IS IT TRUE December 5, 2013

67
Mole #3 Nostradamus of Local Politics
Mole #3 Nostradamus of Local Politics

IS IT TRUE December 5, 2013

IS IT TRUE the Evansville City Council has taken the steps to let the State of Indiana know that they oppose a constitutional amendment that would ban same sex marriage?…the CCO has long supported a person’s right to choose to enter into a contract of marriage with anyone one wishes?…what would be preferable is to get the government out of the marriage business altogether?…we wonder except for the collection of licensing fees and taxation programs that treat married and single people differently why on earth any government ever got into the business of who can marry who in the first place?…the move by the City Council is a move that discourages a new law regarding the State of Indiana regulating marriage?…we commend the Evansville City Council and Mayor Winnecke for opposing this proposed amendment to the Indiana Constitution?…we further commend Mayor Winnecke for breaking with the largely Republican position of trying to use legislation to control marriage?…the CCO says thumbs-up to the City Council and Mayor Winnecke for their stand to keep the government the hell out of people’s bedrooms?

IS IT TRUE that now that that is finished we would like to see the Mayor and the City Council get back to the business of fixing Evansville’s problems and put the distraction of the State of Indiana’s obsession legislating their opinion of morality aside?…it was nice to see these guys agree on something but it would be better to see them work together to do something constructive in Evansville like balancing the budget, having easy audits, creating jobs, and fixing the infrastructure?

IS IT TRUE as Evansville hunkers down for a day of snow and cold it is a good time for people to start thinking about just what should be included in a comprehensive area plan and a downtown master plan?…it is plain as day when examining published words on the City of Evansville website that at one point in time more than 10 years ago someone recognized that without planning THINGS WILL HAPPEN BY CHANCE?…CHANCE is probably the best word to describe development in Evansville for at least the last decade?…CHANCE even ruled the roost here when there was an up to date plan in place so one can understand how the usefulness of a plan is questioned here?…successful cities all use a plan?…random and capricious development is not the best way to grow or refurbish a City and we encourage everyone who cares anything about the future of Evansville to send this message to your City Council members and the Mayor?…before barging forward randomly it is time to reflect and plan as both candidates for Mayor in 2011 pledged to do?…December is a good time to keep promises?

IS IT TRUE President Obama and the White House are appearing to be in an all out effort to enroll the young and healthy people who thus far are not signing up for ObamaCare?…the President himself channeling a cell phone salesman said yesterday that “I don’t know what your bills are. I have noticed that Sasha and Malia seem to spend a lot of time on iPhones. My suspicion is that for a lot of you, between your cable bill and your phone bill, you’re spending more than 100 bucks a month?”…he seems to have been taught well as basic cable and basic phone plans do indeed add up to roughly $100 per month?…the President continued saying, “The idea that you wouldn’t want to make sure that you’ve got the health security and financial security that comes with health insurance for less than that price, you guys are smarter than that. And most young people are, as well?”…this is where the disconnect comes into play?…contrary to what the President may think about the cost of health insurance under ACA the CCO has not heard a single instance of any plan that is less than $100 per month?…if the subsidies are applied that may be the case but there is the problem of “can someone who qualifies for a subsidy afford to pay $100 per month?”

IS IT TRUE in a meeting of Cover California held yesterday something was revealed that makes it just how much of a panic there is about ObamaCare’s inability to attract the young and healthy?…even the California exchange that by all accounts is working smoothly is not attracting the young and healthy?…the discussion that this writer attended was along the lines of “the poor and destitute will be fine, the rich will be fine, but the middle class is going to be adversely effected financially by the ACA (didn’t hear the word ObamaCare even once)?”…there was a desperate tone with regard to enrollment of the young and healthy?…an effort was disclosed to use social media and iPhone apps to get the young and healthy to sign up for ACA offered health insurance at the Coachella Fest which is a 3 day rock music festival held every April at the Indio Polo Fields?…I raised the question about the March 31 deadline to sign up vs. the April event dates and was told “THE ENROLLMENT DATE WILL BE EXTENDED SOON, WE MAY GO TO CONTINUOUS ENROLLMENT SO WE NEVER STOP SELLING TO YOUNG PEOPLE?”…there were even discussions of offering commissions for those who sign target groups up?…this shows first and healthily an understanding of the cash flow of the program, but also a panic at the demographic sign up problems in the only large population state that actually has a working program in place?

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

67 COMMENTS

    • I would postulate that the CCO seems to focus on reality and simple logic and those that refuse to acknowledge these facts need help.

