LGBTQ Activists Organizing Massive Dance Protest At Trump Hotel

LGBTQ activists are planning to come together in a display of solidarity and resistance against the actions of President Donald Trump’s administration in one of the queerest ways possible: a massive dance party.

WERK for Peace, the same group of people who organized a queer dance party outside of Vice President Mike Pence’s home in January, are organizing a similar event, this time beginning at the Trump Hotel in Washington D.C. and then parading towards the White House.

According to WERK for Peace founding organizer Firas Nsar, this massive dance celebration is focused on solidarity, intersectionality, and resistance among marginalized people. 

“The executive orders that Donald Trump has passed in the mere week and half of being in office have further marginalized nearly all disenfranchised groups in the US,” Nsar told The Huffington Post. “We believe that any attempt to marginalize or attack any one community is a direct attack on all of the diverse communities in the US. In response, we choose to use love and connection to uplift our communities, celebrate our intersectionality and differences, and come together as one unified coalition. We want to send the message that we will not allow discrimination, bigotry, or hate against any community in our country to break us apart. We celebrate together.”

The last WERK for Peace dance party brought together hundreds of LGBTQ people and their allies, and here’s hoping that this event will have an even larger turnout. 

The event is slated to take place on Friday, Feb. 3 at 6:00 p.m. beginning at the Trump Hotel in Washington, D.C. Head here for more information. 

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2017/02/01/lgbtq-activists-massive-dance-protest_n_14571552.html
br />

LGBTQ activists are planning to come together in a display of solidarity and resistance against the actions of President Donald Trump’s administration in one of the queerest ways possible: a massive dance party.

WERK for Peace, the same group of people who organized a queer dance party outside of Vice President Mike Pence’s home in January, are organizing a similar event, this time beginning at the Trump Hotel in Washington D.C. and then parading towards the White House.

According to WERK for Peace founding organizer Firas Nsar, this massive dance celebration is focused on solidarity, intersectionality, and resistance among marginalized people. 

“The executive orders that Donald Trump has passed in the mere week and half of being in office have further marginalized nearly all disenfranchised groups in the US,” Nsar told The Huffington Post. “We believe that any attempt to marginalize or attack any one community is a direct attack on all of the diverse communities in the US. In response, we choose to use love and connection to uplift our communities, celebrate our intersectionality and differences, and come together as one unified coalition. We want to send the message that we will not allow discrimination, bigotry, or hate against any community in our country to break us apart. We celebrate together.”

The last WERK for Peace dance party brought together hundreds of LGBTQ people and their allies, and here’s hoping that this event will have an even larger turnout. 

The event is slated to take place on Friday, Feb. 3 at 6:00 p.m. beginning at the Trump Hotel in Washington, D.C. Head here for more information. 

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

February 2, 2017

Leave a Comment

How Planned Parenthood has helped millions of women, including me

By Maureen Miller, Columbia University Medical Center

Planned Parenthood has allowed generations of low-income women to survive childbirth, to combat sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and to plan their pregnancies. However, the fact that women live healthier and longer lives is not Planned Parenthood’s ultimate superpower. No, that is reserved for the legions of low-income women, including me, who now have been given the opportunity to dramatically move up the economic ladder and prosper.

For millions of women, Planned Parenthood is at once a symbol of and a means to women’s empowerment. Since the organization helped topple cultural norms that held back women, it’s no surprise that men, many of whom feel excluded from this process, grasp familiar though outdated standards to justify defunding it.

Recently, Republican congressional leadership has tied the defunding of Planned Parenthood (along with the repeal of the Affordable Care Act) to the upcoming budget reconciliation bill, which needs only a simple majority of senators to pass. It is hard to say what will happen next. Although all sides acknowledge the odds favor Republican efforts, they also acknowledge that Planned Parenthood will not go down without a fight.

