Paying Healthcare Providers for Performance.

It is interesting that in today there is an article in the New York Times Science Times about paying healthcare providers for performance, because I happened to have just been working on this same topic. The article clearly, and concisely pointed out the pitfalls of paying for performance. I think there is merit and reason to such a promise, but I advocate a much different system. There is the idea of paying for results, which is different than paying for performance, and is also being tested by Medicare. But as usual, insurance companies and Medicare, just don’t get it. Their solutions fall somewhere in the middle, rather than developing proper methods, they like to use the most basic and limited thinking to reach their goals. In my pay-for-results plan, there is your base pay plus two bonuses for lowering mortality rates and improving treatment rates based on certain criteria. There are no payments for treatment guidelines as in the current system, because it contributes to the risks and abuses pointed out the article, such as avoiding surgery for patients at higher risk or even treating patients who are very high risks, as well as starting antibiotics and other treatments before you are clearly sure of the diagnosis. You earn your bonuses for lowering mortality or treating in the most efficient manner, meaning earliest and easiest intervention. Only if you don’t get a good result while not following the guidelines the government has established, would you be penalized. In this way, you can show that you are able to achieve excellent results without blindly following generalized guidelines. The problem with these guidelines developed by the government is not that they’re bad, because they’re not. Statistically, they are driven as the generalized best practice. However, if people were machines, especially mass-produced well maintained machines like computers, this generalization would work a lot better. The problem is, human bodies don’t all work perfectly alike, and medical science is art as well as science as there is so much still to be learned. Therefore, providers for innovative and maintains strict controls to be on top of the situation can probably do a better job than generalized guidelines. However, if you’re not good at what you do, and you are flouting guidelines without showing a corresponding better practice, you’ll not only get worse results but the system will now be in place to penalize you for it. Patients will need to be set up in the two tiers, with the most sick patients being put in the final tier, and will be judged statistically on a separate basis, so as not to skew your results and lower your bonus. This will help to remove the encouragement, not to take on the sickest and most high risk cases.
Since generalization is built on statistical evidence I am quite sure it saves lives in institutions where the creativity is lacking, or the attention is not quite there, where they are understaffed and overworked, so it is not a good idea to abandon them completely. Rather, they should be used as a measurement tool to compare what treatment is being done at organizations that are doing below acceptable limits. For the best institutions they should be used to figure out what they are doing right and how to ultimately make those generalizations even better.
It is important to create a tier structure that takes into account the kinds of cases, the hospitals are taking on. We don’t want to encourage hospitals to shy away from the toughest cases, or those institutions that currently do, and should handle the toughest cases, to worry about how they may skew their results in a negative manner.
Clearly, we need to hold providers accountable. Just as we want people who repair all our homes or cars. We need to understand that unlike homes, cars and computers, fixing people is not an exact science, and everything we need to know is not known. Having said that however, we have a right to expect that our providers are not only well trained and licensed, but are knowledgeable and prepared to practice using established, statistically beneficial guidelines, unless they have a good and experienced rationale to divert from these guidelines.
We should not allow insurance companies and Medicare to start dictating treatment. When the only way for a provider to get paid is by following the guideline of treatment, even when they strongly have reason to believe they can do better than those guidelines, then they won’t, and medical science will not march forward. Insurance companies and the government are always looking for a way to pay out less, and this is reasonable if they can find ways to more efficiently offer the same or more effective care. However, what’s necessary here is the creation of a more comprehensive and multi-tiered evaluation system and check and balance system, to allow providers to do what they do best, yet help them to avoid some of the pitfalls and errors to which many of them are prone.
We can do better. We must not allow insurance companies, nor government, to choose what is easy and expedient. Simple cost-cutting and financial constraints are not going to fix our health care system, nor halt health care inflation in the future, unless we accept the realities that major change must be affected. At the same time, we must preserve what is best about our system, and that is our well-educated provider system, our top-notch research and development system and our cutting edge development of technology in healthcare and related fields. We can do better and we will do better.

The Fighting Terrorism Scorecard.

Some Presidents have terror trust upon them, like Bill Clinton in 1993 when, without warning the World Trade Center was attacked. Others are prepared and forewarned with their great understanding of the world around us, like George W. Bush who ran during the 2000 debates as the "anti-terrorism President". After 9/11 George W. Bush said he would have "moved heaven and earth to have stopped those attacks". Since it has long been established that he had warning that Al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden were planning to use our own airplanes against us in a terror attack, we can presume that rather than figurative, W. Bush was being literal. Apparently he might move heaven and earth, which I am pretty sure he actually cannot do, but he would not order the airlines to lock their cockpit doors; something that has been done since the attacks, and has long been credited with helping Israel's airline, EL AL, avoid hijackings. Because he was warned but failed to act in any way, shape or form, George W. and his administration get a big NEGATIVE on their first brush with terrorism. George W. then invaded Afghanistan, the hideout of Osama bin Laden, after establishing that he and Al-Qaeda were the culprits. That goes down as a big POSITIVE. We then invade Iraq, even though intelligence tells us they are not related to the attacks, do not harbor Al-Qaeda, in fact Saddam Hussein was afraid of Al-Qaeda. That's okay. We don't claim they had anything to do with 9/11. We claim they are dangerous on their own right, preparing weapons of mass destruction and all. When this turns out to be false, and we start to learn that the administration knew these were lies, we suddenly start to claim they were part of 9/11 all along. By 'WE' of course, I mean our Government. Then the bipartisan commission finds, as we knew all along, that Iraq had nothing to do with Al-Qaeda or 9/11. George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, John McCain and Joe Lieberman have apparently not read any of this intelligence or been briefed on any of these reports. Many citizens of our country and people around the word have been getting the message however. That would go down as another big NEGATIVE. Our destroying the Iraqi military and having not a clue how to fill the void allowed Al-Qaeda to, for the first time, get a foothold in Iraq and start killing our troops with roadside bombs and Iran supplied anti-tank and helicopter weaponry. Incidentally, also empowering Iran. Our use of torture and indefinite imprisonment during the conflict has helped to turn Arab sentiment against us that had been won over back by the Gulf War. Our hypocrisy has tainted us not only in the MidEast, but on the entire world stage, emboldening Russia. We'll call that another real big NEGATIVE. Our taking the eye off the ball by going into Iraq leaves the job undone in Afghanistan, allows the Taliban to regroup and lets Osama gets away. NEGATIVE. That's five events with one positive and four negative for, or a 20% positive percentage. If you took math anywhere but President Bush's classes at Yale, you know that is a failing grade. If there is any place where John McCain most agrees with George W. Bush, it is in the fight on terror. Do the math. What is really sad is that because the Republicans talk tough, people actually believe them, even with their abysmal record. These are smart people, some of them anyway. If a stockbroker told them he'd make them a lot of money but had a terrible track record of losing people's money, these people would never listen to them. If they were shopping for a car and the salesman said this is the best car in the world, they would still look up Consumer Reports to objectively verify this. But let a Republican talk tough on terror, and it doesn't matter that they have done absolutely nothing, well, almost nothing, and certainly done almost nothing right. Like I said, DO THE MATH, and if you don't want to vote for Obama, then write in a vote for a house plant, or a sponge, or anything or anyone not McCain/Palin, because this country and its citizens cannot afford 4 more years of fighting terrorism the Republican way. We need to start fighting the real threats and we need to focus on that fight until we beat them! But when you do cast your vote, before you write in that house plant, remember that Bill Clinton, a democrat--shudder---caught the 1993 attackers of the World Trade Center, and when Al-Qaeda attacked us in other countries, Bill Clinton sent in cruise missiles, and when Saddam Hussein would break the no-fly zone, Clinton would bomb his bases and other military targets. By that count, Bill gets a passing grade. You can vote Obama, or vote for a sponge (Spongebob for President, anyone?), but I think we'll all probably be better off with Obama.

