So you think you know the Constitution..lol
http://www.constitutionfacts.com/?page=quiz.cfm
“The Constitution, on this hypothesis, is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the Judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they please.”
— Thomas Jefferson
hmm TJ had his visionary glasses on that day
http://www.constitutionfacts.com/?section=constitution&page=readTheConstitution.cfm
and I QUOTE..
POWER FORBIDDEN TO CONGRESS
Section 9. [1] The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.
[2] The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.
[3] No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
[4] No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken. (Note: See the Sixteenth Amendment.)
[5] No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.
[6] No Preference shall be given by any Regulation of Commerce or Revenue to the Ports of one State over those of another: nor shall Vessels bound to, or from, one State, be obliged to enter, clear, or pay Duties in another.
[7] No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.
[8] No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.
Section 10. [1] No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.
[2] No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing its inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.
[3] No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.
Friday, September 17, 2010
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
Monroe Doctrine Review by James Monroe
James Monroe's seventh annual message to Congress on December 2, 1823. The European powers, according to Monroe, were obligated to respect the Western Hemisphere as the United States' sphere of interest.
President James Monroe’s 1823 annual message to Congress contained the Monroe Doctrine, which warned European powers not to interfere in the affairs of the Western Hemisphere.
Understandably, the United States has always taken a particular interest in its closest neighbors – the nations of the Western Hemisphere. Equally understandably, expressions of this concern have not always been favorably regarded by other American nations.
The Monroe Doctrine is the best known U.S. policy toward the Western Hemisphere. Buried in a routine annual message delivered to Congress by President James Monroe in December 1823, the doctrine warns European nations that the United States would not tolerate further colonization or puppet monarchs. The doctrine was conceived to meet major concerns of the moment, but it soon became a watchword of U.S. policy in the Western Hemisphere.
The Monroe Doctrine was invoked in 1865 when the U.S. government exerted diplomatic and military pressure in support of the Mexican President Benito Juárez. This support enabled Juárez to lead a successful revolt against the Emperor Maximilian, who had been placed on the throne by the French government.
Almost 40 years later, in 1904, European creditors of a number of Latin American countries threatened armed intervention to collect debts. President Theodore Roosevelt promptly proclaimed the right of the United States to exercise an “international police power” to curb such “chronic wrongdoing.” As a result, U. S. Marines were sent into Santo Domingo in 1904, Nicaragua in 1911, and Haiti in 1915, ostensibly to keep the Europeans out. Other Latin American nations viewed these interventions with misgiving, and relations between the “great Colossus of the North” and its southern neighbors remained strained for many years.
In 1962, the Monroe Doctrine was invoked symbolically when the Soviet Union began to build missile-launching sites in Cuba. With the support of the Organization of American States, President John F. Kennedy threw a naval and air quarantine around the island. After several tense days, the Soviet Union agreed to withdraw the missiles and dismantle the sites. Subsequently, the United States dismantled several of its obsolete air and missile bases in Turkey.
(Information excerpted from Milestone Documents [Washington, DC: The National Archives and Records Administration, 1995] pp. 26–29.)
recently brought to my attention.. history fans..
President James Monroe’s 1823 annual message to Congress contained the Monroe Doctrine, which warned European powers not to interfere in the affairs of the Western Hemisphere.
Understandably, the United States has always taken a particular interest in its closest neighbors – the nations of the Western Hemisphere. Equally understandably, expressions of this concern have not always been favorably regarded by other American nations.
The Monroe Doctrine is the best known U.S. policy toward the Western Hemisphere. Buried in a routine annual message delivered to Congress by President James Monroe in December 1823, the doctrine warns European nations that the United States would not tolerate further colonization or puppet monarchs. The doctrine was conceived to meet major concerns of the moment, but it soon became a watchword of U.S. policy in the Western Hemisphere.
The Monroe Doctrine was invoked in 1865 when the U.S. government exerted diplomatic and military pressure in support of the Mexican President Benito Juárez. This support enabled Juárez to lead a successful revolt against the Emperor Maximilian, who had been placed on the throne by the French government.
