Tuesday, April 03, 2012
Obama lectures The Supremes
Obama: Size of majority means health care is constitutional
By Stephen DinanApril 2, 2012, 04:02PM WASHINGTON TIMES
NBC News starts probe of edited Zimmerman 911 callObama: Size of majority means health care is constitutionalPoll shows Hatch with big lead among Utah delegatesDanger signs for Romney in new general election pollWhite House downplays flap over Biden comments
In his press conference on Monday, President Obama said he was confident the Supreme Court will uphold his health care law because it was passed by "a strong majority" in Congress.
Mr. Obama defended the law, saying it was helping average Americans, and then said it would be "unprecedented" for the court to overturn it.
"Ultimately, I'm confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress," he said.
The health-care law passed the Senate on Christmas Eve 2009, 60-39, powered by Democrats' overwhelming majority in the chamber. No Republicans supported the legislation. Then, in March 2010, Democratic leaders pushed the bill through the House by a more narrow margin, 219-212, again not winning any Republican votes.
The president, who taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago, said he expects the court to defer to the will of elected officials in this case — and said that's the same argument conservatives usually make.
"For years what we've heard is the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint, that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and — and passed law. Well, there's a good example, and I'm pretty confident that this — this court will recognize that and not take that step," Mr. Obama said.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Inspirational video of the day
ReplyDeleteNo. 1 issue among Women Voters - Healthcare
ReplyDeleteGetting swept up in that Contraception Debate was the stupidest, from a political standpoint, thing the republicans have done in years.
ReplyDeleteHow was it stupid when mandatory contraception violates the freedom of religion granted by the first amendment.
DeleteAfter three years of watching the Republicans fight Renewable energy, Healthcare Reform, and pound the drums for ever more War in the ME, I've come to the conclusion that the republicans are just too ignorant/corrupt to be allowed to govern. This, from a man that has never voted for a Democrat in a national election in his life.
ReplyDeleteLast I checked it was the Iranians, the Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria, North Korea and others that were pounding the drums.
ReplyDeleteresponding to those drums is sane.
Ignoring those that would attack you is criminal.
Now Rufus is claiming it's the GOP, and yet it's the democrats, under Obama that has triple the troops in afghanistan, attacked libya, attacked yemen, used hundreds of predator drones in Pakistan
To claim it's the gop is quite amazing...
After all the Whitehouse controls foreign policy of the nation.
And the Whitehouse stated that Iran must not get a nuclear bomb...
Sounds like Rufus cant hear what even his own choice is saying...
After having to fight Exxon, and the republicans for 3 years, the EPA has finally granted approval of E15 for cars made after the yr 2000. It's NOT a Mandate, just approval to sell it to those that want to buy it.
ReplyDeleteE15 should give you about the same (possibly a touch better) mileage at a slightly lower price.
Widespread use of E15, of course, would lower our Imports of Crude by about a Half a Million Barrels/Day. That would cut into the profit margins of exxon, chevron, and conoco philips. Oh, the pain, the pain.
ReplyDelete.
ReplyDeleteEthics “is a big issue for me,” she said at the time, adding that “it’s right and it’s good business” to be a “responsible steward of taxpayer dollars” because “they’re trusting you with their pocketbooks.”
GSA chief resigns amid reports of excessive spending
The leadership collapse came hours before GSA Inspector General Brian D. Miller released a scathing report on the $823,000 training conference, held for 300 West Coast employees at the M Resort and Casino, an opulent hotel in Henderson, Nev., just south of Las Vegas. From $130,000 in travel expenses for six scouting trips to a $2,000 party in Peck’s loft suite, event planners violated federal limits on conference spending...
Among the “excessive, wasteful and in some cases impermissable” spending the inspector general documented: $5,600 for three semi-private catered in-room parties and $44 per person daily breakfasts; $75,000 for a “team-building” exercise — the goal was to build a bicycle; $146,000 on catered food and drinks; and $6,325 on commemorative coins in velvet boxes to reward all participants for their work on stimulus projects. The $31,208 “networking” reception featured a $19-per-person artisanal cheese display and $7,000 of sushi. At the conference’s closing-night dinner, employees received “yearbooks” with their pictures, at a cost of $8,130.
The GSA also failed to follow regulations on the use of contractors for the conference, promising, for example, the hotel an additional $41,480 in catering charges in exchange for the hotel lowering its lodging cost to honor the government’s limit on room prices…
There was also a clown and a mind-reader; well, perhaps, many clowns and a mind-reader.
.
Gas down two cents overnight at the gas station I track every morning (since 1997).
ReplyDeleteWho called this?
ReplyDeleteOn April 1st, a leading analyst on Middle Eastern affairs spoke with Israeli leadership over recent US actions involving the two allied countries. In his report, analyst Robert Satloff specified that Israel is outraged by the apparent leaks coming from American diplomatic circles on the defense preparations being taken by the Middle Eastern nation, and in accusations to the media by the Obama administration that Israel is the primary cause for high oil prices in the global markets.
A leading U.S. analyst who returned from talks with the Israeli leadership reported that the Obama administration was accused of staging a campaign to undermine Israel. The analyst, Robert Satloff, said Washington was also blaming Israel for the rise in global crude oil prices, deemed as harming the U.S. economy.
Continue reading on Examiner.com Obama administration blames Israel for high oil prices - National Finance Examiner | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/finance-examiner-in-national/obama-administration-blames-israel-for-high-oil-prices#ixzz1qz12vMFG
Obama can't be trusted by our allies, he's made it very clear that he despises Israel and will not be there for them if they are attacked. How anyone of the Jewish faith can vote for this anti-semite amazes me. Come on people... when it walks like a duck, looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck... it's a duck.
ReplyDeleteI guess Bibi thought it was a swell idea to diss Obama on his own turf.
ReplyDeleteObama's not, necessarily, "anti-semite." Maybe he's just slightly "Pro-American."
ReplyDeleteBlacks really don't like Jews. I guess, even at his level, Obama continues the tradition.
ReplyDeleteT, that big refinery over there has been closed due to the fire. Maybe it's re-opening?
ReplyDeleteObama's base is strongly "anti-war." It killed him to have to put those extra troops into Afghanistan.
ReplyDeleteHe's not about to get roped into a shooting war with Iran - despite what he might say about *their getting nuclear weapons.*
Stratfor:
ReplyDeleteIsrael cannot strike Iran without U.S. permission because Israel cannot guarantee that the Iranians would not mine the Strait of Hormuz. Only the United States could hope to stop the Iranians from doing so, and the United States would need to initiate the conflict by taking out the Iranian mine-laying capability before the first Israeli strike. Given its dependence on the United States for managing its national security, the decision to attack would have to be taken jointly. An uncoordinated attack by Israel would be possible only if Israel were willing to be the cause of global economic chaos.
Oh my! the big bad Iranians might MINE the Straights! That would be the END of the world! Oh My!
DeleteCan America handle it? Mostly not...
After all America the weak cannot protect one waterway against the big bad iranians....
America the Pussy... America the Weak... America the impedent...
America the scared... America the humiliated..
Run away, Run away scaredy cat
Obama has done his job, you cannot defeat Islam...
Bow to Allah you Dhimmi assholes, BOW....
What a bunch of pussies...
Look who is laughing at America now... The Weak Horse...
DeleteAmerica the meaningless....
Fact the truth, Allah curses you... The Great Satan, you are a paper tiger...
Pussies....
From previous thread:
ReplyDeleteIt's not just the idea of making the choice that drives these numbers, it's the belief held by most Americans that competition will do more than government regulation to reduce the cost of health care. - Scott Rasmussen
How Health Care can Sink or Save America:
The third approach -- consumer-directed health care -- could be a useful component of a cost-reduction strategy, but its benefits are often exaggerated. This approach emphasizes giving consumers more information and control over their health care and stronger financial incentives to reduce their own spending. The goal is to ensure that patients have a greater stake in keeping costs down through increased copayments and other forms of cost sharing.
If most health-care spending were driven by discretionary decisions among relatively healthy people, this approach could cut costs dramatically. But health-care costs are instead heavily concentrated among a small number of relatively sick patients. The top five percent of Medicare beneficiaries ranked by cost, for example, account for more than 40 percent of total Medicare spending, and the top 25 percent account for more than 85 percent of total costs. Financial incentives can have some effect on these people's decisions, but under virtually all consumer-directed proposals, these patients would still be covered by generous third-party insurance for their high-cost procedures -- which is, after all, the whole point of insurance.
Consumer-directed measures would have a substantial impact only if they lowered the cost of the care delivered in the most expensive cases. Yet some research suggests that consumer-directed health approaches could make high-cost cases even more expensive, because chronically ill patients facing copayments for their medicines would skip some doses, requiring even more expensive treatment later on. (Ironically, those who advocate consumer-directed reforms often oppose advance directives that spell out individuals' care instructions for late in life -- tools that might be more effective than any other consumer-directed change.) Since the share of total costs most affected by consumer-directed health-care incentives is relatively modest, no one should expect this approach to dramatically reduce overall health-care spending.
