Dog Brothers Public Forum

HOME | PUBLIC FORUM | MEMBERS FORUM | INSTRUCTORS FORUM | TRIBE FORUM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
December 05, 2016, 12:51:30 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
98723 Posts in 2346 Topics by 1082 Members
Latest Member: James
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 57 58 [59] 60 61 ... 128
2901  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Politics of Health Care on: November 19, 2013, 09:21:52 AM
I was trying to post an article from Journal Of American Medical Association but I cannot do it since I am not technically a member.  I get their journal sent to me for free because I am on some sort of list.

It is Donald Berwick the lead politburo guy who was the lead shover of this monstrosity down all out throats complaining about the politics involved (how dare the phrase "death panels").   There are other articles as well from politburo.  Not as bitter and obnoxious as well.  Emanuel with another one suggesting we need a leader who announces something akin to JFKs we will be on the moon in 10 yrs. or perhaps Nixon's war on cancer etc.  but suggesting we apply the same unified goal of fixing health care.  I am not adverse to this in theory but I don't want it being a gigantic politburo led government take over of 1/6 of our economy.

I wish their articles in the med journals were posted to public forums. 

They are mostly (not all) Columbia types.  All the professor elites who are smarter wiser nicer more humane then the rest of humanity. 
2902  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Cognitive Dissonance of His Glibness on: November 17, 2013, 05:45:07 PM
As long as Dems can keep offering 51% of voters more Christmas or Hannukah gifts the issue of honesty is only a secondary issue.

I guess the Republicans will have to convince 51% that they are the one's paying for the gifts.  Not receiving them.   It is sad this is what it has come down to.

Hillary is going to use the "women's" angle like a battering ram.
2903  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Politics of Health Care on: November 17, 2013, 05:41:10 PM
The part annoying to me is AHA was not a problem with any of these people who thought it would others who would have to pick up the tab.  You know.  Soak the "rich".   No problem taking money from some to give to them.  Now that they are going to have to pay more, and only now, it is a problem.  It is not the lying.  It is now they are adversely affected:

****Breitbart Logo

17 Nov 2013, 10:07 AM PDT  39  post a comment 

Campus Reform: Students at Bowie State University assailed the Affordable Care Act (ACA) on Thursday after administrators cancelled a low cost school-wide health care plan due to new regulations in the law. Many students told Campus Reform that the now cancelled plans, which provided coverage for just $50 per semester, were the only insurance they could afford.

 "I can't afford anything right now," one said. "I can't even afford my loans."

 "We don't have that money," said another. "We can barely afford books."

 Several students said that they felt they had been let down.

 "It's stupid and it's Obama's fault," one said. "You haven't done anything, Obama, and I'm disappointed in you."

 "What it was hyped up to be, was that it was supposed to solve a lot of problems and help a lot of people, and its not really doing that," said another.

 Many students had no idea the plans had been canceled, which was announced only in an email to their school addresses.

 In a statement to Campus Reform, Bowie State said it was confident that Obamacare would fill the void left by the canceled plans.

 "Most students are now able to be covered under their parent’s health plans up to age 26 at no additional cost and new affordable coverage is becoming available through the Maryland State Insurance Exchange System," it read.

 Campus Reform conducted the interviews with student Eugene Craig III, who first wrote about canceled plans in an article in the school's alternative newspaper, The Bulldog Collegian. ****
2904  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Immigration issues on: November 17, 2013, 02:17:44 PM
Why do I have to supplement their education?  I know a lot of New Jerseyens feel the same way.  No one ever asks us.   Just shoved down our throats by politicians bribing for votes and a Democrat party looking for power.  Always at my expense.  And how dare anyone use the phrase "anchor baby".  How dare we? huh

N.J. bill to offer in-state tuition, financial aid to immigrants in the country illegally gains momentum

DREAM_act_photo.JPG

Giancarlo Tello, an undocumented immigrant who came to New Jersey from Peru with his parents at age 6, pays out-of-state tuition at Rutgers-Newark. Tello, the campaign chair for New Jersey United Students' Tuition Equity for DREAMers, today joined advocates to push for a bill to offer in-state tuition for undocumented immigrants who went to high school in New Jersey. (Matt Friedman/The Star-Ledger) (Matt Friedman/The Star-Ledger)

Matt Friedman/The Star-Ledger By  Matt Friedman/The Star-Ledger   
Email the author | Follow on Twitter
on November 14, 2013 at 4:40 PM, updated November 17, 2013 at 7:50 AM

TRENTON — After a decade-long effort by advocates, a bill that would charge in-state tuition to undocumented immigrants who grew up in New Jersey appears well on its way to landing on the governor’s desk.

The state Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee today voted eight to three with one abstention to approve the measure (S2479), which advocates say will affect tens of thousands of New Jersey residents.

“This community has waited long enough. Let’s not look for excuses to say no. Let’s look for reasons to say yes,” said Senate President Stephen Sweeney (D-Gloucester), who has lent his name to the bill as a prime sponsor.

The bill now heads for a vote in the full Senate on Monday, where it’s expected to pass. Assembly leaders say they expect to pass it soon as well.

Under the bill, undocumented immigrants who attended high school in New Jersey for three or more years, graduated, and filed an affidavit saying they plan to legalize their immigration status as soon as legally possible would be able to get lower in-state tuition rates at New Jersey’s public colleges and universities.

The undocumented immigrant students would also be eligible for state financial aid under the Senate version of the bill. Incoming Assembly Speaker Vincent Prieto (D-Hudson), a Cuban immigrant, said today that he expects the Assembly version will incorporate that aspect — which had been part of a separate bill —as well.

Advocates said it doesn’t make sense for the state to provide K-12 education to undocumented students — which federal law requires — and then refuse to treat them the same as citizens once they graduate.

“After having educated these students from kindergarten through twelfth grade, what purpose does it serve to penalize them by not allowing them to better themselves?” said Frank Argote-Freyre, president of the Latino Action Network.

In-state tuition is available to undocumented immigrants in 16 other states.

Giancarlo Tello, 23, immigrated to New Jersey from Peru when he was six years old. He didn’t find out he was undocumented until his sophomore year in high school, when his mother told him he could not apply for a driver’s license. Now, he attends Rutgers-Newark part-time and pays out-of-state tuition.

“If you consider me a fellow resident of New Jersey, if you believe I deserve an education, a chance at the future, then I urge you all to vote yes on this bill,” Tello told the committee.

Three elected officials from cities with large Hispanic populations — Jersey City Mayor Steve Fulop, Perth Amboy Mayor Wilda Diaz and Plainfield Mayor Adrian Mapp — were also in Trenton to push for the bill.

“We all agree that in order to break that cycle of poverty that exists in this country and exists in places like Jersey City, it really starts with investing in education,” Fulop said at a press conference before the committee meeting. “To invest in a child’s education K through 12 and then turn your back on them is really foolish.”

All eight Democrats on the committee voted in favor of the legislation. And Gov. Chris Christie — while refusing to answer detailed questions about the bill — has indicated he supports the idea. Nevertheless, three out of the committee’s four Republicans voted no, while one abstained.

State Sen. Jennifer Beck (R-Monmouth) said she abstained because a loophole in the bill could allow out-of-state residents – regardless of their immigration status – to qualify for in-state tuition if they attend private high school in New Jersey. She also said New Jersey residents could move to other states for years, then return and qualify for in-state tuition because they went to high school here.

“I don’t want to vote against the bill. I’m just going to abstain today and hopefully by the time we get to the floor Monday we can find a resolution for those two issues,” Beck said.

But state Sen. Joseph Pennacchio (R-Morris), who voted no, said he didn’t think it would be fair that “a struggling family of American citizens in a neighboring state would pay more than an undocumented student.”

Only one member of the public testified against the bill. Pat DeFilippis, a New Jersey representative for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, read a letter from the organization’s state and local director, Dale Wilcox.

“Many New Jersey schools, colleges and universities are experiencing severe budget shortages as a result of the weakened economy and the state debt crisis,” read the letter, which was addressed to Christie. “Granting in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens would only serve to further damage and strain delicate budgets and impose additional burdens on New Jersey taxpayers.”

Christie's action on the bill is uncertain. He worked hard to appeal to Hispanic voters and won 51 percent of their votes in his re-election last week, according to exit polls.

State Sen. Teresa Ruiz (D-Essex), a prime sponsor of the bill, said the governor had not disclosed to her any decision on the measure.

This story has been edited to reflect the correct bill number. It's S2479, not S2468
2905  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Benghazi and related matters on: November 14, 2013, 11:01:29 AM
Doug,
"Honesty" in government is low on the list of many Americans political imports.

Lying has become a no big deal - unless it affects an individual's bottom line.

It is more than ever all about the money.

To me honesty is even just as importance as competence.

That is the one thing I respected about Jimmy Carter.   At least I believed he was honest.

The left certainly doesn't care about honesty.  Look at the Clintons.  Look at Brocks deceptions.  40% will defend them no matter what.  Another 10 - 15 % jump on board as soon as they get the money train offered to them.

I certainly don't know how we can have a government that is not honest.  No matter what they say, no matter when, one never knows if it is the truth or not.  I agree.  How can anyone not think that is a problem?

It suggests to me many people in general are dishonest.  It also proves what I learned.  When it comes to money forget about all else.  Family, friends, neighbors, colleagues, and the rest.

That is the reason Dems have lost some support.  Not the lying.  Just the fact that more people than expected are having to pay more.  That's it.  All about the freaking money.
2906  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Pathological Science on: November 14, 2013, 10:50:37 AM
My impression is that  most people are coming to the conclusion there is a global warming affect though what to do about it is in question.

I don't know what to think.

On this board we tend to only post the deniers point of view.   In some places I read just the opposite.  They conclude it is fact and anyone who disagrees is corrupt, stupid, or a crazed denier.

Again I don't know what to think.
2907  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Race, religion, ethnic origin, LGBT, "discrimination", & discrimination. on: November 13, 2013, 09:18:32 PM
unbelievable. eom

right out of Columbia University.
2908  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Is Devotion to the Constution destroying Democracy? on: November 12, 2013, 07:49:24 AM
Constitution Check: Is devotion to the Constitution destroying democracy?

National Constitution Center
By Lyle Denniston 2 hours ago      
Lyle Denniston looks at a claim that interpreting an old document, like the U.S. Constitution, is a doomed attempt to apply outdated legal principles.


theconstitutionTHE STATEMENT AT ISSUE:
“Professor Neuborne describes this dysfunctional democracy very well, but he does not give the real reason for that dysfunction – the reverence for the United States Constitution.   Each of the Supreme Court’s iniquities he lists is based on the interpretation by five of nine high priests of increasingly irrelevant documents written by wealthy white men in an unimaginably different and distant world.”

