Miss Kolka

So it turns out that it WASN'T the proper phrase (tricky question there)

I heard a phrase in a Björk song but it was

"What's the lesser of two evils, a suicide bomber made to look pregnant - or who actually is.."

anyway - turned my head around.

Have been watching some interesting things on youtube..

A very weird video about tibet and the lies surrounding the situation there and the Dalai Lama. Got me confused.. I don't really see to what end this video was posted on the website.

Other fun thing, the comeback of Obama girl.. tellin Clintontgo quit the attacks, quite funny, Hillary, don't let that change your mind!

 

This phrase I heard struck a corde:

What if  

A suicide bomber made you pregnant?

 Where did I hear that?

Was it     a) in a Bjork song?  

              b) on the "o'reilly factor" on Fox news?

  or         c) from the mouth of Daniel Plainview in the amazing movie There will be blood?
 

my collegue Alexandra  pointed out to me a very interesting article yesterday- its seems that all the drugs we are taking in, and then peeing out are coming back to hunt us.  See more on cnn.com

an extract:

(AP) -- A vast array of pharmaceuticals -- including antibiotics, anti-convulsants, mood stabilizers and sex hormones -- have been found in the drinking water supplies of at least 41 million Americans, an Associated Press investigation shows.

To be sure, the concentrations of these pharmaceuticals are tiny, measured in quantities of parts per billion or trillion, far below the levels of a medical dose. Also, utilities insist their water is safe.

But the presence of so many prescription drugs -- and over-the-counter medicines like acetaminophen and ibuprofen -- in so much of our drinking water is heightening worries among scientists of long-term consequences to human health.

 

Why are we not hearing about this? I remember reading that many species are at risk of extinction because they're changing into exclusively female animals - due to too much estrogen in ground water - that then finds its way to lakes and rivers. Why is there too much estrogen and female hormones in those waters? Because women who have been taking the pill for years also go to the toilet and release all the chemicals that sooner or later find themselves in the groundwater.  Why are we worried about this now? Because it might be coming back to hunt us - we dont care about changing nature ... oh no we just dont want too much ibuprofen in our drinking water. (personally I'm not sure it would be a bad thing) And there's a another good reason for drinking bottled water. Maybe these informations go unnoticed because some people do not find them important, perhaps because there is a multibillion dollar trade that could be badly hurt by these news. The Pharmaceutical companies are also known to be important lobbying groups.

" Ask the pharmaceutical industry whether the contamination of water supplies is a problem, and officials will tell you no."

Of course they will, or people might start taking less drugs...

its all down to money.  

So why is Hillary Rodham Clinton so controversial?

Its enough to google the former first lady /perhaps the next president of the U.S. to see that she has a large group of "anti-fans" and people who want to harm her image. She seems to pose a threat to certain values and ideas and therefore there are alot of people that would not want her to achieve her goal  - becoming the first woman president of the U.S. This is someone who has worked on health care, education and women issues all her life, she also comprehends the economy of today- Is that her weakness?Is it because she understands the justice system and knows her way around the dark alleys of washington politics that she poses a threat?  Is it because her husband was one of the most approved U.S. president after world war II  who reversed the state of the economy after the republicans left it in a mess and tried to reform health care in the U.S.? (too much money in it of course on behalf of the insurance companies for them to let it go)

 Of course Clinton looks tough (and you probably have to be to do the toughest job in the world) and she is not perfect (why was the extraordinary rendition act signed during the Clinton years (aren't they supposed to have one of the best legal teams in the world?)) but you can't suppose that she agreed with everything her husband did during his tenour, they are two seperate individuals after all. And she might be a bit paranoid and think that many are "after her", but after reading Clinton's book "Living History" about the years in the white house,  I've come to realise that her role as supportive wife and campaigner for Bill for so many years might have clashed more than once with her own desire to succeed professionally and on the political stage. It was a learning curve, to know what to do when. And if she is elected, there might be two presidents running the white house, which is probably not the worst thing on earth, having two intelligent persons trying to work out solutions to make the country's policies more effective (as so funnily portrayed by Saturday night life when that was the arguments of the opponents of the Clinton campaign). She has dealt with so many attacks - sometimes more than on a personal level - that would have taken down many - but she has continued to fight, and has never given up - it sure must have been difficult ... and that's way she deserves to be given a chance. She cares about the issues, she cares about the people and has always tried to be closer to them by undestanding what their main concerns are and what is expected of political leaders. I think she would try to govern with intelligence and take decisions based on well-researched information.

