Open forum, April 7-13



The forums are moderated by Columbian staff and our community guidelines and terms of service still apply. To participate, login with your ID or register for an account at

Columbian staff members create new forum threads. Don't see a forum topic here that fits your comments? Email Web Editor John Hill --



I finally found a reason to shop in old downtown Vancouver. I rediscovered Everyone's Music (I think that's the name), on Main a couple of blocks south of 4th Plain. Last time I was there, a few years ago, the emphasis seemed to be Metal and Punk. Now there's a young guy (early 30s?) running it, and he's got an excellent selection of used old rock LPs. I spent a couple of hours digging and found quite a few in good shape - a good cleaning and no extraneous noise when played. A far better option (in my book) than going to Millennium and paying their high prices.

roger — April 7, 2014 at 6:38 a.m. ( | suggest removal

We could dump all the Baggers (Old Badgers) in Wisconsin. They'd have to learn about processing cheese, instead of continuously cutting it. Relocate the feckless Packers to the Canadian Football League, and crown Koch sycophant Scott Walker as Queen. Works for me. (as long as they stay on their side of the border-build a wall?)

-Local Republican Caucus Passes Resolution Allowing Wisconsin To Secede-

A group of Republicans in Wisconsin want to make sure that if they get fed up with the rest of the country, the Badger State can go it alone.

Last month, one of Wisconsin's eight regional Republican caucuses passed a resolution asserting the state's right to secede, according to Daniel Bice at the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.

From the resolution, passed by the caucus in the 6th congressional district:

Be it further resolved that we strongly insist our state representatives work to uphold Wisconsin's 10th Amendment rights, and our right to secede, passing legislation affirming this to the U.S. Federal Government.

Dan Feyen, chairman of the GOP in the 6th congressional district, sent a note to Republican state lawmakers making clear that he did not support the resolution because it did not deal with the "true enemy," e.g. Democrats. He also stressed that the resolution did not really have much support.


In his statement announcing his candidacy last week, Grothman said the "rush towards government reliance has lead [sic] to the well-documented destruction of the American nuclear family, which will have severe, negative consequences for the next generation."

Shortly after President Barack Obama's reelection, there was also a petition on the White House website to allow Wisconsin to secede.

nailingit — April 7, 2014 at 9:34 a.m. ( | suggest removal

-Meet Mark McCloud, The World's Leading Collector Of LSD Art-

Most artists haven't been arrested by the DEA and investigated by the FBI. Then again, most artists don't have the over 33,000 tabs of LSD in their possession. How's that for an intro?

Read More @

nailingit — April 7, 2014 at 1:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal

-From Christie to Limbaugh the right's view of women is steeped in the 18th century. It may finally catch up to them-

We’re not making news, or offering a rare insight, when we denote today’s far right as a loud, angry, fear-mongering, control-oriented faction that accuses government of meddling in people’s lives when it is they who really want to enforce submission. The economic arm of conservatism protects moneyed power, while the socio-religious arm does its best to enforce patriarchy. And yet these same people never tire of tossing out the word “liberty” in their opposition to a supposedly meddlesome federal government. Apparently, to them, liberty means “you can’t take away what I hoard or what I command.” Indeed, they are the party of hoarding and commanding, keeping some people down and pushing other people around. They (more than their typical targets: IRS, Affordable Care Act, etc.) are the meddlesome ones. Why is equal pay for women–or fairness of any kind in the workplace–still at issue?

Read More @

nailingit — April 7, 2014 at 1:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Westboro Baptist Church Chased Out Of Moore, Oklahoma

Funny stuff

Hawkman — April 7, 2014 at 3:02 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Just say No - To those who want to turn Vancouver into a City.

"Some recent scientific studies have confirmed the psychological pitfalls of city life. Compared to their rural counterparts, city dwellers have higher levels of anxiety, mood disorders, and other psychiatric problems. The risk of developing schizophrenia is almost double for people raised in cities than those raised in suburban or rural areas. Cities are so tough on cognitive functions that urbanism experts consider sojourns to Central Park a matter of public health.

"This is not just an issue of physical annoyances like crowded sidewalks, noisy streets, and traffic congestion. A 2011 study of German college students published in Nature suggests that urban brains become physically more susceptible to stress, particularly social stress, than those of country dwellers."

The solution?

"The development of the micro-apartment and the continuing influx of new city-dwellers might imply a coming urbageddon of sorts. But America is known more for its problem-solvers than its lemmings. Recent research suggests that physical activity, even in the confines of your local gym, can do wonders to help stave off depression and anxiety. Regular exposure to nature has been shown to increase cognitive functioning and insulate urbanites against the effects of clinical depression. And a healthy diet, regular exercise, and a consistent sleep cycle can mitigate the stresses that come from social life in America’s bustling metropolises.

"As any fan of True Detective knows, pathology and dysfunction don’t need concrete and skyscrapers to flourish. With proper counseling, most modern-day pilgrims can expect to find happiness in their urban meccas."

I've got a better solution. Stop the high density infill development before it gets out of hand. Stop it while we can still take that peaceful evening walk, or open our windows and hear birds and frogs instead of people. Just say No.

roger — April 8, 2014 at 5:10 a.m. ( | suggest removal

roger: My stepdaughter and her husband have been urban San Francisco dwellers for over 20 years. They always have lived in the heart of the action there and bought half of a beautiful historic row house when the market tanked and it became "affordable."

Lately, both of them have been uncharacteristically crabby about how miserable life has become in the city by the bay. Gridlocked traffic, no parking, never-ending construction, people, people, people. Can't get tables at restaurants or bars. Lines everywhere. They want to sell and move out of CA entirely. I'd never thought I'd hear that from either of them.

Seattle urban life is becoming similarly stressful with all those "apodments" and I think Portland is not far behind. When I visit my friends in lower Manhattan, Chelsea, it takes me 3 days to get used to the sensory stimulation overload. They live in tiny 400 sq ft apartments like stacked lab rats in cages.

There is a world of difference on this side of the Columbia. I think the death of the CRC has slowed things down and that maybe we all should really be thankful for it. A positive reframe on being grateful for the status quo because it could be so much worse.

manthou — April 8, 2014 at 5:58 a.m. ( | suggest removal

Manthou and Roger,
to each their own. Personally, I could not live in a small apartment, surrounded by a gazillion people. I consider myself lucky that we were able to afford a couple acres in the country. Got only the loud frogs to complain about -and we love that sound. I need that solitude, never could understand why people like to live that close together. However, I got friends who grew up smack in middle of large city, small apartment, and they cannot take the quiet.

luvithere — April 8, 2014 at 7:36 a.m. ( | suggest removal

roger — April 8, 2014 at 5:10 a.m.

Good subject and article.

On e of the criticisms of growth management planning, has ALWAYS been social problems related to increased population densification. If ever there was a no brainer: this is it.

luvithere — April 8, 2014 at 7:36 a.m.

To each his own is fine. However, growth management through government centralized planning is NOT about choice. It’s about government forced population densification through zoning, part of which is driven by the notion of zoning especially high density corridors in order to feed public transportation.

kn_dalai — April 8, 2014 at 7:55 a.m. ( | suggest removal

Just say No - To those who want to turn Vancouver into a City.
roger — April 8, 2014 at 5:10 a.m.

At 165,000 residents, and at # 145 on the list of cities in the US, we are already a City. No going back...

That being said, I too, appreciate and enjoy my little open space, and have a hard time conprehending how folks can care for or about the land when they can't even find it.

On the other hand, perhaps it's about options. If the high density housing is DESIRED, and it's a choice, then fine. There of many people who enjoy the lifestyle offered in a city, expecially in the heart of a city. My sister lived 16 floors up in downtown Portland for years, loving every bit of it, and riding her bike anywhere and everywhere she wanted to go. Ater about 18 years of that she packed up her bike and moved to the coast and is still there.

