I am baffled by the CNN (read = Left Wing Coverage) of the protests at the Town Halls around the country in regards to Health Care Reform.
The most glaring example is Sebilius in Pennsylvania getting absolutely slammed by protesters, yellers, questioners, etc. The CNN coverage is that they are saying that the outrage is "canned political theater, manifactured by lobbyists." The Democratic National Committee is also speaking out in protest.
The DNC is claiming that the protests are, GASP, organized, and preplanned. The RNC is stupidly denying it, rather than simply denying comment. The entire month of August is going to be filled with these local outbursts while Congresspeople and Senator's head home for their golf, bbq's and scattered work.
But, to get further to the point, I am angered by the fake outrage the DNC is throwing out to the masses for consumption because they know, they know with so much vigor and understanding, that organized protest is the only way to get anything done in this country. The Left uses these tactics when it comes to Abortion Rights, but more importantly, the ENTIRE civil rights movement was based on organized protests.
You cannot be an adult in this world with an ounce of pride in yourself or your own intelligence if you think that Rosa Parks acted alone, or made a spur of the moment decision to sit in the front of the bus. That's just one example. Protests regarding Vietnam were not individual hippies hoping to make a difference - those obviously existed, but large groups organize and mobilize to get their message out.
Left Wingers out there, realize, understand, appreciate, that even if you think these people are out of line and misunderstand the type of America Obama is trying to create, you have to realize that many millions see the Obama Health Care Plan as an issue that will make their lives worse, to a degree that they are terrified about. So they are exercising their Democratic right to speak out, loudly, to Lawmakers.
The Left whines, an awful lot, about how millions of people are outside of the political engagement process - have you ever felt like the nation was as mobilized as it is now? The country cares again, we are all on one side of the issue or the other, and for CNN to show faux-anxiety over these protests is the kind of thing that we all have to hope disappears someday, because it is more harmful than actually organizing a protest against something you may believe in wholeheartedly. This type of irresponsible and misleading journalism is one of the links in the chain we need to find a way to break.
Who wants to protest CNN's HQ with me in Atlanta?
Wednesday, August 05, 2009
Ignagni, California Prisons, PA Gunman
* I am not going to just write about front page headlines anymore, it's all over the paper now.
For Health Insurers' Lobbyist, Good Will Is Being Put to Test
This is really about a woman named Karen Ignagni, who has been working for the Health Care lobby for as long as I've been insured. The thing that people refuse to remember about the Health Care industry is that they are privately held companies that are in business, in service and all ways otherwise, INTO MONEY.
They are not interested in other things, they are not interested in public service, they are interested in a status quo if $$ is flowing, and into changing things if $$ is not flowing. Obama hasn't been shy to point out the record profits, as this article points out, that the big 10 in Health Care have shown this year.
The cute thing about the debate on Health Care is that the issues are being skirted by the major players, starting with Pelosi. It was her decision, and her ultimate wisdom, to call the Health Care Industry, "villians", which is a stroke of genius. It allows the Right Wing and the Idiotic Blue Dogs to make that the argument, and gives Ignagni the ability to say something like, "Attacking our community will not help get anyone covered," which is the adult way of saying, "be quiet, or I'll take my ball and go home."
People, they do not care about anyone. The Health Industry doesn't care at all about us, they wouldn't exist if they did, and we cannot trust people like Ignagni to make good decisions, or decisions that will benefit the people. Then again, when Pelosi continues to take her foot in shove it in her stupid mouth, I wonder if she cares either. Cuz, as childish as Ignagni's comment is, it's right. Make the industry a villain, and they will find a way to win.
Federal Judges Order California Prisons to Reduce Inmate Population by a Quarter
As you can read, California has to reduce their population by 27% over the next 2 years. I really shudder to think about the type of person in those prisons - and I don't mean I fear their release.
I mean I feel uneasy thinking about some of them in prison for recreational drug possession, those stupid stories you hear about a kid who had a bag of pot in a backpack and he was sentenced to 19 years in prison because he was within 47 square miles of a school for underprivileged children.
I think about that state, and how delinquent it is, and how they surely couldn't have possibly put the right people in prison. Trimming the "safest" 27% off of their prison rosters will, at the very least, improve the quality of life for nearly 40,000 people.