Nonetheless, the consumer-directed approach is at the heart of a reform of Medicare put forward in April by Representative Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), chair of the House Budget Committee. Under Ryan's approach, Medicare would be transformed into a "premium support" plan, whereby the government would pay the premiums for private health insurance plans chosen by beneficiaries. Ryan's plan appears to save substantial sums for the federal government, but it is far less clear that it would substantially reduce overall health-care costs because it may not do enough to affect high-cost cases. Indeed, a preliminary analysis of the Ryan plan by the CBO found that total costs would actually increase -- by an astonishing 40-67 percent by 2030 -- because the benefit of having more consumer "skin in the game" is limited and because private plans would have higher administrative costs and less negotiating leverage with providers than Medicare. The goal should not be to simply move costs around; it must be to reduce them overall.
President Obama is a former president of the Harvard Law Review and famously taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago. But did he somehow not teach the historic case of Marbury v. Madison?
ReplyDeleteThat's a fair question after Mr. Obama's astonishing remarks on Monday at the White House when he ruminated for the first time in public on the Supreme Court's recent ObamaCare deliberations. "I'm confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress," he declared.
Presidents are paid to be confident about their own laws, but what's up with that "unprecedented"? In Marbury in 1803, Chief Justice John Marshall laid down the doctrine of judicial review. In the 209 years since, the Supreme Court has invalidated part or all of countless laws on grounds that they violated the Constitution. All of those laws were passed by a "democratically elected" legislature of some kind, either Congress or in one of the states. And no doubt many of them were passed by "strong" majorities.
As it happens, probably stronger majorities than passed the Affordable Care Act. Readers may recall that the law was dragooned through a reluctant Senate without a single GOP vote and barely the 60 votes needed to break a filibuster. Despite a huge Democratic majority in the House, it passed by only 219-212.
One reason the law may be overturned is because it was rushed through Congress without a standard "severability" clause that says that the rest of the law stands if one part is judged unconstitutional. Congress jammed it into law because it became ever more unpopular the more the public looked at it. The law is even less popular today than it was on the day it passed in 2010.
Mr. Obama's remarks suggest he is joining others on the left in warning the Justices that they will pay a political price if they dare to overturn even part of the law. As he runs for re-election, Mr. Obama's inner community organizer seems to be winning out over the law professor.
Either health care is a commodity or it is a component of the "general welfare." The former invokes the interstate commerce clause. The latter invokes a legal principle that has already been decided by the Court in upholding SS as constitutional on the grounds that it supports the common benefit (Helvering vs Davis, 1937.) Modern Republicans aren't big on the General Welfare clause even though the original SS legislation was passed by both parties.
ReplyDeleteNetanyahu can pound sand. Obama's not the issue.
.
DeleteYou raise two issues, and in my opinion, are wrong on both, at least, from a constitutional viewpoint.
First, over the last half century, we have seen a broad expansion of the Commerce Clause. Each time it happens, more power is vested in the federal government at the expense of the state. It's a slippery slope. And while even the most conservative of judges have been supportive of that expansion, you have to believe that at some point they will say "enough". As has been voiced by others, "If the state can force you to enter into a private contract against your will, what can't they do?" It eventually becomes fascism.
Second, in comparing this to SS, you ignore the real constitutional issue. The Constitution, although modified for our unique circumstances, is pretty much based on English common law. Under common law principles, a contract is only valid if the two parties to it enter into it willingly. The 'individual mandate' makes a mockery of that principle.
The Dems could have written this so that it would have passed muster. However, that would have required them to tax everyone to achieve their goal of universal healthcare, just as we do for SS and Medicare. However, that would have done away with their targeted approach; and more to the point, they would likely have never had the votes to pass it.
.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Delete.
DeleteSorry, should have said, "First, over the last half century, we have seen a broad expansion of the Commerce Clause. Each time it happens, more power is vested in the federal government at the expense of the states or the individual.
.
In reverse order...
DeleteUnder common law principles, a contract is only valid if the two parties to it enter into it willingly.
I don't agree that the issue is contractual. Healthcare, when defined as part of the general welfare, falls directly under Justice Cardozo's opinions distinguishing private from public good. As I implied above, modern Republicans remain uncomfortable with what they "define" as FDR's corruption of the constitution by setting judicial precedent for legislative acts that promote the general welfare, which means that this construct is not persuasive for them.
"If the state can force you to enter into a private contract against your will, what can't they do?" It eventually becomes fascism.
I actually agree. Forcing a contractual obligation with a private business enterprise is fascism, good a word as any, the implication being that nationalized healthcare is the only realistic solution. Huffington Post has sponsored some thoughtful analysis on this subject, much of which leads to the same conclusion, ala Robert Reich.
From Bob Jacobson:
They're right: the government has no such right. It cannot force citizens to purchase this or that thing -- or for that matter, not to purchase it -- unless there is a compelling public purpose. As anyone who currently pays for health insurance knows, there is no compelling purpose for it.
Required entry into a contract with a private company does not serve the public good. Providing universal healthcare does. The markets are not in the business of promoting "the commons" (no matter how much the libertarians try to make the case.) I think the government should properly be the single-payer healthcare provider, but my gut tells me that SCOTUS will defend ACA. Market competition is an inadequate and specious solution for achieving the dual objectives of cost control and universal coverage.
As for the "slippery slope" argument, from Stephen Herrington:
In any case, no one on or before the court seemed able to define a difference between a broccoli and health insurance.
So if the court and all the legions of the advocacy class can't figure it out, maybe they'll allow an old Texan to point out the difference.
Because of state mandates, anyone who shows up at an emergency room must be treated whether they have either of insurance or cash or not. No state mandates that if you show up to a grocery store that the store must give you broccoli whether you can pay for it or not. Therein lies the difference to date.
Currently you can't get free broccoli by government mandate and you can get free health care. Any way you look at it, someone has to pay for the broccoli, the recipient, the grocer or the next guy in line. It's hilarious that the conservative justices are tacitly arguing that it's ok to force a grocer to give away broccoli, but that its not ok to force someone to buy broccoli.
[skip]
Frankly, getting the health insurance mandate off the table as a constitutional solution will move us closer to government provided health care. Taxation to provide roads, schools, defense and import/export regulation is well tested constitutionally. A tax to provide health care already exists. It's called Medicare, in light of which the whole mandate scheme seems ridiculously arcane and stupid and fraught with corruption.
.
DeleteI don't agree that the issue is contractual. Healthcare, when defined as part of the general welfare, falls directly under Justice Cardozo's opinions distinguishing private from public good.
I disagree. The way the Dems decided to proceed made it contractural. One can argue the government has the right (or duty) to look out for the public good; but they cannot use any and all means necessary to achieve that goal. Their remedies have to fall within the constraints established by the Constitution.
As has been pointed out, there were other ways of achieving their goal (if in fact their goal was to achieve universal healthcare) that would not run up against the Constitution.
.
The way the Dems decided to proceed made it contractural.
DeleteI'm a little tired right now but I'm going to agree with that. (I'm also going to say that Rahm Emanuel would have crafted a better version than Nancy Pelosi, but he lost the battle for compromise, which may prove - long-term - highly detrimental to democratic vision and objectives.) The Medicare option would have been better - from a legal as well as a delivery of service perspective. We'll have to wait. Any bets???
From the Bob Jacobson link:
Delete...precisely because the case before the Supreme Court is not about well-being of others. It is about well-being of insurance companies that argued during the passage of the law that they could not deal with these responsibilities unless everyone chipped in and paid insurance premiums. Thus was born the individual mandate, the requirement to sign up with the new private universal health care system that is being argued about in the Supreme Court, with the government picking up the bill for low-income and indigent citizens.
I suspect that the insurance companies made their ingenuous proposal never expecting the president to take them up on it. They rather hoped it would kill the bill. Or maybe they were thinking ahead and proposed the individual mandate as a time bomb that would go off during the 2010 election -- which it did -- and a poison pill that could kill Obamacare if allies at the state level brought suit before the Supreme Court -- which they did. And the poison is working. The individual mandate is indefensible.
.
DeleteAny bets???
Only on the individual mandate. I expect it to be struck down. If I'm wrong, I will buy you a Coke.
I also believe the 26 state attorney generals have a good case on the Medicaid expansion issue; however, I wouldn't bet on that one way or another.
.
One more point in defense of ACA.
DeleteIt seems to me that the Democrats (who get credit for actually supporting healthcare reform for the benefit of their constituents, as opposed to the Republicans, many of whom to this day refuse to acknowledge the systemic dysfunction of healthcare delivery) - the Democrats realized that abrupt nationalization of healthcare was unpopular and likely logistically impossible to get through Congress, leaving no alternative but mandated purchase to fund the larger risk pool, as the only alternative to the status quo, whose defensibility, as I said, depended on which side of the aisle you sat.
Hillary Clinton's plan was killed for reasons related directly to mandated coverage from "competitive but closely regulated" HMO's.
The Obama plan attempted to define some intermediate form of healthcare delivery enterprise that hovered between private and public. (ACA contains a number of provisions to force improved healthcare delivery from private industry, especially the pay-for-performance programs, but these too are proving unpopular.) The Court will decide if it succeeded or not.
Those Government Sponsored Enterprises are dicey.
I don't know what outcome would be better for the country, but Robert Reich explains Plan B:
ReplyDeleteUnhappily for Obama and the Democrats, most Americans don't seem to like the individual mandate very much anyway. Many on the political right believe it a threat to individual liberty. Many on the left object to being required to buy something from a private company.
The President and the Democrats could have avoided this dilemma in the first place if they'd insisted on Medicare for all, or at least a public option.
