Look, before you say that I’m thinking with my some other part of my anatomy, just listen to this and tell me there ain’t nothin’ there.
I mean, besides the obvious visual, uh, accouterments (cute jacket, nice shoes, etc.).
Anyway, she’s my favorite (for now) for AI9. She’s got quirk, and I love quirk.
Listen to this one too. This one I think actually makes a stronger case for why she should be the next American Idol:
Yes, I know. She’s probably a Massachusetts flaming liberal, but so what? She can sing. She probably even has gay friends if she lives on Cape Cod. But heck, I’ll bet even Elton John has gay friends and that doesn’t stop him from being a rock icon.
Without Feathers just moved to a new server. The Export/Import function that I used appeared to work very smoothly — except that it doesn’t seem to have brought over all of my existing user accounts. I’ve made a couple of attempts to recover those accounts, but it’s just not working.
The President did, quite specifically, say that the public option will be forced to make a go of it out of premiums, not the Federal Treasury. No ambiguity about it. It will be just like the USPS, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae… well, maybe those aren’t the best examples, but I get what he means.
He also said that the public option will realize its savings from being a not-for-profit entity (that should lower costs by about six percent) and by not paying the executives who run it — I don’t think that’s quite what he meant to say but, again, I get it. And, since the program will only be available to those who seek it, there will be no sales, marketing or advertising expenses.
No word on administrative costs or taxes, but it looks like the public option will enjoy about a 10% cost advantage over the for-profit insurers who will, no doubt, flock to the exchanges to scoop up the otherwise uninsurables for whom that will be the primary market. What could go wrong?
I have mixed feelings about his assurance that we will no longer be paying the health care costs of the 12 million or so illegal aliens living and working in this country. On the one hand, I don’t think that people who entered this country illegally should be given anything, let alone free health insurance, on the other hand, come on, we don’t want them coughing and bleeding all over everything while they’re here. Anyway, I just don’t believe him when he says that they will not be covered in some way (<cough>taxes<cough>). I’m not calling him a liar, you understand, just sayin’.
President Obama says that “the Public Option” will be just one of a “basket” of options available to Americans who, if they like their private insurance coverage, will be able to keep it. “The Public Option” will just be there, you know, sittin’ there and stuff in case there’s anything you don’t like about your private insurance like if it costs too much or requires co-pays or whatever.
There’s absolutely no truth at all to the suggestions that “the Public Option” is a “trojan horse” designed to sneak single-payer national health into the system or that it is in any way intended to undermine the private insurance market. It will just be another competitor on the same level playing field as everyone else is all. Nothing to see here. Move along.
OK, just a few points I want to clear up and then I’ll sit quietly (for awhile, anyway) and let the grown-ups work out all this which is obviously way to complicated for my limited capabilities.
Will “the Public Option” have to pay its way from premiums collected or will it be able to dip into the Federal Treasury if it is unable to pay claims out of its loss reserves and current cash flow?
Will “the Public Option” have to pay its own administrative expenses or, like the Social Security Administration (which runs the Medicare program), will it be able to coerce health care providers through force of law to cover its administrative expenses out of the remimbursements they receive from it?
Will “the Public Option” be liable for the same local, state and federal taxes as private insurers or, like Medicare, will it be exempt from all taxation?
Now we know that “the Public Option” will be under no pressure to make a profit — in fact profits will not be part of “the Public Option” at all, so there should be a cost savings of about six percent (the percentage of Earnings Before Interest, Taxes and Amortization enjoyed by the private health insurance industry); but I guess I’m also asking if there will be any pressure to break even? Or will “the Public Option” just go to the taxpayers whenever it needs a cash infusion?
Because, you see, here’s the thing: If “the Public Option” doesn’t have to pay taxes and doesn’t have to pay its own administrative costs, and doesn’t even have to break even because it can make up the difference out of public funds; How can any private insurance plan EVER compete against it? I mean, it just doesn’t add up — literally.
So what exactly is “the Public Option” and what exactly is the purpose of offering a “competing” plan that doesn’t have to, uh, compete?
OK. I’ll keep quiet now while my betters do the heavy thinking.
What is it with these white guys? All angry and clinging to their guns and God.
I don’t like what I’ve seen of Obamacare, but you won’t find me going to town hall meetings wearing a red baseball cap with my camera slung over my shoulder like that. For sure, it’s all about race. Look at him getting all up in that young African-American man’s face. You just know he’s packing heat…somewhere.
Can’t that white guy go to a townhall meeting and just have a civil discussion instead of getting all hand up and agitated. I mean, is he about to slap that black guy or what? And he probably wonders why liberals and minorities so don’t love him.
