The Original Avatars Unveiled: Truth Benders Invade Washington D.C.

If we had integrity anywhere,
                    we wouldn't need fact checkers everywhere.

We've been screaming lie, lie, lie at every politician for years now because we have always seen them as the original Avatar, the truth bender's.  Photoshop did not create this realm of attack.

What looks like a war on Obama is just the next campaign already underway.  Watch closely at this strategy because it totally depends on the absolute failure of ObamaCare.  If you feel like they went a bit too far, it is because we are not used to hearing campaigns begin so early.  When there is no plan B you have to amp up plan A. 

Stage 1:  soil the image of Obama.  Stage 2: Every democratic candidate in America will have a picture of Obama alongside their own in attack ads against them.  Since the success of this plan could mean poor folks losing access to insurance, I am rooting against them.  In addition, I am totally excited about the vision of their pivot if ObamaCare succeeds.  Where do you go after you go all in?

WE always knew that elections mattered, now we see why.  From a campaign perspective there is no point of return.  Since elections mean so much they are always campaigning. 

If you are not campaigning, you are losing.

Denver Broncos: Home field is a crutch for teams that are afraid.

When the Denver Broncos take on the Arizona Cardinals this Sunday.......its not Arizona?  When they take on the St. Louis .....not the Rams either.  Let me check the schedule real quick...............

When the Denver Broncos take on the Houston Texans this Sunday, the game is about as important as ......as......lets just say its not important.  Winning is important but not really.  The last two Superbowl champions kinda sucked most of the season and tripped into the playoffs.  If the Broncos win the next two and lose the Superbowl, is there anyone who will remember these two games?

Maybe its just me, but I am happy to be a little late to the pick up game and let all of those excited guys get tired so I can win one, or two. (Sort of like the Suns just did to the Nuggets)

My concern for this team is our hyper sensitive quarterback that we let coach our offense.  He is older and wiser, but in his pursuit of perfect he misses out on pretty good and can get rather ugly at times.  Peyton Manning's ugly is still kinda of cute, but will the defense be better served having to carry a few games, even if we lose, or do we need to continue our offensive assault on the record books?

The easy answer for a Bronco fan is to put the petal to the metal, but let's consider our options here.

We have two teams with very little to play for who get a shot at a likely Superbowl contestant.  One of them is a division foe that will always be considered public enemy #1, even when they stink.  Because neither the Texans this week or the Raiders next week  have a lot to play for, this becomes their "I don't have anything to lose"  de facto Superbowl for this season.  What better way to feel good about your off season than winning that game.

We will get their best shot and we need to take it without sacrificing too much.  If we win, that will be great.  If we do not, I hope we are not depending on anything more than determination to win it all.  Home field is a crutch  for teams afraid they can't win without it.

Nuggets Have Only One Person That Is Not Trade Worthy: BRIAN SHAW

Under George Karl I had a hefty list of players that I would not trade.  Kenneth Faried, Ty Lawson, Danilo Galinari (I still would keep the crippled Italian because of his end game freethrows).  I used to justify the Wilson Chandler love and even the mystery of McGhee (Javale).

Today, I would trade all of these cats to get a couple of players with a desperate hate of losing.  Not that we don't have a good list of players worth keeping, but none of them threaten the rest of the league with the ability to consistently rise to a level above what most typically do.

Except Brian Shaw.

The Vote Is In: B. Shaw, Coach of the Year

For the first time in a long time we have a team that can play the game in every way that the game demands.  Running is great, until it ain't.  Pick and Roll is deadly, until they force the kick out 3.  Drive and kick is probably the holy grail...........IF.

If you keep good spacing and then slash the gaps ...............IF.
If you who make good decisions with the ball.........IF.
If you drive with purpose and don't go like a punk (aka most of the Nuggets on this team)

When all of this fails, the championship teams insert  HE who drinketh' from the holy grail , the superstar athlete; but since we don't have one we will move on.

The Nuggets are not willing to accept that the best, of the best  will force you to hit the short jumper before they let you get to the lid over and over again.  I have said it once, I will say it again.  The Nuggets get more short jump shot opportunities than any team in the league because we miss more short jump shots than any team in the league.

