Quite a few right-wing pundits, tasked with the public denunciation of health care reform and the upholding of libertarian theology, have brought up the Department of Motor Vehicles. "Do you want hospitals to be run like the DMV?" they ask. (Or shout. Or shoutask or askshout.)
My responses:
1. Nobody is talking about changing the way hospitals and doctor's offices are run. This is about changing insurance.
2. The last time I visited a medical clinic (with a friend who ended up needing a difficult operation), much of the experience resembled waiting at the DMV. Same crummy plastic chairs. The DMV was better organized -- I was given a number and waited for it to be called by a RoboGirl with a pleasant voice. At the hospital, a nurse with an unpleasant voice yelled out names on her list. Since she did not have amplification, some patients missed their turn.
On the other hand, the DMV does not have a cafeteria, while that particular hospital has really good grub -- believe it or not. California could make a few bucks by selling food and magazines in DMV offices.
3. Last time I went in to deal with auto registration, the DMV wasn't as bad as all that. True, the morning mob looked dishearteningly massive when I opened the door, but traffic moved at a good clip. In less than an hour, I was done. Only Disneyland does crowd control more professionally. Sure, you and I could come up with dozens of ways to improve DMV service, but they would all cost money.
4. So let's say we privatized the DMV. And let's say that this private company did a better job of processing registrations. How much extra would you be paying? I figure at least a hundred bucks per vehicle. Would that trade-off be worth it to you?
6. Health insurers make money when they deny claims. Suppose a privatized version of the DMV had a financial incentive to deny you a license or registration. Would you end up driving or walking?
7. Ask someone who has had a major illness to describe his or her encounters with the insurance company. Now ask that person to compare the experience of dealing with the DMV to the experience of dealing with an insurer or an HMO. Which experience is merely annoying and which is downright appalling?
"The gummint is going to run health care the same way they run the DMV!" Oooh, scare me.
Permalink
The irony of the guvmint worker versus the free market worker is that all these shouters have complete confidence in cops. And firefighters. And the army/navy/marines/etc. As you so correctly pointed out, I'll take the DMV over Comcast any day. Or PacBell. With the DMV, I can renew my license or registration online in a couple of minutes. Just one more frikkin' Reagan legacy; the myth of the lazy, incompetent federal worker.
posted by syborg : 4:34 PM
Frankly - I've never had a hard time at the DMV, so I also never quite got the reference. Apparently, there are all these conservative pundits who are attacked by slacker government workers at the DMV every time they go there. Someone needs to tell them, that - after the first time and unless they move to another state - they can renew their tags an license over the intertoobz.
The last time I had to go to the DMV, it was completely smooth and painless - took about 15 minutes (on a Saturday, no less). Same holds true for the post office - very cordial, smart employees who were able to handle me sending an ipod to a relative in Malawi - no small feat as fed-ex couldn't do it - and took me (again) about 15 minutes.
Who knows, maybe I'm just blessed, but if that were true, why can't I ever win the damn lottery.
The other metaphor right-wingers use (and which you cited below) is that of the Post Office.
So lets look at that.
The health care system handles 80 million people per year and -according to statistics compiled from The New England Journal of Medicine, the Journal of the American Medical Association, and other promiment medical journals - at least 100,000 people die just from "hospital errors." That's 1 in 800.
In comparison, last I read, the USPS handles more than 80 million of pieces of mail per hour and loses about 1 in 237,000.
Hmm.
Sergei Rostov
posted by Anonymous : 5:09 PM
I have ChampVa health insurance and have never been denied anything my doctors have ordered. As far as the DMV, the ones in my area are quick, professional, courteous, and downright friendly. So I'm not sure what comparisons anyone can draw from that, but I can't think of a single negative thing.
posted by Anonymous : 5:47 PM
I teach in Michigan and we have an insurance company called MESSA. It is WONDERFUL. It covers most everything and errs on the side of the patient in terms of coverage and payment. I have never, never had a problem of any kind over the last 15 years.
It is for teachers only, but if this is similar to the co-ops they are talking about...we could do much worse.
Of course our insurance is always under attack by right wing think tanks, politicians and school board members. Fortunately we have a strong union.
liberalcommontater
posted by Anonymous : 5:59 PM
Joe, Have you seen this about SP's face book page?
Palin: Obama's "Death Panel" Could Kill My Down Syndrome Baby http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/08/palin-obamas-death-panel-could-kill-my-down-syndrome-baby.php
NC has a public DMV but private contractors do the sales work at the local level. The tag offices, private contractors, vary widely in speed, efficiency, and service. The public DMV is somewhat slow but always courteous.
Uhh ... shouldn't someone tell these right wing loony tune Senators and Representatives that they are government workers. But then when they rail against inefficient perhaps it's personal experience speaking. Note that none of them have yet to give up their government health care and buy private insurance.
posted by MrMike : 8:47 PM
There was a time, about ten years ago, that the DMV in my state had a bad reputation. At the point of a revelation of a scandal (corruption, I believe), the state did a complete overhaul of the system.
My experience of the DMV in the last ten years reflects what other posters are saying.
The right wing blowhards may be scaring the corporate media, but I doubt they're convincing the man/woman in the street.
posted by Anonymous : 8:43 AM
Despite some long wait times, overall our DMV is pleasant, professionally run, and staffed by courteous and even friendly people. And in all my years of using the postal service I've been amazed by its efficiency and low cost, again with the caveat of occasional wait times. I WISH I could say the same of my crappy overpriced cable provider, my crappy overpriced phone company, or my truly crappy local hospital, known affectionately to us locals as "The North County Butcher Shop."
posted by DancingOpossum : 7:54 AM
This is interesting. My question is, are CATS covered under Obama family health care plan?
Nowadays, they run a credit check on you if you try to do anything. Even if you are applying for a job so you can pay back your creditors. If you have creditors angry at you, you don't get the job. Catch 22.
If that's the new rule, then let's apply it to the guys who run AIG, Goldman Sachs and the rest of the too-big-to-fail "banks." Because nobody in history has run up unpayable debt the way those clowns did.
Permalink
I love your blog, really missed you and if I had money I would sent it to you. And yeah it is a catch 22. I guess the congress will jump on that REAL SOON. NOT.
When I first found out about this practice, it made no sense to me, since it seems to me a person with debts would work harder, longer, and in general be a better employee than one without, because he or she would need the job more.
That being said, it's too bad running up debts (for no good purpose) couldn't have been made a criterion for denial of employment for Congress and the Office of President starting back in, say, 1981. :)
Sergei Rostov
posted by Anonymous : 3:53 PM
Goldman repaid their debts and the Treasury got a 20% annualized return on their investment.
posted by m.jed : 8:20 PM
Well put! Add to that, banks and credit unions are denying and revoking lines of credit from those with collateral! Those whose houses are not mortgaged to the hilt and are still worth a lot. So just because they screwed up, we're all paying!
posted by Zee : 11:17 PM
I guess the employer thinks that if you're in debt you're gonna embezzle funds or steal the office furniture to fence to pay off your debt, or something like that. I've never understood this practice either and they've been doing it for awhile.
Bluelyon- I have to say, I agree. And merely having good credit doesn't mean one isn't embezzling or a poor risk for embezzling. It may only mean one hasn't been caught yet.
There are so many reason for having a poor short term credit history. Divorce, family illness, job loss. Most people will undergo one of these circumstances at least once in their life. It makes no sense to me to let a short term credit issue prevent a person with otherwise good qualifications from receiving a job offer.
I wonder how this compares to the job market for persons with a criminal background. For instance, my son was convicted of underage consumption of alcohol. That is a misdemeanor. Now is he only one of a very few people who ever did this? No. But will it show up on a background check? Yes.
I am also surprised at the number of jobs that "require" a degree. For instance, some local job listings require a degree for a recepionist position or customer service postion. !!???!!?! Seems like all of this is yet another way to continue the class war.
Proof that life keeps getting more surreal. Here's a headline on TPM:
Birther Vortex Sucks In Innocent Australian Man
Pause for a moment, and try to imagine how a visitor from 2007 might interpret that sentence.
Apparently, a woman named Orly Taitz is at the center of the vorticial suckage. God, the fun I could have with a name like Orly Taitz if I did not have feminist readers.
Permalink
Oh, Joe! This did remind me of home sweet home. I'll explain.
I grew up on a cul-de-sac called Snell Hatch (God, knows where the city planners came up with that name). Anyway, we ALWAYS referred to it as Hell's Snatch (the portal to Hell!!!). And this was way before the "Hellmouth" on Buffy.
And now you tell me of the fate of this poor man. I'll have to give dear old mum a call and ask how she likes her new Aussie neighbor.
As for Oily T!ts. Has she sued her parents yet? She really should.
posted by britgirls : 8:25 PM
I was brought up to believe it was rude to make jokes about people's names.
And how is making antifeminist (offensive-to-women) jokes about Taitz different from offensive "jokes" about Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin?
You should have another site, for men only, where you could express yourself freely. Those damn wimmen!
—g.
posted by Anonymous : 10:01 AM
Awe....go ahead, we would love it - that thang is part both, lol!
Weird tale #1: When George W. Bush tried to talk French President Jacques Chirac into getting on board with the plan to invade Iraq, our beloved former president said that the goal was to prevent "Gog and Magog" from initiating the Apocalypse.
Now out of office, Chirac recounts that the American leader appealed to their “common faith” (Christianity) and told him: “Gog and Magog are at work in the Middle East…. The biblical prophecies are being fulfilled…. This confrontation is willed by God, who wants to use this conflict to erase his people’s enemies before a New Age begins.”
One visualizes Chirac putting the phone down slowly and uttering the French equivalent of "What the fuck?" (Come to think of it, what is the French equivalent of "WTF?")
This astonishing anecdote testifies not only to Bush's zealotry but also to his narrow view of the world. Dubya presumed that a well-educated European, the leader of a nominally (or at least historically) Catholic nation, would understand the gonzo terminology used by barely-literate Southern Baptists addicted to the works of Hal Lindsey and other purveyors of Apocalypse porn.
Weird tale #2: Many of you have seen the not-terribly-good Comedy Central animated series, Drawn Together, a show noted for its tastelessness. The script for one episode featured the line "“Wow, that’s almost as bad as the Holocaust and Slavery.” (The joke, if you can call it that, presumably had something to do with the hyperbole of such a comparison.) The person in charge of Comedy Central's Standards and Practices, who usually spends each day taking eight-hour lunches with the person who does the same job at Fox, suddenly felt compelled to censor this line.
