The only thing I don’t like about this article – Cutting kids’ healthcare will grow the deficit – by David Sirota is he uses the old saying that Republicans are cutting off their noses to spite their faces. That is true, but Republican attacks on children’s health care is typical of the conservative movement’s lack of appreciation for and lack of understanding of value.
In the name of curtailing deficits, politicians across the country are hacking away at programs that aim to make children healthier. In Congress, for example, House Republicans are spearheading a budget that eviscerates funding for food assistance and effectively defunds the wildly successful Children’s Health Insurance Program.
Similarly, from Texas to California, state lawmakers are chopping children’s health programs in the face of budget shortfalls. In all these initiatives, the rhetorical leitmotif is “fiscal responsibility.”
Like clockwork, this has set off the now-standard ideological debate over values, with liberals arguing that it’s immoral to deny healthcare to today’s kids and conservatives countering that it’s even more immoral to saddle the next generation with debt. But as highlighted by a new National Bureau of Economic Research report, both sides are ignoring the most important non-ideological fact: Any so-called deficit reduction plan that cuts child health programs is almost certain to increase deficits.
The NBER study compared British and American illness rates, controlling for both demographic differences and risk factors like smoking and drinking. It found that a) we have “much higher” childhood illness rates than our English counterparts, b) “the transmission rates of higher rates of childhood illnesses into poor health in [adults is] higher in America compared to England” and therefore, c) “the origins of poorer adult health among older Americans compared to the English traces back right into the childhood years.”
In other words, America’s broken private healthcare system allows kids’ medical afflictions to become far worse in adulthood than they become in England — a nation with a government-sponsored universal healthcare system.
When I say value that is not to be confused with values( Republicans have values they just happen to be abhorrent values). They frequently think of ways to cut imminent costs. We can all do that. We could all sell our cars tomorrow, end our phone plans and wear nothing but t-shirts from the thrift store. Those things will safe a lot in the short term. In the long term making such cuts might endanger our jobs, alienate our friends and family, and keep us from working in white collar jobs that require a dress code. This is the answer to Republicans if one assumes they are sincere about cost cutting. They are to the extent they want to cut anything Democrats are in favor of. A review of Republican history and the deficit – their political and economic resume says they are not sincere about the deficit and are consistently two faced about spending. Of our last five presidents three were Republican and they are responsible for 90% of the deficit. These are the same people who thought it gloriously patriotic to send over 4,000 Americans to their deaths over non-existent WMD. If lying Americans to their deaths doesn’t make them break a sweat then certainly lying about the economy and their plans for same is just another day in lalaland.
Who is dimmer Sarah Palin or her groupies? Palin’s fans rewrite wiki history of Paul Revere. In order to make Palin’s bungled history look like fact, her toadies are using her quote as the source. Not Paul Revere’s actual retelling of what happened. No “British” were warned. When Revere was caught by the British he got a little braggadocio and warned or taunted the British with talk about getting their comeuppance one day. Palin apologists are trying to claim that was what she was talking about. Nice try.
When asked why he didn’t veto the stimulus money, Scott reverted to his standard talking point — bashing the federal government. But when pressed by the Miami Herald reporter, Scott said he went through every line of the budget and considered each through the lens of job creation. “That’s the filter I used,” he said. “So if the stimulus money helps creates jobs, then it’s okay?” the reporter replied. Scott immediately reversed himself and denounced stimulus money again, saying, “I think it’s a mistake. It’s taxpayer money and we have to watch how we spend all that money.” “But you okayed it,” the reporter pointed out.
Scott’s staffer then stepped in to try to end the interview. Scott walked away hedging about how he would need more detail about which lines the reporter was talking about, again contradicting himself by suggesting he didn’t know which lines of the budget contained stimulus money.
Good concise article about Elizabeth Warren – The Warren Court
Given the intensely partisan nature of Washington these days, the demonization of Warren and the C.F.P.B. is all too predictable. But it’s profoundly misguided, because Warren is far from the anti-capitalist radical that her critics (and some of her supporters) suppose. Indeed, an empowered C.F.P.B. could actually be a boon to business.
The core principle of Warren’s work is also a cornerstone of economic theory: well-informed consumers make for vigorous competition and efficient markets. That idea is embodied in the design of the new agency, which focusses on improving the information that consumers get from banks and other financial institutions, so that they can do the kind of comparison shopping that makes the markets for other consumer products work so well. As things stand, many Americans are ill informed about financial products. The typical mortgage or credit-card agreement features page after page of legalese—what bankers call “mice type”—in which the numbers that really matter are obscured by a welter of irrelevant data. There’s plenty of misinformation, too: surveys find that a sizable percentage of mortgage borrowers believe that their lenders are legally obliged to offer them the best possible rate.
Liberals don’t like to go to far Right sites, but they are informative in their own limited way. Day after day the article writers, bloggers and commenters are half crazed with the absurd idea that Democrats and progressives are radical socialist leftists. I have actually never meant a real live socialist, much less a Democrat or progressive that subscribed to socialism. On the contrary most of them want a something like a real capitalist society. One that is not rigged. One that is fair to consumers, investors, home owners and consumers. That conservatives think the corrupt plutocracy we have now is capitalism is a lot like the delusions Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann have about U.S. history.
This right-wing writer shares the Right’s common allergy to even the most basic fact checking and contradicts himself,WEINER’S TALE UNRAVELING
But according to data provided exclusively to The Daily from TweetCongress.org, a nonprofit website that captures each member of Congress’s Twitter feeds in real time, the shot seen round the world was transmitted using TweetDeck — a popular Adobe desktop application that links up with social networking sites. A review of Weiner’s Twitter stream from May 27, the day of the crotch pic, shows that Weiner had been posting only from TweetDeck — one of many ways to post messages to Twitter — that entire night.
