Hahaha. This kid is quite funny and talented. Um, I think the Official REPUBLICAN TEA PARTY accent is at No. 14. The English Language In 24 Accents (Be warned - some rough language, but nothing you won't hear every day out in the street):
1. British / Southern English East London - Cockney, 2. British / Southern English - London Jamaican influenced street slang/chav/thug, 3. Southern English / Formal R.P., 4. British / Southern English - Posh Upper Class, 5. British / West country - Farmer accent, 6. British / Northern English - Manchester, 7. British / Northern English - Liverpool, 8. British - Welsh, 9. British - Scotland highlands, 10. Irish - variation 1, 11. Irish - variation 2, 12. United States (general), 13. United States - New York Italian, 14. United States - Southern (Redneck), 15. Australian - General accent, 16. French, 17. German, 18. Russian, 19. Italian, 20. Chinese, 21. Japanese, 22. Indian, 23. South African, 24. Nigerian. Thanks to Telemann for this.
Saturday, October 02, 2010
Friday, October 01, 2010
Quotable, Chris Matthews: 57 to 77 Percent of Americans Are Far Left
Heard on Hardball:
I hate to sound like a teabagger here, but one governing aspect of political populism, after all, is delivering to the people what the people want. Chris Matthews and Lawrence O'Donnell, I think because of their experience in government, like to lecture us on politics as the "art of the possible" and defining governance as doing unpopular things that include telling people what they do not want to hear because those on the inside know best and have the expertise to make the right decisions. Unfortunately, when this elitist worldview fails, when government and media are so insular and self-sustaining that they reinforce the inside narrative, bad things, very very bad things, happen. Like Vietnam and Iraq, and yes, the "process" nightmare passage of a flawed healthcare bill, because President Obama was too timid to expend political capital, that now threatens to undo whatever's left of his progressive agenda.
Sure, there's a so-called "enthusiasm gap" but that is a complete misreading of the turnout question, which in the end, will determine whether winners and losers have a (D) or an (R) next to their names. The so-called "professional Left" will get out there and vote. No one I know plans to stay home and sulk. (Yes, I know, my rad friends hardly constitute a scientific poll of progressives' enthusiasm.) But progressives understand the challenge; and the danger. So when the Chuck Todds of this world base their electoral "wave" assumptions (don't hyperventilate Chuck, it's not gonna happen) that Democrats are not enthused it doesn't follow they will not show up at the polls.
The base, if you will, is disappointed with the President and pissed at Harry Reid — not Nancy Pelosi. So when a pollster asks us these silly questions re: levels of satisfaction compared to the teabagger lunatic fringe (about 20 percent of the electorate), what do you think the answer will be? If so, what makes the Idiot Punditocracy think — i.e., hope against hope a la Norah O'Donnell who let the cat out of the bag when she said “I would be fascinated to see a Senate with Christine O’Donnell, Sharron Angle, Rand Paul, Joe Miller ... ”— the base will sit home and not vote? This is not an ordinary election and ordinary polling assumptions do not hold.
So thank you, Chris, for making our point better than we could, and reversing yourself in the process. That is, the notion this is a conservative country and we ignore it at our peril, is nonsense. It is based on pseudo history and myths perpetuated by rarefied centers of power, including the corporate media, to keep us from stepping outside the reservation, the ghetto the ruling elites have set up for us with sophistic arguments that this nation wasn't born of radical, secular revolution and nourished by progressive values throughout our history. I was astonished to read Jonathan Alter's declaration in his book The Promise that the Public Option was a nonstarter even though it had "polled well." They would have us believe this is all we can get. Hello? Does anyone detect cognitive dissonance here from a fine journalist-historian?
The Public Option is a perfect example of the Idiot Punditocracy and the power elites foisting an irrational "narrative" on progressives who have dared to not only think, but step outside the box reserved for us, not at all like good little soldiers. And they don't like it.
Note to Rachel: We can't get mad at Chris, because he's an authentic performance artist.
Wow. In this Washington Post/ABC News poll, 57 percent of Americans favored the Public Option (10/20/09) while another poll had 77 percent of Americans favoring a Public Option. Mr. Matthews, as one of the deans of the Idiot Punditocracy, actively campaigned against the Public Option because he bought into the inside-the-beltway "narrative" (a term the navel-gazing IP likes to use when explaining to the rest of us peons why "governance" trumps campaign "overpromising") because they belong to the elite corporate media that has defined for the rest of us the boundaries of what is possible in our politics.Chris Matthews: "How do you keep people on the FAR LEFT, people who like the PUBLIC OPTION and that sort of thing, on the team?"
