Abortion !!!!!

I 100% agree with you, abortion is a form of silent murder and when someone is doing abortion, they are killing, and denying a right to a young person not even born to defend itself. It is sort of like hanging someone without a fair trial. It's wrong because they're killing their own child to get out of their mess. If they can’t handle a kid then they obviously shouldn’t be having sex. Abortions are a sad and selfish easy way out. I think it's sad and a terrible thing indeed. I am not for it however; there are many cases when abortion is needed. Do you think a 15 yr old girl that got raped should have to keep an unwanted baby? Her family can't support it and she can't even take care of herself, let alone a baby. Your opinion would be fine in the 1950s, but things have moved on a lot, and lifestyles have changed. Personally, I think it would be a lot worse if it was illegal and some of the reprobates who need abortions had to have their children, unwanted, and unable to teach them proper values. And think about the people who need to have abortions for health reasons. In my opinion I think we need to look at both sides of the issue here lets say if the woman was raped incest or the child was threatening the mothers life or if their was something seriously wrong with the child then yes I would think it would be appropriate to abort the child. If aborting the child just because you didn’t want the child or for no reason at all then YES I do think that it’s a really bad thing. That’s the way i support the education of BIRTH CONTROL and the use of contraceptives to PREVENT unwanted pregnancies that end up in abortions that way we might see less being performed.

Mr. Obama, Mr. Zardari and Mr. Karzai

Interesting editorial in itself but it fails to repudiate Obama’s short sighted approach to the situation in Pakistan and Afghanistan: to differentiate between the good and bad terrorists. American and NATO presence in the region must have an express purpose and that is to root out the threat of terrorism. The Obama team can be likened to the Bush team ion one fundamental way: the Bush administration had ideologues with parochial and black and white views; the current Obama team is composed of members of similar disposition – ideologues, albeit of a different stripe. The problem is that they are so committed to one way of thinking that they cannot see the bigger picture…that short term pains must be endured to bring about long term and lasting solutions. There must be a clear political vision of how the current administration sees the world. The modified Pakistan funding bill being considered by the US Congress and US administration - if passed in its current form with India-specific modifications – can quite plausibly be interpreted by the people of India as the US explicitly enabling and funding Pakistan to continue sponsoring terrorism against the people of India. After all, the original proposed Congressional bill as sponsored by House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Howard L. Berman required that (1) Pakistan stop all Kashmiri militant groups from operating from Pakistani soil and that (2) Pakistan give an undertaking that it will not allow its territory to be used for any armed attack against or inside India. The reasons these two conditions were included in that proposed bill were plainly and simply that Pakistan – without any shred of doubt – was activity engaged in both (1) and (2). Now, to make Pakistan happy both of these India-specific conditions are explicitly waived in the modified funding bill being sponsored by Democratic chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee John Kerry and Republican Richard Lugar. In essence, it seems that as the leader of the free world the US is about to issue a multi-billion dollar check to the leaders of Pakistan to explicitly authorize them - i.e. as per the “allowed to attack India” modifications made to the Pakistan funding bill - to continue to pursue its policy of terrorist warfare against India. If this were to happen, well then, it would be safe to say that India, the US and the free world at large have a fundamental problem in anti-terror strategy that is soon about to result in a significantly enhanced global terrorist threat viz-a-viz the one existing now. We shouldn’t given the level of corruptness in both the Afghan and Pakistani government, why on earth would we assume that any money that we give them would be used for anything constructive? Instead of giving money to a corrupt government, we should work with the UN and NGOs to build schools in Pakistan ourselves. Would the Pakistani government really object?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/06/opinion/06wed1.html?scp=1&sq=Mr.%20Obama,%20Mr.%20Zardari%20and%20Mr.%20Karzai%20&st=cse

Blog 6 (Comment on a colleague’s work #1)

New Public Plan for Health Insurance:

I agree, I think that this many people that are still uninsured are most likely not to participate in the new public plan, because if they wanted to participate in this public plan that they would’ve have some kind of insurance before that would make them to take interest in this. . A government health insurance plan is not going to be financed primarily by premiums paid by the insured. If it were, it would not draw many people away from private plans. As human being and physician, I believe health care is a right. It is unethical for publicly traded corporations to sell health insurance - the only way they can grow, or pay dividends, is to charge more and pay less. This fundamentally puts the interests of the patient against those of the insurer. What's more, these companies are bloated and inefficient, consuming at least 20 cents of each dollar for administration - and creating an unfunded mandate for doctors and hospitals to hire armies of staff to collect what is due. Another problem is liability. We need a system where cases are adjudicated by medical professionals and there are limits on pain and suffering; those injured most be made as whole as possible. There is a tremendous amount of defensive medicine practiced to "CYA" and the cost should not be underestimated. Finally, a bit of enlightened self-interest. Physicians need to be better paid for their time. Real earnings are less than they were in 1990 - in 1990 dollars! This is worse than not keeping pace with inflation. If we, as a society, hope to attract bright and hard-working people to medical careers then we need to pay better. It is simply an issue of political will to pay physicians better - not as well as investment bankers, of course - but better. Simply allowing us to reduce our overhead by eliminating private insurers - and raising fees to keep pace with inflation - would mean a substantial increase in take-home pay. For example: The insurance industry and leading Republicans decry that as unfair competition. Hospitals and doctors worry about being underpaid, but there is a limit to how low government reimbursements can fall without driving them out of the program. If they will add the new public plan in their insurance than more people will be getting involved and more people will start visiting the hospital. This is cause the hospital to wait for the government to pay them what it is left for them to pay. I don’t agree that they should add the new public plan to the insurance they the families own. I think they should leave it the way it is.

