Eighty-fifth Day

© Jose Luis Magana/AP Barack Obama leaves the National Gallery of Art in Washington on March 5 — a rare public appearance in a post-presidency that is nonetheless shaping up to be busier than most. 

Barack Obama is looking good.  Yes.  Indeed.

Sigh.

What a political week it was!
Nothing good on the governance side, but lots of politics.

I learned something interesting about Trump this week via Michael Scherer of Time Magazine on the PBS show Washington Week: Donald Trump considers FACTS as points of negotiation. He throws something out just to see what he can get away with.

As far as healthcare:
One thing to remember - Republicans wanted to Repeal first and Replace some time later.  Trump is the one who said Repeal AND Replace at the same time.

First, listen to the Face the Nation Diary podcast for this week. John Dickerson gives a fantastic overview of how the week progressed.  It was an accurate reflection of what I saw happening.

Nex read this crazy interview with Chuck Todd (NBC News) and Mick Mulvanney (Trump's Director of the Office of Management and Budget) on Meet The Press this morning.
I can't tell if Trump gets his talking points from Mulvaney gets his from Trump. Or, maybe they both get it from Bannon.
Crazy stuff.

Eighty-second Day

From the Seattle Times; March Reader's Lens contest winner Tracey Hillman

This week has been the week of hearings in Washington, DC.  The House Intelligence Committee is hearing about Trump/Russia, and the Senate Judicial Committee is hearing about Supreme Court nominee Gorsuch.

Gorsuch first...I don't trust him.  He strikes me as a completely fake person - he's amped up his 'folksy' mannerisms to 11.  He wants me to think he's like Sherriff Andy Taylor from Mayberry. He reminds me of an actor OVERacting like he's a nice guy.  It's odd and creepy.  

Democrats don't know how to handle it.  Should they filibuster this guy because he's an 'originalist' and this nomination was STOLEN from Obama because Republicans wouldn't even hold a hearing on Merritt Garland?  Or, should they let him go and save their filibuster for the next nominee?

Gorsuch is a replacement for Scalia who was also an 'originalist', so the balance of the court isn't going to be different than it was before Scalia.  On the other hand, Gorsuch is much younger and will be on the court for many years ahead.  I believe he would overturn Roe v Wade based on his own religious beliefs. And the Democrats keep giving the Republicans an 'inch' but they won't give a 'millimeter'.  

Another consideration: If the Democrats use the filibuster on this guy, then Mitch McConnell would be expected to use the so-called 'nuclear option' which would change the Senate rules to allow a Supreme Court nominee to be approved with only a simple majority (currently most administration nominees only require a majority vote, but the exception is the Supreme Court which requires a 2/3 majority, as I recall).  If the Senate rules are changed, that means the NEXT Supreme Court nominee would definitely change the balance of the court and the Democrats wouldn't be able to do anything about it because right now they are NOT the majority in the Senate. 

The Supreme Court is NOT SUPPOSED TO BE POLITICAL!!!!  It's supposed to be the interpretor of our laws and constitution regardless of political party.  We should feel safe knowing they're an equal branch of government.  

It's the 'Originalists' vs the 'Living Document' debate.

Republicans tend to support the 'Originalist' point of view, mostly because they don't believe in a strong Federal government.  The 'Originalist' crowd say if the question isn't specifically addressed in the constitution, then there is no law that supports it.  They think if it's not in there, then the legislature has to make a law.  Its hard to make a constitutional law that all the states will ratify.  We couldn't even get an Equal Rights Amendment passed. 

The 'Living Document' crowd believes the writers of the constitution couldn't have foreseen the issues we have to deal with in today's world and we have to interpret their spirit. 

What if the Originalists were in charge when we were discussing the rights of people of all races?  Would the South ever have voted to ratify an amendment that gives equal rights to all people with regard to race?  And what about women - we can't even get an Equal Rights Amendment passed (ironically because the people say its OBVIOUS so we don't need to define it specifically)?  

It's because a court who believes that our country has some inalienable rights that aren't specifically mentioned but that we can interpret from the original writings.

As it turns out, the Roe v Wade issue has made the Court very political.  

People believe Roe v Wade is bad only because it's their BELIEF that God created life, that it starts at conception, and it's murder to abort a fetus.

But, that goes counter to the idea that the we each have our own right to our own beliefs and our own body.

The Originalists want the right to abortion voted on in each state.  The 'Living Document' crowd think we have a right to abortion because the constitution says we have a right to authority over our own bodies.

Next:  The Trump/Russia investigation.

