The 21st Century Plan For Jobs

An important topic. Our current 2 party system has left Americans in the dust. Black Americans and Hispanic Americans continue to be discriminated against in the workforce. This is unacceptable. We are at a crossroads in America. People are angry, and let's face it- Obama will NOT be elected, which means unless we vote for an Independent, we will be left with a Republican CROOK who only cares for himself. (They'll never elect a woman.)

21st Century Program for Jobs from Communist Party on Vimeo.

Save the nation! Tax corporations! Tax the rich!

“We’re going broke… We can’t afford it.” That’s the line from deficit hawks determined to destroy Social Security and Medicare and slash every federal, state, and local program that benefits working people.

Republicans held hostage an extension of jobless benefits for two million workers in order to extort an extension of $750 billion in Bush-era tax cuts for millionaires.

Now, in the name of “deficit reduction,” they are ramrodding a federal budget that slashes education, privatizes Medicare and cuts Social Security. Tax cuts for wealthy individuals, banks and corporations are preserved adding trillions to the deficits. Also virtually untouched is the trillion dollars per year for Pentagon spending and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Meanwhile, governors like Republican Scott Walker of Wisconsin, unleashed a vicious, nationwide union-busting offensive falsely blaming public employees for the budget shortfall even though these workers gave up wage and benefit increases. Standing in the shadows are the billionaire Koch brothers, bankrollers of Walker and other “Tea Party” Republicans.

The rightwing prophets of doom, must think we have forgotten that we live in the richest capitalist country with Wall Street banks sitting on $13 trillion in reserves, most of it untaxed.

Little wonder that an angry outcry is rising against corporate tax evasion while the rest of us endure cutbacks. The people say: “Save our nation! Tax the corporations! Tax the rich!”

The corporate tax rate is 35 percent but thanks to loopholes they pay less than 18 percent, lower than the vast majority of low and middle-income taxpayers. It is legalized grand larceny!

FACT: Exxon-Mobil
Profits: $45 billion in 2009
Federal taxes paid: ZERO

FACT: General Electric
Profits: $10.3 billion in 2009
Federal taxes paid: ZERO
Tax Rebates Received $1.1 billion

FACT: Bank of America (BOA)
Profits: $4.4 billion in 2010
Federal taxes paid: ZERO
TARP Bailout $45 billion in 2008-09

FACT: Wells Fargo
Profits: $12 billion
Tax Credits: $19 billion after purchase of Wachovia Bank

Billionaire Warren Buffet said the tax burden for low and middle income taxpayers should be reduced “I think people at the high end, people like myself, should be paying a lot more in taxes. We have it better than we’ve ever had it.”

The principal of progressive taxation has come under vicious attack from the Republican right. They echo billionaire real estate mogul, Leona Helmsley who famously sneered, “Only little people pay taxes.”

They believe working class people should pay the taxes while they line up like hogs at the public trough, enjoying services paid for by the “little people.”

WE SAY ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!

End the Bush-era tax giveaways to banks, corporations and wealthy individuals.
Close corporate tax loopholes, especially billions in tax subsidies for the oil companies.
Raise new revenues by restoring 70% tax rate on incomes over $1 million.
Raise $150 billion a year by imposing a financial transaction tax on Wall Street speculation.
Cut the military budget by half. Bring troops home from Afghanistan and Iraq.
Create jobs in a major public works program to repair our nation’s infrastructure and to make our nation number one in “green industry.” Target the jobs to hard-hit inner city communities and the rural poor.
Fully fund a national health care program and drastically increase federal aid to education, Pell Grants, and other vital human needs programs.
Remove the cap on the Social Security payroll tax, so that CEOs and hedge fund managers pay the same rate as the rest of us.

Article Via Communist Party USA Platform, Joshua-Paul Angell (Socialist and Member Of The Communist Party USA, elected official of the United States Parliament)

Natural Medicine- Natural First Aid Kits, How-To Make A Natural Kit, Matural Medicine

Sometimes it’s best to visit the past for inspiration into the healing arts. Back then first aid was simple and used the gifts of Mother Nature. With changing seasons comes restocking and supplying the medicine cabinet. Forget purchasing a new first aid kit though; instead, make your own using natural items and supplies from around the house.

1. Alcohol and Witch Hazel
Alcohol is a great sanitizer for utensils and even your hands when no soap and water are available. Although ammonia is often the reported cure for de-activating jelly fish tentacles, alcohol actually works just as well but does not require dilution as ammonia does. Another antiseptic, Witch Hazel, provides similar qualities but additionally soothes wounds and is far more comforting than pure alcohol.

2. Essential Oils
Two essential oils are so useful they could probably make up the whole kit on their own. Tea Tree and Lavender can both be applied neat, without a carrier oil, and should be used sparingly. Both are antiseptic in addition to antimicrobial and antibacterial. Lavender offers a cooling effect making it an optimal choice for first and, sometimes, second-degree burns. When using either oil, it’s best to buy from local organic farmers whom you trust. In urban communities, find a reputable health food store or herbalist for quality oils. Remember, a little goes a long way so one drop should suffice for most wounds.

3. Tweezers, Needles and Scissors, Oh My!
You’ll need traditional first aid tools of the trade. Outdoors people know how important tweezers are, especially after a day working with wood, including gardening. Sometimes those branches won’t go down without a fight and nothing removes a splinter faster than tweezers. Remember all equipment should be sanitized with alcohol before using.

4. Baking Soda and Clay
It may sound like the makings for a science project, but these two ingredients work wonders on various critter stings. After removing bee stingers, slathering a paste of baking soda and witch hazel to neutralize the venom while soothing the area. Indigenous people have long used clay in the same matter. Choose green French clay or bentonite for making a paste with witch hazel and a few drops lavender or tea tree essential oil. The clay pulls venom from the wound helping slow the damage caused by envenomation. Use it as soon as the bite is noticed for best results and choose only cosmetic grade quality.

5. Cloth, Gauze and Cotton
Recycle a white t-shirt into various shapes and sizes for the perfect bandages. You can still use first aid tape for closure, safety pins, or repurpose the sleeves for holding bandages in place. Purchase gauze or crochet strips from thin, cotton string. Once the items are ready, you will want to launder and sanitize them appropriately for storage. It’s important to keep them in a plastic or glass airtight containers.

Safety Precaution: As with any traditional medications and first aid treatments, adult supervision is always required and precautions are necessary to keep the first aid kit out of children’s reach.
How natural is your first aid kit? Share your ideas and tips in the comments below.

So- again, denied free speech by a Politician refusing to answer the tough issues...

So, I've reached out to join in on a conference call with 2 time Governor of New Mexico Gary Johnson.

It's a call discussing cutting military spending. I've left 2 comments (I was the first two) and stated my stance- ALL money needs to stay in this country. Question is, will a full fledged Republican and Presidential Republican nominee talk to a member of the US Parliament that is a card carrying Socialist and supporter of the Pot Party and Roseanne Barr for 2012? I already know the answer, I will not be included or responded too. That's the problem with this 2 party system. Even some officials sitting in US political office and our US Parliament refuse to publicly admit it. But why won't they admit what they belong too? Roseanne will. I will. Sallie Elkordy will. The Green Party nominee will. So what gives? I'll tell you. Those of us that are Politicians that VOLUNTEER our services and don't draw a penny of your hard earned money and haven't been spoon fed by a silver spoon like the Kennedy's... Well, we are all like YOU. Pee-ons that the Regime will not listen too. Important issues, like legalizing hemp so we can make clothing, fuel, food and medicine are not discussed. There is no money in it for them, in fact- it will take away from their bank accounts from powerful drug lobbyists. So who do we note for this Presidential run? Obama the sell-out big promiser small doer or a Republican wanting to crush Gay rights and Hemp legalization? It's simple. An INDEPENDENT. It's time to speak- but these people will not listen to us- therefore, we must create our own system. It is the All-Party system, and it is based on ranked voting- not single winner districts. Furthermore, New Mexico leads in deaths of Mexican's coming to America to find work that Americans will not do. Why? Because they try to stop the water stations, where people put out jugs of water so these hardworking people don't die in the desert. Makes no sense.

Here is what 2 time Governor of New Mexico Gary Johnson wrote on Google+, and then what I commented as the first 2 comments that were immediately removed:
Gary Johnson - 10:15 PM - Public
I'm hosting a conference call tomorrow, Tuesday August 30th, at 11:00 AM Eastern Time, on the subject of cutting military spending.

If you're a blogger or reporter and would like to ask me questions directly, please RSVP by sending an email to Blogs@GaryJohnson2012.com with the subject "Blogger Call". Please include your name, and the title and URL of your blog or news outlet.

