--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
The Senate voted 96 to 3 Thursday to prohibit members of Congress from
using non-public information for personal financial gain but beat back
a slew of amendments to further limit congressional perks.
The Senate action puts pressure on House Republicans to pass similar
legislation to quell allegations of congressional self-dealing at a
time when Congress's approval rating is at an all-time low.
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) on Tuesday criticized the
Senate legislation as weak. His staff said he would move a
strengthened version of the bill to the House floor at the end of the
month.
Senators voted for an amendment Thursday to expand the legislation's
reporting requirements to members of the executive branch.
The legislation would mandate that lawmakers report all major
transactions within 30 days and file financial disclosure reports
electronically.
But lawmakers defeated several proposals to significantly reform the
perks and powers critics charge have a corrupting influence on Capitol
Hill.
Senators voted down a bipartisan proposal to permanently ban earmarks
as well as an amendment to require lawmakers and senior staff to
divest of stocks or put their stock holdings in blind trusts.
The amendment sponsored by Sens. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) and Pat
Toomey (R-Pa.) to permanently ban earmarks failed by a vote of 40-59.
A solid block of Republicans, including Sens. Lamar Alexander (Tenn.),
Roy Blunt (Mo.), Thad Cochran (Miss.), Susan Collins (Maine), John
Hoeven (N.D.), Kay Bailey Hutchison (Texas), James Inhofe (Okla.),
Dick Lugar (Ind.), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), Pat Roberts (Kan.), Jeff
Sessions (Ala.), Richard Shelby (Ala.) and Roger Wicker (Miss.), voted
to preserve Congress's future power to earmark federal funds.
The amendment sponsored by Sens. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and Jeff
Merkley (D-Ore.) requiring lawmakers and senior staff to divest of
stocks lost 26 to 73.
Senate leaders denied Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) a vote on an amendment to
deny federal pensions to lawmakers who become lobbyists.
The anti-lobbying amendment raised the hackles of some senior
lawmakers, including those planning to retire at the end of this year.
Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), who will leave the Senate at the end of the
112th Congress, called the proposal "foolish."
"Why should someone who has worked and accumulated some equity and is
investing that in American businesses no longer be able to do that
when they're elected to public office?" he said Wednesday.
Leaders also denied a vote on an amendment sponsored by Sens. Michael
Bennet (D-Colo.) and Jon Tester (D-Mo.) to permanently bar lawmakers
from becoming lobbyists and restrict former staff from lobbying their
old bosses in Congress for a period of six years.
Senators defeated another amendment sponsored by Paul to prohibit
executive branch appointees and staff from having oversight,
rule-making, and loan- or grant-making authority over companies in
which they or their spouses have significant financial interest.
The amendment was designed to guard against the alleged improprieties
stemming from the bankruptcy of Solyndra, a solar-panel manufacturer
that received more than $500 million in federal loan guarantees.
A senior Senate Republican aide said GOP candidates would attack
Democratic incumbents who voted against the so-called Solyndra
amendment.
"Any Democrats who vote against this will face a bomb in the fall,"
said the aide.
Brown, Tester and Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) voted against the amendment.
The Senate also rejected a resolution sponsored by Sen. Jim DeMint
(R-S.C.) calling for a constitutional amendment to impose term limits
on members of Congress.
But the underlying proposal to ban lawmakers from using private
information they learn in the course of their duties to profit from
stock trades or other transactions received broad bipartisan support.
"We tried to focus at the specific task at hand, closing loopholes to
ensure that members of Congress play by the exact same rules as
everyone else," said Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), a sponsor of
the legislation.
"This sorely-needed bill will establish for the first time a clear
fiduciary responsibility to the people we serve, removing any doubt
that the [Securities and Exchange Commission] and [Commodities Futures
Trading Commission] are empowered to investigate and prosecute cases
involving insider trading of non-public information that we have
access to through our jobs," she said.
Only three senators voted against final passage: Sens. Tom Coburn
(R-Okla.), Richard Burr (R-N.C.) and Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.).
--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy
--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
Romney gaffes alarm GOP
By Cameron Joseph - 02/02/12 08:20 PM ET
Congressional Republicans are worried Mitt Romney's propensity for
verbal gaffes will hurt him in the fall.
The former Massachusetts governor has had a series of foot-in-mouth
moments that have set off alarm bells for the GOP and brought on
gleeful attacks from Democrats.
