Proud Member of The Moms Clean Air Force
Print This Post
Jan
30
Exxon Mobil profits rise 27%
Filed Under Politics | Comments Off
You’ll be hearing about this all day and night, I’m sure, in the MSM and the blogs. I hope you’re as bothered by it as I am.
I know I live in an economy with an overreliance on oil and so maybe I shouldn’t be bothered by it. But I am.
Is it okay to have 27% profits when my bottom line is shrinking because of how much I pay for gasoline? When I’m spending money to improve efficiency in my home so that I can reduce my utility bills to something reasonable? Why is it that I feel like I have to take steps to reach “reasonable” when, logic would suggest that the companies reaping unreasonable profits should be thinking about reducing their profit margin?
I think I’m missing the gene for how to live in a capitalist society without being miserable about corporate success.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 6:33 am January 30th, 2006 in Politics | Comments Off
Print This Post
Jan
30
Are you your Blog Cloud?
Filed Under Politics | 5 Comments
Find out by going to SnapShirts. Click on Custom, fill in a couple of blanks and the site will generate a word cloud, in alpha order, with the words that appear most often in your blog in the largest font.
Breast cancer, Fisher, Jill, Redfern and Strickland would dominate my t-shirt.
When I ignore Fisher, Redfern and Strickland, then Blog, Ohio, Party and Think stand out.
What words dominate your blog?
Hattip to TechieDiva (I love that site).
By Jill Miller Zimon at 12:33 am January 30th, 2006 in Politics | 5 Comments
Print This Post
Jan
29
Are you your Blog Cloud?
Filed Under Politics | 5 Comments
Find out by going to SnapShirts. Click on Custom, fill in a couple of blanks and the site will generate a word cloud, in alpha order, with the words that appear most often in your blog in the largest font.
Breast cancer, Fisher, Jill, Redfern and Strickland would dominate my t-shirt.
When I ignore Fisher, Redfern and Strickland, then Blog, Ohio, Party and Think stand out.
What words dominate your blog?
Hattip to TechieDiva (I love that site).
By Jill Miller Zimon at 8:33 pm January 29th, 2006 in Politics | 5 Comments
Print This Post
Jan
29
Individual commonalities
Filed Under Politics | Comments Off
Have you ever stared at snow as it falls and tried to isolate, then follow one flake, from as high up in the sky as you can see, until it reaches the pavement or a naked branch or the damp wool of your coat or the soft fleece of your glove and watch as it first sticks, then blends and melts and becomes absorbed or forms a minute puddle of precipitation?
The effect of watching one flake as it drifts, swoops or drops makes the rest of the flakes fall in a clump of stop motion with no distinction. You lose sight of everything around the one.
I’ve found myself trying to isolate one among tens or hundreds or countless others frequently – figuratively and literally. Almost desperately, to demand that they show themselves as individuals.
And yet, for all my efforts at looking for the individuality in everything, I look to common denominators as a way to communicate and understand.
Perhaps because I believe that if I look at, if I breakdown, what it is that each of us believes, wants and desires, I never doubt that I will find similarities, connections and hope.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 8:01 pm January 29th, 2006 in Politics | Comments Off
Print This Post
Jan
29
Are you your Blog Cloud?
Filed Under Politics | Comments Off
Find out by going to SnapShirts. Click on Custom, fill in a couple of blanks and the site will generate a word cloud, in alpha order, with the words that appear most often in your blog in the largest font.
Breast cancer, Fisher, Jill, Redfern and Strickland would dominate my t-shirt.
When I ignore Fisher, Redfern and Strickland, then Blog, Ohio, Party and Think stand out.
What words dominate your blog?
Hattip to TechieDiva (I love that site).
By Jill Miller Zimon at 5:33 pm January 29th, 2006 in Politics | Comments Off
Print This Post
Jan
29
Individual commonalities
Filed Under Politics | Comments Off
Have you ever stared at snow as it falls and tried to isolate, then follow one flake, from as high up in the sky as you can see, until it reaches the pavement or a naked branch or the damp wool of your coat or the soft fleece of your glove and watch as it first sticks, then blends and melts and becomes absorbed or forms a minute puddle of precipitation?
