A bit late in the game but I feel compelled to respond to those who suggest that I have some sort of *chip* on my shoulder.   I did not bring politics into this discussion…the letter writer  made a big point of the political differences he had with his girlfriend and the person who suggested that LW#1’s girlfriend is  a hypocrite because she is a conservative and takes money from her family brought in the politics.  I merely pointed out that there is a vast difference between taking money from taxpayers and taking money from your family.   Taking money from your family may not be *adult* or *responsible* but if it is freely given its a far cry from taking it from tax-paying strangers through government funds.   IF a family has the funds to take care of their children no matter what age they are,  and chooses to do so with their own after-tax money, it is not my business.   Although, I daresay it is not uncommon for families to help their children through higher education and it appears this young woman, conservative though she may be, is embarking on a career of sorts which would eventually make her self-sufficient and perhaps enable her to give back to her family in kind.   And perhaps it did hit a *sore point* with me, since I too, was heavily in debt at age 30 from student loans and my parents did provide me with funds to tide me over when my student loans ran dry.  And, after completing my education and establishing myself I was in a position to help them financially as well.    

I don’t call that *welfare*.  I call it taking care of your own business.   If you cannot see the differene between private gifts of cash and taxpayer funded gifts of cash, I would suggest that perhaps you too could benefit from some higher education (preferably not at my expense).   And…for the record, I paid my federally guaranteed student loans off early.  Since the funds were NOT government funds, but provided by a PRIVATE  financial institutiion who got the benefit of its bargain with me and did not have to ask the federal government to pay for my loan…I don’t call that welfare.   There is a role that government can play in aiding citizens to become self-reliant.  I kept my end of the bargain and then some. 

As for my niece and the onesies.   It is absolutely true that liberals have no concept of irony.   The point…let me make this perfectly clear so that even those who have been educated at Ivy League Colleges can understand….is that cricitizing this woman for taking family money is equivalent to criticizing me for giving a gift to my niece no matter how minimal.  It is no one’s business beause it is not your money.  According to the responders, however, my private gift is equivalent to taxpayer funded welfare.    If you cannot see the difference then once again I say there are none so blind as those who will not see.    

Well gee Karin.. I think there is a huge difference between parents paying their after tax dollars to support their own child and  parents using my tax dollars to support their children but…*I’m just sayin*  Or, rather you just said how upside down the world is.   Somehow, in your view its comparable for a parent to spend the after tax money they earn to support their daughter, which is their own choice to do or not…to forcible confiscation through taxes of my money to support children of strangers.  I submit it is no business of yours how much money this family (after paying taxes) gives to their child.    Or are you of the view that the government should decide whether or not it is *fair* if I buy my great-niece a onesie or not?   Perhaps you think I should donate the money instead to Acorn?  

Its clear the gal has had enough of this guy or she would have picked a place closer to home to get her career going.  Interesting that the letter writer did not say that HE had been supporting HER financiallly.  My guess, he was living off of the kindness of her relatives and they are all sick of his parasite behavior.   Incuding the brother and sister in law. 

#1… If your girlfriend of six years has elected to take a year long training course halfway across the country for one year  I would suggest to you that you have already been dumped so move on.

#2… This is one of those letters Margo’s mother would have laughed at but given the narcissistic nature of today’s young women I’m sure it is a real and not made up letter.  But it is still boring. 

I profoundly disagree with Margo’s analysis and that of Jimmy Carter, who perhaps should look his own anti-semitic soul in the mirror,  before he starts calling  Americans who don’t agree with Obama’s policies racist.   Perhaps those who call for increased civility in public discourse were equally offended by the boos which the Democratic members of Congress showered on President Bush in his state of the union address in 2005 (to be fair, in some of Clintons SOU addresses, some Republicans hissed or booed so this is not something unprecedented but does indicate that strong reactions by opponents could be attributed to something other than racism).  Or Harry Reid callling Bush a liar and a loser.  Or Pete Stark suggesting that President Bush was sending boys off to die for his own amusement.  Or Hillary Clinton suggesting to General Petraeus that she didn’t believe him when he told the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee that the surge in Iraq was succeeding.  Somehow, I suspect those lapses in civility escaped even Margo’s gimlet eye.