This one is so convoluted by the Trump Administration's own actions, it's unbelievable he's still our President.  

I thought I'd give a quick rundown of it, but I need to start working this morning.

And - there's also the health care (Repeal and Replace Obamacare) debate going on in the House of Representatives this week.  It's not so much a debate as an attempt by Republicans to do what they said they wanted to do since the ACA/Obamacare became law. 

Lots of political activity!  It's crazy.

Oh yeah - don't forget ISIS and North Korea.  

Yesterday: "In a deadly attack on Wednesday in London, a man driving a sport utility vehicle crushed pedestrians on Westminster Bridge, then stabbed and killed a police officer outside Parliament" 

Four killed, 40 wounded.  The assailant was also killed.

Note:  All the links today are from The New York Times.  

I generally like to find links from a variety of sources, but I don't have time this morning.

Seventy-ninth Day

Honestly, while working today I also had the Intelligence Committee hearings on.  Comey (FBI) and Rodgers (NSA) testified about the investigation into Trump/Russia, wiretapping, and leaking of classified documents.  They didn't say too much that we didn't already know. Democrats asked about the Russia/Trump connection and the claim by President Trump that Obama had wiretapped him at Trump Tower during the election.  Republicans asked about leaks of classified information.

I just discovered that Comey is 18 months younger than me and Rogers is 4 months younger than me.  Yikes - I'm old.

Seventy-sixth Day

I'm saying goodbye to two more teeth today.  I'm so sad about it.  I wish I'd taken better care of my teeth over the years so I wouldn't have to keep extracting them - or let them fall out from neglect.

It's so sad.

Thank you teeth.  I wish I'd treated you better.

My wisdom teeth (#1, #16, #17 and #32) were extracted when I was 16.  

Today, I'm losing #2 and #3

#15 is gone. 

#18 is gone.

#29 and #31 are gone

Sigh.  

I'm trying to be a 'big girl' about it today and not get overly nervous.  It's a new doctor.  Again.

I sure would be happy with a regular dentist.

My last dentist did good work as far as I know, but I felt she was a bit discombobulated and didn't explain things in a way that made me understand what was happening.  I just went along.  The rest of the work I need done she doesn't do so she referred me to another dentist.  That's fine.

The dentist I'm seeing today took a good amount of time to explain the treatment plan to me.  I appreciate it very much.

But - he's new and I don't know how he works.  

I haven't been nervous really.  Which makes me concerned that at the last minute I'll be overwhelmed with nervousness and not able to control myself.  

I remind myself that all I have to do is sit there.  

The dentist has the hard job.

If I could go back in time - even to a pretty young age - with my current world view, I'd do it, just so I could take better care of my teeth.

Although - come to think of it...with my current world view, I'd know there are some dental inventions that I'd prefer to use.  When I started going to the dentist, we leaned over to spit in the sink a lot.  And I have a feeling numbing agents have probably gotten better.

And, I'd either have to become a better cook or start eating meat again because we didn't have as many vegan options as we do now.

Yeah - I better just stick it out in the here and now.

Yesterday I drove to Tigard for Jan's retirement party.  It was a great drive.  It's been rainy for a while and I was concerned it wouldn't be a good driving day.  Lucky for me it dried up and the sun came out for a perfect driving day.  The same thing happened for SGM when she drove up here on the 4th for a day of card making - perfect driving day surrounded by lots of rainy days.

Miracle, or statistically reasonable?  

Felt like a miracle.

If I'd left the office to come home at 2:00 instead of 4:30, I would have been home by 6:00 or so (I bet) instead of 9:30.  I repeatedly tried to outsmart the traffic leaving Portland for Vancouver and failed miserably, eventually driving up to Rainier and crossing into Longview.  I should have just sat on I-5...like a 'big girl'.

Another thing I did was speak briefly at Jan's party.  I made a funny or two and mentioned how great her hugs are.  I had positive feedback from people.  That made me happy because I don't normally speak in front of large crowds.  But, no one mentioned her hugs so I had to.

I also found a home for LJB's Tardis Blanket (I gave it to him for his last birthday and he liked it).  Jan's a huge Doctor Who fan so it occurred to me as I was saying goodbye to her that I had it in the trunk.  I originally offered it to LJB's daughter and she didn't want it.  

I think it went to a good home.  

It's nearly 10:00 and my appointment is at 10:45 so....yikes. I can feel a rush of nervous adrenaline.  

I'm sending a message to the universe that I'd love some healing light and love energy right now.

