by wj
I was tempted to title this The Best People. But it’s what the “best people” have been doing that boggles my mind.
The blanket refusal to respond to subpoenas has been in start contrast to how previous administrations, all previous administrations, have dealt with Congress. Let’s face it, no matter what one’s opinion of Trump and all his works, it looks terrible. Considering how obsessed Trump is with his image, the question has to be asked: why?
The latest bits of documents to surface (hand written notes by Lev Parnas) give, perhaps, a glimmer. It looks like the folks working for Trump on his Ukraine efforts wrote down lots and lots of stuff which buttress the case for impeachment and removal. The Gang That Can’t Shoot Straight seems to have not only done criminal stuff, not only talked about what they were doing, but actually written down their criminal plans. Stalking a US Ambassador, and suggesting taking actions against her personally (whether assassination or simple assault is not clear to me) is not something normal people would want to make a record of. But there is it.
I have to say, if I was a Republican Senator, the last, the very last, thing that I would want to happen is to find that I voted to not allow evidence and testimony during the Senate trial. And then have conclusive evidence come out before my next election campaign. Considering the rate at which stuff is coming out, even in the face of determined administration stonewalling, there doesn’t look to be much chance that won’t happen. The question in all of their minds has to be “Do I really want to take a bullet for this guy?” — especially considering their off-the-record opinions of him already. No matter how fanatically devoted Trumps fans are, there are worse things than offending them. And those worse things look to be on the horizon . . . and closing fast.
wj: FYLTGE (from your lips to god’s ear)
And yet, no matter what comes out, support for him seems not to waver. We keep thinking that can’t go on, and then it does….
wj: FYLTGE (from your lips to god’s ear)
And yet, no matter what comes out, support for him seems not to waver. We keep thinking that can’t go on, and then it does….
Here is a classic scene, seems like the “Best People” haven’t watched the Wire (punch line comes at the end).
As for the die-hard supporters, I fear the criminal aspect is to them a feature, not a bug.
Here is a classic scene, seems like the “Best People” haven’t watched the Wire (punch line comes at the end).
As for the die-hard supporters, I fear the criminal aspect is to them a feature, not a bug.
no matter what comes out, support for him seems not to waver. We keep thinking that can’t go on, and then it does.
Among his true believers, sadly true. Religion, including idolatry, tends to work like that.
But
a) there does seem to be a bit of erosion among those who voted for him more as a vote against Clinton, and
b) the views of Senators seem to be shifting. That’s their overt views — they never have been among his fans. A marriage of convenience is especially subject to a nasty divorce when the convenience erodes.
no matter what comes out, support for him seems not to waver. We keep thinking that can’t go on, and then it does.
Among his true believers, sadly true. Religion, including idolatry, tends to work like that.
But
a) there does seem to be a bit of erosion among those who voted for him more as a vote against Clinton, and
b) the views of Senators seem to be shifting. That’s their overt views — they never have been among his fans. A marriage of convenience is especially subject to a nasty divorce when the convenience erodes.
ral, I’d say “life imitates art” . . . except that these bozos don’t seem to have had anyone to rip up the notes.
ral, I’d say “life imitates art” . . . except that these bozos don’t seem to have had anyone to rip up the notes.
every defector will be primaried out of their Senate job, guaranteed. perfect party discipline achieved.
instead the conscientious among them will, with furrowed brow and solemn sighs, justify acquittal with “Well, ok, he did it, but it doesn’t warrant removal.” the rest will invent fairy tales where Trump didn’t do anything.
every defector will be primaried out of their Senate job, guaranteed. perfect party discipline achieved.
instead the conscientious among them will, with furrowed brow and solemn sighs, justify acquittal with “Well, ok, he did it, but it doesn’t warrant removal.” the rest will invent fairy tales where Trump didn’t do anything.
Are Republicans seriously arguing the principle that if new evidence comes up after the start of a trial, directly relevant to the issue being tried, that it shouldn’t be heard ?
Really ???
Are Republicans seriously arguing the principle that if new evidence comes up after the start of a trial, directly relevant to the issue being tried, that it shouldn’t be heard ?
Really ???
Are Republicans seriously arguing the principle that if new evidence comes up after the start of a trial, directly relevant to the issue being tried, that it shouldn’t be heard ?
In a word: Yup.
But consider their alternatives. If they allow evidence to be presented, then they are faced with explaining why they ignored it. If they just refuse to allow it, when it comes out they are faced with explaining how they allowed that to happen. If they can establish a principle that says they can’t consider later evidence, they are (or at least can hope they are) off the hook.
In other words, the alternatives are worse.
Are Republicans seriously arguing the principle that if new evidence comes up after the start of a trial, directly relevant to the issue being tried, that it shouldn’t be heard ?
In a word: Yup.
But consider their alternatives. If they allow evidence to be presented, then they are faced with explaining why they ignored it. If they just refuse to allow it, when it comes out they are faced with explaining how they allowed that to happen. If they can establish a principle that says they can’t consider later evidence, they are (or at least can hope they are) off the hook.
In other words, the alternatives are worse.
Most of them are complicit, if not in this act, in another. Opening the Pandora’s evidence box will expose them all as criminals. Awkward.
Most of them are complicit, if not in this act, in another. Opening the Pandora’s evidence box will expose them all as criminals. Awkward.
if new evidence comes up after the start of a trial, directly relevant to the issue being tried, that it shouldn’t be heard ?
right. because something something Democrats.
the GOP is a cult.
if new evidence comes up after the start of a trial, directly relevant to the issue being tried, that it shouldn’t be heard ?
right. because something something Democrats.
the GOP is a cult.
Perhaps they should just pray for guidance….
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/01/trump-supreme-court-shortlister-william-pryor-god-juries.html
Perhaps they should just pray for guidance….
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/01/trump-supreme-court-shortlister-william-pryor-god-juries.html
OK, so having read Nigel’s Slate link, I just want to say that if ever Judge William Pryor is elevated to the SCOTUS, all ObWi personnel should immediately make preparations to leave the US and seek asylum in Canada, or possibly in the UK or the EU. I’m not saying that earlier developments might not warrant the same action, but if he is ever confirmed then we will know for sure that the US is lost, and that the days of the Handmaid’s Tale, Salem Witch trials etc are nigh.
OK, so having read Nigel’s Slate link, I just want to say that if ever Judge William Pryor is elevated to the SCOTUS, all ObWi personnel should immediately make preparations to leave the US and seek asylum in Canada, or possibly in the UK or the EU. I’m not saying that earlier developments might not warrant the same action, but if he is ever confirmed then we will know for sure that the US is lost, and that the days of the Handmaid’s Tale, Salem Witch trials etc are nigh.
Hmmm. On reflection, maybe a slight over-reaction. But only a slight one.
Hmmm. On reflection, maybe a slight over-reaction. But only a slight one.
Prevarication can be fun! Join the holy orgy. Kama Sutra everyone!
Prevarication can be fun! Join the holy orgy. Kama Sutra everyone!
Perhaps they should just pray for guidance….
What I never get are the people who (a) clamor for religious liberty, and (b) are offended if somebody says “Happy Holidays”.
Some folks just don’t seem to have the cognitive dissonance gene.
Are Republicans seriously arguing the principle that if new evidence comes up after the start of a trial, directly relevant to the issue being tried, that it shouldn’t be heard ?
“Arguing the principle” doesn’t quite capture it. It might be more accurate to characterize their position as “Evidence? Fuck you”.
In the face of which, they insist upon a civil response.
It is, really, kind of getting old.
Perhaps they should just pray for guidance….
What I never get are the people who (a) clamor for religious liberty, and (b) are offended if somebody says “Happy Holidays”.
Some folks just don’t seem to have the cognitive dissonance gene.
Are Republicans seriously arguing the principle that if new evidence comes up after the start of a trial, directly relevant to the issue being tried, that it shouldn’t be heard ?
“Arguing the principle” doesn’t quite capture it. It might be more accurate to characterize their position as “Evidence? Fuck you”.
In the face of which, they insist upon a civil response.
It is, really, kind of getting old.
It is, really, kind of getting old.
Not going to end well. Hope the “end” is not the end.
It is, really, kind of getting old.
Not going to end well. Hope the “end” is not the end.
In the face of which, they insist upon a civil response.
This is what they do.
I’d like to see our conservative interlocutors defend this bullshit.
In the face of which, they insist upon a civil response.
This is what they do.
I’d like to see our conservative interlocutors defend this bullshit.
To expand on my previous:
I’m driving to work the other morning. The car in front of me has a “Trump 2020” bumper sticker. At a red light, I’m close enough to read the fine print:
“Make liberals cry again”
So, OK, that’s cute. But it’s also, straight up, bone stupid.
First of all, liberals aren’t crying. They are fucking pissed off.
Second, how long do you think your little nihilstic “burn-it-all-down” fuck your feelings moment is going to last? And what reason are you giving me, your garden variety coastal liberal elitist, to give one single solitary flying fuck about you and your interests and what you want or need, when your little Trumpian moment in the sun has come and gone?
People like me aren’t going anywhere. And I, personally, will never forget the fucking calamity that Trumpies have foisted upon the country and the world. As far as I can tell, Trump supporters have demonstrated themselves to be radically selfish and irresponsible social and political actors. Fucking entitled resentful little children.
I have no particular animus toward them at a personal level, and include a number of Trump supporters among my own family and friends. Just as I have no particular animus toward children when they behave, however egregiously, like children. But I have no respect or regard for their social or political point of view, nor I am likely to ever have any. They’ve cast their lot with the most despicable character of, at least, a generation, and done so with unapologetic enthusiasm.
On their head be it. The whole fucking disaster.
We’ll get through this one way or another. People Like Me will pick up the pieces. We’ll probably even allow Trumpies to continue to vote, and run for office. Maybe we’ll even invite them to dinner parties, if they promise to leave that shit at the door.
But I, personally, will never ever ever ever ever forget what they have done to this country.
Fuck my feelings? You think you’re gonna make me cry? You just make me shake my head. You’re a child, and I will treat you as a child. When, and if, you ever find your way to thinking, feeling, and acting like an adult, perhaps we can have a conversation.
To expand on my previous:
I’m driving to work the other morning. The car in front of me has a “Trump 2020” bumper sticker. At a red light, I’m close enough to read the fine print:
“Make liberals cry again”
So, OK, that’s cute. But it’s also, straight up, bone stupid.
First of all, liberals aren’t crying. They are fucking pissed off.
Second, how long do you think your little nihilstic “burn-it-all-down” fuck your feelings moment is going to last? And what reason are you giving me, your garden variety coastal liberal elitist, to give one single solitary flying fuck about you and your interests and what you want or need, when your little Trumpian moment in the sun has come and gone?
People like me aren’t going anywhere. And I, personally, will never forget the fucking calamity that Trumpies have foisted upon the country and the world. As far as I can tell, Trump supporters have demonstrated themselves to be radically selfish and irresponsible social and political actors. Fucking entitled resentful little children.
I have no particular animus toward them at a personal level, and include a number of Trump supporters among my own family and friends. Just as I have no particular animus toward children when they behave, however egregiously, like children. But I have no respect or regard for their social or political point of view, nor I am likely to ever have any. They’ve cast their lot with the most despicable character of, at least, a generation, and done so with unapologetic enthusiasm.
On their head be it. The whole fucking disaster.
We’ll get through this one way or another. People Like Me will pick up the pieces. We’ll probably even allow Trumpies to continue to vote, and run for office. Maybe we’ll even invite them to dinner parties, if they promise to leave that shit at the door.
But I, personally, will never ever ever ever ever forget what they have done to this country.
Fuck my feelings? You think you’re gonna make me cry? You just make me shake my head. You’re a child, and I will treat you as a child. When, and if, you ever find your way to thinking, feeling, and acting like an adult, perhaps we can have a conversation.
OK, so take this with a late-night wine-with-dinner grain of salt, but I have to say I think this is freaking hilarious.
Right?
Can’t take a joke, you Gadsden flag wavers? Kiss my liberal keister.
And now I’m signing off, before I actually get rude. This stuff is getting under my skin. Too much damage is being done, we’re getting kind of close to the point where a mere sense of humor will no longer be sufficient.
G’night all.
OK, so take this with a late-night wine-with-dinner grain of salt, but I have to say I think this is freaking hilarious.
Right?
Can’t take a joke, you Gadsden flag wavers? Kiss my liberal keister.
And now I’m signing off, before I actually get rude. This stuff is getting under my skin. Too much damage is being done, we’re getting kind of close to the point where a mere sense of humor will no longer be sufficient.
G’night all.
I’d like to see our conservative interlocutors defend this bullshit.
Well it’s clearly indefensible bullshit. But I would argue that it isn’t conservative, at least as I understand the term.
I would hope that the footnote gets left in. Just to make clear to the Supreme Court justices why they should unanimously overturn the ruling. Regardless of whether they think there are grounds for overturning Obamacare. Shoddy workmanship should be called out, no matter whether you agree with the goal or not.
I’d like to see our conservative interlocutors defend this bullshit.
Well it’s clearly indefensible bullshit. But I would argue that it isn’t conservative, at least as I understand the term.
I would hope that the footnote gets left in. Just to make clear to the Supreme Court justices why they should unanimously overturn the ruling. Regardless of whether they think there are grounds for overturning Obamacare. Shoddy workmanship should be called out, no matter whether you agree with the goal or not.
As far as I can tell, Trump supporters have demonstrated themselves to be radically selfish and irresponsible social and political actors. Fucking entitled resentful little children.
Which is why they have embraced someone who routinely acts like a 3 year old** having a tantrum.
** No offense intended to most 3 year olds, many of whom are actually better behaved than this a good part of the time.
As far as I can tell, Trump supporters have demonstrated themselves to be radically selfish and irresponsible social and political actors. Fucking entitled resentful little children.
Which is why they have embraced someone who routinely acts like a 3 year old** having a tantrum.
** No offense intended to most 3 year olds, many of whom are actually better behaved than this a good part of the time.
From bobbyp’s cite:
Not the comfy chair!
Seriously, let’s introduce the topic of family members riding political coat-tails into Trump’s impeachment trial.
Let’s drag the whistleblower out onto the open, so he or she can talk about living life with a security detail.
Go for it, you Randian ass. Put whatever passes for a moderate (R) these days in the cross hairs.
I have popcorn.
From bobbyp’s cite:
Not the comfy chair!
Seriously, let’s introduce the topic of family members riding political coat-tails into Trump’s impeachment trial.
Let’s drag the whistleblower out onto the open, so he or she can talk about living life with a security detail.
Go for it, you Randian ass. Put whatever passes for a moderate (R) these days in the cross hairs.
I have popcorn.
Russell is a lot more forgiving and forbearing than I am.
In my more pleasurable dreams, every Trump family member, Cabinet member, and supporter get *their* citizenship revoked and are deported to helliest hellhole I can find.
To say I hate them all with the fury of a thousand suns is understating the case.
Russell is a lot more forgiving and forbearing than I am.
In my more pleasurable dreams, every Trump family member, Cabinet member, and supporter get *their* citizenship revoked and are deported to helliest hellhole I can find.
To say I hate them all with the fury of a thousand suns is understating the case.
But I would argue that it isn’t conservative, at least as I understand the term.
oh, but it definitely is, as i define it.
But I would argue that it isn’t conservative, at least as I understand the term.
oh, but it definitely is, as i define it.
I have no particular animus toward them at a personal level
you’re a better man than i am, russell.
i see these stickers and i think “this person wants me to know she hates me. she’s telling the world that she’s an out-and-proud asshole.”
at this point, endorsing Trump means endorsing everything he’s done. there have been more than enough opportunities for decent people to say “Nope, that’s enough.” if you’re with him, you have to know what you’re endorsing.
so, when i see a “Trump 2020 / Make the liberals cry” sticker, i see a person who endorses sexual assault, tax fraud, mail-order scams, unhealthy father/daughter dynamics, freeweelling corruption and an utter disregard for truth and knowledge and decency. and i see a person who wants me to see that.
so, they get all the animus they’ve requested, from me.
and no, i will never forget, either.
I have no particular animus toward them at a personal level
you’re a better man than i am, russell.
i see these stickers and i think “this person wants me to know she hates me. she’s telling the world that she’s an out-and-proud asshole.”
at this point, endorsing Trump means endorsing everything he’s done. there have been more than enough opportunities for decent people to say “Nope, that’s enough.” if you’re with him, you have to know what you’re endorsing.
so, when i see a “Trump 2020 / Make the liberals cry” sticker, i see a person who endorses sexual assault, tax fraud, mail-order scams, unhealthy father/daughter dynamics, freeweelling corruption and an utter disregard for truth and knowledge and decency. and i see a person who wants me to see that.
so, they get all the animus they’ve requested, from me.
and no, i will never forget, either.
Thanks, cleek. Speaking for me in a much more constructive way than I usually do.
Thanks, cleek. Speaking for me in a much more constructive way than I usually do.
you’re a better man than i am
No, really, I’m not. My gut response to some guy flipping me the bird is to flip him right back, only with both hands. My immediate impulse upon seeing the bumper sticker was to get right up on the guy’s @ss, to make his driving experience as uncomfortable as I could make it.
Fnck my feelings? No dude, fnck yours!
Right? Not the response of a particularly good person. So no, I’m not that good of a person.
And that’s why, for myself, I feel obliged to try to remember that Trump supporters are more than just their bumper sticker. It is, I suppose, sort of a personal discipline, and it’s mostly hard, because I mostly just want to yell at them all the time. All the time, every day.
As may have been obvious, from my posts above.
And all of that anger is, I think, an expression of grief, about how far – how very, very far – we are, as a nation, from where we could be and should be. Grief about the smallness of our goals and what we settle for as “success”.
Tax cuts! Business friendly policies!
And everything and everyone else on the planet can go to hell. What a puny achievement, given what we are capable of. And, have achieved, at various moments, however brief.
We could be so much better than we are right now. Without breaking a sweat, really. We just need to remember that we’re capable of it.
And that’s why I didn’t ride that guy’s ass all the way from Lynn to Cambridge. Because there has to be something left after Trump is gone. There has to be room for all of the Trumpies to rejoin the human race. At least, the ones who still want to.
So I try my best to not just flip the bird back. Much as I would like to.
It’s not about being a “good person”, or being more “forgiving”. It’s about trying to keep my eyes on the damned prize, so that there’s something left of this damned country after the trainwreck.
Regarding Parnas, I neither believe or disbelieve anything he says. Probably some of what he says is true, and some not, and some sort-of true but not quite as he tells it. What’s undoubtedly true is any and every thing he says is intended for his own advantage.
We are being dragged through a great big pile of steaming toxic shit, but a cabal of corrupt mendacious snakes. He’s just one of the snakes.
None of us has any idea how deep this mess is, or how profound the corruption is. Whatever we can imagine, it’s probably worse. I don’t know what it will take to unravel it, or if it can all be unraveled, or what will be left standing if we are able to unravel it all.
This is one deep, deep mess we are in. Where it all lands is, I think, not completely in our control. We just have to hold on to our humanity and commit ourselves to making things something like better, to whatever degree we can.
Buckle up and hold on to your hats.
you’re a better man than i am
No, really, I’m not. My gut response to some guy flipping me the bird is to flip him right back, only with both hands. My immediate impulse upon seeing the bumper sticker was to get right up on the guy’s @ss, to make his driving experience as uncomfortable as I could make it.
Fnck my feelings? No dude, fnck yours!
Right? Not the response of a particularly good person. So no, I’m not that good of a person.
And that’s why, for myself, I feel obliged to try to remember that Trump supporters are more than just their bumper sticker. It is, I suppose, sort of a personal discipline, and it’s mostly hard, because I mostly just want to yell at them all the time. All the time, every day.
As may have been obvious, from my posts above.
And all of that anger is, I think, an expression of grief, about how far – how very, very far – we are, as a nation, from where we could be and should be. Grief about the smallness of our goals and what we settle for as “success”.
Tax cuts! Business friendly policies!
And everything and everyone else on the planet can go to hell. What a puny achievement, given what we are capable of. And, have achieved, at various moments, however brief.
We could be so much better than we are right now. Without breaking a sweat, really. We just need to remember that we’re capable of it.
And that’s why I didn’t ride that guy’s ass all the way from Lynn to Cambridge. Because there has to be something left after Trump is gone. There has to be room for all of the Trumpies to rejoin the human race. At least, the ones who still want to.
So I try my best to not just flip the bird back. Much as I would like to.
It’s not about being a “good person”, or being more “forgiving”. It’s about trying to keep my eyes on the damned prize, so that there’s something left of this damned country after the trainwreck.
Regarding Parnas, I neither believe or disbelieve anything he says. Probably some of what he says is true, and some not, and some sort-of true but not quite as he tells it. What’s undoubtedly true is any and every thing he says is intended for his own advantage.
We are being dragged through a great big pile of steaming toxic shit, but a cabal of corrupt mendacious snakes. He’s just one of the snakes.
None of us has any idea how deep this mess is, or how profound the corruption is. Whatever we can imagine, it’s probably worse. I don’t know what it will take to unravel it, or if it can all be unraveled, or what will be left standing if we are able to unravel it all.
This is one deep, deep mess we are in. Where it all lands is, I think, not completely in our control. We just have to hold on to our humanity and commit ourselves to making things something like better, to whatever degree we can.
Buckle up and hold on to your hats.
But cleek, you define it imprecisely. Rather than
it should be
Of course I would also say that it’s a definition of “reactionary”, as one of your commenters noted. Granted, the reactionaries have appropriated the label. But their abuse of the labguage doesn’t have to be embraced by the rest of us. At minimum, if we are going to accept their theft of the term, we need a new label for those of us who actually are conservatives.
But cleek, you define it imprecisely. Rather than
it should be
Of course I would also say that it’s a definition of “reactionary”, as one of your commenters noted. Granted, the reactionaries have appropriated the label. But their abuse of the labguage doesn’t have to be embraced by the rest of us. At minimum, if we are going to accept their theft of the term, we need a new label for those of us who actually are conservatives.
My gut response to some guy flipping me the bird is to flip him right back, only with both hands.
Allow me to commend to you this half-way house to tranquility. Hold up your hand, extending the little finger. Think of it as a Hallmark Moment:
You not only get to flip them off, you get to express how little you think their opinion is worth. So it’s a snub as well.
Enjoy!
My gut response to some guy flipping me the bird is to flip him right back, only with both hands.
Allow me to commend to you this half-way house to tranquility. Hold up your hand, extending the little finger. Think of it as a Hallmark Moment:
You not only get to flip them off, you get to express how little you think their opinion is worth. So it’s a snub as well.
Enjoy!
Hold up your hand, extending the little finger
LOL.
If I lived in the south, I could also go with “Bless your heart, dear”.
As it is, I’m gonna stick with not riding the guy’s @ss, with maybe a “You have a nice day now!” thrown in for good measure.
Hold up your hand, extending the little finger
LOL.
If I lived in the south, I could also go with “Bless your heart, dear”.
As it is, I’m gonna stick with not riding the guy’s @ss, with maybe a “You have a nice day now!” thrown in for good measure.
So, does that mean you’re going with whatever’s the opposite of what a conservative would do…? 😉
So, does that mean you’re going with whatever’s the opposite of what a conservative would do…? 😉
LOL
Yes. Updated daily.
🙂
LOL
Yes. Updated daily.
🙂
ERA, redux:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/01/person-who-changes-constitution/605104/
Watch out for another executive power grab.
ERA, redux:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/01/person-who-changes-constitution/605104/
Watch out for another executive power grab.
The Gang That Can’t Shoot Straight seems to have not only done criminal stuff, not only talked about what they were doing, but actually written down their criminal plans.
They should have paid heed to this guy:
“Don’t write when you can talk; don’t talk when you can nod your head.”
Similar quote attributed to Earl Long.
The Gang That Can’t Shoot Straight seems to have not only done criminal stuff, not only talked about what they were doing, but actually written down their criminal plans.
They should have paid heed to this guy:
“Don’t write when you can talk; don’t talk when you can nod your head.”
Similar quote attributed to Earl Long.
A better quote from Lomasney would appear to be the more general “Never let anyone get anything on you.” But then they don’t seem to have a clue how to do that either.
A better quote from Lomasney would appear to be the more general “Never let anyone get anything on you.” But then they don’t seem to have a clue how to do that either.
byomtov, thanks for that link [and hi there!]
byomtov, thanks for that link [and hi there!]
At minimum, if we are going to accept their theft of the term, we need a new label for those of us who actually are conservatives.
hmm. paleo-con and neo-con are already taken. what about “The People Formerly Known As Conservatives” ?
or, Ƭ̵̬̊
At minimum, if we are going to accept their theft of the term, we need a new label for those of us who actually are conservatives.
hmm. paleo-con and neo-con are already taken. what about “The People Formerly Known As Conservatives” ?
or, Ƭ̵̬̊
I suppose WE could go with the flow and appropriate “liberal”. Leave you guys with “socialist” or something.
Not accurate, of course. But hey, we’d get the right wing media helping popularize it. 😉
I suppose WE could go with the flow and appropriate “liberal”. Leave you guys with “socialist” or something.
Not accurate, of course. But hey, we’d get the right wing media helping popularize it. 😉
if we are going to accept their theft of the term, we need a new label for those of us who actually are conservatives.
