Powered by TypePad

« If Obama DID Use A Ghostwriter It Would Be Kennedyesque | Main | Oh, I See - It's Neither Taxes Nor Federal Spending If The Government Forces You To Do It »

October 08, 2009



Wouldn't that be something? They both have done such outstanding work I am sure that would be a delightful evening.


"The original contract was cancelled and his agent secured a second contract for far less money ($40,000) but as of 1994 there was nothing but a pile of notes, some taped interviews and a “partial manuscript,” according to Andersen. Then, Andersen says, at the suggestion of his wife Michelle, Obama turned the whole mess over to his “friend and neighbor” Bill Ayers."

Yeah I have a theory that the Ayers are leaking now for another reason. They know the comparisons and the rumors are out. So they are trying do some damage control. Since it is getting harder and harder to deny Ayers collaborated on the book, they are now trying to portray themselves as just neighborhood friends who just happened to give Obama a few writing tips.

But what they are really trying to hide is that Obama got the book advance and the idea to write the book through the connections to the Ayers and the urging by the Ayers, years before. They want to avoid any more info getting out that Obama was a creation of the Ayers.


And how many dinner parties do you get to go to Tom? Sounds like fun. So do you cook, or does your wife, or are they barbeques? We need the details.

Jack is Back!

Its the Obama background and missing files version of Chinese water torture - drip, drip, drip - information one drop at a time. Next up, the Pakistan trip passport and his days at Columbia (video at 10). All this does is reinvigorate the birthers.


But Obama appears to have always been a pretty bad writer

Is this (at least one of the reasons) why all records of Obama at Columbia and Harvard appear to be inaccessible ?

Jim Ryan

By the way, has anyone heard it said that "The CBO says the Baucus bill will save us money" yet? Facepalm.

Gregory Koster

Ask yourself: when you were 30, with a negligible publication record, how many publishers would have given you $150,000 for your life story, waited several years, and then given you $40,000 (was the original $150K repaid? Seems unlikely given that Mr. Spend Like Water had gotten his hands on it)to get the job done? No wonder The Once and Rolo feel entitled to anything and everything.

Someone should ask Yale Law Professor Stephen Carter, author of REFLECTIONS OF AN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION BABY, or I'M ALL RIGHT JACK and INTEGRITY, or SPEAK NOBLY BUT GET THE CASH UP FRONT if he's going to revise these two books.


"The CBO says the Baucus bill will save us money" yet?

Yeah, that's the headline - The Baucus bill without the legislative language and which will be changed in its entirety by Reid in the back room will save us a trillion bucks in 10 years.

Let's put a lien on that amount on every elected officials estate just in case they are wrong.

Old Lurker

"The CBO says the Baucus bill will save us money" yet?

Yeah, that's the headline"

Sure it does! Just like when my wife comes home from shopping and tells me she got a free gift for buying so much makeup.

CBO says we save money after raising taxes $400B and reducing care to seniors another $400B. Maybe we could save even more if we raised taxes $800B?


Jane--be sure to read the article linked somewhere here today by a former Dem speechwriter on how expensive the Mass healthcare plan is and how bad it is--she can no longer afford insurance..


Why Obama's Columbia years mattered. The question is do they still?


Yeah I saw it Clarice. WElcome to my world.


The CBO said the Baucus "concept" (there is no Baucus bill) would over tax by $89 billion over 10 years.

Unfortunately, the plan raised taxes and supposedly has cuts that span 10 years, but contains only about 7 1/2 years of healthcare, so even with the over taxing, it will be under funded by the end of the 11th year.

Jim Ryan

Jane, I have a poor friend in Mass. Any tips on where she can get cheaper health insurance than the arm/leg she now pays? She has no health problems. I told her to try to get catastrophic. Not sure if they allow that up there. Any tips appreciated.

Jim Ryan

Just like when my wife comes home from shopping and tells me she got a free gift for buying so much makeup.

I told my son I was going to save his some money. At the point of a gun I made him give me $500 bucks. I also started feeding him crappy food, and I put the food savings of $500 into my pocket. I then spent $900 from this $1000 on hookers for myself. Then, I forked over the remaining $100 to him. So, he's $100 ahead on the deal.


Jane, I have a poor friend in Mass.


