'Tis A Puzzlement!

I am well aware that the numbers being bandied about regarding the numbers of uninsured Americans are less than accurate. The idea that there are no programs for the poor are also inaccurate. There is Medicaid, which is specifically designed for these folks.

One reason I am leery of anything comprising heavy government involvement is exemplified by Medicaid. You see, it is a joint program funded by both the federal government and the states. Here's where the problem comes in. Wealthy states budget more than poor states yet poor states tend to have the people most in need. You'd think the feds would help the poor states by giving them a larger piece of the federal pie, but no. The more money the states budgets, the higher the federal piece. Sounds like governmental logic, doesn't it?

I'm not going to begin to get into why more poor aren't enrolled. They either are unaware of it or won't pay the premium which, purposely, is rock bottom cheap. It's so much easier to go to the emergency room and stick the rest of us with the bill.

Now. We know part of the fight is over the cost of this health care overhaul. Those planning this bill have come up with a way to trim $100 billion from the $1 trillion price tag. According to the Wall Street Journal,

The cuts would be achieved in part by asking states to share in a planned expansion of Medicaid, which offers health insurance for the poor, and by requiring low-income people to pay higher premiums to purchase insurance.

What is it about "poor" they don't understand?

In the very same issue of the Journal is this article, Pinched States Wrestle With More Cuts. We already know what's happening in California because it's getting the press. Let's look at a few others in trouble. Pennsylvania may stop paying state workers. Any bets how many will go to the office?

Arizona is considering selling it's House and Senate buildings. They could turn them into housing for the homeless! The shortfalls are staggering and getting worse. How are they supposed to step up Medicaid programs? They can't fund anything!

Liberal talk has been taking great glee in the fact the Republicans are in total disarray. They have no leadership other than want-to-be's like Sarah Palin or mouths that roar like Rush Limbaugh. That may be true.

What's worse, however, is the Democrats not recognizing the reality of the situation they want to blithely "fix" without so much as reading a written word! I don't see leadership there either. I foresee chaos.

The Democrats are the party of big government. You are witness to how well it's working and don't even start with the "he's only been in office six months" mantra.

The truth. The country is a mess. Another truth. The bigger the government involvement, the bigger the mess. Just think about Congress as a whole. How many of them are career politicians? How many of them have a clue about business management? They read so little before passing legislation only we have to adhere to, I wonder if they can read.

Too bad it doesn't equate with talking!

If I Were An Alarmist...

This is one I would watch. We know the Iraqi government has made demands of our military to which I would never have agreed. Like making them subject to Iraqi law and disallowing them to take any action without Iraqi approval beforehand.

Yesterday they really threw it in our face. While Secretary of Defense Gates was in country Iraqi forces stormed a camp sheltering Iranian members of an opposition group who had been instrumental in supplying us with intelligence.

It was alleged to be a brutal attack with American forces present. If true, due to Iraqi dictates they had no authority to intervene.

Do I trust the Iraqi government? Not on your sweet life.

What really alarms me is what Trudy Rubin of the Philadelphia Inquirer writes about the vision Maliki presented while on his recent U.S. visit. The Iraq Education Initiative. On the surface it sounds wonderful. After all education on any level is an American hot button.

What is proposed is the goal of introducing qualified Iraqi students to the ways of the western world and in turn bring what they learn back to their homeland. Maybe.

The plan is to send 10,000 students over the next five years to the US and other English speaking countries on Iraqi scholarships. American institutions will streamline admissions to accommodate these "students" and an English Language Institute in Baghdad will bolster their language skills.

This bothers me on a number of levels. One, our Universities are so strapped they can not even accommodate our own students and two, we haven't seen fit to help those English speaking Iraqis that served as translators for us by giving them entrance into this country.

I hate to dampen enthusiasm for such a program but when the prime minister says,

"We want and seek a strong and solid relationship which is open with the Americans and there are no internal politics of Iraq that prohibit us from having such a relationship with a great country like the United States,"

I balk.

When the Iraqis talk about "a great country like the United States" I'm immediately suspicious. I don't believe for one minute they like us at all.

And what a way to get their people into this country, with polished language skills to boot!

Since I'm really not an alarmist , and if you believe that..., I'll take all this at face value and consider how wonderful it is they want to learn all about us. Maybe they'll even learn how to quit hating each other just like we have.

Should They Or Shouldn't They?

There is a point to be made when it comes to taking time to construct legislation. Financing the health care overhaul has been a big hang up but now the ideas are coming forward. Tax plastic surgery!

Of course this is a boon or bust issue. Take me for instance. I am well aware that insurance does not pay for such luxuries therefore I don't partake even though there are several places on this tired old body that could use some enhancement. I won't list them. Those who know me know from whence I come, to everyone else. Well, tough. So it's a bust issue for me.

