Saturday, August 29, 2009

We're Communicating II

OK, so I spend a lot of time cruising the Dark Side, inserting a little Truth into the Stupid End of the Intertubes. I admit that. They're frequently either ignorant, mistaken, or completely batshit, head-buried-deeply-in-their-anus insane, and I insist on throwing water on their fire, kicking sand in their faces, and injecting reality directly into their veins.

Now, I'll be the first to admit that this is most often a complete waste of time. I find that the Fargone Right tends to be unwilling to listen to any messages that don't come from the vibrations in their fillings, and they tend to have more interest in their agenda than in actuality.

But, for some unknown reason, I keep doing it. It's led to some fascinating discussions, both in the various shadowy corners where I find myself, and occasionally in the Comments section here, when one of them follows me home like some kind of weirdly masochistic, three-legged street mongrel hoping to bite me on the ankle while my back is turned or something.

Now, to be entirely honest, I don't mind batting around the odd idiot. It keeps me off the streets, at least. (Admittedly, I end up feeling like a bully at times, since some of these winners aren't overly burdened by an abundance of common sense. But if I have to be the one to take one for the team, I guess I'll shoulder that burden and bravely move on...)

Of course, then my irony gland kicks in, and I describe the drooling masses of teabaggers and deathers in terms like above, and get called names like "arrogant," or find myself with commenters like the anonymous guy who felt that repeating the phrase "YOU DON’T LISTEN OR ADMIT ANY WRONG. YOU’RE NEVER WRONG" eighteen times was a viable argument.

(It's weird. I have a mental image of that guy actually typing out each line, not cutting and pasting it. I don't know why, but it would fit the rest of his spittle-flecked rant.)

And really, when I write stuff like... well, like everything that's precedes these words... now that I slow down and think about it... when I write stuff like that, I might very well deserve the label "arrogant." But you know, when they make it so easy to feel superior, I'm not sure why I should hold back. It's like some kind of intellectual Darwinianism.

The weird thing is, there's so damned many of these gibbering Neanderthals wandering the landscape these days, you have to wonder whether Cro-magnon could have survived if he was simply overwhelmed and beaten to death by broken tree branches, despite his superior flint spearhead.

Is this our fate (to openly switch metaphors in midstream), some sort of dystopian, zombie-infested landscape, where the Glenn Becks of the future infect our populace with some odd cephalophagian virus, leaving them to shamble over the horizon with blank eyes, muttering "ssssooooooocccciiallismmmmm"?


(Wow, where did that rant come from? Boy, I'm glad I'm not introspective. I'd have to wonder about myself after that...)

Anyway, today we speak of a different kind of "communication." Perhaps one that's even more important that grabbing the mental midgets and using them like bowling balls.

(Stop it! Stop it! You're done with that!)

First, I just finished emailing our "friends" in the White House. (OK, admittedly that isn't the primary contact address for the White House. But that happens to be where I was, and I figured "what the fuck, right?" And sometimes, you've just got to say... aaahh, forget it...)
I'm curious. When are you guys going to get serious about getting universal health care? The insurance companies and the healthcare industry is spending millions to defeat it, the GOP is positioning themselves as roadblocks in the hope that a major loss will discredit Pres. Obama and make him a lame duck less than a year into his first term, and you're trying to be bipartisan?

The Blue Dogs are busy trying to appease constituents who would never vote for them anyway; the GOP is going to block whatever goes through, once they're done with all the stalling tactics they can dream up in committee, and they're going to filibuster when it hits the floor. You know this in advance - the Republicans have been trying to destroy Medicare since it was passed, they aren't going to support this.

Back before the Ignorant Unwashed got brainwashed by the "death panels" and similar garbage, 70% of them wanted a public option (and most of the rest didn't know what one was).

We've entered a post-bipartisan era. You can't keep using a failing tactic over and over, because the result is always going to be the same.

It 's time to bring together a coalition of Democrats, serve a few beers, slap some backs, promise funding for their district, and put together a functional healthcare system using the British or Canadian systems that the right wing is so scared of, fund it using the rolled-back Bush tax cuts, and move on. The GOP will scream and cry and stamp their little feet - let them.