The latest came the morning after his decisive win in Florida's
primary, when he told CNN he's "not concerned about the very poor."
Republicans say the normally disciplined Romney needs to get back on
message, and avoid handing Democrats sound bites that can be used in
attack ads in the general election.
"When you know that the media is against you to start with, which is
the case with Romney and [Newt] Gingrich, you have to be extremely
careful that you don't give them a phrase that can go on a bumper
sticker," said one Republican congressman who asked for anonymity in
order to speak freely.
Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.), who has endorsed Gingrich but said he
liked Romney as well, said the former governor should be more careful
about his choice of words going forward.
"Mr. Romney, unfortunately and through no fault of his own whatsoever,
is almost the ideal caricature for the 'divide America' strategy of
Barack Obama. It's going to be important for him to be aware of that,"
Franks said. "Mr. Obama's strategy is an insidious one, and
unfortunately historically effective. My only admonition to Mr. Romney
is to be aware of it and to be cautious [that] what he says doesn't
play into that."
RELATED ARTICLES
Romney: I 'misspoke' on comments about poor
Romney downplays Trump endorsement
Romney's campaign, which did not respond to a request to comment for
this story, has argued its candidate's words were taken out of context
and, on the whole, people understood his meaning.
With his comments on the poor, Romney was arguing it's the middle
class that needs the most attention in the tough economy, but it was
the phrasing that gave people pause: "I'm not concerned about the very
poor that have the safety net, but if it has holes in it, I will
repair them," he said.
That brought to mind another slip-up last month, when he said he
"liked to be able to fire people." He was speaking about how people
should have the right to "fire" their health insurance company if they
don't like their coverage. But, again, he stumbled on the phrasing.
And whether voters got the full meaning of Romney's remarks, they gave
Democrats sound bites tailor-made for attack ads.
This past summer, he said "corporations are people" and joked to
voters that "I'm also unemployed."
Campaigning in New Hampshire before its primary, he said he knew what
it was like to worry about getting a "pink slip."
He stumbled in the GOP presidential debates too, offering a $10,000
bet to Texas Gov. Rick Perry, and said of the landscaping company he
used in Massachusetts having illegal immigrants as employees: "I'm
running for office, for Pete's sake — I can't have illegals."
A number of Republicans have defended Romney, saying his comments have
been unfairly taken out of context.
"I don't think it's a concern. This is February and I've seen so much
improvement in Mitt Romney in the year that he's been campaigning,"
said Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), who has not endorsed in the GOP
primary. "Just think of the difference between the speech he gave
after he won Florida versus a lot of the other speeches he's given. He
realizes that you've got to put some emotion into it. You'll never be
elected president being a technocrat. … He's going to become sharper
the longer he campaigns."
But most of Romney's comments play into the Democrats' portrayal of
him as an out-of-touch millionaire, and they have pounded on every
stumble.
Even President Obama seems to have gotten on board with the attacks,
taking subliminal shots at Romney.
On Thursday, seeming to refer to Romney's comment about not being
concerned "about the very poor," Obama emphasized his commitment to
them.
"It's ... about the biblical call to care for the least of these, for
the poor, for those at the margins of our society," he said at the
National Prayer Breakfast. "To answer the responsibility we're given
in Proverbs to 'speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves,
for the rights of all who are destitute.' "
Romney's GOP rivals for the nomination also have been on the attack.
"I really believe that we should care about the very poor, unlike Gov.
Romney. But I believe we should care differently than Barack Obama,"
Gingrich said Thursday in Nevada.
More:
http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/208465-mitt-romney-gaffes-alarm-gop-concerned-poor
--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy
--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) accused any lawmakers promising not to touch
Medicare of being liars.
"Any politicians that stands up and says, 'We're not going to touch
your Medicare' is a liar," Coburn, who is famously blunt, said
Thursday night in an interview with Oklahoma's News on 6.
His comments come as Democrats plan to hit Republicans' plans to
change Medicare in their 2013 budget plan, which is expected to offer
the same changes to the program Republicans proposed last year.
Democrats successfully used the GOP budget to win a special House race
in New York last May.
Democrats hope to capitalize on those cuts again and repeat attacks
they made on House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan's (R-Wis.)
plan, which would change Medicare into a voucher system for Americans
under 55 now when they turn 65.
