President claims medieval right of kings

Will exercise caution
Conservatives, previously silent about President Obama’s executive orders claiming the right to arrest, detain and assassinate American citizens without due process, are up in arms today about the latest executive order. The president has invoked medieval droit du seigneur, or right of first night with a maiden, for any marriage happening within forty-nine states, except Idaho.

Bill Kristol, founder and editor to the Weekly Standard, denounced the move. “This president has surely gotten upper tier in terms of power grabbing,” said Kristol. While he said that he understood the lack of interest in Idahoan maidens, he also suggested that if the president is going to exercise the right, he ought to be democratic about it and include all states.

Democrats were more circumspect. Edward Gresser, head of the Democratic Leadership Council, mentioned to supporters in a weekly newsletter that the President would probably not use the right to excess, and anyway would surely use protection.

Democrats overwhelmingly support the president on this matter. In an overnight Gallup poll, 77% of Democrats expressed “go-for-it-man” approval, while an additional 16% expressed mild envy. 4% expressed uncertainty about anything involving the French, but said that they would vote for the president in November anyway. 1% disapproved but felt the president might be “overdue” and said that they would vote for the president in November anyway, as Romney could not be trusted. 1% had no opinion but said that they would vote for the president in November anyway. The remaining 1%, said Gallup, is a rounding error, but that it too would vote for the president in November.

It was not clear at time of this writing how the president would interpret droit du seigneur in light of his recent statement in support of gay marriage.

The darkest of all psychological secrets

If you are given a choice, you believe you’ve acted freely. This is one of the darkest of all psychological secrets. This idea of having a two-party system is much like having fifty-two cards using the same three cards.

I transcribed the above quote, by Teller (of Penn and Teller), from a podcast called “Stuff to Blow Your mind.” Oddly enough, despite the name, the podcast is indeed interesting. The one I listened to is about the art of magicology, which is almost entirely based on psychological manipulation of audiences.

It reminded me of the 2000 election where we were given a “choice” of Gore or Bush, with a real choice, Nader. Democrats screamed bloody murder. Why? It probably had to do with the darkest of all secrets, that by limiting us to two (virtually identical) choices, we imagine we are acting freely.

That, then, is the purpose of elections, and why we even have them. I suggest to the reader that if you want to understand our choice in the 2012 election, do not look for differences between Obama and Romney. Look for similarities. It is far more illuminating.

Death panels

The above photo could only happen in this country – a family member is stricken by cancer, health insurance was either not affordable or available prior to diagnosis, and the family having to resort to selling off possessions and begging for charity to pay for treatment. After treatment, successful or not, the hospitals and doctors will come after them and take what they have, saddling them with overwhelming debt and forcing them into bankruptcy.

The concept of “death panels” was invented by some PR agency back in 2009 for the benefit of Tea Party sloganeering. It’s classic PR – short, emotional and memorable. It was mindlessly repeated to demonize the people who actually open up access to health care: government agencies. The real “death panels” are the people who roped off our health care system in order to charge exorbitant fees for admission – health insurance companies. Deep within their bowels are the faceless people who passed judgment on the poor schmuck for whose benefit the above family is having a garage sale.
Continue reading “Death panels” →

On to Single Payer!

I took a brief trip to town today, and passed a sign that said “Garage Sale for cancer” along with the address. They are not raising funds for the Cancer Society. A family member has it, and they are selling off possessions to pay bills. Only in America do you see that! (I’ll grab a photo of the sign tomorrow if it is still there.)

The following are notes I took of an interview with Dr. Stephanie Woolhandler, co-founder of Physicians for a National Health Care Plan, from the Counterspin 7/6/12 broadcast:

Massachusetts passed a statewide health care plan in 2006, nicknamed “Romneycare.” It was basically a laboratory trial for what would later become “Obamacare,” or ACA. While widely held to be successful and popular, the numbers are not that impressive. It did cut the uninsured population in the state from 10% to 5% of the population. More about that later.*

Even as Romneycare is in year six now, by a 2:1 margin, members of the Massachusetts State Medical Society still favor single payer over it.
Continue reading “On to Single Payer!” →

An unfortunate incident

Ground sausage zero
We had a most unfortunate accident at our house this morning, but fortunately no one was hurt. As my wife and I survey the damage, wondering how it could have happened, experts have explained it to our satisfaction. They have impressive credentials.