Country First

Country First. That's the sign that the Republicans wave around at their convention. I guess they are trying a change of pace, since they tried putting their country last and the richest people first from 2000-2006. They still put their country last from 2006-2008 but it was less comprehensively because they lost the congress, because the country woke up and realized they were being put last. Just about their entire convention has been about veterans. Veterans are heroes and patriots, but that does not mean they are qualified to be President. If you only had to be a brave war hero, then John Kerry would have been our President the last 4 years, and America might have already been on the road back to the greatness it deserves. We can't change the past, but we can fix the future. The Republicans had their chance...and they messed things up. True, we don't need Obama to get us out of Iraq because despite what the Republicans want; Bush wanting the war to continue and McCain saying we will stay there 100 years, the Iraqis are throwing us out! Still, we need a change to right so many other things. Vote Obama. Or go ahead and write in your vote for a sponge, a Buick, a house plant, what-have-you, just not John McCain or any other Republicans.
By the way, did you notice those young Republicans cheering Rudy Giuliani saying John McCain would keep the fight against terrorism on the offensive? Why are they at the convention? Why haven't they enlisted to fight the good fight in Iraq (or even better---the real fight in Afghanistan)? The old Republicans love to cry for war because they aint going, and they aint sending their kids either, make no mistake. Seem a bit hypocritical? Alright, it's true, not just a bit. Of course, not all Republicans are hypocrites. John McCain's kid is in Iraq (as will soon be Joe Biden's), and Palin has family going as well, but sadly, that is pathetic, not patriotic. The only terrorists they will get to shoot at in Iraq were ushered in by George W. Bush, as has been pointed out in this blog before. If Republicans are so easily fooled, and fail to learn when the truth is pointed out to them; that Iraq had nothing to do with 911, and a bipartisan commission pointed that out, and that the Bush Administration lied, and covered up these issues, how can you trust such easily fooled people to run your country? The answer of course, is you can't, and when you try, you get the last 8 years. And Bush was the guy doing the fooling! He's the clever one! The rest are just still believing the lies he sowed! At this point it should just be NUFF SAID. Time will tell.

More on Health Care Reform. Changes to come.

I just want you to know that I have happily worked for insurance companies selling both life and health insurance as well as managing entire units and regions for those companies. Nevertheless, I must call this section, "how the evil insurance companies screwed up everything".
You see, in the 70s and 80s, when insurance companies are able to make ordinals of money on safe interest-bearing investments, they took their eye off the ball and simply reimburse whatever charges doctors and hospitals submitted. This allowed for out of control costs growth and waste. There was no fiscal discipline for decades in healthcare. This is by far not the only cause of the situation, but because the insurance companies acted as insulation between the public and providers, there was never the need to deal with the spiraling costs. Of course, due to the complexity of healthcare, it’s never going to be cheap, and there is no developed nation where health care is quality where it is cheap, although in many places it's less costly and more efficient than it is in the United States.
Now, I don't blame the insurance companies for everything or necessarily even the majority of the current problems. I also wouldn't blame them almost at all if they made a reasonable rational attempt to fix the problems that they did create. But they did not they, like the government, tried Band-Aid fixes that not only do not address the problems that are unfair in their attempts at what meager solutions they offer.
Their cost containment solutions are always aimed at the end providers, ignoring what those providers cost of doing business really is. Now, I have stated myself but I believe we spend enough on healthcare already, but I know that to fix the system to make it operate on these budgets requires major policy retooling. To go to the last end of the providers and say you've got to charge less, we are not paying you any more next year than we did this year, we are only paying for this many days of hospitalization and we won't take into account that people aren't machines and we can't always know exactly what's going on inside them and what the outcome is going to be, are all punitive measures with no rational basis for expecting them to work , or work efficiently. Neither government nor insurance companies get it. There is no simple fix here. Insurance companies place in this business is going to need to change drastically. Insurance companies and HMOs aren't doing a good job, aren't doing the right job and aren't set up correctly for what our healthcare system needs. On a much more superficial basis I am going to begin to lay out here what I do much more comprehensively in my book; and that is how we are going to need to remake the interplay of insurance companies, government funding and healthcare providers into something that works now and will continue to work into the very far foreseeable future.

You heard it here first--You are not a Patriot if you vote Republican!

What does it really mean to be an American? What is a patriotic American? A few great Americans wrote that "all men are created equal". If they had lived in more enlightened times I am quite sure they would have said "all people are created equal". It has been a long time since Republicans treated all Americans, much less all people, as equals. In the last eight years George W. Bush has treated only those who are rich and friends of his and Dick Cheney's as equals. Conservatives of George W. Bush's ilk lie and obfuscate to meet their own personal agendas. They tell you that you need smaller government because it's not right for government to interfere in your lives. I'll tell you government should be as little involved as absolutely possible. The convince you that really all government is for us to protect you from invading nations, and other than that you should really be on your own; because its best for you that way. Then they'll tell you they can have an abortion, can have sex with who you choose, probably love to have certain kinds of sex and only allowed to marry people that they deem proper. What they really mean when they tell you that you need smaller government is that they feel that rich people like them shouldn't have to help out the poor and sick. They don't care about healthcare reform because they can afford health insurance. They want to make it illegal for you to have an abortion, but then cut programs that would provide aid for you and your child once they're born. In case you were wondering, this is not the American way. It's not what our forefathers fought for. It's not the meaning of their written words. If you study history and historical documents you will find that the people who founded this country were great people and great thinkers. They took risks and committed selfless acts. There are almost no politicians alive today who could stand up to a comparison with those that started this great nation. Our soldiers are patriots. They risk their lives for protecting our great nation. Even in wars that you may consider unjust, from Vietnam through the Iraq war, you can only blame the wars on the politicians, but you must respect and revere what our soldiers offer up to their nation. Our police and firefighters are patriots. They lay it on the line for their fellow country people every day. When you vote you are committing a patriotic act. When you speak out, whether for or against your government, you are committing a patriotic act. Your forefathers created this great nation and thousands of lives have been laid down through the years to protect your rights to say what you have to say. If you look at the politicians who tried to paint dissenters as unpatriotic you will see that they have committed more unpatriotic acts; more acts diametrically opposed to the well and teachings of our forefathers, then anyone else. It is no surprise that George W. Bush and Dick Cheney have spent a good part of their administration painting critics of theirs as unpatriotic, because they are perhaps the most unpatriotic leaders of this great nation that we have seen in our own lifetimes. Now, I'm not going to call John McCain unpatriotic. He served his country and he suffered for it. He tried to round on his conscience and cleanly, and was ripped apart by George W. Bush in 2000 because of it. This year, with the Republicans so out of favor, he could've run as the renewed and reinvigorated John McCain who stood for something for many years. He chose not to. To pander to the right wing conservatives he sold his soul, and not to Satan but far worse, to George W. Bush. He has aligned himself with unpatriotic liars who have sullied the great history of our nation. No, I will not call John McCain unpatriotic. However, his campaign and his presidential ambitions have aligned himself with those that are so unpatriotic that it would be a crime against this nation to reward his poor choices by voting him into the White House. I do not know a lot about Barack Obama. I think that's the problem, nobody does. I don't know how he'll react in a crisis or how he'll handle world affecting events, but I do know he hasn't made the poor choices John McCain has. Also in the limited things we do have from Barack Obama we can see a consistency of purpose and compassion throughout the years. I also believe, while they should not have snubbed Hillary who I do believe was qualified to be president, that in choosing Joe Biden he has shown his openness to be guided by experience at his side. Thus, after analyzing our forthcoming election I can only find that the right thing for America and the patriotic thing to do, is to elect Barack Obama and Joe Biden to be president and vice President of the United States later this year.

