Sunday, September 9, 2007
Thursday, August 2, 2007
Monday, July 23, 2007
Late breakfast: Have a cigarette while you can.
Bad News for the smoking population today. Please Read:
Insuring All Children: The people want it
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER EDITORIAL BOARD
Insurance for all kids is the first place to loosen the partisan knots holding America back from better access to health care. U.S. senators took a good, strongly bipartisan first step last week for children's health.
The Senate Finance Committee approved a bill that would add $35 billion over five years to federal support for the efforts of Washington and other states to provide children's health insurance. Thanks to Sen. Maria Cantwell, the reauthorization for the State Children's Health Insurance Program also would erase a longstanding inequity that shortchanges Washington because it started to expand coverage before the federal government.
"We are delighted with the progress that is being made in Congress," said Jon Gould of the state Children's Alliance. Cantwell's Senate push could make a big difference in the success of a new state law aimed at providing health coverage for all Washington children by 2010.
Polls show that close to three quarters of Americans want full coverage for children. The wide support and Congress' long history of bipartisan cooperation on the program help explain why the committee voted 17-4 for expansion, despite a brutishly mean veto threat from President Bush. He complains the expansion would be a step toward "government-run" health care. If anything, passage might provide momentum for a bipartisan, free-market health plan sponsored by Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden and Washington Rep. Brian Baird.
The Senate plan would raise cigaratte taxes 61 cents per pack and cover more hard-working families with modest incomes. Bush calls the tax "huge." Yes, hugely helpful, well targeted and more responsible than free-lunch budgeting.
The Senate proposal needs improvements, such as another $15 billion to cover all eligible children and an end to exclusions of some legally present immigrant children. With or without the president, though, health care insurance for all children is good plan for America.
Doing some simple math.... 61 cents more per box means $4.27 a week more for chain smokers (smoking at least one pack a day) , enough for a gallon of gas in most places. Over a year that number grows to about $222 and some change, enough to buy a few xbox games... not an xbox but games. Over 10 years, which you'd have to figure most chain smoker would make it to is about $2220 more. Now of course you add that to the cost already made and your talking about something close to $10,000 over 10 years. A costly habiat indeed....Luckily for smokers they're is some hope....
Smokers United (http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Parliament/4061/Index.html) has created a campaign to stop being (in their words) discrimated against. Here's some stuff they claim keeps screwing them.
Just because you smoke....
YOU CAN
* Lose custody of your children!
* Be kicked out of your home!
* Be denied a job or be fired from the one you have!
* Be denied medical services!
Anti-tobacco organizations are funded by the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement between the states and Big Tobacco. The $209 BILLION ‘settlement’ is being paid by raising the price of cigarettes, so the industry doesn’t pay it, smokers do. The manufacturers now make 28 cents on a purchased pack of cigarettes; government at all levels gets the rest and happily doles it out to those who want to defame smokers. In other words, we’re paying them to take away our dignity and our rights.
These groups spend millions of dollars a year “denormalizing” smoking. The result is that smokers are being demonized; children are being taught--in school! --to disrespect, fear and hate their parents who smoke. They provide “kits” with all legal papers necessary to make a smoker’s life miserable. Nonsmokers are being told that secondhand smoke will kill them and therefore smokers are murderers. Legislators are bombarded with misinformation from the prohibitionists and we, the people, don’t even know there’s a plot against us until it’s a done deal.
Their goal is a smokefree world, regardless of whose rights they have to trample, who they have to hurt, what lies they have to tell, which legislators they have to buy.
Insuring All Children: The people want it
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER EDITORIAL BOARD
Insurance for all kids is the first place to loosen the partisan knots holding America back from better access to health care. U.S. senators took a good, strongly bipartisan first step last week for children's health.
The Senate Finance Committee approved a bill that would add $35 billion over five years to federal support for the efforts of Washington and other states to provide children's health insurance. Thanks to Sen. Maria Cantwell, the reauthorization for the State Children's Health Insurance Program also would erase a longstanding inequity that shortchanges Washington because it started to expand coverage before the federal government.
"We are delighted with the progress that is being made in Congress," said Jon Gould of the state Children's Alliance. Cantwell's Senate push could make a big difference in the success of a new state law aimed at providing health coverage for all Washington children by 2010.
