4.07.2010

Random Wednesday Morning Thoughts

  • MTV's 16 and Pregnant makes me lose the will to live. But I think it would discourage teenage pregnancies if kids would watch it.
  • New Idiocracy sandwich from Kentucky Fried Chicken. How can that possibly be real? (The bun has been replaced with two slices of fried meat.)
  • The salaries of this years Texas Rangers are here. It's kind of the haves and the have nots (relatively speaking.)
  • Mining looks like a very 19th century kind of job.
  • I didn't realize that much of the NBC Nightly News is replayed on The Today Show. (And I still can't stand Ann Curry.)
  • I think I lost a little bit of a tooth filling which has now caused a jagged edge to be in my mouth. That's not pleasant.
  • There seems to be a lot of hatred against the "guy who sits around and won't work" who might now get health care. I keep hearing everyone talk about him but I don't know who he is.
  • I just learned that 3G phones won't cause the weird buzz when they get near a computer monitor.
  • I saw a couple of violent South Padre Island beach fights during Spring Break on youtube. That does not look like a very inviting place.
  • A church in McKinney is involved in trying to break the world record for the largest plate of nachos. I'm certain that was in the Sermon on The Mount or something.
  • The Dallas Morning News' propensity to have video ads on its web pages is yet another example of how they don't "get it."
  • New feature: One of today's local papers above the fold (although today's isn't very interesting):

39 comments:

Mr. Hyperopia said...

Is that a Bosch dishwasher?

Anonymous said...

Its when a GSM phone (think AT&T or T-Mobile) gets near unshielded speakers, not a computer monitor. And the phone being 3G-capable has nothing to do with it. If the phone has to drop back to EDGE, the GSM buzz will come back.

CDMA doesn't have that problem whether its 1xRTT or EV-DO.

wordkyle said...

Your comment about 16 and Pregnant "discouraging pregnancies" -- intentionally ambiguous?

To the guy working sixty-plus hours a week to support his family, the guy working forty hours who complains that he can't support his family is just sitting around. (Plus you cheapen the word hatred when you use it so cavalierly.)

Anonymous said...

I love the colors of spring and summer. Bikini colors....

Anonymous said...

If you wanted interesting above-the-fold news, you should have gone with the sports page: "Cowboys Stadium will get a face-lift for Super Bowl XLV"
HUH?! It will have only been in use for two seasons, right? That's like a toddler getting liposuction because it has baby fat!

The McKinney church and the nachos: Well, they are trying to duplicate/update the old fishes and loaves story. But when in Rome, or rather, cuando en la loma...
I'll bet you won't be able to get much cheese on one of those communion wafers, though.
From the No-frijoles-for-the-Reverend Dept.:
Reminds me of a line from Trading Places. Fake priest Denholm Elliott(with a brogue): "Oh, no thank you, it gives me the wind something fierce!"

For every girl that doesn't get pregnant because of that show, you'll have one thinking "If I get knocked up at sixteen, that might be my fifteen minutes of fame on TV."

The scenario would be complete if they would just greet you with "Welcome to KFC...I love you"

Triple Fake Colonel, ya'll

Anonymous said...

BG..you had better take care of that jagged tooth now..if you get an absessed tongue you will never forget the pain and the infection can easily spread into your neck and ear. you need to get that fixed today.

Ernest T. Bass said...

There seems to be a lot of hatred against the "guy who sits around and won't work" who might now get health care. I keep hearing everyone talk about him but I don't know who he is.



If you don't truly see these people, then you need to wake up. They are all around you.

They are the ones who would rather take welfare and unemployment than get off their butts and get a real job. Besides, they can currently make more on unemployment than they could working. Many also feel that for them to work at places such as McDonald's or Taco Bell is "beneath them."

Why do you think that the Dems are currently offering 99 weeks of unemployment and looking to expand it to an additional 26 weeks. That would be over 2 YEARS of unemployment.

They are using our tax money to buy votes. These people know that Republicans want to encourage everyone to work hard, so they would not offer all of this. Therefore, these people know that if they vote Democratic, that will mean more money for them.

I have no problem with unemployment. When I was out of work, it was only for 6 months. It gave you incentive to work hard to find a new job. If you didn't have one at the end of the 6 months, then you had better find something temporary.

Anonymous said...

