 day 9 hr ago
+27 diggs
DiggBury
Well played, Mr. President.
Reply1 Reply - Top reply has 3 diggs
Rizing_Son34 min ago
+3 diggs
DiggBury
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on a
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Reply
generalbulldog1 day 9 hr ago
+27 diggs
DiggBury
Well played, Mr. President.
Reply1 Reply - Top reply has 3 diggs
Rizing_Son34 min ago
+3 diggs
DiggBury
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on aComment is buried, click here to see the rest.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
A few weeks ago, the CEO of Master Lock told me that it now makes business sense for him to bring jobs back home.
Today, for the first time in 15 years, Master Lock’s unionized plant in Milwaukee is running at full capacity.
So we have a huge opportunity at this moment to bring manufacturing back. But we have to seize it. Tonight, my message to business leaders is simple: Ask yourselves what you can do to bring jobs back to your country, and your country will do everything we can to help you succeed.
We should start with our tax code. Right now, companies get tax breaks for moving jobs and profits overseas. Meanwhile, companies that choose to stay in America get hit with one of the highest tax rates in the world. It makes no sense, and everyone knows it.
So let’s change it. First, if you’re a business that wants to outsource jobs, you shouldn’t get a tax deduction for doing it.
That money should be used to cover moving expenses for companies like Master Lock that decide to bring jobs home.
Second, no American company should be able to avoid paying its fair share of taxes by moving jobs and profits overseas.
From now on, every multinational company should have to pay a basic minimum tax. And every penny should go towards lowering taxes for companies that choose to stay here and hire here in America.
Third, if you’re an American manufacturer, you should get a bigger tax cut. If you’re a high-tech manufacturer, we should double the tax deduction you get for making your products here. And if you want to relocate in a community that was hit hard when a factory left town, you should get help financing a new plant, equipment, or training for new workers.
So my message...
My message is simple. It is time to stop rewarding businesses that ship jobs overseas and start rewarding companies that create jobs right here in America. Send me these tax reforms, and I will sign them right away.
We’re also making it easier for American businesses to sell products all over the world. Two years ago, I set a goal of doubling U.S. exports over five years. With the bipartisan trade agreements we signed into law, we’re on track to meet that goal ahead of schedule.
And soon there will be millions of new customers for American goods in Panama, Colombia, and South Korea. Soon, there will be new cars on the streets of Seoul imported from Detroit, and Toledo, and Chicago.
I will go anywhere in the world to open new markets for American products. And I will not stand by when our competitors don’t play by the rules. We’ve brought trade cases against China at nearly twice the rate as the last administration, and it’s made a difference.
Over a thousand Americans are working today because we stopped a surge in Chinese tires. But we need to do more. It’s not right when another country lets our movies, music, and software be pirated. It’s not fair when foreign manufacturers have a leg up on ours only because they’re heavily subsidized.
Tonight, I’m announcing the creation of a Trade Enforcement Unit that will be charged with investigating unfair trading practices in countries like China. There will be more inspections...Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
I paraphrase:
Obama: Birth control should be free for employees of religious based organizations
GOP: What? Are you nuts, that's imposing on religious beliefs. You Muslim Kenyan commie!
Catholic Church: That's right! Contraception is evil even though 99.9 % of women used it. Just abstain from sex. Just say no. STOP ALL THAT LAUGHING!
Insurance companies: Uh..we're cool with this. Babies cost a s**t-ton of our money. We like our money and want to keep it.
Obama: OK, OK, stop all that bitching. Religious based organizations don't have offer free birth control, but, the insurance companies should be allowed to contact ladies directly. Religious based employers are off the hook.
Catholic Church: YaaaY! We win!
Insurance companies: Yes *you* won..(snickers). Time to print some literature saying "Babies cost money! Let us tell you about this cool thing called an IUD. Its Free! Get your party on". Get me the mass mailing department!
Ladies: Wait.. contraception is free? *snaps fingers*. Obama 2012!
Obama: I compromised for the good of all Americans (snickers).
GOP: What just happened? Why is Ashton Kutcher laughing over there?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
What’s at stake aren’t Democratic values or Republican values, but American values. And we have to reclaim them.
Let’s remember how we got here. Long before the recession, jobs and manufacturing began leaving our shores. Technology made businesses more efficient, but also made some jobs obsolete. Folks at the top saw their incomes rise like never before, but most hard- working Americans struggled with costs that were growing, paychecks that weren’t, and personal debt that kept piling up.
In 2008, the house of cards collapsed. We learned that mortgages had been sold to people who couldn’t afford or understand them. Banks had made huge bets and bonuses with other people’s money. Regulators had looked the other way, or didn’t have the authority to stop the bad behavior.
It was wrong. It was irresponsible. And it plunged our economy into a crisis that put millions out of work, saddled us with more debt, and left innocent, hard-working Americans holding the bag.
In the six months before I took office, we lost nearly 4 million jobs. And we lost another 4 million before our policies were in full effect. Those are the facts.
But so are these. In the last 22 months, businesses have created more than 3 million jobs.
Last year, they created the most jobs since 2005. American manufacturers are hiring again, creating jobs for the first time since the late 1990s. Together, we’ve agreed to cut the deficit by more than $2 trillion. And we’ve put in place new rules to hold Wall Street accountable, so a crisis like this never happens again.
The state of our union is getting stronger, and we’ve come too far to turn back now.
As long as I’m president, I will work with anyone in this chamber to build on this momentum. But I intend to fight obstruction with action, and I will oppose any effort to return to the very same policies that brought on this economic crisis in the first place.
No, we will not go back to an economy weakened by outsourcing, bad debt, and phony financial profits. Tonight, I want to speak about how we move forward and lay out a blueprint for an economy that’s built to last, an economy built on American manufacturing, American energy, skills for American workers, and a renewal of American values.
This blueprint begins with American manufacturing.
On the day I took office, our auto industry was on the verge of collapse. Some even said we should let it die. With a million jobs at stake, I refused to let that happen.
In exchange for help, we demanded responsibility. We got workers and automakers to settle their differences. We got the industry to retool and restructure. Today, General Motors is back on top as the world’s number-one automaker.
Chrysler has grown faster in the U.S. than any major car company. Ford is investing billions in U.S. plants and factories. And together, the entire industry added nearly 160,000 jobs.
We bet on American workers. We bet on American ingenuity. And tonight, the American auto industry is back.
What’s happening in Detroit can happen in other industries. It can happen in Cleveland and Pittsburgh and Raleigh. We can’t bring every job back that’s left our shore. But right now, it’s getting more expensive to do business in places like China. Meanwhile, America is more productive.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
A few weeks ago, the CEO of Master Lock told me that it now makes business sense for him to bring jobs back home.
Today, for the first time in 15 years, Master Lock’s unionized plant in Milwaukee is running at full capacity.
So we have a huge opportunity at this moment to bring manufacturing back. But we have to seize it. Tonight, my message to business leaders is simple: Ask yourselves what you can do to bring jobs back to your country, and your country will do everything we can to help you succeed.
We should start with our tax code. Right now, companies get tax breaks for moving jobs and profits overseas. Meanwhile, companies that choose to stay in America get hit with one of the highest tax rates in the world. It makes no sense, and everyone knows it.
So let’s change it. First, if you’re a business that wants to outsource jobs, you shouldn’t get a tax deduction for doing it.
That money should be used to cover moving expenses for companies like Master Lock that decide to bring jobs home.
Second, no American company should be able to avoid paying its fair share of taxes by moving jobs and profits overseas.
From now on, every multinational company should have to pay a basic minimum tax. And every penny should go towards lowering taxes for companies that choose to stay here and hire here in America.
Third, if you’re an American manufacturer, you should get a bigger tax cut. If you’re a high-tech manufacturer, we should double the tax deduction you get for making your products here. And if you want to relocate in a community that was hit hard when a factory left town, you should get help financing a new plant, equipment, or training for new workers.
So my message...
My message is simple. It is time to stop rewarding businesses that ship jobs overseas and start rewarding companies that create jobs right here in America. Send me these tax reforms, and I will sign them right away.
We’re also making it easier for American businesses to sell products all over the world. Two years ago, I set a goal of doubling U.S. exports over five years. With the bipartisan trade agreements we signed into law, we’re on track to meet that goal ahead of schedule.
And soon there will be millions of new customers for American goods in Panama, Colombia, and South Korea. Soon, there will be new cars on the streets of Seoul imported from Detroit, and Toledo, and Chicago.
I will go anywhere in the world to open new markets for American products. And I will not stand by when our competitors don’t play by the rules. We’ve brought trade cases against China at nearly twice the rate as the last administration, and it’s made a difference.
Over a thousand Americans are working today because we stopped a surge in Chinese tires. But we need to do more. It’s not right when another country lets our movies, music, and software be pirated. It’s not fair when foreign manufacturers have a leg up on ours only because they’re heavily subsidized.
Tonight, I’m announcing the creation of a Trade Enforcement Unit that will be charged with investigating unfair trading practices in countries like China. There will be more inspections...Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
I paraphrase:
Obama: Birth control should be free for employees of religious based organizations
GOP: What? Are you nuts, that's imposing on religious beliefs. You Muslim Kenyan commie!
Catholic Church: That's right! Contraception is evil even though 99.9 % of women used it. Just abstain from sex. Just say no. STOP ALL THAT LAUGHING!
Insurance companies: Uh..we're cool with this. Babies cost a s**t-ton of our money. We like our money and want to keep it.
Obama: OK, OK, stop all that bitching. Religious based organizations don't have offer free birth control, but, the insurance companies should be allowed to contact ladies directly. Religious based employers are off the hook.
Catholic Church: YaaaY! We win!
Insurance companies: Yes *you* won..(snickers). Time to print some literature saying "Babies cost money! Let us tell you about this cool thing called an IUD. Its Free! Get your party on". Get me the mass mailing department!
Ladies: Wait.. contraception is free? *snaps fingers*. Obama 2012!
Obama: I compromised for the good of all Americans (snickers).
GOP: What just happened? Why is Ashton Kutcher laughing over there?
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on a government-provided social safety net, Americans of limited means had to hope for "support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups." Here is what the Heritage report has to say about Social Security and similar government programs:
Financial help for those in need has also changed profoundly. Local, community-based charitable organizations once provided the majority of aid, resulting in a personal relationship between those who received assistance and those who provided it. Today, Social Security and other government programs provide much or all of the income to low-income and indigent households. Nearly all the financial support that was once provided to temporarily unemployed workers by unions, mutual-aid societies, and local charities is now provided by federal income, food, and health programs.
This shift from local, community-based, mutual-aid assistance to anonymous government payments has clearly altered the relationship between the receiver and the provider of the assistance. In the past, a person in need depended on help from people and organizations in his or her local community. The community representatives were generally aware of the person's needs and tailored the assistance to meet those needs within the community's budgetary constraints. Today, housing and other needs are addressed by government employees to whom the person in need is a complete stranger, and who have few or no ties to the community in which the needy person lives.
Both cases of aid involve a dependent relationship. However, support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups aims to restore a person to full flourishing and personal responsibility, and, ultimately, to be able to aid another person in turn. This kind of reciprocal expectation does not characterize the dependent relationship with the political system.
And it's nostalgia for the good old days is just as strong when it comes to Medicare. The report says: "Regardless of whether the medical and financial results are better today, the relationship between the people who receive health care assistance and those who pay for it has changed fundamentally. Few would dispute that this change has affected the total cost of health care, and the relationships among patients, doctors, and hospitals, negatively."Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
It’s not really why he signed up to be an astronaut, but like it or not, Mike Barratt and his eyes have become a science project.
The eye charts he reads, the red drops that turn his eyes yellow and the ultrasounds being performed on him could determine whether he or any other astronaut ever journeys into deep space or sets foot on other worlds.
NASA’s new priority is how to protect astronauts from going blind on the years-long trip to get wherever they are going.
“I absolutely agree that this is our number one priority,” Barratt said.
Why?
Because when Barratt blasted off to the international space station, he needed eyeglasses for distance. When he returned to Earth, his distance vision was fine, but he needed reading glasses. That was more than two years ago. And he’s not getting better.
“We really need to understand this. This is a critical point for understanding how humans adapt to spaceflight,” he said.
In the past few years, about half of the astronauts aboard the international space station have developed an increasing pressure inside their heads, an intracranial pressure that reshapes their optic nerve, causing a significant shift in the eyesight of male astronauts. Doctors call it papilledema.
Female space travelers have not been affected.
Some of the astronauts slowly recover. Others have not.
Space station astronauts typically spend about six months in orbit.
Barratt is one of 10 male astronauts, all older than 45, who have not recovered. Barratt returned from a six-month stint aboard the station in October 2009 and has experienced a profound change in his sight.
He used to be nearsighted. But now, the space veteran says he’s eagle-eyed at long distance but needs glasses for reading. There is no treatment and no answers as to why female space flyers are not affected.
CNN spent part of a day with Barratt, watching as doctors monitored his progress with high-resolution testing as they try to understand how the weightless environment of space is causing half of all space station astronauts to have this vision change. Today, space station astronauts fly with specially designed variable focus glasses to help combat the vision shift.
“The big benefit of these is that they allow us to adjust for significant prescription changes,” said Dr. Robert Gibson, a senior vision consultant, who was brought in to help study the problem.
Doctors have found that Barratt’s retinas have microscopic folds or wrinkles on them, and the back of his eye, the optic nerve, is no longer round but has flattened.
“I think this is showing that there are physiologic aspects of adaption to spaceflight we weren’t seeing before,” said Barratt.
This raises a red flag for all of NASA’s plans for long-duration human space flight. The space station is supposed to be the test bed for how humans would learn to live in space, but it opens profound questions on whether humans will ever venture to Mars or to an asteroid if they are unable to figure out how the outer-space environment is affecting the eyes.
“This has all of our attention,” said Terry Taddeo, the acting chief of space medicine at Johnson Space Center in Houston.
“It is a serious problem and one we are going to have to understand more about before we would be able to send somebody into a long-duration mission away from Earth, where they would be away for years,” he said.
Right now, the only data that doctors have are from six-month tours of duty on the space station.
NASA has begun doing extensive preflight and postflight eye exams, including high-resolution MRIs of the eyes. There have been anecdotes from some space shuttle astronauts who also complained about vision change, but it does not appear they had long-lasting effects from the much shorter space flights that typically lasted up to about three weeks.
“What we’re seeing appears to occur within the first couple of months of flight and appears to level off, plateau after about four to five months,” Gibson said.
“If it’s just a matter of giving them a stronger prescription, we can live with that,” he said. “But if there is an elevated intracranial pressure as the cause of this, we have to be concerned about other neurologic effects."
That means there could be other effects on the body that haven’t become apparent.
This is why a three-year mission to Mars is in question.
It would be humans' next great leap, and NASA is spending almost $18 billion over the next five years to develop a heavy lift rocket that would take astronauts to the Red Planet or even to an asteroid. They would travel in a new spacecraft, Orion.
But right now, a trip to Mars is still more science fiction than fact. No one is calling this vision problem a showstopper, yet the program’s price tag begs for a solution to be found fast so NASA won’t be building the world’s largest, fastest rocket to nowhere.
Dr. Bruce Ehni, a neurosurgeon at the VA Medical Center at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, has consulted with NASA and is the only neurosurgeon on their panel.
