Army No Longer Considering Recruits Who Fail Drug Tests

When the economy was riding high and the war in Iraq was at its peak, the U.S. Army relaxed its rules to allow some recruits with felony records and those who failed drug tests to join the service. Now that the economy has tanked and the situation in Iraq is quieter, the Army is eliminating such waivers as recruiting picks up. 

Now, the Army is "not even going to consider" applicants who fail drug tests or have felony records, according to Brig. Gen. Joseph Anderson, deputy commander of the U.S. Army Recruiting Command. 

The waiver policy was controversial within and outside the military. With the economic downturn, however, the Army now has the luxury of picking from a greater pool of applicants, and is on track to have 90 percent of recruits with a high-school degree or better for the first time since 2004.

At the peak of the waiver program, in 2007, the Army granted 511 drug and felony waivers to recruits.

The Army also said it will no longer accept recruits with juvenile arrest records unless they have high-school diplomas.

I am not promoting, just informing.

Monday April 27th

"If Joe is out joy riding in that plane again there's gonna be hell to pay"

Air Farce One

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/27/air-force-one-backup-rattles-new-york-nerve/

Monday April 27th, in hopes of getting a cool photo of Air Force One flying over the New York Harbor, the White House authorized an Air Force One look-a-like plane to fly over New York and New Jersey. 

While on their "mission", the pilot decided to take a detour over Ground Zero. 

"Last week, I approved a mission over New York. I take responsibility for that decision. While federal authorities took the proper steps to notify state and local authorities in New York and New Jersey, it’s clear that the mission created confusion and disruption. I apologize and take responsibility for any distress that flight caused." 

Louise E. Caldera Director of the White House Military Office.

I'm confused- who did these federal authorities notify, Because Mayor Bloomberg said he was "furious" that he wasn't informed. 

"Confused and disrupted", seriously? Is that all he has for us? 

For some reason, those just aren't the 2 words that come to my mind when I imagine seeing a low flying plane cruising over New York City. 

His lame-ass apology was a slap in the face to anyone that witnessed the horrors of September 11th.  

A decision to authorize this sort of escapade was a dishonor to those who lost their lives on that insufferable day.

The American Dream

You gotta love this- This is Obama's chief economics director, nodding off during a speech the President was giving last week.

Last night, Chris Wallace asked Larry "Slumbers" Summers, if he found Obama's speech to be boring. He said he was just "dreaming the American Dream".  

At least he has a sense of humor during what Obama calls "the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression".

Maybe it's the fact that before working for the White House he worked for D.E. Shaw. His salary was $5,000,000 a year, and he worked ONE DAY A WEEK!  That is about $100,000 a day ($96,153.85 before taxes).

Now I know I never let the truth get in the way of a good story, but he confirmed this last night on Fox New Sunday with Chris Wallace. I am not blowing smoke up anyone's ass on this. $5 million a year- one day a week. 

When asked what he did for that salary, he said "I provided strategic advice on a range of economic judgments". 

Why don't they talk about this gig at job fairs? Not that I have ever attended a job fair, but if I had ever attended a job fair, you know, I might have considered a career in strategic economic judgments and stuff. 

*In the spirit of full disclosure, I am in Community College, struggling through Pre-Algebra. 

Porter J. Goss was director of the CIA from September 2004 to May 2006

Porter J. Goss was director of the CIA from September 2004 to May 2006, and was chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence from 1997 to 2004. 

SECURITY BEFORE POLITICS Porter J. Goss, Washington Post 

Since leaving my post as CIA director almost three years ago, I have remained largely silent on the public stage. I am speaking out now because I feel our government has crossed the red line between properly protecting our national security and trying to gain partisan political advantage. We can't have a secret intelligence service if we keep giving away all the secrets. Americans have to decide now.

A disturbing epidemic of amnesia seems to be plaguing my former colleagues on Capitol Hill. After the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, members of the committees charged with overseeing our nation's intelligence services had no higher priority than stopping al-Qaeda. In the fall of 2002, while I was chairman of the House intelligence committee, senior members of Congress were briefed on the CIA's "High Value Terrorist Program," including the development of "enhanced interrogation techniques" and what those techniques were. This was not a one-time briefing but an ongoing subject with lots of back and forth between those members and the briefers.

