Why our political dialog sucks monkey balls

There are many reasons to decry the polarization of our public debate, but to me the most insidious aspect of it, at least in my estimation would be the further entrenchment of the opposition as enemy.

I state this fairly often it seems nowadays, it is not just that two sides disagree, it is more personal. It is not only do we disagree, but you are wrong, and more fundamental, there is something wrong with you because you do not agree with me.

This phenomena seems to be at or near a fever pitch now and I am not going to equivocate on the issue. The left and the right are not equal. Not anything near that. The vitriol and venom being spewed on the right is both more voluminous and more virulent then what has been coming from the left. Even at the height of the Bush presidency, the type of rhetoric espoused by those on the left was less acerbic. Yes there were outliers, but what major media outlets actually ran major stories on Bush's supposed ties to the bin Laden family, or organized protests versus the sitting administration?

Instead we see from the right these sorts of comments.

Steele calls Friedman a "nut-job"

Or the far more provocative from John L. Perry: Obama Risks a Domestic Military "Intervention" (TPM for the coverage since it was pulled down from Newsmax).

I have two questions. Why is it when a non-right leaning administration comes to power the right goes absolutely apoplectic? And why do we tolerate this?

I am sure, most people would blame the Internets for this, but I look squarely at Fox News and talk radio as the prime culprits. More so then any other medium, they provide the a megaphone for the fever swamp that the republican party and it's base have become.

So I agree with Steve Benen on both the critique and the substance that Friedman wrote about.

-Cheers

Ask A Spy ---- How to tell someone is lying

Everyone does it. But how can you figure it out when you are being lied to. Mr. Weston again has some pertinent advice for you!



-Cheers

Post Weekend round up...

Had a pretty good weekend. Got to hang out with Steph, Carlin, and Nads this weekend which was a treat. Even got to see and catch up with my old roommate the incomparable Luis.

So as I said, a pretty good weekend. Still a wee bit tired afterwards but I thought I would put together a little post about some of the stuff I read over the weekend.

One one on the looming problem of overfishing.

As well as a piece on "the end of tipping waiters".

Both were pretty interesting, but I must confess, I am a bit more aware of the overfishing problems, so the restaurant opinion piece was a bit more intriguing. The idea of adding a service charge to the restaurant industry to provide adequate wages and benefits is an interesting prospect.

-Cheers

Word of the Day

Today we have another fun word. With all the ups and downs of the last couple of years, I thought people might appreciate a snooty way of talking about that!

Vicissitude

Even through the vicissitudes of modern life, Mike and I's friendship has endured.

-Cheers

Ask A Spy ----- Bribing the Bouncer

So the line is a bit long at Soma. Well never fear Michael has some advice to get you in the
door!



Aww...forget it. I am going to the Pig instead!

-Cheers

'Nuff said....

Your moment of Zen.



-Cheers

Reasons why it is so hard to talk about health care reform

Mainly because people are dumb.



Tee hee...though "teh stupid" burns. If it wasn't so sad it would be incredibly funny.


-Cheers

Sorry to Mike's Girlfriend.....

But your peeps be trippin'.....

I really do not know what to say about this. Seriously I am flabbergasted....

-Cheers

Frisking the Books on Bush...

Backing high school my coach used to tell us, "Look at the score board when you go into the game, and look at it when you come out. That is how you judge your contribution."

I always took that to mean that if you the score was higher when you came out, no matter what the stats may say, you contributed to improving the teams lot. If you scored 30 points, and the team loses because you are there, that is less valuable then the person who scores 5 or none, but a win is managed.

So here we are in a new administration, and the Census Bureau has just released a scorecard, of sorts of the previous administration as reported by Ron Brownstein.

So the summary page on the economic experience of average Americans under the past two presidents would look like this:

Under Clinton, the median income increased 14 per cent. Under Bush it declined 4.2 per cent.

Under Clinton the total number of Americans in poverty declined 16.9 per cent; under Bush it increased 26.1 per cent.

Under Clinton the number of children in poverty declined 24.2 per cent; under Bush it increased by 21.4 per cent.

Under Clinton, the number of Americans without health insurance, remained essentially even (down six-tenths of one per cent); under Bush it increased by 20.6 per cent.

Adding Ronald Reagan's record to the comparison fills in the picture from another angle.