[skip]
There's no question payroll taxes are constitutional, because there's no doubt that the federal government can tax people in order to finance particular public benefits. But requiring citizens to buy something from a private company is different because private companies aren't directly accountable to the public. They're accountable to their owners and their purpose is to maximize profits. What if they monopolize the market and charge humongous premiums? (Some already seem to be doing this.)
[skip]
So why not Medicare for all?
Eliot Spitzer writing in Slate:
ReplyDeleteNoonan’s tone and edge suggest that the vehemence of the attacks on the Affordable Care Act continue to reflect two deeper ideological problems: first, a reflexive rejection of anything the president has done, successful or not; and second, the continued pretense of adherence to a libertarian philosophical view that government simply should not intervene in markets. Environmental regulations to set fuel-mileage standards? No good. A tax to promote reduced energy consumption? No way. The Fed’s use of its monetary power to resuscitate the economy? Forget about it! Loans to an auto industry when the private sector will not provide working capital to save the industry? No.
Where and when do Republicans believe that government intervention is appropriate? That continues to be the fundamental question we need to debate. Sure there are some fair points of disagreement in the middle, but the absolutism of a Republican dogma that rejects anything at all is startlingly contrary to the history of the nation. Even if the Affordable Care Act seemed more intrusive to some, the larger point it raises about the necessity of government intervention—both to regulate and to save at moments of economic crisis—is central to the debate we should be having.
The wise assed and wide assed latina tipped the whitey blacky off that he'd already lost.
ReplyDeleteIt's really a hard assignment to say how damned ignorant and stupid some of the things Obama and Sotomyer have said concerning the constitution really are so I won't try.
In keeping with the recent trend of so-called green companies going into the red, another solar energy company supported by President Obama's top administration officials declared bankruptcy today.
ReplyDeleteSolar Trust for America received $2.1 billion in conditional loan guarantees from the Department of Energy -- "the largest amount ever offered to a solar project," according to Energy Secretary Steven Chu -- for a project near Blythe, Calif., but declared bankruptcy within a year. It is unclear how much of the guarantee, if any, was actually awarded.
Another Fools Gold project.
xxx
The wise assed and wide assed latina tipped the whitey blacky off that he'd already lost.
It's really a hard assignment to say how damned ignorant and stupid some of the things Obama and Sotomyer have said concerning the constitution really are so I won't try.
Bwahahaha--It Don't Take Much To Fool People From Mississippi
ReplyDeletexx
In keeping with the recent trend of so-called green companies going into the red, another solar energy company supported by President Obama's top administration officials declared bankruptcy today.
Solar Trust for America received $2.1 billion in conditional loan guarantees from the Department of Energy -- "the largest amount ever offered to a solar project," according to Energy Secretary Steven Chu -- for a project near Blythe, Calif., but declared bankruptcy within a year. It is unclear how much of the guarantee, if any, was actually awarded.
Another Fools Gold project.
xxx
The wise assed and wide assed latina tipped the whitey blacky off that he'd already lost.
It's really a hard assignment to say how damned ignorant and stupid some of the things Obama and Sotomyer have said concerning the constitution really are so I won't try.
Obama's first term in office is all about getting elected in the second term. You will see him move so far left with his socialist agenda your head will spend. He wants to be like Chavez. He wants to be like Mussolini. We need someone that is a polar opposite of Obama. Is that person Romney? No but it's better than Obama. The lab experiment failed. Time to move on.
ReplyDeleteAnd Fuck You If You Don't Like American Thinker
ReplyDeleteWhat was so wrong with public hospitals?
ReplyDelete"Congress may spend money in aid of the 'general welfare'...There have been great statesmen in our history who have stood for other views...The line must still be drawn between one welfare and another, between particular and general. Where this shall be placed cannot be known through a formula in advance of the event...The discretion belongs to Congress, unless the choice is clearly wrong, a display of arbitrary power, not an exercise of judgment. This is now familiar law."
ReplyDelete"Congress did not improvise a judgment when it found that the award of old age benefits would be conducive to the general welfare. The President's Committee on Economic Security made an investigation and report, aided by a research staff of Government officers and employees, and by an Advisory Council and seven other advisory groups. Extensive hearings followed before the House Committee on Ways and Means, and the Senate Committee on Finance. A great mass of evidence was brought together supporting the policy which finds expression in the act...The evidence is impressive that, among industrial workers, the younger men and women are preferred over the older. In times of retrenchment, the older are commonly the first to go, and even if retained, their wages are likely to be lowered. The plight of men and women at so low an age as 40 is hard, almost hopeless, when they are driven to seek for reemployment."
"The problem is plainly national in area and dimensions. Moreover, laws of the separate states cannot deal with it effectively. Congress, at least, had a basis for that belief. States and local governments are often lacking in the resources that are necessary to finance an adequate program of security for the aged. This is brought out with a wealth of illustration in recent studies of the problem. Apart from the failure of resources, states and local governments are at times reluctant to increase so heavily the burden of taxation to be borne by their residents for fear of placing themselves in a position of economic disadvantage as compared with neighbors or competitors. We have seen this in our study of the problem of unemployment compensation...A system of old age pensions has special dangers of its own if put in force in one state and rejected in another. The existence of such a system is a bait to the needy and dependent elsewhere, encouraging them to migrate and seek a haven of repose. Only a power that is national can serve the interests of all."
Justice Benjamin Cardozo, Helvering vs Davis (1937).
Elephants are neat. Lots of good sense, and compassion. Make attempts to bury their dead too, sometimes. Cover the body up with leaves and dirt. Go back and revisit the burial place. I've never understood why they need those huge ears though. Maybe it is to cool the blood. Must have tough skin, those ears would be heaven for mosquitoes otherwise.
ReplyDeleteThanks for that video. Kinda made my day.
What was so wrong with public hospitals?
ReplyDeletePublic Hospitals Decline Swiftly (2005):
Public hospitals, which are funded by local governments, are often considered safety nets for uninsured patients who have little access to medical care.
An increase in the number of uninsured Americans is straining many public hospitals to the point of bankruptcy, said Mark Wietecha, chairman of Kurt Salmon Associates Inc., an Atlanta health care consulting firm.
“The growth in uninsured people is far quicker than the money available for the public hospitals to care for them,” he said.
.
DeleteThis has been a major meme throughout the Healthcare debate. It would be informative to see some actual numbers on this and where they came from rather than 'estimates' from interested parties.
Likewise, it would be interesting to see what the rise in emergancy room costs consisted of. Some of it is obviously from the uninsured; however, I wouldn't be surprised to find a good portion of the rise was caused by unnecessary visits (like indigestion or a headache) where people with insurance find it more convenient to go the ER rather than set up an appointment with their doctor.
This has been a problem for a while and will likely get worse as more people get insurance. That is not a reason for not giving them the insurance, but just to point out that some of the numbers flying around probably have as much validity as the 'jobs created' numbers we hear from both sides.
.
From the linked article:
DeleteMr. Andrulis’ report was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, a Princeton, N.J., philanthropic organization. Its findings were based on data from federal agencies and surveys done by the American Hospital Association.
.
DeleteSorry, this new format has me confused. I was looking for a 'blue' link and missed the article. I tracked it down before going back and trying the link.
It's a 2005 report and I was able to get more detail although not the actual data. The author's conclusion seems to be that the reason many public hospitals are closing is because of the amount of uninsured they service (ie the hospitals most rapidly closing are in poor neighborhoods). While it's possible this is true, all I saw in the info I was able to access was correlation but no 'proof' of causation. It would have been interesting to see the actual data rather than just summaries.
.
Part of our problem, lest we forget, is we are providing medical care to much of Mexico. And notice, today on Drudge, an item about not sending the illegals back, giving them "waivers".
ReplyDeleteIt is insane what we are doing to ourselves.
xxx
I don't know the race of the victim but
Anybody Want To Guess?
Here is a report of a Battle between the USA and the Iranians, it lasted ONE WHOLE day
ReplyDeleteOperation Praying Mantis
Main article: Operation Praying Mantis
On 18 April 1988, the U.S. Navy waged a one-day battle against Iranian forces in and around the strait. The battle, dubbed Operation Praying Mantis by the U.S. side, was launched in retaliation for the 14 April mining of the USS Samuel B. Roberts (FFG-58) by Iran. U.S. forces sank one frigate, one gunboat, and as many as six armed speedboats in the engagement and seriously damaged a second frigate.
Wow.
I guess those Iranians got you folks all up in arms.
On July 3, 1988, Vincennes, under the command of Captain Will Rogers III, fired two radar-guided missiles and shot down an Iran Air Airbus A300 civilian airliner over the Strait of Hormuz, killing all 290 passengers and crew on board.
DeleteGlorious, no?
DeleteHad it been an El Al flight from Tel Aviv to JFK, it would have been declared a holocaust.
Deletethat's because the enemies of the jewish people have set the value of a Jew at 1,100 to one.
Deletenot my problem if you and yours dont value human life.
the interesting thing about the iranian air? the bodies of the so called victims FLOATED right after the crash...
11,000 syrians have been murdered by the assad government and the reaction of the world?
Deletewho cares...
that is the way the world rolls...
the interesting thing about the iranian air? the bodies of the so called victims FLOATED right after the crash…
DeleteYou remind me of the holocaust deniers… that is the way you roll.