Today, I am slack-jawed to read that members claim to have not understood that the techniques on which they were briefed were to actually be employed; or that specific techniques such as "waterboarding" were never mentioned. It must be hard for most Americans of common sense to imagine how a member of Congress can forget being told about the interrogations of Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed. In that case, though, perhaps it is not amnesia but political expedience.

Let me be clear. It is my recollection that:

-- The chairs and the ranking minority members of the House and Senate intelligence committees, known as the Gang of Four, were briefed that the CIA was holding and interrogating high-value terrorists.

-- We understood what the CIA was doing.

-- We gave the CIA our bipartisan support.

-- We gave the CIA funding to carry out its activities.

-- On a bipartisan basis, we asked if the CIA needed more support from Congress to carry out its mission against al-Qaeda.

I do not recall a single objection from my colleagues. They did not vote to stop authorizing CIA funding. And for those who now reveal filed "memorandums for the record" suggesting concern, real concern should have been expressed immediately -- to the committee chairs, the briefers, the House speaker or minority leader, the CIA director or the president's national security adviser -- and not quietly filed away in case the day came when the political winds shifted. And shifted they have.

Circuses are not new in Washington, and I can see preparations being made for tents from the Capitol straight down Pennsylvania Avenue. The CIA has been pulled into the center ring before. The result this time will be the same: a hollowed-out service of diminished capabilities. After Sept. 11, the general outcry was, "Why don't we have better overseas capabilities?" I fear that in the years to come this refrain will be heard again: once a threat -- or God forbid, another successful attack -- captures our attention and sends the pendulum swinging back. There is only one person who can shut down this dangerous show: President Obama.

Unfortunately, much of the damage to our capabilities has already been done. It is certainly not trust that is fostered when intelligence officers are told one day "I have your back" only to learn a day later that a knife is being held to it. After the events of this week, morale at the CIA has been shaken to its foundation.

We must not forget: Our intelligence allies overseas view our inability to maintain secrecy as a reason to question our worthiness as a partner. These allies have been vital in almost every capture of a terrorist.

The suggestion that we are safer now because information about interrogation techniques is in the public domain conjures up images of unicorns and fairy dust. We have given our enemy invaluable information about the rules by which we operate. The terrorists captured by the CIA perfected the act of beheading innocents using dull knives. Khalid Sheik Mohammed boasted of the tactic of placing explosives high enough in a building to ensure that innocents trapped above would die if they tried to escape through windows. There is simply no comparison between our professionalism and their brutality..

The Change We Need or The Audacity of Hope?

What is Ahmadinejad Looking for in Latin America?

First, he is seeking Latin American support to counter US and European pressures to stop Iran from developing nuclear capabilities. Venezuela and Cuba were, alongside Syria, the only three countries that supported Iran’s nuclear programme in a February 2006 vote at the United Nations’ International Atomic Energy Agency.

Secondly, Ahmadinejad wants to strike back at the US in its own hemisphere and possibly destabilise US-friendly governments in order to negotiate with Washington from a position of greater strength.

Third, Ahmadinejad's popularity at home is falling, and he may want to show his people that he is being welcomed as a hero abroad.

Since Ahmadinejad’s ascendancy to power, he has made three diplomatic tours to Latin America in search of an alliance of ‘revolutionary countries’. He visited Venezuela in July 2006, Venezuela, Nicaragua and Ecuador in January 2007, and Venezuela and Bolivia in September 2007. Ahmadinejad had also hosted President Chávez of Venezuela, President Ortega of Nicaragua, President Morales of Bolivia and President Correa of Ecuador and is expecting the visit of Brazil’s President Lula da Silva in 2009.

The cornerstone of Ahmadinejad’s Latin America policy is the formation of an anti-American axis with Venezuela. During a July 2006 visit to Tehran, Chávez told a Tehran University crowd, ‘We have to save humankind and put an end to the US empire’. When Chávez again visited Tehran a year later Ahmadinejad and Chávez used the visit to declare an ‘Axis of Unity’ against the US. Ahmadinejad’s efforts to further destabilise the neighbourhood suggest that he is seeking a permanent Iranian presence on the US doorstep.

Both leaders are using their mutual embrace to overcome international isolation and sanctions. Both Tehran and Caracas have used their petrodollar windfall to encourage states in Latin America to embark on confrontational policies towards the US.

and the winner is...