In January, Ryan suggested the reforms in his plan were likely to
reappear in the new plan.
"We haven't written it yet, but we're not backing off on the kinds of
reforms we've advocated," Ryan said at the GOP's yearly issues
conference in Baltimore.
Coburn, along with Sen. Joe Liberman (I-Conn.), proposed a plan last
summer that would cut more than $640 billion from Medicare over the
next 10 years, mostly by raising deductibles and other costs for
beneficiaries.
— This story was last updated at 8:58 a.m.
--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy
--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
Susan G. Komen for the Cure has reversed its decision to cut off grant
money to Planned Parenthood following an intense backlash from women's
groups and the left.
The charity did not promise that Planned Parenthood will receive
additional grant money, but said it would change its policies in a way
that would make Planned Parenthood eligible for further funding.
"The events of this week have been deeply unsettling for our
supporters, partners and friends and all of us at Susan G. Komen," the
group said in a statement. "We have been distressed at the presumption
that the changes made to our funding criteria were done for political
reasons or to specifically penalize Planned Parenthood. They were
not."
Komen had said it cut off Planned Parenthood because of a new policy
barring the charity from working with groups that are under
investigation. House Republicans are probing Planned Parenthood's
accounting.
Komen said Friday it would amend the policy to only apply to
investigations that are "criminal and conclusive in nature and not
political."
More:
--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy
--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
THE NAME OF "ALLAH"
Assalamu'alaikum Wa Rahmatullah e Wa Barakatuhu,
| |
|
|
--
http://youtu.be/A59AQV4CneA American use of DU is "A crime against humanity which may, in the eyes of historians, rank with the worst atrocities of all time." US Iraq military vets "are on DU death row, waiting to die."
|
As always, if you like this podcast please forward the link.
http://www.electricpolitics.com/podcast/2012/02/whither_korea.html
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
On Feb 2, 9:27 pm, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> so perfect …. Best 45 seconds you will ever spend****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=JK3wMFiSq8U
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> ****
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
So here's a
question to those who want military strikes on Iran: If our regime is
prepared to stage military strikes in Iran when they don't have a
bomb,
what will they be willing to do if/when they do have one? ****
On Feb 3, 5:42 am, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ****
>
> [As the day approaches when Iran finally gets nuclear weapons, we're going
> to be hearing a lot of "what if" scenarios comparing Iran's present
> behavior with its future behavior after it gets the bomb. It's not a pretty
> picture, and day-to-day life on planet earth is bound to grow more tense
> and less secure - in ways we can't imagine yet - if Iran isn't stopped. df]*
> ***
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> WSJ editorial, 2/1/12****
>
> *A warning on Iran*<http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405297020474090457719550036471...>
> ****
>
> Remember that bizarre story from last fall about an Iranian agent based in
> Texas who allegedly sought to conspire with Mexican drug gangs to blow up
> Saudi Arabia's ambassador to the U.S. in a crowded Washington, D.C.,
> restaurant? The Justice Department insisted the story was true. Yet the
> Administration's reaction was otherwise muted, and the press corps went out
> of its way to cast doubt on the story. The Iranians can't be *that *crazy?**
> **
>
> Well, yes, they can be, at least according to President Obama's top
> intelligence adviser. In testimony yesterday to the Senate Intelligence
> Committee, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper warned that
> Iran's leadership, including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, "have changed
> their calculus and are now more willing to conduct an attack in the United
> States as a response to real or perceived actions that threaten the
> regime." ****
>
> Translation: Not only is Iran prepared to use terrorism in retaliation for
> any military strikes against it, they're also prepared to get their
> retaliation in first. "There is more to unfold here," he said. "They're
> trying to penetrate and engage in this hemisphere."****
>
> Mr. Clapper, a former Air Force general, is not given to flights of
> exaggeration. That should give his warnings some weight, especially among
> those who believe that, for all the aggressive rhetoric, Iranian leaders
> conduct foreign policy in a prudent and rational way and are amenable to
> negotiations.****
>
> Mr. Clapper's testimony comes as Defense Secretary Leon Panetta is warning
> that Iran is about a year away from having a nuclear bomb. So here's a
> question to those who oppose military strikes on Iran: If the regime is
> prepared to stage terrorist strikes in America when they don't have a bomb,
> what will they be capable of when they do have one? ****
>
> ###****
>
> Dan Friedman
> NYC****
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
[As the day approaches when Iran finally gets nuclear weapons, we're going to be hearing a lot of "what if" scenarios comparing Iran's present behavior with its future behavior after it gets the bomb. It's not a pretty picture, and day-to-day life on planet earth is bound to grow more tense and less secure - in ways we can't imagine yet - if Iran isn't stopped. df]
WSJ editorial, 2/1/12
Remember that bizarre story from last fall about an Iranian agent based in Texas who allegedly sought to conspire with Mexican drug gangs to blow up Saudi Arabia's ambassador to the U.S. in a crowded Washington, D.C., restaurant? The Justice Department insisted the story was true. Yet the Administration's reaction was otherwise muted, and the press corps went out of its way to cast doubt on the story. The Iranians can't be that crazy?