http://domain-sadaf.blogspot.com/

The credit card trap

Closing the credit card will not give you the result you want. The problem isn't the credit card, but the way you've been using it. I have credit cards but I am aware of how much I can afford every payment period and so I don't go on spending more than what I can afford every month. Money I don't have in the bank, I don't spend. I hate paying interests, and so if I don't have enough money I wait until I save enough. Credit cards don't make money out of people like myself who always pay on time and in full, but out of people, who like you, don't restrain themselves when spending money they don't have. Therefore, I suggest that you don't close your credit card, unless you cannot control your spending habits. Instead I would suggest that you leave the credit card at home, and pay it. Make a plan on how you will be able to afford monthly payments. If you can only afford $500, you know that this money will go to pay the monthly interests and then the principal ($10000). So once you know how much you pay on interest, then you will be able to plan it and see how many months (years) will take you to pay the whole amount. This will teach you to think long term and make you doubt next time you go shopping things you cannot afford. It will also prepare you for later in life as you will be better qualified to handle your finances. You don't say how much are you being charged on interests.
Call your credit card company and ask them if they can lower your interests. If the person who answers says no, ask to speak to a manager. If this doesn't work, then check your other credit cards and find out which one offers you the lowest interest rate, and make a balance transfer. Be responsible and make your payments if you don't want to mess up your credit report and score because if you fail to pay, this will stay for 7 years in your records and next time you need credit your interests will go higher because lenders will see you as high risk. Remember that the trap is set for those who don't know better, and cannot control themselves. You are smart, so don't fall in traps you already know are there. Learn from your mistakes so you can avoid them next time. Mr. Dodd says it has taken a while for him to gather support for the bill, and last week the banking committee approved it by only one vote. Republicans and bankers who oppose the bill had argued, and continue to argue, that no law is needed because the federal regulations are tough enough. Mr. Dodd, who has faced criticism for his role in bailout legislation that allowed executive bonuses, could help himself by holding firm on his credit card bill. The Federal Reserve regulations are useful, but consumers should not have to wait for real help until 2010.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/06/opinion/06mon3.html?_r=1

Break the silence on sex education

Young: Break the silence on sex education
John Young, WACO TRIBUNE-HERALD

I totally agree with the article. Abstinence only is a good approach, but not good enough, what about the kids who don’t want to use that approach? What about them? Are they in trouble because our school system failed to educate them on being safe from getting pregnant and safe from STD’s? There are more teens that are going to experiment and how are we going to help them? Teens are usually not as smart as they seem in these matters. They need direction and guidance from experienced and informed teachers and researchers. I think it's important to learn about sex and for kids to get all the facts about sex and about abstinence so they can make their own decisions. So they want get any stupid mistake like getting pregnant such a young age. I guess we should have one certified health professional or educator on the health education councils that the state mandates for each district and they can find their past issues about AID’s and STD’s. I believe that Texans should demand real biology education, meaning real sex education. Do the math and see that our kids have shown they can multiply — all too well. I believe this editorial needs to be read by parents and others because it could be their kids or relatives that being in this situation and I think that kids should know the facts and from then on be able to make a personal choice what to do with their bodies.

http://www.statesman.com/opinion/content/editorial/stories/03/01/0301young_edit.html

Mr. Obama’s Energy Future

I think we the Americans are finally waking up to the realization that we have to change not only the way we think but also the way we do things. I agree with the Author that the Barack Obama pledged to transform the way Americans produce and consume energy. President Obama made clear that he is ready to spend both to combat climate change and reduce this country’s dependence on fossil fuels. In nation’s economic future, President Obama listed energy, along with health care and education. During bush days, former President George W. Bush said that fighting climate change could only damage the American economy. It has been five weeks into Obama’s presidency, and he has signaled a readiness to regulate greenhouse gases from cars, trucks and new power plants, to require more fuel efficient vehicles and to invest heavily in energy efficiency. He is also regulating high speed rail and weatherizing homes and energy sources like wind and solar. $80 billion of Obama’s economic recovery package is devoted to all these purposes. President Obama said that China, Germany and Japan are doing better than we are and “He spoke of the profit to be gained by American industries and workers if the United States took the lead in investing in manufacturing wind turbines, more efficient solar panels and next-generation batteries” so we can be better than the other countries. It has been a long time since the world’s industrialized nations agreed in Japan to control global-warming emissions, and emissions continue to rise. President Obama is not just challenging the country but he is challenging history and we need to help him change the course of history.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/26/opinion/26thu1.html

Congress, White House agree on $790B stimulus bill

The congress and the white house agree on the 790 billion economic stimulus bill which is basically designed to create millions of jobs. In this bill, education is invested and more than 1/3 of the bill is dedicated to providing tax relief for middle-class families, cutting taxes for 95% of American workers. This agreement is suppose to save or create more than 3.5 million jobs and get our economy back on track. The tax cut for millions of lower and middle income taxpayers is a hundred dollars less for an individual and two hundred dollars less for a couple. Senator Joe Lieberman says, “The bill will be the beginning of the turnaround for the American economy.” the measure will include $46 billion for transportation projects such as highway, bridge and mass transit construction. $54 billion is going to the state stabilization fund to permit local governments to use some of the money for modernizing school buildings but not building new ones. The bill also includes $70 billion to shelter wealthier taxpayers from the alternative minimum tax. The congressional budget office estimates that provision will have relatively little impact on the economic. This article is worth reading because you will know what's happening in the world or around you.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090211/ap_on_go_co/congress_stimulus