The effect of watching one flake as it drifts, swoops or drops makes the rest of the flakes fall in a clump of stop motion with no distinction. You lose sight of everything around the one.
I’ve found myself trying to isolate one among tens or hundreds or countless others frequently – figuratively and literally. Almost desperately, to demand that they show themselves as individuals.
And yet, for all my efforts at looking for the individuality in everything, I look to common denominators as a way to communicate and understand.
Perhaps because I believe that if I look at, if I breakdown, what it is that each of us believes, wants and desires, I never doubt that I will find similarities, connections and hope.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 4:01 pm January 29th, 2006 in Politics | Comments Off
Print This Post
Jan
29
Individual commonalities
Filed Under Politics | Comments Off
Have you ever stared at snow as it falls and tried to isolate, then follow one flake, from as high up in the sky as you can see, until it reaches the pavement or a naked branch or the damp wool of your coat or the soft fleece of your glove and watch as it first sticks, then blends and melts and becomes absorbed or forms a minute puddle of precipitation?
The effect of watching one flake as it drifts, swoops or drops makes the rest of the flakes fall in a clump of stop motion with no distinction. You lose sight of everything around the one.
I’ve found myself trying to isolate one among tens or hundreds or countless others frequently – figuratively and literally. Almost desperately, to demand that they show themselves as individuals.
And yet, for all my efforts at looking for the individuality in everything, I look to common denominators as a way to communicate and understand.
Perhaps because I believe that if I look at, if I breakdown, what it is that each of us believes, wants and desires, I never doubt that I will find similarities, connections and hope.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 1:01 pm January 29th, 2006 in Politics | Comments Off
Print This Post
Jan
28
UPDATE: Here’s the link to a pdf of the report cited in the Women’s eNews article. Hat tip to Jerry sans link.
From Women’s eNews:
Women in the United States still have a high risk of being diagnosed with breast cancer even if they have no genetic predisposition for the disease, stated a report released Jan. 24 by the Breast Cancer Fund and Breast Cancer Action, two San Francisco-based advocacy groups. The report said that as many as 50 percent of breast cancer cases remain unexplained by either genetics or lifestyle factors such as how old a woman is at her first full-term pregnancy or her rate of alcohol consumption.
The two groups analyzed more than 350 scientific studies linking environmental factors to breast cancer to come up with their findings. In 2005, breast cancer was expected to kill more than 40,000 women in the U.S. The risk of an American woman being diagnosed with breast cancer in her lifetime has nearly tripled in the last 40 years, rising to a 1 in 7 chance.
“This report adds to the compelling evidence that the chemicals we’re exposed to in our daily lives are making us sick,” said Lisa Wanzor, acting executive director of Breast Cancer Action. “Women living with and at risk for breast cancer need public policies that will put our health first and protect us from exposures to toxic chemicals.”
In related news, a Jan. 25 report in the Journal of the American Medical Association states that the number of U.S. women choosing breast reconstruction after a mastectomy has not risen significantly, despite a 1999 federal law mandating medical insurance coverage for the procedure. Only 16.8 percent of the 51,000 women studied who underwent a mastectomy between 1998 and 2002 subsequently chose breast reconstruction. The reasons for the low take-up rate are unclear but there is concern that it is due to a lack of awareness that health insurance covers the procedures, said the study’s lead researcher Dr. Amy Alderman.
The study methodology isn’t direct – they studied studies. I’d prefer to see the report myself (and probably will take the time to find it, then post a link here to it).
Even so, will hit you, someone you know or me? Are you doing everything you can to make sure it gets detected as early as possible? There are no good excuses here.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 12:16 pm January 28th, 2006 in Politics | 2 Comments
Print This Post
Jan
28
UPDATE: Here’s the link to a pdf of the report cited in the Women’s eNews article. Hat tip to Jerry sans link.
From Women’s eNews:
Women in the United States still have a high risk of being diagnosed with breast cancer even if they have no genetic predisposition for the disease, stated a report released Jan. 24 by the Breast Cancer Fund and Breast Cancer Action, two San Francisco-based advocacy groups. The report said that as many as 50 percent of breast cancer cases remain unexplained by either genetics or lifestyle factors such as how old a woman is at her first full-term pregnancy or her rate of alcohol consumption.