President Hillary. Maybe someday...

Hillary Clinton did an amazing job in her speech at the Democratic national convention. She mended fences, praised and pushed Obama , and attacked John McCain. In short, she did everything she was supposed to, and everything the Obama people could have hoped for. So why was Michelle Obama looking so miserable throughout Hillary's speech? Could it be because she looked so presidential? Could it be that she was afraid the audience would be thinking they picked the wrong candidate? Some think Obama has been struggling in the polls because he seems to have lost his direction. He snubbed Hillary for his vice presidential candidate, and could Michelle Obama now be realizing what a terrible mistake that was; failing to create the dream ticket because of his own stubbornness and pride? Joe Biden's a really good guy. Maybe he's qualified to be president, but he sure didn't get many votes when he tried. He's not likely to bring many votes he couldn't get over to Obama. By choosing Biden, after extolling the virtues of going outside the box and not picking a Beltway insider and looking for somebody who didn't have the same old jaded Washington experience, he merely appeared to be caving in to the criticisms that McCain has leveled at him that he somehow escaped when Clinton and Edwards and Biden, et al., leveled them at him themselves. In one fell swoop, choosing Biden over Hillary, but yes, choosing someone like Biden, created the look of a panicky candidate with no firm belief in his own rhetoric. As Hillary said, we need a democrat President...but will we get one in 2008? Stay tuned.

Getting back to how to reform health care.

I am sorry that I've been away so long. Many factors influenced that. Partially because I was so disgusted at what's gone on politically in this country in the last several months. Before I start talking about all of that again, and I do believe what's going on is going to impact health care reform, I wanted to remind everybody that this is a healthcare reform blog some going to put as some of my latest writings on healthcare reform that I have just rewritten in my hopefully forthcoming book:

we need to remember that when dealing with healthcare reform, we need to understand that health care is a lot like electricity; in that it is essential and everyone should have access to it. We need to leave as many aspects free market as possible, but at the same time. It needs to be run with a lot of regulations. Not only dealing with safety, as it has up to now, but it's dealing with access and financing as well.

The reasons are many why we need to preserve what's best about the United States healthcare system. The attacks on our system are numerous, but many are specious as well. While obviously something needs to be done about costs, because it is pointed out that we spend the most on healthcare, it is wrongly pointed out that it obviously is not worth it because we don't have the best longevity rates of a modern population. But of course, we are the most modern population, the richest country, and raise our standard of living for the majority of Americans many years before the rest of the modern world Court up. Because of this, in some ways we are more obese and slovenly than the rest of the world. But as our nation comes to grips with this and starts to work on this, the rest of the world is busily trying to catch up. They are consuming more empty calories, more refined sugars and flour and actually see smoking rates rising in their countries. As one of the earlier pioneers of the modern industrialization movement, America also had the good fortune and subsequent burden of utilizing materials and processes that turn out to be dangerous and/or greatly polluting. While some materials, because of our discoveries and other nations discoveries, will be spared from use in other emerging nations now, we are still seeing the cycle of initial over polluting because of emerging industrialization.

As we are ahead of the curve in "rich country" diseases, I believe we will be ahead of the curve in regaining good health. You will see as America's longevity rates increase that many other modern era countries will stagnate or begin to decrease, before making their own U-turn back to health.

It is of the utmost importance that the amazing research and good work that we do here in the United States is not hampered by a bureaucratic, shortsighted government system. This is why we need government controls and oversight, but a free market solution to the healthcare crisis.

Looking at the total amount that America spent on all healthcare in 2007, I am of the belief that we spend enough. The areas that were going to tackle our waste, realignment of insurance, realignment of physician practice, oversight. In general through process improvement techniques and various cost-cutting initiatives, while you might find it tough to take 20% of your family's budget, a large corporation that hasn't been through extensive cost-cutting in the recent past can often remove 10 to 40% of costs without a significant deterioration of functioning. I think it would not be unreasonable to be able to remove 20% of costs out of our healthcare system and then work back in a vigorous inflation rate so that going forward practitioners, suppliers and providers would all find comfortable increases built into the system.

The realignment of physician practices going to be uncomfortable to many. It is going to reek of government controls because it is literally redefining physicians roles in society. However the proof fashion of physician is just not a profession that has gotten out of control with independence and entrepreneurialism. In reality if we look at physicians as healthcare executives, we can conjure whether so many should be independent? You don't meet a lot of independent vice presidents of corporations. Sure some executives become consultants, or they take a new idea and start a Corporation. Doctors can do the same. But the fundamental system of delivering healthcare through independent entrepreneurs encourages waste. These independent physicians are not adding anything in the form of lower pricing, better services or products or new innovations as would happen when the entrepreneurs begin new companies. These practitioners just go out into the fields to do business as usual like everyone else in the medical field and hope to bring in enough patients for them to make ever more money. It would be like if a McDonald's employee left and started another chain of hamburger joints, and created an exact duplicate of McDonald's and charge the exact same prices. Of course, he would be sued for copyright infringement, but more so, if he did not add to the equation by making everything better or cheaper, he would fail because nobody would find a reason to go to him instead. With physicians, it's true that all things being equal you might choose a physician whose a block or two closer to your home, but more likely you will choose one in your health plan, and that's the extent of most people's shopping. We need a certain amount of physicians in this country to take care of everybody so there is room for them to exist. But just like the copycat of McDonald's the majority of these physicians don't add anything by being independent as opposed to hospital paid employees in offices placed throughout the community.

When a physician works for a hospital and is placed in a field office and knows what salary he's going to make then, just like an executive at a Corporation, he knows the only way he's going to get above average raises will be to do a good job, get good results, do well for the customers and do his best to keep costs in line for the Corporation. Therefore, an adequate physician can expect to get raises in line with inflation, a superb physician keeping his eye on all these things we just mentioned can expect to get excellent raises. A physician who does a subpar job would lose his job like any executive of the cooperation, I would not have to wait to be sued by enough people that his license and ability to earn an income would become in jeopardy. This should be a much tighter run ship and a better self policing agency. This will wring out costs from the system and remove stress from the physicians. Those who are most entrepreneurial, whoever better way to do things, a way to save money for the patient, or who can do a better job for the patience, will still rise to the surface and will be able to open their own independent practices. I do not aim to outlaw independent practices. But it will become necessary to charge more, to have a higher co-pay, for those in independent practice. Therefore, only those that add to the value proposition, that do something better than their colleagues, will be able to run a private practice because they will be the only ones will be ever convince people to pay a higher co-pay to come to see them. In one fell swoop we would have cut costs and created a system where only those who can better the system and improve care will be doing the work independently.

