House GOP Health Care Bill
After months of criticism that they're opposing Democratic efforts on health care reform without any ideas of their own, House Republicans today unveiled a 209-page health care reform bill. It's a little more comprehensive than depeicted in this brilliant Tom Toles cartoon. But not by much. It doesn't aim to expand coverage for the uninsured -- simply to bring down costs over time. Though, I'm still trying to figure out the calculus of how one brings down costs without cutting services or expanding coverage to include all those young invisibles...
-
1
Me and you both... I am still trying to understand how the whole thing will work... or do they even know? I feel like I am watching "Telemundo". As a person that loosely understands spanish, every time I read or hear news on the Healthcare Bill I understand it, but barely... May this all make sense one day and actually work!
-
1.1
It is now 10:22 PM.
For weeks we have heard a ton of bullsh*t from the GOP about introducing their own health care bill. But while they were spewing hot air the good news folks kept dutifully repeating it as if they would REALLY come up with something but in the meantime they set about tearing the Democratic Bills apart down to the tinyest iota. Trying to find any way they could use to call it a bad bill.
.
CBO comes out with a preliminary score that looks bad, mainstream media runs with it. Never mind that a subsequent, more comprehensive score shows better outcomes. Astroturf groups spread lies about the text of the bill and death panels. Mainstream media dutifully repeats as if its a credible "side" of the argument. GOP labels the public option "controversial" and the media follows the script perfectly. Hell I bet you can't find ONE story abou the public option from the mainstream media that doesn't include the word "controversial".
.
But when the GOP puts out this steaming pile of dog sh*t the media just yawns and keeps it moving. When the CBO trashes the bill the media is too busy covering teabaggers outside Congress. When the GOP has been exposed as the most dishonest muthf*ckas ever, the media just yawns and waits for the next fake argument against the Democratic bill.
.
Well let me show you how a REAL journalist covers one of the most important legislative fights in our time.
.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/11/congressional_budget_office_th.html
.CBO begins with the baseline estimate that 17 percent of legal, non-elderly residents won't have health-care insurance in 2010. In 2019, after 10 years of the Republican plan, CBO estimates that ...17 percent of legal, non-elderly residents won't have health-care insurance. The Republican alternative will have helped 3 million people secure coverage, which is barely keeping up with population growth. Compare that to the Democratic bill, which covers 36 million more people and cuts the uninsured population to 4 percent.
.
But maybe, you say, the Republican bill does a really good job cutting costs. According to CBO, the GOP's alternative will shave $68 billion off the deficit in the next 10 years. The Democrats, CBO says, will slice $104 billion off the deficit.
.
The Democratic bill, in other words, covers 12 times as many people and saves $36 billion more than the Republican plan. And amazingly, the Democratic bill has already been through three committees and a merger process. It's already been shown to interest groups and advocacy organizations and industry stakeholders. It's already made its compromises with reality. It's already been through the legislative sausage grinder. And yet it saves more money and covers more people than the blank-slate alternative proposed by John Boehner and the House Republicans. The Democrats, constrained by reality, produced a far better plan than Boehner, who was constrained solely by his political imagination and legislative skill.
.
This is a major embarrassment for the Republicans. It's one thing to keep your cards close to your chest. Republicans are in the minority, after all, and their plan stands no chance of passage. It's another to lay them out on the table and show everyone that you have no hand, and aren't even totally sure how to play the game..
Oh and wherever you are Karen just know that its highly dissappointing that the point person covering health care reform for Time magazine isn't even the one putting up this pitiful piece of trash of a blog post about the Republican "bill".
-
-
2
The republicans could care less about the thousands upon thousands of families in the real world who do not have health insurance. They prefer they would just go away. They have no idea what it is like to become seriously ill and have no health coverage. What it's like lying awake at night in pain wondering who to turn to. As Kanye would say, the GOP doesn't like sick people.
-
2.1
Well octa, the dems have the majority of the house and senate, you'd think they would have passed this a long time ago. I guess that means democrats don't like sick people either. I think you should pay more attention to your party and lees attention to Kanye.