ANNE HATHAWAY,  WILLIAM SHATNER,  BENJAMIN BRATT,   CHANDRA WILSON,  DANA DELANY RECEIVE TOP HONORS AT THE  2009 PRISM AWARDS   Rachel Getting Married, Stop-Loss, The Office, Law and Order: SVU, Breaking Bad Also Receive PRISM Nods   A & E President Robert DeBitetto Receives Larry Stewart Award   LOS ANGELES, April 23, 2009 - Anne Hathaway, William Shatner, Benjamin Bratt, Chandra Wilson and Dana Delany received PRISM Awards for individual performances in film and television at the 2009 PRISM Awards ceremony which was held today at the Beverly Hills Hotel.    The PRISM Awards, which are produced by the Entertainment Industries Council, Inc. (EIC) in collaboration with the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) and FX, honor actors, movies, music, media and television's top shows that accurately depict and bring attention to substance abuse and mental health issues. The Acting Surgeon General, Rear Admiral Steven K. Galson, participated in the ceremony, along with numerous celebrity performers.    "In these difficult economic times, when many of us know someone in our lives touched by these issues, the stories we honor withPRISM Awards have shown great sensitivity towards those who are experiencing addiction, substance abuse, and other mental health problems." said EIC President and CEO Brian Dyak.   Anne Hathaway was recognized in the Performance in a Feature Film category for Sony Pictures' Classic "Rachel Getting Married." The film also received an award for Feature Film. William Shatner received the award for Performance in a Drama Episode in ABC's "Boston Legal"; Benjamin Bratt for Best Performance in a Drama Multi-Episode Storyline for A & E's "The Cleaner"; Chandra Wilson for Performance in a TV Movie or Miniseries in Hallmark Channel's "Accidental Friendship";  and Dana Delany for Performance in a Comedy Series for ABC's "Desperate Housewives."    "It's been such an honor to participate in this year's PRISM Awards with a group of people who have helped send a strong and clear message," said Steven K. Galson, M.D., M.P.H., RADM, USPHS, Acting Assistant Secretary for Health, Acting Surgeon General. "The entertainment industry can continue to help people understand that addiction and mental illness are an illness and that treatment is available, recovery is possible, and that friends and family play an important role in that process."   Television shows that received awards for accurate portrayals of related issues included "Boston Legal," "Breaking Bad," "King of the Hill," "Law and Order: Special Victims Unit," "The Office," CBS's miniseries, "Sybil" and CBS Paramount Domestic Television's "Dr. Phil."   A&E President and General Manager Robert DeBitetto received the Larry Stewart Leadership & Inspiration Award for his addiction and treatment related programming initiatives. The award, which is presented for leadership and inspiration by example, is named in memory of veteran writer/producer/director Larry Stewart, a founding Board Director of EIC.    Additional celebrities involved in the ceremony included Ashley Argota (True Jackson, VP), Paul Ben-Victor (In Plain Sight), Corbin Bernsen (Psych), Andrea Bowen (Desperate Housewives), Jayne Brook (Boston Legal/Brothers and Sisters), Sharon Case (The Young & The Restless), Christian Clemenson (Boston Legal), Bryan Cranston (Breaking Bad), James Denton (Desperate Housewives), Hector Elizondo (Monk), Cassidy Freeman (Smallville), Joanna Garcia (Privileged), Jay Harrington (Better Off Ted), Mariette Hartley, Stana Katic (Castle), John Larroquette (Boston Legal), Sharon Lawrence (Privileged/Monk), Michele Lee, Jennette McCurdy (iCarly), Sarah Jane Morris (Brothers and Sisters), Chuck Negron (Three Dog Night), Dr. Phil McGraw (Dr. Phil), Dr. Drew Pinsky  (Celebrity Rehab), Navi Rawat (Numbers), Melissa Rivers (Celebrity Apprentice), Stephen Root (King of the Hill), John Salley (Best Damn Sports Show Ever), Henry Simmons (Shark), Shadoe Stevens (The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson), Kate Vernon (Battlestar Galactica),  Dee Wallace (My Name is Earl/Sons & Daughters), Rolonda Watts (Days of Our Lives/Radio Host), and Gary Anthony Williams (Boston Legal).      Honorees for the PRISM Awards are selected by an 80-person committee of entertainment industry professionals and technical experts from the fields of medicine, mental health, and addiction.     About Entertainment Industries Council: EIC, a non-profit organization, was founded in 1983 by leaders of the entertainment industry to bring the power of the industry to bear on health and social issues. The organization is considered to be the grand daddy and chief pioneer of entertainment advocacy outreach and one of the premiere success stories in the field of entertainment education and information resources for entertainment creators, through innovative and time-proven services and methods of "encouraging the art of making a difference" from within the entertainment industry.    EIC addresses health issues such as drug, alcohol, and tobacco use and addiction; firearm safety and injury prevention; sun safety and skin cancer prevention; human trafficking; terrorism and homeland security; mental health and mental illness, including bipolar disorder, depression and suicide; diabetes; seat belt use and traffic safety; and HIV/AIDS prevention. For more information, please visit www.eiconline.org.   About SAMHSA: SAMHSA is a public health agency within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The agency is responsible for improving the accountability, capacity and effectiveness of the nation's substance abuse prevention, addiction treatment, and mental health services delivery systems.   About FX Network: FX is the flagship general entertainment basic cable network from Fox. Launched in June of 1994, FX is carried in more than 94 million homes. The diverse schedule includes an award-winning roster of distinctive original series, an established film library with box-office hits from 20th Century Fox and other major studios and an impressive roster of acquired hit series.