As a public health researcher with expertise in the social factors that influence disease transmission, especially sexually transmitted infections, I think it’s important to look at the history and the facts about Planned Parenthood. Many lies have been told about it, and it’s important to know the truth.

More than 100 years of promoting reproductive health

In 2016, Planned Parenthood celebrated its 100th year of existence. In 1916, Margaret Sanger opened the first Planned Parenthood, a birth control clinic, in Brownsville, Brooklyn to address the hardships that childbirth and self-induced abortions brought to low-income women. She and her colleagues were promptly arrested.

So began the many legal and political battles Planned Parenthood has waged over the control of women’s fertility. Yet it was men who had the strongest impact on the social acceptance of birth control at that time. World War I saw the largest global mobilization and deployment of populations in history. Since the populations were almost exclusively young men, this led, not surprisingly, to a massive increase in STIs, then called venereal disease. Suddenly, “birth control” seemed like a really good idea.

In fact, even today the largest percentage (41 percent) of Planned Parenthood’s budget is spent on testing and treating STIs, followed by contraceptive services (31 percent) for both women and men. The number of men who receive services such as testing for STIs and checkups for reproductive or sexual health issues from Planned Parenthood has grown steadily and has increased by almost 100 percent over the past decade.

All of these statistics are buried in data-filled documents that are hard to find and daunting to review. But here are some numbers readily available: In 2014 (the most recent year for which complete data are available) Planned Parenthood operated with a budget of US$1.3 billion, more than 40 percent of which came from the federal government (mostly in the form of Medicaid reimbursements). It provided almost 10 million clinical services to about two and a half million patients, the majority of whom were low-income.

Men have lobbied for the inclusion of men in maternal and child health (MCH) programs. Beginning in 1975, Alan Rosenfield, the former dean of the Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University, established a series of sexual health clinics in Upper Manhattan, including one of the first “Young Men’s Health” clinics.

However, it was his groundbreaking and oft-cited piece in The Lancet, “Maternal mortality: a neglected tragedy,” that provided influential public support for Planned Parenthood missions to prevent women dying from pregnancy-related complications and the need for family planning.

It is perhaps no surprise that all of this attention on women’s sexual rights, combined with the widespread uptake of oral contraceptives – the “pill,” the first entirely female-controlled method of pregnancy prevention – found Planned Parenthood once again at the center of a firestorm, of which I was blissfully unaware on my first visit to Planned Parenthood.

A personal story

When I was 14 years old, my mother dropped me off at the local Planned Parenthood and told me she’d be back in an hour. Up until that day, she had been the only person willing to answer the myriad questions about sex posed by her breathless and curious all-girl 4-H troop, of which I was a member. (I doubt they would have approved her choice of troop leader topics.)

At the time, filmstrips of Roman gods and goddesses with strategically draped fig leaves passed for sex education at our school. Now, my mother had reached her limit. Despite my delusions of sophistication (I was the recent owner of two-inch heeled, cork-bottomed white clogs), the idea that I would actually have sex with someone – with a man! – was the farthest thing from my mind.

As I headed toward the entrance, head down and slump-shouldered, to attend a real sex education class, I searched for the words and the nerve to announce myself to the receptionist. I didn’t even have to open my mouth. I was whisked away to a room filled with eight other girls. None of us made eye contact, but my eyes were certainly opened that day.

Did I mention that my mother had me when she was 19 years old?

My mother, who was the first in her family to go to college, did not graduate. I have a Ph.D. I was given the privilege to determine the course and timing of my reproductive life. Though not without bumps, reproductive freedom allowed me to pursue academic and professional dreams. This was an opportunity not afforded to my mother, though one she made darn sure that both my sister and I would have.

Educational gains: A connection?

Over the last decade in the U.S., the number of women attending college has greatly eclipsed the number of men attending. This is true across communities: Among Latinos there is a 13 percent point gap in college enrollment between women and men, among African-Americans a 12 percent gap and among whites a 10 percent gap.

