RSS

Monthly Archives: May 2015

Liberal Media’s Anti-Mike Huckabee Smear Campaign Distorts Past Alleged Endorsements of Cancer and Diabetes Cure

The liberal media machine has nothing politically relevant or important to exploit and spin to demonize Mike Huckabee, following his announced intentions to seek the GOP nomination for the 2016 United States presidential race, that it has attempted to accomplish the same feat by using his ties to alleged cures for cancer and diabetes. As usual, liberals have distorted the facts.

The liberal media actually first used these connections in January, 2015, when it widely claimed Huckabee was selling a Biblically-based cancer cure, the Matthew 4 Protocol. This has always been simply a tall tale because he never sold or had anything directly to do with the selling of any such “cure;” rather has been Brian Chambers and Dr. Mark Stengler hawking the supposed cancer cure to addresses on Huckabee’s email list, to which they acquired access from the presidential hopeful’s practice of leasing it out to third parties, who use it to pitch their products, sometimes even using Huckabee’s letter head. To put it simple, neither Huckabee nor his company are affiliated with or endorse, directly or indirectly, Chambers, Stengler or their product. Huckabee recently defended this practice, in an interview with Jake Tapper on CNN, saying he does not directly rent his list out but delegates that responsibility to employees running that aspect of his company and that it may be leased to individuals or companies whose products he or his business do not endorse, much like CNN likely sells advertisement space for products it or its employees may not use or support, pointing to examples of “catheters or adult diapers.” Tapper accused Huckabee of making a “false equivalence” by comparing legitimate “medical devices” to what “a lot of people would consider to be hucksterism in terms of Bible verses curing cancer.” Of course the Biblical cancer cure is a scam but I do agree with Huckabee on the two latter points he makes. He is an equal opportunity business man renting his email list to anyone willing to pay his price and he is not responsible for what these third parties do with it, much like, say, a car rental company is not responsible for what customers do with their vehicles. I also do not believe he is manufacturing a “false equivalence.” While what is going on in these emails may be “hucksterism,” it is no different than what most advertisers do daily, including those promoting legitimate medical devices or medication that you see on any mainstream network. Many studies, like in the New England Journal of Medicine, for example, warn of the dangers of direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertisements of pharmaceuticals and medical devices because the information they provide often misleading and confuses the viewer but simultaneously stimulate demand for those products. This is not to defend the emails but to point out that attacks on him for allowing them are unfair and hypocritical.

To hold Huckabee accountable for what these third parties unaffiliated with him promote is, then, wrong and pointless. The real problem that should be addressed is that private information is being leased out in the first place, but unfortunately it has mostly escaped the media’s radar.  Although not illegal, it is unethical, and I agree with both conservatives and liberals who have condemned this practice; but let us be frank, the sole reason most liberals have castigated him on this latter issue is because he is a member of the Opposition, and this is proven every time they defend or fail to call out their comrades for doing the exact same things for which they hold others to account. For example, Democrat  Andrew Cuomo “rented” his email list out to HarperCollins to promote his book and Obama allowed access to his email list, containing 13-million addresses, to Organizing for America, who then used it to advertise merchandise, like Obama coffee mugs and scarves; both of these incidents went virtually unnoticed by the liberal media, Democrats and their supporters.

Liberals are now furthering this assault by targeting Huckabee’s endorsement of a supposed dubious, ineffective, pseudo-scientific $20 “cure” for diabetes called “Diabetes Reversed” (aka Diabetes Solution Kit). While it is true that he has commended this product, it is false to say it is touted as a cure. Rather, it prescribes a wholesale lifestyle and dietary change, or as Huckabee calls them “(t)echniques,” that can “significantly reduce your diabetes symptoms,” including “substituting healthy foods to replace unhealthy foods, or healthy lifestyle habits to replace unhealthy habits.” In other words, it focuses on ways to take better care of yourself, which Huckabee freely admits is how he lost 100 pounds. Such recommendations are not pseudo-scientific; proper changes to lifestyle and diet have been proven effective in preventing, managing and even reversing diabetes, and are among the first steps patients are advised to undertake to deal with their diabetic or pre-diabetic conditions by responsible, competent physicians and relevant organizations.