If Israel hits Iran and takes out it's nuclear sites and Iran does or cannot do anything will Israel get the credit it deserves?
ReplyDeleteIn the run up to the Gulf war there were predictions of 40,000 AMerican dead, body bags and rivers of blood...
When none of that happened and Saddam was defeated in record time what happened to all the doomsday sayers?
Oh I know, they became Israel bashers...
.
DeleteWe took over an entire country in six months.
And we are still paying for it.
.
the invasion and destruction of the iraqi army was record setting.
Deletehow we handled the occupation? that is an entirely different matter
WiO: Here is a report of a Battle between the USA and the Iranians, it lasted ONE WHOLE day
ReplyDeleteThat's about how long the IDF air campaign against the USS Liberty took as well.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DeleteTell us dear Israel hating WASP, how do you go to church and say you're a Christian?
DeleteJesus must really have some serious shit for you in hell...
I cant believe that he would let a lying, jew hating sack of shit like you into heaven.
No Loan Guarantee was ever finalized in the "Solar Trust/Blyth Project."
ReplyDeleteMust have gone bust too soon.
DeleteJoe The Plumber Knows More About Energy Than Obama and Rufus Combined
ReplyDeleteWasp, you are being nasty again for no good reason.
Joe The Plumber Knows More About Energy Than Obama
ReplyDeleteWasp, you are being nasty again without cause.
The Blythe Project started out as a "Concentrating Solar" project, but then, the price of "Photovoltaic Panels" plummeted leaving the "concentrating trough" project very iffy.
ReplyDeleteAlso, Solar Trust was a subsidiary of a German Company, that, itself, has run into trouble.
Remember, there were several hundred "automobile companies" founded in the U.S. Capitalism, eventually, lowered that number to three (and, some purists would argue, one.)
Well then we would be better off letting capitalism take the risks, instead of your tax money, and mine.
ReplyDeleteHow Germany Made Fools of the Anti-Renewable Energy Naysayers
ReplyDeleteI forget who, but a wise man once said, "A lot of times, people don't know what they want until you show it to them." Let's show it to them.
ReplyDeleteFirst camera to figure out how to beat the iPhone wins an 8-gig SD card. And I'll throw in this lime-green neoprene case.
Except for Micro Four Thirds. You're too bulky for it.
iPhone Camera
A final get out the vote call from Mitt Romney's campaign in Wisconsin suggests an unholy alliance of the Santorum campaign, "union bosses," Democrats, and Santorum's "cronies" might be conspiring to extend the GOP contest, and urges Wisconsin voters to stop those efforts by voting for Romney. The call seeks to align Romney with Wisconsin governor Scott Walker, whose challenge of public employee unions has made him immensely popular among the state's Republicans.
ReplyDelete"If new powers are needed, then let the Home Office come and make the case. It isn't for innocent people to justify why the Government should not spy on us."
ReplyDeleteStephen Williams, a Liberal Democrat MP, took a swipe at the Home Office's "inept" handling of the issue.
"If there has been an attempt to bounce us into backing this, then it has backfired, because any legislation will be scrutinised in incredible detail," he said.
These results strongly suggest that the current biomedical research and publication system is wasting scads of money and talent. What can be done to improve the situation?
ReplyDelete...
The chief argument for government funding of academic biomedical research is that it will produce the basic science upon which new therapies can be developed and commercialized by pharmaceutical companies. This ambition is reflected in the slogan on the website of National Institutes of Health (NIH), which reads “the nation’s medical research agency—supporting scientific studies that turn discovery into health.”
These new studies give the public and policymakers cause to wonder just how much of the NIH’s $30 billion annual budget ends up producing the moral equivalent of junk science?
In Cali, Colombia, a woman may only have sex with her husband, and the first time this happens, her mother must be in the room to witness the act.
ReplyDeleteOn this day in 1948, President Harry Truman signed the Marshall Plan, which authorized about $5 billion in aid for 16 European countries.
ReplyDeleteA nutcase led 21 other nutcases into an attack on 3 American buildings and when the 21 nutcases killed themselves, their leader hid in a cave. It was a major tragedy with 3,000 deaths that none of us will forget, but it was not cause for a war.
ReplyDeleteThere was even less cause for war in Iraq. Even Israel tried to talk Bush out of attacking Iraq because as Israel said, she had removed Iraq's nuclear facilities in 1981 and Iraq had no means of employing WMD. …In a total repudiation of what are supposedly our democratic values - We illegally overthrew the first democratically elected leader the Iranian people chose as their leader: Mohammad Mossadegh. That heinous act of spitting in the face of the will of the Iranian people, followed by installing the Shah, poisoned our relations with Iran for decades.
Neocon “What is…”: what do you think will happen when the price of oil goes to 200 dollars a barrel? Do you think the general public will remain cool and collected? We dealt with a Stalin without getting into a war ( far more dangerous, read some history books) how is Iran more of a problem than Stalinist Russia? Isn't Pakistan and even bigger problem? Should we attack them too?
ReplyDeleteJudges order Justice Department to clarify following Obama remarks on health law case
A federal appeals court is striking back after President Obama cautioned the Supreme Court against overturning the health care overhaul and warned that such an act would be "unprecedented."
A three-judge panel for the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday ordered the Justice Department to explain by Thursday whether the administration believes judges have the power to strike down a federal law.
A source inside the courtroom, who did not want to be identified, confirmed the incident to Fox News.
A letter from the court instructs the Justice Department to provide an explanation of "no less than three pages, single spaced" by noon on Thursday.
(Professor Obama taught Constitutional law at Harvard, believe it or not.)
Why Marrying A Good Speller Is Important
ReplyDeleteI do not think Wio is a Neo-con.
ReplyDeleteI do not know what a Neo-con is.
ReplyDelete.
DeleteTry looking it up on WIKI.
.
jeez I pop open Drudge and Santorum lives.
ReplyDeleteI do not know what a Neo-con is.
Is Santorum a Neo-con?
Is Romney?
Hillary is, she says we will use force if we have to.
Obama too must be a Neo-con.
The designation is totally meaningless, like about 70% of designations in our political discourse, IMHO.
Santorum dies.
ReplyDeleteArmy PFC J F Davis from Griffin, GA was killed Thursday by enemy fire in Kandahar Province. 82nd Airborne Div,
ReplyDeleteArmy SPC J E Dutton of Checotah, OK, died Saturday in Logar province 1st Armored Div.
These facts were listed on page 6 in the bottom left hand corner of USA Today. Tell me the difference between these two men and Trayvon Martin. Tell me , I want to know.
These deaths are on Obama. He said when he campaigned, that we should be in Afghanistan, not Iraq. Go ahead, vote for him.
Travon was a skittle eating child, a boy, an innocent and oh by the way , he was black.
DeleteI wonder if either of those 2 young men could be Obama's son, or look like him.
ReplyDeleteWhat a piece of shit.
I hate the nested format. The effort required for follow-up is tiresome for those over fifty.
ReplyDeleteBut invigorating for those over 60.
DeleteOh goody. Next year will be invigorating. And I was worried.
DeleteI've never trusted wiki since I looked up "Quirk" on wiki, and got in a big argument with them over their definition but I finally prevailed and they took it down.
ReplyDelete.
DeleteOn this blog, I have in the past denegrated those who used WIKI as a reference, but I now have a more open mind.
As you probably know, the Encyplopedia Brittanica has published its last print edition (4,000 copies left if you really have to have one). I forget how the argument came up regarding it's relevance and accuracy; however, when it was compared to WIKI in one study, WIKI had the most up to date, accurate information between the two.
The Brittanica naturally disputed the results of the study. The funny thing was their appeal to authority included WIKI.
.
Israel Today
ReplyDeleteHamas leader admits 'Palestinian' identity is invented
Tuesday, April 03, 2012 | Ryan Jones
Share |
Hamas leader admits 'Palestinian' identity is invented
US Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich has come under a lot of fire for saying that the "Palestinians" are an invented people. Most have ridiculed Gingrich by pointing out there are clearly millions of Arabs living in so-called "Palestine."
But Gingrich wasn't talking about the physical presence of those people today, but rather the national identity they have adopted and the fact that most immigrated to the land not so long ago.
In a televised address on Al-Hekma TV last week, Hamas Minister of the Interior and of National Security Fathi Hammad basically backed up Gingrich's assessment, acknowledging that the roots of most "Palestinians" are elsewhere in the Middle East, and that the Palestinian label is only a thin veneer.
Those pushing for a Palestinian state try to paint the Palestinian Arabs as somehow distinct from the Arabs round-about, and therefore in need of their own state. Not so, said Hammad. "Every Palestinian, in Gaza and throughout Palestine, can prove his Arab roots - whether from Saudi Arabia, from Yemen, or anywhere. We have blood ties."
More than that, Hammad stated that the true regional background of most "Palestinians" is not in "Palestine."
"Brothers, half of the Palestinians are Egyptians and the other half are Saudis," exclaimed the Hamas minister.
Hammad's remarks were undoubtedly never intended for a Western audience. Rather, he was pleading with Egypt and other neighboring states to supply Hamas-ruled Gaza with free fuel, which Hammad said Hamas would use "in order to continue to wage Jihad."
.
DeleteSo what?
This talk of names is stupid. It ignores the reality of the politics. You did by the way know that Jeruselem was a city 1000 years before King David conquered it, right. And that Israel and Judea fought over it when it was Judea's capital. More trivia. You waste our time with this BS.
