Posted on

One certain prediction in health care debate

 If I were to say I knew everything there was to know about the Democratic health reform plan, then I think you could pretty easily say that I was lying about such a statement.

 The  truth is that I, like probably millions of Americans, know little about the plan which originally targeted health insurance of some kind for all our citizens.

 But I think deductive reasoning will get one toward some pretty good suppositions about some of the proposed features of the plan floating around out there. I say “suppositions,” not “suppositories,” although I am sure the latter would be an apt word to help describe what Republicans would like the Democrats to do with the plan.

 With respect to the so-called “public plan” that polls show Americans favor, it should be easy to see that the only way any kind of positive change will happen is through some kind of a public options. Perhaps the majority of those polled like a public plan because they want health care available to all Americans and the public plan will be the only way such a plan would fly. If  you have no public plan, you have the status quo, which is nada.

 Another non-starter is the ability for states to opt out. In red states such as Texas, where I live, the  state legislature would never pass  a public plan no matter how much the voting public wanted it. Why some state leaders, like our screwball governor, think the state should pull out of the whole United States. Public health insurance in Texas if it is not mandated? You got to be jivin’ me.

 I may not know a lot about the health reform package but I know if you let states skate on major issues those states will never capitulate until the greater republic decides enough is enough and some form of carrot-stick approach is used to bring the states into line. When I talk about carrot-stick, I refer to examples such as the federal government withholding highway funds until states pass stricter auto or public safety laws. The seat belt and 18-year-old drinking laws come to mind. Pick your own congressional blackmail.

 So we shall see what we shall see in the next month or so. I can’t see too far off in the future but I do have one prediction that will probably hit with near-perfect accuracy. That is, I predict everyone will not be happy when the health reform debate is done. How’s that for sticking my neck on the line?

Posted on

A hair-raising Texas governor's race?

 Hair could be the focal point of the race for Texas governor in the 2010 General Election. That is, such might ring true if Gov. Rick “Good Hair” Perry gets by U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison in the Republican Primary and if whomever ends up running for the Democratic nod gets beaten by Houston Hair-care mogul Farouk Shami.

 Shami, who made millions producing the Chi hair-care line, is scheduled to announce his candidacy today in Houston for the Democratic Primary. He became a naturalized U.S. citizen in a rags-to-riches life after coming to the states from Jordan.

 His ethnicity and support of some pro-Palestinian efforts have raised doubts about whether he has a chance especially in the wake of the Fort Hood shootings, allegedly by a Muslim Army psychiatrist from the Middle East. Of course, given Texas containing a little bit of the world inside its borders, Shami can always insist the Palestinian support that he doled out was given to people in Palestine, Texas. The East Texas city is about halfway between Dallas and Houston. It also is the hometown of the star Minnesota Vikings running back Adrian Peterson.

 If anything comes up about any fiscal or other types of connections Shami might have in China, Italy or Paris, he’s got that covered too, what with cities bearing those names within the Texas state boundaries.

 Perry versus Shami for governor? Expect some hairy jokes.

Posted on

Bow-wow-gate: The Japanese view

There he goes again! One wonders if the U.S. right-wing will lambast President Obama for what appears to be a bow to a child of U.S. Embassy workers in Tokyo. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)
There he goes again! One wonders if the U.S. right-wing will fustigate President Obama for what appears to be a bow to a child of U.S. Embassy workers in Tokyo. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

 My college friend and sometimes IT guru, Paul, offers via e-mail a bit of Japanese perspective in wake of “The Bow Heard Round the World.” I facetiously speak of the uproar over President Obama bowing to the Japanese Emperor during the former’s official visit earlier this week. Paul lives in Tokyo where he has taught English for a number of years. He is an astute observer of his surroundings perhaps either because of or despite — perhaps a bit of both — the journalism classes he and I had together at Stephen F. Austin State University. I still think the name of the institution should be shortened to “Steve.”

 Paul observes that the leftists in Japan, who object to the Imperial system, are the ones bothered by Obama’s bow to the Emperor as compared to the American right-wing who are ticked off because they contend the president is being servile.

 My opinion, of course, is that anything Obama does pisses off the right wing. I used the old adage in response to Paul about the matter:  “Some people would complain if they had a loaf of bread under each arm.”**

 Paul also points out that the Japanese left sees the Obama bow as “giving support to an outdated and superstitious system” although the Japanese on the street support Obama and “can’t understand what the big deal is.”

 The Japanese view the bow as a handshake and contrary to what Americans might think is not witnessed that much in Japan nowadays, according to Paul.

 “The Japanese don’t care if (Americans) do (the bow) because we always f**k it up,” Paul said. “It’s a Japanese thing. They are pleased to take the cultural first dance to practice the handshake.”