S&P’s note however was that the comparison to Slavery was quite fine, but the Holocaust reference had to be removed because Slavery wasn’t as bad as the Holocaust.
Boy, is that telling.
Weird tale #3: Well, this isn't so much a tale as an observation. A lot of Americans appear to be under the impression that Medicare (which has a higher satisfaction rating than does private insurance) is not run by the evil gummint.
The New Republic's health care blog, The Treatment, points out that during the Hillarycare battle back in 1994, then-Sen. John Breaux, a Louisiana Democrat, was accosted at the airport by an elderly constituent. "Now don't you let the government get a hold of my Medicare," she said. Writing in The System, Haynes Johnson and David Broder related Breaux's criminally disingenuous response: "Oh, no, we won't let the government touch your Medicare." In a similar vein, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer recently complained on CNN, "If you like the Post Office and the Department of Motor Vehicles and you think they're run well, just wait till you see Medicare, Medicaid, and health care done by the government."
Yeah. And how about those national parks? Those forest rangers do a great job -- but if the gummint ever gets involved, everything will go to hell.
Permalink
How about if the Democrats get the government out of Medicare for those complaining and use the money saved to give health care to more appreciative people? At least get the government out of Medicare long enough for them to get a clue.
posted by Eric : 9:15 PM
"If you like the Post Office and the Department of Motor Vehicles and you think they're run well, just wait till you see Medicare, Medicaid, and health care done by the government."
Gog and Magog? Baise-moi!
And when Co. Sheriff's funds start drying up all across the country, this pea-brained, fascist loving crew will go gog gog over Xe rolling in to 'serve and protect.'
George Bush was only partially right in his, supposed, conversation with Chirac. The Middle East is a hot bed of political machinations that will, at some point, lead to a war called Gog/Magog. That war is where Iran and Russia hook up to go after Israel. From the descriptions in the Bible it looks to be a nuclear exchange. While the war will happen, it won't be to erase enemies for a New Age. It will be to show Israel that God is still their God and they are still the apple of His eye. Hal Lindsay and the Left Behind Series aren't the ones who made the call, God did. If a person don't believe it all they have to do is ask Him with a sincere heart...He'll tell you the truth.
Lonni
posted by Anonymous : 9:44 PM
WTF in French is 'Qu'est-ce que c'est, cette connerie?'
posted by Buddhist with an attitude : 12:32 AM
Thanks, Buddhist. Good to know!
Although "Baise-moi!" also seems possible. I had forgotten about the double meaning of baiser. As I see it, Dubya's interpreter would have gone for the more sedate, old-fashioned translation of the word. To which Dubya would have responded:.
"You want me to kiss you, Jacques? But...that goes against the teachings of our common faith..."
the French for WTF is (above translation is correct too) in every day speech "c'est quoi ce bordel ?" (literally "what kind of brothel is that ?".
I think that Chirac understood the "Gog and Magog" stuff, because even Catholics read the Book of Revelations (even if it's considered as folklore) - Catholics are interested in the gospels, the rest is background literature - but the French were interested in what it IMPLIED.
If one reads the Chirac's book, you'll find that Chirac predicted with an astonishing "prophetic" accuracy what was going to happen in Iraq : the civil war, the GI-losses, Al Quaeda resurgence etc...
@Lonni
We the French believe in science and facts and not in magical crap. The fact that those stories have been written on a goat skin 4000 years ago by herders that didn't have TV and needed cool stories to have some fun at night, doesn't change a thing.
posted by Leloup/France : 4:33 AM
"C'est quoi ce bordel?" I'll have to remember that. Thanks!
As for "magical crap" -- oh, every national population has a segment that maintains a wistful affection for tales of the supernatural. My boyhood crush on St. Bernadette was shared by quite a few Frenchmen, and her body (preserved by either wax or magic, take your pick) is still on display in Nevers. And I'm given to understand that magical thinking -- "New Age" thinking, as we say in America -- is still very popular in Cathar country.
If you want to define "magic" a little more rigorously, I could point out that, roughly a century ago, France was still the home of the wildest occult revival of modern times. Papus, Peladan, Doinel, de Guaita, d'Alveydre...ah, good times, good times. That strain still exists in French culture, although it is now a bit more subterranean. Don't discount the possibility that you could have another huge eruption. These things tend to be cyclical.
That said: When I was a boy, America had a far greater appreciation of science than is the case today. We were the nation of Einstein and Oppenheimer and Feynman and NASA. Then came the hippies, then came the Jesus freaks, then came the cuts in education... And now we have a population of young people who think that the radio works because it has little people inside.
The Bush 22 percenters believed the same. In fact some of them wanted him to go further and hasten the coming of the Apocalypse. You can thank the print and broadcast media for both Reagan and Bush II. Oh, and Bush III and the damage he will do.
posted by MrMike : 7:08 AM
Kinda makes you embarrassed that you live in a country populated by "Ignant" people!
"Don't let the Gummint touch my Gummint Medicare?" Bwaa haa haa!
Lonni, I don't know if you're referring to Daniel or Revelation, but Jesus himself said that the prophecies in the former were fullfilled in him, and as for the latter, it's not intended to be taken literally, but is a story with the message to Christians "don't worry, if we stay true to the faith (non-violence, good works, love, etc), we will win in the end."
[Incidentally, the inclusion of Revelation puts the lie to claims that the Church excludes books based on some sort of theological "party line": the council which did so didn't want to include it (due to, among other things, how it could be misinterpreted by some as being literal), but had to based on its sole criterion, that being "Has it been determined beyond a reasonable doubt that this was written by one of Jesus' apostles?]
-----
Hmm, I and everyone I know though DT was hilarious (we even had 'watching parties' where we watched each episode the day it premiered...twice.
Sergei Rostov
posted by Anonymous : 3:46 PM
We the French believe in science and facts and not in magical crap.
France:
[http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/3842.htm]
Religion: Roman Catholic 85% (est.), Muslim 10% (est.), Protestant 2%, Jewish 1%.
That would be 98%, as compared to the world average of 95%.
Also, surveys show that 90% of scientists are religious, i.e. the vast, vast majority of them don't feel it's an either-or propostion.
The 2008 election taught us that only racism could prompt anyone to criticize Barack Obama. Visitors to Daily Kos, Democratic Underground, Huffington Post or the other big "progressive" sites heard the message loud and clear. Every day, Obama supporters sent me short, angry, poorly-spelled letters screaming racist racist racist racist racist with an insistence reminiscent of Philip Glass. The very word received a new definition: "Racist" now has no meaning beyond "one who dislikes Obama."
It is my sad duty to inform you that Congressman John Conyers, long praised in these pages, has become infected by the deadly disease of racism.
Obama once gave lip service to single payer health care, but as president has staked his reputation on a mishmash of corporate schemes and deals-with-the-devil masquerading as health care reform – a thoroughly confused and conflicted legislative concoction that Conyers describes, simply, as “crap.”
Conyers suggests that, at the end of the legislative process, progressive congresspersons may wind up voting against Obama on health care because the bill will be simply too bad for advocates of real reform to support.
Busboys and Poets is a favored gathering place for progressives of all races. On the January night last year when Obama won the South Carolina primary, the place was noisier and more boisterous than anybody’s sports bar – so many deliriously hopeful faces, such soaring expectations. Now, John Conyers was telling many of the same people: “There is no one more disappointed than I am in Barack Obama.”
Mr. Conyers -- may I call you Adolf? -- I don't understand why you have allowed the ichor of hatred to flow through your veins. I must conclude that you can't stand the color of our president's skin. No other factor could have prompted you to say such words. You and your privileged, pale-faced brethren -- Bill Clinton, David Duke, Rush Limbaugh -- speak only to a shrinking, aging audience of ignorant, racist hicks.
Mr. Conyers, perhaps you should take some classes in racial sensitivity. At the very least, you should consult people like Josh Marshall of TPM, Markos Moulitsas of Daily Kos and Arianna Huffington. They have a lot to teach you about the black experience.
Note to Tom Tomorrow: For the most part, Obama did not make "entirely different promises" during the campaign. Guys like you were the problem. You were so dizzy with infatuation that you did not notice the weasel-words, the double-speak and the flat-out lies.
You were as wise in 2008 as you were in 2000, Sparky.
Permalink
I didn't see anything racist in that post. Good to see the reference to the Gemstone File. Have you ever looked at my real gemstone file site? I wouldn't suggest reading more than a page or two of the Gemstone File at a time if you value your sanity.
Maybe no one ever said it in those words,gary, but "racist" most definitely was the go-to response to any criticism. Sometimes even they got bored with their standard epithet and said "You just don't like him because he's Black"to change it up.The intertoobz were full of that nonsense.And, you must remember both Clintons being tagged as racists day in and day out last year.
Joseph, perhaps they would call him an Uncle Tom, not a racist? I think that's their go-to for Blacks who criticize Obama. Idiots!
Joan
posted by Anonymous : 1:05 PM
No one ever said that all criticism of Obama is racist.
In theory it is possible to criticize Obama and not be racist.
In practice you are a cross-burning Klansman if you do anything but praise his holy name.
It still happens. Just yesterday some posters at Digby's were screeching that opposition to Obamacare is racist.
But truly I had no idea that John Conyers, of all people, had succumbed to the succubus of hate.
posted by DancingOpossum : 2:55 PM
Thank you so much for spanking Tom Tomorrow and especially the odious NADERITES. They were the original Obots. Anyone who could vote for someone obviously lying through his teeth that Bush and Gore were "the same" had to have the IQ of a gnat and the ego of a chihuahua.
Nader then went on to shaft the Green Party, so he effectively killed a growing party. Obama is a continuation of that successful tactic. I no longer care. The numskull bridezilla generation deserves the far from "hip" future they created.
posted by Zee : 9:52 PM
The media savaging of the Clintons, Al Gore then John Kerry was a lesson not lost. I believe that Obama was selected by the powers that be because any criticism could be labeled as racist. Print and broadcast journalists laid off Obama lest they be called the R word.
posted by MrMike : 6:55 AM
lol! good post Zee.
The obots I knew identify with Obama so completely that they experience any criticism or question of him as a criticism on their own id.
That's why any call to look at the actual man and what he actully said and does, causes such screams. You are pointing out they aren't him and the free pass fluffy pillow he has is his alone and not theirs .....that cannot be stood .
see MrMike, I think those behind the savaging of the Clintons, Al Gore John Kerry etc. are those behind Obama and Bush...the media is but their trained dog who will tear up whoever they want on command.
The " any criticism could be labeled as racist" part is for those not completely marching to the press's and its owners tune. The press is in the can. The press is not an independent entity one needs to manipulate...it's simply bought...and some time ago. imo
Gary..I used to run an internet group..for 8 years. Any time I brought up what Obama really said , contrary to what people wanted to believe of the fantasy of what people wanted to believe he was saying, I was called a racist! Oh and Gary I was an elected democrat from my state, and am married to a dual minority and spent 20 + years as a poll watcher making sure minorites were not kept from voting in my state! I have a dual minority child, and have worked my entire life to protect the rights of minorities. Please do not tell me I wasn't called a racist, and that it wasn't for nafarious reasons! Oh and Gary I went to Iowa and SC for Edwards, and worked as a Caucus Co-Captain to make sure people got to caucus without cheating. While doing so, I saw 3 busses of bussed in Youth from Chicago by Team Obama, and they all had the same white Ipod on and screamed at and pushed and intimidated Hillary voters till they ran out of a school cafeteria crying! It wasn't my job to protect them, but the other Edwards Co-Captain and myself did all we could to try to protect these senior womens safety!Their safety was very much in peril by those thugs! Please do not pee on my leg and tell me it is raining. Many of us lifelong dems were called racists for simply pointing out what the "ONE" really said, as opposed to what the propaganda being sold to the masses really was!
posted by Anonymous : 12:19 PM
Annie you are 100% right...same owner just different guy..and they "use " the racist mantra to try to bring down anyone who questions the "ONE"!
FISA anyone????? Collecting emails that are "FISHY" to the army of Obama?
posted by Anonymous : 3:32 PM
The most sad-and-hilarious thing of all here is that according to this definition, the Obama of five years ago would be a racist.
Sergei Rostov
posted by Anonymous : 4:15 PM
Some Obama supporters called the Hillary supporters "racists".
Some Hillary supporters called the Obama supporters "misogynist" (like you did many times).
Can't you get over it ? I don't see a lot of people in the Obama camp flipping out because the feminist brigades accused everybody of not supporting Clinton because she was a woman (is that better ?)
I'm ready to admit some morons did not vote for Hillary because she was a woman, why is it so hard to admit that some people (mostly republicans) didn't vote for Obama (or thinks he's not born in the US) because he's black.
We have a saying in French for how to handle accusations: Si le chapeau te fait, porte-le. Rough translation: if the hat fits your head, wear it... otherwise, why do you care that much ?
By the way, if I had been a Republican operative during the last election, I would have had a lot of fun on blogs pretending to be an Obama or Hillary supporter. That's so easy to do and the results are obvious.
posted by A.R. : 7:06 PM
John Conyers is a brave man. And he has interesting timing. It will be...entertaining to see what comes of this.
If you come here often, you probably know that I dislike social networking sites, especially Facebook. So I was quite astonished to receive a Facebook invite from none other than Daniel Hopsicker, that exceptional and ornery independent investigator. Didn't he know that Facebook was founded by In-Q-Tel, a CIA cut-out?
His response (reprinted with permission) was addressed to all of his correspondents:
"Did I know that Facebook is a CIA op?" Well, no, I’m forced to admit, I didn't.
I didn’t know squat about Facebook, just that I was some time ago nudged by friends who are way more web 2.0-y than I am to join, so I did.
And then I clicked on something, and before I could dive for the plug on the computer “It” had sent a “friend” message to every name in my gmail account.
By mid-afternoon I knew a lot more about Facebook, in part courtesy a friend -- though not on Facebook! -- named Joe Cannon.
I learned that Facebook is a CIA-funded IN-Q-TEL startup… and I already knew a few things about IN-Q—TEL:
They funded a startup in 2000—a shell company that became the “vehicle” for a huge $40 million stock fraud called Skyway Communications—the company which 'just happened" to own a DC9 airliner busted in Mexico’s Yucatan carrying 5.5 tons of cocaine several years ago.
I’m told everyone involved agreed that this had been something of a faux pas.
In-Q-Tel and SkyWay’s partner in the current unpleasantness was a San Diego defense contractor, Titan Corp.(now L3) which had been the biggest backer of currently-imprisoned California Rep Randy ‘Boo-Hoo’ Cunningham.
Also: A bogus investment bank in Texas called Argyll Equity, in business with an accused drug trafficker in Mexico who is so big he owns railroads in the States (Jose Juan Segovia) and a more down to earth (but still big!) Garbage Guy from New Jersey, who got a billion dollars from WasteManagement, a tough company not known for even giving out the time of day for free.
Also involved are a passel of Saudi sheikhs and Gulf States Potentates with important-sounding appellations in front of their first names.
The reason I’m writing is to say sorry. All of these people now have your name.
Now that I have provided the CIA with every name in my gmail account -— and they didn’t even need to turn on the water! —- I’m taking the rest of the day off.
I’ll probably have a few drinks and maybe even get drunk, before the nighttime traffic begins to arrive with news of how many comrades have perished today in raids on now-compromised safe-houses, and all because I just wanted to not be the only person on Facebook who doesn’t have any friends.
And all I can think of to say to the widows at the funerals is, “I had no idea.”
But of course that won’t be much comfort.
Well, I can't understand why or how Facebook managed to access every address in Daniel's Gmail account. Neither can I understand why so many people invite that kind of nightmare into their lives. That said, the CIA hit squad has yet to arrive.
Then again, the dog did become a bit sick again last night. Perhaps there's a connection.
Daniel Hopsicker has a new blog, http://www.danielhopsicker.tv/. He's also being hit particularly hard by this recession. So if there's anything you can do to help, you could not find a worthier cause. (Yes, I know that many of you are tapped out right now, times being what they are.)
Incidentally, I have, in previous posts, added a bit to the investigation of Argyll. They have a biotech division which is behind a questionable cure for MS. It's a fascinating story -- one which involves a member of the Osmond family, believe it or not.
Permalink
That's hilarious. For the laugh alone, he has earned support. Wish I had more than a few coins.
I have to admit that after years of turning my back on facebook and myspace for all the obvious privacy reasons, I relented and opened up a facebook account because they held the magic key to reaching many lost friends of years gone by.
I keep wondering, what am I doing supporting this crap and opening my life up to the whole world. Then I remember, if they want to know about me, they will find a way one way or another. Facebook is not the key. It just makes their job easier.
Besides, facebook seems to have had an eye on me for quite a while with loads of personal info - trying to seduce me into friending acquaintances long before I opened the account.
Just when I thought they would give up and move on to the next chick down the block, they would come back with another line. The only thing that really worked was a birthday- thinking about old friends I have not seen for years. oh well.
Now if I want, all my "friends" can wish me happy birthday with a bday reminder widget in Facebook. ack.'
Keep up the good work ... k
posted by Anonymous : 3:08 PM
Facebook suggests that you permit them to rummage through your email, so that they can send out invites to all of your friends. If you punch yes on that, they go right through whatever email address that you give them.
Also, when you take the little quizzes that they have on FaceBook (which president are you? which of the seven dwarfs are you?, etc), they tell you that they must draw on your personal information to give you the best answer. Well, that's just silly.
I can tell you this. I have never clicked the link giving Facebook permission to send invites to all my friends in my email account, and still Facebook suggests that I befriend people that I've had a solitary email from.
I was looking for an antique bed last year, and several of the people that I contacted from Craig's List have been suggested as friends. One of them was Indian and so the same was easy to spot for what it was.
Heh. I'd finally concluded Hopsicker must've inadvertently submitted his address list to Facebook, but I'm glad to have that confirmed. Here's a slightly redacted excerpt from an email I sent mid-June to a few friends under the heading, "OK, Now I Am Officially Creeped Out." [Unfortunately, the first few paragraphs still apply.]
Typically I'm about the least-concerned person you can find when it comes to keeping my online and IRL lives separate. I figure I've blabbed so much on so many different fora in the 26 years I've been online that there's no conceivable way of sucking it all back in. I've tried to deal with the issue by attempting to be the same person in as many contexts as possible and letting the chips fall as they may. Still, while I haven't gone out of my way to obfuscate the link between "[real name]" and "Dr Mazoola," I've also not gone out of my way to make it an easy connection to make.
Accordingly, I was more than a little shocked yesterday to discover, while Googling "[real name]" (c'mon, you know you do it, too), a hit on spock.com. Spock -- a specialist search engine of which I was previously unaware -- concentrates on people-oriented searches. Google found a Spock page for [a friend's real name] (known in our circles as "Traci from Tracy") that included "[real name]" as a person related to Traci, based on our being MySpace friends.
Now, publicly on MySpace I am and always have been "Mazoola" -- although I suppose an explicit search on my name will bring up Mazoola's page. The same goes for Friendster. However, searching Spock for "[real name]" brings up hits to MySpace, Friendster, and LinkedIn. Either Spock is doing a bang-up job of data mining... or their agreement with MySpace allows them access to real names -- which they then make public.
As if *that* wasn't enough, today I popped over to Facebook for some reason, and I noticed the "suggested friend" was Daniel Hopsicker. Now, I'm a Hopsicker fan from way back: I've bought his books, contributed to his legal fund, and corresponded with him about minor corrections or additional info I've found. I've promoted him on several sites, including BoingBoing. Figuring it wasn't surprising others in my Facebook community would also be fans, I clicked on "friend request." Only afterwards did it occur to me to see who he and I have as mutual friends.
No one.
So exactly *how* did Facebook make the connection between Hopsicker and I? Any answer I come up with frightens me.
posted by Mazoola : 4:01 PM
Mazoola, I had a similar experience. I have suspicions that it has something to do with my emails or address book. I never authorized any mass email like Hopsicker, so I do not know how they could have gotten that association. I also do not have a GMail account so this is even more creepy. All my emails are sent from my private computer-all addresses are stored on my private hard drive. It would be interesting to see if anyone could research/test this on a facebook account and limited address book with variable factors to prove the source of their data harvesting.
posted by Anonymous : 6:45 PM
If you allow Facebook access to your email account, you allow them to know your password to said account. So, if he had work related contacts who want their identity secret they would be screwed. He's always been overly dramatic (understandable) but he probably has a right to be worried. Dumb thing to do. You would think he would have multiple email accounts just for this reason.
Speaking of Gmail, Google ain't so swell either...
posted by Tony B. : 8:11 PM
For someone who makes fun of other people's conspiracies, you seem to find a few of your own!
posted by Anonymous : 8:20 PM
I doubt anyone that wants to be "sekrit" would bother emailing someone like Hopsicker with an account that is in their own name or even their own account. Some use other people's accounts etc.
