Stevie's Guide to Fixing Everything

1. Fixing Healthcare: Provide government run single payer care to everyone. Wrap up Medicare, Medicaid, VA, every other current program into it. Pay for the rest with graduated taxes based on real income/worth, not just payroll - the people who have the most get the most benefit from living in this society, let them kick in more.

2. Fixing the economy: Do #1. Then build some shit.

3. Fixing Afghanistan: We can't. Never gonna happen. Grow the fuck up and get out of there.

Bensonmum

So there was a lot of anguish over at Eschaton. The trolls were out of control. There was talk of a registration system, banning, or just giving up. It wasn't just stupid or disagreeable remarks - everyone is entitled to an opinion, even if it is a dumb one. But there seemed to be a campaign to force one regular off the blog by filling up every comment thread with vile attacks on him, then urging everyone else to blame him for bringing those attacks. It got so bad we couldn't have a conversation.

It pissed me off.

Then JP asked why we couldn't block everyone with gravatars.

And so Bensonmum was born. Named after the blind butler in Murder By Death, bensonmum brings the hot chocolate. All it needs is Firefox and Greasemonkey and off you go. It gives total user control. Initially, all comments without gravatars are hidden exept for the poster's name and a view link. Mouse over and see the comment if you want. Click on the link to whitelist the poster - from then on, his comments will be visible even if he doesn't have a gravatar. And if a troll gets a gravatar, just click the "hide" link to blacklist him. Easily reversibly, totally in your control.

I've hardly gotten to use it, because pretty much as soon as it became available all the trolls went away. Ahhh! Fresh air.

Grain Of Truth

If you are someone who really needs a $400 tax rebate, $400 is not gong to solve your problems.

Drowning in the Big Pool

President Obama, as many people know, was on Letterman last night. Now, I know - it's a comedy oriented talk show, it wasn't a policy visit, it was a "I'm a good guy, like me" appearance. And he did pretty well, I think. Except for one big mistake that he has repeated over and over about mandatory private health insurance.

Obama says that all the self employed and otherwise uninsurable people seeking private insurance will form a big pool that will be able to get the same kind of rates as big employer groups. Well, they could have done that all along. What was stopping them? The same thing that will be stopping them when coverage is mandatory.

In order for a group to negotiate rates, there has to be a NEGOTIATOR (a person who does the bargaining) and they have to make a decision to go with the best deal. AT&T doesn't just say "look, insurance industry, we have hundreds of thousands of employees, if you want a taste of them you've got to give each one a good deal." No, they have som HR person who uses the VOLUME of the group as leverage to get ONE vendor.

The idea that since all of us as individuals must be insured and can pick any policy we want, insurance companies will somehow be pressured to lower their rates to get our business is ludicrous. I wish our otherwise very intelligent president would realize this.

So Let Me Get This Straight...

So here I am, a middle-class, middle-aged, reliably democratic voter who can't get health insurance because I am self employed and saddled with pre-exisiting conditions. And I'm still probably better off than most of the 47-50 million other uninsured Americans. However you look at it, there is a real healthcare crisis in this country and something has to be done. In the free-market Republican philosophy, as long as the insurance companies continue to thrive and be profitable, all is well - the market will take care of the rest. It will take care of me as soon as I have the heart attack that my pre-existing conditions predict isn't far off, after which I'll no longer be a drain on the system. And while that may be good for a capitalist society as a whole, it isn't the preferred result for me personally. Which is a big reason that I pushed so hard for the Democrats in 2008.

So how is the Democratic head of the Democratically controlled Senate with a Democratic majority in both houses and a Democratic administration going to help me?

By mandating that I buy private insurance from a for-profit insurance company that currently won't even sell me a policy, or face what I gather is about a $4,000 fine. And whether I pay that fine or not, if I get sick or injured I'll still be without healthcare. Oh, wait, there's some wording in Baucus's bill to the effect that the cost of my policy can't be "exorbitant." Look it up, it's an interesting word.

I feel so much better now.

2nd Amendment Terrorists

I recently learned of a GAO report stating that over 1,000 people on the Terrorist Watch List have attempted to buy guns or explosives over the past 5 years, with a 90% success rate. Yes, being on the list will stop you from being able to board a plane or get a visa, but it won't keep you from buying a gun.

This is an appalling policy and it must be ended.

Don't get ahead of me here - it's not what you might think. True, I am generally anti-gun - or at least, pro-sane gun control. Generally. But my problem here isn't that people on the TWL can buy guns.

It is that the TWL exists at all. To refresh your memory, this is a secret list compiled by some secretive organization in our government that denies certain basic liberties to citizens who are suspected of having some relationship with terrorists. That the list is not well compiled is well known - the most publicized example was when Senator Ted Kennedy was not allowed to board a commercial airline because he was mistakenly on the list. There have been many other examples of "innocent" people who happened to have similar names to "suspected terrorists" or who had some tenuous relationship to such people.

But even if the list were perfect - even if it adhered to whatever standard it supposedly meets, even if every name on the list was someone who was suspected of engaging in terrorist activities, the whole concept of such a list is abhorrent in the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave. It is also, I am almost certain, unconstitutional.

If a citizen of the United States is suspected of a crime, evidence should be gathered and he should be charged and tried. If he is suspected of planning a crime, the FBI or CIA or other appropriate agencies should watch him, monitor him, do what is necessary within the limits placed on them by the constitution to respect his rights. But under no circumstances should a completely unaccountable government agency be allowed to decide that a free citizen is a "suspect" and preemptively limit his civil rights to travel - or for that matter, to legally purchase a firearm. The right to be treated as innocent til proven guilty, to face ones accusers openly, to be secure in ones privacy, to be free of government interference in normal daily life - these rights are ultimately more important than the threat of some rogue terrorist. For if we lose them, we've already lost what we are supposed to be defending. Not cars or McMansions or planes or even individual lives.

When the principles and ideals on which this once great nation were founded - even if they were imperfectly followed - are tossed aside out of fear and cowardice and lust for power, we have failed. We should instead be striving to build on the strength of the idealistic foundation that has carried us so far.

Musical Talent

It runs in the family, but away from me. Here my 1-yo grandson demonstrates how it is done.

Faux News Special Report

Transcript:

Ladies and gentlemen, today is the day that every newsman looks forward to with a chill in his bowels. Two score and twice two years ago, our nation defeated both fascism and an evil imperial empire with the most devastatingly awesome weapon ever created. Over the next decades, as two opposing ideologies built great stores of these terrible weapons, giants among men - men like Murrow, Reasoner, Cronkite, Doocey - lived with the fear and pride of knowing that the solemn duty might fall someday to them: to announce the end of civilization as we know it.