Deep breath.  Off I go!

UPDATE at the end of the day...

I survived.  I wasn't overwhelmed by anxiety. I was nervous, but in a normal way. Even sitting in the chair waiting, I reminded myself that nothing was happening to be nervous about.  That worked.

I was going to write more details but I realize it doesn't benefit me to remember and live in those moments. 

After it was over I spent several hours in pain, uncomfortable with the numbness, controlling my saliva, and stopping the bleeding and being concerned about the blood clot.

I tried really hard to breathe through the pain.  It did help a bit.  That's the kind of thing that works best after practicing for a while.  

When I took my second set of Tylenol at 8:30 I finally had some relief.  

I still haven't taken any antibiotic.  I'll do that in a couple hours. I worry about that because I don't want to get nauseous.  I have a very low dose though.

Anyhow - I feel the dentist did a fine job.  I like him.  Patty is the assistant and Vivian is the receptionist.  All were very nice and I feel very comfortable with all of them.

Seventy-third Day

Amy Krouse Rosenthal

On CBS This Morning, during the headline section, we're told that this precious jewel died yesterday.  She is most recently known for writing an article in the New York Times called "You May Want to Marry My Husband" where she wrote, in her last days, of the love she shared with her husband and children.

Of course, I look up the article. Which led me to her obituary.  Which led me to a few inspirations.

She created a video called 17 Things I Made (a bed, a book, a vow, a sandwich, etc).  That's a fun idea. 

She loved Einstein's quote: "There are only two ways to live your life; as though nothing is a miracle, or as though everything is a  miracle."  Ordinary things happen, but it's how we perceive them that make them miracles.  Maybe they seem miraculous because we don't believe magic can be true. Or maybe we don't believe we deserve these amazing things to happen to us so it feels like a miracle. Or maybe we like to believe we are being taken care of by a higher power so when strange and wonderful things happen we attribute it to a miracle rather than a statistical event.

She wrote a book called "Encyclopedia of a Normal Life".  I have not idea what this book is about other than I believe it's a memoir, but I like this idea...everyone should have an encyclopedia of their life.

What if everything in the world that happens and is happening is about me?  What if I really AM the center of the universe, as my friend LJB would often say?

Everything in the world is for my benefit and my edification and my inspiration?

What if that is true?

And, then...what if MY life is also part of someone else's universe where they are the center of the universe and I am here to inspire them...either by being part of the multitudes they never know personally, or the person I smile at in the street?

What if the universe is all about US and us believing in ourselves and magic and the beauty in this world and the people of this world?

We are ALL the center of the universe.  One big center and we're creating all this beauty and love and sharing and caring - it's all for us...and I am one of US, so it's all for ME and my most precious self, the same way it's all for you and YOUR most precious self, and it was for Amy Krouse Rosenthal and HER better self.  We give, we take, we share, we make.  

A section from her obituary:

...even before her diagnosis, she suggested that her energy and imagination were not boundless. Her favorite line from literature, she once said, was in Thornton Wilder's play "Our Town," as spoken by the character Emily as she bids the world goodbye: "Do any human beings ever realize life while they live it?"
When she turned 40, Ms. Rosenthal began calculating how many days she had left until she turned 80.
"How many more times, then, do I get to look at a tree?" she asked. "Let's just say it's 12,395. Absolutely that's a lot, but it's not infinite, and I'm thinking anything less than infinite is too small a number and not satisfactory. At the very least, I want to look at trees a million more times. Is that too much to ask?"

Just like JLB, I hope she was alive every day until she died.

Check out her website here

Sixty-eighth Day

The Republican House (Paul Ryan) has submitted their healthcare 'replacement' proposal.

This is it.

I downloaded a copy as well.

The short comment I have is that it's clear the Republicans care less about presenting a health care plan that can work than about being able to say they repealed and replaced Obamacare.

Why?
1. They haven't even figured out how it will be paid for and they're already trying to pass it through the House.
2. Some conservative Republicans are against it because the plan maintains some key components of the ACA - namely the tax credits/subsidies which they call a new entitlement program.
3. As of this morning the AARP, the AMA, the American Nurses Association, the American Hospital Association, the Association of Medical Colleges, the Catholic Health Association of the US, and the Children's Hospital Association are against the plan.  Some of those groups I don't know anything about, but it sounds like they'd definitely have experience with health care.

Winners and Losers
If I lose my job I believe I'd be one of the losers. The reason the AARP is against it is because people from age 50 - 64 are the most adversely affected by the plan.

