Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Republicans New Trick
The Senate Republicans are in the process of using the auto-bail out as a means of simply destroying the UAW by trying to force the Big Three into having the exact same wages, benefits and work rules as Honda & Toyota. Good to know they are still clinging to ideology first.
But even darker is that this represents a repeat of the ploy used by House Republicans during the banking bail-out. Knowing that the Democrats will be held responsible for nothing getting done, Democrats are forced to negotiate a solution with Bush, a Republican President.
Once that is complete they have to turn around and negotiate with Congressional Republicans who won't fall in line behind Bush. Hell, they only need 9 of 49 Republicans to follow Bush's lead to pass the damn bill, but Bush is such a eunich that he can't even deliver 20% of his caucus.
But even darker is that this represents a repeat of the ploy used by House Republicans during the banking bail-out. Knowing that the Democrats will be held responsible for nothing getting done, Democrats are forced to negotiate a solution with Bush, a Republican President.
Once that is complete they have to turn around and negotiate with Congressional Republicans who won't fall in line behind Bush. Hell, they only need 9 of 49 Republicans to follow Bush's lead to pass the damn bill, but Bush is such a eunich that he can't even deliver 20% of his caucus.
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Obama Nails It
Looking at the news this week and the whirlwind surrounding Blago it has left me thinking that Obama nailed it. The first test Obama was faced with after becoming President Elect was his cabinet choices. We all know, Dems and Repubs that he got it right. Time will tell if his cabinet works for the best but he has certainly presented his case that he would live up to his campaign promises of a new kind of politics, or at least one different than we've seen in 8 years perhaps much longer.
But the second test came out of the blue with Blago and presented with this opportunity to completely fall flat on his face and embarass himself as a typical Chicago politician, Obama not only refuses to even stumble he somehow manages to hit it out of the park.
But the second test came out of the blue with Blago and presented with this opportunity to completely fall flat on his face and embarass himself as a typical Chicago politician, Obama not only refuses to even stumble he somehow manages to hit it out of the park.
'...they're not willing to give me anything except appreciation. Fuck
them!''
What more could you ask for?
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Did this happen at Phil Specter's House?
This one is hard to believe. Apparently the brother of Mark Ruffalo (whoever the hell that is) died today and one of the suspects in the case indicated that he died from 'chronic playing of Russian roulette'. Okay I guess. But one has a one in 6 chance of not surviving Russian roulette.
How chronic could it possibly be?
How chronic could it possibly be?
Monday, December 8, 2008
Bush the Legitimate
David Horowitz has a nice article over at CBSNEWs by way of the NRO basically telling Alan Keyes and all of the other right wing nutters to shut the fuck up about the Obama birth certificate issue. I couldn't agree more! Just what in the world are these people trying to accomplish?
Where I take issue with Mr. Horowitz this statement:
Where I take issue with Mr. Horowitz this statement:
This tempest over whether Obama, the child of an American citizen, was born
on American soil is tantamount to the Democrats’ seditious claim that Bush
“stole” the election in Florida and hence was not the legitimate president.
This
delusion helped to create the Democrats’ Bush derangement syndrome and
encouraged Democratic leaders to lie about the origins of the Iraq war, and
regard it as illegitimate as Bush himself. It became “Bush’s War” rather
than an
American War - with destructive consequences for our troops and our
cause.
First Mr. Horowitz complains that the Supreme Court invalidating the 64 million (actually 67) voters that put Obama in office would be tantamount to shredding our constitution and our rule of law. I wonder if Mr. Horowitz felt the same way about the SCOTUS invalidating all those votes for Al Gore in 2000? It could be that Mr. Horowitz just feel that the SCOTUS would be in the mood for a make up call, ala college basketball, and give this to the Dems one way or the other.
That really isn't the most important thing though. I've heard this arguement from Horowitz now and Rove earlier this week that it wasn't fair that Bush wasn't treated as a legitimate President when he came to Washington. The problem is ofcourse that he wasn't a legitimately elected President. Whether you believe that George W. Bush actually won the vote count in Florida in 2000 as attested by the subsequent private recounts, George W. Bush wasn't the man that the American people wanted as President in 2000.
This isn't only because we have an outdated way of selecting a President whereas one vote in Wyoming counts the same in the final tally as four votes in Florida. It goes beyond that. With problems like the butterfly ballot in Florida where thousands of people became confused into voting for Pat Buchannan it is clear that the voters intended to elect Gore, even if the results of the process were different.
The real meat of this is that even George W. Bush and the Republican Party didn't believe that George W. Bush had won the election. All of the efforts on behalf of Bush by Republicans were explicitly aimed at preventing a recount. They were not interested in a fair recount. They were not interested in a long or short recount process. They simply wanted the counting ended at any costs. Remember the Republicans in the Florida legislature considering changing the laws to simply had Florida's electors to Bush?
Bush was seen as an illigitimate President because he acted like an illigitimate President. A man of honor, having won the election the way he did might have come to Washington with an Obamaesque platform and agenda. A man of courage would have come to Washington and said look, understand that we have just gone through a terribly devisive election, and I understand that, and being a uniter and not a divider I'm going to forge a coalition between the parties to help bring America back together.
None of this is what Bush did however. What Bush did, on the advice of Rove and Cheney was to demand acceptance and legitimacy like a spoiled and petulant child. That same arrogance and condescension towards the opposition has been the hallmark of Bush's 8 years in office. It has defined him and destroyed him.
Friday, February 22, 2008
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Is This Why Huckabee is Staying in the Race?
Rumors are swirling that John McCain was involved in an extra-marital affair during the 2000 campaign. What makes this worse is that the woman involved is a Washington lobbyist. Now we've always thought Republicans were in bed with the representatives of Big Business but this takes the cake.
I don't know if this is true or not, and I certainly have no information that anybody else has, but I have to wonder, is Mike Huckabee staying in the race hoping that this blows up before the convention? Everybody is saying that Huckabee is destroying his own credibility among Republicans by staying in the race, but if and this is a big IF, this does blow up on McCain, then as the man with the second most number of delegates he would be the obvious choice to replace McCain as the nominee.
And even a loss by Huckabee under these circumstances would mean a lot of power in the GOP for the Huckster.
I don't know if this is true or not, and I certainly have no information that anybody else has, but I have to wonder, is Mike Huckabee staying in the race hoping that this blows up before the convention? Everybody is saying that Huckabee is destroying his own credibility among Republicans by staying in the race, but if and this is a big IF, this does blow up on McCain, then as the man with the second most number of delegates he would be the obvious choice to replace McCain as the nominee.
And even a loss by Huckabee under these circumstances would mean a lot of power in the GOP for the Huckster.
Available Soon in New Tuna Flavor
I guess I'm not making the connection. Maybe cherry is a better flavor.
Monday, February 18, 2008
But it was all about the stupid people who took out the loans...