And then, having emerged unscathed from that dark and cold war, we found ourselves confonted with an even more profound threat; and now it falls to me, Stephen B Hamilton, a man whose giant shoes no clown could fill, to make the terrible pronouncement to all Americans that have basic cable:

Healthcare Reform has passed.
America, I urge you to remain calm. Panic will only result in higher blood pressure and occasional bumps and bruises, leading to the possibility of dreaded waiting rooms.

All over this once great nation, people from all walks of life - but mostly the poor, the suffering, the unemployed - previously free from the o'erhanging threat of socialized - or any other - medical care, are phoning doctors for appointments, and in some cases being told that they might have to wait days - even weeks - for the privilege of being stripped, weighed, measured, tested, questioned about their most private bodily functions. Some will be poked with needles, others connected to machines; many will be drugged. Ampecillan, Ativan, Levatol, Lipator, the list goes on and on. Sources say that children - CHILDREN - sick, weak, coughing children will be forced to the front of the lines and ... taken first. Oh the humanity.

I'm sorry, I'm sorry. This is very unprofessional.  

Even now, the Death Panels are being formed. Teams of jackbooted psychologists, social workers, clergy, medical and legal experts, and family counselors; just waiting to dole out free advice and explain the options to any American who choses to take advantage of the program. If that isn't fascism, well I don't know what is.

All over this great land, insurance company executives are being forced to list their private jets on EBay; and we know how effective that is. Shoe prices are poised to sore as excessive street dancing tears apart our very soles. And our beloved congressmen and women, those selfless men and women whom we always return to Washington because although everyone else's representatives are greedy theiving weasels our own are actually pretty good and funnel a lot of federal dollars our way, these poor abused creatures are now forced to deal with the same medical services which they have imposed upon the rest of us.

It is a sad day for America. And yet, this dark cloud has a silver lining. For you have been blessed with me, Stephen B Hamilton, to deliver the horrible news.

This has been Stephen B Hamilton, good night and stay well.

Dawning Realization

Another voice has joined in proclaiming the inevitable and only possible solution to the health care crisis. No public option, no compromise, no finagling trying to get opposition who are going to oppose anything to agree to a watered-down half-assed compromise to which they will never agree anyway. 

HR-676, aka Medicare For All, is the closest thing to a real bill there is out there right now. Instead of begging to be allowed to compete with the private insurance companies, instead of hoping that "affordable" means that we'll be able to afford it, instead of being happy with the tablescraps of almost universal coverage, this is what we should all be pushing for. Let it come to an up and down vote. A recorded vote. So we know who needs to be out on their ass next term.

So Welcome Aboard, Libby. who writes this at The Impolitic:

Screw working for the politically possible. Screw the watered down public option. I'm sick of the noise in the health care debate. I'm sick of the disinfo. I'm sick of pushing back against the crazytrain. Sick of exposing astroturfers. Sick of the sellouts on all sides. It's all a distraction.

I couldn't have said it better myself. 

Why Do You Hate America?

I personally am sick and tired of the Blame America First crowd who think that the greatest government in the world is totally incompetent and unable to run something as complex as a National Healthcare system better than a board of directors picked from a pool of ... well, the kind of people who become directors. Why do you hate America? What do you think makes it different from every other country on earth? It is that we ARE the government. If it doesn't work, it is our own fault. Personally, I would rather trust my health to an organization that only exists BY the people, FOR the people and OF the people, and in which I have SOME form of redress, than an insurance company that exists to make money from me, makes more by NOT providing care, and which only answers to its board members. Which, BTW, is why I prefer the Marines to Blackwater and the Army Corps of Engineers to Halliburton. 

Sure, you can take the view that you personally have the greatest healthcare in the world, that you EARNED it and DESERVE it and those great unwashed masses ought to find their own way and keep their grubby little hands off of your stuff. But that is not only amoral and selfish, it is stupid and will ultimately lead to your downfall. They won't eat cake. Ask Marie. But if you have any semblence of humanity and agree that NO ONE in the richest nation in the history of the world should die because their parents couldn't afford an MRI, what POSSIBLE organization has more resources, ability, power and accountability than the United States Government?

Public Funds, Private Concerns

One of the arguments I've heard against tax-supported single-payer healthcare is "I don't want my taxes used to pay for abortions." Republicans - and some Blue Dog Democrats - on the Hill make the same noise.

I think they are exactly right. The government has no business taking our money and sinfully using it in violation of our deeply held religious beliefs. Isn't that what Freedom of Religion is all about? So let's see no more public funding of anything that is morally and spiritually repugnant.

From now on, in deference to Orthodox Jews, the Interstates should be shut down on the Sabbath. In fact, ALL government services should be shut down on the Sabbath. It must be kept holy. The Quakers would like to stop spending all that money on warfare while we are at it. "Normal" Christians might ask for the same thing if they read their Bibles a little more closely, but we'll let that go for now.

And, since we started out with healthcare, let's finish there as well. We can save a ton of money for everyone by nationalizing the whole thing, and then honoring the deeply held convictions of the Christian Scientists. After all, why should they have to pay for antibiotics for your kids?

Problems solved.

Cooperation

So the latest "alternative" to public healthcare is based on a Co-op model in Seattle; run as a non-profit with a board elected by the insured. That way, the desire for votes keeps the board focused on the patient's well-being. Doctors, working at clinics owned by the Co-op, are paid a salary rather than per-procedure with bonuses based on quality care. According to the NYT,

Patients are assigned a team of primary care practitioners who are responsible for their well-being. Medical practices, and insurance coverage decisions, are driven by the company’s own research into which drugs and procedures are most effective.

[snip]

A number of company officials acknowledged that it is Group Health’s ability to directly manage its doctors that really drives innovation. The cooperative structure’s primary contribution, they said, is to create a consumerist ethos that keeps the company focused on patient care.

“There’s a kind of accountability to the patients in our system,” said Scott Armstrong, president of Group Health. “And when you bring the principles of a cooperative to bear, patients feel responsibility for holding the system together and for their own health.”

Of course, to set this up on a national scale with universal coverage, we'd need an organization large enough to collect votes from every citizen, and for the resulting "board" to oversee career administrators to actually run the behemoth. About $7.5 million has been raised by the Seattle clinic, one would suppose that extrapolating that nationally would cost upwards of a trillion dollars. Who in the world could raise that kind of money?

