Since the Republicans invented the Individual Mandate, tried twice under Bush Sr and once under Clinton to force what would eventually become Obamacare into National Law, I don't know why they are against it. They should be glad their plan passed and not any of the two plans Democrats actually wanted. It was funded the same way Obamacare is. The only real changes is that insurance companies can't deny or charge more for pre-existing conditions, and it went from catastrophic care to comprehensive care, so we treat people before they need major services. Otherwise basically the same thing. It was those plans that Romneycare was based on.

What the Democrats have long wanted, and what the American people deserve is the Single Payer that works so well for every other civilized nation in the world. What Obama promised was a Government Option which is a compromise between the massive for profit insurance that we have now, and a Single Payer. Then massive amounts of Republican's following what they were being sold by Fox News and the Koch brother's massive Tea Party movement, convinced the Repbulican base to ignore what their so called Christ said, to help the needy and poor and heal the sick, to "let them die!" And a massive opposition grew. So the Democrats fearing they couldn't go to the point of actually helping the millions of Americans working for companies that refuse to offer affordable health care and not paying a living wage for the benefit of the executives and shareholders, went with the Republican designed Individual Mandate.

What the Republicans should be doing is celebrating the fact that the Democrats couldn't (or more like wouldn't) pass either of the two plans they wanted, and in the end passed and adapted the Republican plan. They should be proud that Obamacare is basically Romneycare at the National level and be bashing Democrats for blocking it back when they tried to pass it under Bush Sr and Clinton. The Republicans should be saying, "we told you so a long time ago this was the way to go, and because of Democrats blocking it, we didn't get it until we forced Obama and the Democrats to give in and accept our plan. You American's could have had this over 20 years ago, but the Democrats refused. This is a victory for Americans and the Republican party that they finally relented and let our plan pass." Instead we get them shouting "let them die", because that's what the modern Christian Republicans think, that we are better off letting the poor people who work for these giant companies should die rather than let their tax dollars help them.

Quick research reveals some stuff about wingsuit flying over snow.

Those wingsuit skydivers are probably traveling about 60-100 mph. During that near miss, when the one skydiver flairs his suit, he probably dropped down to as little as 40 mph.

Ski racers can travel around 50-100 mph. We see crashes at those speeds all the time in snow and the skiier is generally uninjured.

The fastest skiiers, in the aerodynamic suits, are travelling 120-150 mph. Those crashes are obivously survivable, although catastrophic injury happens.

So, it stands to reason that a serious accident involving a wingsuit flyer over snow is very survivable. With some time to flare, there's no reason they couldn't walk away with little more than bruises. In fact, I suspect it's only a matter of time before we finally see a wingsuit pilot land without a parachute. Maybe over snow first, eventually over water and ultimately...why shouldn't we see someone with the skill to land on solid ground. With appropriate advances in equipment.

@MichaelL, dude, it's only a personal pet-peave of mine, please take anything I spew with a grain of salt. The comment you made caused my brain to rumble and flex a bit , and that's always good thing. I was speaking to a certain personally-perceived pretension which I address here (and that not infrequently and wholly unsolicited), and for that, I apologize if it ruffled feathers which incidentally, are worthy of ruffling if they be but feathers.

@ Payback, guess I'd owe you $5 had I taken the bet, correct by half, as I am often at least 1/4.

@bcglorf.....now THERE's the pretentious statement I was looking for. Dost thou assume incorrectly sir or madam that I have some retarded grasp and disrespect of both science and the English language????

We think so and as often, this is the ACTUAL case, ACT-UALLY!!

@lucky760 We're both on the same page with the magnetic phenomena.....
wizardry or some other unseen forces-only possible explanation.