Appears the FBI is investigating the practices of many of the large Wall St companies who brought us the Sub-Prime crisis. Everything from insider trading to accounting fraud to manipulated home appraisals.
It is probably too much hope at this point for a lot of people to go to jail over this, but it should be a fun ride.
It is probably too much hope at this point for a lot of people to go to jail over this, but it should be a fun ride.
Today's Deregualtion Tidbit
In the news today...
Sure it sounds like just an ordinary case of a rotten apple in the business world, but wait it gets better. This rotten apple from the business world sold 37 million pounds of possibly contaminated meat to the USDA before being caught and shut down. I know I know lets cut the budget for the USDA and deregualte the industry some more. That'll solve this issue!
The U.S. Department of Agriculture announced Sunday that a California
meatpacking company had launched the recall of 135 million pounds of beef -- the
largest meat recall in U.S. history -- following questions about the company's
treatment of cattle that were slaughtered even though they could not stand up.
Sure it sounds like just an ordinary case of a rotten apple in the business world, but wait it gets better. This rotten apple from the business world sold 37 million pounds of possibly contaminated meat to the USDA before being caught and shut down. I know I know lets cut the budget for the USDA and deregualte the industry some more. That'll solve this issue!
Sunday, February 17, 2008
Dumb and Arrogant? Yep.
I wonder what right wingers think about when they read articles like this one by Susan Jacoby which discusses that Americans are not just getting dumber but are arrogant about the fact.
It goes along way to explaining why America is beginning to be surpassed in the world. Too many people who believe in Free Trade without thinking about what it really means. And it certainly isn't open trade borders on our side while other countries protect their own markets.
Global Warming denial.....
Sub-Prime Mortgage crisis....
Iraq & Afghanistan...
These and many other problems caused by people who have a one size fits all ideological approach to every problem in the world and ofcourse George W. Bush is the ultimate poster child for this. Remember in 2000 when it didn't matter that the man who was to become President didn't give a rats ass about anything that happened outside of Texas?
It goes along way to explaining why America is beginning to be surpassed in the world. Too many people who believe in Free Trade without thinking about what it really means. And it certainly isn't open trade borders on our side while other countries protect their own markets.
Global Warming denial.....
Sub-Prime Mortgage crisis....
Iraq & Afghanistan...
These and many other problems caused by people who have a one size fits all ideological approach to every problem in the world and ofcourse George W. Bush is the ultimate poster child for this. Remember in 2000 when it didn't matter that the man who was to become President didn't give a rats ass about anything that happened outside of Texas?
Junkie Revenues
The funniest part of this article from the NYT on the proposed 'crack tax' in New York is learning that Nebraska already has one.
Saturday, February 16, 2008
John McCain on Healthcare
You can go here to see John McCain's proposals on Healthcare reform for the US. Aircav over at ABP has decided that I'm an asshole because I was making fun of McCain, saying I didn't realize he had a plan beyond saying if you don't have health insurance don't plan on getting it anytime soon.
So here is John McCain's plan as posted on his website:
Bringing costs under control is the only way to stop the erosion of affordable health insurance, save Medicare and Medicaid, protect private health benefits for retirees, and allow our companies to effectively compete around the world.
File this under the heading 'No shit, Sherlock'
Families should be in charge of their health care dollars and have more control over their care. We can improve health and spend less, while promoting competition on the cost and quality of care, taking better care of our citizens with chronic illness, and promoting prevention that will keep millions of others from ever developing deadly and debilitating disease.
So it begs asking, how many of you don't have control over your own care right now? Are you prevented from researching different options, going to see the doctor you want, and otherwise price shopping? No? What this really means is that Republicans want people to bare the costs of Healthcare so that they will ration how much they consume, not based upon educated assessments of what value the treatment has but rather based upon costs. Patients can't make truely informed decisions about Healthcare simply because they don't have all of the education necessary to really determine what the best treatment options are. Doctors study for years to make those determinations, if their judgement can be analyzed by the average car mechanic, why do we even need doctors? Perhaps later we'll read about how McCain is proposing to send every person in the US to med school.
While we reform the system and maintain quality, we can and must provide access to health care for all our citizens - whether temporarily or chronically uninsured, whether living in rural areas with limited services, or whether residing in inner cities where access to physicians is often limited.
Another for the 'NSS' file.
America's veterans have fought for our freedom. We should give them freedom to choose to carry their VA dollars to a provider that gives them the timely care at high quality and in the best location.
Rough translation. Privatize VA hospitals.
Controlling health care costs will take fundamental change - nothing short of a complete reform of the culture of our health system and the way we pay for it will suffice. Reforms to federal policy and programs should focus on enhancing quality while controlling costs:
Promote competition throughout the health care system - between providers and among alternative treatments.
Promote competition throughout the healthcare system? Is there a doctor's cabal out there we're unaware of? Doctors and Hospitals do compete for patients now. The problem goes back to the fact that consumers do not have the requisite amount of information to make informed decisions between treatments. This is why HMOs and Managed Care options were formed, to provide on the consumer side a party who could evaluate the treatment options and make the determination based upon medical training whether a treatment was valid or worthwhile. Ofcourse that didn't work because the doctors employeed by the HMOs and MCs options found themselves pressed to work in the best interests of the Insurance Company and not necessarily the best interests of the consumer of healthcare.
Make patients the center of care and give them a larger role in both prevention and care, putting more decisions and responsibility in their hands.
Restating the same. How do you put the responsibility in the hands of patients for their care if they don't have the necessary information to make those decisions? Hey Mr. Jones you have chronnic heart failure. Here are a couple of pamphlets documenting some treatment options. When you decided which treatment option is best for you, please call the nurse and set up an appointment and we'll get you fixed right up. Make sense? Not in the least.
Make public more information on treatment options and require transparency by providers regarding medical outcomes, quality of care, costs, and prices.
Providers are happy to provide you with a listing of their prices already. Pooled insurance is able to negotiate better prices. The quality of care issue is a good thought. Zagut ratings for doctors maybe? Medical outcomes is a far more sticky subject, reporting on that would interfere with patient confidentiality.
Facilitate the development of national standards for measuring and recording treatments and outcomes.
Sounds like a good idea. But doesn't do anything to provide insurance to those who don't have it.
Reform the payment systems in Medicare to compensate providers for diagnosis, prevention, and care coordination. Medicare should not pay for preventable medical errors or mismanagement.
What does this even mean? Medicare should not pay for medical errors or mismanagement?
Dedicate federal research on the basis of sound science resulting in greater focus on care and cure of chronic disease
Are we presently dedicating federal research on the basis of unsound science? If so I agree that should change.
Give states the flexibility to, and encourage them to experiment with: alternative forms of access; risk-adjusted payments per episode covered under Medicaid; use of private insurance in Medicaid; alternative insurance policies and insurance providers; and, different licensing schemes for medical providers.