If only there already existed an entity that could answer to the patients (that is, the American citizens) that was large enough and already experienced in being run by elected officials, and had some kind of research capabilities in medicine and drugs. Huh. Maybe we could create one. Now, I now what you are thinking - why not just use the Federal Government? But then, you see, patients might have primary care physicians assigned, and doctors would be directly managed by the very group paying their salaries. And they'd make decisions on procedures and coverage based on their own research. Plus, in order to get that accountability to patients, the government would have ultimately answer to the people, and the people would have to bear the responsibility of holding the system together. And we know that's never going to work. What kind of government would that be?

World Challenge

Today is D-Day. The world remembers and reflects. Another anniversary.

Here's the challenge: starting tomorrow, world, go for a week without thinking about war. Just one week. I don't believe it has ever been done before.

Another Year

Sometimes I want everyone else to feel bad, too. At the same time, I wouldn't want anyone else to feel like this. Reminders aren't helpful, but you can't stop the calendar from coming around again. I'm glad no one reads this blog. There's nothing to say, anyway.

http://stevebanks.com/olivia

Secular Humanist Thought of the Day

When Jesus passed out the loaves and fishes, he didn't worry about whether the recipients had cable TV or were just too lazy to work.

Tom Price Stands With Father Rapers

Tom Price is chilled. What he heard was that Obama stands with some Americans, but not all Americans. Unlike the GOP. Obama will stand with ethical and competent businessmen, but not with those who drive the economy into the ground and then demand a taxpayer funded bailout. Why oh why will Obama not stand with American crooks and liars and swindlers and cheats, with mother rapers and father killers and father rapers; they are all sitting there on the group W bench, just waiting for this president to join with Tom Price and the Republican Study Committee in standing behind them. As long as they aren't gay.

Single Payer Health Care Considered

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) finally put Single Payer Healthcare into the hearings today. We were worried the subject would be ignored - but no. Baucus today said:

Some people want a single payer solution. That won't work.

See? Simple as that. Anyone who wants congress to even discuss the possibility has been politely dismissed. Issue closed.

We should all write to Sen Baucus and thank him for saving time and money by putting this to bed so succinctly.

Huzzah! Healthcare Reform!

From The Hill:

President Obama will announce an initiative Monday that the administration says will reduce national healthcare spending by $2 trillion over 10 years.

A coalition of six interest groups representing healthcare companies and a labor union are behind the plan. Their chief executives will meet with the president Monday to present him with a written commitment to cut the rate of growth in healthcare spending by 1.5 percentage points each year for 10 years.

We won! Well, in that an industry group is proposing voluntary measures to reduce their costs (oh, sorry, to cut the rate of growth) by increasing efficiency in the belief that will somehow translate to lower fees somewhere down the line.

The White House provided few details about how the savings will be achieved and acknowledged that, as a voluntary effort by private sector entities, there is no formal means of enforcing their pledge.

No worries, though. Surely Congress will step up and make new laws to regulate the health care industry, especially when they have a blueprint written by ... well, the health care industry.

Many of the policies the interest groups will endorse Monday require legislation to put into practice, a senior administration official noted. “This is really dependent on getting reform done,” the official said.

Now one might be thinking, why wouldn't insurance companies and health care providers have already tried to cut administrative costs? Doesn't that just make good business sense? Wouldn't the Invisible Hand of the Market and the self-sustaining miracle of free market capitalism naturally move in that direction? Well, perhaps. But these proposals are revolutionary, ground-breaking, brilliant.

The specific means the interest groups intend to employ were not explained Sunday. The administration did offer some examples, however, that closely match elements of what Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) is expected to include in his legislation, such as reducing insurance company paperwork, “bundling” a single payment to hospitals and other providers that collaborate on a treatment and adding Medicare payment incentives to encourage providers to coordinate the care they provide patients with chronic conditions.

Wow. Just wow. The first part is sort of like legislating that a server can't create separate checks. Get it? Instead of making the Insurance Company write individual checks to the hospital, the surgeon, the anesthesiologist, the referring physician and so on, the insco will send just ONE check - presumably to the hospital. Who will then have the added administrative burden of splitting that check up and paying each of the individual providers. Brilliant! No mention of how or when this will actually reduce the patients' financial burden of course - perhaps if the inscos save enough money, they will be kind enough to trickle some of it down.

The second example is even better: because it is more effective and cost efficient for providers to coordinate care (that is, coordination should provide better care at a lower price), the only way to get for-profit free-market health care providers to do so is by paying them additional government funded incentives to do so!

I'm sure the full proposal, once released, will be full of such gems. I wonder if the patients' bills will even be mentioned in any of them?

Anyway, we can all relax. We are on the path to a uniquely American health care solution, one written by the big money interests to encourage themselves to reduce operating expenses, while providing legislated financial "bonuses" to do so. Now that the Health Care system is fixed, we can move on to something more important.

The Answer

Well, that didn't take long. Karl Rove answers the question I asked last time.

Advise and Consent

Advise and Consent, with emphasis on Consent. That's what we were told the role of the Senate was when right wing ideologue Chief Justice Roberts was appointed. I wonder what Senate Republicans will say about President Obama's appointment when Souter retires in June?

Legal Opinions

Breaking: the Office of Legal Council (OLC) has offered it's judgement that it would be perfectly legal to shoot Dick Cheney in the face. A senior aid to President Obama has ordered a marine to do so.

The marine cannot be prosecuted, since he was just following orders. The OLC cannot be prosecuted for offering "bad" legal advice. The aid to the president cannot be prosecuted as he was acting on the best legal advice available. 

Obama cannot be connected to the chain of events, due to executive privilege.

The crowd cheers.

[note to the NSA: I am in no way advocating violence against the former VP.]

Fred Thompson?

Why anyone should care what Fred Thompson thinks about President Obama's first hundred days (hint: he isn't pleased) is beyond me, but this is the kind of Quality Programming brought to us by the good folks at CNN. Fred thinks that the president is wrong to be pushed toward considering investigation and possible prosecution of those who tortured, ordered torture, authorized torture, or advised that torture was a pretty darn good idea. See, they were only trying to protect the country. 

Thompson said that prosecuting members of a prior administration would make us like "third world countries."

I wonder, which countries does he mean? Iraq? What does Thompson think of Saddam Hussein's trial? 

