Political Processes - Can we talk?

[Frybabe]

I did keep trying to see a persepctive from the GOP but this last revelation that they not only jammed the website but hired actors to publicly show an outrage on TV and social media about being denied insurance that was a lie was not the kind of duplicite behavior that goes with anything I learned in school about Democracy, nor anything JFK subscribed, nor anything Eisenhower subscribed.

Barb, I have not seen this reported on any of the stations I watch nor on my local newspaper's website (and they are generally pro Dem).

[mogamom]

MSNBC reported that the GOP had a playbook to guide its representatives/senators in gathering info on how Obama care was working in their state.

That seems pretty normal - to record how a new program is working.   How does that get interpreted as something of evil intent?  Where is the logic in all this?  It doesn't suggest anything improper or even negative.  Every other report I've heard shows that the 'A'CA has been a disaster - dem or rep - leaning site.  And even leading dems are now calling for a stay on the individual mandate.  The law is bad law - it was not written well, was implemented before anyone even read or studied it or thought through its implications/possible negative consequences.

So even in the bright light of the rollout people are so invested in universal health care that they are unwilling to change this ill-concieved law.  That leads me to believe that this is ideology at work - and has little to do with actually solving any problem in health care coverage for the poor.  This is certainly in keeping with Systems Theory (once a program/agency is implemented/formed it is next to impossible totake it away or even make any major changes to reduce it; it just keeps growing - in this case, until there is a single-payer system), but has been an unmittigated disaster.

The only rollout worse than this one is the Common Core Curriculum that even its supporters admit has been poorly received primarily because it was 'thrown together'.  This appears to be as big a disaster for the Education System as 'A'CA has been for the Health Care System.

[BarbStAubrey]

The memo distributed to House Republicans this week was concise and blunt, listing talking points and marching orders: “Because of Obamacare, I Lost My Insurance.” “Obamacare Increases Health Care Costs.” “The Exchanges May Not Be Secure, Putting Personal Information at Risk.” “Continue Collecting Constituent Stories.”

    The document, the product of a series of closed-door strategy sessions that began in mid-October, is part of an increasingly organized Republican attack on the Affordable Care Act, President Obama’s signature legislative initiative. Republican strategists say that over the next several months, they intend to keep Democrats on their heels through a multilayered, sequenced assault.

That's from The New York Times, which apparently has become the lucky recipient of leaks galore from House Republican operatives eager to convince skeptics that it does in fact have an effective and viable political strategy, and that they are not, contrary to most available evidence, a bunch of nincompoops. The report is filled with a bunch of self-congratulatory rhetoric from Republicans impressed with their ability to have put the administration on defense over Obamacare, which completely makes sense except for the part about how the primary reason why Obamacare has gotten bad press is because in most states, consumers could not access exchanges because of the botched implementation of healthcare.gov and some state-based exchange web sites.

[BarbStAubrey]

PDF Republican Playbook on Obamacare

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2013/images/11/21/obamacare-playbook.pdf

[BarbStAubrey]

The New York Times reported on Thursday, G.O.P. Maps Out Waves of Attacks Over Health Law:

The memo distributed to House Republicans this week was concise and blunt, listing talking points and marching orders: “Because of Obamacare, I Lost My Insurance.” “Obamacare Increases Health Care Costs.” “The Exchanges May Not Be Secure, Putting Personal Information at Risk.” “Continue Collecting Constituent Stories.”

The document, the product of a series of closed-door strategy sessions that began in mid-October, is part of an increasingly organized Republican attack on the Affordable Care Act, President Obama’s signature legislative initiative. Republican strategists say that over the next several months, they intend to keep Democrats on their heels through a multilayered, sequenced assault.

The idea is to gather stories of people affected by the health care law — through social media, letters from constituents, or meetings during visits back home — and use them to open a line of attack, keep it going until it enters the public discourse and forces a response, then quickly pivot to the next topic.

