somewhere i have never traveled, gladly beyond any experience, the massachusetts election results prove everything i've been saying all along
In the annals of bullshit, analysis of what Massachusetts voters “meant” by electing Scott Brown to the Senate must be breaking stank and volume records faster than the resurrected bodies of every Manolete kill that time God confined them to the same corral. Before it’s all over, we’re going to need Hercules, a four-news-cycle supply of whatever Mark McGwire was taking, and the largest shovel available in the Bay State (preferably one used in the Big Dig to remind us that political events there always proceed based on rational calculations by informed voters).
It is particularly amusing to see folks call the outcome stunning in one breath and aver in the next that they can explain why it happened mere hours after the fact, without any new data save the result. This is especially grating when it’s so obvious that the election turned on all the issues that were most important to me, that the outcome so clearly vindicates my world view, and that the wisest course in light of the results is for both parties to do exactly what I’ve been advocating for all along.
Only a partisan hack could deny that all aspects of this election bolstering my analysis happened to be most significant, whereas factors that cut against my thesis were ultimately irrelevant to the outcome. Let this be a lesson to my political and ideological opponents in future contested elections — insofar as it is advantages my policy preferences, what happened in Massachusetts is a harbinger of things to come in the 2010 midterms, and even in 2012. Meanwhile all precedents seemingly at odds with my national political proclivities were unique, and should be ignored.
lol. i’m glad i’m not a political blogger….
— razib · Jan 20, 09:12 AM · #
What an ignorant post. It’s obvious to anyone with half a brain that my views were vindicated, while yours were completely demolished.
— kenB · Jan 20, 01:53 PM · #
dude.
what is happening is exactly what the Framers designed…a measure of representation for every citizen, no matter their status or abilities. What the Framers DIDN’T for plan was that a number of the natural aristoi would use their gifts in the service of Kylon in stead of Pythagoras….
— matoko_chan · Jan 20, 02:28 PM · #
Petulance aside, whichever views have been vindicated by this election,an obvious set of views have been repudiated. For the time being, that is what is more important here.
— Peter · Jan 20, 03:24 PM · #
I’ve been talking to a woman whose adult daughter had an untreated aortic aneurysm, which killed her. She didn’t get help until too late because she didn’t have insurance and couldn’t afford to go to the doctor. And I have been asking this question for over a year of this arguing, in one way or another: what should these people do? I get lots of derision back. I get lots of dismissiveness. I get told that I’m somehow exceeding the bounds of fair politics to ask. I get a lot of what ifs, and a lot of “well, if this was different…” But I never get a genuine answer.
What should that woman have done to save her own life?
— Freddie · Jan 20, 03:36 PM · #
Give me the daughter’s age, income, residence and medical history and I’ll you how she could have gotten treatment.
— Kristoffer V. Sargent · Jan 20, 03:47 PM · #
I think she was in her early ’30s, she’s from CT, she worked part time at the supermarket. Don’t know her medical history.
— Freddie · Jan 20, 03:55 PM · #
I’m going to bookmark this so I can check back regularly b/c I’m certain Kristoffer Sargent can save my life in a blog comment.
Seriously, Sargent, get back over here and save my life!
— Uninsured with Cancer · Jan 20, 04:45 PM · #
If she was the sole earner in her household, working part time at the supermarket would probably qualify her for SAGA Medical Assistance. If she was only working part time because of a disability (her condition might qualify), then she would be eligible to use Medicaid (for services) and ConnPace (for prescription drugs). She would also be able to acquire emergency medical services under Connecticut’s indigent persons policy.
The central issues here, for state-assisted services at least, are household income and disability status. If her condition qualified her for disability, then she would have access to medical care. If her household made less than a certain amount, then the same thing. If none of this obtained, however, then her options reduce to what she could get in insurance and what she would put up with in terms of lifestyle rollback.
At 30, before her diagnosis, she could have gotten a reasonably priced insurance plan (mine costs $62/mo) that covered 100% treatment expenses over $5000, per year or per logically related condition (depends on the policy). Unfortunately, that would most likely rule out preventive screening since people don’t usually opt for no-cause check ups when they have to pay out of pocket. What this would cover, though, is a major operation in the event she did get diagnosed in time — due to sudden symptoms, say. And if that happened the hospital would almost certainly work with her on payments to cover the $5000. She’d have to take on some debt, but it wouldn’t be too bad.
It gets dicier if her condition required constant or intermittent monitoring plus an expensive drug regimen. Most major medical plans do not cover prescription drugs and tend to make you pay the deductible for every legally “distinct” medical event or for every year of treatment. If this was what your friend’s daughter was looking at, then the options are few and uniformly unattractive. But she could get coverage and treatment, if she was willing to live with unpleasant living conditions (low-rent housing and alone) or if she could get her family to mortgage the house (etc) to pay for it.
I know how I would make those trade-offs — for me, for my family — but I’m not so sure how society should make the trade-offs. I don’t think ‘manifest tragedy’ is, by itself, a compelling reason for action. Life is tragic.
— Kristoffer V. Sargent · Jan 20, 05:06 PM · #
“In the annals of bullshit, analysis of what Massachusetts voters “meant” by electing Scott Brown to the Senate must be breaking stank and volume records faster than the resurrected bodies of every Manolete kill that time God confined them to the same corral.”
I’m having a hard time parsing the second half of this sentence grammatically, in part because the referential intention (apart from the general reference to Malolete) escapes me. I simply want to note that “resurrected” bodies, more or less by definition, don’t stink. Perhaps the word is being used in an accommodated sense, or perhaps you wanted a different word?
— SDG · Jan 20, 06:19 PM · #
Weird.
When Obama won, no one had a problem saying he had a mandate (from ‘the people’ who couldn’t articulate a clear or coherent theoretically grounded political goal or directive if they tried) based on change and “being different” from any other “president ever.”