Let's be clear: what Obama may finally (and correctly) consider, and what "the left" is clamoring for, is not kangaroo trials and executions of prior officials for differences in political philosophies. This isn't a question of whether a Democratic administration would have made other decisions. This is a case of Rule of Law. We have laws in this country, and people are expected to obey them or face the consequences. And when those people are operating in the public trust, that is even more important.

We have a new administration. We don't have a new government, much less system of government. Obama did not come to power in a third world coup. And his job as chief executive is to enforce the law. Because if he doesn't, if individuals in our government can trample the law and the rights of citizens and ignore our international agreements and commitments, then what are we? Not a nation of laws. We are series of eight year dictatorships, each immune to accountability to the next. Each will start out knowing they can get away with anything. All they have to do is cover up and hold out until the next dictator takes over. All they have to do is not prosecute themselves.

Tortured Logic

Sen John McCain (R-HasBeen) was on Face The Nation this morning, making the case that not only those who actually tortured people should not be held accountable (they were only following orders), but that neither should those who authorized it. His three main points seemed to be

1. We've got to move on, put this behind us
2. Authorization to torture was just "bad advice"
3. If people are prosecuted, how will you get other people to serve?

These are three very silly arguments. Why do we need to move on? Where are we moving on to? If we just leave this behind us, it will bite us in the collective ass. I wonder if McCain would give the same advice to rape victims - move on, prosecution of the rapist will be hard and painful; better to forget about it and let the healing begin. And if one of the victim's family members insisted, would McCain brush that off by accusing him of having a personal score to settle?

So was it simply "bad advice" or was it criminal? It seems to me that the courtroom is the best place to determine this. That's what prosecution is for. McCain wants to dispense with that part, and find everyone innocent. Which is odd, considering the way he went on and on about how the torture violated the Geneva Convention and U.S. Law - he himself helped pass the Detainee Treatment Act.

Personally, I'm not so worried about how we get people into public service - I worry more about how to keep the kind of people who would authorize torture OUT of public service. If there is no accountability, what is stopping them? McCain says that he believes that no other administration will ever do this again. I wonder if he would have believed in 2000 that the last administration would do so in the first place? I wonder what he thinks is going to keep them from doing it again? Was he opposed to prosecuting Madoff on the grounds that it would keep other people from offering financial advice?

The people who did the torture were just following orders. The people who gave the orders were following the advice they were given. And the people who gave the advice - well, they were just lawyers giving bad opinions. So no one was at fault.

McCain says and apparently believes that the Geneva Convention is very important to follow. That our enemies will follow the convention rules if they "know there will be retribution." And yet, there should be no retribution to our own people for breaking those rules. Did Saddam ask his advisers if torture was OK? Did they give him advice? Did he them order his evil Republican Guard to carry out that advice?

I wonder under what scenario McCain would ever approve of punishment of the punishers? Perhaps if they had a big black "D" after their names.

As much as I despise Dick Cheney, at least he is sticking to his horribly flawed view of the world. In his mind, the torture was a fun way to ensure a needed result, and therefore justified. But McCain is just a weak-kneed weasel. I can only hope that the good people of Arizona watched his pitiful performance and will do the right thing next time they have the chance.

Easter Egg Hunt

The grandchildren, celebrating a missing corpse by collecting dyed, cooked chicken ovums ostensibly hidden by a giant rabbit. Life doesn't get any better than this.

Tag - I'm It

I foolishly thought that by turning off my FaceBook profile I would avoid all this tagging business. Sigh. But since this came from Ina, I am going to break my own rule and respond. But just this once. And I'm going to cheat.

Q: What is your current obsession?
A: What , only one? I suppose it's Chaos Theories - I need to finish it, I'm writing it in my head constantly (mostly in the wee hours) and can't seem to make time to type it up.

Q: Which item from your closet are you wearing most lately?
A: A bowler hat. To be fair, I don't keep much in the closet.

Q: What’s for dinner?
A: Pasta, I'll bet.

Q: What was the last thing you bought?
A: Advil

Q: Say something to the person who tagged you:
A: I'll be in Cambridge at least once this year. You'd better make plans to come see me when I'm there.

Q: Favorite vacation spot?
A: So far, the Outer Banks. But I hope someday it will be somewhere in Europe. As long as it is on the ocean.

Q: What are you reading right now?
A: All's Well That Ends Well. Still memorizing. And Funny Times.

Q: What is your most important goal in the next 12 months?
A: This is the question I changed. I'm going to produce and star in a show that will make Atlanta sit up and take notice. In a good way, I hope.

Q: What is your current guilty pleasure?
A: Watching The Sopranos in the morning when I should be working.

Q: What will be the first spring thing you do?
A: Already done it - took the grandkids in the hot tub.

Q: Where are you planning to travel next?
A: Florida to visit Dad.

Q: What's on your coffee or bedside table?
A: Several scripts, a bag of Hershey's minis, a bag of Milano cookies, and a nearly empty bottle of Bushmills. On my headboard, I don't have a bedside table and the dogs or kids keep us from putting anything on a coffee table.

Q: What flower are you most anxious to see bloom this spring?
A: The dogwoods are blooming already. But I'm waiting for my summer hibiscus.


Q: What fresh vegetable are you most looking forward to this growing season?
A: I already changed a question! I'm only growing one edible thing on purpose: figs. Because I don't have to do a thing.

Q: What is the last live music show you attended?
A: Does Spam-a-lot count?

Q: If you weren't doing what you are doing right now (not counting this question) what would you be doing?
A. Cleaning out the garage so I'd have somewhere to park the car.

Rules of the meme: Respond and rework. Answer the questions on your own blog; replace one question that you dislike with a question of your own invention; add one more question of your own. Tag eight other un-tagged people.

Remember that I said I was going to cheat? If you are reading this, consider yourself tagged. Ha.

Recess!

No political blogging today, even though I am very annoyed with people on both sides. Instead, a picture of my grandsons in the hot tub for the first time. Those are my hands holding the little one up. Notice how curly the older one becomes in the steam.

Dueling Headlines - Moscow Edition

Today's NYT headline:

Obama Offered Deal To Russia in Secret Letter

CNN:

Obama Reaches Out To Russia Over Nuclear Iran

So which one is truthier? Well, the story is that Obama sent a letter to Medvedev suggesting that we wouldn't need to go ahead with the Bush era plan for a European Missle Defense system if Iran stopped persuing nuclear weapons. The body of the NYT article quotes both sides to disprove its own headline, which suggests pretty strongly that Obama unilaterally offered a specific deal to Russia without anyone else knowing about it. Red meat for Rush.