First it was the malfunctioning website, HealthCare.gov, then millions of insurance policy cancellation notices sent to individuals with plans that did not meet the requirements of the health law. Earlier this week, the House aired allegations that personal data is insecure on the Internet-based insurance exchanges.

At a congressional field hearing set for Friday in Gastonia, N.C., the line of attack will shift to rate shocks expected to jolt the insurance markets in the next two years. Coming soon: a push to highlight people losing access to their longtime physicians and changes in Medicare Advantage programs for older people.

[BarbStAubrey]

Daniel Strauss – November 20, 2013, 5:41 PM EST10437

An Americans for Prosperity attack ad directed at Sen. Mark Begich (D-AK) over Obamacare purports to feature a voter for Alaska, but the woman is actually an actress who lives in the state of Maryland, according to The New York Times.

In the ad, a woman criticizes Begich, who is up for re-election in 2014, and President Barack Obama for the "promises they made to pass Obamacare."

"They knew the real truth,"  the woman said in the ad. "Some are even losing their jobs. For too many of us costs are going way up. Senator Begich didn't listen. How can I ever trust him again? It just isn't fair. Alaska deserves better."

In fact, the woman speaking is an actress Connie Bowman, who regularly does voiceovers as well as appearances in print ads.

The Koch brothers-funded Americans for Prosperity ad doesn't explicitly say the woman is an Alaskan, but the Begich campaign slammed the spot for the implication.

"Today's misleading ad from the Koch brothers is just more evidence that even billions of dollars can't buy integrity," Begich spokeswoman Rachel Barinbaum told the Times.

To keep the senator from being too closely associated with Obamacare, Begich's office also released a fact sheet calling attention to his support for legislation that would let Americans keep their current insurance through 2015.

Americans for Prosperity released a statement saying that Begich was just trying to distract from Obamacare.

"While Sen. Begich is focused on the residence of an actress in a TV ad, thousands of Alaskans have lost their health care plans despite promises from Sen. Begich to the contrary," Americans for Prosperity spokesman Levi Russell said in a statement. "Alaskans deserve an answer about why he would continue to doggedly support a law that is leading to less choice, higher premiums, and more bureaucracy.

"The Senator can say he wants to ‘fix’ this law, but he already voted against a bill in 2010 that would help keep health plans grandfathered in. Once again, his focus is on politics, not real people."

[BarbStAubrey]

CNN obtains GOP playbook to target Obamacare
Posted by
CNN Senior White House Correspondent Jim Acosta   

Washington (CNN) - It's a playbook on the bruising field of health care politics, complete with "x's and o's."

The House Republican strategy memo, entitled "Because of Obamacare... I lost my insurance," offers samples of talking points, social media, videos, digital flyers, op-eds, and a fact sheet for GOP lawmakers doing battle against the president's signature legislative achievement.

[nlhome]

I agree, kidsal, the law isn't perfect, but many have been helped and the potential for more is there.

And I do know personally people who have been helped by the exchanges, including people now who will have lower premiums, even without the premium assistance (People who currently have COBRA or who have individual policies that are extremely expensive because of their health and age), people who have been unable to get insurance because of their health issues and now can enroll, and others. I honestly have not yet met anyone who has been seriously harmed. I am sure there are some - with major change there are always some who lose while others win. It will take some time for this to all work out.

[kidsal]

My neighbor who is a substitute teacher came over this evening to deliver an invite to her 50th wedding anniversary party.  Got to discussing -- what else - Obamacare and Common Core.  I have always worked for the Federal government so have good insurance.  However, when I was in Junior High I moved from Oakland, CA to my home town of Ames, Iowa.  I found I was behind in math (fractions, percentages) and have never caught up.  Believe this is one good thing about Common Core -- will be able to move around the country and not find yourself behind or ahead.  Guess being ahead would be best

[jane]

I am so  sick of this sort of thing from the Pentagon/ Dept of Defense.  This has gone on for years and years...administration after administration...and if Congress is looking for greed and fraud and mismanagement, the Pentagon should be the FIRST place to look, in my mind.

Pentagon Fraud and Waste and Mismanagement for years!

