Excuse me, but what's been advocated here for weeks....?

Re CT Gov. Rell apparently offering a more workable possible compromise in the state's ongoing budget battle:

(Link to information from the Hartford Courant "CT Confidential" blog: http://blogs.courant.com/rick_green/ Also: A link to the "CT News Junkie" story.)

I'm far from alone (among non-zillionaires advocating for it), but what has this blog been "suggesting" for weeks? E.g., here (link) , here, and here ??

A: Compromise.



Please....let's be grown-ups now and "get it done". Thank you.

CT budget impasse: Recalcitrant Republicans

Link to 8/22/09 Hartford Courant Connecticut state budget impasse news story: http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=3138688709219220372

Republican Governor Rell states: "I'm equally as frustrated as the public is now...."

It may not be scientific, but this poll at the "CT News Junkie" site has a clear message for Gov. Rell and recalcitrant state Republicans: Increase state income taxes on those fortunate enough to earn $600,000 or more per year. 76% of respondents (currently) vote 'yes':

Link: http://twtpoll.com/r/mqzcok

C'mon millionaires and billionaires; how about doing your fair share.... Axe a day of paid dog-walking for the labradoodles, or something meaningful like that. What's $20 a week to you, while the rest of us can't afford the trifles... like decent health care. (Something that state Republicans want to cut further.)



One word, my state "representatives": Compromise.

And another, revenue-based word: Tolls.

Palin "wins", intelligence loses. (World smirks.)

As governor (before she quit), Sarah Palin supported "plan(-ning) ahead for health care decisions, related to end of life care...." Please see this link to an official, 4/16/08 proclamation, signed by Gov. Palin: http://gov.state.ak.us/archive.php?id=1094&type=6#

As has been pointed out, we're seeing blatant demagoguery on her part re this issue.

Just what America needs: More half-truths, innuendo and tabloid sensationalism. That's real leadership.....that's what made this country great: Rampant paranoia and stupidity.




So who's being a disingenuous ass, mainly for political gain?

If Wasilla-hillbilly-led hysteria "wins", many U.S. health care patients stand to lose. Again. (If you aren't receiving care yet, you will....) The rest of the civilized world is laughing: Though not perfect, they generally addressed effective, available health care from birth through old age.....years ago. You don't have to be rich to obtain decent care. (Or almost.) Please also consider: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/jeremywarner/100000571/us-healthcare-expenditure-the-biggest-waste-of-money-in-the-world/

So what exactly is wrong with facilitating proper planning for the inevitable....? I don't find the concept "confusing" at all, Senator Grassley. Oh, and check this item about Grassley and other GOP demagogues apparently voting in favor of so-called "death panel" funding in 2003: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/14/grassley-voted-for-socall_n_259750.html

Woodstock flashback: The first 5 albums you bought?

For those who were young around the time of the 1969 Woodstock festival. (And are of a "certain age" now.)

Do you remember the first five or so albums that you bought, with your own money? (I assume that you were good and didn't steal them...)

A new teenager at the time of Woodstock, I was a bit young to go.... Though I know children my age were there. (A guy from our school class went...with his parents.) At the time I was just starting to "graduate" from buying music singles ("45's") to purchasing a few albums...with my newspaper route money. I didn't really "get going" on buying albums until the following year, 1970.

Aside: Actually, I think the first album I ever bought was 1966's "The Supremes A-Go-Go", by the legendary Supremes. I believe my brother and I pooled our allowance money at the time. We loved the Supremes, and that pink-covered album got listened to death. You can currently find an import (remastered) version of this album at Amazon. For over $600. (Photo/link.)


With the Woodstock 40th anniversary here, I started thinking about the first albums I ever owned (on my own). Alas; none of them are in my possession anymore. Pretty sure it was my mother who tossed out most of my vinyl collection several years later. (Thanks, Mom.)