Hope to see you there!

AND NOW, by comments that were censored by the regime:
Joshua Angell - I would love to join in. I am a Marketing Minister and full elected Director of the Midwest SS8 in the US Parliament movement, along with prominent names such as Ron Paul (of whom I do not support, but value his thinking) Roseanne Barr, and several of the Peace Party, Green Party and Pot Parties.
10:17 PM - Edit

Joshua Angell - Forgot to mention, I host a radio show of my own, and blog as well. My news outlet- Excellence in Airwaves Network and Examiner/ Clarity Media Group. I'll email. I might be interesting for you to speak too, as I do not believe in any Military spending in support of any other country. I believe in defending our country only- and putting ALL of that money towards our own people. Bush created a huge debt problem that Clinton fixed, and Obama (I did not vote for him) continues to drive our country into the ground.
10:21 PM - Edit

Making Journals From Trash- Get Creative, Recycle...

Confession time: I am sort of a journal fiend. I feel incomplete leaving the house without some sort of notebook for jotting down ideas. It’s fun to buy a journal, but my inner crafter sometimes wishes I’d get it together to make my very own recycled notebook. Here’s some book-binding inspiration to get you going if you’re feeling the same way!

Inner Pages

Since your inner page size will dictate cover size, you’ll probably want to sort this out first. I love the ecclectic feel of journals with remnant printing on them. If you dig that sort of thing, too, you might look to junk mail, old letters, and last year’s calendar pages to fill your journal. Maybe you’d like to throw in a few pieces of handmade paper to boot? You just need to be able to cut the paper to be about the same size.

If you’re a big fan of a fully blank journal, you can hit up your local office supply store for 100% recycled paper to use instead.

Like the journal pictured to the left there, a discarded cereal box makes for a simple, recycled cover solution. If you’re not so into seeing all of that branding, you might try sewing a cover for your journal like the one at the top of this post or gluing a design in fabric scraps. You could also just flip the cardboard over, so your cover is “wrong side out.”

I really like how Matt over at Green Journal used mailers from packages he’d received to create a cover for his day planner. It sounds like a great, sturdy solution!

Do you guys have any other recycled cover ideas?

Binding

If you want to get really back to basics, you can use staples or your sewing machine to bind your journal! Just cut your sheets to the width of two pages, and cut your cover the same, adding 1/4″ – 1/2″. So, if you want your journal to be 8 1/2″ by 5 1/2″, you’ll need your inner pages to be 8 1/2″ x 11″ and your cover to be around 9x 11 1/2″. Just fold the pages and cover in half (don’t fold them all at once….do one at a time so they’re uniform), and either staple or stitch up the seam. If you use your sewing machine, make sure to set your stitch length to be quite long, or you’ll just end up perforating the paper which is no good.

Once your journal is all bound, you’re ready to jot down ideas or toss it in your bag for when inspiration strikes! Maybe you’d even like to make a felt journal cozy to protect your creation!

Have you guys made any recycled journals? I’d love to hear about them in the comments!

Introducing You To US Parliament~ What is it? What do we stand for?

As an elected member of US Parliament, I would like to introduce you to our movement. I am a Marketing Minister, as well as a full Director in Parliament. I am listed as "Green Tea Party", which is a political party founded by Roseanne Barr. I am a 100% full fledged, card carrying member of the fight for Socialism here in the United States, and a proud member of CPUSA (Communist Party USA, located at CPUSA.ORG

So what is this Parliament? And why is it essential to represent the people of the United States?

Simple. We use ranked voting, which truly represents the citizens of our treaty county. While you read through our Rules below, you may find some of the ideas "absurd" if you are not a free thinker. Such as, declaring Roseanne Barr our Queen. You have to actually go to Parliament's website to fully understand what we are trying to accomplish. Roseanne Barr IS running for President in 2012. Many of our elected members of Parliament are also running for office, such as Sallie Elkordy of the Peace Party in New York. Take a look at the website, and sign up. It won't cost you a dime, nobody will rape you of your hard earned money, and you can have a say in what really needs to be said. Our website is located here: US Parliament

And now, the history of Parliament. While it may seem scattered, please read through and you will gain insight into Parliament:
-* FOUNDED ON AUGUST 1ST, 1995 *-

"The First, Third Party/Nonpartisan, US Presidential Mock Election" ~(2/5/95)
=================================================
There were approximately 125 candidates for US President
on the "eballot", and there were about 25 different parties/categories.

Harry Browne (Libertarian) - Wins the first election.

In the first election, a preference "eballot" was distributed on the
Internet, resulting in Harry Browne (Libertarian) winner, with Colin
Powell (independent) and Noam Chomsky (New) coming in 2nd and 3rd.

Although the preference voting (PrV) system was used, none of Colin
Powell's nor Noam Chomsky's votes single-transferred (STV) to Harry Browne.

-*-


"The First Internet US Presidential Mock Open Election" (ended on 7/4/95)
===============================================

In the first open election, web page eballots were distributed by Alan
Keyes supporters, and paper ballots were distributed by Jonah Gruber
(Seattle) and James Ogle (Monterey/Pacific Grove).

Alan Keyes won the single-winner contest by a few votes (proving that
eballots are effective). A 100-member
parliament committee was founded from the results of all the votes cast,
which gained recognition by the FEC on August 1, 1995. Election rules
were published on August 23, 1995.

A 100-member committee, as established on 8/1/95 with the FEC;

Member of Par-
Leader liament (MP) Party/Category Faction Total
-------------------------------------------------------------------
James Ogle Reform 26
Ross Perot Reform 8
34
Alan Keyes Republican 27
Harry Browne Libertarian 13
Randy Toler Green 5
Ralph Nader Green 1
6
Bill Clinton Democratic 6
Noam Chomsky New 4
Gary Geyer Artists 3
Gene Marsee' Hemp 3
Jonah Gruber Moderate 2
Howard Phillips US Taxpayers 2
------------------------------------------------------------------
Total 100

-*-
See more about the recorded history at this link:

http://www.dccourier.com/messengers/mes ... 199606.txt


Here's a story James Ogle wrote about PR after a speech by John Cleese, in case
you've never read about this subject. The town is Santa Cruz, where
the "progressives" sided with the narrow-minded business interests,
in torpedoeing the contra-flow bike lanes downtown just after the
rebuilding from the '89 earthquake.
-----------------------------------------------five page essay


The Case for Proportional Representation
By James Ogle, after John Cleese

I'm very sorry to bore you this morning, but this is a political
speech and you know how boring those can be. This one is about (yawn)
proportional representation, so it will be especially boring.

Proportional representation! What's it all about? Let's look
at the 1992 Santa Cruz city council elections. On the chart below,
you can see the share of the votes cast;

| SCAN-51%
|
| | IND-39%
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | ENV-10%
| | |
| | |
--------------------
share of votes cast

The civic group called SCAN (Democrats) received 51% of the vote.
The independents (Republicans) received 39% of the vote. And the Environ-
mentalist Coaltion (a group of four from four different parties including
the Env Party) received 10% of the vote.

Now, let's look at the share of the seats they got;

| SCAN-100% of the seats
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| . .
------------
share of seats won

Oh? SCAN got 100% of the seats!? The independents and
the Environmentalist Coalition got no seats?









Or, look at it this way;

| SCAN-48,012 | SCAN-Won ALL seats
| |
| | IND-35,966 |
| | |
| | |
| | ENV-8716 |
| | | |
| | | | . .
--------------- ---------------
votes cast seats won

On the left, the number of votes cast. On the right, the number of
seats won.
This is ludicrous! Or as a child would say, "That's not fair!" It took
12,003 votes to elect each SCAN member, but with 44,682 votes, the
independents and the Environmentalist Coalition did not win a single seat!
This left a lot of people frustrated, unrepresented and wondering what to do
next.

Well, proportional representation, or PR, is about making
the representation proportional to the number of votes cast --
if you get twice as many votes, you get twice as many seats.

Now, I suppose that you'd like to know how it works? I will
now give you a twenty second explanation:

[Right now, many of the listeners are leaving the room for a Bud]

Instead of placing an X by your choice, you get to rank several
choices in order of preference. Your first choice, you put a one.
Second choice, a two. Third choice, a three -- up to as many choices
(or as few) as you'd like, like this:

SAMPLE BALLOT

Candidate's Name Party
--------------------------------------
9 Nader Green
2 Brockman Environmentalist
1 Ogle Labor
5 Perot Reform
Clinton Democratic
6 Swing TAO Are Frauds
4 Lyttle Pacifist
8 Hollis Socialist
7 Browne Libertarian
3 Chomsky New
10 Keyes Republican
--------------------------------------

That's it! The rest is up to the computer!

