one more goddamn milestone for genetic engineering

We are truly truly truly truly a dispicable species.

Pet Peeve of ALL TIMES

No, my greatest pet peeve of all times is not the redesign of Art In America, which seems to have been done by people who never held a printed page in their lives, and which ranks high on my list of pet peeves.  My greatest pet peeve of all times is the invention of the bloody seedless watermelon!!!!!  

As can be seen in the above photograph, seedless watermelons aren’t really seedless. Instead of having big juicy seeds that you can actually spit out, they have immature seeds that you have to ingest and that get stuck in between your teeth.  

Genetic engineers with nothing better to do (like maybe genetically engineer themselves off of this planet) have succeeded in manipulating one of my favorite fruits into remaining immature even though it looks ripe.  Hell, visual artist or not, I don’t eat with my eyes only!  With the, perhaps well-founded, assumption that Americans have become too lazy to spit out fruit seeds, they have given us a fruit that is always green even though it looks red; a fruit that goes from being immature to being rotten without ever being ripe.  Gee, thanks.

 

What's in a name?

What’s up with the name Dick?  Is the arrogance exhibited by those politicians who go by that name due to the fact that it can refer to the male organ?  

The puppet master Dick Cheney is finally out of hiding arrogantly defending his policies and, again, fear mongering.  Granted, his warnings about the closing down of Gitmo are not unwarranted; but the dilemma of whether to close or not the facility is entirely of his making.  Had the Bush administration made any effort to establish Guantanamo’s legitimacy in an orderly and legal manner, we would not be in this mess.  Fuck you Dick.

tats

Tattoos... I’d like to study their history.  Knowing nothing at all about them, but having seen them marking peoples from all kinds of cultures and times, and having one myself, I would venture to say that they are used, in all kinds of tribes, even these days when they are ubiquitous and seem to be aquired on a whim, as part of a ritual to mark some kind of passage, to mark an occasion, and to solidify a bond with another or others.

In these times of economic uncertainty, my friend Carlyn has been photographing images which she has classified as “economic indicators”.  NPR, in its mission to paint a picture of the national landscape, has also been putting out small stories, or if you will, giving us snippets of news that, because of Carly, I have come to think of as “narrative economic indicators”.   One such story today was not about the demise of one business or another, but about a business that is flourishing in these times of economic hardship, and that’s the tattoo removal business: the business that removes the markings of a passage, an occasion and/or the solidification of a bond with another.  And the most often removed tattoo category is the name of a loved one. 

Now for the rant: given the time and space we live in, and given the rate of divorce in this here time and space, what kind of IQ does it take to inject the name of another person into several layers of one’s skin! 

Now for a corollary rant: Having gone and done that, people, you should own up to your tattoos and leave the damn things intact; just start a damn list of names.  It will be a reminder that life can’t be so easily erased!

Latest Star Trek: Why I Don’t Hate It Even Though I Should

As if the whole frightful thing were my fault just because it brought me hope, the Ranting Economist woke me up twice during the night to groan about how dreadful the new Star Trek movie was.  In fact he is currently ranting about it on the phone.

Yes, the new Star Trek is dreadful; and no, there is no way to save a planet from a supernova by transforming its exploding sun into a singularity[1], the premise upon which the plot of the movie lays.  A premise, I might add, that was not worked into the plot as it would have been were this actually a good movie; but one that was spelled out to a young Captain Kirk by an old Mr. Spock, played by the one, the only, the true, the Leonard Nimoy.  Yes, yes, yes, the plot is brought to you by the cliché of time travel; here without any of the usual plot restrictions of the collapse of “All-Time” should a character encounter his future/past self in the present (huh?).   Moreover, the whole time travel premise of the plot, such as it is, is never explained, not even through the lazy device of narration.

Suffice it to say that the whole movie is a series of clichés loosely strung together into an incoherent and pedantic plot.  Given this, an interesting question remains as it pertains to me and the Ranting Economist: How come neither of us got up to walk out of the movie theater as we’ve done countless times in the past when confronted with this level of doo-doo?  And moreover, why was I buoyed by the whole thing even though I should have left the movie retching in tandem with the groans emanating from the Ranting Economist?

