by Andy Borowitz on Huffington Post
Republizombie (re-PUB-li-zom-bee) (n)
1. Former GOP office-holder, now undead, unkillable; see Palin, S.; Cheney, D; Delay, T.; Armey, D.; Gingrich, N. A flesh-eater, the Republizombie counter-intuitively eats the flesh of other GOP; see 23rd Congressional District, NY.
2. Former relative of a former GOP office-holder, such as the former fiance of the daughter of a former Governor; like the other Republizombies, the second-tier Republizombie is seemingly ubiquitous, appearing on The Today Show, Tyra, and naked in Playgirl.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Candy's Latest
Spread out over the living room floor. Sunlight streaming through the glass door to the patio. Still unfinished, but getting there. Borders, binding and quilting still to go.
Monday, November 16, 2009
Experts have described the situation as the worst mass poisoning of a population in history
from Discover
It was a twisted cycle: In the 1970s, Bangladeshis used surface ponds or rivers to collect rainwater for drinking. But thanks to garbage dumping and sewage, that water became a breeding ground for disease. So UNICEF sought to fix the problem—the agency helped residents drill simple wells that drew water from a shallow aquifer. But this remedy became a tragedy. Bangladesh’s groundwater was laced with arsenic. Now, in a study in Nature Geoscience, a team from MIT has answered one of the outstanding pieces of the Bangladesh puzzle: Just how all that arsenic got into the water in the first place.
Bangladesh occupies the flood-prone delta of the river Ganges [New Scientist], and that river brought the arsenic to the region’s sediments. But why doesn’t it just stay in the sediments once it’s there? Back in 2002, another MIT team began to answer the question by showing that microbes digest organic carbon in the soil in such a way that frees up the arsenic, but they couldn’t say where that carbon itself came from until Rebecca Neumann and colleagues figured it out this year: man-made ponds left behind by excavations.
Read the rest in Discover after the click ...
My comment: How can "the worst mass poisoning of a population in history" escape the notice of the world press? Probably because Bangladesh doesn't have anything that anyone anywhere else in the world covets ... like oil or other minerals. Gotta have something that someone else wants if you want someone else to be interested in your plight. Otherwise, you're on your own ...
It was a twisted cycle: In the 1970s, Bangladeshis used surface ponds or rivers to collect rainwater for drinking. But thanks to garbage dumping and sewage, that water became a breeding ground for disease. So UNICEF sought to fix the problem—the agency helped residents drill simple wells that drew water from a shallow aquifer. But this remedy became a tragedy. Bangladesh’s groundwater was laced with arsenic. Now, in a study in Nature Geoscience, a team from MIT has answered one of the outstanding pieces of the Bangladesh puzzle: Just how all that arsenic got into the water in the first place.
Bangladesh occupies the flood-prone delta of the river Ganges [New Scientist], and that river brought the arsenic to the region’s sediments. But why doesn’t it just stay in the sediments once it’s there? Back in 2002, another MIT team began to answer the question by showing that microbes digest organic carbon in the soil in such a way that frees up the arsenic, but they couldn’t say where that carbon itself came from until Rebecca Neumann and colleagues figured it out this year: man-made ponds left behind by excavations.
Read the rest in Discover after the click ...
My comment: How can "the worst mass poisoning of a population in history" escape the notice of the world press? Probably because Bangladesh doesn't have anything that anyone anywhere else in the world covets ... like oil or other minerals. Gotta have something that someone else wants if you want someone else to be interested in your plight. Otherwise, you're on your own ...
Wednesday, November 04, 2009
Retire?
You can retire to Phoenix, Arizona where........
1. You are willing to park 3 blocks away because you found shade.
2.. You've experienced condensation on your butt from the hot water in the toilet bowl.
3. You can drive for 4 hours in one direction and never leave town.
4. You have over 100 recipes for Mexican food.
5. You know that "dry heat" is comparable to what hits you in the face when you open your oven door.
6. The 4 seasons are: tolerable, hot, really hot, and ARE YOU KIDDING ME??!!
You can retire to California where...
1. You make over $250,000 and you still can't afford to buy a house.
2. The fastest part of your commute is going down your driveway.
3. You know how to eat an artichoke.
4. You drive your rented Mercedes to your neighborhood block party..
5. When someone asks you how far something is, you tell them how long it will take to get there rather than how many miles away it is.
