Wendell Potter Interviewed by Bill Moyers

Full interview at PBS, but these scenes should at the very least show the frightening power of the health care business over our own government.  To see our legislators parroting the exact lines given to them from the large insurance companies is not really surprising, but chilling nonetheless.  It is clear that all it takes to defeat an initiative like single-payer health care is a system that is corrupt to its core, with whoever has the most money to spend winning the day over what would be in the best interests of the constituents.  Even the watered down government alternative health care insurance system may be made almost completely worthless, and it is no secret how.  The industries that make absurd profits will do whatever it takes to buy the votes necessary in the legislature, the citizens be damned.

Some see corporations as shining examples of capitalism, and others see that some of these corporations are nothing more than faceless tyrants, who will do whatever it takes to not only make a profit, but strive to make even more of a profit in the future.  Making more of a profit is a goal that everything corporation or even small business should aim for, but when their business is health care, there is an all too obvious conflict.  Those in the business of health care do not actually care at all about those that are insured, there one and only goal is to their shareholders.  And the more “at risk” types that can be excluded, who will have no where else to go, the more money their business will make through savings.  They have only one goal, and looking after the health of those that have insurance through them is not it.  They actively seek to deny benefits from patients, and it is no secret that patients are dumped because they ruin the profit margin of insurance companies. 

How, exactly, would competition with a government run program be a bad thing at this point?  No one would be forced to join such a program, but  it would be nice to have this alternative and know you couldn’t be turned away. 

H/T to Politickybitch, who I stole this idea from.

Theocracy in America, Living on C Street in D.C.

Part 2

Even knowing that the guest is plugging his book, there is no way to get around the creepiness level of such an operation that influences the legislature.

Warrantless Surveillance Report

The new report seems to offer little information that was not already known in the unclassified version, but even still there are some interesting parts to it.  I suppose when you are battling your own government to find out just what they have done to the laws of the country, that it should come as no surprise that they are less then helpful in any meaningful way.

“Other Intelligence Activities,” well that sounds much nicer than “Welcome to Orwell’s 1984.”  The scope of the surveillance program is sort of discussed, with the shocking NON-revelation that the program exceeded simply listening for al-Qaeda and their contacts.  All of the other warrantless surveillance is simply listed as “Other intelligence activities.”

PDF of unclassified report

But privacy and freedom are sooo over rated, especially if we don’t even realize what is happening.  It just seems like everything is fine, and sadly, this ignorance and even denial of reality is what many seem to crave.  Though the most worrying signs of the decay of a free society to me was when the revelation of this program first came into the news, when some people justified the warrantless surveillance, actually saying that if we have nothing to hide, then we have nothing to worry about.  As long as Bush was in control,  I expected the defenders of this program to start goose-stepping around, saying “Ja wohl, mein President/fuhrer.”  Well even with Bush out of office, they sort of still keep this mindset, at least on Fox news.

H/T to EFF

Well If You Can’t Trust The C.I.A., Who Can You Trust?

A while back, the C.I.A. was accused of lying to Congress.  This was denied, of course.  But now comes this.

 

And for some inexplicable reason, this scene came to mind -

 

The Central Intelligence Agency Lied?  Who would have ever thought it possible.

Obama Steering Stimulus Funds to Areas That Supported Him – Oh, And Bush Also Sent More Money to The Same Areas

Sometimes, you might think Faux News is just joking around with some of the garbage they spout. 

 

So former President Bush sent money out to the same areas in the same ratio, but now that Obama is President, it must be political payback.  Are these guys stoned, or is it that they are unable to read the entire article on which they make their accusations?  How can this possibly make sense to them, knowing that Bush sent money out in the same way, or are they secretly accusing the former President of backing Obama somehow?  Actually, considering how unpopular the former President was, they might be able to run with that story.

H/T to Thinkprogress

I’ve Figured It Out, John Ensign and Mark Sanford Have Some Sort of Bet…

That is the only thing that makes sense.  They keep dredging up their own wrongdoings, and now the Ensign family admits that they gave a certain woman $96,000 dollars as a “gift.”  Nice work if you can get it, I suppose.

But no where in the press release does it mention why  this information is now being forwarded.  The public, focused on the NEXT family values guy (Sanford), along with the deaths of numerous famous people in the news (BREAKING NEWS: Michael Jackson still dead), would have all but forgotten the Ensign affair. 

Well it seems clear at this point that there is some of of race, perhaps a wager, or something of that nature, to see who can be in the news the most, and for all the wrong reasons.  Best of luck to all of the challengers, and their families, who are the real casualties of such things.

And why on earth did Sanford admit to other affairs besides his South American soul mate?  Oh, right, the bet with Ensign (and who knows who else).  At this point, all of the extra-marital infidelities are sort of just turning into a mush in the news, and maybe that is the plan;  If they ALL have affairs, then none of them will seem so bad. 

Interesting plan.  Oh, if any Democrat has an affair, or more precisely when they are caught,  it would still be considered the end of the world by the religious right, of course.

And what did both Sanford and Ensign say about Clinton’s affair?  Well, it’s best not to ask.  If they followed the advice they gave him, they would of course both have to resign.