Weeelll, I can’t speak for Curtis, but for me, at least, it’s because of the hope “theng”[2].  The entire raison d’être of the movie was to set back the clock in order to resurrect the old crew, albeit with new actors, and start a new franchise with the ones, the only(s), the old, the tried, the true, and the much beloved characters of the one, the only, the first Star Trek.  And although this is a transparent ploy to make more oodles of money for the ST franchise precisely by tapping into the kind of nostalgia I have for the old show, it, pathetically, does bring me hope.

Curtis left the movie cursing and spitting hellfire; while I left filled with joy because now Hollywood could actually go back to the “past” and make more movies featuring the crew of the original, who, to those of us who grew up watching them, are like family, the kind you want to spend time with.  The fact that neither Curtis nor I left the theater before the end of this shuddersome movie is a testament to the character development in the first series.  It was that alone that kept us seated; and knowing my husband the way I do, that truly is an amazing feat.  Now, if the next movie is this bad, I too will be spitting hellfire.  But here’s to hoping....

---

[1] or a black hole, as Mr. Spock had to explain to the viewing audience who might not have come into contact with the word “singularity”; even though chances are that if you’ve never come upon the word “singularity”, your grasp of the concept of a “black hole” might be somewhat limited as well, even more limited than that of those lay people who actually have come upon it.

 [2]  No not the Obama Hope thing; but my hope that Hollywood might again put out a good coherent sci-fi movie.

Rhythm

"We shouldn't be going to see the Star Trek movie."

"Ahhh Let's just take a walk on the wild side."

"That's not it, Star Trek is so anti-thetical to Anderson, S.C."

"We should stop analyzing shit you and I."

"That's not it, this place shouldn't have talking movies."

master/master

Buckmaster asks McMaster to apologize (-; 

legalize it

Ahhh the abortion issue once more

The Pres has gone to Notre Dame, the biggest and oldest Catholic University in the U.S., to give a commencement speech. Due to their disagreement with his stance on abortion, evangelicals and those Catholics who attend mass regularly are marking the occasion with protests; no surprise there. What is surprising to me, well not so much surprising as confusing, is Mr. Obama's plea for common ground on this issue. There is no common ground here: you are either pro abortion or anti abortion. Using the words "life" and "partial-birth" changes nothing; you are either for the the right of a woman to choose or you are not.

I don't know where Mr. Obama thinks he has rhetorical wiggle room here. If the discussion is to be centered on one's view of when life begins, it is non-starter; and that is the starting point for the anti-abortion camp. They believe that life begins at conception; some even believing that it is a mortal sin to put a barrier between ovum and sperm. Given such views, discussion is a non-starter since these people are not willing to discuss abortion in any other context.

Good luck on that one Mr. Pres. ...Though I guess that by "discussion" you mean the usual bickering amongst the members of congress... May the wiggling begin...

for all the good it does...

Dear Senator DeMint, Senator Graham, Representative Barrett, and President Obama,

I am writing to urge you to consider really working on health care reform; emphasis on the word “really”. Our systems, both public and private, are in serious need of repair.

I remember going to see my gastroenterologist, a few years back, for a check-up and striking a conversation with him. He told me he was about to go see eight patients at the hospital, three of which were actually paying to be there. How the costs of the other five patients were being handled was left to the imagination. Now, if one’s imagination comes equipped with a little economic knowledge, one can pretty much conclude that the costs of non-paying patients are the exclusive burden of paying patients together with the costs incurred by those of us who pay the exorbitant premiums charged by private health insurance companies; all of which, no doubt, spend a hefty amount of money lobbying for your help in keeping their profit margins as high as possible at the expense of the average consumer.

I know that those who ostensibly do not want government involvement in healthcare use the claim that the free market is much more efficient at allocating goods and services. In a simple, abstract and beautiful micro-economic model that is true; but the world we live in is far from simple, abstract or very beautiful. Moreover, the free market excuse for not dealing with our current health crisis is a myth. Our system does not clear anywhere near a free market solution since we already have the largest per capita public spending on (crappy) healthcare in the world. And given the scenario I describe above (which seems to be common practice), in the sense that the system encourages taking from Peter to give to Paul, we already have socialized medicine; we just do it covertly, haphazardly and inequitably. I urge you to start thinking about reforming both the public and the private realms of the system in a big way; in a way that provides basic care to people who need it and that distributes the costs equitably over the entire population, rather than concentrating them in the hands of a few.