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/18/us-usa-pentagon-waste-specialreport-idUSBRE9AH0LQ20131118


And read the line about the budget being more than "the 10 next largest military spenders COMBINED". (Capitals are mine.)

[Emails went out to both my Senators and my Representative this morning with the above word for word and the link, AND I added this at the end of those emails ].




CONGRESS allows this to go on year after year and whines there is no money for health care, education for its citizens, etc. CONGRESS and you, its leaders, should be ashamed!
Congress continues to pour $$$ into this bottomless pit of fraud and greed and mismanagement. STOP this madness and take care to know what is being spent there and who is getting our tax dollars!

[BarbStAubrey]

The only way to stop this is to trace the money - who benefits - what companies and who owns those companies and who are the stockholders tht benefits from the huge Pentagon and Defense budget -

The manufacturing needs for the Defense dept is spread out and so we have to look at where these government contracts are being filled in our own state because that is the where the push comes from - they sell to congress the concept of cut them in any budget cut and you cut jobs in your state. They counter with the value of jobs over giving a handout which is how they view most social benefits

We see that push back now in the health care industry that is no longer run by the doctors - once they sold out to insurance that was the end of their power but those who are making the most noise are benefiting from the system as it is now. In order to reduce the Defense Department budget I doubt it would go to schools, health, poor, aged etc. They do not even see a profit in schools unless they can become private - there is more profit in prisons than schools.

The hue and cry since the 1960s has been to get the government to run more like a business pushing statesmen out - just look at how few congressmen have a law degree or for today a political science degree. They are in office because big business put them in office and using their marketing skills to entice the public to give them their vote. All business is is a process to convert manpower and intelligence into energy to trade for either more power or the ultimate money.

And so in our drive to make government balance its budget and get more bang from our government investment we have turned a government which is a social organization into a business enterprise that those who figured it out and have the capitol are running this quasi-government.

[mogamom]

Daniel Strauss – November 20, 2013, 5:41 PM EST10437

Sorry, I'm not familiar with this.  Many groups hire actors/actresses to represent an individual who has written to the company.  In our state a 'disclaimer' (not of the veracity of the story, but of the impression that it is the individual noted who is being shown) is required - I really don't know about Alaska but will check it out carefully.

As to the republicans having a plan to bring these failures to light, I am not surprised (nor offended) at all: they should represent their constituents.  No one is saying that they are making these statements up - there really are many more problems to the 'A'CA than a few 'glitches'; I'm sure you're following the hearings?   I know very little about computers so I have to defer to testimony from IT experts who all agree that it is a poorly devised system.  One problem it apparently has is that it is supposed to interact with about 8 other federal systems and these cannot be interconnected because they were not originally designed to do this.  One journalist points out that Obama also said that the system would work like buying something on Amazon (see articles below) in which he was also lying (misrepresenting? mis-promising?) to the American public.

Democrats are frequently brought to the WH to be given 'talkiing points' and, up until this point, have voted in step with the party.  That has been characterized as 'loyalty', and 'accurately/faithfully representing their constituency'.

I'm curious, though.  Waht were the republicans supposed to do?  What woud have been the right response to all these problems? What have been the responses of democrats in similar situations?

http://www.foxbusiness.com/on-air/willis-report/blog/2013/10/23/obamacare-target-scam-artists?intcmp=obnetwork

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/nov/24/curl-democrats-war-bailing-obama/?page=2

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/nov/12/hurt-its-the-democrats-not-the-gop-facing-a-loomin/

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/11/opinion/daring-to-complain-about-obamacare.html

And this:  http://www.redstate.com/2013/11/22/the-new-york-times-equates-opposing-obamacare-with-slavery/

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/20/opinion/edsall-the-obamacare-crisis.html?pagewanted=3

"The split between lawmakers and the White House reflects the dilemma the president finds himself in as he seeks to follow through on last week’s acknowledgment about his incorrect promise (an interesting way to characterize it - my comment here) on health care coverage. Hundreds of thousands of people have received cancellation notices from health insurance companies because their plans do not conform with minimum standards set by the new law."

