![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Dec. 18th, 2010 03:49 pmHEY GUYS!
DADT IS *SO* THIRTY MINUTES AGO.
DADT IS *SO* THIRTY MINUTES AGO.
(no subject)
Dec. 13th, 2010 11:45 amHawaii's Legal Case Against the United States
Imagine if you grew up being told that you had been adopted, only to learn that you were, in fact, kidnapped. That might spur you to start searching for the adoption papers. Now imagine that you could find no papers and no one could produce any. That's how Dr. David Keanu Sai, a retired Army Captain with a PhD in political science and instructor at Kapiolani Community College in Hawaii, characterizes Hawaii's international legal status.
This is a little long, but it's worth reading or saving to read. I had no idea that any of this happened. Obviously I suck at American history. Either that or hey, maybe nobody wanted actual history to be taught at schools because it would make the US look bad. I don't think I learned anything about Hawaii in school, let alone that it might not even be a state.
Unsurprisingly, I would love to see Hawaii to win this fight, even though the Birthers would have a field day and a half with it.
And then there's this little problem.
Imagine if you grew up being told that you had been adopted, only to learn that you were, in fact, kidnapped. That might spur you to start searching for the adoption papers. Now imagine that you could find no papers and no one could produce any. That's how Dr. David Keanu Sai, a retired Army Captain with a PhD in political science and instructor at Kapiolani Community College in Hawaii, characterizes Hawaii's international legal status.
This is a little long, but it's worth reading or saving to read. I had no idea that any of this happened. Obviously I suck at American history. Either that or hey, maybe nobody wanted actual history to be taught at schools because it would make the US look bad. I don't think I learned anything about Hawaii in school, let alone that it might not even be a state.
Unsurprisingly, I would love to see Hawaii to win this fight, even though the Birthers would have a field day and a half with it.
And then there's this little problem.
“I hope that [Attorney General Eric] Holder did discuss this with the intelligence community. If they believe they got enough from him, how much more should they get? Did they Mirandize him? I know he’s an American citizen but still.” — Rep. Peter King (R-NY), in a Politico interview
You read that right. He actually said 'but still'. Um. But still what?
And besides, Miranda has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with citizenship. It has to do with being in America. Land of the free, home of the brave, remember? Everyone gets Mirandized--white collar criminals and Mafia hit men and serial killers and kids caught with half a joint on them and axe murderers and child rapists and Bernie Madoff--because this is America. What part of "due process" does Rep. King not understand? If a suspect isn't Mirandized, it's entirely possible that s/he will be able to cry foul and walk away.
And the answer is yes, they did Mirandize Faisal Shahzad, after first questioning him under the public safety clause that allows for delaying Miranda. And he talked, before and after.
Source is here.
You read that right. He actually said 'but still'. Um. But still what?
And besides, Miranda has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with citizenship. It has to do with being in America. Land of the free, home of the brave, remember? Everyone gets Mirandized--white collar criminals and Mafia hit men and serial killers and kids caught with half a joint on them and axe murderers and child rapists and Bernie Madoff--because this is America. What part of "due process" does Rep. King not understand? If a suspect isn't Mirandized, it's entirely possible that s/he will be able to cry foul and walk away.
And the answer is yes, they did Mirandize Faisal Shahzad, after first questioning him under the public safety clause that allows for delaying Miranda. And he talked, before and after.
Source is here.
(no subject)
Apr. 25th, 2010 04:01 pmDear Mr. President,
In light of this, maybe you should rethink that whole thing about scouting for offshore drilling sites?
Just a suggestion.
Your fan,
Me
In other news, I'm officially up to date on Doctor Who, with the exception of the very latest ep. I think I will like Matt Smith as the Doctor when my brain stops switching from "Woe. Not David." to "He's so bloody young!.
In still other news, I need to lose weight like woah. Starting Weight Watchers again on May 1, eating reasonably until then. Must be lighter for vacation, and all. Not to mention the whole family history of cardiac problems issue.