There is the govt sponsored plan, which is lousy. I have blue Cross - I moved from Tufts to save $100 a month - but I have a $1500 deductible and am allowed one doctor visit a year and it costs close to $700 a month. I expect the govt plan is half that - but there is also I believe a big waiting period to get on.

My best advice is for her to get a job in Government.

Patrick R. Sullivan
By the way, has anyone heard it said that "The CBO says the Baucus bill will save us money" yet?

AS usual, Keith Hennessey is on this:

The Finance Committee staff are using timing gimmicks to “game the budget window.” They are slipping implementation dates and new subsidy programs by six months here and there so that a smaller share of new government spending shows up in CBO’s measured 10-year timeframe. This has the effect of allowing them to increase total actual long-term government spending, while holding scored spending constant. The figures being tossed around casually in the press of a $8XX B bill or a $9XX B bill are misleading, because they represent spending over different timeframes.

Meaning, that Baucus and friends simply gamed the CBO's scoring procedures.

Steve Diamond

Thanks for the interest in my views on this.

Do take the time to read my post about the Obama Administration's treatment of the Dalai Lama while visiting the site (LUN).

Patrick R. Sullivan

From the same Keith Hennessey piece linked to above:

...there’s a simple Washington-based argument that reinforces my conclusion: the industries that generate income from health spending generally support these bills. They know that the government mandates will, on net, increase total spending on health care and health insurance, the opposite of the President’s correctly stated policy goal. If these bills actually reduced health spending relative to current law, the insurers, doctors, hospitals, and other medical providers would oppose them. Remember that the insurance industry champions the individual mandate. How many other industries would like the U.S. government to force you to buy their product, and then prohibit you from buying inexpensive versions of it?

There's an article in Reuters Health today about the varying quality of healthcare among the states. Vermont is tops. Mass is 7th. I suppose quality costs. Also mentions the varying amounts of uninsured among the states and how the number of states with large amounts of uninsured have increased. So all the differences between the states may be why one person's take on health issues here might be totally different than another's.

Jim Ryan

Jane, thanks. That $700 is cheap compared to what she's paying. I'll tell her about your policy.

My best advice is for her to get a job in Government.

Heh. She's a small business owner, scraping by. Not going near any gummint job.


I was just listening to a woman in line at the grocery store. She was telling her friend about a story she'd read in the paper today, about a man whose insurance company would pay for him to be on a local organ donation wait list, but wouldn't fly him to another state be on their (shorter) list.

Apparently, a new public option would eliminate this. With a public option, when profit isn't important, we will all get to fly where ever we want for treatment.
So. Problem solved.

Jim Ryan

Mass is 7th. I suppose quality costs.

I see, so, Jane has to pay three times more for insurance in Mass than in I do in Virginia for similar coverage because the quality of care is higher. Got it. That lays the issue of high cost of health ins. in Mass to rest, thanks.


Sorry Jim but this is already settled. I looked up the rates on ehealthinsurance.com. The rates for a person the same age with the same deductible are the same for the poor states I looked up and for Mass. Give or take maybe $100 from the top rates.

Outside of Boston that is, as the rates there are a few hundred bucks higher, probably because it is so expensive to live there and no primaries can afford to practice there. Boston is a lovely city though. Always enjoyed it when I visited there. It might be worth the price.


Preposterous, sylvia. I'm getting out my pistolas.
Here's a Dem speechwriter's explanation of why insurance in Mass is unaffordable--and it's the same notions which The Won says he wants:
"Massachusetts has enacted many of the necessary reforms being talked about in Washington. There is a mandate for all residents to get insurance, a law to prevent insurance companies from denying coverage because of a pre-existing condition, an automatic enrollment requirement, and insurance companies are no longer allowed to cap coverage or drop people when they get sick because they forgot to include a sprained ankle back in 1989 on their application."

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/10/08/health-care-speechwriter-for-edwards-obama-and-clinton-doesnt/>Breaking!There's no pie in the sky


Well Clarice I just checked ehealthinsurance again for Jim Ryan's friend. You can get a policy in my state for a 55 year old woman with a $1500 deductible and no coinsurance (that's not allowed in Mass apparently) in the mid $400 to mid $500 range. And same for the zip for Salem Mass, (01970 - I just picked that town because I know the name and I know it's a smaller town - not Boston).

