About Me

My photo
For me it is All About Being of Service & Living the Life of the Give-Away....

Being Mindful of those who are unable to speak for themselves; our Non-Two Legged Relations and the Future Generations.

It's about walking on the Canka Luta Waste Behind the Cannunpa and the ceremonies.

It's about Mindfulness and Respect. It's about Honesty and owning up to my foibles.

It's about: Mi Takuye Oyacin

Wednesday, June 24, 2015

How Republicans Turned Running For President Into A Giant Money Making Scam (VIDEO)


How Republicans Turned Running For President Into A Giant Money Making Scam (VIDEO)

AUTHOR JUNE 21, 2015 9:43 PM
We often joke that the GOP field is like a clown car, but with 28 candidates and growing, even the best clownery won’t fit all the mostly white men into one car.
Why would so many people who hate the government run for President? Don’t they know that most don’t stand even a remote chance? Sure they do. Running for President these days has little to do with wanting to win the highest office in the United States – it’s about making money or getting publicity while pretending to run to serve the country.
When you or I donate to a presidential campaign, we have strict limits. We can donate $2,700 (as individuals) to a primary campaign and the same amount to a general election campaign. We can also donate up to $33,400 a year to a national party. For most people struggling to scrape by, this is a lot of money, but it’s still dwarfed by what can be donated to PACs (political action committees) and SuperPACs, much of which can be kept by the candidate, win or lose.
November 8, 2016 will be the last day anyone will run for the next presidential term, but that doesn’t mean candidates have to stop running, nor does it mean that money has to be returned to donors or even spent. A candidate can run in perpetuity and their PAC can stay alive just as long.
If they do decide to shut down their campaign and their PAC, there are somewhat strict limits on how the money can be spent. They can’t spend the money on personal use, but they can payoff campaign debts, transfer the money to another candidate, or give it to a political party.
That’s just the tip of the iceberg. There is another level of PAC called a leadership PAC. As Open Secrets says about Leadership PACs:
“A leadership PAC is a political action committee that can be established by current and former members of Congress as well as other prominent political figures. Leadership PACs are designed for two things: to make money and to make friends. In the rough and tumble political game, elected officials know that money and friends in high places are very important to winning elections and leadership positions.”
Leadership PACs, like standard donations, have limits of $5,000 per year. The money can’t go toward formal campaigns but they can pay for less direct things like travel, fundraising, polling, consulting, etc. They can also spend it just to support a lavish lifestyle for the candidate, the candidate’s family and whomever, while campaigning or even after.
The real money and the real lawlessness, though, is with SuperPACs. SuperPACSs have no limits. Billionaires and corporations can donate as much as they want and the candidates can do with it whatever the hell they want. The only restriction is that legally, the campaigns can’t coordinate with the SuperPACs. That’s why so many candidates have put off formally announcing – they do get to coordinate before they are official candidates. However, a third party from the candidate can be appointed to run the SuperPAC, even if that third party has a close relationship with the candidate.
The best education the nation has ever had on SuperPACs was when Stephen Colbert started his own.
Here’s the video:

Of course PACs, Leadership PACs and SuperPACs aren’t the only ways people who pretend to run for president gain access to oodles of cash. They also write books, become Fox News regulars, and for some, have a reality show. That’s better than being the leader of the free world anyway. There’s too much stress. Just look at how gray President Obama has gotten in the last six years.
Featured image by DonkeyHotey at Flickr.com.

Tuesday, June 23, 2015

Hard Work

The Law of Attraction


Who Owns Your Freedom

The Top 20 of 147 Corporate Owners WHO CONTROL EVERYTHING

1. Barclays plc
2. Capital Group Companies Inc
3. FMR Corporation
4. AXA
5. State Street Corporation
6. JP Morgan Chase & Co
7. Legal & General Group plc
8. Vanguard Group Inc
10. Merrill Lynch & Co Inc
11. Wellington Management Co LLP
12. Deutsche Bank AG
13. Franklin Resources Inc
14. Credit Suisse Group
15. Walton Enterprises LLC (holding company for Wal-Mart heirs)
16. Bank of New York Mellon Corp
17. Natixis
18. Goldman Sachs Group Inc
19. T Rowe Price Group Inc
20. Legg Mason Inc


Allison Reynolds: Sub-Human Kills a Baby Monkey for Sport

This horrific sub human, called Alison Reynolds just arrowed a baby monkey for fun. 

