In fourteen hundred and ninety two
Columbus sailed the ocean blue
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Today is real Columbus Day–the day the Columbus voyage first landed on the island in the Caribbean, southeast of Florida. Columbus was a great visionary. He imagined what others did not see. Unfortunately, his discovery marked the beginning of the demise of the native people of North and South America. Today’s Columbus Day celebrations are often quiet and low key. Are we correct to keep Columbus Day low key or should we be shouting from the roof tops? Just something to consider…..
Meanwhile…have at it on whatever topic you want.
Where’s my Lief Ericson Day?
HE got here first. Besides, Columbus never found the mainland.
We need Cabot Day!
Found in Wikilieaks: Obama apologizing for Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
Another stop on the tour was in Japan, where Obama in November 2009 bowed to the emperor, something no American president had ever done. It could have been worse if plans to visit Nagasaki and Hiroshima to apologize for winning the war with the atom bombs had come to pass.
A heretofore secret cable dated Sept. 3, 2009, was recently released by WikiLeaks. Sent to Secretary of State Clinton, it reported Japan’s Vice Foreign Minister Mitoji Yabunaka telling U.S. Ambassador John Roos that “the idea of President Obama visiting Hiroshima to apologize for the atomic bombing during World War II is a ‘nonstarter.’”
http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/10/11/obama-tried-to-apologize-to-japan-for-the-atomic-bombings-of-hiroshima-and-nagasaki/
Why am I NOT surprised?
@Cargosquid
At best he was 2nd:
On January 8th, 1992, U.S. President George H.W. Bush was in Japan as part of his 12-day trade-oriented tour through Asia. At the state dinner for over 100 diplomats held at the home of the Japanese Prime Minister Kiichi Miyazawa, the president experienced sudden, violent gastric distress, vomited — as the news reports put it — “copiously” into the lap of Miyazawa and fainted in what was one of the most embarrassing diplomatic incident in the U.S. history.
Moe should apply to be on Jeopardy.
This may not be the most significant Supreme Court case of the year, but it may have produced one of the most memorable arguments:
Carter Phillips, representing the jails, said that jail policy required “simply an anal focus and genital focus search” where the prisoner is ordered “to lift his genitals and to squat and cough.”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204774604576627303439341720.html?KEYWORDS=bravin
@Morris Davis
Of course, now I have to bleach my brain….
Discovering America…..Ol’ Leify boy, Brendan the Voyager, assorted fisherman fishing off the Grand Banks, the Chinese, possible medieval Grail transporters, and last, but not least, prehistoric man.
Columbus just got the best and most prolific press, thereby proving that unless the press covered it….it didn’t happen.
Interesting…..but still WTF? http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/10/07/2673163/us-state-dept-contacts-khan-family.html#ixzz1aXGFOl5F
An official from the U.S. State Department has called the Charlotte family of al-Qaida propagandist Samir Khan to offer the government’s condolences on his death in a U.S. drone attack last week in Yemen, according to a family spokesman.
I mean, the family’s concerns about due process is a valid one, but when does the gov’t apologize to the families of the enemy for the death of the enemy?
@Morris Davis
Mo, I saw that case on SCOTUSBlog and now I sooooo have to read the oral argument. 🙂
@Cargosquid
This day has been coming for a while. Please don’t put unsubstantiated crap about the president up here. It is random and really serves no purpose. If you want to discuss policy, have at it. But that crap you put up about Japan was simply pointless.
In the first place, I saw that video. I also saw the one of George Bush holding hands with some Arab prince. Our presidents lose no face by honoring other head of states’s customs. Furthermore, it wasn’t really a bow but so what if it was. How do you think he greeted Queen Elizabeth? Hi 5 Queenie? I have seen several presidents adhere to customs of the host country and it didn’t bother me at all, nor did it shrink their private parts.
You seem to take great delight in scavaging any kind of crap you can find about the President from unrealiable ‘authors’ to dump here on this blog. I would like for it to stop. Put that kind of crap on your blog, not on ours. You know that Elena and I both support Obama. We have never made a secret of it.
Again, if it is policy, fine. Please use realible sources and not some blog. Bloggers have no accountaility and many simply pull disinformation out of their tails.
