This is a little too close for me, but I suppose it'd be ok if I wasn't wearing my glasses.
Why would you need or want something like that, though, when this is possible?
They should at least put a perch on it. Help dispel the myths that hummers don't sit or even have feet :)
My hummers have been gone for a while now; saw a couple of snowbirds the other day.
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Thursday, August 27, 2009
The Truth about Teddy
Read it here and here:
Alexander's Essay – August 27, 2009
From The Patriot Post (www.patriotpost.us/subscribe)
Lion of the Left
"The foundation of national morality must be laid in private families. ... Public virtue cannot exist in a nation without private, and public virtue is the only foundation of republics." --John Adams
Have you ever attended a funeral service out of respect for a friend or colleague, and left perplexed as to whom the eulogy was referring? Just once, I would like to go to a service for some disreputable rogue and have a clergyman deliver a eulogy that was faithful to the facts rather than full of fiction. (Hopefully, that won't be my own!)
I am certainly not suggesting that we should stand in judgment of any man, for that is the exclusive domain of our Creator. However, we should never abandon our responsibility to discern right from wrong.
On that note, Edward "Teddy" Kennedy (22 February 1932 -- 25 August 2009) died this week at age 77.
Kennedy spent the last 47 of his years as a senator, having been perpetually re-elected by the people of Massachusetts. This made him the third-longest serving senator -- behind Robert Byrd (D-WV) and Strom Thurmond (R-SC) -- in that chamber's august history.
Of course, a fawning Leftmedia will inundate us with non-stop coverage of Kennedy's life, featuring interviews with his political sycophants up to, and probably well after, his interment at National Cemetery. The airways and printed pages are already sodden with accolades, mostly framing the senator's life as one of great personal tragedy but great public success.
Let's take a look at both.
Kennedy was born into great wealth, privilege and political influence, the fourth son and ninth child of Joseph and Rose Kennedy. He never worked a day in a private-sector job, and like his brothers before him, he owed his political career to his father's considerable political machinations.
But, the mainstream media's reference to TK's life as one punctuated by personal tragedy is an understatement.
Before the age of 16, he had suffered through the death of his brother Joseph Kennedy Jr. (his father's heir apparent), who died when his B-24 bomber exploded over Surrey, England, during World War II, and the death of his sister Kathleen Agnes Kennedy, who died in an airplane crash in France.
In 1941 his father ordered a lobotomy for Ted's sister, Rosemary Kennedy, then age 23, because of "mood swings that the family found difficult to handle at home." The procedure failed and left Rose mentally incapacitated until her death in January 2005 at age 87.
Ted, like his brother John, developed a reputation as a serial womanizer in college. Unlike his Ivy League brothers, however, Ted was kicked out of Harvard for cheating, though allowed to return a few years later to complete his undergraduate degree.
Thanks to some election-night manipulation of returns by Old Joe, JFK was elected president in the closest race of the 20th century (49.7 percent to Richard Nixon's 49.5 percent). That paved the way for TK's victory in a 1962 U.S. Senate special election in Massachusetts.
The thrill of victory was brief, however. On 22 November 1963, during a political visit to Dallas, President John F. Kennedy was assassinated.
In June 1964, Ted Kennedy was flying with friends on a private plane that crashed on a landing approach, killing the pilot and a Kennedy staffer. Kennedy survived but suffered severe injuries.
On 4 June 1968, Robert Kennedy, then a candidate for the Democrat Party's nomination for president, was assassinated after a Los Angeles political event. The political baton then went to Teddy, the last of the four Kennedy brothers, but his alcohol abuse and philandering would keep the presidency out of reach.
In 1969, on one of his infamous junkets to "the island" (Martha's Vineyard and Chappaquiddick), Kennedy's moral lapse would cost a young staffer her life, and would cost him any chance of becoming president.
On the night of 18 July, Kennedy left a party with an attractive young intern en route to a private secluded beach on the far side of Dike Bridge. Kennedy lost control on the single-lane bridge and his vehicle overturned in the shallow tidal water. (Note: I drove across this bridge in a large 4x4 truck a few years after this incident, and it was not difficult to keep it out of the water -- but then, I was not intoxicated.)
Kennedy freed himself from the vehicle leaving his passenger, 28-year-old Mary Jo Kopechne to suffocate in an air pocket inside the overturned car. After resting at the water's edge, he walked back to the party house, and one of his political hacks took him back to his hotel.
Nine hours later, after sobering up and conferring with political advisors and lawyers, Kennedy called authorities to report the incident. Kopechne's body had already been discovered.
With the help of Father Joe's connections, Kennedy was charged only with leaving the scene of an accident. In his testimony, he claimed, "I almost tossed and turned... I had not given up hope all night long that, by some miracle, Mary Jo would have escaped from the car." He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to serve two months in jail -- sentence suspended.
With Joan, his pregnant wife of 10 years, and their three children by his side, he claimed that charges of "immoral conduct and drunk driving" were false and he was promptly re-elected to his second full Senate term with a landslide 62 percent of the vote. However, his responsibility for the death of Kopechne would all but disqualify him from ever holding national office. Indeed, the moral composure of the nation differs significantly from that of his Massachusetts supporters and defenders.
