home

March Madness: Elite 8

Four of the Elite 8 teams are in action this afternoon and evening, seeking a berth in the Final Four.

In the afternoon game, 2 seed Kansas State is a 4 1/2 point favorite over 5 seed Butler, the conqueror of 1 seed Syracuse. Butler plays good defense and will want to control pace. K-State appears to have better athletes. But K-State also plays great defense. K-State beat a very good Xavier team in 2OT in the Sweet 16, after blowing a big 1st half lead. Both teams seem plenty tough mentally. I like K-State (-4.5).

In the evening game, 1 seed Kentucky boasts the likely top 2 picks in the upcoming NBA draft (John Wall and Demarcus Cousins) and seems the best team in the tournament. But 2 seed West Virginia is physical and tough. Expect a rough game. I like Kentucky (-5) to tough it out in the second half.

This is an Open Thread.

< 9th Circuit Okays Use of Taser on Pregnant Woman | "24" To End With May 24 Finale >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Krugman v Ezra: Why Markets won't work for HCR (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Dan the Man on Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 11:48:19 AM EST
    Ezra explains how universal coverage can be implemented through the market:


    This bill is Clintonian: It achieves liberal ends through market means

    Krugman on Why markets can't cure healthcare


    Between those two factors, health care just doesnt work as a standard market story.

    There are, however, no examples of successful health care based on the principles of the free market, for one simple reason: in health care, the free market just doesnt work.

    And people who say that the market is the answer are flying in the face of both theory and overwhelming evidence.



    Uh, Ezra (none / 0) (#6)
    by ruffian on Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 12:00:51 PM EST
    this bill has not achieved anything yet, liberal or otherwise.

    I tend to side with Krugman who has evidence of systems systems that have worked and not worked on his side, rather than Ezra who is citing the bill's intentions as accomplishments,

    Parent

    In very, very faint defense (none / 0) (#24)
    by gyrfalcon on Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 09:43:59 AM EST
    of Ezra, they're not really talking about the same thing.  Using "market means" to push around the boundaries of the system here and there, which is what the HCR bill does and Ezra so worships, isn't the same thing as lifting all controls and relying only on "free market" principles to solve everything, which is the insane idea that Krugman is swatting down.

    Parent
    March Madness, Afghanistan Version (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by KeysDan on Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 12:47:30 PM EST
    Accordingly to NYT articles today, innocent Afghans continue to be killed by American and NATO troops firing from passing convoys and military checkpoints.  "We have shot an amazing number of people,but to my knowledge, none has ever proven to be a threat," said Gen. Stanley McChrystal. Failure to reduce these shootings has emerged as a major "frustration" for the military who believe that civilian casualties deeply undermine the campaign in Afghanistan. (the shooting deaths noted do not include those caused by private contractors). Meanwhile, back in Kandahar, a province of about 500,000, the coming American offensive is expected to dwarf the difficult siege for the village of Marja. The Taliban apparently own the area, although nominally still under unpopular government control--with power resting on two families that have prospered under American control, the family of President Karzai, and Agha
    Shirazi, a former governor. In addition to the dangers, the villagers are despairing about the political crisis, it is noted.

    Gryfalcon.. (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 06:15:50 PM EST
    When armadillos are attacked they roll into a ball with their armor like hide protecting them.

    I think the coyotes will wear out and give up...


    Heh (none / 0) (#22)
    by gyrfalcon on Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 09:22:37 AM EST
    You're probably right, but I wouldn't underestimate the cleverness and persistence of the coyotes.  On the other hand, why bother when there are so many rabbits and voles to lunch on without having to fight through the packaging?


    Parent
    And cats and dogs (none / 0) (#44)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 12:39:56 PM EST
    We lost two cats to coyotes in Denver.

    Parent
    I wish... (none / 0) (#48)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 01:52:50 PM EST
    ...they would add more geese to their menu.  

    Darn sh*t factories.  Nothing but pests.

