Disqus - Latest Comments for wakemenow

Re: Health Care Reform is About People

wakemenow — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 22:01:10 -0000

Well shoot, I apparently deleted my comment accidentally. :P Ah well, it was too long and rambly anyway. ;)

To cut it short, sorry to hear you're experiencing that Holly and it's great that you did find a clinic willing to work with you. Hopefully the surgeon will deal fairly too.

Living without health insurance for 14 out of the last 15 years, I can relate. Thank god for good friends and lucky breaks in life. *knock on wood* Sick as a dog myself currently with strep, but that's nowhere near on the scale of what you're going through. Tooth pain is nothing to screw around with. Hopefully you will be fixed up soon!

But the health care reform proposals pushed by Obama and insurance lobbyists won't likely include a public option. Matt Taibbi discusses this in the September 2009 issue of Rolling Stone magazine in an article titled: "Sick And Wrong: How Washington Is Screwing Up Health Care Reform—And Why It May Take A Revolt To Fix It." There's a little more about it on my blog, but read the article for yourselves.

Here's a video of Matt Taibbi speaking with Rachel Maddow about the exclusion of the public option: http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/mat...

The public option was a compromise; a single-payer system would best serve the public. What's the point in creating a health care reform bill that requires people to pay for private insurance while disallowing a public option and declaring single-payer completely off the table? It's no reform I'd want. Looks like a way to make insurance companies happy, but that's about it.

Re: Health Care Reform is About People

wakemenow — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 21:42:51 -0000

So sorry to hear of your pain, Holly. Living without health insurance or, more aptly put, a quality, affordable health plan is truly frightening. My guyfriend thankfully helped cover my doctor visit yesterday to find out I have strep throat and will let me pay him back in time. Without friends like him, I'd surely be as lost as back when he found me.

Approaching my 28th birthday, I've been uninsured since age 12 except for two occasions amounting to less than a year of coverage total (one plan through my college for a semester; the other time 3 months through a private insurer that charged nearly $150/mo. for emergency-only coverage with a bunch of restrictions -- what a joke!). The college health plan was actually pretty good and averaged out to around $100/mo. I'd love to have it back. *sigh*

After discovering a benign breast tumor (fibroadenoma) last fall, it took a few months to find an organization that would help with funding for diagnostics (it turned out as a front to hook me up with county services) and get the ball rolling. Once the tumor was shown to be benign, the county no longer was willing to pay for removal. So it stays. The discomfort comes mostly from its density and its location makes it easily felt. Since it's nearing time for a follow-up, I need to call the county and see if that's covered. Otherwise, no way, no how can I afford the estimated thousands (they were thinking around $5k) to have it removed, and there are no ways to treat or shrink it. But then again, I worry removal might leave scars or cause sensitivity issues, especially when I'm at the mercy of where the county sends me. So glad it's nothing very serious, which unfortunately you sound to be experiencing. Tooth pain is nothing to screw around with. Good thing you found a clinic willing to work with you.

Problem is this bill being pushed by Obama and the insurance lobby isn't likely going to include a public option (not in any true sense anyway), and I personally have a lot of issues with what IS being proposed (like requiring acceptance of your employer's plan, no matter how crummy). Matt Taibbi has an excellent article out in the September 2009 issue of Rolling Stone magazine titled "Sick And Wrong: How Washington Is Screwing Up Health Care Reform—And Why It May Take A Revolt To Fix It" (discussed a bit on my blog but much better to pick the article up yourselves).

And here's a video of Matt Taibbi talking with Rachel Maddow about the public option:
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/mat...

Public option was a compromise to begin with; a single-payer system best serves the people. What is health care reform where single-payer AND public option are off the table? That's not any kind of reform I want.

Re: Health Care Reform is About People

wakemenow — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 21:05:55 -0000

It's not so easy to get medicaid coverage, especially if you're young and child-free. We like to think the state will step in and help during serious cases, but no, not always. Not even usually. Lots of variables play into it, namely whether you're already receiving public assistance (housing, foodstamps, disability benefits, etc.).

In other words, it's a real pain in the ass asking the state for assistance with medical costs.