The two groups analyzed more than 350 scientific studies linking environmental factors to breast cancer to come up with their findings. In 2005, breast cancer was expected to kill more than 40,000 women in the U.S. The risk of an American woman being diagnosed with breast cancer in her lifetime has nearly tripled in the last 40 years, rising to a 1 in 7 chance.
“This report adds to the compelling evidence that the chemicals we’re exposed to in our daily lives are making us sick,” said Lisa Wanzor, acting executive director of Breast Cancer Action. “Women living with and at risk for breast cancer need public policies that will put our health first and protect us from exposures to toxic chemicals.”
In related news, a Jan. 25 report in the Journal of the American Medical Association states that the number of U.S. women choosing breast reconstruction after a mastectomy has not risen significantly, despite a 1999 federal law mandating medical insurance coverage for the procedure. Only 16.8 percent of the 51,000 women studied who underwent a mastectomy between 1998 and 2002 subsequently chose breast reconstruction. The reasons for the low take-up rate are unclear but there is concern that it is due to a lack of awareness that health insurance covers the procedures, said the study’s lead researcher Dr. Amy Alderman.
The study methodology isn’t direct – they studied studies. I’d prefer to see the report myself (and probably will take the time to find it, then post a link here to it).
Even so, will hit you, someone you know or me? Are you doing everything you can to make sure it gets detected as early as possible? There are no good excuses here.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 8:16 am January 28th, 2006 in Politics | 2 Comments
Print This Post
Jan
28
Breast cancer hits 1 in 7, 40K die a year, in U.S. alone
Filed Under Politics | Comments Off
UPDATE: Here’s the link to a pdf of the report cited in the Women’s eNews article. Hat tip to Jerry sans link.
From Women’s eNews:
Women in the United States still have a high risk of being diagnosed with breast cancer even if they have no genetic predisposition for the disease, stated a report released Jan. 24 by the Breast Cancer Fund and Breast Cancer Action, two San Francisco-based advocacy groups. The report said that as many as 50 percent of breast cancer cases remain unexplained by either genetics or lifestyle factors such as how old a woman is at her first full-term pregnancy or her rate of alcohol consumption.
The two groups analyzed more than 350 scientific studies linking environmental factors to breast cancer to come up with their findings. In 2005, breast cancer was expected to kill more than 40,000 women in the U.S. The risk of an American woman being diagnosed with breast cancer in her lifetime has nearly tripled in the last 40 years, rising to a 1 in 7 chance.
“This report adds to the compelling evidence that the chemicals we’re exposed to in our daily lives are making us sick,” said Lisa Wanzor, acting executive director of Breast Cancer Action. “Women living with and at risk for breast cancer need public policies that will put our health first and protect us from exposures to toxic chemicals.”
In related news, a Jan. 25 report in the Journal of the American Medical Association states that the number of U.S. women choosing breast reconstruction after a mastectomy has not risen significantly, despite a 1999 federal law mandating medical insurance coverage for the procedure. Only 16.8 percent of the 51,000 women studied who underwent a mastectomy between 1998 and 2002 subsequently chose breast reconstruction. The reasons for the low take-up rate are unclear but there is concern that it is due to a lack of awareness that health insurance covers the procedures, said the study’s lead researcher Dr. Amy Alderman.
The study methodology isn’t direct – they studied studies. I’d prefer to see the report myself (and probably will take the time to find it, then post a link here to it).
Even so, will hit you, someone you know or me? Are you doing everything you can to make sure it gets detected as early as possible? There are no good excuses here.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 5:16 am January 28th, 2006 in Politics | Comments Off
Print This Post
Jan
27
From Poynteronline comes this piece about a speech given by Dan Gillmor at the Berkman Center for Internet and Society. If you’re young and thinking about a career in politics, click on those links and think about where you’ve set your boundaries for what is private, and what isn’t.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 10:16 pm January 27th, 2006 in Politics | 1 Comment
Print This Post
Jan
27
Talk about convergence
Filed Under Politics | 3 Comments
I don’t know about these things. Others do. But how many days before Ted Strickland announced that Lee Fisher was going to be his running mate do you think that choice was 1) discussed and 2) finalized? What’s the typical timeline for something like that?
