Obama Care: Jul 17, 2013

Wednesday, July 17, 2013

Presidential Proclamation -- World Autism Awareness Day, 2013

Presidential Proclamation -- World Autism Awareness Day, 2013 | The White House Skip to main content | Skip to footer site map The White House. President Barack Obama Get Email Updates Contact Us Go to homepage. The White House Blog Photos & Videos Photo Galleries Video Performances Live Streams Podcasts 2012: A Year in Photos

A unique view of 2012

Briefing Room Your Weekly Address Speeches & Remarks Press Briefings Statements & Releases White House Schedule Presidential Actions Executive Orders Presidential Memoranda Proclamations Legislation Pending Legislation Signed Legislation Vetoed Legislation Nominations & Appointments Disclosures Visitor Access Records Financial Disclosures 2012 Annual Report to Congress 2011 Annual Report to Congress 2010 Annual Report to Congress on White House Staff A Commitment to Transparency

Browse White House visitor logs

Issues Civil Rights It Gets Better Defense End of Iraq War Disabilities Economy Jobs Reform and Fiscal Responsibility Strengthening the Middle Class A Plan for Refinancing Support for Business Education Energy & Environment Ethics Foreign Policy Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Taxes Tax Receipt The Buffett Rule Rural Urban Policy Veterans Joining Forces Technology Seniors & Social Security Service Snapshots Creating Jobs Health Care Small Business PreK-12 Education Women Violence Prevention Now Is The Time

To do something about gun violence

Immigration Reform

Creating an Immigration System for the 21st Century

The Administration We the People

Create and Sign Petitions Now

President Barack Obama Vice President Joe Biden Being Biden Audio Series First Lady Michelle Obama Dr. Jill Biden The Cabinet White House Staff Chief of Staff Denis McDonough Deputy Chief of Staff Rob Nabors Deputy Chief of Staff Alyssa Mastromonaco Counselor to the President Peter Rouse Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett Executive Office of the President Other Advisory Boards About the White House White House On the Go

Download our mobile apps

Take A Virtual Tour

View the Residence, East Wing and West Wing

Inside the White House Interactive Tour West Wing Tour Video Series Décor and Art Holidays Presidents First Ladies The Oval Office The Vice President's Residence & Office Eisenhower Executive Office Building Camp David Air Force One White House Fellows President’s Commission About the Fellowship Current Class Staff Bios News and Newsletters White House Internships About Program Presidential Department Descriptions Selection Process Internship Timeline & FAQs Tours & Events 2013 Easter Egg Roll Kitchen Garden Tours Take a Virtual Tour of the White House Mobile Apps Our Government The Executive Branch The Legislative Branch The Judicial Branch The Constitution Federal Agencies & Commissions Elections & Voting State & Local Government Resources /* Maximize height of menu features. */if(typeof(jQuery)!='undefined')jQuery.each($('#topnav'),function(i,v){var o=$(v),oh=o.height(),sh=o.siblings().height();if(oh Home • Briefing Room • Presidential Actions • Proclamations The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release April 01, 2013 Presidential Proclamation -- World Autism Awareness Day, 2013 WORLD AUTISM AWARENESS DAY, 2013

- - - - - - -

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

A PROCLAMATION

Today, public health officials estimate that 1 in every 88 children in America is growing up on the autism spectrum. It is a reality that affects millions of families every day, from the classroom to the job market. And while our country has made progress in supporting Americans with autism spectrum disorders (ASDs), we are only beginning to understand the factors behind the challenges they face. On World Autism Awareness Day, we recommit to helping individuals on the autism spectrum reach their full potential.

To achieve that goal, we need a health care system that works for children and adults with ASDs. The Affordable Care Act prevents insurers from denying coverage to children on the autism spectrum, and it ensures new health plans must cover autism screenings at no cost to parents. Beginning in 2014, the Act will make it illegal for insurance companies to discriminate against men and women with preexisting conditions, including ASDs. And looking ahead, my Administration is investing in medical research that can help unlock tomorrow's breakthroughs in autism detection, intervention, and education.

Leveling the playing field for Americans on the autism spectrum also takes commitment in our schools. That is why we are advancing initiatives to help students with ASDs get a good education free from discrimination and undue hardship. And it is why we are making sure that education can lead to meaningful employment by supporting vocational rehabilitation programs and opening higher education to more people on the autism spectrum.

All Americans should have the chance to live full, independent lives and follow their talents wherever they lead. This month, we recognize Americans with ASDs who are walking through doors of opportunity, and we recommit to opening them wider in the years ahead.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim April 2, 2013, as World Autism Awareness Day. I encourage all Americans to learn more about autism and what they can do to support individuals on the autism spectrum and their families.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this first day of April, in the year of our Lord two thousand thirteen, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-seventh.

BARACK OBAMA

Blog posts on this issue April 02, 2013 10:39 AM EDTOpen for Questions: The BRAIN Initiative

Have questions about the BRAIN (Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies) Initiative? Administration officials will answer during a session of "Open for Questions."

April 02, 2013 10:15 AM EDTBRAIN Initiative Challenges Researchers to Unlock Mysteries of Human Mind

President Obama unveils the “BRAIN” Initiative—a bold new research effort to revolutionize our understanding of the human mind and uncover new ways to treat, prevent, and cure brain disorders like Alzheimer’s, schizophrenia, autism, epilepsy, and traumatic brain injury.

April 01, 2013 6:44 PM EDTBe Healthy, Be Active, Be You: The 2013 White House Easter Egg Roll

The First Family hosted more than 30,000 visitors for the 135th annual Egg Roll, the largest public event held at the White House each year.

En español Accessibility Copyright Information Privacy Policy Contact USA.gov Developers Apply for a Job

View the original article here

User:Rafael

I believe Conservapedia can become a significant online resource for everyone. It has already changed my thinking about science and, in particular, has helped me to understand why evolutionism is wrong.

Although I am not a conservative in the US sense, I am shifting that way and I believe the Truth is the Truth is the Truth and everything else is interpretation. There is far too much interpretation on the web and this site can help to correct the balance.

At the moment, I am mainly factchecking in my areas of knowledge: literature, Europe and European history and politics.

I am very busy with my day jobs at the moment, but hope to contribute detailed entries soon.

I am based in the UK.

God bless.

View the original article here

New-look Sarepta eyes approval for muscular dystrophy drug

* Under new CEO, Sarepta focused on Duchenne muscular dystrophy drug

* Strong mid-stage trial more than doubles company's value

* Investors hope for fast-track approval; some analysts cautious

* Analysts expect company to relay FDA feedback in April

April 2 (Reuters) - After three decades without bringing a drug to market, Sarepta Therapeutics Inc stands on the verge of a breakthrough with its treatment for a crippling genetic disorder that affects one in every 3,500 newborn boys.

If U.S. regulators fast-track approval of its treatment for Duchenne muscular dystrophy, as some investors are betting, it would complete a remarkable turnaround for the company that began life as AVI Biopharma in Corvallis, Oregon, 33 years ago.

Sarepta's stock has more than doubled in value since October, when its drug, eteplirsen, yielded positive results in a mid-stage trial. The company has a market capitalization of $1.1 billion.

Duchenne muscular dystrophy, or DMD, is classed as an orphan disease -- a condition affecting fewer than 200,000 people. More than a quarter of the 39 new medicines approved in the United States last year were designated for such diseases.

It's an area that has grabbed the attention of drug developers in search of a unique product that can command a high price. There are no approved treatments for DMD.

"Sarepta has the product and development platform necessary to join the ranks of other successful companies that target rare diseases," William Blair & Co analysts said last month as they launched coverage with an "outperform" rating on the stock.

The company also has renewed focus, analysts say -- something that Chief Executive Chris Garabedian says was missing when he took over on Jan. 1, 2011.

"At that time, the company's potential was under-appreciated, because we didn't have robust clinical data in any disease area and our business lacked focus," he told Reuters.

Garabedian, formerly vice-president of corporate strategy at Celgene Corp, arrived at Sarepta - then AVI - following a management shake-up led by private investor George Haywood and Meldrum Asset Management. The name-change followed in July 2012.

"The change is night and day, frankly," Haywood, referring to the company before and after the management changes, said by telephone.

Haywood, who holds a bachelor's degree in biology from Harvard University, began investing in AVI in the early 2000s. He was the biggest single shareholder by 2005; his most recent filing, dated Dec. 31, 2011, discloses a 3.8 percent stake.

Meldrum Asset Management owned 4.9 pct as of Dec. 31, 2011.

"There are a lot of great technologies around, but some of them don't develop because you don't have the right management that can identify areas to focus on, like Chris identified DMD," Haywood said.

Sarepta's Nasdaq-listed shares closed at $35.79 on Monday, eight times the value of AVI's stock at the start of 2012 and up 139 percent since Oct. 2, the day before the company reported that eteplirsen had significantly improved the walking ability of patients in the trial.

Nine of the 10 brokerages tracked by Thomson Reuters StarMine recommend buying Sarepta stock. Their mean price target is $42; five of the analysts rate the company a "strong buy".

The one analyst who has a "sell" rating -- Steve Brozak of WBB Securities -- pointed out that the mid-stage trial responsible for the recent stock bump was conducted on just 12 patients.

Company officials met with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration last month, and analysts said the company probably asked that eteplirsen's approval be accelerated.

Its case is bolstered by support from such nonprofits as Parent Project Muscular Dystrophy, CureDuchenne, Action Duchenne and the Muscular Dystrophy Association.

