<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Senate As A Practical Joke</title>
	<atom:link href="http://larryherzberg.com/wordpress/2009/12/17/the-senate-as-a-practical-joke/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://larryherzberg.com/wordpress/2009/12/17/the-senate-as-a-practical-joke/</link>
	<description>Larry A. Herzberg&#039;s Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 18:03:43 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Larry</title>
		<link>http://larryherzberg.com/wordpress/2009/12/17/the-senate-as-a-practical-joke/comment-page-1/#comment-11077</link>
		<dc:creator>Larry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2009 02:53:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://larryherzberg.com/wordpress/?p=647#comment-11077</guid>
		<description>John-

Yeah, it&#039;s pretty hard not to be hyper-super-cynical when it comes to the sausage making in the Senate.  But the question, I suppose, is whether this bill is better than nothing, and whether it can be improved over time.  Given that no such bill has ever come this far, and the possibility that it might be improved over time once its in place, makes me think that maybe we oughta chalk one up for Barack... who never promised us a rose garden, even from the rose garden.

I was watching the Republicans do their dog and pony routine on the Senate floor today, by far outmatching the positive distortions on the democrat side with their inimitable fox-newsy negative distortions.  And I have to admit that it was somewhat satisfying to hear their whining (even if it&#039;s insincere, given the windfall this bill will give the insurance companies and the issues it will give them to run on in 2010, before most of the benefits kick in).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>John-</p>
<p>Yeah, it&#8217;s pretty hard not to be hyper-super-cynical when it comes to the sausage making in the Senate.  But the question, I suppose, is whether this bill is better than nothing, and whether it can be improved over time.  Given that no such bill has ever come this far, and the possibility that it might be improved over time once its in place, makes me think that maybe we oughta chalk one up for Barack&#8230; who never promised us a rose garden, even from the rose garden.</p>
<p>I was watching the Republicans do their dog and pony routine on the Senate floor today, by far outmatching the positive distortions on the democrat side with their inimitable fox-newsy negative distortions.  And I have to admit that it was somewhat satisfying to hear their whining (even if it&#8217;s insincere, given the windfall this bill will give the insurance companies and the issues it will give them to run on in 2010, before most of the benefits kick in).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Whitney</title>
		<link>http://larryherzberg.com/wordpress/2009/12/17/the-senate-as-a-practical-joke/comment-page-1/#comment-11073</link>
		<dc:creator>John Whitney</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Dec 2009 04:15:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://larryherzberg.com/wordpress/?p=647#comment-11073</guid>
		<description>I hate to say that for a brief moment, Obama did cause me to set aside my cynicism and think maybe our system of government could still work,  but I think now I can safely assume it has been long ago sold to the highest bidder.  

As in the Wizard of Oz, the events of the past 2 years have accidentally pulled back the curtain to reveal there is nothing there but a sham.  Whether or not they can whisk the curtain shut again and keep the story going remains to be seen, but I&#039;m afraid I won&#039;t rejoin the believers.  Sigh.

But, nothing like a bit of humor to ease the pain.  Andy Borowitz summed it up well in his latest column:

Senate Unveils CompromiseCare
Details of Healthcare Plan Revealed

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report) - The United States Senate today unveiled details of its health care plan, tentatively called CompromiseCare:

Under CompromiseCare, people with no coverage will be allowed to keep their current plan.

Medicare will be extended to 55-year-olds as soon as they turn 65.

You will have access to cheap Canadian drugs if you live in Canada.

States whose names contain vowels will be allowed to opt out of the plan.

You get to choose which doctor you cannot afford to see.

You will not have to be pre-certified to qualify for cremation.

A patient will be considered &quot;pre-existing&quot; if he or she already exists.

You&#039;ll be free to choose between medications and heating fuel.

