Originally Posted by The Rani

Another choice is telling both Teams to get lost and figure out what we can do for ourselves. I presented some ideas for those who might be interested in that option.

There's no doubt that health care costs would come down if people did healthy things to care of themselves. There is an epidemic of not doing that in the USA, partly because of all the past conditioning like Grey mentioned.

The problem for a libertarian is that libertarian thinking is only thinking about yourself, e.g. "for those interested.." As if everything is about you, your life, and your own choices, and as if we were just individuals.

But a conscious citizen of the USA is also interested in how different options affect everyone and the country at large, not just yourself; knowing that we are not isolated individuals, but interdependent parts of a community, a nation and a world. Medicare for all is the best option in that perspective, along with the preventive and holistic approaches. One team definitely has better answers than the other, in every respect.

I'm more than ever convinced that this notion that we can forget both teams and go some third way, is mostly merely escaping from the choice that confronts this nation at this time-- even if you acknowledge the inadequacy of the better Team. There is absolutely no doubt about the total bankruptcy of the worst Team.

Originally Posted by The Grey Badger

...You don't have to be an Xer to take a skeptical view of authoritative pronouncements on what's good or bad for you. You just have to have endured 7 decades of them, often at the top of their lungs....

That EXACT topic came-up at dinner with my Mom('42) this Evening. I concur.

Originally Posted by The Rani

...Another choice is telling both Teams to get lost and figure out what we can do for ourselves....

I might add(if I may), "as Individuals, possibly working-together", but that's just a personal "nit".

And then there's always my choice: "Bill the Cat for President"



Prince

Originally Posted by The Rani

Hmm .... not to pick on you or anything, but there's a lot of misinformation out there about what constitutes "healthful" foods:


http://www.cancerproject.org/media/n...ease_grill.php

But I agree with you about how our food is produced.
And I should have included dairy as a food to avoid.

Sadly, I have a pretty strong intolerance to soy.

Originally Posted by Odin

*RANT*
There is no "Autism Epidemic", more are just getting diagnosed and correctly diagnosed. In the past many autistics were misdiagnosed with mental retardation, "childhood schizophrenia", or a personality disorder.

I was just reading about the singer/actress Dorothy Dandridge and it's pretty clear her only child was autistic. (Her daughter was born in the 30s-40s)

Originally Posted by princeofcats67

That EXACT topic came-up at dinner with my Mom('42) this Evening. I concur.



I might add(if I may), "as Individuals, possibly working-together", but that's just a personal "nit".

And then there's always my choice: "Bill the Cat for President"



Prince

I'm not even sure I would vote for Bill for president of the cat world. But you can be the prince.

Originally Posted by General Mung Beans

http://thefrontrowseat.com/jon-hunts...andard-bearer/

Another piece on why Huntsman represents the future of the Republican party. I think in many ways he is similar to Wendell Willkie who would take the Republican Party from an isolationist to an internationalist direction.

I think the future of the Republican Party is to move ever further to the right until they slip off the edge into oblivion. The primary campaign so far confirms this prediction.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Anything proposed by the Republican Party of today is not a solution, but more of the problem.

The proof of that is merely to look at what they propose and what they stand for.

We will need to find solutions... the first requirement for any solution is to vote out the Republicans, who stand in the way of any and all solutions.

No more realistic than my tax reform dream.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

I think the future of the Republican Party is to move ever further to the right until they slip off the edge into oblivion. The primary campaign so far confirms this prediction.

How is this true. the most moderate canidate seems to be winning just not with mass appeal. The Republican party seems to be divided between bases. Tea Party, social conservatives, neocons, and some libertarians here and there. Some of these overlap, but as was pointed out to me by Child of Socrates there probably won't be a republican that appeals to a great enough proportion of the base to get elected.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

I'm not even sure I would vote for Bill for president of the cat world. But you can be the prince.

Oh, but I am, Eric. I am!