It appears, however, that the main issue with Huckabee attackers regarding this product is its endorsement of dietary supplements to manage diabetes, like cinnamon and chromium picolinate, which certain medical organizations, including the American Diabetes Association, do not believe work and thus do not recommend. It should be noted that it is only because these supplements have not been “conclusively demonstrated” effective that they are not sanctioned by organizations like the ADA. Numerous studies show certain supplements, including cinnamon (for example, 1, 2, 3) and chromium picolinate (for example, 1, 2, 3, 4) may be beneficial for certain diabetic conditions. Simply because these results are not conclusive does not mean they should not be tried, perhaps as a first step, particularly for less serious diabetic cases and conditions, and integrated as part of a wider treatment program that includes conventional medication, dietary and lifestyle changes. In fact, Huckabee admits, “dietary supplements” are only “(o)ne of the elements of the plan…(b)ut it’s not the fundamental thing.” These supplements have few to no side effects so if they work then they are much safer alternatives to traditional medications for diabetes, many of which have been shown to have a number of potentially life-threatening side effects. For example, rosiglitazone (Avandia), has been “associated with a significant increase in the risk of myocardial infarction and with an increase in the risk of death from cardiovascular causes that had borderline significance.” Even artificial sweeteners commonly used by diabetics have been shown to potentially have negative side effects, including, ironically, contributing to type II diabetes. However, organizations like the ADA have no issue with prescribing such medications and sweeteners.

Ultimately, this is a smear campaign by liberals misrepresenting, distorting and fabricating details of alleged past product pitches and endorsements that are completely irrelevant to Huckabee’s political platform or his ability as president. It is a desperate attempt by liberals, who were humiliated in the 2014 midterms, to discredit  someone they realize is a serious contender for the  2016 presidential race.

 
1 Comment

Posted by on May 13, 2015 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Florida Couple Face 15 Years in Prison for Sex on the Beach…or Maybe Not

The Young Turks recently claimed that Jose Caballero, 40, and Elissa Alvarez, 20 have been sentenced to 15 years in prison following their Monday May 4, 2015 convictions on two counts each of lewd and lascivious acts for having sex on a public beach in Bradenton Beach, Florida on July 20, 2014. The TYT “army,” comprised mostly of group-thinking militant liberals and atheists, predictably turned this case into a platform from which to propagandize their paranoid anti-conservative, anti-religion demagoguery and lies. According to them, the penalty is excessive, and it is so because of the domination of Christian-conservative fundamentalism in Florida’s political and legal systems; a fundamentalism so puritanically anti-sex even the most innocuous public exhibitions of sex and sexuality are harshly and unreasonably punished. So extreme is the paranoia, demagoguery and lies exhibited by some of these liberals and atheists that they compare the punishment, and, for some, even the making of public sex illegal itself, to the ideology of terrorist organizations, like the Taliban and Al Qaeda, and fundamentalist, Middle Eastern countries. One TYT fan called the southeastern State, for example, “Saudi Florida.” No justification is provided for these analogies, and there is none that can be offered; they are faulty comparisons merely made either for their emotional appeal or because their originators are delusional and hysterical enough to believe them. If Florida was even remotely close to what they allege, the disgusting public displays of sexual depravity exhibited in the State during events like Spring Break and Gay Pride would not be allowed and transgressors would be severely punished. Notice too that it is only religious terrorists and theocracies that atheists and liberals use as the standard for these juxtapositions, not atheist terrorists, like the Tamil Tigers, or state atheist “utopias,” like China and North Korea, where punishments for the same or lesser offenses are just as harsh or worse. Of course not! To them it is only religion that “poisons everything” and is “the root of all evil” whereas atheism is the realization of Shangri-la. Well one such atheist Promised Land is North Korea, which punishes lewd behavior with a trip to a labor camp with intense work requirements, daily beatings, physical punishments, harsh living conditions, usually “with 300 to 400 people sleeping crowded into one room,” and such a lack of food that inmates feed off such things as rats and grass. At first, however, I too believed the potential punishment for this couple to be excessive for what appears to be a victimless, nonviolent offense that could be handled under public nuisance laws carrying a much lighter sentence, often simply a fine, and thus I began to investigate why they were tried under a stricter statute. As I became aware of the context of the charges, I began to endorse the punishment.