My suggestion: don’t accept their theft of the term.
They are reactionaries. Call them that. If they object, so be it.
if we are going to accept their theft of the term, we need a new label for those of us who actually are conservatives.
My suggestion: don’t accept their theft of the term.
They are reactionaries. Call them that. If they object, so be it.
Hi ral,
How’s the piano?
Hi ral,
How’s the piano?
I’m still at it, though taking a break from lessons over the holidays. Very busy at work (another start-up) so that interferes, mostly due to a shortage of mental energy.
I hope all is well with you. Any bridge news? And how’s the piano right back at you?
I’m still at it, though taking a break from lessons over the holidays. Very busy at work (another start-up) so that interferes, mostly due to a shortage of mental energy.
I hope all is well with you. Any bridge news? And how’s the piano right back at you?
My suggestion: don’t accept their theft of the term.
They are reactionaries. Call them that.
That’s *my* take as well. But as you can see from cleek’s comment, it feels like a two front war. Sigh.
My suggestion: don’t accept their theft of the term.
They are reactionaries. Call them that.
That’s *my* take as well. But as you can see from cleek’s comment, it feels like a two front war. Sigh.
wj,
The old Russian joke is “Don’t think. If you think, don’t talk. If you talk, don’t sign. If you sign, don’t be surprised.”
wj,
The old Russian joke is “Don’t think. If you think, don’t talk. If you talk, don’t sign. If you sign, don’t be surprised.”
Sorry, missed one sentence: “If you talk, don’t write. If you write, don’t sign.”
Sorry, missed one sentence: “If you talk, don’t write. If you write, don’t sign.”
Lurker, it’s no joke.
Lurker, it’s no joke.
Lurker, it’s no joke.
Yup.
Lurker, it’s no joke.
Yup.
Yup.
A number of the ads embedded in the article were for pickup trucks. But such juxtapositions are pretty common. Especially if ad selection keys off of content.
Yup.
A number of the ads embedded in the article were for pickup trucks. But such juxtapositions are pretty common. Especially if ad selection keys off of content.
The Trump administration takes a bold stand against fresh fruits and vegetables in school lunches. Because requiring schools to serve fresh fruits and vegetables is too much of an imposition on our local freedoms.
These people are orcs.
At some point, some of the folks who support Trump will wake the hell up and decide that, tax cuts and business friendly policies be damned, he’s just too nasty to get behind.
And, some of them won’t. They’ll go to their graves wearing their MAGA hats.
The Trump administration takes a bold stand against fresh fruits and vegetables in school lunches. Because requiring schools to serve fresh fruits and vegetables is too much of an imposition on our local freedoms.
These people are orcs.
At some point, some of the folks who support Trump will wake the hell up and decide that, tax cuts and business friendly policies be damned, he’s just too nasty to get behind.
And, some of them won’t. They’ll go to their graves wearing their MAGA hats.
It’s difficult to force kids to eat what they don’t want to eat.
“‘That directive is costing schools an added $5.4 million a day, of which $3.8 million worth of produce goes directly into the trash, according to national estimates,’ reads one recent editorial in a Connecticut paper chastising the USDA for all of the food waste its program creates. ‘A Harvard Public Health study found that 60 percent of the vegetables and 40 percent of the fruits are being tossed. Researchers at the University of Vermont found an overall increase of 56 percent in wasted food as a direct result of the mandate.'”
States Fight Back Against USDA Rules That Cause School Food Waste: Bad mandates result in uneaten foods. Schools figure out how to respond.
“It doesn’t matter how healthy options are if kids won’t eat them, and many would not. ‘Countless parents and more than one million public school students voted with their mouths, leaving the school lunch program in unprecedented droves last year[2013],…'”
Sanity Restored to School Lunches?: It doesn’t matter how healthy options are if kids won’t eat them.
It’s difficult to force kids to eat what they don’t want to eat.
“‘That directive is costing schools an added $5.4 million a day, of which $3.8 million worth of produce goes directly into the trash, according to national estimates,’ reads one recent editorial in a Connecticut paper chastising the USDA for all of the food waste its program creates. ‘A Harvard Public Health study found that 60 percent of the vegetables and 40 percent of the fruits are being tossed. Researchers at the University of Vermont found an overall increase of 56 percent in wasted food as a direct result of the mandate.'”
States Fight Back Against USDA Rules That Cause School Food Waste: Bad mandates result in uneaten foods. Schools figure out how to respond.
“It doesn’t matter how healthy options are if kids won’t eat them, and many would not. ‘Countless parents and more than one million public school students voted with their mouths, leaving the school lunch program in unprecedented droves last year[2013],…'”
Sanity Restored to School Lunches?: It doesn’t matter how healthy options are if kids won’t eat them.
Did you actually read those articles?
Did you actually read those articles?
There have been suspicions that the administration deliberately chose Michelle Obama’s birthday to announce this new policy.
Would fit perfectly (and of course it is officially denied and pure coincidence).
There have been suspicions that the administration deliberately chose Michelle Obama’s birthday to announce this new policy.
Would fit perfectly (and of course it is officially denied and pure coincidence).
Did you actually read those articles?
Yes, why?
Did you actually read those articles?
Yes, why?
Yes, why?
Because I’m not sure they make the point I think you think they make.
Yes, why?
Because I’m not sure they make the point I think you think they make.
And now: text messages from Parnas to . . . one of Congressman Nunes staffers. Looks like he was one of those in the loop about Ukraine — for all that direct contact was avoided because Nunes was under investigation by the Ethics Committee and they didn’t want to have visible contact.
Of course, the Congressman’s constituents may not care. Then again, he was down to just 52% of the vote in 2018, so perhaps not all that safe a district for him.
And now: text messages from Parnas to . . . one of Congressman Nunes staffers. Looks like he was one of those in the loop about Ukraine — for all that direct contact was avoided because Nunes was under investigation by the Ethics Committee and they didn’t want to have visible contact.
Of course, the Congressman’s constituents may not care. Then again, he was down to just 52% of the vote in 2018, so perhaps not all that safe a district for him.
Sanity Restored to School Lunches?: It doesn’t matter how healthy options are if kids won’t eat them.
if only there was some kind of place we could send children where they could be taught about things like nutrition and making smart choices.
sounds like socialism.
protip: Ron Swanson is not a role model.
Sanity Restored to School Lunches?: It doesn’t matter how healthy options are if kids won’t eat them.
if only there was some kind of place we could send children where they could be taught about things like nutrition and making smart choices.
sounds like socialism.
protip: Ron Swanson is not a role model.
the GOP cult doesn’t care about corruption in service of the cult.
the GOP cult doesn’t care about corruption in service of the cult.
the GOP cult doesn’t care about corruption in service of the cult.
True. But as we saw in 2018, there are a fair number of voters who are NOT members of the cult, even if they have voted for Republicans. Sometimes recently. That’s how the Democrats took the House. And may well take the Senate this year.
No doubt my view is colored by having watched the cult here in California. Where it is still going strong . . . but not strong enough to be an actual force in state politics. There will doubtless be places where it holds on at the local or state level. But enough of this idiocy may leave it irrelevant at the national level as well.
If you doubt it, consider that California elected Reagan as governor twice, and went for his a President twice as well. It’s not like Democratic majorities are baked into our DNA or something. Yet here we sit. The cult does live on, but it definitely doesn’t thrive.
the GOP cult doesn’t care about corruption in service of the cult.
True. But as we saw in 2018, there are a fair number of voters who are NOT members of the cult, even if they have voted for Republicans. Sometimes recently. That’s how the Democrats took the House. And may well take the Senate this year.
No doubt my view is colored by having watched the cult here in California. Where it is still going strong . . . but not strong enough to be an actual force in state politics. There will doubtless be places where it holds on at the local or state level. But enough of this idiocy may leave it irrelevant at the national level as well.
If you doubt it, consider that California elected Reagan as governor twice, and went for his a President twice as well. It’s not like Democratic majorities are baked into our DNA or something. Yet here we sit. The cult does live on, but it definitely doesn’t thrive.
Interesting article on Japan and social norms:
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200114-why-japan-is-so-successful-at-returning-lost-property
Interesting article on Japan and social norms:
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200114-why-japan-is-so-successful-at-returning-lost-property
But as we saw in 2018, there are a fair number of voters who are NOT members of the cult, even if they have voted for Republicans. Sometimes recently. That’s how the Democrats took the House. And may well take the Senate this year.
we’ll see.
i always go back to Gallup, which has always show that the change in % of people who self-identify as Republican hasn’t changed since 2016 and Trump’s support among those same people hasn’t changed either.
whatever happened in 2018 happened despite that. maybe that’s just turnout. maybe independents switched. probably both.
what it means for this year, though…
future is hazy.
But as we saw in 2018, there are a fair number of voters who are NOT members of the cult, even if they have voted for Republicans. Sometimes recently. That’s how the Democrats took the House. And may well take the Senate this year.
we’ll see.
i always go back to Gallup, which has always show that the change in % of people who self-identify as Republican hasn’t changed since 2016 and Trump’s support among those same people hasn’t changed either.
whatever happened in 2018 happened despite that. maybe that’s just turnout. maybe independents switched. probably both.
what it means for this year, though…
future is hazy.
FYI, voter registration in Nunes’ district is:
Democrats: 43.1%
Republican: 26.5%
No Party Preference: 25.1%
Being an incumbent helps, of course. But when the cult is only a quarter of the voters?
FYI, voter registration in Nunes’ district is:
Democrats: 43.1%
Republican: 26.5%
No Party Preference: 25.1%
Being an incumbent helps, of course. But when the cult is only a quarter of the voters?
I keep reading that a decision to admit witnesses and documentary evidence will require four (4) Republican Senators to bread ranks and vote for that. But I also see that three Republicans — Maine’s Susan Collins, Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski and Utah’s Mitt Romney — have already signaled that they want to have witness testimony.
But wait. If those 3 vote for witnesses, that gives a 50-50 tie . . . which would be resolved by a vote of the presiding officer: Chief Justice Roberts. I’m trying, without much success, to picture Roberts buying the argument that you can have a trial without evidence. In defiance of all precedent, specifically precedent in impeachment proceedings. Failure of imagination on my part, perhaps?
I keep reading that a decision to admit witnesses and documentary evidence will require four (4) Republican Senators to bread ranks and vote for that. But I also see that three Republicans — Maine’s Susan Collins, Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski and Utah’s Mitt Romney — have already signaled that they want to have witness testimony.
But wait. If those 3 vote for witnesses, that gives a 50-50 tie . . . which would be resolved by a vote of the presiding officer: Chief Justice Roberts. I’m trying, without much success, to picture Roberts buying the argument that you can have a trial without evidence. In defiance of all precedent, specifically precedent in impeachment proceedings. Failure of imagination on my part, perhaps?
And… the three moderate (R)’s say, “LOL, just kidding!”
They really want those tax cuts.
And… the three moderate (R)’s say, “LOL, just kidding!”
They really want those tax cuts.
To be honest, I really don’t know where the country goes from here, no matter where things go in November.
This isn’t specifically about Trump. Trump is a corrupt venal ass, but that’s just who he is and nobody with any sense expected any different.
McConnell has established the new rules, which basically amount to “Fnck you”.
I have no idea how the rest of us are expected to work with that.
To be honest, I really don’t know where the country goes from here, no matter where things go in November.
This isn’t specifically about Trump. Trump is a corrupt venal ass, but that’s just who he is and nobody with any sense expected any different.
McConnell has established the new rules, which basically amount to “Fnck you”.
I have no idea how the rest of us are expected to work with that.
It’s turtles all the way down, Russell.
It’s turtles all the way down, Russell.
Not exactly on topic, but things are slow. Also not anything most of us don’t already know, but presented succinctly, regarding the populist plutocrat (or “PP”).
https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/how-to-debunk-trumps-false-claims-about-the-economy
Not exactly on topic, but things are slow. Also not anything most of us don’t already know, but presented succinctly, regarding the populist plutocrat (or “PP”).
https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/how-to-debunk-trumps-false-claims-about-the-economy
when you’re confident the jury is bought and paid for:
https://twitter.com/justinhendrix/status/1219981403120644103
the GOP is a cult.
when you’re confident the jury is bought and paid for:
https://twitter.com/justinhendrix/status/1219981403120644103
the GOP is a cult.
To be honest, I really don’t know where the country goes from here, no matter where things go in November.
Realistically? At some point, maybe after November or maybe in a few more years, the Democrats end up with a majority in the Senate. And the Republican Senators discover what their short-sighted power politics has bought them. The filibuster, for all its faults, survived because Senators knew that someday they would be in the minority. But while it may linger a little longer in a few cases, as soon as something that the majority (regardless of party) cares about is blocked, it’s bound for the ash heap of history.
I admit that I find myself conflicted. On one hand, I would love to see McConnell voted out of office in November. But on the other, there would be something karmic at him coming back and having to live personally on the short end of the stick.
To be honest, I really don’t know where the country goes from here, no matter where things go in November.
Realistically? At some point, maybe after November or maybe in a few more years, the Democrats end up with a majority in the Senate. And the Republican Senators discover what their short-sighted power politics has bought them. The filibuster, for all its faults, survived because Senators knew that someday they would be in the minority. But while it may linger a little longer in a few cases, as soon as something that the majority (regardless of party) cares about is blocked, it’s bound for the ash heap of history.
I admit that I find myself conflicted. On one hand, I would love to see McConnell voted out of office in November. But on the other, there would be something karmic at him coming back and having to live personally on the short end of the stick.
i want to see McConnell driven from the Senate, and from polite company, forced to sell used cars from a trailer down by the river.
i want to see McConnell driven from the Senate, and from polite company, forced to sell used cars from a trailer down by the river.
FYLTGE.
FYLTGE.
Being an incumbent helps, of course. But when the cult is only a quarter of the voters?
Some while back there was a UK phenomenon labelled “shy Tories”, where the Conservatives received a lot more votes than anyone would admit to when polled.
Nothing on this scale, though.
Clearly a large number if people are quite prepared to vote for Trump, but are unwilling to admit they support him or the party which is in thrall to him.
Being an incumbent helps, of course. But when the cult is only a quarter of the voters?
Some while back there was a UK phenomenon labelled “shy Tories”, where the Conservatives received a lot more votes than anyone would admit to when polled.
Nothing on this scale, though.
Clearly a large number if people are quite prepared to vote for Trump, but are unwilling to admit they support him or the party which is in thrall to him.
“But on the other, there would be something karmic at him coming back and having to live personally on the short end of the stick.”
A more savage mass Karma is in order.
“But on the other, there would be something karmic at him coming back and having to live personally on the short end of the stick.”
A more savage mass Karma is in order.
A more savage mass Karma is in order.
Deserved? Perhaps.
But what are the chances?
Think I’ll focus on hoping for things that are actually, if not likely to happen, at least within the realm of possibility. (Always granting that I wouldn’t have considered a President Trump within the realm of possibility. So what do I know?)
A more savage mass Karma is in order.
Deserved? Perhaps.
But what are the chances?
Think I’ll focus on hoping for things that are actually, if not likely to happen, at least within the realm of possibility. (Always granting that I wouldn’t have considered a President Trump within the realm of possibility. So what do I know?)
I think we all need to understand that the sort of fall from grace we are talking about here for the GOP and for those who are enabling this in the name of magical thinking is not going to happen quietly and without any unrest. It’s been a while since we’ve had riots or assassinations or domestic terror of the Weathermen or OKC variety, but that, historically is where we need to get to before this sort of change happens.
I’ve done some grad work in Peace and Conflict Studies. They always stress that it’s non-violence that carries the day, but every time I look at the cases they cite, I see that the parties advocating non-violence are not the only parties involved. Sinn Fein was the more acceptable alternative to the Provos. MLK was the more acceptable alternative to Malcolm X or Huey Newton. Gandhi was the more acceptable alternative to the Ghadar revolutionaries. And the accords are never anything more than contingent. Only continued, good faith effort can repair this sort of regime cleavage.
So wj may be right in the long run, but getting to that long run will likely be messy, and it is by no means assured.
I think we all need to understand that the sort of fall from grace we are talking about here for the GOP and for those who are enabling this in the name of magical thinking is not going to happen quietly and without any unrest. It’s been a while since we’ve had riots or assassinations or domestic terror of the Weathermen or OKC variety, but that, historically is where we need to get to before this sort of change happens.
I’ve done some grad work in Peace and Conflict Studies. They always stress that it’s non-violence that carries the day, but every time I look at the cases they cite, I see that the parties advocating non-violence are not the only parties involved. Sinn Fein was the more acceptable alternative to the Provos. MLK was the more acceptable alternative to Malcolm X or Huey Newton. Gandhi was the more acceptable alternative to the Ghadar revolutionaries. And the accords are never anything more than contingent. Only continued, good faith effort can repair this sort of regime cleavage.
So wj may be right in the long run, but getting to that long run will likely be messy, and it is by no means assured.
Completely agree with nous @ 12:48.
I’ll add one thing to this:
the sort of fall from grace we are talking about here for the GOP and for those who are enabling this
When they fall, they’re taking a lot down with them.
Completely agree with nous @ 12:48.
I’ll add one thing to this:
the sort of fall from grace we are talking about here for the GOP and for those who are enabling this
When they fall, they’re taking a lot down with them.
When the center cannot hold, the political sh*t hits the fan.
When there is no center, political norms give way to violence.
When the center thinks it can politically accommodate the far right, the result is fascism.
A viable center that accommodates, but does not entirely surrender to, the far left can do good things.
There are exceptions to all of the above!
There you have it.
When the center cannot hold, the political sh*t hits the fan.
When there is no center, political norms give way to violence.
When the center thinks it can politically accommodate the far right, the result is fascism.
A viable center that accommodates, but does not entirely surrender to, the far left can do good things.
There are exceptions to all of the above!
There you have it.
HERE you have it:
https://twitter.com/SenSherrodBrown/status/908349218330431490?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1220041989955244033&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.balloon-juice.com%2F
None of these conservative vermin die by the mercy of natural causes.
Look at the subhumans swarm:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/22/opinion/richmond-gun-rights-rally.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage
HERE you have it:
https://twitter.com/SenSherrodBrown/status/908349218330431490?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1220041989955244033&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.balloon-juice.com%2F
None of these conservative vermin die by the mercy of natural causes.
Look at the subhumans swarm:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/22/opinion/richmond-gun-rights-rally.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage
in case anyone wasn’t sure:
Rand Paul is an asshole:
DIAF, GOP
in case anyone wasn’t sure:
Rand Paul is an asshole:
DIAF, GOP
One wishes yet more militant armed landscapers among Rand Paul’s neighbors.
Fuck Libertarians.
Ron Paul is his parent.
Call Social Services.
One wishes yet more militant armed landscapers among Rand Paul’s neighbors.
Fuck Libertarians.
Ron Paul is his parent.
Call Social Services.
nous @12:48: Fascinating, thought-provoking comment.
I’ve done a few peace-studies classes and workshops in my day (not recently), and that’s an observation I never heard anyone make. But it rings true.
I’ve thought about something similar in these later years as I’ve watched relatively centrist people on (sort of) my side (e.g. during the years of gay rights/marriage campaigns) clutch pearls over the radical fringe, and the purist fringe crap on the moderates, and I always want to say: it takes both. The radicals help make the moderates look sensible to the other side, and the centrists are the ones who tend to work out what’s actually politically possible. (Very much off the top of my head thought train.)
*****
cleek @9:55: How did we get to a point where half the country glories in having people running the show who don’t have the standards of behavior of a kindergartner? (Rhetorical question.)
nous @12:48: Fascinating, thought-provoking comment.
I’ve done a few peace-studies classes and workshops in my day (not recently), and that’s an observation I never heard anyone make. But it rings true.
I’ve thought about something similar in these later years as I’ve watched relatively centrist people on (sort of) my side (e.g. during the years of gay rights/marriage campaigns) clutch pearls over the radical fringe, and the purist fringe crap on the moderates, and I always want to say: it takes both. The radicals help make the moderates look sensible to the other side, and the centrists are the ones who tend to work out what’s actually politically possible. (Very much off the top of my head thought train.)
*****
cleek @9:55: How did we get to a point where half the country glories in having people running the show who don’t have the standards of behavior of a kindergartner? (Rhetorical question.)
Paul should be in jail, according to the oath he took at the start of the trial.
Paul should be in jail, according to the oath he took at the start of the trial.
What makes the Hottentot so hot?
REPORTER: “Do you have any comments on Elon Musk?”1
TRUMP: “Well, you have to give him credit. I spoke to him very recently, and he’s also doing the rockets. He likes rockets. And he does good at rockets, too, by the way. I never saw where the engines come down with no wings, no anything, and they’re landing. I said I’ve never seen that before. And I was worried about him because he’s one of our great geniuses, and we have to protect our genius. You know, we have to protect Thomas Edison and we have to protect all of these people that came up with originally the light bulb, and the wheel, and all of these things, and he’s one of our very smart people and we want to cherish those people. That’s very important. But he’s done a very good job.”
https://books.google.com/books?id=8YtJDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT1225&lpg=PT1225&dq=funny+who+invented+the+wheel+cartoons+from+the+new+yorker&source=bl&ots=5v5hfBL9F5&sig=ACfU3U0UCHPPo8RBLyvW17XmgzRjKlOrHA&hl=en&ppis=_e&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi29sy8hZrnAhVUVs0KHakpDjoQ6AEwEXoECAoQAQ#v=onepage&q=funny%20who%20invented%20the%20wheel%20cartoons%20from%20the%20new%20yorker&f=false
https://www.google.com/search?q=who+invented+the+wheel+cartoons+from+the+new+yorker&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=rz4ANf1q6yy4TM%253A%252Cwh6H-MD1eYT9lM%252C_&vet=1&usg=AI4_-kRKJOpJAV2k-SktLm83fuN41-GZsA&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjkp7bqhZrnAhWDcc0KHf0WDykQ9QEwBnoECAUQBw#imgrc=rz4ANf1q6yy4TM:&vet=1
https://www.google.com/search?q=who+invented+the+wheel+cartoons+from+the+new+yorker&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=rz4ANf1q6yy4TM%253A%252Cwh6H-MD1eYT9lM%252C_&vet=1&usg=AI4_-kRKJOpJAV2k-SktLm83fuN41-GZsA&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjkp7bqhZrnAhWDcc0KHf0WDykQ9QEwBnoECAUQBw#imgrc=IyTmwxj_zFEQSM:&vet=1
What makes the Hottentot so hot?
REPORTER: “Do you have any comments on Elon Musk?”1
TRUMP: “Well, you have to give him credit. I spoke to him very recently, and he’s also doing the rockets. He likes rockets. And he does good at rockets, too, by the way. I never saw where the engines come down with no wings, no anything, and they’re landing. I said I’ve never seen that before. And I was worried about him because he’s one of our great geniuses, and we have to protect our genius. You know, we have to protect Thomas Edison and we have to protect all of these people that came up with originally the light bulb, and the wheel, and all of these things, and he’s one of our very smart people and we want to cherish those people. That’s very important. But he’s done a very good job.”
https://books.google.com/books?id=8YtJDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT1225&lpg=PT1225&dq=funny+who+invented+the+wheel+cartoons+from+the+new+yorker&source=bl&ots=5v5hfBL9F5&sig=ACfU3U0UCHPPo8RBLyvW17XmgzRjKlOrHA&hl=en&ppis=_e&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi29sy8hZrnAhVUVs0KHakpDjoQ6AEwEXoECAoQAQ#v=onepage&q=funny%20who%20invented%20the%20wheel%20cartoons%20from%20the%20new%20yorker&f=false
https://www.google.com/search?q=who+invented+the+wheel+cartoons+from+the+new+yorker&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=rz4ANf1q6yy4TM%253A%252Cwh6H-MD1eYT9lM%252C_&vet=1&usg=AI4_-kRKJOpJAV2k-SktLm83fuN41-GZsA&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjkp7bqhZrnAhWDcc0KHf0WDykQ9QEwBnoECAUQBw#imgrc=rz4ANf1q6yy4TM:&vet=1
https://www.google.com/search?q=who+invented+the+wheel+cartoons+from+the+new+yorker&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=rz4ANf1q6yy4TM%253A%252Cwh6H-MD1eYT9lM%252C_&vet=1&usg=AI4_-kRKJOpJAV2k-SktLm83fuN41-GZsA&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjkp7bqhZrnAhWDcc0KHf0WDykQ9QEwBnoECAUQBw#imgrc=IyTmwxj_zFEQSM:&vet=1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EImWL_ppAXM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EImWL_ppAXM
https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2020/01/reagan-and-the-hostages/
When will Ronald Reagan be executed, butchered and slaughtered for his treason?
https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2020/01/reagan-and-the-hostages/
When will Ronald Reagan be executed, butchered and slaughtered for his treason?
The radicals help make the moderates look sensible to the other side, and the centrists are the ones who tend to work out what’s actually politically possible.
No argument that it takes both. But does it take violent radicals? Not just the occasional outburst, mind, but ongoing groups focused on using violence on behalf of their cause? Because that’s how I read some of the comments here.