Now there is a little variation lower in my state, you can find high $300's and some variation higher in Mass, you can find low $600's, but most of the policies are in the middle. So where is this great price difference? I invite you to try the site for your state and see.


Do these charts cover insruance with these restrictions--There is a mandate for all residents to get insurance, a law to prevent insurance companies from denying coverage because of a pre-existing condition, an automatic enrollment requirement, and insurance companies are no longer allowed to cap coverage or drop people when they get sick because they forgot to include a sprained ankle back in 1989 on their application."

Because it is those restrictions, not found elsewhere which make Mass insurance more expensive and I would bet you that the policy charts you are looking are inaccurate and do not contain these restrictions .


Well you have a point that Mass has a more restrictive set of rules and you can't get the high deductibles and the high co-insurance plans there like you can in other states.

But if you compare apples to apples and compare the lux policies in Mass with the lux policies in other states, they are about the same. But yeah that is another debate whether it's good or not to allow the bargain basement insurance plans or not.

Jim Ryan

I find a two or three-fold difference between Mass/Boston and Virginia, using ehealthinsurance.com, depending on coverage.

Old Lurker

wasting your breath, Clarice.


Yes depending on the coverage Jim. If you put in the same coverage you get about the same rates. Don't forget the no coinsurance part.


And don't use Boston Jim. That's cheating. Use another Mass town. Then you'll have to compare Boston to NYC.


Try this https://www.mahealthconnector.org/portal/site/connector/

Mahealth insurance is very expensive--even those who favor govt health plan expansion recognize this.

Rick Ballard

"wasting your breath, Clarice."

Perhaps she's just checking on what new "facts" are being pulled the Personal Data Suppository on Sylviaworld today? I have no other guess as to why she would enter the land of the Sunrise Surprise.


Righto--Let me fire the pistolas into the air and if I make the error again I'm afraid I'll have to shoot myself (But not in Boston--"that's cheating" )


whether it's good or not to allow the bargain basement insurance plans

Who the fuck are you to forbid an insurance company and a person in need of insurance from agreeing to a transaction between the two of them?


"Who the fuck are you to forbid an insurance company and a person in need of insurance from agreeing to a transaction between the two of them? "

The taxpayer that has to bail them out when they go bankrupt because they can't afford the costs when they get really sick.

And Clarice, try my site. The number and the facts don't lie.

Sara (Pal2Pal)

I cannot believe the monthly outlay and the gigantic deductibles. I checked Calif. and Florida zipcodes and for someone my age, I can get good comprehensive coverage for under $400 per mo, but the deductibles are in the $5000 to $10,000 range. That is just stupid, IMHO, to purchase a policy that requires payments and deductibles that high.

I have had 3 fractured vertebrae since 2001 and haven't laid out even a fraction of those amounts for care. Why would I buy into that kind of monthly debt when I'd end up paying those huge deductibles anyway?

Even my knee replacement in 2005, while I still had BC/BS insurance, didn't cost what the deductible would be at the rates that were quoted at ehealthinsurance and I would still have had to break the bank paying the premium each month.



The art for the campaign was designed by Justin Kemerling, who was one of the artists featured in Shepard Fairey's Manifest Hope exhibit. In the coming days, we'll be announcing an art contest and with celebrity judges and featuring YouTubes of musicians, artists and ordinary Americans demanding a public option. We'll be taking up the cause of those, like Nataline, whose lives are considered acceptable losses in the quest for corporate profits.

One person helping her with this is NYCEVE from DailyKos, whose blogs are sponsored by SEIU.


This is scary.


Thomas Collins

Allowing cross state insurance company competition and prohibiting the states from piling up mandates (thus allowing so-called "bargain basement" plans) would be more effective reform than what Baucus and Company is going to produce. Take about 50 billion from the non-stimulus bill to support clinics and charitable hospitals and you have also accomplished reform for the uninsured. Throw in some tort reform and FSA account expansion, and we would have an improved system without stifling innovation.

I really have to laugh about concern with "bargain basement" plans. Such plans, along with a catatrophic rider, would make sense for a lot of folks, and would develop at a competitive level if cross state competition and mandate elimination were accomplished.

MassCare will only get worse. Remember that the disaster that was TennCare developed over time.

One of my worries is that it won't be clear by the 2010 elections that ObamaCare will be a disaster, so the negative impact on the Dems from ObamaCare's passage may not be as great as the Dems would deserve.