I was cooking sausage in a frying pan. The heat from the fires underneath apparently weakens the steel they use to make burners so that it begins to bend. Even though the burners, partially made of tungsten, do not melt until they reach a temperature of 3,100 degrees, the fire marshall explained that the weight of the fry pan caused parts of it to slowly give way. The sausage had inexplicably collected on the NE side of the pan, and as I walked by, I dropped a knife I was using to cut up green pepper and onions, and it hit that side of the pan.
Continue reading “An unfortunate incident” →

The rules explained

Guess his age by the length of his socks
Many thanks to my friend Kevin, who tonight over dinner explained to me the rules of socks and sandals. I wear shorts all summer long, as I don’t do heat well, and it’s hard to come up with a shoe/socks/shorts combination that is tasteful.

It has to do with age. Kevin is 58, and so the rule for him is no socks with sandals ever, under any circumstances. I am 62, and so the rules are eased. I am allowed to wear anklet socks, preferably dark colored or flesh-toned, so as not to call attention to them.

That rule holds in place until age 70, at which time we are allowed to wear white socks with sandals. Shorter is better. At age 75, any length of white sock is OK.

At age 80, we are allowed to wear socks and sandals in any combination we desire, including argyle, surgical, hosiery, and even black or red socks. Indeed, this is a common sight. Young people think that old people don’t know how to dress. What young people do not grasp is the freedom of not caring how one dresses. Who is looking anyway?

85 is a tough transition, but my wife explained to me that if I am still around at that age, I’ll be wearing ‘onesies’ once more. There will be no more need for either socks or sandals.

Coffee-spitting American journalism

Maceda: Plays a journalist on American TV
Wikileaks has gotten hold of maybe a quarter million internal communications of the Syrian Assad government. The communications will be released over the coming months by the organization, and its spokesperson has emphasized that none of the actors on that stage are telling us the truth. The first batch is about an Italian firm that sold high-security communications equipment for use by the Syrian police.

This, from Jim Maceda of NBC news:

However, this release is striking in its broader, more neutral approach, without the trenchant ideology or politics associated with previous data sets.

Translation: It’s about one of our official enemies, and not about the United States government or its corporations. That makes it “neutral” and free of “ideology.”
Continue reading “Coffee-spitting American journalism” →

PBS: Where incuriosity is an asset

Rooney: Miles to go before she wakes
This link is to a interview show called “Greater Boston”, hosted by Emily Rooney. In it she interviews Russ Baker, an investigative journalist who in his research unexpectedly came across evidence that Watergate was not at all what we were told then or are being told now.

The interview is about eleven minutes long, and I don’t know how to embed it (somebody help please!). What struck me about it were three lines by Rooney, to wit:

You’re not a grassy knoller, are you?

Would they have gotten those questions answered?

We let that go too early as journalists.”

Each of the three statements above appear to be mental stops, where her inner parent tells her curious child “This far, no further!
Continue reading “PBS: Where incuriosity is an asset” →

Scrap metal for sale

Other than offering up so few worthy candidates, the American voting system is hamstrung by another major defect – electronic voting machines. These Rube Goldberg devices cannot be made more secure than those who program them or have access to them. Consequently, when used, elections are not secure.

They were pushed on us after Florida 2000 due to the hanging chad fiasco. The first suspected theft of elections by their use happened shortly thereafter in Georgia and Alabama in 2002. (Don Siegelman, who likely won the Alabama election, is a political prisoner at this time.) Exit polling was widely variant of vote results in 2004, likely giving George W. Bush his second stolen election.
Continue reading “Scrap metal for sale” →

Onward!

The twentieth century has been characterized by three developments of great political importance: the growth of democracy, the growth of corporate power, and the growth of corporate propaganda as a means of protecting corporate power against democracy. (Alex Carey, Australian writer and social psychologist)

It is arguable that the success of business propaganda in persuading us, for so long, that we are free from propaganda is one of the most significant propaganda achievements of the twentieth century. (same guy)

I won’t belabor this point, as I know it is bad form. But I am the only person I know who predicted that the Final Nine would uphold the individual mandate. (Side note: I also predicted that Obama would extend the Bush tax cuts. He’ll be reelected and will again extend those tax cuts next year.) I also said in some blog somewhere that the only parts of the law in danger were those of actual benefit to us, such as Medicaid expansion.

More predictions, if my reader thinks I have any credibility at all:

1. Medical costs will continue to go up at alarming rates. Those who see this and support ACA will say “Yeah, but they’d be going up faster if we didn’t have this law.” The non-falsifiable hypothesis is very useful in the art of sophistry.
Continue reading “Onward!” →