It's a boon for all those members of Congress who indulge. Both Nancy Pelosi and Hillary are suspect and we all know Joe Biden had hair plugs. It probably wouldn't cover bad toupees but it should! But then again, there would be a whole lot more of those ridiculous comb overs male politicians love to sport. It wouldn't really matter though because Congress exempts themselves from every law they pass that we have to abide by.

Thinking about that, I'd feel a whole lot better if it were written into any health care legislation, that they cannot exempt themselves; that they'd have to choose from the same plans offered to us.

It would be a bust for the news and entertainment industries. What would the likes of Joan Rivers do? I figure the onset of high definition TV sent our news anchors and reporters scurrying to the nearest plastic surgeon. We know they already need the teeth whitening, nose straightening and probably tummy tuck services but the tax write off would go away. I mean come on, how can you trust what a news person tells you when they lie about how they really look?

I've been watching the promos for the fall line ups on the networks. There are more and more reality shows because it's what the advertising demographics watch. Would that be cool or what? If everything on the tube had to be reality TV?

If taxing plastic surgery should become law, it might help women get over their self image problems. They'd find the icons of image aren't really so very different from themselves. I see this as a positive since some 86% of the patients are female.

It's also thought to be a tax on the wealthy since only they can easily afford it. Those who can't sometimes set aside money for years to get the procedure they want! Take for example the price of a nose job . It ranges between $3000 and $8000. That's a lot of spare change stuffed under a mattress!

Think of all the lost buying power! How long would it take to save that much? For me, had I started in my 20's I'd probably still be saving because things would have come along for which I'd have borrowed from the fund. I'm self indulgent on a lot of levels. And now? Who cares?

Game Face?

We knew it was going to happen. NFL commissioner Roger Goodell has reinstated Michael Vick. Yes, there are conditions he must meet, yet still...

Okay, I'm not having a good day. Bacchus is having a terrible day; something he hasn't had in quite awhile and I'm worried sick. That being the case, this news is even more difficult to digest.

I was listening to the news as the story broke and was appalled at the rationales being given. One anchor, a female no less, said she was an animal lover, but what would we rather have, Vick getting a second chance or going on welfare? Please. That seemed to be the prevailing attitude. Now why would a big strapping guy like Michael Vick have to go on welfare? He can work. He just wouldn't have the earning power he had before.

Of course an NFL team would have to take a chance on him. There is no doubt in my mind one will. I decided to do a little investigating to see what financial sacrifice he might have to endure. The NFL team with the lowest payroll is the Arizona Cardinals. Not that they would want him, but this would be Vick's worse case scenario and would go up with any other team. Their starting quarterback, Kurt Warner , will make $6,006,240 this year.

It is unlikely Vick would land a starting job. Arizona's number two, Matt Leinart, pulls down a cool $2,256,240. Well, let's be realistic. He'd be more apt to get the third slot. Brian St. Pierre draws $465,000. To most of us that is not chump change!

One thing I think should be demanded of Vick. That he be required to reimburse the folks at Best Friends Animal Society who have spent untold hours rehabilitating and caring for his dogs.

Michael Vick's sentence was 23 months. They are saying he has paid his debt to society. He has yet to pay his debt to those dogs. That's how I feel as I fight for the life of my dog!

We Should Not Forget Racism Flows Both Ways

Usually I would have commented on an incident like this and moved on. Now, it would seem, Henry Gates himself says it's time to move on .

The turn around came so fast it made my head spin. I know Obama can be persuasive, but still...

Did he have an ulterior motive when he stated plans to use the incident to improve fairness in the criminal justice system? He continued to say, "in the end this is not about me at all."

I'm not so sure.

We know he had consulted his legal team and was considering a lawsuit. I present a rationale for reading articles to their conclusion. It would seem he vowed to make an documentary on his arrest to "tie into a larger project on racial profiling."

Did he see opportunity here and exploit it?

I am fully aware racial tension still exists in this country and no amount of denial will make it go away. Just like the neo-Nazi's still have a presence in northern Idaho even if we prefer to think they have been eradicated. They have not and on occasion remind us of just that. Such seems to be the case of Professor Gates use of an arrest to further his own agenda.

Two things you might find of interest. One is a website he oversees, The Root. The other is the narrative on the arrest report. Click on the image to enlarge it or follow the link.

While I understand many prominent blacks defending Professor Gates, it would appear that he may be equally culpable in the escalation of this incident as a few unwise words from the President. We should also understand that racism is not a one way street.

Yes. Racism is alive and well. We do not need people of prominence making an issue of it when it's questionable there is an issue to be made.

As for police behavior, Professor Gates should be glad he is in Cambridge rather than Spokane. He'd likely have been tasered or worse and if a lawsuit had been filed the police would probably been found guilty of - nothing. It would not have mattered what his race happened to be.