26 | March | 2012 | Existential Ennui

Tags

blogging, budget, faith, Health care, life in the meadow, Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan, SCOTUS

Yes, well you don’t stay up nights thinking up these titles do ya?

It’s hard, I tell you. I have a wastepaper basket full of rejects before I settle on the perfectly descriptive one that like a laser, pierces directly to the point I wish to make.

You can now be suitable impressed.

On the home front, I’m a day from finishing the bedroom packing. I have only a shelf in the hole of Calcutta (closet) left to do. I actually found that much as the wardrobe in that movie, you can enter an alternative universe directly at the back of the closet. I stuck my arm through and pulled out a plum. . . .oh nevermind. And my name is not Jack.

A whole lot of the selling off of stuff is now taken care of. A friend of ours is going to take possession of tractors and rototillers and so forth and so on, and sell each at its appointed time. That’s a huge step forward, and so we will soon be at the visit to the real estate agent, visit to the RV sales and rental, visit with the bank, and blah blah blah. We’re hoping to get out of here by the first of May.

So, so much for that stuff.

I’m thinking to start a new weekly post on Friday. I got the idea from Morning Joe and Up. Each does a closing segment called “what did you learn today”, and “what did you learn this week”. I thought it might be fun. So, I’m saving up tidbits of stuff I’m learning to put on that post. If you wish to contribute, and I surely hope you will, just send along what you learned (subject matter is wide open) to troyspeyton@iowatelecom.net and let us know. No links are necessary unless you wish. I haven’t come up with a catchy title yet. Something snarky of course. Suggestions welcome there too.

I ran into a number of posts that I found worth your consideration this weekend. This first was I thought extremely revealing about what it means to live faith, even when you don’t have any. It reminds us that morality and values know no religious ideology; in fact they can well be independent of religion at all. Please take the time to read Rethinking His Religion.

Apropos of the SCOTUS oral arguments on the Affordable Health Care Act, is a fine piece in New York Magazine. Jonathan Chait writes The Barbarism of the Health Care Real Crusade and points out the essential difference between Democrats and Republicans on the issue. Fundamentally, Democrats believe that health care is a human right, while Republicans think it is an earned benefit that is obtained by personal responsibility. If they provide help at all, it is to be temporary and offered with plenty of rules. Chait although debunks some of the usual bogus claims made by the Right.

On the other hand, if you would like an amusing but frankly insightful look at Willard, then you can’t do better than How Mitt Romney is like a dog. The analogies are on point. Dana Milbank is your author.

On the other hand, don’t miss the ongoing weekly series by Steve Benen, called Mitt’s Mendacity, vol XI. Maddow has pointed out that all politicians lie a bit, and all stretch the truth. What Romney does is way beyond that. He lies, and the sooner people start using those words, the sooner he may realize that he needs to stop. Over and over, the truth is presented to him and he continues to mouth the same crap. Just bold-faced lies that are proven falsehoods. People are beginning to wonder if Mormonism allows lies as part of their doctrine. We rather doubt it. But then Mitt seems to shy away from his faith so perhaps he’s not much of a practitioner.

I haven’t seen any analysis of the Ryan budget that finds it anything but absurd and ugly. It says that it does not want a safety net turned into a hammock, since you know we all want to just lay back and live on the edge of poverty with our awesome federal subsidies. You know, food stamps and Medicaid, and public housing. Such a cushy life.

I’m told that the Ryan plan secures and additional $187,000 per year in tax savings to the rich. No hammock, but a lovely golden parachute wouldn’t you say?

Good luck trying to sell that one Paulie.

I do not give nearly enough credit to Constant Weader. I don’t always mention the H/T that is owed, since I go directly through their link and link you directly. But I sometimes get 2-3 at a time from her. If you don’t have it in your reader, you should.

A large number of legal experts (the notorious elite university professors) say that there is no chance that SCOTUS will overturn the Affordable Health Care Act. That’s simple because it is obviously constitutional. Based on that analysis, I’m going for a 7-2 vote (I’m not sure if Kagan is hearing it or not), with the two no votes being Thomas and Alito. I don’t think that Roberts has the cojones to twist the law in the way that ultra partisans Thomas and Alito are. Just my prediction.

What is amusing is that the GOP line is now that a win for health care is a minus for Obama. He’ll have to defend it now, instead of being able to rail at the Court for hurting the poor. Dumb reasoning, but then consider the source.

One wonders what goes on in the mind of Willard. It’s like the rich kid winning the trophy because he’s the only one who could afford to send each judge a 2-week vacation present. I mean, the luster on the trophy seems a bit dull doesn’t it? And it doesn’t even give him a head start in the main race, where he can’t buy off the judges, and the judges find him awfully distasteful for buying off the preliminary rounds. So what is left? To go down in history as another “candidate who lost”?

Oh gosh, I think I have overstayed my welcome.

Laters gaters