Jack & Jill Politics

poor thing. i hope he swam well. he was probably mortified.

Yall had me looking at man butt man. I thought it was a chic at 1st. Yall could have kept this one for real. Yall lost cool points with me. I'm about to find me a new black political blog. I'm getting tired of yall bourgeois niggas.

He (or she) is bummed.

I think I like Tamron Hall with Donny Duetch vs. David Schuster because Tamron and Donny rarely agree where as Tamron and David come across as buddies and rarely disagree. I think disagreement challenges both of them and makes for a better (or actual debate) and it showcases her strengths.

They were really going @ it, weren't they?

I agree with you. I was watching those two last week. They're probably about the same age ...... yadda, yadda ..... but they are comfy together, whereas Donny - Donny.

Cute booty cheeks...glad to 2nd thread is up...been looking at booty butt too long.

ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!

What? What's up, Myth? Is something wrong? LOL

Yu'll are SICK! I tell ya..... staring at those sweet lil .... what if his mother tunes in?

Arm the Senate!

By E.J. Dionne Jr.
Monday, July 27, 2009

Isn't it time to dismantle the metal detectors, send the guards at the doors away and allow Americans to exercise their Second Amendment rights by being free to carry their firearms into the nation's Capitol?
Read More
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar...

SECOND AFTERNOON OPEN THREAD IS UP

Rep. Maxine Waters on health care and the public option

Maxine Waters unequivocally says there will be no support by Progressives for any health care plan that does not have a public option in it. She notes that the Democrats have already compromised - and that was not pushing for single-payer and letting a public option be included.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpIV7nR5yk8

Tell'em Maxine; they better RECOGNIZE!

Fox & Friends Terrify Elderly Viewers With Health Care Reform
Accuses Obama of suggesting euthanasia for the elderly vs surgery.

Dumb sick fuckers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VijkhE1E5-E

Fear mongering has been well exercised in the Fox camp over the years.

Am I the only one getting ready to give Dr. Conrad Murray some empathy?

You know I looooovvee me some Michael Jackson, BUT, Ima have to come to the brother's defense. I know we need a scapegoat, BUT Michael Jackson was addicted and willing to pay $150k a month for his drugs of choice. I can see taking his medical license BUT do all black men have to go to jail for all unintentional transgressions.

I know the Jackson family will want Dr. Murray to go down, but the MSM white girl hour on MSNBC is enjoying denigrating this man a little bit too much for me.

Waht chall thank?

Note to all doctors, maids, lawyers and other people who are in constant contact with celebrities, no about of money is worth being a drug giver/mule to any celebrity. Does any one know what happened to Rush Limbaugh maid, that got his drugs for him?

well...here's what i thank (lol): somebody has to 'pay' for michael's death. the jackson family wants to wash themselves clean of any responsibility (michael never abused drugs, joe never abused his children, katherine never looked the other way, the siblings never envied/teased/freeloaded/disregarded).

so dr. murray (sloppy and unprofessional as he decidedly was) will be the one to pay and make this whole thing look like a neat, tidy situation.

I have no sympathy. If MJ was willing to pay $150K a month for heroin is his dealer innocent for providing it? The dealer may not go down for manslaughter but he is going down for dealing drugs. At the very least this doctor provided an illegal drug in large amounts to a user for no real medical reason. Same difference. Put his ass in jail. I don't care what color he is.

If Dr. Murray did not give MJ the shit, you must acquit.

If, however, what is alleged came to pass, fry his ass.

True nuff. LOL!

Oh well, Murray getting ready to loose his "black card"

for sleeping on the job (LOL)

PJ...that is the difference here, a drug deal is supplying ILLEGAL drugs...Murray was prescribing LEGAL drugs. There was nothing ILLEGAL about Murray's actions. He may be medically negligent but not ILLEGAL. We do not need to throw folks in jail that are not a threat to society.

Medical negligence is illegal or at least a breach of legal duty to care.

As far as the legality of the drug, if there is no reason for him to have the drug then it is illegal for it to be prescribed. If it wasn't any doctor could supply any drug to anybody at any time with no repercussions. What would stop a doctor from handing out Oxycitin to everyone for a few dollars? Selling drugs to the highest bidder is not legal and it is not ethical and as a doctor he should have known that. My guess is he weighed the risk/reward and decided to roll the dice. In this case he crapped out.

PJ,
This comes down to standards of care.
How can anyone prove what he needed? Every single drug on the market can be prescribed by a medically licensed physician. Was Conrad, engaging in a pill factory? Did he write prescriptions for the use? Doubtful, as the local pharmacy would not stock the powerful sedative. Or was he treating a patient with reasonable care? Negligence goes to lack of monitoring. Not prescribing, in this instance.

LOL - NOT a threat to society LOL

I wouldn't want him to come at me with that syringe. Incompetency profiling kicking in next.

Nope, I have empathy too.

It is clear manslaughter. I understand what happened to Murray. He was most likely not the only one supplying drugs to MJ and had no way of knowing what all was on board. MJ was getting drugs from multiple sources and unless Murray was the sole source..he should not lose his license.