She doesn't want this to go viral....so we have a mission.... please share every where!

On the Confederate Flag



Today, the Senate cleared a key procedural hurdle on a degraded version of the Fast Track Trade Promotion Authority by the narrowest margin in the legislative mechanism’s history, 60-37. The procedural measure required 60 votes to pass. A smaller handful of Democrats joined with Senate Republicans to pass Fast Track over the will of the American people, who have been clamoring to halt the rush to rubber stamp trade deals like the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). 
Two Senators switched their votes from yes to no, Senator Ben Cardin (D-Maryland) and Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX).
The 13 corporate trade backers included:
 Senators Michael Bennet (D-Colorado),
Maria Cantwell (D-Washington), 
Thomas Carper (D-Delaware), 
Chris Coons (D-Delaware), 
Diane Feinstein (D-California), 
Heidi Heitkamp (D-North Dakota), 
Tim Kaine (D-Virginia),
 Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri),
Patty Murray (D-Washington), 
Bill Nelson (D-Florida), 
Jeanne Shaheen (D-New Hampshire), 
Mark Warner (D-Virginia) and, 
the co-sponsor, Ron Wyden (D-Oregon). 
Senators Bennet, Murray and Wyden are all up for re-election in 2016, 
and voters will remember this Fast Track betrayal when they go to the polls.
Last month, the Senate passed a different version of Fast Track, but House Republicans eviscerated the delicate Senate policy balances, making the version the Senate passed today considerably worse. Today’s legislation does not include the worker-retraining program that many said was essential to securing their vote. Democrats that supported Fast Track today took a leap of faith that House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) can actually pass the worker retraining measures. The Senate should have forced the House to act first on the worker assistance program before walking the plank on Fast Track.
Today’s bill also weakened the Senate’s earlier provisions addressing human trafficking and currency manipulation and includes new House language that prohibits trade deals from ever addressing climate change. Corporate interests are being put on a pedestal, while the health and safety of the American people and our environment are being swept under the rug. Tomorrow, the Senate will likely vote to pass Fast Track, which only requires a simple 51-vote majority, far fewer votes than were needed today.
Fast Track will accelerate congressional consideration of the as-yet-unseen Trans-Pacific Partnership, a trade pact that will undermine key consumer, public health and environmental protections. The Senate Democrats that voted for Fast Track today did so in part because of the promise that the TPP will be “the most progressive trade deal in history” according to Senator Wyden. This is a pathetically low bar, given how bad all the prior trade deals have been.
The Senate passed Fast Track on the narrowest margin its history today because of the stalwart nationwide activism and advocacy. Food & Water Watch will continue to push for trade deals that put workers, the environment and commonsense consumer protections ahead of Big Business. We will not stand for trade deals like the TPP that undermine our food safety standards, expand fracking and privatize our municipal water systems

Republicans Reeling: White House Candidates And Congressmen Took Cash From White Supremacists


Republicans Reeling: White House Candidates And Congressmen Took Cash From White Supremacists
more from Jason Easley
Monday, June, 22nd, 2015, 10:38 am

Rand Paul, Ted Cruz

The Republican Party is being rocked by the news that three presidential candidates and several members of Congress took campaign donations from white supremacist group referenced by Charleston shooter Dylann Roof in his manifesto.

The Guardian reported on the donations that Earl Holt, the president of the Council of Conservative Citizens made to Republicans:
Holt has since 2012 contributed $8,500 to Cruz, the Texas senator running for the Republican presidential nomination, and his Jobs, Growth and Freedom Fund political action committee, according to Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings. On some filings Holt’s occupation was listed as “slumlord”. He has also given $1,750 to RandPAC, the political action committee of Paul, the Kentucky senator and presidential contender, and he gave $2,000 to the 2012 presidential campaign of Mitt Romney, VA further $1,500 was donated by Holt to Santorum, the former Pennsylvania senator and 2012 Republican presidential primary runner-up, who is running for president again in the 2016 race and attended Sunday’s memorial service at Emanuel AME Church.
Holt has also distributed tens of thousands in campaign contributions among prominent Republicans in Congress, such as Representative Steve King of Iowa ($2,000), Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas ($1,500) and Senator Jeff Flake of Arizona ($1,000). He also gave $3,200 to the former Minnesota congresswoman and presidential candidate Michele Bachmann.
The Republican presidential candidates rushed to refund the donations, but their refunds can’t hide the larger point.