Our system is not broken, it simply was designed with no cost controls. The cost controls that are trying to be placed on the system now, especially by government, are ridiculous. They simply arbitrarily decide that they're not going to pay more for something, they don't cut costs a cutting reimbursements on procedures, they trying to turn back the clock by medical providers at the same time that they voted raises for themselves and allow executives to have ever more exorbitant pay packages. The way the government tries to do it is unconscionable. But we do at a cost controls because the costs are out of control. The methods I speak of will bring in controls after creating a more efficient less expensive system, and then we'll build then comfortable increases into the future. Some form of change is coming, over that we can be sure because the system cannot continue to stand the way it is. Forgetting about how much it's pointed out in the rest of the world, we will point out here many times that they were too many people uninsured, too many underinsured and we already pay more than enough for all of it. There it changes that will be less painful and at the same time more beneficial. While you will see many systems offered to control costs by controlling K. our was simply limiting expenditures, you will see that these are not healthcare reform but healthcare reduction and limitation. When I speak of here is reform, and while change is scary, I believe reform will be embraced far more than reduction and limitation as proposed by the government.

Obama confirms he's a loser, but at least it is good to be back.

Satan Here. LH is on his way back to blogging and he promises some stuff to make it worth the wait for all of you that have been waiting LOL. But seriously folks, or should I say folk, I partially blame myself for the lull as I have been too bored to offer up any discussions to LH. And I understand somethings have gotten in the way of his appearing here but I understand he is back! In the meantime, he was so disappointed in Obama's choice of Joe Biden for his Veep candidate that he felt I should write a bit about it since he felt it was my fault. I did whisper it in Barack's ear, but it was a joke. I thought he would pick Hillary, it was the only logical choice. He picks everything he criticized Hillary for, confirming all the things McCain criticizes him for. Politics as usual...bad politics. More from LH on this soon, as he gave me a strict word count limit. He doesn't seem to trust me. Because of this, you will not hear the one about the 3 Victoria's Secrets Models that were sent to Hell by accident. It was a good one, I tell you, but I do not have the space to tell you. Sorry.

Iraq Is Up For Grabs! Come One! Come All!

No, this is not the post I promised. That will come this weekend. Just a short note to point out that if elected, a President Obama has promised to end the war in Iraq in 2009. As anyone can tell, I am for ending the war. Nevertheless, promising such an immediate timetable tells Iran and Al-Qaeda, that, whatever the situation, "We are out of there! Come on in! Do what you want", because we have already made it clear we won't be there to stop you, though it was our invasion that created the opportunity for you to finally get the prize you have both been denied for years and years. Obama seems to be thinking like a child, in absolutes and for immediate gratification, and at this point the Democratic electorate seems to be like-minded. The broader electorate and even the Democrats will probably rethink this in the general election. Unless we want more Republican mess, and at least 4 more years in Iraq under a President McCain (you can spell a McCain Presidency as W. BUSH II), Hillary and the remaining Democratic Primaries better get back on track!

What's Going on with the Primaries?

With nothing substantive, and ideas that already appear to be unworkable, or at least not going to accomplish their goals (most notably HealthCare) , and a record that will probably not stand up very well to McCain, why is Obama leading in the primaries? Because Hillary is going down with the low opinion of the Congress. They have done nothing since getting elected. They did not get us on our way out of Iraq and they did not impeach Bush. Nevertheless, while Congress should change these things, Hillary needs to start talking about how the economy can be changed by president Clinton immediately, about how great America is, and will be, and she needs to stop ceding states to Obama when recent exit polls said the last minute decision-makers were going to her! I am not a one issue voter, but HealthCare is important and she is the only one really talking about CHANGE. Obama likes the word, but doesn't actually back it up with stated substantive policy changes! Hillary didn't think to use the word first, but her policies would be quite a change from the last 8 years! By the way, all of those educated people voting for Obama, why? Hw has stated no actual policies. This is an educated opinion? Besides, stop letting Obama and the Republicans rewrite history. The last Clinton Presidency was actually a GOOD time for America!
Next Up: HealthCare Reform Plans and Satan weighs in on the Primaries!!!!!!

Who’s Dumber than Democrats?

I had hoped to stay out of the primary season, because I prefer to wait until the final candidates have been chosen, before putting in my comments. However, I have not been able to ignore what is going on lately, mainly because it is so pathetic. When it looked like Hillary Clinton was a shoo-in, it really wasn't necessary to say much. I'm not saying she was a guaranteed great president. I'm just saying that of the field that was running, she appeared to be the best.

There is, after all, no possible way, with the country and the world in the state that we have helped to create, that any Republican candidate could possibly gain back credibility for their party and even remotely have a chance to win the 2008 presidential election...unless of course the democrats were to run, oh, say, a pineapple* as their candidate. Alas, of course, the Democrats are doing what they are always so good at doing, and are trying to once again pick a pineapple, or other such unelectable candidate. Actually, they would run a pineapple if they could...but since they are not in season, they would run an unripe and unelectable neophyte candidate instead.

Obama and Edwards are unelectable. Between the two of them, they bring, well, besides almost no experience, they don't bring much else, besides good intentions. If you don't know which road is paved with good intentions, I would introduce you to a frequent contributor to this blog, Satan, but he is not back yet from the Iowa caucuses. I believe he is thinking of a stop over in New Hampshire. Anyway, I have said this in a previous post, back when the election season started: If Obama or Edwards is the candidate the Democrats choose; the same democrats that vote for him now, will cave when the Republican candidate starts saying that in these difficult and violent times, with war in Iraq, Bin Laden in Afghanistan (or somewhere) and Iran going nuclear, that we need a strong and proven leader. And the loser democrats who all chose the guy in the primaries, will then vote for the tough talking Republican, just like they did George “I got you all into this mess in the first place” W. Bush in '04 when he did just that to well intentioned milquetoast Kerry.

I think Hillary is a good candidate and she will make a good president. Is she the best candidate out there? I was kind of leaning towards Al Gore, but I think she's the best of who's actually running. I like Mike Bloomberg, but I think he is considering getting in too late for him to be properly vetted. Independents are also at a disadvantage in this system, even with his considerable financial resources.

These other candidates are trying to turn Hillary’s experience into the “status quo” because between the two of them they have NO experience. She does have 35 years trying to help people and effectively (and sometime ineffectively) making changes! She has made mistakes that she has learned from. The others haven't had the opportunity and we can't afford for them to learn on the job. Only the inexperienced try to make experience into a bad thing, but the American people need to see through this. It is true that you can have bad experience, George W. Bush has certainly shown us that. But Hillary has a near lifetime of dedicated public service where her and her family have fought for everybody in this country. Wrong or right she has always tried to do what's best and has tried to make major changes for the betterment of this country. She has a track record of successes and failures. Everyone else brings nice oratory and good intentions. But you need more than that to run the greatest country ever on the face of the earth. By the way, Hillary has good intentions too; she has just backed them up with actions.

