I see Amy Goodman had Matt Taibbi on Democracy Now!. (And, btw, I never did like Lanny Davis, who is now a lobbyist for supporters of the Honduran coup.)
Signed,
Not Atrios
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
I Guess So
But I don't know what else would convince them.
I must admit, I think there is entertainment value in watching his head explode as an African-American president nominates a latino female to the supreme court.
I must admit, I think there is entertainment value in watching his head explode as an African-American president nominates a latino female to the supreme court.
Healthcare Details
I was wondering the other day whether there was any push by advocates of complimentary and alternative medicine (CAM, which I hold in rather low esteem) to get unscientific health care products and services covered under any public plan.
Medicare/Medicaid won't cover CAM treatments, but the British NHS does, including outright quackery like homeopathy. There's obviously a strong disincentive to pay for ineffective treatments, but CAM quackery does have devoted and vocal supporters. And if there is one thing congress does poorly, it's protecting taxpayers from getting ripped off for the benefit of a business group.
I imagine that the public option would essentially be a ported version of Medicare, which would be fine. But then I read about Sen. Harkin's shenanigans, and began to worry again. Does anybody know if this is a topic of debate around either the senate or house bills?
This is a concern several orders of magnitude less important than the issue of whether or not we actually get real healthcare reform with a strong public option, and much less important than various other details in any bill that will shape how our nation receives healthcare. But as long as people are worrying about costs, it seemed a relevant concern. And there's a lot of room on the internet to worry about minor details, too.
Medicare/Medicaid won't cover CAM treatments, but the British NHS does, including outright quackery like homeopathy. There's obviously a strong disincentive to pay for ineffective treatments, but CAM quackery does have devoted and vocal supporters. And if there is one thing congress does poorly, it's protecting taxpayers from getting ripped off for the benefit of a business group.
I imagine that the public option would essentially be a ported version of Medicare, which would be fine. But then I read about Sen. Harkin's shenanigans, and began to worry again. Does anybody know if this is a topic of debate around either the senate or house bills?
This is a concern several orders of magnitude less important than the issue of whether or not we actually get real healthcare reform with a strong public option, and much less important than various other details in any bill that will shape how our nation receives healthcare. But as long as people are worrying about costs, it seemed a relevant concern. And there's a lot of room on the internet to worry about minor details, too.
Wuuuhh?
London Tube prices aren't all that cheap, but this just can't be true.
Even a cash fare to the furthest out zone will set you back only 7 quid, or about 12 bucks. Of course pass fares are cheaper. And zone 9 stations are like 25 miles from the central city area.
At the news conference Tuesday, Mr. Walder spoke highly of the Oyster card but stopped short of saying he would import the program. And he did not address the issue of fare increases; in London, subway rides start at $2.60 but can rise above $20, depending on the length of the ride and the time of day.
Even a cash fare to the furthest out zone will set you back only 7 quid, or about 12 bucks. Of course pass fares are cheaper. And zone 9 stations are like 25 miles from the central city area.
My Wee Inner Libertarian Comes Out
The reason (fair or not) to limit calorie/nutritional information requirements to chain restaurants is that requiring it of every restaurant for every item would really place a really large burden on small establishments. It isn't costless to get this information, and aside from monetary cost there's a time cost. I wouldn't want my local French BYOB to have to send every new proposed menu item to the lab before putting it on the menu.
It's more reasonable for large chains because their menu items are standardized and the cost can be spread over their entire chain. And, more than that, the major chains at least already know the nutritional information about their products, they just don't necessarily share it very prominently absent regulation.
It's more reasonable for large chains because their menu items are standardized and the cost can be spread over their entire chain. And, more than that, the major chains at least already know the nutritional information about their products, they just don't necessarily share it very prominently absent regulation.
The First Rule Of Fight Club
Well, you know.
- The teenager, Kyle Shore, of 250 West 27th Street in the Chelsea section of Manhattan, was charged with arson, criminal possession of a weapon, and criminal mischief, Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly said at a news conference. He had bragged to friends that he was responsible for the bombing, Mr. Kelly said, and had started an underground fight club modeled on the one in the 1999 film, which starred Brad Pitt and Edward Norton.
Of Course A Bit More Actual Mass Transit Would Help Too
But, in any case, the administration's stated emphasis on building walkable/transit-oriented communities is a positive sign. I don't yet have a sense of what kind of carrots/sticks the feds can realistically wield to encourage state/local gov't to actually do such things. It's important to remember that in most places - even places with mass transit! - it's been extremely hard to actually have such development even if developers are willing.
