Let Me Make This Perfectly Clear

The current GOP echo-chamber that is endlessly

chanting "start over" with "blank sheet of paper" on HCR is nothing but disrespectful political hacks looking the people in the eye and lying through their teeth. The "incrementalism" that they so passionately urge as a solution to the partisan gridlock (which THEY have engineered!) is designed not to achieve progress, but to stop HCR and, in the bargain, pass several of their pet projects. The Republican chorus earnestly pleads with the Democrats to "adopt a series of cost-cutting measures upon which there is general agreement". They go on to list medical malpractice reform, buying insurance across state lines and other relatively minor issues which, they say, could be "on the President's desk" in short order. Yeah, right. This amounts to saying, as Republicans always seem to get around to saying, "Give us what we want first and then we'll discuss what you unAmerican socialists want". Their idea of "tort reform" or "medical malpractice reform" is simply to put a cap on a patient's right to recover damages for a doctor's negligence. If you or I run a red light and cause someone permanent and painful injuries, none of our assets are shielded from recovery; i.e., there are no limits on the amount of the judgment that the injured person could get against us. If, however, the same injuries resulted from medical malpractice, Republicans want to assure the doctor that damages for pain and suffering, for example, won't be permitted to exceed $250,000. Sound fair? That is the type of elitist "got mine, to hell with you" CRAP that these smarmy bastards are trying to peddle as "true bipartisanship" and "the reasoned approach". They need to be called on it EACH time they trot it out and we should be raising hell with any talking heard that let's them get away with it.

The Time Is NOW!

The Health Care Summit: Monsters Under The Bed

By Susie Madrak Friday Feb 26, 2010 7:00pm

I can't say it's a surprise that congressional Republicans think it would be great to start over with health care, or that they're in favor of "incremental" changes. (I'd love to see them get "incremental" health surgery.)

And I can't say it's a surprise that they had virtually nothing useful to offer.

What I realized, though (and maybe this is the driving force behind Obama's puzzling, sometimes infuriating compromises) is that to many Republicans, their illogical fantasies are akin to a child's night terrors. We know there aren't any monsters under the bed, but your child doesn't. So you go through the motions of shooing the monsters away so your child can sleep.

We know that tort reform has such small influence on malpractice premiums that it's virtually meaningless. Any rational person who looks at the research knows this. What you have are a lot of people making what they claim are factual assertions that are nothing more than an intellectual construct to support their emotion-driven conclusion.

We know that selling insurance across state lines doesn't solve the health care crisis, either.
We know that the fastest increases in costly diseases are being driven by environmental pollutants and contaminants, so eating right and exercising doesn't solve the health care crisis, either.

But we're left with a Congress where roughly half of them believe their fairy tales. And since the ideological wars are driven by true believers, we simply don't have the time to convert each of them, one by one, to the realities we face.

Which is simply my long-winded way of saying that Harry Reid needs to shove good healthcare legislation through using reconciliation, right now. No more waiting.

People are dying, every single day. President Obama, we don't need any more to die while you patiently reassure the Republicans about the monsters under the bed.

Get. It. Done. NOW.

We May Have More Medals At The Olympics But Canada Gets Last Laugh

DAMN THEM CANUCKS!!!

 

Last Night My Father Asked Me To Kill Him

If this story of Keith Olbermann and his personal experience with health care in America doesn't bring a tear to your eye, you are a heartless bastard.


Unforunately, I would guess that this same story is happening every day in every hospital across America.


Families are being torn because the people in power - the people WE elected - play their little political games while those we love die - or want to die.


This should NOT be an issue in America today Yet we constantly make the same mistakes of electing politicians that continue to lay in bed with, in this case, insurance company lobbyists.


Its time to WAKE THE FUCK UP America.


A medical decision should be a decision made between the patient, the patients family AND A MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL - NOT A FACELESS INSURANCE COMPANY!



What I had done, conferring with the resident in ICU, the conversation about my father's panicky, not-in-complete-control-of-his-faculties demand that all treatment stop, about the options and the consequences and the compromise - the sedation -- the help for a brave man who just needed a break... that conversation, that one -- was what these ghouls who are walking into Blair House tomorrow morning decided to call "Death Panels."