From the NYT story:

While [U.S. Officials] said it did not offer a direct quid pro quo, the letter was intended to give Moscow an incentive to join the United States in a common front against Iran.
[snip]
a press secretary for Dmitri A. Medvedev told the Interfax news agency that the letter did not contain any “specific proposals or mutually binding initiatives.”

Natalya Timakova said the letter was a reply to one sent by Mr. Medvedev shortly after Mr. Obama was elected.

So the real story seems to be that Medvedev worte to Obama re: relations in general and missle defense in particular, and Obama wrote back that if Russia helped stop Iran from developing weapons, the defense system (which Obama isn't too hot on anyway) might be unnecessary. No secret deal.

There are quite a few other headlines on this one, of course, but I'm only reporting on the ones I see on my iGoogle front page. Yahoo News went with Obama Hints Missle Shield Flexibility To Moscow and the story actually supports the headline. Free Republic, of course, ran with the NYT headline, which shows you something about our So Called Liberal Media. The Freeper comments are hilarious in their cowardice and paranoia, but I can't bring myself to link to that site here.

The verdict: There's a big difference between "suggesting" and "offering a deal." The NYT loses this one. Better luck next time.

Brainlesser

More on Jindal - or rather, Jindal apologists. Zachary Roth posted a piece questioning the story Bobby Jindal told to illustrate conservative discomfort with the idea that the government could indeed be competent and should work for the public good. Roth's suggestion that something about the story smelled was based on news reports and, largely LACK of news reports on Nexis that would have placed Jindal in NOLA at the time. Zach writes:

But there are several pieces of evidence that suggest this just didn't happen. Nothing, to be sure, that definitively proves the story was made up. But more than enough to declare it highly suspicious. [emphasis mine]

He then comments on Jindal's schedule and the fact that "Jindal listed several anecdotes to illustrate the problem, including one that involved a sheriff, and another about a boat evacuation. But nothing that resembled the Lee story he told Tuesday. " As an example, Roth quotes Jindal saying:

There are thousands of these stories. I talked to a sheriff in an area where they had people with boats that were ready to go in the water and rescue people and they were turned away because they didn't have proof of registration and insurance, they didn't bring the right paperwork. The bureaucracy was just awful.

Josh Marshall reports that Erick Erickson posted an article at RedState refuting Zachary's points. He gets it wrong from the get-go, of course.

Based overwhelmingly on two things - the musings of a Daily Kos diarist and a few Nexis searches that didn’t turn up results (as we all remember, the media got more stories wrong than right when reporting in the heat of the moment in the midst of Katrina) - TPMMuckraker and The Washington Monthly conclude that Governor Bobby Jindal is a liar.

There are two problems immediately apparent: one is that TPM concluded no such thing. Read the TPM quote above. It's very clear - the only "conclusion" was that the story was suspicious. The second problem, as we now know, is that Jindal is, indeed, a liar.

I wonder when Erick Erickson will post a retraction?

Now, here comes the funny part: One of RedState's commenters (the aptly named "falsehood"),disputes Zachary Roth's claim that Jindal had never never told the Lee story before by quoting essentially the same Jindal anecdote that Roth quoted - except from an interview Jindal gave to Rush Limbaugh:

“Contrast that with the bureaucracy. I witnessed the frustration of the local law enforcement officials. At one point, volunteers were rushing in boats, to come and pick up people out of the water. Some bureaucrat decided that they couldn’t go in the water — turned away even sheriff’s deputies because he said they didn’t have the right paper- work. He said if you don’t bring proof of insurance and registration, you can’t go in the water to rescue.”

I'm really at a loss to explain such stupidity.

Brainless

Here's how Jack Coleman compares Rachel Maddow and Booby Jindal:

Both are wonkish former Rhodes scholars in their mid-30s, bright and personable. Each could be perceived as a political outsider, Maddow for being openly gay, Jindal by dint of skin hue and ethnicity

Most of the rest of his article is an attack on Maddow's response to the Response; Coleman's dishonest and asinine recasting of what Jindal meant when he evoked government's failure during Katrina to suggest that government could not help the economic crisis (and decrying that Rachel didn't play the now-known-to-be-false story about Jindal and Sheriff Harry Lee), and then he ends with this:

Indeed, so-called progressives want ever more "dialogue" on Katrina, race, gender, etc. -- the more "candid" the better -- followed by liberals condemning conservatives who follow suit as racist, insensitive, pathological, etc. See how it works?

Yes, I see how it works. Jack opens his remarks with racist, sexist, homophobic remarks and then is surprised that liberals don't welcome his "dialogue." Maybe Republicans consider those who are gay or have "skin hue and ethnicity" to be "outsiders," but we don't.

By the way, Jack, if you happen to read this - do you have any further comment on the Harry Lee story?

Today's Dueling Headlines

Back when I wrote "Albatross" I had a regular feature called "Today On Washington Journal" in which I discussed comments by callers to that show. People seemed to like it. And by people, I mean me.

I haven't hit on a regular feature here yet, and am hoping this will do. See. I have an old technology (pre-iPhone) cell, but I can view iGoogle. No audio or video, but headlines and stories. My home page has top stories from BBC, NYT, and CNN (plus weather, the Onion and the always lame Joke of the Day). I started noticing that even without Fax News, headlines about the same stories had decidedly different slants even though the stories beneath them were the same. Often exactly the same, having been supplied by AP or some other source. So far, CNN seems to have the slantiest, but that's just an impression. A few of these posts should prove whether there is a pattern. So here's how they will go - I'll post the headlines (sometimes only 2/3 of the sources have the story in the top 3), then a piece of the story, and then pass judgement. Decisions of the judge are final, but feel free to shout your comments into the wind.

Today's post was going to contrast the NYT headline "Iraq Combat to End By August 2010" with CNN's headline proclaiming that U.S. Troops would remain in Iraq indefinitetly after "withdrawl." However, CNN screwed me up by changing their headline to match the Times. I guess CNN got wind that I was going to blow this story wide open. Or, perhaps they read the story. But that's ok - I'll try again tomorrow.