In light of this, maybe you should rethink that whole thing about scouting for offshore drilling sites?
Just a suggestion.
Your fan,
Me
In other news, I'm officially up to date on Doctor Who, with the exception of the very latest ep. I think I will like Matt Smith as the Doctor when my brain stops switching from "Woe. Not David." to "He's so bloody young!.
In still other news, I need to lose weight like woah. Starting Weight Watchers again on May 1, eating reasonably until then. Must be lighter for vacation, and all. Not to mention the whole family history of cardiac problems issue.
(no subject)
Apr. 2nd, 2010 10:12 pm( Northeast Hit With Devastating Floods, As Federal Flood Insurance Expires Due To GOP Obstruction )
Dear GOP,
Thanks for all your assistance. Don't let your matches get wet.
Sarcastically,
Rhode Island and Providence Plantations
P.S. You'll probably get letters from Massachusetts and Connecticut, too.
source
(no subject)
Mar. 23rd, 2010 09:30 pmThis is really, really scary.
THERE IS A CAMPAIGN TO THROW BRICKS THROUGH WINDOWS OF POLITICAL OFFICES.
IDEK, guys.
THERE IS A CAMPAIGN TO THROW BRICKS THROUGH WINDOWS OF POLITICAL OFFICES.
IDEK, guys.
eleanor, gee I think you're swell...
Mar. 22nd, 2010 02:36 pm- I took
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
meresy's advice and now have a brand-new copy of Top 100 Unusual Things to See in Ontario. This will be v. helpful! - I'm finally starting the Lady Eleanor Stole from Scarf Style. I'll be using Classy Dream In Color Good Luck Jade. I tried to make it once before a couple of years ago, but got snagged up with the entrelac, and I was trying it in a solid colour which didn't look as stunning as I thought it would. The subtle variegation of the Classy yarn is close to the original and will make it look more romantic, which is a big reason I fell in love with the Lady in the first place.
I got the yarn at Unwind, which is also where I signed up for a class in Viking Knitting, something I'd never even heard of before a couple of days ago. I've been wanting to work with metal for a while now--maybe learn to make some jewellery or chain mail. This looks like a good place to start. Plus, the people at Unwind are very helpful and they have drop-in knitting hours which will come in handy when/if I reach a snag with Lady Eleanor. - It looks like I'll be moving to Narragansett. Yeah, I know, I said I wouldn't move again until I finally really move (which, um, yeah, too far in the future to even think about), but I have a chance to share an entire house with someone I've known for years and have lived with before without a problem (and this was back when we both had young kids). It's a three-bedroom ranch on a quiet street with a back yard and a deck and a dog and cat. It's a little more of a commute, but not too bad, nothing like commuting from Tewksbury. I'll also be paying less in rent and sharing the cost of internet, telly, utilities, etc. I'm sure there'll be some stumbling blocks, there always are, but for the most part it seems like a win-win situation. And I can pay my mother back what she loaned me for the security deposit, so that'll be one less thing to worry about moneywise. And anyway, my thing about not moving was that I'd only move in-state again if someplace in Narragansett became available. It really is a lovely town. Here, see for yourself. :)
- John McCain was on CSPAN this morning, basically saying how icky the new healthcare plan is and how it's going to OMG RUIN THE ECONOMY. It's interesting to go back and see that basically the same things were said about Medicare and Social Security. This debate is SO not over, because the Republicans are going to nitpick it as much and as often as possible. They keep saying that the Dems may have won the battle, but they'll lose the war. I can't wait to see what Rachel says about the whole thing. I HEART HER SO MUCH.
- I found a new hostel in Ottawa. It's very pretty and clean and stuff, and I'm going to be making reservations there as soon as I know when I'll be getting there and where I'm going to stay.