Beauty Queen vs Drama Queen

All week long it's been Perez Hilton vs Miss California.
(Does anyone even know who won the pageant?)
Personally, I think Miss Hilton and Miss Cali are the big winners in this whole thing. Both Queens have managed to steal the spotlight and advance their own agendas. You go girls!

But let's keep it real when talking about this whole gay marriage thing.

For many of those opposed to gay marriage, the issue is is not marriage so much as it is homosexuality.
A lot of people (and by a lot, I mean the majority) think homosexuality is immoral. No matter how "accepted" homosexuality is, that is just a fact that has to be recognized when discussing this issue.
A lot of people (and again, I mean the majority) feel if we legitimize gay marriage then we are in some way condoning immoral behavior, thereby damaging the moral fabric of our society. 
(So in order to be fair to everyone I say, "if you are not a moral person you can't get married!"- seriously, think of all the problems that would solve).

For the record, I do not agree with the moral argument.

I may not agree with gay marriage, but it is not because I feel it is a moral issue. 

(PLEASE NOTE: I did not say I don't agree with civil unions for same sex couples).

Why shouldn't gay couples share the same rights (and responsibilities) as heterosexual couples, if that is the commitment they want to enter into? 

Regardless of their sexual orientation, why shouldn't their civil rights be protected? 

Why can't legal kinship between gay couples be established?

Why shouldn't gay couples have the same opportunities to be as miserable as heterosexual couples?

stuff to consider

• Our medical system relies on proven scientific research, not polling results. 

• About 100 years ago, leaders in this country created the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to make sure that medicine falls under the “safe and effective” standard before it is sold on the open market. 

• Research has not demonstrated that smoked marijuana is helpful as medicine.

• A component in marijuana—THC—has been approved in pill form by the FDA. It’s called Marinol, and though it is not frequently prescribed, the U.S. supports the right of doctors to prescribe this drug if they feel it would best serve their patients’ needs. The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) even lowered the scheduling on Marinol to make it easier for doctors to prescribe the drug. 

• Marijuana smoke contains more than 400 chemicals and increases the risk of cancer, lung damage, and poor pregnancy outcomes. 

• The U.S. continues to support research into the medical efficacy of certain isolated properties of marijuana. 

• Even if smoking marijuana makes people “feel better,” that is not enough to call it a medicine. If that were the case, tobacco cigarettes could be called medicine because they are often said to make people feel better. For that matter, heroin certainly makes people “feel better” (at least initially), but no one would suggest using heroin to treat a sick person. 

• Marijuana use causes precancerous changes in the body similar to those caused by tobacco use. Smoking pot delivers 3 to 5 times the amount of tars and carbon monoxide into the body. It also damages pulmonary immunity and impairs oxygen diffusion. 

How could changes such as these be good for someone dying of cancer or AIDS? 

Abstinence from alcohol has a more profound effect on survival rates than the degree of cirrhosis among patients with alcohol-related liver disease, according to researchers who said that stopping drinking at any stage will benefit liver patients.

Science Daily reported April 15 that drinking status was the most important factor in determining the long-term survival of patients with alcohol-related liver disease. Patients who quit drinking within a month of being diagnosed with cirrhosis, for example, had a 72-percent chance of surviving for seven years, compared to 44 percent for those who continued to drink.

