Finally the leaves are showing color. The oranges and yellows are brilliant. Some of the trees are still green. I went to the Skyline Drive a week and a half ago and the leaves were simply uneventful. Now it looks like there is hope.
Where are the good leaf watching spots? There is an Episcopalian Church over in Clark County, on the way to Berryville that is one of the prettiest places on earth in the fall. The reds and oranges are brilliant. Maybe I should head on over!
I’m not totally against Obamacare, but women need to be a little more careful and a little more analytical here. It’s not just about free birth control. I went to my doctor and —yay! — no more $35 copay for those wellness exams. But my doctor’s practice is no longer doing annual Pap tests, citing magical research that just so happened to coincide with my insurance changes that says they are unnecessary at that frequency. That concerns me a lot, especially since I do have some family history. I’m wondering when the mammograms go away, too. If this keeps up, you’ll just be able to log in for your physical, and save the office visit.
Good points, Emma. Some of those issues are have been debated for a while now about various screenings. Question: Can the patient insist of having them?
You know, and you might not believe this coming from me, but if I had to compromise on any of it, I would compromise on the FREE birth control–not on the birth control but the free part. I would slap it on the 5 bucks co-pay routine and be done with it. If anyone really couldn’t afford contraception I would have some provision where they could ask their doctor for coupons or free samples. That way everyone would stop howling about the free end of it. I do think it should be mandatory for contraception to be part of every health care plan, just perhaps not free.
Do you think that would take the fight out of that issue? I truly don’t think an employer should be able to decide what medications their employees take. If contraception was handled just like any other medication and had a low co-pay like most tier 1 drugs, there should be no problem. If anyone howled then, screw them. They have no more right to determine what medication you take than your next door neighbor. What if they decided you couldn’t take your anxiety medication, your diabetes medication, your prozac, WTF. None of their business.
I absolutely agree with you that would have disarmed the critics, who needed something, anything, to discredit the whole thing. Sandra Fluke made it all ripe for the picking–rather than look at the big picture, it was easier to focus on why on earth taxpayers should be on the hook for free birth control for privileged single law students, while diabetics would still be shelling out for meds to keep themselves alive. Everyone should pay something, even if only a little. They could have done a much better job of writing the bill cleanly, making it applicable to EVERYONE, and then marketing it much more effectively–not “we have to pass the bill to see what’s in it!” but real, nonpartisan public education. People understandably didn’t trust the ACA, even feared it, and the Tea Party played on those fears big time.
@Emma
And the Tea Party seems to have been right.
What makes you think that the politicians had anything to do with this bill? Pelosi didn’t know what was in it? They should not have had to “read” the bill…they supposedly wrote it.
Be careful with signing up. Who knows what they’re doing with your information.
http://www.redstate.com/2013/11/02/heritage-healthcare-gov-obamacare-security/
And I wonder how the customer service people knew this:
http://twitchy.com/2013/11/02/jim-angle-shares-disturbing-experience-with-obamacare-800-number/
I am just going to be honest. I don’t believe a great deal that I read about all the people who are meeting with some ill fate over ACA.
Why? Because all of the real people I know aren’t being gouged or having horrible things happening to them. The only person I have heard say that they got gouged was Steve. Every other person I have talked to has said the opposite. There are bound to be some policies that explode in cost. The good news is, you don’t have to take them.
I have talked to a LOT of people who like what they see so far.
We like it because my husband dodged the donut hole costs, thanks to Obamacare and Pt. D.
@Emma
Is there a universal medical billing code or do insurance companies have their own codes? Would having a universal code be a cost saving measure? I ask because my vet told me that they employ a single code. Of course they don’t deal with the number of insurers that the average medical doc does.
When I saw Ellmers Questions Sebelius on Obamacare Failures, I cracked up. Thanks for posting it.
Moon-howler, when you and Emma discuss these issues, I think you begin with some false premises about government.
1. Because the people who run our government have the capacity — the wisdom — to know what is best, for our own good we should let them boss the rest of us around.
2. Being in the majority gives you the right to make the minority do whatever it is you want.
3. Redistributing the wealth is ethical.
4. Power does not corrupt politicians.
5. So long as there is equal representation, taxation is ethical. How the money is spent does not matter.
6. No matter how much power and responsibility we give it, the “system” can be made to work.
I could go on, but here is the point. I would like you to take a moment to back off from specific issues such as what is included in Obamacare. It is more important to consider whether using the government to “give” people their “rights” is ethical. If you insist upon jumping straight into implementation issues (I fear most Democrats refuse to seriously discuss the ethics of Socialism.), then I suggest you look carefully at that last false premise, #6.
