Deep Something » Politics

BP Off the Hook for Oil Spill-WorldNet Daily Says it was God

John — Sun, 27 Jun 2010 14:23:52 +0000

Yes, that’s right folks. I knew it would be just a matter of time, but the tea bagger crazies are now claiming the oil spill in the Gulf was caused by God.

So why would you say God would blow up an oil drilling platform off the Louisiana coast? Well, Katrina was because of those devil worshiping, gays down in New Orleans, so you might think this was because the people down there keep electing prostitution supporter, diaper wearing David Vitter, but you would be wrong.

Turns out, it’s all Obama’s fault. I’m sure that comes as a surprise to you, because it certainly couldn’t have anything to do with the Cheney/Bush cabal eliminating all regulatory control. So what did Obama do you might ask. Well I’ll tell you. Follow me here, it’s a little complicated, and has a lot to do with the Jewish Lunar Calendar. Seems Israel celebrated it’s Independence Day on April 19. Then Fox News reported on the evening of the 19th that the Obama Administration had announced the U.S. would no longer automatically stand with Israel in every United Nations Security Council decision. (You know, maybe because Israel keeps bulldozing people’s homes for no good reason, and killing people on humanitarian missions. God certainly can’t put up with that.)

Then, as we all know, it was April 20th that the well blew up.

You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video

Crazies out in Force Friday

John — Sat, 26 Jun 2010 16:57:27 +0000

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-1st TX) speaking on the floor about the terrorists babies coming to destroy our way of life. He reports a conversation with an un-named “retired” FBI agent who claimed terrorists were gaming our system by sneaking in pregnant women to have their babies here, then taking them back (and they don’t even have to pay anything for the babies) and raising them in the “terrorist way of life,” so they can send them back in 20-30 years to destroy our way of life.

I can only hope (but I doubt) that other Republicans think to themselves, “Oh shit Gohmert is speaking again.”

You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video

Louie, the only thing stupid we are doing is continuing to elect people like you to public office.

DADT Letter to Rep. Todd Akin (R-MI)

John — Thu, 27 May 2010 21:58:54 +0000

Hon. Todd Akin
United States House of Representatives
117 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Congressman Akin:

No sir, I’m not in your district, but I’m done. My mother did not raise me to sit in the back of the bus, and I’m sick and tired of you politicians using me and my life for political gain.

In a floor speech today concerning the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell you stated, “Is this the sort of thing that George Washington or our founders would be proud of…” First off sir, you don’t know…Maybe President Washington would be proud that America was beginning to break down the last of her bigoted policies. Given history as a guide, something you appear clueless about, he might actually think it’s not a bad idea, given that America may very well owe our victory over the British to a gay man.

Major General Friedrich Wilhelm von Steuben of the Continental Army, Prussian aristocrat and military officer who served as inspector general and Major general of the Continental Army during the American Revolutionary War was a gay man. He came to America because his sexual orientation had limited his further advance in the Prussian Army. He is credited with teaching the Continental Army the essentials of military drill and discipline, and helping to guide it to victory. He wrote the Revolutionary War Drill Manual that became the standard United States drill manual until the War of 1812, and served as General George Washington’s chief of staff in the final years of the war.

So sir, President Washington just might think you to be on the wrong side of history. You are certainly on the wrong side of Christian morality and the wrong side of the founding principles of this country……equality for all.

It is time for you and those of you ilk to quit the pandering, to quit using the lives of other good Americans both in and out of the service to your ends, and time to do what is right for the people of this country…all of them.

Don’t Drunk Dial Freedom Works

John — Wed, 19 May 2010 15:17:28 +0000

D. C. Douglas lost his gig as the voice-over announcer for Geico commercials after leaving a rather nasty message on the voice mail for the Teabagger group known as FreedomWorks. This is a hilarious satirical video about their reaction to his message, and calls out the Teabagger for what it actually is…an astro-turf, Koch Industry’s funded front group which has managed to get people to vote against their own best interests in support of big corporations.

Unfortunately, it seems people will fall for anything if it includes going after progressives and the President. As Douglas says, “Tweaking the nipple of hypocrites in power can be dangerous and lead to blacklisting. Please, don’t drunk dial FreedomWorks!”