"This study clearly confirms the commonsense knowledge amongst hepatologists that the single most important determinant of long-term prognosis in alcohol-induced cirrhosis is for the patient to stop drinking," said lead researcher Nick Sheron of the University of Southampton and Southampton General Hospital in the U.K. "At the most simplistic level, the successful management of alcohol-induced liver disease comprises two components; firstly to keep the patient alive long enough for them to stop drinking and secondly to maximize their chances of continued abstinence."

The study was published in the May 2009 issue of the journal Addiction. 

Substance Abuse Treatment Facility Locator.
1-800-662-HELP | 1-800-662-9832 (Español)
The federal government maintains a referral database and hotline connecting callers with over 12,000 treatment programs nationwide.

Transparency?

I would like to formally ask the CIA (how do I do that?) to declassify the reports, containing the information, regarding what was gained, as a result of US interrogations of captured terrorists after 911.  

I have heard all the things that were done to these high-ranking terrorists, (they actually use caterpillars as a torture method) but nobody ever talks about the information gained or intelligence learned as a result of these interrogations. 

Let's declassify those reports! 

I like that Obama was being totally transparent when he authorized the release of the graphic "torture memos" that outlined the CIA's interrogation tactics during the Bush administration- but what about letting the American people have all the information? You can't just pick and choose what your transparent about, can you?

(Oh, YES he can)

Since when have the American people become more concerned about the feelings of our enemies then of the safety of our country? 

just wondering

How come for the past 8 years criticism of the administration was considered the highest form of patriotism? Yet now, according to David Axelrod, it's considered "unhealthy"?

How come for 8 years the anti-war, anti-Bush, anti-Cheney, battle cries were heard loud and clear? Yet now, if you come out against any of the new administration's policies, or criticize the new president, the Department of Homeland Security considers you to be a possible radical extremist?

How come for 8 years cheap shots towards the commander in chief were all the norm, yet now if you say BOO about our new president you are accused of being racist?

*And just for the record- there are many, many, many, things I dislike about our current president. The fact that he is black is not one of them*

I don't care much for David Axelrod's sanctimonious comments, but I do commend his work  with CURE (Citizens United for Research in Epilepsy)                      

                                           www.cureepilepsy.org312)5-1801  |  info@CUREepilepsy.org   730 N. Franklin St. Suite 404, Chicago, IL, 60654  |  (800) 765-7118  |  (312) 255-1801  |  info@CUREepilepsy.org 

the low-down

A. Thomas McLellan, a noted addiction researcher, has been nominated as deputy director of the Obama administration's Office of National Drug Control Policy.

If confirmed, McLellan will serve as the chief deputy to presumptive drug czar Gil Kerlikowske, who also must be confirmed by the Senate.

McLellan, 59, has been involved in some of the most important addiction research in recent decades, including the development of the Addiction Severity Index and studies comparing addiction with other chronic health conditions. Most recently, he headed the Treatment Research Institute at the University of Pennsylvania.

Oh no he didn't...

Who: President Obama

What: Response to Nicaraguan President, Daniel Ortega's 50 minute verbal beat down of the US 

Where: Port of Spain Trinidad & Tobago

When: The other day

Why: I can only guess it's because he (Obama) has no American DNA

" I am grateful that President Ortega did not blame me for the things that happened when I was 3 months old".

QUOTE OF THE WEEK

FIRST SEE FRIDAY APRIL 17, 2009 - Department of Homeland Security?

Long Island NY Rep. Peter King's response to DHS report:

In response to a recent Department of Homeland Security report about right-wing extremism, King told MSNBC Friday the department "has never put out a report talking about look out for mosques. Look out for Islamic terrorists in our country. Look out for the fact that very few Muslims come forward to cooperate with the police. If they sent out a report saying that, there would be hell to pay."

Don’t Meet with Hugo Chavez

by  Gustavo Coronel 

04/16/2009

Dear Mr. President:

In your inauguration speech you stated, “We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals. Our Founding Fathers, faced with perils we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man, a charter expanded by the blood of generations. Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience's sake.” 