Prince

Originally Posted by pizal81

How is this true. the most moderate canidate seems to be winning just not with mass appeal. The Republican party seems to be divided between bases. Tea Party, social conservatives, neocons, and some libertarians here and there. Some of these overlap, but as was pointed out to me by Child of Socrates there probably won't be a republican that appeals to a great enough proportion of the base to get elected.

There are no left or moderate wings in the Republican Party, only conservative wings. That's why in the long run it can't fly.

Originally Posted by radind

No more realistic than my tax reform dream.

That doesn't make it any less true. The Republicans were voted in in 2010; at least in the House they can be voted out in 2012. If Americans have ANY sense left at all, they will vote them out. In the longer term, they all need to be voted out, and the Party needs to die off. It is totally bankrupt. Not just a little bit; totally.

Originally Posted by princeofcats67

Oh, but I am, Eric. I am!

Prince

And proud of it, too!

In the shorter term (before the Republican Party's eventual demise), some of its folks are talking about 41-year old Paul Ryan as a potential dark horse candidate. I don't know if a House member can get elected; it's a very rare thing. But from my astrological crystal ball, he's one of the best-likely to get elected candidates the GOPPERS have. He has more positive planetary aspects as anyone I've looked at so far this season, though he does have some negatives too. His score is 19-10, which is more than twice Perry's positive rating and double his negative. So percentagewise his score is still not as good as Obama or even Romney, Paul or Gingrich, but the higher # of positives could be more important. He has a lot of aspects important to winning presidential elections. He does have a certain charisma and mis-directed intelligence. If there's "another Reagan" out there, it might be Ryan. They are both Aquarians too. As is Sarah Palin, though.

Note I am sticking to my prediction that Santorum will crash and burn after March, just as I predicted that he would rise and stay in the game back before his Iowa victory. But poor Rick just doesn't have what it takes, once Jupiter passes his Sun in Taurus. I think the GOPPERS will settle for Romney, rather than for a dark horse like Ryan or Jeb Bush, who may well be future year factors.

People also look at Christie, but I think he has similar problems to Howard Dean and will probably be just too unsteady and outspoken to win. His rating is actually slightly negative, 11-12. He is sometimes something of a bull in a China shop.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

There are no left or moderate wings in the Republican Party, only conservative wings. That's why in the long run it can't fly.

I don't believe that's completely true--though I will say that the Neo-Cons did their best to push Rockefellers out of the party in the 90s.

~Chas'88

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

There are no left or moderate wings in the Republican Party, only conservative wings. That's why in the long run it can't fly.

Oh please, "if it's conservative it must fail" is pretty weak. "The left has the only answer."

Originally Posted by pizal81

Oh please, "if it's conservative it must fail" is pretty weak. "The left has the only answer."

I agree with Eric here. Conservative Republicanism is totally out of touch with reality and thus can do no one any good. And it copletely dominates the party nominating process as we can see.

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

I agree with Eric here. Conservative Republicanism is totally out of touch with reality and thus can do no one any good. And it copletely dominates the party nominating process as we can see.

Well, like you said this next election will be a Republican against another Republican.

Originally Posted by General Mung Beans

http://thefrontrowseat.com/jon-hunts...andard-bearer/

Another piece on why Huntsman represents the future of the Republican party. I think in many ways he is similar to Wendell Willkie who would take the Republican Party from an isolationist to an internationalist direction.

Of course his tax plan is the most regressive of the lot. Imagine, the taxes paid by the truly wealthy drop to almost zero, but the middle class? Not so lucky duckies. The poor merely remain poor.

Originally Posted by The Rani

Actually, my original comment included this line:

But that brings up a good point.
Are people more worried about their health, or who is going to pay for their medical treatment?
For example, do we worry about getting diabetes because it makes us feel terrible, or because we can't afford the meds?
Maybe the answer has something to do with the difference between those who want to "get more exercise" and those who prefer to "have another drink."