This is probably the most liberal, bleeding-hearted opinion I can have, but its how I feel. I love how the great new hope for California is Jerry Browne, but he is the kind of guy who, like the Right and Left in California, refuses to admit there is a $26B deficit in the state, and seems to scream every time something is cut, altered, changed or shifted in order to close that budget gap. The judges, acting primarily in the name of safety of inmates (1 prisoner in CA dies from "unnecessary" causes per week...) But it is going to have an unintended (wink wink) financial effect that hopefully will start getting things moving in the right direction.
Arnold's solution, as the article says, is to build more prisons with money that doesn't exist. The entire Gov't of that state should have a "moron face-off" against the Gov't of the state of NY, and the winner gets to run the Republican National Committee. The Loser is the new Gov. of Alaska.
Gunman Kills 3 and Wounds 12 at a Gym Near Pittsburgh
I didn't link this because you can read about it anywhere, see it on TV, etc. I just wanted to write about this one because if I ever say anything in this blog that makes you think I am going to do anything outlandish, crazy, insane, deadly and/or otherwise wacky, call me on it and call the cops. Apparently this dude blogged about this, the text is out there to read, and nobody, NOBODY, engages in this type of online blabbering without knowing there is an audience. Someone in PA is having trouble sleeping tonight knowing that the writing was almost literally on the wall, and they knew it.
For Health Insurers' Lobbyist, Good Will Is Being Put to Test
This is really about a woman named Karen Ignagni, who has been working for the Health Care lobby for as long as I've been insured. The thing that people refuse to remember about the Health Care industry is that they are privately held companies that are in business, in service and all ways otherwise, INTO MONEY.
They are not interested in other things, they are not interested in public service, they are interested in a status quo if $$ is flowing, and into changing things if $$ is not flowing. Obama hasn't been shy to point out the record profits, as this article points out, that the big 10 in Health Care have shown this year.
The cute thing about the debate on Health Care is that the issues are being skirted by the major players, starting with Pelosi. It was her decision, and her ultimate wisdom, to call the Health Care Industry, "villians", which is a stroke of genius. It allows the Right Wing and the Idiotic Blue Dogs to make that the argument, and gives Ignagni the ability to say something like, "Attacking our community will not help get anyone covered," which is the adult way of saying, "be quiet, or I'll take my ball and go home."
People, they do not care about anyone. The Health Industry doesn't care at all about us, they wouldn't exist if they did, and we cannot trust people like Ignagni to make good decisions, or decisions that will benefit the people. Then again, when Pelosi continues to take her foot in shove it in her stupid mouth, I wonder if she cares either. Cuz, as childish as Ignagni's comment is, it's right. Make the industry a villain, and they will find a way to win.
Federal Judges Order California Prisons to Reduce Inmate Population by a Quarter
As you can read, California has to reduce their population by 27% over the next 2 years. I really shudder to think about the type of person in those prisons - and I don't mean I fear their release.
I mean I feel uneasy thinking about some of them in prison for recreational drug possession, those stupid stories you hear about a kid who had a bag of pot in a backpack and he was sentenced to 19 years in prison because he was within 47 square miles of a school for underprivileged children.
I think about that state, and how delinquent it is, and how they surely couldn't have possibly put the right people in prison. Trimming the "safest" 27% off of their prison rosters will, at the very least, improve the quality of life for nearly 40,000 people.
This is probably the most liberal, bleeding-hearted opinion I can have, but its how I feel. I love how the great new hope for California is Jerry Browne, but he is the kind of guy who, like the Right and Left in California, refuses to admit there is a $26B deficit in the state, and seems to scream every time something is cut, altered, changed or shifted in order to close that budget gap. The judges, acting primarily in the name of safety of inmates (1 prisoner in CA dies from "unnecessary" causes per week...) But it is going to have an unintended (wink wink) financial effect that hopefully will start getting things moving in the right direction.
Arnold's solution, as the article says, is to build more prisons with money that doesn't exist. The entire Gov't of that state should have a "moron face-off" against the Gov't of the state of NY, and the winner gets to run the Republican National Committee. The Loser is the new Gov. of Alaska.
Gunman Kills 3 and Wounds 12 at a Gym Near Pittsburgh
I didn't link this because you can read about it anywhere, see it on TV, etc. I just wanted to write about this one because if I ever say anything in this blog that makes you think I am going to do anything outlandish, crazy, insane, deadly and/or otherwise wacky, call me on it and call the cops. Apparently this dude blogged about this, the text is out there to read, and nobody, NOBODY, engages in this type of online blabbering without knowing there is an audience. Someone in PA is having trouble sleeping tonight knowing that the writing was almost literally on the wall, and they knew it.
