| The Colbert Report | Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c | |||
| Glenn Beck Attacks Social Justice - James Martin | ||||
| ||||
"I know when I think of Hitler and Stalin, I think of social justice."
Friday, March 19, 2010
Brilliant...
"I know when I think of Hitler and Stalin, I think of social justice."
Thursday, March 18, 2010
The Estimate
The CBO has released its assessment of the health care bill that Congress will vote on this weekend. It will cut the federal deficit by $130 billion in its first 10 years and by $1.2 trillion in its second 10 years. The cost is estimated at $940 billion over 10 years.
This is good news for the Dems as they can now say that it is not only deficit neutral but a deficit reducer. Of course, this doesn't mean much for life inside the cocoon as I'm certain these figures will be ignored and cries of everyone going bankrupt will be heard all over the airwaves.
If they only stepped outside of the cocoon for a bit, they could see that we already are going bankrupt.
This is good news for the Dems as they can now say that it is not only deficit neutral but a deficit reducer. Of course, this doesn't mean much for life inside the cocoon as I'm certain these figures will be ignored and cries of everyone going bankrupt will be heard all over the airwaves.
If they only stepped outside of the cocoon for a bit, they could see that we already are going bankrupt.
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Heatlh Care a Go Go
With all this hubbub about who is and who is not going to vote YES on the health care bill, wouldn't it be nice to know who the reps are that are in question? The New York Times has a handy dandy chart which identifies these folks. Check it out.
I was asked the following question in comments recently.
Tell me M, riding a motorcycle is dangerous. If we really wanted to save lives (and improve everyones health) we wouldn't let anyone ride one. Once you accept that people have a right to make that choice for themselves, they take on the risk that goes with it, no? Same goes with helmet laws - which are really just a fig leaf covering the otherwise naked risk. If you want to protect that person from their own bad decision making - you are arguing for a totalitarian system.
Honestly, I've given this a lot of thought and I don't accept this "if...then" principle. In fact, this is a core problem with how we debate things in our culture right now and it's especially frustrating to me because...ahem..certain people are usually the ones defining the issue with the limp noodle, milk toasters on the "left" sitting...amoeba like...wondering how to respond. This wondering usually turns into months of analysis-paralysis which then leads to people believing that sensible laws are totalitarian. They are not and I completely reject this view.
Riding a motor cycle is dangerous but it has been shown to be not enough of a danger to outlaw it entirely. Drinking and driving is dangerous and there are laws in our country which prohibit doing this because it has led to so much death. This is a law that protects us from bad decision making...does it make it totalitarian? No, it doesn't because it affects someone else more adversely than motorcycle riding. Smoking is another example of this. People bemoan the outlawing of smoking and yet it has been proven that second hand smoke causes cancer. Again, we see someone's bad decision making having an adverse effect on someone else so a law was passed.
Now we get to health care. If someone wants to eat like shit and take shit care of themselves and then die, who cares, right? But now this person's hospital bills are causing my rates to rise by 25 percent. His bad decision making is now having an effect on my life. One must look at all of these issues (drunk driving, smoking, poor eating habits) on a case by case basis and not be so black and white about everything. The question that needs to be asked is: to what degree does this affect other people? How many other people? How adversely?
There are many people in this country who are having a hard time coming to grips with the fact that we live in an interconnected society. Somehow "interconnected" has become totalitarian. Again, that is because we have allowed...some people...to define the picture. These same people having the bizarre notion that we if we somehow become "rugged individualists" that we will be stronger. Aside from the fact that this isn't even close to being feasible anymore, it's simply not American. We are a country that helps other people out-at home or abroad-through both private and public means. Just because the help comes from the government doesn't immediately make it wrong, bad, or evil. This would be an excellent example of how well...a collective of like minded people...have cast the government in a negative light and corporations in a positive one.
Imagine what would happen if President Obama announced that there would be a 25 percent tax hike across the board. People would be outraged and rightfully so. But a 25 percent--40 percent in many cases--raise in insurance rates? Just fine. In fact, it's even OK when ALL corporations do it so each consumer doesn't have any real choice or freedom. Why?
(cue trippy chime music and blurred vision)
Because private industry is beautiful, golden, warm, and translplendant. You will love the Corporation....the corporation is your friend....You will love the Corporation....the corporation is your friend....You will love the Corporation....the corporation is your friend....You will love the Corporation....the corporation is your friend....You do have a choice...you do have freedom...You do have a choice...you do have freedom...You do have a choice...you do have freedom...
I was asked the following question in comments recently.
Tell me M, riding a motorcycle is dangerous. If we really wanted to save lives (and improve everyones health) we wouldn't let anyone ride one. Once you accept that people have a right to make that choice for themselves, they take on the risk that goes with it, no? Same goes with helmet laws - which are really just a fig leaf covering the otherwise naked risk. If you want to protect that person from their own bad decision making - you are arguing for a totalitarian system.
Honestly, I've given this a lot of thought and I don't accept this "if...then" principle. In fact, this is a core problem with how we debate things in our culture right now and it's especially frustrating to me because...ahem..certain people are usually the ones defining the issue with the limp noodle, milk toasters on the "left" sitting...amoeba like...wondering how to respond. This wondering usually turns into months of analysis-paralysis which then leads to people believing that sensible laws are totalitarian. They are not and I completely reject this view.
Riding a motor cycle is dangerous but it has been shown to be not enough of a danger to outlaw it entirely. Drinking and driving is dangerous and there are laws in our country which prohibit doing this because it has led to so much death. This is a law that protects us from bad decision making...does it make it totalitarian? No, it doesn't because it affects someone else more adversely than motorcycle riding. Smoking is another example of this. People bemoan the outlawing of smoking and yet it has been proven that second hand smoke causes cancer. Again, we see someone's bad decision making having an adverse effect on someone else so a law was passed.
Now we get to health care. If someone wants to eat like shit and take shit care of themselves and then die, who cares, right? But now this person's hospital bills are causing my rates to rise by 25 percent. His bad decision making is now having an effect on my life. One must look at all of these issues (drunk driving, smoking, poor eating habits) on a case by case basis and not be so black and white about everything. The question that needs to be asked is: to what degree does this affect other people? How many other people? How adversely?
There are many people in this country who are having a hard time coming to grips with the fact that we live in an interconnected society. Somehow "interconnected" has become totalitarian. Again, that is because we have allowed...some people...to define the picture. These same people having the bizarre notion that we if we somehow become "rugged individualists" that we will be stronger. Aside from the fact that this isn't even close to being feasible anymore, it's simply not American. We are a country that helps other people out-at home or abroad-through both private and public means. Just because the help comes from the government doesn't immediately make it wrong, bad, or evil. This would be an excellent example of how well...a collective of like minded people...have cast the government in a negative light and corporations in a positive one.
Imagine what would happen if President Obama announced that there would be a 25 percent tax hike across the board. People would be outraged and rightfully so. But a 25 percent--40 percent in many cases--raise in insurance rates? Just fine. In fact, it's even OK when ALL corporations do it so each consumer doesn't have any real choice or freedom. Why?
(cue trippy chime music and blurred vision)
Because private industry is beautiful, golden, warm, and translplendant. You will love the Corporation....the corporation is your friend....You will love the Corporation....the corporation is your friend....You will love the Corporation....the corporation is your friend....You will love the Corporation....the corporation is your friend....You do have a choice...you do have freedom...You do have a choice...you do have freedom...You do have a choice...you do have freedom...
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
What Would You Do?
Dear President Obama
I am 50 years old. I was diagnosed with carcinoma in-situ 16 years ago and following my divorce 12 years ago I became self-employed. After my Cobra ran out I was able to find costly, but affordable health insurance. As a responsible individual, I have struggled to maintain my individual coverage and have increased my deductible and out of pocket-limits in an attempt to control my cost and keep my health insurance.
Last year (2009) my insurance premium was increased over 25% even though I increased my deductible and out of pocket to the highest limits available. I paid out over $6075.24 in premiums, $2415.26 for medical care, $225 in co-pays and $1500 for prescriptions. I never reached my deductible of $2500 so the insurance company only paid out a total $935.32 to my providers.
I must repeat, in 2009 my insurance company received $6075.24 in premiums and paid out only $935.32! Incredibly I have just been notified that my premium for next year 2010 has been increased over 40% to $8496.24($708.02 per month)!!!! This is the same insurance company I have been with for over 11 cancer free years!!!
I need your Health reform bill to help me!!! I simply can no longer afford to pay for my health care costs!! Thanks to this incredible premium increase demanded by my insurance company, January will be my last month of insurance.
I live in the house my mother & father built in 1958 and I am so afraid of the possibility I might loose this family heirloom as a result of my being forced to drop my health care insurance. The health insurance industry technically has not denied me insurance directly, but indirectly they have by increasing my costs. They perceive me as becoming a higher risk factor to them despite being a loyal customer. I will never be able to obtain new health insurance due to the lack of real competition.
We are talking about Anthem who apparently has no respect for your attempts to reform the health insurance industry.
Please stay focused in your reform attempts as I and many others are in desperate need of your help.
Sincerely
Natoma Canfield
For those of you who do not support the current health care bill, I have one simple question for you: what would you do?
Monday, March 15, 2010
Finally
My frustration and general downward feelings really haven't abated in terms of the political landscape in this country. In commenting in some of the posts below and over at TSM, I've sadly come to the conclusion that there is no such thing as reality anymore. Even instances like my friend Jill, who told me last Tuesday that she is becoming a Democrat because she sees direct evidence in her life of improvement as a result of President Obama's policies, do little, if anything, to assuage my frustration.
I can see it now....I would tell my friends on the right her story and they would laugh and say she's been brainwashed. Even though there is definable proof that nearly everything the Cult has told her has been wrong, it wouldn't matter. There would be howls of derision, personal attacks, and the insistence that my eyes are wrong.
I've also been giving careful consideration to jettisoning the "Cult" meme from the capsule but now apparently that's caught on as I have heard several Minnesota state legislators saying it over the past week or so in regards to the New Right's approach to the economy and government. It is what it is. I'm not the one behaving that way. When they are ready to return to the honest and fair conservatism of Ronald Reagan, I'll stop calling them a Cult. Until then, they can fall asleep listening to their Glenn and Rush podcasts. But even this line of thought doesn't get me anywhere. For the last few weeks, I've been searching for someone who sees things for what they are...as unbiased as possible in our highly bi polar culture...someone who actually lives in reality.
While I'm not exactly dancing a jig, I think I have found that someone. And his name is David Brooks.
Brooks writes a column for the New York Times. He is considered a right wing tool by the left and a RINO by the right. Ironic, as his latest column pretty much says the same thing...about President Obama.