And- besides, if "they" want the addresses, they obviously have them already if they are telling me who I should be "friends" with and never gave them access to my hard drive or my server pword. creepy
posted by Anonymous : 12:00 AM
Sure the powers that be can get my info... that's all legal now . ...but I ain't giving it to them. I'd rather they have to pay someone for it. lol!
Hey Tony B. I think Hopsicker was being sarcastic. But I guess some don't get his humor. He is verrrrry sarcastic most of the time. I like the general approach-if you can't beat 'em mock 'em at every opportunity.
posted by Anonymous : 8:44 PM
I too received an invitation from Daniel to join Facebook and have him as a friend. What happened next was a series of strange things that targetted my relationships with other people. To check it out it needs to personal be proven with each person to make sure their interest is real or not. The system provides this function but it can’t be trusted. What was learned included strange situations from day to day. Also some of the invitation email received disappear the following day while others remained. Why is that? And a friend told me they weren't involved with Facebook but appears to be involved. So you can be misrepresented. Who is putting someone in Facebook without them knowing about it and why? I even had another friend request that I add this person icon to my friend list when they weren’t involved.
I've posted about my link in a family for more than 26 years who are "CIA Assets" and directly involved in a World Drug distribution system with the CIA. They often talked about their CIA link and many of the strange stories from their CIA friends were always more than humorous.
The family: Mexico drug plane used for US 'rendition' flights: report http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5j6QonBKKMo2gw1e3ql-xUcQEZbVg
Clyde O'Connor is my ex-sister-in-law's brother. Her husband, is my ex-wife's brother and business partner with Clyde. They discussed starting the drug shipping business at my home in the early 90's. The family often bragged about being CIA Assets and nothing will touch them even if it involves murder. Please notice that neither of these people have been aprehended for criminal activities.
My own experience with the CIA insanity exceeds 12 years. This follows the start of the divorce and explains the tricks played with focusing on disrupting all social personal relationships. This includes any type of social relationship including; family, friends, groups and more. Their goal is to isolate you so you're alone. This has been going on in my life for more than 12 years. It cycles from being alone to developing a social life to seeing that distrupted and starting another, over and over again. Each time while in a social life, what surfaces are an ongoing parade of setups to cause trouble. There is proof of this but for another time....
The games or setups seem endless. They employ a full spectrum of snooping from snooping within the home, to my car and where I endup going to have fun. Comcast Cable boxes have cameras and microphones by design that snoop 24/7. The microphones can pick up a whisper 50 feet away. Don't mess around on the couch while watching TV because EVERYONE is watching you. They also have added technology to talk to computers that aren't connected to the internet. Even my small handheld computer without any com ports is snooped upon. Everything electronic is vulnerable. While a friend went out of state visiting family I learned the video players were messed up. They didn't work. The list of problems were endless. I performed extensive testing that suggests their electronics is manipulating them useless. Unplugging the power for two days made them work properly again. It was also learned that your neighbors cable box can affect your electronics as the reach on these boxes exceeds 150 feet.
I know from the family the proceeds from drug sales (Chicago's $100 million/week as an example) fund this behavior. There are many people of all ages involved. The groups run in gangs from a few to many more. Also it’s known they have supported the setups and murder of people.
We seen to be a gawking society. Since the focus is to disrupt someone's social life, Facebook is a GREAT TOOL. It makes sense why the CIA was involved from the beginning.
My Facebook experience for this week makes me wonder if I'll pull the plug or not. Usually with computers when everything works, it's a great experience. But this seems plagued with so many numerous problems that maybe not having it is a better idea.
Blackwater: Murdering whistleblowers and killing Iraqis for fun
Jeremy Scahill has an important story in The Nation about Erik Prince, the allegedly "Christian" warrior who runs the private merc firm Blackwater. Two former Blackwater employees -- presently anonymous, for reasons soon to become clear -- have stated that Prince has murdered whistleblowers cooperating with federal investigations of Blackwater.
Prince also stands accused of weapons smuggling, destroying evidence and misleading investigators.
The former employee also alleges that Prince "views himself as a Christian crusader tasked with eliminating Muslims and the Islamic faith from the globe," and that Prince's companies "encouraged and rewarded the destruction of Iraqi life."
You can find pdfs of the sworn statements here and here. Here's an interesting snippet:
9. Mr. Prince is motivated to engage in misconduct by two factors: First, he views himself as a Christian crusader tasked with eliminating Muslims and the Islamic faith from the globe.
10. To that end, Mr. Prince intentionally deployed to Iraq certain men who shared his vision of Christian supremacy, knowing and wanting these men to take every available opportunity to murder Iraqis. Many of these men used call signs based on the Knights of the Templar, the warriors who fought the Crusades.
Beauseant!
The informant says that these mercenaries went on insane killing sprees, essentially murdering "ragheads" for sport. According to this statement, Prince encouraged the deployment of mentally unstable individuals -- drunk, hopped up on steroids and intent on running up massive body counts. (But still Christian, y'know?) The psychologists who labeled the men unstable were fired.
The second force motivating Prince was, of course, greed.
16. Mr. Prince obtained illegal ammunition from an American company called LeMas. This company sold ammunition designed to explode after penetrating the human body...
I find this accusation more than credible. Here's a PETA piece on the tests conducted by Le Mas on pigs. And here's a scientific study, complete with gruesome photos of what happens to the pigs. Also see the discussion here and the report here, which mentions Blackwater.
Let's get back to the claim that Blackwater kills snitches. One possible victim was Ciara Durkin, who served at Bagram Airfield; I've discussed her strange death in a previous post. Her home town newspaper quoted her sister thus:
"She was in the finance unit and she said, ‘I discovered some things I don’t like and I made some enemies because of it.’ Then she said, in her light-hearted way, ‘If anything happens to me, you guys make sure it gets investigated..."
Originally, Ciara Durkin -- found with a gunshot wound to her head -- was labeled killed in action. Later, she was ruled a suicide. John Kerry and Ted Kennedy asked the Army to assent to the family's request for an indpendent autopsy -- but so far as I know, none was ever permitted. (See also here.)
Another possibility: The highly suspicious death of Ted Westhusing, who also died of a gunshot wound to the head (although in this case, we have a suicide note). Westhusing, an expert in the history of military ethics, was an aide to Gerneral Petraeus.
This story, which does not mention Blackwater, says that he seemed initially to "get along well" with private contractors from a Carlyle group subsidiary called U.S. Investigations Services. That attitude changed:
Westhusing began having increasingly contentious conflicts with the contractors from USIS. There were ongoing problems with USIS’s expenses, and Westhusing was forced to deal with allegations that USIS had seen or participated in the killing of Iraqis. He received an anonymous letter claiming USIS was cheating the military at every opportunity, that several hundred weapons assigned to the counterterrorism training program had disappeared, and that a number of radios, each of which cost $4,000, had also disappeared. The letter concluded that USIS was “not providing what you are paying for” and that the entire training operation was “a total failure.”
And when the Bush administration finally succumbed (in late 2008) to pressure to investigate Blackwater, guess who was given the task of running the investigation? That's right: USIS.
Of course, federal law prohibits the use of private contractors to conduct criminal investigations. Not that the law matters any more.
(Hm. Has the Obama administration changed the situation? I think not...)
Permalink
I've been following these guys for some time since they were bought and brought in to New Orleans by some rich folk (and who knows, possibly Rummie with some secret slush fund) after Katrina. There's quite a collection of stories about what they did down here that would make a book.
These folks are dangerous and need to be put out of business. Any government contract granted them should be pulled back immediately. I wasn't aware of the religious angle, but I believe it.
I've been following these guys for some time since they were bought and brought in to New Orleans by some rich folk (and who knows, possibly Rummie with some secret slush fund) after Katrina....
Indeed, Dakinikat. That's why it took four days to get Katrina victims a sandwich and a bottle of water, as volunteers were turned away.
Bush wanted the LA national guard etc. to stand down for Blackwater. After 4 days the LA Gov relented.
But I believe they were funded by the US taxpayer. It's never anyone in Bush Inc' money. That would bypass the all important point of draining the public cookie jar for " friends."
They also passed a bill were they could pay a pitance to outside workers,( denying local work) who they often didn't pay at all...those who actually clean up get zip...those who get no bid contracts for the clean up...do just that.
Bush Inc and Bush 3's prayer: Oh Lord. Let no planned government failing be without it's boondoggle corporate solution! Amen
For some time I've been talking about many areas linked to the family I was in for more than 26 years. They often brag about being CIA Assets have been deeply involved in laundering money straight into property for CIA operations and others since the late 70's.
In the mid 90's, a new company was to start in the future that would be called Blackwater. It would be one of the military type groups who would be involved in the White House Coup.
Meet the family: Mexico drug plane used for US 'rendition' flights: report Sep 4, 2008 -- http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5j6QonBKKMo2gw1e3ql-xUcQEZbVg
Note the CIA link and make sure you don't miss all the drugs! Clyde O'Connor is my ex-sister-in-law's brother. Her husband is my ex-wife's brother and silent money man business partner to Clyde.
There is a lot more but better for another time...
Marty Didier Northbrook, IL
posted by Anonymous : 12:27 PM
"Blackwater: Murdering whistle blowers and killing Iraqis for fun"
When you think of the billions and billions involved, of course they knock off whistle blowers.
Blackwater sent into Fallujah, a hot spot, those four guys and without any protection, to be killed and give us the "reason " to destroy the city. Killing off their employees for the greater "good" is par for the course.
Also I would think " killing Iraqis for fun" would be part of Blackwater's recruit pitch.
Alot of what I know about Blackwater comes from watching Democracy Now before they became zombies for Obama in 07. It's a real shame
Bill Clinton freed the journalists jailed in North Korea. Instead of celebrating this accomplishment, "liberal" media outlets are still calling Bill Clinton a racist! CNN:
His first major verbal stumble during that campaign came in the run-up to the New Hampshire primary when he told a crowd that then-candidate Obama's claim to have been an early and consistent opponent of the Iraq war was "the biggest fairy tale I've ever seen."
In the ensuing media uproar, many Democratic activists -- African-Americans in particular -- came to believe that the former president had belittled Obama's entire campaign effort.
Obama's Iraq war opposition was indeed a fairy tale.
After denouncing the rush to war in that famed 2002 speech -- at a venue in which expressing any other opinion would have been politically (and perhaps physically) dangerous -- Obama kept mum about the subject. He didn't denounce the decision to go to war during his nationwide address at the 2004 DNC -- in fact, he said that Bush should have sent in more troops. He refused to discuss the issue during the senatorial campaign. In the senate, his Iraq war voting record was to the right of Hillary's. Yet in 2008, he pretended to be a consistent and vocal opponent of the conflict.