 – Michael Gorman of Chicago, a native of Great Britain, as quoted in The New York Times on November 10.  He was one of several writers engaging in a dialogue with New York University law professor Burt Neuborne over the professor’s complaint about harm done to American democracy by a series of modern Supreme Court rulings. The full exchange can be read here.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/06/opinion/invitation-to-a-dialogue-democracy-gone-awry.html?_r=0&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1384171630-7yEFDKkFT5rO5TOK1yVMsA

WE CHECKED THE CONSTITUTION, AND…

One of the fundamental issues that deeply divides the nine Justices now serving on the Supreme Court is the proper way to interpret the Constitution’s meaning for today’s world.  Some of the Justices believe that the key is the “original meaning” of the document – that is, as it was understood in 1787.  Others believe that the document is a “living Constitution” that is adaptable to changing times and thus acquires new meaning from time to time.

No one expects that disagreement ever to be finally resolved. At the same time, all of the Justices agree that the Constitution embodies enduring principles, and that it is the duty of judges in this country to apply them.  Even a sincere devotion to those principles, though, is bound to produce disagreements about their contemporary meaning.

What is often misunderstood about the process of constitutional reasoning is that the Constitution itself does not provide all of the necessary answers to any legal problem that turns on enduring principles.  No document, and certainly no legal document, can always be understood by its literal meaning.  Words are means of expressing ideas, and the same words can mean different things to different judges.

Take, for example, the words of the First Amendment, declaring that “Congress shall make no law….”, etc.  Does that mean that the Amendment only restricts Congress in the use of its powers?  The Supreme Court interpreted it that way – until 1925.   In the decision that year in Gitlow v. New York, the Court began applying the idea that at least some parts of the Bill of Rights restricted the powers of state governments, too.  (Some scholars say that this process actually got its start in 1897.)

That process has continued, off and on, since then.  Most recently, in 2010, the Supreme Court ruled for the first time that the Second Amendment “right to keep and bear arms,” when understood as a personal right to have a gun, applied to state and local gun control laws, too.

What’s the explanation for that process?  The Court interpreted the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of “due process” – two words that are inherently indefinite – to embrace certain fundamental rights, so that the states and local governments, as well as Congress, had to respect and enforce them.

At a more basic level, this process also reflects the very nature of law.  Law is the means by which a society keeps order, and a society would be in constant anarchy if the people could not count on the law being relatively stable. If law is developed in a sound way, that stability reflects how a well-ordered society should be run, by more or less common agreement.

But stability does not mean that legal principles are frozen in time.  There was a time, for example, when petty theft could bring a death sentence.  As more civilized ways of resolving property disputes developed, and as community policing brought more civic order, such punishment was seen as too harsh.  In American constitutional history, this kind of changing perception is reflected in the way that the Eighth Amendment’s ban on “cruel and unusual punishment” has evolved over time.  As one example, it is now unconstitutional to execute a minor even for murder.

As the British native Michael Gorman suggests, in his comment quoted above, some critics of American constitutionalism seem to believe that interpreting the old document means a doomed attempt to apply outdated legal principles.

But even in his own native land, there is such a thing as the “British constitution,” embodying fundamental legal norms, even though it is not written down in the same way as the U.S. Constitution is.   Law in Britain is the accumulation of the “common law,” as it has been developed by judges over time, supplemented by parliamentary legislation.  British courts still respect some parts of the Magna Carta, even though it dates from 1215.

And, for the past four years, Britain has been imitating – to a degree – the U.S. model of a Supreme Court.  The United Kingdom Supreme Court was created by an act of “constitutional reform” in 2005, and began work four years later.  Its power to overturn laws is not as extensive as that of the American court, but it does have significant power to determine law for Britain.

The very idea of a supreme court, of course, is that, somewhere in government, the power to interpret basic legal commitments and promises must be lodged.  The American experiment, now more than two centuries old, shows that this power of interpretation should not be left to the elected political branches.

Perhaps one can attempt to dismiss devotion to the constitutional idea of judicial review as sentimental “reverence,” but it is more properly understood as a good faith belief in abiding principles of justice and equality.   Perhaps more importantly, it has shown that judicial power can be exercised along with democratic government.

Lyle Denniston is the National Constitution Center’s adviser on constitutional literacy. He has reported on the Supreme Court for 55 years, currently covering it for SCOTUSblog, an online clearinghouse of information about the Supreme Court’s work.
2909  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Cognitive Dissonance of His Glibness on: November 11, 2013, 07:46:46 PM
"‘We’re talking about 5 percent of the population.’"

If Clinton said this he would respond that he was talking about the total *World* "population".  Hence no lie.   No big deal.

Next.   

2910  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Media Issues on: November 10, 2013, 10:14:27 PM
Judge Andrew Napolitano, Canceled Fox Host, Tells His Fans To Stop Angry Emails


 Posted: 02/14/12 11:54 AM ET  |  Updated: 02/14/12 12:13 PM ET  

 
   
Judge Andrew Napolitano is trying to calm his outraged followers after the cancellation of his Fox Business show.

The low-rated network axed "Freedom Watch," along with the rest of its prime-time lineup, last week.

Ever since then, Napolitano has had to send repeated messages to his fans to stop bombarding Fox News with angry emails.

In his latest note, posted to his Facebook page on Monday, Napolitano sounded a note of optimism, even as he sternly told his team to cut it out:

In television, shows are cancelled all the time. Two of my former shows have been cancelled, and after each cancellation, Fox has rewarded me with more and better work. This cancellation--along with others that accompanied it--was the result of a business judgment here, and is completely unrelated to the FreedomWatch message. It would make a world of a difference for all of us, if you would KINDLY STOP SENDING EMAILS TO FOX. I am well. Your values are strong. I will continue to articulate those values here at Fox. But the emails many of you are sending are unfairly interfering with my work and that of my colleagues here. The emails even violate our values because they interfere with the use of private property. I have accepted the cancellation decision with good cheer and a sense of gearing up for the future. You should as well.
As a favor to me, and as I have asked this past weekend, PLEASE STOP SENDING EMAILS TO MY COLLEAGUES AT FOX ABOUT THE CANCELLATION OF FreedomWatch; and please stop NOW.
2911  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Cognitive Dissonance of the left on: November 09, 2013, 09:16:55 AM
As Doug points out "after the obligatory belittling of Republicans, and now Bamster is safely elected, and AHA is law, and Hillary now has opportunity to distance herself and is being set up for her coronation, and we get opening phrases such as, "to be fair", and "on balance" the left now sort of makes some sort of back ended "Obama has to take his lumps".

Importantly the Repubs will have to devise strategy to deal with Hillary in the future.  Not simply keep up the same barrage against Obama the same way.
Hillary's mob is already figuring ways to spin this to her favor.  The total difference between her and Obama is she will pretend to compromise, she will pretend to give on certain issues (era of big gov is over) and not be steadfast in your face double downing ideologue - even though she is.   The Republicans always thought they had the goods on Clinton and he most of the time could successfully spin it around take credit and walk away laughing. 

In any case back to Bamster's comrades in arms:

IT'S TIME FOR OBAMA TO TAKE HIS LUMPS
Cynthia Tucker
By Cynthia Tucker 9 hours ago
     
President Obama deserves forbearance on the bungled rollout of his health care initiative. After all, Republicans have dedicated themselves to sabotaging the law -- withholding funds required for a smooth inauguration, harassing the experts hired to explain the law to consumers, and even threatening the National Football League when Obama asked teams to advertise it to their audiences.

Millions losing health plans under Obamacare. Did president mislead? Christian Science Monitor
Obama Tells Americans Losing Coverage: 'I'm Sorry' ABC News
Republicans Allege Obama Deception on Health Plan Cancellation ABC News
Obama promises to "smooth out" health care Associated Press
Why some individuals are losing their health plans under ObamaCare The Week (RSS)

Still, Obama deserves all the blame for the deception that may be the biggest threat to his signature legislative achievement -- and his legacy. He must have known better when he told Americans repeatedly over the past five years that they could keep their insurance policies if they were happy with them. As countless policyholders have learned over the past few weeks, that's simply not true.

Early on, the president was careful in his descriptions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Speaking to a joint session of Congress in 2009, he said, "If you are among the hundreds of millions of Americans who already have health insurance through your job, or Medicare, or Medicaid, or the VA, nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have." The veracity squad at Politifact rated that statement "true."

But as Obamacare, as it is now widely known, picked up a dedicated and vociferous group of critics, the president grew careless. In countless speeches in the last three to four years, he dropped the nuances: "If you like the (health insurance) plan you have, you can keep it."

Just as more Americans were beginning to pay attention to a mandate that will go into effect in 2014, that flawed description became Obama's mantra. Now, as insurers send out cancellation notices, many consumers feel betrayed. And that includes some of Obama's most loyal supporters.

Writer Peter Richmond, who has purchased his health insurance through a small group affiliated with a local Chamber of Commerce in upstate New York, was stunned to learn recently that his insurer was dropping the group.

"(Obama) spoke so vehemently about our being able to keep our coverage. ... I feel betrayed for the first time by (this) president. ... I resent it a great deal," he said.

At a recent congressional hearing, Sen. Barbara Mikulski, a liberal Democrat from Maryland, weighed in, contending that the cancellation notices were creating a "crisis of confidence" about Obamacare. She's right.

On balance, the cancellation notices are affecting a relatively small group of Americans -- those who don't get insurance from their employers but who purchase it in the individual market. They represent about 5 percent of the population. There are no exact figures on the number receiving cancellation notices, but experts have given estimates ranging from seven to 12 million people.

To be fair, many of them will be better off. Obamacare has virtually abolished their old "bare bones" policies, some of which didn't even pay for hospital stays. With subsidies, many consumers will be able to buy far superior health insurance policies for less money. Kaiser Family Foundation health care expert Larry Levitt told CBS News that "the winners will outnumber the losers."

Still, there are many customers who are experiencing genuine rate shock. They will be stuck paying a higher premium for health insurance policies they may not have wanted. That's bad enough, but it's made worse by the fact that Obama misled them.

At the moment, Obamacare is a morass of confusion: dysfunctional websites, lies spread by its critics and even deceptive practices by some insurance companies. That's all the more reason that Americans need to be able to trust their president to tell them the truth about his health care overhaul -- even if some of that truth is unpleasant.