Pakistan’s “No-Go” Areas, and The Continued Funding for The Taliban

A somewhat surprising video from Al Jazeera.  It is not so much surprising what the evidence in the video shows, the surprising part is that the video made it to the air at all.

 

Obviously, an effective counter-insurgency program will have to stop funds from ever reaching the Taliban.  And it might not hurt to stop having areas where the Taliban are allowed to be in with no real threat from the government.

Challenging the State Secrets All-Purpose Excuse

Challenging the government’s cover-all reasoning of State Secrets, a new attempt was made to show that while in some cases state secrets are important to shield, in should not become a “get out of jail free” card for the government if they themselves do in fact violate laws.

From the introduction to the brief filed in the 9th circuit (link below):

This appeal squarely raises the question whether the government may invoke a common-law evidentiary privilege in order to extinguish at the outset any possibility of redress not only for these plaintiffs, but for any victims of the government’s unlawful torture policies. Indeed, the sum and substance of the United States’ position in this litigation is that the government may engage in kidnapping and torture, declare those activities “state secrets,” and by virtue of that designation alone avoid any judicial inquiry into conduct that even the government purports to condemn as unlawful in all circumstances. As the panel recognized, the government’s “sweeping” rationale in support of dismissing this action “has no logical limit” and “would apply equally to suits by U.S. citizens, not just foreign nationals; and to secret conduct committed on U.S. soil, not just abroad.”

Mohamed v. Jeppesen DataPlan, Inc., No. 08-15693, slip op. 4937 (9th Cir. Apr. 28, 2009). The law does not sanction, let alone require, such a categorical grant of immunity.

______________________________________________________

While the original intentions of such broad actions like torture and detainment for eternity without a trial stemmed from fear, we cannot let fear be the guiding principal on which our laws are based.  While many claim that since some of those appealing their imprisonment are guilty, and deserve no protections, they do not seem to understand.  The purpose of these suits is not merely to protect people we believe to be guilty (and there is little doubt that many of the accused are probably guilty, but it would be nice to at least PRETEND to be a nation of laws), the government cannot be given free reign to do as it wishes without regard to laws or we will all suffer.

PDF of file briefing to the 9th circuit

H/T to SCOTUSBLOG

Lyndon Larouche Killed Michael Jackson and Forced Sarah Plain to Resign

Hey, I figure if the Brownshirt followers of Larouche can bother me with pamphlets at the store with all sorts of bizarre interpretations of what the government is doing (though to be fair, he does launch attacks against both major parties), then we should be able to say whatever we want about that nut.  I swear he is just bitter because in spite of his insanity, he never did become President, and he just cannot imagine why that is.   

I actually don’t even know if he is still alive, but alive or not, his followers obey his teachings like he himself is Scientology, or possibly Oprah.  I keep hoping a large truck swerves and at least clips the f*cktards at the larouchepac table outside of the store, but so far no luck.

C-Span Callers

Listening to the people that call in to C-Span can be eye opening and quite frankly somewhat frightening.  Many who call are absolutely livid with anger about something, and are quite sure that whatever party they are for had nothing to do with anything bad that ever happens.  I am of the opinion that both parties are corrupt, but the Left at least occasionally tries to help the less fortunate, whereas the Right seems fine with running the less fortunate over with a tractor (no, not literally).

But as the health care machine swings into gear, spending $1.4 million dollars A FRIKKEN DAY on lobbying efforts, you have to wonder how those that oppose at least offering a basic health plan can manage to close their eyes at the money being spent to keep health insurance profitable to such an excess that they fear a public plan would undercut their profits, possibly making the companies only somewhat profitable as opposed to absurdly profitable.  The arguments that people make like “We don’t want a bureaucrat to decide our health care” are beyond insane, as indeed bureaucrats that work for the insurance companies make decisions daily with regards to what treatment is authorized, and they base this on what will cost them the least, as opposed to what might be best for the patient.

But listening to C-Span, I was struck by what one VERY conservative caller said;  That no where in the Constitution did it say the government should provide health care.  While health care per se is not mentioned in the Constitution, there is a little something in the preamble which talks of “Promoting the general welfare.”  It is difficult to see how this could not very easily be applied to a health care alternative for those too poor to be screwed by insurance companies.  And “welfare?”  Well who knew the founding fathers were such socialist hippies, using words like welfare and all.  Fine, so at the time of the writing of the Constitution, the word welfare didn’t have the same connotation.

But regardless, a government that offers a (workable) health care option should not be seen as some great enemy of freedom, as no one would dream of taking the citizen’s freedom to be severely overcharged away from them.  Remembering back to when Medicare was first introduced, it was also labeled as some sort of socialist/communist idea, and as surprising as this is, the health care industry fought against that too.

Wake up morons, if you cannot see that corporations are scared that their cash cow will dry up, then you aren’t evem CLOSE to being free now.  Well, unless you call the freedom to be ignorant and blind a freedom worth fighting for.  The corporations that are spending $1.4 million per day lobbying are spending this money to prime the pump that may dry up.  If they only spend a few million here and there, then the money from us will just keep flowing to them.