Saturday, April 18, 2015

News Clips For The Day


http://www.cbsnews.com/news/espn-reporter-caught-on-video-in-mean-girl-tirade/

ESPN reporter caught on video in mean girl tirade
CBS NEWS
April 16, 2015

Photograph – Britt McHenry,  CBS NEWS

A video of an ESPN reporter berating a towing company lot attendant has exploded online and resulted in her suspension from the sports network.

Washington D.C.-based bureau reporter Britt McHenry's car had been towed from an Arlington, Va., restaurant earlier this month. When she went to retrieve it, she was displeased and took a nasty attitude with the cashier. First she boasts about her position and threatens the company, Advanced Towing.

"I'm in the news sweetheart, and I will [expletive] sue this place," she said on the video, which was posted to LiveLeak.com

But after a few seconds, her insults become more direct and personal.

"Do you feel good about your job," she asked. "So I could be a college dropout and do the same thing? Why because I have a brain and you don't?"

Then it gets downright nasty. "Maybe if I was missing some teeth they would hire me, huh?"

From there it gets juvenile as she takes more digs at the cashier's dental work: "Oh, like yours, because they look so stunning. 'Cause I'm on television and you're in a [expletive] trailer, honey"

"I wouldn't work in a scumbag place like this. It makes my skin crawl even being here."

McHenry took to Twitter to express her regret. --
In an intense and stressful moment, I allowed my emotions to get the best of me and said some insulting and (cont)http://t.co/Wx37XF2QtM
— Britt McHenry (@BrittMcHenry) April 16, 2015




According to a recent TV report McHenry was only suspended for one week for something which should get her fired. Abusive behavior, and for no good reason in this case, is all too common nowadays. In the news article she makes fun of the cashier's missing teeth and presumed poverty – the reference to her living in a trailer. Being on TV makes some people become extremely conceited, apparently. I'm sorry to say that this verbal assault was made by a woman. Women are not always kindhearted and fair, of course. In the old days you very rarely heard of women or girls fighting physically, but it's in the news every now and then today. The “fair sex” may be disappearing from our midst and becoming “mean girls.” That movie was, unfortunately, a realistic portrayal of many modern high schools. This is not a result of the feminist movement, but rather of poor parenting skills by so many adults. Teens nowadays are often spoiled, and this is the result.




TWO SIDES TO THE STORY – TWO ARTICLES


http://www.rochesterhomepage.net/story/d/story/brockport-teens-arrest-caught-on-camera/37919/7Lw_Tjv2SU2Lz1pi0tOgvA

Brockport Teen's Arrest Caught on Camera
Ali Touhey
4/15/2015

Brockport, NY (WROC)--A roughly two minute video posted to YouTube shows the arrest of Brockport teenager, Dante Bertino by three Brockport Police Officers. " If you guys would, just head home, please," can be heard coming from one of the officers in the video. 

According to Brockport Police Chief, Daniel Varrenti, they were called to the park after receiving complaints of foul language coming from the basketball court and there were children nearby. "They have a right to go to that park without hearing four letter words, without having people swearing and acting disrespectful," the chief said. "There was nothing done by my son to cause that reaction by the officer," said Dante's father, Jeremy. He wasn't at the park when the arrest happened. But, he said his son wasn't the one using profanity. The video captures Dante's interaction with police after the group was asked to get off the court. "I think the officers acted accordingly," said Varrenti. "If someone here in the Village of Brockport wants to come here and challenge a police officers lawful orders, they will be arrested."

Bertino was ticketed for disorderly conduct and charged with misdemeanor resisting arrest. Jeremy believes the situation unnecessarily got out of hand. He wants his son's charges dropped. "They're not there to bully and teach manners. It's not their job to teach kids manners." 

Varrenti didn't watch the video. But, he believes the teens were acting inappropriately in a public park. "They chose not to disperse," explained the chief. "They chose to resist arrest. They chose to obstruct governmental administration. Those were their choices. Had they just dispersed, we wouldn't be here today."



http://thefreethoughtproject.com/york-police-arrest-teen-playing-basketball-video-proves-lied-police-report/

Power Hungry New York Cops Arrest Teen for Playing Basketball – Video Proves They Lied on Report
By Cassandra Fairbanks on April 16, 2015

Brockport, NY– An incident captured on camera Monday shows police arresting a teenager simply because he voiced his displeasure with police harassing him on the basketball court.

The incident started in a park where 17-year-old Deonte Bertino was playing an innocent game of basketball with a couple other high school students.  The police chief has defended his officers actions, despite admitting that he had not yet bothered to watch the two-minute-long video.

The 17-year-old is described as a quiet and good kid who never gets in trouble but was clearly distressed by the officers demands to leave the park, as the teens were simply having some wholesome fun.

When the teenagers were told to disperse, Bertino walked over to the bench to grab his belongings, but was clearly distraught that he was being forced to leave.

