I want to be friends with this girl...all of her shitty life choices make me feel amazing about winning the life-lottery.
Too Many Lies To Keep Up With
Posted using ShareThis
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
What are all the Jersey Shore Boys Gonna Do?!?
KANSAS CITY, KAN - One group of small business owners say that they are not happy about a special tax that's included in the landmark health care reform legislation - tanning salon owners.
The legislation includes a 10 percent tax on indoor tanning.
Northland insurance agent Sandy Gambel's office is just a few feet from her favorite tanning salon. She says that the tax won't necessarily stop her from tanning.
"Honestly, I feel healthier when I've got a little bit of a tan," said Gambel. "I feel better about me, when I've got that tan."
The executive director of the Indoor Tanning Association says that the tax will end up hurting salons, and that the government's estimate of how much revenue it will generate are pure fantasy.
The salon's owner says that he would hate to pass along the tax to his customers because of what it could do to business. But while tanning salon owners are not happy, dermatologists say that it means that their patients come in for exams a lot paler than before. One metro dermatologist says that he tells his patients that "pale is the new tan."
"Putting a tax on that may serve two purposes, from a health perspective," said Dr. Daniel Aires, a dermatologist at the University of Kansas Hospital. "Number one, it may discourage (tanning), hopefully, especially by young people. And number two, it can help pay for some of the health damages it causes."
Dr. Aires says that the date shows a link between tanning and melanoma, the deadliest form of skin cancer.
The Indoor Tanning Association says that the legislation originally included a so-called "Bo-Tax," which would have taxed cosmetic and plastic surgery procedures, but they say that their strong lobbyists change the bill.
The legislation includes a 10 percent tax on indoor tanning.
Northland insurance agent Sandy Gambel's office is just a few feet from her favorite tanning salon. She says that the tax won't necessarily stop her from tanning.
"Honestly, I feel healthier when I've got a little bit of a tan," said Gambel. "I feel better about me, when I've got that tan."
The executive director of the Indoor Tanning Association says that the tax will end up hurting salons, and that the government's estimate of how much revenue it will generate are pure fantasy.
The salon's owner says that he would hate to pass along the tax to his customers because of what it could do to business. But while tanning salon owners are not happy, dermatologists say that it means that their patients come in for exams a lot paler than before. One metro dermatologist says that he tells his patients that "pale is the new tan."
"Putting a tax on that may serve two purposes, from a health perspective," said Dr. Daniel Aires, a dermatologist at the University of Kansas Hospital. "Number one, it may discourage (tanning), hopefully, especially by young people. And number two, it can help pay for some of the health damages it causes."
Dr. Aires says that the date shows a link between tanning and melanoma, the deadliest form of skin cancer.
The Indoor Tanning Association says that the legislation originally included a so-called "Bo-Tax," which would have taxed cosmetic and plastic surgery procedures, but they say that their strong lobbyists change the bill.
Stupak Relents
A health vote falls in place after phone call from Obama
BY TODD SPANGLER
-- Here's how John Dingell described Bart Stupak, his congressional colleague and occasional duck blind buddy, on Monday: "He's got to be one of the best poker players I know."
Villified for weeks as the public face of the Democrats opposed to abortion rights who threatened to bring down President Barack Obama's health care overhaul, Stupak gave no hint that he was ready to play his cards.
The Democrat from Michigan's Upper Peninsula said that behind the scenes, decadeslong health care reform advocate Dingell was "chewing on me" as Stupak worked the White House for a clear statement that federal money couldn't be used for abortions.
The call from Obama came via cell phone about 3 p.m. Stupak walked to the House floor. They had a deal, the president said. On Monday, the White House acknowledged it helped put them over the top.
"Without Bart," Dingell said, "we wouldn't have the bill."
Obama calls, closes deal
Stupak knew when President Barack Obama called with a deal clincher -- an executive order reiterating that no federal funds would be spent on abortions -- that it was as good as he was going to get.
It broke the logjam on health care reform, allowing it to pass 219-212 late Sunday, but it seemed to please no one outside of Congress. Abortion opponents felt Stupak caved in to pressure, pro-choice groups felt he held the entire vote hostage.
The Senate had stripped from the bill an earlier provision that he wrote ensuring that no federal subsidies went to insurance plans that covered abortions, and, even if he had convinced House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to allow another vote changing the legislation, that would have sent it back to the Senate, where it most likely would have been stripped again.
