CNN Cancels Piers Morgan Live. Is Jay Leno taking that spot?

Piers Morgan

CNN President Jeff Zucker has decided to bring an end to ultra liberal  Piers Morgan's low-rated primetime show, network sources told POLITICO on Sunday. "Piers Morgan Live" could end as early as next month, though Morgan may stay with the network in another role.

Morgan, a former British tabloid editor, replaced Larry King in the 9 p.m. hour three years ago, prior to Zucker's tenure as president. His show earned consistently low ratings, registering as few as 50,000 viewers in the 25-to-54 year-old demographic earlier this week.

Will Jay Leno Replace Piers?

"CNN confirms that Piers Morgan Live is ending," Allison Gollust, head of CNN communications, told POLITICO on Sunday after an earlier version of this post was published. "The date of the final program is still to be determined.

It has been reported that Jeff Zucker has reached out to Jay Leno, prior to his departure on from the Tonight Show about doing a daily show on CNN.  The offer to Jay was said to be quite lucrative.  Jeff Zucker was with NBC and previously was Jay Leno's boss at the network.

In a new all time political low, a congressman, Gary Peters tries to silence a woman with cancer. He also goes after licenses of TV stations that play the woman's story.

While Julie Boonstra of Dexter, Mich., struggles to survive leukemia, she now also has to cope with being called a liar by the Democrat who wants to be her next senator.

And the campaign of Rep. Gary Peters is also going after television stations airing ads in which her story is featured, threatening their licenses.

Congressman Gary Peters Thinks It's Ok To Silence A Woman
Dying of Cancer For Telling Her Obamacare Story

The ad by Americans for Prosperity features Julie Boonstra talking about how her insurance was canceled under Obamacare and saying that Peters' decision to vote for the law "jeopardized my health." The ads are airing in Michigan as Peters seeks the Democratic nomination to replace Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., who is not seeking re-election.

Media organizations investigating the ad's claims note that Boonstra was able to find comparable new insurance under the law; the Washington Post's "Fact Checker" blog gave the ad "two Pinocchios" (as compared to four for President Obama's claim that people could keep their insurance under the law).

***UPDATE: BULLY GARY PETERS DUCKS NEWS INTERVIEW ASKING HIM HIS SIDE OF THE STORY***

But Boonstra, in response, told the local Dexter Leader newspaper that though she has no idea whether she will break even with her new plan, as the fact-checkers claim, the uncertainty of having to restructure her health care while coping with a deadly disease is damage enough.

"People are asking me for the numbers and I don't know those answers -- that's the heartbreak of all of this. It's the uncertainty of not having those numbers that I have an issue with, because I always knew what I was paying and now I don't, and I haven't gone through the tests or seen my specialist yet," she said.

"People don't have that certainty -- they don't have the stability of knowing every month what they're going to be paying now and it's the ability to actually have that sum of money to pay. People don't have these out-of -pocket expense moneys."

Boonstra said she is “surprised” by what she described as the Peters campaign’s strong-arm tactics.

“I’m very surprised,” Boonstra said just hour after she attempted to confront Peter face-to-face at his Bloomfield Hills residence. “I have every right to tell my story and express my point of view and opinion on how Obamacare has effected me.”

Boonstra attempted to confront the congressman at his door, but he did not answer when she knocked.

“I just went up to his house and knocked on his door,” Boonstra recalled. “I would like to meet with him, but he did not answer. I know someone was home, so I left a letter there for him.”

Boonstra wrote in her letter, “I don’t understand why you’re trying to silence my voice. I have every right to speak out and don’t understand why you’re doing this.”

A spokesman for the Peters campaign did not respond to a request for comment on the matter.

“The fact that Representative Peters would sic his legal team on a Michigan mother battling cancer to muzzle her tells you everything you need to know about his record of putting politics over people,” AFP-Michigan State Director Scott Hagerstrom said in a statement.

“This attack on her credibility is disgusting, unwarranted, and inexcusable,” Hagerstrom said. “Congressman Peters and his indecent campaign team should be ashamed of themselves.”

The  following is pretty much established fact:

• Julie Boonstra has leukemia.
• She had a plan that she liked.
• She lost it.
• She doesn’t think that her alternative options are acceptable*.
• But back to the previous point: she was told that she could keep her plan.
• She lost it.
• Gary Peters voted for Obamacare, and Obamacare is the reason why Julie Boonstra lost her plan.