Deciding that teaching manners is now in the job description of police, Officer Cranston attempted to grab Bertino as he was following the order to exit the park, causing the teenager to pull away.

Bertino told the officer not to touch him, as he was not detained, and there was no justification for the officer to have his hands on him.  At this point, the officer tells him that he is under arrest and violently throws the barely 17-year-old to the ground with assistance from Officer Caitlin.  A third officer then rushes over to pile up on him.

“The arresting officers lied on the police report saying my son threatened the officer and cursed at the officer. In the unedited video, you can plainly hear he never cursed at the officer,” Dante’s father, Jeremy Bertino, told The Free Thought Project.

Dante was charged with obstructing a government investigation, disorderly conduct, and resisting arrest.  His father obtained a copy of the police report and maintains that the video proves the police lied.  He plans to file a formal complaint on behalf of his son.

“They messed with the wrong guy’s son. I am very informed of the laws and our rights and how they are trampled on daily,” his father stated.  “If everyone just keeps allowing the cops to violate our rights it will only get worse.  We have to take a stand against the tyranny that is being allowed daily in this country by us citizens. The cops are trained to violate our rights for their arrest quotas.”

Brockport Police Chief, Daniel Varrenti, spoke to local news channel WROC and defended the officers, even though he had not taken the time to watch the video before commenting to the press.

“I think the officers acted accordingly, if someone here in the Village of Brockport wants to come here and challenge a police officer’s lawful orders, they will be arrested,” Varrenti stated.  “They chose not to disperse.  They chose to resist arrest. They chose to obstruct governmental administration. Those were their choices. Had they just dispersed, we wouldn’t be here today.”

Varrenti, in typical police fashion, blindly stood behind the thin blue line, instead of the constitutional rights police like to claim they uphold.

“It is what cops are told they have to do. Blindly back up any other ‘badge brother.’  They are taught that if you wear a badge you are always in the right. This is the problem with most police forces today. No accountability.”  Jeremy Bertino told The Free Thought Project.



http://www.epolicenews.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=537:badge-brothers&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=50

ePolice News
Badge Brothers
From: Denise   

Screaming Flea Productions, http://www.sfpseattle.com an Emmy award-winning non-fiction and documentary series production company and a major cable network with more than 300 million viewers worldwide, are searching for active Police partners for a national television series - BADGE BROTHERS.

The series will focus on a single Police Partnership in a high stakes police division, and will take an in-depth look at the challenges and triumphs of two "brother-like" partners working side-by-side. We will be working directly with the Department chiefs and the specific partners will be presented in a positive and inspiring light to show the bonds forged by partners working in law enforcement.
If you are an active Police officer working in a partnership and you work in a high-stake unit/division, you can contact Screaming Flea Casting in Los Angeles, CA at (818) 391-5792, or email bio and photos to screamingfleacasting@gmail.com ...more


http://www.epolicenews.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=frontpage&Itemid=28

Police Union News and Information for Law Enforcement Professionals
News for police association, police union, professional law enforcement and labor organizations representing law enforcement.





“It is what cops are told they have to do. Blindly back up any other ‘badge brother.’  They are taught that if you wear a badge you are always in the right. This is the problem with most police forces today. No accountability.”  Jeremy Bertino told The Free Thought Project.” “Badge brothers” clearly are not always on the side of justice or fairness., but on group solidarity at any cost. I know that not all police officers are of this turn of mind, however, but enough are that we are having a nationwide rash of police brutality and overreaching which the brass then in too many cases condone.

In this particular case, the report (not witnessed by the police officers) that the boys had been swearing does not strike me as good reason for forcing them to leave the park. Why are policemen intervening in our daily lives in that way? On the video the officer did appear to speak to them politely, but he became aggressive when they “talked back” to him, and was joined by two other officers. In the cases when the young people were black the officers were not reported to be nearly as respectful, and even verbally abusive. Of course there is often a possibility that black bystanders may be exaggerating the situation at times, too, since there isn't often a video to prove the case. Still, the “bad blood” between policemen and the neighborhoods they serve is a terrible thing and is often the real problem in conflicts. I saw some comments on one Net article that showed a great deal of competitive hostility on the part of the police officers, and signs of unfairness.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/frustration-with-mistaken-tax-refund-seizures-continues/

Frustration continues with aggressive tax-refund seizures
By WYATT ANDREWS CBS NEWS
April 15, 2015

Video – Social Security continues to seize tax refunds to pay off old debts

More than 77 million Americans have received tax refunds -- but others may not be so lucky.

CBS News has been investigating complaints that refunds are being seized by the government without notice.

Shalita Grant is a Tony nominated actress -- who plays a federal agent on TV's "NCIS New Orleans."

But to Social Security she's been an outlaw -- not because she did anything wrong -- but because her father was overpaid more than $13,000 in disability. Grant grew outraged when Social Security seized her $1,500 tax refund without warning or any evidence against her.

"I would describe it as a theft," she said. "I'm asking for a bill. I'm asking for something that says I owe you. I feel like you guys stole from me and I have nothing to show for it."

But stolen is a strong word.

"Oh yeah, and I feel strongly about that."

Over the last year, CBS News has contacted a dozen taxpayers who say Social Security has taken their tax refunds because a relative had been overpaid in benefits.

Jessica Vela, a U.S. Navy Veteran, lost a $6,000 refund last year, when she was eight months pregnant

"I had a baby due the next month," she said, growing emotional as she recalled what happened. "There are no words to explain how helpless the situation has been."

Helpless because Social Security admitted it had overpaid Jessica's mother, not her.

"I've told them 'til I'm blue in the face, I was a minor, I was learning to ride a bike during that time."

But now she's a Navy veteran, and describing herself as defenseless. "Against your own government."

Social Security declined to speak on camera. In court filings, it said it has the legal authority to go after the relatives of people overpaid in benefits. However, the agency has repeatedly denied it has ever done so.

In January the agency told Congress: "We did not...[collect] any...debt that was incurred by a parent or another family member."

"It's a flat lie," Vela said. "It's an absolute, bold-faced lie."

After our investigation Social Security admitted that the taxpayers in our story were not to blame, that the money had indeed gone to their parents and both of those women got their refunds back. But that's an admission that Social Security is doing the exact kind of aggressive debt collection it's told the public it would never do.




“Shalita Grant is a Tony nominated actress -- who plays a federal agent on TV's "NCIS New Orleans." But to Social Security she's been an outlaw -- not because she did anything wrong -- but because her father was overpaid more than $13,000 in disability. Grant grew outraged when Social Security seized her $1,500 tax refund without warning or any evidence against her. …. Over the last year, CBS News has contacted a dozen taxpayers who say Social Security has taken their tax refunds because a relative had been overpaid in benefits. Jessica Vela, a U.S. Navy Veteran, lost a $6,000 refund last year, when she was eight months pregnant.
"I had a baby due the next month," she said, growing emotional as she recalled what happened. "There are no words to explain how helpless the situation has been." Helpless because Social Security admitted it had overpaid Jessica's mother, not her. .… Social Security declined to speak on camera. In court filings, it said it has the legal authority to go after the relatives of people overpaid in benefits. However, the agency has repeatedly denied it has ever done so. In January the agency told Congress: "We did not...[collect] any...debt that was incurred by a parent or another family member."

“After our investigation Social Security admitted that the taxpayers in our story were not to blame, that the money had indeed gone to their parents and both of those women got their refunds back.” I'm glad to see that Social Security has admitted guilt and refunded the money, but it's still a sign of government corruption. It seems to me that there was a similar story within the last year involving the IRS itself, however. It seems that things done in secret, if not exposed, will probably remain under cover. This is really shameful. Who oversees the actions of the SS and IRS? This kind of thing gives the rabid government haters an excuse for their complaints.

There is probably a senate committee or something. Do they punish this kind of thing if there is no complaint made? These situations are not ones in which the citizen whose tax refund was withheld was actually at fault, but rather a parent or other family member. The Subcommittee on Social Security, Pensions, and Family Policy and the Subcommittee on Taxation and IRS Oversight are given as holding the responsibility for the way business is being conducted at the website http://www.finance.senate.gov/about/subcommittees/. There should at least be due process in every case, rather than a simple denial.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/elizabeth-holmes-youngest-self-made-female-billionaire-revolutionize-health-care/

The world's youngest self-made female billionaire
CBS NEWS
April 16, 2015

Elizabeth Holmes was named to this years' TIME 100 list of the world's most influential people Thursday. She's being compared to visionaries like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs. Just as Gates wanted a computer on every desk, Holmes wants a blood test in every drugstore.

Her company, Theranos, has created what they call a painless, needle-free way to draw blood and test it -- for a fraction of Medicare costs. It's fueled immense anticipation in the health care industry and made Holmes the world's youngest self-made female billionaire, reports "CBS This Morning" co-host Norah O'Donnell.

While she certainly has the money for it, Holmes said she doesn't own a TV.

"I work all the time and I'm basically in the office from the time I wake up, and then working until I go to sleep every day," she said.

At 19 years old, Holmes dropped out of Stanford University. She had a little tuition money and a big idea. Now, at 31, she's what lots of teenagers with that background likely strive to become: the youngest female billionaire in the world.

"You know, it's not what matters," Holmes said. "What matters is how well we do in trying to make people's lives better. That's why I'm doing this. That's why I work the way that I work. And that's why I love what I'm doing so much."

What Holmes is doing is running Theranos, the biotech company she founded in 2003. You'll see her either in a black turtleneck or white lab coat taking a high-tech approach to blood testing. Instead of a needle to the arm, it's a pin prick to the finger. Holmes is marketing Theranos as a faster and cheaper alternative to a process that hasn't changed meaningfully in decades.

"We've created these little tiny tubes, which we call the 'nanotainers,' which are designed to replace the big, traditional tubes that come from your arm, and instead allow for all the testing to be done from a tiny drop from a finger," Holmes said.

Theranos struck a partnership with drugstore chain Walgreens to build thousands of Wellness Centers. Every center would offer a menu of blood tests -- ranging from cancer to cholesterol -- directly to consumers. And every test, Holmes said, would cost only a fraction of what Medicare pays.

Not everyone is sold just yet. Some critics argue the Theranos method doesn't extract enough blood to do all the tests it claims.

"Every time you create something new, there should be questions, and to me that's a sign that you've actually done something that is transformative," Holmes said.

Her tests are not available everywhere yet, but she said they're working as fast as they can to roll out in the next states.

Little is known about how Theranos' tests work, which has raised concerns about putting diagnostic results in patients' hands without doctors present.

Nevertheless, her company is now valued at close to a whopping $10 billion.

"It's a really important area," said Holmes. "When people get a lab test done, traditionally, in order for that lab test to be paid for, you have to have a symptom so the doctor can write in a code on the lab form. But if you can drop the pricing really low, then all of a sudden preventative testing can start to become possible."

Her product could transform the health care industry in America and around the world. It may seem small, but it's revolutionary.

"Making it possible to do tests on tiny samples; any cancer patient, any child, any elderly person whose veins collapse will tell you not having to have their blood drawn that way is a big deal," Holmes said.

For as much promise as those tiny samples hold, Holmes is already known as a very real and rare example of what perseverance makes possible.

She was young when she decided she wanted to change the world, and at nine years old she wrote a letter explaining her dreams to her dad: "What I really want out of life is to discover something new, something that mankind didn't know was possible to do."

"I grew up in a family of people who wanted to make a difference in the world," Holmes said.

She hasn't wasted any time. Last week she became the youngest member ever named to the prestigious Horatio Alger Association, which recognizes grit and drive.

She was the only woman on stage with a lot of older white men.

"This is true, I was," Homes said. "But what was so wonderful about it is that these young girls who are in the audience connect to me as nothing but living proof that their dreams are possible."



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theranos

Theranos
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Theranos is a privately held health technology and medical laboratoryservices company based in Palo Alto, California that has developed novel approaches for laboratory diagnostic tests using blood.[2] The company's blood testing platform uses a few drops of blood obtained via a fingerstick rather than vials of blood obtained via traditionalvenipuncture,[3] and utilizes microfluidics technology.[4]


Microfluidics
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Microfluidics is a multidisciplinary field intersecting engineering, physics, chemistry, biochemistry, nanotechnology, and biotechnology, with practical applications to the design of systems in which small volumes of fluids will be handled. Microfluidics emerged in the beginning of the 1980s and is used in the development of inkjet printheads, DNA chips,lab-on-a-chip technology, micro-propulsion, and micro-thermal technologies. It deals with the behavior, precise control and manipulation of fluids that are geometrically constrained to a small, typically sub-millimeter, scale. 

Typically fluids are moved, mixed, separated or otherwise processed. Numerous applications employ passive fluid control techniques like capillary forces. In some applications external actuation means are additionally used for a directed transport of the media. Examples are rotary drives applying centrifugal forces for the fluid transport on the passive chips. Active microfluidics refers to the defined manipulation of the working fluid by active (micro) components such as micropumps or micro valves. Micro pumps supply fluids in a continuous manner or are used for dosing. Micro valves determine the flow direction or the mode of movement of pumped liquids. Often processes which are normally carried out in a lab are miniaturized on a single chip in order to enhance efficiency and mobility as well as reducing sample and reagent volumes. …. The behavior of fluids at the microscale can differ from 'macrofluidic' behavior in that factors such as surface tension, energy dissipation, and fluidic resistance start to dominate the system. Microfluidics studies how these behaviors change, and how they can be worked around, or exploited for new uses.[1][2][3][4]




“Her company, Theranos, has created what they call a painless, needle-free way to draw blood and test it -- for a fraction of Medicare costs. It's fueled immense anticipation in the health care industry and made Holmes the world's youngest self-made female billionaire, reports "CBS This Morning" co-host Norah O'Donnell. While she certainly has the money for it, Holmes said she doesn't own a TV. …. At 19 years old, Holmes dropped out of Stanford University. She had a little tuition money and a big idea. …. "What matters is how well we do in trying to make people's lives better. That's why I'm doing this. That's why I work the way that I work. And that's why I love what I'm doing so much." …. "We've created these little tiny tubes, which we call the 'nanotainers,' which are designed to replace the big, traditional tubes that come from your arm, and instead allow for all the testing to be done from a tiny drop from a finger," Holmes said. Theranos struck a partnership with drugstore chain Walgreens to build thousands of Wellness Centers. Every center would offer a menu of blood tests -- ranging from cancer to cholesterol -- directly to consumers. And every test, Holmes said, would cost only a fraction of what Medicare pays. …. Her tests are not available everywhere yet, but she said they're working as fast as they can to roll out in the next states. Little is known about how Theranos' tests work, which has raised concerns about putting diagnostic results in patients' hands without doctors present. …. "I grew up in a family of people who wanted to make a difference in the world," Holmes said. She hasn't wasted any time. Last week she became the youngest member ever named to the prestigious Horatio Alger Association, which recognizes grit and drive.”