Obama was a liar -- and liars deserve to be belittled.
And while stumping for his wife in heavily black South Carolina, he seemed to try to minimize the impact of an Obama win by noting that the Rev. Jesse Jackson also won the state in 1984 and 1988 but went on to lose both nominations by wide margins.
Jesse Jackson saw nothing racist in Clinton's remarks. His point was that South Carolina happens to have a history of making maverick choices in Democratic primaries. But the bots found ways to twist everything Clinton said. The Obama campaign pursued a conscious strategy of painting all opposition to their candidate as racism.
Frankly, I wish both Clintons would tell the Democratic party to go to hell, as I have. It's Obama's party now -- which is to say, it's the party of Timmy and Larry and Goldman Sachs and GE. In the end, this puppet president is going to do more harm to the Dems than Dubya did to the Republicans.
Permalink
Yes, of course it is, Peter of Lone Tree. Obama's a soulless narcissist who doesn't give a damn about (what's left of) the Democratic party, or the country, as long as he gets the perks and the attention.
BTW, there's a hoary old joke that goes something like this:
Q: What do you call a Republican politician in Chicago?
A: A Democrat
posted by LandOLincoln : 12:14 AM
They never let a good smear get stale. I bet according to CNN, Gore still said he invented the internet. Notice nothing seem to stick to poor W, he is never introduced in article as the president who stole two elections, lied us in two wars or neglected the warnings on 9.11!
Had 911 happened under an Al Gore presidency the media would have called for his impeachment and arrest.
posted by MrMike : 7:24 AM
911 would not have happened during a competent administration.
And as far as the soulless narcissist Obama, check out the media slide show of pictures of the journalists' return home. Everyone is either beaming with smiles or crying for joy....except Zero. In every single shot of him going to the podium to remark on the rescue of the journalists he is pursing his lips or scowling. He's annoyed the spotlight is on the Big Dog, acting presidential. Especially after his own pony show of sharing beers with the testy professor and lying cop.
posted by Zee : 9:47 AM
I don't know Bill or Hillary from Larry, Moe or Curly but I do see what they do and what they say concerning their efforts to help this country and the world are consistently...consistent. I appreciate that.
posted by andrelee : 4:09 PM
I attended that 2002 rally where Obama supposedly spoke against the Iraq war, but I don't remember him at all from that event. If he really did speak there, it wasn't noticeable.
In fact, if you read the speech (as it appears now on his website) carefully, you'll see that nowhere did he say he was opposed to attacking Iraq. As you said, he was only opposed to the RUSH to attack Iraq. He never said that if he were in the U.S. Senate at that time he'd vote against any measure that might be interpreted as an authorization to attack Iraq. http://www.barackobama.com/2002/10/02/remarks_of_illinois_state_sen.php
It's Obama's typical wishy-washy attempt to have it both ways.
In 2002, Obama argued for continued inspections and against pre-emptive war...which was exactly what Hillary said her yes vote on the AUMF (that very same month) was for ...and yet five years later, Obots and Obama claimed that back then he was against the war, and Hillary for it.
Also:
"Our troops should stay there until the [Bush's] mission is completed...George Bush and I have pretty much the same view of the war at this point."
Well, everyone else is talking about it, so why can't I? This video on YouTube claims that Barack Obama is the AntiChrist. Jesus himself supposedly said so in Luke 10:18: "I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven."
According to the video narrator -- who has that ever-so-reassuring southern accent, as do so many of America's finest theological thinkers -- Jesus originally said these words in Aramaic, "the oldest form of Hebrew." And in that language, the word for lightning is "Baraq" while the word for heaven is "Bamah." Thus, Jesus said "I saw Satan as Baraq ubamah." (The U is supposedly a Hebrew preposition, or something preposition-y.)
Frankly, I'm not inclined to trust the scholarship of a video which avers that Aramaic is the oldest form of Hebrew. As blunders go, that's on a par with saying that California was one of the original 13 states.
The vast majority of New Testament scholars believe that Luke was originally written in Greek. (A minority theory holds that the book was composed in Aramaic and then translated into Koine Greek.) Greek is certainly the language used in our earliest manuscripts, which date back to the late 2nd century. Here's Luke 10:18 (which, by the way, is clearly not a prophetic passage, when read in context):
In case the Greek letters don't show up on your screen, try this:
eipen de autoiV eqewroun ton satanan wV astraphn ek tou ouranou pesonta
Did Jesus really did say these words? I don't know. But if he did, he probably said them in Aramaic. (We cannot be entirely sure even of that, since some now think that Greek was more popular among Galilean Jews than was previously supposed.)
Back-translating a Greek passage to the (presumed) Aramaic original is no easy task, but this blogger has taken on the job. I shall summarize his excellent work.
The word bāmâ -- meaning heights or high place -- is not used to mean "heaven" anywhere in the Old Testament. And if Jesus had used that word, the person who originally translated the sentence into Greek (whoever he might have been) naturally would have used the cognate Greek term, bēma.
Now look back at the Greek. Do you see a bēma in there? Me neither.
The Hebrew for "heaven" is šāmayim.
...the likeliest back-translation of the words "I saw Satan fall like lightning from Heaven" into Hebrew, rather, would be hāzâ (or rā'â) ha-śātān kībārāq min-vešāmayim.
Speaking of Aramaic: The language is also known as Syriac. (The Hebrews called Syria "Aram.") It's related to Hebrew, which is an older tongue.
Today, more than two million people speak derivatives and variants of the language of Jesus. However, things have changed a great deal over the past two thousand years. Most of the people who now have Syriac as a first language would not have been able to understand Jesus, except for the occasional word. Speakers of one Syriac dialect are often confused by other Syriac dialects.
In the ancient Syrian town of Maaloula (a couple of hours north of Damascus), many people still speak a dialect of Aramaic close to that which Jesus used, although the language is rapidly falling out of use. Back in 2003 everyone in town was -- quite naturally -- eager to see Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ. But they could understand surprisingly little of the film. The back-translation was confusing, and the actors' pronunciation was very poor. At least, so thought the good folk of Maaloula.
By the way, if you want to brush up on your Aramaic (just think of how impressed Jesus will be when you greet him in his own language!), you can stay at the Maaloula Hotel for $115 a night. Your room will have a minibar (!!) and internet. So no missing Cannonfire, y'hear?
Update: The new version of the video carries an overlay informing us that a "JEWISH RABBI" has confirmed that Jesus predicted Barack Obama. Good thing they specified a Jewish rabbi, as opposed to all the other kinds out there.
Permalink
I love your post - and my next comment has nothing to do with you. It has to do with the idiots who are the root of this whole story.
GET A LIFE! Seriously, to sit and pontificate on something you know nothing about on the whole subject of "religion" and "God said", is about the biggest waste of time I can imagine.
Actually, I'm glad you posted this, It brought me my first laugh of the day.
Oh, the Clintons score - again! Wonder how long it will take for BO to take credit for Bill's mission to N. Korea?
Ummm yeah I looked this up in the Peshitta (the Aramaic Bible- http://www.peshitta.org/)
And it does not say what the author of the video states it does...
Also the whole thing about Aramaic being the oldest form of Hewbrew... ppfffftttt... That's a good laugh...
Here is an Excerpt from the e-Mail I sent to the author...
"Dear Sir, In your video: "ORIGINAL - DID JESUS GIVE US THE NAME OF THE ANTICHRIST?"
There is a slight Exegetical error at time stamp: 0:30-It is stated that Aramaic is the most ancient form of Hebrew this is most assuredly un-true... we both know that Aramaic/Syriac is the Aramaeain from of Hebrew from the the Achaemenid Empire of Cyrus the Great...
The history of Aramaic is broken down into three broad periods:
Old Aramaic (1100 BC–200 AD), including: The Biblical Aramaic of the Hebrew Bible. The Aramaic of Jesus.
Middle Aramaic (200–1200), including: Literary Syriac. The Aramaic of the Talmuds, Targumim, and Midrashim. Mandaic.
Modern Aramaic (1200–present), including: Various modern vernaculars.
Hebrew is the main language of the Hebrew Bible.Mostly used in the books of Daniel, Ezra and a few other places in the Hebrew Bible and should not be confused with the later Aramaic translations of the Hebrew Bible known as targumim... Aramaic only accounts for about 250 verses out of a total of over 23,000. Biblical Aramaic is closely related to Hebrew being that both are in the Northwest Semitic language family."
8 ways 'The Conspiracy' is destroying our American democracy
A year ago, any article with a subtitle like "8 ways 'The Conspiracy' is destroying our American democracy" would have been relegated to the fringes. But here it is on Market Watch.
Permalink
What the Fed is REALLY Trying to Hide In Fighting an Audit (Partial Quote): "But what the Fed is really struggling to keep hidden is the fact that the entire financial system is based on massive manipulation and fraud by the Fed and its primary dealers.
"Specifically, the Fed is desperately trying to hide that many trillions of the government's bailouts have gone to inflating the stock market, buying up the U.S. government's own treasuries, and gaming the currency and gold markets."
Why wasn't the "cash for clunkers" program designed to encourage buying domestic? And did you know that the extended program came at the expense of renewable energy?
Ethanol=boondoggle. No sadness there but solar energy development or wind turbines are a different matter.
posted by MrMike : 5:49 AM
Cash for Clunkers is just another government bailout program that rewards bad behavior and dumb decisions and those who make them - the car companies that made the gas guzzlers and the people who bought them.
The people that bought gas guzzlers over the past 10 years and, thus, poluted the air, consumed non-renewable resources (foreign oil), and drove up our debt to foreign countries (from whom we buy that oil) are now rewarded with $3500 or $4500 rebates to buy a new car.
I have been driving a Subaru that gets 29 miles per gallon for the last 13 years, so my only options to qualify for this program are the Prius or Honda Insight. By comparison, someone driving an SUV for the last 10 years that gets 12 miles to the gallon can choose from a variety of models that get 22 MPG or greater, qualify for the full $4500 rebate, and still be polluting more than I am with my Subaru.
I can understand why this program is so popular, but is it really good policy?
There are a LOT of problems with Cash for Clunkers. A big opponent right now is the association that represents rebuilders and remanufacturers, who correctly point out that it will deprive poor people of the ability to purchase decent but old cars, and that scrapping perfectly driveable cars and producing new ones is environmental insanity.