Almost 40 years later, in 1904, European creditors of a number of Latin American countries threatened armed intervention to collect debts. President Theodore Roosevelt promptly proclaimed the right of the United States to exercise an “international police power” to curb such “chronic wrongdoing.” As a result, U. S. Marines were sent into Santo Domingo in 1904, Nicaragua in 1911, and Haiti in 1915, ostensibly to keep the Europeans out. Other Latin American nations viewed these interventions with misgiving, and relations between the “great Colossus of the North” and its southern neighbors remained strained for many years.
In 1962, the Monroe Doctrine was invoked symbolically when the Soviet Union began to build missile-launching sites in Cuba. With the support of the Organization of American States, President John F. Kennedy threw a naval and air quarantine around the island. After several tense days, the Soviet Union agreed to withdraw the missiles and dismantle the sites. Subsequently, the United States dismantled several of its obsolete air and missile bases in Turkey.
(Information excerpted from Milestone Documents [Washington, DC: The National Archives and Records Administration, 1995] pp. 26–29.)
recently brought to my attention.. history fans..
Saturday, August 21, 2010
George Allen address the National Jewish Retreat this week
George Allen.. excerpts..
http://www.georgeallen.com/speeches?ContentRecord_id=9f9dc4c7-7cac-41dd-85ea-a0f3277fd530
My Political Philosophy was mostly guided by Gov. Ronald Reagan, who came to LA Rams practices. Then, at UVA studying Thomas Jefferson’s Statute of Religious Freedom and the Declaration of Independence. For me, Mr. Jefferson, in his 1801 Inaugural Address, best defined the Sum of Good Government as:
“…A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned.”
In my book “What Washington Can Learn from the World of Sports”, I write “No One Pays to See Officials Officiate”.
Prior to that day, the Jewish aspect made no sense because there was never any discernable reason to think my mother’s parents, my grandparents – the Lumbrosos or Garcin, my grandmother – were of the Jewish faith. I knew my father was raised Catholic and we all were raised as Presbyterians-Protestants.
I then followed up and asked if any of her family way back were of the Jewish religious faith? I asked my mother about the possible Portuguese and Jewish roots, I simply said “is there anything to this, many centuries ago?”
After this last of my innocent, cross-examination questions in between spoons of cereal, my mother very seriously told me that she would tell me “something” but only if I swore not to tell anyone. No one. I replied “okay”. She insisted that I “swear” on Popop’s head that I tell no one. Popop was the nickname for my grandfather and “swearing on Popop’s head” was code for deadly serious Top Secret. I said “yes, okay. I Swear on Popop’s head that I won’t tell anyone. What is it?”
My mother then haltingly told me that “Popop was Jewish.”
I was surprised. Mostly thinking why all these years this was kept a secret and this was a fascinating discovery. I thought there must be a good way to share this newly discovered aspect with others. I thought it to be interestingly positive. My first audible response to my mother was “why didn’t you ever tell us?” and “amazing, people need to know this.”
http://www.georgeallen.com/speeches?ContentRecord_id=9f9dc4c7-7cac-41dd-85ea-a0f3277fd530
My Political Philosophy was mostly guided by Gov. Ronald Reagan, who came to LA Rams practices. Then, at UVA studying Thomas Jefferson’s Statute of Religious Freedom and the Declaration of Independence. For me, Mr. Jefferson, in his 1801 Inaugural Address, best defined the Sum of Good Government as:
“…A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned.”
In my book “What Washington Can Learn from the World of Sports”, I write “No One Pays to See Officials Officiate”.
Prior to that day, the Jewish aspect made no sense because there was never any discernable reason to think my mother’s parents, my grandparents – the Lumbrosos or Garcin, my grandmother – were of the Jewish faith. I knew my father was raised Catholic and we all were raised as Presbyterians-Protestants.