He starts off with a very important comparison of the criticism of President Obama. In a nutshell, this is it.
For the left, President Obama is
And finally, you’ll notice that both views distort reality. They tell you more about the information cocoons that partisans live in these days than about Obama himself.
Thank the Lord. Someone has finally got the balls to say it. Make no mistake about it. This is true of ALL of them-left and right-and even of yours truly at times. Perhaps part of my frustration is that I am finally breaking out of my cocoon.
This is exactly why my gym friend Nancy's mind will "never be changed." She lives in an information cocoon that distorts reality and tells her what she wants to here. This is why my friend Ralph now thinks that Barack Obama is a stooge of the banks and Goldman Sachs. He lives in the information cocoon that is the seriously flawed site, The Democratic Underground.
Brooks goes on.
The fact is, Obama is as he always has been, a center-left pragmatic reformer. Every time he tries to articulate a grand philosophy — from his book “The Audacity of Hope” to his joint-session health care speech last September — he always describes a moderately activist government restrained by a sense of trade-offs. He always uses the same on-the-one-hand-on-the-other sentence structure. Government should address problems without interfering with the dynamism of the market.
Exactly. Fucking. Right. And true of myself as well. I'm constantly painted as a "perfect example of the Left" by nearly everyone at TSM despite my various writings to the contrary. I am vilified by the left as a war monger because of my support for the effort in AfPak as well as my views on Israel. I've been taken to the mat a half a dozen times in the last few weeks by the "No Nukes" crowd as I have voiced my support for President Obama's fledgling nuclear program. Worse still, my official "leftist" party card has been now thoroughly burned by the fervents for my recent remarks regarding Ronald Reagan and innovation (courtesy of the Manzi article).
Continuing with Brooks.
Liberals are wrong to call him weak and indecisive. He’s just not always pursuing their aims. Conservatives are wrong to call him a big-government liberal. That’s just not a fair reading of his agenda.
Here is where we are going to start interfering with the comfortable cocoons. Sorry, caterpillars!
Take health care. He has pushed a program that expands coverage, creates exchanges and moderately tinkers with the status quo — too moderately to restrain costs. To call this an orthodox liberal plan is an absurdity. It more closely resembles the center-left deals cut by Tom Daschle and Bob Dole, or Ted Kennedy and Mitt Romney. Obama has pushed this program with a tenacity unmatched in modern political history; with more tenacity than Bill Clinton pushed his health care plan or George W. Bush pushed Social Security reform
He's right...again. Everyone in the Cult thinks that it's a government take over of health care. They are wrong. It's simply an increase in much needed regulation. I spent last night talking with my brother in law after a family dinner. He works in the insurance industry. I asked him if his company was worried about losing money. "Nope," he said. "Why?" I asked. "Because all this bill does is increase our customer base to the point where any rates that are adjusted due to regulation will be made up for by an increase in customers," he answered. "But what about all those people that say that the government will drive insurance companies out of business and/or drive up costs?" I asked.
"They're wrong," he answered. Oh, and he's a Republican, btw, who has thankfully left his cocoon.
Take education. Obama has taken on a Democratic constituency, the teachers’ unions, with a courage not seen since George W. Bush took on the anti-immigration forces in his own party. In a remarkable speech on March 1, he went straight at the guardians of the status quo by calling for the removal of failing teachers in failing schools. Obama has been the most determined education reformer in the modern presidency.
I applauded these remarks. Things are going to change even more and it's going to be great. Stay tuned!
Take foreign policy. To the consternation of many on the left, Obama has continued about 80 percent of the policies of the second Bush term. Obama conducted a long review of the Afghan policy and was genuinely moved by the evidence. He has emerged as a liberal hawk, pursuing victory in Iraq and adopting an Afghan surge that has already utterly transformed the momentum in that war. The Taliban is now in retreat and its leaders are being assassinated or captured at a steady rate.
The silence on this issue on both sides is deafening. Where's our sense of patriotism and rallying behind the president in this time of conflict? The left is just pissed off that he is over there at all and the right can't stand the fact that they can't paint him as weak.
Take finance. Obama and Tim Geithner are vilified on the left as craven to Wall Street and on the right as clueless bureaucrats who know nothing about how markets function. But they have tried with halting success to find a center-left set of restraints to provide some stability to market operations.
This would be the only part on which I disagree. Just because Geithner is one of the few people who knows what's going on in the financial industry, doesn't mean he gets a free pass for his fuck ups.
In a sensible country, people would see Obama as a president trying to define a modern brand of moderate progressivism. In a sensible country, Obama would be able to clearly define this project without fear of offending the people he needs to get legislation passed. But we don’t live in that country. We live in a country in which many people live in information cocoons in which they only talk to members of their own party and read blogs of their own sect. They come away with perceptions fundamentally at odds with reality, fundamentally misunderstanding the man in the Oval Office.
We DON'T live in that country. So, I guess my frustration is going to be seemingly never ending. Of course, none of what Brooks is saying here is going to make a bit of difference. After all he's a right wing tool. Or a RINO...depending on the cocoon in which you reside.
At least I take comfort in the fact that there is at least one other person out there who lives in reality.
I can see it now....I would tell my friends on the right her story and they would laugh and say she's been brainwashed. Even though there is definable proof that nearly everything the Cult has told her has been wrong, it wouldn't matter. There would be howls of derision, personal attacks, and the insistence that my eyes are wrong.
I've also been giving careful consideration to jettisoning the "Cult" meme from the capsule but now apparently that's caught on as I have heard several Minnesota state legislators saying it over the past week or so in regards to the New Right's approach to the economy and government. It is what it is. I'm not the one behaving that way. When they are ready to return to the honest and fair conservatism of Ronald Reagan, I'll stop calling them a Cult. Until then, they can fall asleep listening to their Glenn and Rush podcasts. But even this line of thought doesn't get me anywhere. For the last few weeks, I've been searching for someone who sees things for what they are...as unbiased as possible in our highly bi polar culture...someone who actually lives in reality.
While I'm not exactly dancing a jig, I think I have found that someone. And his name is David Brooks.
Brooks writes a column for the New York Times. He is considered a right wing tool by the left and a RINO by the right. Ironic, as his latest column pretty much says the same thing...about President Obama.
He starts off with a very important comparison of the criticism of President Obama. In a nutshell, this is it.
For the left, President Obama is
- Indecisive
- Overly Intellectual
- A Weak Fighter
- Letting the Cult dominate the debate
- Too Compromising
- A Big Government Liberal
- Ruthless, Chicago style politics
- Arrogant
- Condescending
- Adolph Hitler
And finally, you’ll notice that both views distort reality. They tell you more about the information cocoons that partisans live in these days than about Obama himself.
Thank the Lord. Someone has finally got the balls to say it. Make no mistake about it. This is true of ALL of them-left and right-and even of yours truly at times. Perhaps part of my frustration is that I am finally breaking out of my cocoon.
This is exactly why my gym friend Nancy's mind will "never be changed." She lives in an information cocoon that distorts reality and tells her what she wants to here. This is why my friend Ralph now thinks that Barack Obama is a stooge of the banks and Goldman Sachs. He lives in the information cocoon that is the seriously flawed site, The Democratic Underground.
Brooks goes on.
The fact is, Obama is as he always has been, a center-left pragmatic reformer. Every time he tries to articulate a grand philosophy — from his book “The Audacity of Hope” to his joint-session health care speech last September — he always describes a moderately activist government restrained by a sense of trade-offs. He always uses the same on-the-one-hand-on-the-other sentence structure. Government should address problems without interfering with the dynamism of the market.
Exactly. Fucking. Right. And true of myself as well. I'm constantly painted as a "perfect example of the Left" by nearly everyone at TSM despite my various writings to the contrary. I am vilified by the left as a war monger because of my support for the effort in AfPak as well as my views on Israel. I've been taken to the mat a half a dozen times in the last few weeks by the "No Nukes" crowd as I have voiced my support for President Obama's fledgling nuclear program. Worse still, my official "leftist" party card has been now thoroughly burned by the fervents for my recent remarks regarding Ronald Reagan and innovation (courtesy of the Manzi article).
Continuing with Brooks.
Liberals are wrong to call him weak and indecisive. He’s just not always pursuing their aims. Conservatives are wrong to call him a big-government liberal. That’s just not a fair reading of his agenda.
Here is where we are going to start interfering with the comfortable cocoons. Sorry, caterpillars!
Take health care. He has pushed a program that expands coverage, creates exchanges and moderately tinkers with the status quo — too moderately to restrain costs. To call this an orthodox liberal plan is an absurdity. It more closely resembles the center-left deals cut by Tom Daschle and Bob Dole, or Ted Kennedy and Mitt Romney. Obama has pushed this program with a tenacity unmatched in modern political history; with more tenacity than Bill Clinton pushed his health care plan or George W. Bush pushed Social Security reform
He's right...again. Everyone in the Cult thinks that it's a government take over of health care. They are wrong. It's simply an increase in much needed regulation. I spent last night talking with my brother in law after a family dinner. He works in the insurance industry. I asked him if his company was worried about losing money. "Nope," he said. "Why?" I asked. "Because all this bill does is increase our customer base to the point where any rates that are adjusted due to regulation will be made up for by an increase in customers," he answered. "But what about all those people that say that the government will drive insurance companies out of business and/or drive up costs?" I asked.
"They're wrong," he answered. Oh, and he's a Republican, btw, who has thankfully left his cocoon.
Take education. Obama has taken on a Democratic constituency, the teachers’ unions, with a courage not seen since George W. Bush took on the anti-immigration forces in his own party. In a remarkable speech on March 1, he went straight at the guardians of the status quo by calling for the removal of failing teachers in failing schools. Obama has been the most determined education reformer in the modern presidency.
I applauded these remarks. Things are going to change even more and it's going to be great. Stay tuned!
Take foreign policy. To the consternation of many on the left, Obama has continued about 80 percent of the policies of the second Bush term. Obama conducted a long review of the Afghan policy and was genuinely moved by the evidence. He has emerged as a liberal hawk, pursuing victory in Iraq and adopting an Afghan surge that has already utterly transformed the momentum in that war. The Taliban is now in retreat and its leaders are being assassinated or captured at a steady rate.
The silence on this issue on both sides is deafening. Where's our sense of patriotism and rallying behind the president in this time of conflict? The left is just pissed off that he is over there at all and the right can't stand the fact that they can't paint him as weak.
Take finance. Obama and Tim Geithner are vilified on the left as craven to Wall Street and on the right as clueless bureaucrats who know nothing about how markets function. But they have tried with halting success to find a center-left set of restraints to provide some stability to market operations.