Patients can access quality health care if they can prove their name is &quot;Lieberman.&quot;

You will have access to natural remedies, such as death.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I hate to say that for a brief moment, Obama did cause me to set aside my cynicism and think maybe our system of government could still work,  but I think now I can safely assume it has been long ago sold to the highest bidder.  </p>
<p>As in the Wizard of Oz, the events of the past 2 years have accidentally pulled back the curtain to reveal there is nothing there but a sham.  Whether or not they can whisk the curtain shut again and keep the story going remains to be seen, but I&#8217;m afraid I won&#8217;t rejoin the believers.  Sigh.</p>
<p>But, nothing like a bit of humor to ease the pain.  Andy Borowitz summed it up well in his latest column:</p>
<p>Senate Unveils CompromiseCare<br />
Details of Healthcare Plan Revealed</p>
<p>WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report) &#8211; The United States Senate today unveiled details of its health care plan, tentatively called CompromiseCare:</p>
<p>Under CompromiseCare, people with no coverage will be allowed to keep their current plan.</p>
<p>Medicare will be extended to 55-year-olds as soon as they turn 65.</p>
<p>You will have access to cheap Canadian drugs if you live in Canada.</p>
<p>States whose names contain vowels will be allowed to opt out of the plan.</p>
<p>You get to choose which doctor you cannot afford to see.</p>
<p>You will not have to be pre-certified to qualify for cremation.</p>
<p>A patient will be considered &#8220;pre-existing&#8221; if he or she already exists.</p>
<p>You&#8217;ll be free to choose between medications and heating fuel.</p>
<p>Patients can access quality health care if they can prove their name is &#8220;Lieberman.&#8221;</p>
<p>You will have access to natural remedies, such as death.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Larry</title>
		<link>http://larryherzberg.com/wordpress/2009/12/17/the-senate-as-a-practical-joke/comment-page-1/#comment-11069</link>
		<dc:creator>Larry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Dec 2009 05:18:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://larryherzberg.com/wordpress/?p=647#comment-11069</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the comment, Steve.  (Actually, your comment and my response to it belong two posts down in the &quot;Pseudo-Science and Pseudo-Philosophy&quot; area, but let&#039;s not worry about that).

I don&#039;t doubt that Lanza&#039;s book is better than the article from which I took the excerpt, and there are probably some interesting speculations to be made about the place of consciousness in the universe.  But they weren&#039;t made in the article, and that&#039;s all I had to discuss.  I&#039;d like to hear more about his views sometime, and if you&#039;d like to discuss them, just leave another comment under the relevant post.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the comment, Steve.  (Actually, your comment and my response to it belong two posts down in the &#8220;Pseudo-Science and Pseudo-Philosophy&#8221; area, but let&#8217;s not worry about that).</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t doubt that Lanza&#8217;s book is better than the article from which I took the excerpt, and there are probably some interesting speculations to be made about the place of consciousness in the universe.  But they weren&#8217;t made in the article, and that&#8217;s all I had to discuss.  I&#8217;d like to hear more about his views sometime, and if you&#8217;d like to discuss them, just leave another comment under the relevant post.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve Rucker</title>
		<link>http://larryherzberg.com/wordpress/2009/12/17/the-senate-as-a-practical-joke/comment-page-1/#comment-11066</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Rucker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Dec 2009 05:20:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://larryherzberg.com/wordpress/?p=647#comment-11066</guid>
		<description>I actually read Lanza and Berman&#039;s book &quot;Biocentrism: How Life and Consciousness are the Keys to Understanding the True Nature of the Universe&quot;. And although many of their points are speculative (to say the least) they do posit an interesting case for consciousness as the creator of &quot;reality&quot;. Berman, especially, has fun with the notion of the physical universe and the inherent paradoxes within quantum physics as a tool to explain anything. I found the chapter on &quot;non-dualism&quot; particularly interesting as it relates to the Buddhist reconciliation of &quot;in here&quot; and &quot;out there&quot;. As philosophy it may be bunk. But there are many thought provoking concepts, especially from Berman, that make it a worthy and entertaining read.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I actually read Lanza and Berman&#8217;s book &#8220;Biocentrism: How Life and Consciousness are the Keys to Understanding the True Nature of the Universe&#8221;. And although many of their points are speculative (to say the least) they do posit an interesting case for consciousness as the creator of &#8220;reality&#8221;. Berman, especially, has fun with the notion of the physical universe and the inherent paradoxes within quantum physics as a tool to explain anything. I found the chapter on &#8220;non-dualism&#8221; particularly interesting as it relates to the Buddhist reconciliation of &#8220;in here&#8221; and &#8220;out there&#8221;. As philosophy it may be bunk. But there are many thought provoking concepts, especially from Berman, that make it a worthy and entertaining read.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