[BarbStAubrey]

The Republicans were supposed to obey and SUPPORT the law that was even challenged in the Supreme Court!

[BarbStAubrey]

No law is perfect!  Every law offended someone - many of us just did not expect the US Congress to support attempts to arrange for folks to speak on National News telling us lies in order to support insurance giants who want to subvert the law - is Civil Rights next or maybe we go back to the more affective DDT - how about hiring actors to feign the implications so we can ignore OSHA.

As to becoming so depraved as to hire actors and then attempting to justify this, why not justify rape OH I forgot the GOP is already doing that - all I see is contempt for the law and contempt for the people who are being helped by the law and then to hear an average citizen justifying this contempt - hmm I wonder what the Bible does say about that - need to look up that one.

OK this is not putting me in a good place - it is too easy for me to dwell on the same feelings of contempt for those who are trying to justify subverting the law so I think the best thing is for me to give my attention to the books we read on this site...

[mogamom]

No offense was ever intended.  I certainly do not condone lying - of any kind. 

But, let's just take a minute to remember the process that led to this law.  Republicans were locked out of the process.  The public was promised access to a copy of the law.  A draft was posted on-line at one point.  And at one point the republicans were actually locked out of chambers - they were told they weren't needed for a vote.  It was passed at the last minute with every democrat voting for it.  Those congressmen who were brave enough held town meetings over their break - and they were confronted by angry constituents - many of whom had read more of the law than they had.  Every poll taken since that time has only shown a majority of citizens who did not want to be thrust into this health care fix.

Republicans were hired to represent their constituents, just as democrats are.

They tried to slow down the roll-out process because everyone in congress and the administration knew it was not ready.  Some groups were exempted - unilaterally by the president (who does not have the constitutional power to change the law; thus showing contempt for the constitution, our law).  The majority party refused to compromise on any part of it.  So it went through - and here we are.

This is pure 'redistribution' - not anything like SS or Medicare.  And apparently those making $50,000 are now 'the rich'. 

So, if all those journalists from all those articles/newsshows from all those different sources are all only being fooled/used/lied to/deceived, we're in more serious trouble than can be imagined, because they are all painting the same picture. 

[nlhome]

Mogamon, I think you have a different perspective of the law's development than the one I saw. Frankly, the President spent too much time and effort trying to get the Republicans on board with the law. Some of the things, such as a lack of a public option, were the result of compromises. The law wasn't passed overnight - it was a long time coming. There was a lot of input, including the law that was developed in Massachusetts.  I'm not sure you are looking at more neutral sites, such as Kaiser or Families USA, which have facts rather than stories.


Look back to the creation of Medicare Part D - there was a lot of arm twisting, midnight voting, and misinformation in that law as well. But it passed, and it was put into effect, much to many peoples' dismay, including mine. There were a lot of computer problems with that law, and many many problems with the website. The law was passed in 2002 or 03, enrollment started in 2005 and coverage started in 2006. There were many problems, insurance companies that were suspended from participating, people who didn't understand it, enrollment periods that had to be changed, even extended because of problems with mailings and computers, fraud. However, the differences:  it was more limited in coverage than the ACA, and politicians and the states got involved to see that people were helped to enroll. It was the law, and people got behind it. My thought at the time was it was much too complicated and put too much power in the hands of insurance companies, but it has continued to work for most, and elders now have access to insurance for prescription drugs, something only a few had before then. It wasn't "good" law at the beginning - it was given time and support to develop.

[mogamom]

Thank you.  I do remember those events.  Do individuals have to sign up for Medicare D?