-
-
3
Thanks, Jay. I'm still digging thru links in gop site. If only one HC thing gets fixed, I hope it's addressing pre-existing conditions / recissions. So their only answer is creating high-risk pools? I'd ask why not just make these discriminatory practices illegal (as house bill would)? Oh, how can a medical condition be called discriminatory? Some conditions lead to disabilities that ARE covered in the ADA law. I haven't heard R's whine about the ADA being unfair to business. Any other insights here, Jay? (my one thought for today – sorry if I'm in a rare cranky mood, NOT election-related; you do good work and I may be among the few here to openly appreciate it) thx
-
4
Some credit for Boehner and company launching this atrocity has to be given to Alan Grayson and his "die quickly" remarks on the House floor.
I am not a huge fan of everything Grayson has done or said, but he called out the Republicans for having no plan with those remarks, and when the Republicans went after him for his hyperbole, Grayson stood his ground in appearance after appearance, making the point that Boehner and the GOP had nothing to offer on health care except, "No!"
So the Republicans backed off and the resulting silence from them was deafening. Their silence proved Grayson's point.
Thus, this inane "bill" Boehner announced with almost red-faced (if one could tell through his normal orange glow) embarrassment yesterday.
Grayson must be getting a good laugh out of all of this, watching Boehner stutter and stammer his way through what amounts to an incoherent mish-mash.of giveaways to insurance companies masquerading as the GOP Health Care Reform Plan.
-
5
Well its better than nothing. At all.
-
5.1
It's worth than nothing -- at least as I understand it, it would effectively kill employer-based insurance. Whatever happened to "if you like what you have, you can keep it?"
-
5.2
worth s/b "worse"
-
-
6
Ending junk lawsuits. They just aren't trying any more.
Also loved the part about insurers not being allowed to cancell a policy unless a person commits fraud or "conceals material facts about a health condition"
Yep no chance of people being kicked off as the insurer decides what is a "material fact"
-
6.1
You didn't tell us about your teenage acne and that's what led to your prostate cancer.
.
Denied. -
6.2
PNNTO:
.
no chance of people being kicked off as the insurer decides what is a "material fact"
.
That's not true, actually
.
The bill's language says this:(2) in subsection (a), by inserting ‘‘, including without rescission,'' after ‘‘continue in force''; and
.
(3) in subsection (b)(2), by inserting before the period at the end the following: ‘‘, including intentional concealment of material facts regarding a health condition related to the condition for which coverage is being claimed''.The whole passage of 42 USC 300 - Sec. 300gg-42. "Guaranteed renewability of individual health insurance coverage" as amended by the Republican bill would therefore read:
(a) In general Except as provided in this section, a health insurance issuer that provides individual health insurance coverage to an individual shall renew or continue in force including without rescission such coverage at the option of the individual.
.
(b) General exceptions: A health insurance issuer may nonrenew or discontinue health insurance coverage of an individual in the individual market based only on one or more of the following: (1) Nonpayment of premiums The individual has failed to pay premiums or contributions in accordance with the terms of the health insurance coverage or the issuer has not received timely premium payments. (2) Fraud The individual has performed an act or practice that constitutes fraud or made an intentional misrepresentation of material fact under the terms of the coverage, including intentional concealment of material facts regarding a health condition related to the condition for which coverage is being claimed.That's exactly what we're asking for; an end to rescission based on unintentional "concealment", and anything that isn't specifically fraudulent.
.
If people don't know something, they can't intentionally conceal it, which therefore is not fraud, and so coverage cannot be withheld. This bill actually says so. That's good.
.
Just sayin'... -
6.3
What body makes the determination of what is "intentional concealment" and what is oversight or ignorance?
-
6.4
PNNTO:
.
A court, when the insurer continues the practice, and is sued --maybe even class-action sued-- for it. -
6.5
Thanks for the info SZ.
.
So the trail would be: an insurer discontinues health insurance coverage of an individual, the now uninsured, but still sick, individual has to go to court to try to get their coverage back?
.
That you are able to wade through these bills-and process the info-is pretty dang impressive.
. -
6.6
Seriously folks. Whatever gets passed, expect the health insurance companies to do an end run and find some way to keep denying coverage and treatments. As private companies they live and die by their bottom line. And so do the rest of us. Look no further then the credit card industry and all the new fees and rate hikes they are adding despite the passage of the consumer credit protection law. The only entity big enough to keep them "honest" (as if they ever were) is the Government.
-
-
7
Jay
all those young invisibles...
Whoa, ninjas!