“If they can’t predict who is at risk ... they put his health in jeopardy. They put, possibly, the mission in jeopardy if he can’t see or do his job effectively,” he said.
But Barratt thinks that any deep space venture to Mars is still 20 years away. He’s hoping that spacecraft will be a whole lot faster than anything the space agency can fly now.
“You fly fast, and you don’t worry,” he said, with a grin.
“I’m still hopeful that in 20 years, we’ll have advanced propulsion capabilities that can get us there in a matter of weeks to a few months. Then, a lot of these problems go away,” he said.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on a government-provided social safety net, Americans of limited means had to hope for "support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups." Here is what the Heritage report has to say about Social Security and similar government programs:
Financial help for those in need has also changed profoundly. Local, community-based charitable organizations once provided the majority of aid, resulting in a personal relationship between those who received assistance and those who provided it. Today, Social Security and other government programs provide much or all of the income to low-income and indigent households. Nearly all the financial support that was once provided to temporarily unemployed workers by unions, mutual-aid societies, and local charities is now provided by federal income, food, and health programs.
This shift from local, community-based, mutual-aid assistance to anonymous government payments has clearly altered the relationship between the receiver and the provider of the assistance. In the past, a person in need depended on help from people and organizations in his or her local community. The community representatives were generally aware of the person's needs and tailored the assistance to meet those needs within the community's budgetary constraints. Today, housing and other needs are addressed by government employees to whom the person in need is a complete stranger, and who have few or no ties to the community in which the needy person lives.
Both cases of aid involve a dependent relationship. However, support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups aims to restore a person to full flourishing and personal responsibility, and, ultimately, to be able to aid another person in turn. This kind of reciprocal expectation does not characterize the dependent relationship with the political system.
And it's nostalgia for the good old days is just as strong when it comes to Medicare. The report says: "Regardless of whether the medical and financial results are better today, the relationship between the people who receive health care assistance and those who pay for it has changed fundamentally. Few would dispute that this change has affected the total cost of health care, and the relationships among patients, doctors, and hospitals, negatively."
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
It’s not really why he signed up to be an astronaut, but like it or not, Mike Barratt and his eyes have become a science project.
The eye charts he reads, the red drops that turn his eyes yellow and the ultrasounds being performed on him could determine whether he or any other astronaut ever journeys into deep space or sets foot on other worlds.
NASA’s new priority is how to protect astronauts from going blind on the years-long trip to get wherever they are going.
“I absolutely agree that this is our number one priority,” Barratt said.
Why?
Because when Barratt blasted off to the international space station, he needed eyeglasses for distance. When he returned to Earth, his distance vision was fine, but he needed reading glasses. That was more than two years ago. And he’s not getting better.
“We really need to understand this. This is a critical point for understanding how humans adapt to spaceflight,” he said.
In the past few years, about half of the astronauts aboard the international space station have developed an increasing pressure inside their heads, an intracranial pressure that reshapes their optic nerve, causing a significant shift in the eyesight of male astronauts. Doctors call it papilledema.
Female space travelers have not been affected.
Some of the astronauts slowly recover. Others have not.
Space station astronauts typically spend about six months in orbit.
Barratt is one of 10 male astronauts, all older than 45, who have not recovered. Barratt returned from a six-month stint aboard the station in October 2009 and has experienced a profound change in his sight.
He used to be nearsighted. But now, the space veteran says he’s eagle-eyed at long distance but needs glasses for reading. There is no treatment and no answers as to why female space flyers are not affected.
CNN spent part of a day with Barratt, watching as doctors monitored his progress with high-resolution testing as they try to understand how the weightless environment of space is causing half of all space station astronauts to have this vision change. Today, space station astronauts fly with specially designed variable focus glasses to help combat the vision shift.
“The big benefit of these is that they allow us to adjust for significant prescription changes,” said Dr. Robert Gibson, a senior vision consultant, who was brought in to help study the problem.
Doctors have found that Barratt’s retinas have microscopic folds or wrinkles on them, and the back of his eye, the optic nerve, is no longer round but has flattened.
“I think this is showing that there are physiologic aspects of adaption to spaceflight we weren’t seeing before,” said Barratt.
This raises a red flag for all of NASA’s plans for long-duration human space flight. The space station is supposed to be the test bed for how humans would learn to live in space, but it opens profound questions on whether humans will ever venture to Mars or to an asteroid if they are unable to figure out how the outer-space environment is affecting the eyes.
“This has all of our attention,” said Terry Taddeo, the acting chief of space medicine at Johnson Space Center in Houston.
“It is a serious problem and one we are going to have to understand more about before we would be able to send somebody into a long-duration mission away from Earth, where they would be away for years,” he said.
Right now, the only data that doctors have are from six-month tours of duty on the space station.
NASA has begun doing extensive preflight and postflight eye exams, including high-resolution MRIs of the eyes. There have been anecdotes from some space shuttle astronauts who also complained about vision change, but it does not appear they had long-lasting effects from the much shorter space flights that typically lasted up to about three weeks.
“What we’re seeing appears to occur within the first couple of months of flight and appears to level off, plateau after about four to five months,” Gibson said.
“If it’s just a matter of giving them a stronger prescription, we can live with that,” he said. “But if there is an elevated intracranial pressure as the cause of this, we have to be concerned about other neurologic effects."
That means there could be other effects on the body that haven’t become apparent.
This is why a three-year mission to Mars is in question.
It would be humans' next great leap, and NASA is spending almost $18 billion over the next five years to develop a heavy lift rocket that would take astronauts to the Red Planet or even to an asteroid. They would travel in a new spacecraft, Orion.
But right now, a trip to Mars is still more science fiction than fact. No one is calling this vision problem a showstopper, yet the program’s price tag begs for a solution to be found fast so NASA won’t be building the world’s largest, fastest rocket to nowhere.
Dr. Bruce Ehni, a neurosurgeon at the VA Medical Center at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, has consulted with NASA and is the only neurosurgeon on their panel.
“If they can’t predict who is at risk ... they put his health in jeopardy. They put, possibly, the mission in jeopardy if he can’t see or do his job effectively,” he said.
But Barratt thinks that any deep space venture to Mars is still 20 years away. He’s hoping that spacecraft will be a whole lot faster than anything the space agency can fly now.
“You fly fast, and you don’t worry,” he said, with a grin.
“I’m still hopeful that in 20 years, we’ll have advanced propulsion capabilities that can get us there in a matter of weeks to a few months. Then, a lot of these problems go away,” he said.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Reply
generalbulldog1 day 9 hr ago
+27 diggs
DiggBury
Well played, Mr. President.
Reply1 Reply - Top reply has 3 diggs
Rizing_Son34 min ago
+3 diggs
DiggBury
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on a
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Reply
generalbulldog1 day 9 hr ago
+27 diggs
DiggBury
Well played, Mr. President.
Reply1 Reply - Top reply has 3 diggs
Rizing_Son34 min ago
+3 diggs
DiggBury
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on aComment is buried, click here to see the rest.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Reply
generalbulldog1 day 9 hr ago
+27 diggs
DiggBury
Well played, Mr. President.
Reply1 Reply - Top reply has 3 diggs
Rizing_Son34 min ago
+3 diggs
DiggBury
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on a
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Reply
generalbulldog1 day 9 hr ago
+27 diggs
DiggBury
Well played, Mr. President.
Reply1 Reply - Top reply has 3 diggs
Rizing_Son34 min ago
+3 diggs
DiggBury
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on aComment is buried, click here to see the rest.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
It’s not really why he signed up to be an astronaut, but like it or not, Mike Barratt and his eyes have become a science project.
The eye charts he reads, the red drops that turn his eyes yellow and the ultrasounds being performed on him could determine whether he or any other astronaut ever journeys into deep space or sets foot on other worlds.
NASA’s new priority is how to protect astronauts from going blind on the years-long trip to get wherever they are going.
“I absolutely agree that this is our number one priority,” Barratt said.
Why?
Because when Barratt blasted off to the international space station, he needed eyeglasses for distance. When he returned to Earth, his distance vision was fine, but he needed reading glasses. That was more than two years ago. And he’s not getting better.
“We really need to understand this. This is a critical point for understanding how humans adapt to spaceflight,” he said.
In the past few years, about half of the astronauts aboard the international space station have developed an increasing pressure inside their heads, an intracranial pressure that reshapes their optic nerve, causing a significant shift in the eyesight of male astronauts. Doctors call it papilledema.
Female space travelers have not been affected.
Some of the astronauts slowly recover. Others have not.
Space station astronauts typically spend about six months in orbit.
Barratt is one of 10 male astronauts, all older than 45, who have not recovered. Barratt returned from a six-month stint aboard the station in October 2009 and has experienced a profound change in his sight.
He used to be nearsighted. But now, the space veteran says he’s eagle-eyed at long distance but needs glasses for reading. There is no treatment and no answers as to why female space flyers are not affected.
CNN spent part of a day with Barratt, watching as doctors monitored his progress with high-resolution testing as they try to understand how the weightless environment of space is causing half of all space station astronauts to have this vision change. Today, space station astronauts fly with specially designed variable focus glasses to help combat the vision shift.
“The big benefit of these is that they allow us to adjust for significant prescription changes,” said Dr. Robert Gibson, a senior vision consultant, who was brought in to help study the problem.
Doctors have found that Barratt’s retinas have microscopic folds or wrinkles on them, and the back of his eye, the optic nerve, is no longer round but has flattened.
“I think this is showing that there are physiologic aspects of adaption to spaceflight we weren’t seeing before,” said Barratt.
This raises a red flag for all of NASA’s plans for long-duration human space flight. The space station is supposed to be the test bed for how humans would learn to live in space, but it opens profound questions on whether humans will ever venture to Mars or to an asteroid if they are unable to figure out how the outer-space environment is affecting the eyes.
“This has all of our attention,” said Terry Taddeo, the acting chief of space medicine at Johnson Space Center in Houston.
“It is a serious problem and one we are going to have to understand more about before we would be able to send somebody into a long-duration mission away from Earth, where they would be away for years,” he said.
Right now, the only data that doctors have are from six-month tours of duty on the space station.
NASA has begun doing extensive preflight and postflight eye exams, including high-resolution MRIs of the eyes. There have been anecdotes from some space shuttle astronauts who also complained about vision change, but it does not appear they had long-lasting effects from the much shorter space flights that typically lasted up to about three weeks.
“What we’re seeing appears to occur within the first couple of months of flight and appears to level off, plateau after about four to five months,” Gibson said.
“If it’s just a matter of giving them a stronger prescription, we can live with that,” he said. “But if there is an elevated intracranial pressure as the cause of this, we have to be concerned about other neurologic effects."
That means there could be other effects on the body that haven’t become apparent.
This is why a three-year mission to Mars is in question.
It would be humans' next great leap, and NASA is spending almost $18 billion over the next five years to develop a heavy lift rocket that would take astronauts to the Red Planet or even to an asteroid. They would travel in a new spacecraft, Orion.
But right now, a trip to Mars is still more science fiction than fact. No one is calling this vision problem a showstopper, yet the program’s price tag begs for a solution to be found fast so NASA won’t be building the world’s largest, fastest rocket to nowhere.
Dr. Bruce Ehni, a neurosurgeon at the VA Medical Center at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, has consulted with NASA and is the only neurosurgeon on their panel.
“If they can’t predict who is at risk ... they put his health in jeopardy. They put, possibly, the mission in jeopardy if he can’t see or do his job effectively,” he said.
But Barratt thinks that any deep space venture to Mars is still 20 years away. He’s hoping that spacecraft will be a whole lot faster than anything the space agency can fly now.
“You fly fast, and you don’t worry,” he said, with a grin.
“I’m still hopeful that in 20 years, we’ll have advanced propulsion capabilities that can get us there in a matter of weeks to a few months. Then, a lot of these problems go away,” he said.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Reply
generalbulldog1 day 9 hr ago
+27 diggs
DiggBury
Well played, Mr. President.
Reply1 Reply - Top reply has 3 diggs
Rizing_Son34 min ago
+3 diggs
DiggBury
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on a
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Reply
generalbulldog1 day 9 hr ago
+27 diggs
DiggBury
Well played, Mr. President.
Reply1 Reply - Top reply has 3 diggs
Rizing_Son34 min ago
+3 diggs
DiggBury
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on aComment is buried, click here to see the rest.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Reply
generalbulldog1 day 9 hr ago
+27 diggs
DiggBury
Well played, Mr. President.
Reply1 Reply - Top reply has 3 diggs
Rizing_Son34 min ago
+3 diggs
DiggBury
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on a
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on a government-provided social safety net, Americans of limited means had to hope for "support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups." Here is what the Heritage report has to say about Social Security and similar government programs:
Financial help for those in need has also changed profoundly. Local, community-based charitable organizations once provided the majority of aid, resulting in a personal relationship between those who received assistance and those who provided it. Today, Social Security and other government programs provide much or all of the income to low-income and indigent households. Nearly all the financial support that was once provided to temporarily unemployed workers by unions, mutual-aid societies, and local charities is now provided by federal income, food, and health programs.
This shift from local, community-based, mutual-aid assistance to anonymous government payments has clearly altered the relationship between the receiver and the provider of the assistance. In the past, a person in need depended on help from people and organizations in his or her local community. The community representatives were generally aware of the person's needs and tailored the assistance to meet those needs within the community's budgetary constraints. Today, housing and other needs are addressed by government employees to whom the person in need is a complete stranger, and who have few or no ties to the community in which the needy person lives.
Both cases of aid involve a dependent relationship. However, support provided by families, churches, and other civil society groups aims to restore a person to full flourishing and personal responsibility, and, ultimately, to be able to aid another person in turn. This kind of reciprocal expectation does not characterize the dependent relationship with the political system.
And it's nostalgia for the good old days is just as strong when it comes to Medicare. The report says: "Regardless of whether the medical and financial results are better today, the relationship between the people who receive health care assistance and those who pay for it has changed fundamentally. Few would dispute that this change has affected the total cost of health care, and the relationships among patients, doctors, and hospitals, negatively."
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
It’s not really why he signed up to be an astronaut, but like it or not, Mike Barratt and his eyes have become a science project.
The eye charts he reads, the red drops that turn his eyes yellow and the ultrasounds being performed on him could determine whether he or any other astronaut ever journeys into deep space or sets foot on other worlds.
NASA’s new priority is how to protect astronauts from going blind on the years-long trip to get wherever they are going.
“I absolutely agree that this is our number one priority,” Barratt said.
Why?
Because when Barratt blasted off to the international space station, he needed eyeglasses for distance. When he returned to Earth, his distance vision was fine, but he needed reading glasses. That was more than two years ago. And he’s not getting better.
“We really need to understand this. This is a critical point for understanding how humans adapt to spaceflight,” he said.
In the past few years, about half of the astronauts aboard the international space station have developed an increasing pressure inside their heads, an intracranial pressure that reshapes their optic nerve, causing a significant shift in the eyesight of male astronauts. Doctors call it papilledema.
Female space travelers have not been affected.
Some of the astronauts slowly recover. Others have not.
Space station astronauts typically spend about six months in orbit.
Barratt is one of 10 male astronauts, all older than 45, who have not recovered. Barratt returned from a six-month stint aboard the station in October 2009 and has experienced a profound change in his sight.