    Parent

    Not Much Meat (none / 0) (#49)
    by squeaky on Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 02:24:48 PM EST
    Lots of feathers to negotiate, and they probably have a military style defense system worked out.

    As I have said before, I think foie gras was accidentally discovered long after torture by force feeding was invented.

    Nasty animals...  

    Parent

    Not dog in these hunts. Off to see (none / 0) (#1)
    by oculus on Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 11:37:16 AM EST
    "Hamlet" at Met HD.  

    Talk Left seems to be out of sync re Grayson. (none / 0) (#2)
    by oculus on Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 11:41:18 AM EST
    DK and Digby are hearting him and linking to help fill his campaign coffers.  Isn't this the Rep. who sd. he wouldn't vote for an HCR bill w/o a public option?  But did.

    I have mixed feelings on it (none / 0) (#4)
    by ruffian on Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 11:56:08 AM EST
    He represents the district right next to mine, which was gerrymandered to be solid Republican. Really, I should be in his district, but the gemrrymandering distorted the electoral map so much that I am in a thin sliver of area in Kosmas's district, which is mostly the space coast. Anyway, demographics have changed enough that he was able to knock off a real rightie scumbag last time, but may have a tough time doing it again now that the Republicans have targeted him. He is not going to get a primary challenger from the left in this area, that's for sure.

    I don't like that he caved on the PO, but actually voting 'yes' on the bill was the braver action in his district given the tough race he is going to have.

    Parent

    Thanks for the information. (none / 0) (#5)
    by oculus on Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 11:59:28 AM EST
    No problem! (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by ruffian on Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 12:04:34 PM EST
    It will be an interesting race. His district is one of the hardest hit economically in the state, which in effect means the nation. People really need whatever help they can get from HCR.  They really need single payer, more than anything, but given and a PO were clearly not going to happen last weekend, I think he did the best he could for his district. Maybe not the place to make a valiant stand on principle.

    Parent
    Duke will win it all....going to Vegas to make (none / 0) (#8)
    by Angel on Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 12:11:54 PM EST
    my bet....

    Dunno (none / 0) (#17)
    by Democratic Cat on Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 08:36:30 PM EST
    West Virginia pulled one out of the hat tonight, and Butler looked very good earlier.  But my money is (as it has been from the beginning) on West Virginia.

    Parent
    Yeah, loved seeing West VA pull it out over (none / 0) (#19)
    by Angel on Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 08:52:09 PM EST
    Kentucky.  But they got sloppy near the end so I don't think they are ready to win the big one.  Duke has to get past Baylor tomorrow.  Butler is looking awesome.....but I think their Cinderella run is almost over.  I still say Duke because of Coach K.  On the women's side I pick Connecticut.

    Parent
    I for one hope not. (none / 0) (#27)
    by brodie on Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 10:45:26 AM EST
    And I know I'm not the only one who's a little sick of the Coach K worship that goes on, especially as it's encouraged by the corporate sports media.

    But yeah, this one's mostly political, too, given K's Republican leanings.

    I'm rooting for whoever's playing Duke today.

    And for either Mich St or WV to win it all.

    Parent

    I'm not picking Duke because of any worship (none / 0) (#29)
    by Angel on Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 10:59:07 AM EST
    of Coach K.  I just think he's a great coach and usually has a way to get his team to come through.  I don't really care about his personal politics; I respect his beliefs as I would hope he would respect mine.  It's college sports - and for me it's about the kids - I just love to watch college basketball.

    Parent
    Go Mountaineers (none / 0) (#28)
    by ruffian on Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 10:58:43 AM EST
    when my cubicle mate is happy, we are all happy.  She is a fervent WVU alum.

    So I am cheering in support of a harmonious work environment. Other than that, I have no preference.

    Parent

    Rooting for (none / 0) (#33)
    by brodie on Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 11:10:58 AM EST
    WV also, mostly because of Jerry West, who has a son on the team though on the bench, and because it hasn't been to the Final Four since Zeke from Cabin Creek played there as Ike was finishing his last term.