“Little is known about how Theranos' tests work...” Either a whole bunch of scientists are blowing smoke, or something that resembles magic has happened in science. Of course, the invention of the microscope produced a similar magic. I would like to see some information about how many scientists have been able to replicate her techniques with the same results, but I suppose with her company making literally a billion dollars, these tests must be effective. I assume the results have been compared against regular old large tube results or will be. Walgreens obviously believes her.

I first heard the word nanotechnology some twenty years ago, and going by the Wikipedia article above, it has become a huge field in science. It's like physics now. I don't know how it all works, but those who specialize in it do, and I tend to believe they know what they are doing. The most impressive thing in this story is that Holmes got the idea in her 19th year of age without a full college degree and managed to develop her skills in nanotechnology and her specific technique. The really good news is that she wants to use her talents to help the human race. If she isn't a Democrat, she should be.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/senator-slams-feds-over-decade-old-oil-leak-in-gulf/

Senator slams feds over decade-old oil leak in Gulf
AP  April 18, 2015

Photograph – This March 31, 2015 photo shows an oil sheen drifting from the site of the former Taylor Energy oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico, off the coast of Louisiana. The AP's review of more than 2,300 pollution reports since 2008 found they didn't match official accounts of a diminishing leak. In fact, the reports show a dramatic spike in sheen sizes and oil volumes since Sept. 1, 2014. (AP Photo/Gerald Herbert)  GERALD HERBERT, AP

BATON ROUGE, Louisiana - A U.S. senator from Florida is pressing federal officials to disclose technical data and other information about a decade-old oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico, after an investigation by The Associated Press revealed evidence that the spill is far worse than a company or government regulators have publicly reported.

In a letter Friday to Interior Secretary Sally Jewell and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, Sen. Bill Nelson said it is "unacceptable" that oil is still leaking from the site off Louisiana's coast where an oil platform owned by Taylor Energy Company toppled during Hurricane Ivan in 2004.

The Florida Democrat, who is the ranking member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science & Transportation, told Jewell and Johnson that "all necessary resources" should be committed to stopping the oil from flowing.

"If you've got an oil rig that's been leaking for 11 years, then it's time for us to find out what's going on," Nelson said during a telephone interview.

Taylor has downplayed the leak's extent and environmental impact. The New Orleans-based company recently touted a year-old estimate that less than 4 gallons (15 liters) per day is spilling at the site where its cluster of 28 wells remain buried under sediment from a mudslide triggered by Ivan's waves.

But the Coast Guard provided AP with a new leak estimate that is about 20 times greater than the one cited by Taylor.

AP's analysis of more than 2,300 pollution reports to the Coast Guard since 2008 showed a dramatic spike in sheen sizes and oil volumes since Sept. 1, 2014. That came just after federal regulators held a workshop to improve the accuracy of slick estimates reported by a Taylor contractor and started sending government observers on monitoring flights over the site.

When presented by AP with evidence of the spike, the Coast Guard attributed it to an improved method for estimating the slicks from the air - with the clear implication that far more oil had been spilling for years than had been reported.

After BP's massive Gulf oil spill in 2010, Nelson criticized the London-based oil giant's reluctance to publicly release videos of its underwater gusher. BP eventually broadcast a live video feed that showed its efforts to stop the spill, which dwarfed even the highest estimate of Taylor's leak.




“The AP's review of more than 2,300 pollution reports since 2008 found they didn't match official accounts of a diminishing leak. In fact, the reports show a dramatic spike in sheen sizes and oil volumes since Sept. 1, 2014. …. In a letter Friday to Interior Secretary Sally Jewell and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, Sen. Bill Nelson said it is "unacceptable" that oil is still leaking from the site off Louisiana's coast where an oil platform owned by Taylor Energy Company toppled during Hurricane Ivan in 2004. The Florida Democrat, who is the ranking member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science & Transportation, told Jewell and Johnson that "all necessary resources" should be committed to stopping the oil from flowing. …. But the Coast Guard provided AP with a new leak estimate that is about 20 times greater than the one cited by Taylor. AP's analysis of more than 2,300 pollution reports to the Coast Guard since 2008 showed a dramatic spike in sheen sizes and oil volumes since Sept. 1, 2014. That came just after federal regulators held a workshop to improve the accuracy of slick estimates reported by a Taylor contractor and started sending government observers on monitoring flights over the site. When presented by AP with evidence of the spike, the Coast Guard attributed it to an improved method for estimating the slicks from the air - with the clear implication that far more oil had been spilling for years than had been reported.”