6. The 4 seasons are: Fire, Flood, Mud, and Drought.
You can retire to New York City where...
1. You say "the city" and expect everyone to know you mean Manhattan .....
2. You can get into a four-hour argument about how to get from Columbus Circleto Battery Park, but can't find Wisconsin on a map.
3. You think Central Park is "nature."
4. You believe that being able to swear at people in their own language makes you multi-lingual.
5. You've worn out a car horn. ( Ed note: if you have a car)
You can retire to Maine where...
1. You only have four spices: salt, pepper, ketchup, and Tabasco .
2. Halloween costumes fit over parkas.
3. You have more than one recipe for moose.
4. Sexy lingerie is anything flannel with less than eight buttons.
5. The four seasons are: winter, still winter, almost winter, and construction.
You can retire to the Deep South where...
1. You can rent a movie and buy bait in the same store.
2. "Y'all" is singular and "all y'all" is plural.
3. "He needed killin'" is a valid defense.
4. Everyone has 2 first names: Billy Bob, Jimmy Bob, Mary Sue, Betty Jean, Mary Beth, etc.
5. Everything is either "in yonder," "over yonder" or "out yonder." It's important to know the difference, too.
You can retire to Colorado where.....
1. You carry your $3,000 mountain bike atop your $500 car .
2. You tell your husband to pick up Granola on his way home and so he stops at the day care center.
3. A pass does not involve a football or dating.
4. The top of your head is bald, but you still have a pony tail.
You can retire to the Midwest where...
1. You've never met any celebrities, but the mayor knows your name.
2. Your idea of a traffic jam is ten cars waiting to pass a tractor.
3. You have had to switch from "heat" to "A/C" on the same day.
4. You end sentences with a preposition: "Where's my coat at? "
5. When asked how your trip was to any exotic place, you say, "It was different!"
OR You can retire to Florida where..
1. You eat dinner at 3:15 in the afternoon.
2. All purchases include a coupon of some kind -- even houses and cars.
3. Everyone can recommend an excellent dermatologist.
4. Road construction never ends anywhere in the state.
5. Cars in front of you often appear to be driven by headless people.
1. You are willing to park 3 blocks away because you found shade.
2.. You've experienced condensation on your butt from the hot water in the toilet bowl.
3. You can drive for 4 hours in one direction and never leave town.
4. You have over 100 recipes for Mexican food.
5. You know that "dry heat" is comparable to what hits you in the face when you open your oven door.
6. The 4 seasons are: tolerable, hot, really hot, and ARE YOU KIDDING ME??!!
You can retire to California where...
1. You make over $250,000 and you still can't afford to buy a house.
2. The fastest part of your commute is going down your driveway.
3. You know how to eat an artichoke.
4. You drive your rented Mercedes to your neighborhood block party..
5. When someone asks you how far something is, you tell them how long it will take to get there rather than how many miles away it is.
6. The 4 seasons are: Fire, Flood, Mud, and Drought.
You can retire to New York City where...
1. You say "the city" and expect everyone to know you mean Manhattan .....
2. You can get into a four-hour argument about how to get from Columbus Circleto Battery Park, but can't find Wisconsin on a map.
3. You think Central Park is "nature."
4. You believe that being able to swear at people in their own language makes you multi-lingual.
5. You've worn out a car horn. ( Ed note: if you have a car)
You can retire to Maine where...
1. You only have four spices: salt, pepper, ketchup, and Tabasco .
2. Halloween costumes fit over parkas.
3. You have more than one recipe for moose.
4. Sexy lingerie is anything flannel with less than eight buttons.
5. The four seasons are: winter, still winter, almost winter, and construction.
You can retire to the Deep South where...
1. You can rent a movie and buy bait in the same store.
2. "Y'all" is singular and "all y'all" is plural.
3. "He needed killin'" is a valid defense.
4. Everyone has 2 first names: Billy Bob, Jimmy Bob, Mary Sue, Betty Jean, Mary Beth, etc.
5. Everything is either "in yonder," "over yonder" or "out yonder." It's important to know the difference, too.
You can retire to Colorado where.....