As usual, the Young Turks got their facts wrong, and a quick fact check proved that the couple have not yet been sentenced but that 15 years is only the maximum penalty for these individuals’ indiscretion under the statute under which they were prosecuted. The couple are not facing this punishment because of some ideological or religious domination in Floridian law but because their sex act was witnessed by a 3 year old girl thus making them subject to statute 800.04, which governs the prosecution and punishment of a number of “(l)ewd or lascivious offenses committed upon or in the presence of persons less than 16 years of age,” including sexual assault and battery, sexual coercion, sexual molestation and statutory rape. In other words, their offense is covered by a law aiming to protect children, and punish a host of minor and serious sex crimes against or in the presence of them. Perhaps those complaining about the alleged “severity” of the potential penalties are unaware that this is why the maximum sentences are what they are, or maybe they still do not believe such sexual violations and corruption of minors are serious crimes, or crimes at all. Unless, of course, it is committed by religious people and religious authorities. Then they become great crimes to these people; not out of concern for the children, mind you, but because such violations can be exploited to attack religion, religious people and religious institutions. If these liberals and atheists truly want to protect children from sexual crimes, corruption and exploitation then they will want all such malfeasance punished regardless of who or what the culprit is, and they will see this law for what it is – ideologically and religiously neutral. They do not have to support the maximum penalty in this particular case but they must accept that it is being applied solely because it is the applicable statute and not for any ideological or religious motive. It is that simple!

Had a child not been present, these individuals would likely have been tried under a statute carrying lighter penalties, like 877.03, which deals with disorderly conduct and carries a maximum of  “60 days in jail or 6 months of probation, and a $500.00 fine.” Because 800.04 includes such serious transgressions, though, the maximum sentences must be strong enough to punish, and hopefully deter, them effectively. Thus, for those who are convicted but under 18 years of age, the sentence is a minimum prison sentence of 24.5 months and, at the judge’s discretion, a maximum of 5 years in prison, 5 years of sex offender probation and or $5,000 in fines. For those over 18, the maximum punishment is 15 years in prison, 15 years of sex offender probation and/or $10,000 in fines. Unless certain criteria for exemption is met, those convicted must also register as a sex offender. Remember these are maximum penalties that not all crimes will receive. The punishment is to be proportional to the crime. Two consenting adults having sex in public is certainly not as detrimental and serious as other crimes covered by this law, and nobody involved has claimed it to be, and thus violators would normally probably receive a lighter sentence. State Attorney Ed Brodsky explicitly says “It was never our intention to seek 15 years for either of them…That’s not a reasonable sentence.”

In fact, Florida never wanted to prosecute this case and instead offered the defendants plea deals sentencing Caballero’s to prison for 2.5 years and Alvarez to jail for 90 days, and excluding them from the sex offenders registry. Both these deals were rejected by the defendants. Some in the media say that even under these  deals the punishment is worse than that meted out in some fundamentalist Middle Eastern countries. Buzzfeed, for example, argues that Caballero’s deal was “notably more severe than the maximum two-year prison sentence for a similar offense in the United Arab Emirates, where a British couple were sentenced to three months in prison (though deported before serving any time) for indecent behavior on a beach in 2008.” Notice the lack of context in that statement as it doesn’t state that Caballero would have received a longer sentence not because of his sexual indiscretions but because this is his second felony in less than 3 years after being released from prison,  where he had spent 8 years for cocaine trafficking. For this same reason, the State is allegedly now pushing for Caballero to receive the maximum 15 years in prison (although some reports say it not pursuing this sentence); a lesser punishment for Alvarez is being pursued, which may or may not involve jail time. Both will be registered as sex offenders. Funny how these details are ignored by those whining that the couple is being “harshly” punished merely for having public sex because of Florida’s alleged theocracy. The mainstream media has not helped the matter because it has preferred sensationalizing the prospective sentence while omitting or glossing over the context of the case, as I have in this blog.

Public sex is detrimental enough to contribute to the corruption of public morals, to “outrage the sense of public decency” and to “affect the peace and quiet of persons,” all of which are dealt with under statute 877.03. Had a child not witnessed this act, a lesser charge likely would have been pursued by the State. As it is, a child was present and thus prosecution under 800.04 is right! Having rejected the plea deals, which I believe were fair, I fully endorse Caballero receiving the maximum punishment, because he is a repeat offender, and Alvarez receiving jail time and perhaps a fine. These 2 have made their bed and must now lie in it.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on May 13, 2015 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,