I do understand the budgetary constraints we are currently facing; but as I state above, and you well know, a large chunk of our budget is already “wasted” on healthcare. The current way in which money is spent should be reformed in order to better serve the people it is set up to help. If we reform the current system intelligently and expand it to include more people, maybe the marginal cost of revamping it to be more equitable and efficient won't be as great as the naysayers claim it to be (emphasis on the word “intelligently”). It is incumbent upon you, as representatives of the people, to get together, stop bickering and grandstanding, and actually reform the system.

The Swiss model of healthcare is a good one that efficiently combines public expenditures with private incentives. Maybe you should start by dissecting their system and seeing how a solution that works in a business oriented, albeit tiny and somewhat homogeneous, country could be translated to operate in our vast and not so homogeneous one. I know this is an enormous undertaking; but you guys need to start getting serious about it because the status quo can’t hold for long. I once actually got an itemized hospital bill containing a line that stated I owed $30.00 for one Band-Aid; now, even the most unconscious of citizens knows something is seriously wrong with that.

Sincerely,

Katya Cohen
(Pickens County, South Carolina: home of Mark Sanford, poster child for grandstanding at the expense of the social good. One yearns for the days of George Bush’s compassionate conservatism... but I digress)

Demint responds:

Dear Ms. Cohen,

Thank you for contacting me to express your concerns about health care. I appreciate you taking the time to write me about this very important and timely issue.

While Americans have access to the best health care in the world, one of the biggest problems we face as a nation today is the escalating cost of health care. Currently, about 47 million Americans lack health insurance. Some are low-income, working individuals who do not qualify for Medicaid but cannot afford an expensive health insurance policy. Others are healthy individuals who do not find it worthwhile to purchase an expensive health insurance policy. It is essential that we take the proper steps to both control health care costs and increase access to affordable, private health care.

I do not support taking this country down the path to a single-payer, government-run health care system. Government-run health care merely limits patient involvement and choice and rations care and drugs. Instead, in order to achieve meaningful health care reform, we should ensure a fair and efficient health insurance marketplace. Americans should have the freedom to choose an affordable, private health insurance policy that best meets their needs, whether they purchase coverage individually or through their employer.

The first step to health care reform is to change the current tax code treatment of health care. Currently, there is an employer-based tax exclusion on health insurance, but there is no tax relief extended to Americans who purchase insurance in the individual market. I believe that we should offer tax relief for all Americans to purchase private health insurance, be it through their employer or the individual market. In this way, individuals and families can purchase and retain their own health insurance coverage regardless of changes in employment status. I recently introduced an amendment to the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) that would have given all middle class taxpayers the option to receive a federal income tax deduction of up to $1,500 to help pay the cost of covering their children.

Secondly, I believe we should allow people to buy health insurance policies in the individual market from any state, not just their state of residence. Each state sets its own mandated health insurance coverage requirements. Permitting individuals to purchase health insurance from any state would allow them to purchase a health insurance plan that best meets their needs, without having to pay extra in premiums for procedures they do not want covered, such as massage therapy or infertility treatment. Interstate competition would give patients more choices, lower prices, and increased quality. Ultimately, it would give many more Americans access to affordable health care. I have previously introduced this legislation, known as the Health Care Choice Act, in Congress. This simple but effective idea would provide more choices to millions of Americans and help them access affordable health insurance that best meets their needs.

Another requisite for health care reform is to continue to strengthen health savings accounts (HSAs). HSAs are tax-free accounts that can be coupled with high deductible health plans. HSAs can be used to pay for health care expenses, ranging from eye glasses to doctor visits. To make HSAs a better deal, I worked to include provisions in the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006, which passed both the Senate and the House of Representatives and was signed into law by the President in December of 2006.

This new law lifts the current requirement that annualcontributions to HSAs are no higher than the deductible of the health insurance held by the account owner and allows taxpayers to make a one-time distribution from an IRA to an HSA so HSA funds are immediately available to meet family health needs.

You can rest assured that I will continue to push for effective health care reforms that put control into consumers' hands. I appreciate your continued input on meaningful health care reform, and I hope that you will not hesitate to contact me again about anything important to you and your family. It is an honor to serve you and the people of South Carolina.

Sincerely,

Jim DeMint
United States Senator

So white of him...all this blah blah tax incentive this and that assumes an intelligent populace who can make rational decisions based on transparent information, all of which is rarely in evidence in this country.