He used to be nearsighted. But now, the space veteran says he’s eagle-eyed at long distance but needs glasses for reading. There is no treatment and no answers as to why female space flyers are not affected.
CNN spent part of a day with Barratt, watching as doctors monitored his progress with high-resolution testing as they try to understand how the weightless environment of space is causing half of all space station astronauts to have this vision change. Today, space station astronauts fly with specially designed variable focus glasses to help combat the vision shift.
“The big benefit of these is that they allow us to adjust for significant prescription changes,” said Dr. Robert Gibson, a senior vision consultant, who was brought in to help study the problem.
Doctors have found that Barratt’s retinas have microscopic folds or wrinkles on them, and the back of his eye, the optic nerve, is no longer round but has flattened.
“I think this is showing that there are physiologic aspects of adaption to spaceflight we weren’t seeing before,” said Barratt.
This raises a red flag for all of NASA’s plans for long-duration human space flight. The space station is supposed to be the test bed for how humans would learn to live in space, but it opens profound questions on whether humans will ever venture to Mars or to an asteroid if they are unable to figure out how the outer-space environment is affecting the eyes.
“This has all of our attention,” said Terry Taddeo, the acting chief of space medicine at Johnson Space Center in Houston.
“It is a serious problem and one we are going to have to understand more about before we would be able to send somebody into a long-duration mission away from Earth, where they would be away for years,” he said.
Right now, the only data that doctors have are from six-month tours of duty on the space station.
NASA has begun doing extensive preflight and postflight eye exams, including high-resolution MRIs of the eyes. There have been anecdotes from some space shuttle astronauts who also complained about vision change, but it does not appear they had long-lasting effects from the much shorter space flights that typically lasted up to about three weeks.
“What we’re seeing appears to occur within the first couple of months of flight and appears to level off, plateau after about four to five months,” Gibson said.
“If it’s just a matter of giving them a stronger prescription, we can live with that,” he said. “But if there is an elevated intracranial pressure as the cause of this, we have to be concerned about other neurologic effects."
That means there could be other effects on the body that haven’t become apparent.
This is why a three-year mission to Mars is in question.
It would be humans' next great leap, and NASA is spending almost $18 billion over the next five years to develop a heavy lift rocket that would take astronauts to the Red Planet or even to an asteroid. They would travel in a new spacecraft, Orion.
But right now, a trip to Mars is still more science fiction than fact. No one is calling this vision problem a showstopper, yet the program’s price tag begs for a solution to be found fast so NASA won’t be building the world’s largest, fastest rocket to nowhere.
Dr. Bruce Ehni, a neurosurgeon at the VA Medical Center at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, has consulted with NASA and is the only neurosurgeon on their panel.
“If they can’t predict who is at risk ... they put his health in jeopardy. They put, possibly, the mission in jeopardy if he can’t see or do his job effectively,” he said.
But Barratt thinks that any deep space venture to Mars is still 20 years away. He’s hoping that spacecraft will be a whole lot faster than anything the space agency can fly now.
“You fly fast, and you don’t worry,” he said, with a grin.
“I’m still hopeful that in 20 years, we’ll have advanced propulsion capabilities that can get us there in a matter of weeks to a few months. Then, a lot of these problems go away,” he said.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Reply
generalbulldog1 day 9 hr ago
+27 diggs
DiggBury
Well played, Mr. President.
Reply1 Reply - Top reply has 3 diggs
Rizing_Son34 min ago
+3 diggs
DiggBury
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on a
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Reply
generalbulldog1 day 9 hr ago
+27 diggs
DiggBury
Well played, Mr. President.
Reply1 Reply - Top reply has 3 diggs
Rizing_Son34 min ago
+3 diggs
DiggBury
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on a
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Reply
generalbulldog1 day 9 hr ago
+27 diggs
DiggBury
Well played, Mr. President.
Reply1 Reply - Top reply has 3 diggs
Rizing_Son34 min ago
+3 diggs
DiggBury
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on a
skagoFeb 12, 2012
Of course insurance companies will do it, but they won't be the ones paying for it. Everyone will be paying more for their insurance so that poor people can have free birth control.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
mortventFeb 12, 2012
You got an out on offering it, but you still have to pay for it.
And it's not for just poor people ya know. Most poor people that the church claims to want to help rarely have health insurance.
vitriolandangstFeb 12, 2012
Wouldn't taxpayers pay more if women who cannot afford kids had babies? Doesn't paying for birth control save more money?
Either some people are never satisfied -- or they have been lying about their true motives.
TaliscatFeb 12, 2012
They don't care about the kids once they are born, they would rather the kids starve and die on the streets... but heaven forbid a women get birth control!
leonard2Feb 12, 2012
Damn...Can they get any dumber than this one.
mortventFeb 12, 2012
considering how much they fight things like welfare and food stamps... trying to get rid of or reduce them. Not that foolish after all, they want them to come to the church for help so they can be converted into good little sheep
michrechFeb 12, 2012
The "christ" believing religions primary objective is to "grow the flock". By far, it's easier to do so when members of "the flock" have children -- children which will almost certainly be brought up in the church -- which they certainly can't do if they're on birth control.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Bachus is a typically corrupt GOP bastard and this has been a long time coming... Check out these direct quotes from the pig:
"In an interview where he spoke about the outlook he would bring to his chairmanship of the Financial Services Committee, Bachus received criticism for suggesting that it was government's role to "serve the banks". To the Birmingham News, Bachus said "In Washington, the view is that the banks are to be regulated, and my view is that Washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks." Bachus later clarified his words by saying that he meant that regulators should set guidelines for banks but not micromanage them."
Yeah, right...
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Reply
generalbulldog1 day 9 hr ago
+27 diggs
DiggBury
Well played, Mr. President.
Reply1 Reply - Top reply has 3 diggs
34 min ago
+3 diggs
DiggBury
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on aComment is buried, click here to see the rest.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Reply
generalbulldog1 day 9 hr ago
+27 diggs
DiggBury
Well played, Mr. President.
Reply1 Reply - Top reply has 3 diggs
Rizing_Son34 min ago
+3 diggs
DiggBury
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on aComment is buried, click here to see the rest.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Reply
generalbulldog1 day 9 hr ago
+27 diggs
DiggBury
Well played, Mr. President.
Reply1 Reply - Top reply has 3 diggs
Rizing_Son34 min ago
+3 diggs
DiggBury
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on aComment is buried, click here to see the rest.
brewbeauFeb 12, 2012
Yeah, only the poor have health insurance. The rich don't have health insurance and certainly wouldn't consider having their insurance cover most of the cost of contraceptives. Also, down is up.
CliftonForceFeb 12, 2012
We'll actually be paying less for our insurance. More birth control is a *very* effective way to reduce medical costs and insurance costs, so the insurance companies will save a lot of money this way.
miklkitFeb 12, 2012
So we will be paying less and having more sexy fun doing it. Sounds good to me!
netantFeb 12, 2012
...well, until you get AIDS or some other venereal disease. (Herpes, anyone?) Birth control pills are really for married couples. Everyone else should be using condoms.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
chelseaelizobethFeb 12, 2012
I think you meant to say monogamous couples.
netantFeb 12, 2012
...but how monogamous are couples that aren't married? Yes, I know, close to 50% of marriage end in divorce, and cheating must have a significant percentage.
But any couple having sex without being married and not using condoms is just leaving themselves vulnerable to VD. But you're the exception, princess.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Bachus is a typically corrupt GOP bastard and this has been a long time coming... Check out these direct quotes from the pig:
"In an interview where he spoke about the outlook he would bring to his chairmanship of the Financial Services Committee, Bachus received criticism for suggesting that it was government's role to "serve the banks". To the Birmingham News, Bachus said "In Washington, the view is that the banks are to be regulated, and my view is that Washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks." Bachus later clarified his words by saying that he meant that regulators should set guidelines for banks but not micromanage them."
Yeah, right...Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Bachus is a typically corrupt GOP bastard and this has been a long time coming... Check out these direct quotes from the pig:
"In an interview where he spoke about the outlook he would bring to his chairmanship of the Financial Services Committee, Bachus received criticism for suggesting that it was government's role to "serve the banks". To the Birmingham News, Bachus said "In Washington, the view is that the banks are to be regulated, and my view is that Washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks." Bachus later clarified his words by saying that he meant that regulators should set guidelines for banks but not micromanage them."
Yeah, right...Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
gaia242Feb 12, 2012
venereal disease???? how old are you? I think they have not referred to sexually transmitted infections as VD since the 70's.
I dont mean to be a dick, but I cant help but laugh at hear/seeing those words.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
particleman420Feb 12, 2012
yes, but you've been bitching all week that this is about the church and not contraception. so now that that is no longer an issue you're just going to change your tune?
typical.
mortventFeb 12, 2012
It's always been about the easier access to contraceptives, everything else was a smokescreen
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Whoopsadaisy! Citigroup has accidentally been charging many customers more than what they owe for months, with some of them not even realizing it was going on until the bank sent out a notification. Cit's bill-pay app for iPads was the culprit in many cases, charging customers twice what they owed for bills or mortgage payments.
The New York Times says the bug started in the iPad app around July but wasn't detected until December, after consumers' complaints about payments being off. Other mobile applications and the online bill payment system weren't affected, says Citi.
However, some customers who never even used an iPad to pay bill said they'd also been hit by double charges, something that hasn't been explained away yet. The bank is promising to reimburse customers and waive any fees incurred because of the extra charges, as well as give out a few points for its reward program.
"We take seriously the functionality of our products and services as well as the satisfaction of our clients," spokesman Andrew Brent said in a statement.
Users of Citibank Bill-Pay App Charged Twice [New York Times]Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
cherwilcoFeb 12, 2012
seriously who is digging you up for this crap? go away spammer
countess666Feb 12, 2012
"Of course insurance companies will do it, but they won't be the ones paying for it. Everyone will be paying more for their insurance so that poor people can have free birth control."
yes... that's how insurance works.
everybody pays in, and then a few at a time take out when they need it, or more take out when prevention is cheaper.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Whoopsadaisy! Citigroup has accidentally been charging many customers more than what they owe for months, with some of them not even realizing it was going on until the bank sent out a notification. Cit's bill-pay app for iPads was the culprit in many cases, charging customers twice what they owed for bills or mortgage payments.
The New York Times says the bug started in the iPad app around July but wasn't detected until December, after consumers' complaints about payments being off. Other mobile applications and the online bill payment system weren't affected, says Citi.
However, some customers who never even used an iPad to pay bill said they'd also been hit by double charges, something that hasn't been explained away yet. The bank is promising to reimburse customers and waive any fees incurred because of the extra charges, as well as give out a few points for its reward program.
"We take seriously the functionality of our products and services as well as the satisfaction of our clients," spokesman Andrew Brent said in a statement.
Users of Citibank Bill-Pay App Charged Twice [New York Times]Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Whoopsadaisy! Citigroup has accidentally been charging many customers more than what they owe for months, with some of them not even realizing it was going on until the bank sent out a notification. Cit's bill-pay app for iPads was the culprit in many cases, charging customers twice what they owed for bills or mortgage payments.
The New York Times says the bug started in the iPad app around July but wasn't detected until December, after consumers' complaints about payments being off. Other mobile applications and the online bill payment system weren't affected, says Citi.
However, some customers who never even used an iPad to pay bill said they'd also been hit by double charges, something that hasn't been explained away yet. The bank is promising to reimburse customers and waive any fees incurred because of the extra charges, as well as give out a few points for its reward program.
"We take seriously the functionality of our products and services as well as the satisfaction of our clients," spokesman Andrew Brent said in a statement.
Users of Citibank Bill-Pay App Charged Twice [New York Times]Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Whoopsadaisy! Citigroup has accidentally been charging many customers more than what they owe for months, with some of them not even realizing it was going on until the bank sent out a notification. Cit's bill-pay app for iPads was the culprit in many cases, charging customers twice what they owed for bills or mortgage payments.
The New York Times says the bug started in the iPad app around July but wasn't detected until December, after consumers' complaints about payments being off. Other mobile applications and the online bill payment system weren't affected, says Citi.
However, some customers who never even used an iPad to pay bill said they'd also been hit by double charges, something that hasn't been explained away yet. The bank is promising to reimburse customers and waive any fees incurred because of the extra charges, as well as give out a few points for its reward program.
"We take seriously the functionality of our products and services as well as the satisfaction of our clients," spokesman Andrew Brent said in a statement.
Users of Citibank Bill-Pay App Charged Twice [New York Times]Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Whoopsadaisy! Citigroup has accidentally been charging many customers more than what they owe for months, with some of them not even realizing it was going on until the bank sent out a notification. Cit's bill-pay app for iPads was the culprit in many cases, charging customers twice what they owed for bills or mortgage payments.
The New York Times says the bug started in the iPad app around July but wasn't detected until December, after consumers' complaints about payments being off. Other mobile applications and the online bill payment system weren't affected, says Citi.
However, some customers who never even used an iPad to pay bill said they'd also been hit by double charges, something that hasn't been explained away yet. The bank is promising to reimburse customers and waive any fees incurred because of the extra charges, as well as give out a few points for its reward program.
"We take seriously the functionality of our products and services as well as the satisfaction of our clients," spokesman Andrew Brent said in a statement.
Users of Citibank Bill-Pay App Charged Twice [New York Times]Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
FrankLuskaFeb 12, 2012
Shhh, they think they won, seems they could not comprehend the article. Yes, Big Business is the winner, Citizens are the losers Again.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Bachus is a typically corrupt GOP bastard and this has been a long time coming... Check out these direct quotes from the pig:
"In an interview where he spoke about the outlook he would bring to his chairmanship of the Financial Services Committee, Bachus received criticism for suggesting that it was government's role to "serve the banks". To the Birmingham News, Bachus said "In Washington, the view is that the banks are to be regulated, and my view is that Washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks." Bachus later clarified his words by saying that he meant that regulators should set guidelines for banks but not micromanage them."
Yeah, right...Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
laborerFeb 12, 2012
As if.
He caved.
Because he has no philosophy. He has no rhyme or reason but what was bestowed upon him by the all-powerful left academia. So when actual work needs to be done, he inevitably 'capitulates' to the right.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
roguegeniusFeb 12, 2012
If that was caving then I hope he caves on a few more things. Well don't Mr. President. Well done.
laborerFeb 12, 2012
Im glad too.
Its like if we just threaten Obama with the thought of having to do something, he will take up Republican stances anyways.
gaia242Feb 12, 2012
If you want to support conservative bigots, go see Hector Pintos as Pintos Overhead Doors, located in Tacoma Washington.
Mind you Washington is a very blue state, that's just legalized gay marriage (and it has the public support to pass it at the ballot box too). It will also have a ballot measure this November to legalize pot and has not has a republican governor since the mid 80's.
All that being true, just how is this business model working for you? That model being one where you advertise your "family owned business" in your digg profile will simultaneously going out of your way to demonstrate what a retrograde bigot you are????Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
laborerFeb 12, 2012
Digg Staff. I would like to report this as harassment.
gaia242Feb 12, 2012
would you like some cheese with your wine?
laborerFeb 12, 2012
My family are not bigots.
You have no right to act like some kind of internet politics police. Straight out of Stalin Russia.
This is political discrimination and harrasment and it shows how this crowd really works that it has to come down to character assassinations and what amount to fiscal threats.
Gross. But if thats the way it is, I fold.