Obama needs to stand up and admit that he misled consumers about keeping their health care plans. He needs to take his lumps and promise to give the public straightforward and truthful answers.

If he keeps prevaricating, he will be doing as much damage to Obamacare as its harshest critics.

(Cynthia Tucker, winner of the 2007 Pulitzer Prize for commentary, is a visiting professor at the University of Georgia. She can be reached at cynthia@cynthiatucker.com.)
2912  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Obama effectively lifted Iran sanctions enforcement months ago on: November 08, 2013, 08:27:05 AM
Lead article on Drudge.

Treasury simply stopped enforcing companies that do business with Iran.  I assume the House and Senate Committees that deal with this were in the dark.

The government departments are simply ordered to do his bidding behind the scenes.

This makes Iran Contra look like peanuts.

Of course the shysters will be out en masse denying this is the case. 

And Hillary will be doing polls and devising her distancing strategy behind the scenes.

She will campaign for stronger ties with Israel and the Hollywood hypocrites will be flooding her with money.   Now the liar in chief is safely in for the second term they will shift their support to the next one.

All the while we are going to have a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. 
2913  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Libertarian Issues on: November 07, 2013, 11:31:07 AM
Time to legalize pot, prostitution in NJ.  Legalize them and tax them and keep the business and government tax base here.  Screw NY.  We have been getting screwed by NY ever since I can remember:

( I say this with tongue in cheek.  I guess the prostitution money could go to health school lunch programs, and pot could go to pay for the half of the population that gets it "free".  Maybe free mammograms or something and that would also double to secure the chick vote.)

*****Why New York casinos could crush Atlantic City

Richard Cummins | Lonely Planet Images | Getty Images
 New Yorkers have approved an amendment that will allow seven casinos to open in the state, including one to three in the New York City area in seven years. And that could sound the death knell for Atlantic City, already struggling under the weight of regional competition.

Atlantic City should be "very concerned," said Chad Mollman, an analyst who covers casino and hotel stocks for Morningstar. "New York City is the biggest feeder market in Atlantic City. There is a question in terms of the viability of Atlantic City in the long term."

Resorts was the first legal casino on the East Coast when it opened in Atlantic City in 1978. A lot has changed since then.

"Atlantic City's time has come and gone," said Harold Vogel, the CEO of Vogel Capital Management and the author of the bedrock textbook "Entertainment Industry Economics: A Guide for Financial Analysis." "It was second after Nevada, and it was a special place in a small location. It had 10 good years when it was pretty unique, but then we got Indian casinos, and then gambling in Pennsylvania."

(Read more: Stronger than the storm? Maybe not Atlantic City)

Part of the rationale for opening casinos in New York has been that it will capture gambling money that has been going to Atlantic City and other places.

The New York Daily News reported that Gov. Andrew Cuomo made the case for the casino amendment by telling the press, "New Jersey has casinos. Connecticut has casinos. Pennsylvania has casinos. We literally hemorrhage people from the borders who go to casinos. I think it will keep the money in this state and I think it is a major economic development vehicle for the Hudson Valley especially and for upstate New York."

If New York money stops crossing the southern border, Atlantic City is in big trouble.

Richard "Skip" Bronson, the chairman of U.S. Digital Gaming and the author of "The War at the Shore," which chronicled his effort to build a luxury Mirage Resorts casino in Atlantic City, said New York casinos will make a bad situation even worse.

"There are only so many gambling dollars in the pot," Bronson said. "And there has been a massive proliferation of casinos throughout America. It's a form of real estate, and like any form of real estate, it goes through a cycle: Demand, saturation, and then glut. A place like Atlantic City has too many casino hotels and too many rooms. This is a fact of life."
Play VideoRoll the dice on a casino?
Is now the time to be on casino stocks? With CNBC's Melissa Lee and the "Options Action" traders.If Atlantic City does slip into further decline, Caesars Entertainment could be deeply affected. The company owns four casinos there (Bally's Atlantic City, Caesars Atlantic City, Harrah's Atlantic City and Showboat Atlantic City), which have been a serious drag on earnings. The company lost $761 million in the third quarter, largely because of a massive write-down of Atlantic City assets.

"We continue to have a negative outlook for casino companies in the U.S. due to what we're seeing in regional casino markets, and Caesars is the most exposed to regional casino markets," Mollman said. He rates Caesars shares sell, and estimates their fair value (similar to a price target) at $9.

Yet, despite the fact that New York casinos are likely to hasten the demise of Atlantic City, Caesars donated $100,00 to the New York Jobs Now Committee, which supported the pro-casino amendment.

Caesars did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

(Read more: Science says casinos could make Wall Street riskier)

Of course, ignoring potential New York City casinos might be impossible.

"There isn't a gaming company in America that isn't paying attention to New York, and there's not a gaming company in America that's not interested in having an opportunity in New York," Bronson said.

New York casinos could still face an uncertain future because of the extent of regional competition.

"In an oversaturated market, now there's a much higher risk for people who will have to build up these casino palaces, and it's not clear that they'll be at all successful," Vogel told CNBC.com. "This is how markets fall apart, and this is how you have bankruptcies."
—By CNBC's Alex Rosenberg. Follow him on Twitter @CNBCAlex.****
2914  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / How in tarnasion is this possible? on: November 07, 2013, 11:04:58 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/ligament-found-human-knee-142502691.html

I don't know how a "new" ligament could be rightfully "just" discovered.  With hundreds of thousands, millions of knee surgeries and replacements and MRI etc.

I wonder if the new ligament is simply being re categorized as being separate from the lateral collateral ligament and not perhaps a sporadic separate head of the same ligament.

If I run into any orthopedic guys I'll get their opinion.
2915  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Libertarian Issues on: November 07, 2013, 10:53:50 AM
"The money is earmarked for education, so now parents can tell their kids they're getting high for their future, or something"

 rolleyes

2916  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics at the State & Municipal level on: November 07, 2013, 10:36:45 AM
"I'll ask you the same question I pose to ccp: Why do you want limited campaign funding now?"

The topic I am speaking to is fraud and deception.  Running under a banner that did not represent his positions.

I am speaking about lying on the campaign trail about who one is, who one represents.  You are turning this into a free speech issue.

I am speaking of honesty in politics.  

"Because he was freely speaking his mind? Why do you want limited campaign funding now? Maybe if McCain-Feingold had not been overturned...."

This was a divide and conquer strategy from the Democrat side.  It is a dirty trick that is all.

The Libertarians who allowed him to hold up their banner must have been fooled.  And the two most prominent libertarians absolutely were disavowing this guy later on when they realized his true colors.

BTW BigDog, I was never against campaign finance reform.  It does bother me how wealthy people, corporations, wealthy lobbyists can outright control or influence elections.

I believe I am on record somewhere way back when on the board about this.  

Probably one of the few times I diverge in opinion from Doug who is one of my favorite posters over the years.

2917  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Hillary will also distance herself on: November 07, 2013, 10:22:55 AM
Both of them were huge supporters of Obama.  Now he is safely re-elected and the focus is now in the direction of the next liar to be in chief, Hillary, they are safe to come out and mock HIM.

Where were they when it counted - before the election?

http://www.gossipcop.com/cmas-obamacare-video-carrie-underwood-brad-paisley-affordable-care-act-cma-awards-song/
2918  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Big win for McAullife; Bigger win for Clinton on: November 07, 2013, 09:23:41 AM
The FOR PROFIT Clinton Blue Chip were not going to let this strategic position pass by without throwing everything they have into it.  It is remarkable how coordinated the Democrats are in their money, their focus, their unified messages, and their playing as take no prisoners, kill them all war.  It is remarkable that coverage for BCP is one of so many people's minds as THE big issue for them.  What a screwed up country.

*****And Now, The Airing of Grievances

By Jonah Goldberg

November 6, 2013 8:50 AM
In the recent government shutdown fight I found myself in polite (on my part at least!) disagreement with the elements of the right inclined to denounce the “Republican establishment.” No need to rehash all that again. But, I will say that in the wake of the Cuccinelli defeat, I think the critics of the establishment have the better side of the argument.

If the folks running the party want the tea partiers to support their preferred candidates — when they’re the nominee, at least — it should work the other way around as well. It now appears that Cuccinelli, a flawed candidate running against an even more flawed human being, could have pulled this thing out if he’d had more help at the end. In fairness, the Republican Governor’s Association did help Cuccinelli, but it came too early. The RNC treated him like a write-off. I can understand that temptation when Cuccinelli looked like a sure loser. But I don’t understand why, when ObamaCare became a big issue, the RNC couldn’t have done more. I’m sure it’s hard to ramp up at the last second. But so what? Things are going to be hard in lots of ways for as far as the eye can see. Hard can’t be an excuse anymore. As for the more moderate Republican donors who stayed away from Cuccinelli, I certainly don’t think they’re obliged to give money to anyone or anything they disagree with. So maybe they’re pro-choice. Maybe they call themselves “socially liberal but fiscally conservative” (don’t get me started). Fine. But on the issues that make them Republican, McAuliffe will still be far more of a disaster than Cuccinelli ever would have been. McAuliffe says his first priority for the legislative session is accepting the expanded Medicare option under ObamaCare. That’s bad enough, but does anyone doubt that another, equally important, priority of his will be to prepare the ground for a Clinton candidacy should she run? Even if she doesn’t, McAuliffe in the statehouse is terrible news for every kind of Republican. McAuliffe is not a policy person. He’s not a “statesman.” He’s a purely political hack moneyman. And he’s going to use his skills as best he can to put Virginia in the Democrats’ column in 2016.

For all the talk about how the base needs to cooperate with the establishment more, it’s worth remembering that the base almost always does its part on Election Day. Its the establishment that is less reliable in returning the favor.*****
2919  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics at the State & Municipal level on: November 07, 2013, 08:54:28 AM


http://thefederalist.com/2013/10/25/virginia-gubernatorial-candidate-robert-sarvis-libertarian-name/

"I still don't see why spending money in the manner above is seen as crooked"

Sarvis is not a libertarian.  Libertarians would never support his positions.  That is why both Pauls were travelling through Virginia pointing this out.   

Why would do you think someone would run say as a Libertarian when he clearly is not, rather than say an "independent"?   Why does someone clearly and purposefully use the wrong label to describe himself?

Why would someone who was a major supporter of Obama fund this guy to the tune of 70% of his campaign funds through bundled donations?

He knew this guy wasn't going to win.  It had to be for some other reason.
2920  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Political Rants & interesting thought pieces on: November 05, 2013, 07:44:18 PM
"Conservative Parents, Left-Wing Children"

Doesn't that describe Hillary' parents and her?
2921  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Way Forward for the American Creed on: November 04, 2013, 08:24:00 AM
CK is out hawking his book.
I have been more frequently disagreeing than agreeing with his arguments the last few years.
2922  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Israel an international energy market disrupter? on: November 03, 2013, 10:54:42 AM
Of course the Palestinians will lay claim to this source of wealth. 
Personally, and sadly I am hesitant to invest in anything Israeli.   Too much political uncertainty.

****The Motley Fool

This Natural Gas Find Could Completely Change the World As We Know It

By Tyler Crowe   
November 3, 2013   

One thing that makes the energy sector so intriguing is the constant overlap between markets and politics. In many ways, energy security is synonymous with national security, and the supply and demand needs of the oil market can make the most unlikely bedfellows. One country that has been at the center of energy and politics for decades has been Israel. For years the country has been dependent upon foreign energy sources, but a major discovery by Noble Energy (NYSE: NBL  ) and its partners has turned this situation on its head. Let's look how this massive natural gas find could affect both the political landscape and the pockets of major oil companies like ExxonMobil (NYSE: XOM  ) .

With a name like Leviathan, it has to be big
In 2010, Noble Energy and its partners found something in Israel's offshore region that the country had been looking for since the oil embargoes of the 1970's; its own hydrocarbons. You might say that the company and the country found more than they could have hoped for. The Tamar and Leviathan fields are estimated to have as much as 30 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, which is enough gas to supply Israel for decades even if it were to convert all of its energy consumption from coal and oil to natural gas -- with enough left over to export. Noble Energy estimates that this gas field and the planned export projects could net the country more than $130 billion in energy savings and government revenue from gas royalties.

Of course, Israel isn't the only one making out from this deal, either. The nation's proven reserves account for more than 30% of Noble's proved reserves, and will likely be one of the company's premier energy plays for decades to come. On top of that, the U.S. Geological Survey estimates there are more than 600 million barrels of recoverable oil in the Leviathan field, which could boost the company's reserves by another 17%.

Game of Therms
Thirty trillion cubic feet of natural gas and 600 million barrels of oil is not a monumental amount in terms of the global energy landscape. But the combination of the size of the find, its proximity to a major demand center (Europe), and the fact that it's found in Israel could lead to several issues that might leave some major oil and gas powers not too happy.

Israel could disrupt the energy markets via liquefied natural gas terminals or a combination of pipeline and electricity cables. Noble has brought on Australian partner Woodside Petroleum to develop an LNG terminal for the Leviathan gas field and potentially a second site for an adjacent gas field in Cyprus. The Leviathan LNG terminal is projected to export about 0.85 billion cubic feet per day. Again, not much, but enough to displace 15% of the LNG market in Western Europe.

More importantly, though, Noble estimates that Israeli and Cypriot LNG terminals could together undercut both American and Australian LNG export prices, which could drive down natural gas costs for Europe. This could reduce the profitability of major LNG players like Qatar, where ExxonMobil has a 25%-30% working interest in two of that nation's largest LNG terminals.

An even more significant impact would revolve around the idea of supplying natural gas to Europe via pipeline. It may limit the market for Noble's natural gas, but it would probably generate higher profits per thousand cubic feet of gas because of the cost savings from skirting the liquefaction process. Also, since 40% of Europe's natural gas comes from Statoil (NYSE: STO  ) and Gazprom through very lucrative long-term pipeline contracts, Noble could carve out a nice position by displacing either the more expensive pipeline gas from one of these two players or expensive LNG imports.

Not being an expert in geopolitics, I'm not going to try to venture a guess as to how the political landscape will change in the Middle East. It is pretty fascinating, though, that Israel will go from an extremely energy-import dependent nation to a big-time exporter almost overnight. The country has plans to build pipelines to Jordan, the West Bank, and Turkey, which could improve both economic and political ties to these energy-starved regions. Then again, it could also go in the exact opposite direction and could be a prime target for groups or nations who may scuffle with Israel. 

What a Fool believes
Noble Energy may have found a very large oil and gas field that could boost its bottom line for decades, but it found that asset in a place that has been the epicenter for religious and ethnic conflict for millennia. Even more, it may find that other companies are reluctant to join the project. Oil services giants Schlumberger (NYSE: SLB  ) and Halliburton (NYSE: HAL  ) have major contracts across the Middle East, and they are not likely willing to potentially lose those contracts in order to work with Noble in Israel.

Noble Energy investors and geopolitical watchers should be captivated by this story, because the next couple of years could be a wild ride. **** 
 
2923  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Psalm 23 on: November 03, 2013, 10:38:22 AM
I remember the first time I heard Psalm 23 spoken was at a funeral for someone who very unexpectedly died over a weekend where I was doing some part time work.  He died suddenly of a heart attack without warning.  No one could believe it.   It was in a Catholic hospital near where I lived. 

I went to the afternoon service at the Chapel because he had been kind to me.   It would have been 1980 or 1981.   Being Jewish I never heard those words before.  The power of those words struck me immediately and now 32 years later I still vividly recall the Priest reciting those words with elevated volume tone and conviction.   Their power just vibrated through my senses.    I don't remember anything else that was said - just those words!     

Powerful and beautiful stuff.   Cut through my different religious background like water can cut through pure rock.

2924  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: R.I.P. on: October 28, 2013, 09:34:29 PM
Sorry about your father Doug. sad

We only have one;  and when he leaves a part of his child(ren) goes with him and a part of him stays with his child(ren).

The world lost another hero.

Thanks for sharing.

2925  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Intel Matters on: October 28, 2013, 09:09:32 PM
Obama doesn't know about the IRS.  Obama knew nothing of Benghazi.  Obama knows nothing of the health care website mess.  Obama knows nothing of many to lose their insurance or not being able to keep their plans.

Obama knows nothing of NSA spying on Allies. 

The circle to protect this guy (and Hillary) is never ending.

Once a liar - always a liar.  That is the problem.  Thanks to Bill Clinton it has turned into a disgusting art form.
2926  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Tea Party, Glen Beck and related matters on: October 28, 2013, 08:34:55 AM
BD,

"I don't follow you here. The Tea Party is supposed to be the libertarian wing of the GOP, is it not?

CCP,

I don't see the Tea Party as the wing of another party.  It is a separate party and I don't see it as the Libertarian wing though it is closer to that in ideology.

My point is that the jerk who made this statement runs for three different parties.  If he could get elected he would be just fine being a Democrat.  And we would not have heard it from the Huffington Post.

In any case the Tea Party does indeed need to vet its candidates better.   No disagreement about that. 
2927  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Tea Party, Glen Beck and related matters on: October 28, 2013, 08:30:30 AM
Please see my post on American Creed thread.
2928  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Is this what Colin Powell speaks of? on: October 28, 2013, 08:28:54 AM
An undercurrent of bigotry?   He misses the point.  As does the guy in the following article.  My friend and colleague who I noted in another post who is Indian understands.  He said in one generation his people have come here and worked hard.  They were not welcomed with open loving, adoring arms.  Yet look at them achieve and achieve and achieve.   They are the American Dream.   How many other countries can groups move into and accomplish so much.   Does anyone think there are many Latino countries or African countries or Middle or Far Eastern countries where an outside group with different culture and appearance could come in and accomplish so much?

I might have posted this already but post again to sync with BD's post on Tea Party thread.   We don't need people to make blatant racist hatred comments.  That said there is hate on all sides of the aisle to go around.  This guy to me is a coward.  He surely does not really believe in Conservative values if he quits the party over this.  And what do Mexicans expect.  They come here illegally by the millions walking or driving over the boarder, set up shop, and go to our schools, pay no income taxes, property taxes, in some cases even get other benefits, use our ER services, turn around and accuse us of being racist white bigots and then expect us to respond with a hearty welcome?   But it is not just about Mexicans.  There are millions of others from other countries coming here as well. 

That said I do feel terrible reading the stories of narco-terror in the countries south of the border.  And much of those drugs come here and the drug user dirtballs here are feeding the money to the  murderous bastards there.     

http://www.salon.com/2013/05/14/why_i_quit_the_republican_party/
2929  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Tea Party, Glen Beck and related matters on: October 28, 2013, 08:02:26 AM
Of course no Party needs this.

The Tea Party should expel him for life.   

The Tea Party and Republican parties have to move the topic beyond race; the agenda is all Americans.

BTW BD, the guy once ran as a Democrat and now calls himself a libertarian.


2930  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Larry Elder on: October 27, 2013, 11:30:30 PM
SAGE FROM SOUTH CENTRAL

Where do public school teachers send own kids?

Larry Elder looks at data on choices made by elite who oppose vouchers for parents
Published: 10/16/2013 at 7:51 PM


Larry Elder is a best-selling author and radio talk-show host. His latest book is "Dear Father, Dear Son: Two Lives … Eight Hours." To find out more about Larry Elder, or become an "Elderado," visit www.LarryElder.com.
 




 
Guy walks into a restaurant. Says to the waitress, “I’d like some scrambled eggs and some kind words.” She brings the eggs. The guy smiles, “Now how about the kind words?” Waitress whispers, “Don’t eat the eggs.”

This brings us to the fact that urban public school teachers are about two times more likely than non-teachers to send their own children to private schools. In other words, many public school teachers whisper to parents, “Don’t eat the eggs.”



About 11 percent of all parents – nationwide, rural and urban – send their children to private schools. The numbers are much higher in urban areas. One study found that in Philadelphia a staggering 44 percent of public school teachers send their own kids to private schools. In Cincinnati and Chicago, 41 and 39 percent of public school teachers, respectively, pay for a private school education for their children. In Rochester, N.Y., it’s 38 percent. In Baltimore it’s 35 percent, San Francisco is 34 percent, and New York-Northeastern New Jersey is 33 percent. In Los Angeles nearly 25 percent of public school teachers send their kids to private school versus 16 percent of all Angelenos who do so.

The study, conducted in 2004 by the Fordham Institute, said: “These findings … are apt to be embarrassing for teacher unions, considering those organizations’ political animus toward assisting families to select among schools. But these results do not surprise most practicing teachers to whom we speak. … The data have shown the same basic pattern since we first happened upon them two decades ago: Urban public school teachers are more apt to send their own children to private schools than is the general public. One might say this shows how conservative teachers are. They continue doing what they’ve always done. Or it might indicate that they have long been discerning connoisseurs of education. …

“The middle class will tolerate a lot – disorder, decay and dismay, an unwholesome environment, petty crime, potholes, chicanery and rudeness. One thing, however, that middle-class parents will not tolerate is bad schools for their children. To escape them, they will pay out-of-pocket or vote with their feet. That is what discerning teachers do.”