Under Reagan, the median income grew, in contrast to both Bush the younger and Bush the elder. (The median income declined 3.2 per cent during the elder Bush's single term.) When Reagan was done, the median income stood at $47, 614 (again in constant 2008 dollars), 8.1 per cent higher than when Jimmy Carter left office in 1980.

It is definitely worth a read. And honestly any republican politician who parrots the continual tax-cut as miracle remedy needs to answer for these numbers.

So that is the score we have of the bast 8 years. Well that and 2 wars, and ballooning deficits.

-Cheers

Why Health Care Reform is necessary

All you have to do is read a article like this to understand why you need federal guidelines for health insurance. Why letting insurers compete across state lines would just lead to a race to the bottom (like credit card companies). We can talk about rescission or pre-existing conditions such as diabetes or asthma.

But tell me how after reading this article you can justify the insurance practice.

Being a victim of domestic abuse is a pre-existing condition

It turns out that in eight states, plus the District of Columbia, getting beaten up by your spouse is a pre-existing condition.

Under the cold logic of the insurance industry, it makes perfect sense: If you are in a marriage with someone who has beaten you in the past, you're more likely to get beaten again than the average person and are therefore more expensive to insure.

In human terms, it's a second punishment for a victim of domestic violence.

We can talk about the "wonders" of a free market. But sometimes and in some areas of our lives, profit should not be the primary motive.

-Cheers

Word of the Day

Once again we have another installment of the fabulous "Word of the day"!

This weeks word comes from the amazing world of philosophy. Also I find it incredibly fun to say!

Epistemological

One would think by its very nature epistemological studies would lead to a certain humility, instead, it seems to cater to the most pedantic qualities of most.


-Cheers

Things that annoy me....

1) Socialism is not a form of government. It is an economic scheme. People who talk about it like it is have no idea what they are talking about. And more importantly shouldn't be listened to.

2) The Constitution doesn't say what you think it says. In particular how the First Amendment is generally misunderstood. What it relates to is the government silencing descent, not to the back and forth between non-government entities.

3) And Kanye West. He is kind of a Douche Bag. Seriously girlfriend is like 12 and did put together a very nice video and song.

4) Generally I talk about race baiting and "dog whistle" politics from a minority perspective. But this is just appalling, those who are involved should be absolutely ashamed of themselves, and should not be allowed to hold public office. I do not know Steve Cohen, but this just beyond the pale.

Some might say this stuff is just semantics, I say fie upon them! Words and language matter. How we communicate says a lot about our thought process. All I ask in any debate is that there is agreement on what the terms will be. When individuals are allowed to misuse language it damages that relationship.

-Cheers

Ask A Spy ---- Ex Avoidance

It has been a little while, but we have some more advice from Mr. Weston! This time on how to ditch and ex that may be following you.



I will add one thing, if you do not have the resources or support team to fake your own death. Faking a move or long work work assignment may also fit the bill!

-Cheers

This is just sad.

This year is the anniversary year for Charles Darwin. Something that should be celebrated an interesting life, an interesting man, and a beautiful intellect.

Yet there may not be a distributor in the States for the film because it is too controversial amongst the religious sects in this country.

If you ever sense some hostility in my posts for organized religious institutions and some of its backward members, this sort of thing would be the reason why....

Creation

Creation, starring Paul Bettany, details Darwin's "struggle between faith and reason" as he wrote On The Origin of Species. It depicts him as a man who loses faith in God following the death of his beloved 10-year-old daughter, Annie.

The film was chosen to open the Toronto Film Festival and has its British premiere on Sunday. It has been sold in almost every territory around the world, from Australia to Scandinavia.

However, US distributors have resolutely passed on a film which will prove hugely divisive in a country where, according to a Gallup poll conducted in February, only 39 per cent of Americans believe in the theory of evolution.

We are talking one of the greatest thinkers humanity has produced. His findings revolutionized our understanding of the natural world. I find it sad and deeply disturbing that only 39 percent of Americans put stock in, what is well supported science.

On the other hand I have no problem whatsoever understanding why school children in this country score so much lower in science and math then in other developed nations.

There are consequences to holding to such an ante diluvian mindset.

-Cheers

I would like to thank Craig Ehlo.....