"Every time I tried to do something legislatively, I was stymied," he said.
But he had another option. For days, Stupak, a Democrat from Michigan's western Upper Peninsula, had been working with the White House, on his own and through a good friend in Congress -- Rep. Mike Doyle of Pennsylvania -- to fashion a presidential order to allow Stupak and about nine other Democratic abortion rights opponents to vote for Obama's health care reform plan in good conscience. The problem was getting the White House to draw up a provision amid fears it would leak and spark a public fight. Finally, by the weekend, they left Stupak to draw it up and circulate it. Time was running short with a Sunday vote scheduled.
There was another motivation: Stupak's good friend Dingell, a Dearborn Democrat who has served longer in the House than anyone and has been pressing for health care reform for more than 50 years, was prodding him.
"It was tugging at me that I could stand in the way of Mr. Dingell's 50-something-year goal," Stupak said.
He had counted votes in the Senate -- he had no more than 45 for the statutory restrictions on abortion funding he still wants to see. Sixty votes are needed to get it passed in the Senate, though.
After Sunday's vote, Stupak caught more static. When Republicans moved to put Stupak's original provision into the bill Sunday, he rose to oppose it, calling it a tactic to destroy the overall bill's chances. Someone yelled "baby killer."
On Monday, U.S. Rep. Randy Neugebauer admitted he yelled it, but said he shouted, "It's a baby killer" about the deal struck between Obama and Stupak -- not Stupak himself. Neugebauer apologized. Stupak said the Texas Republican might want to apologize to the whole House.
"I was really surprised that they would do this," Stupak said. "Why would they personally attack me?"
He was surprised that Republicans denounced the executive order as meaningless, saying they never took that position when President George W. Bush used an executive order to restrict the use of human embryos for stem cell research.
Stupak could still face blowback at home. Two Democrats plan to challenge him in the August primary.
Beverly Prieskorn, a 68-year-old independent voter in Laurium on the Keweenaw Peninsula, said she admired Stupak's courage but is unhappy that he capitulated to Democratic bullying. "I know it was tough for him," she said.
BY TODD SPANGLER
-- Here's how John Dingell described Bart Stupak, his congressional colleague and occasional duck blind buddy, on Monday: "He's got to be one of the best poker players I know."
Villified for weeks as the public face of the Democrats opposed to abortion rights who threatened to bring down President Barack Obama's health care overhaul, Stupak gave no hint that he was ready to play his cards.
The Democrat from Michigan's Upper Peninsula said that behind the scenes, decadeslong health care reform advocate Dingell was "chewing on me" as Stupak worked the White House for a clear statement that federal money couldn't be used for abortions.
The call from Obama came via cell phone about 3 p.m. Stupak walked to the House floor. They had a deal, the president said. On Monday, the White House acknowledged it helped put them over the top.
"Without Bart," Dingell said, "we wouldn't have the bill."
Obama calls, closes deal
Stupak knew when President Barack Obama called with a deal clincher -- an executive order reiterating that no federal funds would be spent on abortions -- that it was as good as he was going to get.
It broke the logjam on health care reform, allowing it to pass 219-212 late Sunday, but it seemed to please no one outside of Congress. Abortion opponents felt Stupak caved in to pressure, pro-choice groups felt he held the entire vote hostage.
The Senate had stripped from the bill an earlier provision that he wrote ensuring that no federal subsidies went to insurance plans that covered abortions, and, even if he had convinced House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to allow another vote changing the legislation, that would have sent it back to the Senate, where it most likely would have been stripped again.
"Every time I tried to do something legislatively, I was stymied," he said.
But he had another option. For days, Stupak, a Democrat from Michigan's western Upper Peninsula, had been working with the White House, on his own and through a good friend in Congress -- Rep. Mike Doyle of Pennsylvania -- to fashion a presidential order to allow Stupak and about nine other Democratic abortion rights opponents to vote for Obama's health care reform plan in good conscience. The problem was getting the White House to draw up a provision amid fears it would leak and spark a public fight. Finally, by the weekend, they left Stupak to draw it up and circulate it. Time was running short with a Sunday vote scheduled.