The temerity it would take to obstruct or restrict those who PREFER a city lifestyle, or the development of such, borders on the autocratic. Unless that development is going to compromise my land, how someone chooses to live 12 or 15 or 200 miles from me is no more my business than any of their other decisions.

jacjak — April 8, 2014 at 10:17 a.m. ( | suggest removal

Kn and jacjak. As I said, those who want to live in high density area should be able to. Those of us who do not want to, should not.
This assumes one has an option, of course.

luvithere — April 8, 2014 at 11:14 a.m. ( | suggest removal


This is what is so strange about this topic. We have choices. Property is cheaper the further one gets from high density pop anyway. If you don't like high density than choose not to live near it. But please, don't try and stifle growth and dictate others lifestyles. Most of us live in neighborhood sprawls anyway. Whether one approaches this topic citing a radical ideological government conspiracy, or fear of being swallowed by them durn city dwellers, it comes down to one thing.


The same folks who take measures to limit growth, and the needs that accompany it, are by and large the same people who will fight tooth and nail to limit taxes. Old, white and conservative. Tax funded projects involving transportation, education, parks, public utility needs, etc., are always vilified by an aging population fighting to hold on to every personal cent they have. If they don't use it-they don't wanna pay for it. Period.

There is a sizable sect that could give two cents what this region will look like in thirty years. They live in the hear and now and vote their pocketbook.

The ones who have grandkids should be flogged in the public square. :)

nailingit — April 8, 2014 at 12:05 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Vancouver may be a city in name, but it's really just a very large suburb. Cities tend to expand and suck up the resources. Downtown revitalization, as most prominently and recently demonstrated by the Waterfront project, was behind the Vancouver side of the CRC and light rail. The 4th Plain BRT has, as part of its planning, increasing "high density housing" along the future extension east of Van Mall - That does compromise those of us who live in that area and who have overwhelmingly voted against those projects.

Read the comments of young Josh Egan, and a few of the others who post on The Columbian's and othe local facebook pages. They are all about reducing our footprint, reducing our use of personal cars, etc, etc.

This is in fact a war - maintain our current combination of suburban and rural lifestyle, or force a change to the future envisioned by our high density/public transportation advocates.

If someone really wants to live in a city - move there. Don't bring the city to us.

roger — April 8, 2014 at 12:23 p.m. ( | suggest removal

...or the 'here' and now as it were. Much of the fight over the ACA is about a premium going up a few bucks, even though most opposed seem to be agedly dependent on Medicare, and for many, premiums seem to be going down. Then again, we have someone in the White House who can't produce a valid birth certificate. ;) That's another animal altogether...

Same ol' same ol'.

nailingit — April 8, 2014 at 12:23 p.m. ( | suggest removal

roger — April 8, 2014 at 12:23 p.m.

Vancouver is a city set apart from Portland in many unique ways. From business to social aspects, we are separate from Portland Oregon. You guys who use this argument to limit growth and development are spring boarding into a pool of non sequiturs.

nailingit — April 8, 2014 at 12:37 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Nail I think that when people hear Vancouver, it pops in their mind old downtown. Vancouver has become so much more and so spread out. Most don't realize that east is almost a separate city by itself. Old town I don't think will ever become like Portland. We just don't have people with the income level as say the Pearl district. And I really do not see that changing in the next several years. For us a big share of the business we do comes from the east side. Also from Ridgefield and Battle Ground.

timerick — April 8, 2014 at 2:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal

timerick — April 8, 2014 at 2:45 p.m.

I think the Mayor of Camas had the right idea. Build a "parkway" between Battle Ground and Camas. Especially if Madore gets his bridge built, fast trip to Gresham and beyond.

Hawkman — April 8, 2014 at 2:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal

This is why we will NEVER be like Portland!!!

Hawkman — April 8, 2014 at 3 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Hawkman — April 8, 2014 at 2:55 p.m. -- The SW WA RTC has (or had) a map with their 2030 Plan as updated in 2011 that showed just that - a parkway of some sort coming down to the east side through the Hockinson area. They also showed the old Chelahoweveryouspellit RR tracks being used, running people over around either the fairgrounds or Salmon Creek area. (I'd go link to it and work on the accuracy, but they've gone and reconfigured their website, and I don't feel like digging through the folders.)

But that's the right idea. Phoenix AZ would be a good example - they built the beltways around the metro area, and then built the light rail connecting the old downtown (N. Central Ave) with Tempe. Our advantage, if we don't blow it with focusing on the Gramor project and the old downtown, is that we still have the open space to do this. Wait too long (like over in Washington County), and the developers will build, and the costs will skyrocket.

roger — April 8, 2014 at 5:09 p.m. ( | suggest removal

“Mandating higher densities is driven by expectations of decreasing auto use and increasing use of alternative modes. Yet, the evidence that this will occur is weak. For the foreseeable future, people will rely on the automobile to satisfy a great majority of their personal transportation needs. Regardless of the success of new pedestrian and transit-oriented developments, the vast majority of travel will continue to be by auto. In growing urban areas, the argument that “we can’t build our way out of congestion,” or assertions that new highway capacity will only induce more travel and congest again, fails to recognize the expression of personal travel preferences. Moreover, not all of new capacity is consumed by induced travel. The majority of new capacity will serve a needed function in growing regions. The urban planning profession cannot continue to ignore the fact that about 90 percent of new trips will be by auto, and not provide for them.”

“Planners need to take a more realistic stance with respect to personal transportation, particularly in suburban contexts. Planners often assume, with little or no evidence, that people will switch to transit if larger transit investments are made, and if roads are allowed to congest and land use densities are increased. In fact, transit usage continues to decline in all but a few cities, particularly for the journey to work.”

Well, here’s a PhD type that actually seems to have some eyes and a mind. Professor Emeritus, no less.

None of this has anything to do with conspiracies. Just the same; make no mistake that at the heart of government centralized planning, is proactive social engineering by those government urban planners trying to change human behavior, rather than responding to citizens’ own desires. The Washington State Growth Management Act is all about government mandated population densification.

As I’ve stated before, it’s more than a good guess, that there’s an overwhelming presence at our own county level of the - preeminence of government - thinking in social work, planning and environmental departments, at least. And yeah, there is a war of sorts going on, and Madore is in the thick of it in this county.

kn_dalai — April 8, 2014 at 6:59 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Unless the destination is Gresham, a bridge east of I-205 would be just another artery to all points further east on I-84 in order to avoid Portland metro, and a beltway bypassing Vancouver that connects to a bridge east of I-205 would do exactly the same thing... aid interstate travelers while doing little to relieve congestion that already exists on I-5 by local commuters. And in the meantime, should there be a new bridge anytime before the hypothetical parkway is completed, SR14, all 4 narrow lanes of it, turns into an even worse nightmare than it already is from I-5 to the I-205 bridge, with all the semi trucks and other interstate traffic wanting to head east, or those coming from the east heading north. What they will be avoiding is Portland, not Vancouver, while we continue to bicker and die off and wait for something as cosmopolitan as a beltway, especially when something as utilitarian as a commuter train made us freak and carry on about the hounds of hell invading with their crime and drugs and fast women. Oh wait, fast women could actually get a pass...

jacjak — April 8, 2014 at 7:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal

None of this has anything to do with conspiracies. Just the same; make no mistake that at the heart of government centralized planning, is proactive social engineering by those government urban planners trying to change human behavior, rather than responding to citizens’ own desires. The Washington State Growth Management Act is all about government mandated population densification.
kn_dalai — April 8, 2014 at 6:59 p.m.

Considering over half of the world's population already lives in cities, and about 70% will be city dwellers by 2050, perhaps the 'government mandated population densification' has already happened. It does seem as tho folks made their decisions regarding what they prefer starting somewhere around the beginning of the Industrial Age. Don't think it'll reverse soon except for those lucky enough to have the wherewithal to choose where they prefer to live. For the rest of us, if we've planned well, retirement may broaden options, but even that is iffy in today's markets.