What about members of Congress? Where do they send their own children?

A 2007 Heritage Foundation study found that 37 percent of representatives and 45 percent of senators with school-age children sent their own kids to private school. Of the members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus with school-age children, 38 percent sent them to private school. Of the members of the Congressional Black Caucus with school-age children, 52 percent sent them to private school.

The ex-mayor of Los Angeles, Antonio Villaraigosa, was asked why he did not have his own kids in public school despite his strong advocacy of public education. Villaraigosa, whose wife was a public school teacher, said, “I’m doing like every parent does. I’m going to put my kids in the best school I can. My kids were in a neighborhood public school until just this year. We’ve decided to put them in a Catholic school. We’ve done that because we want our kids to have the best education they can. If I can get that education in a public school, I’ll do it, but I won’t sacrifice (emphasis added) my children any more than I could ask you to do the same.”

When he got elected president, Barack Obama and his wife made a big display of looking into D.C. public schools for his two daughters to attend. But the Obamas chose Sidwell Friends, the elite private school whose alums include Chelsea Clinton. Obama’s own mother sent the then-10-year-old to live with her parents – so he could attend Punahou Academy, the most exclusive prep school on the island. In fact, from Punahou to Occidental (a private college in Los Angeles) to Columbia (where he completed college) to Harvard Law, Obama is a product of private education.

So how does this square with Obama’s opposition to the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program that offered a voucher for the children of participating parents? It doesn’t.

Here’s what Obama’s Office of Management and Budget said about the program: “Rigorous evaluation over several years demonstrates that the D.C. program has not yielded improved student achievement by its scholarship recipients compared to other students in D.C.”

Tell that to the educator/consultant the Department of Education hired to evaluate the program. Testifying before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security, Patrick Wolf, a University of Arkansas education policy professor who spent more than 10 years evaluating school choice programs in D.C., Milwaukee, New York and Dayton, Ohio, said, “In my opinion, by … boosting high school graduation rates and generating a wealth of evidence suggesting that students also benefited in reading achievement, the D.C. OSP has accomplished what few educational interventions can claim: It markedly improved important education outcomes for low-income inner-city students.”

President Barack Obama calls education “the civil rights issue of our time.” Yet, his opposition to K-12 education vouchers guarantees that many of America’s kids will sit in back of the bus.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/10/where-do-public-school-teachers-send-own-kids/#rgEUdgdZ6XhhGu7T.99
2931  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Michelle, my favortie hotty on: October 27, 2013, 09:40:02 PM
No not Obama.  Malkin!

Why aren't the dirtballs from these IVY league schools ever held accountable?   Like I said, they happily take the government contracts making promises and then have the nerve to point fingers when everything crashes.   I notice David Blumenthal, Syd's brother is safely back at Harvard.   If he would just damn stay there and stop telling the world what to do. 
Now the rest of the US can understand the shit we doctors have had to put up with.  Any wonder at my disgust at the Ivy leaguers?   They all get their money and benefits all the while there political cronies force their regulatory crap down our throats.

****What happened to all of Obama’s technology czars?    

By Michelle Malkin  •  October 25, 2013 10:04 AM


 Copyright 2013

Why does the White House need a private-sector “tech surge” to repair its wretched Obamacare website failures? Weren’t all of the president’s myriad IT czars and their underlings supposed to ensure that taxpayers got the most effective, innovative, cutting-edge and secure technology for their money?

Now is the perfect time for an update on Obama’s top government titans of information technology. As usual, “screw up, move up” is standard bureaucratic operating procedure.

Let’s start with the “federal chief information officer.” In 2009, Obama named then 34-year-old “whiz kid” Vivek Kundra to the post overseeing $80 billion in government IT spending. At 21, Kundra was convicted of misdemeanor theft. He stole a handful of men’s shirts from a J.C. Penney’s department store and ran from police in a failed attempt to evade arrest. Whitewashing the petty thief’s crimes, Obama instead effused about his technology czar’s “depth of experience in the technology arena.”

Just as he was preparing to take the federal job, an FBI search warrant was issued at Kundra’s workplace. He was serving as the chief technology officer of the District of Columbia. Two of Kundra’s underlings, Yusuf Acar and Sushil Bansal, were charged in an alleged scheme of bribery, kickbacks, ghost employees and forged timesheets. Kundra went on leave for five days and was then reinstated after the feds informed him that he was neither a subject nor a target of the investigation.

As I noted in my 2009 book, “Culture of Corruption,” city and federal watchdogs had identified a systemic lack of controls in Kundra’s office. Veteran D.C. newspaper columnist Jonetta Rose Barras reported that Acar “was consistently promoted by his boss, Vivek Kundra, receiving with each move increasing authority over sensitive information and operating with little supervision.” Yet, Team Obama emphasized that Kundra had no idea what was going on in his workplace, which employed about 300 workers.

A mere 29 months after taking the White House job, Kundra left for a cushy fellowship at Harvard University. In January 2012, he snagged an executive position at Salesforce.com, which touted his “demonstrated track record of driving innovation.”

In 2011, Obama appointed former Microsoft executive and FCC managing director Steven VanRoekel to succeed Kundra. At the time, he promised “to make sure that the pace of innovation in the private sector can be applied to the model that is government.” Mission not accomplished.

Next up: Obama’s “U.S. chief technology officer.” In May 2009, the president appointed Aneesh Chopra “to promote technological innovation to help the country meet its goals such as job creation, reducing health care costs and protecting the homeland. Together with Chief Information Officer Vivek Kundra, their jobs are to make the government more effective, efficient and transparent.”

Chopra’s biggest accomplishment? A humiliating cameo in December 2009 on “The Daily Show” with liberal comedian Jon Stewart, who mocked the administration’s pie-in-the-sky Open Government Initiative. Chopra resigned three years later, ran unsuccessfully for Virginia lieutenant governor and now works as a “senior fellow” at the far-left Center for American Progress, which is run by former Clinton administration hit man turned Obama helpmate John Podesta.

Obama replaced Chopra with Todd Park, the former “chief technology officer of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.” The White House described him as a “change agent and ‘entrepreneur-in-residence,’ helping HHS harness the power of data, technology and innovation to improve the health of the nation.” Park oversees the “Presidential Innovation Fellows” program and is also a “senior fellow” in health IT and health reform policy at Podesta’s Center for American Progress. CAP has tirelessly defended Obamacare and its global joke of an IT infrastructure.

In 2010, when President Obama first rolled out a dog-and-pony demonstration of Healthcare.gov, Park basked in the glow of positive media coverage. He bragged to TechCrunch.com about working “24/7 … in a very, very nimble hyper consumer focused way … all fused in this kind of maelstrom of pizza, Mountain Dew and all-nighters, and you know, idealism.”

It was, as you all now know, all hype and glory. So who has Obama called in to oversee the HealthCare.gov rescue mission? None other than the administration’s “change agent and entrepreneur-in-residence,” CTO Todd Park, who helped build the broken system in the first place!

Obamacare also created the “Bureau of Health Information” and a new “assistant secretary of health information,” who coordinates with a separate “national coordinator for health information technology” overseeing the equally disastrous electronic medical records mandate. Harvard University’s David Blumenthal held the post from 2009 to 2011 before returning to his Ivy League home.

Screen shot 2013-10-25 at 10.21.18 AM

Then came Farzad Mostashari, who was “at the forefront of the administration’s health IT efforts and is a resource to the entire health system to support the adoption of health information technology and the promotion of nationwide health information exchange to improve health care.” In August 2013, Mostashari announced his resignation, and earlier this month, he became a “visiting fellow” at the Brookings Institution’s Engelberg Center for Health Care Reform.

Those who can, do. Those who can’t, waste our money screwing things up and then run back to academia to train the next generation of incompetent technocrats.****
2932  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Politics of Health Care on: October 24, 2013, 10:55:50 AM
Wall Streets shake up artists such as well know Carl Ichan (I wish I bought Cheesepeake when it was at bottom when he got involved - up from 15 to 27!!!), are scouring other energy companies to do the same thing.

The reason I post here is extracting value is EXACTLY what Wall Street is doing in the health care sector.  It seems to be under the radar with AHA taking all the headlines.  I am not saying it is good or bad.  I am just pointing this out.  But this struck me as a very good analogy to what I see in health care:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-16/activists-seek-repeat-of-40-billion-oil-patch-windfall-energy.html
2933  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / She is only going to worsen the divide on: October 24, 2013, 10:46:28 AM
Half the country despises her.   She will simply not go away.  She will as did Bill shove herself in front of us every single day.  I already want to leave the country.  The heckler should have yelled back that "you refuse to take responsibility when you were politely asked.  So yes, now I am yelling."

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/10/24/hillary-clinton-turns-tables-on-heckler-in-buffalo/
2934  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Rush and Crafty - top dogs on: October 24, 2013, 10:37:48 AM
Doug thanks.

I am not trying to beat a dead horse.  By the way, Rush, has been marvelous since the last election.  There is just no one like him.   For me he is top radio dog!   Crafty is top board dog.  grin

I wonder like GM if we need a crash for those who vehemently defend their "entitlements" to wake up.  

Most people are employees not employers.  So they are kind of followers not leaders.  So offer them free stuff and they will "kill" for it.  This is not a racial thing.  It is a economic class thing.  We see these people all over the message boards, on cable, in our daily endeavors.  They despise Republicans.   They feel they are entitled.  They can't earn it for whatever reasons.  So dammit life is not fair and we need government to give us our due.

Reagan brought in many blue collar types.  I think because he brought back the spirit of pride in AMerica.   TOday the demographics are different.   I am not sure why but ASians Latinos and Blacks do not seem to aprreciate  American traditional values.  Perhaps because they come from different countries that have different types of values.  It certainly does not help when children come here and our schools no longer teach them to think of America with pride.  That may be a big part of it.  You know this identity politics thing.  

We need to combat that I think.  We are ALL AMERICANS.  We are not women.  We are not men.  We are not Latino.  We are not white, black, Asian etc.   WE are all in this country and are together.   Do you want us to be the best or keep tearing ourselves apart?

These are most of the core of other issues.  

But back to the economic side;

As  Reich, and has others, are correct in pointing out : Without a thriving middle class we are all either the very few rich or the very many struggling poor.  And that is a big problem.  Repubs need to connect more than with as Doug nicely describes "platitudes".  

Please my fellow Repubs and Tea Partiers -
More than just platitudes - dudes. cool
2935  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Way Forward for the American Creed on: October 23, 2013, 10:29:04 PM
Crafty quotes Jonah Goldberg:

"it's the insufficient power and popularity of conservatism coupled with the very real failures of the GOP to reverse conservatism's fortunes over the last two decades."

I think this is in line with what I am talking about.  How can we reverse conservative's fortunes if we are not listening and responding to the real concerns of so many?

"the insurgents insisted they were in an ideological struggle with the establishment. But there was precious little ideology involved. Instead, it was a fight over tactics and power"

Well yes.  A guerilla resistance war vs. a full scale retreat with management of decline.

We keep debating in circles.   It all comes down to how do we convince people that government is not the answer to all the world's ills.  Indeed it will mostly make things worse.
Half the US gets a check from the other half.  How do we combat that?   I hear a lot of ideas on the board.  But they speak only to the 50% who are working and shelling out the dough.

Does Jonah offer any ideas to reverse the decline?   Jonah is suggesting both ways are flawed. 

It just might take a giant crash of the pyramid of cards the left has shoved down our throats.

BTW if I read one more lefty state how Reagan was willing to compromise while in the same breath point out he ballooned the debt - why he did that because of the Democrats in the Houses!
2936  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Media Issues on: October 23, 2013, 07:08:07 PM
"HILLARY CLINTON: I've been out of politics for a few years now and I've had a chance to think a lot about what makes our country so great."

This has NO basis in reality.  And yet the morons love this stuff.

The part before the "and", and the part after are both just so full of crap.  Only the Clintons could tie TWO obnoxious lies one after the other in the same sentence.

She is the most divisive figure I can think of after Obama.  Even worse.
2937  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / OMG;OMG;OMG;OMG on: October 23, 2013, 11:15:17 AM
 sad shocked huh cry embarassed

McCain considering seeking reelection in 2016

By Aaron Blake

October 22 at 11:57 am

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said Tuesday that he is considering running for another term in 2016, when he would be 80 years old.

"I'm seriously thinking about maybe giving another opportunity for you to vote for or against me in a few years from now," McCain said on KFYI-AM in Phoenix. "I'm seriously giving that a lot of thought."

Asked by host Barry Young to clarify if he was saying he might run again, McCain said: "That would not be wrong."

The New York Times's Mark Leibovich, who is in Arizona following McCain, first tweeted the news.

McCain, the 2008 GOP presidential nominee, is in his fifth term. He has never taken less than 56 percent of the vote and easily dispatched a primary challenge in 2010 from former congressman J.D. Hayworth.

If he runs again, McCain will likely find himself targeted by tea party groups.

Updated at 12:36 p.m
2938  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / What if JFK was not shot? on: October 23, 2013, 11:09:06 AM
I guess the only thing one can say for sure.  More White House interns would have been essentially taken advantage of.  That said.  Oswald unwittingly won big time.  Thanks to him we have had the Great Society, the anti-US counterculture of the 60's and  a march forward towards a more socialist society.  Would Vietnam have turned out like it did?  Who knows?  I don't think so.  Would we have had Civil Rights like we did?  Maybe not.  I agree with it now in some form or another.   Kennedy was not a big government guy according to this article.  Interesting he stiffed the unions.  Why didn't West Virginia mobster unions serve him up the 1960 primary win?
All conjecture.  All water under the bridge but interesting to think what if.....

What if Kennedy lived?
Jeff Greenfield
By Jeff Greenfield October 21, 2013 12:15 PM
 
If Kennedy Lived

Jeff Greenfield's new book, "If Kennedy Lived: The First and Second Terms of President John F. Kennedy: An Alternate History" will be published Tuesday, October 22 by G.P. Putnam's Sons. This is an excerpt from the book's introduction.

It was Thursday, July 14, 1960, in Room 9333 of the Biltmore Hotel in Los Angeles, and Kenny O’Donnell was furious at the man he had just helped nominate to be president of the United States.

Again and again, Sen. John F. Kennedy had assured the unions, the civil rights leaders, the liberals and intellectuals whose support he was seeking that Texas Sen. Lyndon Johnson would not be his choice for vice president. Yet now, little more than 12 hours after the Massachusetts Democrat had won a first ballot nomination with a razor-thin margin of five delegates, he had offered the second slot on the ticket to Johnson — and Johnson had accepted.

“I was so furious I could hardly talk,” O’Donnell remembered years later. “I thought of the promises we had made … the assurances we had given. I felt that we had been double crossed.”

So O’Donnell demanded to confront Kennedy face to face and the nominee complied, taking O’Donnell into the bathroom, and assuring him that the job would actually diminish Johnson’s power by placing him in a powerless, impotent job.

“I’m 43 years old,” Kennedy said, “and I’m the healthiest candidate for president in the United States. You’ve traveled with me enough to know that I’m not going to die in office. So the vice presidency doesn’t mean anything.”

The man who gave his disaffected aide this reassurance had lost a brother and a sister in airplane crashes; had almost died when his ship was destroyed in the South Pacific during World War II; had been stricken with an illness so serious in 1947 that he had been given the last rites of his church; had undergone a life-threatening operation in 1954 to save him from invalidism, an operation so serious that he was away from his Senate seat for nine months; who was living with a form of Addison’s disease — hidden from the press and public — that required a regular dose of powerful medicine; and who lived virtually every day in pain.

For a man so often described as “fatalistic” — who on the day of his murder mused to his wife, and to that same Kenny O’Donnell, about the ease with which “a man with a rifle” could kill him — Kennedy’s blithe assurance about his invulnerability to fate seemed astonishing. (If nothing else, his immersion in history must have taught him that seven presidents had died in office.)

Maybe, though, Kennedy’s words were not so astonishing. They reflect an impulse deep within the human spirit: to push aside the power of random chance, in favor of a more orderly, less chaotic universe. What has happened, the argument goes, is what had to happen. Even for someone like John Kennedy, who had seen sudden, violent death take two of his siblings, and come close to taking him more than once, had dismissed the whole idea of considering that possibility when choosing the man to stand “a heartbeat away.”

For most historians, the idea of lingering over the roads that might have been taken, but for a small twist of fate, to project what might be different about our lives, or our country, or world, seems at best a parlor game, at worst a fool’s errand, like asking “What if Spartacus had a plane?” That is the view that most historians share, in dismissing “counter-factual” history, the “what-if?” questions.

It is, however, not a unanimous view. In his book “Virtual History,” Harvard University historian Niall Ferguson offers a different approach: to examine “plausible or probable alternatives … only those alternatives which we can show on the basis of contemporary evidence that contemporaries actually considered.” It is an approach he calls “virtual” history, and it is anchored in the concept of “plausibility.”

This is the approach I’ve taken in “If Kennedy Lived,” a book that tries to answer in fictional terms a question that is very much alive today: What if John Kennedy had not died 50 years ago in Dallas? The small alteration of history that saves his life, in my account, is no high drama; it is, simply, a minor meteorological matter; had the rain not stopped in Dallas minutes before the president’s arrival, the bubble-top would have remained on the Presidential limousine, greatly improving the odds of Kennedy’s survival.

And after that tiny twist of fate saved the president? Any speculation about the alternative history has to put aside political ideology, or personal affection or distate for JFK, and turn to what we know about his beliefs, impulses and character. For me, for instance, his innate caution, his skepticism about Vietnam — expressed long before he’d become president — his distrust of his military advisors’ advice and his fear of miscalculation and misguided assumptions that shaped his behavior during the Cuban missile crisis all point to the likelihood that he would have disengaged.

But his political calculations, his fear of being tagged with a “Who Lost Vietnam” label, would have made him disengage by stealth, rather than by an open acknowledgement that victory was beyond our power. And a 1960s with no massive war in Vietnam would have meant a very different counterculture, one where “sex, drugs and rock 'n' roll" still emerged, but where convulsive violence did not. In short, Woodstock, yes; Altamont, no.

Similarly, knowing JFK had little legislative skill and few ties to the congressional power brokers (as opposed to Lyndon Johnson) made it far less likely that he could have passed the groundbreaking Civil Rights Act of 1964, or pushed a Great Society agenda through the Congress, even if he had wished to. (And his skepticism about ambitious government programs might have kept him from even proposing so grand — or grandiose — an idea).

Beyond questions of policy, there are more personal matters: Would his extramarital sex life have been threatened with exposure? In fact, it nearly became a public matter in the weeks before his assassination, and had such exposure been a threat after Dallas, history tells us the Kennedys would have worked to keep the story quiet by means fair and foul. (If you doubt this, look at what the administration did in 1962 to force steel companies to toll back their price hikes. “Abuse of power” is not too strong a term.)

All this is by way of saying that alternative history cannot be hagiography, nor “pathography.” Anyone seeking to imagine an eight-year Kennedy presidency has to come to grips with his strengths and weaknesses, his admirable and deplorable character traits, in trying to determine how a change in the weather in Dallas would have changed — and not changed — one of the most turbulent periods in our history.
2939  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Some thought from the Eastern front on: October 23, 2013, 10:23:52 AM
Michelle who is one of my favorite writers, indeed if I was younger and she was available....

Yes we on the front lines of medical care are forced to spend ALL our time collecting and responding to data and data points, and formats, and numbers.  The personal touch between patient and doctor and decision making is being taken away.  Standards are set primarily by government but the big companies are also using the data to extract every single dime out of humanities daily lives.

A case manager at one of the hospitals I go to recently said to me it is all about the data.  Everything we do is for the data.  Data can be manipulated.  It can be falsified.  She said if it isn't written in the data - it doesn't exist.

Hospitals, dialysis, pharmacies, pharmacy benefits managers, pharmaceuticals, urgent care centers, nursing homes are all consolidating and being run by big corporations.  Most of this is I think funded via Wall Street.  One astute physician suggested how health care is one of the biggest and only drivers of the economy right now.  So the 1000 dollar suits are focusing on health care.  No one can compete with their billions to throw around.

(The energy sector could also do well if the liberal machine would get the hell out of the way.)

There are more jobs there will be more efficiencies.  I don't know if care will necessarily be better or not.  One definite thing is that the way it is measured will certainly be distorted to reflect that it is.
One professor who used to do a lot of research pointed out - it is all in the way one measure it. 

The data points that are shoved in front of us are the measurements used to reflect better care.  We will not see other issues that are not being measured. 

I can go on a hospital floor and see rows of nurses sitting at computers.  In some locations I have actually had to scramble to even get to a computer terminal before the nurse gets there.  Or vice a versa.

