Tuesday, August 21, 2012
Monday, August 20, 2012
From the Onion: Pregnant Woman Relieved To Learn Her Rape Was Illegitimate
LITCHFIELD, CT—Though she was initially upset following the brutal sexual assault last month that left her pregnant, victim Martha Byars told reporters she was relieved Sunday to learn from Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO) that her ability to conceive her unwanted child proves she was not, in fact, legitimately raped.
“Being violently coerced into having sex was the worst thing that’s ever happened to me, so I take comfort in knowing it wasn’t actually rape,” Byars said of the vicious encounter in which she was accosted in an alleyway by a stranger, pinned to the ground, and penetrated against her will for 25 minutes. “It was absolutely horrific—I felt violated in the worst way imaginable—but thanks to Congressman Akin, I now realize it must, at some level, have been consensual after all.”
“Thank God for that,” Byars added. “I’m so relieved to know that my child’s father, the man who muffled my screams as he forcefully penetrated me over and over and left me hemorrhaging to death on the street, is not a rapist.”
Explaining that the Republican senatorial candidate’s statements had “really opened her eyes” by helping her understand the workings of her own reproductive system, Byars said she only wishes she could have known at the time of her near-fatal assault that the female body has ways to shut down conception during cases of tried-and-true rape.
“Now that I know the truth, I realize none of the telltale signs of legitimate rape were there at all,” mused Byers, noting that her body did not in any way shut down but in fact continued to register excruciating pain throughout the entire cruel ordeal. “I must have at least subconsciously wanted it—otherwise, the sperm wouldn’t have been able to enter my body.”
“Not only is this knowledge a blessing for me,” she continued, “but it will no doubt bring great hope to the tens of thousands of women who are forcibly and savagely impregnated in the United States every year.”
originally posted: http://www.theonion.com/articles/pregnant-woman-relieved-to-learn-her-rape-was-ille,29258/
From friend of blog Jerry: A look at health care from front lines (an original post)
There seems to be be concerted effort to break apart Medicare into two groups. One group is the one who is drawing upon Medicare currently, and who the Privatizers would like to say "don't worry nothing will change with regards to your plan"; and the younger one who will get a voucher which, in current climate of rising health care cost, will appear to be almost valueless. In some ways this can be seen as a way to break the younger and healthier of the heard; off from older and sicker. After these changes have gone through (on a purely selfish level) there will be reason for their kids to support their more sickly parents after they have just bee sold out by them. In this way the Privatizers will have just destroyed the institution Medicare in two easy steps to the detriment of everyone except the insurance companies.
It is a similar plan to the one that was tried in 2004-2005 George W. Bush spearheaded a drive to wipe out Social Security. That one was dreamed up in a Republican think tank, as I remember reading about the plan before it was ever rolled out. The one thing that the Privatizers hadn't counted on was that these elders seemed to like Social Security and they just didn't want to sell out their children when it came to this benefit. From here I asked a person who is drawing from Medicare now what his thoughts on the institution were. Here's what he wrote:
It is a similar plan to the one that was tried in 2004-2005 George W. Bush spearheaded a drive to wipe out Social Security. That one was dreamed up in a Republican think tank, as I remember reading about the plan before it was ever rolled out. The one thing that the Privatizers hadn't counted on was that these elders seemed to like Social Security and they just didn't want to sell out their children when it came to this benefit. From here I asked a person who is drawing from Medicare now what his thoughts on the institution were. Here's what he wrote:
Medicare, The view from here.
I was asked recently what I thought about changes that might be coming for Medicare. My first thoughts are that with all the talk about it going broke, there may be a need to change some parts of the program. I say may, because the changes may not need to be made to the program, just a new way of funding it. There’s an easy repair, but it involves drastically hiking taxes, so voters aren't hearing about it on the campaign trail. Under federal law, millionaires and billionaires get to dodge payroll taxes on a substantial percentage of their salaries. Employers and workers are charged payroll taxes on salaries up to $110,100 a year, meaning anything above that —a category that includes some of the middle class — is payroll-tax free. Simply lifting that cap would cover about 90 percent of the projected shortfall over 75 years, according to forecasts by the Social Security Administration ( I would recommend the same payroll tax rate applying to capital gains as well, otherwise the Mitts (Romney) of the country get off free)
At 78 years of age I am much more concerned as to how Medicare will be handled for my children, now averaging 49 years of age. I can see some perceived unfairness with the suggestion that radical change may come only to those under fifty-five years of age i.e., some type of voucher program, which until fully described, cannot be fully imagined. I assume it will come as a check which we are told we will buy insurance from various insurance companies. The companies will have a range of policies with various deductibles. I’m afraid I am at a loss to know how an effective voucher can work and I can see how this program could favor the insurance companies unless the vouchers were drawn with very tight specifications as to what range and cost of service they would pay for. (Think how many jobs this would create for the thousands of lobbyist the insurance companies would hire to design this voucher.)
What I can say about the current program is that it has seen me through, a hip replacement, a pulmonary embolism, prostate cancer, and bladder cancer. OMG, have I lived through all that. That said, all of the foregoing was covered as well by private insurance costing in excess of $450 per month. Imagine what Medicare would cost if a great many didn’t have supplemental insurance.
One thing I have become very much aware of is the vast amount of fraud now existing in the current program. Not millions but billions of dollars are being stolen from the taxpayers. A group was discovered in North Carolina in a twenty million dollar scam involving medical equipment. On 60 minutes an interviewer asked a jailed participant in the scam if they were jacking the price of the wheelchairs up and charging Medicare exorbitant prices for them. He answered promptly that no; there weren’t any wheelchairs involved, they were just billing for fictitious people or participants that were paid a small amount to allow their Medicare numbers to be used in the billing process. Asked if any of his friends could start this scam up again, he replied that it would not be a problem. Fraud prevention should be enhanced tremendously .
I think the Affordable Care Act should continued to be activated with the mandate included and then modified over a period of years as we see how it works. So much political activity has taken place already; surely we need to go awhile with what we have already voted on. It appears to be the Democrats, who I favor after forty years of voting for the Republicans, should be explaining how the Affordable Care Act incorporates Medicare and broadens it scope and longevity. This, to me, is not being adequately being explained. Perhaps we could put a White Board like Mitt and use fewer words like: Obamacare, Passed and Solvent …MittPaulCare, Who the Hell Knows?
Sent to me by friend of blog Tom: The Caterpillar Strike as Metaphor
If Labor Unions Can’t Put the Brakes on This Thing, Who Can?
The Caterpillar Strike as Metaphor
Not that anyone—least of all American factory workers over the last three decades—needs to be reminded that corporations have very little respect for working people, the International Association of Machinists (IAM) strike against the Caterpillar plant in Joliet, Illinois, removed any lingering doubts.
Judging by their actions, Caterpillar saw this negotiation as a unique opportunity to stick it to their workers. Indeed, its truculent, take-it-or-leave-it posture is emblematic of every offensive aspect of post-Reagan corporate arrogance. Labor relations have gone from hard-nosed collective bargaining to gladiatorial blood sport, with labor now shedding most of the blood. What used to be viewed as an undignified and unnecessary show of muscle by management, is now regarded as standard procedure.
What Caterpillar has said to the IAM is this: No matter how healthy we are as a company, no matter how profitable we become, and no matter how much cold, hard cash we manage to rake in, we will never, ever, under any conditions, share one more nickel with the hourly workforce than is absolutely, positively necessary. Which raises the question: Why is this company taking such a hard line with their long-time, loyal workers? Simple answer: Because they can.
While it was announced Wednesday that IAM district leadership (as opposed to local leadership, directly answerable to the rank-and-file) had reached a tentative agreement with Caterpillar management to end the 15-week strike (approximately 780 workers went out on May 1), there’s a good chance the local will reject the offer when they vote on Friday. No one can predict how these votes will go, especially after a lengthy strike, but given how disillusioned and resentful the membership it, a rejection is definitely a possibility.
According to reports, the company’s LBF (last, best and final offer) was very close to the concession-laden LBF that precipitated the strike in the first place and resulted in the membership spending 15 long, agonizing weeks on the bricks, drawing a paltry $150 a week in strike benefits. It’s going to be interesting to see how successful IAM’s apparatchiks are in persuading the membership to accept what is, by all accounts, a profoundly inferior contract.
Among other things, it calls for a staggering 6-year freeze on wages and benefits. A company making billions of dollars in profits off the backs of its workers insists on a 6-year wage freeze? How cold is that? And not only is this freeze being offered with a straight face, it’s being presented as one of those “If you don’t like it, pal, you can rot in Hell” propositions. It’s true. The company has indicated that if the union remains coy, they’re prepared to fire everybody and take their chances with a brand new workforce.
Last winter, Caterpillar showed how aggressive they were willing to be. Appealing to that wildly misleading wage statistic known as “fair market,” Caterpillar insisted that the 450 workers at its London, Ontario, plant take a whopping 55-percent wage cut. When the workers balked (and who wouldn’t?), the company locked them out. And when it became clear that the union viewed these tactics as a form of economic extortion and were unwilling to roll over, Caterpillar shut down the entire factory and moved away. Period. No more jobs.
As far as pure commerce goes, Caterpillar is doing spectacularly well. Profits are at a record high and forecasts for the future are even rosier. Moreover, management is so confident and comfortable being in the driver’s seat, they’re not even trying to cosmetically cook the books for negotiating purposes. Caterpillar executives are more than willing to admit that business is booming. In fact, they’re bragging about it.
Last year the company earned a record $4.9 billion in profits, and expects to come in even higher this year. But, alas, they’ve also vowed that none of that increase—none of that marvelous windfall—is going to end up in the pockets of the people who actually do the work. Why would they give these people raises when, technically, they’re not obliged to? Only a fool would pay more than necessary.
To make matters worse, Caterpillar executives are playing dumb. Management is clinging to the fiction that it has no choice but to freeze wages because their pay scale is already higher than the “fair market.” Of course, the insanely bitter irony here is that today’s “fair market” wage is a grossly misleading statistic, the tragic result of a concerted, two-decades long assault on American earnings.
Which is why the middle-class is shrinking so alarmingly. It’s not unemployment that is killing the middle-class; it’s the depletion of decent-wage jobs. While bottom-line fundamentalists like Caterpillar proudly see themselves as benefactors to their stockholders, what they are, in fact, is destroyers of the middle-class and subverters of the American Dream. And if labor unions can’t put the brakes on this thing, who can?
DAVID MACARAY, an LA playwright and author (“It’s Never Been Easy: Essays on Modern Labor”), was a former union rep. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion, published by AK Press. Hopeless is also available in a Kindle edition. He can be reached at dmacaray@earthlink.net
Original Post here: http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/08/17/the-caterpillar-strike-as-metaphor/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)