This sort of analysis (unsubstantiated by anything more than elite brainpower) was then usually followed by criticism that he was not living up to the ideal of “competence,” transparency, enlightenment, and pragmatism certain writers had been insisting he embodied and had sold himself as.
Some version of this silly narrative about the meaning, mandate, or intention of that election has been the flawed premise of much of the praise and criticism of the president and his actions for a year now
I think it’s safe to say that everyone at this point knows a lot more about the (opinions of some, on the) “meaning” of Obama and his election than we do about the person Obama.
Suddenly, this sort of wispy, navel-gazing writing – interpreting the the trend of our times, History, Amrerica’s mood, an election’s significance and the “people’s will” (with or without exit-poll data) – is silly and is now worth denigrating and satirizing as mere spin by cynical hacks.
(And of course spin is almost as bad a snark and incivility in the sacred public sphere of discourse and dialogue.)
That was a short-lived trend. Good riddance, I guess.
But if we can’t aver the cause and meaning of this election, can we at least make blanket statements about the character and intent of the youth, pop culture, music scenes, polloi, aristoi, elites, masses, framers, and other comforting general conceptual categories that exist only in our head that will simplify life and its meaning for us?
Motoko, at least, seems to think so:
“What the Framers DIDN’T for plan was that a number of the natural aristoi would use their gifts in the service of Kylon in stead of Pythagoras….”
Motoko so profound. So authoritatively brief and well-read. Once again saying all that needs to be said in such a creative, unbounded way.
But those founders sure sound stupid. Why would anyone not anticipate what everyone with any experience already knows about human nature?
They had no idea that many leaders usually lead people only on the basis of foolish or destructive popular wishes?
I wish someone with Motoko’s insight wrote our constitution instead of those self-satisfied and ignorant blow-hard naifs.
— Trendsurfer · Jan 20, 06:25 PM · #
“Only a partisan hack….” Your whole post is based on straw men. Kind of “hacky” to me. Jim Webb and Barney Frank seem to get it more than you do. Your post is basically a passive aggressive attack on certain folks on the right and the left. Of course, there are many “meanings” of this election and many reasons it turned out the way it did. It was still important, and there are lessons for both sides. But since you are pro-obama,health care, reason, justice and goodness, you should avoid trying to find any meaning in this election. Nothing to see. Move along.
— JC38 · Jan 20, 07:11 PM · #
JC38,
I suspect that you have very little idea what I think about Barack Obama or health care.
— Conor Friedersdorf · Jan 20, 08:11 PM · #
Because the insurance company would never have attempted to dump her for having a pre-existing condition once they found out she would require major surgery which would run into the 100’s of thousand dollars./s
And, of course, being covered under the indigent person policy is where we all want to be./s
Funny that those who oppose health insurance coverage for all have no problem pushing people onto the public rolls, except for the fact that they then cry foul about people being on the public rolls. Once you have them all on the public rolls, you can demand that the state no longer provide for them with your tax money.
Nor does this in any way help those who make just enough not to receive assistance but not enough to be able to afford health insurance. And no, you cannot just cut back to afford your medical coverage. the number one leading cause of bankruptcy in the US is the cost of a serious medical condition.
— George Orwell · Jan 20, 08:21 PM · #
Glenn Reynolds has taught you well, my young Conor.
just kidding. I actually read your daily beast posting so I thought I had an idea, but sounds like I’ve mis-interpreted your writings. Centrists are so rare that my field guide doesn’t have any updated descriptions.
The real point to my post is that the negative meaning of the election seems fairly clear. I’ll add that the positive meaning is not – I hope the GOP doesn’t use as an excuse to double down on waterboarding and the Dems to double down on expanding the federal government.
— JC38 · Jan 20, 08:53 PM · #
seriously, what in the world does “…faster than the resurrected bodies of every Manolete kill that time God confined them to the same corral” mean?
— sleepy · Jan 20, 09:43 PM · #
<i>I hope the GOP doesn’t use as an excuse to double down on waterboarding and the Dems to double down on expanding the federal government.</i>
LOL! I’m sure you are going to be disappointed.
— libarbarian · Jan 20, 11:27 PM · #
Here are some of the issues Scott Brown ran on.
1. Stop the health care bill as it now is.
2. Stop the out-of-control spending.
3. Return transparency to the legislative process.
4. Support our troops abroad.
5. Use tax dollars to kill terrorists, not pay for lawyers to defend them.
That’s the gist of it, but I’m sure there are some others I didn’t think about. That is a right-of-center, Republican/libertarian platform. This can’t be that difficult, Conor, but you must make it so. Exactly what I would expect of you.
— templar knight · Jan 20, 11:29 PM · #
I think Dan Riehl sums up Conor/‘give ME credit’ quite well here: http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2010/01/conor-and-andy-pattycake-pattycake-.html
— WestWright · Jan 21, 04:37 PM · #
“Funny that those who oppose health insurance coverage for all have no problem pushing people onto the public rolls, except for the fact that they then cry foul about people being on the public rolls.”
So many conservatives act as if they’re welfare proponents once they start discussing universal health coverage. It’s a quite amusing.
— Jeff · Jan 21, 05:29 PM · #
<a href=“http://www.ihtiyacinne.com” title=“kpss”>kpss</a>
<a href=“http://www.ihtiyacinne.com” title=“kpss kitap satışı”>kpss kitap satışı</a>
— kpss · Jan 21, 08:01 PM · #
The best place for freelance projects is freelancing sites. Freelancing sites are the best option for part time home based business and freelance jobs. There are many types of work available at freelancing sites
www.onlineuniversalwork.com
— davidbaer · Jan 23, 07:11 AM · #