You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video

New Poll at Deep Something-The 60 Vote Requirement

John — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 21:28:50 +0000

As most of you know, the United States Senate has a cloture rule which requires at least 60 votes to end debate to then vote up or down on the bill itself. It is important to note that the Constitution says nothing about the rules of the Senate, and does not require such a super-majority. The Constitution speaks only to a requirement for such super-majority votes in a few very specific processes, such as amending the Constitution. This is merely a procedure adopted by the Senate itself.

Many times during the Cheney/Bush regime, the Republicans, while in the majority, could not always get the needed 60 votes. Often they threatened the “nuclear option” meaning they’d have a vote to do away with the Senate procedure requiring the cloture vote. Now that the Republicans are no longer in the majority, and the Democrats are attempting to pass legislation by circumventing the requirement, Rethuglicans are all up in arms claiming its some sort of attempt to short-circuit democracy (which I thought had “majority rule” as one of its precepts).

Senators are no longer required to stay on the floor of the Senate speaking to hold the floor in a true filibuster (ala “Mr. Smith Goes To Washington”). Given that, should the rule be modified to require a lower threshold for cloture, or eliminated all together? Tell us what you think in our poll.

Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.

Would Health Care Reform Help You?

Barbara O'Brien — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 23:29:14 +0000

Guest Post: I am thrilled and honored to have a guest post today from Barbara O’Brien. Barbara’s blogging at The Mahablog, Crooks and Liars, AlterNet, and elsewhere on the progressive political and health blogophere has earned her the notoriety of being a panelist at the Yearly Kos Convention and a featured guest blogger at the Take Back America Conference in Washington, DC. I read The Mahablog daily, and am always interested in the thoughtful and provocative posts there, so we are very excited here at Deep Something to have our very first guest post, and we couldn’t be more excited that it’s Barbara.

Many obstacles and stumbling blocks remain in the way of health care reform. The House and Senate bills will have to be merged, and then the House and Senate both will vote on the final bill. We don’t yet know what will be in the final bill, or if the final bill will be passed into law. Passage will be especially difficult in the Senate, where it will need 60 votes to pass. It is still possible that after all this angst, just one grandstanding senator could kill the whole thing.

But just for fun, let’s look at what conventional wisdom says will be in the final bill and see if there is anything in it that will be an immediate benefit to people with mesothelioma cancer and other asbestos-related disease.

It is likely that the final bill will provide additional funding for state high-risk insurance pools. Currently more than 30 states run such pools, which are nonprofit, state-sponsored health insurance plans for people who can’t buy insurance because of pre-existing conditions. The biggest problem with such pools is that, often, the insurance they offer is too expensive for many who might need it. Both the Senate and House bills provide $5 billion in subsidies for state high-risk pools to make the insurance more affordable.

Under the Senate bill, beginning in 2014, private companies would no longer be able to deny coverage to adults with pre-existing conditions, nor could they charge higher premiums for people with pre-existing conditions. Until then, the state high-risk pools could provide some help.

Closing the Medicare Part D coverage gap — also called the “doughnut hole” — is another potential provision that could help some patients with asbestos-related disease. The “doughnut hole” is the gap between the coverage for yearly out-of-pocket expenses provided by Medicare Part D and Medicare’s “catastrophic coverage” threshold.

For example, in 2009 Medicare Part D paid at least 75 percent of what patients paid for prescription drugs up to $2,700. After that, patients must pay for all of their prescription medications until what they have paid exceeds $6,154. At that point, the catastrophic coverage takes over, and Medicare pays for all but 5 percent of the patient’s drug bills. The final health care reform bill probably will provide for paying at least 50 percent of out-of-pocket costs in the doughnut hole.

You may have heard the bills include budget cuts to the Medicare program, and this has been a big concern to many people. Proponents of the bill insist that savings can be found to pay for the cuts, and that people who depend on Medicare won’t face reduced services. But this is a complex issue that I want to address in a later post.

The long-term provisions probably will include many other provisions that would benefit patients with asbestos-related disease, including increased funding for medical research. Although there are many complaints about the bill coming from all parts of the political spectrum, on the whole it would be a huge benefit to many people.

The BS on Reconciliation

John — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 19:45:39 +0000

Below is a youtube of a segment from Meet The Press this past Sunday in which E. J. Dionne calls out Sen. Orrin Hatch for the Republican’s continuing bullshit about the use of reconciliation to pass things based on a simple majority vote in the Senate. We need to be discussing policy and health insurance reform (or elimination), but instead, all the Republicans can come up with to try to “win” is to run around like Chicken Little complaining that the sky will fall if some Senate procedure is “out-procedured.”

Misdirection on the Polls.