As best as I recall, here's my list of the first albums I owned: They're all from 1970 (I believe) except "Tommy", released in 1969. All were major-ly popular albums at the time. (FWIW, don't remember the exact order in which they were purchased.)

"Chicago II" (Their second album. Pretty sure this is the first one I bought on my own.)

"Deja Vu", Crosby, Stills, Nash, and Young

"Tommy", The Who

"Cosmo's Factory", Creedence Clearwater Revival (Reached #1 on Billboard pop album chart at the time....)

"Steppenwolf 'Live'", Steppenwolf ("Sookie, Sookie" to you!)


From the period anyway, most of these albums still hold up well, IMO.

Memory test: So what's your list? What were the first albums you owned, especially if you were of age/coming of age around the time of Woodstock.(Wherever you are from....)

It's something of a rhetorical question to contemplate, but I've also opened up comments here if you care to leave one containing your list. I think it's interesting. Thank you.

Newsflash: Mr. Cheney thinks we're all weeners

Re the news article linked below, check the current no. 1 def. for 'weener' at Urban Dictionary: Link

And that goes for YOU, too! Per "Mr. Potter's" disdaining references to "public sentiment" in this comment-worthy Washington Post article (by Barton Gellman, today). Link

"So?"

Remember that one, from the former second most powerful person in the world? (He's knows he really was #1. Or, at least: King)

(Image from Google : LIFE archives)

You...yeah, You! You're a "wuss". So are whoever these guys are fawning around me here. And everyone else, especially my former "boss": "The President" of the United States.
BwahhhhHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Those who matter know I'M the real president! And now I've morphed into "Mr. Loquacious" , too....Got that dunk tank ready for me? (Link)
Bring it on....!!

Hasta la vista, baby. I'll be BACK....

A good letter. Plus: Medicare "anti-socialists"

A very good message in a letter to the editor in today's Hartford Courant. I'll trust the gentleman on his statistics.... Link: http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/editorials/hc-digbrflets0813.art3aug13,0,6901116.story


Why are many people vehemently defending the present, deeply flawed U.S. health care status quo? Per the following link, look where the private insurance system has left many working families/individuals:

Link: http://www.courant.com/business/hc-health-care-coverage-0812,0,73778.story


And, why are so many seen on TV/in photos yelling, screaming (uncivilly) in public officials' faces.... older Americans? (Mostly white, too.) Who either are already covered by government-run Medicare and Social Security, or soon will be....(A link to one current photo.)

Socialism!! Never!! (BTW: Read this 'wiki' on what a "mixed economy" is, here.)
Hands off my Medicare....



There's much distortion, deception, and misinformation out there right now. Enjoy a bit of clarity:



(Articulate Ms. Maddow is also dead-on correct about lazy, poor reporting (generally) slapped together and rushed out re the issue.)

Health care forum disrupters and demagogues

Representative John D. Dingell of Michigan has it right:

“As long as I have a vote, I will not let shouting, intimidation or misinformation deter me from fighting for this cause.”

Here's a story link. Especially note some of the associated photos: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/08/us/politics/08townhall.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

People have a right to express themselves, but yelling -- including scripted yelling -- is uncivil, and never accomplishes anything. (Neither does pushing/physical confrontation (by seriously overweight people (who burden any health care system)).)

Not too surprisingly (per previous posts here), this dangerous faction has now surfaced (online):
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/08/anti-health-care-reform-protester-encourages-physical-violence-use-of-firearms.php

"The Revenooers are a'comin!" Some citizens are genuinely concerned (about health care reform), but virulently mixed in are the same reactionary hicks from the Rush/Glenn Beck/NRA nexus: "It's change and involves government so it's automatically bad and to be feared."



(Photo credit: Pfc. Christopher Grammer, 50th Public Affairs Detachment."This image is a work of a U.S. Army soldier or employee, taken or made during the course of the person's official duties. As a work of the U.S. federal government, the image is in the public domain.")