This is the reason why I don't want oil rigs off the coast of Florida, as was proposed within the last year. I'm glad to see that my personal senator Bill Nelson is on the job. Maybe he should run for President one of these years. Every time an oil well is drilled under water there is danger of this kind of problem. When I was young I used to spend lots of time outdoors and in an environment that was not heavily polluted. Animals and green plants were everywhere. The peace would soak into my soul and my eyes were filled with beauty. That was in North Carolina, but Florida is another strikingly beautiful place. I really do hate to see it spoiled.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/why-do-humans-have-chins/

Why do humans have chins?
By STEPHANIE PAPPAS LIVESCIENCE.COM
April 15, 2015

Photograph – Notice how the modern skull, on the left, has a point at the bottom of the face compared to the Neandethal-era skull on the right. The reason: Only modern humans have chins.  PHOTO ILLUSTRATION BY TIM SCHOON

The Wicked Witch of the West can thank facial evolution for her iconic, pointy chin, new research suggests. And so can everyone else.

Compared with other human relatives such as Neanderthals, modern Homo sapiens have particularly prominent chins. Some researchers have hypothesized that the modern human chin helps the jaw stand up to the forces generated by chewing, said Nathan Holton, an anthropologist at the University of Iowa.

In a new study, Holton and his colleagues find that the chewing theory doesn't hold water.

"The development of the chin doesn't seem to have anything to do with resistance to bending stresses," Holton told Live Science. "They're just not related." [The 10 Biggest Mysteries of the First Humans]

Instead, he said, the prominence of the chin may simply be a side effect of the rest of the face evolving to be smaller.

Chin mystery

To determine whether chin prominence protects the jaw from bending while chewing, Holton and his colleagues examined X-ray images from the Iowa Facial Growth Study, which tracked children's skull development from age 3 into adulthood. Using 292 measurements from 18 females and 19 males, the researchers tracked jaw development and bone distribution associated with protecting against various types of stresses.

Chins become more prominent with age, but the scientists found no consistent links between chin prominence and resistance. In fact, jaws are relatively better at resisting some types of forces at age 3, when chins are not well developed, compared to adulthood, Holton said.

The findings appeared online April 11 in the Journal of Anatomy.

University of Iowa researchers find that we develop chins as our head size increases, from childhood to adulthood. At about 4 years of age (left), we have little indication of a chin, but by our 20s, we have a prominent point at the bottom of our faces.

 NATHAN HOLTON LAB, UNIVERSITY OF IOWA

Shrinking faces

If chins don't confer jaw protection, the reason for the pointy human chin is something of a mystery, Holton said. Overall, the Homo genus (which includes humans, Neanderthals and other ancestors) has experienced an evolution toward smaller faces over time, with Homo sapiens showing the greatest reductions in size. Among features on the modern human's face, the lower jaw stops growing last, making it relatively more prominent compared with the rest of the face.

The prominent chin "is a secondary consequence of faces getting smaller," Holton said.

So why have faces shrunk? One possibility is that hormonal changes associated with reduced violence and increased cooperation had the side effect of "domesticating" the human face, thus shrinking it, Holton said. He and his colleagues are also exploring evidence that points to the nose as the culprit. As overall body size shrank, Holton said, the nasal cavities did not need to grow as large to provide enough air for survival. The face then did not have to grow as large to support the nose.

"It really seems like a lot of changes in the modern human face are really due to a reduction in size, so if we can explain that, we can explain a lot," Holton said.




“In a new study, Holton and his colleagues find that the chewing theory doesn't hold water. "The development of the chin doesn't seem to have anything to do with resistance to bending stresses," Holton told Live Science. "They're just not related." [The 10 Biggest Mysteries of the First Humans] Instead, he said, the prominence of the chin may simply be a side effect of the rest of the face evolving to be smaller. …. Among features on the modern human's face, the lower jaw stops growing last, making it relatively more prominent compared with the rest of the face. …. To determine whether chin prominence protects the jaw from bending while chewing, Holton and his colleagues examined X-ray images from the Iowa Facial Growth Study, which tracked children's skull development from age 3 into adulthood. Using 292 measurements from 18 females and 19 males, the researchers tracked jaw development and bone distribution associated with protecting against various types of stresses.”