    Rooting for WV also helps to balance some of the negative vibes I got from things WV after watching the recent two-hour installment of Jamie Oliver's Food Revolution, where the locals did not come off nearly as well in dietary matters as they do on the hardwood.

    Parent

    SportsLeft... (none / 0) (#10)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 01:36:36 PM EST
    ...is dead and gone I take it?  Guess I should take it off my favorites then.

    No (none / 0) (#12)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 03:57:57 PM EST
    I will be moving to it for the Masters and other big events.

    Just have not had time for it lately.

    Parent

    Watch What YOu Wish For (none / 0) (#11)
    by squeaky on Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 02:41:00 PM EST
    Before the results were in:

    Faraj Al-Hayderi [Chair of The Independent High Electoral Commission of Iraq (IHEC)] explained this was a point of principle, not aimed at any particular political party.

    "I don't care what any of them say. I am not even worried about this. We are continuing to work with complete transparency, we are very confident in our work," al-Hayderi said.

    "But my advice to them is: "Don't say anything now you will regret later".

    From Allawi (Iraqiya Party) before he won:
    But perhaps the most pernicious of the claims against IHEC and its role as an investigating body this week were charges by members of the Iraqiya Coalition - the leading challenger to Nouri al-Maliki, the Iraqi prime minister.

    At a news conference in Baghdad, they claimed they had uncovered "rigging to an extent that would render the elections useless", their claims including damaged ballot papers and polling stations failing to post votes.

    Unami's staff, who have been closely involved in the planning, execution, supervision and management of the vote, suggested the Iraqiya Coalition produce its evidence - and show it is acting in good faith.

    Al Jazeera

    Butler! (none / 0) (#13)
    by Cream City on Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 05:50:47 PM EST
    We know its conference well, and now the country will see.  

    They're ferocious like their name (none / 0) (#16)
    by Cream City on Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 07:40:29 PM EST
    and you, as the proud dad of a young woman athlete, may want to know that the Butler women's bball team has an even better record -- a fearsome power in the conference (and a lot of fun to watch, too).

    One very... (none / 0) (#18)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 08:43:40 PM EST
    ...determined dog.  They really don't like that cop car!  

    At least the cops didn't shoot, taze or run them over (as one suggests doing).  

    I'm amazed they didn't (none / 0) (#23)
    by gyrfalcon on Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 09:26:23 AM EST
    quarantine this dog for possible rabies, actually.  Friend of mine across the valley had a rabid fox attack his truck, sank its teeth into the tires and wouldn't let go.  And not having a gun in the truck with him, that's what he did, took a deep breath and deliberately ran over the critter, then backed up and ran over it again to make sure it was dead.  Then he got out of the truck and threw up.  Horrible experience all the way around.

    Parent
    Recess Nominations (none / 0) (#20)
    by squeaky on Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 11:21:29 PM EST
    Obama announced Saturday that he will make recess appointments of 15 nominees to administration posts who are awaiting confirmation by the full Senate. None has generated nearly as much outcry as Becker.

    [snip]

    (CNN) -- One of President Obama's Saturday recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board quickly triggered intense opposition from business groups and Republicans, who called the appointee a radical who represents a White House gift to labor unions.
    The fury is aimed at Obama's appointment of Craig Becker -- a labor lawyer -- to the NLRB, the federal agency that oversees relations between unions and employers.

    link

    Obama also chose a second member for the labor board, pro-union lawyer Mark Pearce, so that four of its five slots will be filled.

     Obama's other appointments announced Saturday:

    • Jeffrey Goldstein, undersecretary for domestic finance at the Treasury Department.

    • Michael Mundaca, assistant secretary for tax policy at Treasury.

    • Eric Hirschhorn, undersecretary of commerce for export administration and head of the Bureau of Industry and Security at the Commerce Department.

    • Michael Punke, deputy trade representative -- Geneva, Office of the U.S. Trade Representative.

    • Francisco Sanchez, undersecretary for international trade, Commerce Department.

    • Islam Siddiqui, chief agricultural negotiator, Office of the U.S. Trade Representative.