.
Spoken like a serious student of history......
DeleteSpoken like a dumb fuck. One hell of a lot of these 'palestinians' were dung burners that followed the Jews in for the jobs that the Jews created once they got the place going again.
DeleteI've noticed on this blog, it is those with a Catholic background, claimed or real, that give the Jews a harder time than those of a protestant background of some sort. I have seen this repeated again and again.
DeleteWhy is that?
Delete"Brothers, half of the Palestinians are Egyptians and the other half are Saudis," exclaimed the Hamas minister.
Dung burners from the desert, wander here and there, then, the Jews come, there they are in the employment line.
I've noticed on this blog, it is those with a Bible-thumping background, claimed or real, that are blind to argument than those of a catholic background of some sort. I have seen this repeated again and again.
DeleteWhy is that?
Dung burners from the desert, wander here and there, then, the Jews come, there they are in the employment line.
DeleteThe Boers argued that they created the farms, commerce and industry. They argued that the black tribes, dung burners, wandered here and wandered there, and then the Dutch came, and were in the employment line.
Israel is a European creation, a European colony created out of a European guilt over European slaughter of other Europeans. The colony exists, based on force and convoluted arguments and has as factual base on history as have the illegal Mexican-Indian blooded illegals in the US Southwest. That is a fact. You are incapable of intellectual honesty and dealing with facts. I am sure that you have a page and verse thats is more useful than actually having to think.
You are a squatter on Indian lands, dung burners when they had to be, who had at least a claim to that land ten thousand years longer than your own. Should the Mexicans have a pogrom and go onto an orgy of murder and decide to settle the wrong by taking your farm, based on ancient undeniable claims, please cooperate and leave. I am sure the Israelis will fight the Mexicans to help you save your farm.
.
DeleteI've noticed on this blog, it is those with a Catholic background, claimed or real, that give the Jews a harder time than those of a protestant background of some sort. I have seen this repeated again and again.
Why is that?
"Give the Jews a harder time?"
I might take offense if I thought that was an euphemism for something else; but surely you wouldn't stoop to that. I'm sure you have the balls to come right out and say what you actually mean.
So, giving you the benefit of that doubt, I'll make the point I made here numerous times before. There is the reality on the ground in the ME and there is this rationalization that takes place on both sides there trying to justify their positions. A lot of the arguments are legitimate, but a lot of it is just plain silly. This meme that you have once again brought up about there being no Palestineans falls into that latter classification.
They are there. They know who they are. The Israeli's know who they are. The ME and the UN know who they are. The US, Russia, the EU all know who they are. If you think calling them Egyptian or Saudi will make them go away you're nutz and you merely make yourself look silly.
Give the Jews a harder time? I'm not giving the Jews a harder time. I'm giving those who bring up this silly stuff a harder time.
.
That proved true again in Wisconsin, where Mr. Romney and an outside political action committee supporting his bid outspent the Santorum camp by more than $2 million in TV ads alone.
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile, Mr. Romney himself has begun to ignore his GOP rivals as he turns his sights on a general election fight with Mr. Obama.
The Romney campaign is expected to announce Wednesday morning that it will begin raising funds for the general election, including through a joint fundraising operation with the Republican National Committee.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIt's over: CNN estimates that Barack Obama has won enough delegates to clinch the Democratic nomination for president in 2012.
ReplyDeleteOh—the Republicans? OK, I'll concede that contest is getting close to over as well.
...
Romney is seventeen years older than President Obama. But to defeat the incumbent, Romney will need to appear bolder, more forward-looking, in a sense the more youthful alternative.
The Iran sanctions effort led by the United States appeared to be causing new fractures in the Iranian economy on Tuesday, with leading oil companies in South Africa and Greece suspending imports of Iran’s crude oil, further signs of emergency self-reliance emerging in Iran, and an influential former Iranian president publicly challenging his country’s anti-American stoicism.
ReplyDeleteThe latest signs of economic distress came as new questions arose about the date and location for resumed talks between Iran and the so-called P5-plus 1 countries — the five permanent members of the Security Council plus Germany — over Iran’s uranium enrichment activities. Iran contends the activities are peaceful but its adversaries suspect they are a cover to develop the capability to make nuclear weapons.
The talks, suspended more than a year ago, are supposed to resume in less than two weeks, but a host country has not been finalized, and Iranian news reports have suggested that the April 13 date may be changed.
Iran has called the sanctions, aimed at stopping its uranium enrichment, a bullying tactic by the West that is doomed to fail. At the same time, Iranian leaders have acknowledged that the sanctions are causing deprivations in the country by severely restricting international financial transactions and sales of crude oil, Iran’s main export. The European Union will tighten the sanctions further starting July 1 with an embargo of Iranian crude oil.
In South Africa, Engen Petroleum, which has been South Africa’s biggest buyer of Iranian oil and is a leading marketer and refiner of petroleum products throughout southern Africa, said Tuesday it was no longer Iran’s customer. “Engen has suspended imports from Iran and our contingency sources are in play,” a company spokeswoman, Tania Landsberg, said in an email, confirming press reports of Engen’s decision.
South Africa, which historically has relied on Iran for a quarter of its imports, had been sending mixed messages regarding Western pressure to reduce Iranian purchases, with recent data suggesting that the country has been buying more crude oil from Iran this year. Engen’s decision to buy elsewhere suggested that the Western pressure was working.
In Greece, Hellenic Petroleum, the country’s leading refiner, also suspended purchases of Iranian crude oil — not because of the impending European Union embargo, but because banking payments to Iran have been rendered unworkable by the financial sanctions already in place, Reuters reported.
The unfortunate ordinary Greeks and South Africans, already broke, will pay the price. I am sure this will endure them to the state of Israel and the USA.
Why on earth would Iran want to defend itself from foreign aggression? "The Iran sanctions effort led by the United States appeared to be causing new fractures in the Iranian economy on Tuesday, with leading oil companies in South Africa and Greece suspending imports of Iran’s crude oil, further signs of emergency self-reliance emerging in Iran, and an influential former Iranian president publicly challenging his country’s anti-American stoicism.”
ReplyDeleteWe are fucking with them, not them with us.
What would we do if the Chinese were breaking our banking system, cutting off our farm exports and surrounding our coastal waters and planning and discussing war against us?
ReplyDeleteI wonder who will pay for all this? Any guesses?
ReplyDeleteMore from the “You can’t make this shit up” department:
ReplyDeleteThe first contingent of 200 United States Marines has arrived in Darwin.
The troops are there on a six-month rotational basis and will take part in training exercises with the Australian Defence Force.
The two countries are boosting defence ties, with the US eventually deploying a 2,500-strong force in northern Australia by 2017.
The move has irked Beijing but US and Australian leaders have stressed it is not an attempt to contain China.
The move has irked Beijing
DeleteAnything that irks Beijing is fine with me. Irk On.
Can we station troops any further away from the Texas border, (where they may do some good), than northern Australia?
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile, all is peaceful in the Midwest. We have found it unnecessary to station troops in Iowa, and no Carrier Groups have been requested for the Mississippi/Missouri Rivers. The corn is being planted early, and without incident.
ReplyDeleteWhat a bunch of dung beetles!
ReplyDeleteNo terrorist attacks in Sioux City this month. The Methodists, and Baptists have been, by and large, peaceful.
ReplyDeletedeuce:
ReplyDeleteIsrael is a European creation, a European colony created out of a European guilt over European slaughter of other Europeans.
This statement shows why you are one dumb, ignorant motherfucker.
Hmm, what does a good host do in a situation like this?
ReplyDeleteHe makes sure that i am never accepted as an equal.
ReplyDeleteWhich he has done.
But that fact that the "host" is a dumbmother fucker that quotes Hamas?
Israel is not what deuce says, it shows his own lack of knowledge of the subject.
Ignores actual facts and history and parrots the most vile israel bashing propaganda out there..
So I stand by my statement.
deuce, that makes you one dumb, ignorant motherfucker.
TO add on, Deuce is not a "good" host.
ReplyDeleteHe is a host.
He certainly is not fair.
But he is a "host"
but certainly not a "good host"
Wow! You are one sick puppy wio.
ReplyDeleteYour examination of the issue does show your depth and breathe of the issue.
Delete"Wow! You are one sick puppy wio."
deep...
articulate...
insightful...
Anyone else, here, would have dropped the ban-hammer on your ass a long, long, long time ago.
ReplyDeleteExcept for poor old befuddled Bob, of course; and he's just . . . . . . . . . . well, befuddled.
Wow that is impressive....
DeleteBan my ass...
I call them as I see them.
I’ll leave it up as a representation of his depth of thinking and his artless retort. To the point, the source of his intellectual vacuousness and mental breakdown:
ReplyDeleteIsrael is a European creation, a European colony created out of a European guilt over European slaughter of other Europeans.
The holocaust was a European creation. It was never an American problem. It was Europeans slaughtering other Europeans. The Europeans decided the only way that Jews and Christians could stop the murder was to send the Jews out of Europe. The Jews bought the idea thinking they could never trust the Christians not to slaughter them again; “never again”.
European colonialism was still alive and well. Cultural superiority ruled the day and Israel was set up as a religious sanction for Jewish Europeans in Arabia. What could possibly go wrong?
Although the US had no part in the slaughter, it would have been far wiser to set the colony in Florida. It would have been interesting to place it in the Balkans, but the European Jews, for good reasons, did not trust the Europeans to behave in the future.
Had either of those locations been chosen, who would have cared about any of the misery that we have been dragged into year in and year out in the lovely religious theme park in the ME, with no end in sight.
The "nation" of Israel was being formed LONG before the Holocaust.
DeleteYou ignorant twit.
Learn history, stop reading PLO talking points
Deuce: I’ll leave it up as a representation of his depth of thinking and his artless retort.
DeleteMy retort was aimed at your level of thinking, I was trying to "talk on your level"...
The World Zionist Organization convinced Britain to recognize the importance of a Jewish homeland. In 1917, Britain introduced the Balfour Declaration, pledging “a national homeland for Jewish people.”
DeleteSay deuce.... ever hear of this????????
Dont let facts get in the way of your insanity...
in 1900 just how many "arab" countries existed?
DeleteJust how many (as a percentage of the arab population) even KNOW what a "nation" was?
the Islamic ummah, Tribes and klans that's what is for these folks...
America in all it's stupidity, helped the arabs embrace "nationhood"
a false construct if ever....
however the Jewish People had been creating their own self determination in the lands between the river and the seas.
The ottomans empire had been destroyed.. ending a brutal occupation of historic jewish lands...
Of course the Brits were there to step in to claim the lootible goodies...
Jewish self determination is as valid or more than any nation on the planet. Certainly more than American claims to nationhood and certainly more than any "arab" nation created by the europeans.
Not to mention the FAKE national movement created in 1966 in Egypt by Arafat and the Egyptian Secret Police (whose members were in fact retired Nazis)
RE Romney
ReplyDeleteIt seems that Bill Buckley's conservatism has been replaced, at the Party level and at the ideological level, with a toxic brew of libertarians (all government is bad - if not evil), oil guys (all oil is good - and recoverable) and evangelicals (all is known through Christ.)
Good luck with that. It's going to be another election where nobody wins - but somebody loses. Anybody-but-Obama will drive the results. Unfortunately our counting system is unreliable at the fringes, vulnerable to fraud. Bitch.
You're a better man than I, Gunga Din. :)
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteIsrael is a European creation, a European colony created out of a European guilt over European slaughter of other Europeans.
This really is stupid. Truly. An example of what I mean.
You are becoming just like rat.
You are a squatter on Indian lands
Now I've fallen off my barstool. You ARE rat.
WiO: Deuce is not a "good" host.
ReplyDeleteDeuce is a good host, but this blog is sending my posts to the bit bucket. Now I need to make text copies of my masterpieces before posting them, and make sure they "took".
and you are a perpetual liar who played the blog for years....
Deleteas for your posts being eaten? thank all that is holy for small miracles.
now you are going to "save" your masterpieces?
doing all of this on our taxpayers dime...
wow, i wish your bosses could see how you waste our money...
You must be having the same trouble as I, o Catholic Woman, muzzie lover, Jew hater.
ReplyDeleteIt is irritating. I had a big answer to the Catholic from Detroit but it vanished.
Why is it you Catholics can't stand the Jews?
Your own Pope these days, didn't he fight for the Nazis?
With people still alive from Holocaust times, you put up that book burning asshole.
Is that really the best you can do.
A guy that banned the books of Schillibeexs(sp)?
That Dutch guy I used to read.
And I see my reply to Deuce is gone as well. I was saying that was an idiot comment about Israel he made and that he was becoming rat.
DeleteThen I said after reading I was squatting on Indian Lands (one wonders of course what he is doing) that Deuce IS rat.
Because we have been through all that nonsense before.
The Sioux for instance used to be a lower Mississippi river folk, maybe run out by the slaver Cherokees, who knows for sure. They were pushed north, then out on the plains. They only, we all know this, had the horse for a blink of time.
Where did the horse come from?
Controversies with the CDF
DeleteIn Jesus: An experiment in Christology (Dutch ed. 1974), Schillebeeckx argued that we should not imagine that the belief of the disciples that Jesus had risen was caused by the empty tomb and the resurrection appearances. It was quite the opposite: A belief in the resurrection - “that the new orientation of living which this Jesus has brought about in their lives has not been rendered meaningless by his death – quite the opposite” - gave rise to these traditions.[2] The empty tomb was, in his opinion, an unnecessary hypothesis, since “an eschatological, bodily resurrection, theologically speaking, has nothing to do, however, with a corpse.”[3] That was merely a "crude and naive realism of what ‘appearances of Jesus’" meant.[4]
Although the books were followed by a couple of articles where Schillebeeckx defends himself against criticism and tones down his radicalism, On October 20, 1976 the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith wrote to him with various objections. As a result of the ensuing correspondence, he was asked to come to Rome to explain his position. In December 1979, he met with representatives of the Congregation. Due to international pressure, the drive for a trial was ended. The conclusions of the Congregation, however, left the impression that a genuine accord had not been reached, and he continued to receive notifications from the Church authorities for his repeated writings.[5][6] His christology was criticized by Cardinal Franjo Šeper and then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, whom Schillebeeckx already knew at Vatican II, and who was later elected Pope Benedict XVI.
In 1984, his orthodoxy was called into question by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and Schillebeeckx was summoned to Rome to explain his views expressed in The Ministry in the Church, which were regarded as Protestant.[6] A third time then, in 1986, Schillebeeckx' theological views were put into question, again regarding the sacramental nature of office in the Roman Catholic Church. More precisely, in The Church with a Human Face Schillebeeckx argued, on biblical-historical grounds, that the consecration to Catholic priesthood does not necessarily gain its validity from, and can therefore be detached from, apostolic succession; rather, the choice of priests (and as a consequence the celebration of the Eucharist) is dependent on the local church community.
However, despite three investigations with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the writings of Schillebeeckx were never condemned.
Schillebeeckx continued to publish after his retirement. A major study on sacramental theology is still expected to appear. His oeuvre, surveyed in several bibliographies, has been the subject of many studies and controversies.
Bob: I've noticed on this blog, it is those with a Catholic background, claimed or real, that give the Jews a harder time than those of a protestant background of some sort. I have seen this repeated again and again.
ReplyDeleteI think it started with our Lord himself.
MATT 22:
[2] The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son,
(The marriage is between Jesus and the People of God, symbolized as a bride)
[3] And sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding: and they would not come.
(The servants were John the Baptist and the disciples of Christ, who announced the Banquet of God)
[4] Again, he sent forth other servants, saying, Tell them which are bidden, Behold, I have prepared my dinner: my oxen and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready: come unto the marriage.
(The Banquet of God is the body and blood of God's son himself in the holy Eucharist, symbolized here as first-rate animals that were sacrificed)
[5] But they made light of it, and went their ways, one to his farm, another to his merchandise:
(The Jews rejected the very idea that God had a Son, and pressured Pilate to release a terrorist that God's Son might be exectuted in his place)
[6] And the remnant took his servants, and entreated them spitefully, and slew them.
(The Jews often gave the followers of Jesus the thirty-nine stripes, and even stoned them).
[7] But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city.
(Vespasian and his son Titus laid seige to Jerusalem and destroyed it, and slew many of the inhabitants thereof)
[8] Then saith he to his servants, The wedding is ready, but they which were bidden were not worthy.
(The Israel of the blood, genetic descendants of Jacob, spurned the Banquet of God.)
[9] Go ye therefore into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage.
(God settled for those gentiles who were eager to approach their creator in the Banquet)
[10] So those servants went out into the highways, and gathered together all as many as they found, both bad and good: and the wedding was furnished with guests.
(Thus the Great Commission to preach the gospel to all nations)
You are a moron, Catholic Dunce Head, when it comes to this stuff.
DeleteEven Rufus makes more sense than you, and he makes zero sense.
I am going back to bed.
It is snowing. DAMN.
The Spanish Conquistadors, idiot.
ReplyDeleteAll Religion is idiotic
ReplyDeleteRufus II:
Amen Brother
DeleteIf you can stand the strain of "margin calls," Nat Gas has to be the "sell" of the century.
ReplyDeleteOops, make that "BUY OF THE CENTURY."
ReplyDeleteI was thinking about selling the "frackers."
ReplyDeleteByron Wien:
ReplyDelete“Over the past three months the pessimistic mood has changed to optimism,” continues Wien, formerly the long-time chief investment strategist at Morgan Stanley. “Ordinarily, optimistic sentiment readings presage a market correction, but there are so many investors looking for an opportunity to increase their exposure that even a minor downdraft gets cut short by a flood of buyers. This could continue for a while.”
[skip]
In a rare instance of discussing a specific company, the strategist singled out the tech giant’s declaration of a dividend as another reason to be bullish stocks.
“Apple ... paving the way for a greater focus on dividends will help the indexes move ahead.”
I just cashed in one of my best performers thinking low volume, less Fed easing, deficits and energy would "correct" the markets this year. Fuck me.
Maybe not. The markets seem to be agreeing with You.
ReplyDeleteByron Wein is a whore, just like all the rest of them. He might be trying to jawbone up the market while he liquidates. The odds are no worse than fifty/fifty.