For example, what was the group violently advocating for gay rights and gay marriage? Not individual outbursts like Stonewall, but something like the Provisional IRA or the Ghadar revolutionaries. Maybe I’m just oblivious (OK, even though I’m pretty oblivious), but I think I would have noticed that . . . and I didn’t.
The radicals help make the moderates look sensible to the other side, and the centrists are the ones who tend to work out what’s actually politically possible.
No argument that it takes both. But does it take violent radicals? Not just the occasional outburst, mind, but ongoing groups focused on using violence on behalf of their cause? Because that’s how I read some of the comments here.
For example, what was the group violently advocating for gay rights and gay marriage? Not individual outbursts like Stonewall, but something like the Provisional IRA or the Ghadar revolutionaries. Maybe I’m just oblivious (OK, even though I’m pretty oblivious), but I think I would have noticed that . . . and I didn’t.
Senator Kennedy is definitely not one of my heroes. But I have to say I think he pretty much nailed it here.
Of course, whether any of the new information will make it past the willful deafness is another story.
Senator Kennedy is definitely not one of my heroes. But I have to say I think he pretty much nailed it here.
Of course, whether any of the new information will make it past the willful deafness is another story.
Sometimes, a situation can be summarized in a sentence:
Republicans: The case for impeachment is terrible — and the portions are so small
Sometimes, a situation can be summarized in a sentence:
Republicans: The case for impeachment is terrible — and the portions are so small
“Republicans: The case for impeachment is terrible — and the portions are so small”
Funnel and a broomstick.
“Republicans: The case for impeachment is terrible — and the portions are so small”
Funnel and a broomstick.
I’d like to see our conservative interlocutors defend this bullshit.
Delurking.
Which bs, the “partisan footnote” bs, or the factual assertions in the footnote bs?
As to the second, the Slate article asserts the “Trojan Horse” theory is a theory “with no basis in fact” without, well, any facts to support that assertion.
Last time I checked, Obamacare would have cost me close to $3k/month. Obamacare was, IMHO, designed to fail the self-employed and small business owner. It would have gone further had the unions not pushed back. I had COBRA I paid for for 3 years (Cal-COBRA after fed COBRA) simply due to the cost being much better than Obamacare. Now I am on a health sharing plan because COBRA ran out simply because of the cost of Obamacare. Does single payer looks better than before? Sure, from an individual financial perspective. So yes, IMHO, there is a factual basis for the Trojan Horse Theory.
I’d like to see our conservative interlocutors defend this bullshit.
Delurking.
Which bs, the “partisan footnote” bs, or the factual assertions in the footnote bs?
As to the second, the Slate article asserts the “Trojan Horse” theory is a theory “with no basis in fact” without, well, any facts to support that assertion.
Last time I checked, Obamacare would have cost me close to $3k/month. Obamacare was, IMHO, designed to fail the self-employed and small business owner. It would have gone further had the unions not pushed back. I had COBRA I paid for for 3 years (Cal-COBRA after fed COBRA) simply due to the cost being much better than Obamacare. Now I am on a health sharing plan because COBRA ran out simply because of the cost of Obamacare. Does single payer looks better than before? Sure, from an individual financial perspective. So yes, IMHO, there is a factual basis for the Trojan Horse Theory.
wj – what was the group violently advocating for gay rights and gay marriage? Not individual outbursts like Stonewall, but something like the Provisional IRA or the Ghadar revolutionaries. Maybe I’m just oblivious (OK, even though I’m pretty oblivious), but I think I would have noticed that . . . and I didn’t.
The gay rights crowd has been, until recently, seeing steady progress in the courts and in politics. It’s only in the last few years that we have seen not just a stalling out, but a reversal of their progress and a move on the right to protect discrimination based on sexual preference or gender identity in the name of religious freedom.
The examples I cited have much longer tails, and gay rights was riding on that longer coattail of the civil rights movement for years before the religious right began working to peel off the Christians of color.
And if you want to find gay rights activists who are embracing more violent means, look to the black block and antifa. There are a lot of queercore activists in their numbers. They just have other irons in the intersectional fire as well.
wj – what was the group violently advocating for gay rights and gay marriage? Not individual outbursts like Stonewall, but something like the Provisional IRA or the Ghadar revolutionaries. Maybe I’m just oblivious (OK, even though I’m pretty oblivious), but I think I would have noticed that . . . and I didn’t.
The gay rights crowd has been, until recently, seeing steady progress in the courts and in politics. It’s only in the last few years that we have seen not just a stalling out, but a reversal of their progress and a move on the right to protect discrimination based on sexual preference or gender identity in the name of religious freedom.
The examples I cited have much longer tails, and gay rights was riding on that longer coattail of the civil rights movement for years before the religious right began working to peel off the Christians of color.
And if you want to find gay rights activists who are embracing more violent means, look to the black block and antifa. There are a lot of queercore activists in their numbers. They just have other irons in the intersectional fire as well.
We presume, as with Marty’s experience, bc, that you were part of the roughly 20% of the Obamacare population who did not qualify for the subsidies and couldn’t qualify for Medicaid because of your accumulated assets.
So, yes, that sucks.
But that’s a problem of America, not Obamacare, that those who have the goods must pay through the nose for health insurance, if they are not employed.
A Republican conservative would tell you to get a job.
However, many of the 80% who qualify for the Obamacare subsidies seem to be satisfied, as they keep coming back for more.
It would nice if, for a change, some of them would show up and say so, but I guess this blog attracts the high-asset earners, who don’t care for subsidies, but nevertheless at least mention when they don’t get them.
When do you qualify for Medicare? Soon, I hope.
And why not right now? Well, just cus you are on your own and .. well … the rest is just made up crap about the American way.
Good luck and good health to you.
We presume, as with Marty’s experience, bc, that you were part of the roughly 20% of the Obamacare population who did not qualify for the subsidies and couldn’t qualify for Medicaid because of your accumulated assets.
So, yes, that sucks.
But that’s a problem of America, not Obamacare, that those who have the goods must pay through the nose for health insurance, if they are not employed.
A Republican conservative would tell you to get a job.
However, many of the 80% who qualify for the Obamacare subsidies seem to be satisfied, as they keep coming back for more.
It would nice if, for a change, some of them would show up and say so, but I guess this blog attracts the high-asset earners, who don’t care for subsidies, but nevertheless at least mention when they don’t get them.
When do you qualify for Medicare? Soon, I hope.
And why not right now? Well, just cus you are on your own and .. well … the rest is just made up crap about the American way.
Good luck and good health to you.
The traditional spectacle of pearl clutching from someone preparing to vote to acquit a brazen criminal:
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/23/susan-collins-impeachment-note-john-roberts-102826
The traditional spectacle of pearl clutching from someone preparing to vote to acquit a brazen criminal:
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/23/susan-collins-impeachment-note-john-roberts-102826
Can we execute female Senators for new heights in mealymouthedness?
Can we execute female Senators for new heights in mealymouthedness?
The Greeks wouldn’t have needed a Trojan Horse if the Trojans would not of been such hardheaded asses and would have stopped preventing the uninsured from accessing healthcare inside the walls of warmongering Troy.
The Greeks were the heroes.
The Trojans had gates, ya know. They were locked.
Next time it won’t be a horse.
The Greeks wouldn’t have needed a Trojan Horse if the Trojans would not of been such hardheaded asses and would have stopped preventing the uninsured from accessing healthcare inside the walls of warmongering Troy.
The Greeks were the heroes.
The Trojans had gates, ya know. They were locked.
Next time it won’t be a horse.
Can we execute female Senators for new heights in mealymouthedness?
Call me an old traditionalist, but I think voting them out of office might be the more appropriate remedy.
Better still, call me a youngish traditionalist.
Can we execute female Senators for new heights in mealymouthedness?
Call me an old traditionalist, but I think voting them out of office might be the more appropriate remedy.
Better still, call me a youngish traditionalist.
If a female Democratic Senator had handed the Chief of Injustice a note asking to be excused to pee, it would be reported in the subhuman vermin anti-American right-wing noise machine as a bomb threat, and an unfair and biased one at that.
If a female Democratic Senator had handed the Chief of Injustice a note asking to be excused to pee, it would be reported in the subhuman vermin anti-American right-wing noise machine as a bomb threat, and an unfair and biased one at that.
Which bs, the “partisan footnote” bs, or the factual assertions in the footnote bs?
Both the footnote and the factual assertions therein are bs, your personal experience notwithstanding.
Last time I checked, Obamacare would have cost me close to $3k/month.
You assert a factual claim. Prove it.
Obamacare was, IMHO, designed to fail the self-employed and small business owner.
Sure. Because as we all know, ALL public policies need to revolve around the needs and wants of the small business owner….Chamber of Commerce 101. Again, I’d say…prove it.
And what Thullen said.
Which bs, the “partisan footnote” bs, or the factual assertions in the footnote bs?
Both the footnote and the factual assertions therein are bs, your personal experience notwithstanding.
Last time I checked, Obamacare would have cost me close to $3k/month.
You assert a factual claim. Prove it.
Obamacare was, IMHO, designed to fail the self-employed and small business owner.
Sure. Because as we all know, ALL public policies need to revolve around the needs and wants of the small business owner….Chamber of Commerce 101. Again, I’d say…prove it.
And what Thullen said.
RIP Jim Lehrer.
Sorry he’s going to miss the bloodiest, most savage and lethal Civil War in American history.
I guess none of it will be reported now.
RIP Jim Lehrer.
Sorry he’s going to miss the bloodiest, most savage and lethal Civil War in American history.
I guess none of it will be reported now.
As to the second, the Slate article asserts the “Trojan Horse” theory is a theory “with no basis in fact” without, well, any facts to support that assertion.
The article in fact cited several reasons why the “Trojan Horse” hypothesis regarding the ACA was total horseshit. NONE OF WHICH YOU BOTHERED TO ADDRESS.
So I see no reason not to laugh off a horseshit claim with no factual basis because I, too, brought no “facts”. That is rather silly.
As to the second, the Slate article asserts the “Trojan Horse” theory is a theory “with no basis in fact” without, well, any facts to support that assertion.
The article in fact cited several reasons why the “Trojan Horse” hypothesis regarding the ACA was total horseshit. NONE OF WHICH YOU BOTHERED TO ADDRESS.
So I see no reason not to laugh off a horseshit claim with no factual basis because I, too, brought no “facts”. That is rather silly.
William Barr lays the cornerstone for the declaration of martial law and the arrests and murders of all liberals, Liberal Jews, blacks, immigrants of all stripes besides Russian, gays, and the homeless and the unemployed as we enter trump’s second term and he defaults on the government debt of the United States, thus halting all government functions outside the of military and protecting with armed force the lives and assets of the very rich and the Supreme Court rules that women and abortion doctors will be executed for their deeds, all public schools will be forced to tow the Christian line, and Obamacare, Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, the Federal Reserve Bank and all public lands are declared unconstitutional.
William Barr lays the cornerstone for the declaration of martial law and the arrests and murders of all liberals, Liberal Jews, blacks, immigrants of all stripes besides Russian, gays, and the homeless and the unemployed as we enter trump’s second term and he defaults on the government debt of the United States, thus halting all government functions outside the of military and protecting with armed force the lives and assets of the very rich and the Supreme Court rules that women and abortion doctors will be executed for their deeds, all public schools will be forced to tow the Christian line, and Obamacare, Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, the Federal Reserve Bank and all public lands are declared unconstitutional.
https://washingtonmonthly.com/2020/01/23/the-attorney-general-lays-the-groundwork-to-carry-out-his-threat/
https://washingtonmonthly.com/2020/01/23/the-attorney-general-lays-the-groundwork-to-carry-out-his-threat/
Obamacare was, IMHO, designed to fail the self-employed and small business owner.
I am curious as to what the putative motivation would be for someone doing so.
The legal code is full of stuff designed to disadvantage various groups. But it’s usually possible to find some motivating dislike behind them. Who dislikes the self employed? Who dislikes small business owners per se (as opposed to business owners generally)?
Now if you want to posit indifference or incompetence, fine. But that’s a long, long way from “designed to fail” a particular group.
Obamacare was, IMHO, designed to fail the self-employed and small business owner.
I am curious as to what the putative motivation would be for someone doing so.
The legal code is full of stuff designed to disadvantage various groups. But it’s usually possible to find some motivating dislike behind them. Who dislikes the self employed? Who dislikes small business owners per se (as opposed to business owners generally)?
Now if you want to posit indifference or incompetence, fine. But that’s a long, long way from “designed to fail” a particular group.
Nine out of 10 senators will tell you that they have not read the transcript of the proceedings of the House. And the 10th senator who says he has is lying.
Reading things is what staff are for.
Nine out of 10 senators will tell you that they have not read the transcript of the proceedings of the House. And the 10th senator who says he has is lying.
Reading things is what staff are for.
“However, many of the 80% who qualify for the Obamacare subsidies seem to be satisfied, as they keep coming back for more.”
They keep coming back for more because having catastrophic health insurance is better than none. Even for those subsidized it could, I didn’t say doesn’t because it never could, achieve the purported goals without a long term subsidy. So the insurance that gets subsidized is 6k deductible, So there is no insurance that working poor people can use because, oh yeah, it costs them more than the rate for uninsured people. Jesus, how long are we going to discuss this ridiculous piece of shit before “better than nothing” quits being good enough. You want single payer? Be prepared for “its better than nothing” medicine.
And yes, intelligently means tested, based on income, access to Medicare is the right answer. But then I have been saying that since these discussions began in 2008. Any plan that doesn’t have an option for everyone is stupid. Making every option the same is also not a good plan.
“However, many of the 80% who qualify for the Obamacare subsidies seem to be satisfied, as they keep coming back for more.”
They keep coming back for more because having catastrophic health insurance is better than none. Even for those subsidized it could, I didn’t say doesn’t because it never could, achieve the purported goals without a long term subsidy. So the insurance that gets subsidized is 6k deductible, So there is no insurance that working poor people can use because, oh yeah, it costs them more than the rate for uninsured people. Jesus, how long are we going to discuss this ridiculous piece of shit before “better than nothing” quits being good enough. You want single payer? Be prepared for “its better than nothing” medicine.
And yes, intelligently means tested, based on income, access to Medicare is the right answer. But then I have been saying that since these discussions began in 2008. Any plan that doesn’t have an option for everyone is stupid. Making every option the same is also not a good plan.
Reading things is what staff are for.
In the normal course of legislative business, perhaps. But when sitting in judgement? No.
Reading things is what staff are for.
In the normal course of legislative business, perhaps. But when sitting in judgement? No.
“Jesus, how long are we going to discuss this ridiculous piece of shit before “better than nothing” quits being good enough.”
When piece of shit “nothing” bankruptcy is no longer considered by conservatives to be the go-to option for Americans without insurance, including the pre-existing pre-born, who need to get a job, or sue Mike Pence for child support.
Or until Jesus returns with the loaves and the catheters.
It’s all moot anyway. The Federalist Society wants Medicare, Medicaid, and Obamacare declared unconstitutional and the only thing standing in front of that murderous train are Ruth Bader Ginsberg’s pre-existing but as yet not fatal conditions, which radical religious conservatives pray will take her to the morgue.
“Jesus, how long are we going to discuss this ridiculous piece of shit before “better than nothing” quits being good enough.”
When piece of shit “nothing” bankruptcy is no longer considered by conservatives to be the go-to option for Americans without insurance, including the pre-existing pre-born, who need to get a job, or sue Mike Pence for child support.
Or until Jesus returns with the loaves and the catheters.
It’s all moot anyway. The Federalist Society wants Medicare, Medicaid, and Obamacare declared unconstitutional and the only thing standing in front of that murderous train are Ruth Bader Ginsberg’s pre-existing but as yet not fatal conditions, which radical religious conservatives pray will take her to the morgue.
“And yes, intelligently means tested, based on income, access to Medicare is the right answer.”
The Supreme Court conservative majority, at the behest of the 1%, will strike that down because they will consider it religious discrimination based on the prosperity gospel and their very own high individual means and income.
“And yes, intelligently means tested, based on income, access to Medicare is the right answer.”
The Supreme Court conservative majority, at the behest of the 1%, will strike that down because they will consider it religious discrimination based on the prosperity gospel and their very own high individual means and income.
And yes, intelligently means tested, based on income, access to Medicare is the right answer.
OK, fine. Let’s do that.
Is it on offer?
And yes, intelligently means tested, based on income, access to Medicare is the right answer.
OK, fine. Let’s do that.
Is it on offer?
And yes, intelligently means tested, based on income, access to Medicare is the right answer.
That is what the Medicaid expansion does. Now you wish to move that eligibility line a bit higher above the poverty level….OK by me.
You might be “fucked” under the current ACA structure, but millions are better off, or at least millions who are not under the fucking control of batshit crazy Republicans aided by a partisan Supreme Court.
Oh, and by the way, you would be just as “fucked” if the ACA was repealed.
But it’s all about you, right?
Jeezus Fucking Christ.
And yes, intelligently means tested, based on income, access to Medicare is the right answer.
That is what the Medicaid expansion does. Now you wish to move that eligibility line a bit higher above the poverty level….OK by me.
You might be “fucked” under the current ACA structure, but millions are better off, or at least millions who are not under the fucking control of batshit crazy Republicans aided by a partisan Supreme Court.
Oh, and by the way, you would be just as “fucked” if the ACA was repealed.
But it’s all about you, right?
Jeezus Fucking Christ.
Is it on offer?
A rhetorical question, no doubt.
Is it on offer?
A rhetorical question, no doubt.
Yeah, because when I argue a point it’s all about me, but YOu can look at the bigger picture. Thank God for,thank goodness for you good people.
Yeah, because when I argue a point it’s all about me, but YOu can look at the bigger picture. Thank God for,thank goodness for you good people.
The article in fact cited several reasons why the “Trojan Horse” hypothesis regarding the ACA was total horseshit. NONE OF WHICH YOU BOTHERED TO ADDRESS.
No, the article is light on facts, high on assertions. It starts with the Trojan Horse theory putting forth a bunch of arguments, not facts, then switches to the mandate. I didn’t go through every link exhaustively, but the article doesn’t provide facts that debunk the theory.
We presume, as with Marty’s experience, bc, that you were part of the roughly 20% of the Obamacare population who did not qualify for the subsidies and couldn’t qualify for Medicaid because of your accumulated assets.
If you mean I have more than $1,500 in assets aside from my home and car and thus don’t qualify for Medicaid, then yes. And I typically make more than the cut off for subsidies.
So, yes, that sucks.
But that’s a problem of America, not Obamacare, that those who have the goods must pay through the nose for health insurance, if they are not employed.
A Republican conservative would tell you to get a job.
I have a job. I am self-employed. And I don’t follow your argument about the problem with “America.” My problem is an ACA problem, not a problem with America per se. If I worked for the government, a union employer or a large corporation, I would have coverage much cheaper than what the exchange offers me. Why is that? It’s not based on income unless you are buying on the exchange.
The ACA structurally encourages everyone paying full boat to get on a group plan where the cost isn’t as “personal” as it is when you are buying on the exchange without a subsidy. How is that not a step towards single payer?
Before ACA, I could control costs and buy a catastrophic plan, stay healthy, and fund my HSA. But ACA doesn’t allow those plans anymore.
However, many of the 80% who qualify for the Obamacare subsidies seem to be satisfied, as they keep coming back for more.
And right there is the proof of a step towards universal coverage. Get the masses dependent on the subsidies. We are, IMHO, a large step closer to single payer.
When do you qualify for Medicare? Soon, I hope.
53. Nope.
Good luck and good health to you.
Thanks.
Listen, I’m in favor of taking care of children, the elderly, and the weakest among us. But some of the uncovered before outside of those categories were uncovered by choice, not by the cost of insurance.
Proof, bobbyp? I guess I could go back into Covered California and try to screenshot it. But that is a huge PITA because I checked last year and it will make me update.
The article in fact cited several reasons why the “Trojan Horse” hypothesis regarding the ACA was total horseshit. NONE OF WHICH YOU BOTHERED TO ADDRESS.
No, the article is light on facts, high on assertions. It starts with the Trojan Horse theory putting forth a bunch of arguments, not facts, then switches to the mandate. I didn’t go through every link exhaustively, but the article doesn’t provide facts that debunk the theory.
We presume, as with Marty’s experience, bc, that you were part of the roughly 20% of the Obamacare population who did not qualify for the subsidies and couldn’t qualify for Medicaid because of your accumulated assets.
If you mean I have more than $1,500 in assets aside from my home and car and thus don’t qualify for Medicaid, then yes. And I typically make more than the cut off for subsidies.
So, yes, that sucks.
But that’s a problem of America, not Obamacare, that those who have the goods must pay through the nose for health insurance, if they are not employed.
A Republican conservative would tell you to get a job.
I have a job. I am self-employed. And I don’t follow your argument about the problem with “America.” My problem is an ACA problem, not a problem with America per se. If I worked for the government, a union employer or a large corporation, I would have coverage much cheaper than what the exchange offers me. Why is that? It’s not based on income unless you are buying on the exchange.
The ACA structurally encourages everyone paying full boat to get on a group plan where the cost isn’t as “personal” as it is when you are buying on the exchange without a subsidy. How is that not a step towards single payer?
Before ACA, I could control costs and buy a catastrophic plan, stay healthy, and fund my HSA. But ACA doesn’t allow those plans anymore.
However, many of the 80% who qualify for the Obamacare subsidies seem to be satisfied, as they keep coming back for more.
And right there is the proof of a step towards universal coverage. Get the masses dependent on the subsidies. We are, IMHO, a large step closer to single payer.
When do you qualify for Medicare? Soon, I hope.
53. Nope.
Good luck and good health to you.
Thanks.
Listen, I’m in favor of taking care of children, the elderly, and the weakest among us. But some of the uncovered before outside of those categories were uncovered by choice, not by the cost of insurance.
Proof, bobbyp? I guess I could go back into Covered California and try to screenshot it. But that is a huge PITA because I checked last year and it will make me update.
wj: yes, it is always speculative to opine about the motives of others.From a purely structural perspective, putting millions on subsidized healthcare is a step towards universal healthcare. Just sayin’.
wj: yes, it is always speculative to opine about the motives of others.From a purely structural perspective, putting millions on subsidized healthcare is a step towards universal healthcare. Just sayin’.
Before ACA, I could control costs and buy a catastrophic plan, stay healthy, and fund my HSA.
Hahah. I like the “stay healthy” part.
Before ACA, I could control costs and buy a catastrophic plan, stay healthy, and fund my HSA.
Hahah. I like the “stay healthy” part.
It’s hilarious that people are talking (again) about the possibility of influencing policy when we’re turning into a Russian satellite country.
Or maybe not so hilarious. Maybe tragic.
It’s hilarious that people are talking (again) about the possibility of influencing policy when we’re turning into a Russian satellite country.
Or maybe not so hilarious. Maybe tragic.
Before ACA, I could control costs and buy a catastrophic plan, stay healthy, and fund my HSA.
Personally, the only way I, as a self-employed person, could get insurance at all, pre-ACA, was to invent (pretty much out of whole cloth) a “group” — pre-existing condition. Once I did that, of course, I could get insurance — because groups didn’t evenhave to ask about such things. At a reasonable rate, even. Didn’t matter that it was a tiny group. Or that everybody in it had one or another pre-existing condition. In fact, at a far lower rate than any of us could have gotten individual health insurance even absent the pre-existing conditions.
In short, the old way had serious flaws . . . unless you figured out how to game the system. Now, there’s a new system. I’d bet fairly large amounts of money that it can be gamed as well — just a different set of loopholes to find and work thru. Which is a pain, but not really that different.
Before ACA, I could control costs and buy a catastrophic plan, stay healthy, and fund my HSA.
Personally, the only way I, as a self-employed person, could get insurance at all, pre-ACA, was to invent (pretty much out of whole cloth) a “group” — pre-existing condition. Once I did that, of course, I could get insurance — because groups didn’t evenhave to ask about such things. At a reasonable rate, even. Didn’t matter that it was a tiny group. Or that everybody in it had one or another pre-existing condition. In fact, at a far lower rate than any of us could have gotten individual health insurance even absent the pre-existing conditions.
In short, the old way had serious flaws . . . unless you figured out how to game the system. Now, there’s a new system. I’d bet fairly large amounts of money that it can be gamed as well — just a different set of loopholes to find and work thru. Which is a pain, but not really that different.
Now, there’s a new system.
The thing about the new system is that it was a base line that could have been improved. Legislatures improve legislation every single year – that’s what they do. Instead, our lovely Republicans were hell bent on destroying a workable plan, when they could have helped fix it.
I love ObWi, obviously, and love everyone here. But it’s so frustrating to pretend that these policy arguments are approached in good faith. Republicans are nihilistic traitors. There’s no hope until we wipe them out of our political system. I’m pessimistic, but have a vague thread of hope.
It would be great if the bcs and Martys around here would admit the corruption. But of course they won’t.
Stay healthy bc! Or not!
Now, there’s a new system.
The thing about the new system is that it was a base line that could have been improved. Legislatures improve legislation every single year – that’s what they do. Instead, our lovely Republicans were hell bent on destroying a workable plan, when they could have helped fix it.
