This post is for arguing the pros and cons of the actual bill, ok?

Civil dialogue, only, please. Stick to topic and argue the actual bill!

Ready Jonathan? Ready Phil? Ready Michael? Anyone else that wants to join in?

Here is your forum. Make your case. See if you can be fair and adhere to the rules of civil dialogue. Maybe then some points could arise that are actually important to everyone.

Here’s how this specific conversation started on Facebook:

I posted this link:

Swastika painted at Georgia congressman’s office – Yahoo! News – Someone spray-painted a large swastika on a sign outside the office of a Georgia congressman who was involved in a contentious argument over health care at a recent community meeting.

And this comment:

“So, this is Georgia and I’m confused. Is this an accusation or a proclamation?”

Feedback from Friends

Michael: Atrocities of WWII aside, that really can’t ever be put aside… EVER.. I’m actually kinda’ impressed that they have both the direction and the tilt correct.. given the usual pool of suspects, anyway. Unlike the one who painted it onto the Plymouth Rock backward… and was caught..

Heidi:
There’s a disconnect for me though. Rush, Limbaugh, etc. have been comparing Obama/Democrats to the Nazis all week, without being aware of the resurgence of the KKK and those sorts of attitudes among their base? Unlikely. Maybe it’s just especially weird here, this week.

Michael:
meh… he’s a clown who’s paid to fill a time slot.. you’d think by now people would wise up against per-minute ideology.

Phil: Typical. The sub-moronic trailer trash who are being goaded and funded to trash the nigg… I mean, that esteemed gentleman of color who happens to be president, praise Jesus and may the man die slowly… lack any apparent form of irony, rationality, intellect or historical knowledge. They DO, however, appear to know how to use spray paint. I guess all those opposable thumbs aren’t totally going to waste!

Phil: PS: Just in case my meaning was not totally clear, I am NOT referring to Obama by any form of racial slur. I am reflecting a sad truth about those who are so vehemently opposed to anything and everything the man does. At heart, they’re just terrified of a colored president, and will believe – or do – anything to counter that apparently terrifying reality.

Jonathan: I’m one of those who dislike the President’s policy decisions. I couldn’t care less what color he is. His policies scare me. Most frightening is the clear difference between his public words, and his actions. In other realms, that would be called lying.

Phil: *sighs*

The “lying” here, Jonathan, is being done by Obama’s opponents. Thanks for being one more American taken in by the high-stakes con-game being run to keep us shackled to the insurance companies! You are buying the lies wholesale, and we’re all paying the bill. If you want to know the truth, READ THE DAMNED PLAN, not the utter fabrications about the plan being spread by Sarah Palin’s lackeys and masters. It’s called “lying,” all right, but Obama isn’t the one doing it.

Phil: And as for “frightened,” be frightened by the people who are starting riots and inciting hatred at town hall meetings. This was done before, Jonathan, using exactly the same playbook. Germany, 1933. Look it up, and see who’s REALLY playing Hitler now.

Jonathan:
Wow. Do you have your tinfoil hat on to block the mind control impulses from the evil republican-neo-cons? We do have that vast right-wing conspiracy including insurance companies…

On a serious note, I’ve only seen/read excerpts from the bill, and those sections are disturbing. How about I post some links to those sections which clearly contradict the Obama rhetoric about the bill? I won’t have time until tomorrow night though. Gotta do laundry.

Phil: Who needs tinfoil hats? All you need is half a brain. As for the “mind control,” it’s quite simple, really: lies, lies, and more lies, backed up by utter fabricated hysteria from Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin and FOX News. Utter. Complete. Fabrications. No evil conspiracies necessary. Just the old Vladimir Lenin truism: “A lie told often enough … Read Morebecomes the truth.”

Regarding the insurance companies, please watch the interview with former Sigma executive Wendell Potter; in it, he tells Bill Moyers exactly what they do, why they do it, and how they get away with it… including a mention of the “third-party dirty work” that would be employed to stop health care reform attempts. See http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07102009/watch2.html

As for the proposed bill, see: http://thomas.loc.gov/home/gpoxmlc111/h3200_ih.xml

Start from here – or start from your own concerns.