Re: PETA Continues Unethical Treatment of Women

wakemenow — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 20:46:42 -0000

Organizations like PETA don't make much sense to me either. What's up with a group of humans hating on other humans under the guise of protecting animals? Intelligent apes (us) = animals too, but PETA people don't see it that way in their arrogant delusions.

The ads you posted were mean-spirited, but nothing new there. Hence why I usually ignore them completely and avoid anything with their name on it.

"People who profess love for all animals except other people" would be an apt description of PETA. I knew a lady like this once who had a house full of animals and freaked if anyone did ANYTHING she deemed improper toward an animal, and yet she beat her kids. Guess I just don't get it. *shrugs*

Re: Where Have All the Morals Gone?

wakemenow — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 03:09:16 -0000

Being a nation obsessed with all types of violence doesn't help.

Young folks seem to be getting the message of equality confused with the old adage "if she wants to talk like a man, let her fight like one." Young people, both males and females, seem more desensitized to violence and to glorify "toughness" among their peers. Girls seem to be expected to "buck up" and fight back, rather than the boys being expected to tone it down. I've said before this is partly an unintended consequence to the popular feminist message, where young girls misconstrue equality to mean them measuring up in a man's world by becoming more man-like. That absolutely sucks, but it's to be expected in a society where violence is the norm and femininity is diminished to little more than sex appeal and materialism.

We can't be a warring society teaching peace and love and cooperation to our young people and expect it to make sense. Just as we can't expect young girls to understand what it means to be strong women when our culture sends so many mixed signals.

Re: Womanism/Feminism…Feminism/Womanism

wakemenow — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 02:45:58 -0000

I think we agree mostly on what constitutes a woman, just not on the equality of humans regardless of gender, sex, race, ethnicity, class, or any other arbitrary distinction. We can't seem to break out of the pecking order mentality. Men don't get it, and women don't get it either.

Funny thing is I didn't realize until now that "womanist" is a term embraced by women of color. I just thought a womanist was someone for women's rights who distinguishes herself from mainstream feminists, regardless of race. Never thought much about it, rarely reading blogs of this sort (outside of this one, of course -wink-).

Re: Submissive Feminists? Professor Foxy Gets It Right

wakemenow — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 20:21:49 -0000

I can understand where Allen is coming from on this. My reply to the conflicted feminist's question would have included the word "trust." Because when you think about it, THAT's what allows the woman to relax and experiment and relish a submissive role - because she knows she can say "stop" and her wishes will be heeded. What separates her boyfriend from some predator pervert? He is showing her respect. Because if we really care to get technical here, the only way most women are going to have full and complete control in the bedroom is if the man's handcuffed with a gun or taser trained on him. lol He is an autonomous being too with power in the situation. Control of the situation comes from a mutual agreement between partners which includes not causing harm beyond the other's comfort zone. That agreement is solidified with TRUST. Not control or power-mongering.

The reason I love being submissive with some of my partners is that it titillates me to experience the strength and passion in the man, feeling small and overtaken by his presence. What makes it enjoyable rather than nerve-wracking and scary is that I know he'll respect my boundaries and treat my body with care, even if we do decide to tease those boundaries from time to time. It's all about trust. Power-plays can be fun for kinky role-play, but outside of that I'd say it creates unnecessary destructive tensions in our romantic relationships. What's the point in competing with your partner like that?

Just love each other and enjoy your sex life. It shouldn't matter what other feminists or anyone else thinks about your personal romantic choices.

Re: He Will Hit You Again

wakemenow — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 18:53:40 -0000

Why was Oprah getting up in other people's business on-air? Anyone else have a problem with that? Care to discuss domestic violence, cool, go ahead, but did she have to bring that girl Rihanna up in it? I didn't watch the show (and never do) but have heard enough to where it sounds like Oprah was out of line there. Even if my (hypothetical) man were completely in the wrong, I wouldn't want a talk show host blabbing about it. That would be my business to handle. Here we have this story plastered all over the news and magazines, diving all up into a couple's personal relationship matters. Very rude, IMO. If Rihanna wants to talk about it, that'll be her business.