You win, McCarthy.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
ageofmasteryFeb 12, 2012
You pass judgment on everyone else, harass and insult everyone who dares to disagree with you...
But when somebody turns the tables on you you whine like a little bitch.
laborerFeb 12, 2012
Its not personal, and Digg is a forum for dissemination.
Well, clearly not. It is a wing of the liberal mob.
ageofmasteryFeb 12, 2012
Well if Digg is such a vile, liberal dominated place, nobody is forcing you to post here.
You can stay on Free Republic and Stormfront where you'll just see views like your own.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
If Obama did this brilliant bit of Judo on a wider scale... My fantasy is that January 2013, Rove Rumsfeld Bush Cheney -- and a few dozen others get jailed and tried by the anti constitutional tyranny they helped to create.
What if all this time Obama was pretending to play ball -- he was actually using his Domestic spying powers to gather evidence on the neocons and fifth-columnists like the Koch brothers?
We probably aren't this lucky, but a guy can dream, can't he?
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Bachus is a typically corrupt GOP bastard and this has been a long time coming... Check out these direct quotes from the pig:
"In an interview where he spoke about the outlook he would bring to his chairmanship of the Financial Services Committee, Bachus received criticism for suggesting that it was government's role to "serve the banks". To the Birmingham News, Bachus said "In Washington, the view is that the banks are to be regulated, and my view is that Washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks." Bachus later clarified his words by saying that he meant that regulators should set guidelines for banks but not micromanage them."
Yeah, right...
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Bachus is a typically corrupt GOP bastard and this has been a long time coming... Check out these direct quotes from the pig:
"In an interview where he spoke about the outlook he would bring to his chairmanship of the Financial Services Committee, Bachus received criticism for suggesting that it was government's role to "serve the banks". To the Birmingham News, Bachus said "In Washington, the view is that the banks are to be regulated, and my view is that Washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks." Bachus later clarified his words by saying that he meant that regulators should set guidelines for banks but not micromanage them."
Yeah, right...
bookantFeb 12, 2012
" . . . the all-powerful left academia . . . "
You really do live in your own "special" little world, don't you. And to be clear, I mean "special" in the "I ride the short bus" sense of the word.
roguegeniusFeb 12, 2012
Heavy on the word "special."
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
It’s not really why he signed up to be an astronaut, but like it or not, Mike Barratt and his eyes have become a science project.
The eye charts he reads, the red drops that turn his eyes yellow and the ultrasounds being performed on him could determine whether he or any other astronaut ever journeys into deep space or sets foot on other worlds.
NASA’s new priority is how to protect astronauts from going blind on the years-long trip to get wherever they are going.
“I absolutely agree that this is our number one priority,” Barratt said.
Why?
Because when Barratt blasted off to the international space station, he needed eyeglasses for distance. When he returned to Earth, his distance vision was fine, but he needed reading glasses. That was more than two years ago. And he’s not getting better.
“We really need to understand this. This is a critical point for understanding how humans adapt to spaceflight,” he said.
In the past few years, about half of the astronauts aboard the international space station have developed an increasing pressure inside their heads, an intracranial pressure that reshapes their optic nerve, causing a significant shift in the eyesight of male astronauts. Doctors call it papilledema.
Female space travelers have not been affected.
Some of the astronauts slowly recover. Others have not.
Space station astronauts typically spend about six months in orbit.
Barratt is one of 10 male astronauts, all older than 45, who have not recovered. Barratt returned from a six-month stint aboard the station in October 2009 and has experienced a profound change in his sight.
He used to be nearsighted. But now, the space veteran says he’s eagle-eyed at long distance but needs glasses for reading. There is no treatment and no answers as to why female space flyers are not affected.
CNN spent part of a day with Barratt, watching as doctors monitored his progress with high-resolution testing as they try to understand how the weightless environment of space is causing half of all space station astronauts to have this vision change. Today, space station astronauts fly with specially designed variable focus glasses to help combat the vision shift.
“The big benefit of these is that they allow us to adjust for significant prescription changes,” said Dr. Robert Gibson, a senior vision consultant, who was brought in to help study the problem.
Doctors have found that Barratt’s retinas have microscopic folds or wrinkles on them, and the back of his eye, the optic nerve, is no longer round but has flattened.
“I think this is showing that there are physiologic aspects of adaption to spaceflight we weren’t seeing before,” said Barratt.
This raises a red flag for all of NASA’s plans for long-duration human space flight. The space station is supposed to be the test bed for how humans would learn to live in space, but it opens profound questions on whether humans will ever venture to Mars or to an asteroid if they are unable to figure out how the outer-space environment is affecting the eyes.
“This has all of our attention,” said Terry Taddeo, the acting chief of space medicine at Johnson Space Center in Houston.
“It is a serious problem and one we are going to have to understand more about before we would be able to send somebody into a long-duration mission away from Earth, where they would be away for years,” he said.
Right now, the only data that doctors have are from six-month tours of duty on the space station.
NASA has begun doing extensive preflight and postflight eye exams, including high-resolution MRIs of the eyes. There have been anecdotes from some space shuttle astronauts who also complained about vision change, but it does not appear they had long-lasting effects from the much shorter space flights that typically lasted up to about three weeks.
“What we’re seeing appears to occur within the first couple of months of flight and appears to level off, plateau after about four to five months,” Gibson said.
“If it’s just a matter of giving them a stronger prescription, we can live with that,” he said. “But if there is an elevated intracranial pressure as the cause of this, we have to be concerned about other neurologic effects."
That means there could be other effects on the body that haven’t become apparent.
This is why a three-year mission to Mars is in question.
It would be humans' next great leap, and NASA is spending almost $18 billion over the next five years to develop a heavy lift rocket that would take astronauts to the Red Planet or even to an asteroid. They would travel in a new spacecraft, Orion.
But right now, a trip to Mars is still more science fiction than fact. No one is calling this vision problem a showstopper, yet the program’s price tag begs for a solution to be found fast so NASA won’t be building the world’s largest, fastest rocket to nowhere.
Dr. Bruce Ehni, a neurosurgeon at the VA Medical Center at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, has consulted with NASA and is the only neurosurgeon on their panel.
“If they can’t predict who is at risk ... they put his health in jeopardy. They put, possibly, the mission in jeopardy if he can’t see or do his job effectively,” he said.
But Barratt thinks that any deep space venture to Mars is still 20 years away. He’s hoping that spacecraft will be a whole lot faster than anything the space agency can fly now.
“You fly fast, and you don’t worry,” he said, with a grin.
“I’m still hopeful that in 20 years, we’ll have advanced propulsion capabilities that can get us there in a matter of weeks to a few months. Then, a lot of these problems go away,” he said.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
It’s not really why he signed up to be an astronaut, but like it or not, Mike Barratt and his eyes have become a science project.
The eye charts he reads, the red drops that turn his eyes yellow and the ultrasounds being performed on him could determine whether he or any other astronaut ever journeys into deep space or sets foot on other worlds.
NASA’s new priority is how to protect astronauts from going blind on the years-long trip to get wherever they are going.
“I absolutely agree that this is our number one priority,” Barratt said.
Why?
Because when Barratt blasted off to the international space station, he needed eyeglasses for distance. When he returned to Earth, his distance vision was fine, but he needed reading glasses. That was more than two years ago. And he’s not getting better.
“We really need to understand this. This is a critical point for understanding how humans adapt to spaceflight,” he said.
In the past few years, about half of the astronauts aboard the international space station have developed an increasing pressure inside their heads, an intracranial pressure that reshapes their optic nerve, causing a significant shift in the eyesight of male astronauts. Doctors call it papilledema.
Female space travelers have not been affected.
Some of the astronauts slowly recover. Others have not.
Space station astronauts typically spend about six months in orbit.
Barratt is one of 10 male astronauts, all older than 45, who have not recovered. Barratt returned from a six-month stint aboard the station in October 2009 and has experienced a profound change in his sight.
He used to be nearsighted. But now, the space veteran says he’s eagle-eyed at long distance but needs glasses for reading. There is no treatment and no answers as to why female space flyers are not affected.
CNN spent part of a day with Barratt, watching as doctors monitored his progress with high-resolution testing as they try to understand how the weightless environment of space is causing half of all space station astronauts to have this vision change. Today, space station astronauts fly with specially designed variable focus glasses to help combat the vision shift.
“The big benefit of these is that they allow us to adjust for significant prescription changes,” said Dr. Robert Gibson, a senior vision consultant, who was brought in to help study the problem.
Doctors have found that Barratt’s retinas have microscopic folds or wrinkles on them, and the back of his eye, the optic nerve, is no longer round but has flattened.
“I think this is showing that there are physiologic aspects of adaption to spaceflight we weren’t seeing before,” said Barratt.
This raises a red flag for all of NASA’s plans for long-duration human space flight. The space station is supposed to be the test bed for how humans would learn to live in space, but it opens profound questions on whether humans will ever venture to Mars or to an asteroid if they are unable to figure out how the outer-space environment is affecting the eyes.
“This has all of our attention,” said Terry Taddeo, the acting chief of space medicine at Johnson Space Center in Houston.
“It is a serious problem and one we are going to have to understand more about before we would be able to send somebody into a long-duration mission away from Earth, where they would be away for years,” he said.
Right now, the only data that doctors have are from six-month tours of duty on the space station.
NASA has begun doing extensive preflight and postflight eye exams, including high-resolution MRIs of the eyes. There have been anecdotes from some space shuttle astronauts who also complained about vision change, but it does not appear they had long-lasting effects from the much shorter space flights that typically lasted up to about three weeks.
“What we’re seeing appears to occur within the first couple of months of flight and appears to level off, plateau after about four to five months,” Gibson said.
“If it’s just a matter of giving them a stronger prescription, we can live with that,” he said. “But if there is an elevated intracranial pressure as the cause of this, we have to be concerned about other neurologic effects."
That means there could be other effects on the body that haven’t become apparent.
This is why a three-year mission to Mars is in question.
It would be humans' next great leap, and NASA is spending almost $18 billion over the next five years to develop a heavy lift rocket that would take astronauts to the Red Planet or even to an asteroid. They would travel in a new spacecraft, Orion.
But right now, a trip to Mars is still more science fiction than fact. No one is calling this vision problem a showstopper, yet the program’s price tag begs for a solution to be found fast so NASA won’t be building the world’s largest, fastest rocket to nowhere.
Dr. Bruce Ehni, a neurosurgeon at the VA Medical Center at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, has consulted with NASA and is the only neurosurgeon on their panel.
“If they can’t predict who is at risk ... they put his health in jeopardy. They put, possibly, the mission in jeopardy if he can’t see or do his job effectively,” he said.
But Barratt thinks that any deep space venture to Mars is still 20 years away. He’s hoping that spacecraft will be a whole lot faster than anything the space agency can fly now.
“You fly fast, and you don’t worry,” he said, with a grin.
“I’m still hopeful that in 20 years, we’ll have advanced propulsion capabilities that can get us there in a matter of weeks to a few months. Then, a lot of these problems go away,” he said.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
laborerFeb 12, 2012
Cute and mature.
Just like a liberal.
bookantFeb 12, 2012
Say something worthy of being taken seriously and you'll get a serious responce; say something worthy of only ridicule and that's what you'll get.
FrankLuskaFeb 12, 2012
You mean like "Liberals Filled With Glee over Article Title, But Failed to Read or Understand what was Written"
Oh, let me guess, people think their insurance rates will go down because or less abortions or child births, instead of big business pocketing the extra money, Ya Right.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
It’s not really why he signed up to be an astronaut, but like it or not, Mike Barratt and his eyes have become a science project.
The eye charts he reads, the red drops that turn his eyes yellow and the ultrasounds being performed on him could determine whether he or any other astronaut ever journeys into deep space or sets foot on other worlds.
NASA’s new priority is how to protect astronauts from going blind on the years-long trip to get wherever they are going.
“I absolutely agree that this is our number one priority,” Barratt said.
Why?
Because when Barratt blasted off to the international space station, he needed eyeglasses for distance. When he returned to Earth, his distance vision was fine, but he needed reading glasses. That was more than two years ago. And he’s not getting better.
“We really need to understand this. This is a critical point for understanding how humans adapt to spaceflight,” he said.
In the past few years, about half of the astronauts aboard the international space station have developed an increasing pressure inside their heads, an intracranial pressure that reshapes their optic nerve, causing a significant shift in the eyesight of male astronauts. Doctors call it papilledema.
Female space travelers have not been affected.
Some of the astronauts slowly recover. Others have not.
Space station astronauts typically spend about six months in orbit.
Barratt is one of 10 male astronauts, all older than 45, who have not recovered. Barratt returned from a six-month stint aboard the station in October 2009 and has experienced a profound change in his sight.
He used to be nearsighted. But now, the space veteran says he’s eagle-eyed at long distance but needs glasses for reading. There is no treatment and no answers as to why female space flyers are not affected.
CNN spent part of a day with Barratt, watching as doctors monitored his progress with high-resolution testing as they try to understand how the weightless environment of space is causing half of all space station astronauts to have this vision change. Today, space station astronauts fly with specially designed variable focus glasses to help combat the vision shift.
“The big benefit of these is that they allow us to adjust for significant prescription changes,” said Dr. Robert Gibson, a senior vision consultant, who was brought in to help study the problem.
Doctors have found that Barratt’s retinas have microscopic folds or wrinkles on them, and the back of his eye, the optic nerve, is no longer round but has flattened.
“I think this is showing that there are physiologic aspects of adaption to spaceflight we weren’t seeing before,” said Barratt.
This raises a red flag for all of NASA’s plans for long-duration human space flight. The space station is supposed to be the test bed for how humans would learn to live in space, but it opens profound questions on whether humans will ever venture to Mars or to an asteroid if they are unable to figure out how the outer-space environment is affecting the eyes.
“This has all of our attention,” said Terry Taddeo, the acting chief of space medicine at Johnson Space Center in Houston.
“It is a serious problem and one we are going to have to understand more about before we would be able to send somebody into a long-duration mission away from Earth, where they would be away for years,” he said.
Right now, the only data that doctors have are from six-month tours of duty on the space station.
NASA has begun doing extensive preflight and postflight eye exams, including high-resolution MRIs of the eyes. There have been anecdotes from some space shuttle astronauts who also complained about vision change, but it does not appear they had long-lasting effects from the much shorter space flights that typically lasted up to about three weeks.
“What we’re seeing appears to occur within the first couple of months of flight and appears to level off, plateau after about four to five months,” Gibson said.
“If it’s just a matter of giving them a stronger prescription, we can live with that,” he said. “But if there is an elevated intracranial pressure as the cause of this, we have to be concerned about other neurologic effects."
That means there could be other effects on the body that haven’t become apparent.
This is why a three-year mission to Mars is in question.
It would be humans' next great leap, and NASA is spending almost $18 billion over the next five years to develop a heavy lift rocket that would take astronauts to the Red Planet or even to an asteroid. They would travel in a new spacecraft, Orion.
But right now, a trip to Mars is still more science fiction than fact. No one is calling this vision problem a showstopper, yet the program’s price tag begs for a solution to be found fast so NASA won’t be building the world’s largest, fastest rocket to nowhere.
Dr. Bruce Ehni, a neurosurgeon at the VA Medical Center at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, has consulted with NASA and is the only neurosurgeon on their panel.