Methinks it is far, far too similar to ObamaCare: Sounds good, feels good, but leaves you hungrier than before you ate it.
There's a lively debate on it at Motor Trend forum:
Also, what Random Weirdness said. Absolutely right, and in fact what dealers are reporting is people bringing in cars that are only a few years old and trading them in for brand-new "green" ones.
My mother keeps begging me to do the C4C because she thinks that my driving a 12-year-old car means Instant Highway Death, but as I told her, my "clunker" gets 30 miles to the gallon and runs great, and it has the supremely wonderful benefit of being paid for. When it gets undriveable I'll either donate it or give it to one of my friends who does demolition derbies.
The more I look, the more I see evidence that this recession is no mere recession -- it's the inevitable result of an organized plan to siphon all the world's cash into the pockets of the very few. Evidence:
1. Iraq reconstruction is now recognized as a fraud far worse than Madoff -- and it would not have happened if senior U.S. officials had not colluded in the crime.
2. Option ARMs are far worse than mere subprime loans, and their true impact has not yet hit.
3. Obama did nothing -- well, almost nothing -- to ease foreclosures, even though he could have forced the mortgage lenders to place their loans into radical rewrite.
4. A.I.G. -- supposedly "rescued" -- remains both dangerous and in danger. A.I.G. keeps writing insurance policies because doing so the only way it can ever hope to repay taxpayers. But A.I.G. lacks the ability to cover the risks it has taken on. The conglomerate has hidden its severe vulnerabilities by moving assets around amongst its constituent companies.
5. Pretty much everything we're hearing about corporate earnings is a big fat lie.
Exactly how impaired are banks’ impaired loans? The Financial Accounting Standards Board, under political pressure, has ruled that the banks decide. Might as well ask a six-year-old who took the cookies.
6. The jobs ain't coming back anytime soon. Unemployment will get a whole lot worse. The government will have to extend unemployment benefits. But we can't do that forever. When the dole ends, foreclosures will rise even higher -- and an uneducated, easily-gulled citizenry will be radicalized.
7. Obama's stiumulus plan has created few new jobs. His "stimulus" seems to have been designed to fail, thus giving Republicans a chance to say: "Well, we tried socialism and it didn't work."
9. Wall Street's rally is based on nonsense. Those high frequency trading programs exist only to scoop up any remaining dollars and place them in the coffers of Goldman Sachs. The Fed has been buying lots of mortgage-backed securities. (See point 2.) Wall Street has become a massive Ponzi scheme backed by taxpayers. The fundamentals aren't there: We don't make anything and we can't afford to buy anything.
10. Obamacare has been midwived by the health insurance industry and the drug companies (even though candidate Obama lambasted the drug companies). The insurance racketeers would wither away if left alone. The "reform" package is designed to keep the monster alive by forcing more people to buy expensive Krappy Kare.
I could go on, but needn't. The real question is: When will everyone finally wake up?
Tyler Durden says that we will remain in a state of mass hallucination for another six or seven months. Next year, the trance will wear off.
It was a short 5 days ago that we wrote about CNBC's misrepresentation of this earnings season as a stellar success for companies. Earnings and revenues were down 32.4% and 15.1% then. Since then the economic situation has deteriorated even more: as of today earnings were down 33.4% and sales have declined 17.4%, respectively, quarter over quarter. And while earnings are now supposed to increase by 114.9% in two quarters by inhaling green shoots and what not, more curious is out of what hat will revenues stage a dramatic 22% increase in just 6 months. If anyone held a gun to my head to indicate when disappointment with guidance/analyst expectations would finally set in, i would have to say middle of February 2010 when miss after miss, both top and bottom line, will demonstrate just what an unjustified joke this rally truly is.
To which one wit added the following:
The economy doesn't have anything to do with the stock market. Given enough liquidty we could have 50% unemployment, cannibalism in the streets and DOW 36,000. In fact that's my forecast. Bon Appetit.
I feel more and more like I live in two distinct, separate worlds : on the one hand the sane, Cannonfire world, on the other hand the Financial Times world, where every day there's an upbeat, optimistic interview of an expert claiming that the crisis is largely over, when it's not some kind of bullshit economic indicator proving irrefutably that in a few months, the credit orgy will return.
An explanation for this market frenzy could be that the subprime Ponzi scheme has been restarted, albeit with a different support base : state and corporate bonds. Investment banks are already busy at creating new piles of steaming, toxic junk, and earning bilions in the process. There is some kind of methodical, sane, rational madness at work here.
Normally, I save the non-political posts for the weekends, but I cannot refrain from commenting on something I recently saw: A young man wearing short pants so low that his beltline hit below his crotch. He kept a long t-shirt tucked into the pants. I presume that hidden safety pins kept the shirt in place.
Now, this is not the first time I've seen such a thing. In fact, the first time was more than ten years ago. And that's my point.
It used to be that stupid clothing fads had a predictable life-cycle. In 1970, you could see hippie wanna-bes wearing ultra-wide bell-bottoms and love beads. By the time The Exorcist hit movie theaters, that look was over: The human race had progressed to other stupidities. Back in the day, young people cycled in and out of novel forms of visual inanity about once every year. Two years, max. Faddists may have been ninnies, but at least they understood the shock of the new.
But the sagging pants thing -- which is, let's face it, the stupidest clothing craze in all human history -- has been around since the early 1990s, or so sayeth Wikipedia. Very soon, the fad will be some twenty years old. Twenty years old.
What the fuck, man? Why won't this thing die?
(Yeah, goth chicks have been around even longer. But goth chicks are hot.)
I remember that 'Our Gang' and 'The Little Rascals' from the 1930s had ill-fitting, over sized clothes, but it was because they were POOR. They wore hand-me-downs and whatever they could get.
Why anyone would deliberately present themself as so poverty-stricken as to wear Daddy's cut-off pants, I don't know.
Later, this style of oversize pants came from prisons, where 'one-size-fits-all'.
Why anyone would deliberately present themself as a prison convict, I don't know.
Why anyone would deliberately present themself as too damned stupid to know what size pants to purchase or how to keep one's pants up, I don't know.
posted by elliewyatt : 1:32 PM
I thought it was a prison fad that said that a young man was "available" to other men...
wonder if those kids know that?
posted by OldCoastie : 2:18 PM
Baggy low-riding pants (that treat the unsuspecting to unpleasant views of butt cracks) have stuck around - just like low-ride pants for girls - because young people today are F A T.
This look hides the obesity of a generation or let's them rationalize why they have flab hanging over their "waist" lines because they have to keep the pants tight to keep them up.
I am soooooo very tempted to turn around and yank hard on some of these pants, just to see what happens.
In my experience, it is thin guys who wear their pants that low. And "low riding" is a term for guys who keep their beltline low but above the penis. Saggers go even lower.
Interesting that you should bring this up, because yesterday I saw exactly the same get-up on a young black man at the grocery store. Do these young people have any idea how stupid they look?
grayslady
posted by Anonymous : 3:09 PM
Recently, I fell in behind a teenaged couple walking down my street. I noticed that the boy was struggling to walk and I thought to myself, "poor kid, so young, such a shame". As I gained on them, I saw that he was a Sagger. The fucking crotch was at his knees. As I passed by them, I turned and said to him, "pull yer pants up, fercrissakes!" I couldn't help it.
juststoppingby
posted by Anonymous : 3:37 PM
I find it more than strange that the guys who like to show their butts this way get so bent out of shape when a gay guy checks out their cracks. Most of them seem to be such homophobes, but go out of their way to invite the appraisal of their posteriors. I don't get it.
Joe, another exsample is Rap. It's the " lastest' music and it's nearly 30 years old. I think part of the problem is the corporate state doesn't allow any new stuff in ...and kids seem so hooked up to it ,they don't bring trends they might creat to the fore.
"Baggy low-riding pants (that treat the unsuspecting to unpleasant views of butt cracks) have stuck around - just like low-ride pants for girls - because young people today are F A T.
This look hides the obesity of a generation or let's them rationalize why they have flab hanging over their "waist" lines because they have to keep the pants tight to keep them up."
Actually, that's not true. Oversize clothing makes one look fatter. People who have less than svelte figures actually look better in well-fitting clothes with design lines that minimize the lumps. The cable show, What Not To Wear, has successfully upgraded the image of many people who have less than perfect bodies in their makeovers.
Why young people are doing this? Part of it may be cultural (alas poor Opera, I knew him well) or it may just be laziness.
posted by Anonymous : 3:51 PM
I like this explanation: The sagging-pants look is rooted in jails, where belts are confiscated. Furloughed toughs than popularized the look on the streets.
But here's a fad that truly won't die: blue jeans. Work clothes designed for miners and farmers in the 19th century, woven of coarse material that needs to be "broken in," blue jeans have been the de facto uniform of young urban non-conformists for more than half a century. Show me a kid who spurns blue jeans, and I'll show you a real rebel.
posted by Trojan Joe : 3:55 PM
I've been sagging for a while but it has nothing to do with my pants.
Joseph - I think I live in an area where obesity is rampant - actually everyone seems to be overweight - but particularly the kids...baggers or saggers.
Annie, you hit upon the point precisely. It's not that I'm anti-rap or hip-hop, even though I do find them annoying. What pisses me off is that kids have not thought of any NEW ways to annoy me. It's been nothing but rap for three decades. Cah-MON, where's the creativity?
Creativity went out the window along with a classical education.
posted by MrMike : 7:57 PM
Saw, or heard, something recently re the fad and law enforcement.
Police allegedlyconsider the pants to be an asset to them, when it comes to "runners".
Hard to run while holding pants up with at least one hand. Spoils the rhythm, and, of course, it is all over when the drop occurs.
posted by Just Me : 4:00 AM
OT, but need to say:
Welcome back! A bit late in expressing such, however, first time I have commented since your return.
Your excellent, eclectic, blog is my first read each day. So needless to say, the days you were away did not start off too well.
Better now, Thanks!
posted by Just Me : 4:08 AM
Here's a site I like: 'The Problem With Young People Today Is...'
Affronts to Old People #4: Irresponsible and Ludicrous First Names
One thing that really grinds an old folk’s gears is this damned stupid habit that young people have adopted of giving their children flashy and irresponsible first names.
When I was a lad there 7 choices for boys names and 9 for girls. Naming a child was a simple affair. When you popped out of the womb and were taken to your old dad, he’d take a deep puff on his cigar, give you a good stare and say “Looks like a Dick to me.”