The jury is still out on whether the reduction in facial size and the increase in the chin development is due to hormones stemming from a gentler life style or from there being no longer a need for the nose to be so large as it was in Neanderthals and others. I would vote for hormones due to living a less violent life. That is because in a very interesting book on the differences between wolves and dogs and that line of evolution, the author stated that wolf puppies in current times which have been hand raised by humans so that they do not grow up hunting, competing fiercely for status within a pack, and killing and eating raw meat tend to have shorter noses than their wild brothers do. Dogs do have shorter noses. This change is thought to be due to a different hormonal balance between the two groups. Of course, it's also very likely that selective breeding by humans led to a preference for shorter noses, either for beauty or as an indication of greater gentleness. Some of the most fierce dogs, however, like the whole bulldog clan, have short noses. Wouldn't it be interesting if smaller noses and larger chins were actually preferred by mating pairs due to a perceived greater level of beauty? At this time I think we can say for sure that men with weak chins or little mini noses do not look as masculine to women. Women want to see strong facial features.





http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2015/04/17/400362239/hillary-clinton-supports-amendment-to-get-hidden-money-out-of-politics

Hillary Clinton Supports Amendment To Get Hidden Money Out Of Politics
Peter Overby
Power, Money and Influence Correspondent
April 17, 2015

Photograph – "We need to fix our dysfunctional political system and get unaccounted money out of it, once and for all, even if that takes a constitutional amendment," Hillary Clinton said at Kirkwood Community College in Iowa Tuesday.
Michael B. Thomas/AFP/Getty Images

Hillary Clinton made a surprising move this week. It wasn't running for president — she'd already set the stage for that — but embracing the idea of a constitutional amendment to restrict or eliminate big money in politics.

The notion of amending the Constitution this way has been discussed, literally for decades. But Clinton is joining a new, if small, chorus of prominent politicians who are talking it up.

"We need to fix our dysfunctional political system and get unaccounted money out of it, once and for all, even if that takes a constitutional amendment," she said to a gatheringat Kirkwood Community College in Iowa.

Campaign finance reform is one of four pillars, "four big fights," of her campaign, she said, along with help for families and communities; a stronger, more balanced economy; and a strong national defense.

Activist groups have toiled for such an amendment since 2010, when the Supreme Court's Citizens United decisionlet corporate and union money directly into partisan politics.

Clinton spoke a few days after Republican Lindsey Graham's most recent comments on a possible amendment.

"The next president of the United States needs to get a commission of really smart people and find a way to create a constitutional amendment to limit the role of superPACs," said Graham, a senator from South Carolina who is weighing a presidential run. He was appearing on WMUR-TV in Manchester, N.H.

SuperPACs were created after Citizens United and a related appellate ruling, as political committees that raise unrestricted contributions from wealthy donors, corporations and unions. SuperPAC donors are publicly disclosed. Along with 501(c)(4) "social welfare" organizations, which have no disclosure as well as no contribution limits, superPACs are fueling the boom in bare-knuckle, lavishly financed campaigning by noncandidate, nonparty groups.

President Obama said yes to amending the Constitution in 2012, in a Q&A session on Reddit, and again last month, in an interview on the website Vox. "I would love to see some constitutional process that would allow us to actually regulate campaign spending, the way we used to, and maybe even improve it," he told Vox.

Campaign spending has been constitutionally protected since a 1976 Supreme Court decision known as Buckley v. Valeo. The justices said Congress could not regulate political spending, because it was tantamount to free speech. All subsequent attempts to control political money have had to work around the Buckley distinction between contributions and spending.

Former Democratic presidential candidate and New Jersey Sen. Bill Bradley said as early as the 1990s that a constitutional amendment was needed to overturn Buckley. In 2012, he told NPR's Talk Of The Nation, "You need a constitutional amendment that says federal, state and local governments may limit the amount of money in a campaign."

But back to Clinton. At People for the American Way, one of the groups mobilizing for an amendment, Executive Vice President Marge Baker said Clinton's statement can help the effort.

"When the leading candidate for president says she's going to make reducing the influence of money in politics one of the four pillars in her campaign, you know that that's going to be a major issue in 2016," Baker said. "So this is a very, very big deal."

Clinton drew a charge of hypocrisy from Republican Gov. Chris Christie, of New Jersey. Not a declared presidential candidate, he was stumping in New Hampshire.

"She intends to raise $2.5 billion for her campaign. But she wants to then get the corrupting money out of politics," he said to laughter at a town hall meeting. "It's classic, right? It's classic politician-speak."

In Congress this year, lawmakers have introduced nine resolutions proposing constitutional amendments — typically proposing to restrict political spending, or bar corporate spending in politics, or overturn the Supreme Court's 129-year-old precedent of giving corporations the constitutional standing of people.

Republican leaders on Capitol Hill simply say nobody should mess with the First Amendment in the Bill of Rights. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky made the point on the Senate floor last fall.

"If the Democrats who run Washington are so determined to force the Senate into debate over repealing the free speech protections of the First Amendment, then fine, let's have a full and proper debate," he said.

