Haven't written for the last couple of days because there's not much more to say that I haven't said already. Feel free to click on past blogs to re-live the thrill of discovery. (I am kidding.)
Comrade Osama on TV again today, promoting socialized medicine. Looking for the data from the Lewin Group, which ran the numbers and determined that about 160 million of the currently-insured would be dumped into a socialized medicine program, I came across a video from ABC-TV's "We love socialism!" special dedicated to giving Mr. Comrade maximum free air time.
(You know, I was a magazine editor for a while. We used to get "PSAs," public service announcments, from charities and similar organizations. We'd run them sometimes if we had an empty space on a page that we couldn't fill with paid advertising. Perhaps this principle explains the ABC-TV thing.)
Mr. Shiels, an executve from the Lewin Group, told the Comrade what Lewin's findings were, that employers would stop offering benefits and dump employees into the socialized medicine option. Comrade Osama responded by promising to penalize -- oops! I mean, "dis-incentivize" -- any company that terminated its health care benefits and tossed their employees upon the stormy seas of public sentiment and misdirected good intentions.
OK. So what the hell is the point of offering socialized medicine in the first place? I mean, who is it supposed to serve? Most people in the USA get health care insurance from their employers, but employers will be banned from considering it? And will be "dis-incentivized" from using it. (Like, nationalize them? In this administration, it could happen.)
Does this sound like a load of b.s. to you? It does to me. Like, for one thing, exactly how would that be enforced? It's like the crap-and-trade provision for using energy-saving light bulbs. Think of how many jobs will be created in the Light Bulb Enforcement Tactical Squad (LBETS), ski-masked individuals armed with M-16s who will invade your home without warning, rip the shades off your table lamps and wall sconces, and check that you're using politically correct light bulbs. OMG! A 125-watt incandescent. Hey, mister, come with me.....
No doubt it's this kind of thing Pazzo Pelosi had in mind when she was howling "Jobs! Jobs! Jobs!" like a demented lottery winner in the House of Reps when the bill passed.
Then Comrade Osama keeps insisting that the socialized medicine program will pay doctors at acceptable rates, reduce fraud, and cut administrative costs. But this is purely PROVEN b.s. Look at Medicare and Medicaid. Many doctors refuse Medicare/Medicaid patients because those programs DO NOT pay the doctor's costs, require massive amounts of paperwork, and are subject to other types of non-medical regulation and bureaucratic interference. And I've said it before, but it's worth repeating -- The New York Times and Washington Post, both fond of enormous government -- set the Medicare/Medicaid fraud rate at about 15% of all their costs. They estimate that at about $60 BILLION per year.
But Comrade Osama's "public option" will not suffer from the same problems of the existing socialized medicine programs. No, his program will be much better. How's he going to do that? Well, we are talking about the Golden Boy here, the Messiah. Perhaps he's going to transport Santa's Little Helpers from the North Pole to implement and manage the program, or resurrect all the dead Catholic saints.
And there are how many insurance companies, insurance plans, health care providers in the market today? And Comrade Osama insists there is not enough competition? We need the federal government to get involved to provide competition? So the new buzzword for "socialism" is "competition"? He does do this kind of thing often -- rename things to make them appear more acceptable.
Sometimes I suspect that Comrade Osama arrived on earth about three days ago in a space capsule from zeta reticuli. He demonstrates daily that he has no awareness of what's actually occuring on earth. Perhaps his latest information comes from episodes of "I Love Lucy" broadcast into space 50 years ago.
The most amazing thing is the numbers of people who are willing to believe him. Or maybe are just hoping for a seat on the gravy train. Although, according to Rasmussen Reports, those numbers are diminishing. The last couple of days, the number of people polled who "strongly disapprove" of Comrade Osama has been higher than the numbers of people who "strongly approve" of him. So maybe Americans have finally recovered from their election hangover and are beginning to look at the facts.
And, on other issues.... Wanna run for congress? Here's a simple formula:
Get up every morning and stand in front of the mirror. Then repeat, "Gosh darn it, people like me!" You too might succeed in achieving your American Dream.
And I must say, when the new, psychotically-liberal senator from Minnesota did this bit on Saturday Night Live with Michael Jordan, that was one of the funniest things I've ever seen on TV. I do hope we can look forward to a steady stream of this kind of entertainment from the US Senate. It may distract them from legislating.
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Capitalism works
Listening to a bunch of Sunday morning political shows. Cap-and-tax and its possibilities for passing the Senate were mentioned. Many commentators brought up a number of issues, mainly that the legislation won't actually reduce carbon emissions by very much, won't reduce carbon emissions significantly globally because China and India aren't playing, and it mainly only gives Comrade Osama a different hand to play at upcoming international Climate Change events -- he'll be able to sell out the USA to the latest version of the Kyoto Treaty.
Wow, doesn't that just send a tingle up your leg?
Domestically, Pazzo Pelosi insists that cap-and-trade will add many jobs to the US economy in a new "green" sector, that is, making and installing windmills and solar panels. You know, Pazzo, if that were true it would already be happening without any compulsion from the federal government. If citizens were mad for green energy, and if it were affordable compared to fossil fuels, right now everyone would be trading in their old furnaces and air conditioners for the new technologies. The truth is, green power generation technologies are more expensive, less reliable, less applicable to things like cars. And massive windmill farms and solar panel installations -- those large enough to actually power a whole community -- come with their own disadvantages.
If there was money to be made in this field, a lot more capital would be moving toward it. As it is, a very few companies are wholly dedicated to green power -- primarily those in which Pazzo, Gore, and other green fanatics are heavily invested. The so-called green industry has, however, given rise to a lot of kinda dodgy "carbon offset exchanges" that on their faces look like schemes contrived by Bernie Madoff. (When you get on a plane, buy $50 worth of carbon offsets that I will give to my friend who is experimenting with solar batteries in his garage.)
A big argument against the Alaskan pipeline was that it would prevent the caribou from migrating and otherwise displace all kinds of wildlife, etc., in the Arctic Circle. One thing -- exactly how much wildlife is there in the Arctic Circle? Not a really diverse range of critters can stand the cold or find food enough to sustain themselves there. And consider that the pipeline is passive 90% of the time and doesn't take up any more space than a highway.
Then look at wind farms and solar panels. They occupy much more space in more temperate climates and for that reason alone, would seem to disrupt the lives and habits of many more species, human and other. Are windmills and acres of mirror-like solar panels any more attractive than oil derecks? They will probably kill the sage and cacti living in their shadows, along with the entire spectrum of bugs and snakes and things that live on the sage and cacti.
Proponents also claim that forcing US citizens to abandon fossil fuels in favor of wind and solar -- and increasingly, biomass -- will free America from its dependence on foreign oil. However, we do have fossil fuel resouces in the US that we are forbidden to exploit, so that's just a lot of crap, isn't it? If freeing America from its dependence on foreign oil was the big issue, right now we have a lot of options to accomplish this, including nuclear, but apparently our dependence on foreign oil just isn't important enough to Comrade Osama and Pazzo Pelosi to let Americans take advantage of our domestic resources and ingenuity.