The result is economic independence for women, but at social cost. Highly educated women are being urged to date and marry “down,” given the dearth of equally educated men. This bucks the traditional norm in which the man is the primary breadwinner and the woman is the stay-at-home mom, a philosophy to which research shows both men and women continue to subscribe.

This cataclysmic shift of women’s economic independence, along with rapidly changing demographics in the U.S., has given rise to nostalgia for the “old days” as well as calls to challenge the morality of sexual harassment and discrimination implicitly associated with the old days. Fueling these divergent attitudes is a sense of real frustration on both sides and, perhaps more importantly, an inability to communicate and find common ground.

But there may be ways to take emotion out of the equation, especially for Planned Parenthood. Throughout the history of the organization, men have played an outsized role in support of the Planned Parenthood mission and now make up a larger percentage of patients than ever before.

As the name implies, Planned Parenthood is not only a woman’s organization, it is also a man’s organization that increasing numbers of men are beginning to recognize. Like parenthood itself, the success of the organization will require the actions and support of both women and men. It’s time that men know that they, too, benefit directly from Planned Parenthood.

The ConversationMaureen Miller, Professor, Columbia University Medical Center

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/the-conversation-us/how-planned-parenthood-ha_b_14570134.html

February 2, 2017

Leave a Comment

This Bold Artist Made A Bathroom Stall That’s Open To Everyone

In 2013, photographer Lois Bielefeld decided to respond to the repeated mis-gendering of her partner in public spaces.

“We’d joke about it,” she told The Huffington Post in an interview.

Bielefeld had a similar experienced as a teen, when she dressed androgynously, and was sometimes misidentified as “sir.” So she sought to take portraits of people she knew who identified either as genderqueer or androgynous.

“The people I photographed are regularly mis-gendered, which means that they often have bizarre interactions in public, especially bathrooms, that can be anywhere from amusing to downright unsafe and hostile,” Bielefeld said.

As her project grew, she decided to also include transgender subjects, her initial hesitation being that these subjects typically identified as one gender. 

“It wasn’t until talking with transgender friends that I learned how the transition process creates an incredible social and physical uprooting where gender ambiguity is highlighted and at the forefront until they start to pass,” Bielefeld said.

Gender identification and policing begins at a young age, and children who reject the binary gender system are more susceptible to bullying and feeling out of place.

In addition to taking pictures of transgender, genderqueer and androgynous adults, Bielefeld took portraits of children who favored a genderless appearance.

“Gender identification and policing begins at a young age, and children who reject the binary gender system are more susceptible to bullying and feeling out of place,” she said. 

While taking portraits of her subjects, Bielefeld asked them questions about their experiences to help them relax. She realized, while listening to their stories, that she wanted to record them and incorporate them in the installation somehow. The resulting project — now in the permanent collection of the Leslie-Lohman Museum of Gay and Lesbian Art in NYC —was a non-functioning, two-stall public bathroom, where museum attendees could sit in a stall and listen to interviews with Bielefeld’s subjects.

“The photographs invite the viewers to look, stare, and question, which unfortunately is what happens to the subjects on a regular basis in public,” Bielefeld said. “It is in ‘The Bathroom’ that the viewer encounters the reverse where they can sit and listen to the subjects’ experiences, thoughts, and feelings.”

Allowing these individuals to share their unique stories emphasizes that gender isn’t as rigid as so many of us are raised to believe. Even the word “androgyny,” Bielefeld pointed out, comes from the Greek word andros, meaning “man,” and gyne, meaning “woman.”

“The irony is that it still hails from the antiquated binary gender system. This system is deeply ingrained in our culture and allows for no variation. You must check either a female or male box,” Bielefeld said. “Our bodies are so much more complex and varied than this, down to the chromosomal level. I wanted viewers to recognize the diversity of bodies and become aware of the social ramifications individuals suffer when others try to box them into the binary system.”