- Trying, really, really trying to get through . The Fountainhead, but I keep going back to my reread of Perdido Street Station instead. Eventually, I'll have to give The Fountainhead back to my chiropractor. It's not looking good for me finishing it. And I've not even got to any of the political-philosophical stuff yet, so I can't blame it on that. It's just not that good. I mean, changing POV in the middle of a scene is just plain careless, IMO, unless there's a really good reason for it (I couldn't find one). And it reads like a 1940s movie would sound. Probably because it's a 1940s novel, but still. Lovecraft reads like the era he wrote in, too, and I can still read that with no problems. *shrugs*
- Caprica, OMG. It had better get renewed, is all I can say.
- Have been teaching Amelia this poem, because she should KNOW it, and stuff. Also, If anyone knows where I can get the pattern for that turtle (which I only found a minute ago when searching for a link to the poem), let me know? I'd much rather make it than buy it.
- I'd post a Song of the Day, but I really want to get back to winding my yarn. Lady Eleanor awaits!
Dear Republican politicians,
I've noticed that many of you refer to the Democratic Party of the United States as "the Democrat Party". I mean, sure, I know why you do it, and you probably think you're so clever for thinking it up, but um.
The party's official name has been "The Democratic Party" since 1844. It has never, ever been "The Democrat Party." So, you are being neither clever nor witty, you are merely WRONG. Saying someone is "a Democrat" is proper. Saying he or she is "a Democrat Senator/Congressperson" or a "Democrat voter" or a "member of the Democrat party" is not only wrong, it's improper grammar and just plain silly.
A bit of advice: If I were you I'd cut it out. I mean, you can keep right on being wrong and knock yourself out for all I care, but don't be surprised if people make fun of you, just like we do to people who say the world is flat or drive Hummers.
And remember, we're not laughing at you, we're laughing--oh, wait. We ARE laughing at you.
In conclusion, Thomas Jefferson*.
Admonishingly,
Me
P.S. I'm not a member of any political party, so I have no stock in what you guys call each other. I'm just in it for the lulz.
In sorta related news, I haven't been able to connect with democrats.org at all today. Conversly, gop.com connects just fine. This fact really isn't related to anything, I just thought I'd mention it.
*In case you're from Texas and have never heard of him, he was one of the Founding Fathers of the United States. He wrote a little document you may or may not know about.
I've noticed that many of you refer to the Democratic Party of the United States as "the Democrat Party". I mean, sure, I know why you do it, and you probably think you're so clever for thinking it up, but um.
The party's official name has been "The Democratic Party" since 1844. It has never, ever been "The Democrat Party." So, you are being neither clever nor witty, you are merely WRONG. Saying someone is "a Democrat" is proper. Saying he or she is "a Democrat Senator/Congressperson" or a "Democrat voter" or a "member of the Democrat party" is not only wrong, it's improper grammar and just plain silly.
A bit of advice: If I were you I'd cut it out. I mean, you can keep right on being wrong and knock yourself out for all I care, but don't be surprised if people make fun of you, just like we do to people who say the world is flat or drive Hummers.
And remember, we're not laughing at you, we're laughing--oh, wait. We ARE laughing at you.
In conclusion, Thomas Jefferson*.
Admonishingly,
Me
P.S. I'm not a member of any political party, so I have no stock in what you guys call each other. I'm just in it for the lulz.
In sorta related news, I haven't been able to connect with democrats.org at all today. Conversly, gop.com connects just fine. This fact really isn't related to anything, I just thought I'd mention it.
*In case you're from Texas and have never heard of him, he was one of the Founding Fathers of the United States. He wrote a little document you may or may not know about.
SPECIAL REPORT-Insurer targeted HIV patients to drop coverage
By Murray Waas
WASHINGTON, March 17 (Reuters) - In May, 2002, Jerome Mitchell, a 17-year old college freshman from rural South Carolina, learned he had contracted HIV. The news, of course, was devastating, but Mitchell believed that he had one thing going for him: On his own initiative, in anticipation of his first year in college, he had purchased his own health insurance.
