President Obama Honors Fallen Troops.

This is how it should be done.














Watching the current president choking back tears while solemnly honoring the fallen makes me think of the way the previous president behaved.



I hope that Barack Obama's trip to Andrews to watch some of our best young people come home in boxes inspires him to bring all of our troops home.

But I'm not holding my breath.

Sweet Hammer of Thor, I fucking Hate Joe Lieberman!

With friends like Joe, who needs enemies?

(from UPI)

WASHINGTON, Oct. 28 (UPI) -- U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman, Ind-Conn., threw cold water onto Democrats' healthcare reform effort, saying he'll help filibuster unless the public option is yanked.

God Damn it, Joe! See, this is why everyone hates you. Why would you possibly oppose a public option?

I think a lot of people may think that the public option is free. (source)

No. No one thinks that. That is a straw man argument that the opponenets of reform have constructed. Everyone knows it will cost money. The difference is that instead of money coming out of your paycheck to go to Aetna, money will come out of your paycheck to go to a publicly-run plan. A plan that will not have a profit-motive to screw you out of coverage. Everyone knows this. You're either stupid, or you're lying.

If the public option, the government run health insurance company, negotitates hard to lower the reimbursement, the money it's paying to hospitals, doctors, they're gonna have to get that money somewhere, and where they're gonna get it is from the 200 million Americans who today have private health insurance. Premiums will go up. It's exactly what's happened with Medicare and Medicaid.

So the problem is that the public option will cost too little?

My hospitals in Connecticut told me a while ago that they get 70 percent of the average cost of patient care from Medicaid, about 90 percent from Medicare. If that was it they'd go out of business. So they charge the private health insurance companies 130 percent of the average cost, and that's what would happen with this new entitlement, new government run health care program. It's just not worth the risk.

Really? Really? The private health insurers hire such shitty negotiators that they end up paying 130% of the cost? Really? Have you ever looked at a health insurance statement?
I'm looking at one right now. Column 1 reads: Piedmont Hospital, X-Ray or Lab Services. Amount submitted, $358.00 Column 2 reads: Amount Negotiated or allowed, $70.91

For the mathematically impaired, that means that Aetna negotiated a payment of 19.8% of the amount the hospital was billing. Where the hell do you get 130%? Joe, "your" hospitals in Connecticut are lying to you. Well, probably not lying, exactly. The hospitals may be billing private insurers 130% of the cost, but the insurers sure the fuck aren't paying it!
So, you know what? He wants to filibuster, call his bluff! Somebody lend Harry Reid a pair and tell him that if Joe wants to filibuster, make him do it for real. Make him go all Jimmy Stewart and keep talking for days on end. Let the public see just how hard Joe is willing to work to make sure that they don't have access to a public healthcare plan. A plan which polls continue to show is popular with the public.

Make sure everyone in America has a chance to turn on C-SPAN and see how hard Joe Lieberman is willing to work to protect insurance industry profits. Then everyone can join me in shouting "Sweet Hammer Of Thor, I Fucking Hate Joe Lieberman!"

Holy Crap! The AP Does It's Freakin' Job!

AP IMPACT: Statisticians reject

global cooling

By SETH BORENSTEIN, AP Science Writer Seth Borenstein, Ap Science Writer – Mon Oct 26, 5:12 pm ET

WASHINGTON – Have you heard that the world is now cooling instead of warming? You may have seen some news reports on the Internet or heard about it from a provocative new book. Only one problem: It's not true, according to an analysis of the numbers done by several independent statisticians for The Associated Press.

Holy Crap! I can't remember the last time I saw a major news outlet actually verifying the veracity of someone's claims. Usually, the best you can hope for is that they'll quote someone who disputes the claim and say "OK, we've presented both sides, we'r objective!"

But someone at the AP finally figured out that there aren't two sides to every story. If the story is about, say, the budget, you can have someone on one side saying "this is a good budget" and someone on the other side saying "this is a bad budget" and really, neither one can be right or wrong, it's a matter of opinion. But if one person claims "the budget totals 3 trillion dollars" and the other side claims "the budget totals 10 trillion dollars" then you have the responsibility to figure out which is correct. Because they can't both be right. (although they can both be wrong)

So with stories about global warming, if one side says "the planet is getting hotter" and the other side says "the planet is getting cooler," you need to find out which is correct. And damned if the AP didn't actually do just that!

In a blind test, the AP gave temperature data to four independent statisticians and asked them to look for trends, without telling them what the numbers represented. The experts found no true temperature declines over time.

The recent Internet chatter about cooling led [the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's] climate data center to re-examine its temperature data. It found no cooling trend.

Statisticians say that in sizing up climate change, it's important to look at moving averages of about 10 years. They compare the average of 1999-2008 to the average of 2000-2009. In all data sets, 10-year moving averages have been higher in the last five years than in any previous years.

So thank you, Associated Press, for finally doing your fucking job!

Now where the hell was this when Bush was claiming there were WMD's in Iraq?

Rush Limbaugh has No Integrity

Let's say you had a radio show.

And let's say you read something that was posted on a humor/satire website.

And let's just say that you were dumb enough to believe it and too lazy and perfidious to do any basic fact-checking.

Then let's say that after you reported the joke as fact, you were informed that the joke was, in fact, a joke.

There are a couple of legitimate responses from which you could choose.

You might say something like: "Sorry, folks, it looks like I've been had. That story was made up as a joke. I'll try to be more careful in the future."

Or you could get angry at the person who posted the joke and try to blame him for your mistake.

But what if you were Rush Limbaugh? (uggggh, shudder!)
If you're Rush Limbaugh, you go with the "it's false, but I stand by it" defense.

"So, I can say, "I don't care if these quotes are made up," he said. "I know Obama thinks it.

"You know why I know Obama thinks it? Because I've heard him say it."

Oh, Rush! You're irrepressible!


Hey, remember when Dan Rather quoted a document which may have been fake (still hasn't been proven) in support of a story whose basic facts were 100% true?

And remember how the right howled for his head? And they got it?!!

Shouldn't they be holding Rush to a similar standard?

Isn't reporting on an obvious fake as if it were fact in service of a story which is total bullshit (and really, the fake article IS the story) like 10 times worse than Rather's mistake? What are the odds that the righties will be calling for Limbaugh to be fired now?

And, yes I know, they'll say that Limbaugh isn't a journalist, he's an entertainer or an editorialist, or whatever, but when he reported this phony story on the air, he was absolutely acting as a reporter. Shouldn't he have to have some standard of integrity?

It's beyond me how anyone thinks this assclown has any credibility.

She Does Have A Point

Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu was on NPR recently, where she had this to say about polls which show a majority of Americans favor a public option.

"I think if you asked, 'Do you want a public option but it would force the government to go bankrupt,' people would say 'No,'" she said.

Well, she does have a point.

Just like if you asked "would you like a nice cold beer?" most people would say "Yes." However, if you ask "would you like a nice cold beer that Mary Landrieu has peed in?" most folks will say "No."

(I believe the lone "yes" came from Sen. David Vitter.)



Or if you ask would you vote for Mary Landrieu, many Louisianans answer "yes."
But if you ask "Would you vote for Mary Landrieu knowing that she is kinda dumb and thinks that you can be easily manipulated by tricky questions?" you get a lot more "No's"