Monthly Archives: July 2013

New GOP Strategy: Give Democrats a Big Head Start! – Ann Coulter – Page full

When people go to see a magic show they know that they are being entertained by tricks. The people viewing the magic show pay good money to see things that they know are illusions. The problem with Ann Coulter and the poor conservatives who listen to her is that she knows that what she is doing is misleading but most of her audience (she must have one otherwise why would any one run her columns or buy her books?) probably doesn’t. Ann will say things like “Demographics are on our side!” Only she isn’t in the “our” in her statement or rather, misstatement. The money she gets paid to write her books and columns separates her from the people she is inflating with the fiction that conservatives are growing in numbers because conservatives, as she defines them (“Believers in religious doctrine, the traditional family and pro-life attitudes on abortion”) are “having appreciably more children per couple” than liberals. What this assessment fails to account for is the change in doctrine over time (Mormon beliefs about Blacks and for that matter Christian teaching about blacks, i.e. the churches position on slavery, or the role of women for centuries). It also doesn’t account for those who were taught certain things (i.e. separation is the best practice in neighborhoods and schools and churches) that their life experiences dissolve, as they experience how diversity is really a very good thing as it increases understanding and facilitates incorporation of valuable alternate approaches. Like the sawing noise and the hand movements which are part of the standard saw-the-women-in-half routine, the “birth-rate” argument includes the nebulous notion of “pro-life” attitudes of the non-existent growing Republican majority. Does she count people who believe that there should be rape and incest exceptions for abortions and those who use contraception in her “pro-life-attitudes” crowd? Or would this crowd be limited to Aiken-Apostles (Todd Aiken)

and Freiss-Freaks (Foster Freiss)

?

In a grand display using smoke and mirrors, Coulter-the-clown crows about population gains in Utah and Kentucky to the rapturous applause from the base which perhaps sees some contribution to a coming, gasp!, conservative electoral domination by conservative-baby-making machines in Utah and Kentucky. Wonder what percentage of the population increase in those states are blue state transplants bringing with them something other than “traditional” family attitudes or what percentage of those growing up , in, oh, say Utah, will be minorities. Stop reading here if you don’t want your illusion spoiled (“Minorities accounted for a third of the 40,940 total new residents added to Utah in 2012.”) Want more funny? The whole point of Coulter-Clown’s assertion about the supposed birth-rate gap was that Republicans shouldn’t waste their time trying to woe non-whites when unbeknownst to her feeble, fleeced, fans, “Minority children make up the majority of students in 15 of Salt Lake City’s 27 elementary schools. And nine of those schools have minority populations of 80 percent or higher, pointing to a diverse future.” And what really has me in stitches is how she is making so much money assuring conservatives who love her illusions because they think they’re real, like I did about wrestl’n as a kid, is that “in 2012, the white population in Utah grew by 1.2 percent. At the same time, the black population grew by 5.2 percent; the Asian community by 4.8 percent; Pacific Islander, 3.5 percent; Latino, 2.5 percent; and American Indian, 1.9 percent.” Oh, Anne, sto, sto, stop, you’re killing me. Ha, ha, ha!!! Worst magic I’ve ever seen. It so bad, it’s funny. By the way, did you read the one where she tried impersonating Angela Davis( Coulter s claims are erroneous(CL)5-17-2012) in her effort to show how white southern Democrats didn’t want backs to have guns while conveniently ignoring the fact(those pesky historical connections that provide context) that they are the ancestors of the present-day white southern Republicans? Ann you’ve got to do a better job of hiding the strings when you do the broom riding trick over facts.

New GOP Strategy: Give Democrats a Big Head Start! – Ann Coulter – Page full

Jameson Taylor: Demonizing now a common tactic | The Clarion-Ledger | clarionledger.com

This from the birth-certificate-secret-Moslem-against-Obama crowd.  Demonization has been the bread and butter of the Tea-Party, cousins of the Mississippi Center for Public Policy(Jameson Taylor’s) people.  In fact his organization is only a front for the oligarchs.  Consider them the Mississippi branch of the Heritage Foundation, it the creation of the Koch brothers and Paul-shrink-the-electorate Weyrich.  Only in the twisted minds of the conservatives is inequality not tantanmount to bigotry. 

And of course those who oppose the insurance exchanges are protecting the oligarch-centric status quo.  Of course the corporate front groups like the Mississippi Public Policy Center would see Medicaid as a failure and long for a return to the days when doctors accepted chickens for check-ups. 

Chickens for check-ups

And you could never expect these so-called champions of the free-market to lobby for removal of the anti-trust exemption that the insurance industry has because they are fakes and aren’t interested in bettering the condition of the average American.  They are only here to confuse you and muddy the waters to protect the status quo.  You come to expect them to say things like “Never mind that the Bible also teaches we should pay our debts and that expanding government entitlement programs unjustly burdens future generations. “  But they can’t show you where in the bible Jesus dunned a paraplegic for his healing or turned the healed blind man’s bill over to collections subsequently driving him into bankruptcy.  So they have to forgive us, if they can find that concept in their bible, for thinking of them as merciless, even if they feel “demonized.” 

And when this crowd that feels demonized says “Medicaid patients have much higher mortality rates and much poorer health outcomes than people on private insurance.”  Did they ever stop to think that to the extent that that is true, if it is true at all, then the difference might have something to do with income-related environmental factors, i.e. the availability and costs of healthy food, and environmental pollution factors which give health conditions before treatment or diagnosis different starting points.

And then the disingenuous corporate flacks say “As hard as it is to believe, Medicaid patients even fare worse than the uninsured — many of whom are getting health care in some way, but paying out-of-pocket for it.”  If the uninsured are paying “out-of-pocket” we are dealing with quite a different group, from an income level, than those who qualify for Medicaid. So the question is who are you counting as uninsured?  And using the emergency room for primary care is not a serious comparison to having Medicaid. 

 

    The commentators arguing that Medicaid causes poor outcomes anticipate some objections by noting that the cited studies include some variables to address socioeconomic and cultural factors that
    can negatively influence the health of poorer Medicaid patients. Their interpretation of the results, then, must be that Medicaid patients have worse clinical outcomes than uninsured patients with the same socioeconomic and cultural characteristics, including, presumably, health-related behavior before and after a given procedure.

    If so, the problem must lie with the physicians and hospitals (many of them academic medical centers) providing care for Medicaid patients. Are these commentators assuming that poor, uninsured patients, who in principle may qualify for Medicaid, actually have the resources to pay doctors and hospitals more than Medicaid would and that providers therefore give these patients better care and attention, leading to better outcomes? Or is the assumption that only less technically proficient doctors and health care facilities accept Medicaid patients, and the associated lack of skill and resources results in poor clinical outcomes?

It is simply odd, to put it in non-demonizing terms, that these conservative think-tank guys have so much concern for the poor and uninsured now after a Democratic House, Senate, and President started supplying legislation to address pre-existing conditions and life-time caps and money to close the donut hole and money for additional primary care doctors.  And “The ACA authorizes money to increase the primary care workforce by training more doctors, nurses, nurse-practitioners and physician assistants. It includes more graduate medical education training positions, with priorities for primary care and general surgery, and more money for scholarships and loans for all health professionals. The law expands the number of patients seen at community health centers in areas with too few doctors and increases the number of staffers who work in the centers. It also expands nurse-managed clinics at nursing schools where nurses in training see patients who live in the area.”

But the truth is that Medicaid is working and so is Medicare despite efforts by the corporatists to degrade and destroy them at every term and install in their place a greater neo-feudal system.

 

Jameson Taylor: Demonizing now a common tactic | The Clarion-Ledger | clarionledger.com