At that point, they're going to try to sabotage it any way they can - cutting funding, passing ignorant bills under the guise of "preventing abortions" or "assisting the small insurance businessman" or whatever, so it might be best if somebody specifically keeps an eye on the program during the initial set-up and beyond. It won't even need to be another "Tzar" position - just a special assistant to Ms Sebelius.

I don’t see any chance of anything else working. The GOP has already stated that they will oppose any program that comes out. So it’s time to use your majority and just push it through.

Please. America needs this.
OK, so maybe the message was a little sappy. Well, practice makes perfect, right? So I sent out the following message two days ago.
Senator Bingaman,

As a member of the Senate Finance Committee, you were selected, along with five other Senators, to craft the Healthcare legislation. Unfortunately, you don’t seem to be having much luck doing that little task. This concerns me.

This is probably the most important piece of legislation currently before Congress. We lose 18,000 Americans every year who can’t get healthcare – that’s as if 9/11 happened once every two months. We need the public option.

And the Republicans, simply because they can’t stand the thought of President Obama "succeeding," have chosen this issue (admittedly, along with every other issue before Congress, but particularly this one) to make their stand. Jim DeMint (R-SC) has already referred to healthcare as the President’s "Waterloo," and a significant number of GOP Congressmembers agree with him.

In your "Gang of Six" alone, Senator Grassley has referred to the House effort as "the Pelosi bill," saying that Pelosi and Obama are "intellectually dishonest" for saying that old people won’t be ground up and made into crackers; he also said that even if he agrees on a bill, he won't vote for it unless the rest of the GOP does the same (as if that’s going to happen).

Mike Enzi has stated that he has no plans to compromise on the bill, he’s just there to see what he can "get them to leave out."

Olympia Snowe, who, like most other Senators, has taken significant amounts of money from the healthcare industry, at least seems reasonable on the issue.

Kent Conrad’s reliance on "co-ops" (an unproved concept which has failed almost every time that it’s been tried) might be a useful diversion, but it's no solution.

And Max Baucus is a Blue Dog who hasn’t been willing to take a stand, preferring to pander to conservative constituents who aren't going to vote for him anyway.

The only good news coming from your committee was last week, when you admitted that budget reconciliation was a viable method of passing health care reform. As the Republicans have shown no interest in negotiating in good faith, it’s time to move on. Craft a bill that a majority of Democrats will support, ensure the public option is included, and push it through. Too much time has been wasted trying to compromise with Republicans who have no intention of agreeing to anything.

As Letterman put it, "Congress has been agonizing over health care for months now. Squabbling, fighting, the town hall meetings going crazy. Meanwhile, while they're arguing about health care, we're stuck in two wars that were rubber-stamped in about 10 minutes. What? How does that make any sense when you think about it?"

This is why I voted for you, Senator Bingaman. Somebody has to lead on that committee, and it might as well be you. Push the public option through. It’s what America needs, despite any lies the Republicans and the insurance companies try to peddle. If Senator Kennedy isn’t going to be around any more to protect the average American, somebody needs to take over at least part of the job.

Make us proud of you, Senator.
Still treading dangerously close to proposing optimism as an alternative, but I think I'm happy with it.

Now, it's your turn. Contact the White House. Contact your Senator or Representative. They get enough block-capital letters scrawled in crayon. Let them hear from the sane side of the populace for once, while we're still a majority. Even if a less-vocal majority.

Now, if you'll excuse me, there's more zombies out there to kill.


Anonymous said...

“We lose 18,000 Americans every year who can’t get healthcare – that’s as if 9/11 happened once every two months.”

What kind of crap is this? These numbers are in no way true or verified or even verifiable! EVERYONE gets healthcare here. Anyone who is taken or goes to a hospital in America gets top notch care. People die nameless cynic, but not nearly as often from care they get from healthcare providers as they do from their own negligence or pride when they keep telling those around them “I am fine, don’t worry, I’m just having a bad day” or some other form of denial. You inflate numbers and you pull them out of the air and send them to members of congress? Who the hell are you to embellish and conceive these lies as fact?

