Liberty Of London (C4): TV Review

Posted on by

UNIQUE: The staff who work at London department store Liberty.

LIBERTY OF LONDON C4

DEPARTMENT store Liberty has a special place in Britain's heart. Like Greggs does with its bowels.

"Its hallways," we heard, "are stuffed with gifts, antiquities and a very strong sense of Britishness." Basically, it's the London version of Hanley indoor market.

Every year, the shop has an open day where designers are invited to bring along anything they feel would make a welcome addition to its wares.

"We try to find things that are unusual," revealed a buyer, "things that are exclusive to us, things that will differentiate us from our competitors." Next year I might try my Union Jack nasal hair trimmers.

Two chaps had brought along a range of dog coats.

"We started looking for jackets," they explained, "and couldn't find anything that was even slightly cool or hip." It's a poodle, mate, not Taylor Swift.

The jackets, they hoped, would suit Liberty as it's one of the only department stores in London to welcome dogs. Whatever you do, don't stand still in the lighting department.

However, the outlet's chief buyer felt it might be rather a niche market. Certainly, few pugs suit a kagoule.

The rest is here:

Liberty Of London (C4): TV Review

AP-BKC–Randolph College-Liberty Box

Posted on by

Smith 0-3 0-0 0, Jacoby 2-6 0-0 5, Desgain 0-3 0-0 0, Brown 5-8 0-0 12, Rogo 3-6 2-7 8, Hann 0-1 0-0 0, Simmons 2-2 0-0 5, Crockett 1-3 1-2 3, Copeland-Morgan 0-1 0-0 0, Sherrod 0-0 0-0 0, Horn 0-3 0-0 0, Sands 0-2 0-0 0, Wimbish 0-4 0-0 0, Eddie 3-5 2-2 10, Robinson 0-0 0-0 0, Toe 0-0 0-0 0, Davis 1-1 0-0 2. Totals 17-48 5-11 45.

Smith 0-2 1-2 1, Gielo 3-6 8-10 14, Johnson 4-6 0-0 8, Retic 2-5 0-0 4, Moller 1-3 0-0 3, Andoh 5-11 0-1 10, Dembley 0-1 0-0 0, Reid 4-6 1-2 12, Hoffman 0-0 0-0 0, Kemrite 1-2 1-2 4, Johnson 0-1 3-4 3, Layer 2-3 0-1 6, Maxwell 2-3 0-0 4. Totals 24-49 14-22 69.

Halftime_Liberty 38-24. 3-Point Goals_Randolph College 6-21 (Eddie 2-4, Brown 2-4, Simmons 1-1, Jacoby 1-3, Rogo 0-1, Copeland-Morgan 0-1, Sands 0-1, Horn 0-2, Wimbish 0-4), Liberty 7-15 (Reid 3-5, Layer 2-3, Moller 1-1, Kemrite 1-2, Dembley 0-1, Retic 0-1, Gielo 0-2). Fouled Out_None. Rebounds_Randolph College 22 (Wimbish 4), Liberty 44 (Gielo 9). Assists_Randolph College 8 (Jacoby 3), Liberty 19 (Retic 5). Total Fouls_Randolph College 18, Liberty 14. Technical_Randolph College Bench. A_4,352.

See the original post here:

AP-BKC--Randolph College-Liberty Box

‘Americans Are Too Stupid For Obamacare Scandal Is Dumb Republican Nonsense – Video

Posted on by


#39;Americans Are Too Stupid For Obamacare Scandal Is Dumb Republican Nonsense
"Has Obama administration adviser Jonathan Gruber inadvertently doomed Obamacare? Or at least handed Republicans a weapon with which to attack the sweeping federal health care program? He #39;s ...

By: The Young Turks

See original here:

'Americans Are Too Stupid For Obamacare Scandal Is Dumb Republican Nonsense - Video

Registered Nurse (Rural Health-Home Based Primary Care) at …

Posted on by

Job Title:Registered Nurse (Rural Health-Home Based Primary Care)

Department:Department Of Veterans Affairs

Agency:Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration

Job Announcement Number:BH-15-JM-1251238-BU

Vacancy Identification Number (VIN): 1251238

To fulfill President Lincoln's promise "To care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan" by serving and honoring the men and women who are America's Veterans.

As a VA professional, your opportunities are endless. With many openings in the multiple functions of VA, you will have a wide range of opportunities and leadership positions at your fingertips. Not only is it the largest, most technologically advanced integrated health care system in the Nation, but we also provide many other services to Veterans through the Benefits Administration and National Cemeteries. VA professionals feel good about their careers and their ability to balance work and home life. VA offers generous paid time off and a variety of predictable and flexible scheduling opportunities. For more information on the Department of Veterans Affairs, go to http://www.vacareers.va.gov.