We can see first hand how every single human endeavor is being manipulated to squeeze every single penny out of our existence. 
2940  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / second post on: October 23, 2013, 10:08:30 AM
I don't love this guy much and while I disagree all of his prescriptions for anything he does have one valid point.  The middle class in the US is dying.  Remember when one could put their money in a local bank and they would pay us 5% interest without fees, without minimums?  Now banks TAKE as much from us while we park our money with them!  That is one example of the difference between years past and now.  No one can save anything.  One may argue with the exact number but when most people in the US are living from paycheck to paycheck we as a country have a big problem.  Republicans are not speaking TO these  people.  They just speak about debt, freedom, smaller government, etc.  I get it.  I agree with the concepts.  But most Joes want to hear what we can do for them!  We ALL know the Clintons will frame the debate so average people who don't spend much time thinking about political philosophy will understand.  They will frame it in a way to tug at people's emotions.  That is why she will win.  Of course, they have a complicit media.  And they are world class liars.  And they repeatedly commit fraud, cover ups, and take no responsibility for screw ups.  And the media lets them get away with it because they are liberal or want to hop on the money and power train.

So IMHO Reich is a crazy communist liberal.  Yet his points about the sinking middle class is DEAD ON.   So what say we?   Less government, more tax breaks, less regulation.  OK fine.  So how does that help or connect with the average Joe who doesn't know the difference between the AHA and Obamacare?  My answer it doesn't.  And that is why folks we lose.

*****Robert Reich: The triumph of the right
By Robert B. Reich, Tribune Content Agency

Posted October 23, 2013 at midnight

Conservative Republicans have lost their fight over the shutdown and debt ceiling, and they probably won’t get major spending cuts in upcoming negotiations over the budget.

But they’re winning the big one: How the nation understands our biggest domestic problem. Conservative Republicans say the biggest problem is the size of government and the budget deficit.

In fact, our biggest problem is the decline of the middle class and the increasing ranks of the poor, while almost all the economic gains go to the top.

The Labor Department reported Tuesday that only 148,000 jobs were created in September — way down from the average of 207,000 new jobs a month in the first quarter of the year.



Search our databases
.
 
 
Many Americans have stopped looking for work. The official unemployment rate of 7.2 percent reflects only those who are still looking. If the same percentage of Americans were in the workforce today as when Barack Obama took office, today’s unemployment rate would be 10.8 percent.

Meanwhile, 95 percent of the economic gains since the recovery began in 2009 have gone to the top 1 percent. The real median household income continues to drop, and the number of Americans in poverty continues to rise.

So what’s Washington doing about this? Nothing. Instead, it’s back to debating how to cut the federal budget deficit.

But the deficit shouldn’t even be an issue because it’s now almost down to the same share of the economy as it has averaged over the last 30 years.

The triumph of right-wing Republicanism extends further. Failure to reach a budget agreement will restart the so-called “sequester” — automatic, across-the-board spending cuts that were passed in 2011 as a result of Congress’s last failure to agree on a budget.

These automatic cuts get tighter and tighter, year by year — squeezing almost everything the federal government does except for Social Security and Medicare. While about half the cuts come out of the defense budget, much of the rest come out of programs designed to help Americans in need: extended unemployment benefits; supplemental nutrition for women, infants and children; educational funding for schools in poor communities; Head Start; special education for students with learning disabilities; child-care subsidies for working families; heating assistance for poor families. The list goes on.

The biggest debate in Washington over the next few months will be whether to whack the federal budget deficit by cutting future entitlement spending and closing some tax loopholes, or go back to the sequester. Some choice.

The real triumph of the right has come in shaping the national conversation around the size of government and the budget deficit — thereby diverting attention from what’s really going on: the increasing concentration of the nation’s income and wealth at the very top, while most Americans fall further and further behind.

More cuts in the deficit will only worsen this by reducing total demand for goods and services and by eliminating programs that hard-pressed Americans depend on.

The president and Democrats should reframe the national conversation around widening inequality.

They could start by demanding an increase in the minimum wage and a larger Earned Income Tax Credit. (The president doesn’t even have to wait for Congress to act. He can raise the minimum wage for government contractors through an executive order.)

Framing the central issue around jobs and inequality would make clear why it’s necessary to raise taxes on the wealthy and close tax loopholes (such as “carried interest,” which enables hedge-fund and private-equity managers to treat their taxable income as capital gains). It would explain why we need to invest more in education — including early-childhood as well as affordable higher education.

This framework would even make the Affordable Care Act more understandable — as a means for helping working families whose jobs are paying less or disappearing altogether, and therefore are in constant danger of losing health insurance.

The central issue of our time is the reality of widening inequality of income and wealth. Everything else — the government shutdown, the fight over the debt ceiling, the continuing negotiations over the budget deficit — is a dangerous distraction.

The right’s success in generating this distraction is its greatest, and most insidious, triumph.

Robert Reich, former U.S. Secretary of Labor, is a columnist for the Tribune Content Agency.*****
2941  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Way Forward for the American Creed on: October 23, 2013, 09:51:11 AM
Doug,
First, sorry about the Giants and Vikings shocked.

Doug writes,

" In politics, they are endless.  How come Republicans want to starve the poor, take away Grannies' meds, don't care about working people, only care about the rich, care only about themselves, don't have a plan of their own, only know how to say no, hate government, hate black people, are war mongers, etc.  How come Republicans want people to raise a family on $8 an hour?  How come they want to stop 20 million people from getting health insurance?  The more we answer these questions, the deeper the hole we have dug."

I absolutely agree that the Republicans do not appropriately answer these questions.  But these are questions people have.
I don't think one can win anyone over by simply ignoring or rephrasing these questions.   We need to answer them. 

Doug writes,

****What do we know about income inequality?

a) It is badly measured and greatly overstated,

b) It is a fact, not an issue, and

c) Focusing on this false injustice leads you to all the wrong policy choices.****

Number one there is huge income inequality.  The top controls huge amounts of the country's wealth.  I agree it is not an injustice, but would you not agree there are injustices?   Would you agree the wealthy do get privileges the rest of us do not get?   I am not against them.    But people see the right totally ignoring some at the top who are ripping off the system.  There are people at the bottom doing the same thing with welfare fraud, disability fraud.  My point is we should strive for fairness at the top and bottom.   I want a system based on competition and hard work, conceding that luck and talent often separates those who do better than others. 

So what.  It is still by far the best way.

Just to call it a "false injustice" is very evasive.   I don't think this will persuade anyone.   We need better responses.  I wish I was retired.   I would like to spend the time and give it a go.

We are having trouble winning people over because WE ARE NOT LISTENING to them.  We are not answering them.  We are not really offering a choice.   We are not reaching them.  Convincing them WE (REPUBS) offer the better way of life.

I think Rove and the Bushes and other Rinos think the compromise and concession is the way to listen to others.  I don't agree with that.  That is a losers take IMHO.

OTOH, if a guy with the completely flawed character of McAuliffe can win Virginia and indeed his numbers improve just by having Hillary stand next to him, another with a flawed dishonest personality than maybe we are finished.  THAT is very discouraging! cry cry

2942  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Way Forward for the American Creed on: October 22, 2013, 07:21:07 AM
A great analogy would be a patient who come in to my office and gives me a few questions.

My response,

Change the questions, rephrase them and give answers to questions he didn't ask and then tell the patient, "this is what you need to do and why".
2943  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Politics of Health Care on: October 22, 2013, 07:19:12 AM
Second health thread post.

Perhaps readers might recall how I pointed out how electronic records are simply not ready for prime time.  Yes there are hundreds of vendors out there who will sell you that theirs is the one that works great.

But all are clunky cumbersome and frankly a pain in the ass.   I recall reading that there was some kick back to the politburo Ivy league know-it-alls.   IN one response editorial one of the leading doctor IT cottage industry  types basically wrote in his response for us doctors to more or less just stop whining, shut up, and be happy we are getting through the "FIRST PHASE".   So now all that IT that is being shoved down our throats is suddenly not the answer but is the first phase.   

Now the world with the AHA tech failure can see what we have been living through for the past couple of years.  The IT people are already blaming the government on Drudge.  Oh they were having to eat pizza and work till 10 etc.  No one ever heard a peep from this crowd while they were happily receiving their pay checks probably each and every one of the promising the government they could do the job so they could get the contract.

People, it is all the classic fingers pointing every which way when something is a mess.  Don't blame me it is him or her; not me.

Eventually it will be made workable but don't expect any of it to be a breeze.  This will take years.

IT does show how government regulations make all of us suffer.  While the Obamas of the world promise free health care to all.

Why even that idiot (I have concluded) Peirce Morgan was on last night saying how they have "FREE" health care in Great Britain.   

Wow!   How do they do that?  It's free?   Why can't we do what you wizards in Europe do here?
2944  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Way Forward for the American Creed on: October 21, 2013, 10:12:25 PM
Or put another way, how can we win people over by ignoring their questions and by posing answers to questions they are NOT asking?
2945  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / The model of excellence for Donald Berwick on: October 21, 2013, 10:10:17 PM
who was one of the designers of AHA was Britain's National Health Service.
In a recent Lancet piece the resigning chair of the Royal College of General Practitioners says that primary care is in crises and headed for collapse.  Sounds like here in the US:

*****The continuing haemorrhage of UK general practice

The Lancet

Last week was no doubt a sad one for Clare Gerada, who gave her last Chairwoman's speech before stepping down from leading the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) after 3 years. She has been the most visible and successful head of the College in recent memory. Unlike previous Chairs, Gerada has not been afraid to challenge the Government on a wide range of issues. She has led doctors with more confidence, passion, positive vision, and success than the British Medical Association has ever been able to do. She has been the voice of clinical practice in the community for the tens of thousands of GPs who are at the frontline of primary care and the Coalition's bungled health reforms.

At the RCGP's annual conference in Harrogate, Oct 3—5, Gerada hit out at the Government again. At a time when it had just announced plans to increase GP surgery opening times in England from 0800 h to 2000 h, 7 days a week, she presented alarming new figures from the RCGP that general practitioners (GPs) in the UK face a £400 million “black hole” as a result of funding cuts during the past 3 years. This disinvestment equates to a 7% cut in spending per patient. Gerada pointed out that although GPs saw 90% of patients as the first contact, they received only 9% of the entire UK National Health Service (NHS) budget, and that percentage share was falling. “General practice is in crisis”, she lamented. In recent surveys, 85% of GPs also felt general practice was heading for collapse. Quality and safety of patient care are being put in danger, since GPs are seeing up to 60 patients in an 11 h day with far fewer resources. Many predict that patients will have to wait longer for an appointment in the future. Gerada called for general practice to get at least 10% of the NHS budget and 10 000 more GPs.