Tuesday, August 04, 2009
..."Cash for Shingles" Proposal...
From last week's story about how a white roof can save you $$/energy over time,
"Studies show that white roofs reduce air-conditioning costs by 20 percent or more in hot, sunny weather. Lower energy consumption also means fewer of the carbon dioxide emissions that contribute to global warming.
What is more, a white roof can cost as little as 15 percent more than its dark counterpart, depending on the materials used, while slashing electricity bills."
While "Cash for Clunkers" is being painted by the right as a failure and another example of Governmental confusion, in reality, after you sift through lies, is a program that exceeded expectations in all areas by such a great degree, that you must build on it's success.
The American public, when given an incentive to make the US greener, and make their lives more cost efficient, have chosen the proper and reasonable path. See the quote above regarding white roofs.
The white roof can cost as little as 15% more than it's dark counterparts, as it says. So, why doesn't the Gov't subsidize that difference as well? You wouldn't be forced to do it, you wouldn't be pushed into it, it isn't socialism, it's simply the Gov't looking at a way to spend $$ now, in order to save the people (and the planet) grief and $$ in the long run.
You could take this down to a complete home makeover in a sense, new windows, new doors, new insulation. Subsidize the cost difference between the new technology and the old for the common person, in the hope that the program is wildly successful and all of a sudden, like the 1/4 Million Fuel Efficient Vehicles that are now on the road in place of Clunkers.
This Administration can get it done.
"Studies show that white roofs reduce air-conditioning costs by 20 percent or more in hot, sunny weather. Lower energy consumption also means fewer of the carbon dioxide emissions that contribute to global warming.
What is more, a white roof can cost as little as 15 percent more than its dark counterpart, depending on the materials used, while slashing electricity bills."
While "Cash for Clunkers" is being painted by the right as a failure and another example of Governmental confusion, in reality, after you sift through lies, is a program that exceeded expectations in all areas by such a great degree, that you must build on it's success.
The American public, when given an incentive to make the US greener, and make their lives more cost efficient, have chosen the proper and reasonable path. See the quote above regarding white roofs.
The white roof can cost as little as 15% more than it's dark counterparts, as it says. So, why doesn't the Gov't subsidize that difference as well? You wouldn't be forced to do it, you wouldn't be pushed into it, it isn't socialism, it's simply the Gov't looking at a way to spend $$ now, in order to save the people (and the planet) grief and $$ in the long run.
You could take this down to a complete home makeover in a sense, new windows, new doors, new insulation. Subsidize the cost difference between the new technology and the old for the common person, in the hope that the program is wildly successful and all of a sudden, like the 1/4 Million Fuel Efficient Vehicles that are now on the road in place of Clunkers.
This Administration can get it done.
I am overwhelmed by fascinating news.
Clinton in N. Korea
This isn't from the papers quite yet, but I cannot applaud the Obama administration enough for sending Bill Clinton over to N. Korea. It is a bold move, given Bill's inability to keep his mouth shut when he should. He went over there, and despite N. Korea state sponsored news, Clinton didn't have any messages other than, "give us our people back."
Now, I am a still extremely pissed at the journalists for sending themselves into harm's way, for them putting Obama in a position where he needed to negotiate with the moronic N. Korean administration. However, I do applaud the administration for actually going out and fixing this problem. They did it as quietly as possible, they did it in a way that I think won't set a precedent, and it looks like the reporters will come home. I think they should never leave their houses, and I think it should be a crime to be an American and visit certain countries, seriously, but I am happy they are safe.
But what a cool additional Chapter to the Bill Clinton story - his job may have been easy as he was requested personally by Kim Jong-Il....but it's awesome that he goes over there, gets the job done, pats Obama on the back, and goes back to jogging in stupid hats. Awesome.
Now, the 3 American Hikers who were detained in Iran, they are a different story. It may sound like the same situation, and as much as I think the Reporter's reasoning is idiotic, the fact that these kids admittedly were just curious and wanted to get a better feel for the reality in Iran/Iraq...well, they were caught with their hands in the cookie jar. They weren't on any kind of sponsored business as Ling/Lee were, they were just, essentially, bored. I don't think the situation is the same in Iran as it is in N. Korea, not enough to the extent that Obama needs to send Jimmy Carter to save them. I think, as horrifying as it is, these kids are on their own, to an extent.