[nlhome]

Medicare D is not mandatory, BUT there is a 1% a month premium penalty for every month a person could have been in a Part D plan and was not (unless they had other creditable coverage), so that people who turn 65, have no prescriptions and decide not to enroll, and then 5 years later decide they now need coverage will have a 60% premium penalty. That's 60% of the average premium nationwide, so if the average premium  in a year is $30, then that person's premium is increased by $18 a month, every month, no end unless the person becomes so poor as to become eligible for "extra help." That penalty amount would change each year based on the cost of the average premium. For a person who has no prescriptions or only takes generics and believes that will continue, not taking a Part D plan may pay off - unless, of course, he/she develops a chronic disease and needs the really expensive drugs. It's not unusual for people to have prescription drug bills of over $600 a month.

There is also a penalty for not enrolling in Medicare Part B - 10% a year for every year a person could have been enrolled and wasn't. The only real exception to that is if a person is covered by employer group coverage through the person's or the person's spouse's active employment.

[jane]

ACA ...
Our paper today had a separate 4 page insert that explained who needed to sign up, [and who didn't]. how to sign up.....it gave the website, 4 in person sites, a telephone number, and a snail mail place...and what the advantages were, etc.  It was sponsored by two hospital groups....the Univ. of Iowa healthcare network and Mercy Hospital...a Catholic hospital in Cedar Rapids.  The insert was very well done, I thought.

[nlhome]

There is a lot of good information available on the ACA. And a lot of confusion. But that's to be expected with such a major program. It is to the hospitals' benefit for people to have insurance, of course, but also ours as taxpayers and health consumers. I just wish there had been a public option or some other way to encourage better cost management.

[jane]

I wish, too, more people realized we the taxpayers do pay for those who don't have insurance.

Back to another of my earlier rants....waste and fraud in the Pentagon thanks to our Congress.  This about $3 BILLION Congress insists be spent on M1 Abrams tanks that the military doesn't want.  The top General has said so over and over.  He said 2/3 of their tanks SIT in the Nevada desert because they don't need them...but Congress puts it in every year.  It's ALL about the Congresspersons being reelected to their cushy jobs and the safety/economy of the entire country be damned!
GRRRRRRRRRR!!!

I've emailed all my congress people yet again.  They probably have my emails going into the spam folder, but I keep emailing them. 

[BarbStAubrey]

Jane what they come back with is do you want jobs or more money for food stamps or education. The congressmen who ok this wasted meney are keeping jobs to make thise tanks in their state and those who own the manufacturing sites are probably big donors.

[jane]

Yes, I know.....but why not get those companies to build what we need....bridge parts, etc.  Would they need to spend some of their obscene profits to retool and retrain?  Yes....but money better spent than for stuff to sit and deteriorate in storage.

Bridges in this country are in serious trouble.

[BarbStAubrey]

Yes, sounds good - what most of us really want - now how do they go through all over again the manipulation to get the contracts to their state - the budget has the money in defense - if it is changed to another committee or under another secretary than the congressmen have to go into war with other congressmen to get the contractors in their state approved because everyone knows that is what they want where as, when they first got the contracts for the tanks it was slipped in quietly in another bill that had to do with defense.

Logic is great when we are playing the same game - but this is high stakes monopoly and calling in favors and making the right friends - not knowing for sure what committee bridges would be financed from puts congressmen in the same peril as wall street talks about when there is no stable and clear future.

I am not trying to be difficult - I too would like to see change however, in order for change to take place we need to understand how the system works and what we and our congressmen are up against. We need to see how our rep could thread themselves through the system that is not what is written on paper - most of us can only read books and in the past observe how things are accomplished in Washington. So much is based on influence and that is dwindling with no one staying in Washington as they did at one time - I think that is part of the dysfunction - they are not able to garner enough influence to make things happen other than to simply rebel against each other, and the other branches of government.  

[jane]

The American people made their voices heard on bombing Syria.  Our Congress and Admin heard the American people.  I believe if they heard us as loud and clear on this waste and fraud...and knowing these voices are watching and voting, Congress suddenly will start listening.  Most don't want to lose an election, it seems.  

I also believe those who won't listen to compromise or who hold to positions that are untenable are one of the big problems...as seen in the shutdown and 40+ attempts to shut down ACA that go nowhere.  It's time they focus on things they can fix...and this pentagon waste is at the top of my list.