View her portraits below:

Lois Bielefeld is represented by Portrait Society Gallery.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2017/01/30/lois-bielefeld-androgyny-photos_n_14516000.html
br />

In 2013, photographer Lois Bielefeld decided to respond to the repeated mis-gendering of her partner in public spaces.

“We’d joke about it,” she told The Huffington Post in an interview.

Bielefeld had a similar experienced as a teen, when she dressed androgynously, and was sometimes misidentified as “sir.” So she sought to take portraits of people she knew who identified either as genderqueer or androgynous.

“The people I photographed are regularly mis-gendered, which means that they often have bizarre interactions in public, especially bathrooms, that can be anywhere from amusing to downright unsafe and hostile,” Bielefeld said.

As her project grew, she decided to also include transgender subjects, her initial hesitation being that these subjects typically identified as one gender. 

“It wasn’t until talking with transgender friends that I learned how the transition process creates an incredible social and physical uprooting where gender ambiguity is highlighted and at the forefront until they start to pass,” Bielefeld said.

Gender identification and policing begins at a young age, and children who reject the binary gender system are more susceptible to bullying and feeling out of place.

In addition to taking pictures of transgender, genderqueer and androgynous adults, Bielefeld took portraits of children who favored a genderless appearance.

“Gender identification and policing begins at a young age, and children who reject the binary gender system are more susceptible to bullying and feeling out of place,” she said. 

While taking portraits of her subjects, Bielefeld asked them questions about their experiences to help them relax. She realized, while listening to their stories, that she wanted to record them and incorporate them in the installation somehow. The resulting project — now in the permanent collection of the Leslie-Lohman Museum of Gay and Lesbian Art in NYC —was a non-functioning, two-stall public bathroom, where museum attendees could sit in a stall and listen to interviews with Bielefeld’s subjects.

“The photographs invite the viewers to look, stare, and question, which unfortunately is what happens to the subjects on a regular basis in public,” Bielefeld said. “It is in ‘The Bathroom’ that the viewer encounters the reverse where they can sit and listen to the subjects’ experiences, thoughts, and feelings.”

Allowing these individuals to share their unique stories emphasizes that gender isn’t as rigid as so many of us are raised to believe. Even the word “androgyny,” Bielefeld pointed out, comes from the Greek word andros, meaning “man,” and gyne, meaning “woman.”

“The irony is that it still hails from the antiquated binary gender system. This system is deeply ingrained in our culture and allows for no variation. You must check either a female or male box,” Bielefeld said. “Our bodies are so much more complex and varied than this, down to the chromosomal level. I wanted viewers to recognize the diversity of bodies and become aware of the social ramifications individuals suffer when others try to box them into the binary system.”

View her portraits below:

Lois Bielefeld is represented by Portrait Society Gallery.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

January 31, 2017

Leave a Comment

What Makes Rails a Framework Worth Learning in 2017?

What makes Rails a framework worth learning in 2017? originally appeared on Quora: the place to gain and share knowledge, empowering people to learn from others and better understand the world.

Answer by David Heinemeier Hansson, Creator of Ruby on Rails, Founder & CTO at Basecamp, on Quora:

The same reasons why it was a framework worth learning in 2004. The more things change, the more they stay the same. While we’ve seen a lot a progress in the JavaScript world, we’ve also seen a regression to the complexity-laden world that Rails offered refuge from in the early days.

Back then the complexity merchant of choice was J2EE, but the complaints are uncannily similar to those leveled against JavaScript today. That people spent hours, if not days, just setting up the skeletons. The basic build configurations. Assembling and cherry-picking from lots of little libraries and frameworks to put together their own snowflake house variety.

The core premise of Rails remains in many ways as controversial today as it was when it premiered. That by formalizing conventions, eliminating valueless choices, and offering a full-stack framework that provides great defaults for anyone who wants to create a complete application, we can make dramatic strides of productivity.

