What happens when a student is arrested for asking a question? Mainstream media automatically try to paint him as a kook, of course. Hey, did you see that guy's other videos? They are like, really weird! And he dares to say that celebrity news is not worthy. Why, why, he probably doesn't even watch Oprah!
And so the lemmings are once again sidetracked into an issue that's not so important from an issue that's very important: John Kerry did not a thing to help him, either showing blatent disregard or ignorance for the U.S. Constitution. Then, Kerry had the gall to state that it wasn't any of his concern, that the police, those always benevolent folks funded by federal tax money, must be right. Well, until the police decide to arrest Kerry, which they probably won't, being that he is part of the elite in this country. I don't care if the student was dressed as Coco the Clown, he asked some excellent questions. As our country becomes communist, the crowd merely watches and cheers. So do illegally elected Senators, by the way. Some of my friends who call themselves liberals still have those "Kerry/Edwards, for a new America" bumper stickers. Maybe they should mark out the "c" in America and replace it with "Amerika."
Here's an excellent analysis of the situation by a true patriot, Paul Craig Roberts:
Aspie with Attitude
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
What happens when a student is arrested for asking a question? Mainstream media automatically try to paint him as a kook, of course. Hey, did you see that guy's other videos? They are like, really weird! And he dares to say that celebrity news is not worthy. Why, why, he probably doesn't even watch Oprah!
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
Check out this story. Then tell me that we're not living in a police state. A McDonald's worker's arrest because a hamburger was oversalted is amazing. It sounds almost as though it's a story in the satirical "Onion" publication. I hope that this girl fights the charges and the police officer is dismissed from his job. But probably, he'll receive a promotion, laugh at the situation with his buddies, and not give one thought to the girl who will now have an arrest record because a burger was oversalted. As bizarre as this story is, it should make every red-blooded American (any of those left?) stand up and fight. But then again, it's so much easier to watch American Idol.
Monday, September 3, 2007
I really wish John Edwards weren't a socialist. I'd like to vote for him. Really, I would. After all, he's from North Carolina. And his wife seems nice enough. But come on, mandatory health care, for everyone? Whether you want it or not?
You can read all about it at this story, but the bottom line is that far, far too many people believe that health care is a human right. I was talking with an otherwise intelligent woman the other night, someone I've always admired, who told me just that. She's over 60, which is supposed to mean that someone is wise, but the fact that people can't see that insurance and health care in general is a HUGE privilege that only those of us born in the past few decades have been lucky enough to enjoy shows me that socialism is all around us, and, unfortunately, gaining ground.
What if I don't want a mammogram? Tough cookies, according to John Edwards. What if I don't want to have my children immunized or checked for "mental health" by a government expert? Health care for all means all, whether you want it or not. And not having the freedom to decide, to choose and purchase your own health care, if you wish to have any (and some people do not want insurance) is one of the fundamental rights of living in a free country. John Edwards would like to change that and make his particular brand of health care, financed by the many pharmaceutical companies that support him, mandatory for everyone.
That's one of the MANY reasons I'm supporting Ron Paul.
Friday, August 24, 2007
Here's what Ron Paul has to say. It was sent to me by Charles Demastus of Freedom Watch. I can't see how anyone could read the following and NOT support Ron Paul, especially when one considers the alternatives.
August 22, 2007
Not all the media are biased. A local newspaper in New Hampshire reported on an annual GOP bbq in the town of Hollis. It could be called "the Ron Paul show," they said, since the far bigger crowd that usual consisted mostly of our supporters. One volunteer even rented an airplane and flew a wonderful sign around the sky. What great, creative, self-starting people I'm meeting, at every stop, all of them united by a love of America and American freedom.
Politics is usually about division. But this campaign is just the opposite. Not only are our volunteers a bunch of happy warriors, but they also practice the virtues of tolerance and peace, just as they want the nation to do.
The other day, the state chairman of an opposing campaign (not in New Hampshire!), angrily tore a sign out of one of our supporter's hands and trashed it. Different people with different beliefs might have responded differently. But our people, though they'd been standing in the rain all day, applied the Golden Rule. It's because of quiet heroes that I know we can change this country.
A reporter in New Hampshire told me this story about Florida: she had seen the same three supporters working every day passing out our literature, and so decided to interview them. She was startled to discover that one was a Republican, one was a Democrat, and one was an Independent. But I wasn't.
Freedom brings us all together. We can all agree on leaving people alone to plan and live their own lives, rather than trying to force them to obey at the point of a gun, as runaway government does. Instead of clawing at each other via the warfare-welfare state, people under liberty can cooperate in a unity of diversity.
There is no need to use government to threaten others who have different standards, or to be threatened by them. Looking to our Founders, our traditions, and the Constitution, we can build, in peaceful cooperation, a free and prosperous society.
At a talk show in Nashua, New Hampshire, the host asked me about the fair tax. Well, I agree on getting rid of the IRS, I told her, but I want to replace it with nothing, not another tax. But let's not forget the inflation tax, I said.
This was something she had never considered, but after I talked about the depreciation of our dollar by the Federal Reserve, its creation of artificial booms and busts, and its bailouts of the big banks and Wall Street firms, to the detriment of the average person, she loved it. That is another tax, she agreed, a hidden and particularly vicious tax.
They try to tell us that the money issue is boring or irrelevant. In fact, it is the very pith of our social lives, and morally, Constitutionally, and economically, the central bank is a disaster. Thanks to the work of this movement, Americans are starting to understand what has been hidden from them for so long: that we have a right to sound and honest money, not to a dollar debauched for the special interests.
Unconstitutional government has created a war crisis, a financial crisis, a dollar crisis, and a freedom crisis. But we don't have to take it. We don't have to passively accept more dead soldiers, a lower standard of living, rising prices, a national ID, eavesdropping on our emails and phone calls, and all the rest.
We can return to first principles, and build the brightest, most brilliant future any people on earth has ever aspired to. Help me teach this lesson. Help me campaign all over this country, in cooperation with our huge and growing volunteer army. Help me show that change is not only possible, but also essential. Please, make your most generous contribution (https://www.ronpaul2008.com/donate/) to this campaign for a Constitutional presidency worthy of our people. Invest in freedom: for yourself, for your family, for your future.
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
It's a real shame that people, and I hate to say this part but especially WOMEN, have allowed socialism to take us over until we are mighty comfortable with allowing the government to make decisions for us. One person commented that she was against Ron Paul because he's against abortion. First, Ron Paul is against the GOVERNMENT's making a decision for us regarding abortion. So am I. Second, from what I've read, he's against abortion personally, which I respect whether or not I agree with him. He believes that it's up to individuals to make abortion not as attractive as it currently is; he does not believe that it's up to the government to make abortion attractive or not. It's none of the government's business. But oh no, the dyed-in-the-wool feministas can't allow people to make up their own minds. No. Government must solve the problem for us. Sometimes, I'm not so sure that the women-being-allowed-to-vote thing was so great for us. Unfortunately, we've been a bit too much like Eve and screwed that up as well.
