Please explain your choice.

“Sicko” has been advertised as “outrageous” , “funny”  and even “entertaining”.

No, its not.  Its not funny at all, though it does have some moments of smirking in recognition.  Whats sad, is that there IS recognition. 

What was surprising is that Che Guevaras daughter spoke on camera. 

My doctor, my friend, and I all would love to go to Cuba.   I think we will skip the Gitmo gateway however.  I want to go for the cars, who knows why they want to go. 

So, back to Sicko…. I have my Sicko videos, Here and Here , and I can state with some authority that the health insurance INDUSTRY is not here to help you at all.   I find it amazing that I refuse most traditional ( and expensive ) treatments, but I was denied coverage for my most important doctor because she is “out of network”. 

It wasnt until I had already racked up over twenty thousand dollars worth of her appointments and more for the treatments, that I realized I could call my state senator ( Haines ) and SICK him on United Health Care to make my case that not only is this cheaper than MRI’s, and surgery, but they wont even have to pay for the medication as its all hand made in Washington State.  I pay for that…when I can afford it. 

Hanies came through, though only partially.  Mikulski failed.  No surprise there.  Mikulski used to have a great staff, but things change, not so anymore. 

Heres the deal;  if you are denied coverage, call your state and fedeal senators.  that is why they are there.  Yeah, you have to work at it and it might take 6 months, but it can be done.  Its not 100%, but you can get some help.  Its a shame that we have to do this, or resort to this, and its a lot of phone calls and letter, but I guess it depends on how sick you are. 

The only alternative is to sue your insurance company, and I know from experience that all insurance companies have the same legal values as Wal Mart.  Wal Marts credo is to “fight them until they die”.  So, in order to beat them at their own game, you must do this too.  They will hammer you with paper, so get a scanner with paper port or Omni Scan, .. its easier to scan in the huge amount of paperwork and not have to retype it.  Most all in ones already have this feature.   They count on you giving up, so dont.  They depend on you not understanding the legalese.  So Google it. 

I was shocked to see that most of the people in “Sicko” simply gave up.  You can never give up, never let them win that way, if you give up, you give into the enormous insurance machine.  You pay for the CEO’s bonus.

How sick is that?

I cant make up my mind if “birds of a feather flock together” or if the simple minded complete redneck-ed-ness is contagious.  ( bird flu??? )  It would be SIMPLE to be in the gutter with them, and it would be EASIER to sink to their level of self serving monoholistic depravity and of course…it would be FUN to spar, knowing I ( or you, or any fifth grader ) would have the upper hand ( verbally anyway ) but yet…sigh…  the high road is always the hardest.   Thats why the gutter is way down below, filled with bird doo.  

SMACKDOWN !   As in literally?   ahhh, just dreaming.   They are probably fans of that type of wrestling, thats how they breed after all.  ( snorting and chortling to myself now heh )   And I bet they leave on their spandex too, who knows what the women wear… heh again.  Oh my, imagine the women not restrained by spandex, the horror!  The unrestrained cellulite!  Help Help!!!  My beak is caught in my spandex!  A tear in the peephole!

Oh wait, they probably dont call it spandex, that is a two syllable word after all….   hmmmm..what WOULD they call their outerwear?  ( as opposed to innard-wear..snort snort ) 

Suggestions are welcomed by the other bored few on a Saturday Night

Waiting to view “Sicko”

Jim has time cards for everything.

men…..

Military leaders say they aren’t pushing for strikes over nuke weapons crisis

The Associated Press updated 7:47 p.m. ET, Thurs., Nov. 8, 2007

The showdown between the United States and Iran is growing more intense. This is the first story in an occasional series examining the confrontation and what it could mean for the region and the world.

WASHINGTON – U.S. defense officials have signaled that up-to-date attack plans are available if needed in the escalating crisis over Iran’s nuclear aims, although no strike appears imminent.

The Army and Marine Corps are under enormous strain from years of heavy ground fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. Still, the United States has ample air and naval power to strike Iran if President Bush decided to target nuclear sites or to retaliate for alleged Iranian meddling in neighboring Iraq.

Among the possible targets, in addition to nuclear installations like the centrifuge plant at Natanz: Iran’s ballistic missile sites, Republican Guard bases, and naval warfare assets that Tehran could use in a retaliatory closure of the Straits of Hormuz, a vital artery for the flow of Persian Gulf oil.

The Navy has an aircraft carrier in the Persian Gulf area with about 60 fighters and other aircraft that likely would feature prominently in a bombing campaign. And a contingent of about 2,200 Marines are on a standard deployment to the gulf region aboard ships led by the USS Kearsarge, an amphibious assault ship. Air Force fighters and bombers are available elsewhere in the gulf area, including a variety of warplanes in Iraq and at a regional air operations center in Qatar.

