Ah....Elections!

So as I'm typing, the Dems have (supposedly) taken the House and the Senate is still up for grabs. At this moment, the Dems need two seats for a "majority" and the races are too close to call. Even if they "win" 2 seats does not a mandate make, it would, however, completely lame duck the President for the remainder of his term and might, just might, inspire the Congress to get back to work...instead of acting as rubber stamps for the current Admin.

Eight states had bans on Same-Sex marriage amendments on their ballots and as of this post, 5 are projected as passing; Idaho, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and Wisconsin. It's likely that the remaining 3 will pass as well--seeing that amendments to that effect have passed in all 20 states that have thrown one onto their ballots. These "protect marriage" amendments just stick in my craw! I'm really wishing one of the groups there would band together to REALLY stick a marriage "protection" amendment on the ballot--one that bans divorce. How about that you hypocrites?! You really want to save marriage? Well, make it impossible to divorce! That would keep marriage rates high, it would allow children to be raised by both of their parents, it would make communities more family friendly, and it would stay true to the word of the bible (or at least the teachings of the church...I mean, if Marriage is a sacred covenant, it shouldn't be a allowed to be broken by man...right?). Of course a measure or amendment to that effect would NEVER pass--why? Because it's crazy! If two people decide that their Marriage doesn't work for them any longer, or is a danger to them, they should be allowed out of it. At the same time, if two people love each other and want to make a commitment only to one another, then they should be allowed to do it! If straight folks can destroy a marriage, then gay ones should be allowed to create one.

Now, not all the election news is bad; Wages got a vote boost in several states (and Dems are saying they'll push for a Fed increase when they get back to work--but, we'll see if they stick to it)

Missouri passed it's amendment to allow stem-cell research (Yay! Michael J. Fox is a hero! I love that guy!). And some pundits are crediting McCaskill's victory (projected by CNN) to her support of that amendment.

The big kahuna was the law that South Dakota rejected (THANK YOU SOUTH DAKOTA VOTERS!!). This was the toughest possible ban on abortion to date. It would have made most abortions illegal in SD...except when the Mother's life was endangered. Yikes. Luckily, it was handily defeated. As was the parental notification law proposed in California.

So, like I said, it wasn't all bad. Still it was a hoot to watch the Election coverage...where much was talked about but, nothing was said (why even cover Elections on the day they are held? It's all speculation until the final tally...why not START the coverage on the following day? Or the following week? Most of the projections are exit polls and how accurate can they be? Uh..not very (Florida, anyone?).

More on specific measures can be found on CNN.com

fracking google!

This is why I hate the internet. It is almost 3AM and I have spent over ONE HOUR looking online for Manolo Blahnik's website. NOT a STORE that sells Blahnik. Not some frickin' BLOG (irony intended)that gushes over Blahnik...I want the ACTUAL website of the frickin' designer! And I can't weed through enough GARBAGE to get it!

And this is why I HATE the internet! I can spend FOREVER looking and NEVER find what I want because the whole thing is completely illogical! Nothing is EVER organized in a way my brain can find it--and of course, it's COMPLETELY obvious to whomever programmed the dang thing--they'd find it 10 seconds (I say 10 'cause there is A LOT of knock-off Manolo stuff).

And don't ask me why I want to even find the dang shoe guy--it's stupid. Okay, I'll tell you. He designed some frickin' shoes for the Marie Antoinette movie and they are apparently available the Manolo Blahnik Boutique...and I want to see them...and I'm not sure if they mean there's a section in some swanky store that would stock them or if he's now got his own store that would sell them.

See...stupid.

Frickin' internet.

Search and Siesure

I went to Target this eve to browse and perchance procure some luxury items (toys, a hat, whatever caught my fancy). Upon completion of my purchases and as I was exiting the store, the security guard asked to see my receipt. I told him no, that my receipt was in my purse, and then I walked out.

Why you ask?

Rude, you say?

Simple. The moment I paid for those items, they became MY items. Mine. As in my PERSONAL property. Why on earth would I just hand my stuff over to be peered at and poke through, without due process? Doesn't the Consititution give us the protection against unlawful 'Search and Seizure' of our property?

I have no Privacy...tell me is it just a dream?

Whilst cleaning out my email, I got an email from my group monitor about Yahoo that just freaked me right out;

"Please be advised that Yahoo is now using "Web Beacons" to track every Yahoo Group user. It's similar to cookies,
but allows Yahoo to record every website and every group you visit, even when you're not connected to Yahoo."

Great.

A website I visit once in a blue moon, and hosts a user Group I check with once a month, is sneaking a peak into MY computer for God knows what purpose! Oh, they say "research" but, for what?! How to sell me more stuff I don't need by watching every site I frequent? Oh, and since Yahoo doesn't really own a store, they make money off of me by selling their "research" to other businesses so THEY can snoop on me too!

Why aren't we being better protected from the interests of businesses?

I know everyone mentions Orwell's 1984 and 'big brother' when this kind of thing makes news...so it's a tad cliched to mention is again....but...have you READ 1984? 'Cause I did and it scared the you-know-what out of me! The idea that you had to hide from the Government for any moment of personal thought-that's one of the things that really stuck out in my young adult mind-that the hero had to hide...in his own house...

