W.- A Review

Last night my hubby and I watched W.- the film by Oliver Stone about George W. Bush. I don't know if any of you saw it, but I thought I would give a quick review in case anybody was curious.

I actually didn't want to watch this movie. It's pretty obvious I do not like Bush at all, but I didn't want to watch a movie that bashed him and made him look like some sort of monster. I am very skeptical of movies like this because how can anyone know the intimate conversations he had with Cheney, or Laura, or anybody else? So I came into the movie with very low expectations- and I will say, in the end, I was pleasantly surprised as this movie did exceed those low expectations.

The movie focused on the Iraq War and Bush's relationship with his father. The movie was incredibly well researched- and they give you the research notes, annotations, etc. with the DVD. You see a human side of Bush and his administration. You see that mistakes were made (in particular WMD's- or lack thereof), and that Bush seems genuinely distraught that he made those mistakes. I think that regardless of political persuasion, if one came into the movie with an open mind they could learn a few things about Bush that they didn't know before. However, I think it would make most people angry in some way. For my husband and me, we were angry with Cheney (again) and Bush (again) for the way 9/11 and Iraq were handled, and I imagine conservatives would be angry that it shows Bush as a real person who did some things wrong and not a hero that many wish he was (don't be offended, the same can be said of Obama and liberals).

The acting in the movie was OK, but I have to say the character of Condaleeza Rice drove me nuts- I hated the way she talked and how she enabled Bush. I don't know much about her in real life, but my hubs said he thought she was just as annoying in real life, so maybe she is- I don't know.

Overall, I would give the movie a 3 out of 5.

Dead from Health Care Rationing: Americans - 22, Canadians - 0

Rep. Ted Poe (R-TX) in testimony before the house recently went on to say how health care rationing - like in Canada (whatever!) will lead to dead Americans. According to him:

Madam Speaker, a critically ill baby was born in Canada just last month. Her name is Ava Isabella Stinson. She was born 13 weeks premature and weighed only 2 pounds. Unfortunately, Canada rations health care. And since the government must grant permission for one to have health care access, Ava was unable to get the
treatment she needed to survive....Fortunately for her, Ava's parents were able to quickly transport her to Buffalo, New York. Little Ava's life was saved by the best doctors in the world right here in America.

See the whole splendid load of tripe here.

Read the rest of this post on my new hero blog here.

Another good one, a former top insurance exec blows the whistle, is here.

My favorite quote:

Not only does Texas explicitly ration care, but so does US, implicitly. Multiple
studies have been been published, all of which show around a 25% increased
chance of death for the uninsured. That breaks down to about 22,000 deaths in 2006 due to health care rationing based on wealth.

I remember when Harry and Louise were on the telly lying through their scripted teeth about Clinton's health care plan. And it worked! Never again, never again.

Palin says she'll stump for conservative Democrats?

Excuse me while I choke on my potato salad.. Wait, they're doing the Heimlich right now. Wait ---okay. hahahahahahhahahahhahahhahahahahahahhahahhaha......

Apparently Jupiter and Saturn have their stars and moons crossed. We're now in an alternate universe where Sarah Palin claims she's bipartisan, and Spock is young again (and he has a girlfriend! they even kiss, ugh) and Kirk can't get any if he tried. Kirk for crying out loud! See here and here if you don't believe me.

Ah, no thanks.

Republican Health Care Reform - Don't Get Sick

I want something done about health care in this country. We have a president now whose willing to do something about it. Finally. He wants to spend billions of dollars to do it.

A few years ago we had a president who wanted to do something about Saddam Hussein. He spent billions of dollars to do it. We let him.

I want someone to explain the difference here. I want to know why some people are willing to justify spending billions of dollars on war with other countries, and not justify spending that much on providing health care for every hard-working American.

My husband works harder than anyone I know. Yet he can't get health insurance now because he has a pre-existing condition. Even if the business he worked for provided it, which they don't because they can't afford the premiums, there would still be a waiting period of at least 1-2 years before they covered his medical condition, if they covered it at all. Not everyone can work for huge companies that provide excellent benefits, except Walmart (the largest employer in the US) of course, they make their employees wait two years, or so I heard.

I want to clarify a common misconception perpetuated by the listeners of Rush Limbaugh who take what that doofus says as actual truth - Americans who want some sort of health care reform do not want something for nothing. So let me make something perfectly clear. My husband doesn't want free medical care. My husband, and all Americans who have some sort of medical condition would like the opportunity to buy insurance at a reasonable price, to not have to decide between going bankrupt or going to the doctor if they feel sick. People are dying every day because of this, because they are not going to the doctor. Not poor people; they get Medicaid. Not rich people; they all can afford insurance, or if they can't get it, they can afford to pay out of pocket. It's the MIDDLE CLASS that is taking it in the pants! So unlike the bumper sticker below, I chose a new one to put on my car: Health Care Reform - a Choice Between Life or Death.