This would be the only part on which I disagree. Just because Geithner is one of the few people who knows what's going on in the financial industry, doesn't mean he gets a free pass for his fuck ups.
In a sensible country, people would see Obama as a president trying to define a modern brand of moderate progressivism. In a sensible country, Obama would be able to clearly define this project without fear of offending the people he needs to get legislation passed. But we don’t live in that country. We live in a country in which many people live in information cocoons in which they only talk to members of their own party and read blogs of their own sect. They come away with perceptions fundamentally at odds with reality, fundamentally misunderstanding the man in the Oval Office.
We DON'T live in that country. So, I guess my frustration is going to be seemingly never ending. Of course, none of what Brooks is saying here is going to make a bit of difference. After all he's a right wing tool. Or a RINO...depending on the cocoon in which you reside.
At least I take comfort in the fact that there is at least one other person out there who lives in reality.
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Yep
In response to Glenn Beck's call for people to leave churches that preach social justice, a friend of mine just wrote this:
This epitomizes what many racists believe, that social equality means white males will somehow be forced to the bottom of our social hierarchy and be subjugated in the same way others have been subjugated. I would like to think that even a moron like Beck would be better than that. I'd like to think that the Constitutionally protected justice he claims to support with every fiber of his being would include, as the Constitution itself says, all people.
This proves me wrong.
It sure does, Vince. It sure does.
This epitomizes what many racists believe, that social equality means white males will somehow be forced to the bottom of our social hierarchy and be subjugated in the same way others have been subjugated. I would like to think that even a moron like Beck would be better than that. I'd like to think that the Constitutionally protected justice he claims to support with every fiber of his being would include, as the Constitution itself says, all people.
This proves me wrong.
It sure does, Vince. It sure does.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Watch Glenn Beck
Or at least you should have yesterday with former Congressmen Eric Massa on for the full hour. As Beck strained to get Massa to admit massive liberal conspiracies, the former New York Congressmen wouldn't bite. Instead, Mr. Massa proceeded to speak in a language that only he understood. Not even Beck knew what to think and, to his credit, said at the end of the show that he felt like he "wasted our time."
Meanwhile, Rush had the following to say recently:
My guess in even in Canada and even in the UK, doctors have opted out. And once they’ve opted, they can’t see anybody Medicare, Medicaid, or what will become the exchanges. They have to have a clientele of private patients that will pay them a retainer and it’ll be a very small practice. I don’t know if that’s been outlawed in the Senate bill. I don’t know. I’ll just tell you this, if this passes and it’s five years from now and all that stuff gets implemented — I am leaving the country. I’ll go to Costa Rica.
He has since clarified his statement, saying that he would go there for private medical care. I find this to be quite interesting considering that the Costa Rican health care system is largely run by the government. It is a policy that operates under the notion that everyone should have health care at an equal rate. Private insurance is virtually nonexistent. Check out this American Journal for Public Health report for more information.
But he is smart in going there. Life expectancy, in the Americas, is second only to Canada at 78 years old. But wait! I thought that people in Canada had to wait in long lines or for months for treatment and the government just lets them die. Ah well, I guess I shouldn't believe what my eyes are telling me.
Double meanwhile, we have Liz Cheney running around saying that lawyers in the DoJ are Al Qaeda sympathizers if they defend detainees. Taking issue with this are several on the right including Lindsey Graham and Ken Starr. One has to wonder if this new found public support the right is enjoying will last at all with all of these latest shenanigans.
No worries, though. They can always fall back on this.
Meanwhile, Rush had the following to say recently:
My guess in even in Canada and even in the UK, doctors have opted out. And once they’ve opted, they can’t see anybody Medicare, Medicaid, or what will become the exchanges. They have to have a clientele of private patients that will pay them a retainer and it’ll be a very small practice. I don’t know if that’s been outlawed in the Senate bill. I don’t know. I’ll just tell you this, if this passes and it’s five years from now and all that stuff gets implemented — I am leaving the country. I’ll go to Costa Rica.
He has since clarified his statement, saying that he would go there for private medical care. I find this to be quite interesting considering that the Costa Rican health care system is largely run by the government. It is a policy that operates under the notion that everyone should have health care at an equal rate. Private insurance is virtually nonexistent. Check out this American Journal for Public Health report for more information.
But he is smart in going there. Life expectancy, in the Americas, is second only to Canada at 78 years old. But wait! I thought that people in Canada had to wait in long lines or for months for treatment and the government just lets them die. Ah well, I guess I shouldn't believe what my eyes are telling me.
Double meanwhile, we have Liz Cheney running around saying that lawyers in the DoJ are Al Qaeda sympathizers if they defend detainees. Taking issue with this are several on the right including Lindsey Graham and Ken Starr. One has to wonder if this new found public support the right is enjoying will last at all with all of these latest shenanigans.
No worries, though. They can always fall back on this.
Tuesday, March 09, 2010
News On The March!
I've received too many emais and requests on this story not to comment on it. Rather than play the game of "Gotcha!" as the Cult does all the time, I'm honestly curious as to why this is excused.
Calgary audience fans of former U.S. VP candidate Sarah Palin? You betcha!
The vocal opponent of health care reform in the U.S. steered largely clear of the topic except to reveal a tidbit about her life growing up not far from Whitehorse. "We used to hustle over the border for health care we received in Canada," she said. "And I think now, isn't that ironic."
Where's the piling on and heaping of cries of dissent? I guess it's OK when she does it.
My favorite quote from the article was this one.
Stephanie Hansen, 18, who wore a pin with Palin's face, could barely contain her excitement. She gushed that she felt out of place among the much older audience. "I love it, I'm really glad that I came. It was really enlightening." She admitted she didn't know a lot about Palin's politics, but said she loves her nonetheless.
I guess our neighbors to the north really do like to emulate us! And congrats to Ms. Palin for achieving her goal in life thanks several million Americans. It's not every day that people get to realize their dream of being a celebrity/media personality.
Next......!
Check out this photo, courtesy of Zombie Girl
What blows me away (in addition to the dichotomy of an anti war sign next to this one), is the desperation. I thought public opinion had turned against him? Maybe this is a photo from last summer but still...
And I'm REALLY wondering what happened to all the screeds against protests? Remember when the Cult yelled, screamed and stomped their feet about Nancy Sheehan and the like? They bemoaned the "professional protester" and now we have the Tea Party.
Ah, well...remember folks...It's not ________ when they do it!
Calgary audience fans of former U.S. VP candidate Sarah Palin? You betcha!
The vocal opponent of health care reform in the U.S. steered largely clear of the topic except to reveal a tidbit about her life growing up not far from Whitehorse. "We used to hustle over the border for health care we received in Canada," she said. "And I think now, isn't that ironic."
Where's the piling on and heaping of cries of dissent? I guess it's OK when she does it.
My favorite quote from the article was this one.
Stephanie Hansen, 18, who wore a pin with Palin's face, could barely contain her excitement. She gushed that she felt out of place among the much older audience. "I love it, I'm really glad that I came. It was really enlightening." She admitted she didn't know a lot about Palin's politics, but said she loves her nonetheless.
I guess our neighbors to the north really do like to emulate us! And congrats to Ms. Palin for achieving her goal in life thanks several million Americans. It's not every day that people get to realize their dream of being a celebrity/media personality.
Next......!
Check out this photo, courtesy of Zombie GirlWhat blows me away (in addition to the dichotomy of an anti war sign next to this one), is the desperation. I thought public opinion had turned against him? Maybe this is a photo from last summer but still...
And I'm REALLY wondering what happened to all the screeds against protests? Remember when the Cult yelled, screamed and stomped their feet about Nancy Sheehan and the like? They bemoaned the "professional protester" and now we have the Tea Party.
Ah, well...remember folks...It's not ________ when they do it!
Monday, March 08, 2010
Say It and (poof! like magic) It's True!
My decided lack of posting has prompted emails, a few calls, and a concerned last in line who, with those loving and puppy dog eyes of his, asked me in person on Saturday night what the REAL reason was as to why I was not posting as much last week. Truth be told, it is just for the reason I detailed on here. I'm really having a difficult time, for the most part, seeing the point in having reasonable discussions with conservatives these days. Take, for example, the issue of civilian trials vs. military tribunals for hirabis. It's just another example of the Cult in action.
They will tell you that military tribunals are the ONLY effective way to deal with hirabis. Civilian courts are a mockery and are too good for these murderers. Besides, some lawyer will probably get 'em off and before long they'll be walking the streets and ready to kill...Kill....KILL!!!!!
After the blood lust has retreated slightly from their eyes, I respond by asking them a question. "How many hirabis have been tried in military tribunals to completion?" Their answer varies, depending upon the person, from several dozen to hundreds. This is incorrect. The actual answer is three.
Now, only one of the three (Ali Hamza Ahmad Suliman al Bahlul, a Yemeni) is serving a life sentence down at Gitmo. The second, David Hicks, plead guilty to providing material support to terrorism and received a sentence of seven years’ confinement. But a period of six years and three months was suspended and he was released. He is now free and living in Australia after serving the other nine months there. The third, Salim Ahmed Hamdan, plead guilty to providing material support to terrorism. This was in 2008 and he was sentenced to five years in prison. But he had already served most of that time at Gitmo so he was released to Yemen to finish and now he is free as well.
Compare this to the 174-523 civilian trial cases (the number has a range depending upon how you want to define "terrorism") that have ended in convictions over the last decade. Of these cases, 25 have been released, some of which simply served their time. In looking at these numbers, one would think that civilian courts would be the way to go, not just for conviction rates but for sheer expediency.
But not for the Cult. Oh no. If they say it, then (poof! like magic), it is now true. Show them the facts regarding military tribunals (direct from the DOD) and it still won't matter. The military is the only way to go and fuck you commie for thinking otherwise. It's basically like talking to Colonel Flagg. And this would be why I haven't posted much lately. This kind of denial...it's pathological...and so frustrating to deal with that these days I really can't take it anymore. It gets worse every day.
A recent visit to the gym further cemented this feeling. A new friend (we'll call her Nancy) and I were discussing health care. She is very conservative and is completely convinced that if it passes, we will have a socialist government. I explained to her that there is no public option in the bill. She informed that it's coming next. I reiterated how that it is not in the bill. It didn't matter...it was still coming and Obama-Reid-Pelosi were ready to pounce just like they were on the guns.
After hearing her deride the Manzi article (the social cohesion part) as being psycho bullshit that will further put us in a welfare state, I was completely at a loss. She went on to accuse me of being ultar liberal and a secret socialist. As I tried to explain to her that a recent article she sent me was fear mongering propaganda and how exactly it was just that (the word "threat" is mentioned in juxtaposition to reconciliation as you can clearly see), she then accused me of being brainwashed and drinking Kool Aid. So, again we see items 1 and 6 on my list of characteristics of being in a Cult.