Biomass is a strange thing. Biomass is organic materials, mostly wood and wood products. Many people who are now promoting biomass as a fuel preferable to fossil fuels are the very same people who in the past have chained themselves to giant sequoias and even douglas firs, to protect certain species of squirrels and owls from losing their habitat. How do you get around that? I mean, were the tree-huggers reasonable then, or are they reasonable now? Or, just exactly when did these people ever concern themselves with reality? How can anyone believe their desperate pleas and protestations on anything, when they seem to just attach themselves to the latest subcultural fad or fancy?
And speaking of cultural fads and fancies.... Is there really any proof that CO2 is destroying the planet? We all exhale CO2 when we breathe out. Anyone working on any new technology to change that to create a more hopeful future for you and me? ("For you and me" should be sung.)
The Kyoto Treaty is simply a nightmare for both developed and underdeveloped nations, and ensures that the third world will remain poor, sick, and dependent. It's kinda like a global cap-and-trade scheme, whereby countries like the US, Japan, England, France, Germany, et. al., will be compelled to purchase carbon offsets from countries like Angola, which don't use them. It's simply another way to create a global welfare system. Proponents say the money the third world derives from worldwide cap-and-tax will fund its development. But how can these nations develop when development would mean eliminating their income from cap-and-tax? Their development would force them to become buyers rather than sellers of offsets, and ultimately that would drive up the cost of development and especially growth for everyone.
The Kyoto Treaty and its 2nd and 3rd generations are all half-baked drivel OR a thinly-disguised attempt at the 1st world to keep the 3rd world under its heel. Is this what the "We Are the World" people had in mind? I honestly don't think so, and I don't understand why they support it as one of their liberal causes. Except that they accept it like some kind of silver bullet to solve everyone's problems instantly. You know what? Real magic like that hardly ever happens.
What third world nations need is unrestricted capitalism -- that is, investment from outsiders to fund their own domestic industries. Radicals are fond of calling this sort of thing "industrial imperialism," but foreign investment serves a couple very important purposes. One is funding the R&D that goes into developing industry, or actually surveying a nation's resources and determining the best and most profitable pathways for development. Two, foreign-funded industry sets up the infrastructure of communications and transportation necessary for trade, as well as the internal legal protocols -- like establishing the principle of private property. Three, foreign-funded industry trains managers and technicians and pays them enough to improve their standard of living. In general, forein investment paves the way for domestic development and ownership of industry. And it's all done with a profit.
Isn't this a better model than the Kyoto Treaty? I mean, really, think about it. That's all I ask.
Finally, and never the least consideration, capitalism ensures political freedom and individual liberty -- so long as it's individuals and private investors who own, operate, and work for a nation's industries. These people all become stakeholders in a free society and grow reluctant to surrender their property, rights, and freedoms. Their personal individual ownership also gives them a powerful means of resistance to political demagogues and dictators. Like, the French Revolution could not have ever happened without the resources of the new bourgeois middle class behind it to fund and implement it. Poor, starving people rarely rebel. They usually just shuffle off into oblivion and die quietly.
Isn't capitalism a better model than the Kyoto Treaty? Really. For the love of God -- look at human history. Exactly who has succeeded and who has failed? And that's success by any measure -- material prosperity, health, freedom, a civil society.... you name it.
And this is even with full awareness that capitalism can bring excesses. Individuals will find opportunities in capitalism for crime and corruption, but not on the massive and unstoppable scale of government fraud and corruption -- both of which are hallmarks of governments in the third world (and more and more, in the USA) and are huge obstacles to their further development.
That's all for now. Have to go cut my grass while the good weather holds up -- or make hay while the sun shines, as we used to say in the US.
Wow, doesn't that just send a tingle up your leg?
Domestically, Pazzo Pelosi insists that cap-and-trade will add many jobs to the US economy in a new "green" sector, that is, making and installing windmills and solar panels. You know, Pazzo, if that were true it would already be happening without any compulsion from the federal government. If citizens were mad for green energy, and if it were affordable compared to fossil fuels, right now everyone would be trading in their old furnaces and air conditioners for the new technologies. The truth is, green power generation technologies are more expensive, less reliable, less applicable to things like cars. And massive windmill farms and solar panel installations -- those large enough to actually power a whole community -- come with their own disadvantages.
If there was money to be made in this field, a lot more capital would be moving toward it. As it is, a very few companies are wholly dedicated to green power -- primarily those in which Pazzo, Gore, and other green fanatics are heavily invested. The so-called green industry has, however, given rise to a lot of kinda dodgy "carbon offset exchanges" that on their faces look like schemes contrived by Bernie Madoff. (When you get on a plane, buy $50 worth of carbon offsets that I will give to my friend who is experimenting with solar batteries in his garage.)
A big argument against the Alaskan pipeline was that it would prevent the caribou from migrating and otherwise displace all kinds of wildlife, etc., in the Arctic Circle. One thing -- exactly how much wildlife is there in the Arctic Circle? Not a really diverse range of critters can stand the cold or find food enough to sustain themselves there. And consider that the pipeline is passive 90% of the time and doesn't take up any more space than a highway.
Then look at wind farms and solar panels. They occupy much more space in more temperate climates and for that reason alone, would seem to disrupt the lives and habits of many more species, human and other. Are windmills and acres of mirror-like solar panels any more attractive than oil derecks? They will probably kill the sage and cacti living in their shadows, along with the entire spectrum of bugs and snakes and things that live on the sage and cacti.
Proponents also claim that forcing US citizens to abandon fossil fuels in favor of wind and solar -- and increasingly, biomass -- will free America from its dependence on foreign oil. However, we do have fossil fuel resouces in the US that we are forbidden to exploit, so that's just a lot of crap, isn't it? If freeing America from its dependence on foreign oil was the big issue, right now we have a lot of options to accomplish this, including nuclear, but apparently our dependence on foreign oil just isn't important enough to Comrade Osama and Pazzo Pelosi to let Americans take advantage of our domestic resources and ingenuity.
Biomass is a strange thing. Biomass is organic materials, mostly wood and wood products. Many people who are now promoting biomass as a fuel preferable to fossil fuels are the very same people who in the past have chained themselves to giant sequoias and even douglas firs, to protect certain species of squirrels and owls from losing their habitat. How do you get around that? I mean, were the tree-huggers reasonable then, or are they reasonable now? Or, just exactly when did these people ever concern themselves with reality? How can anyone believe their desperate pleas and protestations on anything, when they seem to just attach themselves to the latest subcultural fad or fancy?
And speaking of cultural fads and fancies.... Is there really any proof that CO2 is destroying the planet? We all exhale CO2 when we breathe out. Anyone working on any new technology to change that to create a more hopeful future for you and me? ("For you and me" should be sung.)