I am an expatriate Venezuelan who has lived in America for the past five years. My name is on Hugo Chavez’s enemies list because I have spoken out against his metastasizing dictatorial powers that are strangling my native land. In order to make good on your words and be faithful to the charter that has protected the rule of law and the rights of man in this country, you, the President of the United States, should not meet Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, as some political sectors of the hemisphere are urging you to do in occasion of the Summit of the Americas being held next April 17-19 in Trinidad-Tobago.

You have not evidenced knowledge of our reality in Central and South America, which may explain your apparent comfort with the Cuban dictatorship of the Castro brothers. But you must know more about Chavez before you agree to meet with him, because your doing so will give him a legitimacy he does not deserve and will greatly discourage those Venezuelans who yearn for the return of their freedom. 

Who is Hugo Chavez? This man stands for the very opposite of what the U.S. Constitution represents. In 1992, he led a bloody military coup against a democratic president, deceiving the soldiers under his command by telling them they were going to a military parade. More than 100 innocent Venezuelans died during these events. Years later, he arrived to the presidency on the basis of promises he has not kept. 

From the start, helped along by a significant oil income, he has tried to become a regional socialist leader and to convert Venezuela into another Cuba, under the passive, almost indifferent eyes of the Organization of American States. Today, he controls all political institutions in our country, including the National Electoral Council, which makes it practically impossible for him to lose a presidential election. 

He violated both the letter and the spirit of the Venezuelan Constitution, introducing changes that allow him to run indefinitely for the presidency, He has systematically harassed and persecuted political dissidents and has imprisoned or invalidated the rightful political action of the main leaders of the opposition. 

He is changing the laws, with the help of a compliant National Assembly, in order to make it impossible for the opposition Governors and Mayors, who control almost half of the country, to do their job under fair and proper conditions, in an action that can only be defined as a silent coup d’etat. 

He has aligned his regime with the Colombian FARC, with the Hamas and Hizballah, with Iran’s fanatical President Ahmadinejad, with Cuba’s Castro brothers and, in general, with all the rogue leaders and organizations of the planet. He has embarked in an arms race, buying up to $6 billion in weapons from Russia, China and other countries. He is explicitly leading an anti-U.S. coalition in Latin America that has the clear objective of progressively excluding the U.S. from Latin American and Caribbean affairs. 

In the domestic scene Hugo Chavez has received and grossly mismanaged some $750 billion during the ten years he has been in almost total political power. The Venezuelan population has gained very little from this huge income in terms of stable and orderly progress. Chavez’s domestic policies have been based on handouts that give the poor a temporary feeling of well being but which do not solve the deep seated problems of poverty, poor health and ignorance of millions of Venezuelans. 

Some might argue that these are Venezuela’s problems and do not concern the United States, but what is taking place in Venezuela is having a profound effect across the Americas and will ultimately affect the national interest of the United States. It is extremely important, therefore, that the United States reaffirms its credo, as contained in the charter mentioned in your inaugural speech. As you expressed in that speech the ideals contained in the charter should not sacrificed to expedience or to short-term political objectives. 

Meeting with this despot -- posing for the inevitable photos of the two of you shaking hands -- will put America on record as giving its blessing to everything I have recounted here. Do you really want to do that? Wouldn’t you -- meaning America and all its friends in the hemisphere -- be much better off if you placed stringent preconditions on any meeting with Chavez? 

This summit will be as much a test of your presidency as the North Korean missile launch or the Somali pirates’ holding an American captive. It is not only the friends of liberty who will be watching you closely: its enemies will be watching, too. 

---

Gustavo Coronel is a petroleum geologist, author and public policy expert, who was elected to the Venezuelan Congress in 1998 before it was dissolved in 1999 following the election of Hugo Chavez as president. Coronel is currently designated as an "enemy" of the Chavez regime. 

April 17th 2009 Port of Spain-Trinidad & Tobago

"Open Veins of Latin America: Five Centuries of the Pillage of a Continent" 

Written by Uruguayn

April 17th 2009 Port of Spain-Trinidad & Tobago

Hugo Chávez, elected President of Venezuela, in 1998 and re-elected in 2000 and 2006, is the subject of passionate dispute. Supporters view him as a socialist liberator.

Freaky-Deaky Dutch

Dutch naval forces captured seven pirates, and freed 20 captive fisherman, in the western Gulf of Arden this morning.  

"Isn't that veird?" 

The Dutch naval frigate, De Zeven Provincien, was totally having an "Amsterdam good time" until getting caught up in this Somalia Shit-Show. 