Chandler won't keep shooting it, Lawson won't, Faried can't, J.J. is starting to (so stay tuned). Miller is Miller, and Nate is Nate. Everybody else is thinking about minutes instead of a strategic attack .   Whether by intention of our offense or their defense, we are getting that shot and being asked by Shaw to hit it.

George's teams started to get sniffs of that shot but they only understood oops and tre's.  The residual impact of that mindset  lingers.  Shaw understands this holy grail of basketball, the short jumper.  He was a virtuoso of the shot. His skill at it may have forced him to the bench as a secret weapon because all vicious weapons should be stashed.  In this era of  NBA, the only player who frightens you on that shot is old man Tim Duncan who might have played against Shaw.

With all that being said, this team still feels like they are on the edge of finding themselves and scaring the hell out of everybody else.  Is that because Gallo might come back soon, or because Miller and Nate are reliable every night?  Is it because Chandler lives up to his expectations or because the slight glimpses we keep getting with some of the young players.  Do we feel the temperature rising with this team because we can't win without Lawson who is explosive, when he wants to be? Or is it the hopeful return of finger roll McGhee? In his absence, J.J. and Timofey dominate offensive rebounds and missed put backs just like Javale did.

What player turns an ankle in tonight's game and makes you say, oh no, we are in trouble now.  Not one.  We should lose most games, but it feels like we can win any game we play.

Trade 'em all.  I got Shaw.

Socialism .vs. Capitalism. Is this a war or a marriage?

I love to smile inside at times when I think about the years of my early adulthood when I was raising babies and trying to find my way.  At the time, my very dear friend was raising his own babies, so we often spent time together raising our babies and exploring the joy of beer.

John Sherffius is the creator of this.

We were close, close friends from middle school, so our influence on each other is immense.  I can recall how he came to be deeply involved with unions.  As a politically charged young person, I found myself standing outside of a grocery store during a strike and I jumped right in with the workers to fight the good fight.  At the time, I don't think my friend cared much about stuff like that but he joined me anyway.  As we departed I explained to him what I believed about unions then, and what I believe about them now.  Unions dictate work standards for everyone, even those who do not pay the cost for their existence.

Unions rose out of a natural reaction to capitalism run amok.  A great example of the importance of unions is our current insurance debate.  The reason that 85% of the insurance market is employer based insurance is not because employers are so considerate of people, but because companies who did not have unions ran the risk of becoming unionized if they did not move to meet union level standards.  They still do.

As a result of unions in this country, every company tries to stay ahead of employee dissent that could result in a unionization effort.  The rise of unions and the cost of having them does not and did not destroy companies, it just forced them to see the cost of doing business in a broader perspective.  This broader perspective allows 85% of America to currently work for a company that subsidizes each employee in order to pay for the current socialized health insurance program called group insurance.

If companies can justify paying this expense right now (it will go away in 2015 for most ), do you think it will be hard to pay for increased wages when this expense goes away?  Companies take any expense, increased supply cost, increased wages or whatever and treat it like all expenses; as a cost of doing business. That's it.

Most socialism is just a cost of doing business that we disperse among the masses to ease the pain.  Sometimes we call it taxes, other times we call it fee's, but in the end whether its paid out in the form of group insurance or military spending, or food stamps, it is socialism nonetheless.

Socialism demands pragmatism.  Group insurance is pragmatic.  Generally American socialism is not pragmatic but reactionary and therefore expensive as hell. As a result of American socialism, the forces of capitalism and competition have learned to lurk for opportunity to consume  the crumbs and waste from this reactionary beast.  The big crumbs fall from military and healthcare socialism.  Other forms of socialism nip at the edges of our wasteful government but don't consume nearly as much as the big two.

Military waste abroad will be consumed by private security firms and other corporations (have you heard about camp leatherneck). The rest needs to go away to deal with our deficit a bit.  Since war is such a major industry in this world, the military has become an example of socialism and capitalism playing twister. Good luck unraveling those two lovers.  Before the ACA, that's what was happening in healthcare.

In the end, socialism and capitalism are like a husband and wife.  Both compete for power even though they already know who is the boss............s/he is.

THE FIX IS IN: Did Insurance Premiums Really Have To Go Up

This example has a $5,200 deductible currently and a $3,500 deductible
 in the new (B) plan.   He kept Option A... for now. 
How did he keep it?  Click to find out.

