Tuesday, July 22, 2014

A lovely man

Here's a great picture I found on Facebook: James Garner and Diahann Carroll at the March on Washington in 1963.

James Garner and Diahann Carroll at the March on Washington in 1963

Labels: , ,

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post
     <-- Older Post                     ^ Home                   

Silver lining?

Re the decision killing the ACA subsidies, several people - like Kevin Drum over at Mother Jones - suggest that, even if the Supreme Court upholds that ruling instead of the other one, things might work out kind of okay:
What happens is that people in blue states like California and New York, which operate their own exchanges, continue getting their federal subsidies. People in red states, which punted the job to the feds, will suddenly have their subsidies yanked away. Half the country will have access to a generous entitlement and the other half won't.

How many people will this affect? The earliest we'll get a Supreme Court ruling on this is mid-2015, and mid-2016 is more likely. At a guess, maybe 12 million people will have exchange coverage by 2015 and about 20 million by 2016. Let's split the difference and call it 15 million. About 80 percent of them qualify for subsidies, which brings the number to about 12 million. Roughly half of them are in states that would be affected by Halbig.

So that means about 6 million people who are currently getting subsidies would suddenly have them yanked away. It's even possible they'd have to pay back any tax credits they'd received previously.

The key point here is that people respond much more strongly to losing things than they do to not getting them in the first place. For example, there are lots of poor people in red states who currently aren't receiving Medicaid benefits thanks to their states' refusal to participate in Obamacare's Medicaid expansion. This hasn't caused a revolt because nothing was taken away. They just never got Medicaid in the first place.

The subsidies would be a different story. You'd have roughly 6 million people who would suddenly lose a benefit that they've come to value highly. This would cause a huge backlash. It's hard to say if this would be enough to move Congress to action, but I think this is nonetheless the basic lay of the land. Obamacare wouldn't be destroyed, it would merely be taken away from a lot of people who are currently benefiting from it. They'd fight to get it back, and that changes the political calculus.
So, who knows?

Labels: ,

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post
     <-- Older Post                     ^ Home                   

Well this is bad news

A federal court has killed subsidies for federal exchanges.

On the other hand, the appeals court struck down that ruling and upheld them. Rather cheekily, in fact. Sweet.

Still, next stop, the Supreme Court? Oh joy

Labels:

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post
     <-- Older Post                     ^ Home                   

Hmmmmm

I don't know if Ted thinks What's-his-face,Whos's-her-name (a new one on me!), and the Whatchamacllits are pronouns, or if he means the neighbors are lucky they aren't called worse things than "you". (Probably the former.) But while What's-his-face does indeed stand in for a proper noun, that doesn't make it a pronoun...


ted doesn't know the neighbors' names

Labels: , , ,

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post
     <-- Older Post                     ^ Home                   

Trivial but ...

Today's "Dogs of C-Kennel" just misses ... but annoyingly (to me, anyway).

dog takes picture with phone

How hard would it have been to draw the dog with his mouth shut?????

Labels: , ,

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post
     <-- Older Post                     ^ Home                   

Monday, July 21, 2014

Such sad news

James Garner has died. What a wonderful actor he was.

Mary McNamara writes of him:
It wasn't humility so much as a sense of proportion, something so unusual in a lead character or a lead actor that it became a hallmark of a Garner performance — he didn't think too much or too little of himself because he'd rather not be thinking of himself at all.
Elaine Stritch just died, too. Here she sings "I'm Still Here":



And here "The Ladies Who Lunch":



And "The Little Things You Do Together":



(I hope we don't lose a third one...)

Labels: ,

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post
     <-- Older Post                     ^ Home                   

Sunday, July 20, 2014

The Week in Entertainment

Nothing but reading this week! I DVRd some things but didn't watch any of them... Instead, I read the latest Lindsey Davis Flavia Albia novel, Enemies at Home, which is excellent. I then let myself be talked into trying Saylor's Gordianus the Finder, which is ... okay. Granted I only read one novel and one short-story collection, but still, I can't warm up to Gordianus and his preening himself over his slave woman. Erk. However, when I mentioned that to someone at work they told me to try Rosemary Rowe's Libertus novels, and damn ... I read all fourteen of them. And they hold up under that, which a lot of series don't (cough Sue Grafton cough). Libertus isn't Falco, but he isn't Gordianus, either. I enjoyed them a lot.