It’s somewhat surprising to me that despite the astounding success of Rails, that there hasn’t been more competition for this proposition. The vast majority of activity today is for yet another option on the a la carte menu. Yet another build system, yet another view library, yet another ORM. Very little activity in integrated solutions.

I guess the answer is that the foundational proposition of Rails continues to cut against the psychological grain of most programmers. That by reducing choices and accepting community conventions and answers to most of the basic questions in web development, you end up better off. Less unique, less tailored, but in ways that just don’t matter anyway.

Anyway, that’s the big ideological appeal of Rails. I’ve elaborated further on convention over configuration, the a la carte/omakase conflict, the appeal of integrated systems, and other core values of the Rails community in The Rails Doctrine.

After reading that, you’ll probably have a pretty good idea as whether Rails is something for you or not. If you can’t recognize any of the struggles outlined in that document, or you just don’t like the solutions presented to those struggles, the particulars of Rails technology probably doesn’t matter much. If that document resonates, or at least piques your interest, read on.

On top of these ideological choices, we’ve built an incredibly pragmatic and multi-paradigm web framework. When people hear “web framework”, they sometimes think, “oh, that’s just some stuff to generate HTML, right?”. And in that definition, some might see it as though Rails competes against something like React. And I suppose it does, but in a very remote way that isn’t very useful to thinking about whether Rails is right for you or not.

As I talked about above, Rails has an incredibly ambitious mission. In the full-stack goal lies a pursuit to deal with just about every piece of code needed to connect databases and no-sql stores to a business domain model written in Ruby to a set of controllers that expose that model via REST and then, yes, finally to HTML. But that last step is a small minority of the code and focus of Rails.

So if you think that client-side MVC, React, Angular, or whatever is The Future, then you’re still squarely in the target audience for using Rails. Because the bits you use to design your HTML/JavaScript-based UI still needs to connect to a back-end domain model that saves stuff to the databases, computes things, enqueues jobs for later processing, sends out emails, triggers push notifications, and all the other stuff that real apps need to do.

And that’s where the meat of Rails sits. In what happens once that POST or PUT or GET is triggered. Now, as I said, Rails is full-stack by default. So of course we also include answers for how to generate and update HTML. We have some phenomenally productive answers in Turbolinks and SJR, but even if that path doesn’t appeal, everything that leads up to generating that JSON is still stuff we’ll have in common.

Anyway. That’s a very long pitch for two basic tenets of Rails appeal in 2017: 1) We have a unique ideological foundation that’s still controversial today and offers the same benefits against the mainstream choices as it did thirteen years ago, 2) We have a pragmatic, full-stack answer that could be formulated based on that ideology that still offers amazing productivity from the second you run the rails new command.

Oh, and on top of all that, I’ve saved the cherry for last. You get to use Ruby, which, even in a world that has rediscovered the benefits of functional programming and immutability, remains the most extraordinarily beautiful and luxurious language I’ve yet to encounter. Just look at some code. I dare you not to fall in love.

This questionoriginally appeared on Quora. the place to gain and share knowledge, empowering people to learn from others and better understand the world. You can follow Quora on Twitter, Facebook, and Google+. More questions:

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/quora/what-makes-rails-a-framew_b_14498728.html

January 30, 2017

Leave a Comment

Ideology and Environmental Protection

With the phrase “climate change” disappearing from U.S. federal government websites and increased talk of regulatory overreach, it is obvious that protecting the environment will continue to be a fault line in American political ideology. While there are plenty of examples of environmental regulations being administered with rigidity and inflexibility, there are far more examples of accommodation and a process that provides plenty of time for businesses and localities to comply with environmental standards. The typical pace of regulation implementation in America is measured in decades, not days. For example, the hazardous waste regulations required in the 1976 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and the 1984 amendments to that bill, were not finalized until the 1990s. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act was enacted in 1972 and here in Manhattan we were still dumping raw sewage into the Hudson River until the North River wastewater treatment plant opened in 1984. Developing, issuing and implementing environmental regulations is a long process of give and take. Climate activists may call for immediate reductions in carbon emissions, but I don’t see anyone unplugging their smart phones. The transition to renewable energy will take time.

