"The Interview" Conspiracy Theory

Am I the only person who thinks that Sony "hacked" itself?

How can you take an otherwise bland comedy about a reclusive third-world country and turn it into an international "I've-gotta-see-it" sensation? I think the facts speak for themselves.

1. Does North Korea really have the infrastructure to launch a hack?
2. How else can you get the President of the United States to endorse a movie?
3. How can you get the FBI to finger the object of the movie?
4. Can you get the theaters where it was to be debuted on Christmas Day to pull it from their screens?
5. Rehash the movie in the media over-and-over again, by playing the blame game.
6. Decide to release the movie AGAIN in theaters, but, also, let's add an online release, through Google's YouTube and Apple's iTunes.

As I write this blog, I am on the verge of watching the movie online. Would I have watched the movie in theaters, otherwise?

Lord, no! I just don't watch movies in theaters. But I'm sort of interested in seeing what this movie is about, but not so much as I'd grace the doors of a who's-that-getting-a-blowjob-down-front, sticky, icky movie house.

Perhaps, Sony is testing the waters of the "at-home" audience for future reference.

I may be wrong, but I smell an international I Love Lucy-worthy publicity stunt! (That may just be working on me.)

Mirvaso Topical Gel, Part 4

Last week, was the "healing week." On Monday, I experienced another embarrassing flare-up on my cheeks, but it was short lived, compared to the previous episode of flushing. Monday was my last visit from the complete face redness.

Last week, I did notice that my face is very dry. My skin is sensitive and I have been using products to correct that issue. As of this posting, my face feels rather normal compared to where I was at last week. Before, I had pain, then stinging, and now all of that has subsided. I think once the dryness is alleviated, then my red-face will be done. I'll see where I am at in the coming weeks.

I have done research online and noticed there are few resources about Mirvaso and Onreltea. I did see the big, red banana in a Mirvaso commercial posted on YouTube. Yes, that was my face after using Mirvaso! Geez!

I would be interested in receiving comments from other people who have used it and are experiencing positive results from its application. I want to use it and have the beneficial results remain. I am tempted to try it again over my Christmas holiday break, but I am not so sure. Perhaps, if I used moisturizers with it to abet the dry skin. Also, I wonder if using a single pea-size on my face would alleviate the extreme reaction?

It's under consideration! Until then, enjoy the red banana. Ha! Ha! It looks wrong!

Mirvaso Topical Gel, Part 3

Okay, today has been extremely better! My skin didn't have a major meltdown today. The only redness I have noticed is in the last hour. It is on my right cheek next to my nose. Instead of heat, it is mildly warm and it has a tingly sensation, which is new.

I was thinking last night, after my last post, that it is interesting that my forehead and chin never displayed the same symptoms of the skin on my nose and cheeks. Both forehead and chin received a pea-sized application of Mirvaso. When I was having my 10 hour reaction, those parts of my face returned to their regular skin tone and color. It's too bad that my cheeks and nose didn't follow suit; otherwise, I could have continued on the Mirvaso treatment.

Hopefully, tomorrow I will be asymptomatic!

Mirvaso Topical Gel, Part 2

It has now been 3 days since I last applied Mirvaso to my skin. As I outlined in my previous blog, my dermatologist prescribed Mirvaso for rosacea. Unfortunately, for my skin, it did the exact opposite. It works well when applied, but after about 10 hours it loses its effectiveness. At that point, I say hello to the redness.

Today, you would think, would be a normal day. It was not. Today was a bad day for my skin. After my lunch, my face began its transition from its everyday appearance into its new red version. It started with my nose. I didn't realize it was happening at the time. Someone commented that my nose looked really red! I looked in the mirror and I could have been Rudolph's twin nosed brother. It was glowing, and yes, I mean glowing! My nose has never done that before. Then, if that wasn't bad enough, it began to spread to my cheeks. My nose turned to its normal color as my cheeks lit up. By the end of the work day, I was no longer Rudolph, but Bashful, from the Seven Dwarfs. (To tell you the truth, I think I had bashful beat, because my cheeks were rocking a full flush.)

Yes, people laughed at me. I heard comments like "Are you feeling bad?" "Do you have a fever?" "Ohmygosh, what is wrong with you?!" I was almost tempted to put the gel on my face to get the redness gone, but I resisted the temptation, and accepted the unsolicited ridicule that it brought.

So, it wasn't awkward at all. Thanks, Mirvaso.

As I write this entry, My nose is red, my jaw-line on the right side of my face is scarlet, but the middle of my cheek is pale white. It would make the birthmark on Mikhail Gorbachev's head jealous. If someone saw me right now, they would think I am a burn victim. My left cheek is its normal color at this time. It's cool to the touch, and the right is burning up. Is that normal?