Last I checked, insurance companies were doing pretty well.  Some have said that the ACA will hurt them but I say that  Obama would be a fool to bite the hands that feed this monster.

With all of this ObamaCare scare it is still hard to deny that most of the insurance market in America remains the same as it ever was (you old folks get that song out of your head and follow me here).  85% of American's get their insurance at work and will continue to do so until informed otherwise by their companies.  Up until now, companies have paid the subsidy for employer based plans.  In 2015 the government takes over this payment (in essence).  Companies that could pay more for employee plans can pay a cheaper fee and opt out of insurance altogether forcing their employee's to go straight to healthcare.gov (the exchange) to use their subsidy and buy insurance.  The final cost should be less to workers, but we will see.

The working poor should probably cancel  health insurance at work (that you are afraid to use) and get Medicaid instead.  Your children and gas tank will appreciate the decision.  (But that's another blog for another day) 

The reason I call this a  fix is that insurance companies are not suddenly stupid just because laws have changed. The law may require that everyone get covered for crazy stuff that they don't need but why did that change the cost of insurance premiums? 

 Follow me here.

What is the risk from those 50,000 old people who now have maternity insurance?  The same as it was before....zero risk.  The chances of those customers ending up in the hospital pushing out a baby did not change with the law so why did the price?  Insurance companies were slime before this law so what would make them become institutions of high integrity now?

I think the fix is in.

Amazon might be safe but target and healthcare.gov had threats. Are we sure Amazon is safe?

The full blown war on the Affordable Care Act (ACA) has included concerns about the security of the website.
Those of us who don't trust online purchasing call in on our rotary phones. The rest check their bank statements a lot and pray for the best.

If something as simple as a POS register system at Target can get cyber attacked, what makes Amazon so safe.?  

I assumed that we always thought online purchasing  was vulnerable, which is why those of us who don't trust it call in on our rotary phones and the rest check our bank statements a lot and pray for the best.

Palin, Paul and Cain? You've Gotta Be Kiddin' Me!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herman_cain

I'm watching Herman Cain on FOX talk about the vilification of success and lack of opportunity because of our awful economy as the two biggest problems in America today......huh?  Cain added that "In today's environment, a lot of businesses are not worried about making a profit for their stockholders, they are worried about surviving because of this horrible economy". Translated:  Times are a bit too tight to stick it to the worker like we used to.  Herman, are we also to assume that when happy days are here again you won't stick it to the worker again.  Also, Herman.....have you seen the stock reports lately?  Are we to assume you don't invest?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/_Rand_Paul

When FOX is not putting crazy Cain on the mic', they got randy Rand Paul trying to carry the family banner. His non-mainstream ideas work to separate him from the 9% congress,  but he loses his own party with outlandish ideas. Libertarians (left leaning angry Conservatives) are not like Progressives (right leaning angry Liberals).  They have a sizeable party affiliation that demands a Libertarian vote to maintain election legitimacy.  This is code for splitting the conservative vote.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin

Paul's odd behavior pales to that of Palin the biggest FOX mouthpiece of  all potential presidential candidates.  Sarah Palin is easy on the eyes and hard on the brain.  You have to listen carefully with her Alaskan twang to hear if she is saying anything unique like
Paul or Cain.  Don't listen.  She isn't.

If you let her go too long she will usually say Ronald Reagan republican a few times as though Ronnie is the conservative Messiah.  He is.  Even Rush Limbaugh runs back to some Ronald Reagan republican breakdown when pressed on his true ideology.  For those who didn't know, this means one thing, and one thing only.

Trickle down economics.

That's all, that's it.  John Boehner did to the House of Tea what Reagan would have done long ago.  It may be too late because in the absence of republican leadership, the law office of Palin, Paul and Cain has stolen the spotlight.  Rubio and Ryan are trying, but  unlike Paul, they don't have Libertarians to save them from that  9% approval rating.  If you don't have a good message, you had better have a good messenger.  As we wait on Chris Christie and Ryan/Rubio (they will run together) to grab the republican message, we will have 2 more years of the ObamaCare scare and liar liar pants on fire as the campaign slogan for conservatives.

I gotta stop watching so much FOX news.