I love ObWi, obviously, and love everyone here. But it’s so frustrating to pretend that these policy arguments are approached in good faith. Republicans are nihilistic traitors. There’s no hope until we wipe them out of our political system. I’m pessimistic, but have a vague thread of hope.
It would be great if the bcs and Martys around here would admit the corruption. But of course they won’t.
Stay healthy bc! Or not!
Stay healthy bc! Or not!
Oh, and Bless your heart!
Stay healthy bc! Or not!
Oh, and Bless your heart!
sapient:
How is my part of the discussion not in good faith? And you compound it with “bless your heart?” Really?
I say a pox on both the houses to some degree. Wiping out the Republicans? That passes for a good faith argument?
You appear to love only those who agree with your world view.
You laugh at my “stay healthy.” I find your laughter amusing myself. Yes, I believe in personal responsibility while at the same time recognizing that health is also luck, genetics and other things beyond our control. So I support rational health care coverage. I also try to stay healthy and do my part and wish everyone did the same. So shoot me.
Will you “admit the corruption” of the Democrats too? The lies of Schiff, the baseless FISA applications to support spying on a campaign, etc.? There is more than enough to go around, IMHO. But I have the feeling that unless I abase myself completely and denounce my conservative neighbors I will still be found wanting and not “in good faith.”
Stop drinking the Kool-aid and realize that there are people of good will on all sides of the political spectrum, regardless of what you read or hear. Binary thinking gets us nowhere.
sapient:
How is my part of the discussion not in good faith? And you compound it with “bless your heart?” Really?
I say a pox on both the houses to some degree. Wiping out the Republicans? That passes for a good faith argument?
You appear to love only those who agree with your world view.
You laugh at my “stay healthy.” I find your laughter amusing myself. Yes, I believe in personal responsibility while at the same time recognizing that health is also luck, genetics and other things beyond our control. So I support rational health care coverage. I also try to stay healthy and do my part and wish everyone did the same. So shoot me.
Will you “admit the corruption” of the Democrats too? The lies of Schiff, the baseless FISA applications to support spying on a campaign, etc.? There is more than enough to go around, IMHO. But I have the feeling that unless I abase myself completely and denounce my conservative neighbors I will still be found wanting and not “in good faith.”
Stop drinking the Kool-aid and realize that there are people of good will on all sides of the political spectrum, regardless of what you read or hear. Binary thinking gets us nowhere.
You have a lot of questions, bc, but not many answers.
Yes, I believe in personal responsibility while at the same time recognizing that health is also luck, genetics and other things beyond our control.
Don’t we all! Insurance isn’t for the “personal responsibility” part (although, since we are all human, we sometimes have bad habits – obviously not you, St. bc! Hahahaha!)
The lies of Schiff
Which are those? Are you talking about his ill-advised parody? Hahaha!
Stop drinking the Kool-aid
Hahaha!
and realize that there are people of good will on all sides of the political spectrum
No, I’m over that, thanks.
You have a lot of questions, bc, but not many answers.
Yes, I believe in personal responsibility while at the same time recognizing that health is also luck, genetics and other things beyond our control.
Don’t we all! Insurance isn’t for the “personal responsibility” part (although, since we are all human, we sometimes have bad habits – obviously not you, St. bc! Hahahaha!)
The lies of Schiff
Which are those? Are you talking about his ill-advised parody? Hahaha!
Stop drinking the Kool-aid
Hahaha!
and realize that there are people of good will on all sides of the political spectrum
No, I’m over that, thanks.
realize that there are people of good will on all sides of the political spectrum
No doubt.
And all of the good will residing deep in the hearts of our conservative friends is worth approximately one warm bucket of spit at the moment.
Want to demonstrate your good will? Replace the leadership of your party.
Until then, I see no basis for dialog.
The lies of Schiff, the baseless FISA applications to support spying on a campaign, etc.?
Pull the other one.
realize that there are people of good will on all sides of the political spectrum
No doubt.
And all of the good will residing deep in the hearts of our conservative friends is worth approximately one warm bucket of spit at the moment.
Want to demonstrate your good will? Replace the leadership of your party.
Until then, I see no basis for dialog.
The lies of Schiff, the baseless FISA applications to support spying on a campaign, etc.?
Pull the other one.
realize that there are people of good will on all sides of the political spectrum
If by “political spectrum” you mean left/right ideological outlook, sure. But much as it pains me to say so, the amount of good will in evidence among Republican politicians and ideologues these days is minimal.
You can have a “good faith” disagreement about whether what Trump did merits impeachment and ejection from office. But overwhelmingly, that isn’t what we are seeing. Instead we are seeing name calling, flat out lies about what was said or done, etc. Not exaggerations or different perspectives on events (although we see those, too), but straight out contrary to objective reality statements.
realize that there are people of good will on all sides of the political spectrum
If by “political spectrum” you mean left/right ideological outlook, sure. But much as it pains me to say so, the amount of good will in evidence among Republican politicians and ideologues these days is minimal.
You can have a “good faith” disagreement about whether what Trump did merits impeachment and ejection from office. But overwhelmingly, that isn’t what we are seeing. Instead we are seeing name calling, flat out lies about what was said or done, etc. Not exaggerations or different perspectives on events (although we see those, too), but straight out contrary to objective reality statements.
Conversation is nice, but flipping the Senate is better.
Do whatever you can. If “whatever you can” is spending five bucks, then spend five bucks.
The (R) party is an utter disgrace and deserves to be ground to dust.
Conversation is nice, but flipping the Senate is better.
Do whatever you can. If “whatever you can” is spending five bucks, then spend five bucks.
The (R) party is an utter disgrace and deserves to be ground to dust.
Don’t you know how noxious fine particles can be? 😉
Don’t you know how noxious fine particles can be? 😉
Sow their fields with salt.
I’m fine with people having different points of view. I’m fine with people advocating for their own best interest. I accept and embrace the idea that nobody gets everything they want, and that discussion negotiation and compromise is the way to make things actually work.
All of that is fine with me.
The constituency and policies of the (R) party at this point represent a minority of the country. The (R)’s in the Senate represent a minority of the population of the country. The POTUS lost the popular vote.
The (R)’s rightfully deserve a voice and a place at the table, and they rightfully deserve not one thing more. They rightfully deserve to lose more than they win in any point of public policy or law.
They will, apparently, burn the whole damned place down before they will accept any of that.
This is not a position that has a long shelf life. It is not a position or an approach that is sustainable. So, it will end at some point.
The question is what the process of that happening looks like, and what will be left when it does happen. See also nous’ comment in this thread at 12:58.
I’m personally coming to the position that chatting about policy preferences is exactly as valuable as discussing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Because while we’re all chatting away and exchanging points of view, the (R)’s are destroying the institutions that make it possible for us all to function together as a nation.
Change your leadership, and then we can chat. Because until you change your leadership, there is no point in discussion.
You didn’t vote for those guys? Well, they’re speaking for you. You can actually do something about replacing them. I can’t. So it’s on you.
Marty and bc, if the cost of your medical insurance becomes too onerous, you can do whatever everybody else I know who works for themselves and has unexpected medical costs does.
GoFundMe.
Insurance for the gig economy. There’s even an app for it.
Uber for health care. It’s the American way.
Sow their fields with salt.
I’m fine with people having different points of view. I’m fine with people advocating for their own best interest. I accept and embrace the idea that nobody gets everything they want, and that discussion negotiation and compromise is the way to make things actually work.
All of that is fine with me.
The constituency and policies of the (R) party at this point represent a minority of the country. The (R)’s in the Senate represent a minority of the population of the country. The POTUS lost the popular vote.
The (R)’s rightfully deserve a voice and a place at the table, and they rightfully deserve not one thing more. They rightfully deserve to lose more than they win in any point of public policy or law.
They will, apparently, burn the whole damned place down before they will accept any of that.
This is not a position that has a long shelf life. It is not a position or an approach that is sustainable. So, it will end at some point.
The question is what the process of that happening looks like, and what will be left when it does happen. See also nous’ comment in this thread at 12:58.
I’m personally coming to the position that chatting about policy preferences is exactly as valuable as discussing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Because while we’re all chatting away and exchanging points of view, the (R)’s are destroying the institutions that make it possible for us all to function together as a nation.
Change your leadership, and then we can chat. Because until you change your leadership, there is no point in discussion.
You didn’t vote for those guys? Well, they’re speaking for you. You can actually do something about replacing them. I can’t. So it’s on you.
Marty and bc, if the cost of your medical insurance becomes too onerous, you can do whatever everybody else I know who works for themselves and has unexpected medical costs does.
GoFundMe.
Insurance for the gig economy. There’s even an app for it.
Uber for health care. It’s the American way.
Marty and bc, if the cost of your medical insurance becomes too onerous, you can do whatever everybody else I know who works for themselves and has unexpected medical costs does.
Their party held the reins of government absolutely for two years and did nothing. Yet they continue to support Republicans and blame Democrats. They are not serious people on that subject or any other.
Marty and bc, if the cost of your medical insurance becomes too onerous, you can do whatever everybody else I know who works for themselves and has unexpected medical costs does.
Their party held the reins of government absolutely for two years and did nothing. Yet they continue to support Republicans and blame Democrats. They are not serious people on that subject or any other.
this Senate trial is eye-opening.
the Dems are piling evidence ever-skyward. the GOP is pretending not to see it.
it’s always been obvious that the Senate GOP would vote to acquit. but i expected they’d marshal some kind of too-clever defense, because they couldn’t be dumb willfully ignorant as the House GOP showed itself to be. the Senate is supposed to be the more … respectable?… of the chambers. but no, they’re at least as dumb as the House GOP, but older and sleepier.
Schiff and the rest of the House managers are burying the GOP in facts. and the Senate GOP is sleeping comfortably at the bottom of the pile.
this Senate trial is eye-opening.
the Dems are piling evidence ever-skyward. the GOP is pretending not to see it.
it’s always been obvious that the Senate GOP would vote to acquit. but i expected they’d marshal some kind of too-clever defense, because they couldn’t be dumb willfully ignorant as the House GOP showed itself to be. the Senate is supposed to be the more … respectable?… of the chambers. but no, they’re at least as dumb as the House GOP, but older and sleepier.
Schiff and the rest of the House managers are burying the GOP in facts. and the Senate GOP is sleeping comfortably at the bottom of the pile.
i can see it dawning on people, from relatives to op-ed writers in major newspapers, how fragile our system is, how the whole thing is based on unwritten norms and expectations.
“how can he get away with this?”
“they can’t stop it?”
“aren’t they supposed to…?”
nope.
we’re at the limit of what our system of government can do, and it’s obvious that the system is insufficient to handle the moment.
i don’t have any hope that the GOP will pay any price for this in November, either.
i can see it dawning on people, from relatives to op-ed writers in major newspapers, how fragile our system is, how the whole thing is based on unwritten norms and expectations.
“how can he get away with this?”
“they can’t stop it?”
“aren’t they supposed to…?”
nope.
we’re at the limit of what our system of government can do, and it’s obvious that the system is insufficient to handle the moment.
i don’t have any hope that the GOP will pay any price for this in November, either.
the baseless FISA applications to support spying on a campaign
The ‘spying on a campaign’ bit is pretty well baloney, but it is absolutely true that the FBI pursues baseless FISA applications, – as liberal bloggers are only too happy to point out (and as the FBI is occasionally forced to admit):
https://www.emptywheel.net/2020/01/23/fisc-reveals-doj-has-withdrawn-probable-cause-assertion-for-two-of-carter-page-applications/
the baseless FISA applications to support spying on a campaign
The ‘spying on a campaign’ bit is pretty well baloney, but it is absolutely true that the FBI pursues baseless FISA applications, – as liberal bloggers are only too happy to point out (and as the FBI is occasionally forced to admit):
https://www.emptywheel.net/2020/01/23/fisc-reveals-doj-has-withdrawn-probable-cause-assertion-for-two-of-carter-page-applications/
The investigation into associations between the Trump campaign and representatives of the Russian government did not begin with Carter Page, and did not begin with the Steele dossier.
They began when George Papadopoulos, a Trump campaign aide, got drunk with an Australian diplomat and bragged about the dirt that the Russians had on Clinton.
Two of the four FISA warrants authorizing wiretaps of Page were found to be invalid. Two others, including the first, were not.
The FBI should have stopped wiretapping Page after the first warrant expired. They did not. Bad FBI, no cookie for you.
Next freaking topic.
The investigation into associations between the Trump campaign and representatives of the Russian government did not begin with Carter Page, and did not begin with the Steele dossier.
They began when George Papadopoulos, a Trump campaign aide, got drunk with an Australian diplomat and bragged about the dirt that the Russians had on Clinton.
Two of the four FISA warrants authorizing wiretaps of Page were found to be invalid. Two others, including the first, were not.
The FBI should have stopped wiretapping Page after the first warrant expired. They did not. Bad FBI, no cookie for you.
Next freaking topic.
how the whole thing is based on unwritten norms and expectations.
The system is based on respect for the truth. That’s what’s missing in the Republican party. Their voters aren’t interested in the truth.
how the whole thing is based on unwritten norms and expectations.
The system is based on respect for the truth. That’s what’s missing in the Republican party. Their voters aren’t interested in the truth.
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/state-of-the-union/is-trump-offering-west-bank-to-bibi-in-his-deal-of-the-century/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTbl6OzH3W0
“Their voters aren’t interested in the truth.”
It’s much worse than that.
And what is coming is what nous wrote, alright, but there will be nothing academic about it.
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/state-of-the-union/is-trump-offering-west-bank-to-bibi-in-his-deal-of-the-century/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTbl6OzH3W0
“Their voters aren’t interested in the truth.”
It’s much worse than that.
And what is coming is what nous wrote, alright, but there will be nothing academic about it.
i don’t have any hope that the GOP will pay any price for this in November, either.
Me neither, I’m afraid.
And despite bc’s seemingly reasonable Binary thinking gets us nowhere., it is noticeable that, on ObWi itself, when there was a Dem POTUS in the White House he and his administration got plenty of criticism here, whereas with Trump in the White House (despite some insults directed at him personally by Marty) it is noticeable that bc and Marty are happy to drink the Kool-Aid and repeat baseless R talking points like the good little apparatchiks we see on Fox. If our own tiny petrie dish is anything to go by, Republican understanding of and respect for the US constitution has gone the way of the Dodo.
i don’t have any hope that the GOP will pay any price for this in November, either.
Me neither, I’m afraid.
And despite bc’s seemingly reasonable Binary thinking gets us nowhere., it is noticeable that, on ObWi itself, when there was a Dem POTUS in the White House he and his administration got plenty of criticism here, whereas with Trump in the White House (despite some insults directed at him personally by Marty) it is noticeable that bc and Marty are happy to drink the Kool-Aid and repeat baseless R talking points like the good little apparatchiks we see on Fox. If our own tiny petrie dish is anything to go by, Republican understanding of and respect for the US constitution has gone the way of the Dodo.
they’ve mistaken their party for the country.
they’ve mistaken their party for the country.
they’ve mistaken their party for the country.
The new Confederacy.
they’ve mistaken their party for the country.
The new Confederacy.
I’d like to know what baseless talking points I’m repeating please.
The repeated baseless talking points here are beyond counting. Including the constant drumbeat that people like me dont think for ourselves.
There is certainly no Constitutional crisis here, unless we remove a sitting President because the left lost their minds. Jesus. Why are we discussing Carter Page, Russian Mueller crap dudnt even make it through the House. They had to Trump up a new charge just to get an impeachment. Talk about Koolaid.
I’d like to know what baseless talking points I’m repeating please.
The repeated baseless talking points here are beyond counting. Including the constant drumbeat that people like me dont think for ourselves.
There is certainly no Constitutional crisis here, unless we remove a sitting President because the left lost their minds. Jesus. Why are we discussing Carter Page, Russian Mueller crap dudnt even make it through the House. They had to Trump up a new charge just to get an impeachment. Talk about Koolaid.
Why are we discussing Carter Page
bc brought it up.
They had to Trump up a new charge just to get an impeachment.
Haha, good one!
Trump held back money from the Ukraine to coerce them into publicly announcing an investigation in Joe Biden.
You either think that happened, or you didn’t. If you think it happened, you either think it matters, or you don’t.
Why are we discussing Carter Page
bc brought it up.
They had to Trump up a new charge just to get an impeachment.
Haha, good one!
Trump held back money from the Ukraine to coerce them into publicly announcing an investigation in Joe Biden.
You either think that happened, or you didn’t. If you think it happened, you either think it matters, or you don’t.
Baseless talking points:
There is certainly no Constitutional crisis here
There is a Constitutional crisis when the Executive branch has no checks from the other two branches of government, and can ignore the law. The independent GAO has found that Trump violated the law. Who’s stopping him? Who’s stopping him from violating the emoluments clause? Why are the Courts failing to expedite the appellate process relating the the Constitutional violations that are before them?
unless we remove a sitting President because the left lost their minds
A large number of witnesses have testified to Trump’s misconduct. “The left” hasn’t lost their minds.
Why are we discussing Carter Page, Russian Mueller crap dudnt even make it through the House.
What? Nonsensical, but assuming you’re ignoring the fact that Mueller didn’t indict Trump because of the OLC policy disallowing it, but refused to say that Trump was exonerated, well, yes, a baseless talking point.
They had to Trump up a new charge just to get an impeachment.
Repeated baseless talking point. See notes regarding the GAO and the parade of witnesses.
Talk about Koolaid
Projecting?
Baseless talking points:
There is certainly no Constitutional crisis here
There is a Constitutional crisis when the Executive branch has no checks from the other two branches of government, and can ignore the law. The independent GAO has found that Trump violated the law. Who’s stopping him? Who’s stopping him from violating the emoluments clause? Why are the Courts failing to expedite the appellate process relating the the Constitutional violations that are before them?
unless we remove a sitting President because the left lost their minds
A large number of witnesses have testified to Trump’s misconduct. “The left” hasn’t lost their minds.
Why are we discussing Carter Page, Russian Mueller crap dudnt even make it through the House.
What? Nonsensical, but assuming you’re ignoring the fact that Mueller didn’t indict Trump because of the OLC policy disallowing it, but refused to say that Trump was exonerated, well, yes, a baseless talking point.
They had to Trump up a new charge just to get an impeachment.
Repeated baseless talking point. See notes regarding the GAO and the parade of witnesses.
Talk about Koolaid
Projecting?
What russell said.
What russell said.
The (R)’s in the Senate represent a minority of the population of the country.
Actually, it’s worse than that. A majority of Republican voters think the Senate should look at evidence and hear first hand from witnesses. And yet the Republicans in the Senate apparently have no intention of representing that view.
The (R)’s in the Senate represent a minority of the population of the country.
Actually, it’s worse than that. A majority of Republican voters think the Senate should look at evidence and hear first hand from witnesses. And yet the Republicans in the Senate apparently have no intention of representing that view.
Trump held back money from the Ukraine to coerce them into publicly announcing an investigation in Joe Biden.
You either think that happened, or you didn’t. If you think it happened, you either think it matters, or you don’t.
It really can’t be said more fairly or more accurately than this. A footnote would be that the money he held back was authorised by Congress, so his action was unlawful as many of his aides apparently saw, and as the GAO report recently found.
Your president is a crook and a liar, a chiseller and a cheat, who puts his own interests above those of his country. This impeachment is dealing with only one egregious example, for which there is a tremendous amount of proof. You don’t have to like or agree with “the left”, or the Democrats, or any of their policies, but to wilfully blind yourself to the truth of this is as perfect example of drinking the Kool-Aid as can be found since Jonestown.
Trump held back money from the Ukraine to coerce them into publicly announcing an investigation in Joe Biden.
You either think that happened, or you didn’t. If you think it happened, you either think it matters, or you don’t.
It really can’t be said more fairly or more accurately than this. A footnote would be that the money he held back was authorised by Congress, so his action was unlawful as many of his aides apparently saw, and as the GAO report recently found.
Your president is a crook and a liar, a chiseller and a cheat, who puts his own interests above those of his country. This impeachment is dealing with only one egregious example, for which there is a tremendous amount of proof. You don’t have to like or agree with “the left”, or the Democrats, or any of their policies, but to wilfully blind yourself to the truth of this is as perfect example of drinking the Kool-Aid as can be found since Jonestown.
By the way, since we were talking about the deficiencies of Obamacare (again), why don’t bc or Marty address the fact that Republicans did nothing when they could have done something?
Republicans have no legislative agenda other than cleek’s law. And looting the Treasury.
By the way, since we were talking about the deficiencies of Obamacare (again), why don’t bc or Marty address the fact that Republicans did nothing when they could have done something?
Republicans have no legislative agenda other than cleek’s law. And looting the Treasury.
This is definitely how we want our diplomats treated. Well, maybe Republicans do.
This is definitely how we want our diplomats treated. Well, maybe Republicans do.
The thing about Marty ilk is that he accepts the cyanide-laced chalice of the chosen conservative republican sugar beverage, even pouring samples of it around here for our desultory sipping, but at the last second, as everyone else, including republican children, drinks, he pours his helping down his pant leg and then makes for the gate where the getaway car labeled “I don’t like trump either and wish he was gone” is idling.
The conservative movement has that eventuality covered too with their gunmen ready outside the compound and at the airports, bus stations, inside the Uber dispatching algorithms (the car circles the compound and the sneaky petes are hustled inside to finish their helping of the death nectar) and all other points of egress.
Kill and butcher and slaughter the entire nationalist, populist conservative movement round the globe.
Fuck elections.
They are being stolen by republicans as we speak from cyrillic keyboards.
Fuck off.
The thing about Marty ilk is that he accepts the cyanide-laced chalice of the chosen conservative republican sugar beverage, even pouring samples of it around here for our desultory sipping, but at the last second, as everyone else, including republican children, drinks, he pours his helping down his pant leg and then makes for the gate where the getaway car labeled “I don’t like trump either and wish he was gone” is idling.
The conservative movement has that eventuality covered too with their gunmen ready outside the compound and at the airports, bus stations, inside the Uber dispatching algorithms (the car circles the compound and the sneaky petes are hustled inside to finish their helping of the death nectar) and all other points of egress.
Kill and butcher and slaughter the entire nationalist, populist conservative movement round the globe.
Fuck elections.
They are being stolen by republicans as we speak from cyrillic keyboards.
Fuck off.
All republicans are going to go through some things.
It is what it is.
It hadda be done.
The language of thug vermin conservative subhumans everywhere around the globe.
All republicans are going to go through some things.
It is what it is.
It hadda be done.
The language of thug vermin conservative subhumans everywhere around the globe.
“I don’t like trump either and wish he was gone”
Not to pick on Marty, but by his own statements, he doesn’t like Trump, wishes he was gone, but is willing to eat that particular shit sandwich in exchange for tax cuts, business friendly policies, and conservative judges.
Which is, I think, a not-uncommon point of view among American conservatives.
Unfortunately, that means we all have to eat the same shit sandwich.
I’m tired of eating that shit sandwich, and I’m tired of hearing all the reasons that I need to suck it up and eat it anyway.
If you want to eat shit, eat shit on your own time. I’ve had my fill.
I have no particular animus toward conservatives, I have conservative friends and family, conservative co-workers, yadda yadda yadda. I wish them all good health and happiness. I just want them to quit making a mess of American public life.
The time has come to crush the (R) party, raze it to the damned ground, and salt the earth where it once stood. They have surrendered any claim to being good faith actors.
Liars, cheats, and scoundrels, all of them. A pack of corrupt mendacious bastards. The decent ones can’t abandon ship fast enough.
Conservatives need to clean their house. People like me can’t make that happen, they need to do it, for themselves.
Clean your damned house.
“I don’t like trump either and wish he was gone”
Not to pick on Marty, but by his own statements, he doesn’t like Trump, wishes he was gone, but is willing to eat that particular shit sandwich in exchange for tax cuts, business friendly policies, and conservative judges.
Which is, I think, a not-uncommon point of view among American conservatives.
Unfortunately, that means we all have to eat the same shit sandwich.
I’m tired of eating that shit sandwich, and I’m tired of hearing all the reasons that I need to suck it up and eat it anyway.
If you want to eat shit, eat shit on your own time. I’ve had my fill.
I have no particular animus toward conservatives, I have conservative friends and family, conservative co-workers, yadda yadda yadda. I wish them all good health and happiness. I just want them to quit making a mess of American public life.
The time has come to crush the (R) party, raze it to the damned ground, and salt the earth where it once stood. They have surrendered any claim to being good faith actors.
Liars, cheats, and scoundrels, all of them. A pack of corrupt mendacious bastards. The decent ones can’t abandon ship fast enough.
Conservatives need to clean their house. People like me can’t make that happen, they need to do it, for themselves.
Clean your damned house.
“We have all the material; they don’t have the material.”
We, meaning the Shite House, Trump, Marty, and bc.
Co-conspirators.
Those is in the Shite House and Trump will be executed like the Rosenbergs.
The others, and all of their fellow travelers, under the beds, will have their lives and careers ruined like so many of the victims of the McCarthy Inquisition.
Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Republican Party that aligned itself with Vladimir Putin and other foreign powers to subvert American elections and the precious fluids of the American way of life?
It’s about fucking time.
No, I have no shame.
I want savage vengeance.
“We have all the material; they don’t have the material.”