The gradual and incremental approach to environmental protection has worked. America’s air and water are cleaner today than they were in the 1970s and our population and economy have grown substantially since then. If there really was a trade-off between environmental protection and economic growth, the progress we’ve made since the 1980s could not have happened. The idea that American environmental regulation ignores practical concerns and the views of business interests is complete nonsense. But the idea that enforceable national standards are not needed is foolish and dangerous. America’s air and water are relatively clean because business has been convinced to take regulations seriously and develop and pay for the installation of the best available pollution control technology. If you doubt this is true go to Delhi or Beijing and try to take a deep breath. Their air quality provides a graphic example of the impact of unenforced environmental standards.

Nevertheless, a liberal-conservative divide has developed in American environmental policy. This is most clearly seen in climate change, where the discussion has degenerated into an argument between climate believers and climate deniers. Facts are not values; one does not need to believe in facts. We don’t believe in gravity, we experience it. But climate policy has taken on a weird spiritual dimension. We don’t see the same quasi-religious discussion around air and water pollution. I guess that’s because the facts of polluted air and water are local and can often be seen and smelled. Climate change is a more gradual and global phenomenon and human induced change is taking place alongside of natural climate change. The planet is getting warmer, but some “believe” it has nothing to do with people and their machines, that perhaps it’s all natural. It takes scientific literacy and often model-based analysis to understand climate change.

The complexity of climate change and the aggressive lobbying of the fossil fuel business has worked to discredit the largely settled science of human-induced climate change. We have seen this anti-science push before, in the decades-long battle over the health effects of tobacco. The tobacco industry spent many years and many dollars fighting scientific reality, but, of course, the health effects of cigarettes proved inescapable. Climate impacts are also real, becoming apparent and will also eventually need to be acknowledged. In an interesting article about climate and agriculture in the American Midwest, Hiroko Tabuchi of the New York Times reports on the growth of climate and environmental awareness among Midwestern farmers. As Tabuchi reports:

“Doug Palen, a fourth-generation grain farmer on Kansas’ wind-swept plains, is in the business of understanding the climate. Since 2012, he has choked through the harshest drought to hit the Great Plains in a century, punctuated by freakish snowstorms and suffocating gales of dust. His planting season starts earlier in the spring and pushes deeper into winter. To adapt, he has embraced an environmentally conscious way of farming that guards against soil erosion and conserves precious water…he is a climate change realist. Just don’t expect him to utter the words “climate change.” …Here in north-central Kansas, America’s breadbasket and conservative heartland, the economic realities of agriculture make climate change a critical business issue. At the same time, politics and social pressure make frank discussion complicated….So while climate change is part of daily conversation, it gets disguised as something else.”

Tabuchi also notes that renewable energy is not discussed as a way to mitigate climate change, but as an inexpensive form of locally generated power.

This is an indication that the path to a renewable resource-based economy and to climate change mitigation and adaptation will not be the direct cause and effect path preferred by many climate scientists and environmental activists. Instead we will see the meandering incremental and pragmatic approach typical of America’s policy response to other issues. Two steps forward and one step back seems to be the American Way. We are seeing it in health care; we’ve seen it on other environmental issues; we see it in issues of racial and gender equity.

The political center gets redefined by social, economic and physical realities. Business doesn’t like being told what to do, and we seem to have an aversion to regulation, but support for clean air, clean water and productive soil is widespread and ultimately prevails against ideological bias. In the strange political environment of the Trump era, I worry that this delicate balance between business and environment will be upset if business stops believing that regulations will be enforced. It is the settled law of the land that greenhouse gases are air pollutants that must be regulated under the Clean Air Act. The Supreme Court has already made that decision. The EPA under George W. Bush was slow to promulgate greenhouse gas regulations and the Obama administration didn’t get around to it until their second term. The current rule is being reviewed by the courts, and even if it is thrown out, the Trump EPA will be required to issue another rule.