It reminds me of a lesbian message board that I once visited. I was chastised because I didn't allow my sexual preference or whatever tell me whom to vote for. Geez!
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
Linda Schrock Taylor has written an excellent article regarding Ron Paul:
I also just read this article on the YouTube debate:
So, where's the Ron Paul quote? Or was he even invited?
The "hillbillies" about which the article talks refer to the two fabulously funny guys in Red State Update.
Friday, July 20, 2007
I received the following bulletin from a MySpace friend. I've said it before, but I didn't understand the gun thing, and its importance to individual freedoms, until recently. Most people are brainwashed by the media on this one. Gun thing = Second Amendment :)
Thanks to lusciousgirl for letting me know about this.
From: Ed Chenel, A police officer in Australia. Here is the link:
I thought you all would like to see the real figures from Down Under. It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by a new law to surrender their 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by our own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars. (That's $780.79 for every gun collected and destroyed. - RRP)
The first year results are now in: Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent, Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent; Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)! In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not.
While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since the criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed. There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the elderly.
Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in "successfully ridding Australian society of guns." I suspect that you won't see this on the American evening news or hear your governor or members of the state Assembly disseminating this information.
The Australian experience proves it. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens. Take note, you Americans, before it's too late!
This has been verified by many other sources. Here are a couple of them:
DO not let your gun rights be taken away.
Go Here to Take Action Before it is too Late!!
Saturday, July 7, 2007
The Well-Meaning Adoptress
For those of us who've been unbrainwashed by seeking and finding the truth about adoption, it seems especially odd for a mom of two sons to seek other children to adopt. This week, at one of my son's classes, a white adoptress had a black baby in her sling. Either she changed dads since the boys or she adopted, I thought. I found out soon after seeing her that she, a la Madonna, has a little black baby that is not hers, and will never be hers, riding on her hip. Funny how one never seems to see a black mom or adoptress (or both) with a white baby on her hip. Nonetheless, the Madonna adoption complex seems to have hit L.A. It's a real shame.
I have a real problem with someone who not only takes someone else's child and pretends to be the mother, but who seems proud of her legal kidnapping. I find, however, that many people have been so brainwashed by the $1.5 billion adoption industry that they rejoice when an adoptress takes a child. They also mourn when a real mom takes back her baby. With such brainwashed people in the United States, it's no wonder that the "War on Drugs," "War on Terror," and "War on Poverty" can so easily slip by the American people. Let's face it: Most people are so glued to the television that they've lost their intuition, the intuition that says a mom and baby belong together. In the rare circumstances where a mom and baby need to be separated, let's call a spade a spade and not pretend that the family who raises the child is the child's real family. But then again, people might have to turn off American Idol and the nightly news to think about that one.
By the way, while having a Thinking Mama Barbie Beauty Day yesterday, I picked up a copy of People or some other celebrity gossip magazine (sorry, they all look pretty much the same to me:). Sure enough, adoptress Sheryl Crow was being hailed as a "mother" and the real mom of the child she was holding, a child that is longing for its mom, was conveniently left out of the article. My guess is that Sheryl, like Sharon Stone, went to Gladney or one of those other agencies that cajole moms by giving them scholarships, et al. for taking away their baby. Well, Sheryl's new adoptee will have all the comforts of Hollywood, a real blessing to a child who so recently lost its most important connection, the one to its real mom.
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
. . . Once Again!
He's certainly making people think about where our money comes from, something that the dumbed down government schools seem to forget these days.
Check out one of the latest compliments to the Ron Paul campaign for President:
Saturday, May 12, 2007
So, Sheryl Crow has decided to join the list of celebrity adopters, people who have enough money to rabidly defend their decision to take away a child from his (in this case) mother.
I'm as disappointed in Crow's decision to rip apart a natural family as I was in Madonna's. I'd always thought that Crow had some kind of respect for family, but evidently I was wrong. When you read the article, you'll note that Crow gives no homage whatsoever to the boy's natural family. It's all about HER, HER, HER, and her latest acquisition, a child.
Saturday, April 14, 2007
What’s the scariest thing to me about this whole Don Imus affair? While I was driving my brood today, I listened for a few moments to the National Propaganda Radio (NPR) affiliate. I’ll admit that the reason I listened is because my over-educated friend told me that she listens to NPR “all the time.” I used to do the same; it’s the radio show of choice for those of us who have too much education, with children in tow. Recently realizing NPR's own globalist and anti-freedom biases, however, I have learned to love silence. Or a Thomas the Tank Engine c.d. Yet today, I listened to NPR, for a moment.
Within a few seconds, I heard a woman talking about how terrible Don Imus’s remarks had been, how she thought that rap artists’ remarks about women were just as bad. Perhaps. But the clincher here was her solution: They should both be silenced. By whom, I wondered—a government entity?
Granted, the woman part of me should be offended, according to the politically correct, for using “ho,” one-half of Imus’ description of the “nappy-headed hos.”. Would I have wanted to use this rude phrase myself? No, but I’m not offended by those who may want to use it.
During the 80s, I lived in Manhattan for a summer and heard all about Don Imus and Howard Stern. Guess what? They were racist and sexist. Even then. You know something? It was called shock radio in those halcyon days; now, it’s called politically incorrect and banned by corporate sponsors. The woman I heard today on NPR stated, with a straight face evidently, that some speech should be “silenced.” The silencing of speech offends me much more than the idea that a remark is anti-feminist. Some remarks should be anti-feminist, and anti-whatever. Why? Because that’s what a free society calls for: freedom of speech.
What freedom of speech really means is that you have the right to offend me; I have the right to offend you. We can all offend each other. We should be polite and nice, in my humble opinion; although Imus’ remarks did rest in the polite realm, in a free society, remarks do not have to be either polite or nice.
Al Sharpton, (http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0704/09/sitroom.01.html)however, has a different take on the subject:
"There's no way the airwaves should be used to allow people to call people nappy-headed hos. That's what he called these people. And, for him to say that, and just to walk away like, "I'm just sorry; I made a mistake," would then mean that the FCC, who regulates everything on the airways, and who sanctioned people, as far as Janet Jackson, with a wardrobe malfunction, has no purpose at all."
Personally, I’m all for the FCC having “no purpose at all.” What could be better for free speech than having no governmental restrictions on speech? And no federal agency that watches speech?
But, but, but, I already hear the brainwashed masses say, what about protecting my children from ugly, nasty, rude speech? Who’s going to do that if not the government?
I know it’s hard to believe, but there is an off button on radios and televisions. I use it frequently.
With media exposure such as Aaron Russo’s From Freedom to Facism questioning the legality of the IRS agents forcibly taking our money this time of year, it’s no wonder that the power elite need more bread and a new circus to pacify the masses. This Don Imus deal seems to be just the ticket.
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
Someone sent this to me and I love it. The only thing missing is the other side: Seventeen Ways To Be A Good Republican. Takers anyone?