Kennedy's political advocacy swung evermore to the left in the years that followed, and his personal conduct led the way.
In January 1981, Joan announced she had had enough, and they divorced.
Two Senate terms later, Kennedy was partying at the family's Palm Beach compound with his nephew, William Kennedy Smith, who was charged with the rape of Patricia Bowman during that evening. The Kennedy machine was able to undermine Bowman's charges by assassinating her character ahead of the trial.
Not surprisingly, Kennedy was an ardent backer of his friend Bill Clinton after the latter lied about sexual encounters with a subordinate White House intern in 1998.
In turn, Clinton awarded Kennedy the Presidential Medal of Freedom, which, along with the Congressional Gold Medal, is the highest civilian award in the U.S. It is designated for individuals who have made "an especially meritorious contribution to the security or national interests of the United States, world peace, cultural or other significant public or private endeavors."
Setting aside all of his personal tragedies, what about the tributes and rave reviews of Kennedy's public life, his success as a legislator?
According to Barack Obama, "Our country has lost a great leader, who picked up the torch of his fallen brothers and became the greatest United States Senator of our time."
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi insists, "No one has done more than Senator Kennedy to educate our children, care for our seniors and ensure equality for all Americans. Ted Kennedy's dream of quality health care for all Americans will be made real this year because of his leadership and his inspiration."
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid adds, "Ted Kennedy's dream was the one for which the Founding Fathers fought and for which his brothers sought to realize. The Liberal Lion's mighty roar may now fall silent, but his dream shall never die."
Oh, really?
Kennedy has a very long legacy of legislative accomplishments, but not one of them is expressly authorized by our Constitution, that venerable old document he has repeatedly pledged by oath "to support and defend."
Kennedy's long Senate tenure was, in fact, defined by hypocrisy.
For example, consider that this fine Catholic boy's advocacy for abortion and homosexuality was second to none.
In regard to Operation Iraqi Freedom, consider his claim during the Clinton years: "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." A few years later, with his cadre of traitorous leftists at his side, Kennedy claimed, "The Bush administration misrepresented and distorted the intelligence to justify a war that America should never have fought."
Who can forget Kennedy's outrageous 2006 inquisition into the integrity of then Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito? In 1987 when Ronald Reagan nominated Alito to be a U.S. District Attorney, Kennedy's vote was among the Senate's unanimous consent. And when Sam Alito was nominated for the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in 1990, he again received Kennedy's vote and unanimous consent from the Senate. But after impugning Alito's character in his Supreme Court hearings, Kennedy blustered, "If confirmed, Alito could very well fundamentally alter the balance of the court and push it dangerously to the right."
Of course, Kennedy was an expert at "borking" judicial nominees. Indeed, he is responsible for the coining of the term. In 1987, President Ronald Reagan nominated an exceptional jurist, Robert Bork, to the Supreme Court. During Bork's confirmation hearings, Kennedy proclaimed, "Robert Bork's America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens' doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists could be censored at the whim of the Government, and the doors of the Federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens." Despicable.
No agenda was more sacred to Kennedy than opposing Constitutional Constructionists in order to convert the Judiciary into what Thomas Jefferson called the "Despotic Branch" stacked with jurists who subscribe to the notion of a so-called "Living Constitution".
But among über-leftists like Kennedy, there is perhaps no greater hypocrisy than the fact that they are among the wealthiest of Americans but pretend to be advocates for the poor. Of course, they never give up their opulent trappings and lifestyles while pontificating what is best for the masses. (I have written on the pathology associated with this hypocrisy under the label "Inheritance Welfare Liberalism, or "rich guilt" if you will.)
And there is a long list of Kennedy legislation that has proven disastrous.
Second only to the looming disaster of his pet nationalized health care promotion, Kennedy led the charge for the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, ending quotas based on national origin. He argued, "[O]ur cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually. The ethnic mix of our country will not be upset. ...[T]he bill will not inundate America with immigrants from any one country or area..."
How did that one turn out?
Kennedy also had some dangerous dalliances with the Soviets in 1983, endeavoring to undermine Ronald Reagan's hard line with the USSR. Fortunately, his efforts did not prevail.
But Kennedy did have one thing in common with his older brothers: He had powerful oratorical skills.
At the 2004 Democrat Convention to elect his lap dog, John Kerry, Kennedy, who wrote the book on political disunity, declared to delegates, "There are those who seek to divide us. ... America needs a genuine uniter -- not a divider. [Republicans] divide and try to conquer."
Fortunately, the American people weren't buying his rhetoric -- at least not until the 2008 convention, when Kennedy joined Barack Obama's "hope 'n' change" chorus: "I have come here tonight to stand with you to change America.... For me this is a season of hope -- new hope for a justice and fair prosperity for the many, and not just for the few -- new hope. And this is the cause of my life -- new hope that we will break the old gridlock and guarantee that every American -- north, south, east, west, young, old -- will have decent, quality health care as a fundamental right and not a privilege."
Predictably, and before the man has even been laid to rest, there is already a rallying cry from Ted Kennedy's grave: The Left and their mainstream media talkingheads are exhorting us to fulfill the late senator's misguided mission to nationalize health care. (I checked, and the Constitution doesn't authorize this either.)
As I contemplate the life of Ted Kennedy, I am left with two primary conclusions.
First, Ted Kennedy was no JFK.
In his 1961 Inaugural Address, John Kennedy said famously, "My fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you -- ask what you can do for your country." Ted Kennedy inverted that phrase to read, "Ask not what you can do for your country, ask what your country can do for you," and in the process, turned the once-noble Democrat Party on end.
Second, a man who can't govern his own life should never be entrusted with the government of others.
One of our most astute Founders, Noah Webster, wrote, "The virtues of men are of more consequence to society than their abilities. ... In selecting men for office, let principle be your guide. Regard not the particular sect or denomination of the candidate -- look to his character."
In Webster's 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language, the first use of "government" is defined in terms of self-government, not the body of those who govern.
Despite the Left's insistence that private virtue and morality should not be a consideration when assessing those in "public service" (unless, of course, they are Republicans), the fact is that the two are irrevocably linked.
Finally, in 1968, when Ted Kennedy delivered the eulogy for his brother, Robert, he said, "My brother need not be idealized, or enlarged in death beyond what he was in life..."
I would hope that whoever is slated to deliver Ted Kennedy's eulogy follows that advice because we do a disservice to him and our country to suggest Kennedy was anything more than he was.
I do not know who will bestow his final tribute, but I do know it will not be Mary Jo Kopechne.
Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!
Mark Alexander
Publisher, PatriotPost.US
Alexander's Essay – August 27, 2009
From The Patriot Post (www.patriotpost.us/subscribe)
Lion of the Left
"The foundation of national morality must be laid in private families. ... Public virtue cannot exist in a nation without private, and public virtue is the only foundation of republics." --John Adams
Have you ever attended a funeral service out of respect for a friend or colleague, and left perplexed as to whom the eulogy was referring? Just once, I would like to go to a service for some disreputable rogue and have a clergyman deliver a eulogy that was faithful to the facts rather than full of fiction. (Hopefully, that won't be my own!)
I am certainly not suggesting that we should stand in judgment of any man, for that is the exclusive domain of our Creator. However, we should never abandon our responsibility to discern right from wrong.
On that note, Edward "Teddy" Kennedy (22 February 1932 -- 25 August 2009) died this week at age 77.
Kennedy spent the last 47 of his years as a senator, having been perpetually re-elected by the people of Massachusetts. This made him the third-longest serving senator -- behind Robert Byrd (D-WV) and Strom Thurmond (R-SC) -- in that chamber's august history.
Of course, a fawning Leftmedia will inundate us with non-stop coverage of Kennedy's life, featuring interviews with his political sycophants up to, and probably well after, his interment at National Cemetery. The airways and printed pages are already sodden with accolades, mostly framing the senator's life as one of great personal tragedy but great public success.
Let's take a look at both.
Kennedy was born into great wealth, privilege and political influence, the fourth son and ninth child of Joseph and Rose Kennedy. He never worked a day in a private-sector job, and like his brothers before him, he owed his political career to his father's considerable political machinations.
But, the mainstream media's reference to TK's life as one punctuated by personal tragedy is an understatement.
Before the age of 16, he had suffered through the death of his brother Joseph Kennedy Jr. (his father's heir apparent), who died when his B-24 bomber exploded over Surrey, England, during World War II, and the death of his sister Kathleen Agnes Kennedy, who died in an airplane crash in France.
In 1941 his father ordered a lobotomy for Ted's sister, Rosemary Kennedy, then age 23, because of "mood swings that the family found difficult to handle at home." The procedure failed and left Rose mentally incapacitated until her death in January 2005 at age 87.
Ted, like his brother John, developed a reputation as a serial womanizer in college. Unlike his Ivy League brothers, however, Ted was kicked out of Harvard for cheating, though allowed to return a few years later to complete his undergraduate degree.
Thanks to some election-night manipulation of returns by Old Joe, JFK was elected president in the closest race of the 20th century (49.7 percent to Richard Nixon's 49.5 percent). That paved the way for TK's victory in a 1962 U.S. Senate special election in Massachusetts.
The thrill of victory was brief, however. On 22 November 1963, during a political visit to Dallas, President John F. Kennedy was assassinated.
In June 1964, Ted Kennedy was flying with friends on a private plane that crashed on a landing approach, killing the pilot and a Kennedy staffer. Kennedy survived but suffered severe injuries.
On 4 June 1968, Robert Kennedy, then a candidate for the Democrat Party's nomination for president, was assassinated after a Los Angeles political event. The political baton then went to Teddy, the last of the four Kennedy brothers, but his alcohol abuse and philandering would keep the presidency out of reach.
In 1969, on one of his infamous junkets to "the island" (Martha's Vineyard and Chappaquiddick), Kennedy's moral lapse would cost a young staffer her life, and would cost him any chance of becoming president.
On the night of 18 July, Kennedy left a party with an attractive young intern en route to a private secluded beach on the far side of Dike Bridge. Kennedy lost control on the single-lane bridge and his vehicle overturned in the shallow tidal water. (Note: I drove across this bridge in a large 4x4 truck a few years after this incident, and it was not difficult to keep it out of the water -- but then, I was not intoxicated.)