And not to be picky, but in my opinion 'social engineering' is just another organized system of rules, guides, formulas, and interests.... like religions, only without the sensitizing stimulus.

jacjak — April 8, 2014 at 7:59 p.m. ( | suggest removal

So jacjak just what would have been lightrail? More social engineering?

timerick — April 8, 2014 at 8:29 p.m. ( | suggest removal

jacjak — April 8, 2014 at 7:59 p.m.

There is a distinction to be made between poor farmers flocking to cities looking to better their condition, versus government mandated land use policies implemented expressly for the purpose of driving citizen’s into high density urban dwelling.

I must also disagree with your assessment of what constitutes social engineering. 1) Your observation would be better served if religion were mandated by government decree, 2) Those rules and so on that you mention, are to be made with the consent of the governed.

The paper I cited, mentions nothing about political parties nor philosophies; merely that people, quite overwhelmingly, desire their own transportation. Your ideas, about rules and so forth, seem to be advocating for the philosopher kings of Plato. You know; the experts who know what’s best for the governed.

kn_dalai — April 8, 2014 at 8:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal

timerick — April 8, 2014 at 2:45 p.m.

I agree with your assessment. I'm always suspect when someone touts the "suburb of Portland" argument to get across some agenda, regardless of affiliation. It doesn't wash.

nailingit — April 8, 2014 at 10:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal

When folks call this a war, a government conspiracy to control human behavior, etc., it comes to mind why many believe this latest libertarian craze is more cultish than political, and should be given the due respect it deserves. We always have options as Americans. Drive your car, ride your cycle, walk, whatever. Conservatives should quit trying to dictate what people need and stop obstructing progress with the ferocity of the anti-everything else movements they're involved with. It seems like those who denounce simple planning, are the first ones to decree what changes should be made. The CRC has created and emboldened a ... 'generation' of Clark County wannabe urban planners who think they understand community development more than qualified seasoned experts. Too many people who take themselves much more seriously than others take them. It comes with age. Qualifications and experience still mean something people.

But again, tell these folks this stuff is free and they'll jump on board in a heartbeat. They'll even comb the net, find and cite a 12 year old opinionated essay draft for validation. :)) Look what the conservative response has been to Madore's fairy dust planning and make believe bridge. It's free! No Tolls! Thank You David! It's scary what some buy into. One doesn't have to look much further into this mindset to understand why things can go terribly bad at the polls. I'm reminded of the Cat saying Madore had a life sized cutout of Dubya gracing his workplace corridors. Anyway..

Again. Growth brings needs such as public schools, public roads, public works, etc., which expands the tax base, and of course spring boards new needed taxes for road and bridge work, education, meeting community needs, etc., causing govt. 'dependancy' The work of satan to those who have tight pockets and squeaky shoes. Hating government is just a by product of hoarding nickels. (sans Medicare/Social Security/Gov representation/employment/mandated pickleball courts, many etc.'s)

It's all about the dollar for most. For a few it's about their Bazooka Joe cult. For the rest of us, it's an uphill fight for meeting tomorrow's needs, for tomorrows future. Our children.

Take a look at Face Book. You'll get about 50 opinions about what's best for this area. Now look at how many are professionally qualified to give one.

I'm reminded what Dirty Harry once said about opinions......

nailingit — April 8, 2014 at 11:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal

-U.S. Corporations Now Hold Over $2 Trillion In Untaxed Profits Overseas: Study-x

nailingit — April 9, 2014 at 8:17 a.m. ( | suggest removal

Just a quick check in here to the folks of the forum and the rest of people of Columbianland. No, not planning to stick around to respond to everyone, but I felt it was important enough to share this comment with as many people as possible, hoping that the C still has a following.

In the past several weeks, I've been searching for ultra-dwarf fruit trees at the local big box stores with garden centers to add to my miniscule pocket orchard and guess what I found...???

Maybe a half dozen fruit trees in semi-dwarf and standard. Last year, all the stores had plenty of fruit trees in all sizes...not so this year.

Even at the local garden stores, I've been told nurseries from California were forced out of business due to the well as some in the PNW who just couldn't keep up with the rising costs and regulations.

This greatly concerns me because of the fact that 1/2 of Central California's produce has been wiped out due to the extreme drought conditions as well as crops and beef/pork/poultry farms have drastically cut back the number of animal and bird production across the Midwest and down to Texas...and now, organic/free-range chicken eggs are harder to find at the local grocery stores.

People, I urge you now...more so than support your local farmer...become a locavore or teach yourself to grow your own (even in pots on a balcony in a condo). Prices will be driven even higher than we've seen in recent weeks.

And no, I am not trying to be an alarmist by throwing out a conspiratory note. Read up on the facts on your trusted website. Educate yourself. Sometimes it's not just about politics at the local or national level. It's about survival and I suggest you all make an effort this year to ensure your family has food on the dinner plate. If you have extra vegetable starts, pass them onto a neighbor who might not have any and would like some.

I wish the best for all. Remember to be kind to each other. Take care, everyone.

goldenoldie — April 9, 2014 at 9:17 a.m. ( | suggest removal

Thanks for the information. goldie. There are many critical issues and it is sometimes hard to focus on them all by oneself. We're all in it together, when all is said and done.

Be well. Stay safe.

manthou — April 9, 2014 at 11:12 a.m. ( | suggest removal

NAIL 12:23 April 8th
Much of the fight over the ACA is about a premium going up a few bucks, even though most opposed seem to be agedly dependent on Medicare, and for many, premiums seem to be going down…
Did you write this yesterday? I couldn’t believe you did, or was it just you being satirical????
Going up a few bucks??HAR HAR HAR…Mine went up 37% … How about our younger crowd, most of their premiums went up also. So you have statistics to prove how many premiums seem to be going down… What is many, 10-20-30-50% of the Premium paying peeps….I already sent ya a snapshot of our 300 or so folks who signed up and started paying monthly premiums or signed up for the free Medicaid program. Where did the If you like your healthcare plan you can keep it and guess what most of you will be saving an average of $2500 next year in 2014… That’s not what most of our paying customers got.. Quite the eye opener for most.. Again with only 750K new paying insureds, the program "ACA" is in for trouble financially, but wait we have Obama to the rescue, Lets raise everyone's premium who are paying to cover the cost of the program...That's the ticket...LOL, Just what we need more government to tell us how to Live eat sleep and $$$T...
At least we have the Mariners to Root for this year, their looking pretty good...

vanwadreamer — April 9, 2014 at 3:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Getting Walmart Workers Off Food Stamps Would Cost Customers Barely Anything;=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl30%7Csec1_lnk2%26pLid%3D462874

Same with Papa Johns and those fast food joints that cry poor

Hawkman — April 9, 2014 at 6:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal

vanwadreamer — April 9, 2014 at 3:34 p.m.

Feel free to list credible sources to back those numbers up. National sources that produce cost/benefit analysis, to include subsidies, Medicare recipients, income levels, previously uninsured, emergency room cost reductions, etc. Understanding it's too early to properly produce such, just wondering where your blanket opinion came from.

Like any big government program, (e.g. Medicare-Social Security-etc.) It'll take time to iron out flaws. It's important the GOP gets on board to help their constituency.

Regardless- The ACA is here to stay.

Get on board and let's improve and refine this much needed change. To think Insurance companies could turn people away for pre-existing conditions.... unconscionable, and now (thankfully) SO yesterday. This law will never be repealed. Work with it. The right whining about this will become so yesterday also. Just like Social Security, Medicare, etc.


Big news and is bound to affect emergency room costs as predicted. Imagine if the ACA had a smooth roll out.

-Millions More People Are Getting Health Insurance Because Of Obamacare, Survey Finds-

Nearly one week after White House enrollment numbers showed Obamacare surpassing the seven-million mark, an economist-driven survey is projecting more good news for the Affordable Care Act.

RAND Corporation released its findings Tuesday, showing that the health care law is poised to spur a net gain of 9.3 million more insured Americans. The survey results were collected through March 28, 2014, and respondents will be part of a follow-up later in April, once new data is available.