Great post mintbbb. It contained absolutely no human tragedy or catastrophe and no fluffy creatures doing cute things. Nice change 'o pace

Cross-hybridization is one thing. Patenting a cow you found in Africa and then suing the life out of the original tribe is the Monsanto way. Or, changing one gene and then claiming ownership of all corn in the US and then suing small farmers when their crops get contaminated (and of course, denying it) is GMO. The fight against GMO isn't always a "health" concern about wanting to stay truer to our millions of years of evolution and cohabitation with certain foods. It's also about fighting against mega-corperations that unfairly target small farmers with regulations such as requiring white painted walls . . . yearly, or requiring an office and bathroom for a health inspector to use once a year that no one else can use ever, or so many laws and regulations that a small farmer can inadvertently break the law, steal someone's intellectual property and be sued out of existence all while doing the same thing their family has been doing for over 100 years.

When we plant crops of only one variety over large swathes of land we invite disaster. It's already happen numerous times. Hell, no one remember deadly spinach killing around 50 people with no way to trace the origin? Mad Cow? Or the destruction of economies in their world countries because Monsanto requires only their crop to be grown and subsistence farmers into the ghetto's of India so that more High Fructose Corn Syrup can be made.

Or worse . . . the US Farm Bill . . . *shivers*

So no, it's not always about health. It's about staying true to the roots of a society that worships our farmers as life-givers, essential to our health and economy and free of unknown risk that could catastrophically damage the world as we know it all while ending a giant untouchable monopoly that refuses to let even the tiniest bit of oversight oversee it's operations so it can continue to "own life."

lol, Chicken Little found a gig at MSNBC. This guy makes a leap of faith (oil use leads to global catastrophe) that makes anything ever decided by any Pope, saint or disciple look miniscule.
These people really believe in their utopia, don't they?

I don't get the Right's logic on stuff like this... More and more wealth is moving to the top few percent, and more and more of the earnable wages are moving to the top few percent. Walmart for example could easily afford to pay every employee something like $2-3 more an hour, give benefits and hire more people so their stores are properly staffed and still make a profit. And they get upset at the people working there needing help... "oh it's the government's fault for giving them aid letting the company do that"... What?! The company made a choice, and they blame the government actions for it... it's like when they blame moving jobs overseas on the government instead of the rich guy who decided that it is in his own greedy personal self interest to send the jobs there rather than pay Americans. Or its like that cartoon where a rich man, a middle class man and a working class person are all at a table with 100 cookies and the rich guy takes 99 of them, the middle class guy gets 1 and the working class guy has crumbs, then the rich guy warns the middle class guy "better watch out, he wants your cookie" and they fall for it, they get mad at that guy rather than the guy who took 99 cookies for himself...

They get upset at wanting to keep minimum wage in pace with inflation, something that happens in most countries. They get upset at the idea of the cost to business to do so, but somehow businesses do it all around the world... heck, when we were thinking of moving to New Zealand and a few other places we discovered that most countries force employers to give paid vacation time, not just a bonus that some/most employers offer after 1 or 2 years of service if they want. Almost every country forces employers to offer paid maternity leave, and paid holidays... American businesses have it easy compared to most countries, one could possibly argue they have an unfair advantage compared to the rest of the world. And it's not like those businesses outside the US don't make a killing, as in those countries the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer, so that isn't a unique US trait.

They claim that only like 4% of the workforce get paid minimum, but ignore the fact that figure doesn't account for the fact that if minimum kept pace with inflation, that is the actual cost of living, then it would be over $10 something right now, which means everyone making less than that is below minimum... that guy working at Walmart, Target, McDonalds or whatever for $9, yes, they may be "above minimum" but if you account for the actual cost of living they are below it...which means that person making $12, while they are well above minimum isn't that far above it. Stretching it further, if minimum kept pace with worker productivity, and nobody is suggesting it should, it would be over $17, so the companies are getting great value out of their workers, and still would be even if minimum wage kept pace with inflation. That doesn't even account for where it would be if it kept pace with CEO/Executive pay of over $22...

