Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Back to HH

We may have been sidetracked by recent events, though there has been HIGHpocrisy in all of stages of this health care 'reform' debacle (we don't use the word 'debate' because that would imply 2 sides making legitimate policy arguments. Can anyone explain what's to defend in giant insurance companies, as if the current system is fine? This morning's AP article on the Senate Finance Comm. has the R talking point as a gov't plan would drive private insurers out of business... really?!?! Blue Cross, Aetna, Utd Health, all too big to fail, really?!?!? Can anyone explain why the already compromised public option would not be a choice ["option" right there in the title!] to help cover almost 1/6th of the entire country? There's no debate. Oops, dang, sidetracked again). We'll have a final post or two on that later.

But getting back to our roots for a moment, we award 2 HHs -- HHighpocrisy -- to Big Oil companies like Chevron whenever they run ads touting their concerns for the environment (or for people). I heard a radio ad from Chevron the other day, 'they're so green, so friendly', blah blah blah. I had a client who worked for Chevron; brilliant man. I have a friend who worked for a local Shell refinery. Can people be good and productive? People can. Can Big Oil concerned only with making money for their shareholders be good corporate citizens? Not so much.

Monday, September 14, 2009

two quick Dishes

The first is more reader-centric, while the second is more Andrew Sullivan. Last ¶ has the money-quote.

what to believe?

good bill or bad bill? reform or no reform? wait or don't wait? there's a lot to take in, but here's just 1 place to start. yes, the boxing analogy is in there, too (why can't we get credit?), and so is the "inmates running the asylum" line. [Great minds think alike / fools seldom differ]

We might disagree with a few of the points made therein, but the overall gist is close to what we are currently feeling, so we'll go with that. Why then, is Obama saying the same thing about the 'public option' post-speech, but the media reports on all of the caving from Dem leadership and the WH as if there won't be a public option? And if Rahm gets his way, does that mean Obama doesn't? So what does reform look like? Oh, how we wish we had the answers.

J adding, also from the NYT: "the first paragraph says it all...shameful!" But J, haven't you learned that only elitist, commie pinko lib'ruls read that paper and only when it's not perpetuating the lies that lead to war? Why can't you be more prideful in American ignorance? You wouldn't want your children to listen to a smart person about studying when they can read My Pet Goat instead. Welcome to the 21st Century!

Wednesday, September 9, 2009

Master Rope-a-doper

Naturally the cynic in me started drafting this entry before Obama's speech to Congress last night. I was going to call it "Epic Fail" if he came out loving and not fighting as I expected. But I gotta admit, from the parts I've heard, seen, and read about, the man is a great politician. I'll get to that below, but first: I had a dream 2 nights ago that I was in a room, tables arranged in a square. To my right at the same table was some faceless Fox blowhole. To his right was Obama. Symbolism? Obama would have to meet me all the way around a circle if anyone thinks he's to the right of Fox. [BTW, socialism is on the left; fascism is on the right.] Back to my dream: I was standing and arguing about health "insurance" reform, shouting down the Fox moron, while Obama sat there grinning. So I thought I had better write that down for posterity.

Back to speech commentary:

On some level, this was about wanting a fighter. Hence the boxing metaphor. About believing he was different, but thinking I was getting the same. It definitely goes beyond health care. He still has his smarts, so I'll never know why he wasted so much time before, when he is a natural leader, thinking he could hang back and let the inmates run the asylum. Just as I'll never know why someone goes in to the WH one way, but somehow, once the doors close, he emerges seemingly beholden to the same special interests that he promised would not keep their stranglehold on politics. Obama said Wednesday morning that he might have made mistakes letting Congress try to act, all grown-up, like legislators or something. Ya think? I want to believe he will do what's right, and for the good of the country. That is the job to which he or any President is always elected: to make people's lives better. It is why Bush failed so miserably (among many other reasons). It is why I could see myself feeling this morning like that Boise State football player who taunted the Oregon running back but then got sucker-punched to the jaw. Go see, it's all over the web. But the other part of that dude's problem, which didn't make it to air, was that he was swinging at his own guys who were trying to get him off the field. He would have gone into the stands if not for his ass't coach, and some police, holding him back. That was what bothered me the most: fighting the wrong people for the wrong reasons.

And now for random eloquence:

The bigger picture here is this: all those people who worked so hard to help Obama get elected; all those young voters who engaged in politics and its discourse; they could have been even more disillusioned. They could have become cynics like me. And if they disengage, if they tune out for another generation, then more would be lost than Obama's presidency. True progress would be lost. The ability to cover 1/6th of the U.S. population with affordable health care would be lost. Hate and crazy would only advance.