I'd like to welcome you all back from your beer! I've just
completed a political dream for a mean clean voting machine! OH!!
There'll be singing and dancing in the streets tonight!

In the example of a Presidential election shown above,
the voter can rank a candidate regardless of party, race or gender.
When the same method is applied to a multi-candidate election, the
threshold for winning a seat is lowered with each additional open
seat to be filled. For example, to win a seat in the Santa Cruz
race, one/ninth of the votes (plus one vote) would be required for any
candidate to win one seat on the nine-member body.

So, had Santa Cruz used nonpartisan PR elections in 1992,
the results would have looked something like this;

| SCAN-51% | SCAN-5 seats
| |
| | IND-39% | | IND-3 seats
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | ENV-10% | | | ENV-1 seat
| | | | | |
--------------- -------------
votes cast seats won

There! Much fairer. Not only more fair, but more constructive
too! Since each candidate wants to win over the other candidates'
support for 2nd choice, there's more discussion, listening, debate,
respect and positive campaigns. Newspapers sell better, too.

So, if PR gives you fairer results and positive campaigns,
what are the objections?

--First objection) Some people say "PR is a weird and abnormal idea."
On the contrary, a vast majority of the world's democracies use PR
and most emerging democracies are using it too. It's our pluralty
elections that are out of the norm.
There are several forms of PR, from the extreme Israeli example;
which is like one large district with 120 members; to the moderate
9-member districts in Scandinavian countries. The US-style,
winner-take-all, single-member district system is considered to be
an extremist example of democracy, when compared to the moderate forms
of PR such as those that exist in the Scandinavian countries.
In Italy's case of PR, government-financed elections led to
corruption, so their elections were replaced by an innovative
new compensatory PR system in which 75% of the seats are elected in
single-member districts and 25% of the seats are elected by PR in
both houses of Italy's Parliament.
In the US, the Federal Elections Commission presently finances
the two largest parties much like Italy's case, and this tends to
perpetuate the two-party system.
Of the democratic countries that use PR, certain correlations
(with no causative connections) exist;

- All democratic countries that use PR, have a lower trade deficit
than the US.
- All democratic countries that use PR, have a lower national debt
than the US.
- All democratic countries that use PR, have a lower per capita
energy consumption than the US.
- All democratic countries that have greater reserve assets than
the US, use PR.
- All democratic countries that have a greater per capita GNP than
the US, use PR.

Within the past year, South Africa, New Zealand,
Russia and Mexico have adopted PR or semi-PR in their national
elected governments. Most of the world's emerging democracies
are adopting PR.
In the US, forms of PR such as preference voting (PrV), cumulative
voting (CV), and limited voting (LV), are used to elect the city councils of
Cambridge MA and Peoria IL, as well as officials for
scores of New York City School Districts, five Texas school districts
and supervisors in several counties in Alabama. And most corporate boards
of directors use CV in the USA. Hundreds of other kinds of organizations
have adopted PR in some form.
In the majority of the world's democracies in which PR is used,
there is a greater voter turn-out, and the election systems
are supported by all parties because PR gives "universal coverage".

--Second objection) Some people say "Why change the old system,
it will lead to instability?" I disagree. One of the primary
reasons for advocating PR is that the present system discourages
change and forces you to conform to the two-party system. You
can only choose between right and left, liberal or conservative,
and when change does occur, it's so severe that it makes long-
range planning difficult. In addition, the winner-take-all,
or first-past-the-post (FPTP), US system gives the winning majority
a false mandate, and leaves the minority parties with no
representation at all. Perhaps we are too stable, and perhaps
moribund.

--Third objection) Some say coalition governments are weak
and indecisive. Oh? Norway, Switzerland, Japan? Poor wretched
and weak things! Sweden, Austria, Portugal? They make your
heart bleed! Germany, Australia, Spain? They're on the scrap
heap too! If only they could get rid of their weak and indecisive
governments, they too could have a system of gridlock where parties
spend more time bickering than they do running the country.
California! Thank the Lord! Where government is effective,
the economy is strong and stable, voters feel good about represen-
tative democracy! Opportunity and fairness for everyone! NOT!!!

--Forth objection) Some people say that PR is too complicated -
they say that Californians won't understand it. Well, yes,
I'm afraid that if you cannot count up to five, you'll find it
a teeny bit complicated!

--Fifth objection) Some ask, "What will happen to our local
representative?" A perfectly good question! In Santa Cruz
49% of you wasted your vote anyway, because that's the percent
of the vote that went for the independents and the Environmentalist
Coalition, who won no seats in the last election.
With PR, everyone will have representation, and
the highest vote recipients in each self-defined interest group
will be the winning candidates. Very few wasted votes.
Do you know how unrepresented women are in
all levels of government? In the nationally elected US bodies
alone, less than 12% are women legislators. But with PR,
there will be more women in government. For example, in three
Scandinavian countries which use the Sainte-Lague PR system
there are more than 26% women legislators in all three
countries' national legislative governments. Today, 41% of Sweden's
national legislators are women because of PR. Studies show that PR
is the most important positive factor influencing fair representation
for women.

In the US Congress, there is only one independent Congressman
out of 435 Congressmen, even though more than 19% of Americans consider
themselves to be an independent. The 19% of the voters which
voted for independent presidential candidate Ross Perot in 1992
realize that he did not get one single electoral vote!
At the very LEAST, we need proportional electoral votes.
Perhaps we should do away with the electoral college system altogether!

Years after women were given the right to vote and before PR
was adopted there, Kate Sheppard, leader of New Zealand's suffrage
movement had written; "The crudity and the unfairness of the present
method of election ... our clumsy system of voting, still goes on
sending men to Parliament for whom only a small number of their
constituents voted, leaving the majority quite unrepresented. As a
representative system, it is sham, a delusion, a snare to the
unthinking."

In summary;

-- PR is used by a vast majority of the world's democracies and is
supported by all parties.
-- PR is change, yes, but change for greater stability and a more
open government.
-- Coalition governments do better and have better economies with
PR.
-- More diverse representation will be achieved for all parties,
so you will more likely have a representative to talk to that you
like.
-- PR solves the vote-split problem and brings more positive campaigns.
It's *still* one-person, one-vote -- THAT COUNTS! Fair taxation with
FAIR representation!!
-- PR is too complicated for Californians ... Ha .. ha .. ha.

The greatest advantage is that it will reflect the will
of the people instantly. It will give greater diversity in
government. As a melting pot, we Americans find strength in
diversity. Perhaps we can rediscover that strength?

As Thomas Paine put it, "The right of voting for representation
is the primary right by which other rights are protected." Without
PR, our rights are not being protected.

If you find some truth to what I've written, please, join
the movement to bring fairer elections to our government.

Thank you very much for your time.

Very truly yours,
MP James Ogle
USA Parliament


To order an excellent book on PR:
_Real Choices/New Voices - The Case for Proportional Representation
in the United States_ by Douglas Amy, cost $29.50 plus $3. shipping.
Columbia University Press
136 South Broadway, Irvington, New York 10533-2599
phone (914) 591-9111, fax (914) 591-9201

So what prompted me, Joshua-Paul Angell to seek office in Parliament and create change? Simple. Roseanne Barr, and the essential legalization of HEMP.
Here are 2 Youtube presentations of her declaration of Candidacy that Roseanne made on capital Hill, as well as her outspoken appearance on "The View":
The View:

Capital Hill, Part One:

Capital Hill, Part Two:


Here is our current list, of the chosen 97:
The Eighth US Parliament
8/6/2008 to 8/5/2012
Prime Minister: Gail Lightfoot [Libertarian]
Secretary: James Ogle [Free Parliamentary]
Prime Minister: Roseanne Barr [Green Tea]
Secretary: Jacob Covich [Catholic Trotskyist]
Prime Minister: Charles Bruce Stewart [Green Libertarian]

President: Ron Paul [Republican]
Vice President: Gail Lightfoot [Libertarian]

MPs' Votes for Executives • THE CABINET • Executives' Votes for Cabinet



100 Elected Members of the Parliament (MPs)
Libertarian Party – 20 Members of Parliament (MPs)
Gail Lightfoot, Michael Badnarik, Starchild, Ned Roscoe, Richard Winger, Gary Nolan, Cory Nott, Lawrence Samuels [Purple Libertarian], Kristi Stone, Doug Tuma, Aaron Starr, Gabriella Douglas, Mark Hinkle, William J. Wagoner, Dwight Bailey, Aarde Atheian, Alex Plewniak, Howard Stern, Bob Barr, Zachary Scott Gordon [American Libertarian]