Makes me very thankful to not be a celebrity...

Re: Nobody Likes an Apologist

wakemenow — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 18:45:04 -0000

That is weird that anyone would care what Rush Limbaugh thinks of their opinion of him. In fact, it's weird that Rush continues to receive so much attention these days. My crazy, religious extremist ex-in-laws even gave up on him after the Oxycontin debacle.

Ann Coulter's even scarier though. That woman has serious problems.

So sad seeing our country become this divided with people referring to themselves as either on the "right" or "left" as if we can't possibly share any common ground. There are major flaws and oversights on "both sides of the fence," but also plenty of well-intending people and values, even as so many are turning away from figuring out how to communicate effectively with the "others." Polarity. It's not good, not for any of us.

We'd all be better off to quit listening to these idiotic pundits, whether that be Rush on the so-called "right" or some other joker on the so-called "left." They divide us with their stereotypes and labels, encouraging us to see one another in black-and-white absolutes, bracketing our peers in asinine categories like: conservative, liberal, centrist, pro-choice, pro-life, pro-God. I mean we've come to treat these stereotypes like they're applicable in real life where people are more complicated and values cannot so easily be summed up with generic classifications. We start thinking in terms of opposites when really we litter the whole spectrum, and I personally think this is how groupthink gets started. People listen to these pundits, doesn't matter whether they're for or against them, and they react by trying to disassociate themselves from whatever vulgarity has been spewed. Ann Coulter makes darn near everyone want to jump ship (lol), and if you identify that ship as consisting of "rights" and "lefts" you'll jump to take a side. But this isn't a one-on-one competition. Most Republicans aren't Ann Coulter or Rush Limbaugh, and for those Republicans I know, they don't even care to listen to these people. People look to them for shock value, just as they used to do with Howard Stern and Al Franken. It's novelty, pure and simple, that serves only to distract us from concentrating on more important matters.

Re: Too Busy to Blog!?

wakemenow — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 17:03:08 -0000

Here, here. It's an adult space discussing adult issues. We can handle foul language and disagreements.

Re: The Roman Catholic Church Voices Disapproval of Abortion, Says Nothing About the Rape of a 9 Year Old Girl

wakemenow — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 16:55:58 -0000

Roman Catholics make no sense whatsoever. 'Course most Christians don't. Or even most self-described religious people in general. Hypocrites...

This reminds me of the priest who used to see me as an escort (yes, for sex, though he lied and denied being a priest for 4 years) who said that he is strongly against the use of contraceptives...except when it comes to me. Nice. Assholes.

No, abortion isn't worse than rape because a fetus isn't a fully-developed person with conscious thoughts and life experiences.

I'm so completely done with anything and everything related to the damn Catholic Church. What bastards.

Re: Slut Shaming From Sextexting Leads To Suicide

wakemenow — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 16:46:56 -0000

They so rarely go after the bullies and taunters...

Re: Slut Shaming From Sextexting Leads To Suicide

wakemenow — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 04:38:47 -0000

Those are very hurtful words to hear, especially for a teenage girl. This is very sad to learn of.

Re: Open Thread: Your Voting Experience

wakemenow — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 05:31:00 -0000

I ordered an absentee ballot and mailed it back last week, so no lines for me.

Re: What to Expect When You’re Aborting

wakemenow — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 22:50:28 -0000

Wow...the "What to Expect When You're Aborting" blog is definitely raw.

I'm not completely sure what to make of it.

Re: Tina Fey Makes Her SNL Return

wakemenow — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 21:19:46 -0000

Nevermind. They pulled that link too. Frickin' nazis.

Re: Tina Fey Makes Her SNL Return

wakemenow — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 22:55:18 -0000

Someone mentioned it to me earlier today, so I went hunting for it on youtube. Here's a direct link that is functioning: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wi9WEj21h1g.

Pretty darn funny!