This says to allow the states to have power to use different licensing schemes for medical providers.
Build genuine national markets by permitting providers to practice nationwide.
This says states shouldn't be able to set licensing restrictions for people practicing in their state. So which is it.
Promote rapid deployment of 21st century information systems.
Promoted by whom? The Government? And what exactly is preventing this from happening now?
Support innovative delivery systems, such as clinics in retail outlets and other ways that provide greater market flexibility in permitting appropriate roles for nurse practitioners, nurses, and doctors.
Again, what exactly is preventing this from happening now? Pharmacies are starting to put in retail clinics. As far as permitting the appropriate roles for nurse practitioners, doctors and nurses. Do the states not already have this power?
Where cost-effective, employ telemedicine, and community and mental health clinics in areas where services and providers are limited.
Where cost-effective? How about this, we allow it where it is outcome-effictive? And dial-a-doc sounds like such a great policy. Getting diagnosed and treated by somebody who has never met you, seen you, run test on you, or hell, even gone so far as to take your blood pressure sounds like such a great way to conduct business. Just like getting Viagra over the internet.
Foster the development of routes for safe, cheaper generic versions of drugs and biologic pharmaceuticals. Develop safety protocols that permit re-importation to keep competition vigorous.
Another that makes no sense. The reason we don't have these routes now is that it isn't very profitable to research and test a drug for 10 years simply to allow your competitors to market it as soon as it is deemed acceptable for market. And developing safety protocols that permit re-importation? Dubya isn't going to be happy about that. And I thought this was supposed to be the personal responsibility plan? How about we just allow re-importation?
Pass tort reform to eliminate frivolous lawsuits and excessive damage awards. Provide a safe harbor for doctors that follow clinical guidelines and adhere to patient safety protocols.
Don't you like this system? You are responsible for your own medical treatment not your doctor, and when your doctor fucks up that treatment, well, you are responsible for that too.
Protect the health care consumer through vigorous enforcement of federal protections against collusion, unfair business actions, and deceptive consumer practices. John McCain believes that insurance reforms should increase the variety and affordability of insurance coverage available to American families by fostering competition and innovation.
Is he admitting that the current administration isn't vigorously enforcing the federal protections against collusion, unfair business actions and deceptive consumer practices? Well I applaud him for that.
Reform the tax code to eliminate the bias toward employer-sponsored health insurance, and provide all individuals with a $2,500 tax credit ($5,000 for families) to increase incentives for insurance coverage. Individuals owning innovative multi-year policies that cost less than the full credit can deposit remainder in expanded health savings accounts.
$2500 per indiviual and only $5000 per family? So a family of 4 is credited the same amount as an unmarried couple? A unmarried couple with 2 kids would qualify for $7500 in tax credits but a married family with 2 kids would only qualify for $5000. Somehow I don't think James Dobson is gonna like that.
Families should be able to purchase health insurance nationwide, across state lines, to maximize their choices, and heighten competition for their business that will eliminate excess overhead, administrative, and excessive compensation costs from the system.
So states should be required to try innovative insurance methods, but should have no control over who practices in their state.
Insurance should be innovative, moving from job to home, job to job, and providing multi-year coverage.
What the hell does this mean? Job to home? Multi-year coverage?
Require any state receiving Medicaid to develop a financial "risk adjustment" bonus to high-cost and low-income families to supplement tax credits and Medicaid funds.
'Risk adjustment' bonus? Again I not sure what this means, but I have a feeling it means that we should provide health insurance to poor people but find a way to punish them for using it.
Allow individuals to get insurance through any organization or association that they choose: employers, individual purchases, churches, professional association, and so forth. These policies will be available to small businesses and the self-employed, will be portable across all jobs, and will automatically bridge the time between retirement and Medicare eligibility. These plans would have to meet rigorous standards and certification. John McCain Believes in Personal Responsibility
Again, what is preventing this from happening now? Is there some form of law that prevents churchs from offerning health insurance? And you can get insurance that isn't related to your job, the problem isn't availablity it is cost. Large employers get volumn discounts for buying insurance. If you make each man an island in the health insurance game, you eliminate that pooled buying power thus making it easier for insurance companies to charge higher prices. Honestly, who do you think gets the better deal when buying a new car, you with your little Blue Book, or Hertz Rentacar?
We must do more to take care of ourselves to prevent chronic diseases when possible, and do more to adhere to treatment after we are diagnosed with an illness.
More of a lecture than a solution. This is implementable how?
Childhood obesity, diabetes and high blood pressure are all on the rise. We must again teach our children about health, nutrition and exercise - vital life information.
Public health initiatives must be undertaken with all our citizens to stem the growing epidemic of obesity and diabetes, and to deter smoking.
Like implementing food qualities laws?
So my overall impression of the McCain plan is as follows. In order to fix our healthcare system the solution is the exempt employers, doctors, and insurance companies from any responsibility in the system. Doctors shouldn't be required to direct treatment or be responsible for their medical errors, insurance companies shouldn't be responsible for providing good service while controlling prices, and we shouldn't have employer paid health insurance.
On its face is says that McCain belives with no regard to history or economics, that individuals acting in the market place would be able to negotiate better prices than any pooled conumer group. But that is just the selling angle really, the same as the $2500/$5000 tax credit. They realize that some form of healthcare reform is going to happen, and all this plan really says is that the way to change it is to convince people to limit their own consumption of healthcare to what they can personally afford to pay for.
It is the height of modern Movement Conservative thought process. No problem can be solved through direct action. Instead problems can only be solved though a combination of dancing around the problem, cutting taxes, and elimating the responsibility of business to be a part of the solution. And you guys say McCain isn't a Conservative. Funny.
So here is John McCain's plan as posted on his website:
Bringing costs under control is the only way to stop the erosion of affordable health insurance, save Medicare and Medicaid, protect private health benefits for retirees, and allow our companies to effectively compete around the world.
File this under the heading 'No shit, Sherlock'
Families should be in charge of their health care dollars and have more control over their care. We can improve health and spend less, while promoting competition on the cost and quality of care, taking better care of our citizens with chronic illness, and promoting prevention that will keep millions of others from ever developing deadly and debilitating disease.
So it begs asking, how many of you don't have control over your own care right now? Are you prevented from researching different options, going to see the doctor you want, and otherwise price shopping? No? What this really means is that Republicans want people to bare the costs of Healthcare so that they will ration how much they consume, not based upon educated assessments of what value the treatment has but rather based upon costs. Patients can't make truely informed decisions about Healthcare simply because they don't have all of the education necessary to really determine what the best treatment options are. Doctors study for years to make those determinations, if their judgement can be analyzed by the average car mechanic, why do we even need doctors? Perhaps later we'll read about how McCain is proposing to send every person in the US to med school.
While we reform the system and maintain quality, we can and must provide access to health care for all our citizens - whether temporarily or chronically uninsured, whether living in rural areas with limited services, or whether residing in inner cities where access to physicians is often limited.