The Kyoto Treaty is simply a nightmare for both developed and underdeveloped nations, and ensures that the third world will remain poor, sick, and dependent. It's kinda like a global cap-and-trade scheme, whereby countries like the US, Japan, England, France, Germany, et. al., will be compelled to purchase carbon offsets from countries like Angola, which don't use them. It's simply another way to create a global welfare system. Proponents say the money the third world derives from worldwide cap-and-tax will fund its development. But how can these nations develop when development would mean eliminating their income from cap-and-tax? Their development would force them to become buyers rather than sellers of offsets, and ultimately that would drive up the cost of development and especially growth for everyone.
The Kyoto Treaty and its 2nd and 3rd generations are all half-baked drivel OR a thinly-disguised attempt at the 1st world to keep the 3rd world under its heel. Is this what the "We Are the World" people had in mind? I honestly don't think so, and I don't understand why they support it as one of their liberal causes. Except that they accept it like some kind of silver bullet to solve everyone's problems instantly. You know what? Real magic like that hardly ever happens.
What third world nations need is unrestricted capitalism -- that is, investment from outsiders to fund their own domestic industries. Radicals are fond of calling this sort of thing "industrial imperialism," but foreign investment serves a couple very important purposes. One is funding the R&D that goes into developing industry, or actually surveying a nation's resources and determining the best and most profitable pathways for development. Two, foreign-funded industry sets up the infrastructure of communications and transportation necessary for trade, as well as the internal legal protocols -- like establishing the principle of private property. Three, foreign-funded industry trains managers and technicians and pays them enough to improve their standard of living. In general, forein investment paves the way for domestic development and ownership of industry. And it's all done with a profit.
Isn't this a better model than the Kyoto Treaty? I mean, really, think about it. That's all I ask.
Finally, and never the least consideration, capitalism ensures political freedom and individual liberty -- so long as it's individuals and private investors who own, operate, and work for a nation's industries. These people all become stakeholders in a free society and grow reluctant to surrender their property, rights, and freedoms. Their personal individual ownership also gives them a powerful means of resistance to political demagogues and dictators. Like, the French Revolution could not have ever happened without the resources of the new bourgeois middle class behind it to fund and implement it. Poor, starving people rarely rebel. They usually just shuffle off into oblivion and die quietly.
Isn't capitalism a better model than the Kyoto Treaty? Really. For the love of God -- look at human history. Exactly who has succeeded and who has failed? And that's success by any measure -- material prosperity, health, freedom, a civil society.... you name it.
And this is even with full awareness that capitalism can bring excesses. Individuals will find opportunities in capitalism for crime and corruption, but not on the massive and unstoppable scale of government fraud and corruption -- both of which are hallmarks of governments in the third world (and more and more, in the USA) and are huge obstacles to their further development.
That's all for now. Have to go cut my grass while the good weather holds up -- or make hay while the sun shines, as we used to say in the US.
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Mr. Boehner goes to Washington
I watched John Boehner (R-Ohio) for a few minutes on C-SPAN this evening. He's the House Minority Leader. He was doing a "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" thing. He has a great voice, too.
The cap-and-tax bill was 1200 pages or so, and the Dems added a 300-page amendment onto at 3:09 am the morning it was due to come to a vote. So Boehner announced that congress should be aware of what's in the amendment (at least), and he began to read it on the floor of the House.
Thought that was cool, but I had to work and couldn't watch much more. Apparently he didn't read the whole amendment. I'm sure that would have looked too much like a filibuster. Maybe they should have done a filibuster, but I don't believe they are allowed in the House.
One of those silly bitches from Maine -- remember the Brewster Aunts from "Arsenic & Old Lace" -- in the senate is suggesting some kind of compromise now. Idiot. Just vote it down, you brainless twit. The thing is, though, Maine is a big state in the paper industry, and the paper industry LIKES this bill because they got the consideration out of it that they wanted (see the AFandPA.org website.)
So time for this sell-out senator to do her part to shove this stinking bill through, even though killing this piece of drek is the last hope we have to save the country. I suppose selling out the Republicans, when this senator is a Republican, makes her feel important. "Hey! Look at this! I may be small and have a silly squeaky little voice, but I can screw up the whole country! Na-na-nana-na." I truly do hope the Republicans refuse to fund her next campaign.
What happens in a republic when the representatives no longer represent? When they're more concerned about sucking up to some blockhead like Pazzo Pelosi or an industry organization than protecting the principles behind the nation? The paper industry is on the skids, anyway, especially in Maine. And, hey, buttheads -- Those jobs are gone! They aren't coming back no matter how many congressional butts you kiss!
But I guess the reasoning is, if you can't cut down trees anymore to make paper, you might as well burn down the forests and call it "biomass," which is, curiously, an acceptable option to the tree-huggers. Whatever happened to savng the ancient forests? Aren't they afraid of losing their homes up there in the high branches?
I mean, everyone says "Write your congressmen." My congressmen are a little to the left of Vladimir I. Lenin and/or got their senate seat by paying off a disgraced governor who's being tried for accepting bribes. In Illinois, we don't even get to elect senators. We buy them; or rather, they buy somebody, who buys somebody, who...
What good does it do? Congress doesn't listen. They're otherwise engaged -- eyes popping, tongues lolling out, watching their betters glide along Constitution Avenue in limos, so impressed at eating pineapple at a White House luau that they completely forget their principles -- if they had any to start with. Which is certainly debatable. Although I do commend Boehner, McCain (like him better now than when he was running for prez), and a few others.
Nothing about Iran on the news lately, either. I suppose the so-called "freedom fighters" got the message: "Speak up and we'll bust your head. Your humanity has no value weighed against our power."
I'm getting the message, too. Only in the USA, people can own guns. It's the 2nd Amendment, AKA "The Enforcement Clause." Jeez, I wonder whose side the military would take? Comrade Osama's or the peoples'? I begin to see the advantage of "citizen soldiers."
Is that what it takes? When representatives in a republic fail to represent, that's usually where it all ends. Seems to have worked for Abracadabrajab in Iran.
Unfortunately, in politics, violence almost always does work. You start pounding people into bloody pulp and killing their families and they usually do what you want them to do.
I don't think the majority (and I don't mean Dems, I just mean more than half) of the people in congress really understand that we don't automatically love or admire them. We don't regard them with the same high opinion that they regard themselves. We tend to suspect they're liars and thieves. And they usually prove themselves to be just that.
Take Conyer (D-Mich) for example. His wife's going to jail for taking a bribe. Well, she was convicted anyway. She could get three-to-five, I understand, but what do you want to bet she'll end up picking up trash along the highway for a couple weekends and the judge will call it even. Apparently Conyer (D-Mich) was asked to investigate Acorn for fraud and whatever the hell other range of criminal behavior they perform as federal contractors, but Conyer announced that "the powers that be" have decided against the investigation. Turns out, Conyer (D-Mich) himself is "the powers that be." Note the use of the royal plural. Another crook.
I should start listing the crooks, bribe-takers, people who can't honor their marriage vows, and those who have invested heavily in yet-to-be-born "green" industries (those who voted "yea" on cap-and-tax) and the like, but then there would be no end to this blog. And the liars... just call the roll, know what I mean?