Democrats wanted a Senate vote on a constitutional amendment, and they got it. The proposal passed, 54 to 42 — 13 short of the two-thirds majority required for a proposed amendment. Ratification also requires a two-thirds vote in the House, and approval from 38 states.

Republican lawyer Trevor Potter has long worked for tougher campaign finance laws. He was the lawyer for Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., when the Senate passed the McCain-Feingold bill in 2001. It's the last major campaign finance law to emerge from Congress. But now, Potter says a constitutional amendment poses problems that only start with ratification.

Potter said, "Beyond that is the issue of what is it that the amendment would say, and how would it be effective?"

These are questions of language that might go too far, or not far enough, or lie open to reinterpretation by future Supreme Courts.

So far, the answers don't satisfy all of big money's critics.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/501%28c%29_organization

501(c) organization
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A 501(c) organization, also known colloquially as a501(c), is a tax-exempt nonprofit organization in the United States.  …. The most common type of tax-exempt nonprofit organization falls under category 501(c)(3), whereby a nonprofit organization is exempt from federal income tax if its activities have the following purposes: charitable, religious, educational, scientific, literary, testing for public safety, fostering amateur sports competition, or preventing cruelty to children or animals. The 501(c)(4) and 501(c)(6) categories are for politically active nonprofits, which have become increasingly important since the 2004 presidential election. …. 501(c)(4) — Civic Leagues, Social Welfare Organizations, and Local Associations of Employees …. Section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from supporting political candidates, and are subject to limits on lobbying. They risk loss of tax exempt status if these rules are violated.[35][36]An organization that loses its 501(c)(3) status due to being engaged in political activities cannot then qualify for 501(c)(4) status.[37] ….In contrast to the prohibition on political campaign interventions by all section 501(c)(3) organizations, public charities (but not private foundations) may conduct a limited amount of lobbying to influence legislation. Although the law states that "No substantial part..." of a public charity's activities can go to lobbying, charities with large budgets may lawfully expend a million dollars (under the "expenditure" test), or more (under the "substantial part" test) per year on lobbying.[39]




"We need to fix our dysfunctional political system and get unaccounted money out of it, once and for all, even if that takes a constitutional amendment," Hillary Clinton said at Kirkwood Community College in Iowa Tuesday. …. The notion of amending the Constitution this way has been discussed, literally for decades. But Clinton is joining a new, if small, chorus of prominent politicians who are talking it up. …. Campaign finance reform is one of four pillars, "four big fights," of her campaign, she said, along with help for families and communities; a stronger, more balanced economy; and a strong national defense. Activist groups have toiled for such an amendment since 2010, when the Supreme Court's Citizens United decisionlet corporate and union money directly into partisan politics. …. "The next president of the United States needs to get a commission of really smart people and find a way to create a constitutional amendment to limit the role of superPACs," said Graham, a senator from South Carolina who is weighing a presidential run. He was appearing on WMUR-TV in Manchester, N.H. …. SuperPAC donors are publicly disclosed. Along with 501(c)(4) "social welfare" organizations, which have no disclosure as well as no contribution limits, superPACs are fueling the boom in bare-knuckle, lavishly financed campaigning by noncandidate, nonparty groups. …. Campaign spending has been constitutionally protected since a 1976 Supreme Court decision known as Buckley v. Valeo. The justices said Congress could not regulate political spending, because it was tantamount to free speech. All subsequent attempts to control political money have had to work around the Buckley distinction between contributions and spending. …. Potter said, "Beyond that is the issue of what is it that the amendment would say, and how would it be effective?" These are questions of language that might go too far, or not far enough, or lie open to reinterpretation by future Supreme Courts.”

“In Congress this year, lawmakers have introduced nine resolutions proposing constitutional amendments — typically proposing to restrict political spending, or bar corporate spending in politics, or overturn the Supreme Court's 129-year-old precedent of giving corporations the constitutional standing of people.” Would an amendment restricting political spending be enough? Barring corporate spending would help, but there would still be 501(c)(4) money. I would really like to see the Supreme Court decision that declared Corporations to be people be struck down. That whole thing is grossly unfair and illogical. The whole reason people set up corporations is to hide their personal spending and involvement in cases such as liability and taxes. If the CEOs of BP could be sued for damages, the oil spill in the Gulf would have been cleaned up sooner and more thoroughly. There is still oil being found in the bogs of Louisiana. This same ruling has caused Catholic businesses to be allowed to ban birth control under their insurance plans, and certainly gay marriage. I am very relieved to see this push for reform, which even includes at least one Republican backer – Lindsey Graham. Internet articles claim that he is a moderate who is not popular with the Tea Party and stood up against defunding the Department of Homeland Security as a gotcha at President Obama for his Immigration actions. He also may be running for President. He's a Republican, so I won't vote for him, but he has spoken out for some good things in the past, and if I have to have a Republican president he would be better than lots of others.