Thursday, June 17, 2010

HCR Savings begin seeping into public consciousness

Yglesias passes on a great tidbit:

Everyone knows that health care costs are a major component of the federal budget, but they also have important implications for state budgets, so Mainers will likely be interested to learn that the Affordable Care Act signed into law earlier this year will save their state money.
Mal Leary of the Bangor Daily News explains:
A state analysis of the impact of the new federal health reform law indicates it will cost Maine in the near term, but will save the state tens of millions of dollars a year after it is fully implemented in 2014.

This is the type of news that is sure to bubble up over the next 6, 12, 24 months that spells complete doom for all the HCR naysayers and Palin '12 grand-standers. 

Sully on the Tea Party

In a fantastic two part post, Sully reiterates his confusion with the Tea Party ideology, or lack thereof.   Specifically his confusion with the movement's curious anti-government veil covering what amounts to a pro-government face. 
The Bush-Cheney presidency was, in some respects, the perfect pseudo-conservative administration. They waged war based on loathing of the experts (damned knowledgeable elites!); they slashed taxes and boosted spending for their constituencies, while pretending to be fiscally responsible; they tore up the most ancient taboos - against torture - with a bravado that will one day seem obscene; and they left the country in far worse shape than they found it.

Throughout all this, the Tea Partiers supported them. So how do they manage the cognitive dissonance that two failed wars, a financial collapse and a debt crisis have brought? How do they deal with the fact that their beloved president was manifestly the most incompetent and disastrous in modern times? They blame it on the next guy.

Yes, they are doing all they can to avoid facing the fact that they did all of this ... to themselves. And sometimes, the truly, deeply humiliated can only carry on through blind rage.

Tuesday, June 8, 2010

Fatty Labs Body-Boarding on Snow

Oh how I love Labs and their quirky made-up little games.

Watch the vid, bitches


Monday, June 7, 2010

Porn, Sword, Stun Gun, Cliff Fall? Check!

If there's a better lead paragraph from a news story, I've yet to read it. 

A porn actor, who was accused of killing a coworker with a sword, died after falling off a cliff in California on Saturday when police used a stun gun to subdue him.

Wednesday, June 2, 2010

A Mountain of Dumb

Really, is there any other way to describe this fucking bimbo?
Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is using the Gulf Coast oil spill to promote the issue of drilling in the Alaskan Wildlife National Refuge – the 20-million protected acres where untapped oil and gas reserves have long served as a lightning rod of controversy.

"Extreme Greenies: see now why we push 'drill,baby,drill' of known reserves & promising finds in safe onshore places like ANWR? Now do you get it?" the former Republican vice presidential nominee wrote Tuesday evening on her Twitter account.

Chait on Gerson's EC

Good stuff.   Chait busts up two vacuum-chamber rattles about Health Care Reform.

First, that Obama and the left hid the cost of HCR in the "doc fix"
This isn't part of the "overall cost of the entitlement." It's part of the cost of running Medicare. The cost exists irrespective of the Affordable Care Act. The paper savings from lower physician reimbursements were not used to cover insurance subsidies in the bill. If health care reform had died, Congress would still be passing a doc fix. Gerson's charge is utterly, unambiguously false.
Then that HCR is an entitlement for the un-needy

Focus on Gerson's claim that the Affordable Care Act benefits citizens who are not "vulnerable." By what possible standard is this true? The primary beneficiaries are people who can't afford to buy health insurance! They're vulnerable to getting sick and suffering terrible pain, bankruptcy, or even death either because they or a family member has a preexisting condition, or because their employer doesn't offer health insurance and they're priced out of the dysfunctional individual market. That's not "vulnerable"?

Gaza Flotilla

My first reaction to the IDF attack on the Palestinian aide vessel was annoyance mixed with utter despair and concern.  Just another insult on the way to the inevitable breakout of WWIII that Israel seems to welcome.  As I've been perusing left and right blogosphere though I'm left more confused than anything.    I think Chait breaks it down the best (after ample prodding by Sullivan, of course.

First, is the underlying blockade of Gaza humanely constructed? No it is not:
Israel prevents Gazans from importing, among other things, cilantro, sage, jam, chocolate, French fries, dried fruit, fabrics, notebooks, empty flowerpots and toys, none of which are particularly useful in building Kassam rockets. It’s why Israel bans virtually all exports from Gaza, a policy that has helped to destroy the Strip’s agriculture, contributed to the closing of some 95 percent of its factories, and left more 80 percent of its population dependent on food aid. It’s why Gaza’s fishermen are not allowed to travel more than three miles from the coast, which dramatically reduces their catch. And it’s why Israel prevents Gazan students from studying in the West Bank, a policy recently denounced by 10 winners of the prestigious Israel Prize. There’s a name for all this: collective punishment.
Second, given that the blockade was in place, was Israel militarily justified in responding as it did? Yes, it was:
We have no sympathy for the motives of the participants in the flotilla -- a motley collection that included European sympathizers with the Palestinian cause, Israeli Arab leaders and Turkish Islamic activists. Israel says that some of the organizers have ties to Hamas and al-Qaeda. What's plain is that the group's nominal purpose, delivering "humanitarian" supplies to Gaza, was secondary to the aim of provoking a confrontation. The flotilla turned down an Israeli offer to unload the six boats and deliver the goods to Gaza by truck; it ignored repeated warnings that it would not be allowed to reach Gaza. Its spokesmen said they would insist on "breaking Israel's siege," as one of them put it.
Third, given that Israel had a right to stop the ship and reply to the lethal force used against its soldiers, was it wise to respond as it did? No, it was not:
Better information was needed. The commandos didn't know they were going to face an angry mob armed with knives and bats. Different equipment was needed: The raiders apparently didn't have enough nonlethal weapons on hand. A more creative approach was needed: Maybe a way to stop the ship without having to board it. But these are all just technical details of an operation gone sour.
This level-headed perspective is why I like reading Chait.  The Blockade is inhumane; the Israeli's had a right to deter the ship from breaking the blockade; the Israeli's used excessive force.   In the end it seems the Flotilla's main goal of bringing political attention to the Gaza blockade was wildly successful in that it put Israel's inhumane blockade in the forefront of world news.  The whole ordeal also gave us a glimpse into the future of Western border security, should the right ever get their wish to turn the US into a isolated giant.    Excessive force?   Sure!  As long as we protect our borders!!

But I digress.  Where I'm most disappointed in all this is Obama's response, which to me was like the equivalent of a soccer mom threatening to pull the minivan over.  Now now kids, mommy's trying to concentrate here. When nine civilians are murdered on an aide vessel by your supposed ally, you should come right out and denounce the damn action.  Plain and simple. Stop being a pussy about it and put your foot down, Mr. President.