I then followed up and asked if any of her family way back were of the Jewish religious faith? I asked my mother about the possible Portuguese and Jewish roots, I simply said “is there anything to this, many centuries ago?”
After this last of my innocent, cross-examination questions in between spoons of cereal, my mother very seriously told me that she would tell me “something” but only if I swore not to tell anyone. No one. I replied “okay”. She insisted that I “swear” on Popop’s head that I tell no one. Popop was the nickname for my grandfather and “swearing on Popop’s head” was code for deadly serious Top Secret. I said “yes, okay. I Swear on Popop’s head that I won’t tell anyone. What is it?”
My mother then haltingly told me that “Popop was Jewish.”
I was surprised. Mostly thinking why all these years this was kept a secret and this was a fascinating discovery. I thought there must be a good way to share this newly discovered aspect with others. I thought it to be interestingly positive. My first audible response to my mother was “why didn’t you ever tell us?” and “amazing, people need to know this.”
Friday, August 13, 2010
Georgetown University Pathology Lab closed; Breast Cancer Testing HER 2
http://www.darkdaily.com/?s=HER2
Last Friday, The Washington Post broke the news that Georgetown University Hospital (GUH) had closed the pathology laboratory that performed certain breast cancer tests. The action—described as an “unprecedented” suspension by GUH Chief Medical Officer Stephen Evans, M.D.—was taken in response to an investigation of the pathology laboratory by federal officials.
The closure of the laboratory followed an inspection on July 19, 2010 by officials from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and inspectors from the College of American Pathologists (CAP). Hospital officials say the molecular testing laboratory in question will be closed as long as four to eight weeks. During this time, specimens are being referred to outside laboratory testing sources.
The events described by the Post indicate that allegedly improper testing of breast cancer patients for HER2 took place during an 11-month period, beginning in May 2009. Georgetown University Hospital has confirmed issues with breast cancer testing and it is known that the tissues of 249 women have been retested by independent labs.
Post reporters Lena H. Sun and Carol D. Leonnig wrote that “the [GUH] lab received failing results from a quality-control assessment of its HER2 testing in January 2010, and in the following weeks an employee asked supervisors to notify patients and recommend retesting. In an April complaint to hospital administrators, she alleged that nothing had happened, according to a federal official and Georgetown staff. The tests were outsourced later that month, and the two women’s physicians were notified of the new, positive findings in the past two weeks as federal regulators began their inspection of the lab.”
According the timeline of events presented by The Washington Post, an employee of the pathology laboratory, upon learning about the failing results of the quality control testing done in January 2010, had asked supervisors to notify patients possibly affected by the findings and recommend retesting.
The matter didn’t end there. Reporters Sun and Leonnig described the situation, writing that “The employee, whose name has not been released, hired a lawyer, who brought her complaint to top hospital officials in April, a federal official and Georgetown staff said. The employee alleged that the lab director, Dan Hartmann, and other supervisors had rejected her suggestion in March that patients be alerted to the problem or their samples retested.”
Dan Hartmann, Ph.D., is identified on the Georgetown University web site as Professor in the Department of Pathology and Scientific Director of the Molecular Diagnostic Laboratory.
Apparently, unsatisfied with the response by hospital administration to the April complaint, Debra Katz, the attorney for the laboratory staff member, filed a formal complaint to CMS early in July. A copy of the complaint was also sent to the College of American Pathologists. Both organizations then began investigations into the matter. The Washington Post reported that a federal official had said that the complaint “expressed concern that Georgetown was taking a long time to do the retesting and was not sharing the problem with patients.”
The Post wrote that, “In interviews this week, Evans said the hospital learned early this year that lab staff members were not using proper temperature, timing, and tissue-embedding methods in processing samples. That caused the lab to fail the quality-control test for HER2, he said. The lab corrected its procedures, he said.”
For its part, Georgetown University Hospital has vigorously asserted that it wants its “policies and procedures to impeccable,” and that the laboratory “passed two subsequent quality control tests, voluntarily performed retesting that showed a high accuracy rate and is sending other work to outside labs.” For corrective action, “the hospital is increasing the number of quality control workers at the lab,” among other steps.