“If they can’t predict who is at risk ... they put his health in jeopardy. They put, possibly, the mission in jeopardy if he can’t see or do his job effectively,” he said.
But Barratt thinks that any deep space venture to Mars is still 20 years away. He’s hoping that spacecraft will be a whole lot faster than anything the space agency can fly now.
“You fly fast, and you don’t worry,” he said, with a grin.
“I’m still hopeful that in 20 years, we’ll have advanced propulsion capabilities that can get us there in a matter of weeks to a few months. Then, a lot of these problems go away,” he said.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
It’s not really why he signed up to be an astronaut, but like it or not, Mike Barratt and his eyes have become a science project.
The eye charts he reads, the red drops that turn his eyes yellow and the ultrasounds being performed on him could determine whether he or any other astronaut ever journeys into deep space or sets foot on other worlds.
NASA’s new priority is how to protect astronauts from going blind on the years-long trip to get wherever they are going.
“I absolutely agree that this is our number one priority,” Barratt said.
Why?
Because when Barratt blasted off to the international space station, he needed eyeglasses for distance. When he returned to Earth, his distance vision was fine, but he needed reading glasses. That was more than two years ago. And he’s not getting better.
“We really need to understand this. This is a critical point for understanding how humans adapt to spaceflight,” he said.
In the past few years, about half of the astronauts aboard the international space station have developed an increasing pressure inside their heads, an intracranial pressure that reshapes their optic nerve, causing a significant shift in the eyesight of male astronauts. Doctors call it papilledema.
Female space travelers have not been affected.
Some of the astronauts slowly recover. Others have not.
Space station astronauts typically spend about six months in orbit.
Barratt is one of 10 male astronauts, all older than 45, who have not recovered. Barratt returned from a six-month stint aboard the station in October 2009 and has experienced a profound change in his sight.
He used to be nearsighted. But now, the space veteran says he’s eagle-eyed at long distance but needs glasses for reading. There is no treatment and no answers as to why female space flyers are not affected.
CNN spent part of a day with Barratt, watching as doctors monitored his progress with high-resolution testing as they try to understand how the weightless environment of space is causing half of all space station astronauts to have this vision change. Today, space station astronauts fly with specially designed variable focus glasses to help combat the vision shift.
“The big benefit of these is that they allow us to adjust for significant prescription changes,” said Dr. Robert Gibson, a senior vision consultant, who was brought in to help study the problem.
Doctors have found that Barratt’s retinas have microscopic folds or wrinkles on them, and the back of his eye, the optic nerve, is no longer round but has flattened.
“I think this is showing that there are physiologic aspects of adaption to spaceflight we weren’t seeing before,” said Barratt.
This raises a red flag for all of NASA’s plans for long-duration human space flight. The space station is supposed to be the test bed for how humans would learn to live in space, but it opens profound questions on whether humans will ever venture to Mars or to an asteroid if they are unable to figure out how the outer-space environment is affecting the eyes.
“This has all of our attention,” said Terry Taddeo, the acting chief of space medicine at Johnson Space Center in Houston.
“It is a serious problem and one we are going to have to understand more about before we would be able to send somebody into a long-duration mission away from Earth, where they would be away for years,” he said.
Right now, the only data that doctors have are from six-month tours of duty on the space station.
NASA has begun doing extensive preflight and postflight eye exams, including high-resolution MRIs of the eyes. There have been anecdotes from some space shuttle astronauts who also complained about vision change, but it does not appear they had long-lasting effects from the much shorter space flights that typically lasted up to about three weeks.
“What we’re seeing appears to occur within the first couple of months of flight and appears to level off, plateau after about four to five months,” Gibson said.
“If it’s just a matter of giving them a stronger prescription, we can live with that,” he said. “But if there is an elevated intracranial pressure as the cause of this, we have to be concerned about other neurologic effects."
That means there could be other effects on the body that haven’t become apparent.
This is why a three-year mission to Mars is in question.
It would be humans' next great leap, and NASA is spending almost $18 billion over the next five years to develop a heavy lift rocket that would take astronauts to the Red Planet or even to an asteroid. They would travel in a new spacecraft, Orion.
But right now, a trip to Mars is still more science fiction than fact. No one is calling this vision problem a showstopper, yet the program’s price tag begs for a solution to be found fast so NASA won’t be building the world’s largest, fastest rocket to nowhere.
Dr. Bruce Ehni, a neurosurgeon at the VA Medical Center at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, has consulted with NASA and is the only neurosurgeon on their panel.
“If they can’t predict who is at risk ... they put his health in jeopardy. They put, possibly, the mission in jeopardy if he can’t see or do his job effectively,” he said.
But Barratt thinks that any deep space venture to Mars is still 20 years away. He’s hoping that spacecraft will be a whole lot faster than anything the space agency can fly now.
“You fly fast, and you don’t worry,” he said, with a grin.
“I’m still hopeful that in 20 years, we’ll have advanced propulsion capabilities that can get us there in a matter of weeks to a few months. Then, a lot of these problems go away,” he said.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
It’s not really why he signed up to be an astronaut, but like it or not, Mike Barratt and his eyes have become a science project.
The eye charts he reads, the red drops that turn his eyes yellow and the ultrasounds being performed on him could determine whether he or any other astronaut ever journeys into deep space or sets foot on other worlds.
NASA’s new priority is how to protect astronauts from going blind on the years-long trip to get wherever they are going.
“I absolutely agree that this is our number one priority,” Barratt said.
Why?
Because when Barratt blasted off to the international space station, he needed eyeglasses for distance. When he returned to Earth, his distance vision was fine, but he needed reading glasses. That was more than two years ago. And he’s not getting better.
“We really need to understand this. This is a critical point for understanding how humans adapt to spaceflight,” he said.
In the past few years, about half of the astronauts aboard the international space station have developed an increasing pressure inside their heads, an intracranial pressure that reshapes their optic nerve, causing a significant shift in the eyesight of male astronauts. Doctors call it papilledema.
Female space travelers have not been affected.
Some of the astronauts slowly recover. Others have not.
Space station astronauts typically spend about six months in orbit.
Barratt is one of 10 male astronauts, all older than 45, who have not recovered. Barratt returned from a six-month stint aboard the station in October 2009 and has experienced a profound change in his sight.
He used to be nearsighted. But now, the space veteran says he’s eagle-eyed at long distance but needs glasses for reading. There is no treatment and no answers as to why female space flyers are not affected.
CNN spent part of a day with Barratt, watching as doctors monitored his progress with high-resolution testing as they try to understand how the weightless environment of space is causing half of all space station astronauts to have this vision change. Today, space station astronauts fly with specially designed variable focus glasses to help combat the vision shift.
“The big benefit of these is that they allow us to adjust for significant prescription changes,” said Dr. Robert Gibson, a senior vision consultant, who was brought in to help study the problem.
Doctors have found that Barratt’s retinas have microscopic folds or wrinkles on them, and the back of his eye, the optic nerve, is no longer round but has flattened.
“I think this is showing that there are physiologic aspects of adaption to spaceflight we weren’t seeing before,” said Barratt.
This raises a red flag for all of NASA’s plans for long-duration human space flight. The space station is supposed to be the test bed for how humans would learn to live in space, but it opens profound questions on whether humans will ever venture to Mars or to an asteroid if they are unable to figure out how the outer-space environment is affecting the eyes.
“This has all of our attention,” said Terry Taddeo, the acting chief of space medicine at Johnson Space Center in Houston.
“It is a serious problem and one we are going to have to understand more about before we would be able to send somebody into a long-duration mission away from Earth, where they would be away for years,” he said.
Right now, the only data that doctors have are from six-month tours of duty on the space station.
NASA has begun doing extensive preflight and postflight eye exams, including high-resolution MRIs of the eyes. There have been anecdotes from some space shuttle astronauts who also complained about vision change, but it does not appear they had long-lasting effects from the much shorter space flights that typically lasted up to about three weeks.
“What we’re seeing appears to occur within the first couple of months of flight and appears to level off, plateau after about four to five months,” Gibson said.
“If it’s just a matter of giving them a stronger prescription, we can live with that,” he said. “But if there is an elevated intracranial pressure as the cause of this, we have to be concerned about other neurologic effects."
That means there could be other effects on the body that haven’t become apparent.
This is why a three-year mission to Mars is in question.
It would be humans' next great leap, and NASA is spending almost $18 billion over the next five years to develop a heavy lift rocket that would take astronauts to the Red Planet or even to an asteroid. They would travel in a new spacecraft, Orion.
But right now, a trip to Mars is still more science fiction than fact. No one is calling this vision problem a showstopper, yet the program’s price tag begs for a solution to be found fast so NASA won’t be building the world’s largest, fastest rocket to nowhere.
Dr. Bruce Ehni, a neurosurgeon at the VA Medical Center at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, has consulted with NASA and is the only neurosurgeon on their panel.
“If they can’t predict who is at risk ... they put his health in jeopardy. They put, possibly, the mission in jeopardy if he can’t see or do his job effectively,” he said.
But Barratt thinks that any deep space venture to Mars is still 20 years away. He’s hoping that spacecraft will be a whole lot faster than anything the space agency can fly now.
“You fly fast, and you don’t worry,” he said, with a grin.
“I’m still hopeful that in 20 years, we’ll have advanced propulsion capabilities that can get us there in a matter of weeks to a few months. Then, a lot of these problems go away,” he said.
gaia242Feb 12, 2012
Does your sanctimonious bs have no end?
Deputy Dog at your service;-)
laborerFeb 12, 2012
It does. Today. I will no longer post, on this or any other account.
I just ask that it end here. That politics isnt taken outside of Digg and that we remain civil.
Can I please ask that of you?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
gaia242Feb 13, 2012
agreed. Now please, for the sake of your family, get that license renewed.
I bid you adieu Sir.
laborerFeb 13, 2012
Thank you gaia242. There may be some mistake, and I will make sure to check on it all the same.
May the force be with you.
particleman420Feb 12, 2012
LOL! you delude yourself however you have to!
sure, he "caved"!
laborerFeb 12, 2012
Obama gave in like a little bitch.
Because when push comes to shove, Obama will adopt Republicans policies before he tries to think up working solutions [ie. non-top down government aide] of his own [he cant].Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
mlw4428Feb 12, 2012
"Obama gave in like a little bitch."
That's a mature statement coming from someone screaming about liberals not being mature.
Well suck it up, buckwheat...Obama just gave the Repukes enough rope to hang themselves with. It'll be fun to watch them squirm and choke.
laborerFeb 12, 2012
Haha, me chiding the President is the same as carrying out a character assassination through Google by linking up a mans name with disgusting, immature and childish content?
Yup.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
mlw4428Feb 12, 2012
"THE OTHER KIDS GET TO BE IMMATURE, WHY CAN'T I BE? WHHHAAAAA WHAAAAAAAAAA WHHHHAAAAAAAA"
What a whiny child.
laborerFeb 12, 2012
Well at least you can admit Liberals are immature.
Nice to come together sometimes.
mlw4428Feb 12, 2012
"I'M RUBBER AND YOU'RE GLUE, WHATEVER YOU SAY BOUNCES OFF OF ME AND STICKS TO YOU!!!"
Did you get your parent's permission to go online?
laborerFeb 12, 2012
Hahaha, did you?
particleman420Feb 12, 2012
ahh the standard "No You!" argument.
gaia242Feb 12, 2012
nice trash pile in front of your house. At least your next door neighbors have the decency to put a blue tarp over pile of what not.
gaia242Feb 12, 2012
First rule of the internet....dont post a bunch of personal information. DERP DERP DERP!!!!!!
laborerFeb 12, 2012
No, its called being civil.
What an ugly practice.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Bachus is a typically corrupt GOP bastard and this has been a long time coming... Check out these direct quotes from the pig:
"In an interview where he spoke about the outlook he would bring to his chairmanship of the Financial Services Committee, Bachus received criticism for suggesting that it was government's role to "serve the banks". To the Birmingham News, Bachus said "In Washington, the view is that the banks are to be regulated, and my view is that Washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks." Bachus later clarified his words by saying that he meant that regulators should set guidelines for banks but not micromanage them."
Yeah, right...
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Bachus is a typically corrupt GOP bastard and this has been a long time coming... Check out these direct quotes from the pig:
"In an interview where he spoke about the outlook he would bring to his chairmanship of the Financial Services Committee, Bachus received criticism for suggesting that it was government's role to "serve the banks". To the Birmingham News, Bachus said "In Washington, the view is that the banks are to be regulated, and my view is that Washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks." Bachus later clarified his words by saying that he meant that regulators should set guidelines for banks but not micromanage them."
Yeah, right...
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Bachus is a typically corrupt GOP bastard and this has been a long time coming... Check out these direct quotes from the pig:
"In an interview where he spoke about the outlook he would bring to his chairmanship of the Financial Services Committee, Bachus received criticism for suggesting that it was government's role to "serve the banks". To the Birmingham News, Bachus said "In Washington, the view is that the banks are to be regulated, and my view is that Washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks." Bachus later clarified his words by saying that he meant that regulators should set guidelines for banks but not micromanage them."
Yeah, right...
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Bachus is a typically corrupt GOP bastard and this has been a long time coming... Check out these direct quotes from the pig:
"In an interview where he spoke about the outlook he would bring to his chairmanship of the Financial Services Committee, Bachus received criticism for suggesting that it was government's role to "serve the banks". To the Birmingham News, Bachus said "In Washington, the view is that the banks are to be regulated, and my view is that Washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks." Bachus later clarified his words by saying that he meant that regulators should set guidelines for banks but not micromanage them."
Yeah, right...
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Bachus is a typically corrupt GOP bastard and this has been a long time coming... Check out these direct quotes from the pig:
"In an interview where he spoke about the outlook he would bring to his chairmanship of the Financial Services Committee, Bachus received criticism for suggesting that it was government's role to "serve the banks". To the Birmingham News, Bachus said "In Washington, the view is that the banks are to be regulated, and my view is that Washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks." Bachus later clarified his words by saying that he meant that regulators should set guidelines for banks but not micromanage them."
Yeah, right...
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
It’s not really why he signed up to be an astronaut, but like it or not, Mike Barratt and his eyes have become a science project.
The eye charts he reads, the red drops that turn his eyes yellow and the ultrasounds being performed on him could determine whether he or any other astronaut ever journeys into deep space or sets foot on other worlds.
NASA’s new priority is how to protect astronauts from going blind on the years-long trip to get wherever they are going.
“I absolutely agree that this is our number one priority,” Barratt said.
Why?
Because when Barratt blasted off to the international space station, he needed eyeglasses for distance. When he returned to Earth, his distance vision was fine, but he needed reading glasses. That was more than two years ago. And he’s not getting better.
“We really need to understand this. This is a critical point for understanding how humans adapt to spaceflight,” he said.
In the past few years, about half of the astronauts aboard the international space station have developed an increasing pressure inside their heads, an intracranial pressure that reshapes their optic nerve, causing a significant shift in the eyesight of male astronauts. Doctors call it papilledema.
Female space travelers have not been affected.
Some of the astronauts slowly recover. Others have not.
Space station astronauts typically spend about six months in orbit.
Barratt is one of 10 male astronauts, all older than 45, who have not recovered. Barratt returned from a six-month stint aboard the station in October 2009 and has experienced a profound change in his sight.