"GREAT PROMISE"

DMD usually appears in infancy and leads to severe muscle loss and eventual death.

It is caused by the body's inability to produce a key protein called dystrophin, which helps in building muscles. To date, the disease has been treated by using corticosteroids -- a man-made replica of the cortisol hormone -- to slow progression.

This treatment, however, comes with side-effects such as weight gain, growth retardation, glucose intolerance, said Dr. Valerie Cwik, director of the Tucson, Arizona-based Muscular Dystrophy Association.

The gene responsible for producing dystrophin contains a series of 79 sections, called exons. When one or more of these exons are absent, the entire chain is disrupted and the body is unable to produce the muscle-building protein.

Eteplirsen is designed specifically for DMD patients whose 51st exon is absent. It helps the body to skip this particular exon so that dystrophin can continue to be produced.

"Eteplirsen not only treats one of the underlying causes of the disease, but also helps produce dystrophin and appears to be very safe," said Cwik, who has treated DMD patients for 15 years.

Christopher Marai, a San Francisco-based analyst at Wedbush Securities, estimated the annual price of a course of eteplirsen therapy at between $350,000 and $400,000.

"It's probably a $400 million to $600 million drug, conservatively," he said in estimating the annual contribution of eteplirsen sales to Sarepta's revenue.

Accelerated approval is not a foregone conclusion. The company, headquartered these days in Cambridge, Massachusetts, is expected to release details of the FDA's guidance this month.

Dr. Ravindra Singh, professor of RNA Biology & Molecular Genetics at Iowa State University, said the study had shown that the drug holds "great promise", but that its effectiveness in larger studies has yet to be tested.

Improvement during the 12-patient study was measured by a test called the six-minute walk that checked each patient's cardiac, respiratory, circulatory and muscular capacity.

Jeffrey Spaeder, chief medical and scientific officer at Quintiles, the largest U.S. pharmaceutical outsourcing services firm, said smaller clinical studies for rare diseases were sometimes accepted by the FDA as fewer patients are available.

Some analysts -- including Deutsche Bank, which began coverage of Sarepta with a "buy" rating last month -- have said they believe the company is unlikely to get accelerated approval. Mid-2015 is more realistic, Deutsche analysts said.

"Sarepta is highly controversial because so much investor attention is focused on accelerated approval," the analysts wrote in a note. "Fundamentally, timing of approval does not matter ... but we do expect volatility around this decision."

Liisa Bayko, director and senior analyst for biotechnology equities research at JMP Securities, said Sarepta's stock would probably fall if the FDA does not grant accelerated approval.

"But I think there are many investors who are willing to invest in the company," she said. "There is a lot of support for the technology in the investment community."

View the original article here

User talk:Markman

(Difference between revisions)

Welcome!

Hello, --Jpatt 10:00, 19 October 2011 (EDT), and welcome to Conservapedia!

We're glad you are here to edit. We ask that you read our Editor's Guide before you edit.

At the right are some useful links for you. You can include these links on your user page by putting "{{Useful links}}" on the page. Any questions--ask!

Thanks for reading, --Jpatt 10:00, 19 October 2011 (EDT)!

if (window.showTocToggle) { var tocShowText = "show"; var tocHideText = "hide"; showTocToggle(); }

Congratulations, your account has been promoted such that you can now block other accounts!--Andy Schlafly 16:41, 7 November 2011 (EST)

Great block and reverts this morning.--Andy Schlafly 09:33, 8 November 2011 (EST)

I don't think that's a good example of a block, sorry, and changed it to 3 days. They were using the Talk pages. They were providing sources. I think this shows a need for warning, not permanent blocking. They shouldn't have re-added material removed by Aschlafly but I don't think that's cause for a permablock. Some of their edits show they believe in Christianity. --Jzyehoshua 20:04, 23 July 2012 (EDT)

I'd originally changed it to 10 minutes, because I'd just glanced at the Diff and not seen any blatant vandalism. But when I checked the page history, I realized he'd re-added material reverted by the site's founder, pretty serious, so that's why I changed it to 3 days. I've explained it to him at his talk page. I still think it was an honest mistake made by a newbie, not intentional vandalism. Intentional vandals wouldn't go to that much trouble with serious writing and attempted sources. I think he probably spent time writing it, saw it reverted, and thought he could re-add it and discuss it, not realizing who had removed it. I'd like to see him get another chance. --Jzyehoshua 20:33, 23 July 2012 (EDT)

I was wondering what AlanA was blocked for. According to Conservapedia's Guidelines, "Unlike Wikipedia, we do not block for ideological reasons. Warnings are appropriate, not for obscenity, vandalism or parody (Which are block-able offenses without warning.), but for silliness and other problems. In rare cases, our approach to repeated ideological conflict is to lock the page, and then allow the Administrator Group to make changes on a manual basis based upon submitted suggestions on the Talk page."

So if AlanA was blocked for an ideological comment, questioning whether Gallup results are critical of religion, then isn't that contrary to guidelines? And if we are allowed to block based on ideological reasons, shouldn't the guidelines be updated so people at least know what to expect? --Jzyehoshua 12:12, 24 July 2012 (EDT)

I just don't know if it sends that good a message to respond to such a comment by banning and preventing conversation. I disagree with his comment, but I think the right approach is to discuss it so long as he remains courteous and honest in the discusssion. --Jzyehoshua 12:14, 24 July 2012 (EDT) The atheistic Britons comment was vandalism I suppose though, so that might be worthy of a block. I hadn't noticed that one as much before. --Jzyehoshua 12:18, 24 July 2012 (EDT)

Okay, what is with some of these blocks? You just blocked some people on the main page who said some stuff about video games in disagreement with you, even when they were remaining courteous. What was with the block of GuitarSniper in particular? You said he was "trolling" for expressing disagreement about video games causing violence? Are we just blocking everybody who dares disagree with every single one of our most esoteric opinions now?[1] Just blocking everybody who dares make a single comment we disagree with? What's the point of Debate pages if people can't disagree reasonably? Why don't you just delete those and put up a "Dictatorship of Markman" flag on the site if you're going to make blocks like that? Man... This isn't compatible with the Guidelines at all. The site claims that "Unlike Wikipedia, we do not block for ideological reasons. Warnings are appropriate, not for obscenity, vandalism or parody (Which are block-able offenses without warning.), but for silliness and other problems. In rare cases, our approach to repeated ideological conflict is to lock the page, and then allow the Administrator Group to make changes on a manual basis based upon submitted suggestions on the Talk page."[2] Start treating these people fairly so I don't have to reverse all these silly blocks that are contary to Conservapedia's guidelines. It wastes my time and yours. --Joshua Zambrano 23:40, 24 July 2012 (EDT)

I am not saying it is but, like those of a number of long-serving editors here, this user name can be explained with about 5 seconds of thought. Croy is a surname. I also know at least one town in Britain. Ifor is a Welsh name - quite common, a variation of Ivor. Serge is a particularly common name. It's the anglisisation of Sergei, as in Prokofiev, Rachmaninov etc. I went to school with a Serge. Ban him if you like for username reasons, but I thought your comments were a little gratuitous. Just saying.... AlanE 20:23, 22 February 2013 (EST)

While I do not disagree with your recent blocks, I do feel that the the comments you put for the block reason are a little bit over the top, and do not reflect on Conservapedia's professional policies. It is perfectly fair to block a troll, but you don't need to reciprocate by making some more accusations, that have little to do with the user's actions. Thanks for reading,

brenden 21:10, 22 February 2013 (EST)

Bear in mind I was the one who started the baby-eating thing. I think he found it far more welcoming than the "FNQ Hello" (Dvergne will know what I mean.) There is a lack of basic courtesy on this site that one feels unless they are completely within the ideological circle - which you are of course.

What I said had to be said. It needs to be said every now and then because people come here, they do all the right things to get Andy's favour and are given power. They use it. Some of them abuse it. They know they have the boss's blessing. They don't know my history - usually because they haven't bothered to find out. To them I am just another troll, when really I am just letting off a bit of steam as a grumpy old man who likes taking the mickey occasionally . And I have always been a keen and somewhat amused observer of social interaction. And yes, it is trolling to an extent. So are Cons' constant hardly relevant incursions into talk pages. (And just to stir the possum (an Australianism) .... without the homosexual couple who lived in the next apartment from when I was 11 to 18 years of age I may not have been able to create the articles in Category:Sacred music for they instilled in me a love of church music that has lasted over 50 years. Musical vermin, they were.) Cheers - and sorry I misunderstood. AlanE 03:57, 23 February 2013 (EST)

What is the point of blocking a new user and telling them to recreate their account with a more appropriate username if you block them with autoblock enabled and account creation disabled ??? It seems a bit counter intuitive and unproductive to me. Dvergne 03:47, 24 February 2013 (EST)

Whoops, didn't notice I did that. Thanks, I'll avoid this mistake next time. - Markman 03:48, 24 February 2013 (EST) I suggest you be less vigorous with your blocking otherwise I may need to have a word with Andy, it seems you are starting to drive away genuine users as well as the parodists, spammers and trolls. Dvergne 09:12, 25 February 2013 (EST) Just to be sure here, could you put a diff of the offending edits that DonnyC made? brenden 23:23, 26 February 2013 (EST) I have gone through his contributions for the past week and there is nothing that is deserving of a block. --DamianJohn 01:41, 27 February 2013 (EST)

Blocking the User:GiseleRom because of Silly and/or foul username. Account may be recreated as a first name and last initial sounds quite ironic when the block isn't performed by User:MarkM but by User:Markman :-) --AugustO 14:40, 28 February 2013 (EST)