But there has been no new buildup of U.S. firepower in the region. In fact there has been some shrinkage in recent months. After adding a second aircraft carrier in the gulf early this year — a move that Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said was designed to underscore U.S. long-term stakes in the region — the Navy has quietly returned to a one-carrier presence.

Cheney warns Iran against nukes
Talk of a possible U.S. attack on Iran has surfaced frequently this year, prompted in some cases by hard-line statements by White House officials. Vice President Dick Cheney, for example, stated on Oct. 21 that the United States would “not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon,” and that Iran would face “serious consequences” if it continued in that direction. Gates, on the other hand, has emphasized diplomacy.

Bush suggested on Oct. 17 that Iran’s continued pursuit of nuclear arms could lead to “World War III.” Yet on Wednesday, in discussing Iran at a joint press conference with French President Nicolas Sarkozy, Bush made no reference to the military option.

“The idea of Iran having a nuclear weapon is dangerous, and, therefore, now is the time for us to work together to diplomatically solve this problem,” Bush said, adding that Sarkozy also wants a peaceful solution.

Iran’s conventional military forces are generally viewed as limited, not among the strongest in the Middle East. But a leading expert on the subject, Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, says it would be a mistake to view the Islamic republic as a military weakling.

“Its strengths in overt conflict are more defensive than offensive, but Iran has already shown it has great capability to resist outside pressure and any form of invasion and done so under far more adverse and divisive conditions than exist in Iran today,” Cordesman wrote earlier this year.

Cordesman estimates that Iran’s army has an active strength of around 350,000 men.

Gates: Focus on diplomacy
At the moment, there are few indications of U.S. military leaders either advising offensive action against Iran or taking new steps to prepare for that possibility. Gates has repeatedly emphasized that while military action cannot be ruled out, the focus is on diplomacy and tougher economic sanctions.

Asked in late October whether war planning had been ramped up or was simply undergoing routine updates, Gates replied, “I would characterize it as routine.” His description of new U.S. sanctions announced on Oct. 25 suggested they are not a harbinger of war, but an alternative.

A long-standing responsibility of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is to maintain and update what are called contingency plans for potential military action that a president might order against any conceivable foe. The secret plans, with a range of timelines and troop numbers, are based on a variety of potential scenarios — from an all-out invasion like the March 2003 march on Baghdad to less demanding missions.

Another military option for Washington would be limited, clandestine action by U.S. special operations commandos, such as Delta Force soldiers, against a small number of key nuclear installations.

‘Drumbeat of conflict … not helpful’
The man whose responsibility it would be to design any conventional military action against Iran — and execute it if ordered by Bush — is Adm. William Fallon, the Central Command chief. He is playing down prospects of conflict, saying in a late September interview that there is too much talk of war.

“This constant drumbeat of conflict is what strikes me, which is not helpful and not useful,” Fallon told Al-Jazeera television, adding that he does not expect a war against Iran. During a recent tour of the gulf region, Fallon made a point of telling U.S. allies that Iran is not as strong as it portrays itself.

“Not militarily, economically or politically,” he said.

Fallon’s immediate predecessor, retired Army Gen. John Abizaid, raised eyebrows in September when he suggested that initiating a war against Iran would be a mistake. He urged vigorous efforts to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, but failing that, he said, “There are ways to live with a nuclear Iran.” He also said he believed Iran’s leaders could be dissuaded from using nuclear arms, once acquired.

The possibility of U.S. military action raises many tough questions, beginning perhaps with the practical issue of whether the United States knows enough about Iran’s network of nuclear sites — declared sites as well as possible clandestine ones — to sufficiently set back or destroy their program.

Among other unknowns: Iran’s capacity to retaliate by unleashing terrorist strikes against U.S. targets.

Nonmilitary specialists who have studied Iran’s nuclear program are doubtful of U.S. military action.

“There is a nontrivial chance that there will be an attack, but it’s not likely,” said Jeffrey Lewis, director of a nuclear strategy project at the New America Foundation, a nonpartisan public policy group.

What are your thoughts?

Do you agree or disagree? Please share your thoughts!

Republicans, changing course midway through a vote, tried to force Democrats into a debate on the resolution sponsored by longshot presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich.

The anti-war Ohio Democrat, in his resolution, accused Cheney of purposely leading the country into war against Iraq and manipulating intelligence about Iraq’s ties with al-Qaida.

The GOP tactics reversed what had been expected to be an overwhelming vote to table, or kill, the resolution.

Midway through the vote, with instructions from the GOP leadership, Republicans one by one changed their votes from yes — to kill the resolution —to no, trying to force the chamber into a debate and an up-or-down vote on the proposal.