Eleven Simple Words

Louisiana Governor "Bobby" Jindal's response to President Obama's address to congress had me musing once more over how completely the Republican Party has abandoned the legacy of Abraham Lincoln. They either don't or won't remember or understand the phrase that Lincoln is most remembered for uttering. Well, alright, the second most remembered phrase; but "four score and seven years ago" is just a fancy way of saying "87 years ago" and was out of date within a year. This one is timeless, and in eleven simple words defines exactly what makes the USofA the great nation that it is - or at least, that it should be. Allow me to type it out in big, bold, red letters to remind everyone what it is:

Government OF the People, BY the People and FOR the People.

This is important. The US Government is by design not composed of royals or strongmen or high priests or corporations. It is made up of the People. That's us. American citizens. And who performs the daily tasks of governing the richest, most powerful, most loved and feared nation on earth? Why, those duties are handled by the People. All that wealth and power and freedom and every other benefit realized from those activities are not intended for Halliburton or the Church or the Military Industrial Complex - they are for the People. And every time you see the phrase "the people" remember that the word "all" is implied just ahead of it.

This phrase goes to eleven.

Contrast this vision of America to Jindal's philosophy, summed up in the lesson he learned when two government officials - a Sheriff and a Congressman - stood up to a Republican administration that forgot that government was for the people and took it upon themselves to do the job that should have been being done by all of the people.

"There's a lesson in this experience: The strength of America is not found in our government. It is found in the compassionate hearts and the enterprising spirit of our citizens."

Really? But if we live in a representative democracy that is made up of the people, by the people and for the people (repetition assists in memory), then shouldn't that government be a concentrated, distributed, efficient implementation of our national compassionate and understanding spirit? What is Bobby saying here? That it is better that enterprising citizens in the free market decide to rescue people if and when it profits the entrepreneurs? Or that nearby compassionate but likely ill-equipped, under-resourced citizens should take on all the risk and effort of rescuing their neighbors? Citizens who are themselves in the middle of a disaster area?

OK, in a crisis it's all hands on deck and heroes are made from volunteers who leap into the brink; but forgive me for believing that it would be far better for all of the people to be prepared ahead of time and provide a quick, efficient, well equipped, co-ordinated and safe response. Without a profit motive. Without random hope that someone somewhere will "do something." Without all the risk and loss going to the very someone who does do something. Without the chaos of every well-intentioned do-gooder loading up his pickup truck with whatever he imagines might be needed, a gun or two to protect what he considers the good people from the bad people, and towing a leaky boat that he found somewhere but doesn't really know how to operate because by god someone has to do something so the hell with safety regulations and if nothing else he can at least jump in and need just as much rescue as the guy on the roof. Remember the scene in Jaws where all the landlubbers jumped into anything that would float to go hunt the shark? Is that the response Bobby wanted to Katrina? This is one of the times when I regret the decision to avoid obscene expletives in this blog - I guess I'll have to substitute a pithy explanation:

The problem with Katrina was not that the government should not have been doing the rescues. The problem was that the government SHOULD have been.

Jindal also said this:

This is the nation that cast off the scourge of slavery, overcame the Great Depression, prevailed in two World Wars, won the struggle for civil rights, defeated the Soviet menace, and responded with determined courage to the attacks of September 11, 2001.

The American spirit has triumphed over almost every
form of adversity known to man, and the American spirit will triumph again.

Yes. The nation cast off slavery. That is to say, the Federal Government (made up of whom? that's right) cast off slavery. You can read why and how in Lincoln's Gettysburg Address.

It's true FDR did not overcome the Great Depression - the People did, by understanding that it was a huge problem that could only be solved by all the People (working together through what overall organization? good, you've got it!). Of course, part of the way the People overcame the Depression was by electing FDR (four times) and supporting/shaping/contributing to the solutions he implemented on their behalf.

Civil Rights are now enshrined in laws passed and enforced by the government, even to the extent that the Feds compel individual states to follow those laws (and this is done for the P....; I don't even have to finish, do I?)

Government is not the problem, except to the extent that We The People are the problem. And as bad as it sometimes gets, it is at least ours. Sorry, make that "at least it is us." Consider the alternative.

It's (Not) A Miracle!

You know what was the best part of Captain Chesley Sullenberger's landing of the flight 1549 in the Hudson River? OK - right. Everyone survived. How about the second best part?

It was that neither Sully nor his wife nor co-pilot Jeffrey Skiles nor, as far as I know, any of the crew praised Jesus for rescuing them. Or Yahweh. Or Allah, for that matter. No, Sully has been a true professional: humble, forthright, dedicated to the passengers and crew for whom he was responsible. If he is a religious man, he has wisely kept it to himself. He did the job for which he had been trained - did it very well, without a doubt - as a human being committed to the task before him. Of course, he saved his own skin as well but that seems secondary. In every interview I've heard him give, he has been nothing but factual, discussing the conditions and his actions as purely natural phenomena (as opposed to super-natural intervention.) Although some of his questioners and, if I recall correctly even the co-pilot, mentioned "luck", Sully didn't even go that far.

So my least favorite interview question came from Katie Kouric, who asked whether he had prayed. And my favorite interview answer was Sully's to that question, which is that he had been pretty busy flying the plane. He didn't dismiss the question (he even said that perhaps someone in the back had done it for him) but he gave it no gravity whatsoever. Kudos, Captain. Kudos.

Meanwhile, in preparation for this post I Googled "Sullenberger Jesus Pray." There is a Yahoo Answers question on "The Miracle on The Hudson" with comments that mostly echo the sentiments here. But one comment stood out to me:

I believe it was a miracle like they are saying. Praise God!! And I believe anyone who was on that plane and they were not "saved"; they will seriously begin to think about eternal, spiritual things and salvation. I was actually wondering what an atheist would do in this situation. And for anyone not to see that this is a miracle... well I think they seriously have to be jaded.

What would an atheist do in this situation? Just ditch the plane into a city neighborhood because, what the hell, existence is meaningless without God anyway? Or maybe she meant an atheist passenger, which is an easier question to answer: He or she would have stayed in his or her seat and followed instructions, just like everyone else.

And anyway, how do we know whether Sully is an atheist or not? *Gasp!* For anyone not to see that a human being can be outstanding in his work and a selfless hero without the threat of hell or promise of a golden harp, well, I think they seriously have to be jaded.

If I am ever in such a situation, I will pray that the pilot is an atheist. Then I will be sure he is relying on his skill and knowledge and experience to do everything in his power to get that plane down safely. The last thing I want is for the pilot to have his head bowed, eyes closed and hands folded as he asks a mythical being to interrupt the laws of physics for the sake of what are doubtless a mixed collection of sinners and souls ready to go home to their heavenly father.

