Category Archives: Ayn Rand

I really want to beat the Earthquakes, I really do. Firing one of the most regressive coaches in MLS has tempered some of that but not by much. Anyway, lets get to know San Jose, or as the city is known, Americas AV Club.

The Earthquakes of San Jose have come to our barbecue for the Fourth of July. As a franchise the Quakes have the distinction of having their franchise move to a different city, win several championships, and then be re-started as a hapless shell of its former self searching in vain for the formula to find the success that it had before moving away. Essentially, they are the Cleveland Browns of MLS.

Aside from that the biggest highlight in the existence of the team in MLS is that they had Landon Donovan long enough for him to win them two championships and realize that getting wicked homesick and washing out in Germany was better than living in suburban San Francisco. Donovan went on to become the best American in MLS history and won four MLS Championships with the LA Galaxy.

As for this year, somehow the Quakes have managed to win 7 games by scoring just 20 goals through 18 matches. In attack they value fortunate bounces, defensive lapses, the ineptitude of Clement Diop, and playing against RSL to get results. This highlight exemplifies the San Jose plan in possession:

First, they line up behind the fullback and have their striker run the length of the field wearing sandals. When they get close enough to the goal, they execute a handoff, the halfback cuts past the keeper, and leaps into the goal. The key is the red card celebration which needs to be more emphatic than celebrating the goal itself. Side note* if Wondo had used his hands against Belgium he still would have found a way to miss that goal.

San Jose itself is an interesting place. It is home to eBay, PayPal, and Samsung and is the wealthiest city in the country. The city also has the largest wealth gap in the United States. It is a place filled with young men who have ideas they gleaned from Ayn Rand books which somehow inspired them to invent the Juicero, hold the #FyreFestival, and sue Gwaker.

In response to much of societys ills, these fellas are all eager to explain how an app theyve developed will address an issue like hunger or poverty somehow without actually facing the underlying social, political, and economic exploitation that perpetuate these issues - no, all you need is a smart phone with an app on it and have the ability to conflate economic freedom and civil liberties - poof, solved.

Anyway, - stick to sports - back to the soccer. The Earthquakes are so bad at scoring goals that Joey Chestnut will eat more hot dogs in 10 minutes this afternoon than the team will score goals in two MLS seasons. Whats more, its not that many hot dogs, it is only like 70 red hots. Chestnut has real skill and talent at what he does, plus that if I were from San Jose Id give eating myself to death a shot as a career as well.

All that aside, Chestnut is a real life American hero. If Chris Wondolowski entered the Nathans Hot Dog eating contest, he would get the last hot dog - dunk it in water to soften the bun - and then when he went to take a bite, he would inexplicably miss his mouth with it. He is no Joey Chestnut.

What Im trying to say is I hope Joey Chestnut is the only winner from San Jose today and Atlanta United hangs a whole bunch of goals on the Earthquakes.

Link:

The Morning Rekrap: July 4, 2017 - Dirty South Soccer (registration) (blog)

I can think of few entities that Trump has not offended. His targets have been women, veterans (and true war heroes), the press (which is what makes us a free and open country), his own judges and lawmakers, many religions and cultures, world leaders, and by his actions, the poor. He signs executive orders like he is a dictator. He consults few and listens to none. Trump is not well-spoken, he is crass, and either unbalanced or not very intelligent. What has happened to my country?

We the people have elected our President, instead of picking between two selected by our ruling elite in D.C. This has been a start to reestablish our Republic. Term limits are necessary, because if politicians stay long in the swamp they love the rich life and never want to leave, they forget we the people.

All our distress over health care reform and Trumps tweets are simply distractions preventing us from recognizing Trumps actual agenda of enriching himself at our expense.

The First Amendment Establishment Clause was intended by our forefathers to prevent religious persecution from a tyrannical government, not to remove all references of God and Christianity from our schools and other public places.

Make America Great Again was nothing more than a fake promise. It was only to get people pepped up and to get votes, not help people keep their insurance or Medicaid.

Senator Joe Manchin, a Democrat, submitted a bill that would improve the Affordable Care Act, which is also known as Obamacare. However, because Republicans control the Senate, it is unlikely that Joes bill will ever be allowed to come up for a vote. The GOP is all about cutting taxes for the rich. They dont care about people like you and me.

Yes millions suddenly received health care with Obamacare. Nothing is free. Somebody is paying for it one way or another.

Speaks volumes. Prius with Hillary/COEXIST stickers on bumper. Loaded down with few hundred pounds of mulch bags. Broke down along the road.