Parties with One Seat – 15 MPs
Vanessa Morley [Defender of the Republic], Darryl W. Perry [Boston Tea], Pat Buchanan [Reform], Orion Karl Daley [Balanced], Noam Chomsky [New], Mike Bogatirev [Environmentalist], Michale Treeplanter [Co-Operative], Michael Davis [Natural Law], Mark P. Steele [Discordian], Eric Charles [Orwellian], Michael Looney [Houseless], Eric Stevenson [Pizza], Lloyd Llewellen [Flying Saucer], John Coffey [Unity08] and Mike Banon [Skateboard]

Green Party – 13 MPs
Winona Laduke, David Cobb, Medea Benjamin, Mike Nelson, Susan Estes, Kevin Clark [Green/Libertarian], Thomas Leavitt, Mike Rogers, Tad Robinson, Michael Grazian, Gary Swing, Brett Johnsen, Dinah Coffman

Republican Party – 9 MPs
Ron Paul, Jim Doyle, Colin Powell, John McCain, Lani Guinier, Arnold Swarzenegger, Rush Limbaugh, Dennis Peron, Ralph Hoffmann [Republican]

Independent – 9 MPs
Arianna Huffington, Rob Elliott, Dale Gieringer, John Anderson, Kat Penisten, Michael Moore, Casper Leitch, Ralph Nader, David Frey [Independent Socialist]

Democratic Party – 8 MPs
Dennis Kucinich, PRAVDA McCroskey, David Olkkola, Al Gore, Barbara Boxer, John Edwards, Jerry Brown, Victor Cantu

Pot Party – 5 MPs
Nate Brown, Myra Fourwinds, Sister Somayah [Pot / Nigritian Kief], Brandon Garcia, Scott Comings

Free Parliamentary Party – 4 MPs
Laura Booth, Marcellius Smith [Parliament], Daniel Penisten [Free Parliament] and James Ogle

Marijuana Party – 3 MPs
Sabrina Melicia, Kelly Russell, J. Roach

Peace and Freedom Party – 3 MPs
Jan Tucker, Maureen Smith, Stewart Alexander

Comedy Central - 2 MPs
Stephen Colbert, Jon Stewart

Info. Not Avail. – 2 MPs
Clint Eastwood, Woody Harrelson

Radical Revolutionary Party – 2 MPs
Annie Garner, Jennifer Perkins

Constitution Party – 2 MPs
Michael Peroutka and Don J. Grundmann

Total: 97 Members of Parliament (MPs)
Updated on 8/4/2011

And now, let me attempt to explain Parliament in the United State. We are set up as a ranked voting system. If you visit Parliament's website, you will be able to click on different areas and Super States etc, to gain further understanding. In the meantime, here is a picture for you to look at:

Platform Ranks:
The USA Parliament's Three Platform Planks 6/24/2011

1) 1) Whenever a new name is nominated for full cabinet minister,
the new name gets the #1 spot and the current #1 full minister as
well as every other consecutively ranked ministers thereafter are
moved down by one ranking: #1 to #2, #2 to #3, #3 to #4, and so on.
There are 60 full ministers elected by the five executives
(three PMs and two Secretaries), and all full ministers who are
replaced by a new nominee, automatically become a deputy
minister in the same ministry.

So, What does the US Constitution have to do with this?
Section 1. The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his office during the term of four years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same term, be elected, as follows:

Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or person holding an office of trust or profit under the United States, shall be appointed an elector.

The electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for two persons, of whom one at least shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves. And they shall make a list of all the persons voted for, and of the number of votes for each; which list they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates, and the votes shall then be counted. The person having the greatest number of votes shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such majority, and have an equal number of votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately choose by ballot one of them for President; and if no person have a majority, then from the five highest on the list the said House shall in like manner choose the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by States, the representation from each state having one vote; A quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. In every case, after the choice of the President, the person having the greatest number of votes of the electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal votes, the Senate shall choose from them by ballot the Vice President."



And the 12th Amendment;



Twelfth Amendment - Election of President
Amendment Text | Annotations

The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate;--The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;--The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.--The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.

How does the voting system under 1/100th's work?
Commentray from before 2008, by James Ogle
The approved rules, #s 29 and 30, are as follows;

29. HOW THE VOTE-COUNT WORKS: Majority Preference Voting (MPV) for the PM and other single-winner elections. Everyone's vote goes initially to his or her 1st choice. If no candidate has a majority, then the candidate with fewest votes is eliminated, and each of his ballots goes to its next choice. This process of elimination & re-distribution continues until 1 candidate has a majority of the ballots.

30. THE SAINTE-LAGUE seat allocation for the USA Parliament. 1. Divide the election's total number of votes by 100 (number of seats). This is the 1st quota. 2. Divide this quota into each candidate's votes, and round off to the nearest whole number. That's that candidate's seat allocation. 3. If, due to rounding, this awards a number of seats different from the desired number of 100 seats, then adjust the quota slightly up or down, till, when paragraph 2 is carried out, it will award exactly 100 seats.

Commentary
In most all US style single winner and multi winner elections,
the voter makes a “check” or “x” by the choice(s), and the results are
added up using addition, and the one(s) with the most votes wins.
That’s called first past the post, or FPTP, the results are unpredictable,
rarely proportionate, and the majority's choice rarely wins.

A single winner majority is 50% plus one vote, which is guaranteed
Under instant runoff voting, but not under FPTP.

Fox example, in dual district FPTP elections two candidates
can win 100% of the representation by winning 20% of the votes cast, while
the 80% majority could be split among 12 candidates with 6.5% each,
all who lost. In that example the 80% “losers” are the majority,
and the majority won no representation at all.

FPTP also attributes to racial districts, gerrymandering and the
"split vote problem", causing a suppression of many nominees.

The results in FPTP elections are always unpredictable,
and not proportionate to the votes cast.

Dual member districts that use ranked voting however,
under 1/100ths, guarantees that 66.66% plus two
of the votes, elect the two nominees within each category
in your elections under IRV in every
dual candidate election. Because the first two candidates win with 33.33% plus
one vote, and that leaves less than 33.33% of the ballots not electing anyone, so the third choice isn't elected.

The way it works, is once one nominee garners 33.33% of the votes,
plus one vote, they are declared winner.

In no candidate received 33.33% plus one vote, then the nominee with the fewest #1 marks on their ballots is eliminated, and the ballot is transferred over to the voter's #2 choice. That’s called the “single transferable vote”, or STV. Each "round" takes place, eliminating the lowest vote getter and single transferring the ranked ballot to the voters' next choice(s) until eventually the first candidate passes 33.33% by one vote. After one candidate wins, then the “rounds” continue until the second person receives the next 33.33% of the votes plus one vote, and they are declared winner.

The remaining number of rounds and stack of ballots will be less than 33.33% (hence the "plus one vote" earlier in the count),
and the remaining candidate (once all lowest ranked vote getters are eliminated), will have less than 33.33%,
and will not be elected. As the threshold is 33.33% and 66.66% plus two votes had been used to elect the two winners, the balance will be less than 33.33%.

This system will guarantee that 66.66% of the voters get representation every time in two member districts, while
however less than 33.33 percent of voters did not get representation under IRV in the dual member district.

The more the members per district,
the more exact and proportionate, the better the
"portrait of the people", via the results.

In a two member district, the first two with 33.33% plus one vote are elected.
In a three member district, the threshold is 25% plus one vote. (Satisfaction level = 75% + 3 votes.)
In a four member district, 20% plus one vote … satisfaction level is 80% plus four votes.
In a five member district ... 16.66% plus one vote is the threshold for five people to win.


In a 100 member district, the first 100 names that recieve 1/101ths (or .99%) plus one vote are elected, and the last name with 1/101ths of the votes (not plus one vote) is not elected.
Satisfaction level is 99.% plus 100 votes.
The 100-member district is called “full representation”, and that’s how the US Parliament's voting system works.
* * *

If elected, what are my responsibilities?

There are no responsibilities required. However, everyone may contribute in any capacity they wish.
People who recognize that the results of the stack of ballots cast, as counted under a voting system based on 1/100ths and proportional representation, while electing the three prime ministers, two secretaries and the approval of the rules by 50% plus one of voting members, may speak on behalf of the US Parliament to promote the project. As an elected member, they may make known their “MP’s Ballot” to elect the Prime Ministers and Secretaries, and contact other MPs to organize a block behind election of the executives and the rules.