Kennedy freed himself from the vehicle leaving his passenger, 28-year-old Mary Jo Kopechne to suffocate in an air pocket inside the overturned car. After resting at the water's edge, he walked back to the party house, and one of his political hacks took him back to his hotel.
Nine hours later, after sobering up and conferring with political advisors and lawyers, Kennedy called authorities to report the incident. Kopechne's body had already been discovered.
With the help of Father Joe's connections, Kennedy was charged only with leaving the scene of an accident. In his testimony, he claimed, "I almost tossed and turned... I had not given up hope all night long that, by some miracle, Mary Jo would have escaped from the car." He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to serve two months in jail -- sentence suspended.
With Joan, his pregnant wife of 10 years, and their three children by his side, he claimed that charges of "immoral conduct and drunk driving" were false and he was promptly re-elected to his second full Senate term with a landslide 62 percent of the vote. However, his responsibility for the death of Kopechne would all but disqualify him from ever holding national office. Indeed, the moral composure of the nation differs significantly from that of his Massachusetts supporters and defenders.
Kennedy's political advocacy swung evermore to the left in the years that followed, and his personal conduct led the way.
In January 1981, Joan announced she had had enough, and they divorced.
Two Senate terms later, Kennedy was partying at the family's Palm Beach compound with his nephew, William Kennedy Smith, who was charged with the rape of Patricia Bowman during that evening. The Kennedy machine was able to undermine Bowman's charges by assassinating her character ahead of the trial.
Not surprisingly, Kennedy was an ardent backer of his friend Bill Clinton after the latter lied about sexual encounters with a subordinate White House intern in 1998.
In turn, Clinton awarded Kennedy the Presidential Medal of Freedom, which, along with the Congressional Gold Medal, is the highest civilian award in the U.S. It is designated for individuals who have made "an especially meritorious contribution to the security or national interests of the United States, world peace, cultural or other significant public or private endeavors."
Setting aside all of his personal tragedies, what about the tributes and rave reviews of Kennedy's public life, his success as a legislator?
According to Barack Obama, "Our country has lost a great leader, who picked up the torch of his fallen brothers and became the greatest United States Senator of our time."
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi insists, "No one has done more than Senator Kennedy to educate our children, care for our seniors and ensure equality for all Americans. Ted Kennedy's dream of quality health care for all Americans will be made real this year because of his leadership and his inspiration."
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid adds, "Ted Kennedy's dream was the one for which the Founding Fathers fought and for which his brothers sought to realize. The Liberal Lion's mighty roar may now fall silent, but his dream shall never die."
Oh, really?
Kennedy has a very long legacy of legislative accomplishments, but not one of them is expressly authorized by our Constitution, that venerable old document he has repeatedly pledged by oath "to support and defend."
Kennedy's long Senate tenure was, in fact, defined by hypocrisy.
For example, consider that this fine Catholic boy's advocacy for abortion and homosexuality was second to none.
In regard to Operation Iraqi Freedom, consider his claim during the Clinton years: "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." A few years later, with his cadre of traitorous leftists at his side, Kennedy claimed, "The Bush administration misrepresented and distorted the intelligence to justify a war that America should never have fought."
Who can forget Kennedy's outrageous 2006 inquisition into the integrity of then Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito? In 1987 when Ronald Reagan nominated Alito to be a U.S. District Attorney, Kennedy's vote was among the Senate's unanimous consent. And when Sam Alito was nominated for the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in 1990, he again received Kennedy's vote and unanimous consent from the Senate. But after impugning Alito's character in his Supreme Court hearings, Kennedy blustered, "If confirmed, Alito could very well fundamentally alter the balance of the court and push it dangerously to the right."
Of course, Kennedy was an expert at "borking" judicial nominees. Indeed, he is responsible for the coining of the term. In 1987, President Ronald Reagan nominated an exceptional jurist, Robert Bork, to the Supreme Court. During Bork's confirmation hearings, Kennedy proclaimed, "Robert Bork's America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens' doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists could be censored at the whim of the Government, and the doors of the Federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens." Despicable.
No agenda was more sacred to Kennedy than opposing Constitutional Constructionists in order to convert the Judiciary into what Thomas Jefferson called the "Despotic Branch" stacked with jurists who subscribe to the notion of a so-called "Living Constitution".
But among über-leftists like Kennedy, there is perhaps no greater hypocrisy than the fact that they are among the wealthiest of Americans but pretend to be advocates for the poor. Of course, they never give up their opulent trappings and lifestyles while pontificating what is best for the masses. (I have written on the pathology associated with this hypocrisy under the label "Inheritance Welfare Liberalism, or "rich guilt" if you will.)
And there is a long list of Kennedy legislation that has proven disastrous.
Second only to the looming disaster of his pet nationalized health care promotion, Kennedy led the charge for the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, ending quotas based on national origin. He argued, "[O]ur cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually. The ethnic mix of our country will not be upset. ...[T]he bill will not inundate America with immigrants from any one country or area..."
How did that one turn out?
Kennedy also had some dangerous dalliances with the Soviets in 1983, endeavoring to undermine Ronald Reagan's hard line with the USSR. Fortunately, his efforts did not prevail.
But Kennedy did have one thing in common with his older brothers: He had powerful oratorical skills.