@wordkyle - How about the guy who works 70-80 hours a week, owns his own business and still pays a third of his income on healthcare? He neeeds a break.

Anonymous said...

If you really want to meet some of those guys/gals who want a free ride and don't work though they are capable, I used to work home health and could give you a nice long list of names. The laziness and sense of entitlement is amazingly alive and well right here in Wise Co. as well as the surrounding ones.

Anonymous said...

She is hot great pic today.

wordkyle said...

918 - Your hypothetical guy is not the one who will get a break. Obama & co. think he should pay for other people's breaks. Spread the wealth around, as Obama told Joe the plumber. (Redistribution is the real goal of Democrat healthcare "reform," admit Senator Max Baucus, (D-Mont) and former DNC chairman Howard Dean.)

(And yes, we could get into a lengthy discusion regarding the specifics of your example's annual income, choice of profession, business acumen, etc. But that wasn't your point, was it?)

Anonymous said...

If you don't know anyone who sits around and won't work and is waiting for his free health care i can give you his name and address. By the way his kids are already insured through the CHIPs program which I am happy to fund with my tax dollars because it is not their fault daddy is a douche bag but I will be pissed when I start paying for his health care so he can finally go get his bed sores treated.

Anonymous said...

Barry, scratch what I said earlier. Age obviously means nothing in the insane world of today. I offer as evidence the following item lifted from Jezebel & E!:

As mentioned earlier this week, Miley Cyrus is officially a homeowner. Her $3.4 million house has four bedrooms and four-and-a-half bathrooms, a tennis court, a pool, a large master suite with his and her marble baths and a two-bedroom guest house. She is 17.


My Other Brother Darryl

Anonymous said...

I would like to wash her. Dishes

mzchief said...

Just a few ObamaCare FACTS

1... There is no "free health care." Someone has to pay for it.

2... ObamaCare does NOTHING to control the price an insurance company can charge for health insurance. THINK ABOUT IT! If an auto insurer was REQUIRED to insure drunks, old people, speeders, teenagers and other high risk drivers and not able to charge them according to their prior driving records the insurer would have to raise EVERYONE'S price of insurance. The same goes for health insurers who will be REQUIRED to insure diabetics, smokers, fat people, patients with chronic diseases like; Lupus, Crones, Cushings, Alzheimer's, Cystic Fibrosis. The high cost of insuring unhealthy people will be passed on to healthy people and young people who, BY LAW are required to PURCHASE health insurance.

3...By raising the minimum income requirement, 16+ MILLION additional people will be added to the MEDICAID program. That will, in some states, amount to an increase of 60% to the number of people on MEDICAID. NEWSFLASH! Due to insufficient reimbursement, approximately 70% of doctors REFUSE to treat, in their private practice, Medicaid recipients. Due to insufficient reimbursement, currently, 30% of doctors refuse to treat, in their private practice, Medicare recipients. It is anticipated a larger percentage of doctors, due to additional cuts in Medicaid/Medicare reimbursements, will stop caring for Medicaid/Medicare patients, which will result in MORE patients being seen in emergency rooms and the cost being passed on to PAYING PATIENTS.

mzchief said...

To anonymous 9:18...
I do not know what you pay for health insurance. My family has an EXCELLENT policy with United Health Care and currently pays approximately $12,000 a year for health insurance and $2,500 year for auto insurance.

If I am in a HORRIFIC auto accident, with an uninsured motorist, my auto insurance will pay to replace my $65,000 car and my health insurance will pay my health care costs that could easily reach $500,000+. Health insurance is not all that expensive if you consider the cost of health care.

Incidentally, $12,000 is 1/3 of $36,000. If someone works 70-80 hours a week and only earns $36,000 a year, they suck at business and need to find a better paying job. However, under ObamaCare they will qualify for Medicaid.

Anonymous said...

@Wordkyle - Hypothetical? Sorry chief. That guy is my husband. We have owned a restaurant for 20 years. The business grosses about a million a year. He takes around 100K in salary. My daughter has a pre-existing condition. We, of course purchase insurance, but the premiums have increased over 200% over the last few years. We keep upping our deductible to keep costs down but it still rises at an incredible rate. We can't switch ins because of the pre-exist. Currently we pay $1190.00 a month with a $10K deductible. When I go to the doctor I don't even have them run it through the insurance because if they find something (however small) I too, will have a pre-exist. There are a lot of us out here in the same boat..
Most insured americans have group plans. When you are self-insured you don't have the cushion of a large pool. Do I like the plan the president has passed? Not especially, but at least it's a start. I would like to see the republicans do something, but they won't and you know it.