I am uncertain why the Peters campaign thinks that attacking a woman who has leukemia – and make no mistake; they’re calling her a liar in this cease-and-desistletter – will make people like their candidate better.

Gary Peters was sued himself by former rival candidate Rocky Raczkowski in 2010. The suit was over an ad the Raczkowski claimed was filled with lies and misinformation to intentionally mislead voters.

To silence a woman fighting cancer is a new low for any politician. American's For Prosperity was the firm that produced the advertisement but Gary chose not to go after them. Perhaps Gary was to afraid to pick on someone that was in his league?

This slime ball also had the nerve to run outside of the district he lives in to run and steal the congressional representative position from former Congressman Hansen Clarke. Has Gary Peter even worked in his district since becoming Congressman? He almost immediately announced his candidacy for U.S. Senate upon winning the election in 2012.

Government to start investigating newsrooms

A report in the Washington Times says that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is going forward with a plan to look at how newsrooms choose the stories they cover.

From the article, the FCC is quoted as saying that the plan will, "identify and understand the critical information needs of the American public, with special emphasis on vulnerable-disadvantaged populations."

 Starting this Spring, according to FCC Commissioner Ajit Paj, the FCC will begin sending researchers to Columbia, South Carolina. The researchers, according to Paj, will talk to reporters, editors, and station owners about how they select what stories to report on.

The program is called, "Critical Information Needs."

The FCC says the program is voluntary at this time.  But what happens if you don't volunteer??

Big Brother Is Tracking Every Where You Go In Your Automobile.

A very scary and important article was written in the 2/21/14 edition of  The Detroit News.  Who is tracking your travels?  How you Drive?  How often you drive?

Every time a motorist slides in behind the wheel, odds are that car or truck is gathering information: How aggressively the driver accelerated, whether the speed limit was observed, how hard the brake pedal was applied. And beyond driving habits, where and when the car was driven, what route was taken and whether the seat belt was buckled.

 Few laws or regulations address ownership of data collected by infotainment and navigation systems in dashboards and by electronic black boxes under hoods. Auto data privacy is the industry equivalent of the Wild West, according to automotive industry and law experts.

 Should drivers expect information collected by their cars to be private? Can police or other government agencies get their hands on recorded data after a crash to review drivers’ whereabouts if they’re suspected of a crime? What if automakers decided to sell details about driving habits to marketers who want to broadcast targeted ads as motorists run errands?

 These questions come at a time when many Americans are fearful of their privacy in the wake of National Security Agency leaks and the answers are largely unclear.
 One thing is sure: Automakers collect data and they share it, several recently told a Government Accountability Office investigation. And according to the terms of use for many voice-activated and navigation systems, automakers have the right to share that information with marketers or anyone else they might want to.

 Those facts — and the secrecy surrounding what automakers might do with personal information — have alarmed consumer advocates and raised questions within the industry about the future of data collection.

 “The automotive industry needs to think hard about the type of information they want to collect and who they want to pass it on to,” said Thilo Koslowski, a vice president at technology research firm Gartner Inc. “Anything that focuses more on the driver than the vehicle, that’s where consumers won’t find a whole lot of value.”

 Few laws restrict what information can be collected, how long it can be saved and who it can be shared with — whether with private companies or the government.
 The Driver Privacy Act, pending in Washington, pertains only to so-called event data recorders, or “black boxes.” Like the black boxes on commercial aircraft, they save key information — in this instance speed, brake application and seat belt use. The moments leading up to an accident, for example, would be recorded. The recorders cannot, however, transmit data in real time.

 Fourteen states have laws restricting who can access black-box data and how it can be shared, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. California, for instance, says owners of the vehicle can retrieve black box information, but so can law enforcement authorities depending on court jurisdiction. Michigan has no such prohibitions. And no states prohibit police from accessing information after a crash.

 President Barack Obama in 2012 introduced a White House Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights that outlines a set of common privacy practices for multiple industries, including automotive. But on the eve of its second birthday, the blueprint hasn’t gained traction with lawmakers.

 Ford Motor Co. chief executive Alan Mulally has called on the federal government to provide guidance on consumer privacy. “It’s really important that we have boundaries and guidelines,” he said at the Detroit auto show last month.

 Ford recently received a patent for targeted in-car advertisements: Cars would collect data, including location, to decide which ads to broadcast to each driver. Other automakers are looking at similar features.

 Some studies suggest a majority of consumers would accept microtargeted ads, but Koslowski said motorists might consider such targeted advertising more invasive than helpful. “If the marketing angle was that interesting, Google would have been there 10 years ago,” he said.

