Big Tobacco and Obamacare
Posted by unclesmrgol at 09 March, 2014 13:08:13
Mr. Hiltzik artfully managed the red herring -- seguing from Big Tobacco to Republican opposition to Obamacare in one sweeping generalization. Comparing the issues, since Mr. Hiltzik is firmly on the side of health benefits from Obamacare, he equally would have been firmly on the side of Big Tobacco as it argued that what it had was healthy and good, and all the naysayers were just that.
Try to argue your way out of that one, Mr. Hiltzik -- bet you can't.
UPDATE March 9, 2014 6:39PM
@unclesmrgol Unc sorry but you lost it with tobacco. Unlikely he would have been on the side of Big tobacco, there was no science to support the tobacco position what there was was advertising. The strongest supporters of tobacco, why it was the GOP. They fought even putting warning labels on tobacco.
As for the ACA, Hmm the health benefits are already being seen. Seniors being able to afford medication with the donut hole closing. People getting health care they could not get before. Already seeing the difference between states where they have expanded medicaid, people are healthier and living longer. Was it a great plan? no, a much better plan would have been a universal plan but when the congress went with a GOP plan they were looking for what they could get through congress. It is better than what we had before but not as good as we could have had. Those nasty things facts.
Another response (by me)
@AngelaBirch Just as there was no science to support all of the supposed benefits which would accrue from Obamacare.
Now we have cancer patients who can't see their doctors, half as many people in California signed up for healthcare than there were policies ordered cancelled by CoveredCA, people finding that their policies will cost a lot more than the satisfactory ones they had before, deductibles twice the size of the ones they once had, etc. etc. etc.
You have a bridge to sell? Go sell it elsewhere.
@AngelaBirch The original bill (Public Health Cigarette Smoking Act of 1969) which ordered both warnings on cigarette packages and the cessation of advertising on radio and TV was signed into law by Richard M. Nixon on April 1, 1970. The law was passed with 29 Republicans voting yes, and 2 Republicans voting no, and 41 Democrats voting yes, and 5 Democrats voting no.
Now, if you want to understand why there were so many Republicans against the 2009 act (109 against, 70 for), you merely have to look at the text of the act, whose preamble begins "To protect the public health by providing the Food and Drug Administration with certain authority to regulate tobacco products, to amend title 5, United States Code, to make certain modifications in the Thrift Savings Plan, the Civil Service Retirement System, and the Federal Employees' Retirement System, and for other purposes."
As you can see, there's a lot more than smoke in the Act -- or perhaps too much smoke.
Posted by unclesmrgol at 16 February, 2014 14:57:35
"Q: Many people, including some who admire you, have expressed concern that you are involved with a young woman to whom you have been in loco parentis, a father figure.
A: But she's not part of my family. Soon-Yi has a very high-profile father; I was not a father figure to those children. I was a father figure to my own children, period. Those are the three in my will.
Q: But Soon-Yi is the sister of all those kids.
A: Yes, but it's not that they're really sisters.
That's Woody Allen, speaking to the nature of adoptive families. They aren't really siblings. They aren't really related. They are fair game, because they are not really your children.
Q. But didn't you become a father surrogate to the children she had adopted with Andre Previn?
A. I was not involved with the other kids. They had their own father. I didn't spend much time with them, particularly the girls. I spent absolutely zero time with any of them. This was not some type of family unit in any remote way.
Q. Soon-Yi never treated you as a father figure?
A. Not remotely. She never said two words to me. For years I thought Soon-Yi was studying to be a nun. She was going to Sacred Heart, so I thought, well, I had no idea what she was doing. I was only interested in my own kids.
Q. Don't you worry about what the children might feel when their dad is sleeping with someone they consider a sister?
A. I don't think they think of "sleeping with." They only know what is constantly drummed into them. And I don't think my children feel any lack of affection or any rivalry. Soon-Yi and I will be very, very cognizant of their situation and feelings.
Yes, indeed. The Heart Wants What It Wants, and will not be denied.
Posted by unclesmrgol at 26 March, 2013 09:26:41
A fumi-e (fumi "stepping-on" + e "picture") was a likeness of Jesus or Mary upon which the religious authorities of the Tokugawa shogunate of Japan required suspected Christians to step on in order to prove that they were not members of that outlawed religion. The use of fumi-e began with the persecution of Christians in Nagasaki in 1629. Their use was officially abandoned when ports opened to foreigners on April 13, 1856, but some remained in use until Christian teaching was placed under formal protection during the Meiji period. The objects were also known as e-ita or ita-e, while the forced test was called e-fumi.