Sorry, but I am no longer finding it amusing.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/10/12/141276162/wikileaks-japan-rebuffed-idea-of-u-s-apology-for-hiroshima
Update at 4:42 p.m. ET. White House Response:
White House spokesman Tommy Vietor says that while the administration does not comment on leaked cables, “there was never any plan for the president to apologize. The President’s visit speaks for itself.”
I myself prefer to not speak to anything that may or may not be on Wikileaks as I prefer not to lose my job.
I am not going to debate this. There is nothing in that text that substantiates that President Obama planned on apologizing for nuking Japan. It remains gossip and speculation. Wikileaks, in my opinion, is high treason. Marin, you are wise not to speak on it also.
@marin
Congress passes 3 free trade agreements
By JIM ABRAMS – Associated Press | AP – 4 hrs ago
WASHINGTON (AP) — Congress approved free trade agreements Wednesday with South Korea, Colombia and Panama, ending a four-year drought in the forming of new trade partnerships and giving the White House and Capitol Hill the opportunity to show they can work together to stimulate the economy and put people back to work.
In rapid succession, the House of Representatives and Senate voted on the three trade pacts, which the administration says could boost exports by $13 billion and support tens of thousands of American jobs. None of the votes were close, despite opposition from labor groups and other critics of free trade agreements who say they result in job losses and ignore labor rights problems in the partner countries.
http://news.yahoo.com/congress-passes-3-free-trade-agreements-003629553.html
This is good
What specifically was “unsubstantiated” about #2?
O.K. I’ve seen the relevant portion of the leaked cable — ABC News, Fox, NPR, Japan Times, Mainichi Times, Kyodo News, NY Post. It was certainly a policy issue, especially for the Japanese. The White House refused to comment on a leaked cable, as did the Japanese Foreign Ministry as a matter of policy. Neither one said the cable was a fake. I say it was almost certainly legit. Wikileaks doesn’t make these things up. I’ve read a ton of State cables in my nearly thirty years of service and even wrote some of them. And I’ve read a lot of the Wikileaks material. That Manning guy is in jail for good reason.
The problem here is that you have to understand the language and the working context. The Oval Office says that they did NOT propose an apology during a visit to Hiroshima. My read of the original cable is that the White House may well not have proposed this specifically. It looks to me like the Japanese, for internal political reasons, may have been leery that Obama might do something like that and wanted to make sure that it was cut off at the pass. That’s not unusual for any foreign ministry. They would have people watching Obama closely, and these people might have been spooked a bit by Obama’s previous trips and the claims in part of the media/blogs that Obama was into making “apology tours.” Could also be the result of a misunderstood verbal exchange between US diplomats and people in the Japanese Foreign Ministry. Because of their internal political problems with the nuclear issue, the Japanese were most likely not taking any chances with this. ” Hint, hint, hint, no surprises, please.” Whatever it was, the US Embassy thought the issue needed to be discussed with State. Apology never happened. I’ll give the benefit of the doubt here. End of story.
@Wolverine-We are not going to discuss wikileak information. We are not going to Obama-bash as a sport on this blog. My decision is not open to debate. The message was not just for Cargo. It is for everyone.
You are right. There was never an apology nor is there proof there was going to be one.
The Tea Party loses another round
By Dana Milbank, Thursday, October 13, 12:23 AM
It was a(nother) great day to be a member of the Washington elite.
On Wednesday afternoon, the House was steamrolling toward passage of a trio of free-trade agreements without a whisper of objection from the Republican side. Finally, hours the debate, Rep. Walter Jones (R-N.C.) rose to appeal to his fellow Tea Partyers to heed the people who elected them.
“Here we have roughly 9.1 percent unemployment in this country, due in no small part to the Washington elite jamming these job-destroying trade agreements down our throats,” Jones pleaded on the House floor. “It’s time we started listening to the will of the American people, doing what’s in the best interest of the American people, not in the best interest of the foreign nationals who desperately want to take our jobs.”
It was a passionate speech but useless. Lawmakers, including the overwhelming majority of Tea Party Republicans, voted in support of the three trade deals, which had been at the top of corporate America’s wish list.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-tea-party-loses-another-round/2011/10/12/gIQAxbU2fL_story.html?hpid=z2
Most tea partiers are too stupid to understand that their elected officials just stabbed them in the back.