I mean they have stated MJ had a 100K dollar monthly drug bill at the pharmacy.

But none of the other docs MJ employed let him die? How many other docs had Mike let live under his roof? Who was "taking him down and bringing him up" all those years he was banished to Bahrain. I don't think MJ JUST became an anesthia addict. So Murray is betwixt a rock and a real hard place. Look, he was getting mega doses of many kinds of Mary Janes but NOBODY had ever kilt him. That Murray's issue. So, we might have to toughen up and swallow hard, cause the black incompetency stereotype rule is getting ready to kick in. I feel sorry for the brother for not being on top of the game he was paid well to play.

"But none of the other docs MJ employed let him die?"

LET? c'mon

"I don't think MJ JUST became an anesthia addict"

I agree. It has been speculated that he became addicted following his 2nd/3rd degree scalp burns, that he needed skin grafts for. That is a LOT of pain. Which if, the use of this IV anesthetic dates back over 20 years...it is safe to say daily use, would take a toll on his cardio-respiratory system as well.

Nothing here points to incompetency on the part of Murray. Negilence yes, incompetence no. Recall, they also said there were tanks of Oxygen in the residence along with 50 more tanks in a storage unit on site.

What I don't understand is why they did not have a ventilation machine on site, as well as respiratory/cardiac monitors, with all the money Mike had.

On the other hand, if MJ stopped breathing in his sleep, Murray would not know that until he came to get him up!!

The monitors would have alerted them to a CODE BLUE.

Lack of monitors and a 24hr nurse to monitor is negligence given all the warnings on the label.

The story is that MJ used the anesthesia like an alarm clock..enough on board to allow him to wake up when he wanted to.

Which is the negilence...who was monitoring.

Where do I start...

Yeah "LET"! Where the hell was Murray all night? When they interviewed the other anesthesiologist, he let us know that he or staff sat there and watched MJ sleep after he "took Mike down" for the night. I want Murray to tell me where he was all night. For $150k a month, he had better slept in a chair next to Mike's bed.


The MSM will make negligence = incompetence when it comes to a black doctor. No ventilation, no cardiac monitor, not even baby monitors to listen to him breath + ALL LEAD TO MURRAYS INCOMPETENCE.

Now, this is what I want to get to:

Mike hair burning. Girl, that jeri curl flaming didn't do that much damage to MJs scalp. Listen, white people saw all those flames and thought MJ was really suffering some pain. Little did they know it was just that damned jeri curl juice flaming up. ROTFLMBO!! It looked really bad but it was just the curl.

The Extreme ELVISication continue...

"When they interviewed the other anesthesiologist, he let us know that he or staff sat there and watched MJ sleep after he "took Mike down" for the night."

OOOOOoooo, IC, had not heard this. You got a point there!

"Mike hair burning. Girl, that jeri curl flaming didn't do that much damage to MJs scalp. "

O yes it did! Prior to his death, they only showed vid of him from the front. But now, they are showing the vid, from the back when he was descending those steps, and he was burned BAD! On the film you can see a big hole and denuded scalp. The burns were 2nd and 3rd degree..he had to have skin grafts!

It really is not funny. We all thought that before was the J-curl lotion, which did act as an accelerant but NOW whenyou see what happened. It is sad. MJ deserved a lot more empathy, than any vid just from the front would ever elicit. He had to wear wigs after that. Did you hear them when they described his body describe his head as completely bald.

MJ went through a lot..he was a serious burn victim.

I concluded long ago that MJ either shaved his head so his wigs would fit better or he wore wigs for so long that they took his hair out.

Mike had Katherine's "good hair". There was not any reason for his scalp to be bald in the front of his scalp.

Mike's head was burned in that one spot on the crown of his head; the rest was smoke from the j-curl flames. His burn was not that bad.


MJ was full of himself. Betta ax somebody!

"MJ was full of himself. Betta ax somebody!"

No you best look up the video. MJ was burned VERY BADLY.

It ain't even funny. He HAD to wear wigs!

A medical doctor practices medicine to help or at least do no harm

I'll go out on a strong limb and say he won't be able to justify his reasoning & the man is going down for manslaughter

and yes, take a lesson from Kobe, Michael Vick, & Skippy Gates - the same rules still do not apply to you and me. We thought OJ got off till they circled back around for his dumb behind.

The only reason Murray could have was that MJ wanted it and he was willing to pay him $150k a month to give him whatever he wanted. I just wondered if the brother stayed there and watched MJ sleep or did he decide to go to his room and get a little sleep. When he woke uo and came back to "bring Mike back up" it was too late.
The brother can have a defense of not working with MJ but two weeks and didn't know what else he was taking. Murrary ain't looking real competent right about now.

Do the profiling rules apply to Murray? Let's see now.

Would Dr. Phil get a manslaughter charge?

Nor would an unknown Dr. Arnie Klein?

dr. klein... was he that idiot who was on larry king right after michael died? denying paternity of paris and prince? what a QUACK!