At one point during the interview Hatch claims the polls show that 58% of Americans don’t like the reform bill, “and only a few like it.” Well, sounds me to as if 42% must like it…that’s not just “a few.” In addition, while there is one poll with that result, others show a majority favoring reform, and when the provisions of the Bill are explained to people, they actually like the provisions in the bill. Funny how that works.

The host puts up portions of a Hatch statement in which he says things like:

“would be unprecedented in scope,” - BS meter high-turns out the Republicans used reconciliation to pass the Bush the tax cuts which added $1.7 trillion to our federal deficit. I realize in Congress they don’t have much of a concept of money, but $1.7 trillion to me is pretty unprecedented in scope.
“the havoc wrought would threaten our system of checks and balances” - BS meter through the roof-the system of checks and balances is based on three equal branches of government, each have a check on the other two. What procedures Congress decides to use in how it how it acts on legislation has nothing to do with “checks and balances.”
“corrode the legislative system” – BS meter headed to low earth orbit-lest we all forget (which the Republicans are counting on) there is NOTHING, nada, zilch, zero, in the Constitution about the Senate requiring a sixty vote majority to pass normal legislation. The Constitution does require certain super-majorities in very special situations, but not for passing every-day legislation. This magical sixty vote thing is purely a creation of the Senate, and for those who argue about majority rule, this “super-majority” requirement would seem to fly in the face of that.
“degrade our system of government” -BS meter now on an inter-planetary trajectory-A sitting member of the most corrupt Senate (and government in general) has the temerity to talk about “degrading our system of government?” This is the system has not created a system of state sponsored torture, taken us into a war of aggression against a country that had done nothing to us, has shredded the Constitution with the so called PATRIOT Act. Senator, “have you no shame?”

You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video

I just can’t fathom how these people can sit there and lie with a totally straight face. I am convinced they could not and would not tell the truth if that actually favored them.

AIG Executives Say They’ll Quit

John — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 01:59:45 +0000

The New York Times has a Reuters report that five AIG executives wrote letters on December 1 stating they may quit if their salary and bonuses are cut.The senior executives at American International Group told the insurer last week they may quit if their compensation was cut significantly by the U.S. pay czar, the Wall Street Journal reported on Sunday. Now it seems that two of them changed their minds over the weekend. I’m guessing they figured out that they just might have their bluff called.

The new CEO of AIG, Robert Benmosche smiles during an interview with Reuters in the garden of his Adriatic seafront villa in Dubrovnik, Croatia

You know, these are the same braniacs that got the company into that mess.Why they still have their jobs is beyond me. They screwed up to the tune of billions of dollars, and still feel entitled to eight figure salaries.

I think this would fall under the auspices of that grand old southern phrase, “Well bless their hearts.”

New York Gay Marriage: Diane Savino’s excellent testimony

John — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 19:40:05 +0000

Although defeated because of eight regressive Democrats in the New York State Senate, straight Senator Diane Savino gives one of the finest floor speeches I’ve ever heard, and does an outstanding job of making the case for the importance of equality for all. This is a must watch.

You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video

Broken Wrist a Pre-existing Condition

John — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 21:10:05 +0000

And I continue to ask the question, how is it people believe that private companies provide better health care insurance. Below is the story of a lady who fell and broke her wrist. She’d been covered by the same insurance company for years. They first denied the claim…and the reason given by the insurance company…because it’s not covered because it was a pre-existing condition.

Not too surprisingly, the story is about the suspicion of many that insurance companies simply deny claims, and are slow to respond to challenges knowing some people won’t challenge the denials, and others will give up. There is NO suspicion in my mind about this. I have the records to prove it.

On every single dental claim I’ve ever filed, the insurance company has initially denied the single most expensive item on the bill. When challenged, they always pay the item, so it’s clear they know they are supposed to pay them, they just hope, as a matter of policy, that if they deny claims, some percentage of people won’t challenge them. That was the case with the lady in story. When challenged, they paid. I don’t believe for a minute they did it just to make her go away, they knew they were contractually obligated to pay it as a covered expense. I wonder why no lawyer has ever sought a class-action lawsuit against insurance companies for breech of contract?

In some cases, the reason for their denial has been that the dentist used the wrong Code for the procedure. Funny thing about that though, when I asked them what would be the correct code, they always answer with, “Well we don’t know that, it’s just that this one is the wrong one.” I finally explained that I watched my dentist run his finger down the list of the ADA codes, so I had to assume they had a different list of codes. At first, they told me they didn’t have different codes, and only used the ADA codes. So I asked them to send me a copy of their codes…to which they responded that they couldn’t because, “that would be giving out confidential company information.”