Shortly after his diagnosis, however, his insurance company, Fortis, revoked his policy. Mitchell was told that without further treatment his HIV would become full-blown AIDS within a year or two and he would most likely die within two years after that.
So he hired an attorney -- not because he wanted to sue anyone; on the contrary, the shy African-American teenager expected his insurance was canceled by mistake and would be reinstated once he set the company straight.
But Fortis, now known as Assurant Health, ignored his attorney's letters, as they had earlier inquiries from a case worker at a local clinic who was helping him. So Mitchell sued.
In 2004, a jury in Florence County, South Carolina, ordered Assurant Health, part of Assurant Inc., to pay Mitchell $15 million for wrongly revoking his heath insurance policy. In September 2009, the South Carolina Supreme Court upheld the lower court's verdict, although the court reduced the amount to be paid him to $10 million.
By winning the verdict against Fortis, Mitchell not only obtained a measure of justice for himself; he also helped expose wrongdoing on the part of Fortis that could have repercussions for the entire health insurance industry.
Previously undisclosed records from Mitchell's case reveal that Fortis had a company policy of targeting policyholders with HIV. A computer program and algorithm targeted every policyholder recently diagnosed with HIV for an automatic fraud investigation, as the company searched for any pretext to revoke their policy. As was the case with Mitchell, their insurance policies often were canceled on erroneous information, the flimsiest of evidence, or for no good reason at all, according to the court documents and interviews with state and federal investigators.
The revelations come at a time when President Barack Obama, in his frantic push to rescue the administration's health care plan, has stepped up his criticism of insurers. The U.S. House of Representatives is expected to vote later this week on an overhaul of the health system, which Obama has said is essential to do away with controversial and unpopular industry practices.
Insurance companies have long engaged in the practice of "rescission," whereby they investigate policyholders shortly after they've been diagnosed with life-threatening illnesses. But government regulators and investigators who have overseen the actions of Assurant and other health insurance companies say it is unprecedented for a company to single out people with HIV.
In his previously undisclosed court ruling, the judge in the Mitchell case also criticized what he said were the company's efforts to cover its tracks.
Assurant Health said that as a matter of policy it did not comment on individual customer claims.
"We disagree with certain of the court's characterizations of Assurant Health's policies and procedures in the Mitchell case," it said in a statement provided by spokesman Peter Duckler, adding: "The case continues to progress through the appellate process."
Source here.
By Murray Waas
WASHINGTON, March 17 (Reuters) - In May, 2002, Jerome Mitchell, a 17-year old college freshman from rural South Carolina, learned he had contracted HIV. The news, of course, was devastating, but Mitchell believed that he had one thing going for him: On his own initiative, in anticipation of his first year in college, he had purchased his own health insurance.
Shortly after his diagnosis, however, his insurance company, Fortis, revoked his policy. Mitchell was told that without further treatment his HIV would become full-blown AIDS within a year or two and he would most likely die within two years after that.
So he hired an attorney -- not because he wanted to sue anyone; on the contrary, the shy African-American teenager expected his insurance was canceled by mistake and would be reinstated once he set the company straight.
But Fortis, now known as Assurant Health, ignored his attorney's letters, as they had earlier inquiries from a case worker at a local clinic who was helping him. So Mitchell sued.
In 2004, a jury in Florence County, South Carolina, ordered Assurant Health, part of Assurant Inc., to pay Mitchell $15 million for wrongly revoking his heath insurance policy. In September 2009, the South Carolina Supreme Court upheld the lower court's verdict, although the court reduced the amount to be paid him to $10 million.
By winning the verdict against Fortis, Mitchell not only obtained a measure of justice for himself; he also helped expose wrongdoing on the part of Fortis that could have repercussions for the entire health insurance industry.