He used to be nearsighted. But now, the space veteran says he’s eagle-eyed at long distance but needs glasses for reading. There is no treatment and no answers as to why female space flyers are not affected.
CNN spent part of a day with Barratt, watching as doctors monitored his progress with high-resolution testing as they try to understand how the weightless environment of space is causing half of all space station astronauts to have this vision change. Today, space station astronauts fly with specially designed variable focus glasses to help combat the vision shift.
“The big benefit of these is that they allow us to adjust for significant prescription changes,” said Dr. Robert Gibson, a senior vision consultant, who was brought in to help study the problem.
Doctors have found that Barratt’s retinas have microscopic folds or wrinkles on them, and the back of his eye, the optic nerve, is no longer round but has flattened.
“I think this is showing that there are physiologic aspects of adaption to spaceflight we weren’t seeing before,” said Barratt.
This raises a red flag for all of NASA’s plans for long-duration human space flight. The space station is supposed to be the test bed for how humans would learn to live in space, but it opens profound questions on whether humans will ever venture to Mars or to an asteroid if they are unable to figure out how the outer-space environment is affecting the eyes.
“This has all of our attention,” said Terry Taddeo, the acting chief of space medicine at Johnson Space Center in Houston.
“It is a serious problem and one we are going to have to understand more about before we would be able to send somebody into a long-duration mission away from Earth, where they would be away for years,” he said.
Right now, the only data that doctors have are from six-month tours of duty on the space station.
NASA has begun doing extensive preflight and postflight eye exams, including high-resolution MRIs of the eyes. There have been anecdotes from some space shuttle astronauts who also complained about vision change, but it does not appear they had long-lasting effects from the much shorter space flights that typically lasted up to about three weeks.
“What we’re seeing appears to occur within the first couple of months of flight and appears to level off, plateau after about four to five months,” Gibson said.
“If it’s just a matter of giving them a stronger prescription, we can live with that,” he said. “But if there is an elevated intracranial pressure as the cause of this, we have to be concerned about other neurologic effects."
That means there could be other effects on the body that haven’t become apparent.
This is why a three-year mission to Mars is in question.
It would be humans' next great leap, and NASA is spending almost $18 billion over the next five years to develop a heavy lift rocket that would take astronauts to the Red Planet or even to an asteroid. They would travel in a new spacecraft, Orion.
But right now, a trip to Mars is still more science fiction than fact. No one is calling this vision problem a showstopper, yet the program’s price tag begs for a solution to be found fast so NASA won’t be building the world’s largest, fastest rocket to nowhere.
Dr. Bruce Ehni, a neurosurgeon at the VA Medical Center at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, has consulted with NASA and is the only neurosurgeon on their panel.
“If they can’t predict who is at risk ... they put his health in jeopardy. They put, possibly, the mission in jeopardy if he can’t see or do his job effectively,” he said.
But Barratt thinks that any deep space venture to Mars is still 20 years away. He’s hoping that spacecraft will be a whole lot faster than anything the space agency can fly now.
“You fly fast, and you don’t worry,” he said, with a grin.
“I’m still hopeful that in 20 years, we’ll have advanced propulsion capabilities that can get us there in a matter of weeks to a few months. Then, a lot of these problems go away,” he said.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
gaia242Feb 12, 2012
LABORER, The business you are advertising on this and your own website has an expired business license. Expired on 05-31-2011.
Perhaps you should consider either renewing it or REMOVING your adverts. I am not a business law expert but I do believe you are currently committing fraud on my fellow residence of Washington.
Sir, you might want to start acting like a good member of the community and rectify this situation, immediately.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
gaia242Feb 12, 2012
this dumb s**t lives in LIBERAL western Washington yet seems to think its a good idea to hawk his business in his digg profile. Im not familiar with that being a successful business model, where you alienate half your potential client base by being such an open hater. There are many of us whom also live in the Puget Sound region and dont find his bigotry very amusing.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
mlw4428Feb 12, 2012
It's interesting you mentioned this...I did some research...
His license (of some sort) is listed on his website...you generally tend to think something like that is a state-issued business license. Alas no license is found for: PINTOOD8908LHF
----
"
Your Search Criteria:
License Type: All Professional Licenses
License/UBI/Dealer #: PINTOOD8908L
County: All Counties
No matches were found for your search.
Information Current as of 02/10/2012 3:07AM Pacific Time
"
https://fortress.wa.gov/dol/dolprod/bpdLicenseQuery/lqsSearchResults.aspx
---
I'm curious as to the nature of that license, because as a state license, it's certainly not legit. However I did find two business entities with the above name:
Name UBI Business ID Location ID City State
HECTOR RODOLPHO PINTOS
HECTOR RODOLPHO PINTOS
Trade Name:PINTOS OVERHEAD DOOR 602265261 001 0001 TACOMA WA
PINTOS OVERHEAD DOOR
PINTOS OVER HEAD DORR
Trade Name:PINTOS OVERHEAD DOOR 603013376 001 0001 TACOMA WA
Governing People:
HECTOR RODOLPHO PINTOS
Governing People:
ELIAS MICHAEL PINTOS
HECTOR RUDOLFO PINTOS JR
Alas we can assume that Laborer is either Elias Michael Pintos OR Hector Rudolfo Pintos Jr...if that's truly his business.
Which one are you, Laborer?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
gaia242Feb 12, 2012
Intawessing, veddy intawessing!
Not very smart, not very smart at all.... Especially since it only takes a 2 second google search to find their address, which google also has a street level view of too.... looks like the boon docks to me.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
mlw4428Feb 12, 2012
No threat is implied, it's more or less my thinking that a garage door installer probably doesn't have the minimum education required to be commenting on political discussions.
I'm not calling him stupid, but I sincerely doubt that "Garage Door Installer Certificate of Achievement" comes with, say, anything more advanced than Micro-Economics 101. I have a BA in Computer Science with a focus in Computer Security and took a lot of "core" classes which encompassed a very high-level understanding (albeit a better understanding than Laborer and most of the idiot Digg Patriots on this website) of economics and politics.
It's also why I believe that most college educated people tend to be Democrats (or at least Liberal leaning folks)...college breeds a better understanding of the world. It's less about "handouts" and more about sheer knowledge.
Republicans feed off of un/under-educated people.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
gaia242Feb 12, 2012
here here mlw4428. I do not in anyway shape or form condone violence and I DO NOT advocate any here either....that would make me no better than your average militant pro-lifer.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
laborerFeb 12, 2012
Hahaha, so your true natures come out.
Fine, you win. Ill post less and let you keep your place to your own. Whatever.
Seems like harrassment to me though.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
gaia242Feb 12, 2012
you are fully within your rights to act this dumb you winy hypocrite!
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
It’s not really why he signed up to be an astronaut, but like it or not, Mike Barratt and his eyes have become a science project.
The eye charts he reads, the red drops that turn his eyes yellow and the ultrasounds being performed on him could determine whether he or any other astronaut ever journeys into deep space or sets foot on other worlds.
NASA’s new priority is how to protect astronauts from going blind on the years-long trip to get wherever they are going.
“I absolutely agree that this is our number one priority,” Barratt said.
Why?
Because when Barratt blasted off to the international space station, he needed eyeglasses for distance. When he returned to Earth, his distance vision was fine, but he needed reading glasses. That was more than two years ago. And he’s not getting better.
“We really need to understand this. This is a critical point for understanding how humans adapt to spaceflight,” he said.
In the past few years, about half of the astronauts aboard the international space station have developed an increasing pressure inside their heads, an intracranial pressure that reshapes their optic nerve, causing a significant shift in the eyesight of male astronauts. Doctors call it papilledema.
Female space travelers have not been affected.
Some of the astronauts slowly recover. Others have not.
Space station astronauts typically spend about six months in orbit.
Barratt is one of 10 male astronauts, all older than 45, who have not recovered. Barratt returned from a six-month stint aboard the station in October 2009 and has experienced a profound change in his sight.
He used to be nearsighted. But now, the space veteran says he’s eagle-eyed at long distance but needs glasses for reading. There is no treatment and no answers as to why female space flyers are not affected.
CNN spent part of a day with Barratt, watching as doctors monitored his progress with high-resolution testing as they try to understand how the weightless environment of space is causing half of all space station astronauts to have this vision change. Today, space station astronauts fly with specially designed variable focus glasses to help combat the vision shift.
“The big benefit of these is that they allow us to adjust for significant prescription changes,” said Dr. Robert Gibson, a senior vision consultant, who was brought in to help study the problem.
Doctors have found that Barratt’s retinas have microscopic folds or wrinkles on them, and the back of his eye, the optic nerve, is no longer round but has flattened.
“I think this is showing that there are physiologic aspects of adaption to spaceflight we weren’t seeing before,” said Barratt.
This raises a red flag for all of NASA’s plans for long-duration human space flight. The space station is supposed to be the test bed for how humans would learn to live in space, but it opens profound questions on whether humans will ever venture to Mars or to an asteroid if they are unable to figure out how the outer-space environment is affecting the eyes.
“This has all of our attention,” said Terry Taddeo, the acting chief of space medicine at Johnson Space Center in Houston.
“It is a serious problem and one we are going to have to understand more about before we would be able to send somebody into a long-duration mission away from Earth, where they would be away for years,” he said.
Right now, the only data that doctors have are from six-month tours of duty on the space station.
NASA has begun doing extensive preflight and postflight eye exams, including high-resolution MRIs of the eyes. There have been anecdotes from some space shuttle astronauts who also complained about vision change, but it does not appear they had long-lasting effects from the much shorter space flights that typically lasted up to about three weeks.
“What we’re seeing appears to occur within the first couple of months of flight and appears to level off, plateau after about four to five months,” Gibson said.
“If it’s just a matter of giving them a stronger prescription, we can live with that,” he said. “But if there is an elevated intracranial pressure as the cause of this, we have to be concerned about other neurologic effects."
That means there could be other effects on the body that haven’t become apparent.
This is why a three-year mission to Mars is in question.
It would be humans' next great leap, and NASA is spending almost $18 billion over the next five years to develop a heavy lift rocket that would take astronauts to the Red Planet or even to an asteroid. They would travel in a new spacecraft, Orion.
But right now, a trip to Mars is still more science fiction than fact. No one is calling this vision problem a showstopper, yet the program’s price tag begs for a solution to be found fast so NASA won’t be building the world’s largest, fastest rocket to nowhere.
Dr. Bruce Ehni, a neurosurgeon at the VA Medical Center at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, has consulted with NASA and is the only neurosurgeon on their panel.
“If they can’t predict who is at risk ... they put his health in jeopardy. They put, possibly, the mission in jeopardy if he can’t see or do his job effectively,” he said.
But Barratt thinks that any deep space venture to Mars is still 20 years away. He’s hoping that spacecraft will be a whole lot faster than anything the space agency can fly now.
“You fly fast, and you don’t worry,” he said, with a grin.
“I’m still hopeful that in 20 years, we’ll have advanced propulsion capabilities that can get us there in a matter of weeks to a few months. Then, a lot of these problems go away,” he said.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Reply
generalbulldog1 day 9 hr ago
+27 diggs
DiggBury
Well played, Mr. President.
Reply1 Reply - Top reply has 3 diggs
34 min ago
+3 diggs
DiggBury
Yesterday Heritage released an "Index of Dependence on Government" report. Fox and others in the conservative media trumpeted the report. But even a quick look at Heritage's report reveals its true intent: a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit important government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
The report suggests that times were better when, rather than relying on aComment is buried, click here to see the rest.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
A few weeks ago, the CEO of Master Lock told me that it now makes business sense for him to bring jobs back home.
Today, for the first time in 15 years, Master Lock’s unionized plant in Milwaukee is running at full capacity.
So we have a huge opportunity at this moment to bring manufacturing back. But we have to seize it. Tonight, my message to business leaders is simple: Ask yourselves what you can do to bring jobs back to your country, and your country will do everything we can to help you succeed.
We should start with our tax code. Right now, companies get tax breaks for moving jobs and profits overseas. Meanwhile, companies that choose to stay in America get hit with one of the highest tax rates in the world. It makes no sense, and everyone knows it.
So let’s change it. First, if you’re a business that wants to outsource jobs, you shouldn’t get a tax deduction for doing it.
That money should be used to cover moving expenses for companies like Master Lock that decide to bring jobs home.
Second, no American company should be able to avoid paying its fair share of taxes by moving jobs and profits overseas.
From now on, every multinational company should have to pay a basic minimum tax. And every penny should go towards lowering taxes for companies that choose to stay here and hire here in America.
Third, if you’re an American manufacturer, you should get a bigger tax cut. If you’re a high-tech manufacturer, we should double the tax deduction you get for making your products here. And if you want to relocate in a community that was hit hard when a factory left town, you should get help financing a new plant, equipment, or training for new workers.
So my message...
My message is simple. It is time to stop rewarding businesses that ship jobs overseas and start rewarding companies that create jobs right here in America. Send me these tax reforms, and I will sign them right away.
We’re also making it easier for American businesses to sell products all over the world. Two years ago, I set a goal of doubling U.S. exports over five years. With the bipartisan trade agreements we signed into law, we’re on track to meet that goal ahead of schedule.
And soon there will be millions of new customers for American goods in Panama, Colombia, and South Korea. Soon, there will be new cars on the streets of Seoul imported from Detroit, and Toledo, and Chicago.
I will go anywhere in the world to open new markets for American products. And I will not stand by when our competitors don’t play by the rules. We’ve brought trade cases against China at nearly twice the rate as the last administration, and it’s made a difference.
Over a thousand Americans are working today because we stopped a surge in Chinese tires. But we need to do more. It’s not right when another country lets our movies, music, and software be pirated. It’s not fair when foreign manufacturers have a leg up on ours only because they’re heavily subsidized.
Tonight, I’m announcing the creation of a Trade Enforcement Unit that will be charged with investigating unfair trading practices in countries like China. There will be more inspections...Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
FrankLuskaFeb 15, 2012
@mlw4428, No threat is implied, it's more or less my thinking that a garage door installer probably doesn't have the minimum education required to be commenting on political discussions.
That's a mighty evil thing to say, but considering it is from the high and mighty and moral liberal, it is to be expected.
gaia242Feb 12, 2012
Hey nlw4428. The reason we couldn't find anything on laborers' business license is because its closed. Washington State Department of Revenue shows his business licence expired (closed) as of 05-31-2011. Now I am just a simple country lawyer but I do believe that continuing to operate ones business with an expired license is a form of FRAUD and punishable under the law.
So this brings us here: To put your business information out there on a silver platter, while simultaneously pick fights on hotly debated political issues. Then cry "harassment" when people use the information you yourself have provided to call you out. And finally to have the temerity to state that WE are being uncivil is just the hight of RIGHTWING hypocrisy! Would you agree?
Should I contact the Wash St Dept of Revenue about a suspected case of fraud or just let his karma catch up to him?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
laborerFeb 12, 2012
You are a liar and a bully. Please find the decency to leave my family out of this, and keep to your own business.
You can keep Digg to yourself.
laborerFeb 12, 2012
The account Laborer will go silent on Digg if no one further harasses or makes accusations about my family and my families business.
I also apologize for the times this accounts diatribe's got too heated, as the majority of this account was to a be a writing experiment.
Simply a writing experiment in counter culture. But that is ok, and I am sorry for promoting views that were too incendiary.