The five executives, three prime ministers and two secretaries, are expected to elect
twelve full cabinets, and when all nominees get a ranking by each executives, then
each of the twelve executives are guaranteed to elect 1/5th their own nominees
for the twelve Ministries, including Deputy Ministers.
* * *

To conclude, and I know this is a lot to think about and digest, I encourage you to ask questions, to visit Parliament's website, to follow myself on Twitter @simple__living, to follow Roseanne on Twitter @therealroseanne and to sign up for Roseanne's blog located here: Roseanne World

It is important that you sign up for Parliament. You can do this in about 2 minutes on Parliament's website, under the "sign up" link/tab.

Also, feel free to ask any of us questions. You'll find links to our fan pages, websites, blogs, etc. on Parliaments website, and also on Facebook on my fan page, located at: Simple Living Radio- The Joshua-Paul Show, on Roseanne Barr for 2012 Facebook page located at: Roseanne Barr for President 2012 on Facebook , and especially on US Parliament's official Facebook page located here: The USA Parliament Official Facebook Page

I'll be posting much more about the fight to legalize Hemp and the benefits thereof as well. I'll also be broadcasting about this and other issues on the show.

~ Joshua-Paul Angell

Etsy Showcase Feature... Is it worth $7 of a starving artists money?

I thought I'd try Etsy's Showcase feature and see if it brings some attention to my shop. I had never done it before, and I don't know anyone who has, so I didn't have a clue how this was going to turn out.

I thought it might be a good idea to blog about it for the sake of other Etsy sellers, to see if it's worth doing.

The Showcase, basically, puts one item from your shop at the top of a selected category page, hopefully resulting in more views to that item, and perhaps to other items in your shop, and if you're lucky, maybe even a sale. For example: if you sell jewelry in your shop, you book a slot (you can choose the date depending on how many slots are remaining) in Etsy's Jewelry category. You can choose one item to be showcased, and if that item sells Etsy will bump your next choice up into the showcase slot. The idea is to be featured on the first page of that category's search, instead of getting lost in the shuffle of the hundreds of new entries per day; the showcase keeps your item at the top of the page so that people viewing that category can see it at the top, regardless of where it is in the listings. It sounds like a good way to get buyers' attention, since Etsy is overloaded with new items every day, and it's easy to get overlooked.

So I booked a showcase for the crochet category for today (I chose one of my Boho soft multi-colored lamb's wool scarves that take me 18 hours to make as my featured item. The price of the scarf was $21.20, 20 cents covers my listing fee, and the cost to make the item is 11$, and I am putting 18 hours into each scarf, so I am technically getting paid $1.63 an hour for my work. And then, postage hits. But my item didn't sell, so at least I don't have to fork money out to buy packing materials.

I was curious to see whether the showcase resulted in more hits to my shop (or any evidence of my item being noticed), and I was paying close attention to the numbers- all day long.

I checked early on into the showcase, about 6 hours in, and the showcase only provided me with 2 clicks.
I edited the listing so that my blue Boho children's scarf was listed- because on further thought it occurred to me that people might be more willing to look closer at something that's priced cheaper. Result: 3 more clicks.
I started to realize in the late evening that I had gotten exactly 6 views through the showcase feature. Which means, not only is Etsy charging me a listing fee of 20 cents, plus a commission of course, but now I have been charged $1.16 a click (equating to the $7 showcase fee.)

What a waste! A waste of time, money, and energy. I didn't have a single sale today while being showcased. Not even my cheapest item, a $3.20 lanyard that I crochet with expensive multicolor yarn.

I had already booked a slot for the 15th of this month to showcase some very high-end art. I wish I hadn't done that- but once you book a slot, you can't change your mind.

Today's experiment of Etsy's showcase... On a scale of 5 stars, ZERO of 5 stars.

Here is what Etsy promises it's sellers about showcasing:
"Why get a showcase spot?
The Etsy Showcase is a great way to bring buyers to your shop. By getting a spot in a showcase, you're advertising directly to Etsy buyers looking to purchase great handmade items.

Increased Exposure
Showcases are placed in prominent, well-trafficked locations on the site, where Etsy buyers are looking to buy. Most sellers experienced increased views to their items and shops as a result of purchasing a Showcase spot.

Minimal Investment
Showcase spots start at $7 and don't require any lengthy or expensive commitments. You can try it out without breaking the bank.

Long-term Benefits
The perks of being in a Showcase don't end once your timeslot is up. Sellers in the Showcase have more people mark their shop as a favorite, leading to more sales down the road as buyers return to their favorites and share them with friends."

Whatever...That's how they pull you in- with that "Increased Exposure". You can get increased exposure by using free website submission sites, and using hashtags on Twitter. Save your $7... And the hassle.

Foraging: There IS such a thing as a Free Lunch...

Some people say that there is no such thing as a free lunch. Well I beg to differ. Next time you’re on your way to the supermarket, why not have a look in nature first.

Here are some tips to get you going.

Where to start
Start with something familiar. I started by picking blackberries because they are easy to find and easy to eat. When you find what you are looking for, take a look around at what kind of environment they are growing in, and what else is growing there. You will start to recognize familiar plants and understand what conditions certain plants grow in.

Learn
Get yourself a good book, or several on wild plant identification or foraging. Find out about any local courses or wild food walks. The best way to learn is to be shown by an expert. Talk to the locals when you are foraging. They may have valuable knowledge on where to find specific plants. Take photo’s of plants that you are struggling to identify and seek help from online forums. Make a map and take notes of what you’ve found and where you found it. This will make it easier to find next year and help you develop an instinct for where to look for certain plants.

Urban Foraging
Living in a city is no excuse not to get your foraging basket out. Many edibles thrive in urban areas. In many cases, it’s easier to forage in the city than to go to the supermarket!

Cook
Get yourself a good collection of recipes. You probably won’t find many recipe books that tell you how to cook something like Sea Purslane, but the Internet is a wonderful resource for learning how to prepare and eat your wild food. There is no point in gathering a basket full of edibles if you don’t know what to do with them. Be patient and open minded. Many wild plants require careful preparation before they can be considered pleasant enough to eat!

Safety, the law and the environment
Never, under any circumstances risk eating a plant unless you are 100% sure you have identified it correctly. Always consult a good book or speak to an expert before eating something you are unsure about. Also be aware of where the plant is growing. In towns and cities, many edible plants are considered weeds and may have been doused in herbicides. You must also respect the environment when foraging. Only take what you need. Don’t strip a plant bare, take a little from many plants to allow them to continue growing healthily. It is advisable to contact your local authority to find full details on what you can and can’t do.

What to look for
Here is a selection of the most common plants to get you started. They should be quite easy to find.

In the countryside
Blackberries, Damsons, Sloes, Plums, Crab Apples, Apples, Elderflowers, Gorse flowers, Mallow, Rose hips, Wild Garlic, Fennel, Horseradish, Hawthorn.

By the seashore
Sea Kale, Sea Beet, Rock samphire, Marsh samphire, Kelp, Fennel, Sea Purslane, Seaweed (Many edible species).

In the town
Perennial wall rocket, Blackberries, Elderflowers, Wild Mustard.

Foraging for your dinner may not always be as convenient as popping to the local shop, but it certainly makes up for it with the enjoyment and satisfaction you get from collecting and cooking your own food. There is a forgotten world of delicious, unusual and exciting edibles out there waiting to be tasted. Who cares about convenience when you are up to your waist in nature collecting crab apples! So get your boots on and get out there.
{Photo} by nimishgogri via Fickr, used under Creative Commons License
Source: Green Living Ideas (http://s.tt/134j1)

Gas Companies Are Killing You With Tap Water. The Government Doesn't Care.

Natural gas gets a lot of press as being a clean energy solution, and in some ways that’s true. Natural gas vehicles, for example, emit far fewer emissions than traditional fossil fuel cars. The trouble with natural gas isn’t so much related to usage but to how we get that gas out of the ground in the first place.

Just like with oil, we’ve used up much of the easy-to-get-to natural gas that we know about, and that means that companies have to use more extreme measures to get at gas that’s trapped in rock deep below the surface. With oil, we’re seeing this with deepwater drilling, and with natural gas, it means the rise of a practice called Hydraulic Fracturing or “fracking” for short.

What’s so Bad About Fracking?

Hydraulic fracturing involves pumping high pressure liquid into rocks deep below the Earth’s surface to extract the gas. The problem with fracking is that the fluid contains highly toxic chemicals and heavy metals. The really scary part? Gas companies claim these fluids are proprietary, so they don’t even have to tell us what’s in them!

“It’s not supposed to do that.”


No. It isn’t.

What You can Do

If we want gas companies to stop fracking, we need to get heard! You can send a note to your Senator or to your Representative letting them know how you feel. Heck, send emails to both! If you’re not sure what to say, here’s a sample letter cribbed from Advocacy Writings for WCC:

Dear ____________,

I’m writing to express my concern about a threat to our clean drinking water.