Why do I have a sudden urge to throw dollar bills at my screen?

LOL! cue music.....

LMAO

Yeah, and

um. well, not to be crass - uh, is that sun glare or is he a bit ashy?

LOL

I thought it was hair.

EwwWWWWWWWWWW!

Yep, one taut pastywhitehairy ass.

LMAO!

raotflmbo

An angry crowd demanded the resignation of Atwater City Council Member Gary Frago. Frago is in trouble because he forwarded a series of racist jokes on e-mail to several prominent community members. Gary Frago he said he is genuinely nervous and scared about his future as a public figure. He contends he is not a racist, however, he sees nothing wrong with the emails he passed along.

(ABC GO) Protesters Demand Gary Frago's Resignation

The controversy has rocked Atwater, and prompted a special council meeting, where dozens of residents spoke out. The anger over the racist joke e-mails forwarded by Council Member Frago went from the streets, to the city council meeting, which was held in the community center because of the size of the crowd. Most who spoke out asked Frago to resign.

David Futrell said, "You should do the right thing and resign."

"I ask you to please resign, you have hurt this community enough," said Alvin Mayfield.

Ann Glasgow said, "I think you've shown an appalling lack of judgment"

"For all of you supporters of Gary Frago, try telling those black jokes to a black person ... I dare you to," said Alan Brookes.

But Frago had few supporters, even after apologizing. He said, "I am sorry ... I am sorry I have hurt people."

All of the other council members criticized Frago's behavior and unanimously approved writing a letter of disapproval. Most of the citizens seemed to feel it wasn't enough, but some saw it as a hopeful step.

I rarely agree with Ridley, but he got this one right on the money.

Here's what I got:

"Your data suggests a slight automatic preference for African-Americans compared to European Americans."

Well, at least they didn't call me "post-racial" ;-)

Question, can anyone direct me to a link which details what is being proposed for healthcare? Not the bill but a reliable site which summarizes the proposal?

thanks~

If only the Gates arrest had been an aberration
By DeWayne Wickham

Now that both President Obama and Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. have proclaimed Gates' run-in with a cop in Cambridge, Mass., a teachable moment, what are the lessons to be learned?

Gates, one of the nation's most distinguished black academics, said what happened to him "should be a profound teaching moment in the history of race relations in America." A day earlier, Obama walked into the White House press room and backpedaled on his assertion that police had "acted stupidly" in arresting Gates while investigating a possible break-in at his house.

(Gates: Arrested on disorderly conduct./AP)


According to the police report, Gates loudly berated Sgt. James Crowley, the white officer who responded to the 911 call. "Why, because I'm a black man in America?" Crowley says Gates responded when the officer said he was investigating a crime and asked Gates to come outside. After Crowley determined that Gates was in his house legally, he again asked the irate professor to step outside.

Here's the teachable moment that tops my list. It's hard for a cop to accuse you of disorderly conduct for mouthing off inside your home. But if he invites you outside where a crowd has gathered, don't go because he might be trying to get you to a place where he can make that charge stick. This doesn't make Crowley a racist, but it does suggest Gates got under Crowley's skin — and the cop decided to get even.

A familiar pattern

Another thing to learn is that Gates is not alone. It's not just the clashes cops have with poor blacks that raise the specter of racial bias.

Linda Jones, a former Detroit News reporter, was stopped by two Drug Enforcement Administration agents in 1989 at the airport in Birmingham, Ala. She was covering a group of Michigan schoolchildren visiting civil rights landmarks in the South when she got a toothache and decided to fly home for treatment. Jones says the agents stopped her in the middle of the airport concourse and rifled through her bags. When they found no drugs they walked off, leaving Jones' belongings in disarray and her nerves badly frayed.

Status matters not

Howard Bingham, Muhammad Ali's personal photographer since 1962, was stopped by an officer in Manhattan Beach, Calif., shortly after leaving a fundraiser for then-President Clinton in 1999. The cop said Bingham's car was swerving. He wasn't drunk, but the officer arrested him for driving with an expired license, an offense for which California law says no one older than 16 should be arrested or detained.

The cop later said he took Bingham into custody because he suspected he might be Andre Bingham, a man for whom there was a 22-year-old arrest warrant. Bingham says he was arrested even after showing the officer a copy of a 1998 Sports Illustrated. Bingham and Ali were on the cover along with these words: "Who's That Guy with Howard Bingham? You don't know Muhammad Ali until you know his best friend."

And then there's the case of Donna Brazile, a black woman who was Al Gore's campaign manager in the 2000 presidential race. In March of that year, she was stopped in a hotel stairwell by Los Angeles police while on her way to help brief the vice president for a debate. Despite wearing her campaign badge and Secret Service ID pin, Brazile was detained for an hour. She watched as Gore's motorcade left for the debate without her.

The lesson to be learned from all this is that Obama and Gates have an awful lot of teaching to do.

DeWayne Wickham writes on Tuesdays for USA TODAY.

http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2009/07/if-only-...