ReplyDeleteI think it was Gary Kaminski who was saying that the somewhat inexplicable market performance was being sustained by the high volume of stock buy-backs (and Apple of course). I wonder about the feasibility of another (near-term) major correction (30-40%) for the reason Wien mentions - there's so much investment money waiting for an entry point that any slight downturn will simply float on the reserves. My "gut" intuition was destroyed by exposure of the events leading to the 2008 crash. Never considered myself excessively naive but I was caught pants down by the depth (and yeah I'll go ahead and say it, the nakedness) of the corruption. Sometimes I just sit here pondering my pending dotage. I'm sure when this election is over I'll still be sitting in the same place muttering fuck me.
ReplyDeleteRE fracking
ReplyDeleteRemember the objection to ethanol compromising the corn crop leading to food shortages?
Fracking Companies Make Top Bids For Water Alongside Colorado Farmers:
While there has always been competition for water in Colorado, today's contenders no longer just include farmers, but the oil and gas industry too.
The Denver Post reports that an auction hosted by the Northern Water Conservancy District for unallocated water diverted from the Colorado River Basin saw top bids from hydraulic fracturing companies.
Water Democracy:
ReplyDeleteThe alternative to pro-forma consultation is something more dynamic - getting community hands muddy in monitoring water quality, debating pricing at public hearings and mapping water sources with utility workers. This engagement is sometimes described as exercising water democracy and water citizenship. But here's the rub. Water is embedded in everything. It's essential to public health, a key input for manufacturing and food can't be grown without it. Water democracy means democracy. Period. The sorry state of our water underscores fundamental weaknesses in national democracies and the UN system. Achieving water democracy is surely a terrific opportunity to fix governance problems from the local to the global, but it's one enormous task. The drift towards elite private global governance doesn't help -- the World Economic Forum in Davos is a case in point. With water so central to the economy, it's not surprising that self-interested parties seek governance of water for private gain.
[skip]
Climate change has policy makers frightened and ecologically-based planning gets an occasional nod. But early indications are that the draft Rio declaration backs away from the human right to water and looks to markets to resolve the water crisis.
The water commons is rising -- alongside a view of water as a green commodity to be bundled like mortgages and traded on financial markets. The much desired win-win is hard to find between these divergent views. Chances are that some water practices, fracking for instance, can't be reconciled with a safe water future.
Battle lines of the future.
.
ReplyDeleteIt is irritating. I had a big answer to the Catholic from Detroit but it vanished.
I know exactly how you feel, bobbo. I posted a magnificant expose of your lifestyle, outlook, predjudices, foibles, and false views on both history and the world as it exists today. This opus contained pertainent references from noted scholars and historians, as well as, specific references to your past posts (those that were intelligible).
It was, IMO, scathing yet fair. I suspect that upon reading it you would have taken to your bed in mortification or holed up somewhere in a closet or hidey hole.
Unfortunately, blogger, unable to stand it's insight, clarity, and simplicity, ate it.
Oh well.
[Get your daughter to fix your computer and then quit breaking it.]
.
I can't get her off the horse. If she is not on the horse, she is in bed.
DeleteBut it is good to commiserate. Did you know Hemingway had many of his early short stories lost when a thief stole his backpack on the Paris subway?
Never to be replaced.
Yes indeed, the episode can be found in "Hemingway;A Life" by Carlos Baker.
Imagine how he felt!
It is one of the hazards of being creative, is it not!
Fracking Failing to Crack China, Europe Shale, Exxon Says
ReplyDeleteSome shale formations in Europe and China are impervious to drilling techniques that opened vast reserves of natural gas and oil from Texas to Pennsylvania, said Rex Tillerson, Exxon Mobil Corp. (XOM)’s chief executive officer.
New methods and tools will need to be invented to tap many of the shale fields that energy companies and governments expect eventually to yield a bonanza of fuel, Tillerson said during a meeting with analysts in New York today.
[skip]
“Some of the shales don’t respond as well to hydraulic fracturing,” Tillerson said during a meeting with reporters after his presentation to analysts. “It’s going to take research and time in the lab to understand that.”
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And The Europeans really really don't like the concept.
Probably too densely populated to be practical.
They drilled two holes in the Polish shale, and they came in drier than Grandma's booger.
ReplyDeleteAnd, in all honesty, frackin' is being way overhyped in the U.S. Most shale doesn't have economic amounts of oil, and the ones that do play out very quickly.
As for "gas" fracking, there's more supply there, but around $6.00/kcuft is the minimum price for profitability (which explains why fifty percent of the drillers that were fracking for gas have moved on to oil plays.
There's a lot of crazy stuff being printed by people that should know better. I know "some" of them Have to know better.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DeleteProbably another idiot Am Thinker article. Almost has to be to be that far off.
ReplyDeleteCoal produced 44% of our electricity in 2010. It produced 42% in 2011. It's down to 39%, now. Where's the "rolling blackouts?"
They're not coming. All of the coal deficit was made up by Renewables (Wind, and Solar, mostly.)
WIO. do you wake up pissed off every morning? You will truly someday ignite with all that hate and rage inside you.
ReplyDeleteNaw...
DeleteAfter my coffee at about 10 am, I take nice walk around the property, enjoy the sunshine (or rain, love rainy weather) head to the local coffee spot for a danish and another coffee and head to work...
I reserve my pissed off nature for maggots... I am quite happy and blessed...
Of course that doesnt stop me from stockpiled for the zombie apocalypse.
To me I have no problem on unloading on anti-semites and Israel haters. I can go from zero to a hundred in about a nanosecond and back down again.
Jew hating maggots have existed for thousands of years, nothing new about them. I just have a special skill/talent at calling them what they are to their faces...
Now you have a great day sir...
:)
5 States now get 10%, or more, of their Electricity from Wind. Texas got 8.5% last year, and Texas is a Big Economy.
ReplyDeleteLinky-Poo
Sure glad I'm not religious.
ReplyDelete:)
ReplyDeleteNot you, Gag. Just those that want to go out and kill those of Other religions, and take their stuff (in the name of the Lord, of course.)
And, I'm probably not as religious about renewable energies as I appear; I'm just convinced there's not nearly as much of that fossil stuff as the "fossil stuff miners" would have us believe.
ReplyDeleteI am probably the most non religious believer you could know. Lots of horrible things have been done to others in the name of a religion, in the name of freedom, democracy, communism, socialism, conservatism, liberalism, etc. Each are someone's religion, someone's "church.".
ReplyDeleteHere's the deal, Neil. Soto, or Kagan, gave him the bad word, (which is unheard of, a leak in SCOTUS) over the weekend. Being the thin skinned bullying bastard he is, he is out there Monday dissing the court, constitution, and our legal conventions, and, trying to bully one of the swing votes into changing.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteHere is the deal, Neil. He got the bad word over the weekend from Soto or Kagan, (this is unprecedented, a leak from inside SCOTUS)and, being the thin skinned, self important, bullying bastard he is, can't prevent himself from coming out on Monday and challenging the court, the Constitution, and our legal conventions of time out of mind, hoping to bully a swing vote into a switch, and save his ass. And that lower Fed appeals court judge, in Texas?, had this figured out, and, livid, blasted the government lawyer from the bench.
ReplyDeleteThis is the candidate of the ethanol seer from inner Mississippi, Rufus.
The stock-market rally that kicked off last October and has propelled the Standard & Poor's 500-stock index to more than a 25% advance since then has been a boon for many mutual funds that invested in some of the largest-cap growth stocks. Few have more reason to celebrate than Mark Mulholland, whose 15-year-old Matthew 25 Fund returned 23.5% to shareholders this year through March 31 and generated a 25.1% return in the 12 months ended March 31.
ReplyDelete...
Delaware Pooled Select 20, which returned 22.5% to investors in the 12 months ended March 31, is a more concentrated version of the strategy used for Delaware U.S. Growth, the company explains. The latter fund, open to retail investors, was up 18% for the period being measured.
...
Mr. Mulholland, an outdoorsman, also likes Cabela's Inc., CAB -1.28% a Nebraska-based retailer of hunting, fishing and camping equipment that has an online division and a growing array of stores in addition to its catalog business. While he deemed it too pricey to buy immediately after its 2004 IPO, Mr. Mulholland began buying it in 2008.
Mitt Romney won a clean sweep Tuesday night, with victories in the District of Columbia, Maryland, and Wisconsin. It is the latter state I want to focus on, as it was the most important of the bunch (from a political standpoint), and caps off an interesting back-and-forth between Romney and Rick Santorum in the Great Lakes region.
ReplyDeleteLast week I commented that Santorum might have an angle on victory in Wisconsin because the rural vote could be larger there than in the previous Midwestern battles. That did not pan out.
...
First, the rural vote. Romney has been losing this bloc by wide margins in the Midwest. He lost them again Tuesday, but he made noticeable improvements.
Chloe Smith, the Treasury Economic Secretary, said: "The Government's actions mean that from the beginning of the new tax year, 24 million households will be £6.50 a week better off. We're taking millions out of tax altogether by raising the personal allowance, which will put up to £126 cash back in people's pockets.
ReplyDeleteThe need to tackle the huge deficit means we have had to take tough decisions, such as on tax credits. But we've taken those decisions in the fairest way possible, meaning more than 15 times as many people gain rather than lose from this week's changes."
A spokesman for Nick Clegg said that when the Coalition's £10,000 goal for the tax-free personal allowance is reached, low and middle earners would be £700 a year better off.