1. You carry your $3,000 mountain bike atop your $500 car .
2. You tell your husband to pick up Granola on his way home and so he stops at the day care center.
3. A pass does not involve a football or dating.
4. The top of your head is bald, but you still have a pony tail.
You can retire to the Midwest where...
1. You've never met any celebrities, but the mayor knows your name.
2. Your idea of a traffic jam is ten cars waiting to pass a tractor.
3. You have had to switch from "heat" to "A/C" on the same day.
4. You end sentences with a preposition: "Where's my coat at? "
5. When asked how your trip was to any exotic place, you say, "It was different!"
OR You can retire to Florida where..
1. You eat dinner at 3:15 in the afternoon.
2. All purchases include a coupon of some kind -- even houses and cars.
3. Everyone can recommend an excellent dermatologist.
4. Road construction never ends anywhere in the state.
5. Cars in front of you often appear to be driven by headless people.
Tuesday, November 03, 2009
Republicans believe strongly in property rights
... unless the property happens to be yours:
Chris Christie Rips Off Monty Python, Risks Copyright Infringement
Jackson Brown v. John McCain
Heart to Sarah Palin: Quit Playing 'Barracuda'
Aerosmith to House GOP: Don't Use Our Song
Satire, Parody, and Copyright: Republican Govs Ape NYT’s Format netting a cease and desist order.
Dont' Worry, Be Happy: The song was used in George H. W. Bush's 1988 U.S. presidential election campaign until McFerrin, who was a Democrat, objected and the campaign desisted.
I guess it's always easier todefennd a lawsuit beg forgiveness than it is to ask for permission?
Chris Christie Rips Off Monty Python, Risks Copyright Infringement
Jackson Brown v. John McCain
Heart to Sarah Palin: Quit Playing 'Barracuda'
Aerosmith to House GOP: Don't Use Our Song
Satire, Parody, and Copyright: Republican Govs Ape NYT’s Format netting a cease and desist order.
Dont' Worry, Be Happy: The song was used in George H. W. Bush's 1988 U.S. presidential election campaign until McFerrin, who was a Democrat, objected and the campaign desisted.
I guess it's always easier to
Monday, November 02, 2009
FACT CHECK: GOP Math Suspect In Stimulus Debate
Beware the math. Some Republican lawmakers critical of President Barack Obama's stimulus package are using grade-school arithmetic to size up costs and consequences of all that spending. The math is satisfyingly simple but highly misleading.
It goes like this: Divide the stimulus money spent so far by the estimated number of jobs saved or created. That produces a rather frightening figure on how much money taxpayers are spending for each job.
On Friday, the White House released estimates that $160 billion in stimulus spending created or preserved 650,000 direct jobs.
By the critics' calculations, that's over $246,000 a job – and a terrible deal for taxpayers. Why spend nearly $250,000 to employ a highway worker or a teacher making a small fraction of that?
The reality is more complex.
First, the naysayers' calculations ignore the value of the work produced.
Any cost-per-job figure pays not just for the worker, but for material, supplies and that worker's output – a portion of a road paved, patients treated in a health clinic, goods shipped from a factory floor, railroad tracks laid.
Read the rest on Huffington Post after the click
My comment: During the 2008 Presidential campaign, then Republican candidate, John McCain, experienced a stunning moment of truth telling when he admitted that economics was not his strong suit. (Presumably"Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran" foreign policy is his strength.) Republican policies of deregulation on Wall Street, tax cuts for the rich and the off-shoring of American industry drove our economic buss into the ditch. Perhaps it's time for the whole right wing to admit that economics is just not their strong suit.
It goes like this: Divide the stimulus money spent so far by the estimated number of jobs saved or created. That produces a rather frightening figure on how much money taxpayers are spending for each job.
On Friday, the White House released estimates that $160 billion in stimulus spending created or preserved 650,000 direct jobs.
By the critics' calculations, that's over $246,000 a job – and a terrible deal for taxpayers. Why spend nearly $250,000 to employ a highway worker or a teacher making a small fraction of that?
The reality is more complex.
First, the naysayers' calculations ignore the value of the work produced.
Any cost-per-job figure pays not just for the worker, but for material, supplies and that worker's output – a portion of a road paved, patients treated in a health clinic, goods shipped from a factory floor, railroad tracks laid.