Well, yes, they can be, at least according to President Obama's top intelligence adviser. In testimony yesterday to the Senate Intelligence Committee, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper warned that Iran's leadership, including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, "have changed their calculus and are now more willing to conduct an attack in the United States as a response to real or perceived actions that threaten the regime."
Translation: Not only is Iran prepared to use terrorism in retaliation for any military strikes against it, they're also prepared to get their retaliation in first. "There is more to unfold here," he said. "They're trying to penetrate and engage in this hemisphere."
Mr. Clapper, a former Air Force general, is not given to flights of exaggeration. That should give his warnings some weight, especially among those who believe that, for all the aggressive rhetoric, Iranian leaders conduct foreign policy in a prudent and rational way and are amenable to negotiations.
Mr. Clapper's testimony comes as Defense Secretary Leon Panetta is warning that Iran is about a year away from having a nuclear bomb. So here's a question to those who oppose military strikes on Iran: If the regime is prepared to stage terrorist strikes in America when they don't have a bomb, what will they be capable of when they do have one?
###
Dan Friedman
NYC
|
| - Judi McLeod Thursday, February 2, 2012 |
Launched to an unsuspecting world from stage prop Greek columns in the summer of 2008 as The Messiah who could walk on water, Barack Obama revealed today all he has since done is for Jesus.
All that was missing at the National Prayer Breakfast, when he claimed that guidance for what he is doing to the Free World comes from above, were the Gregorian chants.
The Marxist misery he's foisting on the Free World with his job-killing and spirit-killing policies don't come from Karl Marx and Saul Alinsky, because, according to a freshly minted pious Obama, it is all for Him.
Some of the true believers at this morning's prayer breakfast must have all but fallen off their chairs when they heard the new Sermon from the Mount from a politician who has admitted he gets his prayer reminders via his Blackberry.
"And so when I talk about our financial institutions playing by the same rules as folks on Main Street, when I talk bout making sure insurance companies aren't discriminating against those who are already sick, or making sure that unscrupulous lenders aren't taking advantage of the most vulnerable among us, I do so because I genuinely believe it will make the economy stronger for everybody. But I also do it because I know that far too many neighbors in our country have been hurt and treated unfairly over the last few years, and I believe in God's command to 'love thy neighbor as thyself.'" (Buzzfeed
, Feb. 2. 2012)
(OMG! he must have been reading Mark Levin's runaway bestseller Ameritopia).
Meanwhile, just seeing Obama at work shows which side he's on. And it's not the Side of the Angels.
SRI LANKA: An innocent man was illegally arrested, tortured and laid with a fabricated charge
Name of the victim: Mr. Kanahipadi Kankanamge Nalin (29) of Dodamgo, Kaluthara
Alleged perpetrator:
1. Police officer Kamalasiri
2. Civil Defence Force Officer Wickramasinghe
3. Sub Inspector (SI) Mahinda
4. Police Officer Kamalsiri
5. Police Officer Ishantha
6. Officer-In-Charge (OIC)
All are attached to the Dodangoda Police Station
Date of incident: 20 November 2011
Place of incident: Dodangoda Police Station
I am writing to express my serious concern over the case of Mr. Kanahipadi Kankanamge Nalin (29) of Dodamgo, Kaluthara. Nalin is married and a businessman by profession. On 20 November 2011 Nalin went to see the newly opened expressway from Colombo to Galle. He went with his wife, Ms. Wickramasinghe Kankanamge Nadika Lakmali (26), one of his drivers Kalu Malli and the driver's daughter. They went by a Tipper numbered, WP 484959 belonging to Nalin.