(ht reader d)
(ht reader d)
Joe The Soothsayer
Hopefully wingnuts will start taking stock and horse picks from the guy.
That they continue to cling to Joe the Plumber in wingnut world is even more odd than their love of Palin.
That they continue to cling to Joe the Plumber in wingnut world is even more odd than their love of Palin.
Apparently There Was An Election Yesterday
In case you hadn't noticed.
- LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Democrat Judy Chu has easily claimed a vacant U.S. House seat in a Los Angeles-area district, reinforcing the Democratic majority on Capitol Hill.
Shorter Tom Friedman
You can find it.
- Sure we beat the crap out of our kids and pretty much destroyed their lives, but we still have so much love to give.
You can say that again
When Mark Sanford first disappeared in his inadvertent quest for new euphemisms he did have plenty of people rushing preemptively to his defense -- The usual suspects; The Washington Times, the Wall Street Journal editorial page, FoxNews, Jake Tapper.
But none were so prompt and servile as Erick Erickson at Redstate.
Whoops:
But none were so prompt and servile as Erick Erickson at Redstate.
Whoops:
The e-mails also show some reached out to the governor on how best to come to his defense.
“If he wants something more personal for the blog to push back, I’m happy to help,” wrote Erick Erickson, a writer for RedState.com. On June 23, Erickson ripped “media speculation” about Sanford’s whereabouts.
“I wasn’t trying to be a reporter. I wanted to curtail the story,” Erickson said by e-mail. “Well that didn’t work.”
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Sarah Palin's Op-Ed
I was going to say a few words about it, but really it speaks for itself, and it's been ably dealt with several times over already.
I'll just add that more generally, the idea of freeing ourselves from foreign sources of energy is another one of those concepts that polls well across the political spectrum and thus gets overused to the point that it loses all meaning.
We're a net coal exporter, and electricity isn't generally traded between countries (except really along borders), so the entire concept of "foreign sources of energy" really means petroleum and natural gas. And the idea of consuming less imported oil and gas appeals to people for various ideological reasons. And there are genuinely good reasons for reducing the amount of foreign (and domestic) petroleum and natural gas we consume.
But increasing domestic production of an internationally traded fungible commodity won't really solve those associated problems. The EIA has made it pretty clear that our own ability to ramp up production is dwarfed by global demand, even with the recent downturn. I always thought last summer that figures 20 and 21 put the lie to "Drill baby, drill!" (why I never saw a cable news show discuss that report is a separate matter...)
Even if we managed to increase our domestic production to the point where we significantly reduced imports, it wouldn't solve most of the problems of "foreign sources of energy." Global demand would still support dictatorial oil-garchies. The global economy would still be vulnerable, if somewhat less so, to geopolitical supply shocks. And global climate change would continue unabated or accelerated.
My point is just that "freeing ourselves from foreign sources of energy" really only has meaning as "freeing ourselves from petroleum and natural gas*" Sarah Palin's op-ed has no meaning.
The kind of crap that gets published in the WaPo op-ed pages would be amazing, if it weren't so unsurprising.
(* although even in my utopian future, we'll have natural gas cycling plants for some time.)
I'll just add that more generally, the idea of freeing ourselves from foreign sources of energy is another one of those concepts that polls well across the political spectrum and thus gets overused to the point that it loses all meaning.
We're a net coal exporter, and electricity isn't generally traded between countries (except really along borders), so the entire concept of "foreign sources of energy" really means petroleum and natural gas. And the idea of consuming less imported oil and gas appeals to people for various ideological reasons. And there are genuinely good reasons for reducing the amount of foreign (and domestic) petroleum and natural gas we consume.
But increasing domestic production of an internationally traded fungible commodity won't really solve those associated problems. The EIA has made it pretty clear that our own ability to ramp up production is dwarfed by global demand, even with the recent downturn. I always thought last summer that figures 20 and 21 put the lie to "Drill baby, drill!" (why I never saw a cable news show discuss that report is a separate matter...)
Even if we managed to increase our domestic production to the point where we significantly reduced imports, it wouldn't solve most of the problems of "foreign sources of energy." Global demand would still support dictatorial oil-garchies. The global economy would still be vulnerable, if somewhat less so, to geopolitical supply shocks. And global climate change would continue unabated or accelerated.
My point is just that "freeing ourselves from foreign sources of energy" really only has meaning as "freeing ourselves from petroleum and natural gas*" Sarah Palin's op-ed has no meaning.
The kind of crap that gets published in the WaPo op-ed pages would be amazing, if it weren't so unsurprising.
(* although even in my utopian future, we'll have natural gas cycling plants for some time.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)