I didn’t know ADD was THAT kind of disability!

Alright we all know she’s a wingnut. But is anyone else seeing major cracks in the story? At first she just seemed like a sincere wingnut, but now I’m thinking that her puffy-lipped, poker-faced maternal glow is playing us for the fool.

Nadya Suleman: One of my children was tested as ADHD, which is extremely prevalent. In regard to my other child, that child was experiencing mild – mild speech delay. And maybe tiny characteristics of autism as well.

She’s receiving disability payments for all three.

Nadya Suleman: It is temporary. Only one will be on it for awhile. The others most likely – hopefully will be off of it within a few months.

I was not aware you could receive disability for having ADD, and I was definitely not aware a child under seven years old could be recieving it. Do kids under seven even have ADD? Why would you “hopefully” be off of something like that? That’s like saying you are “hopefully” going to be off of a program that pays you $1 every time your baby craps in it’s diaper. There’s no way you’re going off of that, because you are magically receiving benefits out of something your kid is going to do/be anyway. There is nothing sincerely temporary about someone who is willing to accept public assistance because their young child may or may not have a slight learning disability that may or may not affect their kindergarten playtime (at best, she could be claiming the two year old has ADD for all we know).

Ann Curry: You’re saying that you’re going to use student loans to help raise your children.

Nadya Suleman: Temporarily. Temporarily.

Ann Curry: Do you have any way of paying back these loans?

Nadya Suleman: Yes, when I work, when I’m working.

Ann Curry: How is that not like welfare?

Nadya Suleman: Oh no. These are student loans. You consolidate the loans, you pay it back. We don’t pay back welfare.

It might be a while before Nadya pays back her loans, which she’s already spent.

Don’t you um, need to go to school to get student loans? And don’t you need uh, time to go to school?

I’m really calling bullshit on this woman. Not batshit crazy, but malevolent, for real bad lady kind of shit.

(Transcript of whole thing can be found here)

you can’t be anti-octuplet AND pro-life

The thousands upon thousands of internet comments eschewing the inevitable cost of a litter to taxpayers really annoys me. While I agree with that particular point of view, I can’t help but wonder how many of those people are against abortion. Some of the comments are tinged with that certain anti-welfare, anti-“public dole” je ne sais quoi that whispers “Psssh! My wife home schools our kids, we believe global warming is a myth and most of all we PRO-MOTHERFUCKING-LIFE.”

Soooooo let me get this straight: you are totally stoked on forcing an unprepared, single woman into having one or two children YOU will end up supporting, but you’re totally bummed on some other chick having 14 by choice?

Fuck, at least I’m consistent. I think Suleman is batshit crazy and must be stopped, I hate her 14 kids already and I wish more people would have abortions. Consistent with the attitude of: I don’t wanna pay for your dumb shit.

Back to Session Bash

First legislative “bash” I’ve attended. I do not yet go to fundraisers so this is the first straight up, sponsored capitol function I’ve been to. I met a few more legislators, including the one who should be carrying a bill of ours this year. In that vein, meeting his scheduler would’ve been more useful than meeting him. A mid-level assemblyman (and by that I mean he represents a decent Bay Area district- no more, no less) looked at my boobs. I got to meet the Assemblywoman from my hometown and chat with her for a second. Pedro Nava saw a photographer and wondered out loud if any pictures of the guests dining on fresh prawns and crab legs would be published, as that would look awfully bad given California’s unprecedented deficit and budget deadlock.

Most of all, I finally got to see how the other half lives. By the other half, I mean capitol staffers. Lobbyists and their ilk must pay thousands to attend crappy fundraisers with second rate hors deuvres, but if you work in the capitol, every other freaking day there’s some soiree or ice cream social being hosted in “your” (ie your boss’s) honor. This one was paid for by an organization of Indian gaming tribes and the American Cigar Association, hence the fresh prawns, crab legs and seared scallops.