VA encourages persons with disabilities to apply. The health related positions in VA are covered by Title 38, and are not covered by the Schedule A excepted appointment authority.

This position is located at the Lyons, NJ campus of the VA New Jersey Health Care System, but will require the RN to travel to various rural home based locations. These locations include, but are not limited to: Warren, Hunterdon and Sussex counties. Major duties of the position include, but are not limited to:

Work Schedule: Full Time, Monday-Friday, 8:00 am - 4:30 pm.

Visit link:

Registered Nurse (Rural Health-Home Based Primary Care) at ...

Whose (Health Care) Conscience Is It, Anyway? | Janet Chung

Posted on by

Photo credit: James Palinsad

More and more, we live in a world where the religious beliefs of those who want to refuse health care services trump the rights of patients who deserve and need those services. This is untenable. The time has come to return the focus to patients, and an important first step is to protect those health care providers whose consciences tell them that they are obliged to provide health care at least as much as we protect the rights of their colleagues to refuse it.

How did we get here? It's important to understand that this state of affairs has been a long time coming. The U.S. Supreme Court's now notorious decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby is only the latest salvo in an ongoing campaign that makes health care providers' beliefs -- not patients' needs -- the basis for determining what services will be offered.

A mainstay in this assault is a fresh barrage of laws containing so-called "conscience clauses," designed to give health care providers the right to refuse to offer services that they personally disapprove of, regardless of patient needs. In recent years, such state and federal laws have been expanding their reach in troubling new ways. Where they once focused on the right of providers to refuse to participate in specific services, primarily abortions and sterilization, they are now even broader in scope. For example, pharmacists in many states have the right to refuse to dispense any medication -- and some have exercised that right to deny women emergency contraception based on the categorically false belief that such contraception causes an abortion.

Longstanding exemptions for not just individual providers, but also religious institutions further widen the gap between what patients need and what providers are required to offer. For example, in my home state of Washington, the insurance code provides that religiously sponsored plans can opt out of including legally mandated insurance benefits in their plan offerings, based on conscience. Elsewhere, hospitals that generally are required by law to provide emergency contraception to patients who have been sexually assaulted may refuse to do so on religious grounds. Similarly, even before the Hobby Lobby decision, religious institutions, such as houses of worship, were exempt from the Affordable Care Act's contraceptive coverage requirements, and nonprofits with religious objections to ACA coverage requirements could refuse as well. The Hobby Lobby Court then further extended this doctrine, adding for-profit employers with religious objections to the list of entities exempt from providing otherwise mandated health care benefits.

While the Hobby Lobby decision focused on contraceptive coverage, it would be a mistake to think that its reach stops there. By recognizing a for-profit corporation's religious free exercise rights, the Court opened the door to religiously-based refusals of services of all sorts. For example, some providers object to aid in dying, or providing health care services of any kind to LGBT patients. Some religions proscribe vaccinations or blood transfusions. What's more, courts, not wanting to become arbiters of spirituality, do not question the sincerity of claims of religious belief. Thus, a religious objection might just prove to be the trump card justifying denials of such health care services.

This situation is unacceptable. The time has come to accord legal protection to other forms of "conscience." Providers should be protected if their religion or conscience compels them to provide care, not only when they choose to refuse it.

This broadened frame for conscience clause protection is especially needed in light of the precipitous rise in religiously affiliated health care systems; the number of Catholic-run acute-care hospitals increased by 16% from 2001-11. These hospital systems usually come with accompanying restrictions on services based on religious institutional doctrine. To comply with the Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care, a Catholic-affiliated hospital may require its employees, as a matter of policy, not to provide certain services, including non-emergency pregnancy termination, medication for aid in dying, and infertility treatment. These prohibitions can extend not only to employees of the hospital itself, but also to affiliated clinics, hospices, physicians with admitting privileges - even separately owned medical practices that lease office space from a religiously affiliated health system. Studies of physicians at religiously affiliated hospitals have found over half (52 percent) of ob-gyns and one in five primary care physicians experienced conflict between the care they wanted to provide and hospital policies.

Institutional policies should not be allowed to prevent health care professionals from exercising their professional judgment, to practice evidence-based medicine, and to provide comprehensive care to their patients.