I haven't seen your input to this article on Talk:E=mc² yet - I'm interested in your thoughts! --AugustO 14:49, 28 February 2013 (EST)

If you don't know what you are doing, just don't do it! --AugustO 15:09, 28 February 2013 (EST) See my recent edit summary. - Markman 15:10, 28 February 2013 (EST) See Talk:E=mc² and my recent edit summary. --AugustO 15:11, 28 February 2013 (EST)

Hmmn - I suppose CP's policy on usernames may justify blocking him/her, but still, there remains the possibility the s/he was merely a fan of DW, and was unaware of our username policy (Usernames shall be a variation of your real name). brenden 14:27, 1 March 2013 (EST)

Great blocks, but the better block reason is "user name policy: please consider recreating ...." Thanks!--Andy Schlafly 08:57, 2 March 2013 (EST)

Given your personal feelings you should not be blocking DonnyC. In any case he was engaging playfully with a sysop who has not taken offence, and who is big enough and ugly enough to deal with it. Our role is to block obvious trolls and vandals, not editors we happen not to like. Leave that sort of blocking to the sysops, which you are not. Please try to get along with others, rather than picking fights all the time. Thanks. --DamianJohn 15:14, 3 March 2013 (EST)

I have seen your warning regarding my excessive talk posts. Note that 13 of the 20 that you mention represent four discussions. I was unaware that a three post dialog, say, resulted in a 30-post article quota, or that correcting a misspelling in a talk post added 10 more to deficit.

Another two of my talk posts were a suggestion to improve an article (which was met with a request from the original editor to make the change), plus a "done" response from me. If that exchange puts me in the hole for 20 more article updates, I can see this is a very potent rule.

I do admit that the "letter of the law" can be interpreted this way. I will be more careful in the future. As long as I'm here, I wonder if you saw my question to you regarding why you prefer "sheep" to "lamb" in Exodus? MelH 17:03, 3 March 2013 (EST)

Can I ask why you blocked me? All I did was follow the procedures to delete obvious spam. JohnQu 09:47, 5 March 2013 (EST)

How nice of you to go around ask for citations for all my contributions. A lot of the information in those articles was written through knowledge I have gained over the years so probably can't point to a specific location for the referencing. It would be much appreciated if you would help me find these references. Dvergne 03:24, 6 March 2013 (EST)

You fool! You're even doing it to items that are cited. Look at USS Sturgeon. But keep going - it's showing people just how useful I was to the "information" part of the "Encyclopedia. There are hundreds yet. (How many article have you created and on what variety of subjects?) AlanE 14:18, 6 March 2013 (EST)

So sorry but I find Markman "uncited" edits correct. You are encouraged to add sources for verifiability or ask for help.--Joaquín Martínez 19:17, 6 March 2013 (EST) Joachin, I hadn't realised how much you disliked me. I had gone out of my way to treat you with respect and to give you some grounding in the music I love. I had no idea you disrespected my knowledge. Thanks for supporting a person who is doing this for no other reason than malice towards me. AlanE 20:53, 6 March 2013 (EST) While Citation Needed tags are good, it really makes no sense that you are simply systematically going through AlanE's edits, and sticking spamming his perfectly fine pages with them. A quick Google search would verify the credence of his edits, and I see no motive behind this beside petty disagreements with AlanE. brenden 21:08, 6 March 2013 (EST)

Ya might wanna check out the edits by MattyD as BryanF was a sock of that particularly annoying user.

There are a lot of animal articles without citations, u might wanna look at them. 10:31, 8 March 2013 (EST)

And I expect those whining about citations had better be prepared to find and add them. "That's not my job" is an excuse I will never accept. Karajou 11:38, 8 March 2013 (EST)

Try this [3] template instead for short or stub articles. Karajou 17:41, 8 March 2013 (EST)

This is good, but the uncited template is still needed for articles lacking in citations. And in regards to your previous remarks, don't worry about it. As I've already said, tomorrow I'm going to start going through articles lacking in citations and work on fixing them. - Markman 17:43, 8 March 2013 (EST)

Leave mine to me and I will use the books I use to check my facts. I will do them category by category. But don't put that tag on any more of my edits. Seeing as I'm being hung out to dry here, give me at least that. Now excuse me for an hour or three - I'm laying bricks today, at least they are going to stay where I put them.AlanE 19:23, 8 March 2013 (EST)

I've drastically reduced his block period, as his edits to mainspace articles have been helpful, and his edits to talkpages have been rather productive, and insightful. brenden 23:31, 4 June 2013 (EDT)

And then you block him for 2 hours, on the grounds of "accusing you of blocking him out of vengeance". Please explain what this really means. Also, Rafael, 2 day block?? For mocking users (I presume User:C, as he is the primary editor at MPR)? User:C has demonstrated that he prefers to engage in such banter, and the rather gentle mocking from rafael (in comparison to user:C's downright belligerent words) was certainly tolerable by any standards. brenden 13:29, 6 June 2013 (EDT)

I have three issues with what you have said: 1. Before today, I have never heard of the internet joke "Ryan Cash." My account was made in June 2010 and I'm not even sure if that joke was around then, considering that you are the first person to ever bring that to my attention. If the name sounds similar, it is purely coincidence, let me explain. Ryan is my first name and cs is the initials of my double-barreled surname. H was added in when I made my very first internet account and ryancs was taken, with ryancsh being the closest option. Since then, it's just been habit to stick to it.

2. You accuse me of Parody yet there is no evidence on conservapedia to prove that I am guilty of being a parody. I have only spoke with my own opinion and the guild-lines clearly state that the parody must me on conservapedia. In fact, I direct you to the difference between conservapedia and Wikipedia page in which it clearly states that conservapedia does not ban users due to outside blogs or activities. Even though the link to an internet joke is incorrect, you are still going against the values of conservapedia by trying to discredit me with outside information. Also, I might add that if I was a parodist would I not have begun being a parody when I joined and not 2 years later?

3. You blocked me for the 90/10 rule. Firstly I would point out that the rule states "90% talk page edits and only 10% quality edits to Conservapedia articles" on the conservative commandments. My contribution as a whole as been 75%talk and 25% edits, (5 to 20) but that includes the 4 debate talks I did over a year ago. This year it has been 5-15 and in June it was 5-2 (or 5-4 if you count my user page as talk). Surely this would show that I was starting to reform my behavior when you blocked me. I trust that an administrator, who is obviously dedicated as he is fervent to expel any troublemakers, would not like to give the impression "it doesn't matter if you reform we will still ban you" as this goes against the whole idea of repentance and forgiveness. In fact, your block has meant that I am not able to make the planned edits to the Liberal Denial page as I was blocked until 11PM and then had to spend my time writing this to prove my innocence.

So please, in the future, could you just ask before you block or give a verbal warning so that the accused (me in this case) has time to explain. Justice, not vengeance, is truly conservative. Ryancsh 5 June 2013 20:34 GMT

There is no evidence of parody or intentional misinformation from user Ryancsh. Karajou 02:02, 6 June 2013 (EDT)

I like how you didn't even bother to read that userpage. *sarcastic slow clap* brenden 15:50, 6 June 2013 (EDT)

View the original article here

Bill would ease debt burden on students

By Reps. Frederica Wilson (D-Fla.) and Rep. Karen Bass (D-Calif.) - 04/02/13 01:45 PM ET

From the time students enter elementary school, they hear this simple formula for earning a steady income and meaningful work.

Yet, for millions of young Americans, this formula increasingly leads to limited opportunity and mountains of debt. With student loan debt surpassing $1 trillion and unemployment rates for recent graduates lingering near painful post-2008 heights, student debt has become a serious burden on our national economy and on young lives.

While we both firmly believe that a college education remains the right choice for most students, we recognize that our national system for financing college education is in disrepair. We need a new approach that prioritizes college access and reduces the extreme financial burden that often comes with a degree.

In Washington, we talk a lot about not passing debt onto the backs of our children and grandchildren – well there is no more immediate or direct debt on the backs of future generations than the amounts taken from their paychecks to pay back increasingly expensive student loan debts. This debt is hampering their ability to contribute to the economic growth of the American economy.

Over a lifetime, the excessive burden of student loan debt hurts the ability of some 37 million Americans to purchase homes, start businesses, make investments and develop the next generation of innovations that will drive our nation’s economy. Student loan debt has outpaced credit card debt and is second only to mortgage debt for many Americans.

To get a sense of this urgent need, consider the scope of the problem.

Pushed by relentless state budget cuts, average tuition at public universities increased by 8.3 percent in 2010 alone. With their parents battling a tough economy, students have had to take out more and more debt to handle these rising costs. The average borrower graduating from a public or private institution owed an unprecedented $25,250 according to recent figures.

But the problem is not just growing cost: It’s also limited opportunity to afford repayment.

A recent study by Rutgers University found only 53 percent of a random sample of recent four-year graduates of U.S. universities holding full-time jobs. Fewer still were making use of their college-level skills.

It should come as no surprise that students are facing default at increasing rates. As former Congressman Hansen Clarke wrote last year, “students are finding that their degrees, like homes at the height of the real estate bubble, were vastly mispriced assets that are now hard to finance.” Without bankruptcy protections on student loans, unemployed or underemployed borrowers face compounding fees and little hope of escape.

We have proposed the Student Loan Fairness Act to give these Americans — young and old — a chance to break free from this crushing debt.

