primroseburrows: (theirloveissointernational)
ExpandObama and Harper: Bookends in a broken democracy )


"Oddly enough the problem is the opposite in each country. In Canada, individual members of Parliament have almost no power and under Harper even Cabinet ministers have little. All power is centralized in the PMO and in the office of the Leaders. Even still, we don't get a direct vote for those leaders, only for their party and that vote is counted by the antiquated first past the post system so a candidate with a minority of votes usually is the winner and the party that wins almost never has a majority. There are few checks and balances in the Canadian system unlike in the US

In the US, individual members of the Congress have a lot of power supposedly to represent their constituents but in actual fact most of them are bought and paid for by the corporate lobbyists through Political Action Committees. The balance of power in the US means the President is limited by the Congress and in the hyper sectarian atmosphere on Capital Hill, the only things Obama can achieve are things the Republicans want.

But despite the differences, in both countries democracy is broken. The only way to fix it, is by engaging citizens in democratic decision making at every level. The demonstrations on Saturday are just the beginning."
.

source
primroseburrows: (colors don't run the world)
So. The 9/11 masterminds will get a criminal trial in a civilian court, but former child soldier Omar Khadr is still going to face a military tribunal. Apparently the reason is that certain evidence that would be prohibited in a civilian court (translation: evidence obtained under torture harsh interrogation techniques) will likely be accepted in a military court (surprise, surprise!).


This is all despite the fact that a. Khadr was fifteen years old at the time of his arrest, and b. evidence he might not even be guilty. And if that's not enough, let's add some insult to all this injury. Khad'rs own (minority) government is refusing to extradite him.

WTF, people? Since when are child soldiers treated like this? I thought there was supposed to be a law against that.

I'm completely unsurprised by Stephen Harper's actions, but I didn't expect Barack Obama to go along with Bush-era policies. Not, on, Mr. President. Not on at ALL.
primroseburrows: (DT: roland stagedance)
There really, really, REALLY are no words.

primroseburrows: (SA: gtpoint)
In case anyone cares, and even if you don't, the answers to my fandom love letter meme are Expandunder the cut )


In other news, after fits and starts, I'm finally finished watching H20. Holy Jesus on a unicycle, talk about an edge-of-your-seat story. The sequel? Cannot be here fast enough. *bites nails*

Oh, and on a related (at least in the synapses of my weird and overactive brain) subject: Stephen Harper and Paul Gross were born on the same day.
They don't just share a birthday, may it do ya, they were born on the same day. Coincidence or Evil Plot? Discuss. (the fact that Willie Nelson was born exactly 26 years earlier may or may not be noteworthy).


In birth news, the news isn't good.

ExpandC-Section rate rises to 30.2% )

[livejournal.com profile] patchfire says this, and she's right:

"The rate, the article notes, has risen by half since 1996, undoubtedly a result of ACOG's reversal on VBAC. This is, quite simply, intolerable. Caesarean section is surgery and should be reserved for times when it is needed. Not when the doctor is impatient, or the non-medically necessary induction didn't quite take, or the bag of water has just been broken 'too long' without a sign of infection. Most authorities suggest rates should be somewhere between five and fifteen percent, depending on the source."

Also, listen to this. Finally, someone mainstream is admitting that External Fetal Monitors don't change the outcomes in any way except to increase the already outrageously high Caeserian rate, and that the only reason docs use them is so they won't get sued (the guy who invented them even said they should only be used for high-risk births). And it's nice to know that at even though EFMs are epidemic, at least the latest Stupid Gadget didn't getting accepted without question. NPR actually says "births that occur in hospitals", acknowledging that um, no, not all births do occur in hospitals. They do persist in calling birth a "medical event", though, which it is NOT, unless a. There's an actual problem, in which case the problem is the medical event, not the birth, or b. So many interventions are used by obstetricians (and yes, a lot of nurse-midwives) that it becomes a medical event.

Profile

primroseburrows: (Default)
primroseburrows

June 2018

S M T W T F S
     12
3456 789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

Expand All Cut TagsCollapse All Cut Tags