      “Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” –

    • The author of that article’s assessment of the robustness of the healthcare.gov website is naive. He does not have a clue but is probably a pretty good example of the sorts of people that President Obama has in charge of the website. Remember this from a friend who is a retired Marine. The Seven Ps. Piss Poor Planning Precedes Piss Poor Performance! That statement sums up ObamaCare from top to bottom. Come to think of it that describes the dilemma’s the city finds itself in too.

      • The 7 Ps is a British Army adage for Proper Planning and Preparation Prevents Piss Poor Performance.
        What kinda of health care system do the Brits have?

        • Perhaps one that was planned well and implemented correctly thus it accomplishes its goals of covering everyone to a level we associate with health departments and the VA. I did not dog the concept of universal healthcare. I did make fun of the incompetence of the fellow the American proletariat elected to implement it. I stand by my assertion that President Obama and the minions he has appointed could not organize and execute a dog fight. They passed it without reading it and have proceeded to screw up everything they have touched. Vision without execution had just as well be the musings of lunatics. That also describes the present state of ObamaCare.

    • The manner in which ACA has started, just what is the good? And the future looks real bright? And still with the same old, same old: blame the republicans. Don’t blame the CCO for their “focus”:Barry wrote this movie, the CCO is just critiquing.

      • The point is they made up their minds in advance. Obama could have the cure for cancer and fart golden eggs and you guys would still complain. His presidency was dead on arrival. Only thing I wish he would’ve done was pull out of Iraq and Afghanistan the first day in office. The only reason he got re-elected is total ineptitude of the modern republican party.

        • barry could say he cured cancer and farts golden eggs and you can keep your insurance and you liberals will believe him……………

        • “His presidency was dead on arrival”; again, blaming the Repubs, any one or every one except for the person truly at fault for a failed presidency; the big guy himself(BHO if it is not obvious enough)As far as the GOP and their problems, I give you that one.

      • The only people that I have talked to about health care and that are against the ACA are the rich and wealthy (mostly all Rep).
        We all know that the well-financed, broadly implemented sabotage campaign designed to rig the law for failure, while also making it more difficult for Americans to receive insurance.
        It is the law. Deal with it and let the reb bring something to the table or stfu.

        • I am no where near rich and the ACA is doing a fine job of keeping me there. My insurance premiums have went up over 60% in the last two years. That equals about $3,000 that could go to my children.

          • I bet your insurance company has more to do with that (raising of your premiums) than the ACA. I bet they were under biddding just like with my former insurance provider. My insurance went up something like 43%. When Welborn health care went under.

          • The insurance companies will have to raise the premiums of all to cover the additional expenses associated with those with pre-existing conditions. The whole system is set up like that. That’s why Obama said that they required everyone to pay into the system. The young and healthy help offset the cost of the elderly and chronically ill.

          • Phyllip,
            My husband’s premiums decreased 44%. Go figure. And he is no spring chicken.

            • One of the actuarial mandates for ObamaCare was that the old could not pay more than 3 times what the young rates are. The phenomena of people over 55 but not yet on Medicare getting a lower price than is paid by the young was designed into ObamaCare. Phyllip’s price increase and your husband’s price decrease are by design. I have no idea why they decided to do it that way or if they even knew it when it was voted on.

  2. I too commend the mayor and the city council for their stand against the bias-based HJR6. When all the window dressing is stripped away, the only reason for an amendment to Indiana’s constitution like the one pushed by the knuckledraggers is bigotry. Pure and simple.

    • Knuckledraggers, bigots, hatemongers…In the fight for what some perceive to be a basic human right we trample all over the rights of others that are protected under the first amendment of our Constitution; The right to free exercise of religion and freedom of speech. How about everyone gets to have their beleifs without becoming the subject of any name-calling or harrassment?

        • Did I say that it did? I am referring to all of the name-calling from the opponents of HJR-6. If you support it or if you don’t agree with homosexuality, then you become the target of vitriolic hate. That should not be tolerated. Both sides should be able to speak freely without being subjected to name calling. That’s what my post just said. I’m sorry that you read something different.

          • I have expressed my opposition thus far without any name-calling or vitriolic hate, yet my comments on the subject have been met by you with stroppiness and whinging. Why is that?

      • Phyllip…

        You forgot easily led rabble as the voting public was described the other day, nothing like insulting folks that don’t share your point of view to further your cause.

        Not that I care one way or another, but it’s fairly obvious that there are bigots on both sides of the issue….I think anyone should be able to have a union/marriage with anyone they like, makes no difference to me since it’s none of my business.