At the beginning of the night, the hierarchy of staffers was painfully obvious. The free drink beads (yes, beads, as if a nod to the trading customs of indigenous North American tribes) helped loosen that up. But seriously, that’s what the capitol is all about. Hierarchy. It is its own version of Hollywood or high school. While there are a decent amount of hot mens, most of the dudes my age strut around with an expression as though there is something stinky permanently residing between their nose and upper lip (oh it’s poo from brownnosing! Oh SNAP!). A lot of the older mens are more relaxed and recent popularity of beard scruff makes them VERY attractive. Too bad they’re all fucking married. What is it with these guys? Married, married, married.

ayers and obama, sittin in a tree…

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h1HEjutqu_JaEhRe84DLh4FQOLWQD948GC1O0

Bill Ayers gave his first public statement about his “relationship” with Barack Obama on Tuesday. How come nobody mentioned he’s a comedian?

The onetime anti-war radical who lives in the same Chicago neighborhood as Obama said in a newspaper interview he has had no contact with the Obama campaign and considers the GOP vice presidential nominee’s accusation absurd.

“Pal around together? What does that mean? Share a milkshake with two straws?” Ayers said in an interview with The Washington Post.

LOLOLOLOL! Or maybe it means Ayers accidentally pulling the shower curtain open on a soapy Obama. Or Obama and Ayers goofing off at their beer factory job and sticking a rubber glove onto one of the assembly line bottles. Or the two of them unsuccessfully attempting to navigate a revolving door, with hilarious results. Maybe it means ganging up on nerdy younger step-siblings with the squirt gun game at the theme park! Oh the possibilities for pallin’ around are endless, and they are all oh so delightful!

revisiting biden’s debate jab

Last night I rewatched part of the Palin-Biden debate on OnDemand (words cannot describe how much I love OnDemand!!!). I watched it for this part:

BIDEN: Now, with regard to the — to the health care plan, you know, it’s with one hand you giveth, the other you take it. You know how Barack Obama — excuse me, do you know how John McCain pays for his $5,000 tax credit you’re going to get, a family will get?

He taxes as income every one of you out there, every one of you listening who has a health care plan through your employer. That’s how he raises $3.6 trillion, on your — taxing your health care benefit to give you a $5,000 plan, which his Web site points out will go straight to the insurance company.

And then you’re going to have to replace a $12,000 — that’s the average cost of the plan you get through your employer — it costs $12,000. You’re going to have to pay — replace a $12,000 plan, because 20 million of you are going to be dropped. Twenty million of you will be dropped.

So you’re going to have to place — replace a $12,000 plan with a $5,000 check you just give to the insurance company. I call that the ultimate Bridge to Nowhere.

And then he looks over at her and smiles. Good grief!! A collective BOOYAH! swept through the nation. Leading up to the debate there were reports of Biden’s people were telling him to go easy on Palin or risk looking condescending and arrogant. If I was an OBiden advisor, I would’ve said shoot ’em all and let god sort ’em out.

Update/foot in mouth: Prop 3

These new hospitals will not only be available to kids whose parents have excellent health benefits. I was not aware of this (probably because I don’t have kids). Children’s hospitals provide uncompensated care to eligible poor kids. The text states,

“…the burden of providing uncompensated care and the increasing costs of health care seriously impair our children’s hospitals’ ability to modernize and expand their facilties.”

So on that note, it’s a worthy cause and it comes down to money. According to the LAO, the initial $980 million borrowed will amount to $2 billion with interest.

Propositions: A Voters Guide or Voters! A Proposition Guide

People keep asking me how I am going to vote on the propositions. Did you know in Nevada they call them “state questions?” Isn’t that quaint?

1a – SAFE, RELIABLE HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN BOND ACT. Jenn Wu changed my mind on this one with her comparison to BART. While people were skeptical, I cannot imagine a Bay Area without BART. It continues to efficiently transport and suck tax dollars out of us to this day.

2 – STANDARDS FOR CONFINING FARM ANIMALS. INITIATIVE STATUTE. At first I was going to vote no because I don’t like the idea of animals being abused in another state any more than I like the idea of them being abused here. I also feel that since consumers are free to buy any eggs they wish, they don’t really care, so why mandate it? But last week I realized that I simply cannot in good conscience vote against anything that tries to improve conditions for production animals. Through highly efficient suffering, animals bear the weight of what I consider articially low prices for shit like eggs anyway. The people that work in these industries do as well. I know this does nothing to prevent exploitation-eggs from being shipped in from elsewhere. I still don’t care. Just gonna vote with my heart. It happens to the best of us.