"This doesn't make Crowley a racist, but it does suggest Gates got under Crowley's skin — and the cop decided to get even."

LOL! Lesson learned: Black people don't play the dozens with white cops OR NO COPS:


YA MOMMA!!!

The falsified report shows that Crowley decided to get even in a racial way. So, it doesn't matter if he's a *real* racist or not. The effect is the same as if he was the reincarnation of Bull Connor.

Yep....profiling now, profiling tomorrah, profiling forEVAH!!

Did anyone hear Pat Buchanan on Andrea Mitchell declare Crowley was right in arresting Gates? Oh My Ever Loving God!!

I didn't, but I would have been shocked if he had said Crowley was wrong.

Consider the source...Pat Buchanan and his sister think their employee who karate chopped a black woman who committed the crime of being black is a'right, but Skip Gates mouthing off to the cop is WRONG.

Yes, I did...Buchanana, was even worse later, declaring the President was wRONg..and as Bill the opposing view said, the President was RIGHT.

Pat Buchanan is a OLE Wingnut...never to spew anything but venom when it comes to AAs. He carries his white sheet in the briefcase.

National Republicans are airing radio ads urging listeners to pressure three centrist Arizona House Democrats to oppose President Barack Obama's "dangerous experiment" in health-care reform.

(AZ Central) GOP radio ads target 3 Dems from Ariz. on health-care plan

The Republican National Committee announced Monday that its commercials are targeting Reps. Gabrielle Giffords, Ann Kirkpatrick and Harry Mitchell. The spots started running over the weekend.

"If Barack Obama and the Democrats get their way, the federal government will make the decisions about your health care," the ad says. "And, their plan costs a trillion dollars we don't have."

Michael Frias, Kirkpatrick's chief of staff, chided the RNC for using the serious national debate over health-care reform as "an opportunity to score cheap political points."

C.J. Karamargin, Giffords' spokesman, said Arizonans want to end "unfair practices like denying coverage based on pre-existing conditions and imposing lifetime limits on coverage."

Mitchell is listening to his constituents and held a telephone town hall last week about health-care reform, spokesman Adam Bozzi said.

"He is reviewing the health-care bill in the House, which is still in the committee process and is likely to be altered," Bozzi said.

This is why the Democrats need a war room. There should be an automatic push back in all media when this happens. Years in the wilderness and no spine.

White Privilege wins again. MSNBC gives Willie Geist his own show.

One more reason not to watch MSNBC.

What time slot did they give Willie boy, 3 am? LOL!

Five thirty AM

Just from what he just said, it's going to suck big time, especially when the big catch is that it's early in the morning. Give me a break!

Two embattled North Jersey mayors defied mounting calls for their resignations Monday, as hundreds of protesters besieged Hoboken City Hall and Ridgefield residents sat shoulder-to-shoulder to hear Mayor Anthony Suarez proclaim his “complete innocence.”

(North New Jersey) Embattled mayors defy calls for resignation

A third mayor charged last week with corruption, Dennis Elwell of Secaucus, remained largely out of sight as calls for him to step down continued.

In Hoboken, where a bar fight over the mayoralty was brewing Monday, Mayor Peter Cammarano III faced the fiercest public backlash of the three mayors. Cammarano, who reported to work as usual, slipped out the back door of city hall at 5 p.m. as the large crowd of protesters began to gather.

Meanwhile, Joseph Doria, the former state Assembly speaker whose home and offices were searched by the FBI last week, made his first public comments about the case.

“I did nothing wrong, and I feel very confident that the truth will come out,” he said in a brief statement at the door of his Bayonne home. Doria, once one of the most powerful legislators in the state, has not been charged with any crime.

Just 23% Believe Health Care Costs Will Go Down if Reform Passes Congress

"A major hurdle for those pushing health care reform is convincing those who already have health insurance that they will be even better off down the road. "

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/...

John Conyers (D-Betterthanyouland) @ the National Press Club, on the Health Care behemoth:

What good is reading the bill if it’s a thousand pages and you don’t have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you read the bill?

http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/checker.aspx?v=Gd...

You STILL reading that Republican budget?

LMAO!

LOL. I can't decide who is the bigger joke you or Conyers.

you gotta admit. . . . that was a good one Conserv. lol

YA MOMMA!

Don't think about it too long; I wouldn't want to interrupt you from reading ALL 20 pages of the OldAntiquatedOutdated Republican Parties crucial budget INCLUDING healthcare budget options. ROTFLMBAO!!!!

Elizabeth Warren on why the Federal government needs a consumer Financial Products Administration. It starts w/, "A: People who want to become regulators at the Fed want to do monetary policy, not consumer protection. They're not interested in car loans and credit cards, they're interested in M1 and M2 and the velocity of money. That doesn't make them bad people. It just means they have expertise in a different area and an interest in a different area. The people who go to the OCC want to do prudential regulation to see if the banks have enough capital reserves. They don't go there because they want to do consumer protection.

There is no one in Washington - no agency - whose principal responsibility is the consumer, or watching out for the economic health of the American family. No one."

http://www.philly.com/philly/business/51764682....

Which is why NO stimulus will be effective unless and until it factors human beings a/k/a consumers into the equation. A broke and weak consumer does nothing for an economy.

Stop making Sense.
It is one of the weaknesses of the Stimulus in that the shovel ready projects they BaconDavis act was repealed. Many aren't going forward because there were already projects in the pipeline that require union workers. Now they are secure in there future but evryone else is sucking wind.

Sotomayor Confirmed By Senate Judiciary Committee

With Lindsey Graham offering up the sole Republican vote.
"I'm deciding to vote for a woman I would not have chosen," Graham said. Obama's choice to nominate the first-ever Latina to the highest court is "a big deal," he added, declaring that, "America has changed for the better with her selection."

The solid Republican vote against Sotomayor on the Judiciary panel reflected the choice many GOP conservatives have made to side with their core supporters and oppose a judge they charge will bring liberal bias and racial and gender prejudices to her decisions. Others in the party, however, are concerned that doing so could hurt their efforts to broaden their base, and particularly alienate Hispanic voters, a fast-growing segment of the electorate.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/28/sotoma...

The GOP just initiated their own death knell.

Justice Sotomayor- one step closer to CHANGE COMING TO AMERICA!!

Yes we can!

WHOOOPEEEEEE!!!

Let's get on with post-racial America from the SCOTUS...snark.


Val, I hope Cornyn in TX is the first to go...then Kyl..they both have lots of Hispanics/Mexicans in their states.

Someone needs to start organizing and fundraising now.

I wrote a letter to John Cornyn asking him to vote against that damn provider concious bill. I'm now on his newsletter list, which is fine since the man represents my state.

You're right about organizing, WRB. But it's not just Latino's in TX; Black people need to get in on the fun too.

Cornyn lives smack dab in the middle of George Bush country, remember?

Sorry, he's voting his constituency.

He is a U.S. Senator. His election is state wide, not local where he resides. Hispanics have not usually voted. Which is why they need to get organized.

It is also why HRC loss TX in the primaries...even though they outnumbered blacks outside of Houston/Dallas...they had not voted for DEMS and therefore their districts had far fewer delegates..so Obama won, TX.

Texas? Not yet, give or take 10 more years for change to come to this state, sorry. Kay Bailey Hutchinson will not bring that kind of change. Maybe if Ron Kirk comes back in 10 years and run for Governor, we'll see CHANGE in Texas. Until then, don't get your hopes up, glass is half empty.

Could not agree with you more, Myth. I do wanna know if you think KBH has a chance of winning. I've heard she's raising quite a bit of money.....

Shoo-in!

Democrats can't get elected statewide in Texas YET (unless you're the Railroad Commissioner)

Ron Kirk's run against Cornyn showed us that once you step out of the major cities of Texas, you're in the lone star state. That lone star don't shine on minorities yet.

Nope. TX hispanics have enough votes NOW! They simply are not organized. We saw that in the primaries...they have been consistently disenfranchised.

There does not need to be a decade wait.

Are they legal?
Are they registered?
Can they vote?
Are they scared? (Scared deciphers the disenfranchised code)

I here ya! But that is what organization determines. Lots of those who can vote don't, just like the rest of America and many blacks who were disenfranchised.

Geesh!

Sigh!!

Texas...The lone star state!

*Gasp*

Are you dissing Texas? I love Texas, it's my home!

I do not usually agree with John Ridley...but this write up is ON POINT!


"Why all this interest -- besides the curiosity as to whether or not the arresting officer had ever once in his life previously used the word "tumultuous" in a sentence? I think it's 'cause the professor was putting into action what a whole lot of us were thinking: nun-uh. We're sick and tired of having to prove things to the self-righteous reactionary fringe which looks at life as one, big racial profiling traffic stop: Step out of the car Mr. President and show me your birth certificate. Ma'am, could you show me how being a "wise Latina" isn't going to infringe on my male whiteliness? This despite the fact the reactionary fringe is the one with the history of duplicity and infringing.

Culturally this "prove it" mindset dates back to the passage of the 1793 Fugitive Slave Act which put the burden on Freedmen to prove they were in fact not slaves.

You can imagine how the bulk of those cases went down in the 18th century.

Since then, people of color have had to be mindful of walking in too-nice of a neighborhood, browsing in too-swank of a store or simply taking a drive on a too-sunny day lest we have to suddenly prove civil rights which are supposed to be inalienable.

I have, however, just checked the calendar. It's not 1793 anymore.

To that end, how refreshing was it during his presser to hear the president say that the arresting officer in the Gates case acted "stupidly?" Now that that's officially out there, it's not for Gates to prove he was in the right. Let Sgt. James Crowley prove in this instance he wasn't stupid for placing a 58-year-old professor in cuffs in the middle of the day."


more here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-ridley/gates...

Stop making Sense!