        But if you asked me am I for a state sponsored amendment to our constitution either for or against? I’d say no because it’s none of the states concern either…..you know, love is a wonderful thing no matter where you find it, state sponsoring it seems out of their realm of authority.

        JMHO

  3. Hey all I’m confused with different wording ,banning,new amendments just all the bs with same sex marriage . Is our mayor and city council for it or against it…?
    My opinion is I don’t care what they do behind closed doors ,but you cannot call it marriage……

    • So let them be gay just don’t give them any rights? I just want to make sure I have your argument right.

      • Almost everyone that I have ever spoken to that oppose gay marriage support protection of the rights of gay people. The hang up seems to be the word marriage, which the religious (myself included) believe is a sacred ceremony. Holy matrimony. I have plenty of gay friends and I would fight side-by-side with them if anyone ever tried to take their property away. There needs to be open and honest discussion to have a compromise. Instead, we get hateful rhetoric. I try my hardest not to ever hate anyone and love everyone. That’s why I think it’s important to have the discussion. Right now we have opposing forces moving straight ahead without the will to yield anything to the other group.

          • I’m sure that most people know how Christians define marriage and how we understand the origin of marriage to be between Adam & Eve. There’s your opportunity to make insulting remarks about my religious beliefs. Have at it.

          • I will not go there. Just going to bring up that marrying for love is new in regards to human history. It was a business deal to aquire land & wealth. Amirite. I think people need to keep their noses out of others affairs.

          • In order to believe in keeping one’s nose out of the affairs of others, one must first resist the urge to be a control freak, then must understand what freedom means.

  4. For those who think that a conservative image for the State is not “desirable” from an economic viewpoint, I would offer the fact that the most liberal State in the Country, California, is hopelessly bankrupted to the tune of $130. Billion (June, 2013) and it is only a matter of time before WE will be called on to bail THEM out.

    __

  5. I’ll amend my statement that bigotry is the sole reason for ill-advised measures like HJR6. An equally abhorrent co-reason may well be religion’s attempts to own marriage, something it is absolutely unnecessary for. These folks are on the march, merrily abusing the 1st Amendment as they go. They’ll be called names not dreamed up yet and deserve every one of them. When you take positions that are bigoted on their face, you’ll have that. No amount of their crocodile tearish pleading for understanding changes the unmitigated bigotry of what they wish for. We do understand, that is the problem the proponents of HJR6 cannot understand. The curtain has been pulled back on them.

    They seem to be stuck in ‘scold’ mode as they stomp their feet and watch the nation move on without them. A natural die-off will eventually make this issue go away. Our children will look back and wonder what took so long.

    If Bosma puts that bill on the floor he sends a signal to good-paying employers everywhere that Indiana isn’t where they want to be.

    • Hurry up and tell Bosma to copy liberal California’s plan for success. Their liberal policies obviously bring in the good-paying employers. To the tune of the highest poverty rate in the country and third highest unemployment rate.

      • I’m not going to be in a hurry to do anything. Tell ‘liberal California’ yourself if you want them told. Ho ho ho.

      • Liberal CA just balanced its budget for the first time in decades with a combination of spending cuts and tax increases.

    • I do not believe that it’s as much of “Religions” wanting to “own” marriage as it is religious beliefs that a homosexual lifestyle is banned in their teachings or by their god, there are few Christan religions that support homosexuality, most say it is a abomination.

      Homosexuality isn’t something that is new or trendy, it’s as old as humanity itself, and many devote Christians believe it is a one-way ticket to hell, it’s hard to counter or convince people with that mindset that it’s a lifestyle choice that is viable to anyone but heathens destine to spend eternity in the fires of hell.

      And yes I know this is 2013 and God has been kicked out of every public place and thing but there are still very many people who believe in God (whichever you choose) and Christan teachings, these people have the fear of eternal damnation driving their beliefs, right or wrong that’s just how it is.

      Disclaimer: I’m not stating this as my belief, I’m stating it as a opinion on the topic. 😉

      JMHO

      • I don’t think it’s a one-way ticket to hell. I believe that it’s a sin, but no worse than the countless sins that I will undoubtedly make over my lifetime. I’m just as critical of my sins.

  6. I join the City Council members Weaver, Mosby, and Riley, Mayor Winnecke, and the CCO in supporting the rights of people to enter into contracts of union with whomever they choose and to call the union whatever they wish. Getting government out of the private business of marriage is a step in the right direction; it is a step toward freedom.

    • Thank you for letting us know where you stand on this issue. I’m sure all of the parties that you mentioned are glad that you joined them. I, for one, will be able to sleep soundly tonight knowing that.

        • He is waiting for those knuckles to heal.