The survey adds that thanks to shifts caused by circumstances like job and marital status changes, the study cannot pinpoint which shifts were specifically driven by Obamacare's arrival. But limited conclusions can be drawn, including an estimate that the share of uninsured Americans will drop from 20.5 percent to 15.8 percent.

RAND Corporation's numbers arrive one day after Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Nebraska Senate candidate Ben Sasse (R) penned an op-ed in the Washington Examiner, warning Republicans that there is urgency to create alternatives to Obamacare.

"The good news is that the final chapter on the president’s disastrous health insurance takeover has not been written," they wrote. "Conservatives are making a strong comeback with concrete proposals that, if enacted, would create real progress toward better healthcare outcomes for all Americans."

nailingit — April 9, 2014 at 8:56 p.m. ( | suggest removal

The Columbian has a blog - Political Beat - that I'm thinking has about a half dozen readers, based on the number of comments. Too bad - I've usually found what gets covered there a hell of a lot more important than the topics on APIL.

Anyhow, one of the latest is from a fairly new writer, Lauren Dake. Seems that there's a group pushing reduced classroom sizes as an important component of the education funding mandate that the State is supposed to have a plan for by the end of this month.

I'm seeing this as a quite important topic - one that needs to make its way to the main part of the newspaper. Maybe, if others here agree with this, either a visit to that page and a comment (Editor Lou seems to respond to numbers of hits), or bring the topic up in other discussion forums. (Like her.)

My comments are there - I'd repeat here, but I'm late for work.

roger — April 10, 2014 at 6:38 a.m. ( | suggest removal

roger — April 10, 2014 at 6:38 a.m.

Hope this will help you as we need to look to the future. (slow down for that pothole)

nailingit — April 10, 2014 at 8 a.m. ( | suggest removal

On the subject of education and in case anyone would miss this. What a great local story. First steps!

nailingit — April 10, 2014 at 8:11 a.m. ( | suggest removal

-This Is Who They Are: The Republican Budget Vote-

This week, the House of Representatives will vote on the Republican budget, presented by Republican Budget Chair Paul Ryan (as well as alternatives from the Democratic leadership, the Congressional Progressive Caucus "Better Off Budget," the right-wing Republican Study Group budget and Congressional Black Caucus). Republicans are reportedly lined up to vote for the Ryan budget, with the exception of a handful that think it is not extreme enough.

The budget, of course, is dead on arrival in the Senate. So this is a message statement, a voluntary vote to let Americans know where Republicans stand. As Rep. Peter Roskam (R-Ill.), the chief deputy majority whip, stated, "This is now viewed as something that identifies who we are. It's strongly identified with [House Republicans]. It'll pass." (emphasis added)

This "identifies who we are." So who are they. In brief summation, the Ryan budget is a remarkably disingenuous document. Its authors claim to be putting the "tough choices" before voters. But it identifies the taxes that Republicans would cut, but not the loopholes they would close or the taxes they would raise to pay for the cuts as promised. It identifies the savings that they would create, but not the programs that they would cut in achieve them.

Even with that, the Republican budget does identify "who we are," what they value, what their priorities are. These are unsurprising but remarkably unconscionable.

The budget that Republicans will choose to vote for will...

Cut taxes on the rich

The Citizens for Tax Justice estimates that even if Republicans eliminated every loophole claimed by the wealthy, lowering the top rates to 25 percent will still hand millionaires an average tax cut of $200,000 a year.

Cut taxes on multinationals

It would lower the top rate of corporate taxes. But most important it calls for moving toward a territorial system for taxing multinationals which in essence turns the entire world outside the US into a tax haven where corporations can move jobs and report profits without having to pay US taxes.

Hike spending on the Pentagon

The Pentagon is slated to spend $6 trillion over the next decade, with annual spending up at the end of the current five-year plan up 27 percent over 2001 in constant dollars. Republicans argue that is not enough, adding nearly $500 billion over the 10 years over sequestration levels (about $273 billion higher than President Obama's budget). This will pay for policing the world; it does not include the costs of the wars that inevitably result from that policing.

nailingit — April 10, 2014 at 8:31 a.m. ( | suggest removal

Eliminate health insurance for an estimated 40 million Americans

The Republican budget repeals Obamacare without replacing it. It would turn Medicare into a voucher of declining value -- known as a "premium" -- for today's 55-year-olds and younger. It would gut Medicaid, repealing the Obamacare expansion, turning it into a bloc grant and cutting it by a quarter by 2024. Private insurance companies will ration health care by the ability to pay.

Inflict savage cuts in domestic investments

The Republican budget cuts domestic programs by a staggering one-third compared to inflation adjusted levels over the next decade. This includes aid for schools, Head Start, child nutrition, roads and bridges, water systems, border security, the FBI, environmental protection and more. In relation to the size of our economy, spending levels would end up at about half where they were under Ronald Reagan. Republicans will not specify where the cuts come from, which is just as well, since it is inconceivable that they will take place.

Slash programs for the most vulnerable

Even while cutting taxes on the rich and the multinationals, the Republican budget would slash support for the most vulnerable -- Pell grants, Supplemental Nutrition, housing, home heating, child care, and more would be rolled back. The Center for Budget and Policy Priorities estimates that fully 69 percent of the Republican budget cuts are taken from the poorest and most vulnerable Americans. But of course, poor people don't contribute to campaigns or hire lobbyists.

This Is Who They Are

House Republicans will line up to pass this budget. At the same time, they will not even allow a vote on raising the minimum wage or extending unemployment benefits to the long-term unemployed.

There are many things wrong with the Republican budget. Its austerity will cost jobs and cripple the economy. Its tax cuts will add to Gilded Age inequality. Its Big Oil agenda continues to ignore catastrophic climate change. Its numbers don't add up. Its claim to balance the budget in a decade depends on funny money -- assuming faster growth, keeping Obamacare's tax revenue while repealing its benefits, etc.

But put the disagreements aside. Simply accept Republicans at their word: This is who they are. These are their values. These are the priorities that they choose to endorse. And then pray for the future of this country.

nailingit — April 10, 2014 at 8:32 a.m. ( | suggest removal

nailingit — April 9, 2014 at 8:56 p.m.

I believe vanwadreamer was asking what your source is for claiming that premiums are only going up a few bucks. I'd like to know also.
So just where DID you get that from?

kn_dalai — April 10, 2014 at 10:40 a.m. ( | suggest removal

kn_dalai — April 10, 2014 at 10:40 a.m.

You could start by paying attention to detail. What you are referring to is a continued conversation addressed to..

'luvit/JJ/Others' @ April 8, 2014 at 12:23 p.m. Though technically vanwa would be included with "others", your reference (simply a cut & paste would work) was misleading. Instead of supposing or just, "believing", check comments for accuracy. Not a big deal, but this type sloppiness is nothing new.

@ 10:40-"are only going up a few bucks", as opposed to what I actually stated. "going up a few bucks" was the wording. The "only" you chose to throw in, is intended to inject a degree of emotionalism/emphasis in the conversation, and cheapens discourse.

[context] "Much of the fight over the ACA is about a premium going up a few bucks, even though most opposed seem to be agedly dependent on Medicare, and for many, premiums seem to be going down."'s just too easy to be accurate. Instead of rewriting a comment to fit a pointed narrative, just be accurate. Much easier to address a concern.

And to answer the obvious, "Going up a few bucks" was obviously a metaphor of sorts that costs have risen in some areas. Not an attempt to pinpoint figures.

Anything else you need clearing up with? :)

BTW, since your emphasis is on "a few bucks", please state how you qualify rising costs. Please refer to April 9, 2014 at 8:56 p.m. with an attentive response.

BTW- I went to the Portland Zoo for the first yesterday and really enjoyed it. Great weather we're having.

nailingit — April 10, 2014 at 12:36 p.m. ( | suggest removal

nailingit — April 10, 2014 at 12:36 p.m

It’s a little hard to follow along your rather disjointed reasoning, but I guess you’re saying your 12:23 post was a continuation of your 12:05 post. So what? . It has nothing to do with anything.