1. Quickly withdraw into the group and distrust the outside world.
6. Accuse people outside of the cult of being brainwashed and/or in a cult.
While I'm certain this will elicit complaints, not only from my colleagues on the right but the left as well, that I am being too harsh...narrow minded...judgmental and that accusing them of being in a cult isn't helpful, I don't really see any alternative. If someone has any other ideas, I'm all ears.
The only one that I have come up with is to completely change the tenor of my posts or possibly not even engage in discussions like this any longer because the perception of these folks is so far off that I am monumentally dumbfounded. I guess I just have to face the fact that I can't help them.
I don't think anyone can. And that makes me really fucking sad.
They will tell you that military tribunals are the ONLY effective way to deal with hirabis. Civilian courts are a mockery and are too good for these murderers. Besides, some lawyer will probably get 'em off and before long they'll be walking the streets and ready to kill...Kill....KILL!!!!!
After the blood lust has retreated slightly from their eyes, I respond by asking them a question. "How many hirabis have been tried in military tribunals to completion?" Their answer varies, depending upon the person, from several dozen to hundreds. This is incorrect. The actual answer is three.
Now, only one of the three (Ali Hamza Ahmad Suliman al Bahlul, a Yemeni) is serving a life sentence down at Gitmo. The second, David Hicks, plead guilty to providing material support to terrorism and received a sentence of seven years’ confinement. But a period of six years and three months was suspended and he was released. He is now free and living in Australia after serving the other nine months there. The third, Salim Ahmed Hamdan, plead guilty to providing material support to terrorism. This was in 2008 and he was sentenced to five years in prison. But he had already served most of that time at Gitmo so he was released to Yemen to finish and now he is free as well.
Compare this to the 174-523 civilian trial cases (the number has a range depending upon how you want to define "terrorism") that have ended in convictions over the last decade. Of these cases, 25 have been released, some of which simply served their time. In looking at these numbers, one would think that civilian courts would be the way to go, not just for conviction rates but for sheer expediency.
But not for the Cult. Oh no. If they say it, then (poof! like magic), it is now true. Show them the facts regarding military tribunals (direct from the DOD) and it still won't matter. The military is the only way to go and fuck you commie for thinking otherwise. It's basically like talking to Colonel Flagg. And this would be why I haven't posted much lately. This kind of denial...it's pathological...and so frustrating to deal with that these days I really can't take it anymore. It gets worse every day.
A recent visit to the gym further cemented this feeling. A new friend (we'll call her Nancy) and I were discussing health care. She is very conservative and is completely convinced that if it passes, we will have a socialist government. I explained to her that there is no public option in the bill. She informed that it's coming next. I reiterated how that it is not in the bill. It didn't matter...it was still coming and Obama-Reid-Pelosi were ready to pounce just like they were on the guns.
After hearing her deride the Manzi article (the social cohesion part) as being psycho bullshit that will further put us in a welfare state, I was completely at a loss. She went on to accuse me of being ultar liberal and a secret socialist. As I tried to explain to her that a recent article she sent me was fear mongering propaganda and how exactly it was just that (the word "threat" is mentioned in juxtaposition to reconciliation as you can clearly see), she then accused me of being brainwashed and drinking Kool Aid. So, again we see items 1 and 6 on my list of characteristics of being in a Cult.
1. Quickly withdraw into the group and distrust the outside world.
6. Accuse people outside of the cult of being brainwashed and/or in a cult.
While I'm certain this will elicit complaints, not only from my colleagues on the right but the left as well, that I am being too harsh...narrow minded...judgmental and that accusing them of being in a cult isn't helpful, I don't really see any alternative. If someone has any other ideas, I'm all ears.
The only one that I have come up with is to completely change the tenor of my posts or possibly not even engage in discussions like this any longer because the perception of these folks is so far off that I am monumentally dumbfounded. I guess I just have to face the fact that I can't help them.
I don't think anyone can. And that makes me really fucking sad.
Saturday, March 06, 2010
What to Choose....
This year, the Motion Picture of Association of America expanded the Best Picture nominations from five choices to ten. As many of you know, I do like to try to see all of the BP Noms so I have been quite the film attendee these last few weeks. Without further adieu, here are my takes on each of the nominees.
The Blind Side
I just got back from seeing this film. It tells the story of Michael Oher, current right tackle of the Baltimore Ravens, and how he overcame great adversity to be the star he is today. Sandra Bullock stars as Oher's foster mom and, aside from looking schmokin' hot the entire film, delivers and excellent performance. It's a good film but very Karate Kid-ish in several parts.
Avatar
While there is no doubt that this film is visually stunning, the plot is on the thin side. And, of course, very predictable. Many have called this the "Star Wars" of this generation. I have one word for people who have this in their head.
No.
District 9
Loads of shit blowing up...aliens...humans and a poignant message to boot? This is a very good film but when placed next to some others on this list, it's not a Best Picture. Many of my friends went ga ga over the slavery message but I wasn't all that gooey eyed over what is clearly a work of fiction. Perhaps some of them need to pick up a history book for a little dose of reality.
An Education
1962. London. Hot Brit Chick. One would think that this would be my choice but, again, it's just too simple of a plot. There is a great exchange between Carey Mulligan (the previously mentioned hot Brit chick) and Emma Thompson on the topic of Jewish people and Jesus, though, that alone is worth the price of admission
A Serious Man
Just a fantastic film especially for those who like the song "Somebody to Love" by Jefferson Airplane which is played about a dozen times throughout the story. The Coen Brothers homage to their childhood in St Louis Park, Minnesota which was, in fact, filmed here in my state. Filled with all the usual Coen cheer:)
Up
The first 10 minutes of the film are extraordinary...a dagger of pure pathos. But then we segue into the usual journey that leads to redemption fare that makes up virtually all animated features these days. Honestly, not even in my top five of this list.
Up in the Air
Jason Reitman, the director of this film as well as Juno and Thank You For Not Smoking, has become the storyteller du jour in Tinsel Town these days and it certainly is not without reason. His pacing and style are excellent and Clooney, as always, is just fucking gorgeous. I take great comfort in the fact that he is pushing 50 and still looks as good as he does. It gives me hope.
Inglorious Bastards
I love Tarrentino. He's just money. Period. Any thing he touches, it turns to gold. This WWII Jewish revenge flick is so wonderful I could probably write a novel about it. Christopher Waltz is just fantastic and the scene in the basement bar should be studied in every single storytelling class for the rest of time under the heading How To Build Tension. Brad Pitt, as always, is mega and the end is so crazy I laughed for hours afterward. In fact, I'm chuckling right now as I write this as I still can't believe what he did to resolved the story.
This film is in my top three of this list.
Precious
My favorite of the ten but sadly the one that won't win. It's dark, depressing, and all too real. If you want to see the failure of our culture on as many levels as you can imagine, go and see this film. The performances are extraordinary. Gabourey Sidibe is amazing in the lead and Mo'Nique, as her mother, is just chilling...the nightmare of any social services worker and the rock bottom example of a parent.
Be warned that if you decide to see this film it will forever alter you. Quite frankly, it's almost too much.
The Hurt Locker
My prediction for the winner tomorrow night. It's got the mo and it has the story. Jeremy Renner is fantastic as bomb disposal officer in Iraq. I have spoken to several people who served in Iraq and AfPak and they assure me that this is EXACTLY what it is like. The tension and anxiety is almost unbearable at points. I could feel my heart pounding in my chest as they came upon each new site looking for IEDs. The camera work is stark..graphic...and perfectly barren. There's a shot at the end...I don't want to give away what happens...but will talk about it in comments if anyone else has seen it.
So, how about you? What are your picks?
The Blind Side
I just got back from seeing this film. It tells the story of Michael Oher, current right tackle of the Baltimore Ravens, and how he overcame great adversity to be the star he is today. Sandra Bullock stars as Oher's foster mom and, aside from looking schmokin' hot the entire film, delivers and excellent performance. It's a good film but very Karate Kid-ish in several parts.
Avatar
While there is no doubt that this film is visually stunning, the plot is on the thin side. And, of course, very predictable. Many have called this the "Star Wars" of this generation. I have one word for people who have this in their head.
No.
District 9
Loads of shit blowing up...aliens...humans and a poignant message to boot? This is a very good film but when placed next to some others on this list, it's not a Best Picture. Many of my friends went ga ga over the slavery message but I wasn't all that gooey eyed over what is clearly a work of fiction. Perhaps some of them need to pick up a history book for a little dose of reality.
An Education
1962. London. Hot Brit Chick. One would think that this would be my choice but, again, it's just too simple of a plot. There is a great exchange between Carey Mulligan (the previously mentioned hot Brit chick) and Emma Thompson on the topic of Jewish people and Jesus, though, that alone is worth the price of admission
A Serious Man
Just a fantastic film especially for those who like the song "Somebody to Love" by Jefferson Airplane which is played about a dozen times throughout the story. The Coen Brothers homage to their childhood in St Louis Park, Minnesota which was, in fact, filmed here in my state. Filled with all the usual Coen cheer:)
Up
The first 10 minutes of the film are extraordinary...a dagger of pure pathos. But then we segue into the usual journey that leads to redemption fare that makes up virtually all animated features these days. Honestly, not even in my top five of this list.
Up in the Air
Jason Reitman, the director of this film as well as Juno and Thank You For Not Smoking, has become the storyteller du jour in Tinsel Town these days and it certainly is not without reason. His pacing and style are excellent and Clooney, as always, is just fucking gorgeous. I take great comfort in the fact that he is pushing 50 and still looks as good as he does. It gives me hope.
Inglorious Bastards
I love Tarrentino. He's just money. Period. Any thing he touches, it turns to gold. This WWII Jewish revenge flick is so wonderful I could probably write a novel about it. Christopher Waltz is just fantastic and the scene in the basement bar should be studied in every single storytelling class for the rest of time under the heading How To Build Tension. Brad Pitt, as always, is mega and the end is so crazy I laughed for hours afterward. In fact, I'm chuckling right now as I write this as I still can't believe what he did to resolved the story.
This film is in my top three of this list.
Precious
My favorite of the ten but sadly the one that won't win. It's dark, depressing, and all too real. If you want to see the failure of our culture on as many levels as you can imagine, go and see this film. The performances are extraordinary. Gabourey Sidibe is amazing in the lead and Mo'Nique, as her mother, is just chilling...the nightmare of any social services worker and the rock bottom example of a parent.