The beauty of the free market is that it allows everyone to be a decision-maker. Instead of waiting upon some bigwig to tell us what to do, we make our own choices. Based upon what people want — what they are willing to pay for, we find a job or start a business. Then we take what we have earned and do the same for others. Instead of giving half of what we earn to government, we allow people to spend what they earn. Then an amazing thing happens. They spend it more efficiently and wisely than politicians.
What does government do for us? When we have disputes, we go to government for justice. Then we depend upon government to be a neutral third party. When government starts to runs things like Obamacare, for example, we destroy that neutrality. That’s why Socialism is so bad. When we need government to provide for justice, Socialism renders government incapable to the objectivity needed to provide for justice. Because of Socialism, government is no longer a third party.
Justice is blind means that justice is impartial and objective.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Justice
CT, I looked at some of your ‘voters guides’ and have decided I would question the ethics of such a guide that clearly endorses candidates based on a number of pre-set political topics. I find many of them to cause eye brows to raise. For instance, is there a Christian stance on what kind of energy we consume? Are we just guessing that Jesus wants us to mine coal and then burn it? How does He feel about the pollution it causes?
I am one of those separation of church/state people. I like my religion clear of politics and my politics clear of religion. You obviously feel this is a proper job for religion and that people should vote according to their faith. While I believe we want our policy to reflect the overall tennents of our faith, I don’t think the Good Book as a lot to say about health care or energy, off shore drilling, charter schools or Medicaid expansion.
I would think that feeding the poor and helping the sick might be a little more in line with the Good Book but what do I know.
@Citizen Tom
Well said.
🙄
I seem to recall something somewhere in the Good Book about not bearing “false witness.” Well, there seems to have been a lot of false witnessing coming out of 1600 Pennsylvania of late. As in: I didn’t say it. I didn’t know it. Nobody told me about it. Somebody else must have done it. He said it but he didn’t mean it that way. We had nothing to do with it and didn’t know it was going on. This was not authorized by me.
Wow. A whole lot of false witnessing, I would say. Either that or the D.C. herd of bureaucrats is running loose and out of control of the chief cowpuncher.
Wolverine, are you having auditory hallucinations?
I am wondering which President Wolverine is referring to. They have all had their moments.
@Censored bybvbl
Censored, there are two sets of standard, international codes used by all: ICD-10 (Version 10 of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems) and the DSM-5 (5th Version of the Diagnostic & Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders). Most times when you go to a doctor or other health provider, when you get your bill, you may see a list of various codes and short descriptor. But that is only part of it.
The ICD and DSM go futher in the codes for what is billed and why right down to any medical supplies used. Everything done within that category code has sub-coding to not only clarify the condition, but what was done in treatment. And ICD-10 is almost comical in the level of detail which has increased the administrative time.
Example: your home and accidently puncture yourself, and it is deep enough you can’t stop the bleeding so you head off to Patient First or ER. Then the questions start: how did you puncture yourself? I was using the screw driver to put two boards together. Was it a straight head screw or phillips screw? (yes, there is a code for that in ICD-10 since the type of screwdriver determines the tear in the skin). Get the picture of the level of detail? I could go on with other examples, but it would fill pages and pages here on the Ladies’ Blog 🙂
Keeping it down to just one universal code would speed up admin time and reduce cost, but alas, not to be as there is now in the electronic health record a massive cost to overhaul the computer systems….and guess who the provider passes on a small cost for that to? Yup, a slight increase in fee to the consumer.
@Ray Beverage
another thing that ICD-10 will bring in when it is required later this year is that it will validate that UFO’s really exist.
ICD-10 does add complexity but it also allows analysis to determine some waste and fraud that is not possible using the current ICD-9 coding.
@Ray Beverage
Thanks for the info. I guess the next chance to simplify would be when the computer system needs to be overhauled again. I suppose at that point enough data will be available to know what to keep and what is a time waster. I used to see the sheet with the code when my doc was still using paper and never checked to see whether it might be insurer specific or universal.
@Pat.Herve
And where (or by whom) are we most likely to spot a UFO? 😉
@Citizen Tom
“when you and Emma discuss these issues, I think you begin with some false premises about government.”
Oh, good grief, such drama. Remember when “socialism” really was a scary word?
I have very few premises about government. Just IS.
A plane flew over Manassas earlier with a banner staying vote Cuccinelli on Tuesday.