From Monday's Times:
Two Sides Take the Debate Health Care Outside Washington
So there have been other developments, but this next month is going to be fascinating given all these Senators going home for August. They are going to get completely huge earfuls all month from constituents. The reality is the public will, I believe, overwhelmingly tell their Senators that the Gov't should have less, not more, control over the Health Plan. People see the Gov't as a beast, thanks to Bush, Palin, Reagan and the misinformation from guys like Rush, etc.
I said this before, but Obama has been trying to push this through before the August recess for this exact reason - he didn't want to leave this in the hands of the American people shouting into the ear of their Lawmakers. Obama couldn't afford to let this get to an informal shouting poll, and that is where we are, unfortunately.
It comes down to a vision for this country that Obama has, and a lot of left-leaning people out there have, and wear as a badge of honor. Conversely, it has gotten to the point where the reality is the Right-Wing simply doesn't believe this following statement, and its a sad thing. But Obama's vision simply is to ask the question, "What kind of country do we want to be?" Obama does see us, as the richest country in the world, committing a moral crime every day by sending so many American's (47M) out there, uninsured, vulnerable, moments from lifelong destitution should an accident hit them by surprise.
Obama does have a vision where we simply take care of each other, to a degree that wouldn't even require all that much change. The simple exercise you can take part in yourself is this: Look at your paycheck, see how much you + your company send to Health Insurance every month. Look at how much of your total income that is - and compare that to 12-16% which the Gov't would want to control.
Then, look at the differential, 2, 3, 4 (tops) percent, and think about if you are the kind of person who is okay with that percent of your income, a miniscule %, working towards making the country healthier, safer, more responsible. The decision is completely yours, really. Tell your Senators and Congresspeople what you think.
From Tuesday's Times:
Spurring Sales, Care Rebate Plan Is Left Up In Air
I am completely fascinated by the 'Cash for Clunkers'. I cannot believe how awesome it is that something like this can exist. Forget the politics for a few lines, but just think about how awesome it is that there is a program that overwhelmed the Gov't, Car Dealers and consumers that, by any measure, is something that is being done to purely help the environment. So awesome.
250,000 cars were sold this weekend with the program in place. 1/4 Million. First, we own a large percentage of the car companies via the bailout, their health is ultimately tied into our health, we need them to work. That's a first. Secondly, I think this is another example of Obama making large jumps with an eye on the future. This may cost us $$ now, up to $3B, but at least we know it is going to benefit us in the future.
The common phrase we heard over and over in the past few years is that dependence on foreign oil is our most dangerous and expensive problem. Health Care has obviously overtaken that problem with the change in the economy, but for heaven's sake, 1/4 Million gas guzzling craphole cars are being replaced by more fuel efficient vehicles - how can that not help?
So the thing that baffles me is that Republican Lawmakers are now saying they are going to have to really think about, and will possibly reject, and additional $2B for this program. Now keep in mind, this isn't a pure stimulus, it's not just giveaway money. This is money that is being given towards the trade-in of the car, but we will all see a return in this by more fuel efficient vehicles.
The main reason I am baffled is that the GOP, who were part of the approval process in the first place for the first $1B, now feel like an additional $2 doesn't make sense. So, in theory, they wanted the first $1B to do exactly what it did, work out great, sell out fast, but at the same time they thought it was a horrible idea and a waste of money. Am I making any sense? Essentially, if it was a good idea to invest $1B, and it worked out great and was a huge success, how come it isn't good to invest $3B?
These a-holes keep calling it a bailout, but it isn't...it isn't a bailout, it's an incentive program that is working, keep it going!
This isn't from the papers quite yet, but I cannot applaud the Obama administration enough for sending Bill Clinton over to N. Korea. It is a bold move, given Bill's inability to keep his mouth shut when he should. He went over there, and despite N. Korea state sponsored news, Clinton didn't have any messages other than, "give us our people back."
Now, I am a still extremely pissed at the journalists for sending themselves into harm's way, for them putting Obama in a position where he needed to negotiate with the moronic N. Korean administration. However, I do applaud the administration for actually going out and fixing this problem. They did it as quietly as possible, they did it in a way that I think won't set a precedent, and it looks like the reporters will come home. I think they should never leave their houses, and I think it should be a crime to be an American and visit certain countries, seriously, but I am happy they are safe.