At the 2004 Democrat Convention to elect his lap dog, John Kerry, Kennedy, who wrote the book on political disunity, declared to delegates, "There are those who seek to divide us. ... America needs a genuine uniter -- not a divider. [Republicans] divide and try to conquer."
Fortunately, the American people weren't buying his rhetoric -- at least not until the 2008 convention, when Kennedy joined Barack Obama's "hope 'n' change" chorus: "I have come here tonight to stand with you to change America.... For me this is a season of hope -- new hope for a justice and fair prosperity for the many, and not just for the few -- new hope. And this is the cause of my life -- new hope that we will break the old gridlock and guarantee that every American -- north, south, east, west, young, old -- will have decent, quality health care as a fundamental right and not a privilege."
Predictably, and before the man has even been laid to rest, there is already a rallying cry from Ted Kennedy's grave: The Left and their mainstream media talkingheads are exhorting us to fulfill the late senator's misguided mission to nationalize health care. (I checked, and the Constitution doesn't authorize this either.)
As I contemplate the life of Ted Kennedy, I am left with two primary conclusions.
First, Ted Kennedy was no JFK.
In his 1961 Inaugural Address, John Kennedy said famously, "My fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you -- ask what you can do for your country." Ted Kennedy inverted that phrase to read, "Ask not what you can do for your country, ask what your country can do for you," and in the process, turned the once-noble Democrat Party on end.
Second, a man who can't govern his own life should never be entrusted with the government of others.
One of our most astute Founders, Noah Webster, wrote, "The virtues of men are of more consequence to society than their abilities. ... In selecting men for office, let principle be your guide. Regard not the particular sect or denomination of the candidate -- look to his character."
In Webster's 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language, the first use of "government" is defined in terms of self-government, not the body of those who govern.
Despite the Left's insistence that private virtue and morality should not be a consideration when assessing those in "public service" (unless, of course, they are Republicans), the fact is that the two are irrevocably linked.
Finally, in 1968, when Ted Kennedy delivered the eulogy for his brother, Robert, he said, "My brother need not be idealized, or enlarged in death beyond what he was in life..."
I would hope that whoever is slated to deliver Ted Kennedy's eulogy follows that advice because we do a disservice to him and our country to suggest Kennedy was anything more than he was.
I do not know who will bestow his final tribute, but I do know it will not be Mary Jo Kopechne.
Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!
Mark Alexander
Publisher, PatriotPost.US
Monday, August 17, 2009
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Russian antihistamine is the best bet we have against Alzheimer's
Doing my small part to spread the word:
Are We Taking the Wrong Approach to Curing Alzheimer’s?
When I get done being mad about this, I'll consider it good news.
Are We Taking the Wrong Approach to Curing Alzheimer’s?
When I get done being mad about this, I'll consider it good news.
Sunday, July 5, 2009
Healthcare Reform
With the fine job Obama et al have done fixing the economy, I'm really looking forward to seeing what they can do with our nation's healthcare system.
A couple of old adages come to mind when I ponder this topic: If it ain't broke, don't fix it, and Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Our healthcare system is in need of a few tweaks to make it work better- not a complete overhaul. Nor does it need to be thrown out and replaced, especially with a model that hasn't worked for anyone else who's tried it.
I do not have health insurance: I lost it with the divorce. That was one of the scariest parts of being on my own; I'm doing ok so far, but I know we are a small health crisis away from disaster, probably. (This wouldn't be the case if the economy was actually working now.)
If I need to, I can get healthcare at a clinic for people like me. I have gone there in the past, but haven't gone back since they quit giving appointments and started making us wait for hours, with only the hope of being able to see a doctor (first come, first served, and they wouldn't know how many they could see until time ran out).
I've been to the ER with a couple of my adult children who also don't have insurance, and in the first case it worked out well, although we refused a lot of what they would've done because we were trying to keep costs down. In the end, the visit was free, thanks to the hospital's policy of providing free care to people who qualify.
In the other case, we waited for hours and never got past intake. My son- who's in the Army Reserves- limped around for weeks till his probably broken foot healed on its own.
My ex, who still had insurance at the time, had the experience of going to a doctor and being charged an outrageous price for a small procedure. Talking to the doctor's billing department and the insurance company got nowhere. He threw a tantrum, and they decided to let it go.
My underage children are covered under the state's plan, now that their father's coverage has expired. I haven't tried to use it yet, but I heard one has to go to the other side of town to see a doctor- that's how it is here, for most things.
While I was still married and had insurance, I saw our coverage go from excellent to a step above an HMO, yet we had to pay a lot for even the cheapest plan. In the end, the doctors available as Primary Care Physicians were mostly foreigners, often had no office nearby, and overall, were a gamble as far as ability, despite the insurance company's screening process which was supposed to assure quality care.
Now Obama et al want us to throw all that out and- regardless of what they say to sell this inferior product- give us nothing but the worst of what now exists.
If they do what they want, for most of us, a visit to the doctor will involve having to wait- possibly for MONTHS- just for an appointment. When you finally do get in, you will probably find your appointment was actually for one of those cattle pen sessions such as the clinic I mentioned has degenerated to. If you get to see a doctor, and if this person knows what they're doing- which will not be a given, since the quality of doctors will surely decline once the money they can earn disappears- he/she will see what your problem is and will have to decide whether or not to treat you. This decision will be based on whether you are worth treating- are you too old; is your condition too expensive to treat; will the cost exceed the probable outcome; possibly even considering whether you contribute enough to be treated.