I hate to sound like a teabagger here, but one governing aspect of political populism, after all, is delivering to the people what the people want. Chris Matthews and Lawrence O'Donnell, I think because of their experience in government, like to lecture us on politics as the "art of the possible" and defining governance as doing unpopular things that include telling people what they do not want to hear because those on the inside know best and have the expertise to make the right decisions. Unfortunately, when this elitist worldview fails, when government and media are so insular and self-sustaining that they reinforce the inside narrative, bad things, very very bad things, happen. Like Vietnam and Iraq, and yes, the "process" nightmare passage of a flawed healthcare bill, because President Obama was too timid to expend political capital, that now threatens to undo whatever's left of his progressive agenda.
Sure, there's a so-called "enthusiasm gap" but that is a complete misreading of the turnout question, which in the end, will determine whether winners and losers have a (D) or an (R) next to their names. The so-called "professional Left" will get out there and vote. No one I know plans to stay home and sulk. (Yes, I know, my rad friends hardly constitute a scientific poll of progressives' enthusiasm.) But progressives understand the challenge; and the danger. So when the Chuck Todds of this world base their electoral "wave" assumptions (don't hyperventilate Chuck, it's not gonna happen) that Democrats are not enthused it doesn't follow they will not show up at the polls.
The base, if you will, is disappointed with the President and pissed at Harry Reid — not Nancy Pelosi. So when a pollster asks us these silly questions re: levels of satisfaction compared to the teabagger lunatic fringe (about 20 percent of the electorate), what do you think the answer will be? If so, what makes the Idiot Punditocracy think — i.e., hope against hope a la Norah O'Donnell who let the cat out of the bag when she said “I would be fascinated to see a Senate with Christine O’Donnell, Sharron Angle, Rand Paul, Joe Miller ... ”— the base will sit home and not vote? This is not an ordinary election and ordinary polling assumptions do not hold.
So thank you, Chris, for making our point better than we could, and reversing yourself in the process. That is, the notion this is a conservative country and we ignore it at our peril, is nonsense. It is based on pseudo history and myths perpetuated by rarefied centers of power, including the corporate media, to keep us from stepping outside the reservation, the ghetto the ruling elites have set up for us with sophistic arguments that this nation wasn't born of radical, secular revolution and nourished by progressive values throughout our history. I was astonished to read Jonathan Alter's declaration in his book The Promise that the Public Option was a nonstarter even though it had "polled well." They would have us believe this is all we can get. Hello? Does anyone detect cognitive dissonance here from a fine journalist-historian?
The Public Option is a perfect example of the Idiot Punditocracy and the power elites foisting an irrational "narrative" on progressives who have dared to not only think, but step outside the box reserved for us, not at all like good little soldiers. And they don't like it.
Note to Rachel: We can't get mad at Chris, because he's an authentic performance artist.
Weepy Rhambo Bids Adieu, And He’s Headed THIS WAY… Aaargh!
Those are croc tears of guilt …Love is never having to say you’re sorry, right you fucking jackass?!?
After alienating the base — calling progressives “fucking retards” (“fools,” said a conflicted Chris Matthews) — with unhinged expletive-laden mindless energy that so impressed Jonathan Alter he dedicated a whole chapter of his book to Emanuel (waxing poetic about his dubious political prowess), Rhambo breaks the D.C. “bubble” camp (before he’s possibly tar-and-feathered) and takes his one-man traveling circus north to Chicago. Lovely. I mean, fucking lovely.
Rhambo’s timing is impeccable. Who knows what the fallout will be on November 3 — my prediction, oft repeated here, is Democrats retain control of both House and Senate — but whatever the result, it will have the imprimatur of the Rham Emanuelization of the Democratic Party. Emanuel took the brilliant 50-state strategy conceived by Howard Dean and made a royal, Clintonian triangulation, mess of it. Totally screwed it up to the point that the DINO/Blue Dog candidates recruited by Emanuel are not only endangered species, but contributed mightily to the near-destruction of the President’s failed promise of a truly progressive agenda.