It sounds like we are at the beach. How many people are looking up at the sky to see a banner in Old Town?
Someone is going around western PW handing out bibles and telling store employees to vote Cuccinelli.
And I wonder why I want church and state separate.
[…] and I got a laugh out of this post, The newest dumb-ass skit from the monkey court. Then I visited Open Thread…………………………………………..Saturday, November 2. Emma, Moon-howler, and the others had essentially resumed the discussion from The newest dumb-ass […]
@Moon-howler
I replied here. Since I wanted to include some links, I thought that would be easier.
NOW Obama says that he said you could keep your insurance … if it didn’t change. Wow, you mean after weeks of trying to come up with a way of spinning what he said hundreds of times that is the best they can do. Next they will be telling us that the reason we didn’t actually HEAR him say “if it didn’t change” is because the audio cut out on all the many recordings that have been made.
You really honed in on keeping your insurance, SA. Did you lose yours or something?
Why are you so upset?
@Moon-howler
I replied here. http://citizentom.com/2013/11/04/an-absence-of-real-debate/
Since I wanted to include some links, I thought that would be easier.
I didn’t respond because I try to say a little something about general topics. Your response was detailed and…truthfully, I don’t think you and I agree on the basic premise. We have been debating the ACA in bits and pieces for several months, perhaps longer. Our position is that something is needed. We have not whole-heartedly endorsed the entire package, just the need for something to happen.
Voters guides: pretty much from a religious point of view–I still don’t see how some of the issues relate to religion and probably never will.
If you and I did a Venn diagram of our world views, I expect about the only similarities would be breathing air and drinking water. There would be very few overlaps. The overlaps would be more tangential than anything else…right at the oxygen and water spot.
@Emma
Still is.
@Cargosquid
Thank you for the kind compliment.
Heads up to those in the Independent Hill area (and probably the rest of the county as well) – coyotes are being spotted in yards and on decks. Keep an eye on those small kiddos and pets. We’re going to have to get used to them because they’re here to stay.
Absolutely. Ingrid just said that some man got mauled by a pack of them in Aurora, Colorado. A coyote is a coyote.
I saw one crossing the road in Sudley about 10 years ago. No one believed me and they laughed and scoffed at the idea. I know what I saw.
One of my neighbors saw one about 5 years ago. People doubted her too, but now that they’re in the back yards instead of just dashing across the road, they’ve become believers.
On the subject of critters, the skunks are much more prevalent out here now than a few years ago, aren’t they? I see that coyotes do eat skunks, so these two issues are related.
There are a lot more deer as well. We were wondering whether there were any predators of them. One neighbor saw a deer carcass that she thought had been mauled by coyotes. I guess more than one coyote was involved to bring down a deer.
We’ve been lucky not to see any skunks although we get opossums and raccoons. The first dog we owned managed to get sprayed by a skunk.
@Moon-howler
Is something needed. Yes, but is something needed from government? The problem with that presumption is three-fold.
1. Government has the right to tell private citizens what to do about their health insurance. Even if that were eithical, the Constitution authorizes no such power.
2. Politicians can be trusted with the power to redistribute the wealth.
3. Anything government could do as a health care provider would improve our health care. And yes, when government starts telling private companies how to do business, government becomes the provider.
When we spend the money we earn, and that includes the charity we give others, because of the effort we put into earning it, we spend it our money carefully than any politician could or would. Moreover, because we are far more likely give of what we earn from the heart, when we give voluntarily, that charity is real. Unlike politicians, private citizens rarely give away their own money just to buy votes or influence. That’s why we can much more readily rely upon the charity of private citizens to improve the lives of others and get the poor off the dole.
I suppose I just don’t hate the feds. I think that government rights many wrongs. For example, it preserves the national parks and monuments. If left unchecked, private citizens and corporations would destroy and our national treasures would be gone.
The flip side of that is that I don’t trust nor accept the federal government (or state govt either) to make deeply personal or morally appropriate choices for me.
I am not sure that I trust the federal government to kill in my name. The jury is out on that one. Iraq certainly was wrong-headed. Afghanistan? The jury is still out but we need to leave there now. The hell with nation building. We are still having some 30-40 people maimed there weekendly. Most of the maiming is lower extremities. It isn’t worth one more set of American legs.
@Moon-howler
Assumptions — differences in world views — do make a difference. One of us assumes other people have God-given rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That is, God gives people their rights, and men do wrong when they take those rights away. The other of us presumes we can use the power of government to give people their rights. That is, government can take what belongs to the rich and give it to the poor.
Which view is correct?