Anonymous said...

"There seems to be a lot of hatred against the "guy who sits around and won't work" who might now get health care. I keep hearing everyone talk about him but I don't know who he is."

Go to Wal-Mart during the middle of the day during the work week and take a look at the clientele and ask yourself why so many subjugated looking, hygenically challenged folks there are walking around obviously unemployed. Go up to them and ask them how they can afford to have a basket full of cokes, white bread, little debbies, chips, and various other unhealty snacks--they are not working for it. Now, not only will we be subsidizing these folks poor food choices, we will be paying for their healthcare as well...so they way I see it honest, hard working folks are getting double-dipped while the fat and lazy are ordering double scoops, whatasizin', biggie friesin' and they don't be exercisin'!!!

wordkyle said...

1111 - If your hubby earns $100k and you pay $14,280 in premiums, that's not one-third.

FWIW, I'm not defending insurance companies. But the Democrat law overreaches and is way too expensive. It would be cheaper if the gov't simply paid the premiums for the uninsured. If you take away three groups;

* illegal aliens
* those who choose not to obtain medical insurance
* those who qualify for existing programs, but don't bother.

then there are only about ten million involuntarily uninsured Americans. The average annual premium is said to be about $6300. That's about $63 billion a year, less than the costs of the Democrat law.

There were lots of other options, but the Democrats chose the one that best fit their agenda -- moving toward single provider and redistribution of wealth.

Anonymous said...

Mzchief

Your first post was excellant and for the first time ever, I agreed with you.

Your second post however, showed you as the self absorbed snob you usually are!!!!!

mzchief said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Young BG, going to work at the Tarrant County Courthouse, probably drove past the old Texaco across the street from Ripley Arnold.

Did you think those folks hanging around, during the middle of the day, every single day, wanted to work? Do you think they are working now? Do you think they want health care now?

Those are some example of who "they" might be!

Football guru

mzchief said...

To anonymous 12:44...
By your assessment, you agree with a "self absorbed snob."

Since you so eagerly threw down the term "self absorbed snob", share with everyone what about my FACTUAL comment, at 10:54, justified you making such a malicious accusation regarding my character.

Anonymous said...

I nearly always agree with Mzchief!

11:11 Your family's problems are not mine and I don't care to pay for your care. period. end of story. I pay for MINE and shouldn't be obligated to cover you and your family, no matter what your issues may be.

And as for the folks in Walmart, you are correct. Those there in the middle of the work week on a workday are either young stay-at-home-moms or trash who want to live off food stamps and other government programs. they should be forced to either starve or get off their a**es and work. SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST is the best life mantra I know.

Anonymous said...

Mzchief, you left NPD off of your list of preexisting conditions, I'm just saying! You probably would not be inclined to seek treatment for it, however I would suggest Schema therapy if you ever decide to.

Anonymous said...

Barry I don't like your politics, but your choice in pics is good. She is haaaaaaaawt!

mzchief said...

To anonymous 2:34...
Obviously, you know little about NPD which is another good reason for you to stay with your day job, at the car-wash, sucking farts out of the upholstery of everyone's cars.

You really do need to get over your jealousy of me and get on with being you.

Anonymous said...

Wordkyle - We always spend the $10,000 out of pocket, some years $15,000. I'm not just referring to the premium. The ideas you put forth are interesting and I agree with some of them. Unfortunately, when the republicans were in power they did nothing.

Mzchief - I'm sorry your family also has medical issues. I'm not asking anyone to pay for my healthcare. What I fear is that escalating costs are going to make it next to impossible to remain insured. We make a decent living, but still I dread opening that EOB every 6 months knowing it's gone up another 5-10%

2:02- I hope you and your family remain healthy.

Anonymous said...

3:14 I'm 2:02, and my family has many health issues. The difference in us and you is that we pay our way and don't whine wanting others to pay it for us.

mzchief said...

To anonymous 3:14...
Do not look for lower insurance premiums with the passage of ObamaCare. Even the Washington Post was willing to print an article with the TRUTH about how ObamaCare will cause insurance premiums to SKYROCKET.