Another for the 'NSS' file.
America's veterans have fought for our freedom. We should give them freedom to choose to carry their VA dollars to a provider that gives them the timely care at high quality and in the best location.
Rough translation. Privatize VA hospitals.
Controlling health care costs will take fundamental change - nothing short of a complete reform of the culture of our health system and the way we pay for it will suffice. Reforms to federal policy and programs should focus on enhancing quality while controlling costs:
Promote competition throughout the health care system - between providers and among alternative treatments.
Promote competition throughout the healthcare system? Is there a doctor's cabal out there we're unaware of? Doctors and Hospitals do compete for patients now. The problem goes back to the fact that consumers do not have the requisite amount of information to make informed decisions between treatments. This is why HMOs and Managed Care options were formed, to provide on the consumer side a party who could evaluate the treatment options and make the determination based upon medical training whether a treatment was valid or worthwhile. Ofcourse that didn't work because the doctors employeed by the HMOs and MCs options found themselves pressed to work in the best interests of the Insurance Company and not necessarily the best interests of the consumer of healthcare.
Make patients the center of care and give them a larger role in both prevention and care, putting more decisions and responsibility in their hands.
Restating the same. How do you put the responsibility in the hands of patients for their care if they don't have the necessary information to make those decisions? Hey Mr. Jones you have chronnic heart failure. Here are a couple of pamphlets documenting some treatment options. When you decided which treatment option is best for you, please call the nurse and set up an appointment and we'll get you fixed right up. Make sense? Not in the least.
Make public more information on treatment options and require transparency by providers regarding medical outcomes, quality of care, costs, and prices.
Providers are happy to provide you with a listing of their prices already. Pooled insurance is able to negotiate better prices. The quality of care issue is a good thought. Zagut ratings for doctors maybe? Medical outcomes is a far more sticky subject, reporting on that would interfere with patient confidentiality.
Facilitate the development of national standards for measuring and recording treatments and outcomes.
Sounds like a good idea. But doesn't do anything to provide insurance to those who don't have it.
Reform the payment systems in Medicare to compensate providers for diagnosis, prevention, and care coordination. Medicare should not pay for preventable medical errors or mismanagement.
What does this even mean? Medicare should not pay for medical errors or mismanagement?
Dedicate federal research on the basis of sound science resulting in greater focus on care and cure of chronic disease
Are we presently dedicating federal research on the basis of unsound science? If so I agree that should change.
Give states the flexibility to, and encourage them to experiment with: alternative forms of access; risk-adjusted payments per episode covered under Medicaid; use of private insurance in Medicaid; alternative insurance policies and insurance providers; and, different licensing schemes for medical providers.
This says to allow the states to have power to use different licensing schemes for medical providers.
Build genuine national markets by permitting providers to practice nationwide.
This says states shouldn't be able to set licensing restrictions for people practicing in their state. So which is it.
Promote rapid deployment of 21st century information systems.
Promoted by whom? The Government? And what exactly is preventing this from happening now?
Support innovative delivery systems, such as clinics in retail outlets and other ways that provide greater market flexibility in permitting appropriate roles for nurse practitioners, nurses, and doctors.
Again, what exactly is preventing this from happening now? Pharmacies are starting to put in retail clinics. As far as permitting the appropriate roles for nurse practitioners, doctors and nurses. Do the states not already have this power?
Where cost-effective, employ telemedicine, and community and mental health clinics in areas where services and providers are limited.
Where cost-effective? How about this, we allow it where it is outcome-effictive? And dial-a-doc sounds like such a great policy. Getting diagnosed and treated by somebody who has never met you, seen you, run test on you, or hell, even gone so far as to take your blood pressure sounds like such a great way to conduct business. Just like getting Viagra over the internet.
Foster the development of routes for safe, cheaper generic versions of drugs and biologic pharmaceuticals. Develop safety protocols that permit re-importation to keep competition vigorous.
Another that makes no sense. The reason we don't have these routes now is that it isn't very profitable to research and test a drug for 10 years simply to allow your competitors to market it as soon as it is deemed acceptable for market. And developing safety protocols that permit re-importation? Dubya isn't going to be happy about that. And I thought this was supposed to be the personal responsibility plan? How about we just allow re-importation?
Pass tort reform to eliminate frivolous lawsuits and excessive damage awards. Provide a safe harbor for doctors that follow clinical guidelines and adhere to patient safety protocols.
Don't you like this system? You are responsible for your own medical treatment not your doctor, and when your doctor fucks up that treatment, well, you are responsible for that too.
Protect the health care consumer through vigorous enforcement of federal protections against collusion, unfair business actions, and deceptive consumer practices. John McCain believes that insurance reforms should increase the variety and affordability of insurance coverage available to American families by fostering competition and innovation.
Is he admitting that the current administration isn't vigorously enforcing the federal protections against collusion, unfair business actions and deceptive consumer practices? Well I applaud him for that.
Reform the tax code to eliminate the bias toward employer-sponsored health insurance, and provide all individuals with a $2,500 tax credit ($5,000 for families) to increase incentives for insurance coverage. Individuals owning innovative multi-year policies that cost less than the full credit can deposit remainder in expanded health savings accounts.
$2500 per indiviual and only $5000 per family? So a family of 4 is credited the same amount as an unmarried couple? A unmarried couple with 2 kids would qualify for $7500 in tax credits but a married family with 2 kids would only qualify for $5000. Somehow I don't think James Dobson is gonna like that.
Families should be able to purchase health insurance nationwide, across state lines, to maximize their choices, and heighten competition for their business that will eliminate excess overhead, administrative, and excessive compensation costs from the system.
So states should be required to try innovative insurance methods, but should have no control over who practices in their state.
Insurance should be innovative, moving from job to home, job to job, and providing multi-year coverage.
What the hell does this mean? Job to home? Multi-year coverage?
Require any state receiving Medicaid to develop a financial "risk adjustment" bonus to high-cost and low-income families to supplement tax credits and Medicaid funds.
'Risk adjustment' bonus? Again I not sure what this means, but I have a feeling it means that we should provide health insurance to poor people but find a way to punish them for using it.
Allow individuals to get insurance through any organization or association that they choose: employers, individual purchases, churches, professional association, and so forth. These policies will be available to small businesses and the self-employed, will be portable across all jobs, and will automatically bridge the time between retirement and Medicare eligibility. These plans would have to meet rigorous standards and certification. John McCain Believes in Personal Responsibility
Again, what is preventing this from happening now? Is there some form of law that prevents churchs from offerning health insurance? And you can get insurance that isn't related to your job, the problem isn't availablity it is cost. Large employers get volumn discounts for buying insurance. If you make each man an island in the health insurance game, you eliminate that pooled buying power thus making it easier for insurance companies to charge higher prices. Honestly, who do you think gets the better deal when buying a new car, you with your little Blue Book, or Hertz Rentacar?
