Tomorrow morning I have to go to the dentist to get a temporary crown removed and the permanent one installed, and I really dread it.
I hate getting this kind of work; you have to hold your jaw open for a very long time while they’re pounding and pulling and chipping away. Then my jaw will hurt and I’ll grind my teeth until I see my massage therapist, who will hopefully set things right.
Health insurance companies are lying about rising costs!
Is one of the rare bright spots on the political landscape.
Can’t we have a better press corpse?
Athenae’s right, as usual. And frankly, the whole thing makes me sick. Because as nauseating as the whole thing is, the double standard is even worse.
There is an anonymously sourced but on the record story out there (I can’t even get into my old archives or I’d dig it out for you) in which Newt Gingrich – the darling of network news shows – was allegedly getting a BJ from a staffer in the front seat of his car, in daylight, while waiting to pick up his kid from school. During the Clinton impeachment trial.
The timing seems to indicate that the staffer was his most recent (and suddenly quite Catholic) wife.
Did you ever read it on the front page? Heard about it on the talk shows? Nope. Wonder why? This is what a well-trained corporate news editor would call it: “Old news, let’s move on.”
But I thought it was a character issue. I know because the teevee told me so! And yet, contrary to the indoctrination, I really and truly don’t care what two consenting adults do with each other’s genitalia. In fact, I can think of few things more deserving of privacy.
I don’t care that John Edwards cheated on his wife; it’s between him and his wife. Bill Clinton, too. I liked their ideas. When I go into the voting booth, I’m not voting for priest or pope, I’m voting to support a specific set of policies. If I get to feel good about the person for whom I pull the lever, or even inspired, well, that’s gravy.
But the circus goes on.
Why are we suddenly flooded with stories about poor, misunderstood Rahm?
The cost of filling up your car is about to go higher.
Seasonal influences account for much of the expected increase that many analysts say will push gasoline (at a nationwide average of $2.70 yesterday) to at least $3 a gallon this spring. Rising oil prices also are a factor in higher gasoline prices.
Wholesale prices for the April gasoline contract on the New York Mercantile Exchange are about 10 to 12 cents higher than the March contract, which expired Friday. Much of the rise comes from refiners’ switching to more expensive summer blends of gasoline designed to meet tougher pollution standards in effect between April and September. The higher prices should make their way to the pump over the next few weeks.
At $3 per gallon, a typical motorist using 50 gallons of gasoline would pay about $150 per month for fuel. That is about $15 a month more than current prices, according to OilPrice Information Service.
Prices have moved higher the past two weeks, approaching the 2010 high of $2.7583 per gallon set on Jan. 14. In the past week prices climbed 5.7 cents and are now 78.4 cents higher than year ago levels.
What a stellar example of the Republican mindset!
Jack Metzgar from the Chicago Institute for Working Class Studies, on the need to address the unemployment crisis before it becomes further embedded:
The American labor movement has been making that 9-1-1 call to the White House for several months now, and not getting through. Unions in coalition with the Center for Community Change and the National Urban League are backing variations of “A Five-Point Plan to Stem the U.S. Jobs Crisis”. The plan would create (or save) more than 4 million jobs. Though it would add $400 billion to the federal government deficit this year, it would be paid for over the next 10 years by a small (1/2 of 1%) tax on stock trades and other financial instruments — a tax initially proposed more than a decade ago to discourage speculative investment of the sort that led to the financial meltdown in 2008. In other words, the tax is probably a good idea anyway, would be paid only by investors, and it would allow job creation now to reduce the national debt in the long run. Economists from the AFL-CIO and its rival Change to Win met with White House economists to advocate for this program about the same time as Don Peck’s article appeared. The response, I’m told, was “politely dismissive.”
As a Chicagoan who roots for our home-town heroes, I’ve been especially forgiving of Barack Obama. Most of his critics seem to me to underestimate the level of difficulty Obama has faced given the character, severity, and timing of the Great Recession, the anti-functional rules of the U.S. Senate, the complexity of health care economics, and many other things. But it is not difficult for a U.S. President to prioritize a house on fire over a crack in the foundation. Part of the President’s job is to set the agenda for what gets public attention. By establishing a bi-partisan commission to address the national debt while presenting a budget that basically says double-digit unemployment is acceptable for the next couple years, the President is making errors of both mind and heart. It also seems like really dumb politics. Pick up the phone, Barack, the house is on fire.
