Post-Obamacare Motivation

This week the US Supreme Court listened to oral arguments surrounding "Obamacare." Let's assume for argument's sake that it completely strikes it down as being unconstitutional.

What other policy points does the GOP have?

"Obamacare"'s defeat has been a huge fundraising source & rallying point for them. Its dominated the public discussion so much (especially during the primaries) that it makes me wonder if they have any other policy points they want changed.

What are they gonna do talk about contraception for the next seven months?

**********
In other news...
**********

This here is Stashi, doing her quirky thing.



Feel free to comment away on this if you so choose.

Nursing Shortage

As regular readers will know, I often lampoon how idiotic the NYS legislature can be. So the following should come as no surprise.

According to the NYS Nursing Association, the state already has a nursing shortage & is expected to continue for years to come.

What is our legislature's response?

They're proposing to make the entry barrier higher for new RN's. Specifically it proposes that they be required to be a 4-year degree within 10 years, otherwise they'll no longer be able to work within NY state.

http://news.yahoo.com/ny-bill-require-bachelors-degrees-rns-073218574.html

I'm all in favor of educating a work force when its necessary & MAKES SENSE. But to me, this is reads as another way for the state to generate the much needed higher education revenue. If we want them educated, that's fine. But there's got to be a smarter way to go about doing this than removing them from a critical job field for months & often years at a time.


**********

In other news...

**********

Below is of Emily taken awhile ago. I've always like the depth of field play in that shot.

Last I heard she was putting together a homespun screen-printed clothing line, the Hidden Fox, or something like that.



Feel free to comment on any part of this if you so desire.

Rush Backtracks

I've got an update from last week's blog Rush as an Illegal Immigrant. Now that Health Care Reform actually passed a few days ago, Rush had to quickly "clarified" his vow:

http://www.rbr.com/radio/22636.html

When some interpreted that to mean he would move there permanently, he clarified that his trips there would only be temporary, when seeking medical attention.

I never expected him to keep his word in leaving the country but we had, oh, so high hopes! Oh well.

***
In other news...
***

This here is Devlin taken way back when. Life has gotten in the way & we've creatively parted ways since this shot was taken.



Feel free to opine if you so choose.

Rush Limbaugh as an Illegal Immigrant

On his radio program, Rush Limbaugh decries any sort of American Health Care package as being (cue the creepy Scooby Doo organ music) as "socialized medicine". This of course is an abomination. Strange how he was perfectly fine (cues creepy Scooby Doo organ music) getting socialized medicine when complained of chest pains during his Hawaiian in Dec 2009. Its also strange how Congress is looking at very same Hawaiian health care system as a model for nationwide implementation. Then again, Rush has never been a believer in consistency or cared much about hypocrisy.

So it should come as no surprise Mr Limbaugh has threatened to go to Costa Rica for all his medical treatment if Obama's Health Care package is passed.

Personally, I say good riddance but that's not why I'm writing.

Another pet issue Rush rails against are how "illegal immigrants leach our system from hard working, tax-paying citizens."

Soooooooooooo if Health Care passes Congress, Rush becomes an "illegal immigrant leaching money & services from (another country's) hard working, tax-paying citizens."

I doubt his listeners will ever be able appreciate the irony.

***
In other news...
***

This here is Sapphire, the third sister of the Connor family that's been in front of my camera (fourth if you count R's* test shots but she went on to make the silly claim she's "not pretty enough" which is complete BS). I've gotten A LOT of mileage from all of them & they from me. Working w/ certain people just "feels right," I've come to see them as extensions of my own family.

Anyway, the luck of the draw always seems to have my Connor Girl shoots in a basement type setting. Shiloh over the Crane, Sarah in one of the Earth Science Building up in Potsdam during the middle of the day, and Sapphire down here in Queensbury. Certainly makes for some interesting stuff.

Below is something Sapphire & I produced on a recent December day.



Feel free to opine if you so choose.

* denotes the names have been changed to protect the innocent.

the Day the Administration Died

Am I the only one who finds it ironic that the very 2004 Massachusetts law passed to prevent Republican governor Mitt Romney from appointing a Republican to the US Senate was the very law that got a Republican candidate ELECTED to that very same governing body?

I am also amused how people are crowing that the Obama Administration is dead, this w/ just about 75% of his first term left. People seemed to say the exact same things about "Slick" Bill Clinton after the Great Washington Massacre of 1994. "His" loss seemed to strengthen him, not to mention his revised tactic of "triangulation" (for better or worse) helped win him a 2nd term. Will this have the same effect on Obama? Dang if I know.

