Printable View
It is what's called a slow news cycle ... also, there all reportedly over a billion Catholics, so the media figures they have a big audience out there! Also, because the voting is done in secret, it leaves lots of room for rampant speculation!Quote:
Originally Posted by lizbud
THe selection of a new Pope has always been covered heavily in the media, mainly because they know they have a massive audience interested in the proceedings.
I want to know how much smoke they need for that chimney...and what the smoke is.:o:eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady's Human
At least it's better than coverage of murders and all the garbage that these newscasters dig up. I know my DIL in FL is glued to every tidbit of news about this election of the new pope - you'd think she had a direct connection to anything in the Catholic church. She's fanatical!! :rolleyes:
I personally would like to know what is so secret and hush-hush about the election process. I think the Catholic people deserve the right to know what goes on behind those closed and locked doors - afterall - it will directly impact their lives. I know the Vatican is just following age old traditions, but maybe they need to change a bit - just as the times have changed!
No - I'm not Catholic............
Quote:
Originally Posted by pomtzu
Everything about the running of the church is a secret. I am, or was, a Catholic. I will be eternally greatful for their school system, which is one of the
finest in this country, but I can't support the Catholic hierarchy response to the sex abuse scandals. They seem to put a priority on keeping the institution
intact instead of dealing with sexual perverts within the church who prey upon our children.
I don't understand that at all, and understand even less, the blind devotion of the many Catholics, to a church that seeks to sweep this issue under the rug, and protect the perpetrators.Quote:
Originally Posted by lizbud
Quote:
Originally Posted by pomtzu
There is a growing division within the Catholic church on this topic, among others, to drag the Church into the 20th century. Many others feel the need to speak out
and hope & pray for serious change within the church. ( I'm not at all hopeful that anything will change in my lifetime) This article offers a little insight from a Catholic
writer. http://www.thedailybeast.com/newswee...ic-church.html
I am not Catholic, but it makes me a little happy and hopeful that the new Pope chose to be the first Pope Francis, as Saint Francis of Assisi was not only a notorious friend to birds and animals, but a reformer of the church as well.
I know nothing about this guy, but that made me smile.
Some notes on the new Pope:
Quote:
His views While he is known for modernizing an Argentinian church considered to be among the most conservative in Latin America, he is also known for his strict views on morality -- having staunchly opposed same-sex marriage, contraception and abortion.
He has called adoption by gay parents a form of discrimination against children -- a stance that was publicly criticized by Argentinian President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner.
Still, Bergoglio has shown compassion for HIV and AIDS patients, visiting a hospice in 2001 to kiss and wash the feet of some of those affected by the disease.
He once accused his fellow church leaders of being hypocrites and lambasted them for forgetting that Jesus was known to bathe lepers and ate with prostitutes.
"Jesus teaches us another way: Go out. Go out and share your testimony, go out and interact with your brothers, go out and share, go out and ask. Become the word in body as well as spirit," he told priests in Argentina last year.
“This is a man who goes into the shantytowns and cooks with the people," said Gerard O’Connell, CTV Vatican specialist. "I think the world is going to discover a very new style of being pope."
Fast facts on Jorge Mario Bergoglio:
- Ordained as a priest in 1969
- Initially trained as a chemist
- Taught psychology, philosophy and theology
- Became Buenos Aires archbishop in 1998
- Became cardinal in 2001
- Lives in a small apartment rather than a palatial bishop
- Known to love the tango
- Often rode the bus to work and gave up his personal chauffeur
- Chose to sit in the back row of bishops' meetings
I heard on the news that the new Pope chose the name Francis after St. Francis of Assisi, who cared for animals. I didn't know St. Francis was a church reformer. I also heard on the news that he is the first Jesuit Pope -- I went to Loyola University of Chicago, which is a Jesuit Catholic school. I'm not Catholic, though. Does he go back to Argentina before he takes over -- does he get an opportunity to pack up his things and say farewell to the people he had been working with there? Or, does he become the Pope immediately and they a new cardinal takes his position in Argentina?Quote:
Originally Posted by Karen
Ah, a little ray of sunshine, in what has been a very politically dark & dreary Indiana Legislator Session. :)
http://www.theindychannel.com/news/l...pen-in-indiana
Have him test the Presidential waters!
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/...tial-politics/
Rep. Darrell Issa is headed to New Hampshire next month to deliver an address at a venue that has been a must-do appearance for presidential aspirants.
The Vista Republican and chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee will speak to a joint session of the Concord Republican City and Merrimack County committees annual Lincoln Day Dinner on Monday, Feb. 17.