If you haven't read it, go do it right now. There's even more relevant stuff in that book but, don't take my word for it. Go read it.

I just feel that every single thing we do is recorded and analyzed and that the pool of free thought is being turned into a puddle, ever shrinking. The needs of the individual are subsumed by the desires of business in this 'modern' age and I can't feel comfortable with this.

What is the recourse for those of us that want to opt-out of this type of society? I mean, I don't want my personal information given out willy-nilly and until recently, I thought I was pretty good about guarding myself. I don't give out private information, I never fill out anything on a form that isn't required info (why volunteer stuff?), I have a separate email account just for sign ups to collect the inevitable junk, I shred personal info and junk mail and I don't buy much online. I figured "hey, I'm pretty covered".

Then the wake up.

My bank sells my info--oh not to just anyone (they claim)-just to related vendors. You can opt out (somehow) but, don't usually find that out until it's too late. My insurance company sells my info-there is no patient/company privilege. This strikes me as so unethical! I mean, you use insurance to pay for your medical needs, right?! Your DOCTOR can't discuss your course of care with anyone but you and your insurance company (they need to know what the Doc is doing for billing purposes) but, that same company can sell your information to a third party without prior consent from you. Huh?! No way you say. But, by signing the papers in many cases, you've given implied consent. Banks and insurance companies are just the big ones. Think of all the stuff you're signed up for; phone bills, utilities, the newspaper, your Albertson's card, your costco card, your credit cards...this list is endless and they are all selling info about you to each other and third party companies. All agreed to in the fine print.

And the argument that Corporations police themselves is a joke! Here's a fine example; Song BMG added 'copy-protection' to some of their CD titles that, when played on a computer, installed software (unbeknownst to the user/owner) on that computer. Supposedly it was there to make it harder to copy the disc but, it also spied for Sony BMG by sending information on what was on that computer back to Sony..you know...shared song files, movies, etc. It also made your computer easy pickin's for hackers AND was able to wreck havoc on the machine should the user/owner attempt to uninstall said program.

Nice.

Isn't there a law to protect you? Kinda sorta. The Privacy act of 1974 is the guideline used but, as you probably guessed there are tons of exceptions to the rule and anyone with a high powered, expensive attorney can make a case that the information they've exploited meets one of those exceptions. Besides, Uncle Sam wants in on this stuff too!

Recently, US Prosecutors subpoenaed Yahoo, AOL, Microsoft, and Google to turn over search engine results to use in cases for Child Porn prosecution. They're hoping they can use those results as research tools for law enforcement. Here are some quotes from an article on ZDNET regarding Google's fight to against the subpoena.

"Prosecutors are requesting a "random sampling" of 1 million Internet addresses accessible through Google's popular search engine, and a random sampling of 1 million search queries submitted to Google over a one-week period.

Although the Justice Department also demanded that Yahoo, Microsoft and America Online hand over similar records, Google was the only recipient that chose to fight the subpoena in court. After the spat became public last week, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said: 'This is important for the Department of Justice and we will pursue this matter.'

The government's request has raised eyebrows among privacy advocates and members of Congress, some of whom fear it could open the door to future fishing expeditions. Rep. Ed Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat, said he would introduce legislation to curb records retained by Web sites, and Sen. Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat, has asked Gonzales for details."

Now, I'm against Child Porn, let me just state that right now! I do, however, agree with those 'members of Congress' who think this is only the beginning. That once you open that door a crack, it gets whooshed open instead.

But, wait! There's more! Everyone knows about the NSA Eavesdropping/spying scandal and regardless of your personal feelings on National Security--you must see the danger this brings us. Even if you agree with the President's position, you must acknowledge the slippery slope of his actions. After all 'Who watches the Watchers?'

For more information of the NSA spy scandal visit www.nytimes.com
For information of medical privacy rights visit www.hhs.gov/ocr/hipaa
For More info on the Privacy Act of 1974 visit the U.S. Department of Justice at www.usdoj.gov

Sorry, my links aren't linking today.

Now for something completely different

Okay, two posts about SERIOUS stuff and I thought 'hmmm...gotta lighten up or folks'll think I'm bitter. So, a quick note about the greatest place to buy chocolate in the known universe. La Maison Du Chocolat. This place is the most yumalicious chocolate you can find! Rich, lux, and decadent (I can't say enough about it!) It's just great. It comes in these cute brown boxes that, whenever I get one, give me the same thrill as opening a box from Tiffany's. If you're in the New York area, stop by their shop for a thick cup of chocolate. If you're not, order some online! You won't regret it!

Toodles

Dang it!

Another year begins and another smoking fight about abortion. Sigh. Skimming through the LA Times and NY Times online got my blood boiling (why do I do this to myself?).