We must do more to take care of ourselves to prevent chronic diseases when possible, and do more to adhere to treatment after we are diagnosed with an illness.
More of a lecture than a solution. This is implementable how?
Childhood obesity, diabetes and high blood pressure are all on the rise. We must again teach our children about health, nutrition and exercise - vital life information.
Public health initiatives must be undertaken with all our citizens to stem the growing epidemic of obesity and diabetes, and to deter smoking.
Like implementing food qualities laws?
So my overall impression of the McCain plan is as follows. In order to fix our healthcare system the solution is the exempt employers, doctors, and insurance companies from any responsibility in the system. Doctors shouldn't be required to direct treatment or be responsible for their medical errors, insurance companies shouldn't be responsible for providing good service while controlling prices, and we shouldn't have employer paid health insurance.
On its face is says that McCain belives with no regard to history or economics, that individuals acting in the market place would be able to negotiate better prices than any pooled conumer group. But that is just the selling angle really, the same as the $2500/$5000 tax credit. They realize that some form of healthcare reform is going to happen, and all this plan really says is that the way to change it is to convince people to limit their own consumption of healthcare to what they can personally afford to pay for.
It is the height of modern Movement Conservative thought process. No problem can be solved through direct action. Instead problems can only be solved though a combination of dancing around the problem, cutting taxes, and elimating the responsibility of business to be a part of the solution. And you guys say McCain isn't a Conservative. Funny.
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Venus Vs Serena in the Badger State
John Cole over at Ballon-Juice brought it to my attention today that critics are slamming Obama today saying that he can't speak well without using a teleprompter.
So I'm watching him give his speech tonight on MSNBC and lo and behold it strikes me. He is panning back and forth so quickly between his teleprompter screens that he looks like he is giving a speech while watching one hell of a tennis match.
I wonder who won?
So I'm watching him give his speech tonight on MSNBC and lo and behold it strikes me. He is panning back and forth so quickly between his teleprompter screens that he looks like he is giving a speech while watching one hell of a tennis match.
I wonder who won?
Monday, February 11, 2008
Reverse Southern Strategy
Robert Novak is at it again. In todays edition of his bizarre reality he writes a scribe saying that Democrats are racist because Obama's poll results leading up to the California primary were dramatically different than the outcome on primary day was much different than the polls.
It sure sounds convincing doesn't it? But ofcourse a quick look at the real data shows his whole premise is crap. Real Clear Politics has it this way:
Reuters/CSpan/Zogby
02/03
- 02/04
895 LV
49
36
Obama +13.0
SurveyUSA
02/03
- 02/04
872 LV
42
52
Clinton +10.0
SurveyUSA
02/02
- 02/03
853 LV
41
53
Clinton +12.0
Suffolk
02/01
- 02/03
700 LV
40
39
Obama +1.0
Reuters/CSpan/Zogby
02/01
- 02/03
967 LV
46
40
Obama +6.0
Rasmussen
02/02
- 02/02
798 LV
45
44
Obama +1.0
Reuters/CSpan/Zogby
01/31
- 02/02
1141 LV
45
41
Obama +4.0
Mason-Dixon
01/30
- 02/01
400 LV
36
45
Clinton +9
The reality is prior to the California primary the polls were all over the place. Mason-Dixon and Survery USA nailed the results. Zogby and Rasmussen were way off base. The question isn't what happened to Obama's votes. The question is what happened to Zogby (as usual) and Rasmussen?
So what exactly is Right Wing tool Novak trying to accomplish? I think it is a reverse Southern Strategy. Hispanics are becoming more and more important in Democratic politics, and there are competing interests and possibly even some anomosity between hispanics and african
americans. So the right is trying to convince blacks that their place in the Democratic party
is getting pushed aside by racist Hispanics in hopes that they will turn to the Republican party.
Still playing the racist game after all these years.
Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley, an African American Democrat, unexpectedly lost his 1982 campaign for governor. His defeat came as voters told pollsters that
they preferred the black candidate and then voted the other way. In
California's primary last Tuesday, Obama lost by a landslide 10 percentage
points despite one late survey showing him ahead by 13 points and two others
giving him a one-point lead.
It sure sounds convincing doesn't it? But ofcourse a quick look at the real data shows his whole premise is crap. Real Clear Politics has it this way:
Reuters/CSpan/Zogby
02/03
- 02/04
895 LV
49
36
Obama +13.0
SurveyUSA
02/03
- 02/04
872 LV
42
52
Clinton +10.0
SurveyUSA
02/02
- 02/03
853 LV
41
53
Clinton +12.0
Suffolk
02/01
- 02/03
700 LV
40
39
Obama +1.0
Reuters/CSpan/Zogby
02/01
- 02/03
967 LV
46
40
Obama +6.0
Rasmussen
02/02
- 02/02
798 LV
45
44
Obama +1.0
Reuters/CSpan/Zogby
01/31
- 02/02
1141 LV
45
41
Obama +4.0
Mason-Dixon
01/30
- 02/01
400 LV
36
45
Clinton +9
The reality is prior to the California primary the polls were all over the place. Mason-Dixon and Survery USA nailed the results. Zogby and Rasmussen were way off base. The question isn't what happened to Obama's votes. The question is what happened to Zogby (as usual) and Rasmussen?
So what exactly is Right Wing tool Novak trying to accomplish? I think it is a reverse Southern Strategy. Hispanics are becoming more and more important in Democratic politics, and there are competing interests and possibly even some anomosity between hispanics and african
americans. So the right is trying to convince blacks that their place in the Democratic party
is getting pushed aside by racist Hispanics in hopes that they will turn to the Republican party.
Still playing the racist game after all these years.
Saturday, February 9, 2008
Obama the Untouchable
I'm starting to get a little big chaffed by the members of the African American Elite who seem to feel that Barrak Obama needs to be treated with kid's gloves in this election.
Britebart is reporting that former Virginia Governor Douglas Wilder 'is not ready to excuse comments former President Bill Clinton made about Barack Obama. ' This is regarding Bill Clinton's comments calling Obama's claiming that he has a different opinion from Hillary on Iraq a fairy tale that the media has played into.
The comments from Clinton were a fair play on Obama's stance, and were especially accurate in their portrayal of Obama's record in the Senate being the same as Hillary Clinton's record.
Obama and his supporters should be wary of these tactics. If they are allowed to continue and someone as liberal as I am is turned off by them, this could backfire on Obama in the general.
Most people in our country look forward to the day when we have our first African American President and our country has worked hard to come to realize the day when people can be judged by 'the content of their character rather than the color of their skin'. However a sense of entitlement or an expectation that an African American candidate needs to be treated specially only shows us that we haven't gotten there yet.