God forbid, ya know, that the voters just didn't like one candidate & voted for the other. God forbid, ya know, the electorate expressing its frustration w/ the status quo the only way they know how...at the ballot box. God forbid, ya know, that people being fed up w/ virtually 1-party rule in the state of Massachuesetts. Can't be any of that. Those reasons just aren't sexy enough.

*rolls eyes*

What's this means for Health Care? Danged if I know. All sides agree that there's a problem & something needs to be done to alter the status quo. One side has come up w/ a host of ideas (some would say to many). While the other side has been strangely silent. There's been much of what they don't want (public option, less coverage - higher premiums, higher taxes) but have been pretty thin on what they DO want.

All I know is everyone complains about crooked doctors & lawyers, until the very moment they need it. Unfortuantely to many American do not have or cannot get access to the later (let alone being able to afford one). I can guarantee you though, if this falls apart, no one will even attempt to touch this issue for the next 20 years.

What a strange world we live in.

*sigh*

In other news...

This is Ashley participating in my ongoing Breast Cancer Awareness series. Her mom has it or had it or beat it or something like that (haven't heard from them in awhile, not that I'd expect to).

It was tough trying to showcase the tattoo because of where it was inked but I think this one works.



Feel free to opine, comment, whatever if you so choose. Just leave a name if you do, so I know who I'm talking to.

Congressman Coward Votes No on HR 3962

I've been following the debate over Universal Health Care trying to make sense of all the different options & form a half-way educated opinion, as I've written w/ my Sept 14, 2009 entry.

The Representative for NY's 20th district, Scott Murphy, voted "no" on HR 3962. In his press statement, he writes:

(1) "I firmly believe that health care reform is critical to strengthening our nation. However, in order to achieve this goal, we must address the fundamentally flawed system that has led to skyrocketing costs, bankrupt families and extremely profitable insurance companies. For these reasons, I voted no on H.R. 3962 tonight.”

(2)“This bill makes a number of important reforms, which I wholeheartedly support including the elimination of the lifetime caps on insurance benefits and the pre-existing condition exclusion, invests in prevention and primary care, creates a health insurance exchange to force insurance companies to compete and offers a public option for people who want to get away from for-profit insurance companies."

Ok, he's trying to be for the little guy. I get that. Yet he turns around & says this:

(3) "I have consistently said that any bill that Congress passes must curb costs and keep health care affordable in the long term. During these difficult economic times, an unacceptably high price tag will stress our already overstretched federal budget and place even more burdens on our hard working individuals, families and small businesses. We need to fix the system now, and not put off the hard choices for another generation. Furthermore, I am deeply frustrated by the last minute addition of over $50 billion in taxes on the two largest private employers in the 20th District – medical device manufacturers and paper mills."

Emphasis mine.

(4) “As a small businessman, I am also concerned that H.R. 3962 falls short of making health insurance affordable for the small businesses of the 20th District; it fails to reform the fundamentally flawed incentives in the system, which continue to drive costs upward; and it fails to restrain the monopolistic practices of private insurers, which allow them to continue to increase premiums already weighing on families and small businesses."

When comparing paragraphs 1 & 3 this begs the question, who is Congressman Murphy really for? Is he for the people who put him in power by a mere 1465 (out of over 161,000 cast) or is he simply out to protect his benefactors that give him his $$ w/ state sanctioned bribes?

It'd be one thing if he voted against it because the current plan fines people for not having health insurance or that it basically neuters the public option (all legitimate grievances). However in paragraph 3, he's against the provisions that raise taxes on the industries in his district. Let's back up for a minute. During his special election, he was perfectly fine using tax payer dollars for handouts to private industries (even after they demonstrated in screwing up their own finances) but when it rolls around for them to put back into the system, its an outrage. I guess it shows where his priorities are.

If you also take a look at paragraphs 2, he lists all the ways it attempts to fix the very problems he's concerned w/ yet flips flops on why the current bill isn't good (paragraph 4). This would've been less confusing had they appeared in two separate statements (as opposed to just the one). Or maybe they're just playing the old "if you can't dazzle them w/ brilliance, bewilder them w/ BS."

His "no" vote begs the question, what has he actually done to help align the bill w/ his beliefs? Did he propose any amendments to address his concerns? Has he given a floor speech? If not, then what exactly has he been doing since he took the oath of office? Its not like Congress has had much else on its agenda.