Yes the budget cuts are going to hurt across the board. Everybody has a favorite program or department that it will be the end of the world. Heres a suggestion. Run for office. Get elected. Then use your genius IQ to pass a better plan.

There was a story in todays Gazette-Mail about a wrestler with the name Progressive Liberal. If Trump wanted a match he should challenge the guy. Then when the President loses he could wear the crybaby diaper. Appropriate.

We saw today that President Trump is re-working an old wrestling video to get his point across about the press. I cant wait to see how he re-works the Access Hollywood video with Billy Bush...I wonder what point he will be trying to make with it? Its hard to grab things with such small hands.

I like Ric Cavenders (Director of Charleston Main Streets) article espousing all of the efforts to improve Charleston with an eye on making it the NEXT Charleston. There are indeed good things happening and good plans for future improvements. What no one talks about, and what bothers me working in Charleston, is poor air quality. Much better than 30-40 years ago, but still very bad.

Great story about housing for the homeless in Sundays paper. Rep. Mooney didnt do his homework before signing a letter that would hurt homeless veterans and others.

Enough with the sky is falling comments from the unhinged left. If millions are going to die because of GOP repeal of Obamacare. Were they dying before Obamacare? Millions of deaths. Thats an epidemic. Genocide. Where were the news reports and warnings then?

George Will said before expensive modern medicine when someone got run over by a wagon they went home to be cared for by their family, and died quietly. Is he saying if you get run over by a bus and cant afford the bill its family time? Paul Ryan (via Ayn Rand) says it is more important to give big tax breaks to small business owners who live like millionaires and complain about paying minimum wage than to provide minimum wage earners with necessary medical care. That is the job of families.

The fascists in the White House need to understand this is a democracy (actually a federal republic), we dont want a dictator.

Readers Vent: July 3, 2017

Previous Story

Read more here:

Readers' Vent: July 4, 2017 - Charleston Gazette-Mail (subscription)

By JEREMY W. PETERS

WASHINGTON --Something strange has been happening to taxes in Republican-dominated states: They are going up.

Conservative lawmakers in Kansas, South Carolina and Tennessee have agreed to significant tax increases in recent weeks to meet demands for more revenue. They are challenging what has become an almost dogmatic belief for their party, and sharply diverging from President Donald Trump as he pushes for what his administration has billed as the largest tax cut in at least a generation.

And now some Republicans say that what has played out in these states should serve as a cautionary tale in Washington, where their partys leaders are confronting a set of circumstances that looks strikingly similar.

Republicans, with control of Congress and the White House and a base that is growing impatient for tax reform, are trying to solve a difficult math problem: paying for critical programs like infrastructure, health care and education while honoring their promise to deliver lower taxes without exploding the deficit.

The debate promises to test the enduring relevance of one of the most fundamental principles of modern conservatism supply side economics, the idea that if you cut taxes far enough, the economy will expand to the point that it generates new tax revenue.

With the federal deficit growing and economic growth sputtering along in the low single digits, the Republican Party is facing questions from within over what many see as a blind faith in the theory that deep tax cuts are the shot of economic adrenaline a languid economy needs.

Tax cuts good. And thats about as much thinking that goes into it, said Chris Buskirk, a radio host and publisher of American Greatness, a conservative online journal. Now, he said, Republicans in Washington seem to be in an arms race to the lowest rates possible.

Everybody is trying to overbid each other, Buskirk said. How much more can we cut?

Outside Washington, Republicans are discovering there are limits.

In South Carolina, Republicans overrode their governors veto and blocked a filibuster to increase the gas tax. They also rejected a series of broader tax cuts on the grounds that they were too expensive and voted instead to create a smaller tax incentive for low-income families.

The Republican governor of Tennessee, Bill Haslam, signed into law the first increase in the states gas tax in almost three decades. He defied conservative groups that said a state with a $1.1 billion budget surplus had no business asking people to hand over more of their money.

And in the most striking rebuke of conservative tax policy in recent memory, Republicans in Kansas have undone much of the tax overhaul that Gov. Sam Brownback held up as a model for other states and the federal government to emulate.

A fantastic way to go, he said this year, urging Trump and Congress to follow suit with deep reductions to corporate and individual rates. But Republican lawmakers in Kansas decided that they could cut only so much without doing irreparable harm to vital services and voted to increase taxes by $1.2 billion last month. Brownback vetoed the plan, but Republicans overrode him.

Much of the devotion to tax cuts as an inviolable Republican principle stems from the success President Ronald Reagan and Congress had in 1981 when they agreed to an economic recovery package that included a rate cut of about 25 percent for individuals.