In addition, what treatments are available will be limited, as funds for research and development of drugs and procedures dries up, and specialists disappear.
To add insult to injury, this so-called healthcare will include abortion, sterilization, and birth control- not to mention euthanasia- all of which are morally repugnant to real Christians, who will be forced to pay for these and be seen by doctors who have no problem with them. Healthcare providers will have no choice in these matters, either, or in the rationing of care: their only options will be to quit the healthcare field, or risk the wrath of the State by following their consciences.
What Obama et al are not going to tell us is what they will do if/when they or their loved ones need care, especially life-saving care. First of all, they will probably qualify for any top-of-the-line care that still remains, since they're doing such an important job as public servants. If that fails, you can bet they will have access to any better-qualified physicians who are still around, if only because they will be able to pay them. This will probably be kept secret, since most people have a natural understanding of the the rights and equality of all men, as well as an extreme aversion to such elitism, and wouldn't tolerate this kind of deadly discrimination.
Obama is counting on his still inexplicably high approval ratings to shove this program through (and down our throats), like he did his wonderful economic reforms that have brought such bountiful blessings to the average American. He's telling his cronies to divert their attacks from their more moderate fellow Democrats (who can see that this reform sucks) to the majority of Republicans, who are fighting it because they really do care about the little guy. He needs all the Dems in Congress to back him in order to pass it.
Let's not let them get away with it, shall we?
Call, write, email, petition, picket- do whatever it takes to prevent this catastrophic decimation of our healthcare system. There is good reason why everyone who can still comes here when their lives are in danger: in spite of its flaws, ours is the best healthcare available.
A couple of old adages come to mind when I ponder this topic: If it ain't broke, don't fix it, and Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Our healthcare system is in need of a few tweaks to make it work better- not a complete overhaul. Nor does it need to be thrown out and replaced, especially with a model that hasn't worked for anyone else who's tried it.
I do not have health insurance: I lost it with the divorce. That was one of the scariest parts of being on my own; I'm doing ok so far, but I know we are a small health crisis away from disaster, probably. (This wouldn't be the case if the economy was actually working now.)
If I need to, I can get healthcare at a clinic for people like me. I have gone there in the past, but haven't gone back since they quit giving appointments and started making us wait for hours, with only the hope of being able to see a doctor (first come, first served, and they wouldn't know how many they could see until time ran out).
I've been to the ER with a couple of my adult children who also don't have insurance, and in the first case it worked out well, although we refused a lot of what they would've done because we were trying to keep costs down. In the end, the visit was free, thanks to the hospital's policy of providing free care to people who qualify.
In the other case, we waited for hours and never got past intake. My son- who's in the Army Reserves- limped around for weeks till his probably broken foot healed on its own.
My ex, who still had insurance at the time, had the experience of going to a doctor and being charged an outrageous price for a small procedure. Talking to the doctor's billing department and the insurance company got nowhere. He threw a tantrum, and they decided to let it go.
My underage children are covered under the state's plan, now that their father's coverage has expired. I haven't tried to use it yet, but I heard one has to go to the other side of town to see a doctor- that's how it is here, for most things.
While I was still married and had insurance, I saw our coverage go from excellent to a step above an HMO, yet we had to pay a lot for even the cheapest plan. In the end, the doctors available as Primary Care Physicians were mostly foreigners, often had no office nearby, and overall, were a gamble as far as ability, despite the insurance company's screening process which was supposed to assure quality care.
Now Obama et al want us to throw all that out and- regardless of what they say to sell this inferior product- give us nothing but the worst of what now exists.
If they do what they want, for most of us, a visit to the doctor will involve having to wait- possibly for MONTHS- just for an appointment. When you finally do get in, you will probably find your appointment was actually for one of those cattle pen sessions such as the clinic I mentioned has degenerated to. If you get to see a doctor, and if this person knows what they're doing- which will not be a given, since the quality of doctors will surely decline once the money they can earn disappears- he/she will see what your problem is and will have to decide whether or not to treat you. This decision will be based on whether you are worth treating- are you too old; is your condition too expensive to treat; will the cost exceed the probable outcome; possibly even considering whether you contribute enough to be treated.
In addition, what treatments are available will be limited, as funds for research and development of drugs and procedures dries up, and specialists disappear.
To add insult to injury, this so-called healthcare will include abortion, sterilization, and birth control- not to mention euthanasia- all of which are morally repugnant to real Christians, who will be forced to pay for these and be seen by doctors who have no problem with them. Healthcare providers will have no choice in these matters, either, or in the rationing of care: their only options will be to quit the healthcare field, or risk the wrath of the State by following their consciences.
What Obama et al are not going to tell us is what they will do if/when they or their loved ones need care, especially life-saving care. First of all, they will probably qualify for any top-of-the-line care that still remains, since they're doing such an important job as public servants. If that fails, you can bet they will have access to any better-qualified physicians who are still around, if only because they will be able to pay them. This will probably be kept secret, since most people have a natural understanding of the the rights and equality of all men, as well as an extreme aversion to such elitism, and wouldn't tolerate this kind of deadly discrimination.