"Why would I buy into that kind of monthly debt when I'd end up paying those huge deductibles anyway?"

Well it just depends. High deductibles like that are good for people who make decent money who want to protect assets like property. If you are person without a lot of assets, then yeah, it might not make sense to worry about it. Might as well pay out of pocket what you can and then take your chances in bankruptcy court if you get unlucky.

The problem is people without the income are buying those high deductibles and then go bankrupt even with the insurance when it all hits the fan.

Thomas Collins

Via Instapundit, see LUN for the Cato Institute's dissection of the Baucus version of ObamaCare (it seems that there are several versions of ObamaCare, none of which ironically enough is Obama's). In the process of taking apart the Baucus scam, the report gives a nice summary of the MassCare scam.


One of my worries is that it won't be clear by the 2010 elections that ObamaCare will be a disaster

TC, it won't even be clear by 2012. It was planned that way.


There is a new rule here. The CATO
Institute is never allowed to be a reference for ROomneycare. I made this rule because the ONLY damn source of info on RomneyCare that I ever hear anyone talk about comes from CATO, and I don't think the country should allow only one source to do all our thinking for us on a topic. We should at least have, say, two. Especially when I debunked that CATO article a while ago.




Jeez, sylvia. I knew as soon as Jane mentioned what she was paying for insurance that you'd be in here squawking within minutes, but my goodness.


Romneycaare--a disaster according to the American Spectator and the Christian Science Monitor's Hsieh:
"Mitt Romney's health care debacle in Massachusetts lives on--unfortunately. Observes Paul Hsieh in the Christian Science Monitor http://spectator.org/blog/2009/10/01/mitt-romneys-health-care-disas:

The Massachusetts plan thus violates the individual's right to spend his own money according to his best judgment for his own benefit. Instead, individuals are forced to choose from a limited set of insurance plans on terms set by lobbyists and bureaucrats, rather than those based on a rational assessment of individual needs.

Because the state-mandated health insurance is so expensive, the government must also subsidize the costs for lower-income residents. In response, the state government has cut payments to doctors and hospitals. With such poor reimbursements, physicians are increasingly reluctant to take on new patients.

Some patients in western Massachusetts must wait more than a year for a routine physical exam. Waiting times for specialists in Boston are longer than in comparable cities in other states and have gotten worse. Some desperate patients have even resorted to "group appointments" where the doctor sees several patients at once (without the privacy necessary to allow the physician to remove the patient's clothing and perform a proper physical exam). These patients all have "coverage," but that's not the same as actual medical care.

The Massachusetts plan is also breaking the state budget. Since 2006, health insurance costs in Massachusetts have risen nearly twice as fast as the national average. The state expects to spend $595 million more in 2009 on its health insurance program than it did in 2006, a 42 percent increase. Those higher health costs help explain why the state faced a $5 billion budget gap this summer. To help close it, lawmakers raised taxes sharply.

The failure of the Romney plan most obviously demonstrates what Congress should not do. Alas, Sen. Max Baucus's so-called centrist alternative would end up almost as ruinous as a more formal government take-over of health care.


Yeah you're right Porch. I've spent enough time today on this. Although that CATO thing always get me going. Must break away though.


Well thank goodness Clarice another source on the subject finally! I will read it later and try to debunk that article as well.

Rick Ballard

This short piece offers a near perfect illustration of government run versus private insurance. If my memory serves, Oregon is not too far from Washington, yet:

While L&I pushes for businesses and workers to pay higher workers' comp taxes during a crippling recession, the system continues to flounder. In Washington, the average injured worker misses 257 days of work, nearly three times the national average. By contrast, Oregon's average time loss rate is about 70 days. And although employers are doing their part to improve job-site safety and control claims costs (since 1990, injured worker claims have dropped 55 percent), L&I's cost to administer these dwindling claims has increased 28 percent in the last year. In fact, Washington's workers' comp system is among the costliest in the nation.

That's what GovMed will look like - just as bankrupt as GovMo but able to ram neverending tax increases right down our throats. At least we can avoid GovMo Deathmobiles by buying Ford or Toyota.

For a little while longer.



PEW POLL: 47% Oppose ObamaCare, 34% Favor.

That’s even worse than the Quinnipiac poll. And a reader points out: “And that’s even after Pew interviews a margin of 11% more democrats than republicans.”