[kidsal]

I agree with President Obama who said in his interview with Chris Mathews that the mid-term elections are as important as the presidential elections. Need to pay more attention as to who we are electing to congress. 

[jane]

Kidsal....absolutely agree!

[jane]

I heard something on the news tonight that has me outraged.  How can a judge do something that others say is illegal? That is to allow a defense based on being rich and privileged??

Affluenza Defense: Rich Texas Teen Gets Probation For Killing 4 Pedestrians While Driving Drunk

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/12/affluenza-defense-probation-for-deadly-dwi_n_4430807.html

[BarbStAubrey]

yes, we have been seeing this for the past few days and the teen is arrogant as well - whatever his parents do they must have the judge in their hip pocket - judges call the shots - there are no laws to determine punishment With all that power it is why they are typically elected as compared to years ago when they were appointed - a lot of good that change did us.

[Frybabe]

I think the defense is ridiculous, the judge's ruling outrageous. It is not included in the APA's DSM-4 criteria, so how that defense can have any standing is beyond me. As far as I am concerned, it just reinforces the belief and behavior of snotty rich kids that they can do pretty much anything they want and get away with it. The judge's rationale is that if he were sent to jail, he would be out in 2yrs (I just love when prisoners don't have to serve near their stated time, don't you?). The judge went the rehab route instead so that the justice system can keep track of him for a whole ten years. I don't have a lot of faith in that.

Someone is trying to make affluenza into something though. PBS had a program about it. http://www.pbs.org/kcts/affluenza/  Notice the words diagnosis and treatment?

Wikipedia has a short blurb about a book written in 2001 titled Affluenza: The All Consuming Epidemic. Notice that it is listed as an anti-consumerism book and is written by a documentary activist, an environmental scientist, and an economist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affluenza:_The_All-Consuming_Epidemic

Here is another interesting article which brings up the future of affluenza as a defense. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/12/14/whats-the-future-for-affluenza-defenses/4016059/  Note that the term is not strickly limited to rich folk. One could apply the word to those who seek instant gratification, who feel compelled to "keep up with the Joneses", etc. How many college students do you know today who expect to make the big bucks straight out of college? How many people do you know who routinely purchase so much on their credit cards to the extent that they can only pay the minimum or part each month? How many people do you know that just have to have the latest and greatest gadget even if the one they have is still functional?

[BarbStAubrey]

This concept of affluence is so complicated - I think the outrage is because he was not given a similar sentence to other folks - then when you look at it - these kids have to be changed and to do that means not only therapy but being removed from their influential environment.

So how can a family making less than 80K annual income or even 100K afford the cost of treatment - a month is usually minimum and the cost for a month is about 10K. Some as cheap as 8K and most often more than one month is needed plus they then cannot be successful going back to the same environment which often includes the same homelife and hope to stay on a road towards change.

I agree prison does little to change folks but then that is where we still are confused about the role of prison - it is to change those who cannot function in society or is it to punish - some crimes are only punishable but far more are folks who will leave prison and we want them to be different with no tools accept they are older and their past lifestyle has changed as has the environment changed that surrounded them when they committed the crime. And so the only real change factor is time. In the meantime that time brutalized and kept the prisoner separate from any responsibility toward society and his or her family.

You have to question our thirst for revenge, and the power over this person, who humiliated us with whatever the crime that we have, through the law and the traditions of the court to see punishment inflicted.

[BarbStAubrey]

As to living beyond our means - it seems to be ingrained in the best of us - even a group of young folks without a substantially more affluent school mate and still, no one wants to feel left out - there are a few and they get the brunt - everyone wants whatever latest 'thing' that shows they are the leader or at least an acceptable member of the pack.