Here is the thread:

“Much of the fight over the ACA is about a premium going up a few bucks…”- nailingit — April 8, 2014 at 12:23 p.m.

“Going up a few bucks??HAR HAR HAR…Mine went up 37% … How about our younger crowd, most of their premiums went up also. So you have statistics to prove how many premiums seem to be going down… What is many, 10-20-30-50% of the Premium paying peeps…”- vanwadreamer — April 9, 2014 at 3:34 p.m.

“Feel free to list credible sources to back those numbers up. National sources that produce cost/benefit analysis, to include subsidies, Medicare recipients, income levels, previously uninsured, emergency room cost reductions, etc. Understanding it's too early to properly produce such, just wondering where your blanket opinion came from.” - nailingit — April 9, 2014 at 8:56 p.m.

“I believe vanwadreamer was asking what your source is for claiming that premiums are only going up a few bucks. I'd like to know also.
So just where DID you get that from?” - kn_dalai — April 10, 2014 at 10:40 a.m.

You should take your own advice and pay attention to detail. You will note, that I did not directly quote you at 12:23 p.m. I did this so that I might add the word “only” myself. You are correct that this was to emphasize your use of the phrase “going up a few bucks” which clearly implies “only”. However, the emotionalism part is a province which is yours alone, and always has been. As I have repeatedly pointed out to you about your MO: a good defense is a strong offense. And here we see his again.

If your “going up a few bucks” is supposed to be a metaphor, then it’s a very poor one. The significant increases we are all aware of, including those vanwadreamer has seen as an insurance professional, can hardly be described as a "few bucks".

kn_dalai — April 10, 2014 at 3:23 p.m. ( | suggest removal

I saw and read that Rand report to last week.. The crux of this slippery situation is how many "NEW PAYING PREMIUM" folks signed up???The vast Majority 65% of those so called 9.5 million are on the new free expanded medicaid program. the rest had health insurance last year and some went to the exchanges if they Qualified otherwise some were able to stay with their pland while some had to get new plans because their current ones were cancelled.. No cut and paste needed for that. On top of that Rand report there are several other that say anywhere from 7-9 million , but remember 65% went to the Free medicaid plans.Only 750 new paying folks..
According to our very own Kathleen S. we've only signed up 7.5 mil... Again signing up and paying are two different animals..We actually signed up over 400 clients but who actually paid premiums is a different story.
Quantifying a few "BUCKS" maybe $5-$10 more a month.. Most people will swallow that.. But $20-$50 a month more, that isn't going to fly very long.. I would say upwards to 30% of the People won't pay that throughout the year a month.. It's already happening here....

vanwadreamer — April 10, 2014 at 3:39 p.m. ( | suggest removal


You are absolutely correct... Some just don't want to believe what is actually happening.. I don't need to go to any source but I do read what's being said and sad but true much of what's being written and said by this administration could at best be let's say Skeptical as the Malaysian governments accounts of where the 370 plane went... The presidents claims about what this ACA will do and cost for you contains 30 some actual factual lies...I have always said I give him credit for trying, but it's like a carpenter trying to do a heart transplant, he wasn't qualified to put this ACA together.. He only sought the Medical Fields expertise when the websites weren't working and when he changed the plan back where some could keep there plans if the Insurance companies could do it. What is really terrible right now , we haven't heard from a new potential Healthcare client in over a week.. Wonder why???

vanwadreamer — April 10, 2014 at 3:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Vanwa and KN, you both are nuts.

The ACA was never supposed to be the end all- do all program that the Republican'ts keep complaining about and keep voting against. How many times have they taken a vote to eliminate it? 50 or 60? Stupid is as stupid does.

The President needed to get "something" going to help people that couldn't afford health care and those that have been cut off by insurance companies because they were "too high of a risk".

This "program" was and is meant to be an ongoing thing. It's just like any computer program that needs and gets updates from time to time. It's a big piece of clay that needs to be molded into the best program possible to help the most possible. The problem is, the Republican'ts are computer illiterate and can't quite figure out where the "start" button is. If they would spend the same amount of time "updating" the program as they do trying to turn it off, we'd really have something we ALL could LIVE with.

Hawkman — April 10, 2014 at 5:50 p.m. ( | suggest removal

"The ACA was never supposed to be the end all- do all program..." - Hawkman — April 10, 2014 at 5:50 p.m.

Where would you say the ACA is headed? I mean eventually.

kn_dalai — April 10, 2014 at 6:15 p.m. ( | suggest removal

kn_dalai — April 10, 2014 at 6:15 p.m.

It's hard to say. A lot of it has to do with what happens in the Senate next term and exactly how far up their butts the Republican'ts have their collective heads.

Again, I say ---- If they would just WORK TOGETHER with the Dems, this could be a beautiful thing.

Hawkman — April 10, 2014 at 6:33 p.m. ( | suggest removal

If you can't get the whole loaf now, settle for half and get the other half later.

kn_dalai — April 10, 2014 at 7:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal

-Stephen Colbert To Replace David Letterman On Late Show-

Colbert has commented on the new gig in usual form, saying in a statement: "I'm thrilled and grateful that CBS chose me. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go grind a gap in my front teeth."

nailingit — April 10, 2014 at 7:38 p.m. ( | suggest removal

kn_dalai — April 10, 2014 at 3:23 p.m.

How long it must have taken you to copy and paste others words. Than to say absolutely nothing meaningful...

"As I have repeatedly pointed out to you about your MO: a good defense is a strong offense. And here we see his again."

You say this every time. It's kinda like your escape hatch. You're setting a bar so low for discourse, Shemika Charles couldn't boogie under it. As you're so fond of saying (another escape hatch for not answering questions) Nonsense! (oops) Really knd, piggybacking off a couple other conservatives lately. At least you used to stand on your own two feet, regardless of error. Or try anyway. That elicits some measure of respect I suppose......

then again...

To repeat my request I gave your fellow conservative:

“Feel free to list credible sources to back those numbers up. National sources that produce cost/benefit analysis, to include subsidies, Medicare recipients, income levels, previously uninsured, emergency room cost reductions, etc. Understanding it's too early to properly produce such, just wondering where your blanket opinion came from.” - nailingit — April 9, 2014 at 8:56 p.m.


nailingit — April 10, 2014 at 7:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal

vanwadreamer — April 10, 2014 at 3:39 p.m.

I'll use another one of knd's escape saying's. "Did you even bother to read your article?"

From your post:

[Sign-ups for the law stood at 7.1 million last week, but people who had started signing up when the enrollment period closed March 31, or who had trouble signing up, were given extra time to finalize their applications. Four hundred thousand more have now done so, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said in testimony before the Senate Finance Committee. Sebelius said she expects the figure to continue to grow.

The original number already exceeded expectations, a surprise success after a disastrous roll-out and welcome news for Democrats who've been forced to defend their support for the unpopular law derided by critics as "Obamacare." Democratic senators took turns Thursday praising the robust sign-up numbers.

"We now know millions of people who have directly benefited from the Affordable Care Act," said Sen. Ben Cardin, D-Md., while bemoaning that "we're still stuck in this repeal, not repeal mode, particularly in the House of Representatives, and that's not doing a service to the people of this country."]

Seriously. Cherry pick all you want vanwa. Please try working with this law instead of against it.

You've mentioned something about Assurant in the past. Whatever your level of expertise in this field I'm not sure of. What I do know is, you hated this law and the President who signed it long before it went into effect. Your bias has been extreme. It's hard to take you seriously about this for a few reasons, but this is a good one for starters.

Why don't you two chill a bit. Get some good vibes going on. vanwa have a beer or two with your better half and knd...whatever you do to relax. Throw rocks at kids, elbow old ladies leaving church, complain to a Wendy's manager that a leftist youngun didn't serve your Frosty quick enough...whatever it is.