Labels:

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post
     <-- Older Post                     ^ Home                   

Friday, July 18, 2014

Oklahoma Marriage Equality

Still not tired.
oklahoma in rainbow with OK

Labels:

1 Comments:

At 1:18 PM, July 21, 2014 Anonymous Kathie had this to say...

Since you're a birder, what you really need is a US map featuring the official bird of each state. Then as Marriage Equality keeps spreading, you could go "Bird by bird"!

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post
     <-- Older Post                     ^ Home                   

Thursday, July 17, 2014

Okay, this is too much

Okay, yes, I freely admit it - ask anyone who plays me in Draw Something - I can't draw. I especially can't draw people. But then again, no one is paying me to.

But this is just ridiculous. Except for their clothes, Tommie and Carol look absolutely nothing alike in these two panels. And I don't mean like each other, either; like themselves in the other panel.  Hell, Tommie's hair has even grown. I mean, yes, points for drawing each panel separately, but ... look. The house and the fence aren't even the same!


Labels:

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post
     <-- Older Post                     ^ Home                   

Watch those pronoun referents!

First: dawwwwwwwww. Baby Stegosaurus no bigger than a cat! Dawwwwwwwwwwww!

But this? Please:
And it was late one afternoon in 2007 when Mossbrucker himself found something extraordinary in the sandstone — the footprint of a baby Stegosaurus dinosaur.

“The light hit it just right, and I went, ‘Oh, it’s a track!’” he said. The tiny dino wouldn’t have been much larger than a house cat. Based on its size, no bigger than a quarter, it had recently hatched.
No, no, no. I mean, which was it? Larger, if not much, than a house cat? Or no bigger than a quarter? Because while cats are much tinier than adult Stegosauruses, they are indeed bigger than quarters.

I'm going to bet that paragraph originally read something like:
“The light hit it just right, and I went, ‘Oh, it’s a track!’” he said. Based on its size, no bigger than a quarter, the tiny dino wouldn’t have been much larger than a house cat. It had recently hatched.
There might have been a conjunction or two in there, but I'm betting this was it. (Even here, I'd prefer "based on the track's size", but that's just me.) Because in the paragraph as rearranged, there's a severe pronoun antecedent problem.

Once you stick that "tiny dino" and that "house cat" in there in front of "its", it can't mean the track any more.



Labels: ,

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post
     <-- Older Post                     ^ Home                   

Poroshenko considers

Bing blows it on the conjunction:

Russian has two words for "and" - и and a. This one, a, is a "contrastive and" (I like cats and he likes dogs), and "and" is rarely the best choice. "But" is better, "while" is my personal favorite for most contexts. Here, "but rather" is what you want.

Again, Google Translate does better: "I want to emphasize, we believe that this is not an incident, not a disaster but a terrorist act."

BUT they neither one do right by Poroshenko's verb считаем; it's really in the "consider, judge, count, reckon, esteem, look upon, hold to be" semantic field. Poroshenko is saying he believes it's an act of terror; he's saying he considers it one. Big important difference.

see text

Labels: , ,

1 Comments:

At 11:14 PM, July 17, 2014 Anonymous Kathie had this to say...

...proving once again that human translators will not be rendered obsolete by computer programs any time soon :-)))

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post
     <-- Older Post                     ^ Home                   

Reassuring news

Here's a story about the KKK doing a recruiting drive in South Carolina. (Yes, I know, John Roberts said racism is over.) A woman in Seneca contacted the station because she was "worried" and "scared" after
they woke up Sunday to find bags of candy on their driveways with literature directing people to "Save our land, join the Klan."
A nice touch is that because it's a Fox News affiliate, the KKK is characterized as "classified as a "hate group"" rather than as one, and the group involved is called a "sect". Yeah. Like the KKK is, I don't know, a religion. (The Imperial Klaliff's unchallenged description is "not a hate group but a civil rights organization following the Bible.") For Fox, maybe it is...