I even remember a heartfelt TV movie of a young bright Mexican American girl who was taken under a teachers wing. She guided the girl to apply for and the girl received a 4 yr. scholorship to College and the girl was to speak as Valedictorian of her class - the teacher buys a smart black business suit for her to wear while giving her speech and to start her off on the next step of her success. IN the meantime her mother is so proud and only knows her culture and is a caring and beautiful seamstress who makes a beautiful dress all ruffles and more appropriate for a quinceañera. Unexpected and un-be-knowings to the girl her mother comes and stands in the back of the auditorium for the graduation. She never tells her daughter but she is heartbroken.  She learns she is not good enough nor appropriate.

Sure there is culture involved but also there is the example that a certain dress is held in esteem and if you do not have a fairy godmother, teacher or otherwise you need to figure out how to dress as expected which later means dress your kids as expected and live in the kind of house in the kind of neighborhood that is expected which means to be included in this neighborhood community there are all sorts of things that put them over the edge finanically to keep up with what is expected and to socialize with those who will influence the job you get or the way your kids will be accepted.

There may be no free lunch or fairy godmothers but the expectations are there and if you break the law and do not have the means to get the treatment needed to make a change in your life than the best we can hope for is that the person will be taken off the street and away from the environment that influenced the choice to break the law.

So again, is this about revenge that we compare the treatment to what is uncomfortable that others experience because they cannot personally afford a year in a treatment center.  It used be be that we reminded ourselves we were never promised a rose garden and we made the best we could of what put us one step up on the ladder - That is what has been pulled out from under us today and what I really think this is all about.

[jane]

Somehow killing 4 people and injuring others because you're drunk, a thief, and out of control doesn't mix for me with a dress and feeling "low esteem."  Maybe most of you grew up and had all the latest in clothing, cars, homes, etc.  I didn't.  A lot of kids I went to high school with didn't.  So, I guess we all had "self-esteem" issues..and yeah, we were bullied, too.  But, that we could and did survive.  We couldn't have survived being killed by a rich, out-of-control drunken thief.

Accidents where no liquor or drugs are involved and  people die are horrible...situations where your loved one dies because a  person is driving over the speed limit, takes what does not belong to him, and is more than several times is over the limit in intoxication would be very hard for me to forget or forgive.

"Authorities said the teen and friends were seen on surveillance video stealing two cases of beer from a store. He had seven passengers in his Ford F-350, was speeding and had a blood-alcohol level three times the legal limit."

I guess what the court is saying is if you're folks are rich enough, the rules don't apply to you.

[BarbStAubrey]

I agree but then therapy and treatment centers are not about low self esteem are they?

 I wonder how prison helps any teen who makes a poor choice without seeing the consequences of their behavior - but then, as I ask myself do those who are out of control need prison to change their behavior - and if so who pays for it - it would probably be cheaper for all of us to send most prisoners to treatment centers where there is change with long term support as compared to the cost to the tax payer of keeping someone in prison.

I also think there is a lot more about the health of our bodies which includes our mind that is known today with treatment for our greater understanding of health than when we were kids - We had no idea other than kids acted out when we were young - now so much is known about the mind and how we react with our past traumas - I hope we get to a day when all kids can afford decent mental health but until that day comes we are unfortunately limited to treating poor kids like we did 50 and 70 years ago.  

Most kids, even in our generation took things from stores - his problem was what he took they drank and he was driving - not having the details of the accident it is hard to say if he was the sole cause of the accident -

I get the impression a family lost some family members and they are devastated - I would be devastated as well - and it appears the driver was young and under the influence - the biggest message I get from the news and remarks on Huffington is the comparison to how the family thinks others would have been punished as compared to this kid -

The family does not know how another kid would have been punished - none of us know - that is supposition - they do not see being on parole for 10 years as enough punishment. Some folks after a devastating blow believe they will feel better if the one who they believe caused the deaths of their loves ones is punished in a way they would prescribe.

There is much in this story about the current anger over inequality in wealth and the inequality in perceived appropriate punishment that, since the sentence does not fit their picture of due punishment therefore, the wealth must be the reason. The idea of changing behavior is not something they have experienced as a solution except as punishment as their only reference to changing behavior. And then they cannot seem to move on but would prefer to look at, what they consider their measure of what they expected to have happened as a lack of justice.