In what was an amazing career and in no small way stoked my love of the game. Michael Jeffery Jordan was inducted into the Basketball Hall of Fame.


While not an innovator like Russel of Chamberlain, Jordan's greatest "innovation" was that he did what other players did. Only much better.

Again thank you Mr. Jordan. The game would not be where it is with out you.

-Cheers

Presidential Speech on Health Care Reform

I will be honest, I am finding it hard to comment on the substance of what the president said last night mainly do to the unctuous behavior of the republican caucus last night. That is truly sad because there were some noteworthy subjects talked about during the speech. But, that being said, I do not think I have seen a more uncivil, peevish bunch, revel in their perceived sanctimony then last night.

Say what you will about the right and the left, being equivalent in their ridiculousness. That is just not the case. It is hard to overstate the levels to which the GOP has sunk. Imagine what would have happened if Dennis Kucinich had made catcalls during President Bushes remarks? He would have been labeled a terrorist, treason charges would have been bandied about and the like.

Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC), is a ignorant know-nothing. He evidently can not read a bill. I hope, nay, it is my most fervent desire that Speaker of the House Pelosi absolutely censure his prevaricating ass.

Now on to the speech it self. I thought it was a good speech. The president showed some fire, and most of his information seemed to match up with independent analysis of the health care debate. If there was one thing that stood out the most to me though, was that this speech was as full-throated a defense of liberalism as I have seen in the public square.

In particular this bit toward the end grabbed my attention.

You see, our predecessors understood that government could not, and should not, solve every problem. They understood that there are instances when the gains in security from government action are not worth the added constraints on our freedom. But they also understood that the danger of too much government is matched by the perils of too little; that without the leavening hand of wise policy, markets can crash, monopolies can stifle competition, and the vulnerable can be exploited. And they knew that when any government measure, no matter how carefully crafted or beneficial, is subject to scorn; when any efforts to help people in need are attacked as un-American; when facts and reason are thrown overboard and only timidity passes for wisdom, and we can no longer even engage in a civil conversation with each other over the things that truly matter - that at that point we don't merely lose our capacity to solve big challenges. We lose something essential about ourselves.

What was true then remains true today. I understand how difficult this health care debate has been. I know that many in this country are deeply skeptical that government is looking out for them. I understand that the politically safe move would be to kick the can further down the road - to defer reform one more year, or one more election, or one more term.

But that's not what the moment calls for. That's not what we came here to do. We did not come to fear the future. We came here to shape it. I still believe we can act even when it's hard. I still believe we can replace acrimony with civility, and gridlock with progress. I still believe we can do great things, and that here and now we will meet history's test.

Because that is who we are.

This has been a long time in coming. Government intervention is not always a bad thing. Sometimes, it is an effective corrective. Reaganism as an ideology leads to bad government. It needs to be given the long kiss goodnight it has deserved for over a decade.

But that is a different argument.

If you have not I do highly recommend tracking down the speech it is worth a watch. If I get a version I will link it here.

-Cheers

Speechifying and Stuff...

Presidential address to both houses of Congress. You should watch (8 PM EST).

But in the mean time, here is something to read that should be more widely talked about.

The Supreme Court could radically alter the way elections are run and funded in this country.

So it is worth noticing what they are talking about.

-Cheers

Douche-Bag of the Day

Now with the current hackery going on with the health care debate, there are many, many, many candidates for douche-bag honors, but sadly in a slight change of pace I will have to give the nod to State Rep. Michael Duvall (R-CA).

Normally I do not comment on the peccadilloes of politicians unless it is illegal (child, goat, or dead prostitute), but the rank hypocrisy of Mr. Duvall is just jaw dropping.

Now Mr. Duvall is a crusading member of the California legislature, a major proponent of his view of family values and conservative social mores.

But evidently he is also a bit of a braggart as well. It would seem that while waiting for the beginning of a legislative meeting. The married, father of two, decided to regale his colleague with tales of his sexual prowess with two separate young ladies. Who I might add were not his wife.

Again normally I would not even care or comment about this. After all, this is truly a family issue, between he and his wife. But the statements that were recorded were just too salacious not to comment on! To quote:

She wears little eye-patch underwear. So, the other day she came here with her underwear, Thursday. And
 so, we had made love Wednesday--a lot! And so she'll, she's all, 'I am going 
up and down the stairs, and you're dripping out of me!' So messy!