Britebart is reporting that former Virginia Governor Douglas Wilder 'is not ready to excuse comments former President Bill Clinton made about Barack Obama. ' This is regarding Bill Clinton's comments calling Obama's claiming that he has a different opinion from Hillary on Iraq a fairy tale that the media has played into.
The comments from Clinton were a fair play on Obama's stance, and were especially accurate in their portrayal of Obama's record in the Senate being the same as Hillary Clinton's record.
Obama and his supporters should be wary of these tactics. If they are allowed to continue and someone as liberal as I am is turned off by them, this could backfire on Obama in the general.
Most people in our country look forward to the day when we have our first African American President and our country has worked hard to come to realize the day when people can be judged by 'the content of their character rather than the color of their skin'. However a sense of entitlement or an expectation that an African American candidate needs to be treated specially only shows us that we haven't gotten there yet.
Friday, January 4, 2008
Mitt Romney - Brits Don't Like Him Either
Mitt Romney just can't get a break. Check out this online poll at the London Times that gives their readers a chance to 'vote in the US primary'. The results I got were this.
McCain - 41.4%
Romney - 4.8%
Rudy - 17.7%
Huckabee - 12.5%
And the big winner of the night placing second exceeding expectations????
Ron Paul - 17.9%
What? Don't they realize that he's a nut?
On the Dem side, no real suprises though. Obama 60%, Clinton 25% and Edwards 9%. I guess there is something of a suprise. Where did all that Clinton goodwill of the world go?
Oh, and if you do look at the actual poll, notice the option at the bottom that allows you to change your vote after you've seen the results. They have this Iowa stuff down cold.
McCain - 41.4%
Romney - 4.8%
Rudy - 17.7%
Huckabee - 12.5%
And the big winner of the night placing second exceeding expectations????
Ron Paul - 17.9%
What? Don't they realize that he's a nut?
On the Dem side, no real suprises though. Obama 60%, Clinton 25% and Edwards 9%. I guess there is something of a suprise. Where did all that Clinton goodwill of the world go?
Oh, and if you do look at the actual poll, notice the option at the bottom that allows you to change your vote after you've seen the results. They have this Iowa stuff down cold.
John Edward's New Client
Apparently if John Edwards does pull out of the Presidential race after New Hampshire, he won't be out of work for long. It looks like Glenn Beck will be in the market for a good Trial Lawyer.
It should be intersting to see if Beck actually sues, you know, considering how all of those evil fake malpractice lawsuits are driving up our medical costs and all.
It should be intersting to see if Beck actually sues, you know, considering how all of those evil fake malpractice lawsuits are driving up our medical costs and all.
No Mo' Joe Part II
Over almost as soon as it started Joe Biden and Chris Dodd both dropped out out of the race for the President last night. As most know I was pulling for Joe Biden to make more headway than he did, first because during many of the debates he seem to come across as the adult in the room when issues of foreign policy were discussed, and secondly having grown up in Michigan watching the Detroit Lions for all these years, I've been subconciously programmed to root for the team with no chance of ever winning. Perhaps that's why I'm a liberal? :) Oh well.
I thank Dodd and Biden for their time and efforts on our behalf and all the best.
As life generally works, one door closes and another opportunity comes along, so hopefully this just gives Dodd more time to organize his philibuster of the FISA bill and run for Senate Majority Leader. Go team Dodd!
Really though, why would anybody agree to give immunity to the Telecoms if we aren't even allowed to know what they did in the first place? Oh well...... another time.
I thank Dodd and Biden for their time and efforts on our behalf and all the best.
As life generally works, one door closes and another opportunity comes along, so hopefully this just gives Dodd more time to organize his philibuster of the FISA bill and run for Senate Majority Leader. Go team Dodd!
Really though, why would anybody agree to give immunity to the Telecoms if we aren't even allowed to know what they did in the first place? Oh well...... another time.
Thursday, January 3, 2008
Charlie Rangel, Man of Reagan
In what I'm sure is a sign of the coming apocolypse, George Will is singing the praises of Democrat Charlie Rangel, calling him a closet Reaganite of all things. He starts out with a recapping of the life story of Rangel, going from being a college drop out, joining the military, serving in the Korean War (at the Chosin Resevoir, I believe) and then coming home and graduating high school and eventualy going to law school and going on to the Congress. It is a fairly inspirational story.
The gist of the article comes down to this:
It certainly isn't the quote you would expect from a Democrat if all you read were right wing publications and even most left wing publications for that matter and I think Rangel is right. Democrats have for that past couple of decades have been playing the games of the tax cut junkies, and that is the constant manipulation of the tax codes to try to exempt more and more people at the bottom. Part of the reason the Dems bottomed out in the 90s is that with the EIC we reached a point where the people on the bottom either paid nothing or got back more in from a tax return than they paid in taxes.
Just as you aren't providing health insurance to poor people by providing tax deductions, you don't create opportunity for the poor to improve thier lives by cutting what little taxes they do pay. You create opportunity for people by providing as many educational opportunities as possible, by providing small business loans, by enhancing worker rights, and by insisting on fair trade. We have to balance the interests of workers with the interests of business. We can't simply have a supply side economic policy and I'd bet that is where Rangel parts ways with Reagan.
The gist of the article comes down to this:
Regarding two matters, Rangel is a Reaganite. Ronald Reagan opposed using the tax code "as a means of achieving changes in our social structure." Rangel -- in his 19th term, a man of House proprieties -- says, "I don't think the tax code should be a substitute for the appropriations process in making social change." Social policy should be, he thinks, the province of "the standing committees." The question for tax writers "is not just what is fair and equitable but what is good for the economy."
It certainly isn't the quote you would expect from a Democrat if all you read were right wing publications and even most left wing publications for that matter and I think Rangel is right. Democrats have for that past couple of decades have been playing the games of the tax cut junkies, and that is the constant manipulation of the tax codes to try to exempt more and more people at the bottom. Part of the reason the Dems bottomed out in the 90s is that with the EIC we reached a point where the people on the bottom either paid nothing or got back more in from a tax return than they paid in taxes.
Just as you aren't providing health insurance to poor people by providing tax deductions, you don't create opportunity for the poor to improve thier lives by cutting what little taxes they do pay. You create opportunity for people by providing as many educational opportunities as possible, by providing small business loans, by enhancing worker rights, and by insisting on fair trade. We have to balance the interests of workers with the interests of business. We can't simply have a supply side economic policy and I'd bet that is where Rangel parts ways with Reagan.
Obama and Huckabee
Everybody knows the results of the Iowa Caucus by now. Obama and Huckster took home the gold. But what is amazing is what an amazing rebuke this was for George W. Bush. What a rebuke it was for the Iraq War. Things are going better in Iraq yet still the candidates that were able to realize that even given that Americans still haven't forgiven George W. Bush for the war. They haven't forgiven the Republicans for being so cavalier in their treatment of our national security and our troops.