As to the patients possibly affected by these issues, Georgetown provided some information. The Post said that, around the time of the July 19 visit by CMS officials and CAP inspectors, Georgetown University Hospital “began alerting the physicians of patients whose tests came back positive for HER2 breast cancer. After two rounds of outside retesting, six patients were found positive, and their physicians were notified. Four of those had separately received other independent negative results. In the end, Georgetown said, only two patients were misdiagnosed.”
For pathologists and clinical laboratory managers, the events unfolding at the pathology laboratory department at Georgetown University Hospital are both a reminder and a warning. Setting aside the issues relating to laboratory testing quality and integrity, this situation has many hallmarks of the classic whistleblower case.
Was this laboratory staff member correctly requesting a necessary response to valid concerns about lab test accuracy and quality that might affect the diagnoses and treatment decisions of those patients affected by the breast cancer tests in question? It seems the action to suspend testing at the Georgetown molecular diagnostics laboratory in July would indicate that the basic issues triggered by this employee’s request to her supervisor earlier this year had some merit.
Thus, it would be timely for pathologists and clinical laboratory managers to review the policies and procedures in place at their respective laboratories to ensure that employees who call attention to situations of lab testing accuracy or quality are handled responsibly, ethically, and to the best interests of the patients whose specimens were tested.
Improper Genetic Testing and Delayed Corrections Lead to Shut Down at Georgetown
Dark Daily recent news coverage on HER2
WOW ,, good for the lab employee, hope they have a job .. and retain his/her attorney
I am not surprised at all...
as a Med Tech and oncology tech,, Good for them,, I am sure Georgetown will fix this.. should have never happened however.
Last Friday, The Washington Post broke the news that Georgetown University Hospital (GUH) had closed the pathology laboratory that performed certain breast cancer tests. The action—described as an “unprecedented” suspension by GUH Chief Medical Officer Stephen Evans, M.D.—was taken in response to an investigation of the pathology laboratory by federal officials.
The closure of the laboratory followed an inspection on July 19, 2010 by officials from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and inspectors from the College of American Pathologists (CAP). Hospital officials say the molecular testing laboratory in question will be closed as long as four to eight weeks. During this time, specimens are being referred to outside laboratory testing sources.
The events described by the Post indicate that allegedly improper testing of breast cancer patients for HER2 took place during an 11-month period, beginning in May 2009. Georgetown University Hospital has confirmed issues with breast cancer testing and it is known that the tissues of 249 women have been retested by independent labs.
Post reporters Lena H. Sun and Carol D. Leonnig wrote that “the [GUH] lab received failing results from a quality-control assessment of its HER2 testing in January 2010, and in the following weeks an employee asked supervisors to notify patients and recommend retesting. In an April complaint to hospital administrators, she alleged that nothing had happened, according to a federal official and Georgetown staff. The tests were outsourced later that month, and the two women’s physicians were notified of the new, positive findings in the past two weeks as federal regulators began their inspection of the lab.”
According the timeline of events presented by The Washington Post, an employee of the pathology laboratory, upon learning about the failing results of the quality control testing done in January 2010, had asked supervisors to notify patients possibly affected by the findings and recommend retesting.
The matter didn’t end there. Reporters Sun and Leonnig described the situation, writing that “The employee, whose name has not been released, hired a lawyer, who brought her complaint to top hospital officials in April, a federal official and Georgetown staff said. The employee alleged that the lab director, Dan Hartmann, and other supervisors had rejected her suggestion in March that patients be alerted to the problem or their samples retested.”
Dan Hartmann, Ph.D., is identified on the Georgetown University web site as Professor in the Department of Pathology and Scientific Director of the Molecular Diagnostic Laboratory.
Apparently, unsatisfied with the response by hospital administration to the April complaint, Debra Katz, the attorney for the laboratory staff member, filed a formal complaint to CMS early in July. A copy of the complaint was also sent to the College of American Pathologists. Both organizations then began investigations into the matter. The Washington Post reported that a federal official had said that the complaint “expressed concern that Georgetown was taking a long time to do the retesting and was not sharing the problem with patients.”