@Wolverine
I concur with this assessment. I’ve also been (a long time ago) on the writing end of these cables, and in on some of the discussions that take place. That’s part of why they are classified. Internal discussions would have taken place as to what sort of public and ceremonial events President Obama would take part in while visiting Japan. The Japanese, quite wisely in the interests of good Japanese-American relations, did not want to be linked to any of his “apology tours.”
Ceremonies take place regularly, at least on the anniversaries of the atom bomb drops, to cememorate the events and stress that it should never happen again. The intent of the ceremonies is not to debate history or place blame, but to focus on the facts that the US and Japan are now strong friends and nuclear war must be avoided.
The cable only reflects those internal discussions. How many times have any of us discussed things we might do that after pondering the idea with those we trust find it would be dumb and we didn’t do it? That’s much of how diplomacy works. The fact is that President Obama did not extend his apology tour to Nagasaki and Hiroshimi. That was the correct descision. This event illustrates further the damage Wikileaks did, and how much their actions harmed the ability of our foreign policy community to discuss matters internally and confidentially before taking actions or making decisions.
What the heck is going on in Irongate/WestGate/Sudley. The night before last we had a chopper flying over because of a shooting in Irongate that spilled over into WestGate. The suspects there were from Sterling and Herndon. Then there was another incident in Irongate of a robbery with a knife and the suspect is from Roxbury Ln in Sudley according to the article.
I thought our crime rate was going down? At least that’s what our Chairman likes to tout. It sure doesn’t seem this way in three hoods mentioned above. I don’t think these thugs were illegal aliens by any stretch of the imagination. 👿
http://www2.insidenova.com/news/2011/oct/12/two-charged-drug-related-shooting-near-irongate-ar-1379236/
http://www2.insidenova.com/news/2011/oct/12/manassas-man-charged-knifepoint-robbery-ar-1379787/
I find the expression ‘apology tours’ to be highly offensive and misrepresentative of the mission of a good will tour. During the past decade there has been a shift in attitude about the United States. It is easier to have good relations than to drop bombs.
America can’t go around kicking everyone’s ass as its diplomacy, if for no other reason than it is just too expensive.
Let me add my thoughts and support for what Moon has stated.
First, I have no interest in allowing people to weave false narratives for the hollow purpose of tearing Obama down. For a President that you conservatives DARE to denegrate on his foreign policy strength, THIS is the man who ordered the take down of Osama which was a huge risk as there was no guarantee he was there. He is NOT a kiss butt president he is not weak on foreign policy, stop with the innuendos.
I too am disheartened and sick of the finding of any reason to bring our President down. There are plenty of policy differences you can find to debate, but this blog will not be used as a format to propogate misinformation.
For many years, I’ve had a high regard for Warren Buffett as an investor. For many who invest, he’s been the role model. However, his constant harping about hiking taxes and “shared sacrifice” is wearing very thin.
Buffett revealed this week that on adjusted gross income in 2010 of $62,855,038 he paid only 17.4% in taxes, and only $15,300 in payroll taxes.
Two factors explain this low rate. First, most of his income comes from his investments, which means capital gains and dividends. The capital gains tax rate, especially long-term (investments held one year or longer) is far lower than income tax rates for higher income people.
The capital gains tax rate should not be raised. In fact, lowering it would stimulate investment, growth and job creation. Raising the capital gains tax rate would further increase the disincentive to invest in the growth we need to create jobs. Moreover, it would drive even more investment to other countries with lower (or zero) rates.
Second, payroll taxes are supposed to fund Social Security (a retirement plan) and Medicare insurance for when we retire. Neither was envisioned as wealth or income transfer mechanisms. The benefits we receive from these programs later are supposed to reflect the payments we make during our working lives. Unfortunately, politicians have used payroll tax revenue and the Social Security trust fund as revenue sources for whatever they want to do. The solution is to prevent this stealing of the assets that are supposed to help fund our retirements, and keep payroll taxes in line with the expected benefits people will receive later.
Even President Obama understands the stimulatory benefit of low payroll taxes. His administration has in place now a temporary reduction in payroll taxes. The long-term solution is to make the reductions permanent to stimulate growth and job creation – not raise payroll taxes on anyone.
According to the Congressional Budget Office (see link below), the top 1% of household income earners paid 28.3% of all Federal taxes, the top 5% paid 44.7% and the top 10% of household income earners paid 55.4% of all Federal taxes. The bottom 50% receive more from the Federal government than they pay in taxes.
