Last of the year 2007!

Well here we are on the last day of 2007; tomorrow starts 2008.

Do I reflect on the year that was or just look forward to the New Year 2008 – how about both!

2007 was a good year for me and my family as good years go. No major bad spots; I look at my sister’s recovery from breast cancer as a good spot. My job was extra stressful in 2007 but I hope to minimize that stress in 2008.

2007 went by as fast as all the years go by. I have to read all the year-end round-ups in the various magazines I read to remember what really did happen in 2007. What always amazes me is the list of people that have died during the year; these are people that most of us recognize as representing various generations in various fields of endeavor.

As a country, we had our bright and dark spots and continue to struggle on the international front and economically here at home. Many or our problems like Iraq just go year to year with little visible change and some like the sub-prime mortgage crisis, in my opinion, will only reveal its true damage potential only in 2008 and maybe beyond.

The New Year will mean Bush will be out and hopefully will not damage this country in his last remaining year too much. Presidential politics will dominate all of 2008; you will not be able to hide from it. It already started earlier than at any time in our political history.

I wonder if a clear winner will emerge in either party or will it go down to the wire at the national conventions.

I don’t expect dramatic change in 2008 but I am not in control so who can tell. I am starting off the year a little differently by spending a week in Marco Island, Florida with my in-laws from Scotland and our grandson. I do not usually travel this early in the New Year but spend the month of January planning for the rest of 2008 – oh well change is good, I think.

I do need to shed some pounds big time – maybe in 2008.

See you on the flip side!

Christmas Day 2007

Ah, Christmas Day. Spent with family, good food, good drink and good conversation and of course, playing with the grandson.

I don't hate Catholics!

I don’t hate Catholics. My mother is a super Catholic and so are my sister and her family. I have Catholic friends who are good people I like very much. I sometimes feel sorry for people that are basically Catholic sheep but I know of many Catholics that have their own idea about what Catholicism should be regardless of what priests, bishops and popes say.

No, my scorn and derision is aimed squarely at the Catholic Church and specifically the boys that run that Church; shall we say the Vatican?

As far as the reason I pick on the Church or Church leadership so much – well it is mainly because of their unmitigated arrogance!

I have long maintained that humans are predisposed to religion as if it was in our genes. We need knowledge voids filled even if by made up stories; it’s our human nature. And religions of all kinds have been filling the void with stories almost from the beginning.

Religions produce traditions and traditions lead to a way of life for millions of people - if these religions make people happy and content then good for them. But if these religions or religious leaders start accumulating power and demanding control not only over their own adherents but over others, they need to be slapped down and reminded that they have no special position in our human society or in the spiritual universe; they are just keepers of the stories people choose to believe in and nothing more.

The Vatican wants us to believe that it knows what is good or bad for us as if they had a direct line to God – a touch of arrogance you think?

They allowed priests to sexually molest young boys yet demand we listen to those same priests instruct us in the proper handling of sexual issues, marriage issues, behavior issues, etc. – is that the height of arrogance?

The history of the Vatican and the Papacy is replete with stories of degeneracy, immorality, corruption, wickedness, plain evil, decadence, and dissoluteness, wantonness, vice, depravity, debauchery, indulgence, dissipation and whatever other similar words can be found in the dictionary.

One professor teaching about the Papacy said that as despicable as the Papal record is many bishops point to the fact that the papacy still exists means that God must be protecting it for some reason – did you understand that? – as bad as the Vatican has been and may be to this day, the fact that it has not crashed and burned must mean that its fate must be in the hands of God – what a rationale!

Excuse me if I sound a little bitter about the faith of my childhood and the faith of my ancestors but superstition and darkness must stop somewhere and not be passed on anymore.

I am all for tradition and I practice certain Polish / Catholic traditions but I can no longer stomach the blatant arrogance of the Catholic Church and feel strongly that Catholics worldwide need to take the reins of their religion away from the arrogant nitwits in the Vatican.

Local political nonsense!

Monday, December 17, 2007

To: The Canton Observer
Re: “Residents trying to repeal raises for elected officials”, Dec. 16.