The article ends on this cheery note, with a head's up for their neighboring state:
The Loyal White Knights are allowed to speak their minds, protected under the First Amendment the same as anyone else.

[Imperial Klaliff] Jones said his chapter is planning a public protest against illegal immigration in North Carolina on August 9, with a cross burning after dark.

He said people in the area will see more of this type of recruitment.
But here's the really reassuring point:
[Jones] said people who receive the candy and literature shouldn't be fearful unless they're doing something that the Klan considers morally wrong.
So that's all right then!

ps - I lied. Here's the really reassuring point: the good people of Seneca, SC, have planned a Unity Rally later this month in response.

Labels: ,

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post
     <-- Older Post                     ^ Home                   

Wednesday, July 16, 2014

Why

does the CIA even have a "paramilitary arm"? (WaPo: "Lion of Fallujah")

Labels: ,

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post
     <-- Older Post                     ^ Home                   

Lexicon

The print edition of the Washington Times story is headlined Utah bribery case ensnares Harry Reid, while the online one (now?) reads Harry Reid’s name surfaces in Utah bribery case against two former attorneys general but both resolve to
a court filing that makes tantalizing references to a possible pay-to-play influence scheme involving U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.
Not so much a "snare" as a "smear", then.

PS: A friend in Utah writes:
Wow. To anyone familiar with the Swallow-Shurtleff scandal and the actual Harry Reid connection thereto, the Washington Times' implication is beyond mendacious. The Soviets at their worst never waxed this bald in lying innuendo.

Labels: ,

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post
     <-- Older Post                     ^ Home                   

Sunday, July 13, 2014

The Week in Entertainment

DVD: Charlie Chan in London, Paris & Shanghai, some of the best of the Sidney Toler years.

TV:The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou, which is one of my favorite Wes Andersons. And somehow managed to forget to mention I started Vicious, which is somehow absolutely standard humor despite being about two long-term gay partners - played, of course, by Ian McKellen and Derek Jacobi (so good). Also the second season of Last Tango in Halifax

Read: Finished The Three, which was very good. Murder and Mendelssohn, the latest Phryne Fisher, which is my favorite so far. Finished the Kate McCall series - reread the first three (Kate McCall, Private Eye; One Little Lie; Road Trip) and then the last two, Just a Con and Happy Endings. It's a nice goofy series. Shattered, the latest in the Iron Druid series, which takes a couple of hard turns. Shadows Beneath, the Writing Excuses Anthology, which gives us the stories and then discussion and drafts of each one. The Stories We Tell,  an intriguing story. Asylum Harbor, a quick read that holds your attention.

Labels:

5 Comments:

At 3:31 PM, July 14, 2014 Anonymous Kathie had this to say...

No new season of "Endeavour" on PBS? They do a great job of evoking 1966 (which I'm old enough to recall clearly), as well as development of the characters of Morse and Thursday.

 
At 2:10 PM, July 18, 2014 Anonymous Kathie had this to say...

No new season of "Endeavour" on PBS for you?

 
At 3:01 PM, July 18, 2014 Blogger The Ridger, FCD had this to say...

I watched the whole thing back in May on DVD. So I'm not watching it now.

 
At 3:05 PM, July 18, 2014 Blogger The Ridger, FCD had this to say...

But I agree they're doing a tremendous job - though I'm just slightly sick of the whole "secret society" thing (blame The Mentalist)

 
At 11:22 PM, July 20, 2014 Anonymous Kathie had this to say...

Ugh, we saw what you mean on tonight's episode, and wish this were the end of it (although fear not).

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post
     <-- Older Post                     ^ Home