Be warned that if you decide to see this film it will forever alter you. Quite frankly, it's almost too much.
The Hurt Locker
My prediction for the winner tomorrow night. It's got the mo and it has the story. Jeremy Renner is fantastic as bomb disposal officer in Iraq. I have spoken to several people who served in Iraq and AfPak and they assure me that this is EXACTLY what it is like. The tension and anxiety is almost unbearable at points. I could feel my heart pounding in my chest as they came upon each new site looking for IEDs. The camera work is stark..graphic...and perfectly barren. There's a shot at the end...I don't want to give away what happens...but will talk about it in comments if anyone else has seen it.
So, how about you? What are your picks?
Friday, March 05, 2010
The Decided Lack of a Litany
I haven't felt much like posting these last few days. School has been busy but that's not really the reason. I go through phases like this where I'm just tired of all of the lying that goes on with the Cult. In the past week, there has been so much complete dishonesty (hirabi trials, health care, climate change) that I'm too stunned to write anything. Actually, it makes me terribly sad that people believe them.
Tomorrow, I'll put up my take on the Oscars. Hopefully, a little break from the bullshit will do me some good.
Tomorrow, I'll put up my take on the Oscars. Hopefully, a little break from the bullshit will do me some good.
Monday, March 01, 2010
The Gift That Keeps On Giving
I want to start off this post for thanking CenterPoint Energy for being such a great muse these last few months. Without them, I don't think I would've been able to cause so much cognitive dissonance within my very small (but loyal) readership.
As most of you know, I have talked a couple of times about how this company abuses its customers. They can do this because they are the only choice that most of us have for heating needs other than burning wood in the middle of our homes. Many might say that this is the fault of the government for legalizing this monopoly. As I have said many times, I don't doubt the government's involvement with this fact. Obviously, they pass the laws. But how did said law come to be passed?
The Energy Lobby. They are the ones that have the money to grease the politicians so, at the end of the day, they are the ones that are running the show. They can get a law passed, for example, that says that the CenterPoint has the right to come into my home and check the meter to make sure I am paying them every last cent they can get out of me. Yes, it is a court that is putting forth the order but they wouldn't be bothering with it unless someone was telling them to do so. That someone would be CenterPoint Energy.
Many here have also said that I still signed a contract so they have every right to do what they want. Again, what is my other choice for heat? There is none so basically I am beholden to them. So, when they call up customers and tell them, "Hey, we have this great way to reduce you energy costs every month by signing up for this fixed monthly payment" most people would jump at the chance, right? I, of course, did not and I'm glad I didn't.
Take a look at this article from the Mpls Star and Tribune. CenterPoint Energy, along with Xcel Energy, do not have to pay back the $33 million dollars in over charges as a result of their ironically named "no surprises" program. CenterPoint collected 26 million in fees for gas that was never used.
Altogether, more than 50,000 utility customers signed up for fixed-payment programs with CenterPoint and Xcel Energy, which charged customers the same amount each month no matter how much natural gas prices spiked. Xcel customers overpaid at least $7 million, or an average of about $683, according to the attorney general.
According to CenterPoint, that's not how the program works.
CenterPoint Energy and Xcel Energy say they don't have to pay any of the money back because the customers' contracts clearly indicated that they might pay more than the actual cost of the gas. The programs were pitched as "risk reducing," not necessarily cost-saving, the companies said.
Well, the customers did sign the contract but...
That's not how Al Stahlberg remembers it. He signed up for the program in 2005 because he thought it would "protect my pocketbook." Instead, over 19 months, he shelled out $313 that he would have saved under standard billing.
Basically, you need a team of lawyers to sign up for natural gas service. The people from CenterPoint and Xcel marketing this program lied about its purpose. And where is the government in all of this? State Attorney General Lori Swanson?
So far, however, none of the $33 million has been refunded, despite Swanson's conclusion that the two companies engaged in deceptive marketing and were not entitled to the windfall.
Swanson's investigators determined that customers were never told they overpaid for natural gas, and mistakenly believed they could quit the program whenever they wanted.
Though regulators agreed the two companies' billing practices were "disturbing," the commission said it didn't have enough evidence to force the two companies to make refunds, said Janet Gonzalez, the commission's energy manager. "We need a higher level of proof," Gonzalez said. "That's a real tough thing ... it's a difficult, difficult situation."
Yes, quite difficult when the Energy Lobby has unlimited legal resources and people like Al Stahlberg just have himself and...well...the government.
Stahlberg, who's 64 and retired in Fridley, doesn't understand why it took the commission so long to figure out he didn't deserve a refund. He said he still wants his $313.
As most of you know, I have talked a couple of times about how this company abuses its customers. They can do this because they are the only choice that most of us have for heating needs other than burning wood in the middle of our homes. Many might say that this is the fault of the government for legalizing this monopoly. As I have said many times, I don't doubt the government's involvement with this fact. Obviously, they pass the laws. But how did said law come to be passed?
The Energy Lobby. They are the ones that have the money to grease the politicians so, at the end of the day, they are the ones that are running the show. They can get a law passed, for example, that says that the CenterPoint has the right to come into my home and check the meter to make sure I am paying them every last cent they can get out of me. Yes, it is a court that is putting forth the order but they wouldn't be bothering with it unless someone was telling them to do so. That someone would be CenterPoint Energy.
Many here have also said that I still signed a contract so they have every right to do what they want. Again, what is my other choice for heat? There is none so basically I am beholden to them. So, when they call up customers and tell them, "Hey, we have this great way to reduce you energy costs every month by signing up for this fixed monthly payment" most people would jump at the chance, right? I, of course, did not and I'm glad I didn't.
Take a look at this article from the Mpls Star and Tribune. CenterPoint Energy, along with Xcel Energy, do not have to pay back the $33 million dollars in over charges as a result of their ironically named "no surprises" program. CenterPoint collected 26 million in fees for gas that was never used.
Altogether, more than 50,000 utility customers signed up for fixed-payment programs with CenterPoint and Xcel Energy, which charged customers the same amount each month no matter how much natural gas prices spiked. Xcel customers overpaid at least $7 million, or an average of about $683, according to the attorney general.
According to CenterPoint, that's not how the program works.
CenterPoint Energy and Xcel Energy say they don't have to pay any of the money back because the customers' contracts clearly indicated that they might pay more than the actual cost of the gas. The programs were pitched as "risk reducing," not necessarily cost-saving, the companies said.
Well, the customers did sign the contract but...
That's not how Al Stahlberg remembers it. He signed up for the program in 2005 because he thought it would "protect my pocketbook." Instead, over 19 months, he shelled out $313 that he would have saved under standard billing.
Basically, you need a team of lawyers to sign up for natural gas service. The people from CenterPoint and Xcel marketing this program lied about its purpose. And where is the government in all of this? State Attorney General Lori Swanson?
So far, however, none of the $33 million has been refunded, despite Swanson's conclusion that the two companies engaged in deceptive marketing and were not entitled to the windfall.
Swanson's investigators determined that customers were never told they overpaid for natural gas, and mistakenly believed they could quit the program whenever they wanted.
Though regulators agreed the two companies' billing practices were "disturbing," the commission said it didn't have enough evidence to force the two companies to make refunds, said Janet Gonzalez, the commission's energy manager. "We need a higher level of proof," Gonzalez said. "That's a real tough thing ... it's a difficult, difficult situation."
Yes, quite difficult when the Energy Lobby has unlimited legal resources and people like Al Stahlberg just have himself and...well...the government.
Stahlberg, who's 64 and retired in Fridley, doesn't understand why it took the commission so long to figure out he didn't deserve a refund. He said he still wants his $313.
"What bothers me is the state is not protecting the consumer," he said.
No shit. But, hey, let's continue to blame the government further so any small amount of power they did have is eroded completely. Ah, the Wrecking Crew...
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Hmm...
All this discussion of best interest decisions has left me pondering this question....
If someone's best interest is "that which they deem to be so," why is it that the Cult, a collective that champions individual defense of one's property through the right to bear arms, happily gives up that right to the Federal authorities in the form of acknowledgment that our armed forces do, in a fact, know what is in all of our best interest to defend us?
If someone's best interest is "that which they deem to be so," why is it that the Cult, a collective that champions individual defense of one's property through the right to bear arms, happily gives up that right to the Federal authorities in the form of acknowledgment that our armed forces do, in a fact, know what is in all of our best interest to defend us?
Friday, February 26, 2010
Best Interest
An interesting exchange came up in the comments of my "Cult" post and I thought I would bring it out front to illustrate a very key point.
We begin with a comment from blk.
The genius of the right is its ability to convince people to go along with them in direct conflict to their own best interests. This is usually done by dredging up some unrelated hot button issue, linking the two and then get people to support something that will directly harm them.
This is unequivocally true. Unless someone is making an ass load of money, the current form of the GOP is basically about making certain private industry continues to rape the shit out of people financially who, in turn, thank them for it. Never is this more true that with an issue like health care, for example.
Next we have this comment from just dave.
Quick, quick, BLK, what are 'My' best interests? Or my interests in general, for that matter... Therein lies part of the problem…contrary to popular liberal belief, I rather feel that I am more attuned to what is or is not in my best interests than you.
At first glance, it would seem that dave has a point. Why should someone else tell him his best interest? If he wants to stand in front of a oncoming train and be smashed, what of it? At closer inspection, however, we can see how misconceptions regarding liberals come up. It's not that liberals want to tell dave what his best interests are...it's that it's terribly obvious what they are and, if dave were logical and looked at facts, he would follow them. If we see dave standing in front of an oncoming train, I think we can all agree that it is in his best interest to move. We won't tell him to move...he may not move...but it is in his best interest to move out of the way. So, blk's statement is one of fact.
Knowing dave the way I do, he believes that our government should only be funding defense and minor amounts of infrastructure. In other words, social programs such as health care are not good. dave believes that the free market can sort out this health care boondoggle and the government is going to only screw things up more than they already are. In fact, if you were to ask dave which of these phrases are more likely to occur...
The Federal Government can solve much of the health care crisis.
The Federal Government will create death panels and pull the plug on Grandma.
...he would, more than likely, choose the latter. Am I right, dave?
dave, like many on the right, has fallen victim to The Cult. He has withdrawn into the group and has quickly shown that he distrusts the outside world--most of which he considers to be ultra liberal. He is convinced that liberals manage his life in an extremely totalitarian way. Remember the cult has a pathological hated of government while also having a 12 year school girl crush (see: the Twilight series) on private corporations. Call them on it and you are a Marxist! How dare you say ANYTHING bad about US corporations!! They are wonderful...they are pure...they are beautiful.