Rhambo wants to run for mayor of Chicago. With Congressman Luis Gutierrez ready to throw his hat into the ring, it shapes up to be a battle of the big-mouth featherweights. (Political heavyweights.) At least it should be an easy rhetorical transition for Mayor Richard Daley. As a parting gift, Rhambo got a dead fish from fellow Chicagoan Austan Goolsbee.
After alienating the base — calling progressives “fucking retards” (“fools,” said a conflicted Chris Matthews) — with unhinged expletive-laden mindless energy that so impressed Jonathan Alter he dedicated a whole chapter of his book to Emanuel (waxing poetic about his dubious political prowess), Rhambo breaks the D.C. “bubble” camp (before he’s possibly tar-and-feathered) and takes his one-man traveling circus north to Chicago. Lovely. I mean, fucking lovely.
Rhambo’s timing is impeccable. Who knows what the fallout will be on November 3 — my prediction, oft repeated here, is Democrats retain control of both House and Senate — but whatever the result, it will have the imprimatur of the Rham Emanuelization of the Democratic Party. Emanuel took the brilliant 50-state strategy conceived by Howard Dean and made a royal, Clintonian triangulation, mess of it. Totally screwed it up to the point that the DINO/Blue Dog candidates recruited by Emanuel are not only endangered species, but contributed mightily to the near-destruction of the President’s failed promise of a truly progressive agenda.
Rick Sanchez Whine: 'I Want WH Recognition Too! Waaahhh...'
Seen on CNN:
Rick Sanchez, CNN's congenital number three, bitching about the WH Deputy Press Secretary suck-up to MSNBC's Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow as "folks who helps to keep our government honest and pushes and prods to make sure that folks are true to progressive values." Sure, it's election-year bullshit, but that didn't stop Ricky from taking exception:
Guess you're outta luck, Ricky. Especially when you say nonprogressive things like this:
Memo to MSNBC: Dylan Ratigan is the main reason Sanchez is still in the ratings game; you know that, don't you? Never mind. CNN just fired Sanchez.
Rick Sanchez, CNN's congenital number three, bitching about the WH Deputy Press Secretary suck-up to MSNBC's Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow as "folks who helps to keep our government honest and pushes and prods to make sure that folks are true to progressive values." Sure, it's election-year bullshit, but that didn't stop Ricky from taking exception:
"What if as an American I don't agree with all progressive values, Mr. President? And by the way, since when is news supposed to have a limited point of view, only progressive?"
Guess you're outta luck, Ricky. Especially when you say nonprogressive things like this:
Considering you belong to a protected and privileged immigrant population, Cuban-Americans, you should stop whining, Rick. Maybe CNN will get its due when the WH chooses to recognize roadkill or narcissists with flak jackets to match their eye color."Very powerless people... [snickers] He's such a minority, I mean, you know [sarcastically]... Please, what are you kidding? ... I'm telling you that everybody who runs CNN is a lot like Stewart, and a lot of people who run all the other networks are a lot like Stewart, and to imply that somehow they -- the people in this country who are Jewish -- are an oppressed minority? Yeah. [sarcastically]"
Memo to MSNBC: Dylan Ratigan is the main reason Sanchez is still in the ratings game; you know that, don't you? Never mind. CNN just fired Sanchez.
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Last Word With Lawrence O'Donnell
Lawrence, you've had a couple of good shows on balance, but it would be nice when you have a guest like Bob Woodward on to talk about Obama's wars that you not hog the conversation and ask long-winded questions. I hate to break it to you, Lawrence, but you're not that interesting. The topic, on the other hand, is.
And it was annoying to see Woodward sitting there with a silly grin on his face because you never managed to finish your question. What's worse, we heard hardly anything about the fascinating inside conflict going on between President Obama and his advisers, most significantly with his generals. (Wasn't that part of your tease? If so, it was an inexcusable lapse.) We heard a lot about Biden though (yawn), probably because he was your first interview and you wanted to get that in to impress Mr. Woodward. He looked puzzled at having to sit silent through much of the interview.