And of course, the new queen of demagoguery (above) hasn't quit that job; firing off distortions, as described here:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090808/ap_on_re_us/us_palin_health_care;_ylt=AtaGwRpds26_T2B1AErTWESFws8F

8/14/09 update: Ms. Palin's 'death panel' claim, which she has affirmed, is FALSE. Once again revealing the divisive, distorting, ill-informed public figure that she is. Link to pertinent article: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/14/health/policy/14panel.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

We'll see where the national "debate" leads. But my question would be: Health insurers (private) already subject millions of policy holders to "rationing". (Deciding which patient medical procedures they will/will not cover.) IF you can afford a policy at all, do you actually want to (continue to) "trust" the insurance companies -- alone -- with this? (A link to a more complete response to this question: http://www.whitehouse.gov/realitycheck/4 ) Please be sure to read what former CIGNA exec. Wendell Potter had to say about private heath insurers' true focus here.

In case you've already forgotten (uhh...the recent worldwide financial crisis??), insurance companies' ultimate motive is to make a profit. One (more) example of the prime focus of such paragons of altruistic virtue: Anthem Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Connecticut is currently the #1-ranked private health care insurance provider by Consumer Reports. (See Sept. 2009 issue, PPO plans.) Yet they recently tried to perpetrate an (average) 23% rate increase on customers here. (Some rates would have gone up more than 30%.) Read more: http://www.courant.com/business/hc-anthem-rate-hike-data-0727,0,1218919.story

The state's attorney general, congress people, health care advocate and many others stood up to this proposed robbery, and the outrageous rate hike request was rejected. Though, the approved hike is still substantial.

In Obama's health care proposal, you can keep your wonderful, private health insurance, if you want to....http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-seeks-to-dispel-health-reform-rumors-2009-08-08?siteid=yahoomy

Another day in paradise...for Connecticut billionaires!

"JoAnne Bauer, center of Hartford, waves to a plane in the sky with a banner attached to it thanking Connecticut Gov. M. Jodi Rell for not raising taxes on the rich. Bauer is with a group called Billionaires for Budget Cuts for a protest at the State Capitol in Hartford, Conn. , Thursday, July 30, 2009. Gov. M. Jodi Rell is set to release a new budget plan that she says may have to include tax increases. The governor has been saying for months that she wouldn't consider raising taxes until all possible spending cuts have been exhausted."

And here's a link to story & video for the "billionaires'" second visit (8/3/09): http://www.ctnewsjunkie.com/state_capitol/billionaires_for_budget_cuts_m.php

Also love the following comment by "Robin Eublind" at: http://blogs.courant.com/capitol_watch/2009/08/the-billionaires-are-back.html#comment-121242


" Cheers to Gov. Rell for protecting the rich and greedy at the expense of the sick and needy.

I understand that in the coming budget negotiations both sides have admitted there's a need to raise taxes to close the budget gap.

That's fine with me -- so long as no one raises taxes on Billionaires."

ENS: Connecticut gets this one right

Link to story covering today's (8/5) announcement by Gov. Rell about a statewide reverse 911 notification system: http://www.wfsb.com/news/20292114/detail.html

This system may prove invaluable in certain dire situations such as some form of terror attack, or more localized incidents. (E.g., severe weather: CT has had two tornado touchdowns this year. It happens.) According to the announcement the system can also target specific geographic areas of the state, or just certain groups of people. (E.g., emergency responders.)


It also supposedly can be customized by its recipients; e.g., for email, cell phones, etc.

Let's hope all of the features really work, especially when it counts.

Why yes, Palin "think"-alikes, you can opt-out if you want. If you believe all of this is just one more big government, "Big Brother" communistic takeover ploy or something. Then you can be the last to know.....as usual.






Blog note: This post is backdated to fit the order of presentation (of all entries) preferred. It's actual creation date is 8/5/09. - Mr. D. Tails.