    • Alan Bersin, commissioner of U.S. customs and border protection, Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

    • Jill Long Thompson, Farm Credit Administration Board.

    • Rafael Borras, undersecretary for management, DHS.

    • Jacqueline Berrien, chairwoman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

    • Chai Feldblum, EEOC commissioner.

    • Victoria Lipnic, EEOC commissioner.

    • P. David Lopez, general counsel, EEOC.

    Seattle Times


    He's learning; (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by NYShooter on Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 12:09:10 PM EST
    maybe there's hope yet.

    Tacking left at the end got him the votes for HCR, and he's discovered that stiffing the Right gets him more than begging for a kiss.

    The training wheels are off; this could get to be fun.


    Parent

    BTD, (none / 0) (#21)
    by cpinva on Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 02:48:33 AM EST
    don't quit your day job. :)

    Interesting take on the HCR mandate (none / 0) (#25)
    by ruffian on Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 10:19:45 AM EST
    I heard liberal radio host Thom Hartmann put this forward on Friday, and have been mulling it over.

    He says that calling it a mandate is wrong and we should be looking at as a tax deduction, analogous to a home mortgage. The government does not 'mandate' that you have a mortgage, but it gives you a tax break if you do, because congress has deemed that home ownership is good for society as a whole. The penalty for not buying health insurance is thus the same idea as not getting a tax deduction for a home mortgage you don't have.

    Makes sense in a way, and at least I can use it to befuddle my conservative coworkers for a while. If Dems had written the bill that way to begin with, it would be a more persuasive argument. I think the ship calling it a mandate left the harbor a long time ago.

    Thoughts?

    I think that is one of those simplistic (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by Anne on Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 11:23:26 AM EST
    rationales that sounds good, but doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

    When the government passes legislation that says we must all have health insurance, that is a mandate; I don't know how you could not call it that.

    If you own a home, the government does allow you to deduct mortgage interest, among other things, from your income, which can lower the ammount of your income that is subject to tax, but the government does not require that everyone own a home.

    For another, the deduction I get for mortgage interest is for money I actually paid to my lender; the government doesn't care how much money I make or whether I can afford it - I own a home by choice - and my lender didn't reduce the size of my mortgage because it was going to be made whole by the government funneling tax dollars to it.

    Also, whatever tax break the government offers for those who buy health insurance, we already know that a lot of people are not going to get any break at all because they will be ineligible on the basis of income.  The goverment reduces the amount of itemized deductions one can take if one's AGI exceeds a certain amount, but it doesn't take the deduction away altogether.

    The government also does not fine people for not owning a home; it isn't sending the IRS after you if you rent.

    Good luck convincing people that there really isn't a mandate, and there's some kind of equivalence with mortgage interest deductions; I think that's going to be a much harder sell than you think.

    Parent

    I wasn't really convinced on it myself (none / 0) (#39)
    by ruffian on Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 11:47:50 AM EST
    I can see  it could have been structured the way Hartmann claims it is, and maybe that would have been better.

    Raise everyones taxes progressively so that people making over 80k pay an extra amount equivalent to the fine now, then give a tax credit for that amount for those that have insurance. Hartmann's numbers, which I have not verified, said that the uninsured that are making under 80k will be left alone because while they won't get the tax credit, they don't pay the extra tax either, plus they get subsidies for insurance.  He seems to think the tax raise is in the bill already - not sure what he is talking about there.

    I think something like the above would have been a better implementation than the mandates as they are written. But I agree that they are written as mandates and it is probably folly to try tot ell people they aren't.

    Parent

    Hartmann has been doing contortions (none / 0) (#41)
    by shoephone on Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 12:19:01 PM EST
    since this thing passed to try and find a way to justify the very thing he has been railing against for the past year: mandates without a public option. He swings back and forth between his core beliefs and his belief that we must support Obama. Party politics, even when it goes against his own values.