"The report makes clear that several major provisions in the current legislative proposal will cause health care costs to increase far faster and higher than they would under the current system," Karen Ignagni, AHIP's president and chief executive, wrote to board members Sunday. "Between 2010 and 2019 the cumulative increases in the cost of a typical family policy under this reform proposal will be approximately $20,700 more than it would be under the current system."

You are correct in your statement that the Republicans did NOTHING to reform health care in the US. One reason Republicans did nothing to reform health insurance is because insurance is the domain of each individual STATE and not the Federal Government. However, A few good changes would be;

1. Disassociate people's insurance from their employer/employment. (It is outrageous that someone loses their health insurance just because they change/lose their job.)

2. Allow groups/organizations to acquire/provide "Group" health insurance for their members, akin to "Group" insurance acquired/provided by employers with a large number of employees.

3. Allow for the opportunity of the purchase of catastrophic insurance. (Based on the high deductibles of non-group health insurance, most people's coverage only kicks in after a catastrophic health issue.)

4. Have states set up health insurance pools for ALL preexisting conditions.

5. Allow health care providers to DENY service to anyone without the ability to pay for non-emergent care. (Just because someone is hungry they do not have the RIGHT to barge in to a Five Star restaurant, demand service and order the most expensive item on the menu, point to some random diners and proclaim, "Let them pay for my meal, I don't have any money." so there is no reason people should do the same when it comes to health care.)

6. Allow for insurance portability/buying insurance from whatever state a customer wants. (The problem with this is that each state has their own mandates requiring what MUST be covered.)

Health care is no more a "right" than food and housing. Just because some people are able to provide premium coverage for themselves and their family is no reason ANYONE, who cannot afford it, is entitled to premium health care. Just because some people can afford lobster and steak does not mean starving people have a right to eat lobster and steak, paid for by random people.

Anonymous said...

3:50 - I think you misundertood what I am trying to say. I don't want anyone to pay for my healthcare. What I'm concerned about is the cost. If you are self-insured you have surely seen premiums double or even triple in the past 10 years. If not, your employer sure has and has probably passed on some of the extra costs to you. Your employer, at some point, may have to opt out of covering you all together. He will too, if prices keep rising. He'd rather pay that paltry fine - it'll be cheaper in the long run.

Not everyone has their hand out, some just want to fix what's broken.

Anonymous said...

I have no health issues. I choose not to be insured. Rather I have saved my own cash to repair my broken body should I so choose. If I don't care to do so, I am free to exercise my right to die.

In what kind of world should I be coerced into providing anything at all to a fat person(which I am not), a smoker (which I am not), a couch potato (which I am not), a poor eater (which I am not), a skydiver (which I am not)....... you get it.

And if I am able to save money because I don't consume TV or movies, do grow my own food, require my kids to work for their own spending money, and generally exercise thrift in my daily life, then why should I pony up a dime to any fool who lives foolishly?

From each according to his ability for each according to his need didn't work very well as I recall.

Anonymous said...

MZchief - Most of those changes, would indeed, improve the situation dramatically. But, alas, Rick Perry would never implement any of that. You sound like a smart woman. You know that business has to be dragged kicking and screaming to make any changes for the common good. Look at worker saftey, enviromental pollution, motor vehicle safety. Good Lord, it took the US 15 years longer than any developed country to ban lead paint! (sorry off-topic)

You may be right that the president's plan will increase premiums, we will just have to see. But it's a start. Ask anyone who remembers when medicare was passed in 1965. Conservatives thought it was the end of the world.
We don't have to have a system like Great Britain, Canada, Japan, Germany or Australia. We surely can come up with something uniquely American. Something that allows that mom who just lost her job coverage, or that family business affordable care. People are not entitled to steak and lobster, but good God, shouldn't they be able to eat?

wordkyle said...

458 - The Medicare program is a great comparison. When Medicare Part A was implemented in 1965, the lead actuary predicted that the cost would grow to only $9 billion by 1990. Actual cost in 1990 was $66 billion, a 600% error. Medicare is projected to go bankrupt by 2019, eleven years earlier than expected. Moreover, Democrats used Medicare funds (in part) to finance their new healthcare plan. What in our nation's history makes anyone believe that the federal government can run an efficient social program on time and on budget?