The bill provides loan forgiveness for borrowers who have paid the equivalent of 10 percent of their discretionary income for 10 years. Borrowers who are behind on their payments due to a setback like unemployment or illness would be eligible to enroll. In short, no one would be financially ruined by student debt due to a stroke of bad luck.

This bill is about fairness. But it’s just as much about jobs.

Student debt has forced tens of millions of Americans to put off major purchases and placed a tremendous drag on an economy that’s already suffering low levels of consumer demand. Giving student borrowers greater purchasing power would help to turbo-charge our employment recovery.

Our nation’s economic success depends on a well-educated workforce and, in turn, on young people realizing the dream of attending college. To maximize our economic potential and make the dream of attending college a reality we must end the nightmare of excessive student loan debt.

Wilson represents the 24th Congressional District of Florida and sits on the House Education and Workforce Committee. Bass represents the 37th District of California and served as the 67th Speaker of the California General Assembly.

View Comments

View the original article here

Republicans And Diversity: How The GOP’s Rural Base Spoils The Party

My previous post on the GOP’s problem with projecting a love of diversity when they don’t live it focused on the Republican House caucus and the heavily white districts they tend to represent. Another way to illustrate this point is to look at where GOP support tends to come from by population density. The denser an area, the more cosmopolitan and diverse it is likely to be. And that’s precisely where Republicans tend not to be.

Start with the states that Governor Romney won in 2012. By and large, they tended to be rural and lightly populated. Fourteen out of 26 states carried by President Obama this year had 10 or more electoral votes, while just six of 24 states carried by Romney had 10 or more electoral votes. Obama also carried seven of the eight most populous states: California, New York, Florida, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan. Only Texas went for Romney.

But the population density pattern can be seen most clearly by looking at the types of areas that Obama and Romney did well in. Obama ran strongest in large metropolitan areas (those with more than 1 million in population), winning these areas by 56 percent to 42 percent. Well over half (54 percent) of the U.S. population lives in these 51 large metropolitan areas.

Obama and Romney tied, 49 percent-49 percent, in medium metropolitan areas (those with 250,000 to 1 million in population). Medium metros contain another 20 percent of the U.S. population.

In small metro areas (nine percent of the country), where the population dips below 250,000, Romney was finally able to build a vote margin over Obama. Romney carried these areas 55 percent-43 percent. And outside of metro areas, where population density continues to fall, Romney did even better. In micropolitan areas — think of these areas as the small town sections of rural America — Romney beat Obama by 18 percentage points, 58 percent-40 percent. Micropolitans are another 10 percent of the U.S. population. And in the rest of rural America, the part that is most isolated from population centers and the most spread out, Gov. Romney bested Obama by 23 points, 61 percent-38 percent. These areas, despite the vast land area they cover, contain only 6 percent of the population (which is why, if you look at county maps of election returns, so much of it is colored red despite President Obama’s solid victory).

The same density-related patterns of support for Obama and Gov. Romney can be observed within large metropolitan areas. Here we can use a typology developed by Virginia Tech’s Metropolitan Institute and Brookings’ Metropolitan Policy Program to break these areas down by density and distance from the urban core. In large metro areas Obama did best in densely populated urban cores (9 percent of the country), carrying counties in this classification by a whopping 55 points (77 percent to 22 percent). Moving out from pure urban core counties to the densest, closest-in suburban counties—classified as inner-suburban in the typology—Obama carried these counties by a wide 25-point margin (62 percent-37 percent). Almost a fifth (19 percent) of the nation’s population is contained in these inner-suburban counties.

President Obama also carried mature suburban counties (16 percent of the nation’s population)—counties that are somewhat less dense than inner-suburbs and typically contain no portion of the central city—by 13 points (56 percent-43 percent.

Moving out to the emerging suburbs, it is important to distinguish between these areas and true exurbs, which together constitute what people usually think of as “exurbia.” Today’s true exurbs contain only 3 percent of the nation’s population. That is where Gov. Romney did the best, carrying these counties by 24 points (61 percent-37 percent).

In contrast, emerging suburbs contain 8 percent of the nation’s population and tend to be faster-growing and denser than true exurbs. Emerging suburbs include such well-known counties as Loudoun County, VA, just outside of Washington, DC; Scott County, MN, outside of Minneapolis; Warren County, OH, outside of Cincinnati; and Douglas County, CO, outside of Denver. In this category of counties Gov. Romney also did well (53 percent-45 percent) though not nearly as well as he did in the true exurbs, where population density is lowest and concentration of white voters is highest.

Living where they ain’t: that’s today’s Republican party. It’s a problem that is not amenable to a quick GOP image makeover, as the party is currently finding out.

View the original article here

Two-Thirds of Americans Don't Know If They Will Insure Under Obamacare

Break Out the Bandages, Santelli's Tackling ObamaCareCNBC's Rick Santelli maps out the problems he sees with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

The survey, which was conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International, had an overall margin of error of 3.6 percent. At total of 83 percent of those surveyed currently have health insurance, while 17 percent were uninsured—which tracks that national proportions.

(Read More: Uh Oh, Obamacare Math Sinks In for Small Businesses)

Under the ACA, uninsured Americans have until the beginning of 2014 to purchase insurance through health-care exchanges being set up nationwide or other venues—or face a financial penalty. That penalty is equal to $95 per adult, and $47.50 per child, up to a maximum of $285—or 1 percent of household income, whichever is greater.

Those penalties will escalate in future years.

Adams of InsuranceQuotes.com said uninsured people might be holding off making a decision on buying health insurance because "folks are saying that the penalty is low."

"But I have a feeling that it's more that they're not educated," she said.

"It's not surprising that people are confused and uninformed," Adams said. "It's a complicated system. It involves a lot of detail that the average person, unfortunately, is not going to grasp."

That confusion not only could hurt individuals' wallets—by making them pay out-of-pocket for health care as needed—but also put financial pressure on insurers offering coverage through exchanges set up under the ACA.

That system is predicated on the theory that enough healthy people will enroll and buy insurance so that their premiums will offset the costs of benefits for less healthy people in the same plan. If not enough healthy people sign up, Adams noted, insurers will be on the hook for the benefit payouts regardless, cutting into, or erasing their profits.

"If only the sick enroll," Adams warned, "it could be very precarious for the industry and the cost of insurance."

Adams said ignorance could hit lower-income Americans particularly hard.

"There were 68 percent of people who are earning under $30,000, who are not sure what they're going to do," Adams said, despite the fact that "they are certainly eligible" for tax credits to offset the costs of buying insurance under the ACA.

"They should" sign up, she said.

Adams noted that if poor adults without dependents live in states that are not expanding their Medicaid programs under Obamacare, they risk not being covered by that health-insurance program despite making the same low wages as adults who have dependents.

—By CNBC's Dan Mangan. Follow him on Twitter @danpostman.

View the original article here

Cruz: Obama pushing path to citizenship as ‘poison pill’ to kill immigration reform

President Obama is pushing a path to citizenship as a "poison pill" to prevent meaningful immigration reform, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) charged Monday.

"The part that I’ve got deep concerns about is any path to citizenship for those who are here illegally," Cruz said during an interview with Sean Hannity. "I think that is profoundly unfair to the millions of legal immigrants who have followed the rules, who have waited in line.

"I think the reason that President Obama is insisting on a path to citizenship is that it is designed to be a poison pill to scuttle the whole bill, so he can have a political issue in 2014 and 2016. I think that's really unfortunate," continued Cruz.

The Tea Party favorite said Congress could easily pass a comprehensive immigration reform deal if Democrats, and particularly Obama, stopped demanding the inclusion of a pathway to citizenship for immigrants living in the country illegally.

Cruz's comments came as a bipartisan group of senators indicate that it's nearly done crafting a broad immigration bill. The so-called "Gang of Eight" hopes to unveil the legislation in April, with Sen. Lindsey Graham on Sunday suggesting that the group could unveil legislation as early as next week.

On Monday, the White House said that it was "encouraged" by the progress the group has made. The Senate bill is likely to call for increasing border security, introduce a pathway to citizenship, and increasing visas for high-school workers. A House bipartisan group is also working on its own immigration reform plan.

But Cruz argued that the president knows a path to citizenship effectively kills any immigration reform proposal.

"If he actually really wanted to get something passed, he wouldn't be rolling this out as a partisan attack issue," Cruz said. "You look at the State of the Union, that was a divisive speech, that was in your face. And he knows full well that a path to citizenship won't pass the House."

"He knows that it's a partisan, divisive issue and he holds everything else hostage to that wedge issue," Cruz added.

Asked what exactly he would like to see in an immigration reform bill, Cruz said that legislation should include "tripling the border patrol" and streamlining the immigration process for legal immigrants.

"I think that it is likely that there could be some bipartisan solution to those who are here illegally if a path to citizenship were taken off the table," Cruz continued. "But as long as the president and [Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.)] insist on a path to citizenship they know full well it will never pass the House of Representatives and then it's just a political football rather than actually trying to fix the problem."

Cruz predicted that an immigration reform plan would likely pass the Senate before being defeated in the House and said the White House was prepared to exploit that politically.

"Look, they have the votes to force something through the Senate. I think whatever mess comes out of the so-called Gang of Eight, all or virtually all of the Democrats will vote for it and it's likely they'll get a fair number of Republicans to vote for it to so they can probably get it through the Senate," Cruz added. "If it includes a path to citizenship, I don't think it'll pass the House, and I think that's exactly what the Obama White House wants."