Please accept my apology, and please cease any further plans to harm my family.
Thank you.
ageofmasteryFeb 12, 2012
Translation. I'll just make another sock puppet account like all the other conservatives.
laborerFeb 12, 2012
I will discontinue any activity on Digg. The account will stay up, as I cant delete it. But I will not visit here.
I assure you.
Please leave my family out of politics.
miklkitFeb 12, 2012
I take it your significant other cut you off tonight.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Whoopsadaisy! Citigroup has accidentally been charging many customers more than what they owe for months, with some of them not even realizing it was going on until the bank sent out a notification. Cit's bill-pay app for iPads was the culprit in many cases, charging customers twice what they owed for bills or mortgage payments.
The New York Times says the bug started in the iPad app around July but wasn't detected until December, after consumers' complaints about payments being off. Other mobile applications and the online bill payment system weren't affected, says Citi.
However, some customers who never even used an iPad to pay bill said they'd also been hit by double charges, something that hasn't been explained away yet. The bank is promising to reimburse customers and waive any fees incurred because of the extra charges, as well as give out a few points for its reward program.
"We take seriously the functionality of our products and services as well as the satisfaction of our clients," spokesman Andrew Brent said in a statement.
Users of Citibank Bill-Pay App Charged Twice [New York Times]Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
Whoopsadaisy! Citigroup has accidentally been charging many customers more than what they owe for months, with some of them not even realizing it was going on until the bank sent out a notification. Cit's bill-pay app for iPads was the culprit in many cases, charging customers twice what they owed for bills or mortgage payments.
The New York Times says the bug started in the iPad app around July but wasn't detected until December, after consumers' complaints about payments being off. Other mobile applications and the online bill payment system weren't affected, says Citi.
However, some customers who never even used an iPad to pay bill said they'd also been hit by double charges, something that hasn't been explained away yet. The bank is promising to reimburse customers and waive any fees incurred because of the extra charges, as well as give out a few points for its reward program.
"We take seriously the functionality of our products and services as well as the satisfaction of our clients," spokesman Andrew Brent said in a statement.
Users of Citibank Bill-Pay App Charged Twice [New York Times]
particleman420Feb 12, 2012
yes, he gave in by getting the exact same thing he was getting before.
i like how he was so clever that you STILL cant even see it.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
It’s not really why he signed up to be an astronaut, but like it or not, Mike Barratt and his eyes have become a science project.
The eye charts he reads, the red drops that turn his eyes yellow and the ultrasounds being performed on him could determine whether he or any other astronaut ever journeys into deep space or sets foot on other worlds.
NASA’s new priority is how to protect astronauts from going blind on the years-long trip to get wherever they are going.
“I absolutely agree that this is our number one priority,” Barratt said.
Why?
Because when Barratt blasted off to the international space station, he needed eyeglasses for distance. When he returned to Earth, his distance vision was fine, but he needed reading glasses. That was more than two years ago. And he’s not getting better.
“We really need to understand this. This is a critical point for understanding how humans adapt to spaceflight,” he said.
In the past few years, about half of the astronauts aboard the international space station have developed an increasing pressure inside their heads, an intracranial pressure that reshapes their optic nerve, causing a significant shift in the eyesight of male astronauts. Doctors call it papilledema.
Female space travelers have not been affected.
Some of the astronauts slowly recover. Others have not.
Space station astronauts typically spend about six months in orbit.
Barratt is one of 10 male astronauts, all older than 45, who have not recovered. Barratt returned from a six-month stint aboard the station in October 2009 and has experienced a profound change in his sight.
He used to be nearsighted. But now, the space veteran says he’s eagle-eyed at long distance but needs glasses for reading. There is no treatment and no answers as to why female space flyers are not affected.
CNN spent part of a day with Barratt, watching as doctors monitored his progress with high-resolution testing as they try to understand how the weightless environment of space is causing half of all space station astronauts to have this vision change. Today, space station astronauts fly with specially designed variable focus glasses to help combat the vision shift.
“The big benefit of these is that they allow us to adjust for significant prescription changes,” said Dr. Robert Gibson, a senior vision consultant, who was brought in to help study the problem.
Doctors have found that Barratt’s retinas have microscopic folds or wrinkles on them, and the back of his eye, the optic nerve, is no longer round but has flattened.
“I think this is showing that there are physiologic aspects of adaption to spaceflight we weren’t seeing before,” said Barratt.
This raises a red flag for all of NASA’s plans for long-duration human space flight. The space station is supposed to be the test bed for how humans would learn to live in space, but it opens profound questions on whether humans will ever venture to Mars or to an asteroid if they are unable to figure out how the outer-space environment is affecting the eyes.
“This has all of our attention,” said Terry Taddeo, the acting chief of space medicine at Johnson Space Center in Houston.
“It is a serious problem and one we are going to have to understand more about before we would be able to send somebody into a long-duration mission away from Earth, where they would be away for years,” he said.
Right now, the only data that doctors have are from six-month tours of duty on the space station.
NASA has begun doing extensive preflight and postflight eye exams, including high-resolution MRIs of the eyes. There have been anecdotes from some space shuttle astronauts who also complained about vision change, but it does not appear they had long-lasting effects from the much shorter space flights that typically lasted up to about three weeks.
“What we’re seeing appears to occur within the first couple of months of flight and appears to level off, plateau after about four to five months,” Gibson said.
“If it’s just a matter of giving them a stronger prescription, we can live with that,” he said. “But if there is an elevated intracranial pressure as the cause of this, we have to be concerned about other neurologic effects."
That means there could be other effects on the body that haven’t become apparent.
This is why a three-year mission to Mars is in question.
It would be humans' next great leap, and NASA is spending almost $18 billion over the next five years to develop a heavy lift rocket that would take astronauts to the Red Planet or even to an asteroid. They would travel in a new spacecraft, Orion.
But right now, a trip to Mars is still more science fiction than fact. No one is calling this vision problem a showstopper, yet the program’s price tag begs for a solution to be found fast so NASA won’t be building the world’s largest, fastest rocket to nowhere.
Dr. Bruce Ehni, a neurosurgeon at the VA Medical Center at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, has consulted with NASA and is the only neurosurgeon on their panel.
“If they can’t predict who is at risk ... they put his health in jeopardy. They put, possibly, the mission in jeopardy if he can’t see or do his job effectively,” he said.
But Barratt thinks that any deep space venture to Mars is still 20 years away. He’s hoping that spacecraft will be a whole lot faster than anything the space agency can fly now.
“You fly fast, and you don’t worry,” he said, with a grin.
“I’m still hopeful that in 20 years, we’ll have advanced propulsion capabilities that can get us there in a matter of weeks to a few months. Then, a lot of these problems go away,” he said.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
netantFeb 12, 2012
Wrong. Obama gaffed.
Obama was persuaded by the militant liberal feminist groups to standardize health care regulations to provide free birth control to women, and stick it to the Catholic church. He was mistakenly given the impression that nothing would change for the Catholic church, and that it would be "reasonable" enough to not make an objection. The Catholic bishops involved in health care and its charities realized otherwise. They were bugging the Obama administration for a year to clarify what they would be "required" to do; and finally HHS told them to pound sand. That's when the Catholic bishops staged their freak-out.
In any case, Obama was stuck between a rock and a hard place. Concede to change new health care policy to accommodate religious doctrine, and lose feminist votes (who consider it a birthright, and yet don't consider themselves a religious group), or go hardline on the law, and lose Democratic seats/electors in heavily Catholic states. The ONLY reason Obama could pull this face saving deal is because the sides involved, Catholic church and feminists, are pragmatic (unlike Republitards) and were able to resolve their issues (1st amendment & free birth control for working poor women).
Its preposterous to think that this issue was preplanned by Republicans. It also presumes that the Catholic church actively coordinates with Republican party operatives. The Catholic church is only in it for the Catholic church. Consider them a special interest group, rather than a political PAC. Finally, the only reason the Republicans gave heat to the issue was because they're opportunists grabbing at straws. Only the dumb Republicans said anything that was going to hurt them in November. The Republicans are going to slink away from the issue, because only gov't mandating policy to the church was a 1st amendment issue. As long as the gov't doesn't actively violate the Constitution, the Republicans aren't going to hang themselves by taking an unpopular position.
Also, I could be wrong, but the new "concession" basically boils down to keeping the status quo. If you're a woman working for Catholic charities, or a cleaning woman hired by the church, or a hospital that is providing health insurance to employees through the church owned HMO, you're still screwed.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Bachus is a typically corrupt GOP bastard and this has been a long time coming... Check out these direct quotes from the pig:
"In an interview where he spoke about the outlook he would bring to his chairmanship of the Financial Services Committee, Bachus received criticism for suggesting that it was government's role to "serve the banks". To the Birmingham News, Bachus said "In Washington, the view is that the banks are to be regulated, and my view is that Washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks." Bachus later clarified his words by saying that he meant that regulators should set guidelines for banks but not micromanage them."
Yeah, right...Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Bachus is a typically corrupt GOP bastard and this has been a long time coming... Check out these direct quotes from the pig:
"In an interview where he spoke about the outlook he would bring to his chairmanship of the Financial Services Committee, Bachus received criticism for suggesting that it was government's role to "serve the banks". To the Birmingham News, Bachus said "In Washington, the view is that the banks are to be regulated, and my view is that Washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks." Bachus later clarified his words by saying that he meant that regulators should set guidelines for banks but not micromanage them."
Yeah, right...
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
It’s not really why he signed up to be an astronaut, but like it or not, Mike Barratt and his eyes have become a science project.
The eye charts he reads, the red drops that turn his eyes yellow and the ultrasounds being performed on him could determine whether he or any other astronaut ever journeys into deep space or sets foot on other worlds.
NASA’s new priority is how to protect astronauts from going blind on the years-long trip to get wherever they are going.
“I absolutely agree that this is our number one priority,” Barratt said.
Why?
Because when Barratt blasted off to the international space station, he needed eyeglasses for distance. When he returned to Earth, his distance vision was fine, but he needed reading glasses. That was more than two years ago. And he’s not getting better.
“We really need to understand this. This is a critical point for understanding how humans adapt to spaceflight,” he said.
In the past few years, about half of the astronauts aboard the international space station have developed an increasing pressure inside their heads, an intracranial pressure that reshapes their optic nerve, causing a significant shift in the eyesight of male astronauts. Doctors call it papilledema.
Female space travelers have not been affected.
Some of the astronauts slowly recover. Others have not.
Space station astronauts typically spend about six months in orbit.
Barratt is one of 10 male astronauts, all older than 45, who have not recovered. Barratt returned from a six-month stint aboard the station in October 2009 and has experienced a profound change in his sight.
He used to be nearsighted. But now, the space veteran says he’s eagle-eyed at long distance but needs glasses for reading. There is no treatment and no answers as to why female space flyers are not affected.
CNN spent part of a day with Barratt, watching as doctors monitored his progress with high-resolution testing as they try to understand how the weightless environment of space is causing half of all space station astronauts to have this vision change. Today, space station astronauts fly with specially designed variable focus glasses to help combat the vision shift.
“The big benefit of these is that they allow us to adjust for significant prescription changes,” said Dr. Robert Gibson, a senior vision consultant, who was brought in to help study the problem.
Doctors have found that Barratt’s retinas have microscopic folds or wrinkles on them, and the back of his eye, the optic nerve, is no longer round but has flattened.
“I think this is showing that there are physiologic aspects of adaption to spaceflight we weren’t seeing before,” said Barratt.
This raises a red flag for all of NASA’s plans for long-duration human space flight. The space station is supposed to be the test bed for how humans would learn to live in space, but it opens profound questions on whether humans will ever venture to Mars or to an asteroid if they are unable to figure out how the outer-space environment is affecting the eyes.
“This has all of our attention,” said Terry Taddeo, the acting chief of space medicine at Johnson Space Center in Houston.
“It is a serious problem and one we are going to have to understand more about before we would be able to send somebody into a long-duration mission away from Earth, where they would be away for years,” he said.
Right now, the only data that doctors have are from six-month tours of duty on the space station.
NASA has begun doing extensive preflight and postflight eye exams, including high-resolution MRIs of the eyes. There have been anecdotes from some space shuttle astronauts who also complained about vision change, but it does not appear they had long-lasting effects from the much shorter space flights that typically lasted up to about three weeks.
“What we’re seeing appears to occur within the first couple of months of flight and appears to level off, plateau after about four to five months,” Gibson said.
“If it’s just a matter of giving them a stronger prescription, we can live with that,” he said. “But if there is an elevated intracranial pressure as the cause of this, we have to be concerned about other neurologic effects."
That means there could be other effects on the body that haven’t become apparent.
This is why a three-year mission to Mars is in question.
It would be humans' next great leap, and NASA is spending almost $18 billion over the next five years to develop a heavy lift rocket that would take astronauts to the Red Planet or even to an asteroid. They would travel in a new spacecraft, Orion.
But right now, a trip to Mars is still more science fiction than fact. No one is calling this vision problem a showstopper, yet the program’s price tag begs for a solution to be found fast so NASA won’t be building the world’s largest, fastest rocket to nowhere.
Dr. Bruce Ehni, a neurosurgeon at the VA Medical Center at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, has consulted with NASA and is the only neurosurgeon on their panel.
“If they can’t predict who is at risk ... they put his health in jeopardy. They put, possibly, the mission in jeopardy if he can’t see or do his job effectively,” he said.
But Barratt thinks that any deep space venture to Mars is still 20 years away. He’s hoping that spacecraft will be a whole lot faster than anything the space agency can fly now.
“You fly fast, and you don’t worry,” he said, with a grin.
“I’m still hopeful that in 20 years, we’ll have advanced propulsion capabilities that can get us there in a matter of weeks to a few months. Then, a lot of these problems go away,” he said.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
It’s not really why he signed up to be an astronaut, but like it or not, Mike Barratt and his eyes have become a science project.
The eye charts he reads, the red drops that turn his eyes yellow and the ultrasounds being performed on him could determine whether he or any other astronaut ever journeys into deep space or sets foot on other worlds.
NASA’s new priority is how to protect astronauts from going blind on the years-long trip to get wherever they are going.
“I absolutely agree that this is our number one priority,” Barratt said.
Why?
Because when Barratt blasted off to the international space station, he needed eyeglasses for distance. When he returned to Earth, his distance vision was fine, but he needed reading glasses. That was more than two years ago. And he’s not getting better.
“We really need to understand this. This is a critical point for understanding how humans adapt to spaceflight,” he said.
In the past few years, about half of the astronauts aboard the international space station have developed an increasing pressure inside their heads, an intracranial pressure that reshapes their optic nerve, causing a significant shift in the eyesight of male astronauts. Doctors call it papilledema.
Female space travelers have not been affected.
Some of the astronauts slowly recover. Others have not.
Space station astronauts typically spend about six months in orbit.
Barratt is one of 10 male astronauts, all older than 45, who have not recovered. Barratt returned from a six-month stint aboard the station in October 2009 and has experienced a profound change in his sight.
He used to be nearsighted. But now, the space veteran says he’s eagle-eyed at long distance but needs glasses for reading. There is no treatment and no answers as to why female space flyers are not affected.
CNN spent part of a day with Barratt, watching as doctors monitored his progress with high-resolution testing as they try to understand how the weightless environment of space is causing half of all space station astronauts to have this vision change. Today, space station astronauts fly with specially designed variable focus glasses to help combat the vision shift.
