Thursday, February 14, 2008

Deadly Choking Game

Ack! News today of a deadly "choking game" the kiddies are playing. At least 82 young ones have died according to a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention count of fatalities from the cataclysmic fad.

The game involves intentionally choking oneself thus blocking blood flow to the brain. Once the stranglehold is released, blood rushes back to the brain in an attempt to create a brief buzz.

The CDC provides some telltale signs of the players:
CDC officials urged parents to be aware the fad exists, and to watch for possible warning signs like bloodshot eyes, marks on the neck, frequent and severe headaches, disorientation after spending time alone, and ropes, scarves or belts tied to bedroom furniture or doorknobs or found knotted on the floor.
Why is this politically relevant? If enough kids keep croaking from this fad -- and it's believed the number of deaths are underreported -- politicians will most certainly try terminating the practice. But how does one abate something like this? Do you ban the bungee cords and dog leashes used for choking? Certainly you must try awareness and education. . . Not sure exactly what it could entail, but if this fad is not a passing one, some sort of law is on the horizon.

-Dippold

Political Online Reputation

Labels: ,

Tuesday, April 24, 2007

WashingtonWatch.com

Washingtonwatch.com is a site I became privy to by watching the Geekbrief.com video podcast. This site may be old news to some, but WashingtonWatch now offers up congressional bills and information in wiki form where users can edit, discuss, vote on and basically do other Web 2.0 things to the content. It is actually reminiscent of OpenCongress.org which was previously posted about on PoliticalReps.

But the crux of WashingtonWatch.com is the fiscal impact of congressional bills on "our nation's budget - and yours". Two tabs in the middle of the page -- "Greatest Cost" and "Greatest Savings" -- break down certain bills into how much money they either cost or save each family. While the figures are not exact, and it is unclear as to how many constitute an "average family", it is interesting to see possible government expenditures broken down in this fashion. For example, Senate Bill 509, The Aviation Security Improvement Act, would cost the average family $66.59. When the bill is clicked on, more details -- like how much it would cost an individual or a couple -- are available from a drop down box.

Michael Arrington from TechCrunch.com offers this comment about the site's new wiki form:
I expect lobbyists, lawyers and congressional staff will get heavily involved in spinning legislation according to their own agendas, and we’ll soon see the beginning of a Washinton D.C. version of Wikipedia wars. This should be fun.
-Dippold

Political Online Reputation

Labels: , ,