*Ahem* We were talking about accidents. None of this applies. It definitely applies to general health, but no solution is universal.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

The problem for a libertarian is that libertarian thinking is only thinking about yourself, e.g. "for those interested.." As if everything is about you, your life, and your own choices, and as if we were just individuals.

But a conscious citizen of the USA is also interested in how different options affect everyone and the country at large, not just yourself; knowing that we are not isolated individuals, but interdependent parts of a community, a nation and a world.

This is exactly my beef with libertarian and any ideology that refers to the "free market" as the Solution to Everything.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

There are no left or moderate wings in the Republican Party, only conservative wings. That's why in the long run it can't fly.

It's not just conservatism, it's "Severe Conservatism."

Krugman hits it out of the park -

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/13/op...exprod=myyahoo

Severe Conservative Syndrome

Mitt Romney has a gift for words — self-destructive words. On Friday he did it again, telling the Conservative Political Action Conference that he was a “severely conservative governor.”

As Molly Ball of The Atlantic pointed out, Mr. Romney “described conservatism as if it were a disease.” Indeed. Mark Liberman, a linguistics professor at the University of Pennsylvania, provided a list of words that most commonly follow the adverb “severely”; the top five, in frequency of use, are disabled, depressed, ill, limited and injured.

That’s clearly not what Mr. Romney meant to convey. Yet if you look at the race for the G.O.P. presidential nomination, you have to wonder whether it was a Freudian slip. For something has clearly gone very wrong with modern American conservatism.

Krugman then goes through the lunacy of each GOP candidate and then asks "why?"

How did American conservatism end up so detached from, indeed at odds with, facts and rationality? For it was not always thus. After all, that health reform Mr. Romney wants us to forget followed a blueprint originally laid out at the Heritage Foundation!

and his answer and prognosis -

My short answer is that the long-running con game of economic conservatives and the wealthy supporters they serve finally went bad. For decades the G.O.P. has won elections by appealing to social and racial divisions, only to turn after each victory to deregulation and tax cuts for the wealthy — a process that reached its epitome when George W. Bush won re-election by posing as America’s defender against gay married terrorists, then announced that he had a mandate to privatize Social Security.

Over time, however, this strategy created a base that really believed in all the hokum — and now the party elite has lost control.

The point is that today’s dismal G.O.P. field — is there anyone who doesn’t consider it dismal? — is no accident. Economic conservatives played a cynical game, and now they’re facing the blowback, a party that suffers from “severe” conservatism in the worst way. And the malady may take many years to cure.

- hard to argue against that.

Originally Posted by The Rani

Are people more worried about their health, or who is going to pay for their medical treatment?

For example, do we worry about getting diabetes because it makes us feel terrible, or because we can't afford the meds?

I'll answer for me. I'm not worried about diabetes -- I've never been obese and my tests have been normal.

However, I am concerned about cancer; it runs in my family. I certainly hope that my lifestyle (or getting genes from my maternal side rather than my paternal side) means I can dodge that bullet -- unlike my brother and uncles who died of lung cancer and my sister who is fighting it, I never smoked and unlike my father, who died of colon cancer, I don't eat a lot of meat and eat lots of veggies and fiber and also have the frequent colonoscopies.

However, if I do get cancer, particularly at a relatively young age, I certainly will want to be able to pay for treatment!

As for diabetes, as Lady Gaga would say, some are born that way. I'm certainly glad that my Type 1 diabetes colleague at work has insurance for his meds.

The contraceptive issue that was going to bring down a presidency - basically gone; not even in the A-or B- sections.

CNN, being a little prone to more in-depth and continuing coverage long after the majority has grown bored, did have this

Can U.S. bishops regain their clout?

CA overturning Prop 8 - one would have thought we'd be back to the TWO GUYS ON WEDDING CAKE! END OF WORLD COMING!!! WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE!!!

- But really not much beyond a day or so of celebration on the Rachel Maddow Show.