          For a chip that size it will take both hands.

        • No chip. I just think that it’s funny that you think so highly of yourself that you felt the need to make an official announcement that you are joining the local politicals and a website in your position. I was waiting for the disclaimer, “This message brought to you by the delusions of grandeur in Brad Linzy’s mind. Anotherlocal, Treasurer”

          • All I’m doing is voicing my opinion. It’s no more or less valuable than anyone else’s. You bitch so much when I disagree with the Mayor, I would have thought you’d be happy I found something upon which we agree.

            Ironically, speaking of our opinions of ourselves, you display all the classic hallmarks of someone with a low self-esteem. You’re like a high school girl who bolsters her flagging self-worth by denigrating others. You clearly have a chip on your shoulder. I suggest you seek professional help rather than using the CCO as a form of misguided self-help.

  7. Breaking News. Just heard that the Evansville Courier and Press just laid off 12 employees.

    4 of the 12 worked in the Advertising Department. Hope 1 of the other 8 was the know it Editor.

    • At this point, one of the things I would like to see (may even put it on my xmas list) is for the C&P and CCO to form a team of rivals on common issues like blight, Greyhound Bus Station, etc,etc. Even if it would be just a one time deal, a joint volunteer venture between the two would do wonders for both sides and would actually be a breath of fresh air for a town that’s been dirty since the beginning of time.

      Until then, we’re going to keep getting announcements like this one.

  8. Your correct one of them is my sister-in-law. What a great Christmas gift the Courier gave them. All I heard from her during this year was how the paper is mismanaged.

    • I’m sorry that anyone would lose their job, especially during the CHRISTmas season. If there is a bright spot, she may be happier since she has publicly complained about working there.

  9. What troubles me the most about the future of the 2001 master plan is that only one person- Mr. Alan Leibunguth expressed any interest in the master plan during the election even though this was very clearly a Winnecke campaign promise.

    Mr. Leibunguth borrowed my copy of the plan and even sat down and went page by page over it. During the hotel debate, I kept hearing council member after council member say they wanted the master plan. How many have a copy of the plan or have looked at the plan? Even the GAGE link to the plan was deleted (thankfully I printed it off before).

    • Jordan

      If you have an electronic PDF copy, you should post it somewhere online. If all you have is a paper copy, I would bet good money that the CCO would be glad to scan it and post it online.

      Heck, if you have a Dropbox account you can easily share that for people to look at.

      If the CCO cannot scan it, we can figure out a way to get it scanned so more people can see it

      • Dropbox would be the best way to get the plan out there. We have a 2MB limitation on uploading and having seen that plan I am sure it exceeds 2MB.

      • Unfortunately I don’t have an online version of it but I would have no problem scanning. I’ll have to get with the cco on it. My printer/scanner is a Lexmark (Lexington’s finest printer copy as usual) piece of junk and I have no idea how to use drop box but we’ll get it figured out and get it online. Thanks

  10. It is amazing that with a city audit still not issued, the books still not balanced, and the city’s accounting system far from functioning properly, that the mayor finds time to opine on gay marriage. Fix the problems that really matter first instead trying to change the subject from the fact that we have serious issue with the city’s financial controls. Anybody heard what the status is on the hotel financing?

    If you think it takes three month to analyze and fund a hotel loan, then you will likely believe that once you let gay marriage out of the bottle, you will be able to limit any type of marriage, be it to multiple partners or animals.

  11. “we wonder except for the collection of licensing fees and taxation programs that treat married and single people differently why on earth any government ever got into the business of who can marry who in the first place?”

    I am seriously aghast. What has happened in our society that normally critical thinking people can not string enough of a cognitive thought together to understand why marriage is important, or at least has been important, to human culture? If we continue down this trend of viewing marriage licenses as the state sanctioning of love, then indeed there is no reason for states to issue marriage licenses. The current trend however is going to result in mandate for the federal licensing of marriage. If you like the ACA, you’re going to love the federal government sanctioning who loves whom.

    • Our point was clearly that we do not support any government involvement in marriage period. Marriage is a choice that two people willingly enter into. Why should government have anything at all to say about it?

      • If the purpose of a marriage license becomes state sanctioning of the consent and commitment of two adults, then indeed it has becomes nothing more than a love license and there is no purpose of the state authenticating who loves whom. I would have to agree with you that there is no longer any purpose for government involvement. But then we are also going to have to admit that those who claimed gay marriage would destroy marriage were right.

