Alternative Facts, Broken Promises & Wolves

[DrmDoc]

Here's a glimpse of the mindset of one Republican lawmaker, a physician, working to repeal and replace insurance for many of our nation's poor and vulnerable citizens. According to this Washington Post article, Rep. Roger Marshall said:

 

"Just like Jesus said, ‘The poor will always be with us,’ ” Marshall said in response to a question about Medicaid, which expanded under Obamacare to more than 30 states. “There is a group of people that just don’t want health care and aren’t going to take care of themselves.” He added that “morally, spiritually, socially,” the poor, including the homeless, “just don’t want health care.”

 

 

Rep. Marshall appears to be under the mistaken belief that an inability to afford healthcare by the poor is the same as their not wanting healthcare. In my opinion, Mr.Marshall has certainly lost all credibility as a competent physician--much like HUD Secretary Ben Carson, a once respected surgeon who now equates slaves with immigrants.

[Phi for All]

Here's a glimpse of the mindset of one Republican lawmaker, a physician, working to repeal and replace insurance for many of our nation's poor and vulnerable citizens. According to this Washington Post article, Rep. Roger Marshall said:

 

 

Rep. Marshall appears to be under the mistaken belief that an inability to afford healthcare by the poor is the same as their not wanting healthcare. In my opinion, Mr.Marshall has certainly lost all credibility as a competent physician--much like HUD Secretary Ben Carson, a once respected surgeon who now equates slaves with immigrants.

 

When a society decides that the most extreme wealth should be used to offset the most extreme poverty, wouldn't it send a message that the health of even the most vulnerable is worthy of support? Rep Marshall's shoulder-shrugging attitude suggests his own self-esteem comes at the cost of other's.

 

I would also posit that anyone in this age of medicine who fears it enough to forgo their own healthcare lacks education, something Rep Marshall and his party have also fought hard to keep from Americans. These people demand that "healthy" and "smart" should only be attributes of those who can afford it. Circumstances of birth are shit to these folks, they just don't care.

[Ten oz]

WASHINGTON — Senior White House adviser Kellyanne Conway says the government has many options available to conduct surveillance against citizens beyond wiretapping.

 

In an interview with the Bergen County Record published Sunday, Conway had said that people should think beyond wiretapping in terms of monitoring individuals, saying “there are many ways to surveil each other.”

Conway told the Bergen County Record, “You can surveil someone through their phones, certainly through their television sets — any number of ways.”

 

Conway told ABC’s “Good Morning America” Monday that “of course I have no evidence for this,” saying that’s why there’s a need for an investigation.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/conway-suggests-surveillance-of-trump-went-beyond-phones/2017/03/13/63308044-07d5-11e7-bd19-fd3afa0f7e2a_story.html?utm_term=.869d63af0751

 

Trump is over the FBI, CIA, NSA, DIA, and etc. Trump could order an internal review. Trump could fire all the directors of the agency and hire news. Trump could order all programs and surveillance made public. These agencies report to him! Yet he is asking Congress to investigate. His spokes people are claiming TV surveillance and etc. Trump is both accusing his own agencies (and himself by default) of spying on private citizens but then refusing to do anything to stop it while asking Congress to look into it.

[DrmDoc]

WASHINGTON — Senior White House adviser Kellyanne Conway says the government has many options available to conduct surveillance against citizens beyond wiretapping.

 

In an interview with the Bergen County Record published Sunday, Conway had said that people should think beyond wiretapping in terms of monitoring individuals, saying “there are many ways to surveil each other.”

Conway told the Bergen County Record, “You can surveil someone through their phones, certainly through their television sets — any number of ways.”

 

Conway told ABC’s “Good Morning America” Monday that “of course I have no evidence for this,” saying that’s why there’s a need for an investigation.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/conway-suggests-surveillance-of-trump-went-beyond-phones/2017/03/13/63308044-07d5-11e7-bd19-fd3afa0f7e2a_story.html?utm_term=.869d63af0751

 

Trump is over the FBI, CIA, NSA, DIA, and etc. Trump could order an internal review. Trump could fire all the directors of the agency and hire news. Trump could order all programs and surveillance made public. These agencies report to him! Yet he is asking Congress to investigate. His spokes people are claiming TV surveillance and etc. Trump is both accusing his own agencies (and himself by default) of spying on private citizens but then refusing to do anything to stop it while asking Congress to look into it.