1. You have to be against capital punishment, but support abortion on demand.
2. You have to believe that businesses create oppression and governments create prosperity.
3. You have to believe that guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens are more of a threat than U.S. nuclear weapons technology in the hands of Iran or Chinese and North Korean communists.
4. You have to believe that there was no art before federal funding.
5. You have to believe that global temperatures are less affected by cyclical changes in the earth's climate and more affected by soccer moms driving SUV's.
6. You have to believe that gender roles are artificial, but being homosexual is natural.
7. You have to believe that the AIDS virus is spread by a lack of federal funding.
8. You have to believe that the same teacher who can't teach 4th-graders how to read is somehow qualified to teach those same kids about sex.
9. You have to believe that self-esteem is more important than actually doing something to earn it.
10. You have to believe that Mel Gibson spent $25 million of his own money to make "The Passion of the Christ" for financial gain only.
11. You have to believe the NRA is bad because it supports certain parts of the Constitution, while the ACLU is good because it supports certain parts of the Constitution.
12. You have to believe that taxes are too low, but ATM fees are too high.
13. You have to believe that Margaret Sanger and Gloria Steinem are more important to American history than Thomas Jefferson, Gen. Robert E. Lee, and Thomas Edison.
14. You have to believe that standardized tests are racist, but racial quotas and set-asides are not.
15. You have to believe that the only reason socialism hasn't worked anywhere it's been tried is because the right people haven't been in charge.
16. You have to believe that homosexual parades displaying drag queens and transvestites should be constitutionally protected, and manger scenes at Christmas should be illegal.
17. You have to believe that this message is a part of a vast, right-wing conspiracy.
Posted by Thinking Mama at 11:38 PM
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
It's not enough that adoption agencies are providing scholarships for moms who give their babies to strangers. Ahem, love their babies enough to give them away. No, push has come to shove and, evidently, the 40 couples vying for each adoptable infant is just too much for the government, which subsidizes adopters for taking babies from their moms, to swallow. Now, Texas, the great state from which King Jorge came to his current throne, is trying to make it even more wonderful for a mom to give her child to those supposedly more deserving adopters. By golly, don't moms who agree to give away their child deserve $500?!? Well, I can only say that Texas seems to be in the lead of the recycling children campaign. As a recycled child, however, I can only say that their prominence indeed sucks.
I've rallied and railed against the mental health industry. Accordingly, I've received all kinds of e-mails and such from people, mainly women, who think that I'm the crazy one for questioning the mental health industry. I'm sure that if certain true believers read this journal entry, the same kind of thing will happen. Oh well. I know it's a problem to many that neither my children nor I (nor their dad) are on any type of pharmaceutical psychiatric drug. But I'm wondering for how much longer people like my family and me will be a problem? How long will the Busheviks or their descendants, the Clinton "Lizard Queen" (thanks Vox Day) and her husband, leave our family alone?
Really, we just want to be left alone. We do fine by ourselves.
But here's what happens when the government interferes. Parents completely forget that they're in control. And the elite love it when parents do this kind of crap. Let's say that the pharmaceutical companies depend on it. There's nothing better for government-funded business that moms and dads who cede control. Ah, socialism . . .
Monday, March 19, 2007
I can't tell you how happy I am to be deconstructing myself from mainstream media. I assume that everyone else is doing the same. Every once in a while, however, I get an inkling of what the American Idol crowd receives: It ain't pretty!
The whole idea of Hillary's plan to make the United States into a socialist/communist state makes me want to barf. Do YOU really want her to change your light bulbs?
Hillary Clinton vowed to pursue several specific goals if elected president, including universal health care, preschool for every child, and making college more affordable. She also pledged to promote energy independence and drew laughs from the crowd when she described replacing ordinary light bulbs with energy-efficient models and shutting off lights to conserve power.
On the other hand, who knows what she would be up to if she weren't in everyone's house going, "Is anyone in here?" "Can you turn that thing off?" and "Can I take your child and place him or her in my VILLAGE?"
Give me Ron Paul! Thanks to Nick for the photo of a Ron Paul badge from the last time he ran for President. Wouldn't it have been nice if Paul had won in 1988?
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
Last weekend, I was talking with Michelle at The Adoption Show regarding being a guest on her show. We talked for well over an hour and I'm afraid that I kept her East Coast lights on way too long (it was past 11:30 p.m. EST when we hung up). Nonetheless, as we both agreed, there are many, many issues involved in adoption, not the least of which is defeating the myth that adoption is a wonderful thing for everyone involved. Oh, Joy! Adoption agencies seem to be saying, while offering scholarships to moms who give away a baby.
While adoption truth tellers such as Michelle, who has over 25 people who want to be guests on her show, strive to be honest, the $1.5 billion adoption industry continues to make familial separation seem like the most wonderful thing in the world. Although Madonna didn't allow criticism of her taking a young child from his village to stop her from acquiring him, Angelina Jolie doesn't seem to follow in Madonna's footsteps, at least acquiring a child whose parents seem to be out of the picture completely. Of course, Jolie didn't think that maybe her millions of dollars would, perhaps, help keep a mother and child together, maybe even here in America. No, it would be better for this beautiful star whose public relations people have done an excellent job of making over her image since she and Billy Bob each decided to wear a vial of the other's blood. She's acquiring children left and right, making adoption seem like a very hip thing to do. No wonder so many of the 20-something girls that I talk with these days say that they'll "just adopt" if they feel too uncomfortable with the idea of bearing their own child. Celebrities such as Madonna and Angelina make adoption seem like a breeze. Their adoptees will grow up to be indebted to their adopters, never quite understanding why they don't quite feel whole inside. Mother and child separation is a real bitch; celebs should use their money to keep families together. Oh, but then who would promote adoption?
Monday, March 12, 2007
For those who think the REAL ID is just dandy, take a look at what our lovely friends across the ocean are doing with IDs these days. It's just fine if you don't want to have an official government tracking device on your person. It's just that, well, you won't be able to leave the country. Or to come back. Now that's true freedom, isn't it?
What's next? You don't have to have an ID card. No, not at all. It's just that you won't be able to buy or sell anything. Revelation, anyone?
Monday, March 5, 2007
Well, really there's nothing much in the Constitution about it, is there? Especially since, you know, that whole search-and-seizure/Fourth Amendment thing was thrown where, really, it needed to be--in the trash can!! Well, okay, it hasn't been officially thrown out, but try going on a plane without being having your articles searched, and probably seized, by some government official.
So, I guess it should be small news, considering the burial of Anna Nicole Smith's body and such, that privacy invasion is just dandy. You know, of course, that if you don't agree, well, then that makes you anti-Bush. Being anti-Bush makes you, well, anti-American!
My favorite quote from this article , which tells how official committees think privacy invasion is simply dandy, is
The privacy board members declined to comment on the proposed legislation. But they have made it clear that they believe the board works effectively in its current structure and that it could alienate the president if members took on a more openly adversarial role.
Now, that's saying a lot, especially considering these wonderful words:
A White House privacy board has determined that two of the Bush administration's controversial surveillance programs - electronic eavesdropping and financial tracking - do not violate citizens' civil liberties.
The article talks about no-fly lists, but after all, aren't lists that we may or ma not be on, for reasons that we can't find out, placed on there by people whom we don't know, for our own good?!? Don't you realize that safety is first? If we aren't safe, why then, we could alienate our president! You know, the one who's upheld the Constitution and given us back all the freedoms that we've lost in the past one hundred or more years. Well, it's hard to believe that anyone would decide against our great Decider. Evidently, members of the privacy board won't do it either. And who can blame them? As John Lennon would say, Imagine!
Saturday, March 3, 2007
For those who haven't read my latest LRC article on the REAL ID, it happened to appear just days before Homeland Security (misnomer that it is) czar, Michael Chertoff, decided to take the two steps backward, one step forward approach, so very popular with the Fabian Socialist crowd, and give states another few months to comply. Oddly enough, there's some deal going on with "Republican senator" from Maine, who is a sponsor of an anti-REAL ID bill.
We must remember, however, that our power elite have the help of mainstream media, including those supposedly conservative or supposedly liberal rags that tout what our socialist elite leaders (those behind the scenes, not King Jorge and his show-and-tell bunch) want for us. Let's be clear on this point: They want to track us. They want to know where we are at all times and they want to have access to all information about us. Even if they never use said information, it will at least be there . . . just in case.
Just last night, I was watching Huell Howser's California Gold, one of my favorite PBS shows, and he was in downtown Los Angeles. He was talking to a friendly policeman (they're always friendly on television) and our wonderful officer of the law was telling him how fabulous it is that downtown L.A. has surveillance cameras, to, you know, catch people doing crime. Uh, isn't that what the police are for?!?
Nonetheless, people buy the whole security thing hook, line, and sinker, and readers of the National Review are no exception. Or so the power elite think. As with the policeman on Huell Howser's show, the National Review assures us that the REAL ID is something we all need; if we don't already love the idea of it, we're, of course, whiners and complainers. You know how it goes.
But here's my very favorite two sentences of the whole thing:
Of the two main gripes—ideological and fiscal—the first is easy to deal with. The act simply does not create a national ID card. Any modern society must have a means of identifying people—for national security, business transactions, and more.
Yes, yes, I know it's actually three sentences, but the first one, which paints those of us who are fully against the REAL ID (and the Mark of the Beast, et al.) has gripers, complainers, whiners, and wimps, is such a lovely piece of propaganda that I had to include it as well.
Okay, so here's my very favorite part: "The act simply does not create a national ID card," followed by the supposed fact that any "modern society must have a means of identifying people." Well, in other words it'll be the national ID card that isn't a national ID card. Methinks that the editors at the National Review certainly need a lesson in, well, logic. But who can afford the time for such a class when one is being paid off by the power elite to write such drivel?
A thankful nod to Vox Day's blog for the link to the National Review story.
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
As Trevor Bothwell so overtly pointed out, Suze Orman has never had sex with a man. Fine. Well. Good. Although I do think I, if in her position (so to speak), would have at least tried sex with a man. Just once, anyway. Well, whatever, each to his or her own.
Because my second child heard Suze Orman almost everyday, from his conception to birth, I was intrigued by this story. Unfortunately, the station that carried Suze in Los Angeles switched to some horrid elevator-esque music and I have been left without her savvy voice, except for her television show, for the past four years or so.
I started doing a bit of digging on the Internet and found some stories that told the truth behind Suze's supposed savviness. Suze complains that she won't inherit her partner's money--nor will her partner inherit hers--if she dies. Suze uses this as an argument for gay marriage. My question is: Why isn't she, instead, holding up the Estate Tax, which is the reason why neither she nor her partner will receive each other's millions upon death, as the useless piece of crap that it is. Imagine the influence that Suze would have if she urged all her fans to contact their Congress Critters and demand that they do away with the Estate Tax. For good. But no, instead of being something that can help everyone, Suze completely misses this argument and instead uses her dilemma to do something that will push the state into more people's bedrooms: gay marriage. I'm for the state staying out of people's bedrooms, no matter who shares the bedrooms. Repealing the Estate Tax and other taxes that the government forces on us will allow true freedom. It's a real shame that Suze couldn't see the real issue here.
What's your choice? Which is the bigger hindrance to your freedom? Please vote at digg.com: http://digg.com/political_opinion/The_REAL_ID_or_Britney_Spears_A_Modest_Proposal
or at Lew Rockwell's site: http://www.lewrockwell.com/shore/shore12.html
Posted by Thinking Mama at 1:49 AM
A few months ago, I wrote an article about private property. Private property, as I, and I think the founders of this great country, see/saw it, is something on which you can grow whatever herb you want; it's something on which you can raise your children, without fear of government's overtaking of it or of someone's deeming it not yours, via supposed eminent domain. Butler Shaffer understands my thinking on this definition of private property. His equestrian neighbors understand only what they've been governmently schooled to believe: that all property is common property. It's a "communitarian" idea, the kind of thinking that elects both Democrats and Republicans these days. Homeowners' associations, and their recent popularity, attest to the fact that people care nothing about private property in these perilous times. An article in this Sunday's Los Angeles Times revealed how popular homeowners' associations are becoming, and their gated community cousins. Well, can such a people deserve anything less than socialism? Hmmm.
Sunday, February 25, 2007
I'm tellin' ya! Watch this video and tell me why you won't vote for this guy. He's a freedom-lovin' fellow. He'll keep himself, and the government, out of your pants and your home. Please, take a moment and watch Ron Paul's video!
Friday, February 23, 2007
I was thrilled to find out that Ron Paul has his very own myspace page. Hooray! I received the following bulletin, which explains just another attempt at making him look bad. Mainstream media's version of this is concentrating on Hillary, whom Vox Day calls the "Lizard Queen," and socialists such as Mitt Romney, who so communistically made health care mandatory in Massachusetts. Excellent candidates like Paul are raked over the coals, when mentioned at all, for their rather old-fashioned views of limited government. You know, like those old-fashioned views in that old-fashioned document called the U.S.CONSTITUTION?!?
I know that many of my friends will automatically dismiss him because he is a Republican. But I don't care if he registers with the Space Alien Party, I've been following Paul for a while and would LOVE to see him as President. He disagrees with most so-called Republicans and votes for the Constitution. He'd get our butts out of the Middle East, that's for sure! He's also known, by the way, as the Taxpayer's Best Friend!
Here's the bulletin; Paul's myspace address is at the end:
Once again, your overwhelming support for Ron Paul has forced another online poll to resort to censorship.
www.2008horserace.com has removed Ron Paul because of "voter fraud" even though the site clearly states "as of Aug. 8, 2006 only 2 votes per IP address" will be accepted.
Worst of all, they have posted this picture of Dr Paul. [Thinking Mama Here: The picture did not post when I copied and pasted, but it is basically a picture of Dr. Paul, with "Voter Fraud" written on top of it.]
They should at least remove this picture immediately!!!
Please continue to support Ron Paul and tell everyone you know about this.
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
As with most people I grew up with, I never had a problem with guns. I pretty much taught myself to use a b.b.gun and I thought hunters should be able to hunt with anything that they pleased. However, I thought,
as this guy does, that some amount of regulation is not only good but necessary. All thinking people, so I thought, feel this way. When my husband pointed out to me that guns are necessary to defend ourselves from government, I thought this thinking was bizarre. However, I listened. And thought. And read. Specifically, I started reading the Second Amendment and what it actually said instead of the interpretation that the government schools, et al. had taught me. I think that the wool has been and is being pulled over many people's eyes, such as mine, regarding this whole gun thing. We have forgotten, or never knew, that guns were to protect us from government and other possible intruders to our home and property. We have forgotten that we have private property. We depend on the police, who are allowed carte blance with guns to protect us instead of protecting ourselves. And we think it's okay if people go hunting with guns, but we don't trust citizens to do anything else. After more careful study, I don't think this is what the founding fathers of the U.S. intended. Slowly, carefully, the United Nations is trying to disarm us and arm only those who have been state-approved, such as police officers. Of course, the real thugs will always get what they need in terms of firearms. It seems to be the honest, law-abiding citizen, especially ones who don't want government to interfere in their lives, who are losing out on this deal.
Many thanks to Claire Wolfe's blog for this interesting information.
Posted by Thinking Mama at 6:33 AM
Monday, February 19, 2007
Even if you're not an Alex Jones fan, you should find this article interesting. Why is it that the more government wishes to track and monitor us, the more legislation passes for it to happen. What are you doing to stop it? Or are you thinking it'll never happen here?
It's funny that I saw, this weekend, in a California homeschooling magazine, an article about what's happening in Germany regarding homeschooling. The well-meaning author of the magazine article assured us that while we should be vigilant, we shouldn't worry too much, that parents are in charge of their children in the U.S. If we were truly in charge, however, government would not mandate such things as vaccines, schooling, and birth certificates. Likewise, if we're truly free, we would have a choice about being tracked and tagged. Most people aren't even aware of the REAL ID fiasco. Imagine how quickly the U.S. government could pull something like this over the sheeple's eyes. Unless we stand up now, it will soon be too late. Don't wait for this craziness to come to America. Make your stand now! Tell your neighbors now!
Sunday, February 18, 2007
Steven Yates has written an
excellent article that you should read. If we have enough ruckus about the REAL ID, then it will stop. It's interesting to me that only ten or so years ago, there was so much noise about a national ID that Clinton, et al. stopped it. But now, with the excuse of fighting the supposed terrorists, privacy invasion and tracking of American citizens goes by virtually unnoticed. I can't help but wonder if the government schools are doing a way better job of making sheep that some of us ever imagined could be done.
The REAL ID, which you probably have not heard or read about in mainstream media, must be stopped. Pass this information along to all your friends and neighbors. It's that important!
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
This woman is one reason I started publishing freedom kinds of things. When I read her articles about airlines, and then experienced such craziness for myself, I began to admire someone who would dare to expose the bizarre TSA. I thank Becky Akers for helping to release me from the brainwashing of mainstream media. There are others to thank as well, but for now, here's one of Becky's latest articles. I'm so thankful that she is writing about this important subject. It receives almost no coverage, as far as I can tell, in mainstream media:
Read it and pass it along to a friend!
Do something to stop this crazy scheme, even if that something is merely telling your neighbor!
Wednesday, February 7, 2007
If this article doesn't make you want to homeschool, I don't know what will. If my child was being assaulted anywhere, public indoctrination camp or not, I'd take him right out of the situation. I'm not saying that these parents shouldn't be suing as well. But there is an easy answer to this problem: Take your child away from the government schools.
There are all kinds of ways to do this, even if you're a single parent. Joel Turtel's latest article tells one more reason to homeschool, or to place your child in a private school. His Web site, www.mykidsdeservebetter.com, says it all, including how to order his book. The book talks about all kinds of ways to make homeschooling work.
Why would a first grader's parent continue to keep his or her child in the government schools? To teach that child to be a victim? Because the child deserves less than to learn to the best of his or her ability?
Thursday, February 1, 2007
I realize this post is rather long, but it is an important one. I'm no doctor, and I do not claim to give medical advice. But I do like to pass along what I receive so that others may learn and choose for themselves. A few days ago, I was reading a mainstream media story about the five top health concerns of women. One was breast cancer; another was heart disease. There was some osteoporosis and a couple of other diseases thrown in as well. The article told the risk factors, but of course, no mention was made of things that may help, so-called alternative medicine. No, it would be too much to mention that breastfeeding lowers the risk of breast cancer or that B17 may be helpful in preventing and treating cancer, as this article discusses:
Better to line the coffers of mainstream medicine's pocket, because, as we know, those pharmaceutical companies just don't make enough money. Since my mother-in-law died, not of cancer per se, but shortly after her first chemotherapy treatment a little over a year ago, I have been looking at alternative medicine and prevention much more closely. Let's face it: mainstream medicine failed my mother-in-law and it fails many other people as well. As a result, my children will grow up without having their paternal grandmother around. My husband won't have his mom on this earth and I won't have my mother-in-law. Although nothing will bring her back, we can all learn a lesson from her death: following mainstream media and medicine's suggestions exclusively may kill you. It may not. But if there are alternatives, things that may even prevent cancer in the first place, why don't we hear about them?
Thanks to the Internet, we are hearing more and more about common sense things we can do to prevent diseases in the first place. A reader recently sent me this important information about iodine. It's a long read, and I haven't looked yet at the links, but it does provide us with an interesting view of something that's very common and yet, may help to prevent cancer. Since reading this article a few weeks ago, http://www.lewrockwell.com/miller/miller20.html, I have started salting our food with seaweed flakes and taking kelp tablets. There's no guarantee that these things will help us, but then again, there seem to be lots of evidence that they may. I, of course, am not a doctor and am not giving any medical advice. I am merely sharing some things that I've learned so that you can best make your own decision. For yourself. Here's what the reader sent me:
Further to: The Miracle Of Iodine And It's Nearly Free the miracles simply keep piling.... an essential nutrient to maintain health!
"Many physicians would be surprised to learn that more than a hundred years ago, iodine was called "The Universal Medicine", and was used in several clinical conditions. Nobel Laureate Albert Szent Györgyi, the physician who discovered Vitamin C in 1928, commented: "When I was a medical student, iodine in the form of KI was the universal medicine. Nobody knew what it did, but it did something and did something good."
Extracted from: Iodine: The Universal Nutrient (summary below)
"Research work has shown that iodine deficiency in the thyroid presents as a thyroid goiter (enlargement of the thyroid). In those areas of the world where iodine deficiency is very high, such as in Switzerland and in certain areas of Asia and Africa, there are also higher incidents of thyroid cancer. Iodine is also concentrated by breast tissue, and a lack of iodine in the breasts manifests as fibrocystic breast disease (painful breasts with nodules and cysts and often more symptomatic prior to menstrual periods). 93% of American women have fibrocystic breast disease and the longer this disease exists, the higher the potential risk for development of breast cancer. 20% of all iodine in the human body is stored in the skin, specifically in the sweat glands. Lack of iodine in the sweat glands manifests as dry skin with a decreased ability to sweat. Iodine can also be concentrated in the stomach tissue, and the lack of iodine in the stomach manifests as achlorhydria (lack of digestive acid production). Iodine is used by the stomach cells, also known as parietal cells, to concentrate chloride which is necessary to produce hydrochloric acid (digestive acid). With the prolonged presence of achlorhydria, there is a much higher incidence of stomach cancer. Iodine is concentrated in the lacrymal glands of the eye, and a lack of iodine can cause dry eyes. Iodine can also be concentrated in the parotid and submandibular glands of the mouth, and iodine deficiency here can result in dry mouth. Iodine can be concentrated in the ovaries, and Russian studies done some years ago showed a relationship between iodine deficiency and the presence of cysts in the ovaries. The greater the iodine deficiency, the more ovarian cysts a woman produces. In its extreme form, this condition is known as polycystic ovarian disease."
The following is must listen 4 hour compilation* regarding iodine:
Dr. Jorge Flechas - Iodine - 01-26-07 (1hr)
Dr. Jorge Flechas - Iodine - 01-05-07 (2hrs)
Russell Blaylock - Iodine Deficiency - 01-03-07 (1hr)
David Brownstein, MD Video Links on Iodine are here
*The above have been extracted from Radio Liberty - thanks to Kallie Miller for reminding me of these excellent health broadcasts.
In addition to items already mentioned above following items are some more items discussed in the talks:
- Cancer (Breast, Ovary, Prostate etc.)
- Risk of cancer going doubles for women on thyroid medication and more than triples for those who have had no children (1976 JAMA).
- Children can be penalized 10-15 IQ points if an expectant mother doesn't get enough dietary iodine & may cause neurological problems.
- Diabetes - Iodine's ability to revive hormonal sensitivity back to normal significantly improves Insulin sensitivity and other hormones.
- Heart disease* via improved thyroid function it can normalize cholesterol and blood pressure certain types of arrhythmia
- It is Iodine and not Fluoride that the teeth and bones need. It will do everything purported for toxic fluoride plus raise IQ**.
- Iodine chelates heavy metals such as Mercury, Lead, Cadmium and Aluminum and halogens such as Fluoride and Bromide.
*Kenezy Gyula Korhaz, Debrecen, III. Belgyogyaszat. [Article in Hungarian]
The thyroid hormone deficiency on cardiovascular function can be characterized with decreased myocardial contractility and increased peripheral vascular resistance as well as with the changes in lipid metabolism. 42 patients with cardiovascular disease (mean age 65 +/- 13 yr, 16 males) were investigated if iodine insufficiency can play a role as a risk factor for the cardiovascular diseases. The patients were divided in 5 subgroups on the ground of the presence of hypertension, congestive heart failure, cardiomyopathy, coronary disfunction and arrhythmia. Urine iodine concentration ( 5.29 +/- 4.52 micrograms/dl) was detected with Sandell-Kolthoff colorimetric reaction. The most decreased urine iodine concentration was detected in the subgroups with arrhythmia and congestive heart failure (4.7 +/- 4.94 micrograms/dl and 4.9 +/- 4.81 micrograms/dl, respectively). An elevated TSH level was found by 3 patients (5.3 +/- 1.4 mlU/l). An elevation in lipid metabolism (cholesterol, triglyceride) associated with all subgroups without arrhythmia. In conclusion, the occurrence of iodine deficiency in cardiovascular disease is frequent. Iodine supplementation might prevent the worsing effect of iodine deficiency on cardiovascular disease.
PMID: 9755626 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] ***************
**What is happening is the ingested fluoride takes the place of iodine that should be there in the teeth, especially growing teeth. Iodine and thyroid for example have complete control of tooth growth along with some help from growth hormone. (6-8) It is only because our iodine intake has been decreasing over the years that fluoride has been mistakenly added to our water with the idea of helping children's teeth. It would have made more scientific sense to have added more iodine. Monitoring of the results of fluoridation and iodine intake have not been consistent. As one would expect there are lots of publications now about the problems with too much fluoride.
Fluoride has also been used against osteoporosis with beneficial results. This again is just replacing what iodine should be doing. The minor problems of osteopenia (minor loss of calcium) seen in some patients put on thyroid is related to the fact that the same patients are low in iodine. The low iodine causes the hypothyroidism and also the inappropriate short term bone response. If iodine is given with the thyroid hormone this abnormal response can be avoided. So persons taking adequate daily iodine will unlikely to ever develop osteoporosis.
The thyroid gland uses iodine to make thyroid hormone. We know the thyroid gland appeared in evolution at the same time as back bones (vertebrates). Radioactive iodine injected into patients shows a full outline of the bones on a total body scan. This means one of the places iodine goes to immediately is bones. Thyroid hormone makes bones grow, mature and remodel, when necessary. Together thyroid hormone, iodine and growth hormone maintain a healthy bone structure. As vertebrates (animals with backbones) are the only animals with thyroid glands it makes sense that iodine and thyroid control bone structure and function.(6-8)
Extracted from: Dr. David Derry Answers Reader Questions
..."since the beginning of administration of iodine to prevent goitre, children have less caries. Iodine seems to increase resistance to caries, retarding the process and reducing its incidence."
Dental Caries, American Dental Association (ADA). (Lynch, Kettering, Gies, eds.) Original Documents: Summaries on Caries Page 72, Page 73, 1939*****************
Like Vitamins C and D, Selenium and Magnesium, Iodine is more than often deficient in out diets. This of course is in addition to good diet and other supplements such as B complex, boron etc.
Sadly Iodine has been systematically removed from our food sources such as Milk, now from about 50% of the salt sold in the US and India and even from bread where it has been replaced with Bromine another toxic substance like Fluoride. One has to wonder why. While there are a lot of reasons why one should get tested for Iodine insufficiency before supplementing the major one is allergy. If one can eat iodized salt then allergy is generally not an issue. Based on the Japanese intake a daily dose of 12 mg (2 drops of Loguls iodine) is the least that is needed. Szent-Gyorgyi the original researcher of iodine and the inventor of Vitamin C felt that 60 mg daily intake to be safe.
Note: For better absorption iodine works best in conjunction with Vitamin C. Take separately with at least an one hour interval.
Summary of findings
Based on a review of the literature, and recent clinical research studies 2-13, the concept of orthoiodosupplementation can be summarized as follows:1. The nutrient iodine is essential for every cell of the human body requiring peripheral concentrations of inorganic iodide ranging from 10-6M to 10-5M.
2. In non-obese subjects without a defecting cellular transport system for iodine, these concentrations can be achieved with daily intake of 12.5 mg to 50 mg elemental iodine. The adult body retains approximately 1.5 gm iodine at sufficiency. At such time, the ingested iodine is quantitatively excreted in the urine as iodide.
3. The thyroid gland is the most efficient organ of the human body, capable of concentrating iodide by 2 orders of magnitude to reach 10-6M iodide required for the synthesis of thyroid hormones when peripheral levels of inorganic iodide are in the 10-8M range.
4. Goiter and cretinism are evidence of extremely severe iodine deficiency, because the smallest intake of iodine that would prevent these conditions, that is 0.05 mg per day, is 1000 times less than the optimal intake of 50 mg elemental iodine.
5. The thyroid gland has a protective mechanism, limiting the uptake of peripheral iodide to a maximum of 0.6 mg per day when 50 mg or more elemental iodine are ingested. This amount therefore would serve as a preventive measure against radioactive fallout.
6. An intake of 50 mg elemental iodine per day would achieve peripheral concentration of iodide at 10-5M, which is the concentration of iodide markedly enhancing the singlet triplet radiationless transition. Singlet oxygen causes oxidative damage to DNA and macromolecules, predisposing to the carcinogenic effects of these reactive oxygen species. 5 This effect would decrease DNA damage, with an anticarcinogenic effect.
7. Preliminary data so far suggest that orthoiodosupplementation results in detoxification of the body from the toxic metals aluminum, cadmium, lead and mercury.
8. Orthoiodosupplementation increases urinary excretion of fluoride and bromide, decreasing the iodine-inhibiting effects of these halides.
9. Most patients on a daily intake ranging from 12.5 mg to 50 mg elemental iodine reported higher energy levels and greater mental clarity with 50 mg (4 tablets Iodoral), daily. The amount of iodine used in patients with Fibrocystic Disease of the Breast by Ghent et al20 is 0.1 mg/Kg BW per day, 10 times below the optimal daily intake of 50 mg. In our experience, patients with this clinical condition responded faster and more completely when ingesting 50 mg iodine/iodide per day.
10. For best results, orthoiodosupplementation should be part of a complete nutritional program, emphasizing magnesium instead of calcium.
11. A beneficial effect of orthoiodosupplementation was observed in the clinical conditions listed in Table I.5,7,12,13
12. The iodine/iodide loading test and serum inorganic iodide levels are reliable means of assessing whole body sufficiency for elemental iodine for quantifying the bioavailability of the forms of iodine ingested and for assessing cellular uptake and utilization of iodine by target cells.
13. Orthoiodosupplementation may be the safest, simplest, most effective and least expensive way to solve the healthcare crisis crippling our nation. ***********
Iodine Insufficiency FAQ
Does everyone need iodine supplementation?
Iodine supplementations should be prescribed only if indicated by the results of iodine testing. Iodine testing kits may be ordered from my office (1-877-900-5556) by individuals with a physician's order or by health care professionals. If ordered by an individual, test results will be returned to the ordering physician; if ordered by a health care provider, test results will be returned to the health care provider. A cost of $80 per kit covers the cost of the testing kit, testing services, and return postage (charges for additional postage will apply if mailed to location outside the U.S.). A urine iodine spot test was developed by the World Health Organization and looks for iodine sufficiency to prevent goiter. This test is now offered through our office for an additional ($30) thirty dollars making the total $110.
Why is iodine deficiency common in the United States?
We first need to note that the body produces no iodine, and there is no organ other than the thyroid that can store large quantities of iodine. In some areas of the US, including mountain regions, the Mississippi River Valley, the Ohio River Valley, and the Great Lakes regions, the soil has always had a very low iodine content. But even in other areas of once iodine-rich soil, over farming has frequently depleted this iodine content. Hence, we no longer get adequate iodine via the plants we consume. To compensate for this, iodine was added to salt, bread, and milk. Today iodine is no longer added to bread or to milk, and the amount of iodine added to salt has steadily declined over the years. All of these factors contribute to the current prevalence of iodine deficiency in the United States.
How does iodine deficiency manifest itself?
Research work has shown that iodine deficiency in the thyroid presents as a thyroid goiter (enlargement of the thyroid). In those areas of the world where iodine deficiency is very high, such as in Switzerland and in certain areas of Asia and Africa, there are also higher incidents of thyroid cancer. Iodine is also concentrated by breast tissue, and a lack of iodine in the breasts manifests as fibrocystic breast disease (painful breasts with nodules and cysts and often more symptomatic prior to menstrual periods). 93% of American women have fibrocystic breast disease and the longer this disease exists, the higher the potential risk for development of breast cancer. 20% of all iodine in the human body is stored in the skin, specifically in the sweat glands. Lack of iodine in the sweat glands manifests as dry skin with a decreased ability to sweat. Iodine can also be concentrated in the stomach tissue, and the lack of iodine in the stomach manifests as achlorhydria (lack of digestive acid production). Iodine is used by the stomach cells, also known as parietal cells, to concentrate chloride which is necessary to produce hydrochloric acid (digestive acid). With the prolonged presence of achlorhydria, there is a much higher incidence of stomach cancer. Iodine is concentrated in the lacrymal glands of the eye, and a lack of iodine can cause dry eyes. Iodine can also be concentrated in the parotid and submandibular glands of the mouth, and iodine deficiency here can result in dry mouth. Iodine can be concentrated in the ovaries, and Russian studies done some years ago showed a relationship between iodine deficiency and the presence of cysts in the ovaries. The greater the iodine deficiency, the more ovarian cysts a woman produces. In its extreme form, this condition is known as polycystic ovarian disease.
Is there enough Iodine in our salt?
When people go shopping for salt they will notice there is iodized salt verses regular salt. This is also true for sea salt that is plain sea salt verses sea salt with iodine. There is more iodine in iodized table salt that there is in plain sea salt, which contains very little iodine to start with. Quite frequently we see articles in the local press showing that there is a high amount of iodine in salt and we need to reduce the total amount of salt because of the potential damage from iodine. However, during the last National Nutritional Survey called the NHANES III from 1988 - 1994, the study revealed that 15% of the U>S> adult female population suffered from iodine insufficiency where this was defined as a urine iodine level 60 meq per liter. Another misconception that is out on the market is that high consumption of iodized salt helps prevent iodine deficiency. The fact is that iodized salt contains 74meg of iodine per gram of salt. The purpose of iodization of salt was to prevent goiter and cretinism and was never meant for optimal iodine requirements by the human body. An example of this would be the ingestion of iodine in order to control fibrocystic breast disease that is a level of five milligrams of iodine per day. In this particular case one would need to consume 68 grams of salt. In Japan, the Japanese population has an intake of around 13.8 milligrams of iodine per day. Among the population of the Earth, the Japanese have the lowest prevalence and incidence of female reproductive organ cancer in their tissues.
Can I use seaweed purchased from the grocery store to supplement my body with iodine?
Seaweed sold in the United States has a tremendous variation in the amount of iodine content. In Japan, the average Japanese eats around 13.8 mg of iodine per day with the vast majority of that iodine coming from seaweed that has been specifically grown and cultured to maximize iodine trapping in the seaweed. To my knowledge, this particular type of seaweed is not being sold in the United States at the present time.
What about iodine and aging?
As most of us know, hypertension (high blood pressure) often becomes an issue as we age. Because of this, many are being told that they need to decrease the total amount of salt in their diet. However, we must realize that most people over age 60 are becoming depleted of iodine due to the lack of iodine in the diet and that this particular group of individuals is also the group with the highest occurrence of thyroid nodules and goiters. Also of interest is that 25% of the people in this age category will become senile as a result of low thyroid (hypothyroidism). Iodine supplementation may alleviate these iodine-related maladies, but iodine testing and thyroid studies such as a thyroid ultrasound and thyroid lab tests should be conducted prior to beginning iodine supplementation therapy.
Can Iodine be used while a woman is pregnant?
In Japan, the average Japanese woman is eating 13.8 mg of iodine per day while the average American woman consumes 100 times less iodine per day (approximately 0.138 mg per day). For iodine supplementation, I have been prescribing Iodoral, a product made by the Optimox Corporation. Iodoral contains a 12.5 mg combination of iodine/iodide per tablet. Iodine is very crucial in the first three years of life from the development of the fetus inside the womb until two years after birth. In the development of a child's IQ, I feel that it would be very advantageous for the mother to supplement her diet during pregnancy and, if she is nursing the child, for the first two years after pregnancy.
What happens to thyroid hormone production in the presence of iodine supplementation?
Iodine supplementations should be prescribed only when iodine testing indicates iodine deficiency. Iodine testing kits can be ordered from my office (828 684 3233) by individuals or by medical practitioners. Traditional medical literature indicates that patients who have thyroid nodules or thyroid goiter may have the potential to develop hyperthyroidism when supplementing with iodine. Hence, before commencing iodine supplementation, it would be advantageous for a person to have their primary care doctor order a thyroid ultrasound to rule out the possibility of pre-existing goiter or thyroid nodules. The primary care doctor should also order thyroid lab work (to be used as a baseline) before prescribing iodine therapy and this lab work should be repeated and followed at regular intervals during the patient's iodine therapy. For iodine therapy patients not also on thyroid hormone replacement therapy, adjustments to the iodine therapy should be made if signs of hyperthyroidism should occur. Should signs of hyperthyroidism occur in patients who are taking thyroid hormone replacement therapy as well as taking iodine supplementation, the physician should first recommend an adjustment in the thyroid hormone therapy rather than in the iodine supplementation. This adjustment in therapy is recommended because iodine is required not only by the thyroid but is required for the proper functioning of many other tissues. The presence of pre-existing thyroid nodules or goiter does not preclude the patient from iodine supplementation therapy. In fact, in the extensive research with iodine therapy done in my office, I have seen many case of pre-existing thyroid nodules and goiter shrink in the presence of iodine therapy.
Effect of daily ingestion of a tablet containing 5mg Iodine and 7.5mg Iodide as the potassium salt, for a period of 3 months, on the results of thyroid function tests and thyroid volume by ultrasonometry in ten euthyroid Caucasian Women. Guy. E. Abraham M.D., Jorge D. Flechas M.D., and John C. Hakala R.Ph., The Original Internist 9: 6-20, 2002
Iodine sufficiency of the whole human bodyGuy. E. Abraham M.D., Jorge D. Flechas M.D. and John C. Hakala R.Ph., The Original Internist 9: 30-41, 2002.
Effect of daily ingestion of IodoralGuy. E. Abraham M.D., Jorge D. Flechas M.D. and John C. Hakala R.Ph.
The Wolff-Chaikoff Effect: Crying Wolf? Guy E. Abraham, M.D.
The safe and effective implementation of orthoiodosupplementation in medical practice. Guy E. Abraham, M.D., The Original Internist, Vol. 11, No. 1, March 2004. Pages 17-36.
Origin of the word CRETINGuy E. Abraham, M.D., Jorge D. Flechas, M.D.
The Safe and Effective Implementation of Orthoiodosupplementation in Medical Practice Guy E. Abraham, M.D.
The Concept of Orthoiodosupplementation and its Clinical Implications Guy E. Abraham, M.D.
Serum Inorganic Iodide Levels Following Ingestion of a Tablet Form of Lugol Solution: Evidence for an Enterohepatic Circulation of Iodine." Guy E. Abraham, M.D.
A Rebuttal of Dr. Gaby's Editorial on Iodine Guy E. Abraham, M.D., David Brownstein, M.D.
Evidence that the administration of Vitamin C improves a defective cellular transport mechanism for iodine: A Case Report Guy E. Abraham, M.D., David Brownstein, M.D.
Validation of the Orthoiodosupplementation Program: A Rebuttal of Dr. Gaby's Editorial on Iodine. Guy E. Abraham, M.D., David Brownstein, M.D.
The saliva/serum iodide ratio as an index of sodium/iodide symporter efficiency. Guy E. Abraham, M.D., D. Brownstein, M.D., and J.D. Flechas, M.D.
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
Apparently, it's not enough for pharmaceutical companies to own every other television commercial these days. No, somehow that manuever doesn't quite provide enough profits for the giant companies. What they must do instead is to mandate vaccines, making it very difficult for children to avoid them. Then the government provides money for those who can't afford the vaccines, money that we provide as taxpayers. In most states, religious or medical exemptions are required. But in a free country, shouldn't parents be the judge? Shouldn't every parent read as much information as necessary and then decide what's best for the family involved? Ah, but when have we lived in a free country?
Aaron Russo's new film talks about this very issue. It's good to know that people are on to the government's taking our income without due cause. Dan fills us in:
This is an excellent video of a juror who sat on a criminal income tax case. She tells how the jury went through an enlightenment process as the trial proceeded. The prosecution refused to answer the defendent's simple question: "Where is the law that requires me to file a tax return?" The judge was so obviously impartial that the jury was shocked. He also refused to give the jury the law that the defendent allegedly had broken (because there isn't one!). The jury finally figured out what was going on and acquited the defendent on all charges. This video could help other wrongly accused Americans if seen by enough people. Please share!
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
Well, it seems as though the real parents won in this case, after eight long years: http://my.earthlink.net/article/nat?guid=20070123/45b59650_3421_1334520070123-901555026
As a reunited adoptee, I can say that yes, it would have been a bit jarring had I been yanked from the people who raised me and given back to my natural mom and dad, but in the end, I think it would have been beneficial. God and nature intend families to stay together!
It's interesting that in this particular case, it became an interest of the Chinese community. Yes, it was, and often is, a racial issue when children are separated from their parents via adoption. But it's more than that--even if the ethnicity is the same, the child is severed from the people who created him or her. All adoptees look at our adopters, no matter how wonderful they may be, and realize that we do not come from them.
The positive thing about this family is that, at least this little girl, thanks to a good judge, will not have to continue growing up with a family who is not her own. The supposed Christians who were supposedly helping the Chinese family initially took the child as their own. But why? Why wouldn't everyone rejoice and gladly give the child back to her natural family? Here's where, as is often the case, the adopters want the child no matter what. The adopters in this case weren't saving an orphan; they seemed to be trying to take possession of a child who wasn't theirs. Now, why?