HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Ohiogal » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »

Ohiogal

Profile Information

Member since: Tue Dec 26, 2017, 08:31 AM
Number of posts: 15,040

Journal Archives

Tonight's Vinyl Selection


Who's Next

The Who

I remember, as a teenager, my parents freaking out about the album cover, my mom said it was "vulgar trash" and I shouldn't waste my money on it.

We Won't Get Fooled Again

Baba O' Riley

The Song Is Over

and the fabulous

"Behind Blue Eyes" - that one alone was worth the purchase price !

The (sometimes) dreaded earworm

I seem to be one of those people who ALWAYS has an earworm (that is, a song that repeats inside my head that I can't get rid of)

It's okay when it's a song I like .... (Right now my ear worm in "Comfortably Numb"

But sometimes "I can't stands it" when it's an obnoxious song like Celine Dion's Titanic Theme! (and I apologize if there are any Celine Dion fans out there).

Do any other of you DUers have this problem? What's your worst ear worm song?

Tonight's vinyl selection

Todd Rundgren

A Wizard A True Star

Trump's Solution to End School Shootings


Give the police a boatload of military equipment!

From MSNBC.

By Steve Benen

In Benton, Ky., this week, two teenagers were shot and killed at a high school, in an incident that left another 18 people injured. As the New York Times noted, it was “one of at least 11 shootings on school property recorded since Jan. 1.”

At a White House press briefing the day after the deaths, a reporter asked Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders about the president’s efforts to prevent these school shootings. She talked about the administration’s efforts to “crack down on crime,” but had little to say about school shootings specifically.

That same afternoon, however, Trump delivered remarks at the White House to a group of mayors, and raised a curious point about public safety.

“We’re supporting our local police beyond what we’ve ever done. Great. And fire departments. We’re also getting you a lot of our excess military equipment; you know all about that. Previous administrations – but in particular, ‘-on’ – the previous administration, ‘-on’ – they didn’t like to do that, and someday they’ll explain why. But we had a lot of excess military equipment; we’re sending it to your police as they need it. And it’s made a tremendous difference.

“We believe every child deserves to live in a safe home, attend a great school, and look forward to an amazing and very, very safe future. So you’re getting a lot of equipment.”

The transcript may appear a little disjointed, but if you watch the video of his remarks, it was clear Trump was trying to condemn the Obama administration for scaling back local police department’s use of military weapons.

For months, Trump has appeared completely baffled as to why Obama was reluctant to have weapons of war on American streets to be used against civilians. It’s really not that complicated, but the Republican remains dumbfounded.

This week, however, was the first time I’ve heard Trump connect police use of military weapons with school safety.

Look at the quote again: “We believe every child deserves to live in a safe home, attend a great school, and look forward to an amazing and very, very safe future. So you’re getting a lot of equipment.”

In context, in his comments to mayors, “equipment” appears to refer to military equipment to be used by local law enforcement in communities across the country. Looking at the full transcript, there were no other references to schools or other kinds of equipment.

The Washington Monthly’s Nancy LeTourneau noted in response, “[T]o suggest that turning schools into war zones with grenade launchers and armored personnel carriers will keep our children safe leaves me at a loss for words. It is utterly insane.”

Tonight's Vinyl Selection

Pink Floyd's masterpiece

Dark Side of the Moon

"America First" or "America Alone"?


From the New York Times.

WASHINGTON — President Trump is arriving at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, to explain his “America First” approach at a moment when the world is moving ahead with a trade agenda that no longer revolves around the United States.

The world marked a turning point in global trade on Tuesday, when 11 countries agreed to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership, announcing they had finalized the pact and expected to sign a deal on March 8 in Chile. It was a remarkable moment for a beleaguered agreement that was conceived and constructed by the United States, then abandoned by Washington when Mr. Trump took office last year.

As the world’s largest economy and architect of many international organizations and treaties, the United States remains an indispensable partner. But as the global economy gains strength, Europe and countries including Japan and China are forging ahead with deals that do not include the United States.

The world marked a turning point in global trade on Tuesday, when 11 countries agreed to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership, announcing they had finalized the pact and expected to sign a deal on March 8 in Chile. It was a remarkable moment for a beleaguered agreement that was conceived and constructed by the United States, then abandoned by Washington when Mr. Trump took office last year.