Warren, please shut up about “shared sacrifice.” I’m so sick of hearing that. If you don’t think you are paying enough in taxes, please just write a check to the US Treasury. Meantime, keep your hands out of the pockets of the Americans who work hard, invest, and create jobs.
http://www.cbo.gov/publications/collections/tax/2009/summary_table_2006.pdf
@Elena
Moon and Elena:
My comment concluded that after the internal deliberations, President Obama made the correct decision not to apologize for Hiroshima and Nagasaki. My main criticism was of Wikileaks for making these internal, confidential policy discussions more difficult to have.
I’ve also commented very positively on MH on numerous occasions about the President’s effective use of drones, intelligence and covert ops, and his successes beefing up border security. I’ll give him credit where it’s due and criticize when appropriate.
However, even being objective about the positive things he’s done I’m unlikely to support him for reelection. On the whole, his administration has not been good for America. My thinking now is a Romney/Cain ticket. I know mention has been made of Romney/Christie. I like Christie very much, but Romney needs to do something for the conservative wing of the Party. Cain would help him more in that area than would Christie. However, I would enthusiastically support Romney/Christie also.
NTK,
I appreciate your thoughtful deliberations on a variety of topics. I would not expect you to vote for Obama, that is what makes this country great, agree to disagree respectfully.
For one thing, I do not “bash Obama as sport.” What I report here is always backed up, as you’ve seen. It was a topic that I thought you would find important, being the very patriotic people that you are. And I did not bring up any other topic in my post, so why you are bringing up his bowing to assorted dictators is beyond me. We’ve had that discussion.
Furthermore, Obama HAS apologized for America, especially during that tour of the nations.
I WAS criticizing POLICY.
Is he doing it anymore? Not that I’ve seen. And his anti-terror policies have been pretty good.
I supplied the links and the context. Apparently, criticism of the President is now verboten. I guess the truth hurts.
And we don’t know that he was planning on apologizing for anything anyway. We are looking at a snippet of a conversation. We don’t even know that the discussion reached the Oval Office. That is the kind of speculation and spin I have just grown sick of seeing on this blog by those who want to discredit the President at any cost.
Here is another point I would like to add. Creating a discussion based on an event that did NOT happen is pointless. Wikileak, and I agree with NTK, has no value when all it does it give away private diplomacy interactions, it is in fact dangerous. There should be private discussions that citizens are not privy to.
Debating this topic has NO value whatsover. People are on the right would use this as an opportunity to “demonstate” that Obama has no patriotism and I for one am SICK of it.
Cargo, your “premise” is your opinion and not fact, he has NEVER “apologized for America”.
However, America HAS made mistakes, and excercising taking responsibility for your actions is a good thing in my opinion. Invading Iraq WAS a mistake in my opinion, Abu Ghraib IS a blight on America. To love ones country is to acknowledge that there are imperfections. THAT is what makes this country great in my OPINION.
You are looking for needles in the haystack to suggest President Obama is not a true patriot. This ridiculous attack begain with whether he wore the appropriate pin on his lapel or said the pledge of alliegence. Stop attacking him for simply being a Democrat. Having more than one party is REQUIRED in order to be a democracy. If there is only on ruling party, only one political thought, than this is an authoritarian state
@Elena
I’m glad that they have internal, confidential deliberations to air all points of view and arrive at a well-considered decision. I don’t always agree with the decisions the Obama Administration makes (in fact, more often than not I disagree) but think they as all other groups of people should be able to discuss whatever comes forward without being judged for alternatives considered and rejected, which is what happened in the case of apologizing for Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Had he actually done that, I would have been among those in the front line criticizing him for doing so. He, in fact, did not.
Again, the villain in this case is Wikileaks for publishing a data dump of classified material that harms our national interests. This is not a case of an investigative reporter uncovering government wrong-doing and exposing it (such as Woodward and Bernstein) but an ill-advised data dump of classified information that serves no public purpose. OK – so we now know that the Administration considered and rejected apologizing for Hiroshima and Nagasaki. How does that accomplish anything other than make key US and foreign (in this case Japanese) policymakers reluctant to engage in confidential discussions in the future? I think it causes absolute harm.
What if President Obama actually had wanted to do something that stupid (I’m not saying he did)? Would Japanese and American policy makers be as willing to speak candidly and offer their honest advice if they knew they would show up in Wikileaks? I doubt it. The key in this case is that a variety of alternatives was discussed, and in the end the President made the right call.