We, meaning the Shite House, Trump, Marty, and bc.
Co-conspirators.
Those is in the Shite House and Trump will be executed like the Rosenbergs.
The others, and all of their fellow travelers, under the beds, will have their lives and careers ruined like so many of the victims of the McCarthy Inquisition.
Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Republican Party that aligned itself with Vladimir Putin and other foreign powers to subvert American elections and the precious fluids of the American way of life?
It’s about fucking time.
No, I have no shame.
I want savage vengeance.
So, let me get this straight. If Obama witheld documents, ignored subpoenas, ordered Sid Blumenthal to shut the fuck up, and told Trey Gowdy to go pound sand with his ridiculous Benghazi “investigation” it would have been perfectly OK?
I’m just a bit confused here about the ground rules.
So, let me get this straight. If Obama witheld documents, ignored subpoenas, ordered Sid Blumenthal to shut the fuck up, and told Trey Gowdy to go pound sand with his ridiculous Benghazi “investigation” it would have been perfectly OK?
I’m just a bit confused here about the ground rules.
Perhaps we should try to revive the Whigs. Founded in opposition to populist President (and Trump hero) Andrew Jackson. Featured people like Daniel Webster. Whigs (Northern ones at least) were less supportive of slavery than northern Democrats, albeit less opposed than the new Republican Party was then.
Might be worth a thought.
Perhaps we should try to revive the Whigs. Founded in opposition to populist President (and Trump hero) Andrew Jackson. Featured people like Daniel Webster. Whigs (Northern ones at least) were less supportive of slavery than northern Democrats, albeit less opposed than the new Republican Party was then.
Might be worth a thought.
and told Trey Gowdy to go pound sand with his ridiculous Benghazi “investigation” it would have been perfectly OK?
would it help if he then said that people injured in the attack just had “headaches” ?
https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/22/opinions/trump-headaches-injuries-iran-strike-hertling/index.html
Which is, I think, a not-uncommon point of view among American conservatives.
90%, as always.
they can rot.
and told Trey Gowdy to go pound sand with his ridiculous Benghazi “investigation” it would have been perfectly OK?
would it help if he then said that people injured in the attack just had “headaches” ?
https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/22/opinions/trump-headaches-injuries-iran-strike-hertling/index.html
Which is, I think, a not-uncommon point of view among American conservatives.
90%, as always.
they can rot.
I’m just a bit confused here about the ground rules.
It’s OK If You’re A Republican.
otherwise, STFU
I’m just a bit confused here about the ground rules.
It’s OK If You’re A Republican.
otherwise, STFU
A large number of witnesses have testified. Some have testified to his conduct, characterizing as misconduct. None of them testified to him committing a crime, nor did any of them testify to conduct that is dangerous to the security of the country.
Like all three years of investigations, every hyped and out of context line has been treated in talking points as a smoking gun. There’s nothing there. It is why they had to throw in obstruction of Congress as a ludicrous second charge.
So I can complain about Trump, and I do, but the people using there position to dangerously effect an election are the Democrats.
Yall dont even read what is written here, Koolaid wasnt projection it was a response. But the people here mindlessly cutting and pasting and repeating talking points are not Republicans.
A large number of witnesses have testified. Some have testified to his conduct, characterizing as misconduct. None of them testified to him committing a crime, nor did any of them testify to conduct that is dangerous to the security of the country.
Like all three years of investigations, every hyped and out of context line has been treated in talking points as a smoking gun. There’s nothing there. It is why they had to throw in obstruction of Congress as a ludicrous second charge.
So I can complain about Trump, and I do, but the people using there position to dangerously effect an election are the Democrats.
Yall dont even read what is written here, Koolaid wasnt projection it was a response. But the people here mindlessly cutting and pasting and repeating talking points are not Republicans.
None of them testified to him committing a crime, nor did any of them testify to conduct that is dangerous to the security of the country.
you should try paying attention to things outside the bubble.
None of them testified to him committing a crime, nor did any of them testify to conduct that is dangerous to the security of the country.
you should try paying attention to things outside the bubble.
Marty’s comments would have more substance and be less incoherent if he just kept pasting “Nyah nyah ny’ nyah nyah” into the comment box over and over again.
Marty’s comments would have more substance and be less incoherent if he just kept pasting “Nyah nyah ny’ nyah nyah” into the comment box over and over again.
you should try paying attention to things outside the bubble.
Such as the hearings themselves. But why argue with this guy? It’s futile. It’s depressing.
you should try paying attention to things outside the bubble.
Such as the hearings themselves. But why argue with this guy? It’s futile. It’s depressing.
A large number of witnesses have testified. Some have testified to his conduct, characterizing as misconduct. None of them testified to him committing a crime, nor did any of them testify to conduct that is dangerous to the security of the country.
Of course, there is the detail that any witnesses who might be able to testify to his conduct were told not to testify. And many ignored subpoenas to do so. Likewise subpoenas for documents which might show what he did were ignored.
It’s a bit rich to complain about the lack of evidence, when requests/demands for evidence were rejected. Indeed, that is one of the articles of impeachment.
It’s like complaining “but he hasn’t been charged with a crime” when the DoJ rules that he cannot be charged with commission of a (Federal) crime while in office. That, after all, is why Mueller didn’t indict him. Taking having it both ways to a whole new level.
A large number of witnesses have testified. Some have testified to his conduct, characterizing as misconduct. None of them testified to him committing a crime, nor did any of them testify to conduct that is dangerous to the security of the country.
Of course, there is the detail that any witnesses who might be able to testify to his conduct were told not to testify. And many ignored subpoenas to do so. Likewise subpoenas for documents which might show what he did were ignored.
It’s a bit rich to complain about the lack of evidence, when requests/demands for evidence were rejected. Indeed, that is one of the articles of impeachment.
It’s like complaining “but he hasn’t been charged with a crime” when the DoJ rules that he cannot be charged with commission of a (Federal) crime while in office. That, after all, is why Mueller didn’t indict him. Taking having it both ways to a whole new level.
There’s nothing there.
LOL…well there never is. The Reconstruction Republicans did not go after A. Johnson because he fired Stanton (pretty much a nothingburger in the pantheon of crime), but because he was sabotaging Reconstruction. Congress did not move toward impeaching Nixon because of some small and petty political burglary, but for trying to cover it up and taking the position that the President is pretty much an elected dictator. Clinton was impeached and tried for a minor offense that had nothing to do with his responsibilities as President. It was pure politics by lunatic Republicans who never accepted his legitimacy. Pure and ugly partisanship.
Trump has clearly seriously abused his office in a number of ways, and Ukrainegate is just the last in a whole slew of them.
The GOP is trodding a very dangerous path. They have pretty much defined “high crimes and misdemeanors” out of existence. They are essentially supporting a president that claims a right to nearly untrammeled executive power. If you are fine with that, then well OK.
Just remember, what goes around comes around and revenge served cold is a very tasty dish.
So carry on motherfuckers. You’ll not hear any bleating from me begging GOP Senators to find their morals or their conscience. There will only be the cold fury of knowing that sometime, somewhere, it will be our turn.
There’s nothing there.
LOL…well there never is. The Reconstruction Republicans did not go after A. Johnson because he fired Stanton (pretty much a nothingburger in the pantheon of crime), but because he was sabotaging Reconstruction. Congress did not move toward impeaching Nixon because of some small and petty political burglary, but for trying to cover it up and taking the position that the President is pretty much an elected dictator. Clinton was impeached and tried for a minor offense that had nothing to do with his responsibilities as President. It was pure politics by lunatic Republicans who never accepted his legitimacy. Pure and ugly partisanship.
Trump has clearly seriously abused his office in a number of ways, and Ukrainegate is just the last in a whole slew of them.
The GOP is trodding a very dangerous path. They have pretty much defined “high crimes and misdemeanors” out of existence. They are essentially supporting a president that claims a right to nearly untrammeled executive power. If you are fine with that, then well OK.
Just remember, what goes around comes around and revenge served cold is a very tasty dish.
So carry on motherfuckers. You’ll not hear any bleating from me begging GOP Senators to find their morals or their conscience. There will only be the cold fury of knowing that sometime, somewhere, it will be our turn.
None of them testified to him committing a crime
No, grasshopper. The testimony is clear.
HE ABUSED THE POWER OF HIS OFFICE FOR PERSONAL GAIN.
End of story.
None of them testified to him committing a crime
No, grasshopper. The testimony is clear.
HE ABUSED THE POWER OF HIS OFFICE FOR PERSONAL GAIN.
End of story.
There’s nothing there.
OK, thanks for chiming in.
There is no point in you and I discussing any of this any further.
Have a nice day.
There’s nothing there.
OK, thanks for chiming in.
There is no point in you and I discussing any of this any further.
Have a nice day.
None of them testified to him committing a crime
is this that nonsense about how “high crimes and misdemeanors” really means actual statutory crimes?
because that’s just pure nonsense. it has never meant that: not when before it was written, not when it was written, and not now. and Republicans, as recently as 1998, knew it.
None of them testified to him committing a crime
is this that nonsense about how “high crimes and misdemeanors” really means actual statutory crimes?
because that’s just pure nonsense. it has never meant that: not when before it was written, not when it was written, and not now. and Republicans, as recently as 1998, knew it.
In any case, the scholarly consensus – and that of such non-scholars as Lindsey Graham, ca. 1998 – is that impeachment does not require evidence of a statutory crime. The presidency is a sufficiently powerful office that behavior which would not be criminal in an ordinary citizen is impeachable in a President.
In any case, the scholarly consensus – and that of such non-scholars as Lindsey Graham, ca. 1998 – is that impeachment does not require evidence of a statutory crime. The presidency is a sufficiently powerful office that behavior which would not be criminal in an ordinary citizen is impeachable in a President.
nor did any of them testify to conduct that is dangerous to the security of the country.
Oh no?
Several of the witnesses made it clear that withholding the aid when Ukraine was actively fighting Russia was dangerous to national security. Is it a good idea to let Russia expand?
Stop, Marty. Everything you say is Fox lies and idiocy.
nor did any of them testify to conduct that is dangerous to the security of the country.
Oh no?
Several of the witnesses made it clear that withholding the aid when Ukraine was actively fighting Russia was dangerous to national security. Is it a good idea to let Russia expand?
Stop, Marty. Everything you say is Fox lies and idiocy.
No bernard, everything yall say is cnn bs, over and over. There were no witnesses that said it was dangerous, one said it could be dangerous. The truth is many foreign policy negotiations entail some danger. It’s all over lown bs because the foreign service got their feelings hurt.
Stop acting like this is anything except a political sideshow.
No bernard, everything yall say is cnn bs, over and over. There were no witnesses that said it was dangerous, one said it could be dangerous. The truth is many foreign policy negotiations entail some danger. It’s all over lown bs because the foreign service got their feelings hurt.
Stop acting like this is anything except a political sideshow.
here were no witnesses that said it was dangerous
“Over 13,000 Ukrainians had been killed in the war, one or two a week. More Ukrainians would undoubtedly die without the U.S. assistance.”
— Amb. Taylor
for fuck’s sake. educate yourself.
here were no witnesses that said it was dangerous
“Over 13,000 Ukrainians had been killed in the war, one or two a week. More Ukrainians would undoubtedly die without the U.S. assistance.”
— Amb. Taylor
for fuck’s sake. educate yourself.
for fuck’s sake. educate yourself.
For fuck’s sake, we’ve had a dozen years of evidence that Marty is ineducable. He doesn’t come to be educated, he comes to throw poo, which despite a dozen years of evidence to the contrary, he apparently thinks is going to educate us.
Or maybe he comes on the “because it feels so good when I stop” principle. It’s hard to understand it otherwise.
for fuck’s sake. educate yourself.
For fuck’s sake, we’ve had a dozen years of evidence that Marty is ineducable. He doesn’t come to be educated, he comes to throw poo, which despite a dozen years of evidence to the contrary, he apparently thinks is going to educate us.
Or maybe he comes on the “because it feels so good when I stop” principle. It’s hard to understand it otherwise.
This is when, ordinarily, I might be inclined to dig up and present factual information to rebut claims like Marty’s.
But I’m with Janie, it’s not worth it.
FWIW, this is the part that says, to me, not worth my time:
because the foreign service got their feelings hurt
It’s a cheap, pissant comment.
This is when, ordinarily, I might be inclined to dig up and present factual information to rebut claims like Marty’s.
But I’m with Janie, it’s not worth it.
FWIW, this is the part that says, to me, not worth my time:
because the foreign service got their feelings hurt
It’s a cheap, pissant comment.
And speaking of hurt feelings, the media thinks that at this juncture of our history one of the most important things to report on is another episode of “Susan Collins, Pearl-Clutcher Extraordinaire.”
And of course Susan Collins herself apparently thinks that one of the most important things to note about the events going on around her is her own hurt fee-fees.
Whoever invented that “fuck your feelings” taunt, it sure does come in handy.
Misdirection used to work well for Susan. Hopefully those days are over.
And speaking of hurt feelings, the media thinks that at this juncture of our history one of the most important things to report on is another episode of “Susan Collins, Pearl-Clutcher Extraordinaire.”
And of course Susan Collins herself apparently thinks that one of the most important things to note about the events going on around her is her own hurt fee-fees.
Whoever invented that “fuck your feelings” taunt, it sure does come in handy.
Misdirection used to work well for Susan. Hopefully those days are over.
Marty, out of interest, how do you account for the Republicans like Frum and (if I remember correctly) Republicans for Integrity? Are they the left losing their minds? p.s.I knew you didn’t bring up Kool-aid, but it seemed the perfect analogy for what so many of you Rs are doing with regard to Trump.
Marty, out of interest, how do you account for the Republicans like Frum and (if I remember correctly) Republicans for Integrity? Are they the left losing their minds? p.s.I knew you didn’t bring up Kool-aid, but it seemed the perfect analogy for what so many of you Rs are doing with regard to Trump.
Speaking of Susan Collins, if folks want to do something consequential about this freaking mess, go spend some money to help flip the damned Senate.
The (D)’s need to win net 4 seats to gain control, 3 if there’s a (D) VPOTUS. Doug Jones (D) AL is at risk, because AL, so let’s say 5 to be safe.
There are six (R) Senators who are up for re-election in states where the (D)’s have a chance to flip it. Five will get it done, six will tie a bow on it.
Click through and you’ll be able to target all six of those at-risk (R) seats in one go.
If all you have is $5, send $5. If you $1,000, send $1,000.
If you have a few pennies left over, throw them at Amy McGrath. She’s challenging McConnell in KY. Most likely she will lose, but make the Turtle work for it.
Throw them out.
Speaking of Susan Collins, if folks want to do something consequential about this freaking mess, go spend some money to help flip the damned Senate.
The (D)’s need to win net 4 seats to gain control, 3 if there’s a (D) VPOTUS. Doug Jones (D) AL is at risk, because AL, so let’s say 5 to be safe.
There are six (R) Senators who are up for re-election in states where the (D)’s have a chance to flip it. Five will get it done, six will tie a bow on it.
Click through and you’ll be able to target all six of those at-risk (R) seats in one go.
If all you have is $5, send $5. If you $1,000, send $1,000.
If you have a few pennies left over, throw them at Amy McGrath. She’s challenging McConnell in KY. Most likely she will lose, but make the Turtle work for it.
Throw them out.
i suppose i do get all the willfully-ignorant wingnuttery i need just watching Congress.
i believe i’ll turn on the Ignore.
i suppose i do get all the willfully-ignorant wingnuttery i need just watching Congress.
i believe i’ll turn on the Ignore.
And speaking of hurt feelings
Call me simple minded, but there would seem to be a bit of a difference between having one’s feeling hurt because people have backed you into a corner where you may not get reelected, and having one’s feelings hurt because one of your coworkers has had to be evacuated from her post due to grave risk of injury (or death) at the hands of those working with (or perhaps for) the head of your government.
And note that that wasn’t a bunch of liberal whimps saying that the Ambassador was at severe risk. That was Trump’s State Department itself.
And speaking of hurt feelings
Call me simple minded, but there would seem to be a bit of a difference between having one’s feeling hurt because people have backed you into a corner where you may not get reelected, and having one’s feelings hurt because one of your coworkers has had to be evacuated from her post due to grave risk of injury (or death) at the hands of those working with (or perhaps for) the head of your government.
And note that that wasn’t a bunch of liberal whimps saying that the Ambassador was at severe risk. That was Trump’s State Department itself.
The problem with the Kool-Aid analogy is that republicans and conservatives order it this way: “I’ll have the Cyanide and Koolaid … up. And, hold the Koolaid.
But they down it in one gulp and keep walking around, bumping into the furniture and goosing the beauty queens, like bug-eyed Zombies, with no apparent hangover the next day.
I’m afraid someone is watering the cyanide because it’s not doing the job the Founders intended.
Use the concentrate.
The problem with the Kool-Aid analogy is that republicans and conservatives order it this way: “I’ll have the Cyanide and Koolaid … up. And, hold the Koolaid.
But they down it in one gulp and keep walking around, bumping into the furniture and goosing the beauty queens, like bug-eyed Zombies, with no apparent hangover the next day.
I’m afraid someone is watering the cyanide because it’s not doing the job the Founders intended.
Use the concentrate.
The truth is many foreign policy negotiations entail some danger.
LOL…this coming from somebody who claims to be a ‘realist’.
a. It was not a negotiation.
b. It was extortion.
c. It had nothing to do with foreign policy.
No ‘truth’ for you today, sir!
The truth is many foreign policy negotiations entail some danger.
LOL…this coming from somebody who claims to be a ‘realist’.
a. It was not a negotiation.
b. It was extortion.
c. It had nothing to do with foreign policy.
No ‘truth’ for you today, sir!
Call me simple minded…
Um, maybe you just need to tune your snark/irony meter?
😉
Call me simple minded…
Um, maybe you just need to tune your snark/irony meter?
😉
You cant dig it up, because it doesnt exist. What Amb Taylor said was great. But they got the assistance. So? A
The one that’s the most bogus for me is the whole blackmail thing. Presidents have enormous latitude in negotiating foreign policy. All negotiations include some quid pr quo and all Presidents use their office to get reelected.
I could look up examples but Obama admitted to it on an open mic. No one chased down every potential source to see what he was promising because, that’s what Presidents do.
All the wailing and gnashing of teeth in Washington is political theater to impact the next election. It seems to have worked.
Democrats are a cult.
You cant dig it up, because it doesnt exist. What Amb Taylor said was great. But they got the assistance. So? A
The one that’s the most bogus for me is the whole blackmail thing. Presidents have enormous latitude in negotiating foreign policy. All negotiations include some quid pr quo and all Presidents use their office to get reelected.
I could look up examples but Obama admitted to it on an open mic. No one chased down every potential source to see what he was promising because, that’s what Presidents do.
All the wailing and gnashing of teeth in Washington is political theater to impact the next election. It seems to have worked.
Democrats are a cult.
all Presidents use their office to get reelected
They do things that they believe will gain them votes. They do NOT use the government to dig up dirt on (or coerce others to invent dirt on) their political opponents.
all Presidents use their office to get reelected
They do things that they believe will gain them votes. They do NOT use the government to dig up dirt on (or coerce others to invent dirt on) their political opponents.
Impeachment is a political process by which a super-majority of the senate can evict the president. If a president were to appoint only incompetent family members to his/her cabinet and if those incompetents functioned incompetently, the House would likely report out articles of impeachment and the senate would likely convict and the American public would likely support all of the above, all without any provable crime, no bribery, no actual corruption, just serial, gross stupidity.
So, the arguments back and forth on what the limits are on valid grounds for impeachment don’t move my needle in the slightest.
I’m one who believes that keeping the Ukraine independent is in our best national security interests and doing so involves military aid. I cannot interpret DT’s call with the Ukrainian president as anything other than a veiled QPQ. For me, that’s enough to pull the trigger. I’ve said so here and elsewhere prior to today.
I’m repeating myself because the ideas that Trump needs to be removed and the Dems are out of their minds are not mutually exclusive.
Impeachment is a political process by which a super-majority of the senate can evict the president. If a president were to appoint only incompetent family members to his/her cabinet and if those incompetents functioned incompetently, the House would likely report out articles of impeachment and the senate would likely convict and the American public would likely support all of the above, all without any provable crime, no bribery, no actual corruption, just serial, gross stupidity.
So, the arguments back and forth on what the limits are on valid grounds for impeachment don’t move my needle in the slightest.
I’m one who believes that keeping the Ukraine independent is in our best national security interests and doing so involves military aid. I cannot interpret DT’s call with the Ukrainian president as anything other than a veiled QPQ. For me, that’s enough to pull the trigger. I’ve said so here and elsewhere prior to today.
I’m repeating myself because the ideas that Trump needs to be removed and the Dems are out of their minds are not mutually exclusive.
Of course they do wj, although I wouldnt be overly upset if Trump got removed, it is purely a political calculation by the Dems to go through this. Blatantly using their offices to try to win an election. It is indisputable abuse of their offices.
Of course they do wj, although I wouldnt be overly upset if Trump got removed, it is purely a political calculation by the Dems to go through this. Blatantly using their offices to try to win an election. It is indisputable abuse of their offices.
You cant dig it up, because it doesnt exist.
Sorry, the fish are not biting today.
It seems to have worked.
Splendid!
Enjoy your evening.
I’m repeating myself because the ideas that Trump needs to be removed and the Dems are out of their minds are not mutually exclusive.
LOL. Not mocking your comment, just laughing because it’s true and funny.
Thanks McK.
You cant dig it up, because it doesnt exist.
Sorry, the fish are not biting today.
It seems to have worked.
Splendid!
Enjoy your evening.
I’m repeating myself because the ideas that Trump needs to be removed and the Dems are out of their minds are not mutually exclusive.
LOL. Not mocking your comment, just laughing because it’s true and funny.
Thanks McK.
It is indisputable abuse of their offices.
Those bastards!!
It is indisputable abuse of their offices.
Those bastards!!
It is indisputable abuse of their offices.
Those bastards!
LOL
I’m repeating myself because the ideas that Trump needs to be removed and the Dems are out of their minds are not mutually exclusive.
LOL. Not mocking your comment, just laughing because it’s true and funny.
Same here.
So we can add McKinney to Frum and Republicans for Integrity etc. But unfortunately, those who are drinking the Kool-aid outnumber them.
It is indisputable abuse of their offices.
Those bastards!
LOL
I’m repeating myself because the ideas that Trump needs to be removed and the Dems are out of their minds are not mutually exclusive.
LOL. Not mocking your comment, just laughing because it’s true and funny.
Same here.
So we can add McKinney to Frum and Republicans for Integrity etc. But unfortunately, those who are drinking the Kool-aid outnumber them.
Presidents have enormous latitude in negotiating foreign policy.
I draw the line at a president employing his vast powers to “negotiate” (snicker) a deal solely for his own personal political benefit.
Maybe you don’t.
That’s OK.
Just stop the feeble attempt to characterize it as something else, because it is not.
Presidents have enormous latitude in negotiating foreign policy.
I draw the line at a president employing his vast powers to “negotiate” (snicker) a deal solely for his own personal political benefit.
Maybe you don’t.
That’s OK.
Just stop the feeble attempt to characterize it as something else, because it is not.
By the way, I wanted to say something yesterday about the notion of “stay healthy.”
Two of the most capable, vital, energetic, fit people I know have cancer. One of them has been treated for two kinds of cancer in the past five years and is now in hospice. When he first got sick he had just recently qualified for the Boston Marathon at age 60-plus.
The other is (or was) still mountain biking vigorously at age 68. Now he has an 18-inch incision in his leg after the removal of a tumor, and very uncertain prospects for recurrence or spread.
These are people who did everything they could to “stay healthy.” They ate well, exercised, didn’t smoke (or drink much if at all), enjoyed their work and their social lives.
That’s not to mention all the people I know who have died of cancer despite their efforts to “stay healthy.” Or the people I know with disabilities that are going to have them living under a bridge, or dead, if the Rs have their vicious way.
Because we all know that if bad luck strikes, you must have deserved it somehow, so fuck you.
Soon we’ll be putting the infirm on ice floes and sending them out to sea to die out of sight. Though we’d better hurry, lest there be no ice floes left. I suppose in that case we can just stick people into cages with would-be immigrants.
By the way, I wanted to say something yesterday about the notion of “stay healthy.”
Two of the most capable, vital, energetic, fit people I know have cancer. One of them has been treated for two kinds of cancer in the past five years and is now in hospice. When he first got sick he had just recently qualified for the Boston Marathon at age 60-plus.
The other is (or was) still mountain biking vigorously at age 68. Now he has an 18-inch incision in his leg after the removal of a tumor, and very uncertain prospects for recurrence or spread.
These are people who did everything they could to “stay healthy.” They ate well, exercised, didn’t smoke (or drink much if at all), enjoyed their work and their social lives.
That’s not to mention all the people I know who have died of cancer despite their efforts to “stay healthy.” Or the people I know with disabilities that are going to have them living under a bridge, or dead, if the Rs have their vicious way.
Because we all know that if bad luck strikes, you must have deserved it somehow, so fuck you.
Soon we’ll be putting the infirm on ice floes and sending them out to sea to die out of sight. Though we’d better hurry, lest there be no ice floes left. I suppose in that case we can just stick people into cages with would-be immigrants.
I think bc’s point needs to be considered carefully.
As I understand it, he would like to be able to buy a high-deductible policy, to cover catastrophic situations, and put some of the savings into an HSA. Obamacare, apparently, does not allow this.
OK. I get that this makes him unhappy. But it does not mean that “Obamacare was, IMHO, designed to fail the self-employed and small business owner,” for a couple of reasons.
First, and most important, our previous “system” actually prevented lots of people from becoming self-employed, or becoming small business owners. That high-deductible option is pretty risky, and pretty expensive, or maybe unavailable, to someone with pre-existing conditions. And maybe some of these people preferred a more conventional policy. So at least some of the people bc mentions as being “failed” were greatly benefitted.
Second, like may critics of Obamacare, bc overlooks a very important point. When you buy a policy you are getting more than a health care policy. You are also getting the right to continue being covered at a reasonable premium, whatever happens.
This option is enormously valuable. It is part of what you pay for under Obamacare. I don’t know what the renewal provisions of bc’s pre-ACA policy were, but I’d encourage him to take a look before singing its praises.
I think bc’s point needs to be considered carefully.
As I understand it, he would like to be able to buy a high-deductible policy, to cover catastrophic situations, and put some of the savings into an HSA. Obamacare, apparently, does not allow this.
OK. I get that this makes him unhappy. But it does not mean that “Obamacare was, IMHO, designed to fail the self-employed and small business owner,” for a couple of reasons.
First, and most important, our previous “system” actually prevented lots of people from becoming self-employed, or becoming small business owners. That high-deductible option is pretty risky, and pretty expensive, or maybe unavailable, to someone with pre-existing conditions. And maybe some of these people preferred a more conventional policy. So at least some of the people bc mentions as being “failed” were greatly benefitted.
Second, like may critics of Obamacare, bc overlooks a very important point. When you buy a policy you are getting more than a health care policy. You are also getting the right to continue being covered at a reasonable premium, whatever happens.
This option is enormously valuable. It is part of what you pay for under Obamacare. I don’t know what the renewal provisions of bc’s pre-ACA policy were, but I’d encourage him to take a look before singing its praises.
byomtov — yes indeed.
I was self-employed from about 1987 to 2013. I had exactly the kind of catastrophic coverage that bc was talking about, with a $15K deductible and very cheap premiums. I was lucky never to have to dig very deeply into my savings; the only time was when I had knee surgery and paid for it out of my own pocket. It was a calculated risk, and I was lucky enough that it worked out okay.
It’s hard to generalize, because before the ACA every state had its own rules. But in Maine when I first moved here, if you tried to change your coverage, or were booted, a potential new insurer could refuse to cover pre-existing conditions. (IIRC there was a time frame after which they had to cover them, maybe six months. But meanwhile, people with expensive ailments or chronic conditions were SOL.)
A few years later the state pushed through the requirement that if you had “played the game” (as my roommate the insurance commissioner called it) by maintaining coverage right along, insurers could not refuse to cover you if you switched companies. IOW, you got “the right to continue being covered at a reasonable premium.”
Maine continues to try to ensure that this enormously valuable option remains in force no matter what the Feds do.
byomtov — yes indeed.
I was self-employed from about 1987 to 2013. I had exactly the kind of catastrophic coverage that bc was talking about, with a $15K deductible and very cheap premiums. I was lucky never to have to dig very deeply into my savings; the only time was when I had knee surgery and paid for it out of my own pocket. It was a calculated risk, and I was lucky enough that it worked out okay.
It’s hard to generalize, because before the ACA every state had its own rules. But in Maine when I first moved here, if you tried to change your coverage, or were booted, a potential new insurer could refuse to cover pre-existing conditions. (IIRC there was a time frame after which they had to cover them, maybe six months. But meanwhile, people with expensive ailments or chronic conditions were SOL.)
A few years later the state pushed through the requirement that if you had “played the game” (as my roommate the insurance commissioner called it) by maintaining coverage right along, insurers could not refuse to cover you if you switched companies. IOW, you got “the right to continue being covered at a reasonable premium.”
Maine continues to try to ensure that this enormously valuable option remains in force no matter what the Feds do.
he would like to be able to buy a high-deductible policy, to cover catastrophic situations, and put some of the savings into an HSA. Obamacare, apparently, does not allow this.
I’m sure that worked well for him. Presumably, he had the surplus income to put into an HSA, and was reasonably healthy.
A lot of people are not in that position, for either or both reasons.
I don’t really much care what specific program we choose to deal with the cost of health care in this country. Single payer, private insurance with strong regulation, pay for doctor visits with chickens.
I do not give one flying you know what. I don’t.
What I do care about is that whatever approach we take, be something that (a) makes it possible for everyone to go to the doctor when they are sick and for basic preventive care, and (b) manages the potentially large costs of illness for people who don’t have good luck medically so that they aren’t bankrupted by it.
(a) and (b). Whatever makes that happen, *for everybody*, is fine with me.
Catastrophic coverage plus HSA probably doesn’t meet both of those requirements, *for everybody*. Which is to say, it’s great for folks who are basically healthy and have surplus $$$ to put in their HSA, but sucks for folks who don’t have both of those advantages.
The ACA is not a great program for people who are self-employed, don’t otherwise qualify for some group policy or other, and make too much money to qualify for subsidies. I completely understand why those people think it sucks.
So, let’s fix it so that the particular needs of those people are addressed in some way.
Throwing the whole fucking thing out because a relatively small number of people are not well served is not really a good answer.
All of this, of course, assumes that things working reasonably well *for everybody* is desirable. Not everyone works under that assumption. For folks who don’t work under that assumption, I say bugger off. My inclinations are communitarian, contrary to bizarre misanthropes like Margaret Thatcher I actually believe that there is such a thing as society.
I recognize, affirm, and consider myself bound by the idea that we bear some basic responsibility for each other’s welfare. I will by god make no apology for that, not here or anywhere, not now or ever.
You are free to see things however you wish. I recognize and acknowledge other points of view, but I’m sick of watching people freaking suffer for no good reason. So if your “point of view” doesn’t have a credible solution that works *for everybody*, then we have no basis for discussion. I am simply not interested.
Catastrophic insurance and HSAs don’t work *for everybody*. Come up with something that is *actually better, for everybody* than what is available now, and I’m all ears.
Proposals that are *better for you* but which *take stuff away from other people* do not attract my interest. Speaking purely personally. I’m sure other folks here will be happy to discuss them with you, I will not.
he would like to be able to buy a high-deductible policy, to cover catastrophic situations, and put some of the savings into an HSA. Obamacare, apparently, does not allow this.
I’m sure that worked well for him. Presumably, he had the surplus income to put into an HSA, and was reasonably healthy.
A lot of people are not in that position, for either or both reasons.
I don’t really much care what specific program we choose to deal with the cost of health care in this country. Single payer, private insurance with strong regulation, pay for doctor visits with chickens.
I do not give one flying you know what. I don’t.
What I do care about is that whatever approach we take, be something that (a) makes it possible for everyone to go to the doctor when they are sick and for basic preventive care, and (b) manages the potentially large costs of illness for people who don’t have good luck medically so that they aren’t bankrupted by it.
(a) and (b). Whatever makes that happen, *for everybody*, is fine with me.
Catastrophic coverage plus HSA probably doesn’t meet both of those requirements, *for everybody*. Which is to say, it’s great for folks who are basically healthy and have surplus $$$ to put in their HSA, but sucks for folks who don’t have both of those advantages.
The ACA is not a great program for people who are self-employed, don’t otherwise qualify for some group policy or other, and make too much money to qualify for subsidies. I completely understand why those people think it sucks.
So, let’s fix it so that the particular needs of those people are addressed in some way.
Throwing the whole fucking thing out because a relatively small number of people are not well served is not really a good answer.
All of this, of course, assumes that things working reasonably well *for everybody* is desirable. Not everyone works under that assumption. For folks who don’t work under that assumption, I say bugger off. My inclinations are communitarian, contrary to bizarre misanthropes like Margaret Thatcher I actually believe that there is such a thing as society.
I recognize, affirm, and consider myself bound by the idea that we bear some basic responsibility for each other’s welfare. I will by god make no apology for that, not here or anywhere, not now or ever.
You are free to see things however you wish. I recognize and acknowledge other points of view, but I’m sick of watching people freaking suffer for no good reason. So if your “point of view” doesn’t have a credible solution that works *for everybody*, then we have no basis for discussion. I am simply not interested.
Catastrophic insurance and HSAs don’t work *for everybody*. Come up with something that is *actually better, for everybody* than what is available now, and I’m all ears.
Proposals that are *better for you* but which *take stuff away from other people* do not attract my interest. Speaking purely personally. I’m sure other folks here will be happy to discuss them with you, I will not.
byomtov,
As usual, you provide a level headed and sensible take on things. Yes, bc has sour grapes because he is unable to procure a cheapo catastrophic health care policy and call it “health care”. And because of his individual situation and proclivities, he demands that the ACA be destroyed root and branch.
Seems kind of a stretch to me.
But here’s the deal. If we let all the bc’s of the world opt out, then the rest of us have to pick up the tab. And when bc’s sham policy doesn’t pay out? Well, we get to pick up that tab too. And if you have a pre-existing condition? Well, too bad for you! We get to pick up that tab as well.
Because it is the paramount mission of public heath care policy to ensure that folks like bc and marty get cheapo health care, the rest of us be damned.
Somebody in a group plan through their employer is paying about 12K/yr for health care. They have monthly premiums, deductibles, and the employer’s contribution (part of the wage).
But the “self-employed” deserve a special break?
Really?
like religious schools, the bc’s and marty’s of the world want a special exemption, because they don’t want to pay up like everybody else does who is in a similar tax bracket.
They “want to take the chance” that they will remain healthy. And if that does not come to pass? Well, somebody else’s problem.
This is an issue that can be solved within the ACA framework. But that is not good enough for them.
So I see it as simply a case of special pleading.
Glad to hear from you.
bobby
byomtov,
As usual, you provide a level headed and sensible take on things. Yes, bc has sour grapes because he is unable to procure a cheapo catastrophic health care policy and call it “health care”. And because of his individual situation and proclivities, he demands that the ACA be destroyed root and branch.
Seems kind of a stretch to me.
But here’s the deal. If we let all the bc’s of the world opt out, then the rest of us have to pick up the tab. And when bc’s sham policy doesn’t pay out? Well, we get to pick up that tab too. And if you have a pre-existing condition? Well, too bad for you! We get to pick up that tab as well.
Because it is the paramount mission of public heath care policy to ensure that folks like bc and marty get cheapo health care, the rest of us be damned.
Somebody in a group plan through their employer is paying about 12K/yr for health care. They have monthly premiums, deductibles, and the employer’s contribution (part of the wage).
But the “self-employed” deserve a special break?
Really?
like religious schools, the bc’s and marty’s of the world want a special exemption, because they don’t want to pay up like everybody else does who is in a similar tax bracket.
They “want to take the chance” that they will remain healthy. And if that does not come to pass? Well, somebody else’s problem.
This is an issue that can be solved within the ACA framework. But that is not good enough for them.
So I see it as simply a case of special pleading.
Glad to hear from you.
bobby
wrs
bobbyp too!
wrs
bobbyp too!
You can add to the special exemption list the special snowflakes who are now trying to overturn Maine’s new vaccination law.
The right to shoot up schools and churches, the right to infect other people with measles, the right to health care that other people can’t afford…what a crew.
You can add to the special exemption list the special snowflakes who are now trying to overturn Maine’s new vaccination law.
The right to shoot up schools and churches, the right to infect other people with measles, the right to health care that other people can’t afford…what a crew.
When summoned into a thug conservative Republican Party official’s presence, always carry a weapon and stand ready to use that weapon with deadly force in self-defense, just as you would if confronted by a rapist or a mass murderer.
Take him out. He’s going to go through some things.
https://digbysblog.net/2020/01/pompeo-goes-full-trump/
When summoned into a thug conservative Republican Party official’s presence, always carry a weapon and stand ready to use that weapon with deadly force in self-defense, just as you would if confronted by a rapist or a mass murderer.
Take him out. He’s going to go through some things.
https://digbysblog.net/2020/01/pompeo-goes-full-trump/
The good news is Pompeo is, apparently, not going to run for the Senate in Kansas this year. If he ran, he might well win. If he doesn’t, there’s a good chance the Republicans will nominate Kobach, and see him lose to a Democrat. Good riddance.
The good news is Pompeo is, apparently, not going to run for the Senate in Kansas this year. If he ran, he might well win. If he doesn’t, there’s a good chance the Republicans will nominate Kobach, and see him lose to a Democrat. Good riddance.
Are these unhatched free-range chickens you are counting?
Republican vermin in the State of Kansas are rigging the election as we speak.
Are these unhatched free-range chickens you are counting?
Republican vermin in the State of Kansas are rigging the election as we speak.
All the (certified organic) eggs may not hatch. But more eggs still give you better prospects than fewer eggs.
It’s like hoping that people who might beat Roy Moore in the primary (e.g. Sessions) don’t run. Senator Jones might lose anyway. But against Moore, he might win again.
All the (certified organic) eggs may not hatch. But more eggs still give you better prospects than fewer eggs.
It’s like hoping that people who might beat Roy Moore in the primary (e.g. Sessions) don’t run. Senator Jones might lose anyway. But against Moore, he might win again.
people who claim that the ACA was ‘designed’ to be the stalking horse for universal health care have to explain this….without Joe fucking Leiberman’s vote, the ACA does not pass.
people who claim that the ACA was ‘designed’ to be the stalking horse for universal health care have to explain this….without Joe fucking Leiberman’s vote, the ACA does not pass.
bobbyp, you have to understand that nobody can work up a good conspiracy theory if you persist on injecting facts and reality into the discussion.
bobbyp, you have to understand that nobody can work up a good conspiracy theory if you persist on injecting facts and reality into the discussion.
Maybe there is no need to salt their fields, (R)’s may just die off.
So be it.
If you think that’s all just more lefty garbage, check the source and the author.
Maybe there is no need to salt their fields, (R)’s may just die off.
So be it.
If you think that’s all just more lefty garbage, check the source and the author.
The stalking horse for universal healthcare is the fact that so many Americans are shut out of the private health insurance market for one reason or another.
The stalking horse for the runaway Pentagon budget since the Cold War is conservatives’ working overtime to conjure up new threats to replace the specter of international communism, while of course cozying up to Russian plutocratic thugs.
The stalking horse for the Interstate highway system was the automobile.
The stalking horse for more stringent FAA regulation is Boeing purposefully fucking up to enhance their bottom line.
The stalking horses for my visceral hatred for the contemporary conservative movement are the jackasses leading that movement.
The stalking horse for civil rights legislation and Brown versus Board of Education were southern racist filth and their northern brethren such as William F. Buckley standing athwart history and shouting “Stop!”
Conservatives don’t like be stalked?
Then stop what you are doing.
The stalking horse for universal healthcare is the fact that so many Americans are shut out of the private health insurance market for one reason or another.
The stalking horse for the runaway Pentagon budget since the Cold War is conservatives’ working overtime to conjure up new threats to replace the specter of international communism, while of course cozying up to Russian plutocratic thugs.
The stalking horse for the Interstate highway system was the automobile.
The stalking horse for more stringent FAA regulation is Boeing purposefully fucking up to enhance their bottom line.
The stalking horses for my visceral hatred for the contemporary conservative movement are the jackasses leading that movement.
The stalking horse for civil rights legislation and Brown versus Board of Education were southern racist filth and their northern brethren such as William F. Buckley standing athwart history and shouting “Stop!”
Conservatives don’t like be stalked?
Then stop what you are doing.
Russell’s cite reminds me that Churchill didn’t say what others claim he said and is all the more reason for someone to provide a companion volume to Bartlett’s Familiar Quotations entitled Bartlett’s Familiar Misquotations, which will be a heavier tome than the original.
A third and even longer volume could be entitled “Bartlett’s Familiar Quotations by Donald Trump That He Said He Didn’t Say But That He In Fact Did Say More Than Once”.
Marty could write the introduction and then add an Afterword entitled “What I Meant Was” denying that he said what he said in the introduction.
Russell’s cite reminds me that Churchill didn’t say what others claim he said and is all the more reason for someone to provide a companion volume to Bartlett’s Familiar Quotations entitled Bartlett’s Familiar Misquotations, which will be a heavier tome than the original.
A third and even longer volume could be entitled “Bartlett’s Familiar Quotations by Donald Trump That He Said He Didn’t Say But That He In Fact Did Say More Than Once”.
Marty could write the introduction and then add an Afterword entitled “What I Meant Was” denying that he said what he said in the introduction.
I recognize, affirm, and consider myself bound by the idea that we bear some basic responsibility for each other’s welfare. I will by god make no apology for that, not here or anywhere, not now or ever.
1. The real spirit of ObWi, IMHO.
2. WWJD (if you are the sort who cares)? This.
3. The recipe for a better world.
4. So self-evidently right and good, that anybody who disagrees with it is suspect by definition, and (if you are the sort who believes in that kind of thing) an agent of the Evil One.
5. Seriously, WTF has happened to us that this is even arguable?
6. Sowing their fields with salt is beginning to look more and more adviseable….
I recognize, affirm, and consider myself bound by the idea that we bear some basic responsibility for each other’s welfare. I will by god make no apology for that, not here or anywhere, not now or ever.
1. The real spirit of ObWi, IMHO.
2. WWJD (if you are the sort who cares)? This.
3. The recipe for a better world.
4. So self-evidently right and good, that anybody who disagrees with it is suspect by definition, and (if you are the sort who believes in that kind of thing) an agent of the Evil One.
5. Seriously, WTF has happened to us that this is even arguable?
6. Sowing their fields with salt is beginning to look more and more adviseable….
I’m not happy with the Cold War cheerleading that has been a big part of the anti- Trump movement from the beginning. Trump is an obviously corrupt man and his actions in the Ukraine show a man using foreign policy to gather dirt on a political opponent but I would rather people stick to Trump’s corruption and not make it about how we must intervene in the Ukraine because it is necessary for our national security. That is a separate debate.
https://original.antiwar.com/daniel_lazare/2020/01/23/adam-schiffs-very-scary-warmongering-speech/
I’m not happy with the Cold War cheerleading that has been a big part of the anti- Trump movement from the beginning. Trump is an obviously corrupt man and his actions in the Ukraine show a man using foreign policy to gather dirt on a political opponent but I would rather people stick to Trump’s corruption and not make it about how we must intervene in the Ukraine because it is necessary for our national security. That is a separate debate.
https://original.antiwar.com/daniel_lazare/2020/01/23/adam-schiffs-very-scary-warmongering-speech/
Sowing their fields with salt is beginning to look more and more adviseable….
As russell’s cite notes, the reactionaries are not only dying off, but their younger partisans are abandoning ship at increasing rates. And not coming back. Pushing policies which hurt people will tend to have that kind of effect on them — eventually, if not sooner.
Also, isn’t trashing part of the environment, just because it’s someone else’s, a bad idea? 😉
Seriously, the main question, IMHO, is how to hold down the damage (and reverse it where possible) while nature takes its course.
Sowing their fields with salt is beginning to look more and more adviseable….
As russell’s cite notes, the reactionaries are not only dying off, but their younger partisans are abandoning ship at increasing rates. And not coming back. Pushing policies which hurt people will tend to have that kind of effect on them — eventually, if not sooner.
Also, isn’t trashing part of the environment, just because it’s someone else’s, a bad idea? 😉
Seriously, the main question, IMHO, is how to hold down the damage (and reverse it where possible) while nature takes its course.
Bartlett’s Familiar Misquotations is a great idea. An initial contribution:
From here. And probably a thousand other places.
Not quite a misquotation, because I guess Bobby really did say it, and Ted quoted it in his eulogy for Bobby, and JFK used it in a speech, etc. etc.
But the scholar/nerd in me wants credit given where credit is due:
Churchill and Shaw may be among the most quoted *and* misquoted people in history. E.g., this one, where they are quoted (and/or misquoted) together.
As that latter link will show, and as I have learned dabbling in genealogical research, there is hardly any such thing as a fact.
Safer to stick to math.
Bartlett’s Familiar Misquotations is a great idea. An initial contribution:
From here. And probably a thousand other places.
Not quite a misquotation, because I guess Bobby really did say it, and Ted quoted it in his eulogy for Bobby, and JFK used it in a speech, etc. etc.
But the scholar/nerd in me wants credit given where credit is due:
Churchill and Shaw may be among the most quoted *and* misquoted people in history. E.g., this one, where they are quoted (and/or misquoted) together.
As that latter link will show, and as I have learned dabbling in genealogical research, there is hardly any such thing as a fact.
Safer to stick to math.
wj: that could take too long. My ex-State buddies tell me that the damage already done there will take approximately three generations to repair.
wj: that could take too long. My ex-State buddies tell me that the damage already done there will take approximately three generations to repair.
GftNC, the effects of the damage to the judiciary are probably worse. Including, but not limited to, the impact of the recent spate of “not qualified” appointees.
GftNC, the effects of the damage to the judiciary are probably worse. Including, but not limited to, the impact of the recent spate of “not qualified” appointees.
And the damage to the environment, a century.
Optimistically.
And the damage to the environment, a century.
Optimistically.
Yogi Berry would consume a big chunk of “Familiar MisQuotations”.
“I didn’t say half the things I said”
or words to that effect.
Yogi Berry would consume a big chunk of “Familiar MisQuotations”.
“I didn’t say half the things I said”
or words to that effect.
wj: agreed.
Also, I second Janie’s approval of Bartlett’s Familiar Misquotations. I discover, as I bring many of my favourite quotations to the ObWi commentariat, that the attributions I have comfortably lived with for decades are either wrong, or at least disputed. Still, as one friend of mine said to another when they ended up in a jail cell together in the 60s, and his old acquaintance took the opportunity to check on the veracity of an excellent story he’d heard about him, “Well if it isn’t true, it ought to be.”
And come to think of it, although I was told this by the latter, this sounds like the kind of thing said by many wits, in many circumstances, down the ages.
wj: agreed.
Also, I second Janie’s approval of Bartlett’s Familiar Misquotations. I discover, as I bring many of my favourite quotations to the ObWi commentariat, that the attributions I have comfortably lived with for decades are either wrong, or at least disputed. Still, as one friend of mine said to another when they ended up in a jail cell together in the 60s, and his old acquaintance took the opportunity to check on the veracity of an excellent story he’d heard about him, “Well if it isn’t true, it ought to be.”
And come to think of it, although I was told this by the latter, this sounds like the kind of thing said by many wits, in many circumstances, down the ages.
I am laughing at myself about the Shaw quote, because it’s from Back to Methuselah, not Man and Superman.
That’s what I get for trying to be scholarly first thing in the morning. No more commenting without caffeine!
If I were a different personality, I would assert that I did it on purpose, and was waiting for someone to catch it. However……..
I am laughing at myself about the Shaw quote, because it’s from Back to Methuselah, not Man and Superman.
That’s what I get for trying to be scholarly first thing in the morning. No more commenting without caffeine!
If I were a different personality, I would assert that I did it on purpose, and was waiting for someone to catch it. However……..
If you were a different personality (God forfend!) you would double down and insist that it was, too, correct. No matter what the facts actually were.
If you were a different personality (God forfend!) you would double down and insist that it was, too, correct. No matter what the facts actually were.
We were just too kind to draw attention to the error.
Naturally.
We were just too kind to draw attention to the error.
Naturally.
We were just too kind to draw attention to the error.
LOL.
We were just too kind to draw attention to the error.
LOL.
I should add that I’ve flubbed quotes so many times, I invariably now google them to check before posting.
Even, on occasion, if it’s Shakespeare.
I should add that I’ve flubbed quotes so many times, I invariably now google them to check before posting.
Even, on occasion, if it’s Shakespeare.
Mine was a different kind of mistake. I knew perfectly well what play the quote was from; I did my PhD dissertation on Back to Methuselah, for crying out loud. And I’ve read both plays (and Major Barbara and Saint Joan) at least a couple dozen times, some iterations quite recently.
My half-asleep brain just crossed up typing the right name.
Mine was a different kind of mistake. I knew perfectly well what play the quote was from; I did my PhD dissertation on Back to Methuselah, for crying out loud. And I’ve read both plays (and Major Barbara and Saint Joan) at least a couple dozen times, some iterations quite recently.
My half-asleep brain just crossed up typing the right name.
In fact, I had a copy of Back to Methuselah in front of me while I was typing, to make sure I got the quote exactly right.
Sigh.
In fact, I had a copy of Back to Methuselah in front of me while I was typing, to make sure I got the quote exactly right.
Sigh.
Maybe you could blame auto correct..
?
Maybe you could blame auto correct..
?
Wait, what, our comment boxes have autocorrect?
😉
Wait, what, our comment boxes have autocorrect?
😉
I did my PhD dissertation on Back to Methuselah, for crying out loud.
You’re a very weird person. 🙂
I did my PhD dissertation on Back to Methuselah, for crying out loud.
You’re a very weird person. 🙂
You’re a very weird person. 🙂
I’m laughing out loud, although in truth my life might have gone a little better if I hadn’t been quite so weird.