Democrats cite CBO to boost healthcare case

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives pounced on a congressional budget analysis to bolster their plan for a government-run health insurance option on Monday, as party leaders said they were closer to agreement on healthcare reform.

The report by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said the public option proposed by Democrats would not drive private insurers out of business and most people would still choose to get their medical coverage through employers.

The public option has come under heavy fire from Republicans who say it will devastate the private insurance industry.

"We're moving closer to a point where we can hold insurance companies accountable," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat, told reporters, repeating her frequent prediction that once a bill hits the floor for a vote "it will win."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090728/pl_nm/us_us...

Their Own Medicine
Senators prefer the insurance they have.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124786946165760...

n the health debate, liberals sing Hari Krishnas to the "public option" -- a new federal insurance program like Medicare -- but if it's good enough for the middle class, then surely it's good enough for the political class too? As it happens, more than a few Democrats disagree.

On Tuesday, the Senate health committee voted 12-11 in favor of a two-page amendment courtesy of Republican Tom Coburn that would require all Members and their staffs to enroll in any new government-run health plan. Yet all Democrats -- with the exceptions of acting chairman Chris Dodd, Barbara Mikulski and Ted Kennedy via proxy -- voted nay.

In other words, Sherrod Brown and Sheldon Whitehouse won't themselves join a plan that "will offer benefits that are as good as those available through private insurance plans -- or better," as the Ohio and Rhode Island liberals put it in a recent op-ed. And even a self-described socialist like Vermont's Bernie Sanders, who supports a government-only system, wouldn't sign himself up.

Of course, they also qualify now for generous Congressional coverage. Most Americans won't have the same choice. Some will be transferred to the new entitlement as it uses its taxpayer bankroll to dominate insurance markets. Others work for businesses that will find it easier to dump their policies and move employees to the federal rolls. Democrats also know that the public option will try to control health spending by squeezing payments made to doctors and hospitals, and by not paying for treatments that Washington decides are too expensive, which will result in inferior care.

No doubt Mr. Dodd acceded to the Coburn amendment to blunt such objections, and in any case he'll strip it out later in some backroom. Judd Gregg was the only GOP Senator to oppose it, on humanitarian grounds. As he told us in an interview, the public option "will be so bad that I don't think anyone should be forced to join."

Conserv -- is there an echo in here? If you like the coverage you have then by all means keep it. That premise also applies to government officials. No one is arguing against anyone's right to opt out of the public option.

So . . . not sure where you are going with this. The American people want a public option included in the package. We deserve the right to make our own choices.

...unless you change jobs after the bill becomes law, at which point you'll have to be enrolled in the government's healthcare option:

(a) Grandfathered Health Insurance Coverage Defined- Subject to the succeeding provisions of this section, for purposes of establishing acceptable coverage under this division, the term `grandfathered health insurance coverage' means individual health insurance coverage that is offered and in force and effect before the first day of Y1 if the following conditions are met:

(1) LIMITATION ON NEW ENROLLMENT-

(A) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of Y1.

Hey, that's what the bill says.....

D
I tried you link and it says they do not exist anymore. do you have an updated question or search to recover the information in its entirety?

http://thomas.loc.gov

Look up H.R. 3200, and it's under section 102.

BS D. If you lose your job or change your job after the bill becomes law you can opt into the public option OR if you are hired by another company you can adopt their plan.
If you are SOL and are without employment clearly you should jump on the public option to make sure your family is covered.

This is something that was wayyyyy past due.

So now the bill doesn't say what it says?

Where's what you're saying in the bill? Not someone else's interpretation of it....

you know what, I'll be darned if I didn't read your statement and see the face of my 5 year old addressing his 8 year old brother. So here is where I get off this train. . .

Luke 8:4-15
4 And when a great crowd came together and people from town after town came to him, he said in a parable: 5 "A sower went out to sow his seed; and as he sowed, some fell along the path, and was trodden under foot, and the birds of the air devoured it. 6 And some fell on the rock; and as it grew up, it withered away, because it had no moisture. 7 And some fell among thorns; and the thorns grew with it and choked it. 8 And some fell into good soil and grew, and yielded a hundredfold." As he said this, he called out, "He who has ears to hear, let him hear." 9 And when his disciples asked him what this parable meant, 10 he said, "To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of God; but for others they are in parables, so that seeing they may not see, and hearing they may not understand. 11 Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God. 12 The ones along the path are those who have heard; then the devil comes and takes away the word from their hearts, that they may not believe and be saved. 13 And the ones on the rock are those who, when they hear the word, receive it with joy; but these have no root, they believe for a while and in time of temptation fall away. 14 And as for what fell among the thorns, they are those who hear, but as they go on their way they are choked by the cares and riches and pleasures of life, and their fruit does not mature.

You conservatives should appreciate that bit of scripture. He who has ears . . .let them hear.

carry on D.

Love you too, Val. :)

I'm just going off what I see as I read through the bill.

I love you right back. :-) you do that brotha

....but after they bash the CBO for saying Obamacare will drastically increase the deficit.