Again, I don’t know. But let me tell you a story about another part of the conversation I had with Ohio Democratic Party Chairman, Chris Redfern, this past Wednesday morning, just a few hours before the running mate choice was announced.
So, there I am, asking Redfern how a voter chooses a candidate when they look at a competition as being about base issues and electibility. And I mention my impressions of how the Senate race seems stereotyped (at least in the blogosphere) as rock star aka Paul Hackett versus career politician aka Sherrod Brown.
And then, over in the governor’s race, I face the choice between a well-known to me candidate aka Eric Fingerhut -with whom I agree on all the issues important to me, versus a never heard the name before Meet the Blogger’s interviewed him candidate aka Ted Strickland, whose views I know only from the MTB transcript and MSM and blog reports, and I know that he is a member of the NRA, which supports him. And I mention that I could never vote for someone who doesn’t view guns as the danger that they are (IMHO).
And I talk out loud about how I can’t imagine how Strickland will wrestle much of the NEO vote, since there’s a lot of love up here for Fingerhut, even if he lost to George Voinovich (because who couldn’ve beaten Voinovich). And I blather on about how Lee Fisher is the only other Democratic politician I can even name who has won anything state-wide since I’ve been in Ohio (1988) and is still active and could garner NEO.
And I ask Redfern, how do you choose. Which he answers this way: He talks about how he has five base issues that he won’t negotiate and that when his constituents meet him, they express sentiments that indicate that while they might not agree with him on everything, they feel he’ll represent them and their most important issues well (basically describing how you have to swap out some ideals in order to get your most valued interests represented in government).
Fast forward to my getting home, doing the kids’ thing, the unpacking thing, the following up on some work thing and then the sigh of relief that it’s almost bedtime.
And I go check out the blogs. And there I find post after post after post announcing Strickland’s announcement that Fisher will be his running mate.
I’m reading, and mulling, and reading, and mulling and then I’m thinking, holy cow.
Ted Strickland-Lee Fisher is an Al Gore-Joe Lieberman choice:
Strickland – guns
Fisher – not guns
Strickland: no name recognition in NEO
Fisher – name recognition in NEO
Lots of love up here for Fisher.
Lots of love up here for Fingerhut.
Talk about forcing a democrat voting in a primary to keep her eyes on the prize: Because how could a voter like me (from NEO, extremely likely to vote, extremely likely to vote Democrat, and Jewish – which gives me a split heart when you’re talking Fisher or Fingerhut) NOT go with a team that can garner both Cuyahoga County and the rest of the parts of the state, in an amount equal to winning AND has at least one candidate who is pro-gun control?
When Fingerhut said (as quoted in this Plain Dealer article today) that Strickland’s choice is about him, I completely, totally, 100% agree – and thought that immediately as I read all the posts Wednesday night.
Thus, I say, quelle bizarre to me that I returned home on Wednesday to find out that Strickland announced that Fisher is his choice.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 6:30 pm January 27th, 2006 in Politics | 3 Comments
Print This Post
Jan
27
From Poynteronline comes this piece about a speech given by Dan Gillmor at the Berkman Center for Internet and Society. If you’re young and thinking about a career in politics, click on those links and think about where you’ve set your boundaries for what is private, and what isn’t.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 6:16 pm January 27th, 2006 in Politics | 1 Comment
Print This Post
Jan
27
Politicians of the future? Beware your past
Filed Under Politics | Comments Off
From Poynteronline comes this piece about a speech given by Dan Gillmor at the Berkman Center for Internet and Society. If you’re young and thinking about a career in politics, click on those links and think about where you’ve set your boundaries for what is private, and what isn’t.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 3:16 pm January 27th, 2006 in Politics | Comments Off
Print This Post
Jan
27
Talk about convergence
Filed Under Politics | 3 Comments
I don’t know about these things. Others do. But how many days before Ted Strickland announced that Lee Fisher was going to be his running mate do you think that choice was 1) discussed and 2) finalized? What’s the typical timeline for something like that?