Anyhow, we’ve already got the beginnings of Familiar Misquotations, with this we can start another book called Brief Biographies of Not-Famous People.
The beginnings of the Obsidian Wings publishing house!
You’re a very weird person. 🙂
I’m laughing out loud, although in truth my life might have gone a little better if I hadn’t been quite so weird.
Anyhow, we’ve already got the beginnings of Familiar Misquotations, with this we can start another book called Brief Biographies of Not-Famous People.
The beginnings of the Obsidian Wings publishing house!
Byomtov et al:
1) I think the preexisting provisions of the ACA are welcome. I have no problem with those and recognize the benefit.
2) I didn’t love my HSA plan. It was what I could afford with a family of 8 while self-employed. For the first several years, we would have qualified for an ACA subsidy had it been there. We were “lucky” enough to max out the deductible and spend all our HSA each and every year. No savings for me. And the ACA did allow HSA’s. I stayed on mine although the premium went from $600/month or so to $1,800 with a larger deductible. The amount of pure effort my poor wife has had to expend and the stress it has caused trying to manage our family health care budget is mind boggling. And I make decent money.
3) “Staying Healthy” simply meant that we had to manage our own health care to some degree and that there were real cost savings there. I recognize that health is a lot of the time not about personal effort. I didn’t mean to imply otherwise. I just had knee surgery. One of our kids had heart surgery. I get that.
4) I favor some form of universal coverage for children and the elderly and the weakest members of society. And yes, I rather like belonging to a society and believe I have obligations there. So “folks like bc and marty get cheapo health care, the rest of us be damned” is pure bs; I have never said or implied that. I’m ok with trying to resolve it “within the ACA framework,” but skeptical that will happen.
5) I respect those that want healthcare to be a right for all and that consider it our common obligation. I’m not that far off. My main issue is implementation and the need for individual responsibility for non-elderly adults. Frex, when I lived in Alaska back in the day, the huge number of state and fed employees with insurance that provided $10 doctor visits meant it was hard to get a doctor’s appointment at the clinic for fairly serious issues because everyone went there for the “sniffles.” And let’s just not talk about ER visits. So what to do? We have joined a health share that requires: 1) no smoking or immediately trying to quit; 2) trying to lose weight if you are above a certain BMI; 3) no illegal drugs; etc. We don’t require anyone on Medicare or Medicaid to stop smoking or at least try. For non-elderly adults, let’s put some personal responsibility in there too.
6) wj may be right that the absolute failure of the ACA to properly deal with certain people like me is due to incompetence, not design.
7) My main point (originally) was simply that paying the full cost of healthcare for more people and subsidizing to a great extent the cost for millions of others will be something that will never be taken away and thus it is a step towards single payer-for good or for bad- and to say otherwise is, IMHO, naïve.
Catastrophic insurance and HSAs don’t work *for everybody*. Come up with something that is *actually better, for everybody* than what is available now, and I’m all ears.”
What I do care about is that whatever approach we take, be something that (a) makes it possible for everyone to go to the doctor when they are sick and for basic preventive care, and (b) manages the potentially large costs of illness for people who don’t have good luck medically so that they aren’t bankrupted by it. (a) and (b). Whatever makes that happen, *for everybody*, is fine with me.
russell: I’m almost there. For non-elderly adults, I would only add a (c), at reasonable cost, which I believe can only be achieved with personal responsibility.
How about the Singapore HSA model? I have raised that before and went to take a look and see if it is still fairing well. And anybody work for the state of Indiana? One view:
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-us-can-slash-health-care-costs-75-with-2-fundamental-changes-and-without-medicare-for-all-2019-08-15
Another:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/22/upshot/singapore-health-system-lessons.html
Byomtov et al:
1) I think the preexisting provisions of the ACA are welcome. I have no problem with those and recognize the benefit.
2) I didn’t love my HSA plan. It was what I could afford with a family of 8 while self-employed. For the first several years, we would have qualified for an ACA subsidy had it been there. We were “lucky” enough to max out the deductible and spend all our HSA each and every year. No savings for me. And the ACA did allow HSA’s. I stayed on mine although the premium went from $600/month or so to $1,800 with a larger deductible. The amount of pure effort my poor wife has had to expend and the stress it has caused trying to manage our family health care budget is mind boggling. And I make decent money.
3) “Staying Healthy” simply meant that we had to manage our own health care to some degree and that there were real cost savings there. I recognize that health is a lot of the time not about personal effort. I didn’t mean to imply otherwise. I just had knee surgery. One of our kids had heart surgery. I get that.
4) I favor some form of universal coverage for children and the elderly and the weakest members of society. And yes, I rather like belonging to a society and believe I have obligations there. So “folks like bc and marty get cheapo health care, the rest of us be damned” is pure bs; I have never said or implied that. I’m ok with trying to resolve it “within the ACA framework,” but skeptical that will happen.
5) I respect those that want healthcare to be a right for all and that consider it our common obligation. I’m not that far off. My main issue is implementation and the need for individual responsibility for non-elderly adults. Frex, when I lived in Alaska back in the day, the huge number of state and fed employees with insurance that provided $10 doctor visits meant it was hard to get a doctor’s appointment at the clinic for fairly serious issues because everyone went there for the “sniffles.” And let’s just not talk about ER visits. So what to do? We have joined a health share that requires: 1) no smoking or immediately trying to quit; 2) trying to lose weight if you are above a certain BMI; 3) no illegal drugs; etc. We don’t require anyone on Medicare or Medicaid to stop smoking or at least try. For non-elderly adults, let’s put some personal responsibility in there too.
6) wj may be right that the absolute failure of the ACA to properly deal with certain people like me is due to incompetence, not design.
7) My main point (originally) was simply that paying the full cost of healthcare for more people and subsidizing to a great extent the cost for millions of others will be something that will never be taken away and thus it is a step towards single payer-for good or for bad- and to say otherwise is, IMHO, naïve.
Catastrophic insurance and HSAs don’t work *for everybody*. Come up with something that is *actually better, for everybody* than what is available now, and I’m all ears.”
What I do care about is that whatever approach we take, be something that (a) makes it possible for everyone to go to the doctor when they are sick and for basic preventive care, and (b) manages the potentially large costs of illness for people who don’t have good luck medically so that they aren’t bankrupted by it. (a) and (b). Whatever makes that happen, *for everybody*, is fine with me.
russell: I’m almost there. For non-elderly adults, I would only add a (c), at reasonable cost, which I believe can only be achieved with personal responsibility.
How about the Singapore HSA model? I have raised that before and went to take a look and see if it is still fairing well. And anybody work for the state of Indiana? One view:
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-us-can-slash-health-care-costs-75-with-2-fundamental-changes-and-without-medicare-for-all-2019-08-15
Another:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/22/upshot/singapore-health-system-lessons.html
I think the preexisting provisions of the ACA are welcome. I have no problem with those and recognize the benefit.
The thing is, covering those preexisting conditions costs. (Which is why the insurance companies were loathe to do it.) That money has to come from somewhere. And that somewhere is the premiums everybody pays. TANSTAAFL
Or we could just raise your taxes and pay for it that way….
I think the preexisting provisions of the ACA are welcome. I have no problem with those and recognize the benefit.
The thing is, covering those preexisting conditions costs. (Which is why the insurance companies were loathe to do it.) That money has to come from somewhere. And that somewhere is the premiums everybody pays. TANSTAAFL
Or we could just raise your taxes and pay for it that way….
And the ACA did allow HSA’s. I stayed on mine although the premium went from $600/month or so to $1,800 with a larger deductible.
I’m honestly curious as to what caused that jump. Just saying “Obamcare” won’t do it.
Was the coverage beyond the deductible increased, or were other features added?
And the ACA did allow HSA’s. I stayed on mine although the premium went from $600/month or so to $1,800 with a larger deductible.
I’m honestly curious as to what caused that jump. Just saying “Obamcare” won’t do it.
Was the coverage beyond the deductible increased, or were other features added?
How about the Singapore HSA model? I have raised that before and went to take a look and see if it is still fairing well. And anybody work for the state of Indiana?
I’m not sold on Medicare for all. I want our system to meet the objectives Russell lists, and am happy to support something that does it, be it the Singapore model, MFA, the Indiana model, the French model, or whatever.
(I once had to go to the ER in France, after I fell and feared I had broken some ribs. Fortunately, all was well, and the cost from the visit, including talking to the doctor, getting xrays, and being given some pain meds, was under $200. And that included a surcharge because it was a Sunday. The only paperwork needed was copying my passport.)
What frustrates and angers me, and I think many others, is that fior all the criticism of ACA, and efforts to repeal it, the Republicans have offered zero in the way of alternatives. Zero. They just rant about how bad it is, while trying to hobble it anyway they can.
It is simply impossible, IMO, to credit conservatives with the slightest bit of good faith in addressing our health care needs. Look at Medicaid expansion. GOP states turn it down, and then we read sad stories of rural hospitals forced to close.
I personally think ACA is a decent basis for a national system. It needs improvements, probably, but if there had been any interest on the right in addressing the problems we would have had them by now. Instead we get lots of unintelligent criticism, accompanied by no constructive efforts whatsoever, and repeated attempts at killing it.
So while I can sympathize with your situation, I think you should take up your complaints with the GOP.
How about the Singapore HSA model? I have raised that before and went to take a look and see if it is still fairing well. And anybody work for the state of Indiana?
I’m not sold on Medicare for all. I want our system to meet the objectives Russell lists, and am happy to support something that does it, be it the Singapore model, MFA, the Indiana model, the French model, or whatever.
(I once had to go to the ER in France, after I fell and feared I had broken some ribs. Fortunately, all was well, and the cost from the visit, including talking to the doctor, getting xrays, and being given some pain meds, was under $200. And that included a surcharge because it was a Sunday. The only paperwork needed was copying my passport.)
What frustrates and angers me, and I think many others, is that fior all the criticism of ACA, and efforts to repeal it, the Republicans have offered zero in the way of alternatives. Zero. They just rant about how bad it is, while trying to hobble it anyway they can.
It is simply impossible, IMO, to credit conservatives with the slightest bit of good faith in addressing our health care needs. Look at Medicaid expansion. GOP states turn it down, and then we read sad stories of rural hospitals forced to close.
I personally think ACA is a decent basis for a national system. It needs improvements, probably, but if there had been any interest on the right in addressing the problems we would have had them by now. Instead we get lots of unintelligent criticism, accompanied by no constructive efforts whatsoever, and repeated attempts at killing it.
So while I can sympathize with your situation, I think you should take up your complaints with the GOP.
It is simply impossible, IMO, to credit conservatives with the slightest bit of good faith in addressing our health care needs.
I’d put that as
Because, after all, it was conservatives who came up with the design for Obamacare originally (as, admittedly, an alternative to something like single-payer/Medicare-for-all). Not that today’s “conservatives” will admit it. But then, they aren’t really conservatives. But definitely reacting. And in complete bad faith.
It is simply impossible, IMO, to credit conservatives with the slightest bit of good faith in addressing our health care needs.
I’d put that as
Because, after all, it was conservatives who came up with the design for Obamacare originally (as, admittedly, an alternative to something like single-payer/Medicare-for-all). Not that today’s “conservatives” will admit it. But then, they aren’t really conservatives. But definitely reacting. And in complete bad faith.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-way-your-company-can-offer-health-insurance-is-changing-in-a-fundamental-way-and-no-one-knows-about-it-2020-01-22?siteid=bigcharts&dist=bigcharts
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-way-your-company-can-offer-health-insurance-is-changing-in-a-fundamental-way-and-no-one-knows-about-it-2020-01-22?siteid=bigcharts&dist=bigcharts
Byomtov:
I’m honestly curious as to what caused that jump. Just saying “Obamcare” won’t do it.
I stand corrected by my wife. There was a significant increase in premium right before Obamacare that took our cost to over $900 by the time we had to make a choice. And yes, the Obamacare had broader coverage, mainly maternity (we no longer needed that) and the pediatric coverages. Our plan was pretty broad, though, and better in terms of deductible and co-pay.
Byomtov:
I’m honestly curious as to what caused that jump. Just saying “Obamcare” won’t do it.
I stand corrected by my wife. There was a significant increase in premium right before Obamacare that took our cost to over $900 by the time we had to make a choice. And yes, the Obamacare had broader coverage, mainly maternity (we no longer needed that) and the pediatric coverages. Our plan was pretty broad, though, and better in terms of deductible and co-pay.
One approach to primary healthcare.
“Direct Primary Care (DPC) is an innovative alternative payment model improving access to high functioning healthcare with a simple, flat, affordable membership fee. No fee-for-service payments. No third party billing. The defining element of DPC is an enduring and trusting relationship between a patient and his or her primary care provider. Patients have extraordinary access to a physician of their choice, often for as little as $70 per month, and physicians are accountable first and foremost their patients. DPC is embraced by health policymakers on the left and right and creates happy patients and happy doctors all over the country!”
Direct Primary Care Coalition
An example.
“NeuCare works directly and exclusively for patients.
Our simple, monthly membership fee covers the vast majority of primary care services without insurance hassles.”
NeuCare
One approach to primary healthcare.
“Direct Primary Care (DPC) is an innovative alternative payment model improving access to high functioning healthcare with a simple, flat, affordable membership fee. No fee-for-service payments. No third party billing. The defining element of DPC is an enduring and trusting relationship between a patient and his or her primary care provider. Patients have extraordinary access to a physician of their choice, often for as little as $70 per month, and physicians are accountable first and foremost their patients. DPC is embraced by health policymakers on the left and right and creates happy patients and happy doctors all over the country!”
Direct Primary Care Coalition
An example.
“NeuCare works directly and exclusively for patients.
Our simple, monthly membership fee covers the vast majority of primary care services without insurance hassles.”
NeuCare
The “by” at 10:12 is me. Autofill-induced error.
wj,
it was conservatives who came up with the design for Obamacare originally (as, admittedly, an alternative to something like single-payer/Medicare-for-all). Not that today’s “conservatives” will admit it. But then, they aren’t really conservatives.
Well, whatever. If today’s Republicans, and self-styled conservatives, aren’t really conservatives then there is no significant conservative presence in American politics today.
The ideological meaning of terms like liberal and conservative is not fixed, IMO, and they mostly are useful for labeling different, generally opposing, groups, rather than trying to draw general conclusions about their philosophies that hold over a long period of time or across countries.
The “by” at 10:12 is me. Autofill-induced error.
wj,
it was conservatives who came up with the design for Obamacare originally (as, admittedly, an alternative to something like single-payer/Medicare-for-all). Not that today’s “conservatives” will admit it. But then, they aren’t really conservatives.
Well, whatever. If today’s Republicans, and self-styled conservatives, aren’t really conservatives then there is no significant conservative presence in American politics today.
The ideological meaning of terms like liberal and conservative is not fixed, IMO, and they mostly are useful for labeling different, generally opposing, groups, rather than trying to draw general conclusions about their philosophies that hold over a long period of time or across countries.
there is no significant conservative presence in American politics today
Pretty much. There are a few moderately conservative Republican politicians at the local level. And some Democrats who are moderately conservative and can’t find any other home. But they are all individuals, crying in the wilderness. Nothing like a conservative political party is on offer.
there is no significant conservative presence in American politics today
Pretty much. There are a few moderately conservative Republican politicians at the local level. And some Democrats who are moderately conservative and can’t find any other home. But they are all individuals, crying in the wilderness. Nothing like a conservative political party is on offer.
Of all the ridiculous bullshit emanating from the Republican Senate, this perhaps takes the biscuit….
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/26/braun-trump-impeachment-learn-105262
Of all the ridiculous bullshit emanating from the Republican Senate, this perhaps takes the biscuit….
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/26/braun-trump-impeachment-learn-105262
it was conservatives who came up with the design for Obamacare originally (as, admittedly, an alternative to something like single-payer/Medicare-for-all).
False.
Please also note Romney’s 8 vetoes that were overridden by the MA legislature.
it was conservatives who came up with the design for Obamacare originally (as, admittedly, an alternative to something like single-payer/Medicare-for-all).
False.
Please also note Romney’s 8 vetoes that were overridden by the MA legislature.
Like Andy Kaufmann, Trump will appear net Fall in a neck brace chastened by his harrowing near miss at being removed from the highest office in my government.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmHCx8lCl8Y
He will be executed.
The Republican Party will be butchered and slaughtered.
Like Andy Kaufmann, Trump will appear net Fall in a neck brace chastened by his harrowing near miss at being removed from the highest office in my government.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmHCx8lCl8Y
He will be executed.
The Republican Party will be butchered and slaughtered.
From bobbyp’s link, because it can’t be repeated too often:
I hear that “nothing” argument regularly, so I can testify that Scott Lemieux didn’t make it up and project it elsewhere. You’re poor and you get sick, tough luck. You probably deserve it, even if your only offense was not to be born a master of the universe.
From bobbyp’s link, because it can’t be repeated too often:
I hear that “nothing” argument regularly, so I can testify that Scott Lemieux didn’t make it up and project it elsewhere. You’re poor and you get sick, tough luck. You probably deserve it, even if your only offense was not to be born a master of the universe.
How about the Singapore HSA model?
Here’s a primer.
And here’s another take.
In sum, the heavy hand of government “intrusion” is just about everywhere. It is an approach that today’s conservative movement, and our coddled and powerful heath care industry would fight tooth and nail.
How about the Singapore HSA model?
Here’s a primer.
And here’s another take.
In sum, the heavy hand of government “intrusion” is just about everywhere. It is an approach that today’s conservative movement, and our coddled and powerful heath care industry would fight tooth and nail.
Of all the ridiculous bullshit emanating from the Republican Senate….
You have to admit they are pretty good at it.
The idea that Trump would, in any way, be chastised by this whole thing defies both common sense and belief. It will only get worse. He will be emboldened.
Once the Senate gets done with this reverse show trial that Stalin would have been proud of, the House should turn right around and impeach the fucker again.
Of all the ridiculous bullshit emanating from the Republican Senate….
You have to admit they are pretty good at it.
The idea that Trump would, in any way, be chastised by this whole thing defies both common sense and belief. It will only get worse. He will be emboldened.
Once the Senate gets done with this reverse show trial that Stalin would have been proud of, the House should turn right around and impeach the fucker again.
The Republican Party will be butchered and slaughtered.
No, they won’t. And nobody here, probably including you, actually wants that.
C’mon man, we all love you, but you need to cut this out.
The Republican Party will be butchered and slaughtered.
No, they won’t. And nobody here, probably including you, actually wants that.
C’mon man, we all love you, but you need to cut this out.
C’mon man, we all love you, but you need to cut this out.
At least be more subtle, like Trump, Pompeo, etc.
C’mon man, we all love you, but you need to cut this out.
At least be more subtle, like Trump, Pompeo, etc.
I could whine that my statements are “metaphors”.
Like this murderous aborting trump faith healing conservative biblical literalist:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/religion/2020/01/26/paula-white-miscarry-metaphor/
I could whine that my statements are “metaphors”.
Like this murderous aborting trump faith healing conservative biblical literalist:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/religion/2020/01/26/paula-white-miscarry-metaphor/
Was this metaphor?
“Whereas the laws of the United States have been for some time past, and now are opposed, and the execution thereof obstructed, in the States of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas, by combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, or by the powers vested in the Marshals by law.
Now, therefore, I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, in virtue of the power in me vested by the Constitution, and the laws, have thought fit to call forth, and hereby do call forth, the militia of the several States of the Union, to the aggregate number of seventy-five thousand, in order to suppress said combinations, and to cause the laws to be duly executed.”
I too possess all the unlimited powers Donald Trump reserves only for himself under the cessation of the rule of law now declared by the U.S. Senate, by combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings.
All of us do.
We can do and say anything we please.
We can end this country now.
Was this metaphor?
“Whereas the laws of the United States have been for some time past, and now are opposed, and the execution thereof obstructed, in the States of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas, by combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, or by the powers vested in the Marshals by law.
Now, therefore, I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, in virtue of the power in me vested by the Constitution, and the laws, have thought fit to call forth, and hereby do call forth, the militia of the several States of the Union, to the aggregate number of seventy-five thousand, in order to suppress said combinations, and to cause the laws to be duly executed.”
I too possess all the unlimited powers Donald Trump reserves only for himself under the cessation of the rule of law now declared by the U.S. Senate, by combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings.
All of us do.
We can do and say anything we please.
We can end this country now.
https://www.mediamatters.org/fox-news/because-fox-news-pompeos-insult-reporter-leads-trump-threatening-npr
https://www.mediamatters.org/fox-news/because-fox-news-pompeos-insult-reporter-leads-trump-threatening-npr
Thanks for your thoughtful reply above, bc.
paying the full cost of healthcare for more people and subsidizing to a great extent the cost for millions of others will be something that will never be taken away and thus it is a step towards single payer-for good or for bad
I’d say that’s not-unlikely, and as an example I’d offer employer-provided insurance, which is how most people with private insurance get it now.
For all its goods or ills, it’s what most people have, so they don’t want to give it up. It seems “free-ish” to them, because they don’t pay out of pocket for at least part of it. It’s what they know, so they don’t want to let go of it.
And so, now we’re largely stuck with it.
I have no particular issue with the IN or Singapore plans, whatever works. I will say that I don’t have high confidence in approaches that rely on market pressures, because the conditions for efficient markets generally don’t exist in the area of health care. And, we have a recent historical experiment in using market forces to reduce the cost of health care – e.g. HMO’s and PPO’s – and whatever their benefits, they did not reduce the cost of health care.
I’d also say that using cost of / access to health care as a way of motivating them to improve their behavior health-wise is not a guaranteed win. I have a tiny amount of exposure to that world, my general impression is that positive motivations are more effective.
Rather than charge them more for health insurance or care if they smoke / don’t lose weight / etc, give them something if they do. It probably nets out about the same, but it feels very different to the recipient.
People don’t like nanny insurance company any more than they like nanny state. Punishment doesn’t usually result in compliance.
Thanks for your thoughtful reply above, bc.
paying the full cost of healthcare for more people and subsidizing to a great extent the cost for millions of others will be something that will never be taken away and thus it is a step towards single payer-for good or for bad
I’d say that’s not-unlikely, and as an example I’d offer employer-provided insurance, which is how most people with private insurance get it now.
For all its goods or ills, it’s what most people have, so they don’t want to give it up. It seems “free-ish” to them, because they don’t pay out of pocket for at least part of it. It’s what they know, so they don’t want to let go of it.
And so, now we’re largely stuck with it.
I have no particular issue with the IN or Singapore plans, whatever works. I will say that I don’t have high confidence in approaches that rely on market pressures, because the conditions for efficient markets generally don’t exist in the area of health care. And, we have a recent historical experiment in using market forces to reduce the cost of health care – e.g. HMO’s and PPO’s – and whatever their benefits, they did not reduce the cost of health care.
I’d also say that using cost of / access to health care as a way of motivating them to improve their behavior health-wise is not a guaranteed win. I have a tiny amount of exposure to that world, my general impression is that positive motivations are more effective.
Rather than charge them more for health insurance or care if they smoke / don’t lose weight / etc, give them something if they do. It probably nets out about the same, but it feels very different to the recipient.
People don’t like nanny insurance company any more than they like nanny state. Punishment doesn’t usually result in compliance.
Rather than charge them more for health insurance or care if they smoke / don’t lose weight / etc, give them something if they do. It probably nets out about the same, but it feels very different to the recipient.
Income tax refunds seem to indicate that. People feel like they’re getting a windfall. Not that they’re just getting back the money they loaned to the government for free.
Rather than charge them more for health insurance or care if they smoke / don’t lose weight / etc, give them something if they do. It probably nets out about the same, but it feels very different to the recipient.
Income tax refunds seem to indicate that. People feel like they’re getting a windfall. Not that they’re just getting back the money they loaned to the government for free.
Regarding health:
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/coronavirus-china-kung-flu/
I’m sorry I didn’t put hedges on in the stock market last week, though I did some selling around the margins.
Also regarding people’s bad habits and personal responsibility: we have a corporate economic order that does its best to addict folks to alcohol, tobacco and crap food.
When called on it, freedom is invoked and THEN the corporations lie, cheat, and obfuscate about their part in the problem, with lots of help from elected filth who circumscribe regulation.
Individuals get stuck holding the bag.
We’re told government may not interfere because unfettered markets are the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, Amen and shut the fuck up.
Witness the tobacco industry. Witness the painkiller industry. Witness the gun industry.
Layered on top of THAT is a health food and supplement industry that also invokes “freedom” and “markets” to bullshit about the positive, untested effects of their products.
Let the hippies at Vitamin Cottage incorporate and they lawyer and Wall Street up like the suits against any questioning of their marketing claims.
Buyer beware? Cripes.
And by the way, the climate change deniers are using the tobacco industry pushback model developed three decades ago to fuck the world.
Citizens Fucking Ununited.
Really, the cloud of horseshit in this country blots out the sun.
Regarding health:
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/coronavirus-china-kung-flu/
I’m sorry I didn’t put hedges on in the stock market last week, though I did some selling around the margins.
Also regarding people’s bad habits and personal responsibility: we have a corporate economic order that does its best to addict folks to alcohol, tobacco and crap food.