The hate speech and anti-immigrant policies of the Republican Party are appealing to racists. Rep. Steve King is a flaming racist who regularly demonizes immigrants. Sen. Tom Cotton has also engaged in the anti-immigrant rhetoric while calling for military action against Muslims in the Middle East.

Attention will focus on the donations to Republican presidential candidates, but this is a party wide issue. Republicans have spent years trying to divide the country along racial lines, and the racist chickens are coming home to roost.

Racists hear the Republican dog whistles loud and clear when it comes to President Obama and other minorities. The Republican Party is the anti-minority party. Republicans oppose equality and citizenship women, Hispanics, gays, and African-Americans. This platform has not only made it virtually impossible for Republicans to win the White House. It has also turned the GOP into the party of racist hate.

Government Wipes Recent Vaccine Injury Data from Website


Government Wipes Recent Vaccine Injury Data from Website

June 23, 2015 

By Dr. Mercola
Many are not aware that in the US there is a federally operated vaccine injury compensation program (VICP) that Congress created under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act. The US Court of Federal Claims in Washington DC handles contested vaccine injury and death cases in what has become known as "vaccine court". 

The VICP is a "no-fault" alternative to the traditional civil court lawsuit and was established in 1986 after a string of high-profile lawsuits had slammed vaccine manufacturers.
At the time, parents were suing vaccine manufacturers after their children were brain injured or died following federally recommended and state mandated DPT (diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus vaccine). There were several DPT injury lawsuits against the vaccine makers in the 1970's and early 1980's that resulted in multimillion dollar jury verdicts.
At that point the vaccine manufacturers threatened to stop producing DPT, MMR, and oral polio (the only childhood vaccines at the time) if the civil litigation continued. Rather than raising safety standards and compelling vaccine manufacturers to  ensure they are producing the least toxic vaccines – Congress passed the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, and shielded the vaccine makers from most civil liability related to their products.1

The American Public – Not the Vaccine Makers – Pay the Costs of Compensation

The federal VICP compensates vaccine victims not from a fund paid into by vaccine manufacturers, but through a federal trust fund that collects a 75-cent surcharge on every vaccine given (the combination MMR vaccine, for example, has a $2.25 fee tacked on to it because that shot contains three vaccines). So not only are drug companies making big profits from selling mandated vaccines to government and vaccine producers, they are also held legally blameless for both vaccine injuries and deaths and don’t have to pay a cent to those injured by their vaccines.
The VICP contains a Vaccine Injury Table that lists vaccine side effects that are known to be caused by vaccines. In order to win uncontested federal compensation for a vaccine injury, a person must prove he or she developed certain clinical symptoms and medical conditions on the Table within a certain time frame of receiving a certain vaccine, and that there is no more biologically plausible explanation for the vaccine-related injury or death.
If a clinical symptom and medical condition is not on the Vaccine Injury Table – or developed outside of the accepted timeframe, the vaccine injury claim is contested by the US Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) and the US Department of Justice and is adjudicated in the US Court of Federal Claims ("vaccine court"). In Vaccine Court, the vaccine injured plaintiff must prove, usually via medical records and statements from a medical expert, that the vaccine could have caused the injury.
NPR detailed the story of Lisa Smith, a woman who was healthy until she received a flu shot and, a few days later, realized she couldn’t walk and had developed severe pain in her legs.2
Lisa had developed Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS), an autoimmune disease of the nervous system. GBS is in the process of being added to the official Vaccine  Injury Table. She only learned of the VICP after a friend told her about it. She filed a VICP claim and was awarded a settlement of an undisclosed amount.