“As Letterman put it,”

David Letterman is now some sort of expert on healthcare in America? Sweet Jesus nameless give me a break. You liberals all look to Hollywood for your answers. Republicans and Conservatives reject this on the premise alone: We have healthcare, the best healthcare. Is it perfect? NO!! But it’s the best. You look for nirvana where there is none to be found nameless. You want everyone paying for everyone and that creates NO competition, it creates a monopoly. Canada’s doctors are ringing the death bell of their healthcare which this bill emulates.

“If Senator Kennedy isn’t going to be around any more to protect the average American, somebody needs to take over at least part of the job.”

Yes, let’s pass a bill because somebody died. That’s a great reason. Let’s all drive off that bridge together with Ted and see who got better healthcare, Ted or me. If this plan is so damn great, then every American should be on it, congress, The President, EVERYONE!! And until that happens, I will stand against this pile of junk till my last breath.

You are a liar nameless cynic. You blog is full of links from progressive web sites with agendas and loony left wing-nut analysis. I do not agree with everything this “eman” guy said, but he’s right on one thing. You don’t listen to anyone but yourself and you understand nothing.

Thank you for your service to our country. Thank God you serve no more.

Diogenes said...

"EVERYONE gets healthcare here. Anyone who is taken or goes to a hospital in America gets top notch care."

That could not be further from the truth. When a patient presents to a hospital with a potential life-threatening condition, the hospital is required to offer care to take away the treat to life.

You got a condition that isn't life threatening? Tough, if you don't have insurance. You rightwingnuts love to talk about all the hip replacements that Grannies across America will never get under "Obamacare", that they'll get pain pills, at best? THEY DON'T GET HIP REPLACEMENTS TODAY, if they don't have health insurance. And they may not even get the pain pills, either, because a bum hip is not a life-threatening condition.

Even if you HAVE a life-threatening condition, you don't get the "top notch care" that those with insurance MAY get. They get the cheapest palliative care that the hospital can offer under the law.

I don't know where NC got his numbers, to be honest. But I'll be willing to bet he can back it up. He's already much closer to the truth than you seem to be.

(By the way, Letterman tapes in NYC, not Hollywood. Screwed that one up too, didn't you? And if our choices are listening to Letterman or listening to Glenn Dreck, I'll stick with Letterman; he's smarter and better informed than Dreck on most any topic.)

Nobody suggested we pass healthcare reform BECAUSE Kennedy died. That battle was joined long before Teddy was planted in Arlington. It was a battle that Teddy help keep alive for decades, and NC was commenting that somebody had to pick up the slack, now that Teddy isn't there. And he's right.)

Now, go back to the e-boy, "Anon" and tell him you gave it your best shot. Speaking of Hollywood: You have been weighed. You have been measured. And you have absolutely been found wanting.

But there are some lovely consolation gifts on your way out. Ta ta!

Nameless Cynic said...

Yes, an Emergency Room can't turn anybody away. You know what else they don't do? Long term care. Immediate, life-threatening fixes, and they send you back out into the world. They deal with nothing but the most immediate, narrowly-focused types of problems. In M*A*S*H, they called it "meatball surgery." Patch 'em up and send 'em back out.

Weirdly enough, that doesn't sound like "top-notch care."

You blog is full of links from progressive web sites

Wow. That seems damning, doesn't it? I think we should check that out.

At the moment (9/1/09), starting at the top, I see links to: (OK, you've got me there...) (Wall Street Journal? "Progressive"?) (for a description of Amici Forever) (can't recommend going to that one - it ain't pretty. Also openly capitalistic.)
my own blog ("Annals of Surgical Innovation") (There's one! We had to go down 10 links, but we found one that is unequivocally for your side! This is, without question, a progressive website!) again (Two! Out of twelve... and as part of a quote from the first one...)

Are you starting to notice a pattern here?


Nameless Cynic said...

(Sorry. Took up too much room.)

Here, though, is where I think it gets interesting.

I do not agree with everything this “eman” guy said

Now, I just did a quick search. The last time I mentioned Eric was 2 weeks ago. In passing, as part of my collection of wingnut visitors. Before that, you go back to June.

Now, I've mentioned him (and I'll stay in the 3rd person for now) a few times in comments, but I've had a pretty active Comment section of late. And I know that when I'm reading somebody else's blog, I don't tend to read the comments - I'm more interested in the writer and his/her opinions, not the peanut gallery. I'll admit that we get some interesting discussions in there, but overall, it seems a little obsessive.

And "obsessive" is the important word there, Eric. Because I go to your blog right now, and the top story... sorry, dude, but it involves me. Fairly transparent arguments, but I'm headlining, in a venue I haven't even approached in months.

You have to let go, dude. You really do. I'm glad we live several states apart, because you're seriously pinging on the "creepy" meter.

(And Eric misses you too, Dio. That's all I can come up with. Because as I write, he's got no comments any more. He's feeling lonely and sad. He bans us, and then he wonders why nobody wants to play with him any more.)

My god, Eric, a quick google and you've even got one from six weeks ago (I actually had to look back in my archives to work out what this was about) where you were complaining because I offered to make a whole post about the "birther" crisis. I offered to give you an in-depth analysis, and you whined because I wasn't going to give you a shallow joke and a passing insult.

Dude, you're a strange and obsessive man. If I had any fear of you, I'd say you're the type of person that they write horror movies about. But to be honest, you're too sad and pathetic to be worried about.

Let me give you some suggestions. Work on your music. Connect with the people in your church - I'll bet a lot of them believe in the same things you do. Work with the homeless. You said you had a prison mission going - concentrate on that for a while. Read some books.

Really, Eric. You need to stop holding onto the past. It's not you - it's me. You're a good man; you deserve somebody better than me.

We'd be better off as friends. I think we should start seeing other people. You are the only really good man I've ever met, I will probably never meet anyone like you again. You are really marriage material, but that's only legal in a couple of states, and I'm straight. And I'm not sure I am ready to commit to one person.

We were like flames that passed in the night. But it's time to move on.

Anonymous said...

It's not really surprising Aimless considers Letterman an expert on health care. He also considers Jesse Ventura an expert on national security and considers Cash for Clunkers a successful program. Notice he also uses M*A*S*H as a reference?

Where's the reality based argument?

Nameless Cynic said...

Very nice. Almost an argument. ("Aimless." I kind of like that.)

Let's see.

I consider Letterman an expert on the bon mot - his credentials on... well, on pretty much any other subject are questionable.

Jesse ("the Body") Ventura, despite being a former mayor and one-term governor of Minnesota, was primarily included (in a former column... huh, somebody's been following me for a while...) because he'd been through SEAL training, and was therefore one of the highest-profile people to be waterboarded in a "professional" capacity. You hire the experts you have available, right?

And yes, I quoted MASH. I also reference old movies (many from before my time, to be honest), pop culture, books, magazines, news events, and the odd historical tidbit. I am what a classically-trained scholar or a "Renaissance Man" would be, if they were as shallow and superfluous as I pride myself in being.

However, let's talk "Cash for Clunkers" for a moment. Congress funded it for a billion dollars, and it was so overwhelmingly popular that it ran through those funds, and they needed to add another two billion to the pot. (Conveniently, they had some economic stimulus money that they could redirect, since this program had such obvious benefits.)

The cash poured into this program benefited local economies throughout the country. People who might not have bought cars did so, moving the process along beautifully. Ford ended up posting their first profits in how long again?

So in retrospect, why do you claim (other than because the voices in your head tell you to) that this program was anything but a complete success?

Anonymous said...

^^^^ This guy is so full of crap his molars are full of manure^^^^^

Diogenes said...

That last commentary probably strained your mental capacity to its limit, Anon. Very meaningful analysis.

Anonymous said...

^^^^^^^^^^ and this fudge packers "meaningful analysis" comes from paraphrasing Bill.

You should save your breath diogenes, you'll need it to blow up your date.

Diogenes said...

Awwww e-boy, cut it out, willya? You've used that line before.... it's old, it's tired. Give it up. And lose the irrelevant homophobic references, while you're at it.

Anonymous said...

Here's why I claim the program was anything but a complete success:

"I am what a classically-trained scholar or a "Renaissance Man" would be, if they were as shallow and superfluous as I pride myself in being."

Oh, and a classically-trained scholar would recognize the correct verbage should be "he" rather than "they" in that sentence.

Pat Riot

Nameless Cynic said...

Ah, and suddenly you're going from C4C is a failure, to it's "anything but a complete success." Odd how your story evolves over time... you do believe in evolution, then?

And then you post 4 links. Looking at them, we see:

leasetrader: a slanted story trying to make hay from the fact that the government isn't paying the next day (which they never promised they'd do, did they?). Oh, and it's outdated anyway).

cbsnews blogs: some specious math stating that C4C isn't doing anything, because it isn't doing enough. Huh? Oh, and claiming that it's suddenly harder to find cheap used cars. Because there's always been such a shortage of used cars?

productreviews: a lukewarm, relatively balanced story, giving positive and negative angles, without coming to a conclusion.

salon: uhh... did you read that one? It says that people say it's a failure, but it really isn't. Hence the title "Cash for Clunkers: The successful failure."

I know, I know - it's getting harder to cherrypick your google search "cash for clunkers failure," but you should at least read them before you try to use them.

Oh, and I would have corrected the pronoun confusion, if there'd been one. Feel free to read it as "I am what (this guy) or (this other guy) would be, if they were..."

Anonymous said...

Of course, I believe in evolution, Aimless. And I have high hopes that someday you might evolve into a higher life-form. But let's examine how (once again) you missed the subject entirely. You assert Cash For Clunkers was a "complete success". The links I posted pointed out that it was not a complete success. Thanks for pointing that out. It's good to see you did read the articles. Who helped you with the bigger words?

I regards to the productreviews link: I think the best articles leave it to the reader to come up with his or her own conclusion. Give Daily Kos and MSDNC a break sometime and maybe you'll come to realize this...doubtful.

You noticed I've been googling. When will you do the same and support some of your points? It's quite humorous to see when the libs are getting their butts handed to them in a debate their rebuttal always contains the word "google" or "googling". Which, I guess is a bit refreshing, as the standard lib response used to contain the words "racist" or "homophobe" (hint: Special K, get with the times, bub).

As far as some information being "outdated" mean no longer applicable? Like the Cash For Clunkers program?

I cut and pasted and emailed your statement to a friend who's been a professor of English comp at a local state university for over 20 years. She says your wrong. The use of the conjunction "or" keeps the pronouns singular. I'll go with 20 years of education university students over 20 years of cleaning latrines in the Air Force.

Pat Riot

Nameless Cynic said...

Well, it's good that English has become important to you. (Mind if I point out the humor in you then writing "She says your wrong"?)

Yup, I screw up the grammar sometimes. I don't have a problem with it. Grade me down, teacher.

It's cute how you get your dick slapped, and all you've got left is "attacking the messenger."

I'm glad you've been googling. Now actually read the links before you post them, and realize that they aren't supporting your point. (Which, again, gives me a chuckle from your statement "It's good to see you did read the articles")

you mean no longer applicable? Like the Cash For Clunkers program?

Uh... yes, that's correct. C4C ended last month. Very good. And it was both amazingly popular and extremely successful. So your point here is... what, exactly?

If you're quibbling over "complete success," in that some people are unhappy that they didn't get paid as soon as they sent in the paperwork - OK, fine. I'll give you that one.

Some people are cranky because the government is slow. Sears is also slow. Any large organization is. And there are some people who, if you hand them a lump of gold, would complain because you didn't polish it.

Diogenes said...

Do you figure our Anonymous troll will let us know the result when s/he e-mails "She says your wrong" to that same English professor?

Something about glass houses and stones comes to mind......

Uncle Slam said...