Murphy's Health Care position reinforces the notion of being a typical politician w/ no firm beliefs. He makes his decision by licking his finger & putting it in the air to see which way the wind is blowing. Murphy votes against the Stupack Amendment (as reported by PlanetAlbany), a provision disallowing federal funds to pay for abortions in the reform package. He wants it both ways. He pays lip-service to appease the pro-abortion segment yet votes against measures that directly effects his own campaign contributors.

His "I need to study the issue" mantra (as he said countless times when asked about the Federal Bailouts to both the auto, bank, & insurance industries) may have served him well during his special election this past spring, yet conveniently is in favor of it when its outcome is already assured. The "I need to study the issue" doesn't carry the same weight or slack when you've been studying it for the last 6 months. This isn't like the national budget where they cram God only knows how many pieces of legislation in less than a 48-hour period (if that).

I used to be one to scoff whenever pundits said, "So & so's vote is going to come back & haunt him come reelection." The American voter has an incredibly short memory. But w/ instances like this, I understand where they're coming from. To paraphrase Musing of a Fairly Young Contrarian, "If a candidate cannot even be bothered to hold a core set of beliefs, why should I obligated to vote for him?"


Mr Murphy take a lesson from your fellow Congressman like Rep. Thomas Perriello (D-Va.), Rep. Mary Jo Kilroy (D-Ohio), Rep. Steve Driehous (D-Ohio) and Rep. Zack Space (D-Ohio), all vulnerable freshman. "Grow a pair & actually stand for something."

---

This is another shot of Government Center when I was visiting Boston this past summer. (I'm using the clickable thumbnail version because its a little to wide)



Feel free to opine, criticize, whatever so long as said views are expressed in a civilized manner.

Political Irony & Jeanette

As I look at the self-proclaimed Tea-Baggers of the right protesting the policies of the current Obama administration, I really have to scratch my head.

They're fearful of losing their individual freedoms. Ok, I get that. But like where were they when AT&T, Verizon, & other major phone carriers in collusion w/ the Federal Government were listening in on your phone conversations w/o a court order? Or when torture, extraordinary rendition, & Gitmo were going on?

They're fearful of losing their tax dollars. Ok, I get that. But where was the outrage when federal government's spending more than doubled from what the Clinton Administration spent?

They're simply exercising their first amendment rights. Ok, I get that. But where was the empathy when Cindy Sheehan was exercising her own right to free speech?

They're worried about government incompetance about what might happen. Ok, I get that. But where was their outrage at ALL levels of government when Katrina flooded New Orleans?

They're worried about government giving away free hand-outs w/ nothing in return. But where was their outrage when the Congress from the President's own party awards defense contracts over the Sec of Defenses own recemmendations to axe systems like the Crusader artillery? Or the BS how Uncle Sam is now being a majority stakeholder in GM? Or what about the TARP bailouts pushed through in the closing days of W's administration & blessed off w/ little debate by a Democratic Congress?

They're worried about government intruding into people's personal lives, making decisions for them like "killing dear ol' Granny". But isn't that exactly what they were doing since 2002 when they ramrodded all these initiatives onto state ballots that define marriage being between a man & a woman? Isn't that also what a Republican Congress did in the Terri Schiavo case, interfering what should have been a very private family decision even after the courts ruled upon it?

Make no mistake, I completely get what's going on. The outrage is only just when its your side is the one doing it (whatever "it" is defined as). But like when the other guy is in power, you assert your rights because they're being trampled on. Don't believe me? The left is just as guilty. If it was about the war as they claimed for the last 6 years, then why did these Anti-War supporters stop protesting the Iraq War when all of a sudden their guy gets inaugurated? Or how Sen Chris Dodd (D-CT) created massive loopholes in the aforementioned TARP legislation for the applicable companies to take advantage of?

The Right say the current system needs change but the President's are to atrocious to even consider. What do they propose? I for one cannot think of a single thing because, for the life of me, I cannot remember them publicisizing a single proposal. Don't get me wrong, I know EXACTLY what they're doing. They're using the old defense attorney strategy in poking so many holes in the prosecution's case to win via "reasonable doubt." If that's the case, they're not really in favor of change at all like they claim but like the status quo. Ironic to say the least.

& people wonder why so many Americans are turned off by what passes for political discourse. Its so predictablely phoney.

Personally, I don't give to squats about one political ideology or another. My vote will go to whoever sorta are along my own beliefs system but more, for who can get the job done & bring results. If that means voting for the "other guy" or voting for a third party then so be it!

