Month: March 2010

Because I’ve started writing my soliloquies again, I’ve changed permissions again for new users. Anonymous users are allowed to post again, as are recently-authenticated users, but all posts are moderated unless you’re part of the “Contributor”, “Barnsons”, or “Moderator” groups.

There’s only one moderator besides me. If you’re an honorary Barnson, you know who you are. There are no Contributors yet… those will be any folks who I don’t want to be able to host a blog here, but who are active enough to warrant posting without moderation.

Also going through and deleting massive numbers of spam accounts from my system. At a rate of approximately 6 to 10 new spam accounts per day since 2001, the user database has gotten huge.

Found this article in my local online rag this morning.

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) — Attorneys general from 13 states — including Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff — sued the federal government Tuesday, claiming the landmark health care overhaul is unconstitutional just seven minutes after President Barack Obama signed it into law.

This is the same Attorney General who claims we don’t have the resources to enforce the Utah State Constitution, yet we somehow magically have the resources now to take up a challenge to the first bill — the first few baby steps — to reform the horribly broken, incredibly expensive bureaucracy that is the US healthcare system?

I understand that, without a public option, this amounts to an unfunded mandate like No Child Left Behind. And that execrable act at a cost of around $30Bn a year, leaving $9Bn a year to be made up by the states, still never received as much criticism as this one.

“The Constitution nowhere authorizes the United States to mandate, either directly or under threat of penalty, that all citizens and legal residents have qualifying health care coverage,” the lawsuit says.

Legal experts say it has little chance of succeeding because, under the Constitution, federal laws trump state laws.

Let me get this straight. I’m in good health. My kids are in good health. My wife is in good health. As a taxpayer, I’m already funding health care coverage and retirement for America’s over-fifty majority through FICA, and capped my Social Security benefits years and years ago… I will never see a dime of the $13,500 max (EDIT: Uhh, that’s changed. It’s over $15,000 as of 2010) the federal government is allowed to take from me every year. My employer pays $700 a month for my health insurance, and I pay $810 a month for it. So the total cost of health insurance — not including dental, vision, and life insurance — is over EIGHTEEN THOUSAND DOLLARS A YEAR. Add that to FICA — which is really just a big, charitable donation at this point — and between the Feds and the insurance monopolies, I am out potentially over $30K a year.

Thirty. Thousand. Dollars. To pay for somebody else’s retirement, somebody else’s health care, and oh, by the way, a few hundred bucks of health care for me and my kids every year.

My employer refuses to give me a raise. Know why? The rising cost of health care, they tell me, IS my raise. And the amount I’m paying for health care DOUBLED over just the past nine years. We have to do SOMETHING to curb this crisis, and I’m just happy to see someone have the constituency and courage to finally get started on the process.

Then the AG for my state gets a bug in his butt to kowtow to the insurance company lobbyists, and here we are. I’m already subsidizing someone here. In my point of view, all this bloody bill does is show the average taxpayer who it is they’re paying for.

In Michigan, the Thomas More Law Center of Ann Arbor, a Christian legal advocacy group, sued on behalf of itself and four people it says don’t have private health insurance and object to being told they have to purchase it.

You know, I get this part. The Feds mandating that every American buy private health insurance is a little bit grating. We should really have a low-cost, minimal-coverage public option that everybody could pay for if they don’t have other coverage.

Oh, wait. The right wing and insurance lobby killed the Public Option. Now they are the ones grousing about not having a public option. What the heck?

But I kind of see the point now. See, without a Public Option, this bill is an absolutely enormous win for the insurance lobby. Now everybody HAS to have insurance! What a marvelous recruiting opportunity for insurance companies!

The lawsuit claims the bill violates the 10th Amendment, which says the federal government has no authority beyond the powers granted to it under the Constitution, by forcing the states to carry out its provisions but not reimbursing them for the costs.

Right. Just like NCLB did. And all these Attorneys General lined up to block that pig-headed, anti-education mandate under George Bush, Jr.

Oh, wait. They didn’t.

Other changes would not kick in until 2014.