Be happy with it.

knd- I might ask, how much has your health premium gone up or down?

Or are you dependent on government programs to cover that for you.

nailingit — April 10, 2014 at 7:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal

You've had a habit of making a lot of erroneous assumptions nailingit.

kn_dalai — April 10, 2014 at 8:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Just returned from contributing cold hard cash to the Tribes of Grand Ronde. Spent about as much as a really nice dinner for two but had fun about 2/3 times longer. It's the first time we've went somewhere specifically to gamble, and as vacation ends after the weekend for the working member of this family, we wanted to do something more than take advantage of the weather by catching up on yard work and building raised beds for the garden.

Other than the cigarette smoke, I see nothing negative with a casino in La Center, tho must admit I don't know much other than the once or twice a year stop at Lincoln City's Chinook Winds on the way to Newport. Today was about the same as at Lincoln City... oldsters playing penny and nickle slots. Played roulette for a while and a Asian woman at that table was gambling big, and seemed to know what she was doing, but that's about it other than watching another really old guy win $1300 at video poker. They were on him like white on rice with tax forms, etc. Talked to an old guy who comes once a week on a shuttle bus from Woodburn. His wife used to come too, but no longer able. He was more interested in talking to neighbors than playing slots, which was fine, but again no overt signs of gambling mania, tho not sure how this addiction would manifest w/out checking credit reports. Saw no crime, no bums, no panhandling, and no shady mafia types. Just a lot of folks having a day of relaxing and fun, just like we were doing. Perhaps things 'heat up' at night, which I much admit we've never done, even at Lincoln City.

I'm sure the nopes, can'ts, won'ts, don'ts, and the doomers and do-da-do-das will have something to say about the proposed casino at La Center. I want to be listening, because they could actually have legitimate concerns I know nothing about, but want to have some sort of 'hands on' opinion, too.

jacjak — April 10, 2014 at 8:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal

At any rate, your assessment seems to denote past tense.

But I suppose that is the closest I'll get to an answer.

(I guess wicked ol' leftist programs are anti American-until they help us)

nailingit — April 10, 2014 at 8:50 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Hawkman — April 10, 2014 at 5:50 p.m.


nailingit — April 10, 2014 at 8:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal

While I was working butt off last few days, jacjack went gambling (good for her), and the usual crowd argues the same old points re ACA. Nails-you will not convince either of the two to budge. Why try? It comes from O, therefore it is bad.

Liked your run-down re Ryan budget. Same old, same old. Cut where it hurts the most people and the most vulnerable, rich get richer, let's make military even more porky. Salivating over a possible new lil war we could fight somewhere or what?

You guys read about that idiotic "documentary" about geocentrism? How much more backward can we get? Is it something in the water or Monsanto's modified food these people eat? Or just something in the genetics left over from the puritans that makes so many Americans so anti-science? It's so pathetic I am not sure if I should laugh or cry.

luvithere — April 10, 2014 at 9:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Well, when you little dyed-in-the-wool Socialists get tired of your sleight-of-hand obfuscations, stereotyping assumptions and race card playing, you might head over to Lew's site and try to learn how to laugh for a change. (The best medicine in the world). With the dour outlook you people have, it's no wonder you need Obamacare in your lives.

kn_dalai — April 10, 2014 at 10:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal

luvithere — April 10, 2014 at 9:20 p.m.

"Why try" Great point luvit. Every once in awhile I allow myself to get drawn into it. Their tea is stale, strong, and bitter. I guess I'm just tryin' to add a little sugar! :)

Isn't the Ryan Budget a hoot? I have to think most of these guys on the right have no idea what they or their elected believe. I guess Fox must iron it out for them.

I've always thought it was the height of hypocrisy to only apply RyanCare to the younger set, so they will still get the senior block to vote for them. If it's so great, let it start now at all ages. They've got the "I've got mine and to hell with everyone else" voting block locked up.

Have you seen the latest about Jesus having a wife?

nailingit — April 10, 2014 at 10:23 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Then Mary says to me, "What were you doing at Mary Magdalene's place the other night? Peter's wife saw you outside her house."

So I tried to tell her she was only washing my feet...that's all.

Then we started to argue and.....


It only stands to reason Jesus was married. How else could he understand mankind's pain and suffering :)

nailingit — April 10, 2014 at 10:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Lew's blog always gives me a good laugh.

nailingit — April 10, 2014 at 10:51 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Have you seen the latest about Jesus having a wife?

nailingit — April 10, 2014 at 10:23 p.m.

Yes, read it. That is one topic that seems to set off our rw religious fanatics. It would mean women are human beings, with rights, standing, respect - can't have that. They are hard at work to discredit it and make it sound like a modern fake. Science dated this thing - and we can't have science.

Of course, it is religious writing based on other religious writings, based on stories embellished over the centuries, codified into something not quite coherent by the Council of Nicaea to serve the political ambitions of Constantine. For me, not too relevant to my life but always interesting to see what fire storm this sets off again.

luvithere — April 11, 2014 at 7:35 a.m. ( | suggest removal

Wondering if the letter writer or respondents have a clue. If the GOP take control of the Senate as well as the House it would still take Presidential power to repeal.

nailingit — April 11, 2014 at 7:42 a.m. ( | suggest removal

Interesting stuff luvit. It doesn't take much to set off our evangelical friends. Contraception access, black people voting on Sunday's, etc. It'll be fun to see how this plays out.

Now if they upon stumble upon the Golden Plates of Joe Smith, then they have my attention. :)

["Jesus Christ, get your feet off the couch and come help me with these dishes!"] Okay dear!

nailingit — April 11, 2014 at 7:49 a.m. ( | suggest removal

"upon stumble upon.." = no coffee. Time to fill er up.

nailingit — April 11, 2014 at 7:51 a.m. ( | suggest removal

I'm hoping manthou weighs in on the latest controversy with Madore's latest conspiracy charge against the Bus folk.

Before I moved here, I had no idea transportation issues could divide a community like it has this one. I mean we're talking buses and trains, transportation most of the voting block never sets a foot on but are vehemently against.


..paying a few bucks...

...what it's all about.

nailingit — April 11, 2014 at 7:58 a.m. ( | suggest removal

luvithere — April 11, 2014 at 7:55 a.m.

Too funny luvit. I think the Polish have a better perspective than many of us do.

nailingit — April 11, 2014 at 8:07 a.m. ( | suggest removal

roger @ 6:38 am April 10: Thanks for your blog suggestion. I do read the Political Beat, but, I am traveling and not at my computer much. I will check it out.
For all of us here who are vocal about journalism ethics, please note: The Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) is revising its Code of Ethics. Some controversial changes are being proposed, but the public has a chance to comment.

A journalist friend, who used to be a public editor (ombudsman) before most of them were cut, wrote this to me today:

"The SPJ Ethics Code is being revised, as you may know. Go to their website and you can add suggestions to a draft. I plan to do that. The new version DELETES a sentence that says: "Encourage the public to voice grievances against the news media." Unbelievable!

Also on the chopping block? The caution against bias, I am told.

Here is another explanatory story of the SPJ Ethics overhaul from the American Journalism Review:

Get on the website and make your comments. Once the changes are finalized, they will be used to excuse actions you may not like, as news consumers.

manthou — April 11, 2014 at 8:25 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Your seem to be of the type of person that could not be told yes that's water you better go drink it or your going to die. You keep saying nope it's not water and you die.
Again your missing the point. You and others seem just happy that the President has misled or flat out Lied to most Americans about the ACA...If his goal was to add more Medicaid folks to the free healthcare program why didn't he go about it the way he has in other areas, with the brush and stroke of his Pen. He could have also done the same thing with Pre Existing Illness. He didn't have to cause all this disruption in Healthcare world and folks wouldn't have been forced to purchase a plan. Were just going more and more towards Socialized medicine which is falling under it's own weight in every country that has it. Taxes will have to climb in order to help fund it because it cannot stand on it's own. More and more free programs need to be paid by those earning... Now those earning are earning less under this program. Several states have you paying close to 65% in taxes already...The bottom line is the ACA has signed up some lets say 7.5 mil folks which 65% are getting it free and of the 35% left 65% were paying premiums last year.. Only 750NEW paying folks have paid premiums into Obamacare...Calling this the "Affordable Care Act" was a lie from the beginning and "YOU" sheep bought it. It's called Unsustainable.... And when this happens, well But really what's a few Bucks...

vanwadreamer — April 11, 2014 at 2:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal

You and others seem just happy that the President has misled or flat out Lied to most Americans about the ACA..vanwadreamer — April 11, 2014 at 2:34 p.m.