Many People Are Not Aware of Vaccine Court

In 2014, there were 542 vaccine injury compensation claims filed in the VICP. Of the claims, 365 were compensated for a total of $202 million, with settlements ranging from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars.3
What you’ll notice is that very few of these claims are publicized or disclosed to the public in any way. It is obvious that the government does not want to publicize the existence of the VICP because the more Americans learn that there are vaccine injuries and deaths  – those that have been vetted and compensated in a court of law – the more they may start to question the safety and of vaccines.
There is a government VICP website, which is run by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), an agency of the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS).
It maintains vaccine injury claim statistics that have historically been updated monthly – until the government mysteriously removed more than a years worth of data earlier this year…

US Government Removes Vaccine Injury Court Statistics from Public Website

According to investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson, in March 2015 the US government removed the latest vaccine injury court statistics (data from 2014 and 2015) from a publicly reported chart.4
HRSA stated they removed the data in order to sync up with data from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which is only current through 2013 and details the number of vaccine doses given in the US.
However, Attkisson noted there had been a sharp uptick in VICP awards for children and adults filing vaccine injury and death claims and the data was no longer included on the HRSA websites "adjudication" chart, which distorted the reality of what’s happening in vaccine court. As Attkisson reported:
Since January of 2014, the number of flu vaccine cases conceded by the government is more than double the previous eight years combined. The adjudication chart only reflects half of the current number.
Concessions won by flu shot victims since 2006
Chart shows (through 2013): 42
Actual number (through April 2015): 88
Also on the rise is the number of vaccine injury cases the government has ‘conceded:’ up 55% in a little over one year. As a result of the recent website changes, neither of these trends is reflected on the current ‘adjudication’ chart.”
In addition, the HRSA website has been altered to make VICP stats harder to find. The adjudication chart used to be the first item on the statistics page, but was replaced by language stating vaccines are safe and effective.
Since 1998 through June 1, 2015, HRSA reports that 14,812 claims were filed in the VICP. The total paid out to vaccine victims was about $3.1 billion. While 4,121 were compensated,  9,904 have been dismissed. Further, the majority of vaccine injuries never make it to vaccine court. According to Attkisson:5
Only about one injury case for every million doses of vaccines is compensated in vaccine court. Adverse events occur more frequently, according to vaccine warning labels, but rarely end up in the little-known vaccine court.”

Getting Compensated Through Vaccine Court Isn’t Always Easy…

While the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) was originally set up to give vaccine-injured Americans an expedited, non-adversarial, less expensive administrative alternative to a civil court lawsuit, today it is the "exclusive remedy" for those seeking compensation for serious vaccine injuries. 
Many vaccine victims are left waiting without support and financial assistance for years on end, while their case snakes its way through the federal governments red tape. Some VICP claimants even say they felt “attacked” by the government that was supposed to help them.
Another problem has been a lack of public awareness that this program even exists. Reportedly, federal officials operating the VICP have vowed to publicize the program, promising to improve the website to make its literature to make it easier to understand.
They’ve also stated they will seek to increase awareness among health care providers, parents and expectant parents, older adults, Spanish speaking adults, as well as civil litigation and plaintiff attorneys.6
What actually happens remains to be seen. Several years ago, a comprehensive consultant report about publicizing the VICP was created at a cost of $300,000.  However, few recommendations were ever implemented.7
Moreover, VICP directors didn’t begin taking action on publicity until after a congressionally requested Government Accountability Office (GAO) inquiry began last year.
Public outreach has also been largely ignored since the programs inception. The Associated Press also claims it found evidence suggesting that “the government seems intent on keeping the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program’s public profile low.”8

How Common Are Vaccine Injuries?