I am thankful that it is the weekend. It is my sincerest hope that it will subside shortly. I don't know why the effects of this medication are lasting so long. I would have thought it would wear off by now. My body is on overdrive, it would seem. I'm not sure if this is an allergic reaction or just a symptom of withdrawal. I was just on the stuff for about a week! It's a topical gel, not cocaine. I think the FDA has a website for reporting adverse drug reactions. I may go there, because people need to know this stuff isn't benign. I'm sure many people use it without a reaction, but I'm in the minority (as usual).

As for pictures, I will probably take some for my dermatologist so she can have a reference for what I am currently going through. If it isn't better by Monday, I will have to call or go back to the dermatologist's office, because I can't function in this condition.

I think Galderma markets this drug as Onreltea in Canada.

Mirvaso Topical Gel

My dermatologist recently prescribed a medication, Mirvaso, for the treatment of facial erythema, which is better known as rosacea. I am of northern European ancestry, which means that my skin is quite light and prone to redness around my nose, forehead, and chin. I was very excited when my dermatologist suggested this medication, because my face is never a single color. There are usually red blotches, which range in size.

After my first application of this gel, I was able to see an evenness in my skin tone. The redness was gone and my skin looked smooth as if I were wearing foundation. It was a truly exciting time for me!

Galderma Laboratories, which manufactures Mirvaso, suggests that a pea-size amount be applied to the forehead, nose, each cheek, and the chin. Of course, you work the gel into your skin. My skin quickly absorbed the gel, which I liked.

As I said before, my skin usually exhibits signs of redness, but it's not readily noticeable to other people. I don't have the jolly cheeks of Santa Claus...until now. That's right. The drug, brimonidine, wears off after about ten hours. It's not that my skin simply goes back to the way it was before I applied the medication. Instead, my skin went bright red. In fact, my cheeks looked almost purple! And the unsightliness of my appearance wasn't enough. It literally hurt. My cheeks, especially, felt as if they were on fire. I was at the point where I was applying the gel twice a day to keep the redness and pain under control.

After a week of regular use, I have quit this medication, because of the side effects. Unfortunately, I am still experiencing the side effects. After almost 48 hours of being Mirvaso free, my skin is still prone to breaking out in random, fiery redness. I am using cold compresses and ibuprofen to counteract the effects of the medication. As I write this, my face looks fairly normalized in appearance. My skin has a "just got back from the beach" look to it. Happily, the pain is gone.

I hope that my skin will return to its "old ways" in the next 24 hours. I can handle that!

My suggestion for using Mirvaso is to make sure that you suffer from severe facial erythema. If not, I would not recommend using this medication. It is certainly meant for people who have heavy duty skin redness, and not for casual use.

Ebola's impact on American healthcare

Out of curiosity: if I travel to western Africa, and subsequently contract Ebola, will Humana PPO pay for me to be airlifted by private air ambulance, with my own uniquely trained medical team and specialized medical equipment, to the United States?

How much is the co-pay? $125? My insurance card is sort of vague on that issue.

I'm thinking I may call Humana to find out. Hmmm.

Let's sue the President

Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner (pronounced "boner") has announced a plan to ask the United States House of Representatives to file a lawsuit against the President, which would require him to enforce, protect, and defend the Constitution.

Isn't that a noble concept?

Just days after the Fourth of July, such an action would be suggested against the Executive Branch. I find this idea ludicrous at best. How can a house of Congress sue the President to perform his duties? I think in a counter-suit, the President would sue the House of Representatives to conduct itself, through a constitutional manner, to create laws, rather than sit on its collective thumb and do nothing.

Perhaps, the only legal remedy available to the Speaker is found in Article II, Section 4, of the United States Constitution, which allows the House of Representatives to lay charges of impeachment against the President for treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

Accordingly, can the House of Representatives lay a charge for impeachment against the President for enacting executive orders, which is at the heart of this squabble? The President is the head of the Executive Branch of government, which contains many, many organs (yes, I'll use an old communist term here) that allow it to operate. The President has constitutional power to execute the laws of the United States, through the enactment of executive orders. (No, there is no clause that allows for executive orders in the Constitution itself. Executive orders are implied rather than explicit.) For example, President Obama issued an executive order raising the federal minimum wage for its employees. Seemingly that is within the purview of the President, since the executive order only impacts those organs--or parts--that are within the executive's sphere of influence (a Cold War reference, yes). Does such an order maintain that the states must now raise their minimum wage?

No.