Read the rest here:

Whose (Health Care) Conscience Is It, Anyway? | Janet Chung

TPGs Coulter Says Global Health Care Is Best for Deals

Posted on by

Disruptions in the international health-care industry offer the best opportunity for investment, according to TPG Capital co-founder Jim Coulter.

You cant just bet on the economy, Coulter said today at the Bloomberg Year Ahead Summit in Washington. A disruption with cyclical downside protection is interesting.

TPG, which manages $66 billion in assets, is buying hospitals in China and India because of innovations in health-care services there, Coulter said. The Fort Worth, Texas-based firm is also investing in U.S. surgery centers, he said. TPGs recent investments in the industry, according to the firms website, include Evolent Health Inc., Genomic Health Inc., hospital operator Iasis Healthcare Corp. and Australian health-care provider Healthscope Ltd. (HSO), which held an initial public offering in July.

TPG is also seeking investments in young companies in whats known as the sharing economy, in which customers use mobile applications and Web tools for shared services, Coulter said. The firm last year bought a stake in passenger transport company Uber Technologies Inc. and this year invested in home-rental service Airbnb Inc. TPG co-founder David Bonderman is on the board of both companies.

Its a much better business model when you dont have the cost of physical assets, said Bonderman, who was on stage with Coulter. They achieve scale over the Internet very rapidly.

Bonderman, 71, and Coulter, 54, founded TPG in 1992. The firm is seeking $10 billion for its seventh buyout fund, according to an offering document obtained by Bloomberg News, after raising $19.8 billion in 2008 for its previous pool. TPG has told investors it plans to avoid mega-sized deals after experiencing losses in Texas utility Energy Future Holdings Corp., casino operator Caesars Entertainment Corp. (CZR) and savings bank Washington Mutual.

In smaller, technology-focused companies, valuations may at times run ahead of reality, but we should not underestimate the force of disruption thats going to occur, Coulter said today. For us as investors, we have to find the right entry point. Clearly the edge is pretty interesting right now in the sharing economy.

To contact the reporter on this story: Devin Banerjee in New York at dbanerjee2@bloomberg.net

To contact the editors responsible for this story: Christian Baumgaertel at cbaumgaertel@bloomberg.net Josh Friedman, Pierre Paulden

Press spacebar to pause and continue. Press esc to stop.

Read the original post:

TPGs Coulter Says Global Health Care Is Best for Deals

Health care and the Obama presidency: a giant squander?

Posted on by

Theres no doubt that, as midterms go, President Obama has not fared well. In 2010, his Democratic Party lost 63 House seats the biggest midterm loss in that chamber since 1938 and with it, control of the House to the Republicans. Although they also lost six Senate seats, Democrats were at least able to retain their majority there. Four years later, however, Democrats lost the Senate, too, when Republicans picked up eight Senate seats in the 2014 midterms with one more still at stake to regain a Senate majority. Republicans also padded their House majority by gaining a dozen more seats (a handful of House races have yet to be decided). The net result is that Obama is facing an opposition-controlled Congress for the last two years of his presidency.

The successive Republican waves are particularly devastating because they swept away what many pundits believed to be a coming period of Democratic electoral dominance. When Obama was elected president in 2008, he appeared to display substantial coattails; Democrats picked up 25 House and eight Senate seats and enjoyed comfortable majorities in both chambers. More importantly, demographic trends suggested the size of the Democratic voting coalition was likely to expand in the coming years. In short, Obamas election was, asone pundit put it at the time, likely to create a new governing majority coalition that could dominate American politics for a generation or more. Instead, the purported realignment lasted a bit less than two years. To borrow one of the catch phrases ofRed Sox radio announcer Joe Castiglione, the Obama presidency has been, politically at least, a giant squander."

But just how big a squander is it, historically speaking? One chart that made the rounds of the twitterversethis week indicates it was a very big squander indeed. It shows that Obamas Democrats have suffered a net loss of 13 Senate and 77 House seats during the two midterms held in his presidency, which ranks as the third worst cumulative midterm-seat loss among modern presidents, behind only FDR and Truman.

But is this really a useful metric? Roosevelt, who suffered the greatest cumulative seat loss, is nonetheless typically ranked as one of the nations three best presidents someone who was the consummate political leader. The problem with using total seat loss as a measuring rod is that presidents like FDR, who enter office with substantial coattails, as indicated by large partisan majorities, and who serve the longest both arguably measures of political skill stand a greater probability of losing more seats. Moreover, looking only at midterms may not be a fair measure of a presidents party leadership, since midterms operate under such unfavorable dynamics to the president. Perhaps a better metric is to assess the proportion of seats a president loses over the course of his presidency inallelections. This is not perfect, of course, because it still penalizes presidents who enter with a substantial governing majority they have greater room to fall but it is probably a better gauge of a presidents political pull than a raw seat count of midterms alone. Middlebury College student Tina Berger calculated that figure for all the modern presidents and summarized the totals in this chart.