And yes, Walmart is near the bottom of the rung in jobs, no matter what the right may say about them having a choice... Nobody grows up wanting to work at Walmart, McDonalds and the like. Most people working at those sort of jobs work them because that was the best job they can get, and after a while, you gain "job security" as well as you can call it that, which makes it harder for them to move on, up and out, taking a risk that some rich guy might ship their jobs overseas so he can take more for himself while screwing over his workers and the American public. So they get stuck, because it's the best option that they have, especially in a country that is so far lopsided in favor of the business over the workers... in one of the few countries that doesn't guarantee health insurance for everyone, that took a Republican created plan that makes people buy health insurance from for profit insurance companies (which if I recall correctly was one of the top 3 most profitable businesses in the US per dollar earned, with banks at number one, and pharmasutcal companies), and made it the law of the land, while those same Republicans, many who co-sponsored the legislation when Republicans tried to pass it at the federal level, now oppose their own creation... because apparently the changes that the left made to the bill (not being able to deny people for pre-existing conditions and not being able to charge them extra, and moving to comprehensive coverage rather than just catastrophic coverage, so two things that mean insurance companies have to pay out more for) are bad.

C-Engines' right, a war wouldn't do anything unless you're talking about the systematic elimination of individuals behind an empire that's designed to instill a lasting, generational fear in those who would continue the push for ultimate power and control. The only changes that will come will be more total control unless a dialog manifests with meaning and purpose directed at the control mechanism's infrastructure by a majority of regular peeps unsullied by the indoctro-education of so-called knowledge of the the way the world works.

Until people stop trying to work within the framework of rules and engagement that has been created by the same perpetrators of our enslavement, the majority of our sentient, big-brained species may as well get used to the idea that the few freedoms you imagine yourselves to have now are illusion and your children will not enjoy one one-hundredth of that same illusion in 30 years.

Guerrilla-tactics with a broadband and well-coordinated take-down is the only way to end the paradigm that has been in place for thousands of years. That or some unifying world-wide catastrophic necessity for the survival of the species....like a frikkin' meteor storm some other worldwide natural disaster or some influence from without.

Hey Republicans. Don't forget, you invented the individual mandate. You tried to pass it into Federal law many times yourself. Don't be all ticked off just because some black guy finally did what you couldn't. Typical move the goal post behavior. What's changed since the Republican version that was endorsed by the insurance industry? Let's see... they now need to cover pre-existing conditions, yeah, that's horrible, making insurance companies cover sick people and not charge them more, how horrible... and they changed it from catastrophic coverage to comprehensive coverage, so now the insurance companies have to pay for far more services... hmm... I wonder why Republicans suddenly oppose their own idea? Perhaps because suddenly there is less profit in the suffering of millions of people? That is all that matters to Republicans, profit over people. To undue the damage caused by unions in giving people 40 hour work weeks and make people work 80+ hours a week again so that the fat rich cats can keep more and more of the limited resource called money... so that nice little income gap can continue to grow. Hey, perhaps someday soon the US will be like the old Soviet Union with long bread lines, the Republicans clearly want to see that. After all hundreds of them chanted "Let them die!" at the Republican debate... that was the moment that I decided even if I got my faith in god back, I'd rather be in hell then in heaven with people like that, apparently they forgot all the teachings of Jesus about how the rich can't get into heaven, how to help the needy and the poor, how to be lovers of peace and not war, how love was the greatest commandment, and everything else that the Republican party is opposed to.

I don't get why people get upset at the keep the insurance plan. It isn't the government shutting it down, it is greedy insurance companies shutting it down. It's like jobs going to China, people get mad at the government rather than the rich ass hole who sent the jobs oversees so his own personal profits could be higher. I seem to recall the people who are complaining, defended oil company profits by pointing out that per dollar earned/gross profit margin oil was down at 17 or so, while banks were number one followed by a small gap, pharmaceuticals were number two and insurance number three with a nice gap to number 4 and on to the rest of the list. So yeah, if changes in how they have to cover people means they might fall off that list of top 3 most profitable bushiness, then I would expect them to drop the less profitable plans to maintain their multi-billion dollar profit off the suffering of others so a few rich people can have a nice cozy life while millions suffer for their greedy gains.

Health insurance shouldn't be about huge profits. It should be about getting people the health coverage they need... of course I could also argue that the health care industry as a whole shouldn't be so profit driven... nor should the education required to train our healthcare workforce (nor education at all really)... We should have gotten what Obama promised in the first place, a single payer system, or at the very least a Government Option, rather than caving into the Republican Right and turning the money over to a multi-billion dollar industry... and now look, they still oppose it even though it was their idea... If they were going to oppose it no matter what, he should have made it worth everyone's while and given actual reform.

And hey, if you oppose it, come up with something better. Something that will help the millions of people working at places like retail and fast food that can't get employer sponsored coverage. Make sure every American is covered and can afford health care, not emergency treatment, but going to see a doctor for preventative care and affording any medication that the doctor may prescribe.

Like @Grimm said, these fellas did not just profit from a flaw in the system. They spent vast amounts of time and money lobbying for changes to the system, changes which made these exploits possible in the first place. Exploits that in most cases are still in violation of the law over here, but the oversight was starved out to a point of non-existence or simply handed over to entities they should be monitoring in the first place.

As a result, the City of London in particular accumulated enough economical leverage to hold the entire country hostage, knowing full well how a sweep of the City would lead to catastrophic ripples not only through the UK and Europe, but the entire bloody world. So now they can do whatever they please without fear of repercussions as seen in the case of HSBC.

This selective application of the law breeds contempt for the law, particularly if compared to the poor who get hammered for the slightest inconsistency in their paperwork. Too big to fail undermines the free market, but too big to jail undermines the basic rule of law.

Even in the very few cases that were prosecuted, only the institution was penalised, never any high level individual. Some of those responsible need to be held accountable, otherwise the riots in Tottenham will look like child's play compared to what will happen the next time these idiots drive the entire economy to the brink of collapse.

By the way, I'm still waiting for someone to end up in jail for the rigging of Libor or ISDAfix.

I can't quite figure some of the aspects that outrage people over this. Some objections and concerns seem just very naive or ill informed.

Objecting to the goal of attaining absolute superiority over Japan just makes no sense to me. I mean, it is realized that it was a war being fought, for the presumed purpose of establishing superiority over each other? The difference between Japan being willing to surrender with a host of conditions versus unconditional surrender isn't trivial. Unless you want to fight another war later you want the ending to be decisive and sufficient to prevent it coming up again any time soon.

I also think the humanitarian outrage at, gasp, atomic bombs is terribly ill informed. The allies killed a lot more people in many other bombing campaigns and to much more brutal effect. It strikes me as misguided to be so focused on what is in many, many ways a lesser catastrophe than other attacks the allies made.

@bcglorf
thanks for the thoughtful response my friend.

since i wrote my comment i have come across a few more pieces of information that implicate assads regime but not assad himself.it has become apparent that chemical weapons were used but still no conclusive evidence WHO authorized the use.

so right now,in regards to who is to blame for the usage of chemical weapons is still conjecture.

my friend,syria is an awful situation.
two millions people displaced and flooding into neighboring countries.innocent people are dying.the political situation is a hornets nest of privileged power,theocracy and religious dissidents.

but you skipped over (much like the obama administration is doing currently) my questions regarding diplomacy.
why are we not searching with vigor a multi-lateral diplomatic solution?
what would a limited strike on damascus actually produce besides continued violence in which the innocent will pay in blood and only succeed in prolonging a violent civil war?
already the civil war had been prolonged due to outside interference (many countries bear that shame,including the US).

now let us consider if we DO go in to "punish" assad.which i think is likely.
what are the possible consequences?
could it be possible that russia,china and iran react?
what then?

do you see where i am going with this?
a diplomatic resolution may take more time.it may take some..you know..talking and patience,but the final outcome will benefit those innocents both you and i (and pretty much the world) AND the political stability in that region and all outlying players.

while a military resolution will create more casualties and deaths,many of them innocent civilians,and may possibly create a conflaguration of a world powers conflict.where the innocent body bags will begin to be counted in the millions.

am i being overly-dramatic?
possibly.
my point is the diplomatic resolution keeps innocent death counts low while a military resolution will only raise the death count and create more refugees.

so maybe i was not clear in my commentary because i guess i appeared that i didnt want the united states to do anything.
this is untrue.
i was just pointing to the utter hypocrisy of the political rhetoric.
and whatever moral credit america once possessed,it was spent many years ago.