But at that time, the highest marginal tax rates approached 70 percent, leaving much more to cut and a much larger chunk of money to be injected back into the economy. At some point, economists said, tax policy that is too aggressive leaves too little money to inject to make a difference.

Bruce Bartlett, who advised Reagan on the 1981 tax cuts, chastised Republicans for what he described as their reflexive desire to drive rates lower.

The essence of what the supply-siders were trying to accomplish was accomplished by the end of the Reagan administration, Bartlett said.

Yet, he added, Republican policy still mimics what was done under Reagan. Theyve got to keep pressing ahead no matter what, he said.

The situation in Kansas was, for at least some conservatives, a jolting realization that tax cuts can be too blunt an economic instrument.

After Brownback took office in 2011, he pursued a plan that included cuts and, in some cases, an outright elimination of taxes for businesses and individuals to help invigorate the states underperforming economy. He described it as an experiment in conservative governance that could demonstrate what Republicans were capable of if they controlled legislative and executive branches across the country. (He is Kansas first Republican governor since 2003.)

The conservative movement got behind him. The plan was approved with the lobbying muscle of billionaire Koch brothers political network, which is overseen from Wichita, where one of the brothers, Charles G. Koch lives. It had the blessing of prominent conservative economists like Stephen Moore and Arthur Laffer, the Republican Partys foremost supply-side evangelist.

In urging the Kansas Legislature to act, Laffer and Moore said the cuts would have a near immediate positive impact on the economy. Brownback said the plan would pay for itself.

That is where the parallels with Washington start to trouble those who are critical of the plan the Trump administration has laid out. The plan would slash the rate paid by businesses to 15 percent and shrink the number of individual income tax brackets from seven to three 10, 25 and 35 percent.

Laffer and Moore, a Heritage Foundation economist, have both helped shape the presidents tax policy.

Steven Mnuchin, the Treasury secretary, said the Trump tax cuts would pay for themselves with the economic growth they would inevitably create.

In Kansas, the predicted economic bloom did not materialize. Employment and economic growth have lagged far behind the rest of the nation. The state Treasury had so little money to spread around that the Kansas Supreme Court found that the states spending on public education was unconstitutionally low.

If there were three words I could say to Congress right now, said Stephanie Clayton, a Republican state representative from a district in the Kansas City area, they would be, Dont do it.

She criticized what she said was a desire by her party to be more faithful to the principle than to the people Republicans were elected to help. Brownback and many conservatives, she said, overpromised on the tax cuts as a sort-of Ayn Rand utopia, a red-state model, citing the author whose works have influenced the American libertarian movement.

And I loved Ayn Rand when I was 18 before I had children and figured out how the world really works, Clayton added. Thats not how it works, as it turns out.

Trump and Republicans in Washington are undeterred. Kansas, they argue, is not an economic microcosm for the country, with its unique dependence on energy, agriculture and aircraft manufacturing. And lawmakers there never could reduce spending enough to correspond to the much lower level of tax revenue coming into the state treasury.

Many conservatives who support a tax overhaul said they anticipated considerable growth with a reduction in corporate rates, which are among the highest in the world. If those are lowered to 15 percent, down from the current 35 percent, businesses will not only reinvest in the United States but relocate here, they said.

At 15 percent, Swiss bankers will move here, said Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform.

But restraining federal spending is still going to be a key part of the equation. What you need is not an explosion of spending, Norquist added. And you need the economy to grow faster than the size of the government.

In a world in which Trumps deconstruction of the administrative state reduces the size and cost of the government, the tax cuts make sense. But if lawmakers do not have the nerve to find savings somewhere, like in the social safety net for retirees, the outcome could end up resembling something close to Kansas failed experiment.

The question is whether you can put together some kind of revenue-neutral tax reform, said N. Gregory Mankiw, a professor of economics at Harvard and chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under President George W. Bush. I dont see the political will to do that right now. Certainly not in this environment.

More here:

How low can taxes go? Outside Washington, Republicans find limits ... - Buffalo News

On the Fourth of July we celebrate the signing of the Declaration of Independence, which Ayn Rand called the "greatest document in human history." Why? Because it was the first time that society was subordinated to moral law. In her seminal essay, "Man's Rights," Rand wrote:

"The principle of man's individual rights represented an extension of morality into the social system as a limitation on the power of the state, as man's protection against the brute force of the collective, as the subordination of might to right. The United States was the first moral society in history."

