Arguments Against Gay Marriage Literally Stop Making Sense:

The new law won’t make gay marriage equal to straight marriage. Instead, it will create a new kind of marriage in which gay people and straight people are equal.

First, that’s their compromise?

Second, is that really what we as a society are debating here? Or, even more absurd, does coming to such a conclusion even require any debate? I hope not; otherwise I am more embarrassed for this country than I initially suspected.

via jhoff

I had never been so frustrated with Chicago as I was this afternoon. A full 24 hours after the marathon was over, streets were still shut down. Heading northbound on Lake Shore, Roosevelt was closed. Balbo was closed. Jackson, with its ridiculously long turn lane, seemed open, but was closed off about 20 feet from the intersection, which trapped people who were planning to turn left in the left turn lane and forced them to reincorporate themselves into traffic that was flying past while they stood completely still; the lights weren’t cycling either, of course, since it essentially wasn’t an intersection anymore. Monroe, too, was closed. Randolph was closed. I ended up getting off at Chicago.

It’d be fine if the traffic folks had had the courtesy to let people know of the closings. I’d have happily gotten off 4.8 miles earlier on 55 if I’d known I’d be forced to drive all the way up to Chicago. A simple detour sign would have done the trick. Maybe the City can’t afford detour signs anymore.

This was the for the marathon—or I guess the day after the marathon, but who really needs to get anywhere these days?—and it happens every year. What did Chicago expect to have happen if the Olympics were in town?

One more reason to take public transportation, I guess.

Or wait. Shoot. Maybe not. Why would the City reallocate some of the $5 billion they had just budgeted for the Olympics to something popular? Silly me.

Really? Ben Stein is still giving people financial advice? After this?

I’m getting pretty sick of how ridiculous a notion it is for American citizens to go without access to health insurance, to not be able to afford health insurance, and, in some instances, including mine, be forced to pay insane medical bills even with the appropriate insurance. It’s both embarrassing and infuriating for me; I can’t imagine how the uninsured must feel.

The cost associated with the proposed health care reform is perhaps the most commonly cited reason against implementing it. Who cares, I say. We are making a lot of poor choices in spending a lot of money in a lot of other places; my feeling is that we need this, and despite its cost, we need to make it work somehow. The politicking surrounding this issue has become nauseating, and we have to start deconstructing it and looking at it for what it will provide from a moral and social standpoint instead of what it may or may not lead to from a financial standpoint. It trumps most other things in my opinion, and it’s a relief to read that others feel the same way.

This is one of the best articles I’ve read in a long, long time. A few choice snippets from the article:

Congressional critics of President Obama’s efforts to achieve health reform worry that universal coverage will be expensive, while their priority is to curb social spending. So [forgoing health insurance is] their chance to save government dollars in keeping with their own priorities.

Those same critics sometimes argue that universal coverage needn’t be a top priority because anybody can get coverage at the emergency room. Let them try that with their kids.

---

In January 1917, Progressive Magazine wrote: “At present the United States has the unenviable distinction of being the only great industrial nation without universal health insurance.” More than 90 years later, we still have that distinction.

---

When nearly 3,000 people were killed on 9/11, we began wars and were willing to devote more than $1 trillion in additional expenses. Yet about the same number of Americans die from our failed insurance system every three weeks.

Dead on the money. It’s a must-read.

(via caryblack, Pharyngula, @destroytoday, @robinwauters)

Got two calls today from Citibank— the people who send me paper mail to notify me of my status as an enrollee in their all-electronic program—asking me whether I’d like to pay off my balance now, over the phone.

Me: “Umm…I’m not quite sure why you’re asking. I typically pay online after I’ve received the bill, and I haven’t received the bill yet. Do you know when the billing cycle ends?” Them: [Pause. More pausing. Some fiddling.] “Sir, I……..I don’t know. I know we sent an email out to you on June fif—that would be…today I guess. Haven’t you received it yet?” Me: “No.” Them: “Okay, well would you like to pay your balance then?” Me: “No thank you. I’ll just pay it online the moment I get the bill like I’ve done for the last three years now.” Them: “It’s only $61.62…” Me: “No, again, I’m going to pay it online once I receive the bill, and that isn’t even close to the full amount on the card.” Them: “Right, it looks like you’re showing a total balance of……..” [Pause. More pausing. Some more fiddling.] Me: “…$482.62.” Them: [Shuffling papers. Possible removal of the earpiece and side conversation with coworker.] “$482.62? Yes, of course, $482.62. So would you like to pay the $61.62 now then over the phone?” Me: “Is it due today or something? Why are you calling me??” Them: “No sir, it’s due June 24th.” Me: “Okay then, I will pay it when I receive the bill.” Them: “No problem, sir. I will note that in your account. Would you also like to sign up for our no-interest-for-six-months, cash-back—”

Click. Insanity.