View Comments

View the original article here

Exxon’s Duck-Killing Pipeline Doesn’t Pay Taxes To Oil Spill Cleanup Fund

A technicality has spared Exxon from having to pay any money into the fund that will be covering most of the clean up costs of its Arkansas pipeline spill.

The cleanup efforts themselves took a sobering turn as crews found injured and dead ducks covered in oil.

The environmental impacts of an oil spill in central Arkansas began to come into focus Monday as officials said a couple of dead ducks and 10 live oily birds were found after an ExxonMobil Corp. pipeline ruptured last week.
“I’m an animal lover, a wildlife lover, as probably most of the people here are,” Faulkner County Judge Allen Dodson told reporters. ”We don’t like to see that. No one does.”

Exxon has confirmed that the pipeline was carrying “low-quality Wabasca Heavy crude oil from Alberta.” This oil comes from the region of Alberta where the controversial tar sands are located. Heavy crude is strip mined or boiled loose from dense underground formations that often contain a large amount of bitumen. This oil is very thick and needs to be diluted with lighter fluids in order to flow through pipelines. Reports have stated that at least 12,000 barrels of oil and water spilled into the town.

A 1980 law ensures that diluted bitumen is not classified as oil, and companies transporting it in pipelines do not have to pay into the federal Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund. Other conventional crude producers pay 8 cents a barrel to ensure the fund has resources to help clean up some of the 54,000 barrels of pipeline oil that spilled 364 times last year.

As Oil Change International said in a statement today:

“The great irony of this tragic spill in Arkansas is that the transport of tar sands oil through pipelines in the US is exempt from payments into the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund. Exxon, like all companies shipping toxic tar sands, doesn’t have to pay into the fund that will cover most of the clean up costs for the pipeline’s inevitable spills.”

Whatever you call it, as Judge Dodson says, “Crude oil is crude oil. None of it is real good to touch.”

The smell of the spilled oil (similar to asphalt) has reached residents five miles out in the country, and will likely keep residents of 22 nearby homes evacuated for several days.
Surreal video:

The Enbridge tar sands pipeline spill in Michigan happened in 2010 and parents are still concerned about the long-term health effects of having such toxic substances seep into areas where children play.

jQuery(document).ready(function(){jQuery('#comment_submit').click(function(){if(jQuery('#comment_check:checked').length

View the original article here

User talk:Brenden

(Difference between revisions)Considering his past record (see relevant block log) I think that if anything his block was not long enough. Increased length of block to one week. If this was his first offense then maybe it could have ended with a warning. - [[User:Markman|Markman]] 14:10, 6 June 2013 (EDT)Considering his past record (see relevant block log) I think that if anything his block was not long enough. Increased length of block to one week. If this was his first offense then maybe it could have ended with a warning. - [[User:Markman|Markman]] 14:10, 6 June 2013 (EDT)I couldn't help but notice that you are not only frequenting a website dedicated solely for the purpose of attacking Conservapedia (everybody knows which website I'm talking about), but that you are also talking with the other liberals there about me. Care to elaborate? - [[User:Markman|Markman]] 15:05, 6 June 2013 (EDT)

User talk:Brenden/Archive

if (window.showTocToggle) { var tocShowText = "show"; var tocHideText = "hide"; showTocToggle(); }

I've looked into the Anon/WBC incident before for an essay on freedom of speech as it relates to Internet culture, and while both WBC and Anon showed their typical lack of civility and good manners towards each other they didn't violate the 1st Amendment in any way. I might have made a mistake in the report, though, so if you could show me where one side or the other violated 1st Amendment rights I'd be happy to concede the point. Blessings of the Almighty on you :) 16:25, 3 October 2012 (EDT)

....you'll love this guy's stream of edit comments. Hugs and kisses, MattyD 21:00, 31 October 2012 (EDT)

Why have you just unblocked this user - you better have a good reason! EJamesW 17:23, 2 November 2012 (EDT)

No need to block non-malicious morons. Just let them know that they are being ignored.Brenden 17:39, 2 November 2012 (EDT) DON'T DO IT AGAIN~! Look at the history you moron! EJamesW 17:46, 2 November 2012 (EDT)

You've just made yourself look a total idiot. I can't believe I was the one who recommended for promotion. EJamesW 17:58, 2 November 2012 (EDT)

[Comments retracted by poster]Thank you, EJamesW brenden 18:00, 2 November 2012 (EDT)

What does mean?

Does that mean you're trying to be sarcastic? But you can't think of anything witty or amusing to type?

Brenden, why don't you just say sorry and leave it at that? (Have you looked at the history of User:Reactionary22, you will see that I gave this guy a chance to respond and chandged his block settings.)

I suppose some Christians never can admit they're wrong...

EJamesW 18:17, 2 November 2012 (EDT)

Ease up E, Brendan has done the same on more than one occasion. Normally we frown upon adjusting others' blocks but no harm, no foul.--Jpatt 19:04, 2 November 2012 (EDT) My apologies, I failed to take a look at the history, and the tone you took kind of distracted me from looking. Sorry about that.brenden 16:54, 3 November 2012 (EDT)

Editing is fully restored. Sorry I didn't notice this earlier.--Andy Schlafly 23:55, 11 November 2012 (EST)

Thanks, Mr. Schlaflybrenden 00:39, 12 November 2012 (EST)

If you have a personal problem with a sysop, you take it up with Aschlafly. Karajou 11:12, 19 November 2012 (EST)

Just registered. I think an interesting experiment/test could be to add a few articles copied from wikipedia into the wiki after deleting all the spam and see if the content of those articles changes what is being written in the spam. Dvergne 23:57, 17 December 2012 (EST)

I also think we should start and anti-spam squad here to help combat the spam by collecting the IP's and the like and adding those to such sites as Stopforumspam. I also think that copying the spam IP block list from wikipedia is a good Idea as I imagine they would have to have pretty good countermeasures against spam over there. Dvergne 00:02, 18 December 2012 (EST)

Thank you for your thoughtfulness. My only concern is accuracy and credibility. I think that sometimes, people can't see how a stranger will react to their writing because we all have internal writing voices which remember all of our intentions rather than what is on the page. Wschact 01:34, 6 January 2013 (EST)

Thank you for your tireless work against vandals. Your efforts are appreciated. :-) Regards, Taj 17:27, 13 January 2013 (EST)

It seems the spambots are active again. I might start to port over the new spambot IP blocks from Wikipedia again, as that seamed to be quite efficient at stopping them for a while last time. Dvergne 06:29, 3 February 2013 (EST)

I think I might upgrade that to very active! Have you been getting much spam at your honeypot mate? Dvergne 19:27, 3 February 2013 (EST) It's been ok-ish. I blocked most of the ranges that were targeting my honeypot. brenden 19:50, 3 February 2013 (EST)

I think it is poor form to edit talk page comments left by others. If an editor wishes to run afoul of the rules by speaking their mind, it should be their freedom to do so. If that editor happens to be immune to the rules (as with the user in this case), then I think their unfettered comments should stand as testimony to their true nature. Thanks --DonnyC 21:16, 7 February 2013 (EST)

Well, the last time that specific user left his comments, a lot of people were offended. While I agree, that generally, it is inappropriate to censor users, in certain cases, especially when personal attacks are involved, it should be fine. Furthermore, the use of such tags, causes the poster understand that such attacks are not welcome on Conservapedia.

Thanks for your input anyways, though. brenden 22:04, 7 February 2013 (EST)

Try now - your account has been promoted.--Andy Schlafly 00:25, 19 February 2013 (EST)

Thanks! brenden 14:59, 19 February 2013 (EST)

I still retain my suspicion, but if that contributor wants to reregister we should let him. I probably should have enabled account recreation after the block. - Markman 14:34, 1 March 2013 (EST)

Thanks Brenden. I needed that! AlanE 21:20, 6 March 2013 (EST)

NP brenden 21:30, 6 March 2013 (EST)

Hi Brenden. You do not have the authority to undo admin's blocks. If you have an issue, you raise it. DouglasA 15:30, 7 March 2013 (EST)

KK got it. brenden 13:47, 12 March 2013 (EDT)

Thanks. JohanZ 11:56, 9 April 2013 (EDT)

No problembrenden 13:25, 9 April 2013 (EDT)

Sorry I had been playing around with my signature I have now corrected it. CameronD 13:45, 12 April 2013 (EDT)

If you really do have the ability to implement some technical means to protect this wiki from a certain user's flagrant deletion sprees, I implore you to do so. Asking him to stop won't do a thing. He literally is incapable of changing his ways. --DonnyC 22:57, 23 April 2013 (EDT)

Well I do hope that asking him to change will help him overcome his irritating habit of deleting pages, I am prepared to create a bot. Unfortunately, I have no experience with the MW api, sooo, I see a lot of googling, and asking for technical help in my foreseeable future. brenden 13:42, 24 April 2013 (EDT)

I have no intention of leaving, but between C's actions and Aschlafly choosing to ignore the problem(as well as any message I write to him now), it's hard to stay motivated to keep trying to make the site better. I'll stick around for now and continue to fight for this site, but I have this sinking feeling that it is only a matter of time before I'm perma-banned. Thanks for the support though, hopefully those of us who actually care will be able to prevail in the end. Fnarrow 14:24, 25 April 2013 (EDT)