Previously, men were ruled either by a king who claimed a divine right to rule, or by an elite few supposedly blessed with some superior insight, or by the many, through the mob rule of democracy. Rights were considered grants of permission that could be withdrawn whenever the one, the few or the many dictated. Man was here to sacrifice his life to king or council or to society for the greater good.

America's Founding Fathers changed that. For the first time in history society was subordinated to moral law by making the protection of individual rights government's purpose. Eleven years later they crafted the U.S. Constitution, with the guiding principles that limited government's powers with a series of checks and balances, and the Bill of Rights, demanded by the people for their consent to the Constitution.

As a work of logic, the declaration is a syllogism that it, is a logical argument containing a major premise, a minor premise and a conclusion. The major premise is Thomas Jefferson's brilliant summation of John Locke's theory of government, captured in the first sentence of the declaration's second paragraph, which is worth reading today:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to affect their safety and happiness."

Meredith Newman

Annapolis cancels Fourth of July parade, but Severna Park, others march on

Annapolis cancels Fourth of July parade, but Severna Park, others march on (Meredith Newman)

The minor premise is the list of 27 grievances against the king of Great Britain, who was seeking "the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states."

Notice there is not one grievance against the king for not providing for the "needs of the people." The Founding Fathers understood that for governments to provide for "needs" it must take from the haves to give to the have-nots, which violates the rights of the haves. Indeed, the American colonists, rich and poor, felt the king's lash violating their rights as he plundered their towns to provide for his needs to impose tyranny on them.

The declaration's conclusion is: "We therefore, the representatives of the United States of America ... solemnly publish and declare that these colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent states."

As the result of this revolutionary founding, America blossomed into the wealthiest nation in the world. In her speech at West Point to the Corps of Cadets, Ayn Rand paid tribute to America:

"I can say not as a patriotic bromide, but with full knowledge of the necessary metaphysical, epistemological, ethical, political and esthetic roots that the United States of America is the greatest, the noblest and, in its founding principles, the only moral country in the history of the world."

Enjoy and celebrate the 241st anniversary of the founding of America.

Long-time Annapolis resident Talbot Manvel is graduate of the Naval Academy, St. John's College and the Ayn Rand Institute. Contact him at talmanvel@icloud.com.

See the rest here:

J. Talbot Manvel: Declaration of Independence joined morality and law - CapitalGazette.com

There is something magical and almost untouchable about the glimmer and grime of Sunset Boulevard. It is this intangible that makes romances elusive and Los Angeles surreal. Our romance was kind of like that.

I was heading for a party in West Hollywood with trepidation. Sunset and Alta Loma sounded fancy. Id ditched the wide-framed glasses for contacts and the tattered Converse for high heels. Id undone the work bun and let my hair down. The drive up the hill allowed for a view of the city behind me. The city sparkled and the night was damp with the promises that only a summers eve in Los Angeles can hold.

We met as soon as I walked in.

He was taller than most. He had a speckle in one of his light eyes. His most endearing quality was that he was unassuming and statuesque. We exchanged a few words: I never eat when I drink (as I reached for a vodka soda); I went to USC (as I inquired about his background). I found out he was almost five years my junior. As an old 27, I joked that I could almost be his mother.

Are you a veteran of L.A.'s current dating scene? We want to publish your story

We parted ways the rest of the party. I made small talk with an oh-so-clich aspiring actor while the tall stranger navigated the party. As is certain in Los Angeles, there were other girls, some prettier, some taller, some more tightly clad and more extreme, that likely gazed his way. On my way out, as he was talking to a girl in a sequined gold dress, he caught my glimpse. Can I have your number? he asked innocently. On the outs of a nine-year relationship, I gave it to him.

The next morning I received a text message: I dont know about you, but Im famished. We made plans to hang out, both shocked but happy to learn that we lived about 2 miles apart on Sunset. (I near Sunset Junction, he near Sunset and Vista.) Runyon Canyon would soon be our favorite haunt.

I wonder to this day if the romance wouldve blossomed as easily without the Sunset Boulevard proximity, and the city swallowing us whole.

We met a week later. The sun was shining brightly that day. I remember walking up to the table where he sat outside at Franklin & Company. I had a sense but no certainty of what lay ahead. I was glowing with expectations that I couldnt define. I found out he was a writer and had published a book. He told me he was politically conservative, which shocked my sensibilities. But the electricity and mystery that shrouded us eclipsed any differences. Surprisingly, I even found his affinity for Ayn Rand unoffensive. In retrospect, it helps me make fun of us and spares me bereavement. My mother always said Ayn Rand was a juvenile and dystopic vision. Perhaps I should have paid more attention.