1. What is the weakness of the first view? If God gives us our rights, we belong to God. Can we trust God?
2. What is the weakness of the second view? There is an inherent self-contradiction. If the government can give us our rights, then the government can define our rights as it wishes. Therefore, if the government chooses not to define our rights, we have none. Effectively, what that means is that we do not belong to ourselves; we belong to the state. Can we trust the power of the state to care for us and our children?
Who would you rather trust, God or the rule of men?
CT, I would say neither premise is correct and neither represent my world view.
Tell me, if God gives people their rights, then why don’t all people have rights? I can’t get past you telling me with a straight face that God gives people rights.
Thanks you for reminding me why I like politics and religion separated…by a large wall.
If we can’t agree on the basic premise, then there is little reason to explore the argument much less attempt to arrive at a conclusion.
Citizen Tom – you do realize it was the formation of the US Government that codified those rights? You do realize that anarchy is the logical outcome of your thinking?
And, your argument is identical to those who seek Sharia law.
@Rick Bentley
Rick, you made assertions, but you have not explained what you are talking about. At best, you contradicted yourself. If my argument is identical to those who seek Sharia and “the formation of the US Government that codified those rights,” how is it we don’t have either anarchy or Sharia law? How is Sharia law related to anarchy? Could you at least say something that some sort of sense?
Oh my, this sure is some convoluted talk happening. I use to enjoy you citizen tom, not so much now. The idea that every person should have access to affordable health care is somehow akin to socialism is just blah blah blah. They do have access, only it isn’t affordable and it ends up costing the rest of us an arm and a leg. It’s called the ER. Until the ACA was passed, I could never have afforded health care privately. Is this a large segment of the population? no, but when it is you, boy are you screwed. And if you get sick having not been already insured, boy, are you screwed again.
Here is the reality thought, our health care costs, in relation to our productivity was unsustainable, period. For Republicans, what I don’t get, is why don’t you WANT to decouple health care from business? Why do you think its the responsibility of any employer to supply insurance?
A free market would dictate that consumers have the ultimate control, but that is not what happens in this country. I know people who stay with their employer solely because of their healthcare. And because they aren’t independent of their health care, they are often trapped in jobs they might otherwise leave and become even more productive citizens.
I don’t believe it is rational to believe that every person will have equal access to the same care regardless of their ability to pay. That speaks to a broader problem in this country of income inequality and its growing divide. I believe we will eventually go into a single payer system that offers a floor no one can fall under, but that people who can afford it, will be able to purchase supplemental insurance that buys them better care.
@Moon-howler
All people do have rights.
Other people infringe upon those rights. The inalienable rights are world wide.
@Elena
But the ACA is raising costs for people. Deductibles and rates have gone up. And approx 85%+ of people liked their insurance benefits.
Conservatives have wanted to decouple it for decades and introduce more competition. Now we have even MORE gov’t mandates.
“How is Sharia law related to anarchy? Could you at least say something that some sort of sense?”
Your views are so silly that they can be used as a basic for anarchy, Sharia law, Jonestown, Waco, or Nazi Germany. Given that there’s no God in evidence, religious beliefs i.e. interpretations of God’s will are hardly a good basis for government.
“If my argument is identical to those who seek Sharia and “the formation of the US Government that codified those rights,” how is it we don’t have either anarchy or Sharia law? ”
Because people who think like you are not in charge of the country.
Let me lay some facts of life out here …
There’s no “God” in evidence. If there were, we’d all agree on the matter and doubtless follow whatever rules “God” laid down. What you call “God” is just the unknown. It makes you feel better to think of the unknown as a paternal figure. You’re just transferring the unknown into another form, like a shell game. “Who made us?” God”. “Who made God?” “No one knows, God was always here”. “Oh, I see. Brilliant. Now it all makes sense”.
We are all aware on some level of the great universal truth, that we don’t know a “reason” for our existence or for that of the universe, and that we will all die. We define ourselves in large part by how we react to that truth. Many people react with some degree of religious belief; sometimes they use that belief towards positive outcomes, and sometimes they don’t.
Given that God doesn’t exist in any comprehensible or known form, when you hear people talk about what God told them or what God wants them to do, they’re clearly talking about their own desires. Supposedly, in this country, God is telling various people to oppose gay marriage, to promote illegal immigration, to lower taxes, to raise taxes, etc. etc. Don’t believe a word of it. If there were a real God communicating with people, surely he/she would clear through the babble and present a coherent message.