Again, I don’t know. But let me tell you a story about another part of the conversation I had with Ohio Democratic Party Chairman, Chris Redfern, this past Wednesday morning, just a few hours before the running mate choice was announced.
So, there I am, asking Redfern how a voter chooses a candidate when they look at a competition as being about base issues and electibility. And I mention my impressions of how the Senate race seems stereotyped (at least in the blogosphere) as rock star aka Paul Hackett versus career politician aka Sherrod Brown.
And then, over in the governor’s race, I face the choice between a well-known to me candidate aka Eric Fingerhut -with whom I agree on all the issues important to me, versus a never heard the name before Meet the Blogger’s interviewed him candidate aka Ted Strickland, whose views I know only from the MTB transcript and MSM and blog reports, and I know that he is a member of the NRA, which supports him. And I mention that I could never vote for someone who doesn’t view guns as the danger that they are (IMHO).
And I talk out loud about how I can’t imagine how Strickland will wrestle much of the NEO vote, since there’s a lot of love up here for Fingerhut, even if he lost to George Voinovich (because who couldn’ve beaten Voinovich). And I blather on about how Lee Fisher is the only other Democratic politician I can even name who has won anything state-wide since I’ve been in Ohio (1988) and is still active and could garner NEO.
And I ask Redfern, how do you choose. Which he answers this way: He talks about how he has five base issues that he won’t negotiate and that when his constituents meet him, they express sentiments that indicate that while they might not agree with him on everything, they feel he’ll represent them and their most important issues well (basically describing how you have to swap out some ideals in order to get your most valued interests represented in government).
Fast forward to my getting home, doing the kids’ thing, the unpacking thing, the following up on some work thing and then the sigh of relief that it’s almost bedtime.
And I go check out the blogs. And there I find post after post after post announcing Strickland’s announcement that Fisher will be his running mate.
I’m reading, and mulling, and reading, and mulling and then I’m thinking, holy cow.
Ted Strickland-Lee Fisher is an Al Gore-Joe Lieberman choice:
Strickland – guns
Fisher – not guns
Strickland: no name recognition in NEO
Fisher – name recognition in NEO
Lots of love up here for Fisher.
Lots of love up here for Fingerhut.
Talk about forcing a democrat voting in a primary to keep her eyes on the prize: Because how could a voter like me (from NEO, extremely likely to vote, extremely likely to vote Democrat, and Jewish – which gives me a split heart when you’re talking Fisher or Fingerhut) NOT go with a team that can garner both Cuyahoga County and the rest of the parts of the state, in an amount equal to winning AND has at least one candidate who is pro-gun control?
When Fingerhut said (as quoted in this Plain Dealer article today) that Strickland’s choice is about him, I completely, totally, 100% agree – and thought that immediately as I read all the posts Wednesday night.
Thus, I say, quelle bizarre to me that I returned home on Wednesday to find out that Strickland announced that Fisher is his choice.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 2:30 pm January 27th, 2006 in Politics | 3 Comments
Print This Post
Jan
27
Talk about convergence
Filed Under Politics | Comments Off
I don’t know about these things. Others do. But how many days before Ted Strickland announced that Lee Fisher was going to be his running mate do you think that choice was 1) discussed and 2) finalized? What’s the typical timeline for something like that?
Again, I don’t know. But let me tell you a story about another part of the conversation I had with Ohio Democratic Party Chairman, Chris Redfern, this past Wednesday morning, just a few hours before the running mate choice was announced.
So, there I am, asking Redfern how a voter chooses a candidate when they look at a competition as being about base issues and electibility. And I mention my impressions of how the Senate race seems stereotyped (at least in the blogosphere) as rock star aka Paul Hackett versus career politician aka Sherrod Brown.
And then, over in the governor’s race, I face the choice between a well-known to me candidate aka Eric Fingerhut -with whom I agree on all the issues important to me, versus a never heard the name before Meet the Blogger’s interviewed him candidate aka Ted Strickland, whose views I know only from the MTB transcript and MSM and blog reports, and I know that he is a member of the NRA, which supports him. And I mention that I could never vote for someone who doesn’t view guns as the danger that they are (IMHO).