So thank God there has been no religious fervor over this extremely laudable and exceedingly human effort.

Oh, except for this one:

Passenger Jeff Kolodjay said he saw the engine blow up. “We thought we were going to circle around, but we didn’t have time,” he told the Newsday newspaper.He heard Sullenberger tell passengers to brace for impact and then said a Hail Mary.
[snip]
And most of all, we can assume from the above that Sullenberger is a true devotee of Virgin Mary, as he cried for her intercession in this toughest time of his life.
Come on friends, don’t be surprised at the intercession power
of our Holy Mother.

First of all, Sullenberger did not cry for anyone's intercession. Kolodjay said a "Hail Mary." Kolodjay's account was pretty clear, unlike this sloppy uncredited blog post. Secondly, crediting the captain and crew's competence and heroism to divine intervention does them a disservice and is, quite frankly, insulting. Insulting to Sully, his crew, his company, his employer. Insulting to every religion that doesn't consider Mary to be "Holy" and able to intercede in earthly tragedies. And insulting to Mary, who apparently would have let a planeload of (nominally) innocent people perish had someone not cried out a Hail to her.

So Hail Sully, and may other people in the public eye learn from his example.

Friends

It's easy to forget that Facebook "Friends" aren't necessarily really "friends." Oh, they may be people with whom one is "friendly" but they are often just acquaintances, folks who have shared a common experience or passed through the same school or job; been in the same show, commented on the same blog or shared the same bloodline somewhere along the way. Some are even one friend removed, a casual friend of a casual friend.

Now, I have nothing against frivolous social networking. I've certainly posted my fair share of pictures and comments and badgered "friends" to join causes, buy tickets for plays, read this blog. And I've enjoyed other people's similar self expression. But "friend" can be a dangerous term if one starts to believe it.

Textual conversation always runs a risk of being misunderstood. Especially electronic text, which can be sent more quickly than one can consider how the reader might interpret it. Emoticons not withstanding, it is difficult to express sarcasm, or self deprecation, or a friendly wink and a smile in a two line post. In the early days of the Internet, I used to teach night courses in which I cautioned students to be careful what they put in emails - it is so easy to be taken literally, or be misunderstood, or worse to be understood perfectly in a message for which one wishes the "send" button had never been clicked.

But with friends, chatting real time or in wall-to-wall posting, this wouldn't be such a big deal. Because friends know each other. They have a history together, know what kind of person each other is, know the kind of things one would never say, or at least never mean. And, with that comfort, say things to each other in ways that they would never say to strangers. Or casual acquaintances. As simple as pet names, as complex as monotonic satire.

And when real friends hurt or shock or disappoint each other, they can talk about it.

But without that history, without that understanding of who the other party is at heart, hurt and shock and disappointment are all too easy to ignite. To be clear, I'm not personally worried about being on the receiving end. I'm both so easy going and so thoroughly calloused that it is hard to hurt or shock me. And since I tend to have no expectations and give the benefit of the doubt to people until I learn otherwise, disappointment is a rare feeling.

I am sure, however, that I've been on the delivery side of all three. My friends know that I can have a caustic wit, and have a hard time resisting a funny line even if it is a sharp one. My friends know that I don't mean a harsh thing against any one of them, that I am even more likely to direct quips towards myself than anyone. My friends know what kind of person I am, what I believe, what sides I take and so know when I am being straightforward and when I am using hyperbole or sarcasm to make the opposite point. My friends put up with it, or appreciate it, or like it and join in. If they don't, they probably aren't going to stay friends long.

I use myself as an example, but I'm fairly certain we all do it. We develop lines of communication with our friends, sometimes over our whole lives, where things can go without saying. Because they've already been said. And to folks who haven't heard all of those things that are too long to use as preface to every single two line comment on their posts simply have to take things at face value, tinted by their own feelings that the commenter probably does not anticipate.

I'm not going to apologize for not delivering my whole life story as background color every time I talk to a friend. After a while, the aggregate of items posted by an individual on a semi-public forum will tell what kind of person that individual is. And some time along the way, others on the network will have to decide whether it is the type of person they want for a friend. And if it isn't, what the person says really shouldn't matter that much.

Now Is Not The Time

It's almost over - more or less. In less than 24 hours, the Bush Cabal will for the most part be flushed out of the White House and down the sewer of history. Barak Obama, the first African-American President, will take his turn at the oval office. Yay, I think.

I have plenty of reservations. I could even list some of them here and now, without going into details yet. But it can wait. Now is not the time.

So lift you champagne classes, cheer the end of one dark era and the beginning of a fresh new one. Hang with friends, smile and hug and get a little teary-eyed with hope. Because no matter what happens, we now at last have a chance again: a chance to make Democracy work. A chance to return to a government for, by and of the people.

That, to me, is the most exciting and hopeful part of this historic event. It is also the most daunting. On Wednesday, Jan 21, 2009, we can get to work again. But now is not the time to think about that.

Now is the time to celebrate.

Stevie's Restaurant Guide

Regular readers (yes, both of you) have probably figured out that I am a complainer. A ranter. A whiner. But it isn't my fault - so many people, events, politicians, religions and businesses just plain suck. I'll tell you about my experiences with Chase Bank another time to show you just how much.


But, to be fair, that's only "most." Once in a while I'll stumble on someplace that doesn't suck. In fact, sometimes that place is quite good. Even excellent. And when that happens, I suppose I should put aside the curmudgeon and let you all know.


So we went to Eros World Tapas Bar last night. The event was my youngest daughter's 21st birthday. It was critical that she find just the perfect place to celebrate. She is, like her mother and all of her siblings, vegetarian. We wanted to go someplace new where the food was a little special, they would have plenty to choose from, and she could have her first chocolate martini. Add to that the facts that we live in Atlanta, which is not exactly the cultural center of the world whatever locals may believe, and it was a daunting task. Tapas seemed like a good choice, but where? After poring over a multitude of websites, the birthday girl picked out Eros.



The restaurant is located on Monroe Drive near Piedmont under I85. It's an area of the city I've never really been to before. I found out why as we approached - the neighboring businesses all seem to be strip clubs, adult bookstores and peep shows. Even Mrs. Winners' billboard is advertising legs and thighs. The building looks like a spaceport from the first season of Star Trek - it's easy to imagine Captain Kirk and Spock walking up the pathway to meet with the Tirolian Warlord Council inside. Actually, I think it was once a bank that was trying to be far too hip and collapsed in on itself. Being Monday night, it was fairly deserted. We wondered whether we'd made the right choice.