Polls show that close to three quarters of Americans want full coverage for children. The wide support and Congress' long history of bipartisan cooperation on the program help explain why the committee voted 17-4 for expansion, despite a brutishly mean veto threat from President Bush. He complains the expansion would be a step toward "government-run" health care. If anything, passage might provide momentum for a bipartisan, free-market health plan sponsored by Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden and Washington Rep. Brian Baird.
The Senate plan would raise cigaratte taxes 61 cents per pack and cover more hard-working families with modest incomes. Bush calls the tax "huge." Yes, hugely helpful, well targeted and more responsible than free-lunch budgeting.
The Senate proposal needs improvements, such as another $15 billion to cover all eligible children and an end to exclusions of some legally present immigrant children. With or without the president, though, health care insurance for all children is good plan for America.
Doing some simple math.... 61 cents more per box means $4.27 a week more for chain smokers (smoking at least one pack a day) , enough for a gallon of gas in most places. Over a year that number grows to about $222 and some change, enough to buy a few xbox games... not an xbox but games. Over 10 years, which you'd have to figure most chain smoker would make it to is about $2220 more. Now of course you add that to the cost already made and your talking about something close to $10,000 over 10 years. A costly habiat indeed....Luckily for smokers they're is some hope....
Smokers United (http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Parliament/4061/Index.html) has created a campaign to stop being (in their words) discrimated against. Here's some stuff they claim keeps screwing them.
Just because you smoke....
YOU CAN
* Lose custody of your children!
* Be kicked out of your home!
* Be denied a job or be fired from the one you have!
* Be denied medical services!
Anti-tobacco organizations are funded by the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement between the states and Big Tobacco. The $209 BILLION ‘settlement’ is being paid by raising the price of cigarettes, so the industry doesn’t pay it, smokers do. The manufacturers now make 28 cents on a purchased pack of cigarettes; government at all levels gets the rest and happily doles it out to those who want to defame smokers. In other words, we’re paying them to take away our dignity and our rights.
These groups spend millions of dollars a year “denormalizing” smoking. The result is that smokers are being demonized; children are being taught--in school! --to disrespect, fear and hate their parents who smoke. They provide “kits” with all legal papers necessary to make a smoker’s life miserable. Nonsmokers are being told that secondhand smoke will kill them and therefore smokers are murderers. Legislators are bombarded with misinformation from the prohibitionists and we, the people, don’t even know there’s a plot against us until it’s a done deal.
Their goal is a smokefree world, regardless of whose rights they have to trample, who they have to hurt, what lies they have to tell, which legislators they have to buy.
Smoke free world? Those evil bastards.
Oh in addition to the smokers and tobacco companies banning together to fight this.... they got one other thing go for them:
Bush: No Deal On Children's Health Plan
President Says He Objects On Philosophical Grounds
By Christopher LeeWashington Post Staff WriterThursday, July 19, 2007; Page A03
President Bush yesterday rejected entreaties by his Republican allies that he compromise with Democrats on legislation to renew a popular program that provides health coverage to poor children, saying that expanding the program would enlarge the role of the federal government at the expense of private insurance.
The president said he objects on philosophical grounds to a bipartisan Senate proposal to boost the State Children's Health Insurance Program by $35 billion over five years. Bush has proposed $5 billion in increased funding and has threatened to veto the Senate compromise and a more costly expansion being contemplated in the House.
President Says He Objects On Philosophical Grounds
By Christopher LeeWashington Post Staff WriterThursday, July 19, 2007; Page A03
President Bush yesterday rejected entreaties by his Republican allies that he compromise with Democrats on legislation to renew a popular program that provides health coverage to poor children, saying that expanding the program would enlarge the role of the federal government at the expense of private insurance.
The president said he objects on philosophical grounds to a bipartisan Senate proposal to boost the State Children's Health Insurance Program by $35 billion over five years. Bush has proposed $5 billion in increased funding and has threatened to veto the Senate compromise and a more costly expansion being contemplated in the House.