I get frequently assailed over at Ankle Biting Pundits for making the claim that Republicans don't really care about our troops, but you can't possibly be for the troops and be so callous to the plight of the troops and our returning veterans. If you care for the troops then you care about giving them the proper equipment, a proper strategy for victory and the proper medical care when they get home.
The campaign of Mike Huckabee scares the Republican party. The conventional wisdom is that Mike Huckabee scares the Republican party because he can't win. He can't win because he is a religious nut. There is something bigger though that is running as an undercurrent here. Mike Huckabee is threatening to bring the evangelical vote back to the center.
I honestly wouldn't want someone in the charge of our government who has religious views as conservative as Mike Huckabee, be we should be rejoice in his victory, because if the further Mike Huckabee goes the more likely that this represents the shattering of the Reagan coalition and the resurrection of the FDR coalition. And American will Progress once again.
So congrats to Barack Obama and Mike Huckabee!!!!
I get frequently assailed over at Ankle Biting Pundits for making the claim that Republicans don't really care about our troops, but you can't possibly be for the troops and be so callous to the plight of the troops and our returning veterans. If you care for the troops then you care about giving them the proper equipment, a proper strategy for victory and the proper medical care when they get home.
The campaign of Mike Huckabee scares the Republican party. The conventional wisdom is that Mike Huckabee scares the Republican party because he can't win. He can't win because he is a religious nut. There is something bigger though that is running as an undercurrent here. Mike Huckabee is threatening to bring the evangelical vote back to the center.
I honestly wouldn't want someone in the charge of our government who has religious views as conservative as Mike Huckabee, be we should be rejoice in his victory, because if the further Mike Huckabee goes the more likely that this represents the shattering of the Reagan coalition and the resurrection of the FDR coalition. And American will Progress once again.
So congrats to Barack Obama and Mike Huckabee!!!!
Wednesday, January 2, 2008
The Huck Man Cometh
Listening to the popular median one would think that Mike Huckabee is a one trick pony. He may just win Iowa but the conventional wisdom seems to be that it is over from there.
But looking at Real clear Politics seems to tell a vastly different story. He is trailing the pack in New Hampshire polling at a RCP average of 9% as compared to McCain's 32%.
But after New Hampshire the campaign moves to Michigan where Huckabee is in a statistical dead heat with Romney. 18.8% for the Huckster as compared to 19.8% for Romney.
From there it is on to Nevada where Huck is at 15.7% as compared to Romney and Rudy tied at 23%.
Then it is South Carolina where Huck is leading Romney 25.8% to Romney's 19.3%.
Finishing off the month of January is Florida where Huckabee is trailing Rudy 25.3% to 23.3%.
No wonder Romney and McCain are going so hard after the Huckster. It is a very easy to image a scenario where Huckabee leaves January having won 5 of 6 primaries and leading the delegate count by a mile. Ofcourse then comes California where Huck is again second only to Rudy.
These numbers will must have the Rockafeller Repubs squirming.
But looking at Real clear Politics seems to tell a vastly different story. He is trailing the pack in New Hampshire polling at a RCP average of 9% as compared to McCain's 32%.
But after New Hampshire the campaign moves to Michigan where Huckabee is in a statistical dead heat with Romney. 18.8% for the Huckster as compared to 19.8% for Romney.
From there it is on to Nevada where Huck is at 15.7% as compared to Romney and Rudy tied at 23%.
Then it is South Carolina where Huck is leading Romney 25.8% to Romney's 19.3%.
Finishing off the month of January is Florida where Huckabee is trailing Rudy 25.3% to 23.3%.
No wonder Romney and McCain are going so hard after the Huckster. It is a very easy to image a scenario where Huckabee leaves January having won 5 of 6 primaries and leading the delegate count by a mile. Ofcourse then comes California where Huck is again second only to Rudy.
These numbers will must have the Rockafeller Repubs squirming.
No Mo' Joe
Yahoo News is reporting that ole Joementum himself has selflessly come forward to declare that he is not interested in being John McCain's running mate.
Did anybody bother to ask McCain if he even wanted Joe Lieberman as his running mate? I'm sure it would be hard for McCain to turn down a man who proved to be such an asset the last time he secured a slot on the national ticket, but it would be impolite to assume.
It cold be fun though. We could call it the Unified Traitor '08 ticket. McCain being considered the traitor of the right, and Lieberman being.......well Lieberman.
Did anybody bother to ask McCain if he even wanted Joe Lieberman as his running mate? I'm sure it would be hard for McCain to turn down a man who proved to be such an asset the last time he secured a slot on the national ticket, but it would be impolite to assume.
It cold be fun though. We could call it the Unified Traitor '08 ticket. McCain being considered the traitor of the right, and Lieberman being.......well Lieberman.
Defacto Line Item Veto
The Righties are all excited because they feel the Bush Administration has found a way to implement a line item veto on earmarks without all of the messy hard word of actually having to amend the Constitution or pass a law.
Apparently Bush has decided that he can simply enact the line item veto by simply telling the government agencies not to spend the money as directed by Congress.
You see we're a nation of laws. And we have a Constitution. And we must follow the laws and the Constitution to the letter, unless ofcourse Republicans find a convenient way to ignore that laws. And the Constitution.
Bush is a genious I say!! Who else could have found so many originalist intent executive powers in the Constitution that amazingly nobody knew were there! Even the founders!
Update: Kagro X over at the Daily Kos has a more in depth article discussing this issue that is definitely worth a read. Apparently this use of Presidential power originated in the Reagan administration, well I guess if Reagan was the origin then it must be right.
Apparently Bush has decided that he can simply enact the line item veto by simply telling the government agencies not to spend the money as directed by Congress.
You see we're a nation of laws. And we have a Constitution. And we must follow the laws and the Constitution to the letter, unless ofcourse Republicans find a convenient way to ignore that laws. And the Constitution.
Bush is a genious I say!! Who else could have found so many originalist intent executive powers in the Constitution that amazingly nobody knew were there! Even the founders!
Update: Kagro X over at the Daily Kos has a more in depth article discussing this issue that is definitely worth a read. Apparently this use of Presidential power originated in the Reagan administration, well I guess if Reagan was the origin then it must be right.
Them Rotten Liberals at the Washington Times
Tony Blankley over at the Washinton Times has an interesting editorial today regarding the success in Iraq. It starts out with the ole standard of blaming media for everything indicating that ofcourse the media is not reporting the 'good news' from Iraq. We've heard that before right? But he goes on to say that poll results are now showing that the American people are understanding that military progress is being made in Iraq.
Well Sparky if the media isn't reporting it, how exactly are the American people learning about it? It must be ESP or Claire Voyency or whatever the fuck type of supernatural power it is that would allow for people to come to that remote understanding (perhaps we should have the guys from ParanormalState investigate). The truth is, as always the media is doing a good job of portraying the news from Iraq. It isn't as positive as Blankley would like it to be simply because the true objective of 'The Surge', the political reconciliation of Iraq isn't taking shape. I'm not saying that it won't happen, but now is not the time to claim Victory V.8.3 again.