Let's hope Kim Jung Il comes up with something that can hit Washington DC the next time he decides to get frisky -- in a couple days. Heard he'll probably do something on the 4th of July to add insult to injury. Like anyone in Washington understands that the 4th of July is anything but an excuse for a cook-out and fireworks. Be nice if a little nuke could cauterize DC, though. We'd all be better off.
The cap-and-tax bill was 1200 pages or so, and the Dems added a 300-page amendment onto at 3:09 am the morning it was due to come to a vote. So Boehner announced that congress should be aware of what's in the amendment (at least), and he began to read it on the floor of the House.
Thought that was cool, but I had to work and couldn't watch much more. Apparently he didn't read the whole amendment. I'm sure that would have looked too much like a filibuster. Maybe they should have done a filibuster, but I don't believe they are allowed in the House.
One of those silly bitches from Maine -- remember the Brewster Aunts from "Arsenic & Old Lace" -- in the senate is suggesting some kind of compromise now. Idiot. Just vote it down, you brainless twit. The thing is, though, Maine is a big state in the paper industry, and the paper industry LIKES this bill because they got the consideration out of it that they wanted (see the AFandPA.org website.)
So time for this sell-out senator to do her part to shove this stinking bill through, even though killing this piece of drek is the last hope we have to save the country. I suppose selling out the Republicans, when this senator is a Republican, makes her feel important. "Hey! Look at this! I may be small and have a silly squeaky little voice, but I can screw up the whole country! Na-na-nana-na." I truly do hope the Republicans refuse to fund her next campaign.
What happens in a republic when the representatives no longer represent? When they're more concerned about sucking up to some blockhead like Pazzo Pelosi or an industry organization than protecting the principles behind the nation? The paper industry is on the skids, anyway, especially in Maine. And, hey, buttheads -- Those jobs are gone! They aren't coming back no matter how many congressional butts you kiss!
But I guess the reasoning is, if you can't cut down trees anymore to make paper, you might as well burn down the forests and call it "biomass," which is, curiously, an acceptable option to the tree-huggers. Whatever happened to savng the ancient forests? Aren't they afraid of losing their homes up there in the high branches?
I mean, everyone says "Write your congressmen." My congressmen are a little to the left of Vladimir I. Lenin and/or got their senate seat by paying off a disgraced governor who's being tried for accepting bribes. In Illinois, we don't even get to elect senators. We buy them; or rather, they buy somebody, who buys somebody, who...
What good does it do? Congress doesn't listen. They're otherwise engaged -- eyes popping, tongues lolling out, watching their betters glide along Constitution Avenue in limos, so impressed at eating pineapple at a White House luau that they completely forget their principles -- if they had any to start with. Which is certainly debatable. Although I do commend Boehner, McCain (like him better now than when he was running for prez), and a few others.
Nothing about Iran on the news lately, either. I suppose the so-called "freedom fighters" got the message: "Speak up and we'll bust your head. Your humanity has no value weighed against our power."
I'm getting the message, too. Only in the USA, people can own guns. It's the 2nd Amendment, AKA "The Enforcement Clause." Jeez, I wonder whose side the military would take? Comrade Osama's or the peoples'? I begin to see the advantage of "citizen soldiers."
Is that what it takes? When representatives in a republic fail to represent, that's usually where it all ends. Seems to have worked for Abracadabrajab in Iran.
Unfortunately, in politics, violence almost always does work. You start pounding people into bloody pulp and killing their families and they usually do what you want them to do.
I don't think the majority (and I don't mean Dems, I just mean more than half) of the people in congress really understand that we don't automatically love or admire them. We don't regard them with the same high opinion that they regard themselves. We tend to suspect they're liars and thieves. And they usually prove themselves to be just that.
Take Conyer (D-Mich) for example. His wife's going to jail for taking a bribe. Well, she was convicted anyway. She could get three-to-five, I understand, but what do you want to bet she'll end up picking up trash along the highway for a couple weekends and the judge will call it even. Apparently Conyer (D-Mich) was asked to investigate Acorn for fraud and whatever the hell other range of criminal behavior they perform as federal contractors, but Conyer announced that "the powers that be" have decided against the investigation. Turns out, Conyer (D-Mich) himself is "the powers that be." Note the use of the royal plural. Another crook.
I should start listing the crooks, bribe-takers, people who can't honor their marriage vows, and those who have invested heavily in yet-to-be-born "green" industries (those who voted "yea" on cap-and-tax) and the like, but then there would be no end to this blog. And the liars... just call the roll, know what I mean?
Let's hope Kim Jung Il comes up with something that can hit Washington DC the next time he decides to get frisky -- in a couple days. Heard he'll probably do something on the 4th of July to add insult to injury. Like anyone in Washington understands that the 4th of July is anything but an excuse for a cook-out and fireworks. Be nice if a little nuke could cauterize DC, though. We'd all be better off.
Friday, June 26, 2009
The day the glamour died
Farrah Fawcett died this morning; Michael Jackson died this afternoon. Wow. I didn't feel a close personal attachment to either one of them, but sad for the loss of both. And both at one time or another personified -- or maybe created -- a momentary popular ideal of glamour and success.
Funny... With the news of Farrah Fawcett this morning, one TV station showed a snippet from a shampoo commercial she did with Penny Marshall about a million years ago. The set-up was, Farrah was the pretty and popular roommate, Penny Marshall was the less attractive sidekick. It's just strange to look back at that. At the time, no one had heard of either one of them and it would be a few years before either was associated with an actual name.
Do remember that damn "big hair" style with the long bangs curling away from your face. That was so incredibly popular and looked so dorky on so many other girls, almost like they were peeping at your from behind a ruffled curtain. You can see the bad copies of that hair style every now and then on the reruns of "Family Feud" on the Game Show Network. That big hair and a few years later, the shoulder pads. Both trends at some point kinda got beyond any type of reasonable control.
And I just can't help but feel sorry for Michael Jackson. First of all, I remember when I was a kid (a few years before Michael Jackson was) driving through Gary, Ind., on one or another vacation. The steel mills were still open. It'd be sunny in Chicago, then Gary was like you'd suddenly driven into an overcast, the air was so polluted. It always smelled like burnt metal. And you could actually see like large particles of something suspended in it, particles larger than dust but smaller than cinders, just kinda hanging in the air. Michael Jackson spent at least part of his childhood in Gary.
A lot of comments about Michael Jackson never having a childhood. Just the opposite: he never could grow up. By the time he was a teenager, he was such a big star -- so recognizable, and so many incomes depending upon him -- that he never really had the opportunity to go through the typical horrors of high school and pimples and all that kind of thing. If his parents wouldn't do something for him, he could pay someone else to get it done.
A long time ago a big topic on the therapeutic talk shows was the results of a study that indicated that kids who'd been spoiled and pampered all their lives exhibited similar behaviors and neuroses as kids who'd been abused and neglected. I do believe you need to experience both bad and good to learn to recognize and understand the difference. I worry about kids who grow up on Ritilin for the same reason. How are they ever supposed to learn how to control themselves without chemistry? Kids are supposed to run around like crazy maniacs (or wild indians, as my mom would say, so politically incorrect.) The maturing process is learning how to direct their own behavior -- learning usually through trial and error.
Commented to my mom one time about those electric-socket caps they have now so your toddlers don't stick their fingers in the wall sockets. I said something like, "I remember being almost electrocuted." Mom just looked at me for a minute, like trying to figure out if I was blaming her for something, then she said, "Well, you only did it once." For sure. She didn't raise any stupid kids.
Michael Jackson was strange. Quite possibly he never really understood, or ever had to learn, social behavioral norms or expectations. All that ever mattered was what he did on stage. All of his energy went into creating the perfect illusion. How do you define reality then? He was probably over-sensitive, never having to learn the emotional defenses most of us acquire as a matter of survival to get past the senior prom disaster and not being picked for the football team. And he was incredibly talented. One of the best dancers I've ever seen. That takes enormous discipline.
Just too bad. Doesn't matter to me how he died, so much as the strange legacy he leaves behind. By the time he was really popular, I'd moved beyond listening to Top Ten music, but remember a young girl I worked with for a time involving me in this conversation about how Michael Jackson was probably a really nice guy, even though at that time there was a big question about his sexual orientation -- this was before he was accused of being a little too interested in children. I think he'd just acquired the skeleton of the Elephant Man, and his chimp, Bubbles, was another curiosity.
Then came his apparent fixation on children. It is entirely possible that he simply felt most comfortable around children without any really evil or sexual intentions. You know where children are coming from and they usually don't strike out to hurt you for no reason, don't understand that a Pop Star is supposed to be... whatever. They wouldn't befriend him for his money or fame, or spend three hours with him and then try to sell their story to the National Enquirer -- though apparently their parents would.
Poor Michael. I hope he's at peace. If you listen to his earliest recordings with the Jackson Five, there's such a gleeful abandon in his voice. And R.I.P. to Farrah, too.
And I still haven't gotten over the fact that Frank Sinatra is no longer with us, or Bob Hope, Jimmy Stewart, Cary Grant, Marilyn Monroe, or John Wayne. I grew up watching "The Late Show," and still have a strong preference for old black-and-white movies. No amount of special effects can replace a plot and characterization. I remember being maybe seven or eight years old and my mom taking my sister and I with her to see "Love Me Tender," Elvis Presley's first movie. He dies in the end. That was the first movie I ever cried over, and I cried all the way home. I'm sure my mom never expected that.
Re-makes just aren't the same. Can you ever imagine anyone surpassing that scene in "On the Waterfront"? When Marlon Brando, turns to his brother, Karl Malden, and says, "I coulda been somebody... I coulda been a contender." Just thinking about it makes me cry. Think I was halfway through "Teahouse of the August Moon" when I realized which character Brando was playing. Then sat silently for a minute trying to wrap my mind around that. He was probably one of the best actors who ever lived. He grew up only a couple miles from where I live now. "People around here might think you're a one-eyed jack, but I seen the other side of your face...."
I'm glad we have audio and visual recording technology today. No one can ever know what Chopin sounded like when he played, or exactly how Beethoven conducted his own symphonies. I love ballet, and without film, or digital now, it could never be recorded. I believe at least one or two audio recordings of Sarah Bernhardt exist, but no visual. But now, like the famous quote says, "Death is nothing at all...."
Really, we have all these people forever.
Funny... With the news of Farrah Fawcett this morning, one TV station showed a snippet from a shampoo commercial she did with Penny Marshall about a million years ago. The set-up was, Farrah was the pretty and popular roommate, Penny Marshall was the less attractive sidekick. It's just strange to look back at that. At the time, no one had heard of either one of them and it would be a few years before either was associated with an actual name.
Do remember that damn "big hair" style with the long bangs curling away from your face. That was so incredibly popular and looked so dorky on so many other girls, almost like they were peeping at your from behind a ruffled curtain. You can see the bad copies of that hair style every now and then on the reruns of "Family Feud" on the Game Show Network. That big hair and a few years later, the shoulder pads. Both trends at some point kinda got beyond any type of reasonable control.
And I just can't help but feel sorry for Michael Jackson. First of all, I remember when I was a kid (a few years before Michael Jackson was) driving through Gary, Ind., on one or another vacation. The steel mills were still open. It'd be sunny in Chicago, then Gary was like you'd suddenly driven into an overcast, the air was so polluted. It always smelled like burnt metal. And you could actually see like large particles of something suspended in it, particles larger than dust but smaller than cinders, just kinda hanging in the air. Michael Jackson spent at least part of his childhood in Gary.
A lot of comments about Michael Jackson never having a childhood. Just the opposite: he never could grow up. By the time he was a teenager, he was such a big star -- so recognizable, and so many incomes depending upon him -- that he never really had the opportunity to go through the typical horrors of high school and pimples and all that kind of thing. If his parents wouldn't do something for him, he could pay someone else to get it done.
A long time ago a big topic on the therapeutic talk shows was the results of a study that indicated that kids who'd been spoiled and pampered all their lives exhibited similar behaviors and neuroses as kids who'd been abused and neglected. I do believe you need to experience both bad and good to learn to recognize and understand the difference. I worry about kids who grow up on Ritilin for the same reason. How are they ever supposed to learn how to control themselves without chemistry? Kids are supposed to run around like crazy maniacs (or wild indians, as my mom would say, so politically incorrect.) The maturing process is learning how to direct their own behavior -- learning usually through trial and error.
Commented to my mom one time about those electric-socket caps they have now so your toddlers don't stick their fingers in the wall sockets. I said something like, "I remember being almost electrocuted." Mom just looked at me for a minute, like trying to figure out if I was blaming her for something, then she said, "Well, you only did it once." For sure. She didn't raise any stupid kids.
Michael Jackson was strange. Quite possibly he never really understood, or ever had to learn, social behavioral norms or expectations. All that ever mattered was what he did on stage. All of his energy went into creating the perfect illusion. How do you define reality then? He was probably over-sensitive, never having to learn the emotional defenses most of us acquire as a matter of survival to get past the senior prom disaster and not being picked for the football team. And he was incredibly talented. One of the best dancers I've ever seen. That takes enormous discipline.
Just too bad. Doesn't matter to me how he died, so much as the strange legacy he leaves behind. By the time he was really popular, I'd moved beyond listening to Top Ten music, but remember a young girl I worked with for a time involving me in this conversation about how Michael Jackson was probably a really nice guy, even though at that time there was a big question about his sexual orientation -- this was before he was accused of being a little too interested in children. I think he'd just acquired the skeleton of the Elephant Man, and his chimp, Bubbles, was another curiosity.
Then came his apparent fixation on children. It is entirely possible that he simply felt most comfortable around children without any really evil or sexual intentions. You know where children are coming from and they usually don't strike out to hurt you for no reason, don't understand that a Pop Star is supposed to be... whatever. They wouldn't befriend him for his money or fame, or spend three hours with him and then try to sell their story to the National Enquirer -- though apparently their parents would.