I love that they actually "tracked the pirates back to the mother ship", according to CNN.  So cool, so totally un-Dutch, right? 

Those Somalia pirates took it "right in the kanickies".

Seriously though, all inappropriate Goldmember references aside.

The audacity of these Somali pirates! 

In 2008 over 150 ships were attacked off the coast of Somalia. Currently there are 14 ships being held for ransom.

Q- Why don't they just employ preemptive and preventative measures, right? 

A- Because it's cheaper to pay the ransoms than to employ on board security guards and increased insurance premiums associated with employing armed resistance.

Q-Why doesn't the US Navy get more involved, right? 

A-Because even though we are the largest Navy going, we can't provide coverage for a body of water as vast as the Indian Ocean.

Q- Why doesn't the US issue air strikes against all of the pirate ships, right? 

A- Because this would only reinforce the Somali enmity toward the US and fuel anti-Islamic radicalism, which has already attracted the attention of al-Qaeda.

Q- What are we going to do? 

A- On April 23rd, the US plans to send an envoy to an anti-piracy conference in Brussels. 

Q- Really? That's it?

A- Come on Hilary, time to grab your brass ones. 

 

Department of Homeland Security?

Sending a memo such as "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment" to police departments across the country, is doing nothing more than encouraging profiling and violence. 

I can't believe the DHS would even put in writing the statement that our military may be vulnerable to recruitment by supremacist and radical groups when returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.  Have they no faith in these men and women? It borders on defamation of character, as far as I am concerned.

I am really disappointed in the "political climate". Our new, and improved, president was going to unite our country. Yet recent polls and studies show the United States has never been more divided. And now this? From the DHS? What is happening here? Is anybody out there?

I am as offended as I am disheartened.

Copy & paste at your own risk:

http://www.gordonunleashed.com/HSA%20-%20Rightwing%20Extremism%20-%2009%2004%2007.pdf

Jack, you will be missed.

In early recovery Jack said to me, "Just hang on, give it about 5 years, and I promise your going to hear a really loud pop. That's going to be your head coming out of your ass." 

I will never forget that, and Jack, as soon as I hear it, you will be the first to know. 

Not SMART

A new trend, among middle-schoolers across the country, is "smoking" Smarties candy. 

How do you smoke Smarties candy? 

(It's really pretty simple. I just googled smoking Smarties candy on You Tube and watched a very informative, instructional video given by a pre-teen boy in his living room)

First, crush the candy while it's still in the wrapper, then open the ends only, and drag on it as if it were a cigarette or joint. When you exhale through your mouth and nose, it looks just like you're smoking... Smarties candy.

Although kids aren't getting high off this, and there aren't any life-threatening concerns, there are definite health ramifications. According to Mark Shikowitz, an ENT doctor at Schneider Children's Hospital, irritation of the nose, throat and lungs are just a few. 

I can't help but wonder, is this just "kids being kids", or could this be considered a "drug related behavior"? 

Will this lead to kids smoking? Or is this more along the lines of chewing gum in class, and spitting spit balls through plastic straws? 

Are we becoming a hyper-sensitive society? And if we are, is there good reason to be? 

Some schools are taking this pretty seriously and banning the candy altogether.

Some parents think it's typical of our punitive society, and that more focus needs to be put on education.

I remember those little candy cigarettes, and how cool it felt to simulate smoking when I was a kid. (My favorite were the gum ones, actually. I loved that you could blow a little puff of "smoke" out the end) 

I also smoked. 

Did I smoke because nobody made me kick the candy cigarette habit, or did I smoke because nobody told me how unhealthy it was to smoke?

What I will never figure out is how come when I tried my first cigarette, and I coughed and I hacked and I threw up in my mouth a little- why did I try it again?

              Want help quitting or know someone who does?  Call 1.800.QUIT.NOW  (800.784.8669)                                                                  

                                                              

                                                   You can learn a lot from a dummy. 

the low-down

For the past 2 weeks, 36% of Americans feel the country is heading in the right direction while

58% of Americans feel we are on the wrong track. 

Amends:

I have to make an amends to the President for criticizing his gift to the Queen on Sunday April 5, 2009. I have just been informed by Kate Connolly and Holly Bailey, of Newsweek, that in addition to the iPod, the Queen was also given a very rare songbook signed by Richard Rodgers. The Queen's favorite musical is Rodgers and Hammersteins's Oklahoma! so this was very thoughtful. Moreover, it was a lot more sophisticated then just an iPod, like I blogged about previously.