Let me also say here that, I like Oprah, I like her and respect her a lot. She is an amazing human being, who has accomplished a lot, and I hope someday to be on her show. However, I cannot explain why she so exuberantly endorsed Barack Obama. She's been around long enough and experienced enough to know that great change is possible in this country, but at the same time she knows it didn't come from just good intentions or good oratory. It required difficult and forceful action and painful transitions. It not only requires many forces and people working together, but strong leadership to get there. You cannot unite just with good intentions. You need strong leadership. Jimmy Carter was a perfect example of how good intentions could fail to work, and he was working with a Democratic Congress and Senate. Ronald Reagan is a good example of someone who can get what he wanted accomplished, even when dealing with a Democrat Senate and Congress, he was bullying with them., and brought his case to the American people to have them help him push his agenda along. Now, this is not to say that Mr. Obama does not have the additional qualities necessary, but that we have no reason to know if he does. If there is one job, that even though you cannot know what it is like until you have it, that cannot afford much of a learning curve, it is President of the United States. He might make a great President someday, and we may indeed find out, but I don't think he has shown us enough to get there now. We had another inexperienced guy, who said he would cross party lines and be a "uniter, not a divider" and who needed to learn on the job (and hasn't, by the way) and as we all know, George W. really did not work out well.

There is still time for the Democrats and Hillary to turn this around and preserve the Presidential election for the Democrats, and subsequently, for the betterment of our country and the world. But it doesn't look good.

*(This pineapple debacle may stem from the Democrats misunderstanding of a recent CNN/Reuters Poll that asked: "If an election for President were held today and the choices were Barack Obama, John Edwards, John McCain, Mitt Romney or a Pineapple, which way would you vote? The Pineapple won this hypothetical election by a two to one margin over the runners up.)

Well, the New Hampshire results are in, and either a lot of new Hampshire residents read my blog, or maybe I should have named this post: Who's Dumber than Iowa Democrats? But we shall see where things go from here before I rename anything.

Reforming Behavioral Health Care.

I was having a discussion with a NAMI (National Alliance on Mental Illness) Executive Director the other day and naturally we discussed the challenges of mental illness and ways to reform the entire field of behavioral health. I was asked to succinctly list the ideas contained in my book for reforming behavioral health care. I had pointed out that this was the last section of my book to be worked on, even though I had some direct experience in behavioral health care, and that in some ways it was the hardest to work on. Although my ideas for reforming healthcare are sweeping, behavioral health needs a lot of solutions tailored directly for it.

Behavioral health, much of its most debilitating diagnoses have been conclusively tied in large part to brain chemistry, tend to be chronic, long-term in nature and needing of various medication and psychotherapy. Assessing the state of mental wellness and treatments and the way they are handled by insurers and government, leads to a short list of necessary reforms. It's funny, whenever I'm asked to list some of my ideas for health care reform, and I do, people often find many of them interesting and possibly revolutionary, but they also always point out that if I'm able to give them a succinct and detailed list so quickly, how can I possibly really fill up a whole book with these ideas. Of course, there is more to the explanations than that. And I point out that there are political obstacles and tax ramifications that all need to be explored. But those who know me don't necessarily believe these explanations as much as they believe that I like to talk and always have lots, LOTS to say.

To reform behavioral health care we need complete parity. Mental illness must be treated like any other illness. There have been major inroads lately but we are not there yet. Also, because of its chronic and debilitating nature in many instances, we need to expand residential services, because supervised and supported places to live are much cheaper than longer-term hospitalizations, as well as much better for the long-term mental health of the service recipients and their families. We need more supported employment programs to help people get to work in whatever capacity they are able. Work builds self-esteem, gives people true meaning rather than something to keep them busy and provides financial assistance. We need reform of assistance programs at the state and federal level so that as the consumers of mental health services make money in supported employment, or in the traditional job market, they don't have to worry about losing their benefits, and other support structures that might otherwise tempt them to avoid employment in the first place. We need a comprehensive and national level, with regional variations, anti-stigma campaign. Mental illness is not something to be ashamed of or to be feared by others. Stigma is caused by ignorance and fear. In order to ensure that people are comfortable seeking out help and treatments, that people seek out the most effective treatments and assistance, and are comfortable adhering to treatment, we need to remove the stigma that has built up and remains over time. Stigma affects all aspects of behavioral health care. In order to ensure appropriate and adequate housing, employment and adherence to treatment we need a true effort to combat stigma. All of these things, along with the reforms to healthcare in general, can help us improve health care delivery and results, control costs and yet still maintain the most innovative, forward thinking and dynamic health care system in the world.

Because I believe that comprehensive anti-stigma campaigning is one of the core and key factors in reforming behavioral healthcare and helping it to move ahead as one complete reformed healthcare system someday, I am part of a mental health anti-stigma project. Anyone interested in this topic should visit the blog: http://www.mhas1.blogspot.com/. The link is also in our links section to the right. It is another piece in the movement to reform all healthcare.

Bush’s Latest Release: "HealthCare, Leave the Children Behind." Satan’s Review: "Two Horns Up!!"

“That’s just plain mean.” Satan said as his face lit up and a wide grin spread across his face face. We were sitting at the bar of our favorite Manhattan spot when the news scrawled across the bottom of the cable news screen. President Bush was suing to stop states from expanding public insurance programs to cover more uninsured children.

"He needn't keep trying so hard to get my attention and spend the afterlife with me in my domain," Satan said, "he had me at Hello!" We laughed.

"Yeah, tell me something we didn't know!" I said.

"This is pretty despicable though, keeping health care from children in need because he believes this is slowly leading to Universal Government Run Health Care." Satan said.

"Yeah, well, he and his administration aren't going to be accused of either great foresight or great compassion. And as for intellectually and morally considering issues, well, I heard he is also committed to outlawing antibiotics to stop the genocide against microbes!"

"So where do you stand on this issue?" Satan asked.

"I am for the genocide of illness inducing microbes, actually, although I understand the importance of microbes in general and support all non-pathogenic microbes, molds and viruses."

"No." He barked. "On expanding these government run programs for children!"

"Ah, well, I am not a fan of Universal Health Care because I believe it will sap the future of medical innovation and grind health care to a bureaucratic halt where we will end up a nation of chronically ill generic pill poppers. I believe that a carefully constructed realignment of health care is in order, and I have peppered these concepts throughout my many months here. However, I am never against fixing anything and Universal Health Care is better than no health care, which the most recent census just announced another 2 and a 1/2 million uninsured in this country to over 48 million! This needs to be addressed and Universal Health care is one way. If the president fears this, he'd better come up with alternatives because a conservative free market President that hates lawsuits should not be threatening to sue states to stop them from providing necessary health coverage to uninsured children. In the short run, these programs make sense and should be put into place while the kind of system wide restructuring I advocate is explored and enacted." I responded. Satan just looked at me.

"You both think very highly of your opinions," Satan began, "but at least your ideas would help people. and George W. Bush's will help him go down in history, not only for so many terrible crimes against humanity in the middle east, and for his atrocious self serving domestic initiatives, but now, for holding back health care from the children! He will have as a big a place in history as he imagines, but not in the way he believes." Satan smiled.

