Win, or go home.

Anyone who's ever watched a football game, seen one team completely dominate the other in total offensive yardage, yet still lose the game, can understand why the current health care bill(s) being debated need to be fixed.

Most legislators, on the other side, understand the purpose of the game is to win - not both sides working together to rack up as many points for each other as they can.

I don't care what Harry Reid says, that the current legislation, as it's written, does a lot to fix what's broken. It does. A little. But too little. It is unacceptable in its current form. Agreeing to implement it is giving up.

"Gee, you guys played a pretty good first half, how about we call it a draw?"

If the other side cheats, uses sneaky, underhanded tricks to sway the game their way, you can't sit and cry that the ref didn't call it - you just have to play that much harder.

This isn't little league - both sides won't get trophies for just showing up. No one is going to congratulate you on game well-played, cheer you for scoring, no matter the outcome.

To my senators and congressmen: play well, or be traded next year.

2010 California Marriage Protection Act | Safeguarding marriage from the evils of divorce

2010 California Marriage Protection Act | Safeguarding marriage from the evils of divorce.

Best. Cause. Ever.

Seems some would like to choose from the scriptures like it was a buffet.

 

The Fed helps those who help themselves (to your money)

Why can we so readily approve giving away public funds (at a deficit, with no tax base to recover them) to banks and brokerage firms, but we have a hard time allocating money for regular Americans with genuine need?

I don't wish to debate the wisdom of helping the most wealthy out of a situation their own greed created, because they're "too big to fail." I believe business runs on access to available credit, and credit markets need to be relieved.

But if we all agree that the economy thrives when money changes hands, does it make better sense to bail out a corporation so they can cut their losses, bolster their profit, so stockholders have value in their holdings (emphasis on "holding"), or to give the money to people who will actually spend it?

I don't mean the stereotypically irresponsible things like flatscreens and Nintendo Wii's (I believe the huge corporate retail chains like Walmart will endure). But if instead of giving insurer AIG some $80 billion to keep them afloat, we floated some of those funds to people who've been most impacted by the economy, they could afford things - things like health insurance - and give companies that provide goods and services their much needed capital.

Now I'm going to speculate. (You may want to get your tinfoil hat.) Why can't we do this? You're still going to buy that flatscreen and latest-model iPod, aren't you? (if you're a good American, and do what you're told, you're going to go out and shop to help the economy.) But without available cash, you're going to buy them on credit. And for that, the banks make money, in the form of interest.

On the other hand, it's been shown that many people, with large consumer debt, given the funds would choose to lower their debit position. (e.g. pay off some of their credit cards.) This is good for consumers - it lowers their unsecured debt, lowers their interest payments, and gives them more funds to save, if only for that new iPod.

It is, however, bad news for a bank. It lowers their interest income and reduces their assets. Yes, the money you owe them is an asset. It is only "unsecured" to you, in that you don't have an asset (e.g. a house) to offset the debt. Recent changes in bankruptcy laws mean the bank will get its money, somehow. There is no risk that the poor, defenseless bank, who was only trying to help everyone it could by extending them all ridiculous amounts of credit, even to those evil cheats who lied about the stability of their employment, would get left twisting in the wind.

And if you don't get your own, personal infusion of bailout cash - if you can no longer pay your bills - even better for the bank. They now get to charge usury... I mean, the default interest rate, meaning it's going to cost you more money to not have any.

(You can take your hat off now. If the above made sense, then it was working.)

[the following text is stolen from TrueMajority.org]
The U.S. faces the most serious economic crisis since the Great Depression. Just how deep we go and how long the recession lasts depends upon how quickly we take steps to counter it.

The economy is hemorrhaging jobs at a frightful rate. For all of 2008, the economy lost a net total of 2.6 million jobs. That was the most since 1945, when nearly 2.8 million jobs were lost.
More than 300 of the country’s leading economists have called for immediate passage of a significant and broad-based jobs and economic recovery package.

A package must include investments in alternative energy technology to create millions of new jobs and generate billions in public revenue and tackle the issue of climate change and reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

We must also provide grants to state and local governments so that they will not be forced to raise taxes, layoff workers and cut services in the middle of a downturn.

Finally, we need investments in public infrastructure that will provide a crucial shot in the arm for the economy and create hundreds of thousands of good paying jobs to strengthen our middle class.

Commies are Pink, Herrings are Red; Republicans stink, you heard what I said

"Patriotism is supporting your country all of the time, and your government when it deserves it." - Samuel Clemens

Last week, Gov. Sarah Palin and Rep. Michele Bachmann accused progressives of not being "real Americans."