But what gets me most about Blankley's article is the following quotes:
Wow. Noting the human costs of the war in American and Iraqi terms. Noting the vast cost in treasure of the war. Noting driving thousands of muslims into the hands of the extremists. Noting the fact that we've been bumbling in Iraq for years. Holy Crap. A conservative on the pages on the Washinton Times pretty much saying that the criticisms of the left of this war have been right all along!
Blankely goes on to make an arguement that I've made for a while now. That if it is possible to succeed in Iraq that is the best path, and we may be on that path. Some people on the left have become to invested in the failure of Iraq and not willing to look at the problem going forward, rather they want to refight the decision to invade. But we Dems need to be willing to take credit for the fact that the turning point in Iraq was the turning point in US politics. The November 2006 election. Lets not blow it because we (rightfully) dislike and distrust Bush.
kwAwk
Well Sparky if the media isn't reporting it, how exactly are the American people learning about it? It must be ESP or Claire Voyency or whatever the fuck type of supernatural power it is that would allow for people to come to that remote understanding (perhaps we should have the guys from ParanormalState investigate). The truth is, as always the media is doing a good job of portraying the news from Iraq. It isn't as positive as Blankley would like it to be simply because the true objective of 'The Surge', the political reconciliation of Iraq isn't taking shape. I'm not saying that it won't happen, but now is not the time to claim Victory V.8.3 again.
But what gets me most about Blankley's article is the following quotes:
"First, of course, the debit side must be noted, foremost the human cost,
to date: about 4,000 dead American troops, about 30,000 injured, perhaps half
seriously, including more than 600 amputees and about 3,000 diagnosed traumatic
brain injuries. Many more Iraqis have been killed. The financial cost of the war
will run above $1 trillion. We have also, at least temporarily, driven thousands
of Muslims into the radical ranks, created great enmity in much of the Muslim
world (and not a little in Europe also.)"
"If, after years of stumbling and bumbling, the enduring strength and
eventual wisdom of the American people can enter into the belly of the Islamist
world, overturn tyrants, empower the Muslim people with peaceable and prosperous
ways and intimidate two Islamist nuclear aspirants to renounce their
pretensions, we will show ourselves to be the strong horse."
Wow. Noting the human costs of the war in American and Iraqi terms. Noting the vast cost in treasure of the war. Noting driving thousands of muslims into the hands of the extremists. Noting the fact that we've been bumbling in Iraq for years. Holy Crap. A conservative on the pages on the Washinton Times pretty much saying that the criticisms of the left of this war have been right all along!
Blankely goes on to make an arguement that I've made for a while now. That if it is possible to succeed in Iraq that is the best path, and we may be on that path. Some people on the left have become to invested in the failure of Iraq and not willing to look at the problem going forward, rather they want to refight the decision to invade. But we Dems need to be willing to take credit for the fact that the turning point in Iraq was the turning point in US politics. The November 2006 election. Lets not blow it because we (rightfully) dislike and distrust Bush.
kwAwk
Tuesday, January 1, 2008
Bhutto Cries Foul From the Grave....
CNN is reporting that Benazir Bhutto was planning to meeting with Republican Arlen Spector and Democrat Patrick Kennedy on the day of her assasination to provide them with evidence that the Pakistani government was planning on rigging the upcoming elections for Prime Minister. Unfortunately I think the reaction of most everybody here is the US is going to be: "Duh. It's Pakistan, what do you expect".
But what gets me is the next claim from the article:
But what gets me is the next claim from the article:
Ninety percent of the equipment that the USA gave the government of Pakistan to fight terrorism is being used to monitor and to keep a check on their political opponents," the report says.
You've gotta love 3rd world countries ehh? The country is the new home for world terror. Their President has had numerous assasination attempts against him. Their political candidates are under constant attacks. The fanatical Islamists are drooling over the prospects of getting ahold of the country's nuclear weapons. And all can do is take the equipment we've sent them to help out and use it to futher degrade their own political institutions.
This is world George Bush has led us into. Our national security, ney, world security is in the hands of a government in Iraq which can't seem to compromise to save itself, a government in Afghanistan that has no control over its country, and a government in Pakistan which is more interested in fighting itself than Al Qaida.
If I were a religious person, I'd say 'God help us'.
kwAwk
Our Great Inaugural Post
The new year is here. We're counting down the days to the elections in 2008 and to the welcome day, shortly over one year from now when George W. Bush will finally be tossed onto the great scrap heap of history. Ooh admit how you long for that day to come! It is no secret! The real secret is how much the Republicans are longing for the day just as much.
So what is the point of this blog? What I'm aiming to do is to create a different form of blog. The standard format for a blog that I've come across seems to be a place where people can gather to demostrate to themselves exactly why everybody else in the world is downright stupid!! Except ofcourse those people who believe in exactly the same thing that the proprietor of the blog believes in. I want a free place where people can have fun, discuss issues, and maybe learn something new once in a while.
I am a Democrat and I am a liberal. I believe that liberals always win on important matters, it is just a matter of waiting long enough for the foot draggers to die off. Democracy during the revolution. Slavery during the civil war. Sufferage. The Sherman Anti-Trust Act. The League of Nations and the United Nations. The rise of Unionism. The New Deal. The Civil Rights Movements. And soon to come the equal rights for homosexuals.
But lets not confuse that with the notion of Liberals always being right. There has yet to be a perfect person born, and there has yet to be a ideology perfected. So expect me to be really hard on the Wingnuts, and loonies on the Right. But expect me to be just as hard on the left.
Anyways, hopefully I can at least be fair.
To whomever reads this, thanks for coming, and let me know what you do and don't enjoy!
kwAwk
So what is the point of this blog? What I'm aiming to do is to create a different form of blog. The standard format for a blog that I've come across seems to be a place where people can gather to demostrate to themselves exactly why everybody else in the world is downright stupid!! Except ofcourse those people who believe in exactly the same thing that the proprietor of the blog believes in. I want a free place where people can have fun, discuss issues, and maybe learn something new once in a while.
I am a Democrat and I am a liberal. I believe that liberals always win on important matters, it is just a matter of waiting long enough for the foot draggers to die off. Democracy during the revolution. Slavery during the civil war. Sufferage. The Sherman Anti-Trust Act. The League of Nations and the United Nations. The rise of Unionism. The New Deal. The Civil Rights Movements. And soon to come the equal rights for homosexuals.
But lets not confuse that with the notion of Liberals always being right. There has yet to be a perfect person born, and there has yet to be a ideology perfected. So expect me to be really hard on the Wingnuts, and loonies on the Right. But expect me to be just as hard on the left.
Anyways, hopefully I can at least be fair.
To whomever reads this, thanks for coming, and let me know what you do and don't enjoy!
kwAwk
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)