-
8
Meh. the GOP plan ends up being a race to the bottom, with large health insurance corporations maintaining its grip on American health care.
Oh, and including "Repeal of Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research" under the "PROTECTING THE DOCTOR-PATIENT RELATIONSHIP" heading is a hoot...as if providing data as to which treatments work and which do not is a bad thing...
-
8.1
correction: maintaining their grips
-
8.2
Absent repeal of the antitrust exemption it's probably OK to refer to "large health insurance corporations" in the singular.
.
Anyone? Anyone? Strunk? White? -
8.3
Unlike this site, Strunk and White are on daylight savings time...
-
-
9
[...] here to read the rest: House GOP Health Care Bill – Swampland – TIME.com Tags: a-little-more, care-reform, democratic, house, little-more, their-own, today-unveiled [...]
-
10
All I know is that if someone with as many well honed positive relationships with Congressional Republicans as JNS is forced to scratch her head and declare WTF, then it has to be a REALLY bad plan. I don't even have to read it.
-
10.1
Hmm, shades of Conyers....
-
10.2
No, go ahead; it's hi-larious.
-
-
11
Catastrophic loss prevention– check p.7 sec 101
No exclusions for an insured for pre-existing conditions – check p.12 sec 103
Set up of a government backed “small employer” group policy program – check p 25
Open up State to State sales of insurance – check p 28, p 118
Tort Reform – check p 150
Protection for Doctor Patient relationship – check p 168
Incentivizing health and wellness programs – check p 169
Protecting taxpayers from out of control government funded future entitlement programs – check 172
Prohibiting tax payer funded abortions – check p 173
Streamlining the transition of drugs from brand to generic – check p 185
Stopping Medicare and Medicaid abuse and fraud – check p 176 -
12
JNS says:
."It doesn't aim to expand coverage for the uninsured -- simply to bring down costs over time
.
NOT TRUE - A LIE!
.
See p. 25 -
13
Jay Newton-Small:
.
Have you read this thing?
.
It's really, really irritating.
.
You know, after spending all of this time reading the House bills (HR 3200, then the latest HR 3962) and the HELP & Finance Committee markups, I suppose I've actually come to appreciate the people who wrote those.
.
In the Republican bill, the authors have adopted this weird rhetorical technique of naming sections with political messages, but then the sections don't necessarily correspond with the proclaimed intent of the section header.
.
Take, for example this section, which is gloriously entitled:
.
"ENSURING COVERAGE FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH PREEXISTING CONDITIONS AND MULTIPLE HEALTH CARE NEEDS":Sec. 101. Establish universal access programs to improve high risk pools and
reinsurance markets.
.
Sec. 102. Elimination of certain requirements for guaranteed availability in individual
market.
.
Sec. 103. No annual or lifetime spending caps.
.
Sec. 104. Preventing unjust cancellation of insurance coverage.Well, just from the header, one would expect to see some pretty heavy assurances of coverage for folks who can't get it through insurers.
.
Taking these sections from last to first, we actually do see some good reform.
.
In fact, there is clear action on "Section 104: Preventing unjust cancellation"; they do very clearly ban rescission in very precise language. It's good.
.
Section 103 is similarly clear and precise. It bans caps on payouts, both annually and lifetime. Very good.
.
Section 102 is also good, it wipes out a number of conditions that the previous guaranteed renewability law had put on people trying to keep the policies they had after they leave their jobs. It makes it explicitly easier for people who have been a part of a group plan under their employer to be guaranteed continued coverage from that plan under the law. Not magnificent, but good.
.
But Section 101...Now that's total f-ing lunacy.
.
They start off with this big deal about establishing "universal access programs", but very quickly you see that it's all about mandating that the states create high risk insurance pools for all the people who were dropped from plans because of claims; i.e. the people who need payouts for medical care the most:IN GENERAL.—Not later than January 1,
14 2010, each State shall
.
(A) subject to paragraph (3), operate—
.
(i) a qualified State reinsurance program described in subsection (b); or
.
(ii) qualifying State high risk pool described in subsection (c)(1); and
.
(B) subject to paragraph (3), apply to the operation of such a program from State funds an amount equivalent to the portion of State funds derived from State premium assessments (as defined by the Secretary) that are not otherwise used on State health care programs.Oh Lordee!
.
What a fantastic idea!
.
The Republicans will simply mandate that states insure desperately and chronically ill people, and where will that money come from?
.
From whatever moneys are "not otherwise used on State health care programs."!
.
Whoopee! Problem solved!
.
Awesome!
.
I'm sure that the states have bucketfuls of cash just lying around for this very purpose, and were just waiting for Congressional Republicans to step up to the plate to force them to use the money on high risk pools!
.
So that the states better understand the seriousness of their purposes, Republican lawmakers spell out that funding must be --get this-- "stable":(1) IN GENERAL.—A qualifying State high risk pool described in this subsection means a current section 2745 qualified high risk pool that meets the following requirements:
.
(A) The pool must provide at least two coverage options, one of which must be a high deductible health plan coupled with a health savings account.
.
(B) The pool must be funded with a stable funding source.That's right!
.
Those geniuses have told the states that sick and broke folks must be required to pay high deductibles somehow linked to whatever funds are left in their imaginary "health savings accounts", and then --with serious faces-- gravely intone that the "source" --whatever that may be-- must be "stable".
.
Well, hallelujah! Problem solved! Charge people high deductibles to be taken out of whatever meager savings they've been stupid enough to put away, and require that some pot-o'-gold funding "source" be "stable", and Voila!
.
Health care crisis over!
.
But surely these people must know that the states don't have that kind of money! States can't borrow money like the Feds, and have balanced budget amendments and such! What say the Republicans?
.
Aha! There's a section called "Funding"!
.
Later on, we get to the numbers, which are here in (e) FUNDING:(e) FUNDING.—In addition to any other amounts appropriated, there is appropriated to carry out section 2745 of the Public Health Service Act (including through a program or pool described in subsection (a)(1))—
(1) $15,000,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2010 through 2019; and
(2) an additional $10,000,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2015 through 2019.That's it.
.
$25 billion dollars over 10 years, ten billion of which come after 2015.
.
That's the whole thing.
.
Is there any serious person who would defend the notion that this section of law "Ensures" anything for "INDIVIDUALS WITH PREEXISTING CONDITIONS AND MULTIPLE HEALTH CARE NEEDS?"
.
What this does is throw the problem right back at the states, tosses $2.5 billion a year for the next ten years at them, and says "Go for it."
.
That's less than the money we give Pakistan, isn't it?
.
What did we give Pakistan, again? (link to Times article)Pakistan Aid Places U.S. in the Midst of a Divide
.
By JANE PERLEZ Published: October 12, 2009
.
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — The new aid package for Pakistan passed by Congress last month — a promise of $7.5 billion for civilian needs over the next five years — has unwittingly thrust the United States into the center of the perennially uneasy relationship between Pakistan's powerful military and its weak civilian governments.OK, so it's a little less than half the amount we hand over to the Pakistanis every year.
.
Still, with health care spending increasing faster than GDP by at least 2%, and the current expenditures coming in at over a trillion dollars (according to Health and Human Services), what on earth are the Republicans thinking applying Pakistani aid levels to the spending required to fund the health care of everyone in the highest risk, uninsurable pools of sick people the states will come up with?
.
Can you figure this out, Jay Newton-Small?
.
Are they serious?-
13.1
Stuart, I've said this before, but - TIME should hire you. I'm impressed you're reading the Dem bills, but really impressed you are slogging your way through the GOP plan.
-
13.2
Art Pepper:
.
LOL
.
Well, I can't be a professional, because I dashed out "it's a little less than half the amount we hand over to the Pakistanis every year" instead of "it's a little less than twice the amount we hand over to the Pakistanis every year" and posted before I could catch it on a re-read.
.
Exacto-opposite-o! Whoops, my bad.
.
7.5 billion dollars over 5 years is 1.5 billion a year (Pakistani aid), whereas 25 billion dollars over 10 years is 2.5 billion a year (Republican aid to state health care high risk pools). 2.5 is a little less than twice 1.5.
.
I'm glad I caught that embarrassing typo.
-
-
14
I am with the Democrats on being dismissive about the Republican option and this delay new tactic however, I am TIRED of the Democrats and their bickering over the bill.
I know the Democratic party is not a monolithic entity, however, for something as key as the Health care reform bill, one would have expected
more cohesion and dynamism about reform among the rank and file of the party, instead we have an old world, old politics and same old Washington posturing-Blah!Again, as I stated in a prior comment, Obama needs to be seen as a strong leader in order for order to reign in the party. Sometimes as they say, the forecast calls for pain-this one certainly does- and Obama needs to stand his ground and be a strong leader.