 

How does a president of the most powerful nation of the free world accuses his government of spying on him without ordering an investigation? I welcome Trump's continued belief in nonsense conspiracies and tweeting about it to the world. I think a little worldwide embarrassment for our nation is worth Trump's eventual ejection from a position for which he is clearly not qualified.

[DrmDoc]

​Here's an interesting perspective from a co-conspirator in the Nixon era Watergate cover-up on the probable turmoil in Trump's White House. According to this The Hill article, Nixon era counsel, John Dean says "There's just never been any question in my mind about that. I've been inside a cover-up. I know how they look and feel. And every signal they're sending is: 'we're covering this thing up'," His remarks regards his view of a probable cover-up effort by the Trump administration in the wake investigations by the FBI on possible collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign this past election season.

Edited March 21, 2017 by DrmDoc

[DrmDoc]

Here is another example of how the Donald has kept his promise to "drain the swap" with his nominees. According this The Washington Post article, Trump's current nominee for Labor Secretary, billionaire Jeffrey Epstein, is a registered sex offender who cut a 13 months sentencing deal in 2008 on convictions that should have brought him life imprisonment. Deplorable, despicable, and horrifying are just some of the adjectives that come mind when I think about this administration's nominees and efforts.

Edited March 22, 2017 by DrmDoc

[Phi for All]

Trump's current nominee for Labor Secretary, billionaire Jeffrey Epstein,

 

No, Alexander Acosta is the nominee, Epstein is the pedophile Acosta helped get off the hook. Headline of the article:

 

Labor nominee Acosta cut deal with billionaire in sex abuse case involving 40 underage girls

 

[DrmDoc]

 

No, Alexander Acosta is the nominee, Epstein is the pedophile Acosta helped get off the hook. Headline of the article:

 

 

You're quite right. My apologies to SFN and it's readers for this error. Perhaps it's my aging eyes or conscious bias towards this administration that facilitated this error. In future, I'll try to take several breaths before feverishly posting on this subject matter.

[Phi for All]

You're quite right. My apologies to SFN and it's readers for this error. Perhaps it's my aging eyes or conscious bias towards this administration that facilitated this error. In future, I'll try to take several breaths before feverishly posting on this subject matter.

 

No problems. Perhaps it's not age, but just the refraction produced as you weep for the country.

[DrmDoc]

It seems that Trump and the wealthy 1% have a studied and confirmed penchant for lying and cheating. I was recently reminded of this 2012 PNAS study wherein research suggests "Higher social class predicts unethical behaviors." From the abstract:

 

 

Seven studies using experimental and naturalistic methods reveal that upper-class individuals behave more unethically than lower-class individuals. In studies 1 and 2, upper-class individuals were more likely to break the law while driving, relative to lower-class individuals. In follow-up laboratory studies, upper-class individuals were more likely to exhibit unethical decision-making tendencies (study 3), take valued goods from others (study 4), lie in a negotiation (study 5), cheat to increase their chances of winning a prize (study 6), and endorse unethical behavior at work (study 7) than were lower-class individuals. Mediator and moderator data demonstrated that upper-class individuals’ unethical tendencies are accounted for, in part, by their more favorable attitudes toward greed.

 

 

Although a dated study, Trump's alt-facts--most recently Obama spying accusations--convincingly validate this study's conclusions.

[DrmDoc]

Jubilation! Republican efforts to repeal and replace the ACA have failed, Sen. Paul Ryan has just announced that, so-called, Obamacare remains the "law of the land." The poor and vulnerable can rest assured, at least for a day or so, until this adminstration and the Republican led Congress again attempt to deprive them of necessary and affordable healthcare.

Edited March 24, 2017 by DrmDoc

[iNow]

He pulled the bill... Didn't even bring it to a vote because they couldn't get enough Yay votes for it to pass.