The Post wrote that, “In interviews this week, Evans said the hospital learned early this year that lab staff members were not using proper temperature, timing, and tissue-embedding methods in processing samples. That caused the lab to fail the quality-control test for HER2, he said. The lab corrected its procedures, he said.”
For its part, Georgetown University Hospital has vigorously asserted that it wants its “policies and procedures to impeccable,” and that the laboratory “passed two subsequent quality control tests, voluntarily performed retesting that showed a high accuracy rate and is sending other work to outside labs.” For corrective action, “the hospital is increasing the number of quality control workers at the lab,” among other steps.
As to the patients possibly affected by these issues, Georgetown provided some information. The Post said that, around the time of the July 19 visit by CMS officials and CAP inspectors, Georgetown University Hospital “began alerting the physicians of patients whose tests came back positive for HER2 breast cancer. After two rounds of outside retesting, six patients were found positive, and their physicians were notified. Four of those had separately received other independent negative results. In the end, Georgetown said, only two patients were misdiagnosed.”
For pathologists and clinical laboratory managers, the events unfolding at the pathology laboratory department at Georgetown University Hospital are both a reminder and a warning. Setting aside the issues relating to laboratory testing quality and integrity, this situation has many hallmarks of the classic whistleblower case.
Was this laboratory staff member correctly requesting a necessary response to valid concerns about lab test accuracy and quality that might affect the diagnoses and treatment decisions of those patients affected by the breast cancer tests in question? It seems the action to suspend testing at the Georgetown molecular diagnostics laboratory in July would indicate that the basic issues triggered by this employee’s request to her supervisor earlier this year had some merit.
Thus, it would be timely for pathologists and clinical laboratory managers to review the policies and procedures in place at their respective laboratories to ensure that employees who call attention to situations of lab testing accuracy or quality are handled responsibly, ethically, and to the best interests of the patients whose specimens were tested.
Improper Genetic Testing and Delayed Corrections Lead to Shut Down at Georgetown
Dark Daily recent news coverage on HER2
WOW ,, good for the lab employee, hope they have a job .. and retain his/her attorney
I am not surprised at all...
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
John Kerry snaps about Isabel... his yacht
I couldn't help it,, when I saw that
http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/john-kerry-yacht-sales-tax-rhode-island/2010/07/27/id/365777?s=al&promo_code=A5D4-1
Top News
Sen. John Kerry on Monday snapped at reporters and tried to dodge questions about his new $7 million, 76-foot yacht.
On Friday, the Boston Herald reported that the Massachusetts Democrat had berthed his yacht Isabel in Rhode Island and suggested he was seeking to avoid paying about taxes..
What? Avoid paying taxes.. now who would want to do that?. LOL
Article says Rhode Island does not charge sales taxes on yachts.. unlike Massachusetts..
I have mixed feelings about this because,, I actually agree with John Kerry, why in the world
would anyone want to give away 70K ,, yes 70k in taxes? ....
so there ya go....not a limosine liberal afterall.. proof positive
http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/john-kerry-yacht-sales-tax-rhode-island/2010/07/27/id/365777?s=al&promo_code=A5D4-1
Top News
Sen. John Kerry on Monday snapped at reporters and tried to dodge questions about his new $7 million, 76-foot yacht.
On Friday, the Boston Herald reported that the Massachusetts Democrat had berthed his yacht Isabel in Rhode Island and suggested he was seeking to avoid paying about taxes..
What? Avoid paying taxes.. now who would want to do that?. LOL
Article says Rhode Island does not charge sales taxes on yachts.. unlike Massachusetts..
I have mixed feelings about this because,, I actually agree with John Kerry, why in the world
would anyone want to give away 70K ,, yes 70k in taxes? ....
so there ya go....not a limosine liberal afterall.. proof positive
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