The recent attacks on the Canton Township Board of Trustees for their decision to give themselves a 3% raise were expected, as they always are; but trying to repeal the raises has gone past plain silly and into the realm of the absurd.

It appears that all parties agree the board deserves the raise but somehow the board picked the “wrong time” to give themselves the raise. In this time of economic turmoil in Michigan the board’s action was somehow “insensitive” when so many Canton residents are not in the best of financial positions.

I can see anger at CEOs awarding themselves millions when their companies are heading for bankruptcy but I cannot see getting angry over a deserved and planned 3% raise amounting to around $11,000 total.

May I posit the idea that there is no right time for public officials to give themselves raises and there never will be a right time; people complaining about the raises are people that complain about any and all raises that elected officials grant themselves no matter how miniscule the raise or how good or bad the economy.

These same people feel that elected public servants are just that, servants that should work for servant wages. They tend not to see these individuals as real people with real lives, real bills to pay and real kids to raise.

Elected office is not for everyone. Living from election to election is not for everyone. All you can do is the best job possible, hoping the electorate sees the results and votes to allow you to continue your good work.

Getting mad at Canton’s elected officials for one’s financial misfortune when they had nothing to do with the cause(s) of that misfortune is unfair and quite frankly, smacks of envy and serves no positive purpose whatsoever.

I missed the point in Romney's speech!

I have written about Mitt Romney’s “religion” speech on a number of occasions already but just recently I have been made aware, by commentators, that I may have missed the whole point of his speech – duh?

I thought that Romney basically ignored his Mormonism and focused on the freedom of religion in this country and the fact that religion should not determine if a candidate is fit to run for the presidency.

On closer reading of his speech, he is trying to unite all Christians (includes Mormons) to stem the attack of the secularists or as he put it, the unbelievers. He mentioned godless Europe as an example. Hmmmmm, that is a good political move on his part; uniting the Christians instead of defending Mormonism against Christians who call it a satanic cult and not Christian at all.

Smart fellow that Romney! But what do I think of this us against them; Christian against secularist that he is touting? On the one hand he says religion should not be a test for leadership (unconstitutional) but on the other its either vote for me (us) or a secularist may get in (read Democrat) and the U.S. may turn into a godless Europe.

It is interesting to point out that some countries in Europe have state religions (U.K. etc.) a clear repudiation of our separation of Church and State doctrine and yet in those same countries the people could give a shit about religion.

Hmmmmm, so the Christians in the U.S. want Christianity to become the official American religion so we can then all ignore it?

Anyway, I am having some trepidation about this whole religion in U.S. politics thing and I think the secularists here are going to have to start making some noise.

The Golden Compass & the Catholic Church

Hey there is a great kid’s movie coming out at Christmas time and it’s called THE GOLDEN COMPASS.

I have seen trailers and am thoroughly captivated by the special digital effects and the story line – out of this world!

But wait, there may be a controversy brewing about this children’s flick. The Catholic Church or at least some department of the church calls the movie as trying to imbue innocent children during Christmastime with a notion that religion is evil and especially the Catholic Church.

Well, this sparked my interest as these types of controversies always do and I had to search deeper.

The movie is the first of a trilogy (Lord of the Ring?) written by a man named Phillip Pullman; his books titled “HIS DARK MATERIALS”. Yes, the man is an avowed skeptic, secularist or atheist; take your choice, suffice it to say he is not a fan of religion and especially the Catholic Church which he names specifically in his books but in the movie he calls it THE MAGISTARIUM.

The word magistarium actually does pertain to the Catholic Church and is the “teachings” of the Church; magister is teacher in Latin and the magistarium is the infallible and fallible sacred teachings of the Church as a whole.

Pullman has said that the Catholic Churches makes up teachings and then demands that all Catholics believe these teachings as true when in fact they are total nonsense. Catholics are hammered by the Church since an early age to blindly believe and follow whatever the “magistarium” dictates. I think this is made obvious in the movie also.

The director of the movie realizes what the author intends but claims he has made the movie as neutral as he could. The movie is about good and evil, reason and free will against superstition and subjugation.

I have not seen the movie yet but am really looking forward to seeing it AND of course following the controversy as it continues.