Read the rest on Huffington Post after the click
My comment: During the 2008 Presidential campaign, then Republican candidate, John McCain, experienced a stunning moment of truth telling when he admitted that economics was not his strong suit. (Presumably
Sunday, November 01, 2009
Warfare vs. Health Care: What Do Americans Value?
Actions speak louder than words, which means you can tell a lot more about what a person truly values by looking at what they do rather than merely at what they say. We can, though, also learn a lot by looking at a person's contradictions. No one is perfectly consistent, and while some inconsistencies may be due to outright hypocrisy, far more are likely due to blindness — probably a self-defense mechanism to prevent us from truly seeing how our real values may be pulling us in a direction different from what our professed values are.
I think we're seeing this in the contradictions between how people treat America's foreign wars versus how they treat domestic health care. The justifications being offered by conservatives and "moderates" for continuing wars in the Middle East are ignored when it comes to questions about providing domestic health care. So what are the real values which lie behind it all?
Read the rest after the click ...
I think we're seeing this in the contradictions between how people treat America's foreign wars versus how they treat domestic health care. The justifications being offered by conservatives and "moderates" for continuing wars in the Middle East are ignored when it comes to questions about providing domestic health care. So what are the real values which lie behind it all?
Read the rest after the click ...
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
The Yes Men Rule (A lesson in how the invisible hand of the market REALLY works)
The bottle looks beautiful. It sports an old-fashioned spring-top stopper. The red, diamond-shaped label features an elegant font. From a distance, the silhouetted landscape on the label looks exotic. It is, like all fine gourmet water, "bottled at source." Even the French name of the water suggests elegance: B'eau Pal.
But wait: B'eau Pal? That sounds rather familiar. You look at the label more carefully. The top of the label reads: "25 years of pollution." The picture on the label isn't an exotic location after all. It's...the Union Carbide plant in Bhopal, India that poisoned a half a million people and killed thousands back in 1984 when it accidentally released tons of methyl isocyanate.
B'eau Pal is the work of the Yes Men, the dynamic duo of disinformation. Five years ago, one of the pair, Andy Bichlbaum, appeared on BBC as a spokesman for Dow Chemical, which now owns Union Carbide, to announce that his company would provide $12 billion in medical care for the 120,000 victims of the Bhopal calamity and fully clean up the site. Dow lost $2 billion in market value in 20 minutes. That's how long it took before the hoax was exposed.
"We demonstrated what would happen if Dow did do the right thing in Bhopal," Bichlbaum told Foreign Policy In Focus (FPIF) senior analyst Mark Engler in Pranksters Fixing the World.
Read the rest after the click.
But wait: B'eau Pal? That sounds rather familiar. You look at the label more carefully. The top of the label reads: "25 years of pollution." The picture on the label isn't an exotic location after all. It's...the Union Carbide plant in Bhopal, India that poisoned a half a million people and killed thousands back in 1984 when it accidentally released tons of methyl isocyanate.
B'eau Pal is the work of the Yes Men, the dynamic duo of disinformation. Five years ago, one of the pair, Andy Bichlbaum, appeared on BBC as a spokesman for Dow Chemical, which now owns Union Carbide, to announce that his company would provide $12 billion in medical care for the 120,000 victims of the Bhopal calamity and fully clean up the site. Dow lost $2 billion in market value in 20 minutes. That's how long it took before the hoax was exposed.
"We demonstrated what would happen if Dow did do the right thing in Bhopal," Bichlbaum told Foreign Policy In Focus (FPIF) senior analyst Mark Engler in Pranksters Fixing the World.
Read the rest after the click.
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Anthony Weiner Points Out the Hypocrisy of Members of Congress on Medicare but Against the Public Option
Rep. Anthony Weiner’s (D-NY) office today released an internal study showing that 151 members of Congress “currently receive government-funded; government-administered single-payer health care — Medicare.” Of those 151 members, 55 are Republicans who also happen to be “steadfastly opposed [to] other Americans getting the public option, like the one they have chosen.”
Included on Weiner’s list are anti-public option crusaders Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ), Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), Sen. Orin Hatch (R-UT), Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL), Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY), Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC), and Rep. Peter King (R-NY).