Chet Wisniewski, a senior security adviser at security software company SophosLabs, said the TweetDeck stamp “does make it more plausible that it did come from him.”
Weiner used TweetDeck frequently, but he often also posted from the Web directly or from his BlackBerry. A widely circulated explanation for how Weiner’s Twitter account could have been hacked by email would also seem to be incompatible with the fact that the message in question originated on TweetDeck. If email had been used, the message probably would have originated via the photosharing site Yfrog, where the infamous picture was posted.
Notice something obvious. The lies just never stop, do they? – A journal called The Daily has reconstituted a false argument first offered by The Mighty Seixon in order to “debunk” what I said about the Yfrog exploit.
Let’s knock this one down quickly, shall we?
I revealed in this blog — long before the Daily published its “exclusively” provided “data” — that Weiner used TweetDeck that night. But so what?
The poor schlub writing for the Daily — his name is Daniel Libit — doesn’t understand that Seixon’s entire “TweetDeck” argument was based on the presupposition that the congressman used TweetDeck or some similar app EVERY SINGLE TIME. Thus, he never established a Yfrog account.
Yet even the Daily stipulates that this was not the case.
So there goes the argument. Poof.
Furthermore, TweetDeck and similar apps (such as the divinely-named Twitterberry) always append an identifying signature: “via TweetDeck” and “via Twitterberry.” Something like that. Weiner’s previous photos didn’t have that data. They were labelled “via Yfrog” and “via Twitter.”
Let’s take it a step further. Suppose Weiner had used TweetDeck and nothing but TweetDeck during his entire career as a twitterer. Again: So what?
TweetDeck automatically establishes a Yfrog account for you. When you try to send a pic, it even flashes a message: “Sending via Yfrog.” Don’t take my word for it. Download the app for yourself and try it out.
I downloaded TweetDeck and had one of my fictional creations send a pic to another. “Chalice153” had never set up a Yfrog account — and yet one was set up for her. Here it is. (That’s Angela, my model. Pretty, isn’t she?) That account was open to the very same exploit which I pointed out in my post. ( My note: you can see Joseph’s experiment at the link on his post.)
Than there is the other very obvious problem – the photo that ended up on Congressman Weiner’s Twitter stream has no metadata. This is a run down of all the Conservative bloggers who have latched on to this story like mindless blood sucking leeches – Rightbloggers E*aculate Over the Women of Weinergate. Imagine one of really bad college freshman sex comedies – the straight to $5 dollar DVD variety. That is about the level of discourse you’ll find.
TBogg has a write up of Patterico’s Pontifications ( who reportedly has a job on the public payroll as a DA in California) long post which consist mostly of some teenage girls tweeting back and forth about Congressman Weiner. PP actually thinks he has broken open some kind of wild hijinks. Like A Dog With A B*ner
Now, Patterico his own bad self is working the Weiner beat and he could have spent a lovely Southern California day with his wife and kids doing stuff in the sunshine. But, no. Because he can’t let this penis go, he spent the day creating timelines and using his mad Google skillz (with which we have personal experience) and reading between the lines and possibly even checking the kerning on notes passed amongst some tweens who think Anthony Weiner is Bieberiffic.
So lets say you’re accused of murder. PP presents as evidence a string of Twitter feds of people talking about you. Ah ha, proof you’re guilty, take the accused to the electric chair forthwith. Andrew Breitbart is also mentioned in the PP post as having some new breaking story which alleged that Rep. Weiner traded inappropriate photos with another woman. He’s off to a bad start – they traded photos? Last i heard consenting adults can do stuff like that. I’ve gone over there and checked several times and so far all he has is a pic of Rep. Weiner holding up a sign that says “me” – fully dressed.
Update: I don’t agree with everything Jack Shafer says in this article. For one most bloggers never said that Brietbart hacked Weiner’s Twitter account, but that Breitbart relayed what was unsubstantiated material as a fact. Shafer does nail a lot of what Weiner defenders are feeling about now, Anthony Weiner’s Semantic Satiation
Weiner owes me no apology for his serial lies because I understand that that’s what politicians do when they’re cornered by their fibs or unseemly behavior. I’m not even sore with him for scapegoating the press over a problem of his own making. That, too, goes with the territory. Nor am I outraged that he went onto national television to attempt to cover up his lies, telling Rachel Maddow that he wasn’t “trying to be evasive” and he just didn’t “know” whether the Tweeted drawers photo was of him. For me, when the mass of lies equals the mass of apologies, the whole package congeals into some new sociopathic form for which there is yet no name. (Weinerite, perhaps?) That he was caught lying about his personal life, and not about public policy, doesn’t really matter to me. By demonstrating that he’s as good a liar as he is an apologizer, Weiner tells us everything we need to know about him.
I’m less judgmental about the “sin” that Weiner confessed to this afternoon, of sexting his junk or his chest shots to six women over three years. If you’re as old as Weiner (46) and have never done something naughty but still legal, you’re probably immune to the power of human desire, have no sense of fantasy, and have been living in a locked veal cage in a convent basement. You don’t have to be a libertine to not care about a politician’s kinks, as long as those kinks don’t get in the way of his job.
Within that torrential cascade of apologies he could or should have included his wife and family. At this point Rep. Weiner has shown more class and humility than John Ensign (R-NV), Tom Coburn (R-OK) who helped Ensign with the cover-up and David Vitter(R-LA).