Okay, just got an email asking me to sign the "People versus Carbon" petition! Hello? Hello? Anyone home? Um, we humans (and most life on earth) are partially made up of Carbon - did a quick Google, and we are about 18% Carbon - not really something we can be opposed to and live, anyway!
Really? That was what you took away from the petition? That if one opposes carbon, the human species dies? So, we need iron...OK to drop a ton of it in your yard/neighborhood and let it sit there?Quote:
Originally Posted by Karen
I think the petition speaks more to atmospheric carbon, pollution and the stricter monitoring of coal/oil production. The local coal plant here is shutting down half its operation, as it won't be able to financially work the re-structuring necessary to address the nasty pollution.
I knew they mean they oppose the burning of fossil fuels, and carbon emissions just thought the title of it was absurd! Glad for you your local coal plant is at least shutting down half its production/pollution, there are scrubbers, etc., that could be installed of course (Dad was a stationary engineer) but that does cost money to build and maintain ...Quote:
Originally Posted by Cataholic
And thanks, we have a bunch of iron here - cars, including mine park outside! ;) And of course, iron-y happens sometimes anyway! ;)
The output from the scrubbers is epa regulated, and it's no longer easily disposed of, which adds to the expense and complicates planning of implementing scrubber technology.
One question:
The elimination or restriction of coal use would eliminate 40% of the power currently used in the United States. Where are we going to make up the difference?
Solar and wind are weather dependent, and the backup batteries which would be required for grid redundancy with the heavy use of those technologies are REALLY environmentally nasty, both in production, which require massive amounts of strip mining, and use, as an industrial-sized battery would require some special provisions. In addition, the production of the generators for wind turbines also require massive amounts of strip mining.
Nuclear energy production has been hamstrung in the US by lawsuits and scare tactics, and the sole proposal for a workable nuclear waste storage site has been stuck in gridlock.
Natural gas production is being fought tooth and nail.
Where would you propose we acquire new energy sources?
What's wrong with this picture? Illinois gubernatorial candidate Bruce Rauner's daughter was admitted to Walter Payton College Prep, a Chicago selective admission high school, even though the family lives in the suburbs, specifically tony Winnetka. What's up with that? And then, when she was initially declined for admission and then accepted - using an as yet undisclosed Chicago address - the Rauner Family Foundation made a donation of $250,000 to the Payton Prep Initiative for Education. This doesn't look good. This is the same candidate who said he wanted to decrease the state minimum wage from $8.25 to $7.25 an hour to make Illinois more competitive with other states. That went over like a ton of bricks, so he quickly reversed his position on the minimum wage in Illinois and said it should be increased. Illinois politics are so weird.
So would that make the governor wannabe the Big Noise from Winnetka?
I think he would like to be the Big Noise from Winnetka. His campaign seemed to start out as "I'm a businessman, not a politician" but he's a lot more wealthy than the average businessman.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady's Human
I wonder what the Ukranian term for Anschluss is?
I once went to a meeting where the BIG boss was asked about hiring one person - a transporation aide - to push the patients to and from surgery....
The idiot answered, 'I want a porsche, but can't afford one - you will just have to do your job'.
Ever since then, whenever I hear someone in charge make a flip statement it really wrankles me arse...
-----------
Hokay, The idiot republicans want to 'sue' the president and the dems are laughing at them. Useless waste of resources?
So the prez is out and about doing speeches and whatever and he begins to mock this 'lawsuit', and rightly so.
But, instead of stopping there, he cracks a joke. He says, "You know who is going to pay for it......"
The crowd mumbles.....
"You are!"
All politics aside - just talking demeanor here - Does that mean he thinks it's funny that he is the head of an effed up system and being the target of this stupidity is a badge of honor? He carried on for another minute or two, but I didn't listen, I was trying to figure out who would brag about being the cause of some bureaucratic waste of time - then mock the people who were 'paying for it'....
We are governed by a bunch of idiots....No, Idiots would be insulted if they were lumped into this group of morons.....sheesh.
Just remember, at some point, WE the people voted for this lot of poltroons.
Why the ()@#)_( is the government allowing the introduction of vectors by bringing infected aid workers back into the country? The British had quarantine procedures worked out in the 1700s. They worked. they weren't compassionate, but they stopped the spread of disease. use them.
The reassurances from the CDC that there's no risk are hardly reassuring, as this is the same agency which in recent weeks has lost track of lab samples of bird flu, smallpox, and anthrax.
I'm with you on this, LH.
From the World Health Organization: "Ebola is introduced into the human population through close contact with the blood, secretions, organs or other bodily fluids of infected animals. In Africa, infection has been documented through the handling of infected chimpanzees, gorillas, fruit bats, monkeys, forest antelope and porcupines found ill or dead or in the rainforest.