Previously undisclosed records from Mitchell's case reveal that Fortis had a company policy of targeting policyholders with HIV. A computer program and algorithm targeted every policyholder recently diagnosed with HIV for an automatic fraud investigation, as the company searched for any pretext to revoke their policy. As was the case with Mitchell, their insurance policies often were canceled on erroneous information, the flimsiest of evidence, or for no good reason at all, according to the court documents and interviews with state and federal investigators.
The revelations come at a time when President Barack Obama, in his frantic push to rescue the administration's health care plan, has stepped up his criticism of insurers. The U.S. House of Representatives is expected to vote later this week on an overhaul of the health system, which Obama has said is essential to do away with controversial and unpopular industry practices.
Insurance companies have long engaged in the practice of "rescission," whereby they investigate policyholders shortly after they've been diagnosed with life-threatening illnesses. But government regulators and investigators who have overseen the actions of Assurant and other health insurance companies say it is unprecedented for a company to single out people with HIV.
In his previously undisclosed court ruling, the judge in the Mitchell case also criticized what he said were the company's efforts to cover its tracks.
Assurant Health said that as a matter of policy it did not comment on individual customer claims.
"We disagree with certain of the court's characterizations of Assurant Health's policies and procedures in the Mitchell case," it said in a statement provided by spokesman Peter Duckler, adding: "The case continues to progress through the appellate process."
Source here.
your (US) tax dollars at work
Mar. 15th, 2010 11:06 amLawmakers spend 1K/month on taxpayer-funded cars.
When people talk about how much the US government is spending on PROGRAMS, maybe they should take a look at this first. Jeebus. My rent is less than what these guys spend on car leases. My rent when it goes UP this year will still be less.
When people talk about how much the US government is spending on PROGRAMS, maybe they should take a look at this first. Jeebus. My rent is less than what these guys spend on car leases. My rent when it goes UP this year will still be less.
(no subject)
Mar. 6th, 2010 10:24 amJoe "You Lie" Wilson is using RCAF discharge policies as an example of how discharging gays and lesbians under DADT doesn't affect military readiness in wartime. DOES HE NOT SEE HOW HYPOCRITICAL IRONIC THIS IS? Answer: No.
I wonder how many people he's tried to shut down who have referenced the Canadian Medicare system as an example of how single-payer healthcare won't kill our grannies and/or force us all into slavery to the government.*
*not that the current US healthcare plan is ANYTHING LIKE single-payer healthcare, because IT SO ISN'T.
I wonder how many people he's tried to shut down who have referenced the Canadian Medicare system as an example of how single-payer healthcare won't kill our grannies and/or force us all into slavery to the government.*
*not that the current US healthcare plan is ANYTHING LIKE single-payer healthcare, because IT SO ISN'T.
(no subject)
Feb. 3rd, 2010 01:46 pmJoint Chiefs Chairman: Time to repeal 'Don't Ask Don't Tell'
Also, watch Joint Chiefs Chair Mike Mullen rock like a rocking thing while John McCainflip-flop like a fish in a bucket change his mind comes to an alternate conclusion about stuff he said last year. Bonus: Jeff Sessions' face after he figures out that he's up the creek without a paddle. Or a boat. Or a creek.
I think I have this right: If it's offered as part of a defence bill (which would make sense, because that's how DADT was introduced in the first place), Congress will need sixty votes not to GET a repeal, but to KILL one. *tiny squee of optimism*
"No matter how I look at the issue I cannot escape being troubled by the fact that we have in place a policy which forces young men and women to lie about who they are in order to defend their fellow citizens."
How can there even BE an argument against this?
ETA: Oh, and also watch this: BBC Viewpoint: Gay US airman.
Also, watch Joint Chiefs Chair Mike Mullen rock like a rocking thing while John McCain
I think I have this right: If it's offered as part of a defence bill (which would make sense, because that's how DADT was introduced in the first place), Congress will need sixty votes not to GET a repeal, but to KILL one. *tiny squee of optimism*
"No matter how I look at the issue I cannot escape being troubled by the fact that we have in place a policy which forces young men and women to lie about who they are in order to defend their fellow citizens."