 High Court's stance unclear

The U.S. Supreme Court has indicated it isn’t sure how it would rule in some cases involving automotive privacy.

 In the 2012 case United States v. Jones, the court found that long-term attachment of a GPS by the government to a private citizen’s vehicle constitutes a search under the Fourth Amendment. Justice Samuel Alito wrote that “even if the public does not welcome the diminution of privacy that new technology entails, they may eventually reconcile themselves to this development as inevitable.”

 Data collection for infotainment, voice-activated or navigation systems is outlined in written terms agreed to by consumers before they use a voice-activated, navigation or infotainment system. Those agreements are often filled with dense legal jargon. Most motorists click “yes” without reading.

 Some public interest groups such as the Washington-based Electronic Privacy Information Center are calling for federal legislation to make those contracts consumer friendly; drivers would decide exactly what data could be shared.

 “None of this data collection should be turned on as default, especially when they are collecting so much information,” said Khaliah Barnes, administrative law counsel at the center.

 Until the rules become clearer, motorists could unknowingly share personal information or have their own data used against them in court.

 “These are still corporations and this information is still going to be worth a lot of money to various people,” said attorney Steven Gursten, owner at Michigan Auto Law and president of the Motor Vehicle Trial Lawyers Association. “We are depending on the good citizenship of nameless people in giant corporations to keep our info private.”

Read more from The Detroit News: 

NekNominate A New Drinking Game That Has Killed 5

A new social media drinking craze called is being blamed for at least five deaths.

The game, known as Neknominate, is thought to have originated in Australia and is now sweeping the world. It involves you filming yourself downing a drink -- often alcoholic and of large quantities -- and then nominating a friend to outdo you. All this is posted on social media -- be it Facebook or YouTube.

But what started for some as fun has turned deadly; at least five men aged under 30 have died after drinking deadly cocktails. Now health professionals are warning young people of the risks of consuming large amounts of alcohol in a short time

The rules: Record a video of yourself drinking as much alcohol as possible, in the shortest amount of time possible. Next, nominate or dare your social media friends to outdo you.

Some are criticizing Facebook for not taking down the videos

Arizona Senate OKs bill that protects one's religious beliefs

The Arizona Senate has passed a Republican-backed bill that expands the rights of people to assert their religious beliefs in refusing service to gays and others.

Democrats and civil rights groups opposed the bill being pushed by social conservatives, saying it would allow discriminatory actions by businesses.

But GOP Sen. Steve Yarbrough of Chandler says his push was prompted by a New Mexico case where the state Supreme Court allowed a gay couple to sue a photographer who refused to take pictures of their wedding. He says he's protecting religious rights.

The 33-27 vote by the House sends the legislation to Republican Gov. Jan Brewer and puts Arizona back at the forefront of a polarizing piece of legislation four years after the state enacted an immigration crackdown that caused a national furor.

Similar religious protection legislation has been introduced in Ohio, Mississippi, Idaho, South Dakota, Tennessee and Oklahoma, but Arizona's plan is the only one that has passed to date.

Democrats sponsored eight hostile amendments during Wednesday's debate that were rejected by Republicans who control the Senate.

A similar bill is making its way through the House.

Fourth Georgia hospital closes due to Obamacare payment cuts

More "unexpected" consequences of ‪ObamaCare?

"The federal government has historically made payments to hospitals to cover the cost of uninsured patients seeking free medical care in emergency rooms, as federal law mandates that hospitals must care for all patients regardless of their ability to pay.

Because the Affordable Care Act’s authors believed they’d forced all states to implement the Medicaid expansion, Obamacare vastly cut hospital payments, the Associated Press reports."

In the Supreme Court decision that upheld the ‪#‎ACA as constitutional, the ability for the feds to make the states expand their Medicaid programs was struck down. Now, with the government no longer fully bailing out the uninsured who seek their care from hospital ERs, many hospitals are being forced to close their doors, as they are still required to treat everyone that comes in, regardless of their ability to pay.

The Lower Oconee Community Hospital is, for now, a critical access hospital in southeastern Georgia that holds 25 beds. The hospital is suffering from serious cash-flow problems, largely due to the area’s 23 percent uninsured population, and hopes to reopen as “some kind of urgent care center,” CEO Karen O’Neal

We MUST hold those Democrats who voted for ObamaCare accountable this fall for passing this mess without reading it... it's a national disgrace.