Finally, Lawrence, please spare us your lectures about Adam Green and his fellow netroots new generation progressives. It's unseemly and it makes you, Matthews, and Alter look like snarky old farts. Especially since you wrongly predicted healthcare reform wouldn't pass — therefore when it did, it seemed miraculous to all you seasoned "professionals"— and you were also wrong about the reconciliation process, whereas one of the young guns, Ezra Klein, was right about it, as he was in predicting most everything that occurred in the healthcare debate. So when Ezra laid out a roadmap for how a more progressive bill that included the public option could be passed, he was far more credible than the smug "we-know-best" ravings emanating from you, Matthews, and Alter. Bottom line, we were right: in the end the damn thing got passed with reconciliation without a single, solitary Republican vote. Months too late and brimming with uneccessary concessions to corporations and special interests.
And I can give you chapter and verse where we were right and you were wrong. So please, don't lecture us about the differences in campaigning vs. governance, blah-blah-blah. Adam Green himself noted how the President pressured Kucinich to vote for the bill with some arm-twisting LBJ-style politicking but laid off when it came to applying the same kind of pressure to Traitor Joe Lieberman.*
So Lawrence, I hope you'll get over yourself and take your own advice: When Bob Woodward stops by, for the sake of your audience, please give him the last word.
*Question for the Idiot Punditocracy: Who would be the stronger candidate in Arkansas: Blanche Lincoln or Bill Halter? This one even Lawrence might get right.
And it was annoying to see Woodward sitting there with a silly grin on his face because you never managed to finish your question. What's worse, we heard hardly anything about the fascinating inside conflict going on between President Obama and his advisers, most significantly with his generals. (Wasn't that part of your tease? If so, it was an inexcusable lapse.) We heard a lot about Biden though (yawn), probably because he was your first interview and you wanted to get that in to impress Mr. Woodward. He looked puzzled at having to sit silent through much of the interview.
Finally, Lawrence, please spare us your lectures about Adam Green and his fellow netroots new generation progressives. It's unseemly and it makes you, Matthews, and Alter look like snarky old farts. Especially since you wrongly predicted healthcare reform wouldn't pass — therefore when it did, it seemed miraculous to all you seasoned "professionals"— and you were also wrong about the reconciliation process, whereas one of the young guns, Ezra Klein, was right about it, as he was in predicting most everything that occurred in the healthcare debate. So when Ezra laid out a roadmap for how a more progressive bill that included the public option could be passed, he was far more credible than the smug "we-know-best" ravings emanating from you, Matthews, and Alter. Bottom line, we were right: in the end the damn thing got passed with reconciliation without a single, solitary Republican vote. Months too late and brimming with uneccessary concessions to corporations and special interests.
And I can give you chapter and verse where we were right and you were wrong. So please, don't lecture us about the differences in campaigning vs. governance, blah-blah-blah. Adam Green himself noted how the President pressured Kucinich to vote for the bill with some arm-twisting LBJ-style politicking but laid off when it came to applying the same kind of pressure to Traitor Joe Lieberman.*
So Lawrence, I hope you'll get over yourself and take your own advice: When Bob Woodward stops by, for the sake of your audience, please give him the last word.
*Question for the Idiot Punditocracy: Who would be the stronger candidate in Arkansas: Blanche Lincoln or Bill Halter? This one even Lawrence might get right.
More MSNBC Cutting Edge Journalism, Part Deux
Seen on MSNBC:
Tamron Hall is so hapless, she can't even get the results of their own poll right! Said the newsreader:
“The most popular Democrat is Bill Clinton,” according to our WSJ/NBC poll. WRONG, TAMRON!
The poll clearly states that Bill Clinton is the most popular POLITICIAN in the country, regardless of party, with a 55% popularity rating. Second is Barack Obama, with 47%. The closest Republican is Sarah Palin, with a miserable 30%, in third.
Tamron. Tamron. Do you need eyeglasses, or is this a deliberate misrepresentation? It's not the first time Tamron pulls a fast one. So it's a deliberate distortion/misrepresentation from MSNBC's crummy excuse for news. The caption — Most Popular Democrat — reiterated the deception.
Also, the immature Norah O'Donnell doubled down on her unprofessionalism after being criticized here for uttering the Republican/Tea Party pejorative "Obamacare" for the new healthcare bill. Just 24 hours later, Norah repeated it a gazillion times (four or five) before Democratic Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida, slapped her down with a wry smile:
“You’re playing into Republicans’ hands by calling it 'Obamacare'.” Ya think?