 Given that a seemingly small portion of Japanese leftists have their nose out of joint, the clamor over a bowing Obama is just a whole trunk load o’ nothing that the American right-wing class can use to get a few days of media. Okay, you got it. Now move on to the next ridiculous matter you can find to criticize Obama and the Democrats.

 It all is just meaningless drivel from people whose point of view becomes increasingly less relevant in a society that has tired of all the bulls**t.

**I’m not certain where this saying originated although I have heard it most of my life. I’ve also heard the variation “pig under one arm and a loaf of bread under the other.” Both aphorisms, or platitudes if you prefer,” would nicely fit the Great Depression era. Or perhaps, for some, the sayings might work these days.
Posted on

The opposition proves they are right silly

 If the “loyal” opposition to the current ruling party in U.S. government is serious about anything, anything at all, then perhaps they should start acting like it. Make that, they should start acting like adults.

 After raising Hell about the administration’s rightful prerogative to have alleged terrorists tried in New York where the 9/11 horror happened, the right now blathers about the president’s bow to the Japanese emperor.

 I didn’t like George W. Bush. But I don’t think his enemies attacked every breath he took, every move he made, every fart he produced. I think the “loyal” (allegedly loyal) opposition needs to get a life, or perhaps just shut the f**k up.

Posted on

Don't judge an unsolicited opinion by its deliverer

The idiom “Don’t judge a book by its cover” has been around in one form or another for probably, well, let’s just say a very long time.

Nonetheless, if the adage is cliche to one or the other then all I can do is provide a response with an acronymn, delivered in the phonetic alphabet, kind of like you hear fighter pilots do in movies. My phonetic message is: “SIERRA, ALPHA, TANGO, SIERRA,” which is short for “sorry about that s**t. In other words, don’t judge a book by its cover suits my needs insofar as this — hopefully — short post exists.

I stopped to talk with a neighbor upon returning from the store. After a few words or so, he launched into a discourse about how the elections in Virginia and New Jersey today should tell the tale of just how screwed up that blankety-blank Obama is doing.

Now I wrote a line or two about this yesterday saying I don’t think these few scattered elections are going to tell anything about how Obama is doing in office, the state of the Democrats or the future for the divisions within the Republican party. So, I told my neighbor I didn’t think the elections will matter one damn bit except in those states. He went just right along with his rant.

I have never discussed politics with my neighbor. He probably doesn’t even know I blog or have what some refer to as a “liberal” blog. I don’t particularly see EFD that way, but whatever works. I am a liberal in the good sense, but mostly a moderate and conservative on other matters and even libertarian on still others. The neighbor’s take on matters is rather obvious, a “watch Fox News all-the-time ultra conservative Republican.” This is obvious because he spouts the party line every time I see him.

What puzzles me is why he thinks I would like to hear his, mostly wrong, political opinion. Is it because I look like a redneck? I get along with some of the rednecks who live around here. I don’t get along with some of the crackheads. So is that why my neighbor targets me as a Limbaugh-boostin’ Obama hater?

The same happens when I am in the waiting room at the VA clinic. Some guy wearing a World War II GI-rene veteran ball cap — thank him for his service — comes in and starts blasting away at how Obama is ruining this universe, not to mention the Corps, Semper Fi! Of course, at the VA you’re liable to get some long-hair guy wearing a biker’s vest with Vietnam veteran patches who either starts saying the same type of thing, or else he goes off on the Republicans, which he blames all the way back to Dick Nixon.

Surely it isn’t just me. My past mental health counselor labeled me as  having a narcissistic personality disorder, so that statement should be a sign of progress, yes? Well, perhaps not. The point is, why do people who you really don’t know that well or at all approach you and unload upon you with their opinions — or the opinions of Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Limbaugh and Fox News?

The same goes for religion. I don’t mind having a rational discussion about religion but I don’t like people who get in my face and tell me I’m going to Hell when in fact they don’t know me well enough to know where I might be going. Nederland, Texas, for instance. I have had very civil discussions about religion with Mormon missionaries who neatly parked their bikes outside my place and were extremely polite. They even gave me a Book of Mormon, which I have somewhere.

But I am getting out of the octagon here. People approaching me about religion, I think, would be less likely based on how I look than politics. The truth  is, though, I have to think that a good many people who give me their political outlook unsolicited do it because, well, I’m not sure why they do it. I guess the weather became to passé.

Some probably do see in me the look of a Limbaugh-Palin conservative: Shaved head, overweight, unhappy looking most of the time (although that is from chronic pain and not from figurative pains in the ass), known to wear ball caps with the Houston Astros logo. There you go.

If that be the case, then I wish people would cease and desist. Stop judging this book by its cover, or whatever the hell else it is that’s wrong with you!