    I used to like listening to him a few years back, but he has lost his integrity. And anyway, he mostly loves to hear himself talk, which really means he just goes on and on about the same old things--the founding fathers (in particular Jefferson, whom he seems to think he has the keenest understandings of), the JFK assassination, and Reagan's union-busting of the air traffic cintrollers way back when. He has become unlistenable to me.

    Parent

    Also unconvinced (none / 0) (#43)
    by brodie on Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 12:29:54 PM EST
    by Hartmann's analysis/spin of the mandate, which Anne rightly criticizes.  Tough one to sell in the upcoming elections, but Dems probably will do better to avoid the backflips and somersaults inherent in Hartmann's idea.

    As for TH generally, he's been a puzzle for me in recent years for two reasons:  his curious take on Dallas and the motive for same, including his wildly offbase reading of JFK and Castro post-missile crisis, and second, his almost unique success as a lib-left talk show host at a time when true libs have struggled mightily to remain on the air and grow their audience.  

    Hartmann seems to have a very friendly relationship with many conservatives, even from the far right (DHorowitz comes to mind).  Is this primarily because he features so many of them on his show on a regular, daily basis, and usually doesn't give them a hard time (and/or the host and guest engage in a dog and pony show of on-air disagreement)?  

    A puzzle, and maybe I'm being too harsh, maybe he's just a very egocentric liberal who likes to talk about himself and let everyone know how much he knows, but I've long had my suspicions about the guy.

    Parent

    It should strike all of us that having (none / 0) (#42)
    by Anne on Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 12:23:42 PM EST
    to come up with such a convoluted plan (calculate tax, give tax credit, some get subsidies, some don't, some pay tax and get fined, and so on) that, at bottom, is all about funneling both private dollars, and tax dollars, to the health insurance industry, is insane.

    It isn't even at Rube Goldberg-level, because Rube's contraptions actually worked...neither Hartmann's nor the one just legislated is going to do that.  Work, that is.

    How much sense does it make that I pay $8,400 in premiums annually, have an $800 deductible, so am paying out $9,200 before the first dollar of care is covered, I won't qualify for tax credits or subsidies - and Hartmann thinks I should pay more tax?

    I would be happy to pay more tax to fund a single-payer plan that would cover everyone, lower my premiums well below the level where they are, guarantee me care no matter what, but instead, Hartmann thinks I should pay more tax that ultimately finds its way to Big Insurance, on top of what I already pay them, and leaves ultimate control over my access to care to the industry?  

    I don't think so.

    Parent

    Please don't underline things that are not links (none / 0) (#50)
    by cymro on Mon Mar 29, 2010 at 03:15:33 AM EST
    Use italic or bold for emphasis; Jeralyn provides html formatting reminders below the comment box.

    User interface conventions are important; content that ignores them is just annoying. For more about Web Usability, I recommend reading Don't Make Me Think.

    Parent

    Demon Weed [synthetic (tm)] (none / 0) (#26)
    by Capt Howdy on Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 10:32:08 AM EST
    I have returned from my experiments with synthetic marijuana to report that, well, its not marijuana exactly but its definitely something.
    and the buzz it gives you is not exactly a pot buzz but honestly its almost close enough.

    if you were to bestow that high on someone, poof, I dont think most people including myself - as close to a professional as you will find - could tell the difference. the problem is as any serious pot smoker will tell you the taste and smell is a large part of the experience. it doesnt smell or taste like pot.
    which is not to say it smell or tastes bad. its just not pot.
    thats needs work
    but on the whole I am giving three and 3/4 stars to Demon.


    Are their pot-tasting/smelling/smoking (none / 0) (#30)
    by oculus on Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 11:00:10 AM EST
    experts who are paid for their expertise?

    Parent
    not as far as I know (none / 0) (#31)
    by Capt Howdy on Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 11:06:09 AM EST
    but if I am wrong please send contact information.

    Parent
    Why yes... (none / 0) (#32)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 11:09:23 AM EST
    ...there are.

    Sorry Capt'n, the jobs been filled.  