“The big benefit of these is that they allow us to adjust for significant prescription changes,” said Dr. Robert Gibson, a senior vision consultant, who was brought in to help study the problem.
Doctors have found that Barratt’s retinas have microscopic folds or wrinkles on them, and the back of his eye, the optic nerve, is no longer round but has flattened.
“I think this is showing that there are physiologic aspects of adaption to spaceflight we weren’t seeing before,” said Barratt.
This raises a red flag for all of NASA’s plans for long-duration human space flight. The space station is supposed to be the test bed for how humans would learn to live in space, but it opens profound questions on whether humans will ever venture to Mars or to an asteroid if they are unable to figure out how the outer-space environment is affecting the eyes.
“This has all of our attention,” said Terry Taddeo, the acting chief of space medicine at Johnson Space Center in Houston.
“It is a serious problem and one we are going to have to understand more about before we would be able to send somebody into a long-duration mission away from Earth, where they would be away for years,” he said.
Right now, the only data that doctors have are from six-month tours of duty on the space station.
NASA has begun doing extensive preflight and postflight eye exams, including high-resolution MRIs of the eyes. There have been anecdotes from some space shuttle astronauts who also complained about vision change, but it does not appear they had long-lasting effects from the much shorter space flights that typically lasted up to about three weeks.
“What we’re seeing appears to occur within the first couple of months of flight and appears to level off, plateau after about four to five months,” Gibson said.
“If it’s just a matter of giving them a stronger prescription, we can live with that,” he said. “But if there is an elevated intracranial pressure as the cause of this, we have to be concerned about other neurologic effects."
That means there could be other effects on the body that haven’t become apparent.
This is why a three-year mission to Mars is in question.
It would be humans' next great leap, and NASA is spending almost $18 billion over the next five years to develop a heavy lift rocket that would take astronauts to the Red Planet or even to an asteroid. They would travel in a new spacecraft, Orion.
But right now, a trip to Mars is still more science fiction than fact. No one is calling this vision problem a showstopper, yet the program’s price tag begs for a solution to be found fast so NASA won’t be building the world’s largest, fastest rocket to nowhere.
Dr. Bruce Ehni, a neurosurgeon at the VA Medical Center at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, has consulted with NASA and is the only neurosurgeon on their panel.
“If they can’t predict who is at risk ... they put his health in jeopardy. They put, possibly, the mission in jeopardy if he can’t see or do his job effectively,” he said.
But Barratt thinks that any deep space venture to Mars is still 20 years away. He’s hoping that spacecraft will be a whole lot faster than anything the space agency can fly now.
“You fly fast, and you don’t worry,” he said, with a grin.
“I’m still hopeful that in 20 years, we’ll have advanced propulsion capabilities that can get us there in a matter of weeks to a few months. Then, a lot of these problems go away,” he said.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
Bachus is a typically corrupt GOP bastard and this has been a long time coming... Check out these direct quotes from the pig:
"In an interview where he spoke about the outlook he would bring to his chairmanship of the Financial Services Committee, Bachus received criticism for suggesting that it was government's role to "serve the banks". To the Birmingham News, Bachus said "In Washington, the view is that the banks are to be regulated, and my view is that Washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks." Bachus later clarified his words by saying that he meant that regulators should set guidelines for banks but not micromanage them."
Yeah, right...Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
It’s not really why he signed up to be an astronaut, but like it or not, Mike Barratt and his eyes have become a science project.
The eye charts he reads, the red drops that turn his eyes yellow and the ultrasounds being performed on him could determine whether he or any other astronaut ever journeys into deep space or sets foot on other worlds.
NASA’s new priority is how to protect astronauts from going blind on the years-long trip to get wherever they are going.
“I absolutely agree that this is our number one priority,” Barratt said.
Why?
Because when Barratt blasted off to the international space station, he needed eyeglasses for distance. When he returned to Earth, his distance vision was fine, but he needed reading glasses. That was more than two years ago. And he’s not getting better.
“We really need to understand this. This is a critical point for understanding how humans adapt to spaceflight,” he said.
In the past few years, about half of the astronauts aboard the international space station have developed an increasing pressure inside their heads, an intracranial pressure that reshapes their optic nerve, causing a significant shift in the eyesight of male astronauts. Doctors call it papilledema.
Female space travelers have not been affected.
Some of the astronauts slowly recover. Others have not.
Space station astronauts typically spend about six months in orbit.
Barratt is one of 10 male astronauts, all older than 45, who have not recovered. Barratt returned from a six-month stint aboard the station in October 2009 and has experienced a profound change in his sight.
He used to be nearsighted. But now, the space veteran says he’s eagle-eyed at long distance but needs glasses for reading. There is no treatment and no answers as to why female space flyers are not affected.
CNN spent part of a day with Barratt, watching as doctors monitored his progress with high-resolution testing as they try to understand how the weightless environment of space is causing half of all space station astronauts to have this vision change. Today, space station astronauts fly with specially designed variable focus glasses to help combat the vision shift.
“The big benefit of these is that they allow us to adjust for significant prescription changes,” said Dr. Robert Gibson, a senior vision consultant, who was brought in to help study the problem.
Doctors have found that Barratt’s retinas have microscopic folds or wrinkles on them, and the back of his eye, the optic nerve, is no longer round but has flattened.
“I think this is showing that there are physiologic aspects of adaption to spaceflight we weren’t seeing before,” said Barratt.
This raises a red flag for all of NASA’s plans for long-duration human space flight. The space station is supposed to be the test bed for how humans would learn to live in space, but it opens profound questions on whether humans will ever venture to Mars or to an asteroid if they are unable to figure out how the outer-space environment is affecting the eyes.
“This has all of our attention,” said Terry Taddeo, the acting chief of space medicine at Johnson Space Center in Houston.
“It is a serious problem and one we are going to have to understand more about before we would be able to send somebody into a long-duration mission away from Earth, where they would be away for years,” he said.
Right now, the only data that doctors have are from six-month tours of duty on the space station.
NASA has begun doing extensive preflight and postflight eye exams, including high-resolution MRIs of the eyes. There have been anecdotes from some space shuttle astronauts who also complained about vision change, but it does not appear they had long-lasting effects from the much shorter space flights that typically lasted up to about three weeks.
“What we’re seeing appears to occur within the first couple of months of flight and appears to level off, plateau after about four to five months,” Gibson said.
“If it’s just a matter of giving them a stronger prescription, we can live with that,” he said. “But if there is an elevated intracranial pressure as the cause of this, we have to be concerned about other neurologic effects."
That means there could be other effects on the body that haven’t become apparent.
This is why a three-year mission to Mars is in question.
It would be humans' next great leap, and NASA is spending almost $18 billion over the next five years to develop a heavy lift rocket that would take astronauts to the Red Planet or even to an asteroid. They would travel in a new spacecraft, Orion.
But right now, a trip to Mars is still more science fiction than fact. No one is calling this vision problem a showstopper, yet the program’s price tag begs for a solution to be found fast so NASA won’t be building the world’s largest, fastest rocket to nowhere.
Dr. Bruce Ehni, a neurosurgeon at the VA Medical Center at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, has consulted with NASA and is the only neurosurgeon on their panel.
“If they can’t predict who is at risk ... they put his health in jeopardy. They put, possibly, the mission in jeopardy if he can’t see or do his job effectively,” he said.
But Barratt thinks that any deep space venture to Mars is still 20 years away. He’s hoping that spacecraft will be a whole lot faster than anything the space agency can fly now.
“You fly fast, and you don’t worry,” he said, with a grin.
“I’m still hopeful that in 20 years, we’ll have advanced propulsion capabilities that can get us there in a matter of weeks to a few months. Then, a lot of these problems go away,” he said.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
qntmdnmcsFeb 12, 2012
It’s not really why he signed up to be an astronaut, but like it or not, Mike Barratt and his eyes have become a science project.
The eye charts he reads, the red drops that turn his eyes yellow and the ultrasounds being performed on him could determine whether he or any other astronaut ever journeys into deep space or sets foot on other worlds.
NASA’s new priority is how to protect astronauts from going blind on the years-long trip to get wherever they are going.
“I absolutely agree that this is our number one priority,” Barratt said.
Why?
Because when Barratt blasted off to the international space station, he needed eyeglasses for distance. When he returned to Earth, his distance vision was fine, but he needed reading glasses. That was more than two years ago. And he’s not getting better.
“We really need to understand this. This is a critical point for understanding how humans adapt to spaceflight,” he said.
In the past few years, about half of the astronauts aboard the international space station have developed an increasing pressure inside their heads, an intracranial pressure that reshapes their optic nerve, causing a significant shift in the eyesight of male astronauts. Doctors call it papilledema.
Female space travelers have not been affected.
Some of the astronauts slowly recover. Others have not.
Space station astronauts typically spend about six months in orbit.
Barratt is one of 10 male astronauts, all older than 45, who have not recovered. Barratt returned from a six-month stint aboard the station in October 2009 and has experienced a profound change in his sight.
He used to be nearsighted. But now, the space veteran says he’s eagle-eyed at long distance but needs glasses for reading. There is no treatment and no answers as to why female space flyers are not affected.
CNN spent part of a day with Barratt, watching as doctors monitored his progress with high-resolution testing as they try to understand how the weightless environment of space is causing half of all space station astronauts to have this vision change. Today, space station astronauts fly with specially designed variable focus glasses to help combat the vision shift.
“The big benefit of these is that they allow us to adjust for significant prescription changes,” said Dr. Robert Gibson, a senior vision consultant, who was brought in to help study the problem.
Doctors have found that Barratt’s retinas have microscopic folds or wrinkles on them, and the back of his eye, the optic nerve, is no longer round but has flattened.
“I think this is showing that there are physiologic aspects of adaption to spaceflight we weren’t seeing before,” said Barratt.
This raises a red flag for all of NASA’s plans for long-duration human space flight. The space station is supposed to be the test bed for how humans would learn to live in space, but it opens profound questions on whether humans will ever venture to Mars or to an asteroid if they are unable to figure out how the outer-space environment is affecting the eyes.
“This has all of our attention,” said Terry Taddeo, the acting chief of space medicine at Johnson Space Center in Houston.
“It is a serious problem and one we are going to have to understand more about before we would be able to send somebody into a long-duration mission away from Earth, where they would be away for years,” he said.
Right now, the only data that doctors have are from six-month tours of duty on the space station.
NASA has begun doing extensive preflight and postflight eye exams, including high-resolution MRIs of the eyes. There have been anecdotes from some space shuttle astronauts who also complained about vision change, but it does not appear they had long-lasting effects from the much shorter space flights that typically lasted up to about three weeks.
“What we’re seeing appears to occur within the first couple of months of flight and appears to level off, plateau after about four to five months,” Gibson said.
“If it’s just a matter of giving them a stronger prescription, we can live with that,” he said. “But if there is an elevated intracranial pressure as the cause of this, we have to be concerned about other neurologic effects."
That means there could be other effects on the body that haven’t become apparent.
This is why a three-year mission to Mars is in question.
It would be humans' next great leap, and NASA is spending almost $18 billion over the next five years to develop a heavy lift rocket that would take astronauts to the Red Planet or even to an asteroid. They would travel in a new spacecraft, Orion.
But right now, a trip to Mars is still more science fiction than fact. No one is calling this vision problem a showstopper, yet the program’s price tag begs for a solution to be found fast so NASA won’t be building the world’s largest, fastest rocket to nowhere.
Dr. Bruce Ehni, a neurosurgeon at the VA Medical Center at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, has consulted with NASA and is the only neurosurgeon on their panel.
“If they can’t predict who is at risk ... they put his health in jeopardy. They put, possibly, the mission in jeopardy if he can’t see or do his job effectively,” he said.
But Barratt thinks that any deep space venture to Mars is still 20 years away. He’s hoping that spacecraft will be a whole lot faster than anything the space agency can fly now.
“You fly fast, and you don’t worry,” he said, with a grin.
“I’m still hopeful that in 20 years, we’ll have advanced propulsion capabilities that can get us there in a matter of weeks to a few months. Then, a lot of these problems go away,” he said.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
heliosPR1M3Feb 12, 2012
Maher: Conservatives Are the Ones Dividing the Country
When Newt Gingrich calls the subway "elitist," you have a problem.
With all the talk of "class warfare" coming out of CPAC and from the Republican Presidential Candidates, Bill Maher thought he'd take a look at which ideology actually carves the American populace in two. Surprise, surprise, he found that the conservative mindset in our country is the business of pitting "real Americans" against the rest of us.
It's the CPACers who roll their eyes at certain parts of the country, he noted--often the parts with the best policy! Democrats don't do this, he said, wondering if Jerry Brown would ever make a speech in California mocking Texas.
Watch below.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Rizing_SonFeb 12, 2012
What’s at stake aren’t Democratic values or Republican values, but American values. And we have to reclaim them.
Let’s remember how we got here. Long before the recession, jobs and manufacturing began leaving our shores. Technology made businesses more efficient, but also made some jobs obsolete. Folks at the top saw their incomes rise like never before, but most hard- working Americans struggled with costs that were growing, paychecks that weren’t, and personal debt that kept piling up.
In 2008, the house of cards collapsed. We learned that mortgages had been sold to people who couldn’t afford or understand them. Banks had made huge bets and bonuses with other people’s money. Regulators had looked the other way, or didn’t have the authority to stop the bad behavior.
It was wrong. It was irresponsible. And it plunged our economy into a crisis that put millions out of work, saddled us with more debt, and left innocent, hard-working Americans holding the bag.
In the six months before I took office, we lost nearly 4 million jobs. And we lost another 4 million before our policies were in full effect. Those are the facts.
But so are these. In the last 22 months, businesses have created more than 3 million jobs.
Last year, they created the most jobs since 2005. American manufacturers are hiring again, creating jobs for the first time since the late 1990s. Together, we’ve agreed to cut the deficit by more than $2 trillion. And we’ve put in place new rules to hold Wall Street accountable, so a crisis like this never happens again.
The state of our union is getting stronger, and we’ve come too far to turn back now.
As long as I’m president, I will work with anyone in this chamber to build on this momentum. But I intend to fight obstruction with action, and I will oppose any effort to return to the very same policies that brought on this economic crisis in the first place.
No, we will not go back to an economy weakened by outsourcing, bad debt, and phony financial profits. Tonight, I want to speak about how we move forward and lay out a blueprint for an economy that’s built to last, an economy built on American manufacturing, American energy, skills for American workers, and a renewal of American values.
This blueprint begins with American manufacturing.
On the day I took office, our auto industry was on the verge of collapse. Some even said we should let it die. With a million jobs at stake, I refused to let that happen.
In exchange for help, we demanded responsibility. We got workers and automakers to settle their differences. We got the industry to retool and restructure. Today, General Motors is back on top as the world’s number-one automaker.
Chrysler has grown faster in the U.S. than any major car company. Ford is investing billions in U.S. plants and factories. And together, the entire industry added nearly 160,000 jobs.
We bet on American workers. We bet on American ingenuity. And tonight, the American auto industry is back.
What’s happening in Detroit can happen in other industries. It can happen in Cleveland and Pittsburgh and Raleigh. We can’t bring every job back that’s left our shore. But right now, it’s getting more expensive to do business in places like China. Meanwhile, America is more productive.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.