        What perplexed me however was that you can not grasp that there was a reason for government to to grant marriage licenses. Heterosexual marriage has literally eons of acceptance and is not on trial, or at least should not be on trail. The next generation comes into existence only through heterosexual relationships. That is a unique attribute of heterosexual relationships and a huge impact on culture. Marriage gives heterosexuals a short cut to certain rights and when families mostly consisted of one bread winner it provided financial considerations.

        If there are unfair tax considerations, then to me it makes more sense to change tax codes to be equal for all rather than single out homosexuals for special consideration while leaving those in other non tradition relationships, or those who chose not to seek a marriage license, frozen in an unfair tax bracket.

      • The problem with the issue is that it is driven by emotions and prejudice on both sides rather than rational consideration. Anyone who does not accept the “all or nothing” option concerning homosexual marriage will face a barrage of vindictive accusations and character assassination.

        When I consider the CCO’s preferred solution, “that government should get out of the marriage business, but it makes the statement th e”…the CCO has long supported a person’s right to choose to enter into a contract of marriage with anyone one wishes?…” it appear to me that the one statement cancels out the other. How does the CCO support state sanctioning of homosexual marriage wile at the same time saying it does not support the state sanctioning of marriage? I am not use to that sort of convoluted logic from this tabloid.

        It is rare to find rational debate in this issue, and that is going to result in a bad law no matter how it is decided.

        • I think we have different definitions of sanction. Our preferred solution would be for the state to have nothing to do with marriage at all. That is not to sanction. On the fundamental right side the state should protect basic rights and the right to marry who one chooses is included. For instance as marriages are pretty much under the constitutional area of “pursuit of happiness” the state should prevent anyone or any group from infringing on the rights of others.

          Lets examine a situation where in some location with a majority of people who are gay that gets together and passes a law against traditional marriage. Would you agree that the constitution should protect heterosexual rights to marry under either “pursuit of happiness” or “freedom of religion” if the marriage were seeking church sanction? It should work the same way in reverse and that is what the opposition to this bill in Indiana is all about.

          Sanction by the state in the case of marriage happens when you buy a marriage license because the state essentially grants approval and permission for the union one is about to enter. Our preference is that the states are completely out of the marriage business period but we realize that the constitution should govern any oppressive actions initiated by either side. If no one tries to jam their ideology down someone else’s throat the government will never take any action at all.

          • My use of sanction is to ratify, authorize, or confirm.

            I would say marriage falls more under the principle of promoting common good rather than pursuit of happiness. How would one license a pursuit? However, providing legal pathways as a short cut to the necessities of building a life together would require a certification such as a marriage license and adds to the common good, the next generation. Perhaps culture has changed enough that the definition of marriage should be enlarged, but enlarging to a select group who qualify by sexual preference alone is inherently unfair and does not accomplish the goal the proponents of same sex marriage claim.

            “Lets examine a situation where in some location with a majority of people who are gay that gets together and passes a law against traditional marriage. Would you agree that the constitution should protect heterosexual rights”

            An emphatic no!

            You can not write laws that singles out and excludes any group. That is why Iowa’s amendment was declared unconstitutional. You can however constitutionally define marriage, and 29 states have already done so. We are one of four that has not done so. (I do not see these states suffering the economic doom that the opponents of this amendment.) This amendment no more denies homosexual marriage than it denies polygamy.

            But if it is unconstitutional to single out homosexuals for exclusion from marriage, then how is it constitutional to single them out for marriage but exclude polygamist or any other union between consenting adults?

            Someone’s ideology is going to be jammed down someone else’s throat no matter how this issue rolls out. I actually agree that we would be better off for the government to get out of the marriage business than write bad laws based on emotionalism. But you still have the problem of how you prefer the government get out of the marriage business while at the same supporting the addition of same sex to the qualifications of marriage.

            To me the most reasonable choice is to leave marriage as it is or no longer issue marriage licenses.

  12. I have NO idea where the editor is getting his/her information.

    Actually the 18-35 year old group are signing up of Covered California at a pct higher than the overall population.

    • From the local agency that runs the sign ups for Covered California. I was in the meeting Tuesday. They had all of the spreadsheets right down to the counties and the real sign up numbers. Sign ups are those who are enrolled as opposed to those that have chosen a plan but not taken the last step. Unless the State of California is publishing false numbers to the insiders who are doing the enrollments you have bad information.

    • Another bit of info from yesterday. This region (Coachella Valley) has approximately 90,000 people who are eligible to sign up for ACA. It is geographically small. Yesterday there was a highly publicized sign up rally with over a hundred volunteers to help people sign up. Exactly 40 people showed up. 24 chose to sign up after seeing the prices of their options. 2 were in the young and healthy category.

Comments are closed.