Poor Michael. I hope he's at peace. If you listen to his earliest recordings with the Jackson Five, there's such a gleeful abandon in his voice. And R.I.P. to Farrah, too.
And I still haven't gotten over the fact that Frank Sinatra is no longer with us, or Bob Hope, Jimmy Stewart, Cary Grant, Marilyn Monroe, or John Wayne. I grew up watching "The Late Show," and still have a strong preference for old black-and-white movies. No amount of special effects can replace a plot and characterization. I remember being maybe seven or eight years old and my mom taking my sister and I with her to see "Love Me Tender," Elvis Presley's first movie. He dies in the end. That was the first movie I ever cried over, and I cried all the way home. I'm sure my mom never expected that.
Re-makes just aren't the same. Can you ever imagine anyone surpassing that scene in "On the Waterfront"? When Marlon Brando, turns to his brother, Karl Malden, and says, "I coulda been somebody... I coulda been a contender." Just thinking about it makes me cry. Think I was halfway through "Teahouse of the August Moon" when I realized which character Brando was playing. Then sat silently for a minute trying to wrap my mind around that. He was probably one of the best actors who ever lived. He grew up only a couple miles from where I live now. "People around here might think you're a one-eyed jack, but I seen the other side of your face...."
I'm glad we have audio and visual recording technology today. No one can ever know what Chopin sounded like when he played, or exactly how Beethoven conducted his own symphonies. I love ballet, and without film, or digital now, it could never be recorded. I believe at least one or two audio recordings of Sarah Bernhardt exist, but no visual. But now, like the famous quote says, "Death is nothing at all...."
Really, we have all these people forever.
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Socialized medicine gibberish
Whew! What a day so far. I'm actually sorry for Governor Sanford. He seems so contrite. Doubt he would be so affected by this all if he didn't truly believe in marital fidelity and all that.
And here's hoping Comrade Osama's socialized medicine snake oil pitch is buried under these more sensational events.
Just saw Catherine Sibelius, Welfare Czarina (?), in a brief interview on Fox. Like several others from the regime who've spoken on the issue lately, she's talking about how the "government option" in health care (that's the government-run socialist medicine program) will "level the playing field."
Oh, these people are so geniunely and unintentionally funny. They just make my day!
How does a government-funded, government-run option "level the playing field"?
1.) The government has the US Treasury -- what's left of it, after TARP, the GM bail-out, the Stimulus Package, and declining revenues -- to fund its socialist program. By contrast, the private insurance companies have investors and customers to pay for theirs. By the way, this also explains why private insurance and any other industry is way more cost-effective, efficient and devoid of graft and fraud than government-run anything.
2.) The government can and probably will set arbitrary charges for doctors' services and hospital care. Private insurance doesn't have this kind of control over the expenses they cover.
3.) Ultimately, the government can hold a gun to your head, my head, the heads of doctors, nurses, and hospital administrators to compel them to do what the government directs -- like take serious pay cuts, implement rationed care, perform what the doctor himself may believe is inappropriate and even possibly harmful but less expensive procedures. Private insurers certainly don't have this kind of authority.
4.) Due to all of the above, the socialist option can and will completely undermine private insurers and crowd them all out of the marketplace. I believe this is why Comrade Osama is pushing so hard for the socialized medicine option. He wants another US industry to just fall into his lap, the way the financial industry and auto industry has. Then he can stand there and say, "Hey, I didn't ask for this." No, he's just assumes we're all stupid.
Any way you look at it, the "level playing field" is complete crap. And it's a line so often repeated, I just picture all these bureaucrats assembled in a large auditorium. Comrade Osama or one of his minions is at the podium, reading from a teleprompter:
"Repeat after me," he says. "The government option will provide a level playing field." All those assembled recite the Osama-approved mantra over and over until they get it right. And there was a quiz.
It doesn't have to make sense. Osama assumes the American people are so monumentally stupid we'll believe anything to be true if we hear it repeated often enough. But no, Comrade, that's your mistake, not mine.
And what is the demonstrated ultimate outcome of socialized medicine? I refer you to the Healthcare.Cato.org once again, "The Grass Is Greener," or my blogs from recent days ago about how socialized medicine operates in other countries.
Or closer to home, look at Medicare. How many competing insurance programs for seniors are there in the marketplace? Did Medicare create a "level playing field"? Has Medicare -- with $60 billion per year going to fraud -- made the insurance industry "more honest"? (By the way, I checked that $60 billion figure. It comes from stories that ran in the New York Times and the Washington Post, both extremely left-leaning rags, so we can probably assume that the fraud is even more rampant.)
Really. What a load of dung Comrade Osama and Sibelius are peddling. How can anyone trust these people anymore? I mean, when they lie so often and so well, how can you determine if and when they're ever telling the truth?
More realistically, the predictable outcome of socialized medicine is the closure of hospitals, and the mass exodus of highly-trained doctors, nurses, and other health care professionals from the health care industry. They just won't be able to make a decent living in health care anymore. They may end up making considerably less than an assembly line worker at GM -- and with lesser benefits.
For patients, this means long, long waits for exams and treatment, substandard and rationed care, and steadily rising co-pays to support a system that simply won't be worth it.
"Isn't this what you voted for?" Comrade Osama wants to know.
And here's hoping Comrade Osama's socialized medicine snake oil pitch is buried under these more sensational events.
Just saw Catherine Sibelius, Welfare Czarina (?), in a brief interview on Fox. Like several others from the regime who've spoken on the issue lately, she's talking about how the "government option" in health care (that's the government-run socialist medicine program) will "level the playing field."
Oh, these people are so geniunely and unintentionally funny. They just make my day!
How does a government-funded, government-run option "level the playing field"?
1.) The government has the US Treasury -- what's left of it, after TARP, the GM bail-out, the Stimulus Package, and declining revenues -- to fund its socialist program. By contrast, the private insurance companies have investors and customers to pay for theirs. By the way, this also explains why private insurance and any other industry is way more cost-effective, efficient and devoid of graft and fraud than government-run anything.
2.) The government can and probably will set arbitrary charges for doctors' services and hospital care. Private insurance doesn't have this kind of control over the expenses they cover.
3.) Ultimately, the government can hold a gun to your head, my head, the heads of doctors, nurses, and hospital administrators to compel them to do what the government directs -- like take serious pay cuts, implement rationed care, perform what the doctor himself may believe is inappropriate and even possibly harmful but less expensive procedures. Private insurers certainly don't have this kind of authority.
4.) Due to all of the above, the socialist option can and will completely undermine private insurers and crowd them all out of the marketplace. I believe this is why Comrade Osama is pushing so hard for the socialized medicine option. He wants another US industry to just fall into his lap, the way the financial industry and auto industry has. Then he can stand there and say, "Hey, I didn't ask for this." No, he's just assumes we're all stupid.