There was another motivation: Stupak's good friend Dingell, a Dearborn Democrat who has served longer in the House than anyone and has been pressing for health care reform for more than 50 years, was prodding him.
"It was tugging at me that I could stand in the way of Mr. Dingell's 50-something-year goal," Stupak said.
He had counted votes in the Senate -- he had no more than 45 for the statutory restrictions on abortion funding he still wants to see. Sixty votes are needed to get it passed in the Senate, though.
After Sunday's vote, Stupak caught more static. When Republicans moved to put Stupak's original provision into the bill Sunday, he rose to oppose it, calling it a tactic to destroy the overall bill's chances. Someone yelled "baby killer."
On Monday, U.S. Rep. Randy Neugebauer admitted he yelled it, but said he shouted, "It's a baby killer" about the deal struck between Obama and Stupak -- not Stupak himself. Neugebauer apologized. Stupak said the Texas Republican might want to apologize to the whole House.
"I was really surprised that they would do this," Stupak said. "Why would they personally attack me?"
He was surprised that Republicans denounced the executive order as meaningless, saying they never took that position when President George W. Bush used an executive order to restrict the use of human embryos for stem cell research.
Stupak could still face blowback at home. Two Democrats plan to challenge him in the August primary.
Beverly Prieskorn, a 68-year-old independent voter in Laurium on the Keweenaw Peninsula, said she admired Stupak's courage but is unhappy that he capitulated to Democratic bullying. "I know it was tough for him," she said.
State Employees get the shaft (not in a good way)
Here is a Guest Opinion from SEIU Local 517M Executive Vice President Phil Thompson that was published in the March 17, 2010 edition of the Oakland Press.
GUEST OPINION: CEOs should share in sacrifices, end hypocrisy of targeting state workers
BY PHIL THOMPSON
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Doug Rothwell sure is singing a different tune these days.
In 1999, while working in state government, Rothwell got a handsome pay raise that bumped his $108,000 salary to $190,000. Adjusted for inflation, that's nearly $240,000 in today's money. With the raise, Rothwell became the highest paid person in state government -- better-paid than even his then-boss, Gov. John Engler.
When Rothwell got the raise, he complained it wasn't enough, saying the bonus was the government's way of recognizing that his job required "a little more skill and talent than somebody managing a burger-flipping joint down the street," according to Gongwer news service reported Aug. 6, 1999.
Fast forward to 2010. While Rothwell no longer works in government, he's still complaining about public employee salaries -- except now, he thinks ordinary state workers earning one-sixth his old salary are paid too much. Talk about amnesia.
Rothwell and the group he leads, Business Leaders for Michigan, claim the only way to get Michigan out of a budget hole is by targeting state workers who have already made deep sacrifices year after year. Incidentally, the board chairman of Rothwell's group is David Joos, Consumers Energy CEO, who received a 148-percent pay raise this year, according to government filings. Last year, Joos pocketed $5.8 million in pay and perks, Mlive.com reported March 10. Joos, by the way, is the same man who pushed legislation that raises electricity rates to pay his salary and build an expensive plant Michigan doesn't need.
It's the height of hypocrisy when wealthy, powerful multimillionaires -- and some politicians in Lansing -- demand more sacrifices from ordinary state workers who have taken cuts after cuts, when they themselves refuse to share in the pain and accept real reforms.
Here are some reforms that will save taxpayer dollars without hurting working families or public services:
• Every year, corporate CEOs get more than $32 billion in tax giveaways. Michigan should review these loopholes to see if they create jobs, and end those that don't.
• Every year, Michigan spends $15 billion in private contracts. Michigan should renegotiate those contracts to find savings, as everyone else in today's tough economy is doing.
• Every year, some Lansing politicians refuse to end their own tax-payer funded lifetime health benefits. Ending these free perks now for current politicians would save taxpayers millions -- and show Lansing can lead by example.
Instead of adopting real reforms, CEOs and some politicians blame state employees. That's wrong because, every year come budget crunch time, state workers are the first to step up to help save taxpayer dollars.
According to a 2009 study by Michigan State University economist Dr. Charles Ballard, state workers have given up more than $3.7 billion in pay cuts, health care sacrifices and other concessions since 2001. Many workers also lost their jobs.