The girls also informed me that it was PM Gordon Brown that gave Obama the multi-volume bio of Winston Churchill, not the Queen. So in all actuality, I think the Queen made out pretty good with that gift exchange. The Obama's just got the standard framed photo of the Queen and Duke. Lame.

Cheers!

In the movie, Rachel Getting Married, Anne Hathaway plays Kym, a recovering addict. Kym's family decides to take her out of rehab for the weekend to attend her sister, Rachel's, wedding. For anyone struggling with substance abuse (and or mental health issues) the "home environment" can be very challenging. Not that home environment's aren't challenging to people without addictions and mental health issues. It's just that dysfunctional relationships are one of the top three causes of relapse for those struggling with addictions and that just happens to be the story line of this movie. Is Kym going to relapse and wreck Rachel's wedding? 

You are going to have to rent it to find out because I am not giving it away. I am only writing about it because I saw that it had come out on dvd back in March, and I thought "you know, out of all the movies and TV shows I have watched, dealing with the subject of addiction and mental health, this one had some integrity".  

In 1997 the Entertainment Industries Council, (EIC) in collaboration with Substance Abuse & Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) created The Prism Awards. The award show honors actors, films, music, and the top television shows, that accurately depict and bring attention to substance abuse and mental health issues. This year the ceremony will take place at the Beverly Hills Hotel on April 23rd. 

Gratitude and best of luck, to actor Anne Hathaway, writer Jenny Lumet and director Jonathan Demme.

For more information on Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services go to www.samhsa.gov 

             

                                                                        

What do you get the woman who has everything?

Apparently, an iPod. 

Last week , the President and First lady, met and exchanged gifts with, the Queen of England. The Queen gave the first family a silver framed photo of herself and the Duke of Edinburg (standard protocol but lacking in re-gifting ability) and an original multi- volume set of Winston Churchill (tasteful, worth something on eBay for sure).

The President reciprocated with an iPod. 

After the dvd debacle, with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, you would think that the position of presidential personal shopper would have been given to someone other than Joe Biden. Doesn't he have enough on his plate with this whole 43 minute video of daughter Ashley snorting cocaine? (I hear the collective sigh)

Regardless, let's let Joe get back to his "war on drugs" and coining terms like "drug czar". 

Let's get the President a personal shopper that knows the meaning of spreading the wealth. We are talking about heads of state here, dignitaries, this isn't the oval office grab bag. 

For more information about cocaine abuse, contact the National Clearinghouse for Alcohol and Drug Information (NCADII) at 800.729.6686

• In 2007, the National Survey on Drug Use &  Health (NSDUH) estimated that nearly 35.9 million Americans, ages 12 and older, had tried cocaine. 
  

                                                                      That Blows!                                                                          

So, I read that Barack Obama is still smoking-

But I smoked, like I was going to the chair, for over 25 years- so I'm not passing judgement. When I put out the cigarettes, I started chewing the nicotine gum. If it wasn't for the fact that I went to Mexico, ran out of Nicorette 3 days into the trip, and couldn't find a "Farmacia" anywhere that carried it, I would still be chewing that gum like it was my job. I really think I was hooked more on the gum than I ever was on cigarettes. I could chew that gum anywhere without getting looks of disgust. I chewed in the shower, in dressing rooms, on trains, even while getting a mammogram. It was great! Anyway, I'm romancing nicotine right now, and that's not good for me to do, so here are some sobering facts- 

• Tobacco use remains the leading preventable cause of death in the United States. 430,000 preventable deaths annually.
  
• Nicotine contains over 4000 chemicals, 60 are known carcinogins.
  
• Only commercial use for nicotine, besides cigarettes, is as pesticide.
  
• 29% who try smoking become dependent ( FYI- 2% of people who try cocaine become dependent).
• 80% want to quit.

Just some of the reasons why they say "there is a flame on one end of a cigarette and a sucker on the other".

Want help quitting or know someone who does? The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services have a toll-free hotline!

Call 800.QUIT.NOW (800.784.8669)or visit them on the web at www.smokefree.gov 

To learn more about tobacco and other drugs of abuse, visit the National Institute of Drug Abuse Website at www.drugabuse.gov

             Smoking Sucks, Please Quit.

Welcome to Read, Right, and Blew!

More to come...