From a C-SPAN interview:
My comment: You were elected to represent ... THE PEOPLE!
Included on Weiner’s list are anti-public option crusaders Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ), Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), Sen. Orin Hatch (R-UT), Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL), Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY), Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC), and Rep. Peter King (R-NY).
From a C-SPAN interview:
WEINER: Well it’s more kind of another way of looking at this debate, this discussion about the public option, to put it in focus. We went, just out of curiosity, looked at how many members of Congress get the public option. And I know a lot of people have said, “Well under the new bill, how many of you members of Congress would choose the public option?”
Well there already is one; it’s called Medicare. And we found that 55 Republicans and 151 members of Congress are on Medicare right now. So they’re already getting the same type of public option that we’d like people who are without insurance to be able to get. And I guess the purpose of this list was to kind of point out some of the hypocrisy of this debate.
You have members of Congress thumping their chest how they’re against government health care, against government control of health care, socialized medicine and yet when it’s time for them to accept Medicare, they’re like, ‘Sign me up!’
Source: Crooks and LiarsMy comment: You were elected to represent ... THE PEOPLE!
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Annual Car Show at St Gregory's
Hood Ornament from the 1930s.
I haven't seen that many gold ornaments/
Pontiac styling (found on a Firebird)
I think I'm getting better at this ...
Friday, October 16, 2009
Why do Republicans love them some rapists?
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Rape-Nuts | ||||
| ||||
Or catch the video HERE after the click ...
Competition? What do YOU mean by competition?
Everybody in the health care debate talks about it. Everybody in the health care debate says it’s a good thing. On the face of it, you’d think both sides agree but that’s not the case. Those who favor the “public option” say that it will create competition.. Those who oppose the “public option” say that the option will generate “unfair competition.”
What is missing from the discussion is the definition of “competition.” If you think about it for a moment you have to come to the conclusion that both sides of the argument are using different definitions of the word.
To the health insurance companies, “competition” means the pursuit of more profit dollars for its shareholders than the other insurance companies. Profit dollars are based on the ratio of income to expenses, as it is with any corporate entity. More income and fewer expenses yield greater profits.
On the other side of the issue are those who favor a “public option”. Their definition of “competition” is the pursuit of the best health care for the greatest number of American citizens.
The two definitions are at odds with each other. Greater profitability comes from lower expenses. Lower expenses don’t come from providing health care; they come from weeding out those who will most likely need health care because they are an expense and it means courting the people who are less likely to need health care because they represent more premium dollars and therefore greater income. Claims denial exists as a means of protecting profits. Caps on benefits are not designed to provide superior health care. They exist as a means to protect profitability. Pre-existing conditions are not about providing health care. They are totally about profit protection.
If health insurance companies were competing with each other to provide the best health care to the greatest number of people, we wouldn’t have a debate, but that’s not the case.
Unfair competition? A public option would certainly create unfair competition for profit dollars. Profits are not the point of the public option. But, would a public option create unfair competition in providing better health care for everyone? Not at all. There is no one currently in that end of the healthcare insurance business. There is no competition. Insurance companies would be forced to change their whole priorities structure, lowering the profit priority in favor of the priority of providing healthcare service … a far less profitable proposition.
The invisible hand of the market only works if we all define "competition" the same way. So, the question is, how do you define "competition"? What's your priority? Is your priority the best, most affordable health care for the greatest number of American citizens or is your priority the greatest profitability for healthcare insurance companies at the expense of actual healthcare?
What is missing from the discussion is the definition of “competition.” If you think about it for a moment you have to come to the conclusion that both sides of the argument are using different definitions of the word.
To the health insurance companies, “competition” means the pursuit of more profit dollars for its shareholders than the other insurance companies. Profit dollars are based on the ratio of income to expenses, as it is with any corporate entity. More income and fewer expenses yield greater profits.
On the other side of the issue are those who favor a “public option”. Their definition of “competition” is the pursuit of the best health care for the greatest number of American citizens.
The two definitions are at odds with each other. Greater profitability comes from lower expenses. Lower expenses don’t come from providing health care; they come from weeding out those who will most likely need health care because they are an expense and it means courting the people who are less likely to need health care because they represent more premium dollars and therefore greater income. Claims denial exists as a means of protecting profits. Caps on benefits are not designed to provide superior health care. They exist as a means to protect profitability. Pre-existing conditions are not about providing health care. They are totally about profit protection.
If health insurance companies were competing with each other to provide the best health care to the greatest number of people, we wouldn’t have a debate, but that’s not the case.
Unfair competition? A public option would certainly create unfair competition for profit dollars. Profits are not the point of the public option. But, would a public option create unfair competition in providing better health care for everyone? Not at all. There is no one currently in that end of the healthcare insurance business. There is no competition. Insurance companies would be forced to change their whole priorities structure, lowering the profit priority in favor of the priority of providing healthcare service … a far less profitable proposition.
The invisible hand of the market only works if we all define "competition" the same way. So, the question is, how do you define "competition"? What's your priority? Is your priority the best, most affordable health care for the greatest number of American citizens or is your priority the greatest profitability for healthcare insurance companies at the expense of actual healthcare?
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Rambling thoughts on passing
LP in California, whom I knew mostly through her brother some 50 years ago, wrote to tell me that BA had died of pancreatic cancer in Oregon. They'd been good friends and my mother's elementary school students many years ago. I didn't know BA except by name and the pride my mother had taken in the two of them. They'd stayed in contact with their old teacher and I guess I'm the only remaining contact point with those days and with Mrs. K, who died almost a decade ago.
When I was between marriages, Mary (Mrs. K) tried to hook me up with LP. It was a strange, surreal afternoon ... sitting on lawn chairs, under a tree at the house in Jamesville, drinking lemonade with my mother, my daughter and LP. We've written back and forth, now and then, since that afternoon.
When we are young we make friends and acquaintances faster than we loose them. But nature loves balance. There comes a time when we loose friends faster than we can make them.
I honestly don't know why LP thought I should know ... or even wanted to know that BA had died. I received the note from LP more than a week ago and I don't know how to answer it. She included a picture of my mother's class that she shared with BA.
Somehow "I'm sorry for your loss." seems so detached and impersonal.
When I was between marriages, Mary (Mrs. K) tried to hook me up with LP. It was a strange, surreal afternoon ... sitting on lawn chairs, under a tree at the house in Jamesville, drinking lemonade with my mother, my daughter and LP. We've written back and forth, now and then, since that afternoon.
When we are young we make friends and acquaintances faster than we loose them. But nature loves balance. There comes a time when we loose friends faster than we can make them.
I honestly don't know why LP thought I should know ... or even wanted to know that BA had died. I received the note from LP more than a week ago and I don't know how to answer it. She included a picture of my mother's class that she shared with BA.
Somehow "I'm sorry for your loss." seems so detached and impersonal.
Friday, October 09, 2009
Alan Grayson sums it up nicely ...
October 08, 2009 C-SPAN. Rep. Alan Grayson had a few words for both Democrats and Republicans on health care reform.
Grayson: Maddam Speaker I have words for both Democrats and Republicans tonight. Let's start with the Democrats. We as a party have spent the last six months-- the greatest minds of our party dwelling on the question, the unbelievably consuming question of how to get Olympia Snowe to vote for health care reform. I want to remind us all... Olympia Snowe was not elected president last year. Olympia Snowe has no veto power in the Senate. Olympia Snowe represents a state with one half of one percent of America's population.
What America wants is health care reform. America doesn't care if it gets fifty one votes in the Senate or sixty votes in the Senate, or eighty three votes in the Senate-- in fact America doesn't even care about that. It doesn't care about that at all.
What America cares about is this. There are over one million Americans who go broke every single year trying to pay their health care bill. America cares a lot about that. America cares about the fact that there are forty four thousand seven hundred eighty Americans who die every single year on account of not having health care. That's a hundred and twenty two every day. America sure cares a lot about that.
America cares about the fact that if you have a pre-existing condition even if you have health insurance, it's not covered. America cares about that a lot. America cares about the fact that you can get all the health care you need as long as you don't need any. America cares about that a lot.
But America does not care about procedures, processes, personalities-- America doesn't care about that at all. So we have to remember that as Democrats. We have to remember that's what's at stake here is life and death, enormous amounts of money and people are counting upon us to move ahead. America understands what's good for America.