(Unless you think God is locked in battle with some equivalent force that is scrambling his/her message, or pretending to be him/her – ala Phillip K. Dick’s “The Divine Invasion”).
Notably, those who claim to be interpreting the Christian Bible as God’s word are nearly always full of it. It says pretty clearly in the Bible that eating shrimp is an abomination. A bit less clearly, it says that two men lying with each other is an abomination. It approves of slavery and taking money as compensation for your daughter’s virg*nity, and states quite clearly that you should kill your children by stoning if they worship another “God”. It’s clearly primitive nonsense, and anyone who claims to be trying to use it as abasis for living is clearly doing what they really want to do and using the Bible to rationalize the things they enjoy doing (or are compelled towards doing) in the first place.
Given that anyone claiming and inspiration from or direction from God is projecting their own desires outwards, this is obviously a very poor basis for a system of government. It is how these imbeciles in the Middle East justify acid attacks on schoolgirls. It is how some anarchists justify molotov cocktails. It is, to me, idiotic.
I think we just have to accept that different people have different religious beliefs. Some have no religious beliefs which is their right also.
I just don’t like it being used as a test nor do I like someone else’s beliefs being showed down my throat. Conversion at the end of the sword isn’t really conversion.
Rick, I think you are better off establishing that what you said is your opinion. Your opinion isn’t verifiable.
Seems like deductive reasoning to me. We might as well be arguing about whether the earth is flat or round.
That’s the reason not to debate it with people. Faith is an emotional thing and based on …well faith. Faith really doesn’t need logic. It needs faith.
While what you say could be very logical and make perfect sense, it also offends a lot of believers. I prefer the live and let live philosophy. I leave people alone about their religion and I demand the same in return.
It should be noted, too that Cuccinelli had the law wrong – http://dcist.com/2012/01/_cuccinelli_well_i_saw.php .
oops, once again, posted to the wrong thread. Sorry.
So,moving on, what is going to happen with the 2014 Va senate seat. Guess McDonnell may not be viable and they’re going to do this by convention again. Can they reverse that decision now or is it too late?
There will be 2 open Va senate seats I guess. Northam’s and Obenshain/(or Herring’s)
When will the special elections be held?
50% of VA delegate races were unopposed.
a very interesting interview with Charlie Munger (Berkshire Hathaway Vice Chairman) – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WkpQ4PpId4 – he has comments from politics to investing.
U.S. Economy Grew at 2.8% Rate in Third Quarter.
Cheer!!!!
The deficit is down 400 billion as compared to last year, sequestration has cut the size of government as per the American people’s wishes, and the economy is growing. The sky is not falling.
Now THIS is funny.
It’s interesting. In England, we say “full stop” instead of “period”; but in America, the president says “period” instead of “I’m lying.”
— Charles C. W. Cooke (@charlescwcooke) November 7, 2013
And who is Charles C. W. Cooke and why is he so disrespectful of our president? Is he a brit? He needs to get on back across the pond and learn some manners. I don’t sit here and talk ugly about his queen.
@Rick Bentley
The deficit is no longer down. It was artificially restricted since May because the Treasury had reached the Debt limit early.
Almost 400 billion dollars was borrowed within 12 hours of the raising of the debt limit.
So, should that increase be added to THIS year’s deficit or last year’s?
Cargo, the terminology/semantics that I read everywhere is that the deficit is down, but debt is up. That the “budget deficit” for the year is just taxes minus spending. And that the 400 billion you refer to was borrowed in previous years, not in this one; it is debt but not part of this year’s budget deficit. I believe it that it is accurate to say that the budget deficit is down, and at its lowest level since 2008, but that our debt amount is increasing.
So in other words, we are in a big hole (as is most of the world), but moving in the right direction. FOX News be damned, we are moving in the right direction.
Most nations are in similar amounts of “debt”. Here is some detailed info on where we stand, relative to the rest of the world – http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-06-04/debt-nations
The sky is not falling. The great concern about our debt is that China is going to manage to manipulate it to their advantage, somehow. I wouldn’t bet on it. We are by any measure the greatest nation on Earth, are currently driving technology as well as culture, and will remain so. FOX News be damned.
@rick
In fire there is heat, in people there is good. We call good God.
Lyssa’s last comment merits posting on my refrigerator door. I mean that as a high honour.
That is as profound as the blogosphere gets.
St Thomas Aquinas gets the credit – it’s paraphrased somewhat. I was struck by his post and recalled proof is sometimes in what isn’t. It was meant gently and kindly.
Verra deep for a night when the caps won a shootout and the redskins MAY be on a winning streak.