[DrmDoc]

He pulled the bill... Didn't even bring it to a vote because they couldn't get enough Yay votes for it to pass.

 

My only concern now is that this reversal may cause some voters to view Republican less unfavorably for the mid-term elections. If anything, their efforts have quite convincingly shown how little they care about our poor and vulnerable citizens.

[iNow]

They won by promising to repeal the law. Trump won by promising to repeal the law. They control the House. They control the Senate. They control the Presidency. They still couldn't get it done. I think that hurts them and that voters will remember.

[Ten oz]

They won by promising to repeal the law. Trump won by promising to repeal the law. They control the House. They control the Senate. They control the Presidency. They still couldn't get it done. I think that hurts them and that voters will remember.

I want to agree but 63 million voters couldn't or didn't care to see through Trump's con. I don't have faith they will remember or care about this bill. I'll use the poster tar as an example since we are all familiar. He understood Trump was a liar and snake oil salesmen but he still voted for him anyway purely based on us vs them racial politics. Not repealing Obamacare or anything else tangible mattered.

Edited March 24, 2017 by Ten oz

[iNow]

I didn't comment about how many voters would remember

[iNow]

This view aligns with the point made by a Ten Oz above:

 

http://www.vox.com/polyarchy/2017/3/24/15055636/aca-repeal-angry

If the goal of the campaign against the Affordable Care Act was to repeal the Affordable Care Act and leave millions without health care, it failed, thankfully. But if the goal was to win election after election, and virtually wipe out the Democratic Party across much of the country, while never actually engaging with the tough questions of health care, then it succeeded beautifully. And that success lives on. It is really one of the longest, most coordinated political deceptions in American history, and one in which Trump is only a minor player.

 

Other crises and issues are likely to emerge between now and the 2018 midterm elections. So it’s entirely possible that Republicans will pay no political price attributable to today’s failure 19 months from now. That is to say, Democrats paid a staggering, existential price for finally succeeding in delivering health insurance to almost everyone. And Republicans will pay none for eight years of pretending they had a better, cheaper, painless way to reach the same goal, only to reveal at the end that they had nothing, not even a Laffer curve drawn on a napkin.

[Endy0816]

I'm hoping this serves to derail more of his agenda. Did make for some strange bedfellows. Democrats, staunch Conservatives against it any form and Republicans concerned with preserving the new status quo.

[Ten oz]

It is all sport for the right. The more carefully crafted fact filled an argument from a progressive position the harder the right laughs. I use to think they laughed as a tactic to deflect but have come to realize their laughs are genuine. It is actually funny to them that progessive don't realize they don't care about the facts. It cracks them up that people waste their time being so careful when they simply don't give a f#ck. They never cared about how Hillary Clinton checked her emails, never cared whether or not the ACA was good policy, don't care about about melting glaciers, and etc. It is all a game and we're all suckers for dwelling on the facts in their opinion.

 

An analogy: Two college guys are attempting to date the same girl. One purely just wants a one night stand to win a bet going with his pals. The other guy thinks he may love the girl and wants a relationship. The girl herself wants a monogamous relationship and superficially likes both guys about the same. Clearly the girl should choose to date the guy which actually cares for her. Problem is that the guy who just wants to use her to win a bet is a liar. So the girl has no idea which guy is better for her as they both present themselves as meaningfully interested. The fact that the guy who cares is the only real option here is irrelevant. He is forced to compete with the liar. Not only is he forced to compete but if he loses he lose the girl and she will end up hurt. The facts provide him zero advantage. The guy who cares must find a way to sell above and beyond the facts because merely attempting to studiously refernce the facts of the situation will merely get him mocked and laughed at. The guy who's looking to win a bet doesn't care who is better for the girl. He doesn't care about girl or the other guy. He has his own agenda which exists outside of the facts which the other guy and the girl in the situation care about. He has his own alternative facts which drive him.