That’s when most Americans will for the first time be required to carry health insurance — either through an employer or government program or by buying it themselves. Those who refuse will face tax penalties.

“This is the first time in American history where American citizens will be forced to buy a particular good or service,” said Nebraska Attorney General Jon Bruning, explaining why his state joined the lawsuit.

Actually, untrue. We are required to purchase auto insurance if we drive an automobile. We are currently required to purchase health insurance if we don’t have the cash to pay for huge medical bills out-of-pocket, bills that are so huge because we’ve already been forced to fund emergency-room visits for uninsured individuals and fund huge lawsuits which are the legal community’s equivalent of winning the lottery.

Why not insurance-industry reform instead? Let’s have some oversight over the out-of-control insurance industry that charges extortionate sums and refuses to cover many of the claims. We know now that the past forty years of incredible rise in medical costs can be laid at the foot of the insurance companies, not technology or litigation.

Oh, that’s right. We can’t reform the insurance industry. They are making unheard-of profits, and own most of our politicians. That’s the only reason the current health-care bill saw the light of day: because despite the hugely-divisive nature of health care reform, this one is just enough of a sweetheart deal for the insurance industry to buy key politicians who might have considered voting against it… or voting in some other reforms.

Can you tell I’m ambivalent about this bill? I’m optimistic, but given that the public option was excised from the bill in order for it to pass, I look at it now as more charity for the bloated, unproductive insurance industry… and we need to fix that as soon as possible.

Until today, I have largely ignored the Tea Party. Decided to read some of their own literature today. After careful study, I’ve come to the conclusion that it’s a mostly-male thinly-veiled white-supremacist organization hell-bent on eliminating religious freedom from the USA. Apparently some 11% of the USA sympathizes with them. Yuck.

Here are a few specifics I’ve discovered in my half-hour of skimming their stuff. Note that I’ve had practically no exposure to their party up until now… I heard about a few poorly-attended rallies and people buying tea to throw into local harbors, but just kind of brushed it off. However, they made one of the front-page links of CNN because they are considering the creation of a third major political party in the US. Facts I learned:

• 6 out of 10 members of the Tea Party are male.
• After extensive Googling, I have never seen a photo of a black member of the Tea Party.
• Around 40% of Tea Party members are retirees.

I found a few more interesting things reading their “Declaration of Redependence”, a re-write of the Declaration of Independence with modern-day Christian sensibilities rather than the Founding Father’s Enlightenment principles:

Free-market Solutions for Healthcare Reforms, Entitlement Program Reforms, Education Reforms Are Needed – Failure of our leaders to find free market and spiritual based solutions for these human needs cause citizens to flirt with compromising God’s 5th through 10th behavioral mandates. Attempts to leverage human needs and suffering and the redistribution of wealth for political power or personal enrichment has its roots in the breach of Gods first three Commandments.

Wow, do I have a number of concerns with this statement. First, they are saying that by not finding a “free market and spiritual-based solution”, political leaders are violating commandments 5 through 10. Assuming we’re talking about the Commandments in Deuteronomy 5:6-21, those commandments are:

17 You shall not murder.
18 Neither shall you commit adultery.
19 Neither shall you steal.
20 Neither shall you bear false witness against your neighbor.
21 Neither shall you covet your neighbor’s wife. Neither shall you desire your neighbor’s house, or field, or male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.

So a public option for health care, according to the Tea Party, will cause you to flirt with murder, adultery, theft, perjury, and covetousness. OK, that sounds fairly whacky to me, but now I know where they stand.

This document gets weirder.

Judicial Reforms Are Needed – The unconstitutional legislating from the judicial bench, establishing immoral precedents and ignoring the original intent of the US Constitution. Judicial arrogances prove a complete contempt for Gods first three Commandments and selective disregard for our Creators 5th, 7th, and 10th directives, while facilitating their erosion.

So, apparently, it’s time for “out with the old, in with the new”. Let’s throw out the checks and balances and go with, I don’t know, say, the Divine Right of Kings instead? Apparently, to the Tea Party, this is the new ideal: No judiciary!