Why?  Under the ACA (Affordable Care Act), tax credits were calculated based on the cost of insurance in a person's area and their income.  The AHCA (American Health Care Act) only offers a flat tax credit based on a person's AGE.
As a result, an older person (50 - 64) who doesn't have medical insurance through work, lives in a high premium area, and is low income is the most adversely affected.  The tax credit will not cover the entirety of their insurance premium.
Conversely, the biggest winners are younger, high income people who live in an area with low premiums.  Their tax credit will cover more of their insurance premium.

Another trip up with this plan: Let's imagine you're insured through work.  You lose your job, which means you also lose your insurance.  You're shocked.  You give yourself a couple months to get yourself together.  During that time you don't have insurance because you're afraid you don't have enough money.  A couple months later you put your life back together and attempt to get insurance.  Because you have a couple months without insurance, you now have to pay 30% MORE for your insurance than other people in your exact situation have to pay.  Why?  Because you allowed your insurance to lapse.  You get penalized for not getting any insurance during those two months.  This is intended to 'encourage' no lapse in coverage.

Sounds like an individual mandate if you ask me.  And that's the complaint about the ACA that I heard the most.

That's it for today.


P.S.
The website that promotes the AHCA says the reason the ACA is bad is that premiums have increased by an average of 25 percent
Note:  Of the more than 90 percent of Americans who have health insurance, most get it from their job or the government. Premium growth has been LOW for those groups in the last few years.  The remainder buy it themselves either directly or through the ACA Marketplace.  It's the people who buy it themselves who are seeing the rise in premiums. But, of those, 85% the people buying insurance through the ACA Marketplace are receiving a subsidy so they aren't affected by increases. So the only people affected by increasing premiums are 15% of people using the ACA, and the people who buy their insurance directly from the insurance company.  Those two groups account for THREE percent of all Americans.

Sixty-seventh Day

On tonight's edition of CBS Evening News with Scott Pelley, Scott Pelley interviewed Leon Panetta and began his interview with this lead-in:

"In the last few weeks the President has told his military that there are terrorist attacks no one knows about because the press covers them up, he's described the news media as the 'enemy of the American people', he has likened his own intelligence agencies to Nazis, and now we have the wiretapping charge against President Obama. Is it appropriate to ask whether the President is having difficulty with rationality?"

Wow - that's quite a statement.

I don't know why more people aren't asking it.  And we know the answer is yes, so why isn't something being done about it?

Where are the Republicans?

They're in charge right now.

Here is Leon Panetta's response and the rest of the conversation:

"Scott, the coin of the realm for any President is trust; trust of the American people in the credibility of that President.
"And when he says the things that he says, in particular this allegation about wiretapping that has no bit of evidence to support it, it raises concerns about trust in the President.  Because there are one or two conclusion you draw.
One is that he says these things knowing that they're not true in order to divert the public.  And if he's doing that he's misusing the powers of the Presidency.
Or, he truly believes that they are true when indeed they're not true, and he hasn't tried to find out the truth which then shows a real lack of judgment.
Either way, I think it undermines and weakens the strength of the Presidency in this country.

Scott Pelly:
"How is this calculated in Moscow, and Beijing, and Pyongyang North Korea?"

Leon Panetta:
"Well that's the greatest danger.  You know, in many ways we've seen the President say the things he's done and we often kind of move on.
But, the danger is, what if something should happen that requires the President of the United States to take action?  For example we're dealing with North Korea and the threats from North Korea.  What if the President decides that we have to take military action as a result of that? Or what if we find out that Iran is actually developing a nuclear weapon that requires military action?
He's got to stand up and tell the world, and this country that that's required, when indeed his credibility is now subject to question.  I think that is raising the most serious danger with regards to the ability of this President to relate to this most serious world."

Special Edition - International Women's Day

This is fantastic!

KNOW THE POWER OF WOMEN IN LEADERSHIP
SHE MAKES A DIFFERENCE

Sixty-fifth Day

In the news today:

The United States is in trouble.

On Saturday, the Republican President tweeted out that Obama had a wiretap at Trump Tower during the election.  

It seems outrageous and makes no sense at all.  

If it's true, that means Trump Tower had someone who was in cahoots with the Russians at Trump Tower, which is what Donald Trump is trying to distract us from, so why would he bring it up?

If it's false, it's just the most irresponsible thing for a President to do.

Maybe his allegation will be that it was an illegal wiretap?  

On CBS This Morning, Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), head of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform said the Republican President has access to all kinds of intelligence so Chaffetz accepts that it must be true, though he hasn't seen any evidence of it.