It was a little chilly inside. There was only one other group of diners. We were greeted and seated quickly - too quickly to change our minds and go someplace safe and familiar - maybe Applebees in Roswell, or O'Charlies in Sandy Plains. Here we were, Inside the Perimeter, the suburban mom and dad and their little girl (and her boyfriend) at a place called "Eros" in the heart of the stripper district. The BF noticed that the large greyscale prints decorating the interior were closeup sections of a naked woman's body (though tastefully done, like an Oil of Olay ad campaign.) Were we out of our league?


No, we were not. We were home.


Our server was a pleasant, cheerful, friendly, efficient young woman. The birthday martini was not chocolate, but I understand that it was delicious. Our server made a big hit (and earned a big tip) by bringing a lit birthday candle out with the drink and holding it for the b-day girl to make a wish. My two dirty martinis were excellent - also, quite generous and powerful. Three would have been too many. And then there was the food.


The problem with being vegetarian in Atlanta is that it usually means ordering a bean burger or a pasta primevera. There are exceptions of course - Waffle House will hold the bacon, and if one doesn't mind paying a premium for rice wrapped in a little kelp there are a few sushi places. But Atlanta, and the south in general, are not Meccas to non-carnivores.


At least half of the menu items at Eros seemed to be vegetarian. And interesting. And (I can say this because we ordered most of them) delicious. The spicy potatoes were exceptionally good. The Green Bean Tempura was a favorite. Then of course there were the non-veg plates. I would have been happy eating nothing but the prawns - perfectly spiced, tender and lovely with crunchy little legs (sorry, veggers - but they are.) But then I would have missed the Calamari. Have you ever ordered calamari and ended up with a pile of deep fried rubber gaskets? I have. Not this time. It fairly melted in ones mouth. And finally (Molly Ivors and Thers, this is for you) the Chorizo Lollipops = chorizo, blue cheese stuffed figs, wrapped in bacon on a stick. If it had stopped my heart, it would have been worth it.


These were real tapas, not a bunch of appetizers disguised as tapas. Everything was fresh and tasty. Our orders came promptly and correctly. And as many dishes as we ordered and passed around, there are plenty more we didn't get to for next time.


So yeah, the world generally sucks. But once in a great while, with the right occasion, the right companions, the right place, and a couple of very strong martinis, it can be not too bad after all.

Shakespeare's Geopolitical Works

From The Complete Works of William Shakespeare (abridged). More or less.

"Because Shakespeare's geopolitical works are some of my favorite stuff. Really. I mean, it's like the stuff he wrote about four hundred years ago is still relevent today. Like that scene he put in Hamlet where Polonius and Ophelia discuss the failed U.S. banking and mortgage systems under the Bush Administration."

Starting Over

So here I am having my first cup of coffee in the first new week of 2009. Here I am. Surveying the same old world in a brand new year. Oh, sure, we're going to have some milestones. Make some history. But we do that every year, one way or another, and it never really seems to make a significant difference. All those historic changes and achievements and advances seem, in spite of the intense and concerted efforts of those who bring them about, to be in the end random, ineffective flashes of light that never really illuminate a path forward. Too like the lightning which ceases to be ere one can say it lightens, as a famous Elizabethan blogger once posted.

And thus, Stevie Guide. I see now that this is my sacred obligation - to shine like a shaft of golden light while all around is darkness. Or at least to keep enough fairy dust in the air to cast some lasting shadows.

The question you are probably asking yourself is "why me?" Fair enough. But what you should really be asking is "why you?" Think about that for a moment while I formulate the answer. Why should I (by whom I mean you) listen to you (that is to say, me?)

Why? Because I am not an expert. Allow me to explain. And then to sum up. A few days ago, I was involved in a silly debate in the comments section of another blog which shall rename nameless because I am here to promote my own blog, not Eschaton. Besides, Duncan is an expert and so I can't recommend paying him any mind. The point is, one of the regulars (not even a troll) claimed that circumcision would be an effective means to battle AIDS in a high risk population (which I took to mean "Africa.") There is, of course, no definition of the word "effective" that would make this hypothesis even remotely true, but the commenter (who shall remain nameless here because I ridiculed him enough at the nameless blog) linked to some statistics^* from the CDC and NIH indicating a reduced probability of transmission of STDs in circumcised men and then asked a very reasonable question: Whom should he believe, scientific experts at two of the most respected health organizations in the world, or some guy commenting anonymously on a blog under the name "dirk gently" (that is to say, once again, me.)

The answer is obvious.

No? Well, think about this. About six years ago, the experts told us all that the nation of Iraq had to be stopped. Iraq had a highly trained standing army of Republican Guard as vicious and powerful as the Sarduakar (another fictional army , coincidentally commanded by the emporer Shaddam), unmanned aerial drones capable of spying on American soil, biological and chemical Weapons of Mass Destruction, and a nuclear program on the verge of turning the western hemisphere into a single boiling mushroom cloud. Not to mention, Saddam Hussein was secretly training his sworn enemies, the Al Queda terrorists, and had been personally involved in the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center.

These experts included the United States Secretary of Defence, Secretary of State, National Security Advisor, Vice President, President, the CIA, the FBI, the NSA and of course Bill Krystol. Experts and organizations that had unprecedented and unsurpassed access to information, facts, statistics and analysis with which to prove their points and justify their actions. On the other hand were mopes like me who insisted that none of the experts' assumptions or conclusions made the slightest bit of sense. Mopes who looked at the vial of talcum powder presented by the United States Freaking Secretary Of State as evidence of Iraq's anthrax program and said "Hey, it's just talcum powder!" Anonymous amateur analysts armed only with logic and a lack of personal agenda.

Whom should one believe?

Anyway, the point of all this ramble is that had Stevie Guide been available six years ago, hundreds of thousands of lives might have been saved. Hundreds of billions of dollars. So I apologize. And I'll try to do better from here on in. Now, I can't promise that every post will potentially save hundreds of thousands of lives, hundreds of billions of dollars, or civilization as we know it. But I will make the same promise that Senator Al Franken makes - everything will be the truth, except for the jokes. In fact, I'll do Al one better: some of the jokes will be true, too.

-----------------------------------------

* I can post links, too. Click the circumcision picture.