There’s a lot of discussion about the candidates’ IQ scores, but I’ve only found good evidence for McCain and Palin (see links). The other scores are unverified and from multiple sources – please send any better figures/links in the comments and I will gladly update this. I’m throwing in some others for fun.

• >200 – “Unmeasurable genius”
• 180-200 – Highest genius
• 165-179 – High genius
• 155-164 – Genius (e.g., Nobel Prize winners)
• 145-154 – Genius (e.g., professors)
• 135-144 – Highly gifted (e.g., intellectuals)
• 125-134 – Gifted (e.g., post-graduate students)
• 115-124 – Above average (e.g., university students)

• Over 140 – Genius or near genius
• Garry Kasparov – IQ 190
• Ludwig Wittgenstein – IQ 190
• Voltaire – IQ 190
• Leonardo da Vinci – IQ 180
• Lord Byron – IQ 180
• Michelangelo – IQ 180
• James Woods – IQ 180
• George Friedrich Handel – IQ 170
• Stephen W. Hawking – IQ >160
• Bill Clinton – IQ 159-182
• Barack Obama – IQ 148-172
• Plato – IQ 170
• Galileo – IQ 165
• Ludwig van Beethoven – IQ 165
• Charles Darwin – IQ 165
• Charlotte Bronte – IQ 165
• Jonathan Swift – IQ 155
• Sharon Stone – IQ 154
• Abraham Lincoln – IQ 150
• Franklin D. Roosevelt – IQ 147
• Joe Biden – IQ 146
• Richard Nixon – IQ 143
• 120 – 140 – Very superior intelligence
• Hillary Clinton – IQ 140
• Madonna – IQ 140
• Harry Truman – IQ 132
• George W – IQ 91-134
• John McCain – IQ 133
• Jodie Foster – IQ 132
• Nicole Kidman – IQ 132
• Dwight D. Eisenhower – IQ 122
• 110 – 119 – Superior intelligence
• 90 – 109 – Normal or average intelligence
• Ronald Reagan – IQ 105
• 80 – 89 – Dullness
• Sarah Palin – IQ 82
• 70 – 79 – Borderline deficiency
• 50-70 – Mild mental retardation
• 35-50 – Moderate mental retardation
• 20-35 – Severe mental retardation
• IQ < 20 - Profound mental retardation

• A score of 132 equals the top 2%
• A score of 134 equals the top 1%
• 50% of IQ scores fall between 90 and 110
• 70% of IQ scores fall between 85 and 115
• 95% of IQ scores fall between 70 and 130
• 99.5% of IQ scores fall between 60 and 140
• A score of 68 equals the bottom 2%
• A score of 66 equals the bottom 1%

That’s a claim that really takes some nerve – or desperation. Could it be that there’s some worry about losing the South after all? Now they’re trying to claim MLK – now? Unbelievable.

Memes to you all… because there’s no real argument or justification left to vote Republican except fear of the demonized left wing, right? Please tell me that there is only a very very minuscule subset of the voting population that could in any way fall for this one. I wish I had more confidence in my countrymen, but discernment has been lacking in the last couple of elections.

Thanks to Rob Kall at OpEd News.

” Told about the billboards, the Rev. Joseph Lowery let out a soft chuckle that grew stronger as he began to think more about the idea.

“These guys never give up, do they?” said Lowery, who co-founded the Southern Christian Leadership Conference with King. “Lord have mercy.”

In a statement released through the King Center, Martin Luther King III said, “It is disingenuous to imply that my father was a Republican. He never endorsed any presidential candidate, and there is certainly no evidence that he ever even voted for a Republican. It is even more outrageous to suggest that he would support the Republican Party of today, which has spent so much time and effort trying to suppress African American votes in Florida and many other states.”

Read the entire AP story.

John and Cindy McCain been married for a long time and been through a lot together, but I can’t help thinking an unkind thing. Cindy McCain reminds me of Cruella DeVille. Blond tresses notwithstanding, Cindy McCain’s bionic eyes on that manni-kin body give me the serious creepy crawlies.

People had problems with Hillary as First Lady. They ridiculed John Kerry’s wife Teresa. I haven’t really seen any serious coverage of Cindy McCain yet. All I can tell you is that in a very superficial way (I admit it), I’m not liking what I see when I picture her as First Lady. Given what I know about McCain, I guess I wouldn’t be surprised if he was straying.

Take it further. Vicki Iseman looks a bit like a younger version of Cindy McCain, no? Has no-one noticed the resemblance between these two women? Or are they just too hesitant to say it?

It’s easy to think that John McCain simply fits a certain stereotype of the power-drunk man looking to update to the current model, right?

But somehow that’s not what went through my mind.

What if that assumption is what drives this whole thing? It’s as though Vicki were made to order.

What if she were?

Given the following anecdote about about McCain met (second wife) Cindy, it would be a simple matter to draw up a battle plan that included a kind of mata-hari woman who could “push his buttons.” How do you win friends and influence people in politics? Power, money or charisma – preferably all three, right?

Cindy and John met in 1979 at a military reception in Honolulu. John: “She was lovely, intelligent and charming, 17 years my junior but poised and confident. I monopolized her attention the entire time, taking care to prevent anyone else from intruding on our conversation. When it came time to leave the party, I persuaded her to join me for drinks at the Royal Hawaiian Hotel. By the evening’s end, I was in love.”

If you were highly motivated to influence McCain, wouldn’t it make sense to identify McCain’s likes and dislikes, his attractions and repulsions? With all his rhetoric against lobbying, wouldn’t it be silly not to notice that it might take more than money to move this bear?

Everything I’ve heard about this story is focussed on the wrong end of it. I think it’s a story about using sexual attraction as one more lobbying strategy. Ask any doctor about the hunks and chicks they send to push the new drugs out onto the market.

For election coverage, I would prefer to see more criticism of McCain’s actual record. There’s plenty there to examine.

And please, I beg of you please, please stop using that photo of McCain hugging Bush. Stop using it. I found the whole thing disturbing enough at the time.

Which Historical Lunatic Are You?
From the fecund loins of Rum and Monkey.

You are Joshua Abraham Norton, first and only Emperor of the United States of America!

Born in England sometime in the second decade of the nineteenth century, you carved a notable business career, in South Africa and later San Francisco, until an entry into the rice market wiped out your fortune in 1854. After this, you became quite different. The first sign of this came on September 17, 1859, when you expressed your dissatisfaction with the political situation in America by declaring yourself Norton I, Emperor of the USA. You remained as such, unchallenged, for twenty-one years.

Within a month you had decreed the dissolution of Congress. When this was largely ignored, you summoned all interested parties to discuss the matter in a music hall, and then summoned the army to quell the rebellious leaders in Washington. This did not work. Magnanimously, you decreed (eventually) that Congress could remain for the time being. However, you disbanded both major political parties in 1869, as well as instituting a fine of $25 for using the abominable nickname “Frisco” for your home city.

Your days consisted of parading around your domain – the San Francisco streets – in a uniform of royal blue with gold epaulettes. This was set off by a beaver hat and umbrella. You dispensed philosophy and inspected the state of sidewalks and the police with equal aplomb. You were a great ally of the maligned Chinese of the city, and once dispersed a riot by standing between the Chinese and their would-be assailants and reciting the Lord’s Prayer quietly, head bowed.

Once arrested, you were swiftly pardoned by the Police Chief with all apologies, after which all policemen were ordered to salute you on the street. Your renown grew. Proprietors of respectable establishments fixed brass plaques to their walls proclaiming your patronage; musical and theatrical performances invariably reserved seats for you and your two dogs. (As an aside, you were a good friend of Mark Twain, who wrote an epitaph for one of your faithful hounds, Bummer.) The Census of 1870 listed your occupation as “Emperor”.

The Board of Supervisors of San Francisco, upon noticing the slightly delapidated state of your attire, replaced it at their own expense. You responded graciously by granting a patent of nobility to each member. Your death, collapsing on the street on January 8, 1880, made front page news under the headline “Le Roi est Mort”. Aside from what you had on your person, your possessions amounted to a single sovereign, a collection of walking sticks, an old sabre, your correspondence with Queen Victoria and 1,098,235 shares of stock in a worthless gold mine. Your funeral cortege was of 30,000 people and over two miles long.

The burial was marked by a total eclipse of the sun.

What a character!