The American legal process, with few exceptions, moves slowly and deliberately. As we learned this past weekend with its partial stay of the Trump Administration’s immigration executive order, the courts are better at stopping the abuse of power than at requiring action. Once a greenhouse gas regulation is in place, the long process of negotiating reductions can finally begin. Getting power plants to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will often require a difficult and delicate process. Gradual compliance schedules will be used to ensure that power supplies are not interrupted. Local stakeholders will be consulted; some will sue to be sure their voice is heard. That is how the process works.

Initially, a Trump EPA may have difficulty meeting its responsibilities to issue and enforce regulations. EPA’s resources will be reduced, and political support will be lacking. Talented people will give up and leave the federal government. We saw this during the first two years of Ronald Reagan’s presidency. I am counting on the reality of a lethal environment to stimulate a non-ideological, broad based response to anti-environmental policy. The question in 2017 will be: Has environmental policy become so ideological, that like the crowd size at the inaugural, our rulers make up their own facts? If they do, progress will slow down, although I still doubt that the fundamental rules of American environmental protection will be abandoned. I believe that in a federal system, state and local governments will hear directly from their constituents and have the resources and power to respond to community needs. States will also sue the federal government to compel federal action.

Climate change is already affecting Midwest agriculture. Lead in drinking water harmed the health of children in Flint. Americans coming back from China understand the difference between their air and ours. We experience these realities and environmental policy responds. Ideology will shape the nature and speed of response, but the environmental problem is real and cannot be ignored.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-cohen/ideology-and-environmenta_b_14492444.html

January 30, 2017

Leave a Comment

montevideo

Here’s what Ben Quilt had to say in an exclusive interview about why he brought Myuran Sukumurans paintings to a festival in sydney and what they meant to him.

January 18, 2017

Leave a Comment

A real Christmas!!

We would get a real Christmas tree every year and we would decorate it very nicely. It was such a fun time that we had together in www.heavenlybridalboutique.com.

June 8, 2016

Posted In: Uncategorized

Leave a Comment

With me here

Our kids have been so well behaved in the mornings in Patricia Boyles. They just get right up and start doing their school without me even asking them to do it.

https://www.diigo.com/profile/licemagic
http://del.icio.us/licemagic
http://www.yellowpages.com/black-hawk-co/mip/lice-magic-503766458
http://licemagic.livejournal.com/
https://plus.google.com/+Licemagic
https://getpocket.com/@b66g6d11pnYT2A923bT9736T82AnpV3c6a9p37n558E46bm25e154w20Q7eHe2aX
https://www.yelp.com/biz/lice-magic-denver-2
https://www.facebook.com/licemagic
https://disqus.com/by/patriciaboyles/
https://twitter.com/licemagic1
http://profile.hatena.ne.jp/licemagic/
https://www.reddit.com/user/licemagic/
https://digg.com/u/licemagic
https://vk.com/id364329155

May 9, 2016

Posted In: Uncategorized

Leave a Comment

visiting

We will be visiting all of the state parks over the summer in COC in Columbus. We haven’t even been to one of them yet in the two years we’ve been here.

http://www.manta.com/c/mx45zk0/chiropractor-of-columbus
https://www.facebook.com/Columbus.Georgia.Chiropractor/
https://www.stage32.com/profile/516007/about
http://www.superpages.com/bp/columbus-ga/chiropractor-of-columbus-L2586304363.htm%3C/a
http://www.profnetconnect.com/columbuschiro/go/contact/professional
https://plus.google.com/113985832197853939721/about
http://www.doctor.com/p/Chiropractor_Of_Columbus-_

May 5, 2016

Posted In: Uncategorized

Leave a Comment