I must add that the Catholic Bishop’s Movie Review Board or the Catholic Movie Reviewers – found the movie to be OK and commendable to promote light against darkness which the Church also supports – are you kidding me?

More later…

Religious Test to run for President!

Mitt Romney delivered his “religion” speech and by all accounts it was a well polished speech that was not a defense of his Mormon religion but a defense of the freedom of religion in this country and the fact that religion should not be a factor in choosing a president.

Romney cited our own Constitution, Article VI, Section 3 that states “…no religion test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States”. So to ask him to defend his Mormonism would be unconstitutional.

I am saying that in this country, at this time in our history, in this election, a de facto religious test IS REQUIRED to run for the office of president.

All candidates, Republican and Democrat, have had to affirm their “deep” religious roots and beliefs and that their lives are guided by these beliefs and if so, so will what they do as president will be guided by those beliefs. Of course, they all (not Republicans) could be just bull shitting in order to get elected but the fact that they feel they absolutely need to appear religious to win is very troubling to me!

Another way to look at this issue is to ask yourself what chance of getting elected would an atheist have, or even just a secularist? What if you just said you were an agnostic and just didn’t know which if any religion was “true” or even if a god existed; you’re not against religion, you just don’t know if it all isn’t just made up nonsense.

I don’t think a non-religious person would have any chance at being elected to the presidency in our present time.

I don’t think it was always this way. What religion was Eisenhower? Did anyone give a shit? So it must be the evangelical movement and their money that is changing our political landscape and it needs to be stopped.

The silent majority is going to have to speak with its vote. We need to let people know with our vote that religion should be a personal matter and we don’t want to hear about it. What we care about is how a candidate stacks up as a man or woman of this world and of this country.

What that person stands for, not what their religion stands for. Are you going to uphold our constitution or undermine it like little Bush has done? Are you going to use common sense based on solid evidence to make your decisions or are you going to hang on to superstitions your faith espouses like not accepting evolution as a scientific fact, or that stem cell research causes potential mini abortions and should not be allowed.

If our candidates do believe that they need to promote their religion to get elected but really would not do so under normal circumstances; we need to find these. We need to separate the real religious kooks from the candidates that are just playing the religious game to get elected.

I am pretty sure Hillary is one such person and I am sure Giuliani is also. In fact Obama is for a fact since he took up religion only when advised to politically. Edwards I am not sure of.

Huckabee is a religious kook but I don’t think Romney is. McCain is probably not and I would say the same of Thompson.

More later…

Huckabee quarantine AIDS patients!

Huckabee has been accused of suggesting quarantine for AIDS patients in 1992. OK, I did the same back then.

I am medically trained; trained to diagnose and contain the spread of a threatening epidemic – that is “standard operating procedure” period.

The fact that AIDS could not be spread by casual contact but through (in those days) homosexual (anal/blood) sex placed it in a different category than lets say Typhus or Ebola so quarantine per se was not absolutely indicated. But we did not know much in the first days of AIDS and quarantine would not be a totally farfetched action at that time.

Huckabee was also critical of Hollywood and especially Elizabeth Taylor for trying to get the government to spend billions to find a cure “immediately”. I was also very ticked off at Liz because she never mentioned that AIDS could be prevented by the practice of safe sex; she did not want her boys to have to wear a condom, it would diminish the pleasure somewhat.

Huckabee was angered by the government directing billions away from cancer, etc. to find a cure without first having an effective prevention program in place – I agree and was also mad at this irrational approach to handling an epidemic. He suggested that Hollywood fund the research and I suggested Liz Taylor pay for it if she wanted a cure so bad.

We now know a lot more about AIDS and it no longer is a homosexual disease but afflicts many non-homosexuals. We did let it go out of control and now are having a hard time getting it under control but that is another subject.

I agreed with Huckabee on his AIDS stance in 1992 but we part ways as far as homosexuality is concerned but then he IS a Baptist Minister and that is that!

For me he may be an OK person but not presidential material at all!

Romney and his troublesome MORMONISM!

Mitt Romney has decided to give a “religion” speech to the nation but it will not be like the JFK speech of the 60s.