Alas, Obama does even worse by this standard among modern presidents only Dwight Eisenhower lost a greater proportion of party seats across his presidency. The Republican Ike, however, presided in the midst of the post-Depression Democratic-dominated era (he was the only Republican president to serve between 1933 and 1969) and he managed to retain his personal popularity even as control of Congress reverted to what might be called its natural partisan state during this New Deal period. Obama, in contrast, has watched his popularity stagnate in the low 40% approval level for the better part of a year and, with Democrats winning four of the last six presidential elections, it can hardly be called a Republican era (Karl Roves McKinley-esque visions notwithstanding.)

To be sure, not all of the blame for Democrats losses can be pinned on Obama. Surely the Partys congressional wing is partly culpable for its dismal showing. Nor should we forget, when judging his political leadership, that Obama won reelection in 2012 and did so while helping Democrats net eight House and two Senate seats. The bottom line, however, is that, in this era of nationalized politics, elections even midyear ones are invariably in large part referendums on the presidents performance. And, at least by this one metric, Obama appears to have come up short.

Where did it all go wrong? Pundits are quick to blame the Presidentsdetached leadership style,but as Ive noted in previous posts, its not clear how muchtemperamentorcharacterreally matters. The fact is that Obama inherited an economic mess and a war on terror two issues that defy easy solutions under the best of political circumstances. Moreover, as David Mayhewpersuasively argues, the American system of separated institutions, each operating according to its own electoral clock and responding to different constituencies, seems to possess a systemic equilibrating tendency that prevents either party from holding onto strong majorities for very long, regardless of the presidents skills. In this respect, Obamas presidency demonstrated a not unexpected reversion to the political mean.

Still, I doubt very many pundits in 2008 predicted the speed and degree to which Obamas governing majorities would dissipate if they predicted dissipation at all. If one were to isolate one primary reason for this speedy partisan erosion, it is probably Obamas decision to pursuehealth care reform,despite strong Republican opposition and lukewarm public support. Along with the economic stimulus bill, health care proved to be the focal point of Republican resistance early in his presidency, and his failure to bring even a single Republican aboard when passing Obamacare cemented the partisan divisions that have come to characterize our national politics, and provided a rallying point for Republicans as they fought to regain partisan control of Congress. This is not to say pursuing health-care reform was a mistake. It is to say that Obama and his Democratic Party paid a steep political price for doing so.

And so I wonder: As he contemplates finishing out his presidency facing two years of an opposition-controlled Congress, and with the fate of his signature piece of legislation now partlyin the hands of the Supreme Court, does the president ever ask himself whether passing health-care reform was really worth it?

Matthew Dickinson publishes his Presidential Power blog at http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/.

See the article here:

Health care and the Obama presidency: a giant squander?

Open enrollment for 2015 health care coverage starts Saturday

Posted on by

Several Quad City Organizations held a press conference Friday, November 14, 2014 to explain how they will be helping residents in the Quad Cities sign up or renew health insurance under the Affordable Care Act.

Saturday, November 15 is the first day of the open enrollment period for 2015 health coverage under the Affordable Care Act. The enrollment period runs through Sunday, February 15.

What we want to get across is that, not only is it important to enroll for insurance if you dont have it, but its also a time when you can compare what you do have to maybe some of the new plans that are coming out to see if somethings more affordable, said Linaka Kain, manager of marketplace exchange for UnityPoint Trinty.

Genesis Health System, UnityPoint Trinity, Community Health Care, The Project, Casa Guanajuato, Progressive Action for the Common Good and Eagle View Health all had representatives at the press conference. All the organizations will also offer in person navigators or certified application counselors to help people sign up for coverage and better understand the Affordable Care Act.

It is important to have health insurance because you, you know, we, were not able to think ahead and know when something is going to happen. So, its best that you take care of yourself and be proactive instead of reactive after somethings happened, said Kain.

In both Iowa and Illinois, people wanting to enroll for health care coverage can use the federal website, healthcare.gov. Illinois residents can also visit getcoveredillinois.gov.

Although the enrollment period runs through February 15, 2015, those who want coverage by January 1, 2015 need to enroll by December 15, 2014. If a person does not enroll for coverage by the February 15, 2015 deadline, they will likely not be able to buy the marketplace health insurance coverage for 2015 until the next enrollment period, according to healthcare.gov.