Ebola then spreads in the community through human-to-human transmission, with infection resulting from direct contact (through broken skin or mucous membranes) with the blood, secretions, organs or other bodily fluids of infected people, and indirect contact with environments contaminated with such fluids. Burial ceremonies in which mourners have direct contact with the body of the deceased person can also play a role in the transmission of Ebola."
I'm not with you on this one, LH. I think bringing the doctor home for treatment under the close supervision of the CDC was the right thing to do. The level of ICU care he can get here cannot be matched in developing countries.
Close supervision of the CDC?
Again, they can't even maintain adequate procedures for handling virus cultures in their own labs. They shouldn't be trusted at the moment to contain an outbreak of chicken pox, much less control the spread of a hemorrhagic fever virus. There are other alternatives, such as setting up a closely monitored clinic in the affected areas to control the disease using strict contact protocols.....
Wait, never mind, that's how the aid workers were infected in the first place.
So, patient 0 has died, there are 80 or so possible close contacts being monitored, one has checked himself into the hospital for monitoring.
Still want to leave those borders open?
The family is blaming the U.S. for his death. HUH???? Yes - the hospital screwed up when he went in the first time, and they sent him home, but the family is complaining that he didn't get the same experimental drug that the other 2 patients that survived, received. There was no more of that particular drug to be had, so he was receiving a different one. Yeah - I guess they have to blame someone - right??? :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady's Human
I am sure they are right now acting out of grief and pain, and fear for their own lives. I do not count anything they say right now against them, frankly.Quote:
Originally Posted by pomtzu
They've named "reverend" Jackson as one of the family spokespeople. Racebaiting lawsuit in 3...2...1...Quote:
Originally Posted by Karen
Tragic story, the whole ebola situation is sad, and yes the hospital initially screwed up, but experimental drugs are, indeed experimental, and have nothing to do with the color of the individual's skin.
The media having a field day is the saddest thing of all. I refuse to watch any of the talking heads on this case!
Canadian politics nosing in here.
Our Prime Minister has a habit of offering "omnibus" bills to be passed. As you might guess, there is a lot of stuff in them, and there is often not enough time for opposition members to review everything before the vote. (If I recall correctly, these bills are not even debated!).
Because the Conservative Party has a majority in the House, the bill passes even if all the other parties vote against it.
In this latest omnibus bill is a change in copyright law. This means that any political party can take material out of context from Canadian broadcasters - TV, radio, etc - WITHOUT their permission to use in attack ads against other parties.
Can you tell we have a Federal election coming next year? Harper has to GO!
That's awful, doing away with copyright protection like that. Is this widely known to the Canadian public yet? Would there be any kind of public outcry against this happening? Would that be effective?
How do Harper and the gang justify that, or do they even bother to?
Ebola entering the US isn't sad, it's criminal dereliction of duty and failure to uphold the oath of office on the part of all Constitutional officers in D.C.Quote:
Originally Posted by Karen
So if I want to use a statement made on a news show by my opponent in the election, on a station which might be owned/operated by someone aligned with that opponent which might be run by my political opposition I have to essentially seek the approval of the opposition to use their statement?Quote:
Originally Posted by Catty1
This isn't a change in copyright law, it's common sense. You shouldn't need the approval of your opponent to quote them in a political campaign, as long as the quote is an actual quote.
LH, here's an article that explains it a bit better:
http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/conse...-ads-1.2046197
Conservatives to change copyright law, allowing free use of news content in political ads
http://www.ctvnews.ca/polopoly_fs/1...._620/image.jpghttp://player.9c9media.com/ETS_Unive...Icon_hover.png
CTV News: Unprecedented copyright law in Canada
The Conservative government plans to change Canada's copyright laws when it comes to political ads. Laurie Graham explains.
Power Play: Copyright law changes coming?
University of Ottawa professor Michael Geist says there are problems with the federal government's proposal to change copyright laws.
CTV News Channel: Path was paved in 1988
Copyright lawyer Howard Knopf says the pathway for the government’s proposed copyright law changes 'was paved by the Liberals back in 1988.'
123
Text:
CTVNews.ca Staff
Published Wednesday, October 8, 2014 10:00PM EDT
The Conservative government is planning to change Canada’s copyright law to allow political parties to use content published and broadcast by news organizations for free in their own political ads.
An internal Conservative cabinet document obtained by CTV News details an amendment to the Copyright Act which would allow “free use of ‘news’ content in political advertisement intended to promote or oppose a politician or political party.”
The amendment would also remove “the need for broadcasters to authorize the use of their news content.” And it would force media outlets to run political ads even if their own footage and content was used in a negative message to voters.