@Need to Know
Whether the Warren Buffets of America pay more or Cain chunks the tax code in favor of a 9-9-9 plan that fits on a 3×5 card or the TP caucus defunds NPR and the EPA, we have systemic problems that require a holistic cure. Too often we focus on an aspect or two as the root cause when we need to reexamine the process as a whole. What are our national priorities? We spend as much on our war-fighting capabilities alone as every other major country in the world combined. We spend more on health care than anyone in the world – part of that funded by the government (military, elderly, poor, etc) and part by the private sector – and our health is about middling compared to other developed countries that spend less. As a nation, what’s really important? Who is going to contribute to paying for our priorities and how much is fair? And what is the most effective and efficient way to manage this process? A friend of mine testified at a Senate Budget Committee hearing yesterday on a proposal to convert the federal budget process from one that requires a concurrent resolution (Congress only) to one requiring a joint resolution (Congress plus the President’s signature or veto). Here is a link to his prepared statement where he traces the budget process problem back to the Budget Act of 1974 (the deficit has gone from $1T to $14T since then). http://budget.senate.gov/democratic/index.cfm/files/serve?File_id=12b51c1a-57b7-4a9b-be84-3cbfa148b79c I don’t think the answer (and there is no one right answer) is as simple as Cain wants the public to believe nor is it so hopelessly complicated that we should just throw up our hands and give up. The process has evolved over time to favor some and not others, and it has us pitted against each other rather than looking for common ground. Hopefully we (and by “we” I don’t mean lobbyists and others who strive to tilt the table in their favor) can have a rational discussion on what our priorities are, how much we’re willing to spend on them, how we equitably allocated sharing in the cost, and how we most effectively manage the process. … And now break’s over and it’s back to grading papers.
We don’t KNOW that Obama considered any such thing. It is all supposition.
Why are we discussing this? We don’t know jack!
Cargo, you have made your feelings known time and time again. You have said, in writing, that you dislike and have no respect for the president. That is your right. However, I would prefer that the endless picking at him and at Democrats and anyone else who isn’t a Republican be kept to specifics rather than just data dumping anything negative that comes along from conservative blogs that appears in the form of ‘when did you stop beating your wife.’
I am aware of how difficult it is to disprove a negative and how that is used in political rhetoric.
If we are going to have a place where people can discuss and look for common ground, it really has to be welcoming for moderates and liberals also.
@Morris Davis
Hear, hear, Mr. Davis. I like your post.
I noted your comment in the middle about how much we spend on health care compared to others and have a lesser result.
To continue the conversation about that, what opinion do you have about why that is. I struggle with the question.
Is it because it is plain inefficient or is it because we generally lead the world in development of new medicines and techniques (obviously not all-encompassing as many countries also contribute) and thus are funding some of the health care needs of other countries indirectly? Are our health regulations such that it takes 10 years or more to approve a drug which other countries use in much less time. How much is due to our system of laws that increases indirectly the costs of hospitals by virtually forcing people to use emergency rooms for normal health issues?
I am asking the question since I don’t know why. I sometimes suspect that we look for the simplest answer, ie insurance companies are evil, money hungry entities, lawyers are money grabbing parasites, hospitals have no justification for exorbitant costs, etc., and legislate against those things without actually analyzing the true ills of the system. So if there are basic explanations and we don’t touch them, are we making it better substantively or superficially?
One can also add the issues of preexisting conditions. On the one hand, you have people who because of economic calamity have lost health insurance and then can’t get insurance for something, and then there are others that simply don’t get insurance until they become sick. One garners sympathy and the other doesn’t. But the simple approach is to deal with preexisting conditions as though they are the same when there are sympathetic and not sympathetic reasons.
Perhaps Moe will clarify, but this argument usually flows from two statistics – life expectancy and infant mortality.
Life expectancy and infant mortality don’t really tell us much about the efficacy of our health care system. When we use statistics to measure health care systems across nations, we should satisfy three basic criteria:
1.) The statistic must assume interaction with the health care system.
2.) The statistic must measure something the health care system can affect.
3.) The statistic must be collected in a consistent manner across nations.