As for the and gun-toting Americans.   I think there was ONE person who carried a gun into a town hall meeting (and he didn’t even shoot anyone).  ONE guy was found with a gun in the vicinity of the capitol before Obama’s speech.   As for carrying guns into bars…thats been happening in America since before we gained our independence and frankly I don’t see that as having any relevance at all to the current policy debates.  I mean if someone carried a club into a voting precinct to intimidate voters, I would be apalled  but that would never happen in America.  Just ask Eric Holder. 

I am sure that there are Americans who are racists.  But those who want to discount the large body of Americans who are not happy with the direction of this country as raciists  are none so blind as those who will not see.   Polls on Obamacare show that the majority of Americans do not support it, even AFTER all the speeches.  And its not because Obama is black.  Its because they see similar systems failing in England and Canada.   Its because they know that if they get cancer today in America they will live longer than if they get it in Canada or England.  They know that rationing is inevitable.   They have seen how well other government bureaucracies function (the drivers license lines, the car tag lines, the post office lines, the passport delays and most recently, the delays in getting the dollars from the clunkers for cash program to the dealers).  And then there is the simple problem of arithmetic.  If 80% of Americans are happy with their current health care coverage why on earth would they see this as something they want to change?    Not to mention the common sense that tells them that *projected cost savings will pay for this* is phony baloney and wonder why if there is so much waste and fraud in medicare they aren’t doing something about that now and why it takes a massive takeover of 1/6 of the US economy to save those dollars.

The economic collapse a year ago shook up all of us.  Watching the government bail out, stimulate, and spend spend spend does not reassure  the little over 50% of us who actually pay income taxes.  And, as for the Anne Frank quote…that is the essential difference between liberals and conservatives.  Liberals want to believe that everyone is good hearted and kind and out for the common good and conservatives recognize that people are motivated by their own self-interest…even liberals.   Well, actually, especially liberals.   As I sit on the island I am laughing at the energy saving, environmentally conscious, plan to put wind power off of Cape Cod.   Except that there are  some NIMBYS here…called the Kennedy family who do not want their water view obstructed by windmills in the ocean . And if you are in Massachusetts you know that nothing is more important than making the Kennedy family healthy, wealthy and in power.   

No Margo, the reason people are protesting in large numbers against the direction this country is going is because they disagree with the direction this country is going.   A few years ago, when Code Pink was calling Bush a war criminal, no liberals objected to the lack of civility.  Their protests were called *patriotic* by the liberals.  When a filmmaker made a movie about how much better the world would be if Bush was assassinated, it was applauded as *speaking truth to power* even though…*we hope no one really kills him because then we will be stuck with Dick Cheney as president.*  And Margo is upset because some guy (who probably had a conceal and carry permit) carried a gun into a town hall meeting which remained concealed and carried. 

As for Jim Wilson…as far as I am concerned he is a great American statesman for speaking truth to power.  Of course whatever health  bill is passed will cover illegal aliens. If it didn’t La Raza would be all over it like flies on excrement.  Just like NOW and Planned Parenthood wouldl be all over it if it didn’t cover abortions.  AFTER the *you lie* challenge, Obama is saying he will support an amendment (which had been rejected by the Democrats over and over again) to require verification of citizenship before services.  Which pretty much tells me mean old racist Jim spoke the truth.   But even  Obama’s statement about verification  is a phony baloney deal because he knows  the Supreme Cout will declare an exclusion of illegal aliens unconstitutional just like they did in California.