Oh - so Republicans believe it!?!?  Even though the Republican President has made outrageous claims before and none of them panned out?  He said Obama wasn't born in the USA, he said thousands of Muslims in America cheered after 9/11, he said there were millions of people at his inauguration, and he said 3 million people voted illegally in his election (he would've won the popular vote if the 'illegals' hadn't voted).  Those are the ones I can remember off the top of my head. He doesn't have evidence of any of it and nothing ever comes of the accusations.

People are calling for a Special Prosecutor - someone not associated with the campaign, the administration, or the Republicans.  

There are so many ins and outs and weird behaviors going on related to the Trump campaign and the Russians, and Trump has always had strange comments about Putin that it seems imperative we get to the bottom of this.

The only reason none of that other stuff got investigated is because we have a Republican congress.  

In other news:

A private Facebook page of the Marines (I don't know if it's a sanctioned page or an informal one) has been sharing nude photos of fellow female service members and making disrespectful (and illegal?) comments about the women.  It included their full names and where they are.  

These are the Marines!

How can this behavior have happened?  There are 30,000 members of the Facebook page and these are people who are supposed to DEFEND US!  They're the criminals and yet I'm supposed to TRUST THEM?  

And more:

North Korea fired four ballistic missiles into the Sea of Japan over the weekend.

It's their response to an annual 'wargames' exercise that Japan and the United States routinely engage in.  North Korea believes it's a practice for an invasion of North Korea.

It comes less than a month after the half brother of the current leader of North Korea was murdered in a Malaysian airport. It's common for this (and former) North Korean leader(s) to murder opponents or people who might try to take away their power.  

And in the other corner:

Here's what the White House has done as of February 28, 2017

Update:  From The Washington Post's The Upshot this morning:

"Large portions of the Republican caucus embrace a kind of policy nihilism.  They criticize any piece of legislation that doesn't completely accomplish conservative goals, but don't build coalitions to devise complex legislation themselves.

The roster of congressional Republicans includes lots of passionate ideological voices.  It is lighter on the kind of wonkish, compromise-oriented technocrats who move bills."

The article goes on to remind us that the Republican Party hasn't made any domestic policy since the early years of George W Bush's first term (expand Medicare to cover prescription drugs, No Child Left Behind, and Sarbanes-Oxley)

"If you make a career opposing even the basic work of making the government run it's hard to pivot to writing major legislation.  In the opposition, its easy to be strident and pure in your views.  Legislative sausage-making requires compromise and flexibility and focus on the gritty details."

  

Sixty-fourth Day

Ted - from John's apartment patio

I had a productive week at work.  Things were moving along, getting ticked off my To Do list.  Felt good.

Yesterday SGM drove up from Portland to visit.  We made cards.  Honestly, I can't make cards at all even though I have a bunch of supplies!  But, she made five cards sitting right there in a matter of 5 hours that also included a walk to buy lunch!  What's up with that?

My current theory is that I don't have enough patience when I'm creating.  I like to see the end product so I rush through it and make mistakes.  I never have something I can send.

On the other hand, SGM didn't move so slowly that she couldn't finish anything in 5 hours.  She finished FIVE cards!!!!

I made mistakes on all of mine.  Except the last one.  But, I haven't finished the last one because I'm going so slow.  I'm making one mark per hour it seems.

Too fast, too slow!  Grrrrrrr. 

I'll attempt to finish mine today.

I will say that while I was moving slow, I was enjoying the process more, so that's a benefit.

I volunteered to be the condo's building committee chairperson for at least a year.  I hope that will be fun and I can do a good job.

This week on my plate:  Today go to Mukilteo to check on a couch for my niece, Monday meet with garden planter people (??), Thursday meet with door people, Friday meet with courtyard bidders, Saturday meet Mom at her tax guy's place.  And work full time.

(March 15 is building committee meeting, March 16 is Jan's retirement party in Portland, and March 22 is condo meeting).

Busy month for me - I usually have much less of my time spoken for!!  But - what has that gotten me?  I'm lazier and lumpier - but not happier.

So, I'll be busy(ish) for a bit and see how that goes.

By the way - our President sends tweets that boggle the mind.  They're immature and childish.  

It's so irritating that it distracts us from the policy changes he's making.  

I'm watching Fox News periodically to see what the other side is thinking.  I'd be so embarrassed if I voted for the current Republican Administration.  People who did, they KNEW he was going to be a problem but they wanted to vote for their personal interests - not the country.