Monday, September 21, 2020

Did Mitch McConnell Just Give Republicans A Way to Vote Against Trump??

Republican Senator Mitch McConnell on Monday may have given conservatives a way out of Voting for Trump! 


McConnell indicated, for those conservatives worried about how a democratic president might affect the make-up of the Supreme Court, there is nothing to worry about.  He may have a way around that.

The Senate Majority Leader said he is committed to confirming outgoing President Trump’s nomination to fill the Supreme Court seat vacated by the passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the 87-year-old liberal justice who became known across generations as the “notorious RBG.”

This means Republicans who were planning to simply hold their nose and vote for Trump to ensure a conservative judge would be appointed to replace the octogenarian who has suffered health problems these past years, no longer need to do so.   

While some Republicans have already crossed party lines, many have held firm to Trump because of concerns about maintaining the conservative make-up of the Supreme Court.

With the Senate firmly set to ensure a conservative appointment in the final days before the election, those who express such concerns no longer need to suffer Trump as the Republican Party’s only hope for a continued conservative court. 

This shift could have a stark effect on the coming electoral standoff, as many Republicans have been more concerned over the appointment of justices than with any misdeeds in which Trump may have been involved.



Friday, June 19, 2020

Author Offers Free Books to help in Tough Times (LINKS BELOW)


MELBOURNE, FL— COVID-19 has everyone worries. With cases on the rise, and the economic impacts felt around the globe, many people are struggling to meet basic needs. Disposable income has become a luxury many simply do not enjoy in 2020.

G.W. Pomichter, an author and the host of the Internet talk show series the Hangin With Web Show, announced today, that to do his part in this time of need, he would be lowering the price of his books as much as he was able.

The independent author said that means for Apple iOS and iBook readers as well as Barnes and Noble Nook readers all of his titles will be FREE of charge.

For Amazon Kindle readers, who shop for books on the wildly popular amazon online platform or on their portable Kindle devices, the electronic copies of his books would be less than $1.

“The lowest price afforded to me as an amazon author is $0.99,” said Pomichter. “So, that is what I have done. I have lowered the price to under $1 for Kindle readers.”

Since Amazon’s website does at times guarantee price matches for books, Pomichter says he encourages Amazon shoppers to mention the Nook and Apple Deals.

Pomichter said that he hopes that the deals will encourage readers to download his work and enjoy an evening or two of reading adventures.

“It is in tough times that we all need an escape,” he said. “These are the times when our heroes and our villains provide the much needed catharsis from daily life..”

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, many have been self-isolating at home, some have been out of work and still others practicing as mush smart social distancing as possible. For many independent authors, this has meant that conferences, conventions and other places where book sales occur have been cancelled or postponed. While the economic impacts of these events is still unclear, and for many could be devastating, Pomichter sees another impact as well.

“If we can’t table and sell books,” he said, “that means that readers can’t find and buy them. The impacts are doubled. It’s important that we do what we can to help ease minds and entertain audiences, much the same way film companies have through streaming.”

To that end, Pomichter made the descision to lower the cost of his works for a limited time, but has said he has not determined the time limit as yet.

“I’ll make these prices available as long as it feels right,” he said. “I already told these stories. They are already on the page. They aren’t any good to anyone sitting on a server or in a shelf. These stories want to be read. They want to be told. They long to be enjoyed. I hope that’s what will happen.”

Friday, June 12, 2020

The Michael J. Fox Foundation Collaborates with ESPN Founder Bill Rasmussen




A press release this week announced that The Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research (MJFF) announced that Bill Rasmussen has joined its team to help speed a cure for Parkinson's disease.

Mr. Rasmussen is the storied founder of ESPN, the world's first 24-hour, 7-days-a-week sports television network, who ushered in a new era of 24/7 broadcast sports news and coverage. Diagnosed with Parkinson's disease (PD) in 2014 at age 81, he has taken on the disease with his signature positive attitude and commitment to staying active, embracing engagement and inspiring others, one person at a time.

Mr. Rasmussen will sit on the Foundation's Patient Council, a 35-member body of individuals living with Parkinson's who guide and counsel the Foundation on programmatic strategy to ensure the Foundation's mission to bring a cure for Parkinson's over the finish line is informed, supported and fortified by the patient voice.

As a Foundation ambassador, Mr. Rasmussen will speak to Parkinson's patients and families about the invaluable contribution they can make by participating in research studies, especially in the first days and months after a diagnosis with PD. By telling his own story of Parkinson's diagnosis and engagement in the community, he hopes to quarterback an effort to find, educate, encourage and recruit newly diagnosed patients in research studies during their critical earliest stages of disease.

"Whether Parkinson's-related or not, the obstacles in my life won't stop — and I won't let them stop me," said Mr. Rasmussen. "I make workarounds to address the disease and I accept it for what it is. I still enjoy meeting new people. And I continue to be grateful that I can share my story. I hope my life story can help more people — even just one more person."