And, bingo, you had your name. It may not have been “original” but if nothing else you knew that there would be 10 other Dicks just like you on your street.
But today, my God! Everyone names their nasty sprogs after perfumes and automobiles and months of the year. The parks are overflowing with snot-faced urchins running around with droopy diapers and million dollar handles like “December”, “Chanel”, “Mercedes” or worse.....
http://crabbyoldfart.wordpress.com/
posted by elliewyatt : 7:54 AM
Like those in tail-fins [then] and spoilers [now] on cars, styles in baggy-pantedness (pant bagosity?) have tended toward the extreme. Allegedly, though, the trend for wearing a low-slung pair of loose-fitting jeans originated in said garment's abilities, first, better to conceal a handgun tucked beneath the waistband and, second, to establish the wearer as someone with a need for best-of-breed, weapons-concealment apparel.
posted by Mazoola : 7:32 PM
Maz, I don't know how one would go about concealing a gun in a pair of basketball shorts worn with the waistline of the garment hugging the thighs. At any rate, the kids who affect that style -- they don't exactly look intimidating. Hell, I could take 'em.
The baggy pants thing began because black kids were poor and either had to wear 'hand-me-downs' from their older siblings or buy irregular/odd sizes...first suburban white kids imitated them ("black kids are doing it, so it must be cool, right?"), then more affluent black kids did it in order to fake being "from the 'hood." Manufacturers caught onto this, and after some slight redesigns (smaller waists, for example) relabelled these as trendy "baggy" pants (after a huge markup, of course). As for "saggy" pants, that came later...except in that case, the manufacturers didn't even need to redesign them.
Annie, as far as music types, emo and electronica - to name but two examples - are a lot younger than rap.
Sergei Rostov
posted by Anonymous : 4:37 PM
Perhaps, with each generation, the collective IQ of Americans is decreasing?
posted by Eowyn : 5:21 PM
You might have to go overseas. http://www.moscow.ucla.edu/ Plenty to annoy you here, though some of it is isn't. --Jay
My first piece on the New Jersey organ trafficking ring received a fair amount of attention. Czech and French translations now exist. (You may have to scroll down for the French version of my piece; also see here.)
I don't know Czech at all and thus cannot comment on the quality of that translation. Although my French is poor, I can see that the translation into that language was done to a high professional standard. It's always interesting to see how a translator handles slang and word-play.
The major media seem content to let this story slip away. No journalists have deigned to mention the related Brazilian case, in which an Israeli army officer admitted that his government was behind the ring.
Nearly all of the coverage presumes that a kidney can jump into a new host via magic. (Visualize Dumbledore pointing his wand at one body and then the other: "Organus Switcherus!") No articles -- aside from this brief opinion piece -- have asked about the doctors who do the work. Even the FBI has bent over backwards to exonerate them. Time Magazine studiously ignores the issue of collusion by noted hospitals, even though -- as we have seen -- Nancy Scheper-Hughes has video evidence implicating Mount Sinai.
Laudably, Time does note the Israeli connection to the related topic of New Jersey political corruption. An expert on the ultra-Orthodox community observes that secular law is often derided and skirted, even though every phoneme of religious law is considered inviolate:
But the dark side of this is a mentality that often too easily slides into rationalizations for acts that cannot be rationalized, with the idea that the end justifies the means. Here we are raising money for charitable institutions, and therefore we're allowed to cut corners." Halevi adds, "There have been other examples in the past of drug-running happening under cover of certain religious institutions here.
One of my previous stories on this topic prompted this response:
I just happened on your post. I'm an Orthodox Jew and have taken some heat for my work on behalf of victims of child sexual abuse, many of them in Orthodox Jewish communities. (Anyone interested can read all about my work on my web site, MichaelLesher.com.)
I have little to add to what you wrote; I just want you to know that I understand and agree, and that you should not feel uncomfortable writing as you did. Our religious communities will never really mature until we stop putting tribal loyalty over moral values. And it is certainly not anti-Semitic to say so.
I quite agree. Lesher's excellent site is here; his articles make clear that, in Judaism as in Catholicism, religion has too often provided cover for child sexual abuse.
It certainly was not anti-Catholic to discuss the abuse scandal that still rocks the church, and it certainly should not be considered anti-Semitic to discuss abusive rabbis. No-one is off the hook: Protestant clerics are just as likely to interfere sexually with young people, as this earlier post makes clear.
Hatred: You think I'm harsh in my treatment of our president? Check out the Israeli right. See here:
Members of National Union, Likud and Israel Beiteinu led the crowd, which included Kahanists wearing t-shirts saying “Kahane was right,” referring to Meir Kahane’s ideology of violence against all who stand in the way of the constant expansion of Jewish territory.
The people that attended the rally think that occupying another people and chanting racist slurs at the first black president of the United States (who was elected by a majority of American Jews who support him) is their expression of freedom and democracy. As a humanist and a pragmatist, it can feel very uneasy and unsafe in this country.
Most people we talked to did not hesitate to attack Obama and his administration, of which many are Jews themselves. The general atmosphere of the rally was that Obama is a Muslim and a racist who denies the Jewish people their right to control the Land of Israel. When asked about American aid to Israel, most replied that this was a separate issue.
This "Obama as racist" meme would be hilarious if the situation were not so frightening. These rallies received positive coverage on the notorious WorldNet Daily site:
"Obama should not be pressing Israel to compromise and freeze building in Judea, Samaria and eastern Jerusalem," protest organizer Yaacov Steinberg told WND.
"How dare he tell the Jews where they can or can't live! The era when Jews were banned from living in different places has ended," Waldman exclaimed.
The story quote Netanyahu as saying:
"Imagine what would happen if someone were to suggest Jews could not live in or purchase [property] in certain neighborhoods in London, New York, Paris or Rome..."
Are Palestinians free to live wherever they please? Apparently not. A sign at the rally read "Jordan is Palestine." That phrase is a rallying cry for Jews who believe in ethnic cleansing -- a final solution for the Palestinian problem.
And yet these bigots decry Obama as a racist!
Incidentally, the marching bigots soon started issuing threats, as bigots are wont to do. The following comes from the abominable Rabbi Waldman:
"Obama beware. This insolence will bring about the downfall of the American leadership. Anyone who dares give an order to prevent Israeli life in Jerusalem or anywhere else in the land of Israel is destined to fall," he said.
That should be taken as a death threat. You want to talk about insolence? Rabbi Waldman has demonstrated that he is a true expert.
Permalink
"Obama's settlement policy" is NOT his policy alone, but in reality the official US government foreign policy regarding the status of the occupied territories and settlements thereon that has been officially in force for the past 41 to 42 years. That policy was first embodied in UN SC 242 after the '67 war, and the US has always supported and referred to that binding Security Council resolution as detailing the world's conditions required under international law for a just settlement there.
So, as haughty as the attacks on Obama's policy may sound, they are far more haughty still-- they amount to a a rejection of binding international law, the Geneva Accords, some 65 binding UN SC resolutions, and the entire rest of the world's long-held opinion and stated policy.
However, this still understates the Authority that Israel denies, rejects, and condemns, which is the Authority of the Torah's holy scripture, and the order of G-d Himself. Or at least so goes the entire historical analysis of the situation as stated by Judaism's most revered and prominent religious leaders of yesteryear (prior to and then also after the creation of the state of Israel).
XI
posted by Anonymous : 8:43 AM
Good article...
As mentioned many times in the past, while in a family for more than 26 years, it was later they talked in more detail about the "Black Market Organ Trade". Although this may not mean much to many, it's who this family is that should make many start asking questions.
Meet the family: Mexico drug plane used for US 'rendition' flights: report Sep 4, 2008 http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5j6QonBKKMo2gw1e3ql-xUcQEZbVg
Keep in mind that there is a CIA link with this family as they often bragged about being a CIA Asset. Their answer was into my questions about aren't they worried about being prosecuted? They told me that being a CIA Asset means they won't ever have to worry about being prosecuted even if it meant they committed murder.
As mentioned by the family, the Organ Black Market is well entrenched in our fabric and linked with many Hospitals. I would expect to hear more about this in the future because it's much bigger than what surfaced in New York. Also, you may want look forward to hearing about a CIA link as well.
Marty Didier Northbrook, IL
posted by Anonymous : 1:25 PM
...Organ Black Market is well entrenched in our fabric and linked with many Hospitals. I would expect to hear more about this in the future because it's much bigger than what surfaced in New York.
As I implied in an earlier comment on this topic, such a market would either require the facilities of a hospital, or the private equivalent, which would have to be funded, equipped/staffed and kept secret. Which would be easier, doing the latter (complicated), or the former (which would mean simply faking some papers and doping the donors)? I say the former.
---------
Hmm, I've contended Obama is a racist for a while now, but for an entirely different reason:
Racism is considering one race as better or worse than another. Obama's ancestry is equal parts black and white, yet he self-identifies as black..in other words, he is in effect saying that his black half is somehow better than his white half, which by definition is racist.
HR 676 is the single-payer initiative, which will go to a floor vote when Congress comes back. As we've noted earlier, 676 is the sane alternative to the Obama/Baucus plan.
Write to your congress-critter and make it short and un-sweet:
676 OR QUIT!
If you don't vote for HR 676, I'll vote for your opponent -- even if you're running against Jack the Ripper. In fact, I'll send money to Jack's campaign.
Without an honest dialogue, this is an example of a mercy F**k for those of us that truly care about healthcare reform. We have to do better than this ... without a real vote, it's just symbolic and it's meaningless!
Somehow, we need a real discussion on health care reform. We need to get passed the scare tactics and the rhetoric.
If only we could talk Republican legislators, as well as liberal Democrats into voting for HR 676! Then it might pass and President Obama would have to sign it or veto it. Interesting, huh?
Actually, for the Republicans, as well as liberal Democrats, that would be a very smart strategy.
You may want to go here and scroll down to a post titled "Email from Gordon Novel." There's a comment from me. I will comment no further on the matter, here or in private, except to say that the "confession" letter does indeed exist. Seek and ye shall find.
Permalink
Hmmm ... I searched the Mary Ferrell site for this letter but I couldn't find it. Do you have a url? I asked Mr. Novel a few questions via email but haven't heard back from him.
Whether from the Senate side (Gary Hart was involved there) or the House Select Committee on Assassinations (forget which just now), one of them had a good laugh when someone claiming to be 'The Umbrella Man' showed up with what was supposedly his umbrella. (He operated it up and down and nothing unusual happened; it appeared to be a standard umbrella. Haha, those wacky conspiracy theorists, shown up again!)