State employees do vital work that keeps families in our communities safe, such as preventing contaminated or diseased foods from getting to consumers, inspecting roads and bridges for safety, and performing many other safety checks. Thousands of them also put their lives on the line every day, fighting fires and crime in our neighborhoods and keeping dangerous predators locked up.
State workers continue to serve proudly, doing more with less, tightening their belts and getting the job done.
Real reform requires everyone to sacrifice, not just state workers and their families.
They know what it means to sacrifice. They work hard without complaint. They have shown leadership by example. Rothwell and his CEO friends should end the hypocrisy and share in the sacrifice like everyone else.
Phil Thompson is executive vice president of the state Service Employees International Union, SEIU 517M.
URL: http://www.theoaklandpress.com/articles/2010/03/17/opinion/doc4ba0ac4c59767679770100.prt
© 2010 theoaklandpress.com, a Journal Register Property
VEsD/
GUEST OPINION: CEOs should share in sacrifices, end hypocrisy of targeting state workers
BY PHIL THOMPSON
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Doug Rothwell sure is singing a different tune these days.
In 1999, while working in state government, Rothwell got a handsome pay raise that bumped his $108,000 salary to $190,000. Adjusted for inflation, that's nearly $240,000 in today's money. With the raise, Rothwell became the highest paid person in state government -- better-paid than even his then-boss, Gov. John Engler.
When Rothwell got the raise, he complained it wasn't enough, saying the bonus was the government's way of recognizing that his job required "a little more skill and talent than somebody managing a burger-flipping joint down the street," according to Gongwer news service reported Aug. 6, 1999.
Fast forward to 2010. While Rothwell no longer works in government, he's still complaining about public employee salaries -- except now, he thinks ordinary state workers earning one-sixth his old salary are paid too much. Talk about amnesia.
Rothwell and the group he leads, Business Leaders for Michigan, claim the only way to get Michigan out of a budget hole is by targeting state workers who have already made deep sacrifices year after year. Incidentally, the board chairman of Rothwell's group is David Joos, Consumers Energy CEO, who received a 148-percent pay raise this year, according to government filings. Last year, Joos pocketed $5.8 million in pay and perks, Mlive.com reported March 10. Joos, by the way, is the same man who pushed legislation that raises electricity rates to pay his salary and build an expensive plant Michigan doesn't need.
It's the height of hypocrisy when wealthy, powerful multimillionaires -- and some politicians in Lansing -- demand more sacrifices from ordinary state workers who have taken cuts after cuts, when they themselves refuse to share in the pain and accept real reforms.
Here are some reforms that will save taxpayer dollars without hurting working families or public services:
• Every year, corporate CEOs get more than $32 billion in tax giveaways. Michigan should review these loopholes to see if they create jobs, and end those that don't.
• Every year, Michigan spends $15 billion in private contracts. Michigan should renegotiate those contracts to find savings, as everyone else in today's tough economy is doing.
• Every year, some Lansing politicians refuse to end their own tax-payer funded lifetime health benefits. Ending these free perks now for current politicians would save taxpayers millions -- and show Lansing can lead by example.
Instead of adopting real reforms, CEOs and some politicians blame state employees. That's wrong because, every year come budget crunch time, state workers are the first to step up to help save taxpayer dollars.
According to a 2009 study by Michigan State University economist Dr. Charles Ballard, state workers have given up more than $3.7 billion in pay cuts, health care sacrifices and other concessions since 2001. Many workers also lost their jobs.
State employees do vital work that keeps families in our communities safe, such as preventing contaminated or diseased foods from getting to consumers, inspecting roads and bridges for safety, and performing many other safety checks. Thousands of them also put their lives on the line every day, fighting fires and crime in our neighborhoods and keeping dangerous predators locked up.
State workers continue to serve proudly, doing more with less, tightening their belts and getting the job done.
Real reform requires everyone to sacrifice, not just state workers and their families.
They know what it means to sacrifice. They work hard without complaint. They have shown leadership by example. Rothwell and his CEO friends should end the hypocrisy and share in the sacrifice like everyone else.
Phil Thompson is executive vice president of the state Service Employees International Union, SEIU 517M.
URL: http://www.theoaklandpress.com/articles/2010/03/17/opinion/doc4ba0ac4c59767679770100.prt
© 2010 theoaklandpress.com, a Journal Register Property
VEsD/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