America cares about health care. America cares about jobs. America cares about education, about energy independence. America does not care about process or politicians, or personalities or anything like that.
And I have a few words for my Republican friends as well. I guess I do have some Republican friends. Let me say this. Last week I held up this report here and I pointed out that in America there's forty four thousand seven hundred eighty nine Americans who die every year according to this Harvard report-- published in a peer reviewed journal-- because they have no health insurance.
That's an extra forty four thousand seven hundred eighty nine Americans who die, whose lives could be saved-- and their response was to ask me for an apology... to ask me for an apology. That's right... to ask me for an apology. Well, I'm telling you this-- I will not apologize. I will not apologize.
I will not apologize for a simple reason. America doesn't care about your feelings. I violated no rules by calling this report to America's attention. I think a lot of people didn't know about it before hand.
But America does care about health care in America and if you're against it, then get out of the way. Just get out of the way. You can lead. You can follow-- or you can get out of the way. And I'm telling you now to get out of the way.
America understands that there's one party in this country that's in favor of health care reform and one party that's against it and they know why.
They understand if Barack Obama were somehow able to cure hunger in the world, the Republicans would blame him for over-population.
They understand that if Barack obama could somehow bring about world peace, they'd blame him for destroying the defense industry.
In fact they understand that if Barack Obama has a BLT sandwich tomorrow for lunch, they will try to ban bacon.
But that's what America wants. America wants solutions to its problems and that begins with health care. And that's what I'm speaking for tonight.
Grayson: Maddam Speaker I have words for both Democrats and Republicans tonight. Let's start with the Democrats. We as a party have spent the last six months-- the greatest minds of our party dwelling on the question, the unbelievably consuming question of how to get Olympia Snowe to vote for health care reform. I want to remind us all... Olympia Snowe was not elected president last year. Olympia Snowe has no veto power in the Senate. Olympia Snowe represents a state with one half of one percent of America's population.
What America wants is health care reform. America doesn't care if it gets fifty one votes in the Senate or sixty votes in the Senate, or eighty three votes in the Senate-- in fact America doesn't even care about that. It doesn't care about that at all.
What America cares about is this. There are over one million Americans who go broke every single year trying to pay their health care bill. America cares a lot about that. America cares about the fact that there are forty four thousand seven hundred eighty Americans who die every single year on account of not having health care. That's a hundred and twenty two every day. America sure cares a lot about that.
America cares about the fact that if you have a pre-existing condition even if you have health insurance, it's not covered. America cares about that a lot. America cares about the fact that you can get all the health care you need as long as you don't need any. America cares about that a lot.
But America does not care about procedures, processes, personalities-- America doesn't care about that at all. So we have to remember that as Democrats. We have to remember that's what's at stake here is life and death, enormous amounts of money and people are counting upon us to move ahead. America understands what's good for America.
America cares about health care. America cares about jobs. America cares about education, about energy independence. America does not care about process or politicians, or personalities or anything like that.
And I have a few words for my Republican friends as well. I guess I do have some Republican friends. Let me say this. Last week I held up this report here and I pointed out that in America there's forty four thousand seven hundred eighty nine Americans who die every year according to this Harvard report-- published in a peer reviewed journal-- because they have no health insurance.
That's an extra forty four thousand seven hundred eighty nine Americans who die, whose lives could be saved-- and their response was to ask me for an apology... to ask me for an apology. That's right... to ask me for an apology. Well, I'm telling you this-- I will not apologize. I will not apologize.
I will not apologize for a simple reason. America doesn't care about your feelings. I violated no rules by calling this report to America's attention. I think a lot of people didn't know about it before hand.
But America does care about health care in America and if you're against it, then get out of the way. Just get out of the way. You can lead. You can follow-- or you can get out of the way. And I'm telling you now to get out of the way.
America understands that there's one party in this country that's in favor of health care reform and one party that's against it and they know why.
They understand if Barack Obama were somehow able to cure hunger in the world, the Republicans would blame him for over-population.
They understand that if Barack obama could somehow bring about world peace, they'd blame him for destroying the defense industry.
In fact they understand that if Barack Obama has a BLT sandwich tomorrow for lunch, they will try to ban bacon.
But that's what America wants. America wants solutions to its problems and that begins with health care. And that's what I'm speaking for tonight.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)