How can there even BE an argument against this?
ETA: Oh, and also watch this: BBC Viewpoint: Gay US airman.
bipartisanship ftw!
Jan. 29th, 2010 07:18 pmIn which the POTUS addresses House Republicans...
...immediately followed byQuestion Period a Q&A session addressing a variety of issues:
People are calling this event historic and meaning it. Hats off to the President for doing this, and to the House Republicans for inviting him. *waves flag*
(I deliberately used the smaller-sized embeds, but if they're messing with anyone's flist I'll put them under a cut)
...immediately followed by
People are calling this event historic and meaning it. Hats off to the President for doing this, and to the House Republicans for inviting him. *waves flag*
(I deliberately used the smaller-sized embeds, but if they're messing with anyone's flist I'll put them under a cut)
preach it, mr. president.
Jan. 27th, 2010 10:08 pm"Just saying no to everything may be good short-term politics, but it's not leadership."
THIS. ♥♥♥♥
THIS. ♥♥♥♥
( Obama and Harper: Bookends in a broken democracy )
"Oddly enough the problem is the opposite in each country. In Canada, individual members of Parliament have almost no power and under Harper even Cabinet ministers have little. All power is centralized in the PMO and in the office of the Leaders. Even still, we don't get a direct vote for those leaders, only for their party and that vote is counted by the antiquated first past the post system so a candidate with a minority of votes usually is the winner and the party that wins almost never has a majority. There are few checks and balances in the Canadian system unlike in the US
In the US, individual members of the Congress have a lot of power supposedly to represent their constituents but in actual fact most of them are bought and paid for by the corporate lobbyists through Political Action Committees. The balance of power in the US means the President is limited by the Congress and in the hyper sectarian atmosphere on Capital Hill, the only things Obama can achieve are things the Republicans want.
But despite the differences, in both countries democracy is broken. The only way to fix it, is by engaging citizens in democratic decision making at every level. The demonstrations on Saturday are just the beginning.".
source
"Oddly enough the problem is the opposite in each country. In Canada, individual members of Parliament have almost no power and under Harper even Cabinet ministers have little. All power is centralized in the PMO and in the office of the Leaders. Even still, we don't get a direct vote for those leaders, only for their party and that vote is counted by the antiquated first past the post system so a candidate with a minority of votes usually is the winner and the party that wins almost never has a majority. There are few checks and balances in the Canadian system unlike in the US
In the US, individual members of the Congress have a lot of power supposedly to represent their constituents but in actual fact most of them are bought and paid for by the corporate lobbyists through Political Action Committees. The balance of power in the US means the President is limited by the Congress and in the hyper sectarian atmosphere on Capital Hill, the only things Obama can achieve are things the Republicans want.
But despite the differences, in both countries democracy is broken. The only way to fix it, is by engaging citizens in democratic decision making at every level. The demonstrations on Saturday are just the beginning.".
source
From johnk at Blue Mass Group:
"Not sure if it was because I was still hungover and not seeing clearly, but I think Red Mass Group just turned into a Commie, Pinko, Socialist site.
I wanted to read the reaction to the Brown victory last night by our right wing friends and I was surprised to see a new graphic with the title on the web site:
Hmmmm, red and people's. I can't place my finger on it but it sounds familiar.
I don't know, sorry nothing is coming to me."
Source.
"Not sure if it was because I was still hungover and not seeing clearly, but I think Red Mass Group just turned into a Commie, Pinko, Socialist site.
I wanted to read the reaction to the Brown victory last night by our right wing friends and I was surprised to see a new graphic with the title on the web site:
Hmmmm, red and people's. I can't place my finger on it but it sounds familiar.
I don't know, sorry nothing is coming to me."
Source.