What a grand idea! No check on legislative powers! Why didn’t the Founding Fathers think of this? We should ensure there are no powers to review a new law — however poorly imagined or implemented — other than how the Chief Executive chooses to implement it. Genius!

Seriously, though, I think the Tea Party folks are sore about Roe V. Wade. Apparently the Tea Party is unaware of the Constitutional Amendment process. I believe that is supposed to be the ultimate balance against judicial impropriety, and in fact we as a country have used it a number of times.

In fact, at least once in modern history we squeaked through an amendment banning alcohol from coast to coast. It took over a decade, but eventually we the people realized what a stupid idea that was, how much crime it created, what a dramatic reduction in quality of life it created, and we repealed that very bad, poorly-thought-out amendment. Since that time, we’ve been extremely cautious about passing amendments. So cautious, in fact, that despite the very loud outcry from Pro Life activists, an anti-abortion provision in the Constitution has never seen the light of day.

It’s not a conspiracy. It’s that you need overwhelming support to pass a law overturning the judgment of the Supreme Court. And apparently Americans aren’t yet willing to throw their rights under a bus driven by the whims of their state representatives. The day they are, rather than the Tea Party trying to eliminate the power of the Judicial branch of the American Government, why not have a big rally and start the kick-off party for your Constitutional Amendment banning abortions in the USA?

Heck, make it a celebration larger than any the world has ever seen. Maybe you’ll drive those leftist, commie-pinko Liberals to emigrate to Mexico or Canada where they’ll get their monthly abortions in the mail alongside their latest episode of “The Nation”.

America’s Judeo-Christian Spiritual Foundation and Responsibilities of American Citizens Recognized – Disrespect for our God and Creator, His Words in the Holy Bible and the Ten Commandments, His imprint upon our founding documents plus the assault on the traditional family and life issues moral decline in our society, contributes to the loss of our principles, values and Common Sense. Our current government leaders and judiciary revel in the violation of Gods first three Commandments and cause our citizens to be in frequent conflict with His other behavioral dictums.

Which God? Zeus? Thor? Allah? JHVH? The Great Mother?

Here’s where the Tea Party totally lost me. This nation was founded by many religions and by Enlightenment thinkers who understood that the “Divine Right of Kings” was absolutely a wrong approach to government. The power of government, to our Founding Fathers, derived not from God, not from the Bible, not from the Commandments, but from the PEOPLE. The Founders understood that to fairly govern, the government must first and foremost look after the people, not any specific religion. They wanted most of all to depart from state-sanctioned religion as experienced under the oppressive hand of England.

The Founders got their wish. Now the Tea party wants to force the US government to bow its knee to their God. We, the people, are the government; its officials are only our representatives. I would no more force my Muslim neighbor, my Hindu neighbor, or my Jewish neighbor to kneel before the Christian god than I would force a Christian to bow to an idol of Shiva.

So there you have it. Ultimately, these kinds of statements cast no doubt that the Tea Party is nothing but America’s Taliban: religious extremists hell-bent on seeing their interpretation of Christianity shoved down the throat of every American.

Whether we want it or not.

So, I rarely post anything I heard at Church, but this is worth quoting.

True story: A pastor went to a conference in the bible belt and when it was his turn to speak, he said: “40,000 people died of starvation today and you people don’t give a shit”. The conference drew in its collective breath and sat there slackjawed. He said: “I’ll say it again, 40,000 people died of starvation today and you people don’t give a shit.”. There was rumbling in the crowd, and he looked at them, and pointed out what I think is the difference between happy, pretty, right-wing, Fox-News watching “Christianity” and the kind of Christianity I want to believe in.

He said, (and I paraphrase): “Which part of that sentence really bothered you?” – because for many, it was the “curse” word, and in fact theres nothing really wrong with that word. We get so pissed off at politicians and people we work with, and that @$$hole who scratched our car. These little things that maybe, if we had a little perspective, we would brush aside, focusing our anger on real injustice or real pain, then maybe be moved to throw a couple of bucks toward folks who need it.

Whatever you believe, its a good message. Gonna go throw a couple more bucks toward Haiti, since I’m thinking about it. How bout you?