Unemployment down, but GOP wonking feverishly to show its not real; most people tuned out. Now GOP working feverously to cut federal spending so economy will flatten or decline before summer. However, their efforts to stifle employment seems to have run into some local realities of bringing home the bacon in an election year. Such as on the Transportation Bill -

House Republicans have proposed spending about $260 billion over nearly five years, but the bill is drawing fire from so many quarters that the ability of Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, to muscle the measure through to passage is in doubt. ...The bill's treatment of mass transit programs has riled urban lawmakers, including New York and Chicago metro-area Republicans who may wind up voting against the bill. It eliminates the guarantee of a portion of federal gasoline and diesel tax revenues for transit, leaving programs vulnerable to future budget cuts.

..."If you are a Republican from a city that has mass transit, how can you vote for this and go home?" said Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., who is sponsoring an amendment to restore a portion of fuel tax revenues for transit. Seven Republicans have co-sponsored the amendment.

...The bill also eliminates locally popular federal programs that help underwrite bike paths, bike lanes and pedestrian safety projects, including the Safe Routes to School program, in order to concentrate funding on highways.

It looks like Obama is going to get considerable deficit spending for the summer. It may impact federal workers, but that is in regard to their future pensions - no impact for the summer.

So what is the GOP left with? The usual -

Obama Budget Proposal Takes Heat From GOP Critics

...Republicans vehemently disagree, attacking his 2013 budget as a replay of the failed economic policies they say have resulted in an economy growing at subpar rates and government debt soaring to record highs.

"Subpar rates"??? Well, if Obama gets his deficit spending, that's going to seen as GOP sour grapes by the summer.

So, what the GOP has left is "government debt soaring" - sort of ignoring that the 2013 deficit would be down about 25%.
But, more importantly, we have the Dems' ace-in-the-hole, "severely conservative," Paul Ryan, reminding everyone -

Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., chairman of the House Budget Committee, said Monday that he expected the Republican-controlled House would in coming weeks pass an alternative to the Obama budget that would gain control of the deficit, not by raising taxes but by curtailing Medicare and Medicaid.

"President Obama's irresponsible budget is a recipe for a debt crisis and the decline of America," Ryan said.

Obama's cuts in Medicare and Medicaid avoid cuts in benefits and instead make modest trims in payments to health care providers. In contrast, the Republican House last year approved Ryan's plan, which would essentially transform Medicare into a voucher system in which future seniors would get a fixed amount to buy medical insurance.

Yep, we're gonna tame that nasty federal deficit by denying grandma her hip replacement; hey, if she falls, the private sector provides her with 1st Alert at just $125 upfront and less than an dollar a day to take her to the emergency room where they'll give her some aspirin and send her on her cheery way!

yea, this video is a nasty one -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGnE8...yer_detailpage

- but given the mudslinging that will be going on with a billion dollar election, it will be seem tame. However, don't kid yourself, in a Presidential election, the message will still be just as clear ... and even more devastating.

Not to get too carried away, but is anybody getting a whiff of a blow-out in November?

59% percent of Catholics disapprove of the Obama's job performance. In 2008 he won 54% of the Catholic vote. He now has 40% approval among Catholic voters. Anyone who thinks Obama's latest attempt to breach the Constitution hasnt damaged him politically is braindead. This will have impact in Catholic heavy states like Penn, Wisc, Ohio, Florida, Nevada etc.....

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...ob_performance

Originally Posted by Weave

59% percent of Catholics disapprove of the Obama's job performance. In 2008 he won 54% of the Catholic vote. He now has 40% approval among Catholic voters. Anyone who thinks Obama's latest attempt to breach the Constitution hasnt damaged him politically is braindead. This will have impact in Catholic heavy states like Penn, Wisc, Ohio, Florida, Nevada etc.....

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...ob_performance

Most Catholics will forget this culture war when it comes time to decide between more trickle-down economics and sensible economic policies that help the recovery.

This is not a freedom of religion issue. It is an issue of allowing church fathers from a foreign country to impose church doctrine and dictate behavior to Americans, forcing employees who don't belong to the church to buy expensive contraceptives on their own.