John Kennedy had to defend his Catholicism by saying that the Pop/Vatican does not control him and will never control him. He said that he was not a Catholic running for president but an American who happens to be Catholic running for president. Obviously his speech worked because he won!

Romney, a Mormon, did not see a need to give a “religion” speech but since ole’ Huckabee, a Baptist minister, is winning in Iowa; Romney decided he had to make things clear to the public about his Mormonism.

The little I know about Mormonism and I do have a former Mormon friend, is not enough to make my opinions altogether very erudite, but I do generally know that the theology behind this religion is a stretch; a big stretch. Some say it is downright silly and totally absurd.

Romney is not going to defend Mormonism which Christians consider a “cult” and not a part of Christianity. He will basically say that look at the man and not his religion. His biblical words were: by the fruit of their labor will you know them – fair enough?

I am conflicted here. I don’t like people that wear their religion on their sleeve; I think it should be a private matter. If they spout religion all the time, I will not consider them seriously period!

BUT because Romney is trying to downplay his religion (like JFK did), I have to respect that.

I am conflicted about Romney mainly that he is a flip-flopper and is way too political BUT he is a good business man and a good manager. The fact that he is kissing ass everywhere he goes can be accepted as necessary politically? – Giuliani is not kissing ass!

Anyway, just an observation…

Hugo done lost - wow!

Hugo Chavez lost. Hugo tried to become the dictator of Venezuela and was voted down but only by a smidgen.

Many will say that people become dictators NOT by a popular vote; not usually but some have. Hugo is not worried, he has five (5) years to go and he WILL find a way to become dictator mainly by liquidating the opposition – he has the poor in his pocket already so its just getting rid of the educated and the middle class – he probably will do it.

I still have to admire the fact that he tried to take over the country in a “democratic” way and that he did not immediately stage a “coup” right after the election went against him.

I have been to Venezuela and I do business there and there is a great disparity between the “rich” and the “poor”. There is a middle class but there is also “abject” poverty living in cardboard houses along a mountain side.

Chavez says that only benevolent socialism will work in Venezuela and even though I agree that democracy does not work everywhere, I am very skeptical of a dictatorial socialism/communism – history is proof that it does not work.

Venezuela has oil and therefore money coming in; how they use that money is the key. Just giving it away to the poor is not the solution; you need to create a thriving economic community so you must have a plan to lift the poor into the middle class.

Venezuela is an interesting case study in how a country and a people can progress economically and socially in the modern world.

Chavez is not that bright when he kisses Castro as some kind of hero. Cuba and Cubans have suffered and are suffering because of Castro. Whole generations were denied happiness and prosperity because of that misguided communist asshole – we free the Iraqis thousands of miles away but cannot help the destitute a few miles away from our shore – go figure!

Anyway, this is an interesting occurrence on the international scene if you pay attention to such things – I have to but I also find it fascinating!

Huckabee first in Iowa, last in N.H.

Huckabee is leading in Iowa and dead last in New Hampshire. I have written before about the screwed up primary system in this country and this is proof.

Michigan tried to move up its primary to January but Iowa and New Hampshire moved theirs up even earlier AND the Democratic Party punished Michigan by telling Michigan Democrats that their delegates will not be seated at the Democratic convention denying them a vote at the convention.

What the hell is all that about?

Well, number one it is about money. Iowa gets millions of dollars as the presidential candidate’s campaign there. They also get power by deciding who gets to run for president; many candidates give up if they fail in Iowa or New Hampshire.

My question is why are Iowa and New Hampshire in such powerful positions in our presidential election process?

Iowa is all for Huckabee; maybe a nice fellow but a Baptist preacher with no chance in hell to make president or am I wrong? Carter had no chance also and was pretty religious.

New Hampshire is made up of independent twits who hold no party loyalty. Why are they in this dominant position? Who in the hell are they to choose who I vote for?

I think every state Democratic Party and Republican Party should hold their primaries when they want regardless of what the national party thought! Sure, the nationals should have control over the national conventions but let the states decide when, where and how they hold primaries.