Hypocrites.

The CBO did say the deficit would rise but not drastically and it would be offset by tax increases on people who make 1 million a year.But my question to you is,Why the sudden interest in the deficit when your party exploded the deficit with tax cuts for the rich and a war that we have to borrow to fund?Your party has no credibility on fiscal matters.Since Reagan all republicans did was spend and borrow and ran up debt.

Both parties contributed, true. Never disputed that.

But that doesn't give either free reign to make it WORSE.

see djchefron. You were nice to provide an answer. D should know better and do his own research. He already knew the answer. . . he just wasn't interested.

because it will not drastically increase the deficit D. That assessment was/is false.

One more thing. . . . no one said everyone has to agree with everything. It is perfectly fine to point out your disagreements and highlight areas where you agree and this does not classify you as a hypocrite.

Examples of a hypocrite: Jindal - slamming the stimulus while parading around handing out HUGE stimulus checks around his state. Sanford who rejected the stimulus but held out his hand for a loan, The C-Street hookers spouting family values but are quick to lay with any body for a quick buck (even wives of their employees).

"In sum, relative to current law, the proposal would probably generate substantial increases in federal budget deficits during the decade beyond the current 10-year budget
window."

Are they wrong?

And if so, why?

Your statement is beyond the "current" ten year budget. You know that there will be changes in all areas of the policy. Why present fear of ten years? You're going to be too busy shooing away males from your baby girl.

"You're going to be too busy shooing away males from your baby girl."

lol now that is the truth. lol

Because, ultimately, she and my son are the ones who are going to end up truly paying for this bill. It's past looking out for myself; now it's about them.

djchefron will say, "yeah, well what about the Republicans who ran up the deficit?" I have a bone to pick with them as well...but that doesn't give the sitting party an excuse to make things worse than they already will be.


At some point, someone has to say, "you know, maybe this is a bit much right now." And I'm wondering where all those people who were saying that during the Bush Admin are now...

or ultimately, she and your son will be the ones who are going to end up truly utilizing the benefits of this healthcare program.

Both are true.

Assuming it passes. ;)

D - didn't you watch ANY of the President's town halls on Healthcare or even his last press conference where he repeatedly discussed this? No? Google it and listen to your President.

I know what he said...tax the wealthy to pay for it (huge paraphrase).

And I'm still waiting on how/why that's a good idea. You just don't take something from someone just because they have it and you don't.

Now you are telling falsehoods D. Clearly you missed the entire conversation. Listen again.

Still not sure what the argument is about seeing that everyone retains the right to choose their own healthcare plan based on personal needs.

I just took the Harvard Implicit Association Test on racial preferences I mentioned in the Morning thread and my result:

Your data suggest a moderate automatic preference for African American compared to European American.

Now that I have my result I can get all uppity and ask..Who are the 50% of blacks that have an automatic preference for whites?

Anyway the test takes about 5 minutes if you are interested. Here is the link again:

https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/demo/take...

Click on "Race IAT".

"I can get all uppity and ask..Who are the 50% of blacks that have an automatic preference for whites?"

Can you?

This outcome also means that 50% of the time you don't discriminate against whites.

Also, as an AA your preference would be anticipated to be culturally biased just as Eurowhites, preference their culture...as we say with Toure and Ratigan, respectively, this morning...

But how does what you post explain 50% of blacks who took the same test coming out with a slight or greater automatic preference toward whites? I'm gong by the data posted on the site. A site and test that may be inherently flawed based on the pool of people that took the test.

Here's what I am saying PJ...a 50% number means BOTH sides win. Because it is equal. If 50% of blacks who took the test have a greater preference toward whites, it also means that 50% of blacks who took the test also do not discriminate against whites.

IOW's 50% do discriminate and 50% don't.

It is 50/50.

Did that help?

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with the idea that it means 50% of blacks don't discriminate against whites, but it could also mean that 50% of blacks discriminate against blacks. I'm guessing that a black person's implicit bias toward whites and against blacks can manifest itself in any number of ways.

I can see that. We know that blacks are impacted as much as whites by the racial images, news and stereotypes they see of blacks.

Even JesseJackson has said that he gets nervous at night walking down the street in DC when a black male is approaching.

Black folks are not immune to the negative stereotypes perpetuated on the news. We are all human beings. Not to mention that we know black on black crime is very prevalent in our communities, and in society as a whole.

The lawless culture of the incarcerated is devastating our communities.

Lawabiding blacks would be crazy NOT to think there is a high likelihood they could be a victim of a crime where the perpetrator is black.

Those are simply the indisputable facts of our reality.

Well, I think it goes beyond the current crime stats, WRB. I imagine if this test were given 60 years ago, the split among blacks would have been the same, at best.

You are certainly right. We have been mindshackled for centuries and changing that mindset will take more time. After all, 12 generations of slavery can't be erased by a CivilRightsMovement.

AND since we know we needed a song like I'm Black and I'm Proud to wear fros in the 60s we definitely have self-image esteem issues. Self-esteem was the whole point of BLACK POWER the fist with Tommy at the Olympics, we had no images of pride.