I wonder if Obama did have to repay the $150,000 advance? If so, where did he get the money to repay it? I'm sure he spent the money as soon as he cashed the check. Do you have to repay an advance if you don't deliver the book?


Wow, clarice, that's good news. I had gotten the sense from Ras that polls were slowly moving in O's favor...guess not.

Rick Ballard


A few days of "$400 billion in Medicare benefit cuts" in the news and the bill dies like a rabid dog. The nice thing is that it's the absolute truth. They're not planning a decrease in the rate of increase - they're going to cut benefits and they're going to start by cutting how much primary care physicians receive for a Medicare visit in 2011. I guess the Kill Granny Death Panels won't be set up until '12.


The taxpayer that has to bail them out when they go bankrupt

Why do you have to do that?


"So, he's $100 ahead on the deal."
I believe we have a new candidate for the position of Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee.


I hope you're right, Rick. I can't honestly say this October is more white knuckle than last October, but it's close.

Old Lurker

"That is just stupid, IMHO, to purchase a policy that requires payments and deductibles that high."

Sarah, that might very well be true for some individuals, but not for all.

I happen to prefer the highest deductible BCBS offers to Maryland residents - something like $20,000 for two - for two rational reasons: 1)we can cover the deductible if need be, and 2)the MUCH lower premiums "pay for" that deductible in just three years assuming our actual expenditures are "normal for us" in those three years. I have few other investments with three year paybacks.

Since we have followed this strategy for six years now, I have banked two full years of maximum deductibles.

That your decision is rational for you, and mine is rational for me, makes exactly the point that "one size fits all" coverage will be irrational for some.

It is the difference between using the insurance as "insurance against disaster", and using it as prepaid health care.


Jane, thanks. That $700 is cheap compared to what she's paying. I'll tell her about your policy.


If it helps, give her my email address and I'll find the name of the person at Blue Cross who I booked it with. She only deals with new customers. Email: fwdaj@live.com



Ignore Sylvia. I'm not in Boston and I don't think that is a price variant. MA has the highest premiums in the country, and we learned yesterday that ER's are just as full as ever. I have to book my appointments a year in advance now, as opposed to calling and getting an appointment next week. Sylvia doesn't pay for her health insurance which is her qualification for being an expert.

Old Lurker

Is she gone?

My finger is tired from "scrolling through".


Just don't start talking about the Duke Lacrosse players OL.

Old Lurker


JM Hanes

Steve Diamond's piece on the Dalai Lama, including his extended remarks in the comments, is well worth everyone's time. As you might expect, he covers the backstory that media should be bringing to public attention. What's been played as a symbolic gesture of deference to the Chinese has serious real world consequences.


One of the many things that frosts me about the Baucus bill is that sure as shootin', in 2010 when the government starts collecting health care taxes, the critters will not put it in a "healthcare lockbox" but rather start siphoning off the proceeds for pork, as they do with Social Security tax revenue today.

So, come 2013 we'll be in even worse shape come when the ObamaCare health care utopia is scheduled to take effect.

I wouldn't even trust most of these folks with my pocket change.

hit and run

I wouldn't even trust most of these folks with my pocket change.

Not going to make a joke about Barney Frank reaching for your pocket.


Captain Hate

Steve Diamond's piece on the Dalai Lama, including his extended remarks in the comments, is well worth everyone's time.

Yeah I went right to it when I saw his link; he gave a massive pawnage to the snotty douche in the comments with his "you're just missing the big picture" garbage. I think that guy is in a fetal position at his keyboard wondering if he'll ever find his happy place again.


Ok, way, way off topic here, but this is just crazy:

http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZjZlM2I1MDA5YWIzMzMyMTYxYmViZjA0MWIzMjFlYmY=>The Mother of All Expiration Dates: The Taliban Is No Longer a Direct Threat to Us

Someone needs to remind Obama that it was making the exact same kind of about face in Somalia after the "Blackhawk Down" fiasco al Qaeda that the US was weak and could be taken down with a few hard strikes. Doing this now, after finally defeating them in Iraq and putting them on the ropes in in the Af/Pak theater would be a total disaster and completely re-energize them.

Words fail to express how bad this really is.