I choose life.

What are you choosing?

How to beat the heat - Part One

When the temperature dips into the 90's I try to save on the AC and cook outside. I looove my dutch oven. A few briquet's, a sturdy pot. What more do you need?

A new favorite I made at girl's camp last week that can easily be made at home too:

Chocolate Love Me Not Cherry Cobbler

1 Devil's Chocolate Cake mix (be sure to get the lumps out)

1 cube butter - divided into tablespoons

2 cans unsweetened cherries, partially drained

1 can of Coke

Pour the two cans of cherries with a little juice into the bottom of the pan. Sprinkle with cake mix and dot with butter. Pour the entire can of Coke over the contents. Bake with about 8 briquets on the bottom and 8 on the top. It takes about 30 minutes if you leave the lid on. Serve with ice cream or the bottled whipping cream.

Seriously, this stuff is awesome!

Want the family discount at your local water park? Better have your marriage certificate, birth certificates, SSN's, date of your last pap smear...

According to a recent article in the local rag, a lesbian couple and their three foster children were denied the family discount at Lava Hot Springs, Idaho, a few weeks ago.

Lava Hot Springs, the popular tourist attraction, is where the lesbian couple with their three foster kids were denied the advertised family price because they don't fit the definition of a family, under Idaho Law.

The Lava Foundation's Executive Director, Mark Lowe, said the state doesn't recognize gay or lesbian marriage and defines a family as one male, one female and children.

So, just a heads up people, if you're divorced, or say you have a common law marriage, even if you have children you're no longer a "family" in the eyes of Lava Hot Springs. They've made what they consider a moral decision to exclude a group of people from a benefit they provide to everyone else. One male and female must be present to get the five dollars off, even though Idaho law doesn't define "family" at all. It defines marriage, a whole other ball of wax.

It seems the last time I frequented one of these types of establishments for a scheduled day of sore, tired feet and a permanent wedgie from one too many water slides, that a slew of paper work to prove I was married was not required to get a discount. If a man and woman appear with children, do the Lava police ask if they're married? (Sorry sir, but you look like the type that won't commit...) I've never been asked before. What about the single mother? Is she too denied the discount, she who probably needs it the most?

No matter what you believe regarding the issue of marriage, families come in all shapes and sizes. Some are big, some small. Some thin, some fat. Rich, poor, whatever. Is it really up to anyone, especially the place of your planned summer activities that get your kids away from the tv and out of the house, to decide what constitutes a "family" or not? In 2009, is it possible that a place of business can legally chose whom it serves and whom it doesn't?

Now Lava Hot Springs is threatening to completely do away with family passes.

This whole issue is almost the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

When IS it OK?

In light of this weeks top stories, I had to post. First, we have the hilarious story of this man:


Oh, Governor Sanford- what a stupid, stupid man you are. Of course, it is incredibly sad that he decided to cheat on his wife when he has four sons at home to take care of- that part is a true tragedy. But, honestly, who is dumb enough to simply vanish for three days (4? 5? I forget how many) when you are the GOVERNOR, not tell anybody where you are going, and expect not to get caught? That part is hilarious to me- I think we can all safely put him out of the presidential nominee category!

Then perhaps the saddest story of all- our beloved Jon and Kate. Who could have seen this one coming? Once again, a love affair coming inbetween the most beloved of couples. Love of the camera, and the love of another woman.

Then, on the radio last night, the DJ was asking a very thoughtful and wonderful question. She asked, "When IS it ok to have an affair?" I had to stop and think. Kate is overbearing- surely that is a good enough reason to have an affair. The Argentine was hot- surely that's a good enough reason. One silly woman actually called in and said it was NEVER ok to have an affair, but that idea was (thankfully) quickly quelched by the listeners. So, I decided to come up with my own list of when it is ok to have an affair:

1. When it starts out "innocent" and "accidentally" happens

2. When your spouse is a little controlling

3. When Ben forgets to floss his teeth- totally grosss!

4. When the guy is REALLY REALLY REALLY hot (or, just a little hot)

5. When Ben comes home late from work- that gives me so much extra free time for other activities

6. When I can pretend like I am hiking and lie to the entire country- that's awesome!

7. When I just need to get away from the kids

8. When I happen to accidentally be in a singles bar and somebody hits on me and makes me feel good about myself

9. Whenever Ben makes me mad

10. Pretty much whenever I want it to be OK.

Any other reasons that it's totally OK to have an affair?