Your right to have that conversation with a doctor -- not the government, but a doctor -- and your right to have insurance pay for his expertise on what your options are when Dad says "kill me" or what your options are when Dad is in a coma and can't tell you a damn thing, or what your options are when everybody is healthy and happy and coherent and you're just planning ahead -- your right to have the guidance and the reassurance of a professional who can lay that out for you... that's a quote "death panel."






It's a life panel.

A life panel -- it can save the pain of the patient and the family -- it is the difference between you guessing what happens next, and you being informed about what probably will, and that's the difference between you sleeping at night or second-guessing and third-guessing and thirtieth-guessing.

And it can also be the place where the family says 'we want you to keep him alive no matter what, we believe in miracles' and the doctor saying yes. Nobody gets to say no except the patient and the family.

It's a life panel. And damn those who call it otherwise to hell.


 I wish Keith and his father well. 

Being Searched By The Police

If a police officer asks your permission to search, you are under no obligation to consent. The only reason he's asking you is because he doesn't have enough evidence to search without your consent. If you consent to a search request you give up one of the most important constitutional rights you have—your Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.

A majority of avoidable police searches occur because citizens naively waive their Fourth Amendment rights by consenting to warrantless searches. As a general rule, if a person consents to a warrantless search, the search automatically becomes reasonable and therefore legal. Consequently, whatever an officer finds during such a search can be used to convict the person.

Don't expect a police officer to tell you about your right not to consent. Police officers are not required by law to inform you of your rights before asking you to consent to a search. In addition, police officers are trained to use their authority to get people to consent to a search, and most people are predisposed to comply with any request a police officer makes. For example, the average motorist stopped by a police officer who asks them, "Would you mind if I search your vehicle, please?" will probably consent to the officer's search without realizing that they have every right to deny the officer's request.

If, for any reason you don't want the officer digging through your belongings, you should refuse  to consent by saying something like, "Officer, I know you want to do your job, but I do not consent to any searches of my private property." If the officer still proceeds to search you and finds illegal contraband, your attorney can argue that the contraband was discovered through an illegal search and hence should be thrown out of court.

You should never hesitate to assert your constitutional rights.

Just say "no!" 

AVAILABLE HERE!!!!!  

A Man With A Plan

Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, has proposed lowering the age to qualify for early Social Security benefits to 60 from age 62 for the first 1 million people who apply. He assumes that all the people who would take advantage of this opportunity are currently employed. Thus, according to him, the proposal would automatically lead to the opening up of 1 million job vacancies.

This is not a new idea. As historian William Graebner has documented, the Social Security program itself was partly conceived in order to encourage older workers to leave the labor force so as to create employment opportunities for younger workers.* That’s why those receiving Social Security benefits were long prohibited from earning more than a token amount of wage income.

This is a $15 billion bill funded by the bailout and stimulus. Kucinich estimates that by offering retirement two years early, a million workers will leave their jobs, creating opportunities for those actively looking for work.

Although the plan sounds good in theory, I’m not convinced it would work in practice.

But at least he HAS a plan.

 CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFO!!!

The fourth amendment to the U.S. Constitution limits the powers of the police to perform
searches and seizures, requiring that any such search or seizure performed be "reasonable." br>

Generally, satisfaction of this "reasonableness" requirement necessitates that police officers
obtain prior judicial approval in the form of an arrest or search warrant before a search or seizure is performed. Recognizing the impracticality of officers obtaining arrest or search warrants prior to every search or seizure, the U.S. Supreme Court has recognized a number of exceptions to the
warrant requirement that allow, under certain circumstances, searches and seizures to be
reasonably performed without prior judicial approval.

This book is a MUST for ANYONE that may run into a cop one day.

WAKE THE FUCK UP AMERICA!

It's easy to miss the threat of someone who's misinformed, paranoid and more than a little crazy. But when that someone has oodles and oodles of dollars, organizing prowess, and private ownership of a significant book-publishing company and a television network, you'd better watch out.