Does that mean Hobby Lobby must now raise its minimum wage to offset the cost of birth control pills and Plan B for its female employees?

No. (It's in the Bible! No, don't look it up.)

So, who can help in such a quagmire?

Let's look to the Judicial Branch, through the Constitution's well-crafted plan of Checks-and-Balances. Outside of impeachment, the only remedy for Speaker Boehner's complain can be found in the courts; however, which court has original jurisdiction over such a suit? Will the Speaker, along with a throng of Republicans, file suit in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia? Or like Bush v. Gore (2000), will the case go directly to the Supreme Court of the United States for adjudication?

When it's all said and done (if it ever gains traction), I believe that the courts will find that the only recourse for action in such a case is within Article II, Section 4, of the Constitution of the United States. Previously, the Supreme Court of the United States has determined that the language of the Constitution is quite sufficient and clear in such a case. Inasmuch, Nixon v. USA (1993), the Supreme Court found that it has no judicial review of impeachment proceedings or outcomes, as such proceedings are the "sole" charge of Congress.

In other words, draft articles of impeachment, or hush!

Hitler in Crimea

Hillary Clinton referred to Russian President Vladimir Putin's recent incursion into Crimea (which is part of Ukraine) to protect Russian minorities as being akin to Adolf Hitler's wolf-in-sheep's clothing declaration of protecting German minorities in Austria, Czechoslovakia, and Poland, during the dawn of World War II.

I don't think Hillary Clinton was calling Putin--himself--Adolf Hitler; she was simply stating that his tactics are similar. We can already see that what she said is true. The Crimean parliament has voted to secede from Ukraine and join Russia. It will put the matter before the people of Crimea in the next ten days.

Secretary Clinton also used an interesting phrase in her speech, in which she stated that President Putin did not simply want to solidify Russia, but he wants something more grand. He is looking to "re-Sovietize" the Russian frontier. Perhaps after bringing Ukraine to heel, he will work on the other former Soviet states. Who's next? Georgia? Armenia? Certainly, they contain Russian minority groups worthy of Mother Russia's very firm protection.

Silly Canadian, you can't be President!

Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX), and Canadian born citizen, thinks he can be president of the United States.

Cruz, who is a Tea Party wunderkind, is slated to be one of the top Republican picks for 2016. I truly wonder how the Tea Party could in all clear conscience put forth a candidate who was clearly not born in the United States?

His father was born in Cuba and his mother was born in Delaware, which is his only claim to American citizenship. I'm sure, however, that Article I, Section 1 of the United States Constitution, says only "a natural born citizen" can be considered for Executive. The only other way I can see Ted Cruz being legitimate is if he were living in the United States prior to September 17, 1787. And, with that said, I'm pretty sure I haven't seen his name in the Guinness Book of World Records as the world's oldest living man.

So, Tea Party members, don't be hypocritical. You raked Barack Obama over the coals for being a black man born in Hawaii. How can you put forward an individual who was clearly not born in the United States?

It's remarkably insane! Gracious!

Hillary for President

I was reading an article on Yahoo! extolling the cautious virtues of declaring a political party front-runner in the modern age of presidential elections, when it dawned on me that Hillary must be really putting the screws to Republicans and to Democrats!

If we could go back in time to 2008, with the knowledge we have today (yes, I know, 20/20 hindsight), I know we would have elected Hillary as president. Barack Obama would have continued as the junior senator from Illinois, and America would have been a much better place because of it!

I'm back up and running for Hillary Clinton for president!

Hillary 2016

The Celebrity Trend

It would seem that in order to be a successful celebrity in the United States, you must be a terrible human being.

For a pittance of $2,500 I can have my armed security (including my father) seal off a Florida neighborhood, hold its residents hostage, and drag race my Lamborghini (or was it a Ferrari, I forget?) through their streets, while intoxicated on alcohol, marijuana and prescription drugs (that my mother helped procure).

After Justin Bieber did it and got out of jail for $2,500, I think other celebrities should follow his example. That much money, in terms of a bond, is a joke to someone with millions of dollars at their disposal.

A slap on the wrist? Hardly! I think it would be a blip that would barely register on his radar.

A $250,000 bond may have been a slap on the wrist. A $2.5 million bond would have truly slowed things down. As the judge, I would have taken into account every person's life and liberty, who lives in that neighborhood, when assigning Bieber's bond amount.

Justice is equitable, not equal. In other words, what is fair to me may not be fair to you. $2,500 is a large sum for the average person. In that case, equal justice would demand that Bieber pay $2,500. But, at the same time, if justice is equitable to the individual, by holding him or her to account for his or her actions, then in this case $2,500 hardly seems justifiable.