On a related note... am I the only one who sees the hypocrisy in C's repeated use of the 90/10 rule as a reason for banning (including the block of FWilliamM a mere 40 minutes after your unbanning him) when 38% of his own last 500 edits were to talk pages? Fnarrow 00:28, 27 April 2013 (EDT) I do try to unblock the users unfairly blocked by that admin. brenden 01:17, 27 April 2013 (EDT) I know you do and my earlier comment wasn't aimed at you. I was just frustrated with his antics last night and needed to express that to someone. Thank you for doing what you can. Fnarrow 08:32, 27 April 2013 (EDT)

That is enough from both of you. Brendan, you have no business or authority unblocking users because of a pet peeve against Conservative, especially when I look into the matter and discover they are proven trolls previously blocked for hostility. User Fnarrow, your whining about being bullied is now over and done with. You chose to come into the site, and you chose to put yourself into conflict with another user when you could have chosen otherwise. This site is an encyclopedia; it is not a site where anyone can cause a fight with anyone else. Karajou 13:51, 27 April 2013 (EDT)

Karajou, I've always respected you, and found you to be a fair, and rational person, despite whatever ideological differences we may have. On the other hand, I must protest that contrary to what you said about FNarrow, "you chose to put yourself into conflict with another user when you could have chosen otherwise." is actually an incorrect take on what happened. FNarrow was according to his contributions, merely being a productive editor, when s/he was provoked by User:C's ad-hominem attacks, and blatant violation of the Commandments. As per my authority to undo blocks placed by a superior, I feel, (and I'm pretty sure that Mr. Schlafly agrees with me), that blocks placed to censor users, and to subvert the policies here, are worthy of an immediate unblock. brenden 14:44, 27 April 2013 (EDT) This edit [1] says a lot in support of my argument; this individual also created three additional accounts via a Philippine proxy in order to cause an attack on user Conservative...and you unblocked two of those socks. What you and FNarrow need to do is not only read the Conservapedia Commandments, but read and heed the warnings at the bottom of my user page. Everyone coming in is going to respect this website and the people in it, or they are out. Karajou 01:04, 28 April 2013 (EDT)

Respect,K.? Ha!! Whose wife was implied to be a slut, K; and by whom, and who stood by and let that worm, Cons, get away with it? Who said one thing on Gmail and something else in public when he realised he had to show solidarity with a certain Mexican "gentleman" who backed a coward who has not bothered to do what he said he would do. I am still here, K. Where did Markman go when he realised he had given himself some work to do?

Just one question - why, if lack of citations is such a crime, wasn't I pulled up in 2007? AlanE 02:55, 28 April 2013 (EDT)

Sorry Brenden for smeering your page with my anger. One takes the opportunity when it arises. AlanE 03:12, 28 April 2013 (EDT)

@User:Karajou

I don't have the checkuser ability, so I cannot tell if the people I block and unblock are socks. As per respecting the website, and the people (Especially user:C), I do try to respect the person, even if I cannot respect their actions. brenden 13:37, 28 April 2013 (EDT)

I am a friend of Fnarrow and he asked me to post the copy of this email which he sent to cpwebmaster@conservapedia.com on the user talk pages ofa few people whom he said had always been fair to him.

I got banned for a day and then Karajou immediately changed it to infinite for no apparent reason immediately after it expired. I have cut the dead end pages by nearly half during my short time there and feel i have made substantive improvements to other articles during that time. While i have had disagreements with Karajou and Conservative, i have always been respectful and adhered to the Conservapedia commandments. Finally, I never had a chance to respond to my accuser and did nothing to deserve this treatment. Please forward this to Mr. Schlafly for review. Thank you, Fnarrow

If my opinion counts for anything, Frank really is a great and passionate guy who could add a lot of valuable knowledge to yosite. That is all, please keep up the great work. JSandler 14:35, 28 April 2013 (EDT)

If you hide another civil discussion that I am having with another editor again, I will ask that you be removed from the website. Thank you. I am sure Karajou and others would agree with me on this matter if I bring up this matter with other Admins. Conservative 16:12, 17 May 2013 (EDT)

How dare you? You insulted Patmac, and a vast host of other anglicans, you dragged me into this fight, and if you don't tone down your insults, I will bring it up with Mr. Schlafly, who certainly agrees that your words are unnacceptable. brenden 16:14, 17 May 2013 (EDT) I don't consider my post to you daring. And I do mean to carry out what I said I would do should you do it again. Conservative 16:15, 17 May 2013 (EDT) That discussion was civil? Calling user:Patmac a untrue christian, who is also a "lying evolutionist"? Really? I have brought this matter with the site's owner already. brenden 16:19, 17 May 2013 (EDT) Stating untruths about the conversation is not going to further your cause. In fact, you are making things worse. For example, I expressly did not answer Pacmac's question on whether or not he was a Christian which is why he repeated this question. You are digging for yourself a deeper hole. I would suggest you stop digging. Conservative 16:28, 17 May 2013 (EDT) Since when is it your right to be implying that any user is not a "True Christian"? And furthermore, can you justify User:Conservative/Patmac dodged this issue?brenden 16:32, 17 May 2013 (EDT)

Brenden, you shouldn't have pushed it so far. All C probably meant was that "no true Christian" would advocate this or that. You'd have to be an idiot to take that personally (in fact, you'd have to be an imbecile not to realize that 'be an idiot' was just a figure of speech).

It may seem unfair that sometimes admins get greater leeway when it comes to personal remarks, but getting into a pissing contest over it will never be productive. If you're really worried about fairness, I suggest you consider all the people in totalitarian dictatorships who have NO ACCESS to the Internet and no way to express themselves without a swift ride to prison. Getting blocked on a pro-freedom site for personal remarks hardly compares.

Chill out, and come back refreshed. --Ed Poor Talk 23:48, 17 May 2013 (EDT)

It is nothing to do with like or dislike. It is for your own good. This is a fight you will NOT win. Rob Smith tried this and he now edits at ratwiki, he is an ex-person here. Keep this up and you will be as well. Davidspencer 16:23, 17 May 2013 (EDT)

Thank you, David. I'm sorry for my choice of words now, but I must say, what User:Conservative did was not acceptable, and I tried to do my best to halt it before it returned to another user:C vs other sysops wheel war like last week. brenden 16:27, 17 May 2013 (EDT)

I do appreciate it, but don't want to cause disruption--Patmac 16:41, 17 May 2013 (EDT)

I don't see why user page edits should not be understood as talk page edits for purposes of enforcing the 90/10 rule. I'm thinking of indefinitely banning Ryancsh for being a parodist anyway. Look up "Ryan Cash" on google, it seems to be some kind of an internet joke. - Markman 11:25, 5 June 2013 (EDT)

I searched up Ryan Cash, and saw that the second result points to a certain "Sonichu.com". However, I don't see how a website dedicated to provoking the creator of "sonichu" has any connection with Conservapedia or editing at Conservapedia. brenden 13:41, 5 June 2013 (EDT)

Considering his past record (see relevant block log) I think that if anything his block was not long enough. Increased length of block to one week. If this was his first offense then maybe it could have ended with a warning. - Markman 14:10, 6 June 2013 (EDT)

Good day,

I couldn't help but notice that you are not only frequenting a website dedicated solely for the purpose of attacking Conservapedia (everybody knows which website I'm talking about), but that you are also talking with the other liberals there about me. Care to elaborate? - Markman 15:05, 6 June 2013 (EDT)

View the original article here

Sequestration Cuts Soon To Hit Long-Term Unemployment Insurance

The automatic budget cuts that went into effect on March 1 will soon begin to affect a new subset of Americans: the long-term unemployed who have been out of a job for more than six months and are dependent on the federal government’s unemployment assistance program.

The federal Emergency Unemployment Compensation program aids workers after they exhaust their state-level unemployment benefits, which typically last 26 weeks. The benefits are modest — about $300 a week on average — and will become even more so this month and later, when sequestration forces cuts of up to 10.7 percent on all benefit checks, as National Journal reports:

These checks—which average $300 a week, without the cuts—go to roughly 2 million people who have already exhausted their regular unemployment benefits, meaning they’ve been out of work for a while. The Bureau of Labor Statistics defines the long-term unemployed as people who have not held a job for 27 weeks.
Moreover, they are people whom the political establishment has largely forgotten. There are no new stimulus programs on the horizon for the long-term unemployed, nor is there anything new to help train them or connect them to jobs. Those still receiving benefit checks will see them whacked by as much as $450 in total between now and the end of the fiscal year in September, according to Labor Department estimates—all due to spending cuts that both parties consider ill-advised and indiscriminate.

The cuts, as National Journal explains, will come at different times based on how they are implemented by states. But in some states, the cuts will carry an even bigger punch to the guts of jobless workers. Eight states have recently made substantial cuts to their own unemployment compensation programs, shortening the amount of time jobless workers are eligible for benefits. That, in turn, reduces the amount of time they are eligible for federal benefits as well, since the federal program is tied to state programs.

The average unemployed worker has been out of work for 35 weeks; 40 percent have been jobless for 27 weeks or longer, meaning they rely on the federal program. But instead of stimulus programs to help create jobs, Congress has focused on cutting the budget, and given that unemployment insurance is good for both workers and the overall economy, these cuts are another misguided policy that won’t just make it harder to be unemployed, but harder to find a job too.

View the original article here

User talk:Aschlafly

(Difference between revisions)

Comment here

Hi! Thank for for creating this website.

Archive Index

if (window.showTocToggle) { var tocShowText = "show"; var tocHideText = "hide"; showTocToggle(); }

I was a little bit disappointed that Pentecost didn't make the Main Page, even after I had mentioned it: see Talk:Main_Page#Pentecost....