Hydrofracking involves blasting a mixture of water and chemical additives horizontally through the rock formations deep under the surface of the earth in order to break up the rock and create a conduit for natural gas to flow out. Millions of gallons of water are required, and many of the chemicals used are toxic to the environment and to human health. Worse still, large sections of the proposed drilling areas underlie watersheds that supply New Yorkers with drinking water.

Because of the dangers associated with this new and under-researched drilling method, the WCC supports not only the newly-enacted New York state moratorium on hydraulic fracturing through July of 2011 but also a broader suspension of fracking permits until the public can be assured of an environmentally sound drilling process. A moratorium should certainly be in place until the EPA completes its in-depth investigation of hydrofracking, an investigation that surely cannot be completed by July. The public also deserves absolute assurance that chemicals will not be injected into the rock formations that underlie our drinking water.

If an environmentally sound method of natural gas drilling does not yet exist, the gas industry should be sent back to the drawing board to develop one. For now, it is up to all of us, and to our politicians in particular, to hold industry responsible for its actions. The DCS, DRN and DRBC are already leading the way by standing up for the environment and public health against the serious threats posed by hydrofracking and other experimental drilling. The WCC wholly supports these efforts.

Thank you,

_________________

Have you guys reached out to your representatives about this before? I’d love to hear what response you got!

Image Credit: Creative Commons photo via Progress Ohio

What we do know is that in areas where fracking is prevalent, people report high incidences of illness, and some have even been able to light their tap water on fire. This trailer for the film Gasland highlights the problem of fracking pretty succinctly:

World Water Week- What Will You Do?

This World Water Week Help Charity: Water Bring Clean Water To Africa – Ecopreneurist
Since 1991, World Water Week has focused the world’s attention on water issues during a week-long summit in Stockholm. The Stockholm International Water Institute (SIWI) organizes and sponsors the event which has a current three-year theme spotlighting Responding to Global Changes. It began August 21st and runs through August 27th. With 29,000 children dying in only a three month span due to severe drought conditions in Africa, the conference proves the importance of updating and changing water policy to coincide with world demand. As horrific as the crisis presents, lifestyle changes don’t need to be extreme to make a difference.

Here are just a few ways you can bring about change during World Water Week.

Be the Change

To get others to do something, you must be willing to take the lead. Take shorter showers, use grey water, wash dishes by hand and fix leaks. These are just a few inexpensive and simple ways to make a difference. People are more willing to make lifestyle changes when they see others doing the same. It’s one thing to tell someone to shorten their shower. It’s much more relevant to talk about how you and your family are using timers to make a game of shortening showers in your home.

Talk About It

Talk about the world’s water crisis to anyone and every one. Unfortunately, some of the most relevant stories never make the main stream media’s front page. Even in our highly informative society it’s possible for many to remain unaware of what goes on in other parts of the world. Ask friends and family if they have heard about the water needs in other countries and how change can be made. If you work with children or have children, Water.org offers great lesson plans to teach about the water crisis. Use them for adults as well and allow them to take materials so they can become a part of the information chain.

Use Social Media to Spread the Word

Non-profits are seeing the major benefits of social media Facebook, Twitter and blogs are great places to discuss and promote causes like World Water Week. Becoming a model is one of the best ways to promote change. Give a simple idea or tip for how you are helping even if it’s simple. Those easy tips are the ones people are most likely to remember and re-tweet or post on their own wall.

Raise Money

While there is a lot of financial hardship laying heavy on many minds, it takes so little to make a difference. One dollar may seem insignificant, but when an office of twenty workers donates than that one quickly becomes $20. From there a campaign can spread until it becomes a viable source helping organizations like Water.org and Charity:water bring life saving water to those in need.

{source: Water. org Lesson Plans and World Water Week in Stockholm}

{cc photo courtesy of waterdotorg from Flickr}

Source: Green Living Ideas (http://s.tt/137b9)

Support The Mission Of The Last Blog. Buy a T-Shirt Here

Support The Mission Of The Last Blog. Buy a T-Shirt Here: (copy and paste the link into your browser)
http://www.cafepress.com/CafePressItems

YOU CAN READ THE ORIGINAL BLOG POST BY COPYING AND PASTING THIS IN YOUR BROWSER, OR LOOKING AT THE BLOG ARCHIVES... http://simplelivingradio.blogspot.com/2011/08/bipolar-disorder-going-from.html

Bipolar Disorder: Going from pharmaceuticals to natural remedies, such as a vegetarian diet and smoking marijuana.

There are just some days that seem to be better than others. Yesterday, was an encouraging day for me. Today, I woke up late with a sinus headache. I just took all of my meds, for the bipolar and the other vast array of pharmaceutical toxins prescribed to me by a Doctor. I am feeling discouraged today. Is this because I just took my meds? Those toxic little man made "It will fix everything" pills? I am starting to thing not.

Once the commune is developed, I intend to be medication free. Of course, I will attempt to work with a doctor on this mission. I do know that one of my meds is very difficult to ween off of. I have been through this before- and it was not pleasant. We'll get to that story on another day.

The point being, in this life changing experiment that is set to take place with a countdown clock that was set nearly 2 weeks ago... I will be living ashram-style, excluded from mass society in any and every shape or form (except for my computer of course, but you know what I mean). With this change, I will begin to ween myself off of the pharmaceutical nut-jubs Mr. Greedy-Fingers Corporations little pills.

I'll be seeking alternative therapy, such as exact and proper nutrition an vegetarianism (pulled from my own garden, mind you) and, of course- I may see a Doctor to "prescribe" for me some of what Mother Earth and God decided to bless the rich soil with, a plant called Cannabis.

There are so many benefits to this. Although the withdrawal from the toxins within my body will be as grueling as cold-turkey smokers of crack who just stop... and one of my meds will be more difficult to ween off of than Heroin... I will persevere with a new diet, fresh open air and my own form of Government on the Commune.

BEFORE WE PROCEED, PLEASE LISTEN TO THIS SONG AND TRULY THINK...


Here are some tips:

Bipolar Disorder is one of the most difficult to treat. Not only is it difficult to find the right medicine recipe for each person, patient compliance is a major obstacle. Some people suffer debilitating side effects or cannot tolerate the high dosages of some medications. Some start feeling better and make a conscious decision to stop taking their medications. Others simply don’t like taking medication at all. Some of these same people will turn to vitamins, health supplements and holistic answers instead. Herein lies the problem. It seems to me that the general population is much more willing to trust the claims on vitamins bottles and health supplements than that of prescription medications that are governed by the FDA. Who is it that regulates vitamins and health supplements– the “natural healing fairy?

Well, come to find out, many studies are being conducted on holistic approaches to bipolar treatment and they are being funded by organizations like The Stanley Organization, National Institute of Health and the National Institute of Mental Health. Some important organizations are taking notice that maybe there is something to this “natural” approach. Maybe there is and maybe there isn’t. I am convinced that doing everything possible to make this illness more bearable is worth a shot, but I’m not willing to give up my medication yet and neither are any of the organizations funding the studies.

Nothing that you read here is meant to replace any advice that you are given by a trained professional. The information is simply what I researched and the claims may or may not be accurate. Please do not try any holistic approach without consulting with your physician or psychiatrist first- and telling them what you are going to do. They will try to stop you, as there will be no money to be had for it in their pockets. Also, all of these approaches, by their own admission are to be used as weening process to get off of psychiatric medications. In other words, they are meant to help reduce the dosage, not to immediately replace the medicine all together. And, it should be noted, that while I AM a Doctor (Doctor of Divinity that is, NOT and MD), do your own investigation.

VITAMINS & MINERALS

Mood Stabilizing Substances
Lecithin (Phosphatidyl Choline)
L-Taurine (Amino Acid)
GABA (Amino Acid)

To Fight Depression
B- Complex
Folic Acid
B1 (Thiamin)
B6
B-12
Magnesium & Calcium
Manganese
Zinc
L-Tyrosine
Methionine
L-Phenylalynine & DL-Phenylalynine
L-Triptophan (Amino Acid)

Most of these vitamins and minerals can be found in a good multivitamin. The ones that are separate supplements should be verified with your doctor before you go spend a lot of money on them. I didn’t even start taking my multivitamin without checking it out with my psychiatrist first – but then I’m a little anal when it comes to managing my bipolar and my money. I don’t know about your insurance but mine doesn’t cover vitamins.