So, then we get comments like this
That Mark thinks there is any answer other than, "your best interests are those you deem to be so" is... revealing.
Yes, it is revealing...revealing in the sense that we can see the excellent work that The Cult has done. In their eyes, we should all be "rugged individualists" who account to no one and, FUCK YOU!, we can do whatever we want. So, in addition to being 12 year old girls with crushes on the corporations of America, they are also 8 year old boys who are self involved to a fault. The problem with this attitude is that we live in something called a...society.
If dave decides to not have health insurance, for example, that affects me through rate increases due to a diminished pool of insurees and hospital bills that someone will have to pay if dave gets sick. Again, that someone is me.
So, dave's actions regarding his "best interests" regarding health care affect the rest of us. He is not an island. He is a participating member of US culture. I'm not sure how much dave makes a year but if he is like most people, he will get a tax cut due to President Obama's policies. And yet, he does not support him because he has been convinced by the Cult that Obama is raising his taxes and forcing him to...well...do what exactly?
At the end of the day, this whole line of thought from dave and anonymous comes down to a child like tantrum. They don't like the rules we have in our culture that have created collectivity or a community. Because, as well know, the word "community" is pretty darn close to that other "C" word and that would lead to this:
We begin with a comment from blk.
The genius of the right is its ability to convince people to go along with them in direct conflict to their own best interests. This is usually done by dredging up some unrelated hot button issue, linking the two and then get people to support something that will directly harm them.
This is unequivocally true. Unless someone is making an ass load of money, the current form of the GOP is basically about making certain private industry continues to rape the shit out of people financially who, in turn, thank them for it. Never is this more true that with an issue like health care, for example.
Next we have this comment from just dave.
Quick, quick, BLK, what are 'My' best interests? Or my interests in general, for that matter... Therein lies part of the problem…contrary to popular liberal belief, I rather feel that I am more attuned to what is or is not in my best interests than you.
At first glance, it would seem that dave has a point. Why should someone else tell him his best interest? If he wants to stand in front of a oncoming train and be smashed, what of it? At closer inspection, however, we can see how misconceptions regarding liberals come up. It's not that liberals want to tell dave what his best interests are...it's that it's terribly obvious what they are and, if dave were logical and looked at facts, he would follow them. If we see dave standing in front of an oncoming train, I think we can all agree that it is in his best interest to move. We won't tell him to move...he may not move...but it is in his best interest to move out of the way. So, blk's statement is one of fact.
Knowing dave the way I do, he believes that our government should only be funding defense and minor amounts of infrastructure. In other words, social programs such as health care are not good. dave believes that the free market can sort out this health care boondoggle and the government is going to only screw things up more than they already are. In fact, if you were to ask dave which of these phrases are more likely to occur...
The Federal Government can solve much of the health care crisis.
The Federal Government will create death panels and pull the plug on Grandma.
...he would, more than likely, choose the latter. Am I right, dave?
dave, like many on the right, has fallen victim to The Cult. He has withdrawn into the group and has quickly shown that he distrusts the outside world--most of which he considers to be ultra liberal. He is convinced that liberals manage his life in an extremely totalitarian way. Remember the cult has a pathological hated of government while also having a 12 year school girl crush (see: the Twilight series) on private corporations. Call them on it and you are a Marxist! How dare you say ANYTHING bad about US corporations!! They are wonderful...they are pure...they are beautiful.
So, then we get comments like this
That Mark thinks there is any answer other than, "your best interests are those you deem to be so" is... revealing.
Yes, it is revealing...revealing in the sense that we can see the excellent work that The Cult has done. In their eyes, we should all be "rugged individualists" who account to no one and, FUCK YOU!, we can do whatever we want. So, in addition to being 12 year old girls with crushes on the corporations of America, they are also 8 year old boys who are self involved to a fault. The problem with this attitude is that we live in something called a...society.
If dave decides to not have health insurance, for example, that affects me through rate increases due to a diminished pool of insurees and hospital bills that someone will have to pay if dave gets sick. Again, that someone is me.
So, dave's actions regarding his "best interests" regarding health care affect the rest of us. He is not an island. He is a participating member of US culture. I'm not sure how much dave makes a year but if he is like most people, he will get a tax cut due to President Obama's policies. And yet, he does not support him because he has been convinced by the Cult that Obama is raising his taxes and forcing him to...well...do what exactly?
At the end of the day, this whole line of thought from dave and anonymous comes down to a child like tantrum. They don't like the rules we have in our culture that have created collectivity or a community. Because, as well know, the word "community" is pretty darn close to that other "C" word and that would lead to this:
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
News On The March!
I'm going to start "quick hit news" type postings under this heading. I've always enjoyed those old news reels from the 1940s and this affords me the opportunity to make quick comments about something I see as I am perusing the news online. And, of course, see what you all think.
First up, we have this little ditty from the New York Times.
Fearing Obama Agenda, States Push to Loosen Gun Laws
When President Obama took office, gun rights advocates sounded the alarm, warning that he intended to strip them of their arms and ammunition. And yet the opposite is happening. Mr. Obama has been largely silent on the issue while states are engaged in a new and largely successful push for expanded gun rights, even passing measures that have been rejected in the past.
Gun control advocates say, Mr. Obama has failed to deliver on campaign promises to close a loophole that allows unlicensed dealers at gun shows to sell firearms without background checks; to revive the assault weapons ban; and to push states to release data about guns used in crimes.
First up, we have this little ditty from the New York Times.
Fearing Obama Agenda, States Push to Loosen Gun Laws
When President Obama took office, gun rights advocates sounded the alarm, warning that he intended to strip them of their arms and ammunition. And yet the opposite is happening. Mr. Obama has been largely silent on the issue while states are engaged in a new and largely successful push for expanded gun rights, even passing measures that have been rejected in the past.
Gun control advocates say, Mr. Obama has failed to deliver on campaign promises to close a loophole that allows unlicensed dealers at gun shows to sell firearms without background checks; to revive the assault weapons ban; and to push states to release data about guns used in crimes.
He also signed bills last year allowing guns to be carried in national parks and in luggage on Amtrak trains.
Asked by reporters about the Brady group’s critical report on the Obama administration, a White House spokesman, Ben LaBolt, pointed out that the latest F.B.I. statistics showed that violent crime dropped in the first half of 2009 to its lowest levels since the 1960s.
“The president supports and respects the Second Amendment,” Mr. LaBolt said, “and he believes we can take common-sense steps to keep our streets safe and to stem the flow of illegal guns to criminals.”
Still, gun rights groups remain skeptical of the administration.
“The watchword for gun owners is stay ready,” said Wayne LaPierre, chief executive of the National Rifle Association. “We have had some successes, but we know that the first chance Obama gets, he will pounce on us.”
Um....huh? He's been in office for more than a year, has had plenty of chances, and still has increased gun rights. I can't call them paranoid, though. Then they'll play the victim card and it will all go down hill from there. Ah, the cult...
Regardless of Mr. Obama’s agenda, gun dealers seem to be reaping the benefits of fears surrounding it.
I think I'll let this one pass without further comment...:)
Closely related to this issue....
Ariz. lawmakers: Verify citizenship of candidates
Hey, that's Kevin's back yard!
Nearly half of the Arizona Legislature wants to force President Barack Obama to show his birth certificate to state officials if he runs for re-election.
He did. A million times.
Anyone want to mention to them that you can be born somewhere else (like John McCain) and still be a US citizen? Anyone? Bueller?
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
The Cult
One of my favorite programs of all time was M*A*S*H. In fact, I patterned much of my view of the world after Hawkeye Pierce although I do admit to being more hawkish than him--no pun intended. After all, he didn't have hirabis to deal with in Korea.
Two of my favorite characters were Frank Burns and Colonel Flagg....the former, a weenie who essentially made up whatever he wanted, wrapped himself in the flag, and claimed to be a patriot...the latter, an ultra nationalist, xenophobic psychotic who was so far over the top, he didn't seem believable...even as a fictional character. In watching both the Tea Party and CPAC conventions in the last week, I must sadly conclude that Major Frank Burns and Colonel Flagg are alive and well.
Even though they are fictitious characters, their vision has created a cult.
On last Friday's Season 8 premier of Real Time with Bill Maher, Bill proclaimed that the tea party movement wasn't a "movement" at all but a cult. He then set about proving it quite well.
Ever since I have started this blog, I have been searching for answers. Why do people listen to the base? What is it about them that gets ordinary folk to chuck all reason and logic out the window and believe anything Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, or Rush Limbaugh has to say? What is the one umbrella that all of this fits neatly under? Answer: A cult.
Expanding on what Maher had to say, I submit that the majority of the people at both the CPAC and the Tea Party conventions have fallen, along with millions of others across this country, into a mass cult. Consider the characteristics of a cult:
1. Quickly withdraw into the group and distrust the outside world.
Never a more pure example of this is seen at The Smallest Minority. Anyone who does not jibe with their ideology is labeled a "liar." Further, the left is portrayed as being bent on the socialist destruction of our nation. This is especially troubling when you consider that much of the left has been bought off by Wall Street.
Essentially, they don't trust anyone except cult-approved information outlets (townhall, hot air, the american thinker, worldnet daily, pajamas tv etc). Anything that will probably help them (ex: the health care bill) has been spun by cult leaders to be immediately NOT trusted and offered as proof of the coming destruction of the United States).
2. Driven by some large, unattainable goal.
This would be the return of our government to that which was "envisioned by our Founding Fathers." So, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Education funding and anything the funds any sort of "agenda" are gone. All that remains would be the military. I would assume this means that a woman's right to vote will be taken away and blacks will return to being 3/5ths of a person.
3. Have their own vocabulary (aka "If I say it, then it's true.")
Maher's examples were: Freedom=Guns, Diplomacy=Weakness, Elitist=Reading a Book. I say they have their own entire, and quite bizarre, language. Take this line from Mitt Romney at the CPAC convention. He screamed that "liberal, neo-monarchists" were in charge of our country. Huh?
He went to say the following
Americans will not endure government run health care, new and expensive entitlements, and inexplicable and surely vanishing cuts in Medicare.
Ok, seriously....WHAT THE FUCK IS HE TALKING ABOUT?
And how about Keynote speaker Glenn Beck who said that the only job of the Constitution was to protect us from "bad" guys. The pre-amble to the Constitution states
Establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.
Anyone from the cult want to explain what that means to them? Perhaps Kevin Baker can explain it as he found Glenn Beck's CPAC speech to be "excellent."
4. Attach problems to one simple explanation.
Well, this one is easy: The Left, with its Hiterlesque leader, Barrack Hussein Obama, are the cause of every problem everywhere for ever and ever until the end of time.