Gary Hart Redux: Or Another Difference between Democrats and Republicans.

I really hate to go against Oprah, because I respect her, look up to her, and sincerely hope to be on her show someday with a book I wrote that she puts on her recommended list! Nevertheless, I cannot figure out why she believes all you need to be President is to be a good person and have some good ideas. If that were enough then Jimmy Carter would have gone down as one of the best Presidents of the 20th century instead of one of our less effectual ones.
I am of course speaking of her endorsing Obama for President. Fortunately, as bad as Democrats are at running elections, as a party they rarely vote in those with good things to say, but no substance, or at least current proof of substance, for what is surely the single most important job in the free world. They didn't vote in Gary Hart, or Howard Dean, even though it was exciting to think you could just embrace change and move the country forward. It takes much more then good intentions and good ideas in this world. It takes foresight, compromise, political abilities, guts, determination, and yes, experience in these areas. Republicans on the other hand love inexperience because it leaves less of a history to dissect and attack. that is why George W. was their candidate. He was a mediocre 1 and a 1/2 term governor of a middle-ground state. Very little to point to, and little to criticize, and really not much to talk about at all...just to speculate...and then, of course, be attacked for speculating. It works for parties afraid of their candidates, but not for those looking for the best. And in that regard I believe Hillary Clinton, should, and will be the Democrat candidate for President, as well as the first female President of the United States of America.

Note to Bush Administration: Just because Satan does it, doesn't mean you have to!

I was busily working on my HealthCare Reform Part 2b when my cellphone rang, and as is often the case, the caller picked a hell-of-a time to call.
"Hello." I said.
"You don't sound so happy for getting a call from your biggest---and really, ONLY--- fan." Satan said.
"I'm busy, that's all. What's going on?"
"I noticed in one of your drafts for a future blog entry you mentioned that Satan could learn a thing or two from President Bush, what with his trampling of American citizens rights and all."
"I was being facetious." I responded. Then, "Hey! Don't look through my drafts!"
"I look at more than your drafts, I've gone all through your computer and I have to say I am shocked, horrified and impressed all at the same time. As for being facetious---so you say, but I want you to know if anyone learned it from anyone, he learned it from me!~ Meet me at our favorite establishment in an hour and we can talk more about it. Maybe I can even give you some ideas." He was already clicking off as I agreed.
One hour later at a bar in NYC.
I didn't see Satan out front but when I looked in I saw him at the bar. I walked in and sat down at the available stool right beside him.
"I can always get a seat here, no matter how busy it is." I remarked.
"Some people don't want to sit too close to the devil. Maybe they fear guilt by association." He mused. "But you have never hesitated, not since that first day you found yourself sitting beside me and you eavesdropped on my phone call."
"I'm not sure sitting next to you is the issue." I said, "But as for eavesdropping---you were talking very loudly. I think you wanted me to hear. After all, it went down like a healthcare joke, remember? You were sitting there and you were repeating what you were hearing, and apparently there was a train full of managed care and health insurance executives, politicians, lawyers and doctors all on their way to Washington D.C. for a congressional hearing on healthcare reform when there was a terrible accident. Many were killed, and their souls were on their way “down” to you for processing. Suddenly, you dropped the phone on the bar, threw your hands up in disgust, and cried out: “What did I do to deserve this?!!! Remember?”
"Yes, I remember." He smiled. "A fortuitous coincidence." He smiled again, in a way that made me sure he was lying. Then he pulled out a digital recorder and laid it on the bar. "A glass of 'Blue' for my friend here, " he began, "and another for me as well."
"You have good taste, I always have to say." Which I did. Then he pulled out two fine Fuente Dominican cigars with the ends already neatly clipped.
"Thank you," I said as I took one, but added, "you know, even though you keep ignoring it, I pretty much gave these up. I only smoke with you now."
'What do you want to do, live forever?" He said with mock indignation.
"Well, I'd like to hang around a while, and besides, I'd like to be sure where I am headed first."
"Oh. I think we both know where YOU are headed. Besides, afraid of Hell?" He asked.
"Isn't that the point?" I asked.
"But it's a dry heat." He remarked.
"Yeah, yeah. I know. I am also scared of the company. When I look who is likely headed down there, I am afraid every day would be like the 2004 Republican Convention."
"We get all kinds down there, you know." He responded.
"I understand." I said as flame flared from his fingertips and lit both of our stogies. "What's with the recorder?" I asked. "You want to quote me accurately in your own blog?" I laughed.
"No. I want to play you a recording I made in the White House back a ways." He said.
"OK. But if it's Monica talking about dress stains, I don't need to hear it. I'm thinking of ordering food at some point!"
"No. Not Monica."
"Something historical? Thomas Jefferson cavorting, perhaps?" I asked.
"No. But by the way, the digital recorders back in Jefferson's time were the size of a house and needed a thousand rats running on treadmills to power them."
"Sure." I said sarcastically.
"Or maybe I'm just having a flashback to the Flintstones. Anyway, listen...." He said as he pushed a button on the recorder. A little screen popped up and I was watching as well as hearing George W. speaking with Dick Cheney. On the bottom right corner it flashed 2005.
"Dick, I am a little concerned here, sticking up for Halliburton when they continue to do business in Iran, and when all the news is on about how they were in Iran and Iraq back when you were running them. I wasn't supposed to have to do this. You said no one would notice."
"Mr. President, George, please, we've been over this before. I said it was none of their damn business, but you have nothing to worry about, after all, let me remind you that you have already actually won the election this time! Now, as I have said, that is a subsidiary of Halliburton doing the business, and in my opinion, and that of many Halliburton executives, it is a quite legal thing to be doing. But more important, let me remind you how Halliburton continuing to work in Iran is good for all Americans."
"Please Dick, please do that, I am faltering from my moral high ground and I need your stout hearted, albeit with stents and medication, faith and support."
"Look, it's great to hate Iran. Really. Hey, I hate it, and all its people too. But--BUT---if we are too hard on Iran, or don't help support its infrastructure, a big supplier of oil will falter, and then we will have less oil for all the blessed people of our great nation to execute their God granted right to drive big gas guzzling automobiles and SUV's. Now, it's okay to say we shouldn't work in, or deal with, Iran, because that sends fear into the markets and raises the price of oil without actually affecting supply. This in turn enriches those great Americans, like ourselves, who had the foresight to invest in Oil and fuel services. BUT, if the supply were to actually be disrupted, then the price increases would primarily go to all those Terrorist--Allah fearing countries with little left for honest Americans except long gas lines. So you can see that Halliburton is really carrying out a public service, protecting our peoples supply of gasoline as well as enriching some of the most deserving and important Americans."
"Dick, I know I can call you Dick because so many people do. I want to thank you for reminding me of how difficult it can sometimes be to protect this great way of life for our friends as well as all non-Muslim Americans and for giving me the strength to continue to fight the good fight, even when being criticized by those Godless liberals and their always dragging the Constitution into everything. As long as we hold onto Congress and the Senate, and I have no doubt that we will because I believe we have begun a Republican empire that will last a 1000 years, before I leave office I am going to propose a constitutional amendment to make it unconstitutional to throw the constitution in the President's face every time he has to 'trample on a few personal liberties and rights' for the greater good of this great nation of ours."
"George. What a courageous and bold idea. Not like anything I have heard before. There has truly never been a President quite like you. I believe that your brilliant handling of the Middle East will ultimately seal our place in history " Cheney uttered in awe and admiration.
"Thank you Dick. Read my lips, and I'm sorry to have to say this daddy, but I think you, Dick Cheney, are the hardest working Vice President this nation has ever known."
At this point Satan clicked off the recorder.
"What'd you think?" He asked. Then he looked in my eyes, "You're unimpressed!" He barked.
"No, I admit it was interesting to have the particulars, but to see that Dick could convince George W. of these things is not really much of a surprise from a President who thinks 'rights' are just some complicated gibberish the police read to you just before they book you for drunk driving."
"You make a good point."
"Also," I began, "I actually agree with Cheney on one point. I believe the way this Administration has handled the Middle East will help to seal their fate in the historical record. However, not in a good way. By the way, what you did here was really bugging, circa Nixon, more than wiretapping circa Bush. But, then, I guess it's all really just covert and illegal surveillance of American Citizens circa a bunch of Republicans." I pointed out.
Satan considered a moment and then said, "Let's watch the Mets Game and then I'll give you some ideas you might be able to use."
"Ok. I love the Mets. They've been doing pretty good the last couple of years." I said as I puffed my cigar, then took a sip of scotch. Satan looked at me and smiled, then said, "They strike a hard bargain."
"No. I know you're kidding this time because if they made a deal with you they wouldn't have blown the playoffs last year!" I cried out.
"Or maybe they just didn't read the fine print." He said as he began laughing.
To Be Continued, (again)....