Life expectancy is a poor metric because it fails the first test. For example, how many people die in car accidents? How about gunshot wounds? We have lots of fast cars and guns here in the ol’ US of A. Individuals who die without any contact with our health care system tell us little about its effectiveness (but all such deaths are computed into the statistic). Life expectancy also fails the second condition, as a health care system has questionable impact on life expectancy. There is no relationship between spending on health care and life expectancy. For example, Greece spends the least per capita on health care, yet they have higher life expectancy than Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the United States. Spain, which spends the second least per capita on health care, has higher life expectancy than ten other countries that spend more. Additionally, regression analysis of data across multiple countries revealed that life expectancy was far more affected by factors such as sanitation, clean water, income, and literacy rate. (source: M. Furukawa, “Factor Analysis of Attributive Determinant for Life Expectancy and Infant Mortality Rate With Recipient Country Data in Consideration of Socioeconomic Environment”)
So why do we spend more on health care and have lower life expectancies? The primary reason is that we’re much more of an ethnically diverse nation than those we’re being compared to. For instance, the life expectancy of a Japanese-American is about that of the Japanese. A good deal can be explained by looking at the life expectancy of the African-American (72.3) versus other segments of the population. What accounts for this difference? Well, one study suggests that 1/3 is accounted for by income disparity, another 1/3 in personal risk factors (obesity, blood pressure, alcohol intake, diabetes, cholesterol concentration, and smoking) and the final 1/3 unknown (source: “The Effect of Known Risk Factors on the Excess Mortality of Black Adults in the United States,” Journal of the American Medical Association, 1990, Vol. 263). Yet another study found that the disparity was due to higher rates of HIV, diabetes and hypertension (source: “Contribution of Major Diseases to Disparities in Mortality,” The New England Journal of Medicine, 2002, Vol. 347).
The bottom line is that many factors influence life expectancy, including genetics, lifestyle, diet, income and educational levels – most of which the health care system has little to no impact on.
Infant mortality tells us less about the health care system than you might think, because of the inconsistent collection across different nations. The United Nations stipulates that when an infant is removed from its mother and “breathes or shows any other evidence of life such as beating of the heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles… is considered live-born regardless of gestational age” (source: Demographic Yearbook 2002, United Nations Statistics Division). The US follows this definition, but Switzerland does not. In fact, Switzerland contends that “an infant must be at least 30 centimeters long at birth to be counted as living.” (source: Nicholas Eberstadt, The Tyranny of Numbers: Measurement and Misrule). I’m sure you can see how this would exclude most vulnerable infants from the statistic. Switzerland isn’t the only offender – Japan only counts births to Japanese nationals living in Japan. Finland, France and Norway, by contrast, do count births to nationals living outside of the country. Belgium includes births to its armed forces living outside Belgium but not births to foreign armed forces living in Belgium. Finally, Canada counts births to Canadians living in the U.S., but not Americans living in Canada.
There’s also this from the United Nations Statistics Division:
“some infant deaths are tabulated by date of registration and not by date of occurrence… Whenever the lag between the date of occurrence and date of registration is prolonged and therefore, a large proportion of the infant-death registrations are delayed, infant-death statistics for any given year may be seriously affected”
Australia, New Zealand and Ireland are suspect here. In other words, late reports of infant deaths don’t make it into the statistic. The takeaway from all this is that life expectancy is influenced by too many factors other than the health care system, and infant mortality is measured too inconsistently to be of consequence.
“I sometimes suspect that we look for the simplest answer, ie insurance companies are evil, money hungry entities, lawyers are money grabbing parasites, hospitals have no justification for exorbitant costs, etc., and legislate against those things without actually analyzing the true ills of the system.”
So that nobody misinterprets my post, I was using the hyperbolic rhetoric that was heard being said by others for different solutions. It was not my personal opinion that a group is money grabbing or another is evil, or that charges are exorbitant, etc.
Cato, thanks for your comments. I will read them in more detail a bit later.
Speaking of Pre-existing Medical Conditions, a Public Service Announcement about the latest scam:
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has recently become aware of a website that has the appearance of being an official government website for the Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan (PCIP). This new website – http://preexistingconditioninsuranceplan.com – is not maintained by any government programs and consumers are strongly urged not to submit any personal information requested by this website under the assumption that it is a government website.
CMS is taking the appropriate steps to protect consumers from being misled.
The Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan made available through the Affordable Care Act makes health insurance available to people who have had a problem getting insurance due to a pre-existing condition.
The Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan:
• Covers a broad range of health benefits, including primary and specialty care, hospital care, and prescription drugs.
• Does not charge you a higher premium just because of your medical condition.
• Does not base eligibility on income.
Individuals interested in the new federally backed pre-existing condition insurance program should visit: http://www.pcip.gov or call 866-717-5826.
And another Scam Alert!
SCAM Alert: SCAMMERS OFFER PHONY SNAP APPLICATION ASSISTANCE
The Food and Nutrition Service has noted the recent rise in online scams related to applications for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). These scams involve ads on the internet, sometimes beside legitimate articles, that offer assistance filling out SNAP applications after submitting credit card information.
The links to these ads will take individuals to another website where they may be asked to provide personal information, including credit card information. Benefits counselors should warn their clients that SNAP officials never seek credit card details and not to provide this information. It can be used by identity thieves to make unauthorized purchases on their credit card, or gain access to their bank accounts. If they see any ad on the internet offering SNAP application assistance with a corresponding link, they should be warned not to click on it. If they have already fallen victim to this or a similar scam, they should contact their credit card company immediately. They may also choose to file a police report.
For more information on identity theft, please visit: http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/microsites/idtheft/
Komisarjevsky guilty on all counts……good. Fry that piece of
Garbage!
More corn now going to fuel than animal feed.
http://green.autoblog.com/2011/10/12/more-corn-now-going-to-ethanol-than-animal-feed/
This also means that more corn is burned than eaten by humans.
WTF? Everyone knows that ethanol is for DRINKING!
Btw….now you know why chicken is getting more expensive. Their feed price is skyrocketing. Obama wants go get elected? Have him cancel the ethanol subsidy and tax breaks to big Farm.
Thank you, Cato. Interesting stuff.
Thanks, Mr. Beverage, for the info about the misleading website.
“chicken is getting more expensive”, all the more reason to add “Dewey” to the menu.
@Mom
Adding Dewey to the menu…..
Is that what they’re calling it nowadays?
Um…there’s other dirty jokes in there that I’m going to leave alone….
Beer Can Cat
1 Cat
1 Can of beer (any brand)
1 tsp garlic powder
1 tsp onion powder
1 tsp salt
1 tsp ground pepper
1/2 tsp chili powder
Mix spices and rub over cat. Drink half the can of beer and then place beer can into rear of cat and stand cat tripod-like on BBQ. Rotate in 30 minutes. Cook for a total of one hour.
Smoke flavoring helps.
@Mom
Won’t the cat protest the insertion of said can? I mean, its hard enough just to give the darn things a bath…..
If you think they protest the insertion, you ought to get a load of them when you stand them up on the BBQ.
Mayor Bloomberg may be ousting the OWS-ers. Not sure if it is for real or if some group is trying to do some quick fund-raising.
For years I’ve heard about Nixon’s southern strategy and how it won him the election and lost the GOP the black vote.
Apparently its a myth.
Here’s a map that shows the results. The map shows the results of the 1968 presidential election. Nixon-Agnew in red. Humphrey-Muskie in blue. Wallace/LeMay in green.
http://blogfromonhigh.blogspot.com/2011/10/warning-for-liberal-media.html
Apparently Nixon won because Wallace and Humphrey split the vote.
What was Nixon’s southern strategy? Was that something the historians thought up after it was over?
All I can tell you about that election is that there were 2 dominating forces: Vietnam and segregation.
As I recall, Humphrey wanted to continue in Vietnam and Nixon had some Tricky Dick way to end the war. I don’t remember George Wallace even running but I knowhe did. He was seen as the redneck vote. I can remember hoping my parents didnt vote for him. My husband voted D and I voted R. We agreed many years later to switch.
It was confusing. Up was down and down was up. Now that was from the Virginia perspective.