And I talk out loud about how I can’t imagine how Strickland will wrestle much of the NEO vote, since there’s a lot of love up here for Fingerhut, even if he lost to George Voinovich (because who couldn’ve beaten Voinovich). And I blather on about how Lee Fisher is the only other Democratic politician I can even name who has won anything state-wide since I’ve been in Ohio (1988) and is still active and could garner NEO.
And I ask Redfern, how do you choose. Which he answers this way: He talks about how he has five base issues that he won’t negotiate and that when his constituents meet him, they express sentiments that indicate that while they might not agree with him on everything, they feel he’ll represent them and their most important issues well (basically describing how you have to swap out some ideals in order to get your most valued interests represented in government).
Fast forward to my getting home, doing the kids’ thing, the unpacking thing, the following up on some work thing and then the sigh of relief that it’s almost bedtime.
And I go check out the blogs. And there I find post after post after post announcing Strickland’s announcement that Fisher will be his running mate.
I’m reading, and mulling, and reading, and mulling and then I’m thinking, holy cow.
Ted Strickland-Lee Fisher is an Al Gore-Joe Lieberman choice:
Strickland – guns
Fisher – not guns
Strickland: no name recognition in NEO
Fisher – name recognition in NEO
Lots of love up here for Fisher.
Lots of love up here for Fingerhut.
Talk about forcing a democrat voting in a primary to keep her eyes on the prize: Because how could a voter like me (from NEO, extremely likely to vote, extremely likely to vote Democrat, and Jewish – which gives me a split heart when you’re talking Fisher or Fingerhut) NOT go with a team that can garner both Cuyahoga County and the rest of the parts of the state, in an amount equal to winning AND has at least one candidate who is pro-gun control?
When Fingerhut said (as quoted in this Plain Dealer article today) that Strickland’s choice is about him, I completely, totally, 100% agree – and thought that immediately as I read all the posts Wednesday night.
Thus, I say, quelle bizarre to me that I returned home on Wednesday to find out that Strickland announced that Fisher is his choice.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 11:30 am January 27th, 2006 in Politics | Comments Off
Print This Post
Jan
27
Congressional bloggers, including Barack Obama
Filed Under Politics | Comments Off
Thank you Dawno for this timely link to an article called, Congress catching on to the value of blogs. Barack does it here, although not as often as we’d like, I’m sure.
What is everyone else waiting for? Really, now. (Mother looking down at kids with hands on hip and angled eyebrows, one foot forward, tapping toe.)
By Jill Miller Zimon at 3:40 am January 27th, 2006 in Politics | Comments Off
Print This Post
Jan
27
Although some political organizations and candidates might feel too anxious to seize the opportunities that blogs offer, this Forbes.com article provides five specific, discrete and successful ways that businesses can benefit from blogs. Anyone want to argue why these ways can’t be adapted to nonprofits, civic groups or entities within the political process?
By Jill Miller Zimon at 1:12 am January 27th, 2006 in Politics | 3 Comments
Print This Post
Jan
26
Congressional bloggers, including Barack Obama
Filed Under Politics | Comments Off
Thank you Dawno for this timely link to an article called, Congress catching on to the value of blogs. Barack does it here, although not as often as we’d like, I’m sure.
What is everyone else waiting for? Really, now. (Mother looking down at kids with hands on hip and angled eyebrows, one foot forward, tapping toe.)
By Jill Miller Zimon at 11:40 pm January 26th, 2006 in Politics | Comments Off
Print This Post
Jan
26
Although some political organizations and candidates might feel too anxious to seize the opportunities that blogs offer, this Forbes.com article provides five specific, discrete and successful ways that businesses can benefit from blogs. Anyone want to argue why these ways can’t be adapted to nonprofits, civic groups or entities within the political process?
By Jill Miller Zimon at 9:12 pm January 26th, 2006 in Politics | 3 Comments
Voted into Top 25 Political Mom Blogs
Now on sale-WLST essay included!
Posts About Pepper Pike City Council2010 WE Magazine 101 Women Bloggers to Watch
Category Specific RSS
Pepper Pike Cleveland+ Politics Women Ohio Elections Law Jewish