At one point there were 290 votes to table. After the turnaround, the final vote was 251-162 against tabling, with 165 Republicans voting against it.

“We’re going to help them out, to explain themselves,” said Rep. Pete Sessions, R-Texas. “We’re going to give them their day in court.”

Democrats countered by offering a motion to refer the proposal to the House Judiciary Committee for further study, effectively preventing a debate on the House floor. That motion passed by a largely party-line vote of 218-194.

The White House, in a statement, said Democrats were shirking responsibilities on issues such as childrens’ health insurance “and yet they find time to waste an afternoon on an impeachment vote against the vice president. … This is why Americans shake their head in wonder about the priorities of this Congress.”

Kucinich has long pushed for a vote to impeach Cheney, but has failed to win the backing of the Democratic leadership. After Kucinich introduced the resolution, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., immediately moved to table it.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said “impeachment is off the table” and Congress is focused on responsibly getting U.S. troops out of Iraq, covering 10 million uninsured children and meeting national priorities long neglected by the Bush administration, said her spokesman Nadeam Elshami.

The resolution said that Cheney, “in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of vice president,” had “purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States by fabricating a threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to justify the use of the U.S. Armed Forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security interests.”

The 11-page resolution also charged that Cheney purposely deceived the nation about an alleged relationship between Iraq and al-Qaida and has “openly threatened aggression against the Republic of Iran absent any real threat to the United States.”

House approval of an article of impeachment sends the issue to the Senate, which has the constitutional authority to try and, with a two-thirds vote, remove a person from office.

Hello Everyone, 

I would really like to hear your thoughts about the possible Impeachment of Dick Cheney and any reactions that you may have to the article above.

“I must respectfully disagree with President Bush’s veto of this important and long-overdue water resources development act,” said Rep. John Mica, R-Fla., the top Republican on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, in explaining the rare rebellion of the GOP faithful toward the president.

The vote was 361-54, well over the two-thirds majority needed to negate a presidential veto. The Senate, which approved the bill 81-12 in September, could cast its override vote as early as Wednesday.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said Bush’s argument that the bill is fiscally irresponsible rings hollow when the White House is asking for an additional $200 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. “Fiscally responsible people maintain their infrastructure,” he said. “Fiscally responsible people know that clean water and safe harbors aid our commerce and the health of our people.”

Asked whether the veto override was essentially a crack in the dam — the first in perhaps a string of veto overrides as Bush’s power wanes — White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said: “We’ll see about that.”

“One thing that the president would like to do is to make sure that he’s on the right side of federal taxpayers,” Perino said. “And that’s what he’s doing with this veto.”

Bush did not veto a single bill during the first five years of his presidency, when Congress was mainly in GOP hands. He has since vetoed a stem cell research bill twice, an Iraq spending bill that set guidelines for troop withdrawal and a children’s health insurance bill. He vetoed the Water Resources Development Act, or WRDA, on Nov. 2, saying it was too expensive.

I would like to hear your thoughts about this bill, the imminent veto override vote and any of your reactions.Thanks,
Brad Brown, Founder
Carroll County Progressives

Just wanted to tell you about my experience today. LOL
I heard that Yvonne and her “friends” would be standing at Locust Lane again this Saturday. I wanted to see just how many people showed up a second time.

Not at all surprised, I would estimate that 10 (very gratuitous, most likely less) actually attended the rally. So, let’s do the math on this. On Saturday, October 27th the GOE’s had we’ll say 40 people and just one week later, on Satuday, November 3rd they only had 10. If my 5th grade mathematics serves me, they lost 75% of their people in one week.

I must state the obvious and repeat what my sign said last weekend. “Doves Fly Together, Eagles Fly Alone.” That’s too bad though, I was really starting to like the idea that the “Eagles” would be standing in protest of our rallies from now on.

Oh, I forgot to tell you how I rode by the event.

I decided to contact a friend of mine that has a convertible and we drove by Sam’s Bagels with my Peace Flag on it’s seven foot pole sticking out of the top of the car. I was not disappointed by the response I received from one of the very intelligent men that were on the corner of the street. This rather large man yelled, “You’re American chickens.” Not quite sure what that meant, but at least someone refered to me as an “American,” finally.

 Irregardless, I am glad that the people of Westminster and Carroll County have started to rub the crust out of their eyes and start standing up for something. My mother always told me, if you don’t stand for something, you’ll stand for anything. Thanks Mom! I must say I have a much better life because of those wise words.

Thanks again to those of you that stand with people that support our troops, yet don’t support the Administration or the War. Together we will be able to regain control over Congress and the White House. This fight is far from over, but we will rise to the occassion.
IN THE NAME OF PEACE,

Brad Brown, Founder
Carroll County Progressives