I am honestly curious about these "eye-patch" underwear. They sound mighty uncomfortable.

Congratulations Rep. Duvall. You are the douche-bag of the day!

-Cheers

Mama said wonk you out

*Apologies to Ezra Klein for the blatant theft.

So over the last few weeks, health care has dominated the public discourse. Or I guess a more accurate representation would be that the health care debate has dominated the national discourse.

Acrimony and vituperation has categorized that discussion as of late. In general there seems to be little understanding of how our health care system actually works. So I decided to do some homework on the subject.

Today I decided to look into the subject of "tort reform".

A common refrain from right/GOP is that medical malpractice is a consequential driving force on the upward movement of health care costs. And if I was doing what is commonly done on the teevee machine, then I would not point out that all available information paints this statement in a bad light.

The CBO (Congressional Budget Office) a non-partisan organization, which has in it auspices the duty to score governmental spending, looked at the issue in some detail. And what they found was this.

Evidence from the states indicates that premiums for malpractice insurance are lower when tort liability is restricted than they would be otherwise. But even large savings in premiums can have only a small direct impact on health care spending--private or governmental--because malpractice costs account for less than 2 percent of that spending.⁽³⁾

Case closed right? Not really. Further they go on to state this.

Advocates or opponents cite other possible effects of limiting tort liability, such as reducing the extent to which physicians practice "defensive medicine" by conducting excessive procedures; preventing widespread problems of access to health care; or conversely, increasing medical injuries. However, evidence for those other effects is weak or inconclusive.

The problem with medical malpractice is that it is a complicated issue.

To society in general it is a valuable corrective. There must be some recourse of individuals done harm.

But at least, in regards to practicing doctors, their motivation can be equally persuasive. Even though the cases of malpractice litigation are rare, the fear and the personally deleterious effect on the physician are quite real. Even if there is a 1 in 10 chance of litigation the resulting suit may well cost the physician his practice or just be financially ruinous. These are real concerns and I do not want to minimize them.

The problem is more the perception of "tort reform". People believe, devoid of any statical evidence, that there is an epidemic of malpractice suit abuse. When in actuality the opposite is true.

"Thirty years of inflation-adjusted data show that medical malpractice premiums are the lowest they have been in this entire period. This is in no small part due to the fact that claims have fallen like a rock, down 45 percent since 2000. The periodic premium spikes we see in the data are not related to claims but to the economic cycle of insurers and to drops in investment income. Since prices have not declined as much as claims have, medical malpractice insurer profits are higher than the rest of the property casualty industry, which has been remarkably profitable over the last five years."

Now this is not to say that some reforms are not needed, but to state as is commonly done, that this is some sort of magic bullet is inaccurate.

A few more articles and charts on the issue can be found below.

American for Insurance Reform
American Association for Justice
Scott Maxwell-Orlando Sentinel
Townhall.com
The Dallas Morning News (and example where they capped damage awards)

-Cheers

Word of the Day

Well this word is brought all the way from the steamy climes of St. Louis! With this lovely message from Ed attached:

This word perfectly describes you!

Gadabout

–noun

1.	a person who moves about restlessly or aimlessly, esp. from one social activity to another.

2.	a person who travels often or to many different places, esp. for pleasure.

---

Have you Roman? He has been such a cad of late! Kind of turning into a gadabout. We hit like 7 bars last weekend.

-Cheers

A movie have I will have to see.

The combination Clooney and "Jedi warriors" is just to much for my sci-fi addled mind to resist.

-Cheers

The peevishness of the modern day journalist

Another day, another chance to point out how thin skinned establishment journalists are to criticism. A little bit ago, I pointed out a some exchanges between Joe Klein and Glenn Greenwald.

Well it got a bit more involved yesterday. Joe Klein blew the proverbial gasket. Greenwald tentatively dips his toe into the muck.

Now I have approvingly posted both men over this course of this blog, but I have also agreed with many of the Greenwald's concerns and criticisms with some of Joe Klein's the pieces as well. Klein is at times the best example of what is wrong with mainstream media journalism.

But as Greenwald points out in his post many other bloggers take Klein to task for his mendacity.

It is all well worth a read. And count me as a "pathetic acolyte".

-Cheers