 

In my opinion if progressives are going to start winning elections they need to stop believing they can beat the horny guy looking to win a bet with facts alone. We can't. Move over we need to recognize when we are being made fun of for trying. Sean Spicer as Press Sec. is the Trump admin laughing at the press. Spicer's job is to mock the press. Yet journalists waste time writing intricate questions to ask Spicer hoping he'll take one serious. Shame on the journalists they should know better by now. Rather than asking Spicer a single question they should all should walk out and just print that the White House refused to send out a legitimate reppresentive to answer questions. Because there is no point in treating Spicer as a source of information. For starters his goal is to distract attention away from things that matter and to avoid those things he can't distract from. And secondly he doesn't actually have any information to provided even if he wanted to. He isn't privy to any of the information journalists are hoping to get. Trump and Bannon chuckle everytime they send Spicer out there because they know doing so it just a big middle finger to the press. Facts may be on our side but we are still forced to compete and superficially allowing ourselve to get openly mocked daily by clowns like Spicer and Kelly Ann Conway hurts. We need to turn out backs to lies the way they turn their backs to facts.

 

Their alternative facts exist because they have alternative goals and motivations. They are out there selling goals and aspirations while progessives are running around trying to sell facts. I think 9 times out of 10 aspirations sell better than facts. The right make no attempt to honestly match up their goals to our facts yet we constantly try to match up facts to their goals. It is an error, We need to show how facts align with our goals and just ignore their lies.

Edited March 25, 2017 by Ten oz

[DrmDoc]

This view aligns with the point made by a Ten Oz above:

 

http://www.vox.com/polyarchy/2017/3/24/15055636/aca-repeal-angry

 

Wow, it was all a political game and we fell for it? Politicians, they should all burn in hell.

[Delta1212]

 

Wow, it was all a political game and we fell for it? Politicians, they should all burn in hell.

Every time some politician does something scummy or worse, people complain about "politicians" as if this is only to be expected from anyone who is a politician and, implicitly, letting the person or people who caused the actual problem off the hook by making the case that anyone who could have been elected would have done the same thing. After all, they are all politicians.

[DrmDoc]

Every time some politician does something scummy or worse, people complain about "politicians" as if this is only to be expected from anyone who is a politician and, implicitly, letting the person or people who caused the actual problem off the hook by making the case that anyone who could have been elected would have done the same thing. After all, they are all politicians.

 

By no means would I advocate letting any politician off the hook for their despicable deeds and behaviors. Although I hope for the best but expect the worse, I support holding their feet to the fire and accountable for the actions.

Edited March 25, 2017 by DrmDoc

[Ten oz]

Every time some politician does something scummy or worse, people complain about "politicians" as if this is only to be expected from anyone who is a politician and, implicitly, letting the person or people who caused the actual problem off the hook by making the case that anyone who could have been elected would have done the same thing. After all, they are all politicians.

Any time it is proclaimed that a whole group behaves a certian way it provides cover to the worst amongst them.

[OldChemE]

While I see some good points in the above posts, I have to note that under Obama my medical insurance costs went up with no change in coverage, Our economy went in the tank (median household income peaked in 2008 in the US and has not recovered), a close friend DIED of prostate cancer after the "Improved" medical care system said he should not have his cancer removed surgically because he was too old, and it wouldn't kill him, and many more upsets. Anybody who promises to stop the Federal Government from meddling in my life has my vote.

[iNow]

I have to note that under Obama my medical insurance costs went up with no change in coverage

Indeed, your costs went up, but what most people don't realize or understand is that they'd have gone up far more if ACA/Obamacare hadn't passed.

 

I recognize it's difficult to understand and accept a counterfactual like this, but a fact it is and facts are stubborn things.

 

Put simply, your experience was far better with ACA than it would have been with the status quo, even though your personal experience overall was still more painful and your out of pocket costs much higher than any of us would like.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/higher-health-insurance-premiums-dont-mean-the-affordable-care-act-is-a-disaster/2016/10/26/1b7f7ce0-9b84-11e6-a0ed-ab0774c1eaa5_story.html

Another way to assess the ACA is to compare current premium costs with what costs were projected to be without the law. Recently, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected that under current law, premiums for employment-based coverage will be 10 to 15 percent lower in 2025 than they would have been without the ACA, assuming a tax on high-cost plans goes into effect.

 

Similarly, the Brookings Institution estimated that in 2016, health insurance premiums in the ACA are at least 30 percent lower than they would have been for individuals without the ACA.