When called on it, freedom is invoked and THEN the corporations lie, cheat, and obfuscate about their part in the problem, with lots of help from elected filth who circumscribe regulation.
Individuals get stuck holding the bag.
We’re told government may not interfere because unfettered markets are the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, Amen and shut the fuck up.
Witness the tobacco industry. Witness the painkiller industry. Witness the gun industry.
Layered on top of THAT is a health food and supplement industry that also invokes “freedom” and “markets” to bullshit about the positive, untested effects of their products.
Let the hippies at Vitamin Cottage incorporate and they lawyer and Wall Street up like the suits against any questioning of their marketing claims.
Buyer beware? Cripes.
And by the way, the climate change deniers are using the tobacco industry pushback model developed three decades ago to fuck the world.
Citizens Fucking Ununited.
Really, the cloud of horseshit in this country blots out the sun.
because the conditions for efficient markets generally don’t exist in the area of health care.
And here we are almost 60 years later pounding the pud of the very classical economics that conservatives swear they are sucking the toes of.
Makes one wonder.
because the conditions for efficient markets generally don’t exist in the area of health care.
And here we are almost 60 years later pounding the pud of the very classical economics that conservatives swear they are sucking the toes of.
Makes one wonder.
Bolton.
Sheesh.
Bolton.
Sheesh.
Really, the cloud of horseshit in this country blots out the sun.
Agreed.
Really, the cloud of horseshit in this country blots out the sun.
Agreed.
Bolton.
Is possibly, potentially, open to testifying, but doesn’t want to FUBAR his book deal.
Who remembers this item, from back in November (courtesy of Nigel)?
Not so interested in sharing what he knows with Congress. Happy to spill to the money people.
All about the Benjamins.
Seriously, these are horrible people. Horrible. And all of the incentives are oriented toward attracting horrible people and helping them to thrive and succeed.
Trump is an epiphenomenon. The rot is much, much, much deeper.
Bolton.
Is possibly, potentially, open to testifying, but doesn’t want to FUBAR his book deal.
Who remembers this item, from back in November (courtesy of Nigel)?
Not so interested in sharing what he knows with Congress. Happy to spill to the money people.
All about the Benjamins.
Seriously, these are horrible people. Horrible. And all of the incentives are oriented toward attracting horrible people and helping them to thrive and succeed.
Trump is an epiphenomenon. The rot is much, much, much deeper.
doesn’t want to FUBAR his book deal.
When you know any claim to patriotism on his part, ever at any time, is garbage.
doesn’t want to FUBAR his book deal.
When you know any claim to patriotism on his part, ever at any time, is garbage.
Yeah, it’s about as convincing as the Republican claims that Collins and Murkowski are the “conscience of the Senate”…
OTOH, when villains fall out, they don’t always keep their mouths shut.
And Bolton has a notoriously short fuse.
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/480027-bolton-lawyer-slams-corrupted-white-house-review-process-after-book
A lawyer for former national security adviser John Bolton accused White House officials of leaking details of Bolton’s forthcoming book following a report that the manuscript contained the allegation that President Trump directly tied security aid for Ukraine to the country investigating his political rivals….
As an aside, I’m sure Lin Manuel is absolutely delighted that Bolton has appropriated a Hamilton line for his book title…
Yeah, it’s about as convincing as the Republican claims that Collins and Murkowski are the “conscience of the Senate”…
OTOH, when villains fall out, they don’t always keep their mouths shut.
And Bolton has a notoriously short fuse.
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/480027-bolton-lawyer-slams-corrupted-white-house-review-process-after-book
A lawyer for former national security adviser John Bolton accused White House officials of leaking details of Bolton’s forthcoming book following a report that the manuscript contained the allegation that President Trump directly tied security aid for Ukraine to the country investigating his political rivals….
As an aside, I’m sure Lin Manuel is absolutely delighted that Bolton has appropriated a Hamilton line for his book title…
An optimistic view of the Bolton affair…
https://www.emptywheel.net/2020/01/26/dick-cheneys-apprentice-strikes/
An optimistic view of the Bolton affair…
https://www.emptywheel.net/2020/01/26/dick-cheneys-apprentice-strikes/
When Putin decides to murder Russian dissidents in England, he goes out of his way to make it obvious who’s responsible, by using Polonium-210 or Novichok. Then he denies responsibility. He thus speaks both to credulous supporters who are eager to believe any protestation of his innocence, and to triumphant supporters who celebrate his willingness and ability to do as he pleases.
Trump admires Putin enormously, and is doing the same thing in his own stupid way. No thinking person is supposed to believe his denials. That doesn’t matter to him at all: the point is for him to prove that he can and will shoot a liberal dead on 5th Avenue and proudly get away with it.
When Putin decides to murder Russian dissidents in England, he goes out of his way to make it obvious who’s responsible, by using Polonium-210 or Novichok. Then he denies responsibility. He thus speaks both to credulous supporters who are eager to believe any protestation of his innocence, and to triumphant supporters who celebrate his willingness and ability to do as he pleases.
Trump admires Putin enormously, and is doing the same thing in his own stupid way. No thinking person is supposed to believe his denials. That doesn’t matter to him at all: the point is for him to prove that he can and will shoot a liberal dead on 5th Avenue and proudly get away with it.
Maggie Haberman twerks:
“Per sources, some GOP senators privately pushing White House for information on who at administration had visibility into the manuscript over the last month. Senators feel blindsided”
Oedipus, Helen Keller, Blind Lemon Jefferson, Stevie Wonder, my maternal grandmother, and the Three Blind Mice were blindsided.
The subhuman, vermin conservative republican filth running the Stalinist show trial and 62 million willing tax-hating anti-American deplorable dupes, including whichever Bernie bros voted for fascism, eyes wide open, fucked America.
And now America will fuck them.
Wipe the Republican Party off the face of the Earth, including John Bolton.
Maggie Haberman twerks:
“Per sources, some GOP senators privately pushing White House for information on who at administration had visibility into the manuscript over the last month. Senators feel blindsided”
Oedipus, Helen Keller, Blind Lemon Jefferson, Stevie Wonder, my maternal grandmother, and the Three Blind Mice were blindsided.
The subhuman, vermin conservative republican filth running the Stalinist show trial and 62 million willing tax-hating anti-American deplorable dupes, including whichever Bernie bros voted for fascism, eyes wide open, fucked America.
And now America will fuck them.
Wipe the Republican Party off the face of the Earth, including John Bolton.
First, of course, we must endure martial law and the cancellation of the 2020 elections as trump vermin hold up in the Oval Office suites at Mar-a-Lago, their heavily armed republican paramilitary wings standing sentry outside while assassinating liberal figures around the country, and issue fatwas against their enemies.
Russian troops, under the UN flag, will be welcomed into the State of Texas by the Governor of Texas to quell savage chaos and mayhem.
I can play this game better and longer than any fucking right winger, and if it’s not a game … then game on.
First, of course, we must endure martial law and the cancellation of the 2020 elections as trump vermin hold up in the Oval Office suites at Mar-a-Lago, their heavily armed republican paramilitary wings standing sentry outside while assassinating liberal figures around the country, and issue fatwas against their enemies.
Russian troops, under the UN flag, will be welcomed into the State of Texas by the Governor of Texas to quell savage chaos and mayhem.
I can play this game better and longer than any fucking right winger, and if it’s not a game … then game on.
Senators feel blindsided
Oh, the poor dears.
But you know the refrain…….
Senators feel blindsided
Oh, the poor dears.
But you know the refrain…….
I guess we’ll see if the definition of hearsay can be stretched even further to suggest that Bolton’s knowledge of events isn’t firsthand enough to count as evidence. If so, mental gymnastics might become a new event at this year’s Summer Olympics.
I guess we’ll see if the definition of hearsay can be stretched even further to suggest that Bolton’s knowledge of events isn’t firsthand enough to count as evidence. If so, mental gymnastics might become a new event at this year’s Summer Olympics.
“Disgruntled employee with a book to sell” is going to be doing a lot of work.
“Disgruntled employee with a book to sell” is going to be doing a lot of work.
No, it’s better suited to the Winter Olympics. It’s all about snowing people, after all.
No, it’s better suited to the Winter Olympics. It’s all about snowing people, after all.
“Disgruntled employee with a book to sell” is going to be doing a lot of work.
No, they have quite another excuse prepared…
“The problem with John is that it’s a national security problem,” the president added, indicating executive privilege would apply to Bolton’s testimony. “He knows some of my thoughts. He knows what I think about leaders. What happens if he reveals what I think about a certain leader and it’s not very positive and I have to deal on behalf of the country?”…
Oops, I was wrong…
“There is no way in the world President Trump would say this to John Bolton,” Giuliani tweeted. “It’s a shame that a man will sacrifice his integrity to make a few bucks on a book. No wonder he accomplished so little as National Security Advisor….
“Disgruntled employee with a book to sell” is going to be doing a lot of work.
No, they have quite another excuse prepared…
“The problem with John is that it’s a national security problem,” the president added, indicating executive privilege would apply to Bolton’s testimony. “He knows some of my thoughts. He knows what I think about leaders. What happens if he reveals what I think about a certain leader and it’s not very positive and I have to deal on behalf of the country?”…
Oops, I was wrong…
“There is no way in the world President Trump would say this to John Bolton,” Giuliani tweeted. “It’s a shame that a man will sacrifice his integrity to make a few bucks on a book. No wonder he accomplished so little as National Security Advisor….
wrt Bolton,
“The enemy of my enemy is my friend.”
The guy is out of government and not likely to get back in.
I’m wondering if he leaked it himself, for fear the WH would hold it up until after the election.
wrt Bolton,
“The enemy of my enemy is my friend.”
The guy is out of government and not likely to get back in.
I’m wondering if he leaked it himself, for fear the WH would hold it up until after the election.
The emptywheel post I linked above pretty well suggests as much.
The emptywheel post I linked above pretty well suggests as much.
“What happens if he reveals what I think about a certain leader and it’s not very positive and I have to deal on behalf of the country?…”
Yeah, Rocket Man, Animal Assad, Juan Trump, Sleepy Joe, Crooked Angela Merkel Clinton, and My Jew Netanyahu might go bezeek when they find out.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nicknames_used_by_Donald_Trump#Foreign_leaders
Dese republican vermin are going to go tru sum tings.
Take him out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWpdAR_ldRE
It’s how business is done oveh heah.
It is … what it is.
“What happens if he reveals what I think about a certain leader and it’s not very positive and I have to deal on behalf of the country?…”
Yeah, Rocket Man, Animal Assad, Juan Trump, Sleepy Joe, Crooked Angela Merkel Clinton, and My Jew Netanyahu might go bezeek when they find out.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nicknames_used_by_Donald_Trump#Foreign_leaders
Dese republican vermin are going to go tru sum tings.
Take him out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWpdAR_ldRE
It’s how business is done oveh heah.
It is … what it is.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/romney-collins-bolton-book-trump-witnesses-impeachment-trial
Whore fluffer Mitt Romney takes one dick out of his mouth and puts another one in.
You just have to wait your turn with that sleazeball.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/romney-collins-bolton-book-trump-witnesses-impeachment-trial
Whore fluffer Mitt Romney takes one dick out of his mouth and puts another one in.
You just have to wait your turn with that sleazeball.
With Romney, you just put money on the table over there and unzip.
With Romney, you just put money on the table over there and unzip.
Now Susan Collins, she’s a Madame.
With one pinky raised, she slips the fifty down her decolletage.
Now Susan Collins, she’s a Madame.
With one pinky raised, she slips the fifty down her decolletage.
Four seats flips the Senate. No majority, and McConnell has no power. No majority, and no more Federalist Society judicial conga line.
And, should Trump win, with no majority in the House or Senate, he’s dead in the water. A nullity.
If you have $5, send $5. If you have more, send more.
Four seats flips the Senate. No majority, and McConnell has no power. No majority, and no more Federalist Society judicial conga line.
And, should Trump win, with no majority in the House or Senate, he’s dead in the water. A nullity.
If you have $5, send $5. If you have more, send more.
i think i’ve donated to a dozen races so far this cycle. even Schiff got some, thanks to Donny’s threat yesterday.
i think i’ve donated to a dozen races so far this cycle. even Schiff got some, thanks to Donny’s threat yesterday.
If only people in other countries could (legally) donate – it would be interesting to see if America’s friends spending money to get rid of Trump could outspend its enemies (like Putin) spending money to support him.
If only people in other countries could (legally) donate – it would be interesting to see if America’s friends spending money to get rid of Trump could outspend its enemies (like Putin) spending money to support him.
A little something for those of you who think there are no decent Republican politicians:
https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2020/01/27/column-kevin-faulconer-is-the-gops-best-and-only-hope-to-regain-ground-in-california/
A little something for those of you who think there are no decent Republican politicians:
https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2020/01/27/column-kevin-faulconer-is-the-gops-best-and-only-hope-to-regain-ground-in-california/
wj,
There are a host of moderate to conservative Democrats who hold the same mix of positions. Hell’s bells, Obama was in the thrall of austerianism. He seriously tried to achieve a “Grand Bargain” on the budget with the GOP (gag me with a spoon). Nancy Pelosi is all in for “pay-go” (an utterly bankrupt fiscal approach).
So what makes this guy a Republican?
I’d wager it comes down to sucking up to the business community (tax breaks for ‘entrepeneurs’, who, being exceptional people don’t need them, right? A loathsome hate on unions, especially public sector ones? Rolling back burdensome regulations (i.e., cost shifting)?
But I am just guessing.
wj,
There are a host of moderate to conservative Democrats who hold the same mix of positions. Hell’s bells, Obama was in the thrall of austerianism. He seriously tried to achieve a “Grand Bargain” on the budget with the GOP (gag me with a spoon). Nancy Pelosi is all in for “pay-go” (an utterly bankrupt fiscal approach).
So what makes this guy a Republican?
I’d wager it comes down to sucking up to the business community (tax breaks for ‘entrepeneurs’, who, being exceptional people don’t need them, right? A loathsome hate on unions, especially public sector ones? Rolling back burdensome regulations (i.e., cost shifting)?
But I am just guessing.
Listened to about 5 minutes of the impeachment trial when I was out on an errand.
Apparently, there are some bad people in the Ukraine. Also, Hunter Biden was paid a lot of money by Burisma for not doing a whole lot, and everyone agreed that this created “a strong possibility of the perception of a conflict of interest” for Joe Biden.
Donald who?
Listened to about 5 minutes of the impeachment trial when I was out on an errand.
Apparently, there are some bad people in the Ukraine. Also, Hunter Biden was paid a lot of money by Burisma for not doing a whole lot, and everyone agreed that this created “a strong possibility of the perception of a conflict of interest” for Joe Biden.
Donald who?
strong possibilities of perceptions are criminal corruption, too, my friend.
strong possibilities of perceptions are criminal corruption, too, my friend.
or, present a strong possibility of the perception of it.
In other news, the CEO of GoFundMe tells us that 1 out of 3 dollars raised on their website go to pay for medical expenses.
One of the take-aways from the article:
$1,000, in 30 days. $3 and change a day. Can you scratch $3 and change a day out of your household budget? To pay for a medical emergency?
Half of the people asked said “no can do”.
Markets are roaring. It’s the best economy in the history of nation, if not the world.
Bigly.
How come nobody says “bigly” anymore?
or, present a strong possibility of the perception of it.
In other news, the CEO of GoFundMe tells us that 1 out of 3 dollars raised on their website go to pay for medical expenses.
One of the take-aways from the article:
$1,000, in 30 days. $3 and change a day. Can you scratch $3 and change a day out of your household budget? To pay for a medical emergency?
Half of the people asked said “no can do”.
Markets are roaring. It’s the best economy in the history of nation, if not the world.
Bigly.
How come nobody says “bigly” anymore?
Also – I am seriously the most innumerate dope on the Internets.
Zeros. How the f*** do they work?
$33 and change a day.
Find $1000, in a month, to pay for a medical emergency. Half of the folks asked said “no can do”.
Best economy in the history of the nation.
Also – I am seriously the most innumerate dope on the Internets.
Zeros. How the f*** do they work?
$33 and change a day.
Find $1000, in a month, to pay for a medical emergency. Half of the folks asked said “no can do”.
Best economy in the history of the nation.
Listened to about 5 minutes of the impeachment trial when I was out on an errand.
ditto.
same impression.
what’s fun about the GOP’s defense is that they are making it about Joe Biden. which is exactly Trump’s motive for what he did re: Ukraine.
they’re working Trump’s campaign strategy, during a trial over Trump’s campaign strategy!
do they think we can’t see this?
Listened to about 5 minutes of the impeachment trial when I was out on an errand.
ditto.
same impression.
what’s fun about the GOP’s defense is that they are making it about Joe Biden. which is exactly Trump’s motive for what he did re: Ukraine.
they’re working Trump’s campaign strategy, during a trial over Trump’s campaign strategy!
do they think we can’t see this?
do they think we can’t see this?
we aren’t the intended audience.
do they think we can’t see this?
we aren’t the intended audience.
Also – I am seriously the most innumerate dope on the Internets.
Zeros. How the f*** do they work?
Clearly you have a bright future in the Trump OMB. Or would, if you didn’t feel compelled to correct your errors.
Also – I am seriously the most innumerate dope on the Internets.
Zeros. How the f*** do they work?
Clearly you have a bright future in the Trump OMB. Or would, if you didn’t feel compelled to correct your errors.
I’m in Europe this week (meetings), so I’m getting impeachment news in a clump to start my day, rather than dribbles throughout. Which may impact my perceptions.
But it looks to me like a house of cards collapsing. Is there any defense left? I mean besides ginning up a national security crisis (i.e. war) to try to justify suspending proceedings indefinitely? Preferably before a vote on whether to call witnesses. (Which is more of a strategy than an actual defense.)
Of course, even a suspension suffers from the detail that damning information keeps coming out anyway. But seriously, what else is left?
I’m in Europe this week (meetings), so I’m getting impeachment news in a clump to start my day, rather than dribbles throughout. Which may impact my perceptions.
But it looks to me like a house of cards collapsing. Is there any defense left? I mean besides ginning up a national security crisis (i.e. war) to try to justify suspending proceedings indefinitely? Preferably before a vote on whether to call witnesses. (Which is more of a strategy than an actual defense.)
Of course, even a suspension suffers from the detail that damning information keeps coming out anyway. But seriously, what else is left?
Loved this bit (from the Economist’s daily newsletter):
“Unprepared” — yeah, that sounds like them.
Loved this bit (from the Economist’s daily newsletter):
“Unprepared” — yeah, that sounds like them.
Is there any defense left?
the fact that the Senate GOP is going to acquit no matter what obviates the need for an actual defense.
it’s good to be the cult leader.
Is there any defense left?
the fact that the Senate GOP is going to acquit no matter what obviates the need for an actual defense.
it’s good to be the cult leader.
the fact that the Senate GOP is going to acquit no matter what obviates the need for an actual defense.
Then they could have just stood up and said: “The defense rests.” If they’d done that, they could have gotten their vote before Bolton’s stuff went public.
I have the sneaking suspicion that the defense feels that the outcome is far less certain than it appears to us on the outside. Highly probable still, certainly, (although the odds are dropping). But not as certain as we think. Maybe because they know something we don’t. About the Senators — we know they know stuff we don’t about what evidence of Trump’s guilt could yet surface.
the fact that the Senate GOP is going to acquit no matter what obviates the need for an actual defense.
Then they could have just stood up and said: “The defense rests.” If they’d done that, they could have gotten their vote before Bolton’s stuff went public.
I have the sneaking suspicion that the defense feels that the outcome is far less certain than it appears to us on the outside. Highly probable still, certainly, (although the odds are dropping). But not as certain as we think. Maybe because they know something we don’t. About the Senators — we know they know stuff we don’t about what evidence of Trump’s guilt could yet surface.
wj, I think it’s more likely that the defense team have gotten their instructions
“They said BAD things about me! Very bad things! Now go and hit back at them!”
I still think the Senate should have opted for ‘trial by combat’: Trump vs. Schiff, with baseball bats. To the death.
wj, I think it’s more likely that the defense team have gotten their instructions
“They said BAD things about me! Very bad things! Now go and hit back at them!”
I still think the Senate should have opted for ‘trial by combat’: Trump vs. Schiff, with baseball bats. To the death.
I have the sneaking suspicion that the defense feels that the outcome is far less certain than it appears to us on the outside
that would take 20 GOP Senators. there aren’t even four willing to stand up and demand witnesses.
it’s not a defense, it’s a campaign ad.
I have the sneaking suspicion that the defense feels that the outcome is far less certain than it appears to us on the outside
that would take 20 GOP Senators. there aren’t even four willing to stand up and demand witnesses.
it’s not a defense, it’s a campaign ad.
it’s not a defense, it’s a campaign ad.
This, a thousand times.
Plus the sneering glee of pulling it off, that not-quite-hides just below the serious faces and the manufactured outrage (“they feel blindsided, woe is them).
it’s not a defense, it’s a campaign ad.
This, a thousand times.
Plus the sneering glee of pulling it off, that not-quite-hides just below the serious faces and the manufactured outrage (“they feel blindsided, woe is them).
that would take 20 GOP Senators. there aren’t even four willing to stand up and demand witnesses.
First, it is looking increasingly that there may be 4 (or more) who are willing to accept witnesses. It’s taken an appalling amount of time for them to get there, but it looks like it will happen.
Second, I think that it would be a substantive change in result to get a majority, even if not the necessary 2/3, voting for removal. That might not happen, of course. But I think the defense is thinking that that might well happen — that was what I was trying to say.
I still doubt there will be enough votes for removal. But just losing a majority would be a massive defeat for Trump. Certainly it would be in his mind.
that would take 20 GOP Senators. there aren’t even four willing to stand up and demand witnesses.
First, it is looking increasingly that there may be 4 (or more) who are willing to accept witnesses. It’s taken an appalling amount of time for them to get there, but it looks like it will happen.
Second, I think that it would be a substantive change in result to get a majority, even if not the necessary 2/3, voting for removal. That might not happen, of course. But I think the defense is thinking that that might well happen — that was what I was trying to say.
I still doubt there will be enough votes for removal. But just losing a majority would be a massive defeat for Trump. Certainly it would be in his mind.
The Hunter Biden thing, while it does stink that you can get that much money by virtue of being he VP’s son, actually does make sense. You have an historically corrupt company trying to clean up its image. Sure, having a Biden on your board “looks good” in a very general sense. But, beyond that, you are giving someone a position of authority at your company and making him privy to your company’s activities.
That person can rat you out in a heartbeat to the guy who is in charge of Ukraine affairs and rooting out corruption on behalf of the United States. Having Hunter Biden on the Burisma board actually makes corruption at Burisma far less likely. That’s the goal.
The Hunter Biden thing, while it does stink that you can get that much money by virtue of being he VP’s son, actually does make sense. You have an historically corrupt company trying to clean up its image. Sure, having a Biden on your board “looks good” in a very general sense. But, beyond that, you are giving someone a position of authority at your company and making him privy to your company’s activities.
That person can rat you out in a heartbeat to the guy who is in charge of Ukraine affairs and rooting out corruption on behalf of the United States. Having Hunter Biden on the Burisma board actually makes corruption at Burisma far less likely. That’s the goal.
How many corporate boards/C-suites have people that are vastly overpaid, based on any rational appraisal of what they contribute? It’s not like politician spawn are alone in this particular cesspit of corruption.
Fire ’em all, sez I.
How many corporate boards/C-suites have people that are vastly overpaid, based on any rational appraisal of what they contribute? It’s not like politician spawn are alone in this particular cesspit of corruption.
Fire ’em all, sez I.
Hunter Biden, bad look, blah blah blah, yada yada yada.
that the President of the United States should be personally interested in it, that his personal lawyer should be involved in making a shadow diplomatic effort to ‘investigate’ it, that it should be a cornerstone of the US’s policy towards Ukraine, is absolutely absurd. the matter of one person sitting on a corporate board is not what the person at the top of an organization with 2M+ employees worries about.
the GOP is at least twice as stupid as it assumes everyone else is.
burn it down.
Hunter Biden, bad look, blah blah blah, yada yada yada.
that the President of the United States should be personally interested in it, that his personal lawyer should be involved in making a shadow diplomatic effort to ‘investigate’ it, that it should be a cornerstone of the US’s policy towards Ukraine, is absolutely absurd. the matter of one person sitting on a corporate board is not what the person at the top of an organization with 2M+ employees worries about.
the GOP is at least twice as stupid as it assumes everyone else is.
burn it down.
How many corporate boards/C-suites have people that are vastly overpaid, based on any rational appraisal of what they contribute?
As a first approximation: 100%
Mostly what they contribute is a reliable vote for high CEO salaries. In exchange for the CEO doing the same when he sits on their board.
The better question is, how many boards have as many as 1/3 of their members who actually have something useful to contribute? My guess: damn few.
How many corporate boards/C-suites have people that are vastly overpaid, based on any rational appraisal of what they contribute?
As a first approximation: 100%
Mostly what they contribute is a reliable vote for high CEO salaries. In exchange for the CEO doing the same when he sits on their board.
The better question is, how many boards have as many as 1/3 of their members who actually have something useful to contribute? My guess: damn few.