    Parent

    DEA? (none / 0) (#34)
    by oculus on Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 11:14:29 AM EST
    oh.my.god (none / 0) (#35)
    by Capt Howdy on Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 11:15:09 AM EST
    and I thought the guy who did these commercials had my dream job.

    the only thing that could possibly better than either is both at once.

    Parent

    I think I'll wait (none / 0) (#36)
    by brodie on Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 11:16:43 AM EST
    for the good people of CA to vote for legalizing the real stuff come November -- and hope the Obama admin, meanwhile, doesn't do something stupid to try to stop it.

    Natural guy here.  Though synthetic, at times, might have its place.  LSD back in the day for instance probably spurred a few artists into some quality creations.  Seemed to work out okay for the Beatles for instance, the Doors and that Brit writer Aldous Huxley.  Cary Grant too got some personal benefit.  Besides, the real stuff, that ayahuasca plant in SAmerica, is rather hard to come by and a very dicey matter in the proper preparation.

    Parent

    back to the sick world we live in (none / 0) (#37)
    by Capt Howdy on Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 11:21:24 AM EST
    I just got this email:

    Obama Finds Legal Way Around The 2nd Amendment And Uses It.

    If This Passes, There Will Be WAR
    Just got this...pass it far & wide.
    On Wednesday Obama Took the First Major Step in a Plan to Ban All Firearms in the United States
    On Wednesday the Obama administration took its first major step in a plan to ban all firearms in the United States. The Obama administration intends to force gun control and a complete ban on all weapons for US citizens through the signing of international treaties with foreign nations. By signing international treaties on gun control, the Obama administration can use the US State Department to bypass the normal legislative process in Congress. Once the US Government signs these international treaties, all US citizens will be subject to those gun laws created by foreign governments. These are laws that have been developed and promoted by organizations such as the United Nations and individuals such as George Soros and Michael Bloomberg. The laws are designed and intended to lead to the complete ban and confiscation of all firearms.

    The Obama administration is attempting to use tactics and methods of gun control that will inflict major damage to our 2nd Amendment before US citizens even understand what has happened. Obama can appear before the public and tell them that he does not intend to pursue any legislation (in the United States) that will lead to new gun control laws, while cloaked in secrecy, his Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton is committing the US to international treaties and foreign gun control laws. Does that mean Obama is telling the truth? What it means is that there will be no publicized gun control debates in the media or votes in Congress. We will wake up one morning and find that the United States has signed a treaty that prohibits firearm and ammunition manufacturers from selling to the public. We will wake up another morning and find that the US has signed a treaty that prohibits any transfer of firearm ownership. And then, we will wake up yet another morning and find that the US has signed a treaty that requires US citizens to deliver any firearm they own to the local government collection and destruction center or face imprisonment.

    This is not a joke nor a false warning. As sure as government health care will be forced on us by the Obama administration through whatever means necessary,  so will gun control.

    Read the Article

    course if you actually read the article, assuming you can read, it is obviously talking about international arms sales.

    I am so sick of this sh!t

    "The first step toward.." (none / 0) (#45)
    by jondee on Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 01:31:04 PM EST
    They just love that crap.

    Regulating international arms trafficing is the first step towards the complete banning of firearms; HCR is the first step towards full-blown socialism;
    The UN is the first step toward (again, socialistic) world government; giving priority to the evidence for evolution over intelligent design is the first step toward "secularism", godlessness and moral decline..

    None Dare Call it Conspiracy. In the not-too-distant-future, you'll wake up one morning to find that your precious bodily fluids are the property of a secular, internationalist, dictatorship. And so on and so forth..

     

    Parent

    Gen Jack D Ripper (none / 0) (#46)
    by squeaky on Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 01:39:17 PM EST
    Thought so:
    you'll wake up one morning to find that your precious bodily fluids are the property of a secular, internationalist, dictatorship.

    precious bodily fluids...

    Parent

    The not so distant future... (none / 0) (#47)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 01:50:35 PM EST
    ...was yesterday for me.  That's when my precious body fluids became the property of the evil, socialist/fascist (or is it progressive/liberal) health care providers.

    Parent