Re: Gloria Steinem on Sarah Palin

wakemenow — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 01:05:48 -0000

I'm not sure they're actually aiming for the miffed Hillary supporters, despite all the talk to the contrary. There are a lot of women out here who REALLY don't like Hillary Clinton (or her husband for that matter) who wouldn't have voted for her even if she was running on both republicrat tickets. They're proposing an alternative that's likely to appeal to a different kind of woman altogether because it doesn't make any sense at all that they honestly would expect Hillary supporters to jump on a Fundamentalist's bandwagon, female or not.

She's the first female Fundamentalist Republican VP nominee, not a Hillary replacement. Liberal women interested in voting a female into office ought to look into Cynthia McKinney.

Re: The Rise of Sarah Palin is Like a Really Bad Disney Movie

wakemenow — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 00:53:18 -0000

Yeah, it's definitely a scary thought. Whether McCain dies or not, Palin will obviously have impact from her perch just as Cheney has in the last 8 years.

But absurd? Well, depends on who you ask. The people willing to vote for her (and McCain) is a group that apparently identifies with her persona who think it would serve D.C. to inject some "small town goodness" into U.S. politics. The obvious problem being that Palin's public persona is crafted (Karl Rove had a hand in her selection...) and isn't likely an honest depiction of who she is. Oh, she may very well be unqualified or even incompetent, but she's Fundamentalist and that's where the appeal lies for her voting base.

She's not who they think she is just as I don't believe Obama is who many of the Democrats think he is, but the one most effective at coming across as "one of them" is the one the people will likely elect. See, Obama comes across as smart and studious, which isn't nearly as appealing to blue-collar folks who are tired of being looked down upon and ridiculed. Palin knows how to speak their language. And anyone who contests or criticizes her is automatically vilified as being one of those jerks looking to put her down, winning her more sympathy from the Republican base. This is intended to create a no-win situation in the press.

So...not absurd so much as intentionally crafted. Once in office, she'll have plenty of support, backing and advice from McCain and Bush's team of advisers.

Re: Obligatory 9/11 Post: The 9/11 Myth

wakemenow — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 00:31:37 -0000

deleted - accidental repeated posting

Re: Obligatory 9/11 Post: The 9/11 Myth

wakemenow — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 00:29:49 -0000

Well now, we did elect them. Or if nothing else, we've failed to impeach them.

To blame the rulers and ignore our own complicity is what allows history to repeat.

AM

Re: Obligatory 9/11 Post: The 9/11 Myth

wakemenow — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 00:21:20 -0000

Joel,

There's so much evidence available out there that it's astounding and makes you wonder what the hell is wrong with the average American that we're not able to see it for what it is.

You're basing your assumptions and beliefs on what you want to believe, which is within your right to do so, but simply because we wish something were true doesn't make it so. Can you find supporters to back your claims? Oh yes, plenty of them, but again, that proves nothing. Because a veteran buddy couldn't find conclusive evidence doesn't and shouldn't imply that said evidence doesn't exist.

You've spent years...well so have some of the us who originally started out as patriotic and supportive of our current administration's claims after 9/11. It's heart-wrenching to see it for what it is and to be faced with no other choice but to scrutinize the actions and intent of your government (both past and present), only to succumb to being labeled as just another "conspiracy theorist" when you attempt to make your findings known to others. It's not pleasurable to weigh the evidence that 9/11 in fact does NOT appear to be the work of a terrorist organization in Afghanistan (and Iraq doesn't even enter into the equation as no ties have been substantiated to date), but instead carried out by officials in Pakistan's ISI, funded by people within our own country: http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?geop...

No, I don't like having to admit that to myself as I'm sure few others do, but the truth is worth knowing. Our country was changed for the worse after 9/11, and that is incredibly unfortunate. What's encouraging is that out of this national emergency and the loss of a few thousand of our brothers and sisters, more and more people are beginning to question what's being sold to the public as facts and are looking back at the history of this country, spanning over the last century and a half, in search of answers for why and how we've reached the point we're at now.

Very little in the way of positive change has emerged from the deeply saddening/maddening events of 9/11, but these inquiries are perhaps the most necessary and honestly patriotic endeavor we the people can undertake in an effort to heal our country and ourselves. It's not about causing trouble or making people feel bad for believing the Bush hype or the Clinton hype or the Reagan hype, etc.; it's about caring enough about what this country was founded on and seeking justice for the lives robbed under false pretenses (in the world trade towers just as with our troops in the Middle East).

Additional reading:

9/11: Press For Truth documentary:
http://www.911pressfortruth.com/
NYPD's "Radicalization in the West: The Homegrown Threat" report:
http://www.nypdshield.org/public/SiteFiles/docu...
The Senate Committee on Homeland Security's "Violent Islamist Extremism, The Internet, and the Homegrown Terrorist Threat" 2008 report (co-authored by Joe Lieberman):
http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/_files/IslamistR...

There are also a number of relevant documentaries we're all free to view on:
http://freedocumentaries.org/

I commend you Holly for posting Zeitgeist. It's an excellent, important film. And just wanted to say to Lemur that I appreciated your post up above. Thanks.

AM

Re: Dirty Old Man

wakemenow — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 23:21:42 -0000

I'm not into McCain or Palin and wouldn't care one way or the other if the two did run off together to elope. With that said, however, I don't believe this video is showing anything inappropriate taking place. To me, it looks like he's looking over and down at her notes. He breasts are higher up than where he's looking. And men do fiddle with their wedding bands when nervous, and speaking in front of people, introducing your running mate selection, is enough to make anyone nervous. Any ogling likely to take place will probably occur behind closed doors or at least in a less formal, less public setting.

So, yeah, this video clip hasn't demonstrated any wrongdoing in my mind. I would caution folks about jumping to conclusions of this sort, especially without concrete proof. It's so easy to speculate on these matters, especially when we're not fond of the man in the first place.

Re: Women DO Deserve Better, Women Deserve CHOICE

wakemenow — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 22:11:03 -0000

Damn. Fantastic video clip! Would you happen to know who the speaker is?

I just might have to post this one to my blog as well, since I'm sure the men will appreciate it. ;)

Re: Don’t Believe It, Pro-Choicers!

wakemenow — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 20:15:16 -0000

George Carlin is the bomb. lol I've often wondered about the "women are natural serial killers" issue myself, because by pro-life arguments, it must indeed be true. Our bodies are designed NOT to carry each and every possible conception to full-term, just as sperm is treated as a foreign substance that must be eradicated from the system. It's just the way the body works. So then I hear people say that, well, life begins at the moment of implantation. But again, not all of these fertilized eggs make it to the final stage. Miscarriages happen.

I argued with someone many moons back about how, if abortion were deemed illegal, would we determine if a miscarriage was accidental and unintended or actually the result of an illegal abortion. Just think about that. Would the burden of proof fall on the woman, and if so, how on earth would she defend herself? It seems this would only encourage women NOT to seek out prenatal care for fear that if a miscarriage occurred, she might be held liable as her pregnancy was already made known. Maybe if the woman was rushed to the emergency room directly afterwards she would stand a chance at defending herself, but then wouldn't doctors have a "moral responsibility" to report to police if they suspected something was amiss? And what would it take for them to think so? The miscarriage being the result of a tumble down the stairs? Things like that happen, and I'm not sure how you would be able to discern deliberate actions from unintentional accidents. The only way as far as I can tell is to lock up the women and monitor the progress of their pregnancies daily, and how realistic is that?

Some say this is all so extreme. Well, the pro-life arguments are extreme. I'm just trying to figure out how they might enforce what would amount to an unenforceable law.

As for Palin...I wouldn't vote for McCain anyway, so I haven't concerned myself with this woman. From what I've read (since everyone's talking about it these days), she sounds like one of the worst choices for vice president in the history of this country. Why McCain would shoot himself in the foot like this is beyond me. Most republicans aren't fundamentalist Christians. Some say he ought to have chosen an independent VP to draw in the independent voters, but I'm thinking most of us independents are planning on steering clear of the GOP this election, opting for "third party" candidates instead. McCain isn't conservative, he's pro-neocon and his chosen running mate will likely turn off plenty who identify with the old conservative mindset of limiting government and keeping Washington out of our personal lives.