As the world’s largest economy and architect of many international organizations and treaties, the United States remains an indispensable partner. But as the global economy gains strength, Europe and countries including Japan and China are forging ahead with deals that do not include the United States.

Thirty-five new bilateral and regional trade pacts are under consideration around the world, according to the World Trade Organization. The United States is party to just one of them, with the European Union, and that negotiation has gone dormant. The United States is also threatening to withdraw from one of its existing multilateral agreements — the North American Free Trade Agreement with Mexico and Canada — if it cannot be renegotiated in the United States’ favor.

The world marked a turning point in global trade on Tuesday, when 11 countries agreed to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership, announcing they had finalized the pact and expected to sign a deal on March 8 in Chile. It was a remarkable moment for a beleaguered agreement that was conceived and constructed by the United States, then abandoned by Washington when Mr. Trump took office last year.

As the world’s largest economy and architect of many international organizations and treaties, the United States remains an indispensable partner. But as the global economy gains strength, Europe and countries including Japan and China are forging ahead with deals that do not include the United States.

Thirty-five new bilateral and regional trade pacts are under consideration around the world, according to the World Trade Organization. The United States is party to just one of them, with the European Union, and that negotiation has gone dormant. The United States is also threatening to withdraw from one of its existing multilateral agreements — the North American Free Trade Agreement with Mexico and Canada — if it cannot be renegotiated in the United States’ favor.

more:https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/24/us/politics/trump-trade-america-first-davos.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

So I dug out a few of my old vinyl record albums

Hubby connected the old turntable to our living room speakers tonight.

I listened to

The Yes Album

Let It Be album

Allman Bros. Brothers and Sisters

... good stuff...... Sure took me away from all the idiocy and crap in the news for a while.....

(smiling)

I'm getting so sick and tired of this

Hearing right wingers say that "Dems go to the mat for these illegals .... and turn their backs on REAL 'Mericans!"

Does this have to be a zero-sum game? Because you help one group, the other group feels jealous?

And I ask you, which party has spent decades trying to aid the poor, protect us from consumer fraud, keep our air and water clean, fight for workers' rights, make sure everyone has affordable health care? It sure ain't the Republicans.

But they whine that they're not getting any special favors.

GAH!!!!

Can anyone believe this shit?!

In 3 States, if Anthem Thinks You Shouldn't Have Gone to the ER, They Won't Pay

When you decide to make a trip to the ER for symptoms such as chest pain or difficulty breathing, you do it because you are concerned that this could potentially be a life-threatening situation. After undergoing careful medical evaluation including X-rays, EKGs, ultrasounds or CT scans in the ER, the end result might indicate a condition that isn’t dangerous, such as pleurisy or bronchitis.

But this very process and the assurances to systematically arrive at a final diagnosis are being threatened by one insurance company that is creating a list of specific diagnoses they are choosing not to cover.

Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield is placing policy holders in Kentucky, Missouri and Georgia on notice that they could be responsible for covering the cost for such ER visits. It turns out that Anthem has developed a specific list of diagnoses that it will not cover, such as “chest pain on breathing” and blood in the urine, even if the patient thought it was a medical emergency.

“Health insurance companies are scaring people away from emergency departments, saying they will decide after the fact what is a real emergency,” Rebecca Parker, MD, FACEP, president of the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP), said in a news release published online last Tuesday. “If your insurer disagrees with your decision to visit the ER, they may now refuse to pay. These new actions violate federal law and are dangerous because people with identical symptoms — such as abdominal or chest pains — may either have a deadly medical condition or a non-urgent issue. It is not fair for health insurers to expect patients to know the difference between a heart attack and something that is not life threatening.”

More

https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertglatter/2017/10/16/anthem-at-odds-with-your-decision-to-visit-the-er-and-refusing-to-pay-in-certain-states/#5f0fc1054356

I would like to ask a right wingnut

If Hillary and her "bands of thieves" were bringing illegals here by the droves so they could vote in last year's election .... as they all believe ....

Then why did she lose???
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »