Matt Hamill forced to withdraw from UFC 102 due to knee injury

Well, gee. I couldn't go and that's a good thing since Matt Hamill was forced to withdraw his fight a few days ago when he suffered a meniscus tear to his knee during his training. That'll take a while to heal. Not sure how serious but if it's that bad he'll need surgery to help fix that knee.

Get well, Matt.

Texting while driving = drunk driving

I know there are a lot of deaf people on the road who depend on their cell phones to communicate through texting but that is not an excuse to text while driving. There is no excuse to text while driving. None! More and more people are using their cell phones to text, including while driving. That continues to go up every year and each year more people are killed or seriously injured on the road because a driver was distracted for a few seconds at a time that led to an accident.

Texting poses serious, sometimes fatal distractions to all drivers, but particularly teenagers. According to the Centers for Disease Control, auto accidents are the leading cause of death for people between 16 and 20, killing more than 5000 annually. Increasingly, drivers are texting on their phones and this is placing others at risk. Recent studies show that text messaging is a growing cause of auto accidents in the United States. Motorists who text message have been found to be more distracted and more likely to be involved in an accident.

A new study by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute found that when drivers engaged in texting while driving, their risk of an accident was 23 times greater than when not texting. This study showed that texting is much more dangerous than other driving distractions. The study also demonstrated that drivers spent almost five seconds looking at their cell phones while texting and driving.

Traveling at 60 mph and for a 4 second distraction texting on your cell phone you'd have travelled the length of a football field. As in this case in the United Kingdom one driver was momentarily distracted while texting and ended up killing a motorcyclist.

Anybody, even Deaf people, who text while driving is in the same league as drunk drivers. And to do so means that they are irresponsible drivers who do not care for the safety of other people who may be harmed or killed over a stupid texting moment.

I hope stricter laws will be enacted that includes jail time and/or the confiscation of cell phone depending on the nature of the driving (e.g. 10 mph versus 75 mph on a highway).

Hey, I got a message to all you drivers who insist on driving while texting, especially Deaf people who don't listen.

Text driving = drunk driving = immature drivers.

Don't text and drive. You may save a life, including your own.
.
.

Avdism as a crutch excuse?

This "a-wordism" has lately become vulgarized through the repeated abuse of the word, marketing, and just plain ol' fashioned use of the internet to help spread the word. In the main heading of my blog I stated, "Don't use deafness as your crutch. We all face adversity in our life and don't let it become an obstacle but a challenge!" Yet it is true and a sad fact that people are discriminated for what they are and it shouldn't be like that. But that isn't justification to abuse this a-wordism by over-playing this particular discrimination card. Just like when people use the race card for every single supposed racist act when it never happened or existed a la Gates-Crowley Incident. People on both end purposely practice discrimination. Yes, even Deaf people against hearing people, even discriminate against those who prefer to talk despite their deafness. The horrors!

Maybe the answer to this a-wordism will either be that technology becomes so great and prevalent and accessible to all will ensure that this a-wordism wouldn't be an issue since techology would become that great 'equalizer.'

Or perhaps more likely that biotechnology would come early and a cure for hearing loss is made real where all babies born deaf will become hearing through the help of stem cells, thus the decline of Deaf culture and community would occur through attrition in the next 100 years. Some say this cure for babies born deaf won't happen in our lifetime or that it won't happen so "soon" in 10, 20 or 30 years. Or some simply believe it'll never happen and it'll be impossible for the biomedical technology to come up with a cure for hearing loss. Oh, wait, I think the cure for babies born deaf or acquired hearing loss very early on is already beginning in clinical studies this year.

The CBR Center for Regenerative Medicine is collaborating with two leading medical institutions to initiate a research study that would evaluate using a child's own cord blood stem cells to help restore or improve hearing that's been damaged from injury or sickness.

Specifically, we are looking for children under the age of 18 months whose own cord blood is stored at CBR and who have sustained hearing damage...

Regardless, this a-wordism may eventually go away either wholly or to some extent. Just a matter of time. But for the time being, do not use it as crutch and an excuse for your deafness. Certainly we have really dumb hearing people who don't know better but ignorance is not the same thing as accusing them with the a-wordism. Educate them instead.

Alldeaf - the prejudice factor

This is my third and final installment of the "factor series" (see previous ones here and here) where prejudicial feelings are used as a justification to go after people whose political views or opinions that do not line up with their supposedly prevailing attitudes. In short, acting out of sheer deaf madness in moments of temporary insanity. But read on further and I'm sure you'll get a big laugh out of this one!

Here it goes.

Not too long ago I got a ban notice saying that my ban would last 4 days but it ended up lasting only one day (they owe me 1 day of no access!) after a moderator (who doesn't like me for my political beliefs and opinions, a fact) realized the folly of banning me over something that was really funny in the first place. Right then and there I knew it was all about the person's own political feelings getting hurt and nothing about keeping things "neutral" (if there is such a thing in AD) while as a moderator.

Here's my cropped banned letter with the original reason why I was banned just to save space.



This was the result of me putting a picture of a cat dressed up as an al-Qaeda suicide bomber in the jokes section. Yuk yuk. Only this person didn't have any sense of humor, obviously. The ban only lasted less than 24 hours which I'm sure others higher up had to convince this person just how stupid it was and and how transparent the actions were by going after me so quickly, and without thinking, too.

Here's the "offensive" picture that I posted along with some notes.

Finished laughing?

Then came *TWO* reasons explaining why I was banned for putting an "offensive" picture of a suicide bomber cat in the Jokes and Funny Stories section. But in less than 24 hours the 4-day ban was rescinded and I got this PM letter. This person asked why I put the picture up. I responded,

"Because it was funny. Live a little."

Still laughing?

I'm not done.

Two weeks earlier (I didn't even know the same suicide cat bomber picture was posted there, too!) the same suicide cat bomber picture was found in the pets section of AD. Go to this link here and you'll see it before your very own eyes. Don't worry. I made a screen capture and an html copy of it just in case. See what the commenter said below about the 72-virgins post -picture joke? Shouldn't that comment be "offensive," too? And what about the suicide bomber cat picture? Is it that offensive? How come that poster never got banned? Do you see anybody in that thread howling with outrage?

But really, the first time I saw that picture it was in Deafreedom. I thought it was hilarious and so I copied and pasted it in AD in the jokes section. As I found out, laughingly so, somebody certainly didn't find the picture amusing. But this whole "banning thing" was a complete joke in of itself worthy to have it's own jokes section.

This wank, S*blesc**t, (in a forum that claim to be politically neutral, hah!) seriously needs to address his own personal issues against me and leave the proper and professional moderating duties to those who know how to do them correctly.

Lou Ferrigno - finally, the first non-Deaf star to be on "Dancing with the Stars" show

(See update below).

Thank goodness that the people of Dancing with the Stars were smart enough to finally "pick" a "non-Deaf" star, Lou Ferrigno (who is famous for playing the big, green hulking mutant in a 1970s The Incredible Hulk tv series), for a shot at the dance shootout. And, if officially picked, we'll see whether his feet matches his muscles, or perhaps his brain, in terms of dexterity, grace, and, without stumbling flat on his face, too. The last deaf person on Dancing with the Stars was in fact a Deaf person named Marlee Matlin who signed her way throughout the show but ultimately eliminated from the competition.



Now, the table has turned. We will have Lou Ferrigno who represents the majority of deaf people who do not know or use sign language to communicate but rather use oral/aural methods to communicate with the help of their hearing aids or cochlear implants in their everyday lives. Lou is a role model and an inspiration to the hundreds of thousands if not millions of deaf and hard of hearing kids who will get a chance to watch this "Deafless" guy dance (or stumble) his way across the screen. So the question is this. How light is Lou's feet? Well, check out Lou's 2007 audition clip where he didn't make the cut the first time around and probably enough to make you wince watching it, I did (sorry Lou). Just don't bad mouth since Lou is also a reserve Deputy Sheriff who was sworn in back in 2006.



Lots of hip swiveling with his white t-shirt and jeans along with fading in and out screen shots. Hmmm, 50s type dancing? Not really impressed. Probably the same feelings as the producers of the show who saw Lou's clip. But who knows how he'll fare this time around (I'm assuming his recent audition clip was much better than the one in 2007?) once he gets a professional dancer to teach him how to really dance. We might be in for a surprise. At least hopefully he'll go a lot longer than Marlee before getting eliminated.

Ok, folks. Calm down now. You can stop hyperventilating.

Geez.

UPDATE: Apparently last week on Good Morning America a list of names was read on those who were officially selected by DWTS Tom Bergeron. And the name Lou Ferrigno wasn't on that list. Lou's mad, or maybe was more surprised than mad but certainly his wife, Carla, is mad after whipping Lou into shape and have him lose 25lbs in bodyweight.

From E! Online:

Here's the full list of "stars" you'll see during the three-day premiere of Dancing With the Stars, kicking off Sept. 21 at 8 p.m. on ABC...

Kathy Ireland, 46, model
Macy Gray, 41, singer
Melissa Joan Hart, 33, actress
Mya, 29, singer
Ashley Hamilton, 34, actor-comedian
Michael Irvin, 43, football player
Mark Dacascos, 45, actor and martial artist
Donny Osmond, 51, entertainer
Kelly Osbourne, 24, singer
Debi Mazar, 45, actress
Chuck Liddell, 39, UFC fighter
Natalie Coughlin, 26, swimmer
Joanna Krupa, 30, model
Louie Vito, 21, snowboarder
Aaron Carter, 21, singer
Tom DeLay, 62, former House majority leader

I suppose they went for Chuck Liddel, a widely popular and well known UFC fighter, instead of the bigger (now slimmer) Lou Ferrigno? Who knows what the DWTS officials were thinking, especially picking a politician, Tom Delay, who is not even considered a "star" but more of like a very well known public servant whose only fame was getting kicked out of the House majority leader position.

Will Lou try again? No, not according to Carla and the fact that DWTS never had the class to inform him or his manager beforehand.

His manager and wife Carla told RadarOnline.com:

"They never even had the class to give Lou a call and tell him that he was not going to be chosen - this is the second time they haven't selected him but it will be the last."

"We couldn't believe some of the people they picked, and Lou was more surprised than upset that he wasn't chosen because we know he would have been great. "I mean, Tom Delay, a corrupt politician, a skateboarder [Louie Vito] who nobody has ever heard of, and what exactly has Ashley Hamilton ever done?"

Indeed. A strange list of "stars." But don't worry folks, Lou is still a role model for millions of deaf and hard of hearing kids to look up to.

Alldeaf - the censorship factor?

I've heard about it but didn't think much of it until I sent a Private Message (PM) to another Alldeaf member. And then I saw it. The returned PM message back to me I noticed the one word I used. I was replaced with a long ugly line of asterisks instead. My original message out got censored! How could this be? And then I tried at first a short list of words (see screen capture) to see what would happen. All done in the name of research only involving our privacy.

After that quick experiment I tried a long list of words based on discussions with a few people. Several of words in the list ended up as "flagged" words and were replaced with asterisks. Incredible!


CLICK HERE FOR LARGER VERSION.


Now, see how petty for Alldeaf to censor Deafreedom, Deafsummit, Deafmadness (currently inactive but you can see the archived part), and Deafparent (no longer active but you can see the archived part).

There is no justification to do this sort of invasion of privacy on a regular basis. Even under a "spamming rule" it doesn't apply to PMs having a friendly conversation mentioning another deaf run forum site. If the receiver of PM messages feels that he or she has a spammed PM then simply forward the offending PM to one of the moderator and ask for help there. Censoring other people's Private Message is good way to ruin their trust. How many other unknown flagged words are there in AD's list of "offending" and "offensive" words are there? No one knows except the moderators.

Here's an interesting question. How come only four forums were censored but not the other three such as Deafchat ("temporarily closed" like...for long time but you can see the archived section), Deafonline2 (or Deafonline), and Deafnotes? Well? Oh, fer crying out loud, don't give me the spamming justification when one can forward the offending PM to the proper moderator who can easily address that rather than resort to flagging "questionable" words in the first place. Typing in the word n***er and seeing it get censored on the receiving end in a PRIVATE message (PM) isn't about spamming, is it? No. But an outright invasion of AD members' privacy, no matter how vulgar the PM might be between two consenting adults.

As I continue to learn about other deaf run forums and what moderators have done in the past I found out that at least one member was banned when one of the moderators actually used that member's PM (flagged words or otherwise) and subsequently banned him/her based on what was said in his/her PMs. A fact or a bit of truth stretched some? How much power do these moderators have anyways regarding PMs? I know that PMs cannot be read by a 2nd party unless they know the password but what do I know? How people got banned because of their PMs with the flagged words were justification in banning that member? I don't know but I suspect that was back during the earlier days when many forums were up and running and competition was fierce to retain members. But regardless of what happened in the past there shouldn't be any excuse to remotely censor words for fear of spamming. Time to grow up and be more responsible and conscious on the privacy issue. As Dale said, who is the owner and moderator of Deafreedom, about PM,

Anyway, PM's and Emails are sacred around here, I wouldn't read 'em.

And, no, I'm not trying to advertise Dale's Deafreedom site but to show a voice of reason, common sense and sanity knowing what's right and wrong when it comes to privacy issues and moderating. Invading members' PMs is good way to lose their trusts.

Remember, this is a Private Email. "P" means private. Not censorship. Or looky loos into emails. Things like that. It's either a private message or not. Otherwise it'd be an Orwellian or Big Brother thing going under your radar without knowing exactly what are moderators are doing in those forums behind that screen of theirs. Have they peeked in the past? I wonder. As they say, sunlight is the best disinfectant.

Stay tuned, I have more including wacky excuses for person to be banned or why messages were censored. Politically motivated or just a bad moderator?

Famous deaf person loses 82 lbs with successful portion control program

Rush Limbaugh, who is deaf by the way, is continuing with his successful weight loss program which stands at 82lbs after hearing it on the radio recetly Friday a few days ago (link will expire in a few days).

....my weight loss, which is now 82 pounds. I started on March 9th. This is August 14th. My weight loss is now 82 pounds...

That'd be losing on average 1/2 lb of bodyweight a day. Not bad. Quite safe. And he follows highly nutritious meals prepared for him at 1500 calories a day under a "Quick Weight Loss" program. He looks much better in his ditto-cam nowadays and not so much looking overly rotund.

Here's a dinner description that Rush highlighted on Friday:

Last night when dinner was placed before me, I said, "This can't be right. There's too much here." The plate was filled with seven ounces of chicken, chicken breast cut in half, and on the top of it was a casserole type of broccoli, a little rice, some cottage cheese in there, and a thickening agent, I don't even know what it was, and a cup of asparagus that looked like the whole package from the grocery store. And then there was the frozen strawberry daiquiri protein shake, which is, by the time you drink it, about 20 ounces. I looked at that and said, "This can't be." I almost called Kathryn, said, "Kathryn, this is not right, this is too much food." I've thought that I can't tell you how many times that I've sat down to eat on this diet. It's amazing. The people who have not done it and the people who don't know what it is are telling you more about how it can't work and doesn't work than the guy who has done it! The arrogance of these people is just amazing.

Arrogance? How about prejudiced, too, simply because he's a conservative Republican? Unreal. And there were articles after articles demonizing Limbaugh for losing 1/2lb a day or 15lbs a month but spun it as if he was losing weight dangerously to imply, unrealistically, that Rush is in danger of doing that. Unreal. And they call themselves "doctors."

I went over to Alldeaf to start a topic to congratulate Rush Limbaugh on his weight loss success with kudos. The only thing I got was veiled demonizations from commenters against Rush rather than to give him any kudos. That tells alot of how they make this into a political reason not to praise and give kudos to Rush. In short, this was about politics when it shouldn't have been about politics but about acknowledging and giving well deserved kudos. Kind of funny when commenters attempt to bob and weave with their responses to make sure they don't give any semblance of kudos to Rush Limbaugh. Funny, but sad at the same time, too. It's people like Rush Limbaugh who inspire others to lose weight and that alone speaks volume. Avoiding kudos also speaks volume, doubly so.

Rush didn't take stimulants (ie. diet pills). No drugs. Instead he has a planned eating program designed to learn how to portion your food intake while having a great and nutritious meal. And because of that, Rush was able to lose 82 lbs so far and inspired others to continue with their own weight loss program.

CALLER: I'm calling because I've had similar success on a weight loss program very similar to your program.

RUSH: Not possible.

CALLER: (chuckling)

RUSH: The weight I've lost I haven't lost, according to the experts.

CALLER: I know. I heard that. I started out at 319; I lost 90 pounds.

RUSH: In what period of time?

CALLER: It took about a year.

RUSH: It took about a year.

CALLER: Uh-huh. And I looked online at the program you were using and I realized that the products were very similar to the ones I used. The protein supplements and things were very similar.

RUSH: Well, congratulations, that's great, 90 pounds, that's significant. I'm at 82 since March the 9th. But, you know, men lose weight faster --

CALLER: Exactly.

RUSH: -- than women do. They just do.

CALLER: And I had kind of slacked off and wasn't being as diligent and then when I saw what you were doing I got back on it and I lost five pounds the first week.

RUSH: Well, way to go! I'm happy to provide inspiration in yet another way.

CALLER: Thank you.

RUSH: You had a question. It says up here, "Do you still eat...?" What? What were you going to ask me?

CALLER: Oh, the screener was asking me if I go hungry, and I told him no. I don't go hungry at all. The food is very nutritious. It really teaches you the proper portions and you don't go hungry at all.

RUSH: I actually don't look at this as a diet anymore. I look at it -- you can call it portion control or whatever. It's just how to eat sensibly.

CALLER: Mmm-hmm.

RUSH: I'll tell you a little something. We've had a blast out here this week and I've been going to dinner every night, and one night this week -- it's not because I overate or anything, but one night this week -- at the end of the night I felt like I used to feel when I weighed 290 after eating dinner.

CALLER: Mmm-hmm.

RUSH: And I said, "I am never going through this again. This is never going to happen." It just took that one time.

CALLER: Mmm-hmm.

RUSH: Really, I don't know what happened. I think it was just a combination. That was the night I pulled the all-nighter and so forth. But I'll tell you, this is the first diet -- quote, unquote, "diet" -- that I been on that I don't want to get off of.

CALLER: Well, I'm still on it.

RUSH: Other diets when I finally got to the goal I said, "All riiiiiiiight!"

CALLER: Exactly. That's what I did and then I started putting it back on.

RUSH: Yeah, well, that will happen. Yeah.

CALLER: I'm not going to do that.

RUSH: Well, congratulations, June. That's just great. I'm very proud of you.

CALLER: People can do it.

RUSH: People don't know how hard this is. They don't know how to stick with something and lose 90 pounds.

CALLER: It is hard but people can do it.

RUSH: Of course! Of course people can do it. People do it all the time but the experts say I haven't done it.

CALLER: I know. I heard that. (chuckling)

RUSH: It's just amazing. June, thanks for the call.

CALLER: Thank you. Bye.

RUSH: I appreciate it.

So, instead of using politics as an excuse to avoid kudos to anybody who loses weight in sound and sensible manner who took the time and planned effort deserves kudos no matter what their background in politics. People will try all kinds of justification to avoid any semblance of a kudos and will come up with their own lame, lame way to avoid it.

Sad to see that happen. So, congrats to Rush Limbaugh on his successful weight loss! The most famous radio personality in the United States who happens to be deaf and wears a cochlear implant.

"All wee weed-up"....an accident or not? National legalization of marijuana coming?

Looking at it now I don't think what Obama said was an accident but a perfectly timed comment done on purpose "..all wee weed- up." Most likely as a way to somehow provoke a conversation on what he meant by "all wee weed-up." And so, I'm thinking weed as in marijuana. Why? Well, for one he did go down to Mexico in April to discuss the economic issue that has been vexing Mexico. Second thing I noticed in the news today is that Mexico has just now legalized marijuana (in small amount). And so I quickly went to the Library of Congress on pending bills and searched for anything that has to do with marijuana. Yup, sure enough. Here is it for 2009, it's called "Personal Use of Marijuana by Responsible Adults Act of 2009," H.R. 2493, sponsored by, who else, Barney Frank and introduced on June 18, 2009.

6/18/2009--Introduced.
Personal Use of Marijuana by Responsible Adults Act of 2009 - Prohibits the imposition of any penalty under an Act of Congress for the possession of marijuana for personal use or for the not-for-profit transfer between adults of marijuana for personal use.

Deems the possession of 100 grams or less of marijuana as personal use (one ounce or less for a not-for-profit transfer between adults).

Allows the imposition of a civil penalty under the Controlled Substances Act for the public use of marijuana if such penalty does not exceed $100.

Mind you this is for small amount of marijuana possession for personal use only without penalty under Act of Congress. Which means this paves the way for states to pass similar bills so they can start the machination on getting those weeds into anxious and curious users. Not to mention a good way to bring in tax dollars, too. California is one state thinking about it as a way to generate cash for their cash strapped state back in February.

Assemblyman Tom Ammiano will announce legislation on Monday to legalize marijuana and earn perhaps $1 billion annually by taxing it.

And it's gaining traction, too.

But this isn't all an accident (note the sarcasm in irony use of the word "accident" and "all wee weed-up") I think this whole thing timed and it wouldn't hurt Obama's image since he smoked pot while in high school as seen in Hawaii Punahou's yearbook photo. Even Mexico's recent legalization of marijuana is for small amount for personal use, too, though quite small by a factor 20 when compared to theHR 2943 bill with the limit at 100 grams or 80 joints worth.

The maximum amount of marijuana for "personal use" under the new law is 5 grams—the equivalent of about four joints.

From the looks of things, I don't think Obama's "..all wee weed-up" blurb was not an accident but a perfectly timed one (or rather a subconscious play that bubbled to the surface) to hopefully generate discussions on marijuana use in the United States. It isn't the same as "misunderestimated" but with Obama high on weed-upping most anything nowadays how could it hurt him now with a passage to make marijuana for personal use legal across the United States?

"Mulo" - ironic word of the day/week/month/year for current administration

By Michael Ramirez


New ironic but actual word of the day/month/year/ that describes the current administration:

mulo.

According to the Real Academia Espagnola mulo has two meanings in Spanish. The first meaning is “mule” from Latin mulus. The second meaning of mulo is “a person characterized by strength and vigour”.

(Del lat. mulus).

1. m. Hijo de caballo y burra o de asno y yegua, casi
siempre estéril. (Translated via Google translator: Son of horse and donkey or ass and mare, almost
always sterile.)

2. m. coloq. Persona fuerte y vigorosa. (Translated via Google translator: Strong and vigorous person.)

For some reason the two definitions certainly don’t mesh well together nowadays, does it? Just find it rather amusing to see the whole irony behind the word "mulo." Especially with the health care reform Trojan donkey. Go figure!

My Plan Continues to Work Flawlessly!

Heh heh.... my plan continues to work flawlessly! *rubs hands*

People are starting to conspire and bicker against each other over nonsense and boring issues! AGBell is winning! Cochlear implants on the rise with CI-borgs running the show. "Critical"(but worthless) bloggers continue to drop out. Cure for hearing loss is getting closer with each passing day with research for application of stem cells starting today. Enrollment continues to decline until soon no more. The dreaded death panel dies. Mandatory cures for babies born deaf is on its way. And finally your favorite genetically-modified monkey boy in an empty suit successfully evolved into a gun-totin-monkey-in-a-suit you do not want to mess with! Never bring a banana to a gun fight! *evil laugh* - Bwahahahhaaaa!

Louisiana Commisson for the Deaf to benefit from noise pollution fines?

Not exactly sure what the Louisiana lawmakers were thinking to use some of the fines collected from violators of noise pollution to go to the Louisiana Commission for the Deaf. Does this even sound a bit patronizing?

LaFonta said his House Bill 55 banning exterior sound systems on most vehicles is designed to reduce noise pollution. Violators must be fined at least $500, with some of the money going to the Louisiana Commission for the Deaf.

$500 dollars a pop? Isn't that a bit excesssive? Was there ever a $500 speeding ticket? Maybe next time draft up a law that would fine graffiti violators and use some of the money to go to the commission for the blind, too? Or direct some of the funds to a starving artist program? How about making sure those funds go to someplace that's a bit more specific like set up a fund to help pay the costs for emergency assistence for deaf/hh people displaced by a hurricane instead? Since there were so many instances of communication confusion (or lack of communication) by those who are deaf and hard of hearing, it'd be a better use of the money for those emergency purposes. Or maybe direct the money into a special fund for those who can't afford hearing aids instead? Or maybe a cochlear implant fund?

Yeahhh.

The Rusting of Deaf Minds

Recently there's been a lot of finger pointing at Sarah's "Death Panels" comment calling her a hypocrite because while as Governor of Alaska she issued a proclamation for “Healthcare Decisions Day” to be recognized on April 16. Supporters of this current health care reform bill were breathlessly calling out Palin's proclamation as the same thing as the "death panels" she brought up earlier and proceeded to call her a hypocrite and accusing her of "flip flopping." One funny thing when they said that. Are they acknowledging that Section 1233 of HR 3200 health bill does contain provisions governing that "death panels" do exist?

That'd be a losing argument.

When people cannot even see the vast and simple differences between this health care reform bill to that of Palin's proclamination to generate greater awareness and personal responsibility to plan for end-of-life care. Indeed, iron doors shut tight and while their deaf mind rusts.

There is this fatal flaw in reasoning on calling out Palin's "death panels" comment while calling her a hypocrite. How so? Let me count the ways.

First of all in the health care bill there is a passage (there was one but now dropped) to offer financial incentitives for the push on end-of-life care at the behest of the doctors involved just to save money and for doctors to make money during the process as well. A slippery slope issue right there.

From NPR where :Mr. Jay Sekulow (Chief Counsel, American Center for Law & Justice) explains what and how this bill works.

The problem here is the financial incentive for the entire bill is to reduce cost. That will end up either being one of two things: rationing of services or life care, end-of-life-care decisions based on economic motive, where the doctor becomes basically the advocate for the determination as to life end, which should really be a decision that the doctor's involved in, obviously, but with consultation with the family.

A second problem with this bill.

And also the idea that the government itself, the bureaucrats, or the government, the doctors will be reporting back to the government these results. I mean, it almost sounds like a commission sales approach, which is not what doctors need to be in the position of doing. This idea you report back: Were you successful in getting A, B, C and D.

And these are decisions that have medical implications, ethical implications, implications for people that have religious faith, for those that do, moral concerns. All of those are the totality of what takes place here. And this idea that you just simply give this to a government commission, who's then in consultation with the doctor, I think, is dangerous.

Mr. Jay Sekulow explains further how consultation works in this bill.

The entire program, under the Health Reform Bill, is monitored by a government panel. Who do you think came up with, for instance, what would be included in the consultation? If a consultation's going to take place, and if in fact it is going to be a reimbursable expense under the Medicaid, which I have no problem with, who made the determination of what goes in that consultation? The government did. The panel did. The medical experts.

Hence, the worry over a "death panels" (note the quotation marks) scenario where there'd be financial incentives to reduce cost and quality of care. A classic case of what a slippery slope would look like.

This bill is vastly different by night and day to that of Palin's statewide awareness message which was sought to increase the public’s knowledge about creating living wills and establishing powers of attorney. Just a simple public awareness message to proclaim April 16 as "Health Care Decisions Day." Nothing insidous about the message and no where near the hypocrisy level either accusing her of promoting that same "death panels" for her own state.

But here's the good news so far. Obama capitulated.

Bowing to Republican pressure and an uneasy public, President Barack Obama's administration signaled Sunday it is ready to abandon the idea of giving Americans the option of government-run insurance as part of a new health care system.

Somebody's mad right now. But that doesn't mean we're out of the woods yet. The first obvious problem to this whole thing is that we don't have the money. We're already $11.5 trillion in debt. Where will the money come from to pay for this boondoggle nationalization attempt over health care? It's better to work at the root of the problem first such using tort reforms as a leverage and lower costs at the same time instead of ramming a nationalized and socialized health care down everybody's throat at the expense of our economy and national security.

And lastly, well maybe not, there is this problem of Democrats who will try and somehow sneak in a provision that was dropped earlier back into the bill or somehow find a way to get around. Why? This. And then of course we need to heed what the dear One said his goals were:

"Remember, we are going to rebuild every school, bridge and road in the country. We will fix healthcare. We will restore the constitution, end illegal wars [and] reduce emissions of greenhouse gasses."

Everything? He must be doing something right.

AllDeaf - the mulatto factor.

I'll say it out loud here for all to see. Somebody is misunderstanding the whole thing in a post which got off topic when I broached a subject about mulatto in a thread I started but it is no longer there. Thank goodness for Google cache. How kind it was for moderators to delete the whole thread, quietly, shhhh, without ever informing me or AD members rather than just delete posts that have the "offending" word instead. Either there's been a misunderstanding on their part or we have some very, very sensitive people out there who hide under the race mantle. I think it's more like the latter tho'.

But you cannot and shall not call a president a mulatto in that forum. EVER! *stomps foot like an upset little boy*

How politically expedient. How...hypocritical. How...convenient.

Let me count the ways.

Recognize the common theme that liberals go by on nowadays? Put a joker face of Obama and you're called a racist. Or put on a Hitler face and you're a racist. Do not support health care and you're a racist. But a white SEIU union thug beat up a black guy captured in a YouTube video and suddenly liberals look the other way saying it wasn't a racist attack and nothing to do with race with a straight face even after the Gates-gate incident between a white cop and professor Gates, and a president that acted stupidly in all that fracas.

*sigh*

All this is really getting old and it's being done for political expedency or agenda driven purposes rather than debate in a dialogue that's meaningful and not worry about being called a "racist" at every turn. It's highly ironic that people use the color of a person's skin as an excuse to level racist charges. And to discuss race in a subcontext fashion using the word mulatto would have you charged as a racist in the attempt to "disrespect other members" in a discussion forum.

This defies logic. And people need to seriously lighten up. Like, dude man.

Because using the very word "mulatto" in a context of a race discussion might actually offend very sensitive people who claim the race mantle even though they're white. Maybe they think they count because they happen to have a friend, extended family, or a spouse of ethnic diversity?

How convenient. How intellectually dishonest.

Wait! Before you get into temper tantrum let me give you an example.

The joker president. Putting a joker face on a president isn't about race nor is it racist. Look here in the Google image section to compare and contrast.

Exhibit one on joker faces - Bush.
Exhibit two on joker faces - Obama.

And you're telling me people who use a joker face on a president is a racist?

How convenient. The hypocrisy is just...dripping here.

Another compare and contrast example.

Look to Deafreedom discussion forum on the topic "Obama is a mulatto" (I had a topic thread discussion I started yesterday in AD "Famous Mulatto People" but that got removed....rather quickly....about celebs and well known people who are mulatto. Even the Google cache wasn't quick enough to capture that thread). I know I won't be at risk for banishment from DF or have my "Obama is a mulatto" thread removed just for discussing the mulatto topic and saying that Obama is a mulatto. And if DF members get into a tizzy and complain over the topic "Obama is a mulatto" need to take a chill pill. It's a fact. Obama is a mulatto. Even Mulatto.org says it with great pride to see the first mulatto president by describing him as a mulatto. Yet, could it be that the liberal white lily skinned people are the ones who are doing the complaining and retching over the word...mulatto? What are the odds that people will soon level a charge against DF by calling it a racist forum just because of a thread "Obama is a mulatto" got started?