 

And a Robert Wood Johnson Foundation-Urban Institute analysis found that national health-care spending is expected to be 11 percent $2.6 trillion lower from 2014 through 2019 than previously estimated by CBO.

-----

Our economy went in the tank (median household income peaked in 2008 in the US and has not recovered)

Once more I must remind you that facts are stubborn things and the facts don't support your assertion that Obama tanked the economy. Quite the opposite, really.

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-01-19/ranking-the-obama-economy

Whatever you think of Obamas policy choices, the U.S. economy did better while he was in the White House than it did under all but one of his five most recent predecessors.

(...)

Obama took office during the worst recession since the Great Depression, when the economy was losing 750,000 jobs a month and already had lost a record 9 percent of GDP. He completed his two terms with the largest annual gain in the value of the dollar, the biggest annual decrease in household debt as a percentage of disposable income, and the largest annual increases in car sales and hourly wages.

 

His presidency coincided with the second-highest annual gain in home equity and trailed only the Clinton period in deficit reduction as a percentage of GDP. While non-farm payrolls under Obama had a slower annual increase than they did under Jimmy Carter, Clinton and Ronald Reagan, they rose for 75 consecutive months, the longest streak since February 1939.

(...)

There's no Obama economic disaster.

 

Facts are stubborn things. By measures that count, the last eight years have been a time of steady improvement, though short of a record-setting boom. Only one of the last six presidents led the U.S. during a more vigorous economic period. That was Clinton, and he gives Obama extra credit because of the financial crisis.

http://www.factcheck.org/2016/10/obamas-numbers-october-2016-update/

 

Annual federal deficits hit 1.4 trillion (USD) in fiscal year 2009. As we've documented elsewhere, Obama inherited most of that deficit and signed spending measures that contributed, at most, $203 billion to FY 2009s red ink.

 

Since then, the yearly deficits have declined markedly. In fiscal year 2015, which ended last Sept. 30, the deficit was $438 billion, a drop of 69 percent from FY 2009.

(...)

Median household income has gone up $1,140, or 2 percent. The buying power of the average workers weekly paycheck is up 4.2 percent. (...) Overall inflation during Obamas first seven years in office has been half the historical average, and has actually turned negative since our last report.

(...)

Middle-income households were bringing in more money last year than they were the year before Obama entered office. Median household income last year jumped up 5.2 percent, to $56,516, Census reported. That was the largest percentage increase in 17 years. In real income, adjusted for inflation, that was $1,140 more than in 2008 an increase of 2 percent under Obama.

(...)

Real Weekly Earnings The recovering economy, coupled with modest increases in prices, has boosted the buying power of weekly paychecks since Obama took office, especially in the last two years.

 

The BLS measure of average weekly earnings for all workers, adjusted for inflation and seasonal factors, was 4.2 percent higher in August than it was when Obama first took office. Most of that gain is recent. Real weekly wages are up 2.8 percent in the most recent 24 months.

 

Those figures include salaried managers and supervisors. But the gains have been even larger for rank-and-file workers. The BLS measure of inflation-adjusted average weekly earnings for production and nonsupervisory employees was 4.6 percent higher in August than when Obama first entered the White House.

 

Consumer Prices Overall price inflation during Obamas time in office has been less than half the historical average.

 

The average yearly rise in the Consumer Price Index under Obama has been just 1.7 percent, measured from December to December. Thats well under half the post-World War II average, according to BLS figures. From 1946 to 2008, the average December-to-December rise in the CPI was a bit more than 4 percent.

 

And inflation has slowed even as the economy has warmed up. In the most recent 12 months on record, ending in May, the CPI rose less than 1.1 percent.

 

For the first seven years and seven months of Obamas time in office, the CPI has gone up by only 13.4 percent. In the eight years of the Bush administration, the CPI went up 20.7 percent.

Btw - I'm sorry to hear about your friend. That really sucks.

 

Cancer is a cold heartless bitch and a horrible, hurtful, hard hurdle for anyone to overcome no matter how awesome or available or affordable their healthcare.

Edited March 26, 2017 by iNow