The fodder for ridicule provided by the weekend's Conservative Political Action Conference gave progressive journalists, including me, the opportunity to have lots of gleeful word fun examining the internecine battles over gay rights and torture, Ron Paul's victory in the presidential straw poll, Ann Coulter's tired act. Glenn Beck's medicine show -- and a host of other madness.
But ridicule is not activism. It makes us feel better, assuring us of our superiority while the other side gathers steam for the fight ahead.
I do not mean to dismiss the work of the many tireless progressive activists engaged in keeping health-care reform alive, keeping progressive media vibrant, bringing feminism to a new generation, or fighting labor's good fight. Nor do I mean to dis the funders and major donors of progressive causes. But unless progressive leaders truly reassess, at an operational and structural level, the organization of the right, I will remain doubtful of our ability to compete at the moment when the right has found a cause around which to unite: hatred of all things Obama.
It wasn't the predictable program at CPAC that brought me to this point: not the panel on the ostensible global warming hoax or the one on "Saving Freedom From the Tax Collectors," or the speeches by U.S. senators calling the president a tyrant and a socialist. I've been covering the right a long time; I'm used to that kind of thing.
No, it was my tour through a seemingly endless exhibit hall that rang my alarm bell -- table after table piled with glossy, slickly produced literature, trinkets and treats. The whiff of underfunding that so often pervades the exhibit halls of progressive confabs was hard to locate here.
I got a bright yellow bag, gratis, emblazoned with the letters 'NRA". Newsmax gave me a deck of Ronald Reagan playing cards (a different Reagan quote on each card).
The Claire Boothe Luce Policy Institute supplied me with a nicely produced date book featuring photographs of the right's leading ladies: Phyllis Schlafly, Bay Buchanan, Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, all shot specifically for that calendar in a kind of uniform of white shirt and jeans (except for Phyllis, who wore a skirt).
From Let Freedom Ring, I picked up a high-quality black bumper sticker with the word "ARROGANT" printed in white, except for the "O", which was replaced by the logo of the Obama for President campaign.
It's not the goodies on offer in the hall that are the right's treasure, but rather the financial backing the easy dispensing of tchotchkes and nachas represents.
Also prominent in the hall were a number of for-profit companies there seeking new business from conservative groups, whether for Web site design and hosting, campaign organizing or data mining.
Near the front of the hall was Eagle Publishing, the parent company of Regnery Publishing and Human Events magazine. Regnery's authors include Michelle Malkin, Newt Gingrich, Laura Ingraham, and a host of right-wing notables. They have a knack for creating bestsellers, which is not as hard as it looks when you've got a hall that big full of groups willing to buy these books in bulk to give away as premiums for membership and or other purposes.

republicans Get A Taste Of Thei Own Medicine

 

Unfortunately, Kansans have never had to consult their doctors about prolonged exposure to a sane Republican Legislature.

But there was a glimpse of sanity yesterday, when Republican men - who seem to like to tell women what to do with their bodies - got a taste of their own medicine.

During a debate on a bill dealing with insurance regulations, Rep. Pete DeGraaf (R-Mulvane) got an amendment added that would require women to buy separate insurance policies that covered abortions.  It passed 73-45.

Assuming what's good for the goose is good for the gander, Rep. Ann Mah (D-Topeka) proposed an amendment that would require men to buy separate insurance policies that covered erectile dysfunction drugs.  She pointed out that many insurance plans don't cover birth control, and asked why it was then fair to have women pay “the cost of Viagra for all the old guys who want to have sex?”

Mah's amendment passed 64-35.  Nineteen legislators who voted on the previous abortion amendment were strangely unable to rise in opposition.  And somewhere, Bob Dole spit out his Pepsi.

Since the House had also added an anti-smoking amendment, the Republican leadership saw it had prematurely lost control of the chamber (that usually only happens on the budget), so Rep. Virgil Peck (R-Technicolor Dreamcoat) proposed sending the bill back to committee, which the exhausted House promptly did.

Here We Grow Again - Under Dem LEADERSHIP

republicunt Hypocrisy