So let’s be sure I summarize this for the proponents of private insurers. They claim they use standard published ADA codes which I can get from the American Dental Association, but they can’t provide their version of that list because it is confidential corporate information. The Ombudsman for the Virginia Insurance Department says otherwise, and I finally got the list. Once I did, amazingly, they no longer used that as a reason for denying claims.

So what was the next excuse. Well it was a whopper. After having some emergency dental work done in Boston while on a business trip, they denied the claim because the name and address of the provider wasn’t on the claim form. It should be noted, I called them to be sure I was using the correct and current claim form (as they had been purchased by United Healthcare), but there was no place on their claim form that asked for the provider information. I pointed this out, but pointed out that it was on the bill from the Dentist, and they obviously had it, as it was printed on the explanation of benefits (EOB) they had sent.

Denial Code #2, the lady wasn’t sure what it meant, and said that sometimes, if they didn’t have an exact code, they would use just any code…so help me God, that was what she said. She couldn’t explain how we’d ever resolve the situation if the insurance company itself wasn’t sure of the reason for the denial.

Denial Code #3, they were insisting that the I provide them a copy of the Dentist’s license. The Dentist laughed at that, explained he got checks daily from United Health care, and had never provided a “copy” of his license. I checked with two other dentists, and they’d never been asked for such a thing either. In fact, the dentist I go to here in Tampa is not in their network or any other network, and I’ve never been asked to provide his license, but of course I was going to him back when they were still using the “wrong code” dodge.

I explained to the lady that it was silly, since even if his license was revoked or suspended, no State sent out “license police” to collect the licenses, and asked her if she’d ever heard of Photoshop, and explained I could probably create a license for the guy in about 10 minutes. I told her to look on-line for Massachusetts, and find their public listing of licensed professionals. She said they had a team of people that did just that. I never pressed the issue about why, if that were the case, why were they asking me for the information. She called back two days later to tell me that their people couldn’t find such a website or listing for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, so while I had her on the line, I found it. They refused to reimburse me for my time doing their research.

So this story comes as no surprise, but people continue to believe that somehow private companies have your best interests at heart when it comes to taking care of your health. Please…get real.

And now, finally, some on the conservative right come forward, and tell us the real reasons we can’t have government run insurance (not health care, but insurance to pay for health care). First David Brooks writes in an op-ed in the New York Times opposing a public health insurance option. Brooks’ opposition is based on the fact that it wouldn’t bring to the problem any efficiencies (because, you know, private health insurance companies make the healthcare system so efficient), but his article admits:

The authors of these bills have tried to foster efficiencies. The Senate bill would initiate several interesting experiments designed to make the system more effective — giving doctors incentives to collaborate, rewarding hospitals that provide quality care at lower cost. It’s possible that some of these experiments will bloom into potent systemic reforms.

But the real reason, as it comes out in a later paragraph is, “Reform would make us a more decent society…,” and of course we can’t have that.

Havard economics professor Greg Mankiw agrees with Brooks, and offers this explanation as to why we can’t have any reform of the current healthcare insurance system:

Put simply, the health care reform bill would make the United States more like western Europe. That may mean more security about health care, but it also means that future generations of Americans will likely spend more time enjoying leisure.

So let me sum up the position of this Harvard (are your serious?) Professor. In order to get more security about healthcare, the trade-off will mean that our children get to enjoy more leisure time. Please don’t throw me into that briar patch.

Now those are definitely some good reasons to get behind for opposing health care insurance reform…ghess. Really, who could possibly want average Americans to enjoy more leisure time, and we sure as hell can’t go around building a more decent society. What was I thinking!

Deep Something » Politics

BP Off the Hook for Oil Spill-WorldNet Daily Says it was God

Related posts

Crazies out in Force Friday

Related posts

DADT Letter to Rep. Todd Akin (R-MI)

Related posts

Don’t Drunk Dial Freedom Works

Related posts

New Poll at Deep Something-The 60 Vote Requirement

Related posts

Would Health Care Reform Help You?

Related posts

The BS on Reconciliation

Related posts

AIG Executives Say They’ll Quit

Related posts

New York Gay Marriage: Diane Savino’s excellent testimony

Related posts

Broken Wrist a Pre-existing Condition

Related posts