The Government and its Health and Social Care Act wanted to make general practitioners the clinical leaders of the NHS. But by by withdrawing investment in primary care they have starved general practice of the resources needed to lead the service properly. The result will not only be an inevitable vacuum in leadership but also serious damage to the care of patients.*****

Thanks to the other "Donald".

2946  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / We should not just answer the questions we choose to answer on: October 21, 2013, 12:23:56 AM
Doug writes<

"I share all your frustration, anger, disappointment, etc and then some!  To answer you literally, Republican is a brand that is still winning half of the elections, holding the House, a 30-20 lead in Governorships, a majority of state legislatures, well over the 40 Senator threshold, threatening (for a 3rd try) to take back that majority.  That is with no leader, clarity or message.   Also should have won the Presidency in 2012. 

At the start of the tea party movement I thought the uniting message was cut spending first.  Reduce the size and scope of government, especially federal government.  Lower tax rates along with a booming private sector can follow.  But this was in reaction to Obamacare passage in particular, the greatest expansion of government power in this country ever.

Failing to take the Senate, failing to take back the Presidency, failing to get these expansions struck down in the Court, and failing to defund it, all lead us to starting over, carrying all this damage and with a dispirited base.  We are fighting to get back to where we were, which was in a faltering economy with a huge government and even more people not contributing.

We actually need to both defeat the establishment Republicans and unite with them, a daunting proposition.

Each state, house district etc., IMO, needs to choose the most conservative candidate - that can win in that state or district.  Same for the Presidency.  They need to be focused and disciplined, not make the mistakes that sank others recently.  Get a message and stay on message; this is not about rape abortions, secession, or shooting our way out of this mess.

We need a vision and some visionaries.  A shining city on a hill.  Tell people the positive things about a realistic, America-2014 and beyond vision.  Move past the liberal terminology and definitions of the issues.  As Newt once did, ask questions that poll well and favor our side.  Would you like more government control over your life or more personal freedom and economic opportunity?  Would you like to stop others from succeeding or improve your own lot on life?  Do you like jobs, businesses, schools, health care, and everything else controlled mainly by Washington or closer to home?  Do you think public sector people should have far bigger salaries, pensions, benefits and shorter work days than the private sector people who support them or be in line with the rest of the economy?

At some point there are demographic groups such as unemployed young people who will begin to see that the move toward Stalinism isn't helping them.  Hope and change meant sit still and demand things.  These things tend to swing like a pendulum.  At some point people open up to a different message.  But we didn't made good use of the turns we had to govern and we haven't presented a coherent alternative while out of power, so we are now paying that price."

All excellent points.  It mostly works for me.  Yet I sense something is missing.  It is all beautiful talk but I still think this misses the mark.

Older people have suggested to me it is much tougher to get ahead then it used to be.  Competition is much greater.  One member of household out working was more common.  Now two must work.  College degrees are far more expensive.  Way ahead of the cost of living and wages.  Worse a college degree used to almost guarantee a good job.  Now even advanced degrees don't.

There has to be more specific ways in which republicans speak more than just ideals.  Freedom, less government, less taxes, etc.

This is just not enough.   Something is missing.   

This will not beat Hillary who all is about identity politics and her apparent phony story about conciliation and compromise.

Doug, I agree with you but the message is still short and unsatisfactory.  It is not a winner IMHO.  Unless times get so bad the Repubs win by default.

" As Newt once did, ask questions that poll well and favor our side. "   Why can't we come up with BETTER answers to the questions that don't poll well and favor our side?

Ignoring these questions or changing the subject is exactly the problem I am talking about.

We like it or not half the country wants answers to such questions.   We can't just change the subject.  We must answer them but do it better.

If someone asks why is it not one Wall Streeter went to jail the answer should not be to change the subject.

 
2947  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Turks betraying Israel for Iran on: October 19, 2013, 08:11:47 PM
I don't think the US would give up Mossad agents but I don't trust the Obama led US not give up Israel plans for an attack on Iran"

****Turkish Betrayal’ Is the Talk of Israel

By Karl Vick and Aaron J. Klein / Tel Aviv @karl_vickOct. 18, 201320 Comments   
       
Israeli newspapers were dominated Friday morning by a Washington Post report that Turkey betrayed Israeli spies to Iran.  “Turkey Blows Israel’s Cover for Iranian Spying Ring, “ was the headline on columnist David Ignatius’  Thursday piece, quoting “knowledgeable sources” who described how the Turkish government disclosed to Iran the identities of 10 Iranians who had been meeting in Turkey with Israeli intelligence case officers. The Hebrew daily Yedioth Ahronoth noted a “thunderous silence” from the Israeli government in its article, headlined “The Turkish Betrayal” and including numerous quotes from unidentified officials reinforcing the premise of the story.  The Post column followed an Oct. 10 Wall Street Journal profile of Turkey’s intelligence chief, Hakan Fidan, that included a broader charge that he had passed Israeli secrets to Iran.

Turkey’s foreign ministry dismissed the reports as a “smear campaign” intended to further damage Turkey’s fraught relations with Israel, which Ignatius is in a position to appreciate better than most.  He was the moderator at the 2009 World Economic Forum panel featuring Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Israeli President Shimon Peres, when Erdogan pulled off his microphone and stormed off the stage over the 2008-2009 conflict in Gaza. “When it comes to killing, you know well how to kill,” Erdogan told Peres.

Beyond tightening tensions between Ankara and Jerusalem, the new reports also add to the narrative of the secret war between Israel and Iran that has been emerging in bits and pieces.  In January 2012, intelligence sources acknowledged to TIME that a young man who appeared on Iranian state television in 2011 confessing he had been working for the Mossad, had, in fact, been an asset for the Israeli intelligence agency. The chagrined intelligence officials said 24-year-old Majid Jamali Fashi, who was executed in May 2012 as a “Mossad spy”, had been betrayed to Iran’s security services by a third country, which TIME did not identify.   A subsequent Israeli investigation concluded that Turkey had not overtly identified the Mossad agents, but rather permitted them to be discovered by Iranian state security, either by possibly through their movements between Iran and Turkey, according to an intelligence official.

Three months after Fashi was hanged, the Iranian government paraded another 14 Iranians on primetime television, all describing their roles in the assassinations of scientists involved in Iran’s nuclear program. Iran blames the killings on the Mossad – and correctly so, Western intelligence officials said. The officials acknowledged the loss of more operatives, Iranian nationals paid to provide logistics and other support for the Mossad operation. The officials said the assassinations were intended both to deter Iranian scientists from joining the nuclear effort, and as part of a broader covert campaign aimed at delaying Iran’s program. Before scaling back the level of covert operations later in 2012, Israel’s secret campaign ranged from silent attacks such as the Stuxnet computer virus, to very loud ones, like the massive Nov. 2011 blast at a missile base outside Tehran, which intelligence officials acknowledged to was Israeli sabotage.

Iran attempted again and again to strike back at Israel, in a fast-moving  “shadow war” that involved attempts on the lives of Israeli diplomats and expatriates, from Bangkok to Baku to Nairobi.  But it did not fare well. The Israelis or other governments thwarted every attack until July 2012, when agents of Hizballah – which Iran created and has a history of partnering with in terror attacks – bombed a bus in the Bulgarian resort of Burgas,  killing five Israeli tourists, a Bulgarian bus driver and a Hizballah operative who may not have meant to die.

Karl Vick   @karl_vick   

Karl Vick has been TIME's Jerusalem bureau chief since 2010, covering Israel,the Palestine territories and nearby sovereignties. He worked 16 years at the Washington Post in Nairobi, Istanbul, Baghdad, Los Angeles and Rockville,

Read more: http://world.time.com/2013/10/18/turkish-betrayal-is-the-talk-of-israel/#ixzz2iDhwVzJk****
2948  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Guerilla war or try retreat and regroup while we get our asses kicked on: October 19, 2013, 11:46:26 AM
Do we want a retreating action or a guerilla war?   Which is it?   

As Mark Levin would describe the Tea Party now,

"we are a resistance movement".

Like the French resistance.

Instead of a simple rear guard defensive retreat like establishment Republicans I prefer a guerilla resistance like the Tea Party.   Hit the enemy where one can.  As hard as possible.  Fight back.  Not as Hannity described simply, "manage defeat". 

Reading on Lenin and Stalin they were essentially the same thing - against Tsarist Russia.  They both fought their whole lives to gain power.  I don't admire their use of terror and lies, and murder, and robbery.   But I admire their persistence, their single minded agenda. 

Neither was about money.  It was all political.  Though the politburo members did later become more about money and power for power's sake.  Though they had to pretend they were not like evil capatilists.  tongue
2949  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Al Gore's stock advise on: October 19, 2013, 10:55:04 AM
Short oil.   

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/al-gore-carbon-bubble-going-burst-avoid-oil-121707563.html
2950  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politically (In)correct on: October 19, 2013, 10:47:53 AM
"Enough! Done! and a hearty Foff to any who would seek to correct me."

I have many Black patients.   I guess they trust and like me.

I have to admit to being a little afraid at times of how to address them.   Some diseases are different with regards to prevalence or severity in Blacks vs Whites vs. Latino vs Asians.   It does sometimes matter where a person is from; born, raised, how long they have resided in the US. 

Hepatitis B, sarcoidosis, Helicobacter pylori, malaria, intestinal parasites, glaucoma, prostate and colon cancer, liver cancer, thalassemia, sickle cell, and others to name a few.

I was not sure to address them as African American or Black.   I have no problem addressing anyone the way they wish to be addressed.   I sometimes do not know which is preferred.   Once I recall using AA and the patient immediately kind of grinned as though she thought it just as silly.   A few times I recall pointing out a disease is more common in "Blacks" and the patient does display a bit of a change in facial expression.   I try to be as sensitive to this as I can.    I don't know how else to tell them the medical facts.  I go with the facts and present them as they are. 

Usually I use the term Black.   For example when I discuss the pros and cons of doing the PSA (prostate blood test) I would make the patient aware that prostate cancer deaths are more prevalent in Blacks.   Cause unknown but you need to know this.   

I would not use the term colored or Negro.  But do I use AA - which by the way in this case is not even accurate.  Or do I use Black?  I have chosen to use "black".   Thank goodness there has never been any response that suggested anyone was offended.   That is the last thing I would want to do.

In anthropology races were divided into Caucasoid, Negroid, and Mongoloid back in the 70's.  I do not know if it still that way when examining skeletons or not.
Pages: 1 ... 57 58 [59] 60 61 ... 128
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!