Any way you look at it, the "level playing field" is complete crap. And it's a line so often repeated, I just picture all these bureaucrats assembled in a large auditorium. Comrade Osama or one of his minions is at the podium, reading from a teleprompter:
"Repeat after me," he says. "The government option will provide a level playing field." All those assembled recite the Osama-approved mantra over and over until they get it right. And there was a quiz.
It doesn't have to make sense. Osama assumes the American people are so monumentally stupid we'll believe anything to be true if we hear it repeated often enough. But no, Comrade, that's your mistake, not mine.
And what is the demonstrated ultimate outcome of socialized medicine? I refer you to the Healthcare.Cato.org once again, "The Grass Is Greener," or my blogs from recent days ago about how socialized medicine operates in other countries.
Or closer to home, look at Medicare. How many competing insurance programs for seniors are there in the marketplace? Did Medicare create a "level playing field"? Has Medicare -- with $60 billion per year going to fraud -- made the insurance industry "more honest"? (By the way, I checked that $60 billion figure. It comes from stories that ran in the New York Times and the Washington Post, both extremely left-leaning rags, so we can probably assume that the fraud is even more rampant.)
Really. What a load of dung Comrade Osama and Sibelius are peddling. How can anyone trust these people anymore? I mean, when they lie so often and so well, how can you determine if and when they're ever telling the truth?
More realistically, the predictable outcome of socialized medicine is the closure of hospitals, and the mass exodus of highly-trained doctors, nurses, and other health care professionals from the health care industry. They just won't be able to make a decent living in health care anymore. They may end up making considerably less than an assembly line worker at GM -- and with lesser benefits.
For patients, this means long, long waits for exams and treatment, substandard and rationed care, and steadily rising co-pays to support a system that simply won't be worth it.
"Isn't this what you voted for?" Comrade Osama wants to know.
The ABC-TV town hall ballet
I don't know if it's true or not, but I've heard that in North Korea, Kim Jung Il has installed a radio or TV in every private home. This device is fixed on one channel that does nothing but spout pro-government drivel all day. Citizens can't turn it off.
Apparently in the USA, ABC-TV is vying for the role of service provider for this in the Osama regime.
They're doing what they call a "Town Hall Meeting" on socialized medicine. Although apparently only Comrade Osama and his minions will be represented; ABC-TV isn't inviting Republicans or other known opposition to present their views. They won't even take paid advertising from people who have a different view. They say they will allow questions from the audience.
Look, I've been to these things. This is pretty much how it works: If they've scheduled two hours for it, you can be sure at least one solid hour at least will be the pro-socialist crowd doing their sales pitches. They may include videotaped clips from pathetic people who don't have insurance. (I'm one of them. No one's been knocking on my door.) I'm not sure how ABC is setting up the format, but apparently they're doing an interview with Comrade Osama, so perhaps this will occupy one full hour, followed by the sales pitches for socialized medicine from the lesser gods in the regime. Comrade Osama is above the nuts'n'bolts details.
Then they may have "open microphones" somewhere. People will line up to ask questions. OK. These aren't people who just wander in off the street. They're screened before they're admitted to the meeting, and probably nowadays frisked for weapons, as well. Honestly, that's only practical. I mean, they had to reroute the traffic in DC to keep Clinton out of range of drive-by shooters, and all Clinton did was molest willing interns. So I can just imagine what the Secret Service has to contend with nowadays.
ABC may allow 30 minutes or so for public questions. Probably two or three dozen people will line up at the microphones, and they will very likely be asked what their questions are, and certain of them will be moved ahead in line. The TV people say they do this to get a variety of questions in. However, usually they end up with some halfwitted exhibitionist-type in high-waisted double-knit slacks and a turned-around baseball cap spending about 20 minutes praising Comrade Osama and the Socialist Path, and not really having any question, he just wants his mom to see him on TV. ABC probably won't allow any more than three or four questions and, apart from wasting time on the thickheaded panderers, the questions will probably be in the vein of:
Watched Hannity tonight. He had Christie Heffner on the "Great American Panel." She pointed out that Joe-the-plumber asked a tough question. Think they're going to let Joe-the-Plumber in the room, let alone anywhere near a microphone?
These things are very carefully choreographed. It will be a lot like the Dance of the Sugar-Plum Fairy.
A long time ago, a friend of mine attended a Health Care Town Hall that was staged by one of the networks. It might even have been ABC; I really don't remember. That guy who looked like Alfred E. Newman -- the guy who was on Nightline, Ted Koppel -- was moderator, so I guess that would make it ABC. At any rate, the thing was a total whitewash rah-rah b.s. presentation pushing government-run socialized medicine.
My friend stood in line at the microphone for about an hour and was totally ignored. Finally, with about five minutes left of the show -- which was presented live -- my friend stepped to the microphone and interrupted whatever was going on on-stage. He just blurted out: "If socialized medicine works so well, how come so many Canadians come to America for health care?"
The resident doctor-consultant on ABC's payroll, who was on the speaker panel -- don't remember his name, either -- looked like he was going to have a stroke. He shouted, "They do not!" [A straight-up lie.] My friend, undaunted, started to offer some numbers, and then they cut away to a commercial.
When the show returned, everyone on the stage was laughing and joking about how these kinds of shows serve as a kind of "safety valve" for the loonies in the world. Yeah, otherwise we might have some kind of situation like downtown Teh'ran.
So don't expect anything but an exercise in futility. No honest opinions will be expressed unless they conform to Comrade Osama's party line. It's all a show to make the drive toward socialized medicine look like a runaway freight train, and if you're smart and want to be popular, Well, Hop aboard, Comrade! We're happy to have you! Grab a Kool-Aid and let me tell you a little bit more about dialectics and historical inevitability!
Then they'll all join hands and sing "This Is Your Country."
In fact, I suggest you boycott ABC in the name of The First Amendment, a free press and the open exchange of ideas. This is pure B.S. Don't play the game.
For me, I'd much rather watch "Ghost Hunters" and "Monster Quest." That's my Wednesday night line up. Always pondering the great mysteries of the universe. "UFO Hunters" is apparently all wrapped up for this season. I never watch the networks anymore. Well... occasionally to get the local weather on WGN, or to watch poor George Will roll his eyes and smack his forehead as George Stephanopoulos shamelessly stumps for the latest liberal five-year-plan on Sunday morning. If I wake up in time.
OK, and I'm writing this at 1:53 a.m. CST, on the morning of June 24. The town hall meeting airs tonight, and no one's seen it yet that I know of.
But I guarantee you this time tomorrow, if you watch that presentation, you'll swear I must be positively psychic. (Call me at 1-800-YEAHSURE and we'll discuss the situation with your boyfriend, very slowly, at $4.00 a minute.)
Apparently in the USA, ABC-TV is vying for the role of service provider for this in the Osama regime.
They're doing what they call a "Town Hall Meeting" on socialized medicine. Although apparently only Comrade Osama and his minions will be represented; ABC-TV isn't inviting Republicans or other known opposition to present their views. They won't even take paid advertising from people who have a different view. They say they will allow questions from the audience.