But first she has to win the democratic race. I am so glad to see that there are no longer only middle aged, white males that think they can change the world. Too long have important issues been ignored by that group and it would be a beautiful example to next generations to not elect John McCain.

 I am glad Hillary R. Clinton dared to compete.

So what has happened since my last blog? Absolutely nothing! As with so many other dillusional ideas the president has, closing France 24 was announced and then as noone could explain why or how it would be done, it has now been put on hold. This president loves to blabber about just anything to get attention. Any attention is better than no attention (did his mother show him enough when he was a baby?). Our fellow workers at the french public service also got some bad news when he announced that he would cancel all advertising on public television. Two months and hundreds of people in panic later, the public service decided to strike unanimously on tv and radio yesterday to make a point: "what now?" This has been announced.. but for when and what does it mean for the public service? Where will the money come from? ( the fees are not nearly enough for all the stations to work, around 30% of revenu comes from advertising) And what is going to replace the air time of advertising - which could account for 2-3 hours of programming every day on each channel? No one knows... some abstract taxes on internet and mobile phones - how? with advertisers paying for publicity on private channels AS WELL as for a tax to the public channels? It makes no sense.

I dont know about that strike though, whether it truly achieved anything at all, that is according to my dad, the french answer to all problems... If there is a strike, it is a serious problem. Does it still work like that? I also think the french people should ask themselves alot more often WHY? Why is the president deciding this? Why does he want to ban advertising on public television when one of his best friends owns the biggest private television network? How much did the shares of that company go up again the DAY sarkozy announced the changes for public broadcasting?

The question remains, what now? No one knows and I doubt the man behind all the panic has the slightest idea himself. He just has opinions. Opinions on everything all the time and unfortuntely we have to hear about them everywhere, all the time. Maybe a little less opinion and a little more information would be better. To take decisions, one needs to gather information and TALK to people (not only to a handful of mysterious advisors). To learn, one has to listen. And to Govern successfully, one has to delegate. One person cannot rule every little aspect of a country with over 60 million people alone. It would help if the president concentrated (does he know how to do that?)on a few matters and then would know what he was talking about.

Anyway, like my fellow news junkie pointed out yesterday I am finally becoming a real french journalist. I am obsessed with everything the president says and does. Im obsessed with his wife, Im obsessed by how rude he is, Im obsessed by how he lets his son ruin the reputation of a poor spokesperson, I am obsessed by all the stupid things he says all the time without anyone ever questioning publicly his judgement and decisions. And when I hear about his ministers that "punish " the journalists because they haven't been nice in Guinea, may I remind you, just doing their job- I just get mad. Lets just hope I can just hold on a branch of critical thought amid all the political propaganda splashed at me all day long. Or I might have to get into a whole different profession. I am thinking about it. Seriously.

• very classy | 05-09-2008
• Im not seventeen anymore | 02-09-2008
• The word is out | 01-09-2008
• What's beneath the Iceberg? | 30-07-2008
• Im back! | 29-07-2008
• Það er komin 17. júní | 17-06-2008
• In memoriam | 09-06-2008
• Noh Það er bara svona! | 22-05-2008
• Remember 5 fruits and vegetebles per day! | 21-05-2008
• How much is enough? | 09-05-2008
• Where is Iceland's money coming from? | 06-05-2008
• There's no way out | 19-04-2008
• Sendi it back to China | 07-04-2008
• Poisson d'avril | 01-04-2008
• Wish I was | 30-03-2008