Human studies, also known as clinical trials, play a critical role in the development of new and better treatments by testing safety and how well they work. But clinical trials and new treatments can't move forward without the support of participants willing to join the team.

Across all research, 85 percent of trials face delays and 30 percent never get started because of the chronic shortage of volunteers. This means people with Parkinson's wait longer for better solutions to manage the disease.

In particular, research that tracks the progression of Parkinson's is best carried out in patients so recently diagnosed that they are not yet taking medicine to alleviate symptoms. Yet as the New York Times has reported, "It's not uncommon for people with Parkinson's to conceal their diagnoses, often for years. But the secrecy is not just stressful to maintain; experts fear that it also may be slowing down the research needed to find new treatments."

Mr. Rasmussen is featured in the Foundation's new resource, "If I Knew Then What I Know Now: The Michael J. Fox Foundation Patient Council's Guide for People Newly Diagnosed with Parkinson's Disease." He also was a guest panelist on the Foundation's corresponding webinar held Thursday, May 21 from 12 to 1 p.m. ET. (Register to listen on demand at michaeljfox.org.) And he will appear in the Foundation's limited series COVID-19 podcast hosted by fellow MJFF Patient Council member Larry Gifford, founder and host of the award-winning podcast "When Life Gives You Parkinson's" (Corus Entertainment/CuriousCast).

"The first few months and years following a Parkinson's diagnosis can be overwhelming," said Rachel Dolhun, MD, vice president of medical communications at The Michael J. Fox Foundation. "Few people think about participating in clinical trials during this time. But people in this fleeting window are in a unique position to contribute to research and help scientists capture the full continuum of Parkinson's. We are thrilled to have Bill as an ally in sharing this story and helping increase the flow of critically needed newly diagnosed individuals into Parkinson's research."

Mr. Rasmussen's collaboration with the Foundation is made possible by leadership funding from ESPN.

Saturday, February 29, 2020

Check out HWWS Indie Music Radio NOW

This is a completely indie music streaming radio network, where we strive to share the hottest tunes from the greatest artists you may not have heard of, until now!

All Music, All Indie, All Day, All Night, All the time! Play NOW! 


Tuesday, August 27, 2019

21st Century Challenges: Old School Solutions


It Starts with Us:  Personal Responsibility
 
Let’s begin with some concessions.  The author of this article concedes the following:  Advertising and marketing behaviors are in fact based on tested and effective psychological and sociological methods.  Taste, smell and other sensory perceptions and preferences can, in fact, scientifically be found in concentration, in select demographics and communities of interest.  These concessions are made in deference to any person or persons who might be unaware of the constancy with which business and personal interests are manipulating their perceptions of choice.  In acknowledging these concessions, it is the author’s hope that readers might concede the following: that the routine manipulations produced through the psychological and sociological use of the routine advertising and marketing of consumer products and services is a well known and documented occurrence, and that, as such, should be stipulated as common knowledge.

The studies into the precise nature of marketing and advertising psychological effects from passive to more aggressive techniques such as those researched in the mid 20th century into subliminal techniques are well known common knowledge.

With these stipulations in place, we can begin an honest discussion about the personal responsibilities of individuals to use sound decision-making strategies to navigate the complexities of daily life as both consumers and citizens.
 
In recent years several health and behavioral epidemics have been identified and targeted for their negative impacts on the general health and welfare of human beings and society.  A few of these include the detrimental effects of obesity, nicotine addiction, consumer credit use and more.  All of these represent a clear and present threat to the beneficial health and well being of both individuals and society as a whole.   In a society, however, where manufactures, advertisers, and distributors of consumer goods are often held to account for the impacts of their products on the populace, the question remains as to what the obligations of consumers might be with regard to their own decisions and decisions made by them that might have impacts on others. 

To begin, we will look at the obesity epidemic that has been identified, in particular, in western or U.S. society.  Obesity is a dangerous threat to public health and welfare. Obesity can lead to several severe health problems, including heart disease, hypertension, joint and muscle debilitation and more.  It is particularly important that we look at obesity, as it resultant of specific behaviors, not organic or hormonal conditions. 

The ongoing battle against obesity has taken many shapes.  Public or government initiatives to promote healthy consumption habits, as well as broad reaching regulatory mandates, are tools employed to combat this problem.  One of the most often recourses for individuals has increasingly become litigation between the purported victims of this epidemic and those who knowingly manufacture, distribute or market products that have an apparent connection to or seem outwardly to contribute to, poor health habits with regard to weight gain.   Law suits with fast food companies, grocery producers and even scientific endeavors working in the farming of crops and livestock have been targeted if the resulting products appear to contribute in any way to obesity or related behavioral disorders. 
 