And you seem happy to believe everything Fox news feeds you. So you are trying to tell me that out of 7.5 MILLION people that signed up, only 750 are new and are paying ? 750 out of 7.5 million? Huh, got proof? Actually, I don't care if you have proof or not, I'm sure you don't. But hey, let's beat a dead horse some more. Maybe he will come back to life, it is close to Easter.

Hawkman — April 11, 2014 at 3:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal

I just love it when people tell us that socialized medicine is failing in all countries that have it....Socialized medicine, do you really think it is all FREE? People PAY for it, it comes out of their paychecks. Called TAXES. Those without a paycheck, yea, they get help. Some countries just do not believe one should let their citizens get sicker or die due to lack of funds.
Why do I bother. People do not even understand what socialism actually is. Or capitalism with socialism thrown in. Sigh.
Weather too nice to dead that dead horse. Although-if Hawk is right-might come back to life.

luvithere — April 11, 2014 at 3:29 p.m. ( | suggest removal

"...and the usual crowd argues the same old points re ACA. Nails-you will not convince either of the two to budge. Why try?..." -- luvithere — April 10, 2014 at 9:20 p.m.

Let’s get something straight. My exchange yesterday with nailingit was about one thing: nailingit claimed that ACA premiums were ONLY going up a small amount and I asked him to support his claim. That’s it. Look at it. Look at my question of 10:40 a.m. and then look at his response at 12:26 p.m.

kn_dalai — April 11, 2014 at 3:33 p.m. ( | suggest removal

kn, was not singling you out. Was just commenting that it is always the same crowd arguing the same points re ACA. Crowd = more than one.

luvithere — April 11, 2014 at 3:38 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Well actually luvithere, since you referenced "two", and it was only vanwadreamer and me; I'd kinda think you did single me out. Just sayin'.

No matter. It seems to me that nailingit pulled that alleged factoid out of thin air, and I asked for clarification. Vanwadreamer has made it clear that his numbers are coming from his own hands-on experience.

kn_dalai — April 11, 2014 at 3:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal

...SO touchy. :))

nailingit — April 11, 2014 at 4:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal

To repeat:

“Feel free to list credible sources to back those numbers up. National sources that produce cost/benefit analysis, to include subsidies, Medicare recipients, income levels, previously uninsured, emergency room cost reductions, etc. Understanding it's too early to properly produce such, just wondering where your blanket opinion came from.” - nailingit — April 9, 2014 at 8:56 p.m.



A glimpse of things to come. In crunching numbers, one forgets about the humanity involved. Not only is ObamaCare driving costs down, it's just downright human. Win/Win

Give me an A! A!! .. Give me a C! C!! .. Give me another A! A!! .. What's that spell?


DOES ANYONE WHO POSTS HERE BELIEVE RyanCare IS A BETTER IDEA? Do you have a better idea? Tell us why? If not than........quit sounding foolish.

Why fight it? Just sit back, relax, let the ObamaCare vibe fill your mind in this soulless ObamaNation we call America. It's just not what it used to be. And that guy in office.....he's different. I mean this was a Heritage Foundation inspired law, predicated on the implementation from a Republican Governor, who, became so popular, much because of RomneyCare, he was chosen as a GOP Presidential candidate less than two years ago.

The nerve of this President. Implementing a right wing formula for health care and expecting republican support.

Pathetic to say the least.

nailingit — April 11, 2014 at 4:56 p.m. ( | suggest removal

I mean really. Some premiums are up and some are down. Let's wait for some real numbers to factor in. A good look at the ACA a few years from now will be interesting. (yes republicans-the law will still be here)

Hey knd.....your 'premium' go up?

I will say this is slightly more interesting to discuss than trains & buses. A little.

nailingit — April 11, 2014 at 5:17 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Understanding the big picture. The ACA is continuing and forging lower costs. As was projected, health care costs were to swallow 40% of our GDP by 2018.

It's easy to forget (and it shouldn't be) just how screwed up our economy was under republican controlled congresses and Bush for so many years. Obama had a mess on his plate like no other.

~Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.~


-Reining In Health Care Costs Key To Trimming Deficit-

The Congressional Budget Office earlier this week said this year's deficit is likely to be about one-third the size it was in 2009, when the Great Recession bottomed out. A recovering economy is the main reason for the deficit's improvement, but moderating health care costs have also contributed.

Harvard economist and health policy specialist David Cutler says getting the federal government's finances under control is all about health care.

"A fairly accurate summary of the federal budget is that the U.S. does not have a deficit problem — it has a health care problem," Cutler says.

The problem is that health care costs grew significantly faster than the economy in the 1960s, '70s and '80s — driving up the cost of government health care programs like Medicare and Medicaid. In the 1990s, increases slowed a bit, but then they peaked again in 2001.

These increases have led to projections of huge, unsustainable budget deficits in the future as baby boomers retire and demand more health care for their aging bodies.

"So if you say, 'What's affecting the long-range outlook for the federal budget?' it is almost entirely health care," Cutler says.

Please read more @

nailingit — April 11, 2014 at 5:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal

luvithere @ 7:55 a.m.

And, members can purchase a little car decal to proclaim their conviction....

jacjak — April 11, 2014 at 7:52 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Jacjak, R'amen!

You got to love them Polish folks.
Might have to get one of those. I find the whole FSM thing so brilliant. The humor is hilarious even though a certain fraction ain't getting it.

luvithere — April 11, 2014 at 8:32 p.m. ( | suggest removal

"As was projected, health care costs were to swallow 40% of our GDP by 2018." -- nailingit — April 11, 2014 at 5:34 p.m.

What's your source for this claim?

kn_dalai — April 12, 2014 at 7:12 a.m. ( | suggest removal

Lou's column is great today. It appears that Madore didn't show up at Steve Stuarts "going away party" because nobody put it on his calender. Hmmmm. This only proves that Mielke's head is firmly connected to Madores rear. Why else would he miss it as well. Or do they have the same secretary and keep the same calender? So many questions......

Hawkman — April 12, 2014 at 7:35 a.m. ( | suggest removal

kn_dalai — April 12, 2014 at 7:12 a.m.

CBO projections in 2009.

nailingit — April 12, 2014 at 8:16 a.m. ( | suggest removal

Hawkman — April 12, 2014 at 7:35 a.m.

The pic is priceless. Isn't that Harriet Miers? Too funny.

nailingit — April 12, 2014 at 8:52 a.m. ( | suggest removal

nailingit — April 12, 2014 at 8:16 a.m.

“Health care expenditures in the United States are currently about 18 percent of GDP, and this share is projected to rise sharply. If health care costs continue to grow at historical rates, the share of GDP devoted to health care in the United States is projected to reach 34 percent by 2040.” --

kn_dalai — April 12, 2014 at 8:57 a.m. ( | suggest removal

I'm not sure if you're cherry picking or just misusing information. These were projections were in 2009. It is predicted in most formats that health care costs could rise dramatically after 2020.

Quip Pro Quo-

To repeat:

“Feel free to list credible sources to back those numbers up. National sources that produce cost/benefit analysis, to include subsidies, Medicare recipients, income levels, previously uninsured, emergency room cost reductions, etc. Understanding it's too early to properly produce such, just wondering where your blanket opinion came from.” - nailingit — April 9, 2014 at 8:56 p.m.