Which brings us to Dylan Ratigan. why is Dylan Ratigan distorting the truth with a focus on lobbyists without highlighting how Republicans are the ones most beholden to the corporations, or that the Citizens United decision favors Republicans by 6-1, or that the Chamber of Commerce and his evil six corporations are pumping money into electing Republicans, or that for Democrats to pass anything it requires a 60-vote supermajority, which is why it took them one year to pass a small business jobs bill with the help of a retiring Republican, or that the Republicans just voted down a bill sponsored by my Senator, Dick Durbin, a great public servant, to close tax loopholes for corporations shipping jobs overseas and give tax breaks for those creating jobs in America, while Ratigan was traipsing about a jobs fair, demagoguing the issue as he masks his real agenda — a nihilistic prescription of Randian libertarian BS that never saw practical application in history?
When Ratigan starts generalizing about government, and calling all politicians crooks, where are the specifics? Is Dick Durbin a crook? How about the 53 to 59 politicians who voted against Republican filibusters? Are they crooks? No, they are not; and for Ratigan to suggest there's no difference in the vast venality of Republicans compared to Democrats is to vastly distort the truth to suit his idiotic brand of nihilistic conservatism minus the "social stuff." Ratigan distorts the truth more than anyone else on MSNBC, trying to fit his "none of the above" square peg into a round hole. Why do they keep him around?
Note to Cenk: Take a chill pill, pal.
Tamron Hall is so hapless, she can't even get the results of their own poll right! Said the newsreader:
“The most popular Democrat is Bill Clinton,” according to our WSJ/NBC poll. WRONG, TAMRON!
The poll clearly states that Bill Clinton is the most popular POLITICIAN in the country, regardless of party, with a 55% popularity rating. Second is Barack Obama, with 47%. The closest Republican is Sarah Palin, with a miserable 30%, in third.
Tamron. Tamron. Do you need eyeglasses, or is this a deliberate misrepresentation? It's not the first time Tamron pulls a fast one. So it's a deliberate distortion/misrepresentation from MSNBC's crummy excuse for news. The caption — Most Popular Democrat — reiterated the deception.
Also, the immature Norah O'Donnell doubled down on her unprofessionalism after being criticized here for uttering the Republican/Tea Party pejorative "Obamacare" for the new healthcare bill. Just 24 hours later, Norah repeated it a gazillion times (four or five) before Democratic Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida, slapped her down with a wry smile:
“You’re playing into Republicans’ hands by calling it 'Obamacare'.” Ya think?
Which brings us to Dylan Ratigan. why is Dylan Ratigan distorting the truth with a focus on lobbyists without highlighting how Republicans are the ones most beholden to the corporations, or that the Citizens United decision favors Republicans by 6-1, or that the Chamber of Commerce and his evil six corporations are pumping money into electing Republicans, or that for Democrats to pass anything it requires a 60-vote supermajority, which is why it took them one year to pass a small business jobs bill with the help of a retiring Republican, or that the Republicans just voted down a bill sponsored by my Senator, Dick Durbin, a great public servant, to close tax loopholes for corporations shipping jobs overseas and give tax breaks for those creating jobs in America, while Ratigan was traipsing about a jobs fair, demagoguing the issue as he masks his real agenda — a nihilistic prescription of Randian libertarian BS that never saw practical application in history?
When Ratigan starts generalizing about government, and calling all politicians crooks, where are the specifics? Is Dick Durbin a crook? How about the 53 to 59 politicians who voted against Republican filibusters? Are they crooks? No, they are not; and for Ratigan to suggest there's no difference in the vast venality of Republicans compared to Democrats is to vastly distort the truth to suit his idiotic brand of nihilistic conservatism minus the "social stuff." Ratigan distorts the truth more than anyone else on MSNBC, trying to fit his "none of the above" square peg into a round hole. Why do they keep him around?
Note to Cenk: Take a chill pill, pal.
NAPOLEON Jim DeMint Previews TEA PARTY Senate … YAY!
Jim DeMint has had Napoleonic delusions over and above the obnoxious behavior of ALL Republicans in the Senate plus mutualist (as in “mutual life…” or “mutual health...” — antonym of independent) Traitor Joe Lieberman and fellow corporate lapdogs Ben Nelson and Blanche Lincoln, DINOs Rham Emanuel loves to rub in progressives’ faces. Considering the company kept by the junior senator from North Carolina, being grandiose and presumptuous enough to shut down government is what places him in Gingrich territory.