The losses by the Democrats yesterday can be tied, in part at least, to the general public perception that not much has been done by the Obama Administration. In large part because key initiatives like the Health Care reform plan have shown no real progress and have instead become a platform for elected officers from the Democratic Party to strut, consolidate their political power (In the Senate or House of Reps) and engage in endless posturing.
Obama promised a new era of politics in Washington, and to achieve that, there must be far reaching change. Change can never occur without resistance and “war”. If Obama wants to look like a True leader and get the Democrats to pass a truly robust bill then he needs to get his party in order so they can work as one team, otherwise the losses in NJ and VA are just the tip of the iceberg of the massive problems awaiting the Democratic Party.
Strong President=Party Unity and fewer "rogue" Representatives=COHESION on the Health care reform matter=passage of Robust bill=boost to public confidence in Obama
_______________PS: Obama should continue with efforts to quash rabble rousers like Fox News so they stop poisoning the minds of the people with their unending and increasingly vicious anti-Obama Rhetoric.
_____________LM
-
14.1
By quash you mean what LM? Eliminate? And then whose next? Anyone who would dare utter a negative word against "the great one"? You just said a word or two about him that was less than positive, when all the naysayers have been done away with would they then "quash" you too? And me, and anyone else who dared offer any form of dissent? For a while there you were making sense, but as usual you went off the deep end.
-
-
15
StuartSzechman aka Paulnottheotherone aka RustyReturns aka Palin in a Towel aka Grapecrush aka so many other aliases is a BLACK MAN and a VILE CRIMINAL who stalks and molests innocent women and children.
This man “AkbarShabazz”(he contributes to the Associated Press and other media outlets) and his wife “Shay Riley” aka Eve Sharon Moore" of the “Black Female Interracial Marriage blog” and the site "Black Women Blow the Trumpet" etc. (they own hundreds of other sites) are con artists and low life CROOKS. You can view them on the website http://www.akbarshabazz.com They are BLACK, VIOLENT AND DESPERATE CRIMINALS.
I am a little taken aback that no one on “Swampland” has investigated this low life who blitzes this site with numerous aliases.
“Akbarshabazz” and “Eve Sharon Moore” on this site and others uses numerous aliases to stalk, rob and track unwitting and law abiding people. I think it is a real travesty of justice that these disgusting low lives are allowed to roam free and to continue using technology to violate and brutalize innocents.
LM
-
15.1
I would say I've missed you, but then -- OOPS! -- there goes my nose growing again!
-
15.2
palintinaowel:
.
It isn't that you're violent, or desperate, it's because you're BLACK, I think... -
15.3
If LM is some form of performance art, then it's it's gone on far too long.
.
If LM is not, then LM is most likely mentally ill, possibly some form of paranoid delusional or schizophrenia. -
15.4
gah, delusion, not 'delusional'.
.
My grammar is off today.
-
-
16
"Thirdrockspnk"
Quash definition is: To make void; to throw out; to put an end to
__________________So very many aliases used by these BLACK THUGS on this site to desperately try to prevent a close examination of the facts I state here.
“Project 21”, one of their numerous organizations which they use to perpetuate the Nigerian Advance Fee Fraud on the public is a so called National Black Conservative site—that site is full of fake officers like “David Almasi” the so called WHITE MAN who heads this Black Conservative Organization. David Almasi does not exist despite the elaborate history created for him by these desperate felons.LM
-
16.1
Must..not..
.
GAH -
16.2
Stay on the case LM. Never give up. And always remember: You're Special!!
-
-
17
1. GOP unveils health care bill.
.
2. FLAMEFLAMEFLAMEFLAMEFLAME
.
This is why I thought it was pointless for the GOP to unveil their own health care bill, they should have saved their breath.
.
This reminds of the beginnings of Fox News. For years liberals told conservatives that if they didn't like how the media was, then they should go get their own network. Well, they did, and it was turned into the cause célèbre for the current administration, though it certainly didn't start there.
.
(Anyone who has read what I've written before on here knows that I dislike Fox News. I'm just making a point).-
17.1
apollyon07:
For years liberals told conservatives that if they didn't like how the media was, then they should go get their own network.