The Fifth Knot
Posted by unclesmrgol at 11 February, 2013 09:46:54
"One of the tests is they make you dive to the bottom of a pool and tie five knots," the Shooter says. "One guy got to the fifth knot and blacked out underwater. We pulled him up and he was, like, dead. They made the class face the fence while they tried to resuscitate him. The first words as he spit out water were 'Did I pass? Did I tie the fifth knot?' The instructor told him, 'We didn't want to find out if you could tie the knots, you asshole, we wanted to know how hard you'd push yourself. You killed yourself. You passed.'"
It's what remaining true to your faith may require.
A second time the angel of the LORD called to Abraham from heaven and said: “I swear by my very self—oracle of the LORD—that because you acted as you did in not withholding from me your son, your only one, I will bless you and make your descendants as countless as the stars of the sky and the sands of the seashore; your descendants will take possession of the gates of their enemies, and in your descendants all the nations of the earth will find blessing, because you obeyed my command.”
The Man Who Shot Osama bin Laden
A Crack in the Mandate
Posted by unclesmrgol at 05 February, 2013 07:25:49
Religious organizations that object to providing birth control coverage under the Affordable Care Act would be allowed to hand that responsibility off to a third party under new rules proposed Friday by the Obama administration.
Putting aside the obvious optics that this is analogous to the Gastapo telling the Dutch that they don't have to turn in the Jews themselves, but can designate a third party to do so, this is an interesting development from a Constitutional standpoint.
With this new action exempting churches and religious organizations but requiring individuals and every other organization to directly purchase abortifacient and contraceptive coverage, Mr. Obama has proven the non-Constitutionality of the HHS mandate.
Mr. Obama’s exemptions, which allow some to freely practice their faith, but denies others an identical practice of faith in an identical way, contravenes the establishment of religion clause of the First Amendment.
Furthermore, by making these exceptions, Mr. Obama acknowledges that the rules place a burden on the free practice of religion — similar to the way that a poll tax places a burden on the free practice of the right to vote.
Now will come the excluded others, like Hobby Lobby, making both of these points in court.
Religious Freedom Day -- Honored in the Breach
Posted by unclesmrgol at 16 January, 2013 21:16:22
RELIGIOUS FREEDOM DAY, 2013
- - - - - - -
BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Foremost among the rights Americans hold sacred is the freedom to worship as we choose. Today, we celebrate one of our Nation's first laws to protect that right -- the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom. Written by Thomas Jefferson and guided through the Virginia legislature by James Madison, the Statute affirmed that "Almighty God hath created the mind free" and "all men shall be free to profess . . . their opinions in matters of religion." Years later, our Founders looked to the Statute as a model when they enshrined the principle of religious liberty in the Bill of Rights.
Because of the protections guaranteed by our Constitution, each of us has the right to practice our faith openly and as we choose. As a free country, our story has been shaped by every language and enriched by every culture. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus, Sikhs and non-believers. Our patchwork heritage is a strength we owe to our religious freedom.
Americans of every faith have molded the character of our Nation. They were pilgrims who sought refuge from persecution; pioneers who pursued brighter horizons; protesters who fought for abolition, women's suffrage, and civil rights. Each generation has seen people of different faiths join together to advance peace, justice, and dignity for all.
Today, we also remember that religious liberty is not just an American right; it is a universal human right to be protected here at home and across the globe. This freedom is an essential part of human dignity, and without it our world cannot know lasting peace.
As we observe Religious Freedom Day, let us remember the legacy of faith and independence we have inherited, and let us honor it by forever upholding our right to exercise our beliefs free from prejudice or persecution.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim January 16, 2013, as Religious Freedom Day. I call on all Americans to commemorate this day with events and activities that teach us about this critical foundation of our Nation's liberty, and show us how we can protect it for future generations at home and around the world.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this sixteenth day of January, in the year of our Lord two thousand thirteen, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-seventh.
In a land where businesses are fighting (and winning) in the courts to not be forced to do what Mr. Obama's HHS Mandate would force them to do -- against the dictates of their consciences -- there is just one word which suffices in response to this hubris.