The laughter later seemed misplaced or deliberate obfuscation when a) the ribbing of the displayed umbrella didn't match the ribbing shown in 'the umbrella man's' pictures/video and b) Agency plans for the creation of several air-powered poison-flechette umbrellas were discovered by the Church committee.
XI
posted by Anonymous : 8:56 AM
GN was not the Umbrella Man. The only person who ever accused him of being the Umbrella Man was a conspiracy theorist named R.B. Cutler, who -- sweartagod -- once told me that some of his best theories came to him via ESP. Nobody in the JFK community has ever told RB that is a silly-billy, because he has money.
A fake story holds that Sarah Palin will soon divorce her husband Todd. Naturally, the DUmmies bought into the yarn without double-checking -- and their commentary is predictably sexist and ugly.
DU was starting to be a diverting source of schadenfreude fun for a time there. It's not even that anymore. It's just sad and pathetic -- as the need for distractions grows, they start to sound desperate. And uninteresting, as they get increasingly unhinged.
What have they got besides Palin hate, at this point?
I saw this story on the front page of a supermarket tabloid yesterday and I just knew dKos & DU would be eating it up. They don't even stop to consider the source (supermarket tabs????) they just want to trash Palin.
These morons had as much to do with me leaving the Dem party as anything the Dem RBC did.
posted by Anonymous : 3:50 PM
I am shocked there are so many people there. What a waste of time!
I just glanced at the headlines, because scrolling through the actual comments would've been too time-consuming and icky, but my favorite was the one where a poster started a conspiracy theory that the Palins started the rumors themselves.
Representative Weiner is guy behind HR 676. He's one of the last true Democrats.
If you want to know the economics behind his health reform plan, go here. Keep in mind that in Missouri (for example) the average health insurance premium is $12,925. Under Obama's putrid plan (which is not single-payer), folks in MO would still pay that amount to the insurance racketeers for Krappy Kare.
Ah, but under Weiner's HR 676 plan, you would pay much, much less. Yes, there's a tax increase. But it is very small and it targets the ultra-affluent. Always remember that you would no longer be handing the insurance companies a huge chunk of your earnings. Paying $0 to the racketeers sure beats paying $12,925 -- doesn't it?
So where is the revenue going to come from? Under 676, hospital bills are, in part, paid for by a tiny tax on stock and bond transactions -- so tiny that the traders won't even notice. Other countries started taxing trades ages ago, and their stock markets did not collapse. It's a long-overdue idea.
Savings will amount to $350 billion in the first year due to reduced administration and marketing costs, removal of for-profit interests, and bulk purchasing of drugs.
Single payer is not socialized medicine. Doctors and hospitals can remain in private practice. You can choose your own doctor or health care provider, without having an insurance company limit your choice. Providers will send claims to one national office using one accepted form, not the thousands of forms required by insurance companies today.
A reader has sent the following message to all of his friends and family:
Here is a chance to DO SOMETHING about health care. There are two different health care bills before congress - you can contact your congresspersons and tell them which of these 2 bills you want.
Me, I want single-payer health care. I want the same level of health coverage that congress gets, and that's single-payer health coverage. I do not want the health plan that's supported by the insurance industry and the big pharmaceutical corporations.
HR676 (House of Representatives bill #676) is the single-payer proposal. That's the one I think is best. It's the kind of coverage that the military gets, and the elderly get through medicare, and congress gets. It is national health insurance. Billing, advertising, overhead and profit margin costs would be eliminated.
HR3200 (House of Representatives bill #2300) is the health care "reform" proposal. This is the one that congress thinks you and I should have, but they have written an exclusion for themselves ... congress currently has single-payer and wants to keep it that way. They want us to have this lesser option (HR3200).
If you have a high speed (not dial-up) internet connection, please take 8 minutes to view this video from YouTube. It is an interview that sums up why HR676 is a good option for regular people like us. Click here to see the interview .... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lz5hG8LqxTI
Half of bankruptcies are caused by a family medical catastrophe, and 75% of these bankruptcies are families that actually had health coverage! That's the insurance industry's ethics.
Plain & simple - national health insurance DOES NOT MEAN that all medical professionals work for the government; it means that they bill the government (like in Medicare).
You can use this link to find out who your representative & senators are, and you can use it to go directly to their government website and tell them what you want. All you have to provide is your zip code - - - http://www.govtrack.us/congress/findyourreps.xpd
And here is the message being sent to the pols:
I believe that America needs universal health coverage. And, I believe that the insurance & pharmaceutical industries have demonstrated that the quality & quantity of healthcare is not in the interest of their bottom line.
This is why I urge you to support single-payer health care for all (HR676 or its senate equivalent).
And this is why I urge you to vote NO on the health care industry-sponsored health coverage "reform" act (HR3200 or its senate equivalent).
This issue is extremely important to me, and I will be paying close attention to your position and your vote on these two options.
You may want to go even stronger. Consider sending a message like this to your congressperson:
676 OR QUIT!
If you don't vote for HR 676, I'll vote for your opponent -- even if you're running against Jack the Ripper. In fact, I'll send money to Jack's campaign.
And let's get on Al Franken's ass to sponsor something like 676 in the Senate.
I'm not optimistic about our chances. You want optimism, find another blogger. But I do believe in trying.
The following gets good only about half-way through, when Weiner shows up:
Weiner's bit of political theater vis-a-vis Medicare drives home the same point I tried to make here.
By the way: Daily Kos still has nothing about 676 on its front page, where the big news is still birther blather. No single-payer news on TPM. No single-payer news on PuffHo. Some "progressives" they are!
Permalink
The reason that Daily KOS doesn't have anything about HR 676 Single Payer is because they bought into the meme of it's UnAmerican to ask questions or think...just follow your dear President. Oh, but I thought CHANGE was elected? Is Bush still in office?!?
Those that are too connected and don't want to be place on the D list or the NO LIST are simply pretending that HR 676 Single Payer doesn't exist. It is only getting a vote (IMHO), because everyone keeps blogging about it and it is now getting out to the main street folks. So, that is why they will vote, not fight for it and then say, see, we have to go with Obama's 1,017 pages of HR 3200 which most of them haven't read and which doesn't have anything that can be called a Public Option.
If HR 676 was in place, it would allow freedom and also more choices than our current plans.
Currently the largest nurses organization is supporting HR 676 Single Payer as even some nurses have been denied care after working 30 + years giving care. Also, how many stories haven't we heard of frist hand of workers being dropped off their insurance because they didn't return to work within X months? Yup, that is why often there are e-mails asking for donation of vacation/sick time to the account of the ill worker so they can stay home and fight for their lives and not loose their coverage. Imagine that fighting for your life and fighting to keep the insurance coverage. We need HR 676 Single Payer and Obama is running out of excuses!
Woman Voter
posted by Anonymous : 5:33 AM
Under 676, hospital bills are, in part, paid for by a tiny tax on stock and bond transactions -- so tiny that the traders won't even notice
Even though I am an investment professional, I've advocated a transaction tax for many years now to encourage long-term investing over short term. This would be a great use for those monies.
Single payer health care reform will come to a vote. To a degree, this move is a sham, since the vote has about as much chance of passage as I have of bench-pressing my body weight. Neither Obama nor Pelosi will support HR 676, even though they have, in the past, pretended to like the idea.
Still, we have the month of August to work on our congress-critters. Force your representatives to drop the petticoat and show what's underneath. This is your chance to fight the good fight, and never mind the odds.
Lambert at Corrente notes that no A-list blogs have bothered to mention the floor vote. I can confirm that, at this writing, Kos features pieces on the birthers (but of course!) and a wacky conspiracy theory favored by Glenn Beck. Nothing about 676 on Talking Points Memo. Americablog is doing same-sex marriage. PuffHo features more birther blather, Diane Feinstein on wiretapping, and some crap from Obama. I guess progressives do not consider nationalized health insurance an important matter.
I have no faith in the democratic party in enacting any meaningful, effective reform. I've long been concerned that, as important health-care reform is, our current political situation inherently prevents it. Our so-called 'elected representatives' are so thoroughly bought and paid for through lobbyist and industry money that they have, collectively, abrogated their responsibility to their actual constituents and handed them over to their donors. I can barely envision a scenario in which meaningful, effectual health-care reform is accomplished without first divorcing our 'representatives' from their fund-raising needs. The be-all, end-all reform to end all reforms is 100% public financing of elections and the absolute removal of moneyed interests. Until that happens, expect nothing but a continuation of legislation-as-enabling-of-corporate(contributor)-profits.
The class war started decades ago; until the victims of said war realize there is a war being waged upon them, nothing will change, except cosmetically. My main concern is that the victims of this war mis-indentify their oppressors, and in doing so enable the continuation of the war itself.
There may come a day when the backlash is too great to withstand. My intuition is.. the longer it takes for us, as a nation, to reach that point, the uglier the consequences will be.
posted by Hoarseface : 11:07 AM
Benin frames this as "symbolic." Then again, one of the things that politics does, as I understand it, is take symbols and make them real.
So: I take the attitude that here's an opportunity. And it's not like the battles that were fought in 2008 aren't going to be refought again and again until justice is done.
Birther Blather? Joe, what if he renounced his American citizenship?
Take a look at "Obama's spring break in Pakistan" at http://www.colony14.net/id40.html which contains this quote:
"Barack Obama was likely a citizen of Indonesia, by virtue of adoption, and possibly maintained both his citizenship and his passport for many years – or at least long enough to travel to Pakistan in 1981. But because Indonesia does not allow dual citizenship, Obama would have had to relinquish his U. S. citizenship (assuming he was born in Hawaii and actually had it) to be a citizen of Indonesia and carry a passport from that country. If Obama never relinquished his Indonesian citizenship, he is not an American citizen – and thus ineligible to serve as its President."
If even the MSM is talking about the "birth question" what are they NOT talking about? Another way of asking, "Is the birth certificate smoke and mirrors?"
I wonder what keeping the option of third party off the table. It amazes me how the most of us who loathe the 2- party system still cringe when you mention the 3rd party(except me of course..ha ..ha) What I am trying to say is that things will continue to be the same untill we take serious steps to change. Please don't think money because it is the root of the problem to begin with. Take it out of the political proccess and that will be your solution, if you want one that is.
posted by Anonymous : 2:09 AM
HR 676 Single Payer Healthcare for All Americans. Don’t let CONGRESS KILL HR 676 BILL. Write Your Representative https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml and ask them to PASS HR 676, Everyone In, Nobody Out, only 23 pages long…It’s ALL American!