Look, I've been to these things. This is pretty much how it works: If they've scheduled two hours for it, you can be sure at least one solid hour at least will be the pro-socialist crowd doing their sales pitches. They may include videotaped clips from pathetic people who don't have insurance. (I'm one of them. No one's been knocking on my door.) I'm not sure how ABC is setting up the format, but apparently they're doing an interview with Comrade Osama, so perhaps this will occupy one full hour, followed by the sales pitches for socialized medicine from the lesser gods in the regime. Comrade Osama is above the nuts'n'bolts details.
Then they may have "open microphones" somewhere. People will line up to ask questions. OK. These aren't people who just wander in off the street. They're screened before they're admitted to the meeting, and probably nowadays frisked for weapons, as well. Honestly, that's only practical. I mean, they had to reroute the traffic in DC to keep Clinton out of range of drive-by shooters, and all Clinton did was molest willing interns. So I can just imagine what the Secret Service has to contend with nowadays.
ABC may allow 30 minutes or so for public questions. Probably two or three dozen people will line up at the microphones, and they will very likely be asked what their questions are, and certain of them will be moved ahead in line. The TV people say they do this to get a variety of questions in. However, usually they end up with some halfwitted exhibitionist-type in high-waisted double-knit slacks and a turned-around baseball cap spending about 20 minutes praising Comrade Osama and the Socialist Path, and not really having any question, he just wants his mom to see him on TV. ABC probably won't allow any more than three or four questions and, apart from wasting time on the thickheaded panderers, the questions will probably be in the vein of:
- "How can I sign up for the Public Option?"
- "How can anyone question your wonderful generosity and warm concern for your loyal subjects, Mr. President of Presidents? Will you kiss my baby for luck?"
- "Why is anyone opposing your marvelous marxist program?"
- "My whole family is on federal disability. One or another of us is hospitalized at any given time. The 12 of us have been living in a discarded refrigerator crate down by the railroad tracks because after we get done paying for Grandpa's insulin and Grandma's leukemia medicine, there's not much money left. Can you possibly include toilet paper and an ice chest as part of the benefits?"
Watched Hannity tonight. He had Christie Heffner on the "Great American Panel." She pointed out that Joe-the-plumber asked a tough question. Think they're going to let Joe-the-Plumber in the room, let alone anywhere near a microphone?
These things are very carefully choreographed. It will be a lot like the Dance of the Sugar-Plum Fairy.
A long time ago, a friend of mine attended a Health Care Town Hall that was staged by one of the networks. It might even have been ABC; I really don't remember. That guy who looked like Alfred E. Newman -- the guy who was on Nightline, Ted Koppel -- was moderator, so I guess that would make it ABC. At any rate, the thing was a total whitewash rah-rah b.s. presentation pushing government-run socialized medicine.
My friend stood in line at the microphone for about an hour and was totally ignored. Finally, with about five minutes left of the show -- which was presented live -- my friend stepped to the microphone and interrupted whatever was going on on-stage. He just blurted out: "If socialized medicine works so well, how come so many Canadians come to America for health care?"
The resident doctor-consultant on ABC's payroll, who was on the speaker panel -- don't remember his name, either -- looked like he was going to have a stroke. He shouted, "They do not!" [A straight-up lie.] My friend, undaunted, started to offer some numbers, and then they cut away to a commercial.
When the show returned, everyone on the stage was laughing and joking about how these kinds of shows serve as a kind of "safety valve" for the loonies in the world. Yeah, otherwise we might have some kind of situation like downtown Teh'ran.
So don't expect anything but an exercise in futility. No honest opinions will be expressed unless they conform to Comrade Osama's party line. It's all a show to make the drive toward socialized medicine look like a runaway freight train, and if you're smart and want to be popular, Well, Hop aboard, Comrade! We're happy to have you! Grab a Kool-Aid and let me tell you a little bit more about dialectics and historical inevitability!
Then they'll all join hands and sing "This Is Your Country."
In fact, I suggest you boycott ABC in the name of The First Amendment, a free press and the open exchange of ideas. This is pure B.S. Don't play the game.
For me, I'd much rather watch "Ghost Hunters" and "Monster Quest." That's my Wednesday night line up. Always pondering the great mysteries of the universe. "UFO Hunters" is apparently all wrapped up for this season. I never watch the networks anymore. Well... occasionally to get the local weather on WGN, or to watch poor George Will roll his eyes and smack his forehead as George Stephanopoulos shamelessly stumps for the latest liberal five-year-plan on Sunday morning. If I wake up in time.
OK, and I'm writing this at 1:53 a.m. CST, on the morning of June 24. The town hall meeting airs tonight, and no one's seen it yet that I know of.
But I guarantee you this time tomorrow, if you watch that presentation, you'll swear I must be positively psychic. (Call me at 1-800-YEAHSURE and we'll discuss the situation with your boyfriend, very slowly, at $4.00 a minute.)
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Invite a mullah to lunch
Just watched Comrade Osama's press conference. Or parts of it. I did have to mute some of it to restrain myself from throwing a chair at the TV screen. I really can't afford to replace the TV. Easier to replace the Comrade.
Oh, so now he "condemns" the violent repression of protest in Iran.
Too late, Comrade. Congress already got out in front of you on that one.
And how does he express his dismay? By Inviting the Iranians to a White House barbecue on the 4th of July.
What if they burn the US flags? Given past behavior, this is likely.
Osama will probably laugh and hand them another book of matches, and maybe a copy of the Constitution as well.
Comrade Osama likes heavily centralized government control. Why would he argue with the mullahs in Iran? Comrade Osama very probably sympathizes with the Ayatollah's plight. Comrade Osama is probably just now engaged in quiet talks with Hugo Chavez about training a Mobile Tactical Thug Squad to break up the Tea Parties planned in the USA on the 4th of July, just in case the National Guard refuses to muster.
Interesting... On health care, he said the socialized medicine option is necessary because health care costs will continue to rise.
They certainly will, maybe in direct proportion to the rate you tax them, Comrade.
What a blockhead. And I thought I was bad at math.
Oh, so now he "condemns" the violent repression of protest in Iran.
Too late, Comrade. Congress already got out in front of you on that one.
And how does he express his dismay? By Inviting the Iranians to a White House barbecue on the 4th of July.
What if they burn the US flags? Given past behavior, this is likely.
Osama will probably laugh and hand them another book of matches, and maybe a copy of the Constitution as well.
Comrade Osama likes heavily centralized government control. Why would he argue with the mullahs in Iran? Comrade Osama very probably sympathizes with the Ayatollah's plight. Comrade Osama is probably just now engaged in quiet talks with Hugo Chavez about training a Mobile Tactical Thug Squad to break up the Tea Parties planned in the USA on the 4th of July, just in case the National Guard refuses to muster.
Interesting... On health care, he said the socialized medicine option is necessary because health care costs will continue to rise.
They certainly will, maybe in direct proportion to the rate you tax them, Comrade.
What a blockhead. And I thought I was bad at math.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)