Michigan and Florida, trying to hold early primaries, represent a wider swath of the American population than the farmers of Iowa or the independents of New Hampshire; let the population of more diverse states have a say.

I think Michigan will battle for their right to hold early primaries and I hope Florida does also and I hope if the National Democratic Party wants to punish either state; we punish them – let’s think of the ways we can!

Christmas / Winter Solstice?

Well, it’s December 1st so let’s get on to some Christmas stuff.

Around our water cooler someone brought up the fact that they did not like some of the Christmas music being played because it was not truly “Christmas” music, you know, about Jesus and his birth.

The music picked out as especially irritating was the type John Lennon sings, you know, peace and love during Christmas but no Jesus.

Every year I remind the Christians that historically, no one knows when or where Jesus was born although historians are pretty confident it was not in Bethlehem and not on December 25th.

The occasion that the whole world celebrated and celebrates at this particular time is the “Winter Solstice”; the time when the days start getting longer not shorter also known as New Year. This celebration, as natural as the rotation of the earth, was celebrated way before there was a Jesus.

In fact, the Christians plopped their Jesus’ birth celebration on top of the Solstice celebration for specifically to downplay if not marginalize the natural albeit pagan celebration of the winter solstice / New Year.

And every year, it grates the hell out of me that those same Christians complain that THEIR holiday is being taken over by hedonistic pagans bent on only having fun and not paying homage to the birth of the world’s savior.

Since I am having a very nice French? Vodka on the rocks while writing this, my irritation may be slightly amplified.

I will not bore you with the historicity of the celebrations at the end of December but I will take exception to the music complaint. If Jesus was all about “love thy neighbor…” why object to Christmas songs touting peace and love; it would seem very Christian to me.

I feel kind of sorry for Jesus because if he was here he would just shake his head at all this nonsense going on and tell everyone that he was a Jew and remained a Jew till the end. His whole mission was about reforming Judaism and who in the hell are all these bloody Christians and what in the hell have they done to his name and legacy.

Anyway, that’s my first Christmas rant; more to follow…

Islamic Law needs reform!

Staying with Islamic Law, what about Saudi Arabia and the judges that sentenced a female to prison and lashes for enticing men to rape her over and over again – how dare she!

These types of cases are common in Saudi Arabia but this time the girl (19), her husband and their outspoken Islamic lawyer, are not staying quiet. They leaked the case to the outside media and now the Saudi government which controls the judges, the law and everything else is looking pretty bad – how backward can you be?

I am happy to see that there is a huge uproar from the West about this case, both men and women, and a start of some discussions within the country itself. Maybe this is the revolution from inside that I was talking about.

Saudi Arabia is rich, has all the trappings of modernity, sends students to study in the West and is very influential (oil) worldwide BUT it is backward!

It has the strictest form of Islam (Wahhabist), treats its women like dogs and adheres to extreme Wahhabist Sharia Law. This law punished the girl for being in the presence of a male that was not her relative but did not punish the seven men who repeatedly raped her. Eventually the huge outcry about the case has resulted in an even stricter sentence for her, a 5-7 year sentence for her attackers and the disbarment of her lawyer for daring to question the court.

The case will now go to their so called supreme court but it is the government that will make the decision and so far it has been besieged by Americans and Europeans and their decision may actually affect the entire Muslim world since they are the birthplace of the Prophet and the location of Mecca, the holiest of the holies for Muslims.

I am encouraged by the fact that the case somehow made it out to the world and that the girl could somehow tell her story to the world. Usually the people are kept in darkness, nothing in and nothing out, but something must be happening and all I can think of is that with the internet and other modern communication modes, light can enter the darkest places.

China was communist and totalitarian but not religious. In fact communism demanded atheism and religion was looked at as an opiate of the people. China opened up to the West and is now an economic giant; an amazing transformation (I was there). We don’t hear of backward religious laws and the people are smart and industrious and are enjoying the fruits of their labors.

China is an ancient civilization and has gone through many historic periods. They had a belief system but it was nothing like Christianity and Islam. Is it because they were never under the grip of Christianity or Islam that they are now enjoying their existence to the fullest?

I know this is a complicated matter historically but I will lay the current turmoil in the Middle East and elsewhere at the feet of the two biggest world religions: Christianity and Islam.

More later…

Teddy bear named Mohammad!

I have a number of issues to discuss but let me start with one that irks me and should irk everyone.

It is the story of a British teacher in Sudan who was teaching in a private school there. A class project was to name a teddy bear and the class decided to name the toy bear Muhammad after the name of a student in the class. Muhammad is a very, very common name given to boys in Islamic countries.

Anyway, someone complained that the teacher insulted the Prophet Muhammad and Islam in general and should be put to death.

She was arrested and the judge sentenced her to months in jail and 200 lashes which was actually very lenient considering she could have been sentenced to death. Crowds rioted at the reduced sentence demanding death!!!

OK the British government reacted immediately and British parliamentarians who are also Muslims traveled to Sudan to intervene on behalf of the 56 year old teacher. The president of Sudan will probably pardon her and she will probably escape back home being so grateful to be out of that loony bin.

What do we have here besides hopeless absurdity?

Well we have another backward country being kept backward by a religion that has not changed since the Middle Ages. The government is partly responsible because it promotes and encourages this backwardness as a means of total control over the people.

Can’t really blame the people; they don’t know any better and they are programmed from an early age to consider all foreigners as devils trying to hurt them and their religion. The judges are no better since most of them are religious clerics charged with making sure the “religious” laws are obeyed and dishing out severe punishment if they are not; their (clerics) very existence is depended on the continuation of this religious form of law so obviously they are biased and will fight any suggestions to move to a more modern system of justice.

Islamic Law is not as totally absurd as it seems to most of us. Yes it was created by men to favor men but it did have a semblance of basic justice or fairness. In the case of the teacher, a clear intent to actually do harm or make fun of the prophet or Islam would have to be proven before conviction but obviously the judges were swayed by emotion and not really by the letter of THEIR law which means there is no law, only judges controlled by governments.

Some say economic progress will bring enlightenment. I used to think that but I now point to Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and the rest and say they are economically progressive and still retarded by religion. Look at the U.S., richest country in the world and we have more religious kooks than anybody so that argument does not work.

In the short run we need to embarrass the hell out of these regimes that foster this backwardness and encourage and foment revolution from within?

Thanks on Thanksgiving Day?

Happy Thanksgiving Day or Thanksgiving Weekend to all; we usually have the Friday off also making a great weekend to work or relax – I do both. Had a great meal as always, love that turkey, mashed potatoes and especially the gravy! It’s great to have the family around on yet another “traditional” holiday.

We have a lot to be “thankful” for; many have a lot less than we do and I mean not only money and possessions but also basic “happiness”.

My wife uncharacteristically, offered a “grace” before the Thanksgiving meal. She offered thanks for our family’s health and well being and wished for the safe-keeping of our troops fighting in a war no one believes in.

After the dinner I asked to whom was she praying if it was that what she was doing or was she just thanking someone, but whom? She merely said she was addressing a higher power.

She is spiritual without being necessarily religious but the whole affair raised some interesting question(s): whom do you thank when you offer thanks for your happiness?

The Thanksgiving tradition is kind of muddled but we are taught that it celebrated the Pilgrim’s first harvest in the New World and now we celebrate all our harvests since then. Others point to Lincoln’s proclamation of having a national Thanksgiving Day after the Battle of Gettysburg for victory or something else? Anyway, it was definitely intended to thank a god or some supernatural being.

So whom do secularists thank for their well being, themselves? That seems kind of inane!

If you were a secular farmer with a great harvest you couldn’t just thank yourself since a good harvest also depends on the weather and other factors that you do not control. Would you thank Mother Nature or just your very good luck?

My point is that you can definitely just celebrate your good fortune on Thanksgiving Day without thanking anybody or any thing but I feel we humans have a certain “need” to thank a higher power that we “feel” must be somehow involved in the higher scheme of things even if we have no possible idea how or maybe eating too much turkey affects the brain in silly ways.

Healthcare Reform #3: Universal Coverage

In healthcare reform one of the key provisions must be, in my opinion, universal coverage. That means, you MUST have health insurance; it is not an option, penalties to be worked out later.