So now that Obama has regained some mojo, where does that leave us? Maybe "Wall-E" or "Planet of the Apes" number of years from now, history will have 'decidered' (rendered judgment for those who don't speak W). And history will show that on this issue, fixing 1 of the main things broken in this country, we had a President who spoke like a President, like an adult even, to a room full of petulant children. I've looked at HuffPo, and the links on the right, to see if someone posted a more succinct blog of how I might capture all of this. Haven't found it yet. For me though, I saw the guy I voted for. He's so far above the intellect of all those who seek to hurt him, or have him fail. He never takes the bait; the other side can't help themselves, so they always end up looking even worse than they probably are. All the vile crap, and he just stands there and says, 'you want to keep acting this way, fine, go ahead. I'm not sinking to your level.' Obviously, if he did, the nutbars would trot out the angry black man card. Obama has that calm demeanor that I wish I could have. He's so composed, and the more hate the crazies spew at him, the more he brushes it off. Maybe that is the transformative power of his message? Even if I've been disappointed in a few of his policies, and this health reform has not become law yet, I still give him all the credit for standing there, taking it all in, and never flinching when the punches come right at him. He may never be the most powerful counter-puncher ever, but he has mastered the rope-a-dope. He may never win by knock-out or even TKO, but if he wins all of his major bouts, even by split decision, he still wins. Even if he doesn't go undefeated, he could still be a hall-of-famer. That would help.

Back to HIGHpocrisy soon (we're looking at you, MSM)!

Sunday, September 6, 2009

Tempest nothing

language vs. language. They're both right, in their own ways.

Almost a year ago (Oct. '08), we posted an entry comparing Obama's resolve in the face of all things ugly to the courage of Jackie Robinson. And that was before Obama won! Robinson was a hall of fame athlete with a super-human personality to match. We'll know soon enough if the comparison was apt, because you can't be transformative if the talent never rises to defeat the tempest.

Friday, September 4, 2009

how many times

and ways am I going to say the same frikkin thing: can anyone explain why Obama would even be considering punking his base when he has to know damn well that the other side will never give him 1 frikkin vote? Repukes -- the ones running the freak show -- do NOT WANT TO GOVERN! They are Bush's petulant offspring; they have already declared they want to both pick up their own ball and go home, at the same time they steal all the candy from the babies on the playground. There is no good faith negotiating. There is no support to be had. They just want failure to restore them to power, to then destroy again, without checks or balances. They do not want to build, to "progress", to create. And my blood is boiling as I refuse to believe Obama cannot see that! He must, so WTF is he after? What's the end game here if his own base has to bend over on every important issue, just so he can appease the lunatic fringe? Do blinders come with the job he was elected to do? AAAAAAARRRRRRRGHHHHHHH


Could. not. resist.

deep thoughts

And hopefully, some final thoughts before next week's make or break speech by the big O. There are just some crazies who will never support anything Obama tries to do. He could go on TV next week and say that water is wet, the grass is green, and the earth revolves around the sun. But nutbars will rush right out to say the opposite. The problem is, too many of these people are actually in what was once the GOP, now unrecognizable. Have they even once proposed a solution of their own, to any serious problem? No, because they don't want to fix what's broken. And they're so far off the HIGHpocrisy scale of 5 Hs, we can't even track it [e.g., what happened to supporting a war-time president?]

The other problem is that the MSM reports the batshade as de facto news. Arianna Huffington has lamented this repeatedly. Not every issue has 2 sides, there can actually be truth and fiction; right and wrong. Ratings, profit, ego, power, all are wrapped up in this neat little package. That's what an oligarchy does (I can spell-check, too); it's why fear-mongering has worked, because it's how you suppress the people from owning up to their responsibility as an informed citizenry.

Enough rambling and incoherence: next week, Obama will either have pulled off the baddest, mother-F^&k*n' rope-a-dope in history, or his entire agenda will be history. As we've said already, if he can't win this one -- with Dem. majorities, popularity and public opinion on his side, not to mention the right thing to do -- what can he win?

Thursday, September 3, 2009

duh x3

Duh to this header, but didn't read it; duh to this header too, would not read it [does anyone even in CT -- J? -- still pay attention when that guy speaks?]. And BIG DUH to this, read it. Especially the parts that refer to the wingnuts doing everything they can to beat Obama, anything to have him fail, b/c after all, government is always the problem when Rs are not in power. It's also the problem when they R in charge, but they just suck at it so bad. Guess we'll find out in a week who gets to decide the health of this country, literally!

Sorry, one more, read it. Will he be a lover or a fighter?

Tuesday, September 1, 2009


We know Obama's good at politics. We know he's smart. He's certainly smart enough to know what's going on, and he doesn't want to fail. But man, I sure hope this guy's "right" about all this.