Democrats had to use bogus numbers to convince the public that their healthcare wouldn't cost anything. Instead they've stolen from our children and grandchildren to expand government's power. Every social program has had to borrow from future generations to be sustained, all in the name of "compassion." How compassionate is it to take food out of your grandchild's mouth to give to a stranger? How compassionate is the Democrat program that forces you to do it?

Anonymous said...

"There seems to be a lot of hatred against the 'guy who sits around and won't work' who might now get health care. I keep hearing everyone talk about him but I don't know who he is."

Take a look in the mirror there Hoss. While you're at it, could you give me the definition of pariah?

Anonymous said...

Chief... It is really easy to that when someone hits home with a point you simply spin it back and try to use the projecting angle as a defense mechanism. You are real classy, "sucking farts" who even uses that type of language.

By the way, you being you apparently involves an abundance of blogging and bragging. As a successful person myself I find it highly unbecoming and very telling when people that have had a little success take every opportunity to tell it to the masses! If you were truly content in life you really wouldn't need to massage your ego.

mzchief said...

To anonymous 4:58...
1. Prick Erry has little or NO control over insurance regulations in Tx. Believe it or not, in TX, the Lt. Gov. has more power than the Governor. Just because TX is slow to change is no reason for the Federal Government to deprive states of the right to determine the insurance coverage of citizens within individual states. As for your straw man assertion that "business has to be dragged kicking and screaming to make any changes for the common good."; I contend that it is no more the place of an employer to provide health insurance for their employees than it is to provide mortgages for the homes of their employees. Believe it or not, employers are doing their employees a favour by hiring the employee. When an employer hires someone they pay them for the work the employee does. An employer does not take an employee to raise. If you have not noticed, employers can ALWAYS find people willing to work for the lowest possible wage which is one reason countless businesses have taken to maintaining much of their labour force offshore. Incidentally, employers owe their employees nothing but the wages for which the employee agreed to work.

As for people being able to eat, let them make the appropriate PERSONAL CHOICES that allow them to get a job and feed themselves and their family. People who are hungry do not have the right to come into anyone's home and help themselves to what is in the fridge. The government taking money from one person, who has worked for the money, and giving it to anther person who has not worked for the money is immoral because it is tax slavery.

Making someone work and giving the fruits of their labour to someone else is slavery.

mzchief said...

Nony @ 10:04... We get it, you do not like me. However, your dislike for me does not change the validity of the FACTS within my comments.

If you honestly believe I was bragging by stating what I pay for health and auto insurance and that my auto insurance would cover the replacement of my SUV, you really have not achieved much in the way of success.

Incidentally, your statement of "As a successful person myself I find it highly unbecoming and very telling when people that have had a little success take every opportunity to tell it to the masses!" proves about YOU everything of which you accuse me. Make note, you felt compelled to "tell it to the masses" that you "have had a little success".

Something else you should know about yourself:
"The most telling thing that narcissists do is contradict themselves. They will do this virtually in the same sentence, without even stopping to take a breath."

You should also be aware of a few other traits of someone with NPD/Narcissistic Personality Disorder that seem to be a perfect fit for YOU:
contemptuous
critical of others
don't recognize own feelings
envious and competitive
hard to have a good time with (no doubt, you are a beating to be around)
hyper-sensitive to criticism
impulsive
lack sense of humour
pessimistic
religious
secretive (You do throw down comments as 'anonymous')
self-contradictory

Before you point the NPD finger at someone else, take a long hard look in the mirror, sweetie.

*LOL@U*

See, I really do have an awesome sense of humour

Anonymous said...

Thanks Chief, you described yourself to a tee!

I never stated anywhere in my comments that paying for health and auto was bragging, just the way you needed to number drop while doing it.

I also like the way you continue to spin my words, when I stated I have had success in life I did so without arrogance or conceit; No contradiction on my part, just your use of spin to try to deflect(see defense mechanism)you been doing all your life. I could have listed all my worldly possesions, accomplishments, education, familiy etc., but I really do not feel the need. Obviously having people know the quantitative value of your success is very important to you

By the way, spin alone is not having a sense of humor, it likens itself more to the child who repeatedly says "I know you are but what am I" when engaged in an unsavory manner....come to think of it "sucking farts" is quite childish as well.

Good day!