Enough has been said and written about the Gates/Crowley affair. I just want to get one more word in. Two words, really: Exigent Circumstances. Most Americans mistakenly believe that the police cannot enter your home without a warrant. That isn’t true. The police can enter your home anytime they want if they believe exigent circumstances (aka probably cause) justifies it. The only real problem police have with entering a home without a warrant is the admissibility of evidence obtained without a warrant.
So what does this have to do with Sgt. Crowley entering Professor Gates’ home? What possible “exigent circumstances” could Crowley have had to enter without a warrant? Listen to this recording. It is the Cambridge Police Department dispatcher talking to Sgt. Crowley (who, by the way, never spoke to the 911 operator)
The most significant piece of information relayed to Sgt Crowley is near the beginning of the recording when he asks where the suspects are. The dispatcher tells him: “Both [suspects] are still in the house.” Just to be clear, the dispatcher tells Crowley: “Both [suspects] are still in the house.”
Exigent circumstances — black and white. Crowley approached the front door of 17 Ware St. in the belief — later proved to be mistaken — that two “larger men” (according Lucien Whalen on the 911 recording) were in the house at 17 Ware St. Had Sgt Crowley simply walked away from the front door when Professor Gates commenced his tirade, he (Crowley) would have been guilty of gross dereliction of duty — and probably worse had the police dispatcher later proved to be correct.
Sgt. Crowley wasn’t just doing his job on that humid July afternoon up in Cambridge town, he was — to the best of his knowledge — putting himself in harms way to protect the lawful resident of that home, because — it cannot be said enough — when he climbed the stairs to the front door of 17 Ware St., he believed that: “Both [suspects] [were] still in the house.”
You want to speculate on Crowley’s white anger and suppressed working class rage over finding this uppity negro the master of such a fine house? No need to speculate on Crowley’s state of mind, because there is a recording of the police dispatcher telling him that he and the lawful resident of the house were probably in danger.
We also don’t have to speculate on what was on Professor Gates’ mind. He was quite candid about it in an interview for the Daily Beast (.com) a few days later:
My house. I mean, he was there investigating? He should have gotten out of there and said, “I’m sorry, sir, good luck. Loved your PBS series—check with you later!”
Apparently the professor was miffed that proletarian Crowley failed to recognize his eminence as a PBS auteur.
I’ll let the erudite Professor Gates have the last word here. I was a little confused at first by this clip. For a moment I thought it might be an excerpt from an old episode of “Good Times.” You’ll understand why towards the end. This is well worth listening to the end, especially the last minute or so. (Say what Skip about “yo’ mama?”)
For me: Unexpected but not surprising. I didn’t expect Sarah Palin to run for a second term as Governor of Alaska. Even if it was a job she enjoyed and arguably executed well, her post November ‘08 tenure has surely been excruciating.
I can’t think of another example of one party hounding an office holder of the other party so relentlessly for simply being a politically successful member of the opposition. True, the pressure on Palin can be considered a politically legitimate effort to short circuit the ambitions of a potentially dangerous adversary. Still the remorseless onslaught against Sarah has a bad odor about it.
You may not be aware of just how pernicious the campaign against Governor Palin has been. It isn’t just dry-drunk Maureen Dowd, professional gossipist Gail Collins, Keith Olbermann (who famously resigned from MSNBC in 1998 because he was expected to report on the Monica Lewinsky, obstruction of justice scandal) and Trig-truther Andrew Sullivan.
The Governor has also been under the constant duress of 15 lawsuits claiming ethics violations since last November, with no end in sight, running up a legal bill of over half a million dollars despite the fact that 13 of those lawsuits have been summarily dismissed and, of the other two, one was settled for $8,200 (reimbursement of travel expenses claimed for family members) and the other appears to be heading for a fate similar to the 13 non-starters..
This — along with simple malicious slander (such as the gross misrepresentation of the Alaska Department of Fish and Game’s policies on predator control) — has proven to be an effective way to counter a governor who must otherwise be considered one of the most competent and effective in her state’s (at least recent) history. I only wish the Republicans could work up the gumption to challenge the two squalid crony-masters currently looting NY and NJ! What? You don’t think a relentless campaign of ethics challenges would stand up any better against Corzine and Patterson? Bear in mind, both of these guys have already been caught morally compromised.
So if (like me) you are a Palin fan, this looks like the start of bigger things for Sarah. If you curdle at the words “you betcha!” this must look like a hard-won victory to you. Just Remember: More than one moose became moose-burger by underestimating the lethality of that hockey mom.