3 – CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL BOND ACT. GRANT PROGRAM. INITIATIVE STATUTE. There are too many children in this state who wouldn’t even have access to these hospitals because they lack sufficient healthcare. What kind of kid gets to go to a state of the art facility with the latest technology when they are very sick? A kid whose parents have excellent health benefits. No thanks. They can just continue going to Stanford or UCLA or UCSF for now. Till we figure this out.

4 – WAITING PERIOD AND PARENTAL NOTIFICATION BEFORE TERMINATION OF MINOR’S PREGNANCY. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Unlike the last 50,000 times this has been on the ballot, it doesn’t demand parental consent anymore, which I suppose is more palatable to the masses. Obviously this gets a fatass no vote. The same group that opposed AB 1511 (a bill that funded informational materials for parents who need help discussing the birds & bees with their kids) last year on grounds that the government should not mandate familial communication is wholeheartedly behind this bill. Hypocrisy aside, what scares me the most is a murky statute of limitations to bring civil suite against doctors who violate the consent process. Smacks TRAP (Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers) law, which is way more effective at stopping abortion than actually trying to stop abortion. Just regulate the shit out of providers and clinics, and open the door for massive malpractice suits and what do you get? Dramatically reduced access to abortion, which is the next best thing to making it illegal again.

5 – NONVIOLENT DRUG OFFENSES. SENTENCING, PAROLE AND REHABILITATION. INITIATIVE STATUTE. No. I absolutely will not stand for reducing parole for meth dealers. I fucking hate meth and tweakers! I’m not trying to create a conspiracy theory or anything, but where were Props 5 & 36 when there was an epidemic of crack dealers, who typically aren’t white people? Just sayin. I also don’t think that shitty outpatient, Prop 36 style rehab is all that effective for hardcore drug users. It sounds so hardline but people with addictions need to see real consequences before they stop. Our prisons are not overcrowded with your Mission friends who do coke on Wednesday nights, or your friend who got caught with a pipe in his car. Most nonviolent drug offenders do not go to jail on a first offense.

6 – POLICE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT FUNDING. CRIMINAL PENALTIES AND LAWS. INITIATIVE STATUTE. Never ever ever vote for anything that mandates spending! That is why we are in a budget crisis! Remember Prop 49, that alluring promise of after school programs? Well it mandated spending for them. And now we must spend $550 million a year on after school programs, no matter how much those same kids desperately need healthcare or textbooks or housing. We probably could’ve freed up some of that money for law enforcement in recent years, and then maybe they wouldn’t have to ask for a mandated spending formula of their own.

7 – RENEWABLE ENERGY GENERATION. INITIATIVE STATUTE. I’m staying away from this. I haven’t decided yet.

8 – ELIMINATES RIGHT OF SAME–SEX COUPLES TO MARRY. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Duh!

9 – CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. VICTIMS’ RIGHTS. PAROLE. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE. I’m not too knowledgeable on this subject, but apparently victims already have some say in the parole process. This just doesn’t seem to be a pressing matter and it will undoubtedly cost money so no.

10 – ALTERNATIVE FUEL VEHICLES AND RENEWABLE ENERGY. BONDS. INITIATIVE STATUTE. If T. Boone Pickens wants people to start driving cars that require fuel his company produces, he should write those rebate checks himself. Why the fuck do we have to pay for it and then buy his gas? Yuppies don’t need help buying hybrids. Besides, everybody in the know knows the coolest method of transportation is a bike. Give me a rebate on a bike, asshole. If only Clean Energy produced glucose and leg movement. We’d be subsidizing rebates on pedaling and walking right now.

11 – REDISTRICTING. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE. Thank you baby jesus. Next up is publicly financed campaigns.

12 – VETERANS’ BOND ACT OF 2008. There is already money available for stated purposes. It is unnecessary. Besides, if McCain wins, veterans will enjoy unprecedented government monies as he freezes spending in every other sector besides the military. Especially if your definition of “military” is “Blackwater.”