I'd like to see the Christian Feasts being honored on the Main Page, be it by a masterpiece, a link to an article, etc.: the next will be Trinity Sunday. Any ideas?

Thanks, --AugustO 08:42, 21 May 2013 (EDT)

Good suggestions. Often this will depend on what else is in the news, or what other entries editors are spending their time on at a particularly moment. Other websites on the internet are purely religious sites.--Andy Schlafly 10:48, 21 May 2013 (EDT)

Mr. Schlafly,
I wanted to apologize if my past edit offended you or damaged the project. It was never my intent to remove information from the table, but only to enhance the layout and supplement the content through additional citations. I have also apologized on the talk page of the article, but I thought I owed you a direct apology as well.

Additionally, I still have a desire to improve the article. I have posted a proposed plan on the talk page, and I would be very grateful for your input. I eagerly await your suggestions.

Sincerely, WilliamWB 11:27, 23 May 2013 (EDT)

Andrew Schlafly, you claimed that „Jesus prayed, often publicly, for people”. I'm still interested in an example for this - as you said that this happened often, you should be able to provide us with one. To be more precise: I don't want examples of Jesus blessing or giving thanks ( e?????? - like in Matthew 14:19) or laying hands upon someone (?p?t???µ? ?e??a? - like in Matthew 19:15), I'd like to see an example of Jesus praying (p??se???µa?) publicly for people.

Could you please give us a verse? Thank you. --AugustO 15:40, 24 May 2013 (EDT)

For example, Jesus routinely prayed in public before each meal.--Andy Schlafly 21:32, 24 May 2013 (EDT) „I don't want examples of Jesus blessing or giving thanks” „I'd like to see an example of Jesus praying (p??se???µa?) publicly for people” „Could you please give us a verse?” As you can see, your answer doesn't match the question. --AugustO 22:45, 24 May 2013 (EDT) Try John 8-14 (Translated)#11:41 - when Jesus very publicly prays to and thanks God prior to raising Lazarus from the dead.--Andy Schlafly 23:45, 24 May 2013 (EDT) I wonder if he'd be satisfied with John 17:11-17: Holy Father, keep them in your name, which you have given me, that they may be one, even as we are one. 12 While I was with them, I kept them in your name, which you have given me. I have guarded them, and not one of them has been lost except the son of destruction, that the Scripture might be fulfilled. 13 But now I am coming to you, and these things I speak in the world, that they may have my joy fulfilled in themselves. 14 I have given them your word, and the world has hated them because they are not of the world, just as I am not of the world. 15 I do not ask that you take them out of the world, but that you keep them from the evil one. 16 They are not of the world, just as I am not of the world. 17 Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth. [1] Perhaps there aren't as many transcripts of our Lord's specific prayers as we'd all like. --Ed Poor Talk 19:46, 26 May 2013 (EDT)

I may be a "liberal" Christian but I am devout, but some articles (guess by who?) suggest I am more associated with Satan them I am Jesus. I will not stand for it any longer--Patmac 09:34, 26 May 2013 (EDT)

Dear Mr. Schlafly,

Can you please unprotect this page? I would like to update it with information about VY and Shock's chatroom that has come to light at Talk:Main Page. If this is not desirable, then I would suggest unprotecting the page (which is currently sourced only to a single page on an anonymous blog) so that a more verifiable article can be written in its place (and perhaps if I can get a hold of Conservative, he can point me to reliable sources). Thanks, GregG 21:28, 31 May 2013 (EDT)

Can you do anything with this: Template:Dead link? --JoeyJ 14:02, 1 June 2013 (EDT)

What is wrong with it?--Andy Schlafly 16:20, 1 June 2013 (EDT) Maybe you can expand it. In Wikipedia there is a category for articles with dead links --JoeyJ 09:00, 2 June 2013 (EDT) I've done it. If Mr. Schlafly or someone else wants to change the exact name of the category, they can go ahead. Onward 09:25, 2 June 2013 (EDT)

Could you restore my talk page, actually? A nice little memento from the hoopla. :) Onward 20:24, 1 June 2013 (EDT)

Conservative still goes on with his hatred, I will get blocked for this but here is my promise, I will wait 3 days and if after that time this users hatred is not completely removed from this site I am going to report Conservapedia to the Southern Poverty Law Center and request it is designated a hate group.--Patmac 11:28, 3 June 2013 (EDT)

I would have preferred to send these messages to you in person but I cannot find an email for you so it has to be done here, I have requested you do something before but have been constantly ignored. Lets face it Andy, despite not holding office you are very much a politician, and what does a politician do when a subordinate constantly jeopardizes his position? He gits rid.--Patmac 11:41, 3 June 2013 (EDT) Conservapedia supports and defends the full right to free speech, and urges liberal groups to do likewise.--Andy Schlafly 12:16, 3 June 2013 (EDT)

This is not free speech, this is hate speech. When i read that Jesus eats and spits out moderate Christians that is hate speech, and it also brings the name of our saviour into disrepute. He does not just attack evolutionists and atheists, he attacks Christians, to the extent that we are not Christians at all. "Liberal" Christianity and marital infidelity, "Liberal" Christianity and whore mongering, "Liberal" Christianity and bestiality, need i say more? But if someone dare challenge his position, he blocks them, how is that free speech? I think you personally have some pretty strange ideas but you do allow them to be challenged without going on a hate spree, and you are to be respected for that. But constantly allowing Conservative to post his vile tirade, however free it may be, just undermines Conservatives and by extension your image.--Patmac 12:32, 3 June 2013 (EDT)

This user Pacmac is blocked indefinitely. Apparently, he thinks he can define what hatred is, even so far as to saying that the above reference concerning Jesus constitutes "hate speech". This is the place in the Bible where it comes from, Revelation, Chapter 2: 14 And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God; 15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. 16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. 17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked: 18 I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see. What it means is that this user is trying his best to stop any mention of the Bible unless this mention is done in accordance with his liberal philosophy; which means that the above Revelation verses are null and void. He further threatens to call the SPLC on us if we don't behave in according to his whims, i.e. one hate filled individual calling a hate-filled organization to complain about our alleged hate against his own hate-filled ideas. Patmac had also forgotten about our First Amendment RIGHTS to FREE SPEECH, FREEDOM OF RELIGION, and FREEDOM TO ASSEMBLE. He's so filled with hate himself that he would demand the SPLC to try to stop us from enjoying those rights. As far as I'm concerned, he failed. And he can continue failing somewhere else. Karajou 13:12, 3 June 2013 (EDT) Firstly, let me say that I do not endorse user:Patmac`s tactics of legal threats. They have no place on a wiki, and should instead be sent to the site's owner (Mr. Schlafly) by email. However, as per hate speech and the Bible, it is clear that the Bible condemns churches who do not uphold the tenets of Christianity, but on the other hand, who is User:C to decide which churches are not upholding these tenets? brenden 13:43, 3 June 2013 (EDT)

This is an opportunity for Andy to show some leadership in setting a path that de-escallates the conflict here. On the one hand, Patmac is absolutely right about the intemperate nature of User:C's comments. On the other hand, Patmac's frustration with the failure to address that problem led him to make intemperate remarks as well. I suggest that we forgive Patmac for his transgression, and address whether User:C's edits are consistent with the fundamental commandments of Conservapedia. This is not a "Free Speech" issue. User:C is free to express his views on his private blog. Our question is whether CP should endorse and republish some sharp comments as the views of the entire project. Wschact 07:22, 4 June 2013 (EDT)

ReymeDneK's contributions? Thanks, GregG 10:15, 5 June 2013 (EDT)

There is a dispute between myself and user:Markman regarding User:Rafael's block. Could you please provide some guidance? Thanks, brenden 15:34, 6 June 2013 (EDT)

View the original article here

Remarks by the First Lady at "42" Film Workshop

The White House

Office of the First Lady

State Dining Room

11:57 A.M. EDT

MRS. OBAMA: Well, hello! How’s everybody doing?

AUDIENCE: Good.

MRS. OBAMA: Welcome to the White House. (Laughter.) It’s nice. Let's do this. (Applause.) I know sometimes it’s hard to know how are you supposed to act in the White House. (Laughter.) Everybody is sitting with their -- just loosen up, loosen up. It’s okay. You all are here. You’re just going to talk. I can tell you all talk a lot. (Laughter.) So you’re just going to talk a little more right here in the White House. We are honored to have you. Welcome, welcome.

Let me start today by thanking Paulette for moderating today’s workshop. Paulette is the new Director of the Office of Public Engagement right here in the White House, and we’re glad to have her on our team. I want to give her a round of applause -- Paulette. (Applause.)

I want to thank Harrison Ford -- I’ve wanted to say that for a while. (Laughter.) Harrison Ford. So you think you trip because I’m here? I’m tripping out -- (laughter) -- because he’s here. And look at this stage -- Mr. Harrison Ford, Chadwick Boseman -- he’s as cute as he was in the movie. (Laughter.) Just admit it. (Applause.) Outstanding -- as well as Brian Helgeland, who is here as well. You’re going to hear from them.

And I want to thank all of you young people here, because I want to make sure I know who’s here. We have students from Gaithersburg, Maryland -- who are you, where are you? (Applause.) Maryland in the house. Alexandria, Virginia. (Applause.) You guys are here. We’ve got some D.C. kids. (Applause.) Of course you all are the loudest ones. (Laughter.) It’s okay. We’ve got students from the Animo Jackie Robinson Charter High School in Los Angeles -- where are our L.A. kids? (Applause.) There you go. You can be louder. (Laughter.) It’s okay, you all traveled.