I'd almost rather rap about how many people cross a bridge each day....--yawn-- and the--taxes associated with--yawn-yawn--and health much has knd's costs gone up....?,....yawn.....zzzzzzz.....ZZZZZZZ..,,..

(CAPTCHA) chefe lolhigh

nailingit — April 12, 2014 at 10:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal

knd- Not wanting to add to your confusion, my reference should have been to this post instead.

nailingit — April 10, 2014 at 7:44 p.m.

On a personal note, maybe you should get some sun today. Go for a drive or something.

After you get back, maybe you could tell us how the ACA has driven knd's costs up.

[I haven't tried a mirrored third party request before....hmmmm]

nailingit — April 12, 2014 at 10:16 a.m. ( | suggest removal

nailingit — April 12, 2014 at 10:16 a.m.

There is a significant difference between your claim of 40% of GDP in four years from now, and the White House web site which says 34% in 26 years from now, both of which are based on projections of rising rates without the ACA. Just link to your information source, as I did, so everyone can see.

Your repeated and repeated “Feel free to list credible sources…” , was directed to vanwadreamer @April 9, 2014 at 8:56 p.m. regarding his post of @April 9, 2014 at 3:34 p.m. See - vanwadreamer gave some anecdotal figures based on his personal experience, which he identified as such, so there’s no reason for this thing about asking him to list sources and cost benefit analysis and so on. Your reason for doing is highly suspect. On the other hand, my own exchange with you was solely about you supporting your claim of only small premium increases, so your “list credible sources” thing, has even less to do with me, as I made no claims.

And I REALLY don’t like you asking me personal questions about anything at all. Take that anyway you want.

I imagine you’ll just twist everything around again, instead of giving a forthright response, to include a link to your information site.

kn_dalai — April 12, 2014 at 11:08 a.m. ( | suggest removal

So ready to jump on board with rising costs yet failing to provide transparency. Oh yeah, you're a republican. :)

Your arguments are shallow and usually without substance sans right wing talking points. I didn't expect you to divulge info that wouldn't support your reasoning.

"And I REALLY don’t like you asking me personal questions about anything at all. Take that anyway you want."

Of course you don't. (so high maintenance)

As far as the personal stuff...that's pretty tough territory if you wish to dialogue. (please feel free not to dialogue-I totally understand, and if I were you...oops:) From the weather to a song to ideas... to articles....tell you what. Just don't approach me about an issue. That works for me. But it won't be a two-sided coin as I'll still throw some love your way once in awhile.

(you picked up your bat and ball, but you left your fanny pack behind-I'll mail it to you)

I'm always curious about those who denounce government's role in people's lives, yet cash a check when it's a personal benefit.

I believe "proudly hypocritical" was a term I coined recently, and a term you have since used.


BTW I explained the obvious about the few bucks statement. Why you're clinging to something that is obviously a loose metaphor as I stated before is beyond me. (proven by the fact it's impossible to qualify numbers) Well, no it's not. It's all you have to dispute...nevermind. Say it long and loud enough, and you'll find some solace.

nailingit — April 12, 2014 at 1:16 p.m. ( | suggest removal

nailingit — April 12, 2014 at 1:16 p.m

Why don't you just put up a link to that 2009 CBO report you referenced?

kn_dalai — April 12, 2014 at 1:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I found that same CBO report myself. Where are the 40% by 2018 numbers? I'd think nailingit would know, but he doesn't seem to forthcoming.

kn_dalai — April 12, 2014 at 1:51 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Stir, stir, stir, zzzzzz

kn_dalai — April 12, 2014 at 1:51 p.m.

If I'm wrong about this I'm wrong. At a quick glance I am finding reports of 20% by the time spoken of (although 2019) but not 40%. 40% was much bandied about during the health care debate when factoring emergency room costs, inflation etc. 5 years ago.

Regardless, it was unsustainable by anyone's standards.


[[Until I come up with what I'm referring to, (I am sensing no urgency BTW as this stuff is like watching paint dry, and oh Gawd what if I'm WRONG? AAHHH!) I suppose I'll take my lashings with a wet noodle. But when I care to devote more time to this...yawn...subject I will search for it.]]

(I believe I would be the first person in the history of our Forum to admit to being wrong about something! Based on how pathetic that is, I kinda hope I am. :)


"Why don't you just put up a link to that 2009 CBO report you referenced?"

kn_dalai — April 12, 2014 at 1:27 p.m.

I really don't like you questioning what I do in my personal time. (man it's hard to be this smug and nasty, how do you do it?) But since you answer- I'm looking for it.

Your turn.

Quid Pro Quo

Has the ACA affected your premiums? If you are on government assistance (e.g. Medicare, Medicaid, Social security, Food stamps etc.) how does that play into your narrow view of Libertarianism? Have you mirrored your philosophy in your personal life, or are you on the sidelines as one of the "proudly hypocritical. Please respond.

Or disengage.

Without tit for tat, it becomes tit only. As in the governments perhaps?

"I'd think nailingit would know, but he doesn't seem to forthcoming."


Always a leftist conspiracy, isn't it.......or a nailingit conspiracy.

It is good to see you so energized. I just wish the energy was positive.

BTW- On a personal note, I haven't noticed a change in my premiums.

nailingit — April 12, 2014 at 3:49 p.m. ( | suggest removal

nailingit — April 12, 2014 at 3:49 p.m.

I'm not questioning what you do in your personal time. You made a claim citing specific numbers. It's up to you to support that claim. The one you admire so much, use to state this constantly when questioning others. It has nothing to do with personal - anything. You know that.

You would not be the first to admit wrongness, as I once apologized most humbly to Roger for my rudeness. It seems to me that there was at least one other time when I acknowledged being wrong about something. I may be wrong about that. If so, I'd like to admit that right now.

You'd be very surprised about things. As I've said, you have made and make (present tense) far too many erroneous assumptions.

Thank You.

kn_dalai — April 12, 2014 at 4:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal

Well, must be official if the C even has it up as lead. Campaign 2016 is starting. And here I was, enjoying the day and the sun.

Looks if the current crop of GOP runners are already sniping at each other. naturally, ACA unites them, but Ryan budget pulls them apart.
Can't wait for two years of griping and lying.
Goes for the other side also.

luvithere — April 12, 2014 at 4:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal

This is one wild story and still developing. Gun totin' Tea Party run amok.

Cows pigs n baggers.

-Cliven Bundy supporters bring cattle roundup protest to Las Vegas police headquarters-

nailingit — April 12, 2014 at 11:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal

These are good times to be a government charlatan or brainless fool. Why? Watchdog journalists are a dying breed:

manthou — April 13, 2014 at 8:22 a.m. ( | suggest removal

manthou — April 13, 2014 at 8:22 a.m. --

Blame it on the internet? There is so much information out there, and there's so much bias attached to most issues that it's difficult to tell what to pay attention to.

Case in point - Samir Khan, US citizen, and editor and publisher of Inspire, a Muslim internet magazine. Was he a propagandist for al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, or was he engaged in a legitimate effort to expose and publicize the killing of innocent civilians by the drone strikes conducted by the CIA and JSOC in Yemen and elsewhere in the region? Hard to say - It all depends on what one believes. And seeing as how he died in the strike that took out Anwar al Awlaki, another US citizen who spoke out against our War on Terror....

roger — April 13, 2014 at 9:23 a.m. ( | suggest removal

roger: We see blogging being protected by the courts in a similar way traditional journalism has enjoyed. The definition of "journalist" has expanded and they, like other professions, are tying to protect their "guild" and standards. We should license journalists the way we license other professions, but I can hear the hew and cry right now. Hoo boy. Regulate journalism like the UK?

The US has certainly silenced its own citizens over the terrorist reason before. Who really knows that the truth is in those cases? It pays to be skeptical and difficult to stay out of government firing range (there are many other ways the government can "kill" innocent citizens figuratively, when they don't like your message or research findings).

manthou — April 13, 2014 at 10:51 a.m. ( | suggest removal

Forum Login