Karl Rove Apologizes! And HealthCare Reform Part 2.

Unfortunately Karl Rove resigned before I ever got to finish this (and unfortunately he did not resign many years before!). I post this as Part 2(a) with the rest coming soon, before it becomes even more irrelevant, along with Mr. Rove and his sidekick Mr. W. Bush!
I am sure we don't need to preface this with a list of all that Rove has to apologize for since we have mentioned it regularly. Of course, he only advises, and the worst offenders are really those that follow his lead. Nevertheless, to remind you we can just look at his most recent debacle; his coordinating on behalf of the administration, the firings of the Federal Prosecutors. Now, this is just the latest in a string of heinous violations of decency and human and religious moral and ethical codes. But it came as quite a shock when I turned on the television and found Rove making this announcement: "I am terribly sorry for helping to engineer a Presidential Administration that makes most Americans long for the good old days of Nixon and Carter and the non lethal crimes of Watergate and runaway inflation and oil prices (oh wait--we have those!). Yes, you see, I have just come to realize that I, as bad as I am and have been known to be since High School, still have not been myself. It appears that I have been channeling the spirit of Lord Voldemort (of Harry potter fame) for the past 6 years." This was not really much of a revelation, of course, but what was, was just how swiftly George W. attacked him on it. Standing next to him, in a show of support, the President appeared quite angry and turned to him and said: "Darn it all, Karl, The Dark Lord? He-who-must-not-be-named!? He was a brilliant tactician, he almost took over the entire Wizarding realm, Karl---why the heck didn't you clue me in so I could have put you in charge of Iraq?!!!!" At this point I started to smell sulfur and brimstone. I just hoped mine wasn't the only television receiving this broadcast! I pulled out my cellphone and, even though I knew it would cause every kind of petty overage known to cellphone science, I called HELL.
"I thought that would get your attention!" Satan said.
"Oh man, you mean it wasn't real?" I asked.
"Oh, it's real, except it is not really Lord Voldemort he is channeling, but rather a resident of my domain, Aerostreptos, an ancient Mesopotamian regional ruler that created death and mayhem and was only a tactical genius in his own mind! I figured he would fit well with this administration but because he fashioned himself a 'dark lord' with mystical powers to try to dissuade his detractors from killing him, which actually did not work as they threw him into a pit with a thousand scorpions, I guess there was a misidentification. But while this is all true, in actuality, Karl and George haven't really gone public. You are the only one who knows!" Satan laughed, thinking how frustrating this would be for me.
"No. I am the only one who saw that transmission, but that there are evil influences surrounding this administration is hardly a shock. I assure you, the majority of the country, and the world, already knows this.
(To be continued...)

Hubris: thy name is Gingrich.

Boy, it is good to be back blogging again. I'd ask if I was missed, but as Satan has pointed out, my 'hits numbers' would indicate that, no, sadly, I was not missed. Anyway....
As reported by the AP, from an interview with FOX News (who else would give him the airtime?) Newt (a fitting appellation) predicted a Clinton-Obama ticket and then discussed the Republican candidates, pointing out that if none of them seemed a credible candidate against Clinton, he, NEWT, might then choose to run. This sort of implies he feels he WOULD be a credible candidate to run against Hillary. I question, however, whether he is credible to run against a cantaloupe, much less an intelligent, accomplished and experienced candidate like Ms. Clinton. Newt apparently has forgotten his own legacy, which if I were Newt, I certainly would endeavor to do. He managed to misrepresent the Clinton Presidency and mislead the people about his failed Contract with America, that he was able to stall the government and derail Healthcare Reform. Since then, he has toured the country, preaching to the wealthy that the real key to Healthcare Reform is to put the onus and expense on the back of the common people, so that they would really appreciate health insurance and try to keep costs in line. In reality, people are more likely to put off costly healthcare decisions then they are home or car repairs, and this would lead to more lost productivity from illness as well as an entire new class of 'bankrupt from poor health and costly healthcare' Americans (which is something the Republican led Congress helped to begin with their bankruptcy laws overhaul of the last couple of years). Newt would not make a good President, or lizard like amphibian, for that matter. He is well suited for his current role however, touring the country and telling rich conservatives how great they are, and that they are right to want lower taxes and to remove the burden of health insurance financing from their businesses to the backs of their employees. Conservatives love that feel good stuff. They have used it to their political advantage, sadly, and obviously, at great cost to the overall health and stability of this country. But things have been shifting lately, and soon, possibly very soon, the only ones listening to Newt will be Newt, and maybe George W., Cheney and a handful of others.

It really is okay to make the punishment fit the crime.

As reported by CURT ANDERSON, Associated Press Writer
MIAMI - A sex offender was found guilty Wednesday of kidnapping and raping a 9-year-old girl and burying her alive in a case that led to a crackdown around the country on people convicted of sex crimes. Jurors deliberated about four hours before returning the verdict against John Evander Couey in the slaying of Jessica Lunsford, who was snatched from her bedroom in February 2005 about 150 yards from the trailer where Couey had been living.
Her body was found in a shallow hole, encased in two black plastic
trash bags. She had suffocated and was found clutching a purple stuffed dolphin.

And let me add this:
As enlightened as we are in the 21st Century, we must face reality. There are no effective treatments for Pedophilia and Sex Offenders. Castration and Exile seem to be the only reasonable options. Some would say that this was "cruel and unusual" punishment. But it isn't. Because anything else is not really a punishment, or rehabilitation, because nothing else works. We have to start worrying more about the potential victims rather than the rights of these monsters. In the meantime, though I generally oppose the death penalty, there was enough evidence and confession to be sure who committed this crime, so put the animal to death, because we, as a society, are not ready to ship him off to some god forsaken island somewhere, even though we are comfortable watching game show contestants marooned on them. And as you contemplate these harsh fates for these sick and unrepentant creatures, if your courage wavers, let the picture I placed here haunt you back to bitter reality.
Rest in Peace little Jessica.