Related Stories
- Trudeau calls byelection attack ad 'misleading and, quite frankly, disgusting'
- More Conservative MPs say 'no' to anti-Trudeau attack ads
- Tory attack ads take aim at Trudeau hours after win
Photos
http://www.ctvnews.ca/polopoly_fs/1...._225/image.jpg
Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird speaks to media in the foyer of the House of Commons in Ottawa, Tuesday, Sept.16, 2014. (Sean Kilpatrick / THE CANADIAN PRESS)
http://www.ctvnews.ca/polopoly_fs/1...._225/image.jpg
The government is planning to change Canada's copyright rules so that political parties can use content from media organizations, for free, in their political ads.
The internal document warns that media outlets will vehemently claim their work is being unfairly targeted for the benefit of political parties. The document provides instructions to Conservatives to come up with a strong communication plan to manage the reaction.
The proposed legislation is buried in the latest instalment of the omnibus bill, which is sure to pass in the House of Commons, given the Conservative majority. The bill will be introduced in the coming weeks.
Opposition parties say sneaking in a change to the Copyright Act in the massive bill is “deceitful” and designed to give the Conservative campaign an edge ahead of next year’s federal election.
“Changing copyright law … to improve their odds of winning over the Canadian public as opposed to improving copyright law to improve the economy, let’s say, is disrespectful,” NDP finance critic Nathan Cullen told CTV News.
“And to bury it in the middle of an omnibus bill suggests that they knew this wouldn’t be popular.”
Cullen said using material gathered by journalists for attack-ad purposes without having to ask for news outlets’ permission is “disrespectful” and “shameful.”
“If I say something unflattering or if I do something that looks a little embarrassing, suddenly it’s a Conservative ad,” he said.
“They just don’t seem to have any ethical boundary at all. Anything goes, as long as it plays to their advantage.”
Deputy Liberal Leader Ralph Goodale accused the Conservatives of “choosing a very devious process” to bypass copyright rules that currently prevent them from using media outlets’ material.
“This is an attempt to take something that is clearly illegal at the moment…and to change the law so that the rules will now suit Conservative practices,” he said.
Goodale said the move would disadvantage news organizations and, “most seriously, it will blur the line between news and propaganda.”
Although the copyright amendment would allow all political parties to use news content, Cullen said the NDP is “guided by a different ethic” and does not want to produce attack ads or “smear campaigns.”
The Conservative Party has already been accused of lifting content from media organizations without permission, for use in attack ads against Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau.
Some media outlets teamed up and sent a letter to all political parties in May, warning them that use of their content without express authorization will not be tolerated.
Pollster Nik Nanos said the proposed copyright change will make it “very easy to quickly produce attack ads in order to turn things around.
“I think the Conservatives think they’re going to need to be very agile in the next election and quite negative in order to tear down the Liberal and the Trudeau brand. And what this does is provide them the opportunity to have that flexibility,” he said.
Nanos said it appears that Trudeau is “a much more elusive figure to run attack ads against,” so the Conservatives are trying to deploy “every resource they can.”
With a report from CTV’s Ottawa Deputy Bureau Chief Laurie Graham
I heard our government is now sending 5000 troops to Africa to help with the Ebola situation. It bothers me that we are sending all those healthy people over there to get exposed to that and bring more of it here!!:eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady's Human
Again, when fighting an infectious disease, step one of the field hygiene manual calls for the elimination of vectors.
We're bringing new vectors into the situation.
Those soldiers, sailors and marines are going to have to be quarantined for 21 days after exposure. Hopefully none of them come down with Ebola, but hope in one hand...
We're killing people on the altar of political correctness and feeling good. Quarantine, limit (preferably eliminate) travel in the affected areas, and for goodness sake, no more damned commercial flights out of the hot zone. (It's too late for all that, however, the horse has left the barn)
Maybe put them all on a slow boat back to the States?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady's Human
Yeah, it is unconscionable that there have been no limits to flight out of the three most affected nations, and if you think you are going to get sick, well, then you probably want to get "somewhere better" and then end up spreading the disease.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady's Human
I still think, though, it was plain ignorance that led the Spanish officials to kill that nurse's dog. That that woman got trend away and sent home from three different hospitals, makes Eric Duncan's case look like it was expertly handled!
Did that woman for sure have that virus? If not they killed for nothing ! If she did, that does not mean the dog would get it. They missed an opportunity to see if the virus could be transmitted by animals by not quarantining the dog and seeing if it got sick if the owner did in fact have it. What now, will all animals by owners thay MAY have the virus be slaughtered?Quote:
Originally Posted by Karen