I am so sick of this crap. Every year there is a screaming match about this and every time a surpreme court vacancy crops up, we get rabid, mouth-foaming 'debate' about abortion. Why? There are bigger fish to fry! Really! Look around your neighborhood....I'll wait...In my neighborhood we have poor people, and homeless people, and people who are mentally ill but can't afford medication. There are more liqour stores in my neighborhood than any reasonable person could need. There are run down shops and no parks for children to safely play. What about your neighborhood? I'll bet many of you live in the same place. So, instead of taking all that passion and energy and using it to better each other and our surroundings - to make sure that children have a safe place to be children, a place that teens can go to and learn about things other than thuggery, a place that has jobs and health care, a community that nurtures - we argue about what a woman does with her body when she finds herself pregnant with a child she cannot take care of or isn't equipped to care for.

This isn't some whim, you know. I've never heard a woman flippantly say, "you know, a baby will just crimp my style. They clash with my designer life-style." or "I need to party. No time for babies!" and then toss her glossy hair and skip out the door. A woman who makes this decision, this choice, is stunned, bereft, devastated. And yet, she does it. Do you know why? Because she must. It's too late to avoid pregnancy. So, unable to take care of this child, she must terminate it. Is it easy? No. Is it the optimal situation? No. Would we women prefer it not to happen. Yes. But it does.

I also understand the people who feel passionately that abortion is wrong. They feel it's murder. (I mean, secretly, don't we all feel bad that this happens?). Those many kind souls who abhor the thought of abortion. Who wish it abolished, outlawed, impossible. But, what then? The politicians who support this anti-abortion...er...I mean "pro-life" movement are the same politicians who have cut benefits to single mothers. They've taken billions from states that give assistance to women and families who could not support their children in a healthy manner. Forced women to work at low paying jobs with no benefits and then cut programs that supplemented those paltry incomes. Baby-sitting, food stamps, health-care services. What alternatives are there? If you follow the decree of this 'culture of life' and keep a child you know you cannot care for, what do you do? Work harder? Who will watch your children and how will you pay them? How will you feed them? What if they get sick? Where are these answers? Why isn't this information in the pro-life pamphlets? Are you kindly souls going to feed the children you've encouraged these unprepared mothers to keep? Of course not.

So what now?

Well, abortion rates have been dropping (according to reports), which is a good thing. It means that more women are accessing options available to them. Contraceptive devices, and 'morning after' pills when all else fails. But we can do better. If abortion advocates and abolistionists can agree that abortion is not the best alternative to avoiding pregnancy, we might get past this blood-boiling antagonism and really make a difference. If we maintained proper sex education and guaranteed access to birth control pills (paid for by insurance or government programs), if we made it easy to procure a 'morning after' pill when the occasion warrants it (this isn't abortion...there isn't even a fetus yet!), and encouraged those who felt comfortable with absintence to practice it (but, still give them the education on sex and birth control and the understanding of the consquences of not using those tools). Then we wouldn't need abortions. They would virtually disappear. Abortion would be available if needed but, would rarely BE needed.

Isn't that healthy? Smart? Can we agree with this? Or are we going to fight some more.

Toodles

Got Milk? I don't know?!

So, I'm reading the LA times today (even tho I don't really LIVE in LA and we have perfectly good papers here) and I found this bizarre little article about super-filtered Milk and how the dairy folks want it to be used in cheese. You can ship more for buck--and so on. And I'm fine with this. Hey, if folks want to use it and it tastes fine (there is some arguement about that AND nutritional values), then there's no problem. My problem began when I read that the Cheese Institute (can there REALLY be such a place?) doesn't want to put ultra-filtered milk on packages of cheese USING ultra-filtered milk and are kicking up a storm with the FDA about it. Here's the quote:

"Mindful that consumers might not take to cheese with ultra-filtered milk listed as a major ingredient, the Cheese Institute is fighting the FDA over labeling requirements.

The Cheese Institute is "concerned about proposed language that requires manufacturers that use ultra-filtered milk to declare this ingredient as ultra-filtered milk on the ingredients statement of the finished product, rather than simply listing milk," said Clay Hough, senior vice president and general counsel for the International Dairy Foods Assn., which includes the cheese trade group. Hough said that such a requirement would confuse consumers and reduce the flexibility of manufacturers to use varying quantities of fluid milk and ultra-filtered milk by each batch of cheese produced.

"Complying with this labeling requirement would be very problematic," Hough said."

Now this may be a bug in my bonnet but, if the Cheese Institute wants to USE ultra-filtered milk (and I'm fine with that) then I want to KNOW it's in my cheese! I want to know what's in my food in general!!

And, of course, now I wonder how many other companies have dug their heels in and held their breath until the FDA gave in and let 'em have their way? Come on! The FDA is under-funded and yet, is required to protect the public from harmful drugs, harmful foods, and oversee the companies that make the food and drugs...yikes! That's a lot to do and not enough moola to do it with. I wouldn't be surprised if they've been pushed to give in on other foods before.

Anyways, check out the article at www.latimes.com (I know it isn't linked yet but, I'll do it as soon as I figure out how...oh stop it! I'm a total gimp at this stuff! Cut and paste it for crying out loud!) You can also visit the Food & Drug Admin at www.fda.gov

Toodles