There is a picture of Mitt Romney’s father in this link.
http://www.pophistorydig.com/?tag=richard-nixon-vs-hubert-humphrey
Good general info on the 1968 election.
http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=1968
The other side of this coin is that our two blogmeisters would seem to be setting themselves up as arbiters of what is properly said about the President and what is not. Since they are the owners of the blog, that is their absolute right. But it does not mean that the posters must simply click heels and salute. I as a commentator cannot submit to a rule which says that I must follow certain opinion standards in order to get a nihil obstat on the content of my observations before I can appear in print. I am not an employee of this blog. I am a volunteer contributor. I have done my best to follow the dictates on the masthead. If I am engaging in name calling or ad hominem attacks against the subject of a post or against other posters, that is a legitimate cause for complaint and upbraiding. If anyone wishes to dispute what I have said on the merits of the content, that is fine. But imposition of a form of nihil obstat on opinions legitimately and honestly held comes far too close to censorship. That is not why I came to this blog. I refuse to write under a cloud of having to wonder whether or not the blogmeisters will label my opinions as eligible for print based on their own philosophical or political opinions or on their own standards of what is “policy” and what is not. In my opinion, that is not a workable arena.
All blog owners set the standards for their blog. Elena and I have that ultimate responsibility.
We have been very clear about what the problem is, for us.
We are not the “arbiters of what is properly said about the President and what is not.” We are the arbiters of the tone we want our blog to take.
Wolverine,
In as much as I would not want a “birther debate” on this blog, I also would not allow a “truther” debate. Both are bizarre conspiracy theories that I believe are only given credibility when you treat them as though they are deserving of a rational conversation.
Free speech, in my opinion, for this blog, does not mean any and all subject matter backed up by any random voice from the blogosphere. I will not debate whether hispanic children are parasites, I will not debate lots of topics here when they are rooted in a foundation based soley on innuendo and half truths or even lies.
I love good vigorous debate on policy, is it frustrating at times, a big resounding YES, but I still welcome the back and forth. What I don’t welcome is the constant immature comments about Obama as President.
The end of rational discussion began with “death panels” and all the other bizarre hysteria surrounding health care reform.
But…but…but…we must know the truth about Obama’s birth!
Rumors of his immaculate conception continue to spread! The aspects of his birth able to bridge entire continents and leap not one, but TWO oceans! Being both Hawaiin AND Kenyan at the SAME time!
Able to stop the seas from rising….
Able to make the guns walk again.
Making the blind SIEU again…
Making the dead rise up… and vote! Again.
Able to strike our enemies dead from afar! (true this one.)
Organizing people into groups, growing like a tree from an…ACORN.
And finally, getting a golf handicap of 16!
😈 👿 😉
@Cargosquid
Did you forget to take your Pepto=Bismol tonight?
@punchak
Why? I was being light-hearted….and funny.
Ok, I thought I was being funny. Your mileage may vary.
Is it bashing the “President” or bashing the man “Obama”? In common use, the title and the man are one in the same….but in a person’s thinking, it is not the same – especially for Veterans of any time, and especially true of those of us who have seen the elephant.
When joining the Military, you take an Oath – and till you pass on to the next world, next life, next adventure, that Oath remains hire than the Pledge you said as a child in the classroom. Within that Oath for Officers and Enlisted alike is first, to uphold and defend the Constitution and then secondly to obey the orders of the President of the United States. In the case of the National Guard, it is defend both the US and State Constitutions, then obey the orders of the President and the Governor of your State.
Lawful orders of course. So far, neither a person holding the Office of the President or Govenor has issued an unlawful order resulting in a Military denial of compliance.
For Veterans, we will stand and defend the Office of the President; however, no where it is specifcially written do you have to like the person holding the position. The same hold true within the Military Rank Structure – you may have not liked a person senior in rank to you, but you respected the rank at all times.
Mr. Obama is not the first person holding the Office of the President under the Constitution to whom has been bashed. Mr. Carter was the first one in my life time, and miltary career, who was often degraded.
Those who accept a Veteran and permit commentary must also remember we are trained hard in Leadership – not necessarily management. Someone in the postion of authority is viewed through the lens of the Leadership Principles, Traits, and Compentencies. If you fail the test, be prepared a Veteran express their view with the utmost, clear and unvarnished candor.
When one is trained and ready to meet the elephant, those who waffle and wince are not ones words are spaired lightly and often not respectfully on.
Perhaps you should have been around for LBJ and Nixon, Raymond. And yet the bottom line is, it is all opinion.
We want to have an environment here that is welcoming to everyone. Elena and I were beginning to feel like unwelcome guests on our own blog. We have also had complaints.
Feel free to do gratuitous bashing where ever you want…just not here. Moonhowlings is for everyone, not just the Obama haters. For those who weren’t here earlier, gratuitous Bush Bashing wasn’t permitted either.