We are immersed in a culture that is Eurocentric and reinforces daily that white is the standard not only of beauty but civilly and correctness as well.

So, course you right. Crime on top of that makes it worse.

Did you take the test? Because it is not testing discrimination it is testing preference. Two completely different studies. So 50% of blacks have a preference toward blacks while 50% have an inherent preference toward whites. If what you said above is true about identifying culturally then 100% of blacks should have a test result of at least a slight preference for blacks.

Yes, I did take it at the Science Museum here, it was one of the exhibits for the RACE exhibit traveling the country.

http://www.smm.org/race/

PJ, you saw MorningMeeting, right? The Professor who developed the test, stated...it is an ANTI-Discrimination test.

I did, I've stated my thoughts and I will leave it at that. Those who watch the Morning Meeting clip and/or take the test can make of it what they will.

It means that 50% of the blacks who took the test have an implicit bias toward whites. In other words, it means what you think it means.

Thank you, Plantsmatx, I thought it was that simple.

Here's what I got:

Your data suggest a slight automatic preference for African American compared to European American.

Fits in with who I am...

Your data suggest a slight automatic preference for European American compared to African American.

Of course, my right hand (dominant) wanted to slap my left hand for getting those red Xs.

I do wonder how much right hand/left hand plays into it. I got the most red x's distinguishing between who was black and who was white. I'm sorry, some of those women looked like the black women in my family. For those not taking the test they show black and white photos of the eyes and nose of males and females.

I got the most red x's distinguishing between who was black and who was white

Yeah - when I first started I thought the lighting, like in the background, made the white faces almost indistinguishable. It reminded me of a bit of the type of photographs my dad has from long, long ago.

ya'll know you ain't right. *snicker*

I don't know if this was posted.
David Frum ripped Coulter a new one ver SarahPalin and populartity as electability, "In perhaps the best line of the day, Frum dismissed Coulter's argument about Palin's popularity by saying, "Michael Jackson is also a bigger story than the president of the United States, but the American people aren't going to vote for him." STFU and STFD
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/25/david-...

Rikyrah, you know you're not right. Think of us office folk who have to explain this if the boss walks in (LOL).

Having said that, that bum looks so firm you could bounce quarters off it.

(sends self to bad chair with one of GLH's spare fans)

It doesn't compare to Jamie Fox's. Please see the shower scene in Miami Vice for reference. *fans self*

lol - to the bad chair Sepia lolol

.yeah, and I bet he is getting lots more calls, emails from the opposite gender right about now, who wanna see if a quarter will bounce..lol

Welll - I LIKE that butt.

lol

From Radio Air America

Birther Conspiracy Reaches the Mainstream

In the beginning, it started out as a few exceptionally wacky GOP soldiers claiming that President Obama wasn't actually born in America, and that he refused to release his birth certificate to prove it. In spite of the fact that Obama was born in the US and that his birth certificate was available to anyone who wished to view it, these few right wing fringe freaks managed to convince countless Americans that our president is a Kenyan extremist set on a path to destroy our country. To make matters worse, the so-called mainstream press is now reporting this story. Mike Papantonio of Air America's Ring of Fire sets the record straight in this week's Pap Attack.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHa6kIr2bZk

-- Senate panel approves Sonia Sotomayor's nomination to U.S. Supreme Court, setting up confirmation vote by full Senate.

CNN breaking news -

Nice ass.

That swimsuit looks like something Prince would wear.

And I thought I was the only one thinking about Prince:

"Do you have a man? Is he fine?"

[turns to show his pants with both cheeks showing]

"Does he have an ass like mine?"

**slinking off to join others in the Time Out corner.**

LOL! I that third picture he even has Prince's haircut. At least Prince's haircut the last time I saw him.

True!

lol

It tore; it wasn't purposeful. (tee-hee)

See, WordSmith, you and I are like this >> - <<< on that swimsuit. It's just too perfect a rip not to be sewn together like that.

Probably an instruction label inside of the suit that says: " To rip hole in ass, spread legs 3 inches apart and bend over."

Who was the manufacturer? Is this a case of shrinkage, durability or did he become aroused right before that dive?

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/sotomayor-s...

Sotomayor sails through Judiciary Committee
By J. Taylor Rushing
Posted: 07/28/09 12:10 PM [ET]

Sonia Sotomayor’s nomination to the Supreme Court sailed through the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday by a wide margin but only bare bipartisan support.

Committee members voted 13-6 to send the nomination to the full Senate floor, where it will be debated before the Senate recesses next Friday. The nomination is widely assumed, as was Tuesday’s vote since Democrats hold a 12-7 edge on the panel.



As expected, the sole GOP vote on Sotomayor’s behalf Tuesday came from Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, saying he understands the Republican criticism of Sotomayor but wanted to demonstrate a reversal from the filibusters that were launched against Chief Justice John Roberts’ nomination in 2005 and Samuel Alito in 2006.