ST JOHN’S WART

This is the supplement that we’ve all heard does wonders for depression. Well, I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but marketing and advertising people create all that hype. I know this, because I work in advertising. I found tons of information on St John’s Wart (SJW) and most of it echoed the same warnings, that bipolar patients should use extreme caution and consult their physicians before attempting to use it. I know I won’t be adding it to my recipe. The only time it seems to be recommended is for people with very mild depression who almost don’t need to take prescription medication and they still suggest checking with your doctor.

Researchers at Harvard Medical School believe that SJW could be a mania trigger for those who are bipolar but who haven’t experienced a manic episode yet. This is similar to what some antidepressants do to people with bipolar. It can also precipitate hypomanic states or rapid cycling. They mentioned that if you have bipolar you should use extreme caution and confer with your doctor before hand.

In Feb 2000, the FDA released a public health advisory warning that there was a risk of dangerous interactions between SJW and certain prescription medications. Bipolar meds included mainly the Tricyclic Antidepressants (TCA’s) Tofranil, Asendin & Elavil and the anticonvulsant Tegretol. It is assumed that the similar TCA’s Vivactil and Palemor and the similar anticonvulsant Trileptal could also be in the risk group.

There are also reports that when SJW is combined with Serotonin Selective Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRI’s) it can cause Serotonin Syndrome. Symptoms of Serotonin Syndrome symptoms can include dizziness, cognitive difficulty, faintness when standing or walking, unsteadiness when walking, muscle spasms and a racing heart beat. Do not combine SJW with any SSRI’s or with the newly FDA approved Tamoxifen that is used for depression.

OMEGA-3 FATTY ACIDS

Omega-3 Polyunsaturated fatty acids (Omega-3) are found in fish, fish oil and flaxseeds. Yummy! You can bet I was not too excited about the thought of fish oil as a cure for bipolar. Oddly enough, every bit of information I found on Omega-3 was positive. Positive that is as an adjunct to standard bipolar medications. So for people who cannot tolerate high doses or the side effects of their medications, this is something to check out with your doctor.

Many studies have been done, but the one I read most about was a 4 month double-blind placebo controlled study comparing 9.6 g/day of Omega-3 vs. olive oil in 30 patients (Stoll et al., 1999). 8 co-authors concluded that not only were the Omega 3’s well tolerated, but the improved the short term course of the patients with bipolar. They would not suggest using Omega-3 as a first line treatment but would try it for patients who had failed with other medications. Omega-3’s should only be used alone in patients with a very mild form of the illness.

Patients seem to be quite interested in the Omega-3’s because they are a natural supplement with very few side effects and little or no toxic effects. The only reported symptom was mild gastrointestinal distress – generally characterized by loose stools. Many psychiatric medications have this same effect along with a myriad of other more unpleasant ones. If my meds plagued me with a tremendous number of side effects, I would certainly be looking into this one myself.

TRUEHOPE (Synergy Group of Canada, Ltd.)

If you haven’t heard about this one, it’s pretty interesting – depending on how you look at it. Personally I thought they were a couple of quacks until I started investigating it deeper. I mean, when all you know is that it started out with supplements that they give to pigs who are prone to ear and tail biting, you have to be a little skeptical. Don’t you?

Well, they didn’t start with actual pig nutrients; the biologist of the pair, David Hardy created a supplement for humans that were then given to Anthony Stephan’s 2 bipolar children. You can read the entire story at their website, referenced below. The supplement was named EM Power and consists of common minerals, vitamins

and amino acids. In fact, the ingredients are so common that they cannot receive a patent for their work.

Several small independent studies were done through individual doctors with small numbers of patients. The results were good – up to a 50% reduction in symptoms compared to when the patients were on psychotropic drugs. Then Harvard psychiatrist Charles Popper monitored 15 patients within his own practice and the results were reported in the Journal of Clinical Psychiatry. Of the 15 patients that were treated, 11 were stable for 6 – 9 months without taking psychiatric medications. They also did research with Dr. Bonnie Kaplan, PhD. This helped get a grant of a half million dollars to do a placebo-controlled double blind study of 100 bipolar patients at the University of Calgary.

The two drawbacks with EM Power (besides it’s odd origins) are that it isn’t cheap and it’s a lotof pills to take. Initial treatment requires 32 capsules per day until your symptoms disappear and the cost is approximately $220.00 a month. The maintenance dose averages 16 capsules a day. It is safe for children as well – as long as they can take that many pills.

ACCUPUNCTURE

Boy did I find a ton of information on the treatment of depression and bipolar with the ancient Chinese art of acupuncture. What I didn’t find was any proof. No real trials with quantifiable results. I did find one small study done at the University of Arizona College of Medicine, which simply reported positive results using it for major and unipolar depression. That was it.

That was it except for 2 major grants being given to the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas (where I am trying to get in on some studies!). Both the National Institute of Mental Health and the National Institute of Health have awarded UT Southwestern significant grants to study the effects of acupuncture. NIMH’s grant with be used to study bipolar patients in their depressive states. The NIH grant will be used for a study similar to the one done at the University of Arizona.

The NIMH trial is the first being conducted regarding acupuncture as an adjunct to medication for bipolar disorder. Once again, not a full cure, but the possibility of reducing medications to tolerable levels.

So, after all of this am I still a skeptic? Sure I am. I’m skeptical of everything until I see proof – but that’s just me. Am I skeptical of “Wholistic Healing” – using holistic methods with psychiatric medications and anything else you can do to make your life better? No. I think there are some great alternative options available for those who cannot handle the symptoms or for those who seem to get little or no results from psychiatric medications.

Cannabis time and time again has proven itself in cancer patients, mental illness patients, chronic anxiety and OCD patients- and beyond. It, along with the natural supplements above- will get me out of this "system" of money grubbers. the Politicians, their lobbyists, and the Doctors who get pay-offs from dispensing the newest drug for the mentally ill.

The commune is nearly 6 1/2 months away, and I am being very selective who who knows the exact information, the exact details, etc. But I will hint. The commune will be located on a tip on the country with such easy access to leave this Country, the USA that has gone haywire and no longer cares for it;s own people. The easy access into our second choice country can be had by foot.

Be Sure To Visit The Official Website Of Simple Living Radio

http://www.thegypsyshop.webs.com

Back to Basics: Living with "Voluntary Simplicity"

Oprah.com recently had a great article on Voluntary Simplicity:


Overwhelmed by consumerism and sobered by the economy, more Americans are embracing the less-is-more philosophy of "voluntary simplicity," trading possession obsession for personal fulfillment. Allison Glock drops in on a few devoted followers and discovers that for them, enough really is enough.


All Kristen Martini wanted was a simpler life. Not a simpler way to make a goat cheese omelet. Not a simpler way to drop five pounds. Not a simpler mop and broom system that traps lint in those hard-to-reach places. No, the goal was nothing less (or more) than a simpler way to be.

"Essentially, I wanted to stop consuming so much. I wanted to let what I have be enough."

Kristen, 37, a good friend, tells me this as we drive to Orlando, Florida. We are headed to meet two members of the Simple Living Institute, an organization devoted to helping people attain happiness through a lifestyle called voluntary simplicity, or simple living, whose most devout followers whittle down their possessions to only what they need to get by. The movement has been gaining momentum recently, advanced not only by the faltering economy but by a persistent ennui many Americans are feeling. Hounded by the nagging suspicion that no matter how many cars, coffee presses, or perfect-fit T-shirts they own, their personal fulfillment remains elusive. Many of us are coming to recognize that time spent watching Real Housewives of Atlanta is not time that buffers the soul. We are experiencing the dawning, sometimes painful realization that stuff, even really cute stuff, in the end is kind of a drag.

"A few years back," Kristen continues, "I was married and doing the country club thing, and I met some friends who were living very simply. I saw how much happier they were than me. They were authentic. I realized then that the endless shopping was not making me happy."

Not even a tiny bit?

"Maybe for a few minutes. But then what? I saw there was more to being alive than collecting possessions."

Kristen gives me a wan smile. She knows I am a collector, that I am drawn to stuff like dogs to ripe garbage. Old things, mostly. Crappy, kitschy, vintage bric-a-brac. Linens. Mason jars. Handknit doilies. Kristen is aware that I have never, not once, passed a yard sale without stopping.

She was once like me, but for the past 14 months she has been teaching herself how to be free of the burden of too much. "How many Florida-themed salt-and-pepper-shaker sets can you own?" she asks wryly. (I stop my mental count at seven.)

We met last year at our children's school. I noticed her immediately. She was wearing jeans and a cotton tank top, her hair loosely pulled back with a gauzy scarf. She looked pretty, bohemian. More, she looked peaceful. We quickly discovered we had more in common than third-grade children: We are both liberal do-gooders. We both enjoy a stiff cocktail. And we are both single moms, a boot-camp bond if ever there was one.