America needs to grow up.

I can't believe the nonsense I'm reading in the press these days. David Geffen, Arianna Huffington, and the Hollywood elite are getting behind Obama because they have their misgivings about the Clintons. They forgot how good the Clinton presidency was to them, and to this country. They clamor for Hillary to apologize for giving the President authority to wage war in Iraq, when the majority of Americans supported the same thing based on the lies and misinformation our President was supplying at the time. It's ludicrous to think she should not have supported it, although some of us didn't, I don't blame anyone who did, if they felt that the evidence the President was giving was convincing. Remember, the President had promised not to wage war unless it was the last resort. That was his LI E, not any of the senators who voted for the resolution.

I have said here before that politics is the only place where it is unacceptable to learn from your mistakes and change your mind. Now you can add to it another crazy distortion; in politics these days, it seems, experience is considered a bad thing! Bob Herbert, the New York Times columnist, was writing today about Obama’s fresh ideas being a threat to Clinton's establishment attitude. This is of course nonsense. Voting someone in with no experience and good intentions usually leads to an ineffectual President; see Jimmy Carter. Inexperience is not a virtue. Senator Obama couldn't get a mid-management level position in a company with the amount of experience he has. People want to vote him in to the highest office in the most powerful nation in the world? If he's really a good person and has good ideas maybe someday he will become a good politician, who can work within government to build a concensus, and to put fourth reasoned ideas, and he may, someday, be electable. Obama talks about a new brand of politics. Funny, a first-termer, little experience, and he talks about new ideas and working together: sounds a lot like George W. Bush. If that doesn't scare you away from thinking Obama should be President, I don't know what would. Now I'm not saying Obama would make a bad President, I wouldn’t know. Neither would any of you. That's the point. After the primaries, in the general election, the Republicans would rip him apart. They'll take everything that the misguided Democrats in the primaries liked about him, and then convince the same people that those are all negatives, just like they've done many times in the past. When a seasoned politician like a McCain or Giuliani, will talk about their experiences and how they worked together for the betterment of this country, and then attack Obama for his lack of experience, especially in these “dangerous time” you will watch as the same people who voted for Obama will buy it, not vote for Obama in election, and will put in another misguided Republican administration that will bring us further down into a hole. What would Obama's slogan be? INEXPERIENCE THAT COUNTS! I HAVEN'T MADE ANY MISTAKES YET. MY BEST MISTAKES ARE AHEAD OF ME! On the other hand, Clinton is experienced, intelligent and talks about a lot of good ideas. Her experience has made her learn from her mistakes. I’ll bet, for example, her next healthcare reform proposals, while not as grand as they were in the early 90s, will probably be much more approachable. Mind you, I have never found anything to particularly like about her, or dislike, as I did not think about her very much at all. But now that thoughts turn to the next Presidential election, I have had to think about it, and I think she is probably the best candidate out there. It's not because I liked her husband so much though I did)that I think she should be in office, just to bring him back there too. No, I think she's proving to be the best qualified and electable candidate. Obama, just like John Edwards, only has style and no substance. Experience and compromise will bring legitimacy and wisdom. Someday both of them might be good candidates, but that day is far in the future.

I am truly sorry for America that I am not making this up...

Vice President Dick Cheney announced that it was a good sign that England was withdrawing a good amount of its troops, saying, "it shows that things are getting better in some parts of Iraq". This, as our Administration attempts to send over 20,000 more American troops into Iraq. Now, I am sure some parts of Iraq are more stable; in fact, I heard that there is a deli in Baghdad that has not had any patrons pulled outside by roving militias and executed in almost a week!! Nevertheless, as far as I can tell, we have these things called 'Humvees' to transport troops, so if the reason England is pulling their troops is stability in some (imaginary) part of Iraq, and we need to send over 20,000 troops because of instability elsewhere, maybe they could MOVE their troops?? They could...if that were the reason they are withdrawing. It is because Tony Blair hitched his star to George W. and now that his star is quickly fading, he is trying to salvage something of his reputation by acknowledging things are NOT working as planned, and leaving his soldiers there, is leaving them to possibly die with litttle chance to succeed. Now, I don't know Dick Cheney personally, but I hear tell he is a pretty intelligent guy, so I smelled something Prime Evil here. Though I had never called him; he always got in contact with me, I decided to try to call Satan himself and see what the deal was. I pulled out my cellphone and went to the received calls log, and when I pulled up 'HELL' I pressed SEND and it seemed to be placing the call. Moments later I heard Satan's voice on the other end. "Hell's Kitchen, can I take your order?"
"Oh, what?" I asked confused.
"Just messing with your head. I hate to tell you what placing this call is going to do to your cell phone bill, but I think this counts for like 20 or 30 text messages!" He said.
"Damn!" I exclaimed.
"Sure." He responded.
"Listen, what's the deal with Cheney? He says the British troop pull out is an indication that everything is on plan in Iraq. He's either smoking some really bad shit, or I smell a little sulfur and brimstone, no?"
"Listen, you can't pin this on me!" Satan howled. "Cheney's crying to me about how everything in Iraq is, if you will pardon the expression, going to Hell, and I admit, I was a little drunk, and well, I make a little joke about telling everyone this troop pull out is a good thing. And he takes me seriously! The next thing I know he's announcing it to the media! I should know better than to joke with him. The last time I saw him, we were out hunting and I yelled: "That lawyer's about to charge ---SHOOT! And, well, you know, it was really, after all, not a very good shot, anyway, not fatal or anything." He muttered. "I just meant he was about to charge----him $275 an hour!" He laughed.
"I see." I said, not really understanding, or necessarily believing everything I was hearing. Then I mentioned that White House spokesman Tony Fratto warned that a pullout of U.S. troops could bring chaos to Iraq. Laughing I said, "Chaos might be an improvement, although in actuality I believe chaos is just the appropriate word for what we have there right now.
Satan said: "That one you have to pin on Cheney and Bush. I had nothing, NOTHING, to do with that. Even drunk I couldn't get those words out, I'd be laughing too hard!" Then he thought a moment, "Perhaps civil war, or uncivil war, might be good."
"They all seem accurate." I pondered. Then Satan changed the subject.
"Listen, a Dunkin Donuts in Duluth has a bran muffin that looks like Mary and I have to go make it talk backwards and spit pea soup." He said.
Nauseated, I asked, "Really?"
"Nah, that would be kind of funny, not the effect I'm looking for. I might make it start bleeding though...from where, I haven't decided yet."
"Okay." I said, trying to put the thought of bran muffins shaped like biblical women that would start bleeding from---the Devil knows where---out of my head.
"So, where was Part 2 of the Healthcare reform discussion we had? I didn't see it on your blog yet." He mentioned.
"I'm still sorting it all out. I'm trying to get it up soon." I promised.
"See that you do. If I had to sit through all of that...the rest of your loyal readers should have to also. You do still have a loyal reader...right?" He laughed.
"Hey. I have more than one...I think."
"Fine, I'll speak to you after you post that piece then, okay?!" He said.
"Okay." I said.