Obama is counting on his still inexplicably high approval ratings to shove this program through (and down our throats), like he did his wonderful economic reforms that have brought such bountiful blessings to the average American. He's telling his cronies to divert their attacks from their more moderate fellow Democrats (who can see that this reform sucks) to the majority of Republicans, who are fighting it because they really do care about the little guy. He needs all the Dems in Congress to back him in order to pass it.
Let's not let them get away with it, shall we?
Call, write, email, petition, picket- do whatever it takes to prevent this catastrophic decimation of our healthcare system. There is good reason why everyone who can still comes here when their lives are in danger: in spite of its flaws, ours is the best healthcare available.
Friday, June 12, 2009
What you don't know...
Yesterday, we received in the mail an item that was for someone else. I looked at the address and saw that it was less similar to ours than the misdirected mail we frequently get usually is, and we had not received any for this person before.
Since it was a postcard, I also saw that it was for a little girl whose birthday is coming up, and the postcard was for her to receive a free meal at a national restaurant chain. I wanted to make sure that she got this little card and gift, but was reluctant to drive over and try to find her house, which is what I often do for the guy with the same house number on a similarly named but different street that is not too far away, whose mail I usually get. (Besides, he brings my mail when it comes to his house; I was especially grateful for this one time when it was a letter from my son who was then in Marine boot camp, and I wasn't hearing from him anywhere near often enough.) So I decided to try to catch the mailman (read postal carrier, if this bothers you) when he came by today and ask him to deliver it to the proper address. (We got tired of watching for him, so I stuck it on my mail slot cover with a clothespin, which also works.)
My 9-year-old, meanwhile, learned through this experience that
1. It's ok to look at a postcard in such a situation, but I wouldn't open a letter for someone else that came here by accident because that would be illegal
2. We are required by law to give mail that isn't ours to the proper person, or back to the mailman or post office
He didn't know that, and it got me to wondering, how many people do? Where are we supposed to learn such things? I don't think the Postal Service is up to the task, although they have sent out info about the collections of donations for hunger centers that they do every year, the ways you can get postal supplies, and once, a handy card that told the abbreviations for all the states. But I don't think I've ever seen or heard of them telling us what to do if you get someone else's mail. Or that it's also illegal to take mail or packages left for other people at their houses (like somebody must've done with several things that never arrived here in the past. So I put up a sign that tells delivery people not to leave things out front, and it mostly seems to be working.)
I suspect this problem will be moot in the not-too-distant future, when the Postal Service goes out of business. (It can't last much longer, with hardly anybody sending Christmas cards anymore, or writing letters, and with the price of stamps getting totally freaking ridiculous.) But until then, please make sure the people you know are aware that they must not just throw away mail that doesn't belong to them. (Although I was really tempted to, that time it was a Playboy magazine...)
Then I started thinking about other signs that people don't know things that they should. Like, often when I shop for food, I'll see an item sitting on a shelf that someone decided they didn't want and apparently just stuck in the nearest convenient place. Unfortunately, these items are often things that must be kept refrigerated or frozen to prevent spoilage, so when I give them to a person who works at the store, I point out that they were left sitting on a shelf and not refrigerated. I hope and pray these people realize that, if they do not dispose of such items properly (don't just put them back in the refrigerated or freezer section), they could cause someone who ends up consuming them to become very sick or even to die from food poisoning.
Driving provides many proofs that a lot of people have no idea what they're doing. Worst is when an emergency vehicle is trying to get through, and they just keep going their merry way, oblivious to the law that requires them to get the hell out of the way, if possible. I mentioned turn signals in a previous blog; there are lots of others, but I'm sure you get the drift.
The same thing is going on in my Church: I think they need to do a refresher course on the main points at least once a year- from the pulpit- since most people aren't going to try to correct their ignorance on their own. Most of them don't even know what they don't know, or care, from what I can tell.
I got in a minor fender-bender on the way to the cemetery in a funeral procession in January, because a woman was trying to break through from a side street and created a distraction that almost caused a multi-car pile up (thank God we were going about 25 mph, but the roads were wet and nearly icy). I glanced at her and the escort who was blocking and confronting her as I drove by, then looked forward to see that the car in front of me had come to a dead stop. I hit the brakes and narrowly avoided rear-ending him, but the guy behind me couldn't stop in time. Luckily, everyone was ok and we were able to continue to the graveside service. Funeral processions have the right of way, ok?
If you find money or a wallet lying on the ground or wherever, it is not your lucky day. If you have an ounce of moral fiber, you will try to find the owner. For money, you can leave your name and number at the office of the nearest business and ask them to call if no one claims it, which is a waste, but hey, ya never know. I started realizing a lot of people here are selfish morons the day I dropped $50 going into the grocery. If I had realized it before I went to pay, I might've tried to find the culprit by looking for someone who looked unusually happy. I tried to console myself with the thought that maybe they needed the money more than my hungry and now-broke family did.
And when you're out in public, you have to share with and be nice to the other people you meet. It's not required by law, but it is highly recommended. God sees and cares how you treat other people, and you never know how someone will react if you treat them badly, whether you intended to or not.