More L.A. Affairs columns

That night was the stuff dreams are made of. There were deep conversations in dim bars the Woods on La Brea has never seen two people more enamored that were followed by several hours of drinks on the roof of his apartment. We did not kiss that night, but we wanted to.

Fast-forward two dates later and it happened. We sat in another bar, this time on 3rd Street. Two or three drinks in, and the kiss happened. We closed down the bar. That night we went home together. He didnt want a relationship, and neither did I, but somehow it happened. We would lie for hours in his apartment, watching sitcoms based in New York but filmed a few miles away, with the sound of hovering helicopters interrupting the TVs streaming sound. Every time we had together was passionate, explorative and romantic. Like many in love, we were all that mattered. It was us and everyone else.

Two years later, after sharing an apartment by the Grove, family vacations, exploring the future possibilities, and many, many arguments I will describe poetically as deeply impassioned, it all ended just abruptly as it started.

I wanted commitment and he was too young to give it. It was earth-shattering.

One empty apartment later, my story of Los Angeles has changed. I no longer avoided the Churchill on 3rd Street. (In fact, I even enjoyed another unforgettable night there cue black-and-white photo booths and several whiskey gingers.) A Silver Lake jaunt with a stop at Diablo, flaming margaritas at El Compadre, and even Asian tapas at Yatai are once again savory and ripe for new memories and men. I can eat my favorite foods, drink sake that finally tastes good, and drive the 101 overpass in Hollywood without wincing.

I know that my story is not the only one. It is a right of passage that many Angelenos have endured. In a city brimming with creativity, youth of all ages and beauty in every form, we are all looking onward, for the next union of uncontaminated love in whatever form that may be. Its this juxtaposition of love and loss, success and failure, hot condensed fog set against the wide open Pacific, that keeps the city and its residents churning. And hopefully, among the beautiful mix of it all, we find what we are looking for.

A. Zane is an attorney and barre instructor in Los Angeles. She is on Instagram @theannazane

L.A. Affairs chronicles the current dating scene in and around Los Angeles. If you have comments or a true story to tell, email us at LAAffairs@latimes.com.

To read the article in Spanish, click here

MORE L.A. LOVE STORIES

I got caught on AshleyMadison.com

8 lessons I learned about being single in L.A.

I finally asked her: Are we dating, or just hanging out?

home@latimes.com

Read this article:

I watched the sun set on my Sunset Boulevard romance - Los Angeles Times

Sign Up for

Our free email newsletters

As someone who voted for Barack Obama twice, supported the Affordable Care Act, and could be persuaded to vote for the right kind of single-payer system, I've found the entire health-care debate over the past several months deeply depressing. That's no doubt why my first instinct was to cheer when reading a recent rant against the right from an editor at The Huffington Post.

The transparently titled opinion column, "I Don't Know How to Explain to You That You Should Care About Other People," is a perfect expression of our political moment in its utter exasperation at those on the other side of a policy debate, but even more so in how it casts these partisan opponents as moral monsters with whom communication, let alone persuasion, is simply impossible.

I admit that it does often feel that way these days, especially when it comes to the House and Senate bills to remake the nation's health-care system, since so much of the discussion has been conducted by Republicans in undeniable bad faith with bills primarily designed to cut or eliminate taxes dishonestly described by leaders in Congress, as well as the president, as efforts to make health care more affordable. (The tax cuts ensure that health care would in fact become much less affordable for millions of people.)

But the instinct to cheer on the argument should be resisted.

The fact is that most intelligent and informed people on the right do not oppose progressive policies because they're stingy bastards who don't give a damn about their fellow citizens. It's true that this may describe some Republicans. There are probably a non-trivial number, especially those unduly influenced by the odious ideas of Ayn Rand, who do come close to viewing the poor as parasitic moochers. But many, many others the vast majority, in my experience do not take this position. They believe, instead, that progressive policies do more harm than good for the very people they're designed to help.

Consider the minimum wage. Many conservatives oppose raising it, especially as high as $15/hour, as some municipalities around the country have opted to do over the last few years. Do they take this position because they prefer lower-wage workers to struggle? No. They take this position because they understand basic principles of economics, which predict that raising costs for businesses that employ low-wage workers will lead them to make fewer hires, thereby hurting these workers overall. (A study released earlier this week seems to indicate that this is precisely what's been happening in Seattle since the city began incrementally raising its minimum wage.)

The same holds for the concerns that led the original neoconservatives to make various proposals for reforming crime and welfare during the 1970s and '80s proposals that powerfully influenced policymaking at the local and federal levels during the 1990s.