But I want to make sure that you all know how welcome you are here in this house, because the truth is we do these things -- we make sure that we do these workshops so that you all know that this is your house, too. So we want you to make yourselves at home. We want you to feel good and relaxed and learn and ask questions, okay?

And finally, I saved the best for last. I want to pay special thanks to a woman that I am totally in awe of. And I’m not going to get emotional. I’m going to say that now, because I can tend to get emotional. But she’s a woman of strength, of courage, conviction; a woman who paved the way for me, but she paved the way for millions of Americans all across this country. We have with us Mrs. Rachel Robinson. (Applause.)

And this is what a beautiful woman looks like. She is a proud 90-years-old, and I’m telling you that because she told me she’s proud of it. (Laughter.) And I told her she wouldn’t have to tell anybody how old she was because she doesn’t look a day over 40 (laughter) -- beautiful, and smart, and gifted, and graceful. So we are just so thrilled to have everyone here.

Now, the President and I, we watched this movie over the weekend. It was just us, because our girls were away. And they are definitely going to watch this movie. We think that everybody in this country needs to watch this movie. And I can say with all sincerity that it was truly powerful for us. I don’t know about you, but we walked away from that just visibly, physically moved by the experience of the movie, of the story.

And it wasn’t simply the wonderful performances, because the performances were brilliant -- brilliant. I mean, I’m no movie critic, but you all are pretty good. (Laughter.) And it wasn’t the wonderful screenwriting or the directing. It was the raw emotion that it just makes you feel after the experience. I mean, watching anyone go through what Jackie and Rachel Robinson did -- the outright discrimination they encountered at every turn, from the fans in the stadium to the airport receptionist, even from some of his own teammates. And you’re left just asking yourselves, how on Earth did they live through that? How did they do it? How did they endure the taunts and the bigotry for all of that time?

And while so many in this country still face clear challenges, they still exist today. I was struck by how far removed that way of life seems today. I mean, there’s work to be done, but things have changed. Major League Baseball is fully integrated. You can’t imagine the baseball league not being integrated. There are no more “Whites Only” signs posted anywhere in this country. Although it still happens, it is far less acceptable for someone to yell out a racial slur while you’re walking down the street -- it still happens, but not tolerated. That kind of prejudice is simply just not something that can happen in the light of day today.

And then on the other hand, for us to be able to sit in the same room as Rachel Robinson -- do you all understand? We are here with Rachel Robinson -- (applause) -- the woman who lived through that life whose memories and perspectives will forever be shaped by those experiences. Her presence here today makes us realize just how connected we are to that part of our history. It is very real and very tangible. In the end, I can’t help but marvel at just how far we’ve come over the course of this woman’s life. But it also remind us how far we have to go, how much more work we have to do.

Jackie and Rachel Robinson’s story reminds us how much hard work it takes to move a country forward. It reminds us how much struggle is required to make real progress and change.

So as you reflect on this story, not just today, but I hope you keep thinking about it for the rest of your life, I want you to think about how much strength it took day in and day out for Rachel and Jackie Robinson and for thousands of other people just like them all across this country to keep pressing ahead, even though some folks wouldn’t even treat them like they were human beings. They just kept pressing ahead.

It would have been easy for them to get mad, because I know I was mad just watching the movie. It would have been easy for them to get mad or to give up. But instead, they made hate -- they met hatred with decency. I want you all to keep that in mind -- they met hatred with decency. And, more importantly, they gave their absolute very best every single day -- do you hear -- they gave their best every single day.

From the time they were young people just like all of you, they worked hard to prepare themselves for greatness so that when the opportunity came their way, they were ready for that greatness. This would have been a totally different story had they not been prepared, had they not trained themselves, had they not educated themselves.

Yes, Jackie Robinson certainly was a tremendous athlete, but he was so much more than that. He bravely served in our Armed Forces. He attended college at UCLA. He competed as hard as he could at everything he did so that his gifts wouldn’t go to waste. And Rachel Robinson was in every way his equal, ladies -- in every way his equal. She made her education a priority. She worked hard in school. She eventually became a nurse.

So Jackie and Rachel Robinson weren't destined for greatness -- they prepared themselves for greatness, which meant that they could make a difference outside of baseball, as well. And that is the only thing that is important for you to understand. You can be great in your profession, you can earn a lot of money, you can be famous, but the question is what are you doing for others.

After he retired, Jackie Robinson became a leader in the Civil Rights Movement working with Dr. King, the NAACP. He helped to start a bank to help other minorities start their own small businesses and to own their own homes. And after his death, Mrs. Robinson carried on that legacy by starting the Jackie Robinson Foundation, which has provided college scholarships and training and career opportunities for more than 1,400 underserved students. In fact, I know that we have a few Jackie Robinson scholars here today who are studying at Howard, and Georgetown, and Yale, and Brown, and even my alma mater, Princeton -- righteous. (Laughter.)

And I have seen the quality of these scholars firsthand because one of my personal assistants, little Kristin Jones, was a Jackie Robinson scholar in 2003. And I was couldn’t be more impressed by the work that she has done and the young woman that she has become -- very proud of you. And more than anything else, that is Jackie Robinson’s legacy -- opening up a whole new world of opportunities to young people like Kristin and every single one of you here today.

And that's why it was so important for me to have all of you here for this event. We intentionally did this. Now, we’re going to have a screening for a bunch of fancy people somewhere later on down the line, but we wanted to be here with you. Because this isn’t just about watching a wonderful movie about an important moment in history, this is about helping all of you believe that you can write your own history.

And I can't say this enough to enough young people -- you might not be able to hit a ball like Jackie Robinson, but you can get your education. In fact, you must get your education and demand more of yourself every single day. You have to do that, and you have to pick up yourself when somebody knocks you down -- because you will get knocked down. But to do all of that, you have to put the work in. That's all I have to say.

All of this is about hard work. And you have to be willing to face any obstacle you might encounter along the way. That's what Jackie and Rachel Robinson did, and the same could be said for all the folks on this stage, quite frankly.

Before he became an actor, Harrison Ford had to overcome a crippling fear of speaking in front of an audience. So he’s terrified right now. (Laughter.) And it took Chadwick 10 years of hard work before landing his first starring role. So this stuff doesn't come easy. And then Brian sits down to create a script, and that means hundreds of hours of writing and rewriting, painful doubting and rewriting -- (laughter) -- oh, you can see the pain -- before he comes up with a finished product. And that's really the secret.

And I want all young people to understand -- what does it take? What does it take? What’s the secret? The secret is that no one comes out a finished product. None of us are finished products. There is no magic that makes someone an actor or a director or a doctor or a lawyer or a President or First Lady. There is no magic. That is the one thing I want you all to understand. If you gain nothing from this movie or any of our lives, there is no magic. It takes grit. It takes determination and a whole lot of hard work. And as you know in the movie, it takes guts.

So as you think about the obstacles you face in your own life, as you hear someone telling you that you’re not good enough, or that you don't belong, I want you to think about how Jackie Robinson got up and played after he got spiked in the leg. I want you think about that. I want you to think about how Rachel Robinson is still working to make this world a better place at 90 years old. She’s still not stopping. You can rest a little bit. (Laughter.)

And then I want you all to put your heart and soul into everything you do -- every single thing you do. Can you promise me that? There is no exception to that rule. Everything you do, you have to do 120 percent. And you all are capable of doing that. Everyone is capable of doing that. And that's going to start right now.

Your first test of how passionate you’re going to be is right here today. Because I want you all to take full advantage of what we have for you. I want you to ask questions. I don't want you to hesitate. I don't want you to be shy. Because the first step in greatness is just using your voice, just knowing that whatever question, whatever thought, whatever ideas that you have have meaning and relevance in the world, and you will not hesitate to make your voices heard.

Take advantage of these folks. Make sure you understand and ask questions and push and drive. And when you leave here I want you to promise me that you’re going to keep doing that every single day, no matter what you want to become in life; that that is how you’re going to lead your life -- with greatness, with focus, with drive, determination. And when you do that, and I know you will, you will be something great.

Don't know what it is. I still don't know what I’m going to do with my life. But you will be something great. You all have everything it takes to make that happen, and it is an honor for me to be here with you guys.

Have fun. I got to go work. But I’m going to get a report on what’s been going on here today, so talk and ask questions. Thank you, guys. (Applause.)

END
12:11 P.M. EDT

Have questions about the BRAIN (Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies) Initiative? Administration officials will answer during a session of "Open for Questions."

The First Family hosted more than 30,000 visitors for the 135th annual Egg Roll, the largest public event held at the White House each year.

view all related blog posts

View the original article here

Obama Care

Donations Are Always Welcome and Appreciated

Translate

Wednesday, July 17, 2013

Presidential Proclamation -- World Autism Awareness Day, 2013

User:Rafael

New-look Sarepta eyes approval for muscular dystrophy drug

User talk:Markman

Bill would ease debt burden on students

Republicans And Diversity: How The GOP’s Rural Base Spoils The Party

Two-Thirds of Americans Don't Know If They Will Insure Under Obamacare

Cruz: Obama pushing path to citizenship as ‘poison pill’ to kill immigration reform

Exxon’s Duck-Killing Pipeline Doesn’t Pay Taxes To Oil Spill Cleanup Fund

User talk:Brenden

Sequestration Cuts Soon To Hit Long-Term Unemployment Insurance

User talk:Aschlafly

Remarks by the First Lady at "42" Film Workshop

About Me

Blog Archive