"Ben Bernake fancies himself as a student of the Great Depression," says renowned investment broker, global strategist, author, and Austrian economist Peter Schiff, "but... if he were my student he would have gotten an F."
ReplyDeleteDuring a lecture entitled "The Fed Unspun: The Other Side of the Story", Schiff responded to Bernake’s recent four-part college lecture series, rebutting many of the Federal Reserve Chairman's claims about the cause of the housing crisis, the role of the Federal Reserve, the value of the gold standard, and more.
Other Side Of The Story
How do you make the links in color (red)?
DeleteYour own links look black. Other people's links look red.
DeleteHere's the trick, which Melody mastered but Bob cannot.
Delete<a href="http://www.yourlink.com">Whatever you want to be blue goes here</a>
Thanks W but I got that part (scrolling your cursor over my links makes them blue). I think this is one of those "more than meets the eye" things. Black vs red you know.
DeleteOn this day in 1968, Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated at a hotel in Memphis, Tenn. He was 39 years old.
ReplyDeleteMoral of this story:
DeleteDon't bring skittles to a gun fight.
Why I Am now Divorced
ReplyDeleteLast week was my birthday and I didn't feel
very well waking up on that morning.
I went downstairs for breakfast
Hoping my husband would be pleasant and say,
'Happy Birthday!',
And possibly have a small present for me.
As it turned out,
He barely said good morning,
Let alone ' Happy Birthday.'
I thought.... Well, that's marriage for you,
But the kids.... They will remember.
My kids came bounding down stairs to breakfasts
And didn't say a word..
So when I left for the office,
I felt pretty low and somewhat despondent.
As I walked into my office,
My handsome Boss Rick, said,
'Good Morning, lady,
And by the way
Happy Birthday! '
It felt a little better
That at least someone had remembered.
I worked until one o'clock ,
When Rick knocked on my door
And said, 'You know,
It's such a beautiful day outside,
And it is your Birthday,
What do you say we go out to lunch,
Just you and me..'
I said, 'Thanks, Rick,
that's the greatest thing
I've heard all day. Let's go!'
We went to lunch.
But we didn't go where we normally would go.
He chose instead a quiet bistro
With a private table.
We had two martinis each
And I enjoyed the meal tremendously.
On the way back to the office,
Rick said, 'You know,
It's such a beautiful day...
We don't need to go straight back to the office,
Do We?'
I responded, 'I guess not.
What do you have in mind?'
He said, 'Let's drop by my place,
it's just around the corner.'
After arriving at his house,
Rick turned to me and said,
If you don't mind,
I'm going to step into the bedroom
For just a moment.
I'll be right back.'
'Ok.' I nervously replied.
He went into the bedroom and,
After a couple of minutes,
He came out
Carrying a huge birthday cake ...
Followed by my husband
My kids, and dozens of my friends
and co-workers, all singing 'Happy Birthday'.
And I just sat there....
On the couch....
Naked.
well fuck me.
DeleteHealthcare reform is critical to economic recovery, which is critical to everything else. The problems are fiscal, ideological and political.
ReplyDeleteThe fiscal part has been well defined but it is worth noting that the business community seems to have forgotten their complaints to government to fix health care because it was breaking them - whether unions or small shops or whatever. Vertical cost curve for at least a decade.
The ideological part is (borderline) subtle. The historic events of 2001 and 2008, coupled with exportation of the manufacturing job base as a third component, was a pretty healthy Strike one, two, three to this country. I do not *think* USA is *out* but neither are we in fighting form. The three strikes were either (a) responsible for or (b) tributary to the rise of ideological extremism in Washington. (Contrary to "popular opinion, the Tea Party was not spontaneous. The Occupy people never pretended to spontaneity.) Universal healthcare (and the idea of government as a promoter of the General Welfare) is the poster child for the ideological extremism that gripped Washington after the 2010 elections. The "Rollback FDR Crowd" is alive and kicking.
The political part is tightly correlated with the ideological part (!!) USA must demonstrate that the institutional structure of democracy (yes I know we are a republic) can resolve the deep divisions that animate the current campaign season. Absolutely nothing about this is new. What is new is that the "elite" have moved away from politics into business and finance. With unsurprising results.
Crony capitalism can be "narrated" in many ways. This is just one story in the Naked City of Modern Hubris.
The "Other" Anonymous
Four retired guys were walking down the street in Apache Junction AZ., when they saw a sign that said, "Old Timer's Bar" "All Drinks 10 Cents!"
ReplyDeleteThey looked at each other, then went in, thinking this is too good to be true.
The old bartender said in a voice that carried across the room, "Come on in and let me pour one for you! What'll it be, Gentlemen?"
All four asked for a martini.
In short order, the bartender served up four iced martinis, shaken, not stirred, and said, "That'll be 10 cents each, please."
The four men stared at the bartender for a moment, looked at each other, then paid the 40 cents. After the second round, which cost them under a dollar, their curiosity got the best of them. Finally, one of the men said, "How can you afford to serve martinis as good as these for only a dime?"
"Well, I'm a retired tailor from Boston, and I always wanted to own a bar. Last year I hit the lottery for $50 million and decided to open this place. Every drink costs a dime, wine, liquor, beer, all the same." "Wow, that's quite a story" said one of the men.
As they continued to sip their martinis, they noticed three guys at the end of the bar who didn't have a drink in front of them and hadn't ordered anything all the while they were there. One of the men asked the bartender, "What's with them, they're not drinking?"
"Oh, they're retired farmers, from a little town up in Washington State. They're waiting for happy hour at 5 o'clock, when drinks are half price."
Universal healthcare (and the idea of government as a promoter of the General Welfare) is the poster child for the ideological extremism that gripped Washington after the 2010 elections.
ReplyDeleteShould read ... The response to "universal healthcare etc etc
Please make your corrections and additions as a reply here. I would like to make it the next post.
Deletethank you,
Deuce
If you don't like someone that doesn't like the idea of death panels call them an extremist.
DeleteThat's it. Standing by the rest of it.
DeleteObama is so good at it, so smooth, so deep voiced, and he can shoot buckets, too, a guy like Ruf doesn't even feel the handcuffs going on.
DeleteHow about affirmative action in health care allocation? Based on race, not age. Got to make up for all those years of slavery and Jim Crow.
DeleteJohn Manning wrote: A new Economist/YouGov poll finds that just 11% of Republican voters would be excited if Mitt Romney became the party's presidential nominee.
ReplyDeleteIt's his turn. Just like it was Grampy McCain's turn last time.
62 percent of American Jewish voters want him to be reelected, according to a new poll from the Public Religion Research Institute.
ReplyDeleteDr. Josef Mengele could run for President and US Jews would vote for him, as long as he had a D after his name.
I should also add that there is a strategic advantage to giving the appearance of licking one's wounds.
ReplyDeleteSome analysts worry the effort could be tripped up by conservative elements who stand to lose if Myanmar opens more extensively to foreign competition. Past efforts to reform the financial sector, especially in the 1990s, petered out in large part because of military meddling.
ReplyDeleteThe biggest immediate test for the central bank will be how it handles its new foreign-exchange regime.
...
In the past, the government issued billions of dollars in bonds to fund its operations through the central bank. The goal now is to have state enterprises "stand on their own feet" by raising their own funds.
Excellent
ReplyDeleteHealthcare reform is critical to economic recovery, which is critical to everything else. The problems are fiscal, ideological and political.
The fiscal part has been well defined but it is worth noting that the business community seems to have forgotten their complaints to government to fix health care because it was breaking them - whether unions or small shops or whatever. Vertical cost curve for at least a decade.
The ideological part is (borderline) subtle. The historic events of 2001 and 2008, coupled with exportation of the manufacturing job base as a third component, was a pretty healthy Strike one, two, three to this country. I do not *think* USA is *out* but neither are we in fighting form. The three strikes were either (a) responsible for or (b) tributary to the rise of ideological extremism in Washington. (Contrary to "popular opinion, the Tea Party was not spontaneous. The Occupy people never pretended to spontaneity.) Universal healthcare (and the idea of government as a promoter of the General Welfare) is the poster child for the ideological extremism that gripped Washington after the 2010 elections. The "Rollback FDR Crowd" is alive and kicking.
The political part is tightly correlated with the ideological part (!!) USA must demonstrate that the institutional structure of democracy (yes I know we are a republic) can resolve the deep divisions that animate the current campaign season. Absolutely nothing about this is new. What is new is that the "elite" have moved away from politics into business and finance. With unsurprising results.
Crony capitalism can be "narrated" in many ways. This is just one story in the Naked City of Modern Hubris.
The "Other” Anonymous
This is a Paul Revere moment. The survival of you, your family and your nation is at stake, far more so than even on that April night in 1775. Exercise your rights of freedom of speech and democratic participation while you still have them, indeed, while you are still alive.
ReplyDeleteUnilateral Disarmament
xxxxx
WaspApr 4, 2012 05:43 PM
Here's the trick, which Melody mastered but Bob cannot.
Whatever you want to be blue goes here
I am working on it. Slowly. M is smarter than me.
Michelle Obama and her hog daughters stopped off in Las Vegas Thursday. They were irate when the Sands wouldn't give them $5000 in free chips. They must have been confused and thought they were back in the gold Palace at Versailles on another $200 million dollar vacation --care of the US taxpayer.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWasp, shame on you; leave the children out of this.
ReplyDelete