Update: Lately, I've noticed that a lot of people apparently don't know about rip currents. We live on Lake Erie, and almost every time there are rip current warnings from the NOAA- which I see online but have heard on tv- someone drowns, and it's usually a little kid. Last week it was a 13-year-old girl; her 2 friends also got sucked out/under but survived, from what I can tell by the online news. It makes me wonder whether people just don't realize the lake is not safe- not ever, but especially when there are rip currents- or they just don't care about their kids.
Since it was a postcard, I also saw that it was for a little girl whose birthday is coming up, and the postcard was for her to receive a free meal at a national restaurant chain. I wanted to make sure that she got this little card and gift, but was reluctant to drive over and try to find her house, which is what I often do for the guy with the same house number on a similarly named but different street that is not too far away, whose mail I usually get. (Besides, he brings my mail when it comes to his house; I was especially grateful for this one time when it was a letter from my son who was then in Marine boot camp, and I wasn't hearing from him anywhere near often enough.) So I decided to try to catch the mailman (read postal carrier, if this bothers you) when he came by today and ask him to deliver it to the proper address. (We got tired of watching for him, so I stuck it on my mail slot cover with a clothespin, which also works.)
My 9-year-old, meanwhile, learned through this experience that
1. It's ok to look at a postcard in such a situation, but I wouldn't open a letter for someone else that came here by accident because that would be illegal
2. We are required by law to give mail that isn't ours to the proper person, or back to the mailman or post office
He didn't know that, and it got me to wondering, how many people do? Where are we supposed to learn such things? I don't think the Postal Service is up to the task, although they have sent out info about the collections of donations for hunger centers that they do every year, the ways you can get postal supplies, and once, a handy card that told the abbreviations for all the states. But I don't think I've ever seen or heard of them telling us what to do if you get someone else's mail. Or that it's also illegal to take mail or packages left for other people at their houses (like somebody must've done with several things that never arrived here in the past. So I put up a sign that tells delivery people not to leave things out front, and it mostly seems to be working.)
I suspect this problem will be moot in the not-too-distant future, when the Postal Service goes out of business. (It can't last much longer, with hardly anybody sending Christmas cards anymore, or writing letters, and with the price of stamps getting totally freaking ridiculous.) But until then, please make sure the people you know are aware that they must not just throw away mail that doesn't belong to them. (Although I was really tempted to, that time it was a Playboy magazine...)
Then I started thinking about other signs that people don't know things that they should. Like, often when I shop for food, I'll see an item sitting on a shelf that someone decided they didn't want and apparently just stuck in the nearest convenient place. Unfortunately, these items are often things that must be kept refrigerated or frozen to prevent spoilage, so when I give them to a person who works at the store, I point out that they were left sitting on a shelf and not refrigerated. I hope and pray these people realize that, if they do not dispose of such items properly (don't just put them back in the refrigerated or freezer section), they could cause someone who ends up consuming them to become very sick or even to die from food poisoning.
Driving provides many proofs that a lot of people have no idea what they're doing. Worst is when an emergency vehicle is trying to get through, and they just keep going their merry way, oblivious to the law that requires them to get the hell out of the way, if possible. I mentioned turn signals in a previous blog; there are lots of others, but I'm sure you get the drift.
The same thing is going on in my Church: I think they need to do a refresher course on the main points at least once a year- from the pulpit- since most people aren't going to try to correct their ignorance on their own. Most of them don't even know what they don't know, or care, from what I can tell.
I got in a minor fender-bender on the way to the cemetery in a funeral procession in January, because a woman was trying to break through from a side street and created a distraction that almost caused a multi-car pile up (thank God we were going about 25 mph, but the roads were wet and nearly icy). I glanced at her and the escort who was blocking and confronting her as I drove by, then looked forward to see that the car in front of me had come to a dead stop. I hit the brakes and narrowly avoided rear-ending him, but the guy behind me couldn't stop in time. Luckily, everyone was ok and we were able to continue to the graveside service. Funeral processions have the right of way, ok?
If you find money or a wallet lying on the ground or wherever, it is not your lucky day. If you have an ounce of moral fiber, you will try to find the owner. For money, you can leave your name and number at the office of the nearest business and ask them to call if no one claims it, which is a waste, but hey, ya never know. I started realizing a lot of people here are selfish morons the day I dropped $50 going into the grocery. If I had realized it before I went to pay, I might've tried to find the culprit by looking for someone who looked unusually happy. I tried to console myself with the thought that maybe they needed the money more than my hungry and now-broke family did.
And when you're out in public, you have to share with and be nice to the other people you meet. It's not required by law, but it is highly recommended. God sees and cares how you treat other people, and you never know how someone will react if you treat them badly, whether you intended to or not.
Update: Lately, I've noticed that a lot of people apparently don't know about rip currents. We live on Lake Erie, and almost every time there are rip current warnings from the NOAA- which I see online but have heard on tv- someone drowns, and it's usually a little kid. Last week it was a 13-year-old girl; her 2 friends also got sucked out/under but survived, from what I can tell by the online news. It makes me wonder whether people just don't realize the lake is not safe- not ever, but especially when there are rip currents- or they just don't care about their kids.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)