But what a cool additional Chapter to the Bill Clinton story - his job may have been easy as he was requested personally by Kim Jong-Il....but it's awesome that he goes over there, gets the job done, pats Obama on the back, and goes back to jogging in stupid hats. Awesome.
Now, the 3 American Hikers who were detained in Iran, they are a different story. It may sound like the same situation, and as much as I think the Reporter's reasoning is idiotic, the fact that these kids admittedly were just curious and wanted to get a better feel for the reality in Iran/Iraq...well, they were caught with their hands in the cookie jar. They weren't on any kind of sponsored business as Ling/Lee were, they were just, essentially, bored. I don't think the situation is the same in Iran as it is in N. Korea, not enough to the extent that Obama needs to send Jimmy Carter to save them. I think, as horrifying as it is, these kids are on their own, to an extent.
From Monday's Times:
Two Sides Take the Debate Health Care Outside Washington
So there have been other developments, but this next month is going to be fascinating given all these Senators going home for August. They are going to get completely huge earfuls all month from constituents. The reality is the public will, I believe, overwhelmingly tell their Senators that the Gov't should have less, not more, control over the Health Plan. People see the Gov't as a beast, thanks to Bush, Palin, Reagan and the misinformation from guys like Rush, etc.
I said this before, but Obama has been trying to push this through before the August recess for this exact reason - he didn't want to leave this in the hands of the American people shouting into the ear of their Lawmakers. Obama couldn't afford to let this get to an informal shouting poll, and that is where we are, unfortunately.
It comes down to a vision for this country that Obama has, and a lot of left-leaning people out there have, and wear as a badge of honor. Conversely, it has gotten to the point where the reality is the Right-Wing simply doesn't believe this following statement, and its a sad thing. But Obama's vision simply is to ask the question, "What kind of country do we want to be?" Obama does see us, as the richest country in the world, committing a moral crime every day by sending so many American's (47M) out there, uninsured, vulnerable, moments from lifelong destitution should an accident hit them by surprise.
Obama does have a vision where we simply take care of each other, to a degree that wouldn't even require all that much change. The simple exercise you can take part in yourself is this: Look at your paycheck, see how much you + your company send to Health Insurance every month. Look at how much of your total income that is - and compare that to 12-16% which the Gov't would want to control.
Then, look at the differential, 2, 3, 4 (tops) percent, and think about if you are the kind of person who is okay with that percent of your income, a miniscule %, working towards making the country healthier, safer, more responsible. The decision is completely yours, really. Tell your Senators and Congresspeople what you think.
From Tuesday's Times:
Spurring Sales, Care Rebate Plan Is Left Up In Air
I am completely fascinated by the 'Cash for Clunkers'. I cannot believe how awesome it is that something like this can exist. Forget the politics for a few lines, but just think about how awesome it is that there is a program that overwhelmed the Gov't, Car Dealers and consumers that, by any measure, is something that is being done to purely help the environment. So awesome.
250,000 cars were sold this weekend with the program in place. 1/4 Million. First, we own a large percentage of the car companies via the bailout, their health is ultimately tied into our health, we need them to work. That's a first. Secondly, I think this is another example of Obama making large jumps with an eye on the future. This may cost us $$ now, up to $3B, but at least we know it is going to benefit us in the future.
The common phrase we heard over and over in the past few years is that dependence on foreign oil is our most dangerous and expensive problem. Health Care has obviously overtaken that problem with the change in the economy, but for heaven's sake, 1/4 Million gas guzzling craphole cars are being replaced by more fuel efficient vehicles - how can that not help?
So the thing that baffles me is that Republican Lawmakers are now saying they are going to have to really think about, and will possibly reject, and additional $2B for this program. Now keep in mind, this isn't a pure stimulus, it's not just giveaway money. This is money that is being given towards the trade-in of the car, but we will all see a return in this by more fuel efficient vehicles.
The main reason I am baffled is that the GOP, who were part of the approval process in the first place for the first $1B, now feel like an additional $2 doesn't make sense. So, in theory, they wanted the first $1B to do exactly what it did, work out great, sell out fast, but at the same time they thought it was a horrible idea and a waste of money. Am I making any sense? Essentially, if it was a good idea to invest $1B, and it worked out great and was a huge success, how come it isn't good to invest $3B?
These a-holes keep calling it a bailout, but it isn't...it isn't a bailout, it's an incentive program that is working, keep it going!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)