Kristen lives with her 8-year-old twins, Aidan and Ellie, in a stucco cottage in the woods. The house is miniature and remote, at the end of a long unpaved drive. It is 800 square feet, with low wood ceilings and stone floors. The family of three shares one bedroom and two beds. The single bath is the size of a telephone booth. The first time I visited, I was both impressed and appalled. "Maybe you shouldn't have put the house in the dryer?" I teased.

Before renting the cottage, they had lived in a 3,600-square-foot, five-bedroom house with two kitchens. There was a playroom. There was a laundry room. There was enough space not to see each other for hours at a stretch. "I didn't even use some of the rooms," Kristen says. In the cottage, privacy is nonexistent, yet she loves her home with unbridled fervor.

Her new lifestyle has a precedent. "I lived in the woods when I was 21, 22," she says. "I had my own garden. I was really into my nice, quiet, cheap life."

Then she got engaged to a businessman and told herself grown-ups didn't live in the woods, without a television or a set of china. So after she got married, she found herself in a huge home, full of things, which she took great care in placing here and there, while ignoring the signs that all was not well beneath the surface.

The babies were a distraction for a time. Then they weren't. Depression followed. And insomnia. Then medications, therapy. None of it worked. Kristen found herself unable to get out of bed. She lost 20 pounds. Her husband, earnest and traditional, was confused by her unhappiness. After all, they were supposed to be living the American dream.

"I knew it was time to get out when my life started to make me physically sick," she says now.

Kristen realized that to become the person she longed to be, she had to leave her marriage. So, after much soul-searching, she abandoned her old life in its entirety—her spouse, her furniture, excess clothes, collectible salt and pepper shakers—and returned, with her children, to the woods of her youth.

"The day I moved, I brought only my car, a few clothes, and food," she says. "I got to the cottage around 4 in the afternoon and went out looking for firewood. As I made a big pile by my door, I kept thinking, I'm getting my do-over!"

Kristen started keeping a journal.

"I want to explore, to climb trees, to kayak different rivers," she wrote. "I want to continue building strong, healthy friendships. I want to make a difference. I want to sleep on my own. I want to grow spiritually and emotionally. To have more patience and stillness. To be quiet inside. I want to be at ease with myself, to create, to give, to love, and to laugh my ass off."

"So, how's it going?" I ask as we zip down I-95.

She smiles. "So far, really, really good. My electric bill went from $150 to $35."

"You can't warm that place with body heat alone?" I joke.

"You're just bitter because your bill is $500 a month," she shoots back good-naturedly.

True, I am one of those Americans whose house is too big for their income. One of those poor schmucks who have to work long hours at jobs they wish they didn't have just to pay to heat rooms they don't need. Meanwhile, Kristen, who earns a small salary as an elder caretaker, has cash to spare. This keeps her high on the juice of freedom. So intoxicated, in fact, that she craves more. Hence our trip to learn more about the Simple Living Institute, a group she hopes will offer additional ideas for paring down her already austere life.

"I can do more," she says excitedly. By which she means, have less. Such is the heart of the simple living philosophy: Become conscious of what you genuinely need, and the rest, punt like a rotten apple.

"I do have friends who just don't get what I'm doing," she says with a shrug. "Many of my friends from my old life think I'm a little nuts. But my true friendships are getting much deeper. The other people who do this, we make time for each other. We care about community. We volunteer. We create time to do the things we believe in, in lieu of just mindlessly accumulating."

Instead of shopping, Kristen now gardens. Instead of buying new clothes, she trades with friends. Instead of racing to get her kids new bicycles from a big-box store, they prowl the thrift shops until the right one turns up.

"I also stopped dyeing my gray hair, which has mortified some of my girlfriends," she says, laughing. "I don't care. I don't want to spend time altering myself anymore. I want to be happy as I am, with who I am and what I have."

"Me too," I think. I'd like to feel cage-free, unburdened. Minus the gray hair—I draw the line at voluntary aging.

The notion of voluntary simplicity has been around for centuries; see: Buddha, Jesus, Thoreau, the Shakers, the Amish. In 1936 a Quaker named Richard Gregg published an essay titled "The Value of Voluntary Simplicity," thus coining the term. Over time the concept evolved into a movement, though it remained a fringe lifestyle. But 2008 was something of a perfect storm for the voluntary simplicity movement. The mortgage crisis, the banking meltdown, the spike in gas prices, and the unfettered baking of our atmosphere has led an unprecedented number of folks to put down the credit cards and start thinking about plan B. According to Wanda Urbanska, 52, the amiable host of PBS's Simple Living with Wanda Urbanska and the de facto Martha Stewart of the voluntary simplicity movement, the lifestyle is gaining mainstream appeal. At least 10 percent of the population, by some estimates, have embraced the tenets of living simply.

"This isn't a fringe thing anymore," Urbanska says from her home in Mount Airy, North Carolina, considered a simple-living hot spot. "There is a shift going on. When I first started talking about this in 1992, I was seen as a wacko zealot. Now simple living is fashionable."

Urbanska's ratings have gone up each of the show's four seasons, and PBS just upped her viewership range to 75 percent of the country. "People keep telling me this is just what we need at this time," she says. "They want to get back to basics, assume financial independence and environmental stewardship. For the first time, the culture is saying bigger isn't better. When you are in debt, it's hard to live with any pleasure. People are starting to feel there is so much more to life. Everything you bring into your house becomes a responsibility. You have to care for it, clean it, and ultimately, dispose of it." She sighs. "I don't want to say it's empty to shop, but to me, a great conversation is worth way more than anything I could pull off a shelf."

One of the movement's pioneers is Vicki Robin. In 1980 she and her business partner, the late Joe Dominguez, began running frugality seminars around the country, traveling in a motor home and staying with friends. They donated all their profits to other causes. They later wrote Your Money or Your Life, a seminal book that espoused the benefits of spending less. The Pacific Northwest is one of the movement's original strongholds, and in the 1980s Robin, now 63, moved to Seattle. Today she lives in a small apartment above a garage on Washington's Whidbey Island and drives a two-seater Honda Insight hybrid. "For me, frugality equals freedom," she explains. "I don't have any debt, I know how to live within my means. I am not scared by the economic bogeyman."

"Money doesn't buy you happiness" may be a cliché, but science supports the idea. In 2005 Tim Kasser, PhD, associate professor of psychology at Knox College in Galesburg, Illinois, and the author of The High Price of Materialism, with his colleague Kirk Warren Brown of Virginia Commonwealth University, published a study that compared 200 voluntary simplifiers with 200 typical Americans. Though the simplifiers earned an average of $26,000 per year, about $15,000 less than the typical group, they were found to be "significantly happier."

"You hear that in order to be happy you need lots of money or stuff," says Kasser. "That just didn't turn out to be true."

In fact, Kasser says those results suggested that the very things society teaches us to crave—wealth, status, prestige—can actually lead to persistent feelings of depression and dissatisfaction.

"People who pursue intrinsic values—self-acceptance, making the world a better place, helping polar bears—are much happier than people who chase popularity, money, and image," says Kasser. "If you orient your life around personal growth and family and community, you'll feel better."

Consider that even though the average family income has more than doubled since the 1950s, our level of happiness has essentially remained stagnant. "Take a deeper look at what you are really after with all this stuff," suggests Kasser. "Love? Acceptance? Feeling competent? Find more direct ways to achieve those goals. Live your values. In our sample of typical Americans, 27 percent said they'd made a voluntary income reduction already. To me, the good news is that fixing this is something that is accessible to everybody. We can shift our goals."

Other voluntary simplicity advocates are seeing similar results. "This past year, more than 100,000 people have expressed interest in the tenets of simple living," says Carol Holst, cofounder of Simple Living America, a Los Angeles–based nonprofit that offers advice for people looking to "find the satisfaction of enough."

"We take the stand that you can be fulfilled without things," says Holst. "Once you reach that conclusion for yourself, life really changes. What used to seem empty and futile becomes joyful and exciting."

She reiterates that this is voluntary simplicity. "Listen, if there was something I really wanted, I'd do it," says Holst. "No guilt. Ed Begley Jr. jokes about how this movement isn't about living under a rock in Topanga. It's about feeling satisfied, not deprived. About filling up, not emptying out. Our approach is to empower the individual. There isn't any finger-wagging. This isn't a high bar. It can vary greatly, depending on your needs. Maybe you stop watching television. Maybe you join a gardening club."

Or maybe, like Kristen, you flush your whole past down the composting toilet.

*****


Read more: http://www.oprah.com/omagazine/Meet-Followers-of-the-Simple-Living-Philosophy/5#ixzz1WBpX7zRz