& people sometimes wonder why I'm so ornery. :-)

[/rant]

----------------------

Outdoor location shoots are always interesting in the sense that I'm never really sure if Mother Nature is going to cooperate or not. Unless its like winter & there's some sort of snow storm on the horizon, the weather report is borderline useless, even when its 3-6 hours before start time. It just is what it is.

My shoot w/ Jeanette last Autumn was one of those days. It was partly cloudy which means the sun was jetting in & out as the clouds moved. Extremely annoying particularly when shooting in the unforgiving digital medium...but certainly not impossible.

I'm choosing the shot below for a number of reasons. I really felt everything came togther at just the right moment. Her expression, the location, the color palette, the brief gust of wind to blow her hair in front of her face.



Feel free to opine about any part of this entry if you wish to do so. Just keep it civil.

Health Care

I have some problems w/ the Universal Health Care proposal. Actually, its not w/ the actual proposals themselves, its w/ the rhetoric.

As a person who (I'd like to think) is somewhat educated, I've been trying to sift through all the plans to figure out what's what. Public option, no public option, a co-opt option, the Massachuesetts model, it can be quite dizzing and I'm actually TRYING to understand what's what. I can only imagine who confusing it is for someone who doesn't take the time to understand or leaves it for others to intrepret.

Until about a couple weeks ago, I hadn't put two & two together what the "public option" is referring to.

This begs the question in my mind. Why the hell doesn't the administration simply change the rhetoric...or at least the vocabulary. Let's assume that half of those still don't get what the public option is, because it is that complicated for them & are simply not making the Obama administration's intended connections.

Why not simply taut universal health care coverage as "expanding Medicare/Medicaid"? Everyone already knows what Medicaid/Medicare is. Instead of starting someone's knowledge base from scratch, it draws upon a known quantity. Its less time you have to spend building that foundation, just so to where you can even start explaining the nuisances.

Heck if it were phrased in that way, any Congressman/Senator would be begging to have their opposition hammer away at them whenever they were up for reelection. Just imagine the attack ads. Flashing pictures of overcrowded ER's. Picture of some mother (alla Dorthea Lange's) craddling her bundled up child. A baby coughing or crying in the background. Or another picture of ER workers at work attending to an accident victim. Then flash the words, "Senator So & So is in favor of the ordinary citizen getting sick." Maybe even have some C-Span snippet of him proudly proclaiming, "I'm against this bill." & then have some voiceover of "& he's against ordinary Americans being healthy while the fat cats line their pockets." Yes, its horriblely skewed but its not like attack ads are beacons of accuracy no matter what side its from.

This is different than auto insurance coverage (as a friend & I discussed today). Keep in mind, these are my analysis BUT driving a car is a priviledge. If I chose to drive my car, the states mandate by law that I have to have some form of auto insurance. If I disagree w/ paying auto insurance premiums, I forfeit that driving priviledge. However I can also CHOOSE to ride my bicycle or walk or ride public transportation or hitch a ride w/ a friend or pay for a cab.

Unlike my friend who viewed staying in good health a priviledge (still thinking along the auto insurance before I offered my counter-observations, I eventually pointed out his line of reasoning was contrary to the goverment's own actions, specifically citing the "Children's Health Insurance Program." In that case, they believe children should have a right to be in good health & have access to getting better if need be.

I still have a lot of questions about Universal Health Care. How're we going to pay for it, is one? How're we to speed up the beaurcracy because from personal experience, anything dealing w/ the government is mind-numbingly slow? How much of this is going to be horse-traded away & leaving us w/ what? I wonder how the President's pledge that any plan won't cover noncitizens squares w/ a doctor's ethical oath to "do no harm" as well as their standard operating procedure to treat the most critical paitent first regardless of what their background is. I also wonder how increased coverage is going to be balanced w/ the current shortage in health care professionals.

& for the record, it was extremely refreshing to talk to someone in a civil manner & understand their point of view even if I may or may not agree w/ them. In so many cases, the discourse is simply disappointing in that its like I can see the arguements coming a mile away & a person makes no attempt see another's point of view (even if they disagree w/ them). Hysteria may make for fabulous entertainment but as how Barney Frank expressed it, having a discussion w/ those kinds of people is like talking to ones dining room table.

---



The above is from my stay in Boston this summer. It was taken on one of the rare nice afternoons where it wasn't overcast nor rainy.

Feel free & comment away on any part of this entry. I'm an admitted feedback comment whore in that respect. LOL