so the best route to take BEFORE there is even talks of military action is diplomacy.even our staunches allies have refused to engage militarily,and yet what are we seeing?obama traveling the political circles to promote the march to further violence.

syria is no threat to the united states.
the humanitarian argument to fight violence with violence is a canard,its bullshit.
this has nothing to do with saving lives nor preventing further violence.

the international community needs to band together and put pressure to cease and desist.this is the moral path to take.
this is the path that will garner results quickly with far less bloodshed.


i fear this is not what is going to happen.
right now as i wrote this the obama administration is putting political pressure on all fronts.
i fear this is going to end badly.
i fear that this may domino and drag opposing nations to a conflict where the death toll will be catastrophic.

i hope i am wrong.

thanks for responding bc.i know we disagree politically on some issues and its always a pleasure discussing issues with you so i can see things from a different vantage point.

If you have children with serious conditions, you still have to worry about small to medium sized businesses finding some reason to terminate you due to your child making their premiums go up. I mean they could do it to the employee, but chances are if you have something fairly serious it'll affect your job at some point and have to be mentioned before too long.

Or people who would rather not get treated for conditions because it puts them in a "high risk" category. While their insurance may not know exactly what they have, getting certain scripts will make it clear soon enough. So you run into the situation where the person is putting their health in the backseat to keep premiums low. Something that comes to mind here is Diabetes, and off the top of my head two reasons. 1) CDL Truck drivers and probably as some point in the future, regular licenses have to get tested and approved more often if they have diabetes and have more restrictions on them. Makes you unattractive to trucking companies, you can't conceal it easily since you have to make it known to get your license.
2) It puts you at a higher risk for other health issues or is often linked to other health issues. So your premiums are going to go up because of this. If you're on a tight budget, it might not be within the realm of out of pocket costs if you have to carry your own insurance.


As much as companies bitch about health care costs, they really have some people by the nuts with how it's setup.

And I don't think he's making the point that money should be given to anyone, he's making the point that having it tied to businesses puts you at a severe disadvantage if you have a urgent NEED for healthcare due to chronic conditions. The case and point being the guy who needs "catastrophic coverage" and pays out 10 grand a year before his insurance kicks in. A very large company can absorb people like that, even a medium to large could. Small and even mediums could not without a really lucrative cash influx. It really limits your options, because unless you are making more than the same people in your position...they will find a way to replace you if you get too expensive. They do it all the time, they just need to find one reason to terminate you. And it's pretty damn hard to be perfect, especially when you're sick and have to deal with the issues that come with it.


It's a really messed up situation if you're not a very skilled sick person or a very healthy unskilled person (with no sick family).

Have to look at other government ran healthcare systems for examples of maybe what he wants. I don't think the US is going to get there....too many people with lobbying power making bank on your health. Which is pretty much happening across the board in many markets, they aren't controlling themselves because the people profiting have too much power over them.

@ghark
@notarobot

I recall news reporting just prior to military intervention in Libya was suggesting that Gaddafi's forces were approaching Benghazi and there were expectations of massacre if they were to reach it.

Wikipedia for what it's worth:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_military_intervention_in_Libya

"9 March 2011: The head of the Libyan National Transitional Council, Mustafa Abdul Jalil, "pleaded for the international community to move quickly to impose a no-fly zone over Libya, declaring that any delay would result in more casualties".[38] Three days later, he stated that if pro-Gaddafi forces reached Benghazi, then they would kill "half a million" people. He stated, "If there is no no-fly zone imposed on Gaddafi's regime, and his ships are not checked, we will have a catastrophe in Libya."[39]"

"17 March 2011: The UN Security Council, acting under the authority of Chapter VII of the UN Charter, approved a no-fly zone by a vote of ten in favour, zero against, and five abstentions, via United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973. The five abstentions were: Brazil, Russia, India, China, and Germany.[49][50][51][60][61] Less than twenty-four hours later, Libya announced that it would halt all military operations in response to the UN Security Council resolution.[62][63]"

Your video, Comic-Con Cosplay Catastrophe, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.