Yet all this reminds me of a description "hearing impaired" in reference to people whose hearing is impaired and by using that word you'd likely be called an "audist" by some of the Deaf elites. Problem is, some of these people read way, way too much into these things. Same with mulatto. Thin skinned people are no fun. They just run to their mommies instead demand censorship or feign a bit of fake outrage as a matter of political correctness.

Hmmm...

Funny thing is I have mixed blood as well. Recently my uncle who is a genealogist nut worked on for years to gather information about his side of the family and was able to trace back to one our ancestor who is the sister of Pocahontas. Whoa! Found out last week when my mother came over to visit. I'm gonna ask my uncle to supply me his CD on his genealogy work. But I'm not the only one with mixed blood. My wife's blood is a little more "thicker" with North American Indian blood in her (her grandfather is 1/2 Indian). So, in a sense my wife is a mulatto. So am I but it's not that obvious with my strong Irish features and caucasian skin color. Even Obama's blood is 3% Irish. Though you won't see him celebrating on St. Patricks Day. But looking back at the whole Pocahontas discovery was a strange revelation since my Mom whose brother is my uncle helped me say the word "Pocahontas" when I was a little boy. I remember vividly that one. Since I am of mixed blood, or "mulatto" in a sense, then I can't be racist for discussing the mulatto topic in deaf/hh forums then?

Now, I'm sure Obama as a person and human being is a cool guy. Something that you can sit down and maybe have beer with him, and chat or play a good game of basketball with him. The problem is that he lacks proper judgement and experience on the politics of things. It's the combined qualification, experience and political knowledge I look for in a president. Not skin color which is why many people voted Obama for his "blackness." Condoleeza Rice, Michael Steele, Bobby Jindal and even Colin Powell are much better choices to be president than Obama. And that's just looking at their background, not the skin color. Just because I disagree with Obama's policy and direction does not make me a racist person. The articles or comments I write are not by its nature racist. So, please do not use the color of Obama's skin to be used as YOUR excuse to set your poltical correctness agenda and tone that are politically and conveniently expedient for you. Leveling the racist charge is the worst form of demogaugery around. Doing so shows obvious intellectual dishonesty in this whole charade while hiding under the race mantle. You, too, AllDeaf mods and the few who got their sensibilities challenged when I said that Obama is a mulatto by accusing me of being a racist, implicitly so. You dudes need to seriously chill, man.

Meanwhile, enjoy a video of me playing a 1908 piano piece called "Black and White Rag" by George Botsford. A well known and famous ragtime piece in an era when Scott Joplin was (and still is) the King of Ragtime. The picture at the top of my blog is Scott Joplin, the most famous black Ragtime composer. Heck, with me playing ragtime pieces I'd probably be called a racist. Maybe an "audist," too. But do enjoy one of my many favorite ragtime pieces, Black and White Rag. And if you like hearing me play ragtime piano then visit my Ragtime Piano blog.



UPDATE III:

Another update and clarification for those lurkers, you know who.

I was never informed of the change on the wording from "mulatto" to "bi-racial" as I was just recently informed but the thread is no longer there. Oooh, how brave. How convenient, too. Nor was I ever contacted about it beforehand. They made NO effort to contact me just to hear my side of the story since there's no way to get in to check any PMs. You want to talk about intellectual dishonesty while claiming to be "neutral"? There you go. There's a case load right there. At least Deafreedom.com mods never went the route of political correctness just to appease a few limp-wristed complainers who think that having "friends, families or spouses of diversity" earn them the equivalent race mantle. It's simply an example of pc for the sake of expediency. They shout "Fire!" when it's just a flashlight I'm shinning on rather than play the guessing game.

UPDATE II:


Manufactured outrage. Tho' this baby really is crying.

UPDATE: While on the subject of mulatto in the AllExpert website talks about the origin and history of the word "mulatto" it provides us with a list of "Famous Mulattoes" beginning with Obama at the top of the list:

Famous Mulattoes

*Barack Obama, (1/2 Kenyan - 1/2 European American) U.S. Senator
*Halle Berry, (1/2 African-American - 1/2 white British) American actress
*Aleijadinho, (1/2 Portugese - 1/2 African) most famous Brazilian colonial architect
*Thandie Newton, (1/2 Zimbabwean - 1/2 White) British actress
*W.E.B._Dubois, (part Dutch, Haitian, French MGM) civil rights leader
*Booker T. Washington, Civil Rights Leader
*Frederick Douglass, Abolitionist
*Arnaldo Tamayo Mendez, Cuban Astronaut
*Antonio Maceo, Cuban Aboloitionist, general and independence fighter
*Bob Marley, (1/2 black Jamaican - 1/2 white Jamaican) Jamaican singer/rastafarian
*Kelly Holmes, (1/2 Jamaican - 1/2 English) British athlete/olympic gold medalist (800m, 1500m)
*Daley Thompson, (1/2 Nigerian - 1/2 Scottish) British Athlete/olympic gold medalist (2x Decathalon)
*Vicente Guerrero, Mexican Abolitionist and independence fighter
*Emiliano Zapato, Mexican Abolitionist and independence fighter
*Alexandre Pétion, first elected Haitian president and abolitionist
*Sade Adu, (1/2 Nigerian - 1/2 British) British singer and musician
*Isaiha Jackson, Director
*The Hughes Brothers, film directors
*Shirley Bassey (1/2 English - 1/2 Nigerian) British Singer
*Craig David, (1/2 Grenadian - 1/2 English/Jewish) British R&B singer
*Ophelia Devore, French, German, Indian, Black]]
*Machado de Assis (1/4 black Brazilian - 3/4 white brazilian and portugese) Brazilian writer, considered the most important writer of brazilian history
*Alexandre Dumas(1/4 African 3/4 white French) most read French writer
*Fefe Dobson, (1/2 Jamaican/Asian - 1/2 White/Native American) Canadian singer
*Paul Boateng, Former British MP, now ambassador to South Africa
*Rick Fox, (1/2 Bahamian - 1/2 White Canadian) American basketball player
*Trisha Goddard, (1/2 Dominican - 1/2 English) British talkshow hostess
*Malou Hansson, (1/2 Ghanaian - 1/2 Swedish) former Miss Sweden
*Ben Harper, (1/2 Jewish/American - 1/2 African/American) American musician
*Javine Hylton, (1/2 Jamaican - 1/2 White) British singer
*Alicia Keys, (1/2 Jamaican American - 1/2 Italian/Irish) American singer
*Boris Kodjoe, (1/2 Ghanaian - 1/2 German) Austrian model/actor
*Shakara Ledard, (1/2 Bahamian - 1/2 French) French model
*Noémie Lenoir, (1/2 Réunionese - 1/2 French) French actress/model
*Shemar Moore, (1/2 African-American - 1/2 Irish/French-Canadian) American actor/model
*Romário, Brazilian football (soccer) player
*Ronaldo, Brazilian footballer
*Roberto Carlos da Silva, Brazilian footballer
*Rivaldo, Brazilian footballer
*Cedric Simmons, (1/2 African American - 1/2 German) American basketball player
*Mya, (1/2 Jamaican - 1/2 Italian) American Singer
*Sophie Okonedo, (1/2 Nigerian - 1/2 Jewish) British actress
*Renee & Rosie Tenison, (1/2 African-American - 1/2 White) American models
*Mariah Carey, (1/2Irish - ¼ Venezuelan-1/4 African-American) American singer
*Tamia Washington, (1/2 French-Canadian - 1/2 African-Canadian) Canadian singer
*Vin Diesel (1/2 Italian,Scottish,Irish - 1/2 African American) American actor

And it provides external links that discusses the topic on mulatto.

* Joan Carradine's International mulatto.
* Joan Carradine's American International mulatto
* Mulatto Families of Southern Maryland
* An article on the mulatto depictions in fiction.
* Mulatto.org
* Mulatto America wikipedia
* Asians Find Pride as Hapas An Article from the Los Angeles Times

Go figure. Mulatto. Mulatto. Mulatto. If it was such a racist word why the use, especially in Mulatto.org - a site where mulattoes come together to discuss their mixed heritage? I suppose "hapas" (mixed Asian race) will be considered as an offensive word, too? The first happas U.S. president? The first hapas pro-golfer? That would be Tiger Woods. Get a grip folks. But what's interesting is the increased constituitional resilency seen in people with mixed heritage.

And, turning racist ideas of "hybrid degeneracy" on their head, Psychology Today magazine earlier this year featured studies finding that Eurasians were regarded as more attractive than whites or Asians and healthier because of their genetic diversity, associated with a lower incidence of some diseases.

So, AD get their wet panties in a wad over the term "mulatto" thinking it's a racist term. I suppose if I say that Obama has a lot of "mulo" in him you'd think I'm making a racist slur on him? Get real. The meaning of mulo in Spanish according to the Real Academia Espagnola is "a person characterized by strength and vigour".

For once, folks, stop with these knee jerk reactions thinking everything has a racist connotation when there is none to be had.

Deafless in Seattle

Deafless? What in the heck is that word? According to Barry in the video below it is in a sense opposite of what "Deafhood" is about. For those who are "deafless" see themselves as human beings first and not about a person's own hearing loss (i.e. deaf first or in this case Deaf first and everything else is last) and not be constrained by the word "deaf." Barry makes some good points and all done in a veiled tongue-in-check response to "Deafhood." In other words, don't get your wet panties into a wad.


Barry makes a salient point about Deafhood and Deaf, and mocks to a degree about audism as well. Barry proclaims at the end of the video that he chooses to be seen as "deafless" which means he sees himself as a human being first, and not about his hearing loss or deafness that describes him.

What Barry said was pretty much what said starting three years ago when I did four pieces (see here, here, here and here) on my own "invented" word, "Deafhoodism" where I made the point that I see myself simply as a human being who happens to have a hearing loss. My deafness does not solely define me, it's everything else combined that defines me. I don't subscribe to a club mentalilty based upon a condition. There are commonalities, yes, but to make it as a requirement to be a part of one? No.

What's funny was that bloggers actually used my newly "invented" word for awhile as you can see in this Google search. Now, it's Barry's turn that people are suddenly using the "deafless" word but only in the context, as it would seem, to elevate themselves above to "Deafhood" status by looking down on the word or the people who use it. Even though Barry's acceptance of the word "deafless" was seen as a bit of a tongue-in-check to all this but, correctly so, it's the point he's making behind all that word. We're simply human beings and we should see each as that and not about belonging to some club or see ourselves as a deaf person but a person who happens to have a hearing loss.

And, oh, about "Deafless in Seattle"? Ever see the movie "Sleepless in Seattle"? No connection between the two. Just thought I put that one out. By the way, don't take the "Dummies" cover page seriously. All done in tongue-in- cheek with a variety of meanings behind my illustrated graphic page.