After seen the road while they were on their way home the child wanted to eat an ice cream so the vehicle was stopped in front of the Gurukanda Restaurant near the Thudugala Junction. Then the driver went with his daughter to buy the ice cream while Nalin and his wife waiting at the vehicle.
Two police officers who were in uniform approached them and ordered them to remove the vehicle from that place as it was in front of the restaurant. Nalin told the officers that as the driver went into the restaurant he needed to wait for him to return. Then the police officers later identified Kamalasiri and Wickramasinghe attached to the Dodangoda Police Station in Kalutara, dragged Nalin out of the vehicle and started to beat him with. Then Nalin's wife Nadika came to the officers and pleaded with them not to assault her husband but the officers continued to assault him. Nalin suffered a hemorrhage due to the beating. Another group of police officers who had been notified by the first officers approached by a three wheeler and they also beat Nalin. Then they dragged Nalin into the three-wheeler and brought him to the Dodangoda Police Station.
At the police station the Officer-in-Charge (OIC) of the station came to him and told him "I waited till you were brought to me". Then the officers brought Nalin to the Traffic Branch of the police compound and there also he was assaulted. Nalin identified Sub Inspector (SI) Mahinda, Kamalsiri, Ishantha and Civil Defence Force officer Wickramasinghe as some of the officers who assaulted him.
Then Nalin pleaded with the officers to take him for medical treatment as he bleeding heavily. Then the officers brought him to the Wilpatha Rural Hospital. While the doctors were treating him he explained that he was severely tortured by the police officers. The doctor advised the officers to admit him for further treatment. He was admitted but Nalin observed the police officers talking to the doctor in a confidential manner.
During the night several of Nalin's relatives came to visit him but the police officers who were on watch did not allow them to do so. When Nalin asked for permission for them to visit one of the officers beat Nalin even at the hospital.
On the next morning Nalin was discharge from the hospital despite pleading with the staff not to discharge him as he still suffering severe pain. But the doctor who was on service worked with the police officers and allowed them to take Nalin back to the police station where he was locked in a cell.
Later the OIC called Nalin to his room and then he was threatened with a fabricated charge and prosecution in the High Court. He further threatened him that his throat would be cut and he would not be allowed to live. Then late in the evening he was produced him before the Magistrate of Kalutara. Later Nalin learned that he was charged with obstructing the official duties of the police. Nalin vehemently denies the charge and states that police officers fabricated the charge against him.
Nalin further states that police officers tortured him and filed the fabricated charge against him because as when he was working in South Korea a police officer named Manju, who was attached to the Dodangoda Police Station attempted to have an extramarital affair with his wife which she refused. He further states that after he returned to Sri Lanka and started several businesses police officer Manju started to harass them. He made a complaint to the Police Headquarters and later under the supervision of an Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP), an inquiry which resulted in Manju being transferred to another police station. Later Nalin learned that the OIC stated that he wanted to take revenge on Nalin.
Nalin states that he was illegally arrested, detained, tortured and laid with fabricated charges thereby violating his fundamental rights.
I request your urgent intervention to ensure that the authorities listed below instigate an immediate investigation into the allegations of illegal arrest, illegal detention, torture by the police perpetrators, and the prosecution of those proven to be responsible under the criminal law of the country for misusing powers of state officers and for wrongful prosecution. The officers involved must also be subjected to internal investigations for the breach of the department orders as issued by the police department.
Yours sincerely,
William Nicholas Gomes
William's Desk
www.williamgomes.org
William Nicholas Gomes--- On Fri, 3/2/12, Farhan Safeer Qureshi <qureshiqureshiqureshi@gmail.com> wrote:
|
so perfect …. Best 45 seconds you will ever spend
Doctors in Iraq have estimated that birth defects have increased by 2-6 times, and 3-12 times as many children have developed cancer and leukaemia since 1991. Moreover, a report published in The Lancet in 1998 said that as many as 500 children a day are dying from these sequels to war and sanctions and that the death rate for Iraqi children under 5 years of age increased from 23 per 1000 in 1989 to 166 per thousand in 1993. Overall, cases of lymphoblastic leukemia more than quadrupled with other cancers also increasing 'at an alarming rate'. In men, lung, bladder, bronchus, skin, and stomach cancers showed the highest increase. In women, the highest increases were in breast and bladder cancer, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma.1