My point isn't to make a case for these policies (though I think many of them were defensible in the context of the time). The point is to recognize that the proposals were made with the intent of improving the lives of the poor, crime victims, and others, not with the intent of hurting them, or of giving the rich a post-spending-cut tax break. (While it's true that most of these conservatives supported tax cuts as well, those cuts, too, were justified as a spur to economic growth and job creation that would benefit everyone.)

It's certainly easier and more morally satisfying for those on the left to presume that the right is just motivated by rank selfishness. But it's no more true at an individual level than it is as the level of public policy debate.

Though there's been considerable dispute about studies purporting to show that conservatives are more generous than liberals when it comes to private charity, the most fair-minded critics don't claim the opposite that only people on the left care about the well-being of their fellow citizens. The critics claim, rather, that ideology is an insignificant variable in determining who gives to charity, and how much.

So much for having to explain to Republicans as a group why they "should care about other people."

Now, it may well be that Republicans are more inclined toward generosity when it comes to private charity than they are with regard to government programs. Is that foolish? Could conservatives do more social good if they supported tax hikes and policies devised and run by the federal government? That's an empirically testable proposition, the outcome of which just might change some minds on the right.

But only if liberals, progressives, and democratic socialists resist the temptation to flatter themselves and demonize their opponents and keep up the hard, unglamorous, sometimes infuriating work of trying to persuade.

Continued here:

Why can't self-satisfied liberals admit that conservatives care about people, too? - The Week Magazine

Fiction.

Columbia Pictures

The Republican health care bill has stalled in the Senate, at least until after the July 4th recess, and for people who live in states with Republican senators, the delay poses a rare opportunity to reach out and let the senate know exactly how they feel about the AHCA. But before picking up the phone, Slates chosen three movies that will help you understand the Republican health care plan backwards and forwards. Check these movies out and youll be an AHCA expert in no time, ready to talk rings around anyone answering the phone at your senators office. Take a look, and get ready to learn to speak Republican!

Its true that you wont find many wonkish health care policy details in F.W. Murnaus 1922 silent masterpiece. But as a primer in the small government philosophy that underlies the Republican partys signature legislation, Count Orloks vampiric reign of terror is at least as instructive as an Ayn Rand novel. Give it a watch to get pumped up before dialing your senator, and remember: Republicans cant enter your house unless you invite them.

You might think that Werner Herzogs 1979 remake of Murnaus film would have just as little to say about effectively lobbying against Trumpcare as the original version. But have you considered that, in many ways, the Republican health care plan resembles the sort of legislation that might be drafted by a political party that was created to serve the interests of vampires? Whos got his finger on the political pulse now?

Yes, I am literally saying that the people who support the AHCA are vampiresand not, like, sexy teenage vampires, but the German Expressionist kind, the ugliest vampires there ever were. Will watching three different films about the same vampire prepare you to call your senators and beg them not to pass a bill that will cause your fellow citizens to suffer and possibly die, just as surely as they would if Count Orlok were drinking their precious blood? I mean, at this point, what harm could it do?

More here:

These Three Movies Will Help You Understand the Republican Health Care Bill - Slate Magazine (blog)

In Matthew 25: 31-46, Jesus talks about compassion for the least of these. He identifies them as the hungry, the thirsty, the stranger, the naked, the sick and the imprisoned. He says that when time is fulfilled, the goats and sheep will be separated. The sheep are those who show compassion. The goats are those who do not. In the end, the goats will go away into eternal punishment (in today's language, they'd roast in Hell) but the sheep will enter into eternal life.

Jesus makes it very clear where he stands. Central to life in the Christian Church must be compassion for our fellow human beings. When I look at some of the people in our present U. S. Congress who are trying to pass a new health care bill that will hurt millions of poor, disabled, addicted, and elderly people, I wonder if they know that they are acting like a bunch of goats.

Oh, I'm sure some champion the notion of personal responsibility. While being responsible is a good thing, they say that if you are among the hungry, the thirsty, the strangers, the naked, the sick, or the imprisoned, it's your own fault. Yet this is not the message of Jesus. It's the philosophy of a mid-20th Century lady named Ayn Rand who thought that the talented few should be protected not the least of these. Its a notion that ought not be in the vocabulary of the Christian Church.

In my Christian bones, I believe that what is being contemplated in the new health bill is immoral. I wonder how our representatives in Congress would respond to the question: Are you a sheep or a goat?

Link:

The least of these - Ashland Daily Press

Our college professor sons were up from San Diego, and, as is our practice, we sat on the back porch drinking and discussing the current state of affairs. After a while, I noticed one word entering the conversation so often that it was beginning to chafe. I stood up and shouted, "Enough! Enough of the T-word. I hereby banish its use!"