You know, I'm a liberal, and I can't for the life of me remember anyone who has ever said anything like that.
.
Can you point to some of those instances of liberals saying conservatives should "go get their own network" in the form of links and quotes, apollyon07?
.
Thanks so much in advance. -
17.2
Well, it looks like the GOP forgot the part where the plan should be credible. Do they want points for showing up?
-
17.3
Pointless? I thought the point was so the GOP could have something solid to point to as an alternative to the Dem proposal.
-
-
18
apollyon07, care to add anything more than "Flame"?
SZ has been pretty specific, rather than pearl clutch why not engage him?
-
19
I wasn't referring to people on here. More on that later.
-
19.1
Don't engage him apollyon. He'll open up a can o' Huffpo on ya.
-
19.2
Are you scared of Huffpo, 2/3?
-
-
20
2/3rds of a nut is right, appollyon07.
.
He will open up a can of...
.
...of...
.
...of...
.
...facts! -
21
By the way, it should probably be 'young invincibles'.
-
22
[...] is the original post: House GOP Health Care Bill – Swampland – TIME.com Health, Uncategorized [...]
-
23
Now, are these (chicken-hearted) Republicans going to argue their vision of HCR in a town-hall somewhere ....
-
23.1
Banners? Check.
Mean Face? Check.
Never read the damm Republican report? Check.
Throat lozenges? Check.
[Some, eh, oxycodone pilfered from the cache of a radio show host ...]
How-to Manual from those disruptive tea-baggers? Check.Ready for the Republicans' town hall meet .. .
-
23.2
you're witicisms are off the charts cfuk. Page 1 of lefty handbook; A: Ridicule
B:call names
C: repeat A and B -
23.3
" .. Page 1 of lefty handbook .."
Now he warns us - that Limbaugh, Beck and their tea-bag crowd and town-hall howlers may be lefties (in sleeper cells) ...
-
-
24
" .. House Republicans today unveiled a .. health care reform bill. .. to bring down costs over time. "
YOU LIE!
-
25
Hi,
I am an outreach coordinator for the health videos website.
I wanted to add to the discussion by offering up some videos for those of you looking for more information on health care reform. We have three topics pages about health care, one is specifically about policy, one is about the current reform efforts and finally, one features videos discussing the politics of it all.
http://www.icyou.com/topics/politics-policy/healthcare-policy
http://www.icyou.com/topics/politics-policy/healthcare-politics
http://www.icyou.com/topics/politics-policy/healthcare-reform
Check out these videos for answers to your questions, and check back daily for updates and new information!
Thanks,
Laura
- jnsmall @Marty2634 in 140 characters or less- that's a tall order...! - 53 minutes ago
- jnsmall @tgriff7 ha! I didn't know you're real first name is William! oh, Willy, aren't you proud that whales are free? ;-) - 1 hour ago
- jnsmall @mikemadden landmark in terns of the statue of libery or yucca mtn? Me thinks it might be closer it the latter... - 1 hour ago
Most Popular »
- NBC: There Was Never a Conan O'Brien
- Undercover Boss Is Phony and Manipulative. But Don't Hold That Against It.
- NH Poll: Dems Face A Thumpin'
- Barack Obama: Then vs. Now
- Gibbs Mocks Palin, Tea Party Convention
- Irony of the Day
- Paul Ryan Won't Run For Prez In 2012
- Love At First Byte: Your Nerdy Valentine's Day Guide
- Today's Health Care Checkup - GOP Plans Under the Spotlight
- Do You Spend Less than $2,000 Annually on Internet, TV, Cell Phone Service, and Video Games?
- Asian Carp Battle: Foreign Fish Threaten Great Lakes
- Is the Bible Fact or Fiction? Archaeology's Discoveries
- Spain's Troubled Economy: Fears Over Euro Zone Outlook
- Kennewick Man, Archaeology Find: Who Discovered America?
- Tea-Party Convention: Lessons on Palin and the Movement
- Al-Qaeda, Yemen, Wedding: Unlucky Name, Celebration
- Jim Frederick, Black Hearts in Iraq's Triangle of Death
- Venezuela: Chavez Protests at Ball Game Over Electricity
- Marja: Operation Moshtarak Tests Obama's Afghan War Plan
- Why China Needs The U.S. -- And Vice Versa
Quotes of the Day »
RSS