Those that do not have health insurance during the year 2015, may have to pay a fee. According to healthcare.gov, that fee would be 2% of a persons income or $365 per adult or $162.50 per kid, whichever is more.

If a person was enrolled in a 2014 marketplace plan, that benefit year ends December 31, 2014. To continue the plan in 2015, a person can renew their current health plan or choose a new one through the open enrollment period.

Below are a list of contacts in the Quad Cities who can help with the enrolling process:

See the article here:

Open enrollment for 2015 health care coverage starts Saturday

Salt Lake City to host health care enrollment fairs

Posted on by

Salt Lake City invites the public to learn more about individual, family and small business health insurance options at community health care enrollment fairs beginning next week.

Shutterstock

Enlarge photo

SALT LAKE CITY The public is invited to learn more about individual, family and small business health insurance options at community health care enrollment fairs beginning next week.

The fairs will provide opportunities for enrollment throughout this years Affordable Care Act open enrollment period, Nov. 15-Feb. 15.

Under the Affordable Care Act, most people in the United States must have health coverage in 2015 or pay a fee either 2 percent of income, or $325 per adult and $162.50 per child whichever is higher.

Health navigators will be present at the fairs to provide information about the open enrollment application process and offer enrollment assistance. Bilingual assistants will also be available to help answer any questions.

Federal health insurance marketplace carriers including Arches Health Plan, Altius, BridgeSpan, Humana, Molina and SelectHealth will take part in the free community fairs on Dec. 7 and 14, Jan. 6 and Feb. 4. Utah's Avenue H will also be on hand to answer questions about small business insurance.

Anyone interested in applying for health insurance at the fairs should plan to bring proof of income, Social Security numbers for each individual applying and the date of birth for each person to be covered. If not a U.S. citizen, documentation of legal residency status will be required (such as a green card).

Fairs will be held: Friday, Nov. 21, 3-8 p.m., Sorenson Unity Center, 1383 S. 900 West; Sunday, Dec. 7 and Sunday, Dec. 14, 1-5 p.m. Salt Lake Main Library, Urban Room, 210 E. 400 South; Tuesday, Jan. 6, 5-8 p.m., Horizonte Instruction and Training Center, 1234 S. Main Street; and Wednesday, Feb. 4, 5:30-7 p.m., Rose Park Elementary and Community Learning Center, 1105 W. 1000 North.

View original post here:

Salt Lake City to host health care enrollment fairs

Many U.S. Doctors Wary of Genetic Testing: Survey

Posted on by

By Randy Dotinga HealthDay Reporter

WEDNESDAY, Nov. 12, 2014 (HealthDay News) -- Many American doctors may not support genetic testing in patients without a major family history of certain illnesses, suggests a new survey of physicians.

When presented with the hypothetical case of a middle-aged man with a family history of cancer in an aunt and uncle, more than a third of 180 U.S. doctors surveyed said they wouldn't recommend any genetic testing. Almost half would only recommend testing for cancer genes, and fewer than one in five would recommend whole-genome testing, according to the survey.

The genome is the complete genetic "blueprint" for an individual.

So what's going on? "Most doctors still feel uncomfortable with genetic testing," said Dr. Robert Klitzman, who studies genetic testing and is a professor of psychiatry at Columbia University's Joseph Mailman School of Public Health in New York City.

"Most doctors feel uncomfortable with knowing how to order genetic information, interpret it and counsel patients," explained Klitzman, who was not part of the study.

And even when genetic testing is done, the results may provide plenty of frustrating uncertainty about a patient's future health, he said.

In some cases where potential treatment options are clearer, such as women with histories of breast and ovarian cancer on one side of the family, doctors may be likely to order genetic tests, Klitzman said. Genetic tests can indicate that certain women have much higher risks of breast and ovarian cancers, according to the National Cancer Institute.

The survey asked readers of The New England Journal of Medicine to consider genetic testing in a made-up 45-year-old patient who requested it. The hypothetical man didn't appear to have any significant risks based on his health or family history.

Doctors responded from 77 countries. The responses from the United States were similar overall to those in the rest of the world. Of the 929 respondents, 74 wrote comments and expressed concern about what to tell the patient if testing showed a risk of cancer. Would the patient be stressed out or even be able to do anything? What about cost and the potential for discrimination against the patient based on his medical future?

Here is the original post:

Many U.S. Doctors Wary of Genetic Testing: Survey