5. Use fear.
Every speech was riddled with fear mongering. Keynote speaker Glenn Beck said our country was headed for "economic holocaust" citing debt to GDP and hilariously, in the same breath, praised Ronald Reagan who left office with a debt of 51 percent of GDP. He also said that progressivism was designed to "destroy the Constitution" (even though it was progressive movements like women's suffrage that added to it).
6. Accuse people outside of the cult of being brainwashed and/or in a cult.
LMAO all over the mother fucking hizzy! This happens to me constantly here, at TSM, in email, or in discussions. I'm a "perfect example of the Left" and yet I just got screamed at over the last few days for supporting President Obama's decision to fund nuclear power. I get hollered at at least once a month for degrading women with my "foul language." I state, in unequivocal terms, that I support our effort in AfPak and thus, get endless shit from the naive peaceniks. And yet, I am a "perfect example" of the left. I couldn't figure out why this gross mischaracterization was happening but now I know.
It's because they are in a cult.
Further proof of this can be seen in this CBS/New York Times poll
78 percent don't know that President Obama CUT taxes for 95 percent of working families? Are you kidding me? Now you see why I keep talking about the "minority" party. The fact that they have brainwashed people into believing this is absolutely mind boggling and demonstrates, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that some serious de-programming needs to be done.
And, no cult members, that does not mean I am advocating Re-Education Camps.
This poll also states that "Of people who support the grassroots, "Tea Party" movement, only 2 percent think taxes have been decreased, 46 percent say taxes are the same, and a whopping 44 percent say they believe taxes have gone up."
Amazing. Simply fucking amazing. A group whose center issue is taxes doesn't have a clue about....fucking taxes!
Not surprising, though, when the spirits of Frank Burns and Colonel Flagg embody what is so very clearly a CULT.
Two of my favorite characters were Frank Burns and Colonel Flagg....the former, a weenie who essentially made up whatever he wanted, wrapped himself in the flag, and claimed to be a patriot...the latter, an ultra nationalist, xenophobic psychotic who was so far over the top, he didn't seem believable...even as a fictional character. In watching both the Tea Party and CPAC conventions in the last week, I must sadly conclude that Major Frank Burns and Colonel Flagg are alive and well.
Even though they are fictitious characters, their vision has created a cult.
On last Friday's Season 8 premier of Real Time with Bill Maher, Bill proclaimed that the tea party movement wasn't a "movement" at all but a cult. He then set about proving it quite well.
Ever since I have started this blog, I have been searching for answers. Why do people listen to the base? What is it about them that gets ordinary folk to chuck all reason and logic out the window and believe anything Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, or Rush Limbaugh has to say? What is the one umbrella that all of this fits neatly under? Answer: A cult.
Expanding on what Maher had to say, I submit that the majority of the people at both the CPAC and the Tea Party conventions have fallen, along with millions of others across this country, into a mass cult. Consider the characteristics of a cult:
1. Quickly withdraw into the group and distrust the outside world.
Never a more pure example of this is seen at The Smallest Minority. Anyone who does not jibe with their ideology is labeled a "liar." Further, the left is portrayed as being bent on the socialist destruction of our nation. This is especially troubling when you consider that much of the left has been bought off by Wall Street.
Essentially, they don't trust anyone except cult-approved information outlets (townhall, hot air, the american thinker, worldnet daily, pajamas tv etc). Anything that will probably help them (ex: the health care bill) has been spun by cult leaders to be immediately NOT trusted and offered as proof of the coming destruction of the United States).
2. Driven by some large, unattainable goal.
This would be the return of our government to that which was "envisioned by our Founding Fathers." So, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Education funding and anything the funds any sort of "agenda" are gone. All that remains would be the military. I would assume this means that a woman's right to vote will be taken away and blacks will return to being 3/5ths of a person.
3. Have their own vocabulary (aka "If I say it, then it's true.")
Maher's examples were: Freedom=Guns, Diplomacy=Weakness, Elitist=Reading a Book. I say they have their own entire, and quite bizarre, language. Take this line from Mitt Romney at the CPAC convention. He screamed that "liberal, neo-monarchists" were in charge of our country. Huh?
He went to say the following
Americans will not endure government run health care, new and expensive entitlements, and inexplicable and surely vanishing cuts in Medicare.
Ok, seriously....WHAT THE FUCK IS HE TALKING ABOUT?
And how about Keynote speaker Glenn Beck who said that the only job of the Constitution was to protect us from "bad" guys. The pre-amble to the Constitution states
Establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.
Anyone from the cult want to explain what that means to them? Perhaps Kevin Baker can explain it as he found Glenn Beck's CPAC speech to be "excellent."
4. Attach problems to one simple explanation.
Well, this one is easy: The Left, with its Hiterlesque leader, Barrack Hussein Obama, are the cause of every problem everywhere for ever and ever until the end of time.
5. Use fear.
Every speech was riddled with fear mongering. Keynote speaker Glenn Beck said our country was headed for "economic holocaust" citing debt to GDP and hilariously, in the same breath, praised Ronald Reagan who left office with a debt of 51 percent of GDP. He also said that progressivism was designed to "destroy the Constitution" (even though it was progressive movements like women's suffrage that added to it).
6. Accuse people outside of the cult of being brainwashed and/or in a cult.
LMAO all over the mother fucking hizzy! This happens to me constantly here, at TSM, in email, or in discussions. I'm a "perfect example of the Left" and yet I just got screamed at over the last few days for supporting President Obama's decision to fund nuclear power. I get hollered at at least once a month for degrading women with my "foul language." I state, in unequivocal terms, that I support our effort in AfPak and thus, get endless shit from the naive peaceniks. And yet, I am a "perfect example" of the left. I couldn't figure out why this gross mischaracterization was happening but now I know.
It's because they are in a cult.
Further proof of this can be seen in this CBS/New York Times poll
78 percent don't know that President Obama CUT taxes for 95 percent of working families? Are you kidding me? Now you see why I keep talking about the "minority" party. The fact that they have brainwashed people into believing this is absolutely mind boggling and demonstrates, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that some serious de-programming needs to be done.And, no cult members, that does not mean I am advocating Re-Education Camps.
This poll also states that "Of people who support the grassroots, "Tea Party" movement, only 2 percent think taxes have been decreased, 46 percent say taxes are the same, and a whopping 44 percent say they believe taxes have gone up."
Amazing. Simply fucking amazing. A group whose center issue is taxes doesn't have a clue about....fucking taxes!
Not surprising, though, when the spirits of Frank Burns and Colonel Flagg embody what is so very clearly a CULT.
Monday, February 22, 2010
Stack Update
Just saw this come across the wire...
Daughter says pilot in Texas IRS crash was a hero
The daughter of a man who crashed his small plane into a building housing offices of the Internal Revenue Service called her father a hero for his anti-government views but said his actions, which killed an IRS employee, were "inappropriate."
But if nobody comes out and speaks up on behalf of injustice, then nothing will ever be accomplished," she told ABC. "But I do not agree with his last action with what he did. But I do agree about the government."
Wait...but I thought he wasn't an anti-government crazy?
Daughter says pilot in Texas IRS crash was a hero
The daughter of a man who crashed his small plane into a building housing offices of the Internal Revenue Service called her father a hero for his anti-government views but said his actions, which killed an IRS employee, were "inappropriate."
But if nobody comes out and speaks up on behalf of injustice, then nothing will ever be accomplished," she told ABC. "But I do not agree with his last action with what he did. But I do agree about the government."
Wait...but I thought he wasn't an anti-government crazy?
The Return of Corporate Abuse Part the Second
Yesterday, I updated the CenterPoint Energy meter inspection story in Minnesota. As I expected, questions regarding my sanity cropped up in comments. While I respect nearly all of the opinions that are posted here, I disagree that my cheese, in fact, has slipped off my cracker. And here's why.
Other than the reason of safety, which I agree is certainly a reason to check out a gas meter, what other reason could CenterPoint have for demanding access to my home? BLK answered it quite well in comments yesterday.
It is probably not the case that Big Bad government is forcing the gas company to do useless inspections. My guess is that the gas companies demanded the ability to do this because they want to be able to read meters so that they can charge you for the gas you use.
Bingo! So, is it really all that crazy to say that my theory is just that CenterPoint wants to make sure that they keep making tons of cash? No, it's not. So let's go back to the original question, posed by juris.
"What specific power has a corporation used to abuse you?"
Centerpoint Energy is forcefully demanding access to my home to make certain that they are getting every last penny they can out of me. Centerpoint knows full well that the old meters, like the ones I have, aren't as reliable as their new ones. They also know that they can't just say, "We demand more of your money so either let us in your home or we will get a court to force us in." Instead, they found another way to get in...a legitimate one, mind you...so now they can honestly say, "It's for safety."
Thus, Centerpoint Energy is forcing their way into my home so they can abuse me financially.
BLK raises another interesting point.
Corporations operate completely behind the scenes, we can never really know who is really behind the passage of laws. Corporations hire independent lobbyists, who talk to lawmakers behind closed doors. And of course, lobbyists are very frequently also involved with raising campaign contributions (usually with "bundling"). Depending on what state you live in you may or may not be able to find out how much corporations are spending on lobbying your representatives.
I have been asked several times to point to a specific example of corporate abuse. Even though I have done so above, I still say...how about all of it? The ENTIRE system. With the recent SCOTUS ruling in the Citizen's United case, can anyone honestly say that corporations DON'T now run everything? But hey, I'm a reflective guy so I'm going to give all of you another example of corporate abuse: the financial industry.
Elizabeth Warren, current chair of the TARP committee, was the first guest on Real Time with Bill Maher last Friday night. Ms. Warren stated, in no uncertain terms, that it was business as usual for financial services in this country. "The problem couldn't be more obvious," she said, "the solutions couldn't be more obvious. Lobbyists from the financial service industry, in numbers I have never seen, descend upon our representatives 2-4 times a day...writing position papers for them...and making certain they are in line.
"The financial institutions of our country are still trading in the high risk instruments that sent us into this recession in the first place," she stated unequivocally. So, my bank can still take my money and gamble it on air. Great.
Tell me again...who's the entity using force again?
In looking at all of this, one has to wonder...what in the fuck are people like the Tea Partiers talking about when they say that the government is taking over everything? It's obvious to me that the government hasn't done shit. Any time President Obama makes even the slightest noise about bank restrictions, the 12 year old girls that are the financial services industry begin to whine and cry. This, in turn, sets off a cascading effect which trickles down to folks like the commenters at TSM or the Tea Partiers who then respond with the outrage, paranoia, and fear bomb.
When you think about it, it's truly an ingenious way of controlling the way people think.