No, sadly it's on point he was mentored by a terrorist, and an America hating preacher,
what could possibly go wrong, not surprising you get headlines like this in the LUN


Hit -

Heh. But eewwww...yuck.

Captain Hate

not surprising you get headlines like this in the LUN

Wow; they must be having a "Mission Accomplished" moment in the White House.


If only we had someone who 'gave a damn' about our fighting men and women, in the LUN


Mr Ballard:

Regarding L&I in WA state--years ago I was injured on the job and taken to the emergency room. L&I wouldn't pay the bill. They've been a joke for decades.

On another note I would like to relate a health adventure I recently had in Las Vegas.
I got terrible sick there and went to a walk in clinic. Although I have health insurance it is a large deductible and I explained to the folks at the desk I would be paying in cash.

When it came time to settle up the statement showed what the bill was if insurance was involved and what the cash price was. The cash price was less than half what the insurance price would have been.

Got wonderful care from a great doctor and the nurses. But that price discrepancy was a real eye opener.


Got wonderful care from a great doctor and the nurses. But that price discrepancy was a real eye opener.

Posted by: glasater | October 08, 2009 at 07:44 PM

Yes, Rush has a similar story. He has said several times that he paid cash at a hospital, and it cost less than half of what it would have been if he used insurance. Kind of amaizing when you think about it.


Isn't that illegal?

I'm certain it's illegal for a doctor's office to bill an insurance company for an amount and then not make the patient pay the amount insurance won't.

Old Lurker

Why should that be illegal? Let me think, cash in hand today, or cash, maybe, long in the future after X number of manhours trying to get it. Those lines have to cross at some point, so why should the cash payer not split the savings with the doc?

Rick Ballard


Why would a cash discount be illegal? I believe that it's actually pretty common and I don't see anything even slightly unethical, let alone illegal in discounting for immediate payment.

The insurance/Medicare scam is a very expensive burden. It would be absolutely unsurprising to see cash payments actually make a brief comeback before the progressive jackboot slams down on our faces forever.


It certainly is amazing.

When I go to a doc in my hometown--they bill the insurance automatically and I believe it is so the insurance company puts that cost toward the deductible.
Had a procedure done two years ago and just recently got a bill from the lab for a portion of the cost that evidently had been bouncing for all that time.
I called the lab and apologized for the confusion and that they had to wait so long to get paid.


Well, I asked, I didn't say it was.

It is illegal for a doctor's office to tell the insurance company it is charging the patient more than it really is so the insurance company pays more (and the patient less).

A cash discount does make sense, but a lot of laws around insurance billing in the name of fairness don't make sense, frankly.


OT, this colloquoy between Latimer and Ponnuru, it's like Iran and Iraq, you don't want either to win,


It would have been better to put it this way:

The lab kept billing the insurance company 'cause that's what they are used to doing. Having the insurance company pay the bill.
Had the insurance company just called the lab or sent the bill to me the lab would not have had to wait two years to get paid. But neither company chose to do that.

Uncle BigBad

Sylvia is the new Carol Hermann


No, Carol's much more cryptic, I should talk right, she's over on Surber's side most of the time.

Ranger kill Laden, Diamond Atomic Llama, Beasts across the Stream.

Ranger, has bin Laden reached his 'kill by' date?

Steve et al: Don't miss 'The Universe in a Single Atom', by the Dalai Lama.

Carol and sylvia are both fabulous stream of consciousness thinkers. Appreciate them, their pearls and their flaws.

Buford Gooch

This site is usually so much fun in the "Whack-A-Troll department. It seems that Sylvia completely discombobulates the normal troll whackers, though.


Buford- that's part of her art. She usually starts out with a statement that makes some sense. Maybe the reader can agree. Then she builds up to an absurd conclusion via ever-increasingly nonsensical assumptions and assertions. By the time you get to the end of her screed, you don't understand where it went wrong-- you just know that it did.
Untangling it is like pulling just one fishhook out of a bowl of fishhooks.

If you do manage to swat down one of her assertions, she simply starts rebuilding using another, newer, more absurd assumption.
I don't think she believes what she is saying so much as she is testing her own ability to build her art piece.

Sara (Pal2Pal)

Sylvia's last comment was over 4 hours ago and you're still bashing her? C'mon.


I'm praising her.


I think we have all known at least one "sylvia" in our lifetimes (in person, not on the web).

They are basically pretty lonely souls, able to clear a room simply by entering in.

They are not flawed. It is you who are flawed.

Poor, poor things.

Charlie (Colorado)

I think it's all because HHTDL said he loved George Bush and met with McCain during the campaign.


Breaking:National Enquirer:
"David Letterman's sensational sex scandal has triggered a $300 million divorce war between the 62-year-old talk-show host and his outraged wife Regina, say sources close to the star.

The couple - who lived together for years before marrying March 19 - are fighting over everything from his extensive property holdings to custody of their son Harry, 6, according to insiders.

"It's become a real battle," revealed a Late Show insider.

"Regina is humiliated, and she wants to get even with David for his public admission he cheated on her repeatedly during their 23-year relationship."

The ENQUIRER was told the kinky late-night host maintained a fully equipped love nest, likes to play "dress up" - and even had a girlfriend parade around with a set of pom-poms pretending to be a cheerleader.

Letterman owns a very successful production company - ironically named Worldwide Pants - plus a fortune in real estate, and boasts an annual income of more than $45 million."


Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet

The Enquirer has just become the hottest publishing property in the country. Think of it. Simultaneous coverage of dissection of Edwards and Letterman by their very well-represented wives.

Sulzberger is crying in his beer right now. The Grey Lady is about to be overtaken by the Enquirer. Is there anything that can go wrong for the NYT?


Okay Clarice I skimmed your article and I already see lots of propaganda.

It talks about not being able to book a primary in Mass. What none of these articles talk about is the main reason is that there is a severe SHORTAGE of primaries in Mass, and has been for years, even before Romneycare. As there is a shortage of primaries across the country, but historically more severe in Mass.

Second it talks about the premiums and costs doubling. Hello! The premiums and costs have doubled in much of the country. That is why we are in a health care crisis now. So again that is not a result of ROmneycare.

As to not being able to choose your own benefits, I think that is a good thing. Many people are gamblers, like the poster here with the high deductible. I can understand why they would do it but I don't know if he realizes that if he gets really sick, like years of cancer treatment, once he has a high deductible, he can't lower it at that point. So if he has a $20,000 deductible, he might be able to swing it for the first year he is sick, but can he swing $20K a year for 4 or 5 or 10 years in a row? Most people couldn't. That's why I think in the end it's good to make the deductibles reasonable.

And as to the state lowering payments to doctors, I don't think one has that much to do with the other. That has also been happening all oer the country as the budget deficits have gone up. But I would have to look into that more.

So basically the problems with all these proganda articles is that they are not comparing Mass problems with the rest of the countries. They need a baseline first to establish their case.


"she builds up to an absurd conclusion via ever-increasingly nonsensical assumptions and assertions. "

I'm sorry but there is a little irony here. I think you may be guilty of this, not me. I try to stick to the facts and give sources for my ideas. The rest of you cling to your ideas even in the face of facts, and then console yourselves with the idea that I am being nonsensical.

Like Jane for instance. I show her the website with the health insurance prices, show her they are comparable, give her the stats, and she STILL refuses to believe it. I show her a medical article from years ago talking about a severe primary shortage in Mass, and she STILL refuses to believe it. Now THAT'S nonsensical. You can't argue with a person like that.

Rick Ballard

There is a sack of hammers somewhere which is experiencing a momentary feeling of intellectual superiority. And rightfully so, as well.


Rick- case in point. You can't argue with my facts, so you resort to insults. A mark of inferior intelligence. But stupid people hardly bother me anymore. I am used to them. It's the human condition sadly.

Rick Ballard

Conversing with an incoherent jibbering idiot isn't the best use of anyones time. I agree with MayBee that this is "performance art" but watching you beclown yourself for your own amusement has grown tiresom. You need a different schtick or a new venue.

Kim - if by "stream of consciousness" you were referring to filling a urinal, you have a point.


Anyway the irony with a high deductible is that the people who can afford to pay $10k or $20K costs in a year, years in a row, are obviously rich people. Those are the same people who can afford a few hundred bucks extra in premiums a month for a low deductible, which they don't have to use if they don't want to.

And the poorer people who are getting the high deductibles because they can't afford the premiums are not the people who can afford the 20K a year payments.

So Romney was right, basically a very high deductible is useless.


Rick, see my earlier post about insults and stupidity.

The comments to this entry are closed.