This week, conservatives have decided to brand progressives as "Communists," "Socialists," "Marxists" and "Redistributors" for supporting tax policies that help middle-class families.

We’ve had enough.

http://www.iamproamerica.com

We believe that in difficult times, it's been Progressive leadership that has put our country back on track.

We believe that we can rebuild our economy in a way that helps every American - not just the richest.

We believe that health care is a right, not a privilege.

We believe that we can build an education system that truly leaves no child behind.

We believe in the American Dream.

I am Pro-America. I am Progressive.

http://www.iamproamerica.com

Full of wit: if you can't think straight, then the terrorists have won

Richard Pryor said:
"Snakes make you run into trees. White people see a snake and go, 'snake!' (turns) POW! (face into outstretched hand)"

Please try to remember this when (that's right when) Bin Laden tries to get you to vote for McCain.

via BoingBoing

clipped from miscellanea.wellingtongrey.net With Barack Obama so far ahead in the polls some people are getting worried that this election cycle’s October surprise will be a terrorist attack. keep your brain running at all times. When you switch it off bad things happen.

Horton Hears Who's Voting

My son has a new favorite book: Horton Hears a Who. He wants to read from it every night before bed. It has supplanted previous bedtime staples such as Goodnight Moon, The Going to Bed Book, and I Love You Stinky Face.

He's just 2, and while he listens to the story, I wish I could fully explain to him what the story means: Get out and vote.

Among other things.

At its core, the story is about speaking up for yourself and making yourself heard, "no matter how small."

(It does not have anything to do with people who presume to call themselves "pro life." Anti-abortionists co-opted the "no matter how small" stanza, and only after Theodore "Dr. Seuss" Geisel threatened to sue, did they take it off their stationary - though they still chant it, in movie theaters, in between screaming anti-abortion slogans at children.)

For those of you who don't have toddlers, Horton is an elephant whose really big ears allow him to hear the plight of tiny, near microscopic people called Whos. As others react with depraved indifference, almost destroying their little village, Horton, who is the only one who can hear them, decides to become their protector.

Several antagonists feel it is not enough to ridicule Horton for talking to people they don't think exist, they put him in a cage and try to destroy the Whos (to prove they don't exist, apparently).

Does any of this sound familiar?

John McCain was once asked what he considered "rich." He said "How about $5 million?" He said he was joking, but does he really not consider $1 million wealthy? Are you merely average at $500K?

Here's my question: in McCain's world, is anyone earning under $180K/yr (over 95% of Americans) worth paying attention to? Does he hear you? Do you even exist (to him) if he doesn't?

What economic crisis? Guess what, John McCain is still rich. How about you? Have all your assets been "boiled in Beezle-nut oil?" I guess that proves you don't exist, either.

What difference would one vote make?

In the story, all the Whos are making as much noise as they can, to prove to a sour kangaroo that they're real - all except one. Only with that one extra, "YOPP!" does the kangaroo and the Wickersham monkey clan hear them, and agree to protect them as well.

There was a recent bill in the Senate (# S.3335) to extend tax breaks for alternative energy sources (the kind of tax breaks we currently give oil companies to go find more oil, because, you know, they need an incentive). That bill was defeated by one vote - just one more "yes" and it would've extended tax credits for wind, solar, geothermal, etc. Curiously, Senator John McCain was absent that day. What would his vote have been?

Most registered voters don't even show up to vote. It's extremely easy to get disenchanted. I've been there, myself. I didn't register to vote until my 20's, and it was years after that I cared enough about goings-on to cast another ballot.

I used to say, "what difference would one vote make?" My wife used to say that, too. And her sister, and the bulk of their family, and many people I know who are/were similarly minded. Mine is "just one vote," and together we are dozens of "just one votes." The hundreds and thousands of people in your district who're going to sit at home and have their favorite shows interrupted by election results on Nov. 4 are hundreds and thousands of "just one votes." The last two presidential elections were decided by a few hundred thousand people.

George Carlin had a great argument for not participating. He said that by voting you were buying into the illusion that you actually had a choice in what happens.

I still say that democracy is being allowed to vote on getting a sharp stick in the eye, but when you show up at the poll, the choices are Right or Left.

I still have issues with people who want to be in a position of power over me. There are very few politicians I'd choose to vote for. So, yes, showing up to vote is like asking for a less painful sharp stick in the eye.

I just can't stand idly by and watch people actively try to destroy the little dust speck I live on. I have to make sure the people in Who-ville are heard.