Obama’s real problem is not racism.  It is an electorate which is increasingly informed.   And doesn’t like what is going on.  If the electorate is directing their dissent toward the President it is perhaps because he is the President and not because of racisim.   

And i hope he rejects Jimmy Carter’s and Margo’s analysis because if there is one thing American’s cannot stand it is a whiner.  (Which, by the way, is why Jimmy Carter was not re-elected and why he should keep his mouth shut and I am pretty sure he got a call from AxleRahm today telling him exactly that). 

Oh grow up.   Whine Whine Whine.  It appears you have a life that would be the envy of anyone and you are here blathering about not having good dreams anymore?   Countless women are living lives with far less public acclaim, glamour, and personal fulfillment and aren’t sitting around whining about it.  They just wake up every day, feed the kids and husband and pets, get the cereal on the table, get the book bags together, get the kids to school, go to their own nine-to - five jobs, and come home exhausted and put dinner on the table, help with homework, make dinner,  clean the toilets and throw some laundry in, fall into bed and HOPE they don’t dream but get a good night’s sleep.  I have a suggestion for you..if you have a hard time falling asleep because you don’t dream anymore, try counting your blessings. 

Who cares when and if George Clooney ever marries?   He is the Warren Beatty of his generation.  Eventually, he will settle down with some beautiful woman 25-30 years his junior, impregnate her with a bunch of kids and hope she stays around to change his diapers.  

I remember reading a memoir of Katharine Hepburn.  I cannot recall the author’s name.  But one of his stories was about the time that Warren Beatty and Annette Bening came to her to ask her to portray the old wise aunt in their remake of *An Affair to Remember*.   When they left, she made a comment to the effect of *So nice to see two people so much in love…too bad they are both in love with Warren Beatty*.

Susan, I completely agree that politicians who pretend to be family men and cheat on their wives are reprehensible but  I didn’t wish Ted Kennedy to die.   You may have hastened his death with your bad juju wishes.  Bill Clinton and John Edwards better stay out of your juju range. 

Actually, I agree with the first poster.  Would I be happy to hear Osama Bin Laden was found and killed in battle…you bet.  Other than that I really cannot think of anyone I would want to kill or have killed.  Want to be humiliated and cast away by polite society…yes.   And I do support the death penalty for heinous crimes but I am not going to go all vigilante and  say I would execute people without due process. 

Weird topic.    I almost think the persons posing the question  were hoping some crackpot would come on here and say something really unforgiveable like wanting some politician whose views they disagree with to be shot and killed.  If that was the motive, I guess Susan satisfied it.

Well I started this thread so let me be the first to ask…who is Rachel Maddow?  Even if I knew who she was I wouldn’t care a whit who she chooses to sleep with as long as she doesn’t do it in the street and scare the automobiles.  (Credit…Lady Asquith)  Second, I heard tonight on Fox news that the number on 9/12   was probably close to 200,000 but no one has really made a reliable estimate including the parks departments, fire departments etc.   And of course that doesn’t take into consideration the local groups which were considerable too.  Bottom line, there were certainly more than the few gathered in Crawford under poor Cindy Sheahan and the media’s reporting of every breath they took and every bite they ate and other matters which are better reserved for doing behind closed doors.  (I distinctly recall the media sympathizing with Cindy’s lack of adequate toilet facilities…I guess President Bush should have paid for porta potties for her and her 15 acolytes). 

Viewing the pictures from the mall and surrounding blocks, it is obvious the 9/12 crowd was massive.  And they came from all over the country and came on their own dime and their own time.  One guy was asked who *organized* the private charter bus he took from South Carolina to Washington and he said *my neighbor*.   As my generation said in the late 60’s…There’s something happening here…what it is ain’t exactly clear*.  

As for the Acorn situation…I heard Bob Beckel try to defend this criminal enterprise tonight by referring to Republican’s who have gone to prostitutes.   Of course, one only has to mention Elliot Spitzer to shut  that red herring down.  (Or Bill Clinton, or St. Ted,  or any other number of politicians).   One has to think when we are in an upside down world when the Maryland State’s Attorney is more interested in prosecuting the journaists for allegedly violating wiretapping laws than the Acorn employees for facilitating child sex slavery but hey….thats the upside down world those many crowds were protesting. 

As for *what leverage do we have without the public option?* question…

First I hope you do understand that the current bills will penalize employers for providing private insurance to their employees in addition to requiring private insurers to abandon any risk assessment when choosing who they insure.   Which will require them to increase rates to employers and those individuals who are buying their insurance outside of their employment.   So, ultimately, we will all have the *public option* with the exception of federal and state employees and probably union members because there is almost certainly a clause in the legislation which prohibits employers from altering union members current coverage  ad infinitum but then the insurance companies will go out of business because it is no longer profitable  and even union members will be on the public dole.

There is another way.  Allow insurers to offer across state lines consumer options.  For example..as a 57 year old woman who will never get pregant I could choose a policy without pregnancy coverage.  And, as I do with my car and home owner’s insurance I could set the level of my deductible and pay less or more as I see fit.   If I were in my 20’s I probaby would place a bet I wouldn’t get cancer within the next policy year.   But…if I was super cautious I could choose that coverage as well.    These are all ideas that have been proposed by Republicans to get people better insurance and health care.  But the Obama care proponents insist there are no other solutions offered (which  is of course….dare I say..a LIE?) 

And no one has answered my original question…why…if this is such an urgent matter..to help the economy…to save our country…to keep the oceans from rising and keep the stars and sun  in the sky…do the current proposals not take effect until AFTER the next election?  And why did Obama originally insist that Congress do this before the August recess?  And why has NO ONE who is electorally accountable READ THE BILLS? 

That is why people are protesting and that is why people do NOT TRUST this current administration and its congress.      

I’m amazed at the tens of thousands of people who marched on  Washington yesterday and that this site does not even acknowledge that it happened.    Cindy Sheahan had 15 or so people in her camp at Crawford and we heard about it for days on end.  (Not so much when she took her people to the Vineyard to make the same protest against Obama).  We have, today, in Washington, and all across the country, the largest protests since the Civil Rights marches in the 60’s and you have the audacity to ask what is the news today?

 Its certainly not which botox treatment is more effective or how you can control the children you bred but won’t parent.  Or even whether Whitney is really rehabiliated. 

Today the country has seen the largest protest against its government since at least 1860 if not 1776 and you are all. *oh…let me put my finger in my cheek to be cutesy*  and quite katie couric simple minded lets talk about Michelle Obama’s arms (because we cannot tallk about the nether regions) silly. 

 Of course the hot topic is Obamacare.  I have only one question for all  of Obamacare suppporters.  If it is such an urgent need, and if its going to cure the economy, why do none of the plans take effect until 2013?

Letter #1:  Are you Jon Gosselin? Cause it sounds like you are married to Kate.   I think, absent abuse, addiction etc. that joint custody is the rule in most states these days.  If counseling (which you may have tried) does not work for you and divorce is the solution, make sure you have a good family lawyer and fight for your right to be involved in your children’s lives through shared custody and shared decisions about education, healthcare, activities and discipline.  If you haven’t had an affair (and it sounds like you have not) I applaud you.   For a reason I do not wish to discuss, I have been watching the show Bridezilla lately.  I am apalled at the nastiness of these women and am always thinking…why doesn’t the fiance just RUN RUN RUN AWAY…who could love such a nasty person.   The show makes it seem like its normal to be a Bridezilla but it definitely is NOT.  

Letter #2…I think that having two or so dishes that your guests with special dietary needs can enjoy is just fine.    But I do think that it is wrong for anyone to criticize you for wanting to please and accommodate your guests’ dietary issues.  If you want to do the extra work to make everyone happy…so long as you don’t resent it and get all martyr about it…whose business is it of your friend to tell you what to do? She sounds like a nosy Parker and I would ignore her critique (and I am just guessing here…she probably never entertains anyone).   