DeMint’s Napoleonic proclivities manifested when he blocked a continuing resolution in the Senate to keep the government running through early December. The last time such a stunt was pulled by Newt Gingrich in the 90s, it cost the taxpayers $800 million and Gingrich his job as House Speaker. The latter result was a good thing, but the people shouldn’t have to fork out millions in government services to have radical government-hating Republicans thrown out.
The Scully FBI character on NBC’s The Event — an aliens among us theme, which could be a metaphor for the Tea Party if not for the aliens being a highly intelligent advanced civilization — could have been describing DeMint:
If the hat fits … DeMint is setting up the Republican Party’s Waterloo, with him as Napoleonic leader of the Tea Party. The figurehead Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell, is too skeert of the teabaggers to say anything. Of course, history tells us that Napoleon was decisively defeated at Waterloo by the Duke of Wellington. From where will DeMint lead his fractious forces: The Island of Saint Helena?
Reading your history is like eating your vegetables: It’s good for you.
DeMint’s Napoleonic proclivities manifested when he blocked a continuing resolution in the Senate to keep the government running through early December. The last time such a stunt was pulled by Newt Gingrich in the 90s, it cost the taxpayers $800 million and Gingrich his job as House Speaker. The latter result was a good thing, but the people shouldn’t have to fork out millions in government services to have radical government-hating Republicans thrown out.
The Scully FBI character on NBC’s The Event — an aliens among us theme, which could be a metaphor for the Tea Party if not for the aliens being a highly intelligent advanced civilization — could have been describing DeMint:
DeMint is the self-appointed de facto (so far) minority leader of the Senate, like Napoleon who decided to appoint himself leader of France and went on a destructive rampage up and down the European continent. DeMint’s battleground is the political American landscape, which is both virtual and real. DeMint’s claim to unelected peer power is that just about every Tea Party candidate he’s endorsed won the Republican primaries, setting up a battle royal for “the heart and soul” of the Republican Party, as old conservative hand Richard Viguerie noted. DeMint is betting it will be hard right, extremist, ideological, racist and dogmatic, with purity tests as white as the high-grade cocaine Glenn Beck admits to having snorted.“Narcissistic delusion is common in any number of psychiatric delusions. Based on your file I pegged you as just a run-of-the-mill sociopath but now I’m leaning more towards paranoid schizophrenic with a strong persecution complex.”
“This is really, really, really, really, really, really bad,” one Senate staffer told the Washington Post. “In a precedent-setting institution like the U-S Senate, letting one person anoint themselves king is not a good idea.”Not king, NAPOLEON. Senator DeMint is acting out the Republican Party’s own private Waterloo. He has already said he’d rather lose with wingnut Christine O’Donnell than win with moderate Mike Castle in Delaware: “I’m not interested in political ideology or party right now. We need people up here to understand we’ve got to get back to limited government, and we can’t afford to have other Republicans who don’t get that message.” And that message is? Right wing ideology. To be exact, right wing ideological purity, a wingnut litmus test that would exclude any Republican of Mike Castle’s moderate-to-conservative views.
If the hat fits … DeMint is setting up the Republican Party’s Waterloo, with him as Napoleonic leader of the Tea Party. The figurehead Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell, is too skeert of the teabaggers to say anything. Of course, history tells us that Napoleon was decisively defeated at Waterloo by the Duke of Wellington. From where will DeMint lead his fractious forces: The Island of Saint Helena?
Reading your history is like eating your vegetables: It’s good for you.
Guess Who Pays For Sharron Angle's Health Care?
YOU AND I. That's right. Sharron Angle and her husband receive health care from the federal government, her campaign had to admit:
“Mr. Ted Angle receives his pension through the (federal) Civil Service Retirement System. While it is not supplemented by the federal government, current civil servants pay into the program to pay the schedule of those already retired - much like how the Social Security Program works today. Mr. Angle does not qualify - nor does he receive Social Security benefits. His health insurance plan (the Federal Employee Health Program), which also covers Sharron, is a continuation of what he was receiving while he worked for the federal government.”
Sunday, September 26, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
of you have sat, and perhaps thought, with us!