It was futile, of course, you can't get away from it now. As the racist Alabama governor, George Wallace, famously said about Southern bigotry, "Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever." Just substitute Trump and you get the picture in the Disunited States today.

It's not just the frequency of the moniker that troubles me. It's the fact that ascribing all present and coming woes to one man misses the point.

See, here's the thing: Donald Trump is not really running this show. He is a narcissistic, ignorant blowhard, who ran for president as a goof. He was as startled as anyone when America's electorate threw a pre-kindergarten tantrum ("This'll show the grownups! Nyah nyah!") and put him in the White House.

When someone ostensibly in charge isn't up to the job, it means that someone else takes over (see: George W. Bush and Dick Cheney).

In the case of Trump, many people are pulling the strings, from the captains of industryespecially the death/weapons and air pollution industriesto every Republican in Congress, most notably Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Speaker of the House Paul Ryan.

And wethe press, the populaceseem unaware of this. We gape, with near stupefaction, at the orange-haired clown in the center ring, oblivious to the fact that others are controlling his freakishly fascinating and appalling actions. We don't notice that those same manipulators have sent people prowling beneath the bleachers to pick our pockets as we gawk at the ostensible main attraction.

It's long past time that we give them the credit they are due.

Let's begin with McConnell, this era's Dick Cheney and the most powerful man in Washington for the past six years.

McConnell is happy as a pig in slop at what Trump is doing and so are his 51 stooges in the Senate.

Comedian Jon Stewart used to mock McConnell, portraying the chinless Kentuckian as a slow-talking tortoise. But there is nothing amusing about this particular land-dwelling reptile, whose shell conceals a cornucopia of sinister tricks.

This is the man who chose to nullify the American people's right to choose their president when he spent six years derailing the man they said they wanted to lead them, Barack Obama. This is the guy who had such little respect for America's political institutions that he denied the people a Supreme Court Justice for a year because he feared that a jurist chosen by the man who represented the people would be beyond his control.

McConnell won that last battle and eventually got Trump to rubber-stamp his choice for the court, a guy who will join the GOP's other corporatist judges to ensure that money remains the deciding factor in politics until your grandchildren have grandchildren. This court is about to put its seal of approval on gerrymandering that will keep Republicans in power indefinitely. McConnell (not Trump, despite appearances) may get another pick soon as well.

Almost as bad are the 51 other members of the U.S. Senate, who do whatever McConnell tells them to do. They are supposed to represent the citizens of Maine or Wisconsin or Arizona or Georgia. They don't, and if you scrunched all 51 of them together you wouldn't get a single backbone.

One GOP senator, Dean Heller of Nevada, is hinting that he is going to oppose the repeal of the Affordable Care Act on the grounds that it is too cruel (other GOP senators oppose the bill because it isn't cruel enough). But Heller's coyness comes with fine print: He opposes the bill "in its present form." When the time comes, he will do as Uncle Mitch tells him to do, as have such other "mavericks" such as Susan Collins of Maine and John McCain of Arizona.

With a Senate divided 52-48, any three Republicans could have given the country a Supreme Court justice 18 months ago and could stop today's Republican efforts to harm the poor and middle-class people in their states who get sick. All they have to do is stand up to McConnell.

The far-right House of Representatives is led by Ryan, who, it turns out, is an Ayn Rand cultist: "government is bad so I'll go to Washington and see if I can destroy it." When the House voted to overturn the Affordable Care Act and deprive millions of Americans of medical care, Ryan gushed that he had been working on limiting health care for 20 years. He was so excited he was drooling.

Like McConnell, Ryan has puppets in the House, some of them from around here, like Kevin McCarthy of Bakersfield and Devin Nunes in the Central Valley.

Behind these people are America's titans of industry, the corporate hierarchy, who are supposed to look out for their fellow citizens but don't. There are so many foxes in the country's henhouse that the chickens don't stand a chance.

So we have military warlords whispering (flatteringly, to be sure) in Trump's ear that the world needs more weapons, and, presto, a multi-billion-dollar arms sale to Saudi Arabia goes through and the military gleefully explodes what some deranged general called "the mother of all bombs" in the Middle East. These men and women could easily, and may, persuade Trump to use The Bomb.

There are too many others to mention. People in charge of environmental protection who don't believe the environment needs protecting; people in charge of peoples' health who worry only about the health of Big Pharma's bottom line; those in charge of education who disdain public schools.

None of them care whether your grandchildren will have bad lungs from polluted air, or whether you have a job to take care of your family, or whether you can send grandma to get her teeth fixed, or whether your kid misses school because he is sick.

To them, the Constitution and traditions of this country are abstract and out-of-date.

To repeat: It's not Trump who is running the country. It is all these people and organizations who are taking us to ruin, using the pliable and easily manipulated Trump as their front-man.

We need to acknowledge that and somehow hold them accountable, if we hope to change it.

Bob Cuddy wants to drain the swamp from Arroyo Grande. Send comments through the editor at clanham@newtimesslo.com or write a letter to the editor at letters@newtimesslo.com.

The rest is here:

The T-word - New Times SLO

Will Pearson andMangesh Hattikudur founded an online empire worth millions on the heels of a campus magazine. Their project boiled down the interesting wormholes of college lectures, offered a curious and fun dorm-roomtone, and eventuallythe duo realized that this approach would make for killer audio.

Seventeen years after launching Mental Flossout of a Duke University dorm room, theyve joinedup with the crew at HowStuffWorks to launch a podcast. With a nod toward those transcendent, stoned conversations you used to have, and a sincere love of nerdy knowledge, the hosts are naturals.

Part-Time Genius, launched this month, offers the weird thoughts and analysisthat made Mental Floss successful, and does soin a format that feels natural and fun in your ears. Listening to the longtime friends discuss why Ayn Rand is a political rockstar or how tax havens became a thing is like hearing your dorm neighbors chat, laugh, and argue through the wall.

Those conversations at night were just so much funthey werent pretentious, they were just super interesting, Hattikudur tells the Daily Dot. Youd have someone whos an economics major relaying the most fascinating topics about why econ is interesting, why beer was sold in six packs, or why Miller Lite is actually a really interesting craft brew.

Apparently beer was sold in six packs because it was the perfect weight for women to carry.

The podcast works as a standalone experience, lacking a throughline between episodes.I was fascinated by studieson how humans can feed 10 billion people or how to live without sleep; I wasted my time while listening to Pearson and Hattikudur discuss the ultimate superhero animalwhich is the point.

Pearson saysthat just like with Mental Floss, theyre buildinga database of episodes that listeners can scroll through years from now, cherry-pickinginteresting topics.

I love the idea of being able to create a show where something that the guys did for Stuff You Should Know five years ago is still being discovered today, says Pearson, referring to another HowStuffWorks podcast. And that was really appealing to us for being able to create this really fun archive that people could dig into once they discovered a show.

Other show topics include: the enduring survival of rats, how boy scouts conquered the U.S., degrees of cleanliness, and a deep dive into what the most American place in the country actually is.At its best, the series takes topics youve never considered and makes them into essential and engaging lectures.

Pearson and Hattikudurlikewise deliver strong guest experts, many of whom are alumni of Mental Floss. Its a whos who of internet culture: guests include YouTube sensationSimone Giertz, Saturday Night Lives Streeter Seidell, and best-selling author John Green. In each episode, guests compete for the coveted Part-Time Geniusaward: a handwritten note of praise from the hostsaddressed to the winners mom or boss.

In addition to these gueststars, the show also spotlights fanswho have day jobs tangentially related to the topic du jour, sayZumba instructors or architects, who come on to ask trivia questions. This segment can be inane, but I appreciate that it brings the listener back from an encyclopedic journey to a fun, informal aside.

How Stuff Works is a network consistently ranking in the top five of overall podcast listener metrics, and is pushing for more podcast market dominance. In addition to bringing on Pearson and Hattikudur, its recently also hired the founder of Cracked.com, Jack OBrien, who will be launching HowStuffWorks first West Coast Studios and spearheading the networks expansion into comedy.

The launch of Part-Time Genius marks the 14th podcast series in the HowStuffWorks network, which was founded nearly 20 years ago in 1998. The podcast joins the ranks of notable shows likeStuff You Should Know,Stuff Mom Never Told You,andStuff You Missed in History Class. This spring HowStuffWorks debutedFoodStuff and released the second season of The Stuff of Lifethe company says its reaching nearly 30 million unique visitors a month.

We joined HowStuffWorks as well because of their plans for the future, Pearson says. The company will be launching additional shows and the opportunity to play a role in how those take shape and how those launch will be a lot of fun as well I think youll see over the next six-to-12 months.

HowStuffWorks is a quirky network for the nerdiest of nerds, and Part-Time Genius fits right in.

Go here to read the rest:

'Part-Time Genius' takes encyclopedic adventures into weird, wild stuff - The Daily Dot