Well, at least one person in this thread is an *oportunist*.   Before you start casting aspersions on spelling, my thoughts,  make sure you can spell the big words you want to use.  That aside,  I find this obsession with Sarah Palin interesting.   Of course there are those who are upset at her *trotting out*  Levi at her campaign.  Of course, all SANE people know that would not have happened if some idiots had not made the claim that her son was her daughter’s son.   My guess is, she would not have disclosed her daughter’s pregnancy if the kos crowd had not spread false stories about her own pregnancy.   What I think everyone has decided to ignore, is that Sarah Palin, until her nomination, was not out seeking a national forum.  She was governing her state.  Her national appearances to that point were related to energy issues.  It was her nomination and her appeal to a large body of Americans which resulted in the vitriol which was directed at her and her family.  

Yeah, her kid got pregnant by a low life son of a low life meth head.   Well, thats what happens in America.  Perhaps had she sent her child to a prep school on the east coast…her daughter would have dated a Kennedy and ended up not pregnant, but paralyzed or dead.  

Should the kid have been at the convention?  Probably not.  If you think it was Sarah’s idea to have him there, then you probably think Obama can stop the next hurricane with his force of oratory and personality.  I’m sure it was the McCain campaign that orchestrated that scenario and frankly, I wish they had not given this mullet meth head that 15 minutes of fame. 

The good thing is, I think the Palins will be just fine.  Something tells me they don’t give a mooses hair about the opinion of Liz Smith and Vanity Fair. 

I don’t care about Brad and Angelina or Tom and Katie.  They all appear to be self-aborbed narcissists with little their little *prop* children.   And Liz, glad you had a good time in the Hamptons.  Here on Nantucket,  I was happy to have a good heavy rain which blighted out most of  the satellite coverage of the Kennedy *farewell*.    It cleared up in time for me to see the burial services and note that the Pope dissed him royally (or papally as the case maybe)  in response to the obviously self indulgent  letter he sent to the pope in which he, as all of his kin, managed to plead for Obamacare as opposed to his immortal soul.   I also saw Biden’s comments at the wake….I lost track of the times he said the word *I*.

But yes…we had a good rain here on Nantucket which we needed so the weekend was not a waste.   

Number #1 made a telling comment *I don’t have the time or money for an education*.  I think the real problem is you don’t want to have to do the work necessary to get one.  If you did, you could support yourself and marry for love not money.  I went to law school at age 27 on loans, work study projects and summer jobs.  My niece did the same at 24, 24 years later.  If you wanted to do something other than be cossetted by a man, it can be done.  I love the joke about middle-aged (or older) rich men who cannot understand that beautiful young women are not looking into their eyes with love but at the platininum American Express card plastered on their forehead.  (Donald Trump comes to mind here although he probably has some sort of super duper black diamond platinum  uranium American Express Card on his forehead).   And frankly, any man who would marry you after you tell him you are marrying him for his money is probably going to treat you for just what you have proved yourself to be.  

#2…I wouldn’t dump him but I would suggest that you get some brief counseling so you can communicate your fears about his obsessive shopping.  And I definitely would not bring children into the mix until you two can work out this issue.  It may be something easy to resolve or hard to resolve.   But if you love him, I hope you can resolve it. 

Letter #1:  Margo said it best.  Do not attend these functions.  At some point your ex will reveal himself as the louse he is and your daughter will come back to you.  At which time you will receive her lovingly.

Letter #2:  hey, your single, you want to explore, as long as you are doing it on your dime and don’t scare the horses I don’t care.  Just be careful because while there are definitely good friendships that can be made online, there are also some really crazy dangerous people out there and sexual experimentation of the sort you describe is sort of a red flag to me…but glad it worked out well this time.