Right now Hillary and Edwards agree, Obama says mandate it only for kids the rest voluntarily. On the Republican side, none of them are for universal coverage with McCain being the most vocal AGAINST mandated coverage. Mitt Romney, while governor of Massachusetts, established mandatory coverage but now is against his own plan?

One of the main reasons for having universal coverage is to eliminate the “uninsured”. The uninsured are the people most responsible for the dramatic rise in health care costs. Because hospitals are mandated by law to treat the uninsured (pro bono) they jack up the prices for their medical services to those of us with insurance and in so doing, allow us to pay the uninsured person’s medical bills.

It stands to reason that if we eliminated the uninsured medical facilities would not need to keep raising their costs; they are no longer treating people for free – get it?

You may ask who are the uninsured (40+ million) and how will they be able to buy insurance?

As to who they are is a complicated question but there are surveys available. Many are young people (men) that think they will never get sick, others would rather get free coverage at the ER and some are working poor that don’t qualify for Medicaid but cannot afford the expensive policies available to them currently.

One obvious answer is to make available many insurance policies, prices according to the extent of coverage and co-pays. This will enable the young guy to buy just catastrophic coverage for cheap. Right now, states like Michigan mandate what an insurance policy MUST cover and since they MUST cover basically everything, their cost is astronomical and therefore out of reach to the working poor. The absurdity of such laws becomes apparent when the 19 year old single male has to have a policy covering maternity services.

Subsidies will be available for people needing help with their premiums. I mentioned that employers not offering healthcare coverage would pay into a pool or trust fund that would use that money for subsidizing the working poor. Remember I am only talking about the current uninsured; the poor will continue to have Medicaid and the elderly Medicare.

The Republicans are saying that forcing people to get health coverage is a little un-American but they don’t mind forcing people to have auto coverage? What’s the difference? Obviously you cannot depend on people to do the right thing so you force them Herr Hoffmann!!!

Healthcare #2 - Employers.

Today’s paper carried articles on healthcare reform and the fact that it is the second biggest issue that concerns voters right now; the Iraq War is the first issue.

I will be going over some of the plans that Democrats and republicans are promoting but I will limit the discussion to specific points per blog to keep it short and readable.

I mentioned before that “socialized medicine” plans are not on the table at either party.

In my opinion the “employer provided” health plans should be abolished and individuals should be required to buy their own plans. Many plans should be offered so that you can buy as little or as much health coverage as you want or can afford. Those who need help in paying for health coverage because of low income, etc. would be able to apply for a subsidy from our government.

The reason I favored doing away with “employer provided” health coverage is because people look at that coverage as “free” and often misuse it and also because they don’t pay for it they don’t see any reason to lead a healthy life-style.

If people had to pay for their healthcare they would make sure they did everything possible to remain healthy.

Anyway, the plans being promoted by our presidential candidates keep “employer provided” health benefits but for employers that do not provide any medical coverage, the plans call for them to contribute to a general medical coverage pool that would be used to subsidize those people that need help buying their own insurance.

Another problem with keeping “employer provided” medical coverage is that if an employer has been providing generous benefits sees that he can cut his expenses by paying into that mandated medical coverage pool, he will and the workers would lose out at this point.

California seems to be on the threshold of bringing out such a plan and it will be interesting to see what happens. It will be closely watched as a potential plan for the whole nation. Massachusetts already has a similar plan.

The "Surge" is not really working dude!

Just a very quick note on Iraq less you thinks I have forgotten about it. Bush is being congratulated on the success of his “surge” tactic but he knows better.

I have maintained from the beginning that the only way top end this stupid war was to split Iraq into three (3): Sunni, Shia and Kurd.

The reason that the so called “surge” appears to be working is because Iraq is now de facto segregated along ethnic lines: Sunni, Shia and Kurd. The fact that they are segregated means they are not killing each other on a daily basis.

Once we leave, all hell breaks loose and that is why only a formal division of the country will work; each with its own government but with a federal agency to split oil revenues between the groups.

So you see the “surge” hasn’t done shit but Bush will lie and say it did and he was right all along!