Private industry is beautiful....all corporations love you....they are golden, warm and snuggly....they only wish to raise quality of life....anyone who doubts this is a commie and wants to steal your guns and hard earned tax dollars...like Markadelphia...read Ayn Rand...read George Orwell...the government is bad....the government is bad....the government is bad....the government is bad....the government is bad....
It's sort of like...a cult.
Other than the reason of safety, which I agree is certainly a reason to check out a gas meter, what other reason could CenterPoint have for demanding access to my home? BLK answered it quite well in comments yesterday.
It is probably not the case that Big Bad government is forcing the gas company to do useless inspections. My guess is that the gas companies demanded the ability to do this because they want to be able to read meters so that they can charge you for the gas you use.
Bingo! So, is it really all that crazy to say that my theory is just that CenterPoint wants to make sure that they keep making tons of cash? No, it's not. So let's go back to the original question, posed by juris.
"What specific power has a corporation used to abuse you?"
Centerpoint Energy is forcefully demanding access to my home to make certain that they are getting every last penny they can out of me. Centerpoint knows full well that the old meters, like the ones I have, aren't as reliable as their new ones. They also know that they can't just say, "We demand more of your money so either let us in your home or we will get a court to force us in." Instead, they found another way to get in...a legitimate one, mind you...so now they can honestly say, "It's for safety."
Thus, Centerpoint Energy is forcing their way into my home so they can abuse me financially.
BLK raises another interesting point.
Corporations operate completely behind the scenes, we can never really know who is really behind the passage of laws. Corporations hire independent lobbyists, who talk to lawmakers behind closed doors. And of course, lobbyists are very frequently also involved with raising campaign contributions (usually with "bundling"). Depending on what state you live in you may or may not be able to find out how much corporations are spending on lobbying your representatives.
I have been asked several times to point to a specific example of corporate abuse. Even though I have done so above, I still say...how about all of it? The ENTIRE system. With the recent SCOTUS ruling in the Citizen's United case, can anyone honestly say that corporations DON'T now run everything? But hey, I'm a reflective guy so I'm going to give all of you another example of corporate abuse: the financial industry.
Elizabeth Warren, current chair of the TARP committee, was the first guest on Real Time with Bill Maher last Friday night. Ms. Warren stated, in no uncertain terms, that it was business as usual for financial services in this country. "The problem couldn't be more obvious," she said, "the solutions couldn't be more obvious. Lobbyists from the financial service industry, in numbers I have never seen, descend upon our representatives 2-4 times a day...writing position papers for them...and making certain they are in line.
"The financial institutions of our country are still trading in the high risk instruments that sent us into this recession in the first place," she stated unequivocally. So, my bank can still take my money and gamble it on air. Great.
Tell me again...who's the entity using force again?
In looking at all of this, one has to wonder...what in the fuck are people like the Tea Partiers talking about when they say that the government is taking over everything? It's obvious to me that the government hasn't done shit. Any time President Obama makes even the slightest noise about bank restrictions, the 12 year old girls that are the financial services industry begin to whine and cry. This, in turn, sets off a cascading effect which trickles down to folks like the commenters at TSM or the Tea Partiers who then respond with the outrage, paranoia, and fear bomb.
When you think about it, it's truly an ingenious way of controlling the way people think.
Private industry is beautiful....all corporations love you....they are golden, warm and snuggly....they only wish to raise quality of life....anyone who doubts this is a commie and wants to steal your guns and hard earned tax dollars...like Markadelphia...read Ayn Rand...read George Orwell...the government is bad....the government is bad....the government is bad....the government is bad....the government is bad....
It's sort of like...a cult.
Sunday, February 21, 2010
The Return of Corporate Abuse (in 3-D!) Part One
Last November, I wrote a piece entitled Corporate Abuse that caused quite a stir. For those of you new to NFTF, I'm sure you have wondered about the references (in comments) regarding how I "failed" to demonstrate that corporations are the ones with the real power in this country and the government is simply their stooge. These references and ensuing comments are quite typical of what transpires here and over at TSM.
Basically the pattern goes something like this:
1. Mark offers a viewpoint backed up by facts.
2. Some of the readers, many of which basically belong to a cult (more on that in the coming days), don't like it.
3. Rather than disprove it, they call me "stupid," "Marxadelphia" and a "liar."
4. Following this is a seemingly endless series of comments which "prove" that I have "been beaten." They go on in such perpetuity that one really has to wonder...if I am "wrong," why do they keep talking about it?
5. (and my favorite one) I'm secretly a Marxist who wants to cede my rights to a collectivist government.
This pattern, however, is part of a much larger one which I will illustrate through an update of the Centerpoint Energy Meter Inspection project that was the subject of my last post. For those of you who don't know, Centerpoint is the company that I purchase gas from to heat my house. They sent me a card, which I showed in my last post, which ordered me to allow them access to my house otherwise they would take legal action. It is the only company that I can get heat from in my area. I do, of course, have the choice of burning wood in my house but I think that most of us can agree that's not really "the free market" now, is it?
Take a look at this column from last December.
Now, in my first column I was told that it was actually the government driving these inspections, not Centerpoint, due to safety and regulation. While it is true that there is a regulation that Centerpoint Energy must follow federal laws regarding safety, I'm wondering why the company themselves has to get the court order. If the government is the one doing the forcing, why don't they have them already? And where are the fines that we heard would happen if Centerpoint didn't follow the law?
To me, the company is the one driving this show, not the government. Further proof of this can be seen in the last line of the column.
WCCO-TV also checked with Xcel Energy, which has about 600 customers with indoor meters that still need to be checked. At this time, an Xcel spokesperson says the company is not considering court orders.
What? Why? Now, I was assured by several commenters here that if companies weren't compliant that BIG BROTHER was going to descend into their offices and nationalize them. So, why is Xcel Energy being so lackadaisical?
Because the government isn't the all powerful beast members of the cult claim it to be. They might make regulations but enforcing them? Forget it. It's not going to happen. In fact, I'd be willing to bet--just like Xcel is betting--that the government is so inefficient and weakened right now that this regulation would probably not be enforced in all of our lifetimes.
Thus, we see how this larger pattern works...a pattern of propaganda, if you will...as the comments start to roll in on this post. I will be told that while I see a company obtaining court orders, it's actually the government driving this whole thing in one massive power grab. I will be told that while I actually only have one company to choose from for my heating needs, I really do have a choice and am not being forced by any legalized monopoly to buy their product. Again, the government will be blamed. I will be told to not pay attention to Xcel Energy as that is not relevant. And so on and so on...This is but a small example of how the cult works.
(cue theremin)
President Obama has taken away your hard earned money through tax increases (even though he has cut taxes for 95 percent of working families)....President Obama has taken away your hard earned money through tax increases....President Obama has taken away your hard earned money through tax increases.....President Obama has taken away your hard earned money through tax increases....
The question does remain, though, why does Centerpoint want to get into my home? No doubt, safety is a concern. Knowing corporations the way I do, I'm fairly certain there is another reason and that will be the subject of Part Two.
Basically the pattern goes something like this:
1. Mark offers a viewpoint backed up by facts.
2. Some of the readers, many of which basically belong to a cult (more on that in the coming days), don't like it.
3. Rather than disprove it, they call me "stupid," "Marxadelphia" and a "liar."
4. Following this is a seemingly endless series of comments which "prove" that I have "been beaten." They go on in such perpetuity that one really has to wonder...if I am "wrong," why do they keep talking about it?
5. (and my favorite one) I'm secretly a Marxist who wants to cede my rights to a collectivist government.
This pattern, however, is part of a much larger one which I will illustrate through an update of the Centerpoint Energy Meter Inspection project that was the subject of my last post. For those of you who don't know, Centerpoint is the company that I purchase gas from to heat my house. They sent me a card, which I showed in my last post, which ordered me to allow them access to my house otherwise they would take legal action. It is the only company that I can get heat from in my area. I do, of course, have the choice of burning wood in my house but I think that most of us can agree that's not really "the free market" now, is it?
Take a look at this column from last December.
Gas Co. May Get Court Orders For Meter Inspections
Now, in my first column I was told that it was actually the government driving these inspections, not Centerpoint, due to safety and regulation. While it is true that there is a regulation that Centerpoint Energy must follow federal laws regarding safety, I'm wondering why the company themselves has to get the court order. If the government is the one doing the forcing, why don't they have them already? And where are the fines that we heard would happen if Centerpoint didn't follow the law?
To me, the company is the one driving this show, not the government. Further proof of this can be seen in the last line of the column.
WCCO-TV also checked with Xcel Energy, which has about 600 customers with indoor meters that still need to be checked. At this time, an Xcel spokesperson says the company is not considering court orders.
What? Why? Now, I was assured by several commenters here that if companies weren't compliant that BIG BROTHER was going to descend into their offices and nationalize them. So, why is Xcel Energy being so lackadaisical?
Because the government isn't the all powerful beast members of the cult claim it to be. They might make regulations but enforcing them? Forget it. It's not going to happen. In fact, I'd be willing to bet--just like Xcel is betting--that the government is so inefficient and weakened right now that this regulation would probably not be enforced in all of our lifetimes.
Thus, we see how this larger pattern works...a pattern of propaganda, if you will...as the comments start to roll in on this post. I will be told that while I see a company obtaining court orders, it's actually the government driving this whole thing in one massive power grab. I will be told that while I actually only have one company to choose from for my heating needs, I really do have a choice and am not being forced by any legalized monopoly to buy their product. Again, the government will be blamed. I will be told to not pay attention to Xcel Energy as that is not relevant. And so on and so on...This is but a small example of how the cult works.
(cue theremin)
President Obama has taken away your hard earned money through tax increases (even though he has cut taxes for 95 percent of working families)....President Obama has taken away your hard earned money through tax increases....President Obama has taken away your hard earned money through tax increases.....President Obama has taken away your hard earned money through tax increases....
The question does remain, though, why does Centerpoint want to get into my home? No doubt, safety is a concern. Knowing corporations the way I do, I'm fairly certain there is another reason and that will be the subject of Part Two.
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Hitch Your Wagon To This Star
"We're planting the flag on constitutional ground, and if you try to take our freedoms, we will fight back."
----Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty at the CPAC conference yesterday.
"I have a message for President Obama and my message is this: Mr. President, no more apology tours and no more giving Miranda rights to terrorists in our country."
----Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty at the CPAC conference yesterday.
Tim?
I'm fighting back.
----Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty at the CPAC conference yesterday.
"I have a message for President Obama and my message is this: Mr. President, no more apology tours and no more giving Miranda rights to terrorists in our country."
----Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty at the CPAC conference yesterday.
Tim?
I'm fighting back.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)