The question remains, as to the culpability of each individual for deciding to consume these products once it is known that said products are being marketed to a susceptible population. It is a foregone conclusion that once a product is brought to market, it should in fact be marketed directly to those most likely to purchase them.  If an individual fits this demographic, then it can be assumed that that individual is most likely targeted for distribution.  Once we know this, is it now left to this individual to make the final and accountable decision to consume or not, any such product?  It can be, as above, stipulated that advertisements for such products will endeavor to produce a specific behavior, based on a targeted psychological appeal.  However, the question remains, is the targeted demographic group or individual still the arbiter of the final resultant decision? 

Nicotine “vaping” is one of the most recent epidemics among young people through out the country.  In much the same way fast food, consumer soft drinks, and other non-essential products and services are marketed, demographic studies are engaged, psychological profiles are established, and market research directed toward identifying successful methods for manipulating consumer behaviors that are undertaken.  Advertising methods are then put into practice and consumption begins.  The question now bears repeating.  Is the consumer or targeted demographic group or individual still reasonably responsible for the deliberate purchase and use of a product? 

If we fully stipulate that we as a populace is aware of and knowable of the fact that our behaviors are the target of specific manipulation by advertising and marketing standard practices used by any and all consumer services, then we must accept that said knowledge is, at the least, a first step toward the deliberations needed to be a smart and informed consumer.  If this is true, then it is derivative that the ultimate decision to act to purchase, use or consume any product is exclusively that of the individual, and that the individual assumes at the point of purchase, the sole responsibility for their own actions.

For this to be the case, any and all information about the product must be disclosed.  In much the same way U.S. regulations require a surgeon general’s warning on cigarette packages, nutritional facts be published on food staples or behavioral dangers be printed on irons or other appliances, any health or welfare risks must be disclosed, so that the ultimate decision of the individual can be considered an informed and deliberate one. 

TRUTH IN ADVERTISING:

 
To serve the above stated purposes, full disclosure and a more informed consumer population, fairness and truth in advertising regulations have been established throughout history.  Efforts to reduce these restrictions in favor of the so-called “free-market” have met with limited but important success.  While general health and welfare concerns are often still requisite, they can be psychologically countered by hyperbolic claims about the salutary benefits or effects of products.  Many regulations have been utilized to limit these, often disingenuous, claims, but few have survived the overwhelming pressures of the “free-market” to allow manufactures and distributors to profit from their endeavors.  This makes the struggle to produce a truly informed consumer public a difficult one. 

MEDIA INDEPENDENCE:

In the 21st century, the seemingly unrelenting growth of social media and other internet-based information platforms has made it even more difficult to become a truly informed consumer.  It is easy for providers, distributors and manufacturers to produce their own media content and influence the targeted consumer market.  For this reason, the fully independent press-media market must be protected.  This presents a growing difficulty as media companies struggle to diversify and become embedded in the consumer marketplace.  Ownership of press-media providers by consumer goods manufacturers and distributors is increasingly prevalent, making the independent media more difficult to find.  There are few regulations with regard to the ownership and influence of the presumed 4th estate, and many have been stricken as intrusive to the “free-market.”  This means that it is more incumbent on media consumers to vary and critically analyze media that is directed toward them.

These trends also have salutary effects.  Independent media was throughout much of the 20th century, controlled by a limited number of companies and individuals.  Understanding that these have merged, diversified and reduced in numbers, while access to the Internet and social media has increased, means that there are opportunities for entrepreneurs with a genuine interest in an independent media structure.  The single responsibility of consumers with regard to media today, is to be vigilant in seeking unbiased, disconnected and critically neutral media in a growing sea of choices.  It is also incumbent upon consumers to know and be able to distinguish media that caters to opinion-based or paid editorializing.  A general rule to apply to any editorial content that is aimed at providing information, is to analyze the content to determine if it is designed to reinforce or challenge one’s world view.  If an article purports to bolster your opinions, or unduly challenges them from a distinct point of view, the content is not informative, it is designated as influential and at its best, is editorializing, and at its most extreme, advertising or ad vocation. 

THIS ARTICLE (For Example) IS EDITORIAL CONTENT and is NOT Journalistically NUETRAL. 

SOLUTIONS:

The sole and single most vital ability of a consumer or citizen is to make unilateral and arbitrary decisions.  It is the right, and this article argues the sole right, and responsibility of each individual to inform themselves, form and reinforce critically considered opinions, and ultimately determine through thoughtful and deliberate consideration, to act or behave in accordance with or opposition to, the conditioned and solicited manipulations of consumer goods and services providers, distributors and manufacturers.  In short, each of us must decide, knowing that we are being solicited to act in certain ways and purchase certain things, whether or not to do so. 

ONLY, when we each as individuals, make deliberate choices and accept that we are in fact still the arbiters of the rewards and consequences of these decisions, can we free ourselves to consumer, citizen or to become provider, manufacturer or distributors of information, goods or services and in effect, take vital control over our economic, societal and individual health and well-being.

These are, as always, the rambling thoughts of a guy who is no smarter than any of you, and these opinions are submitted to each reader for consideration, nothing more.