The kid on trial was not the only one is the car - he evidently was driving but what where the circumstances - and what was going on with the other vehicle - it's probably not cut and dried he slammed into the other car to injure or kill others but because of his drinking he did not have the same reflexes required and so he was a drunk driver - seems to me the judge noted a prison sentence would not be as affective in changing behavior as will time in a treatment center.

I do not know about others but i do know a lot about injustice and if I dwell on it I am sunk - like those who complained in the Bible about the 11th hour grape pickers getting the same compensation as they who worked all day - I just do not see the benefit of holding onto our thinking of punishment as compared to all we know today about how to change behavior, its cause and its cure.

[marjifay]

An interesting problem from a talk show host in LA who is also an attorney:
 
He posed a problem he thinks will undoubtedly occur because of the way the new same-sex marriage law is allowed to be interpreted differently in different states:

Suppose a man marries another man legally in one state but they move to another state that does not recognize their marriage.  Can the man (probably bi-sexual) then legally marry a woman in that state (since per the state, he is not married to the man)?

Another problem:  If the man dies, how does the federal government decide who will receive his social security, which usually goes to the surviving spouse?

(just something to cogitate if you have nothing else to think about (LOL)

Marj

[Frybabe]

I guess we can say this is a political move on Penguin's part, but it doesn't look like Amazon's customers were happy with it either. Most of the reviews are very negative.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-26184819

[Frybabe]

I read an article this morning on our local paper's website that former Harrisbug, PA mayor Linda D. Thompson is considering running for congress. http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2014/03/linda_thompson_running_for_con.html  She wasn't well liked and lost her bid to run for mayor last year, coming in third.

This all reminds me that I never mentioned that the new Harrisburg mayor, Eric Papenfuse, owns the Midtown Scholar Bookstore. Midtown Scholar is something of a local icon to Harrisburg residents. Papenfuse has for a long time been involved in community efforts and his bookstore hosts many gatherings of one sort or another. The store also supports local artists.  http://www.midtownscholar.com/?page=shop/aboutus  I haven't visited it yet, but I did order a used book from them. Unfortunately, it was listed as like new with just some light shelf wear; it came with coffee or tea stains and a slight warping of the cover because of it. I don't call that like new.

[mogamom]

Inside the Ring: Memo outlines Obama’s plan to use the military against

[marjifay]

Does anyone read Andy Borowitz's column in the New Yorker magazine?  He does humorous political satire that I get a kick out of -- such as this one today:

PRESSURE ON OBAMA TO QUICKLY RESOLVE CENTURIES-OLD SUNNI-SHITE CONFLICT

Posted by Andy Borowitz   

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—Congressional leaders left the White House on Wednesday “deeply frustrated” that President Obama had not found a swift resolution to the conflict between Sunnis and Shiites that began in the seventh century A.D.

After meeting for more than an hour with the President in the Oval Office, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell expressed disappointment that Mr. Obama “came up empty” when asked for a plan to heal the rift between the two religious groups, which began in the year 632.

“All we ask of this President is that he do one thing: settle a religious conflict that has been going on for a millennium and a half,” McConnell said. “What did he offer today? Nothing.”

Speaker of the House John Boehner acknowledged that there was a possibility that Obama might find a way to resolve the centuries-old Sunni-Shiite conflict, but the Ohio Republican was not optimistic.

“This struggle between Sunnis and Shiites has been going on for almost fifteen hundred years,” he said. “That means President Obama has had ample time to fix it.”

Marj

[BarbStAubrey]

  - It is so stupid it is funny but yet, so embarrassing and then, so ridiculous to realize they have no clue about their role and like kids in a schoolyard pick a fight over anything and everything - using wordless faces I guess it goes like this -              


Problem is even if you do not agree with everything the Dems or Obama believes and does you are backed into a corner with no option because the only other options in this mess are ridiculously embarrassing with little respect for anyone not like them - Male, White, Christian, if not rich at least quite comfortable, and of a certain age.