When the VICP was first created, if the injured party was denied compensation or was dissatisfied with the amount of the award, they could then proceed with a civil lawsuit with certain restrictions, depending upon the case.
Unhappy with this partial liability protection, drug companies kept pushing for complete liability protection and, in 2011, convinced the US Supreme Court majority to rule that federally licensed and recommended vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe” and that the VICP should be the “sole remedy” for all vaccine injury claims.9
I think it’s worth repeating, in case you just glossed over it: The reason you cannot sue a vaccine manufacturer for injury or death is because vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe.” At this point, vaccine manufacturers have virtually no incentive whatsoever to ensure the safety and effectiveness of vaccines that are recommended by federal health officials and mandated by state health officials.
The question you’re probably wondering is, so how safe, or unsafe, are they? The answer is, no one really knows, as appropriate safety studies haven’t been conducted.
It's important to understand that ALL vaccines carry a risk for provoking an immediate acute adverse reaction, such as anaphylactic shock, fainting, or having a seizure, which could be truly life threatening if you're driving a car or crossing a street, for example.
Further, vaccines can impair and alter immune system responses and can also cause brain inflammation (encephalitis or encephalopathy) that may lead to permanent brain damage.
In addition, as Institute of Medicine Committees have pointed out in published reports, some individuals are more susceptible to suffering harm from vaccines because of biological, genetic, and environmental risk factors but, most of the time, doctors cannot predict who will be harmed because there are few scientific studies that have evaluated vaccine risks for individuals.10

Problems with a One-Size-Fits-All Vaccine Program

It’s now known that the microbiome influences our health and that an individuals gut microbes may help determine their immune response to vaccines. For instance, infants that responded to the rotavirus vaccine had a higher diversity of microbes in their gut, as well as more microbes from the Proteobacteria group, than infants who did not mount the expected immune response.11
Further, there has been little scientific research into how vaccines affect your genes and it’s likely different for every person because no two people are identical in terms of inherited genes, environmental exposures, or epigenetic influences that contribute to biodiversity.
There's really no way to predict which genes will be affected, but the US government recommends, and many states mandate the same vaccine schedule for every American.
Yet, each individual will have a unique response to any given vaccine based on their age, current health status, and microbial makeup. In addition, we're also epigenetically predisposed to respond differently in terms of the vaccine side effects we might develop.
The fact is vaccines appear to cause mild or no reactions in some people but clearly can cause devastating reactions in others. Here are just some of the ways vaccines can impair or alter immune responses and brain function:
  • Some components in vaccines are neurotoxic, including heavy metals such as mercury preservatives and aluminum adjuvants; residual toxins like endotoxin and bioactive pertussis toxin; and chemicals like formaldehyde and phenooxyethanol
  • The lab-altered and genetically engineered viruses and bacteria in vaccines may impair immune responses and do not stimulate the same kind of immunity that occurs when the body responds to an infectious disease
  • Foreign DNA/RNA from human, animal, and insect cell substrates used to produce vaccines may trigger serious health problems for some people
  • Vaccines may alter your T-cell function and lead to chronic illness
  • Vaccines can trigger allergies by introducing large foreign protein molecules into your body that have not been properly broken down by your digestive tract (since they are injected). Your body can have an allergic reaction to these foreign particles

Protect Your Right to Informed Consent and Defend Vaccine Exemptions

With all the uncertainty surrounding the safety and efficacy of vaccines, it's critical to protect your right to make independent health choices and exercise voluntary informed consent to vaccination. It is urgent that everyone in America stand up and fight to protect and expand vaccine informed consent protections in state public health and employment laws. The best way to do this is to get personally involved with your state legislators and educating the leaders in your community.

The Pope Says:


The Pope Has A Message For Christian Fundamentalists: You’re No Better Than ISIS

AUTHOR DECEMBER 3, 2014 10:20 AM
The Pope gave liberals an early Christmas Present this week, on a flight back from Turkey…by drawing a parallel between Christian Fundamentalists and Islamic terror groups such as ISIS.
When a journalist attempted to draw the Pope into yet another condemnation of the world’s 2 billion Muslims on the basis of the actions of a few thousand – the pontiff dropped a logic bomb.
“You just can’t say that, just as you can’t say that all Christians are fundamentalists. We have our share of them (fundamentalists). All religions have these little groups,” Pope Francis said.
With this succinct, unapologetic statement – Pope Francis has said what many of us, religious and not, have been quietly thinking for some time: Christian and Muslim fundamentalists have far more in common with each other than the rest of us.
Was it US Muslims or Christians that lobbied against legislation outlawing spousal rape? Answer: Christians.
Virginia Republican Richard Black argued against such legislation in January 2014, stating that a woman could not be raped by her husband because she had already given consent through marriage.
Was it Muslims or Christians that used the state’s legal system to allow corporations to remove female workers’ control over their own reproductive health?  Answer: Christians.
Was it a Christian or Muslim legislator who argued a woman could only get pregnant through consensual sex?  Answer: The US Republican Party. 
In 2012, Missouri Republican Todd Akin drew ire around the world for this comment:
“It seems to me, from what I understand from doctors, that’s really rare,” Mr. Akin said of pregnancies from rape. “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”
Was it a Christian or Muslim fundamentalist news channel  that put women on air to advise other women not to vote? Answer: Christian.
Fox News does this regularly, as in this October 2013 discussion of how married women tend to vote Republican and single women tend to vote Democratic:
“It’s the same reason why young women on juries are not a good idea. They don’t get it! They’re not in that same life experience of paying the bills, doing the mortgage, kids, community, crime, education, healthcare. They’re like healthy and hot and running around without a care in the world.”
 Ok, so maybe there’s a parallel with women…but then there’s the violence. Christian fundamentalists aren’t terrorists are they? Answer: Yes they are.
Contrary to popular opinion, most of the terrorist activity in the U.S. in recent years has not come from Muslims, but from radical Christians, white supremacists, and far-right militia groups.  Our friends at Alternet prepared an astonishing list of the 10 worst US terror attacks by Christian Fundamentalists which included:
  • Wisconsin Sikh Temple massacre, Aug 2012. white supremacist Wade Michael Page used a semiautomatic weapon to murder six people during an attack on a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wisconsin.
  • The Dr. George Tiller Murder, May 2009. In 1986, his clinic was firebombed. In ’93, he was shot five times by female Christian Right terrorist Shelly Shannon (now serving time in a federal prison) but survived – but in May 2009 Dr. George Tiller was shot and killed by anti-abortion terrorist Scott Roeder on May 31, 2009.  He was a victim of Christian Right terrorism, not al-Qaeda.
  • Knoxville Unitarian Universalist Church shooting, July 2008. On July 27, 2008, Christian Right sympathizer Jim David Adkisson walked into the Knoxville Unitarian Universalist Church in Knoxville, Tennessee during a children’s play and began shooting people at random. Two were killed, while seven others were injured but survived. Adkisson said he was motivated by a hatred of liberals, Democrats and gays.
  • The Centennial Olympic Park bombing, July 1996. Eric Rudolph is is best known for carrying out the Olympic Park bombing in Atlanta during the 1996 Summer Olympics—a blast that killed spectator Alice Hawthorne and wounded 111 others.  His long list of terrorist attacks committed in the name of Christianity includes his bombing of an abortion clinic in Birmingham, Alabama in 1998 caused the death of Robert Sanderson (a Birmingham police officer and part-time security guard) and caused nurse Emily Lyons to lose an eye.
So a big hat-tip to the Pope for making a comparison that many ardent liberals have been to afraid to make, through fear of the repercussions, or accusations of hyperbole.  Religious extremism is dangerous, but it is not the preserve of any faith.  There is no ‘worst’ form of religious extremism. To be frank, the assumption there is often finds its roots in racism.  So maybe the next time Bill Maher wants to call comparisons of Christian and Muslim fundamentalists ‘liberal bullshit’, he should have a little chat with the Pope…or, you know, open a history book.

Sunday, June 21, 2015


Yes, I Am Entitled to My Social Security!

Tuesday, June 16, 2015

Fracked Drinking Water: Map

US - Fracking and Drinking Water Map: This Map Shows Where You Shouldn’t Drink Tap Water in the USA. In this map you can retrieve two types of information: the US #rivers in blue and the fracking areas superimposed in red. This map is from the#documentary #Gasland.

"There is just one thing I would say about this terrifying map: Be careful if you live in a red area, your tap water may be contaminated and poisoned by the chemicals and other toxic substances used for fracking and described in the following report: Chemicals Used In Hydraulic Fracturing."http://bit.ly/18aVrpU#FreeTheArctic30 #StopHarper #KeystoneXL#NoTarSands #NoKXL #Fracking