So... we guess thats that. We'd discuss this more... but honestly we gotta go have a smoke. We will only prolly be able to afford this for 18 more months. (wink, wink)
Monday, July 16, 2007
White Knight Sydrome
Good Morning. Today we at the breakfast would like to discuss a problem that has been affecting men for thousands of years. Its called White Knight Syndrome. Most people don't know the name of it but apparently many men surfer from this problem. It's a condition where the man wants to be the hero and save someone, particularly a significant other who they love. Basically it’s a dude that likes really f'ed up chicks so he can be the hero and save them. For a more substantial/correct meaning, I turned to the leader in Dictionaries online.....Urban Dictionary. It hits it right on the head.
| | |
| |||
| | n. A personality characteristic found in most males that lead them to: | ||||
If you are still reading at this point.... you might be asking "why good morning breakfast are you telling us about some random syndrome?" Simple.... because here at Good Morning Breakfast, we care about your knowledge and we think one of the most important things to avoid in relationships is being a white knight or looking for a white knight. Everything.com agrees:
It is well known (for various definitions of 'well') that there is an attraction between women and 'assholes’. There is, however, a just as popularized (if not more so - it has been in the media for several hundred years) but not as acknowledged. It is the White Knight Syndrome.
By the very nature of the nice guy, there is a romantic notion of saving the damsel in distress. This notion is deeply rooted in the minds of guys - from
.
Somehow, something triggers the damsel in distress. It may be real, or imagined by the white knight. Given that the majority of these males are single, it is quite likely that the modern day white knight shall become enamored with the woman and it makes the 'quest' all the more important to the white knight.
Unfortunately, it is difficult to get rid of a white knight. The most effective method is to demonstrate that that the damsel is not in any distress at all. This can be difficult at times without hurting the feelings of the white knight (often the nice guys are also the sensitive ones too). Still, the enamoring will continue for some time (be it infatuation or love - the terms are left to those who wish to argue over them).
Okay... time to digest this breakfast friends. It seems that everything.com is saying this is the male version of “Women falling for Asshole” The Breakfast has heard many stories about a man or a woman trying to do whatever they can to make their significant other happy and in the end it ends as a train wreak. How does someone who clearly surfers this terrible disease find a way to love someone for who they are and not about the status of their mental state (i.e a damsel)? How does anyone... male/female, gay or straight find the right person and not some one who is always in a chaotic state?
Well lets look at the definitions first, clearly those definitions are a little different so let’s rule out the third. Honestly, chivalry is died and if you’re dying for it..... Then by that logic you are already dead. Perhaps, we are wrong but that logic seems flawless.
The first definition is not so easily removed (just because we decided to not really discuss the third definition doesn’t mean we think its okay to do that twice). This one says "rush to the aid of any female they see who appears in any form of distress." Honestly.... it’s kind of sweet. You just want to save the day... but unfortunately some times the female in distress doesn’t want your help or worse you can’t save her. We know that’s kind of harsh and pretty unromantic but well.... in practice (oh in practice) it makes sense.
If you’re still reading.... we applaud you. You've come a long way and clearly you are really bored. Maybe you should go to this link for a minute
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=11226071
Back to the definition... the second definition makes the most sense and is the biggest problem. "Become attracted to said damsel in distress." Honestly, the bottom line here is that damsel in distress are all really hot. Here's some examples from Urban Dictionary (your leader in online knowledge):
Snow White (Show White and the seven Dwarfs), Sleeping Beauty (Sleeping Beauty), Princess Zelda (The Legend of Zelda, The Adventures of Link, A Link to the Past, Ocarina of Time, the Oracle Series, Four Swords), Princess Peach Toadstool (some of the Mario games) and etc.
Our favorite part about reading that is that they include where you might know them from. Like, for example.... did you know Snow White is from Snow White in the Seven Dwarfs? Also... Its interesting that none of these are real women. However, if they were we think hands down Sleeping Beauty would be the hottest.
Yet, we digress. This part of the definition is tough, honestly their is no cure for this one. Trust us, we know. So maybe you’re saying
"I love someone I shouldn't. I love people that I shouldn’t and know that I am doing it. I am almost as dumb as the people at Urban Dictionary".
It’s okay. Lots of us have this problem and you can overcome it. Oh how, you say? Well we don’t know... but that’s not really what we do here on our little breakfast site.... we only raise the questions and let you think about the answers. Eat your breakfast, we are glad we raised your IQ on this issue, and if you want.. Tell us what you think?
Thursday, July 12, 2007
welcome entry
hello everyone.... It's been a long time since I've used a blog and for the most part this is going to be for me to get some thoughts out. Mostly... they will be random silly thoughts but I like having a forum for the stuff. I named this good morning breakfast because I seem to have my best ideas after waking up or eating something like oatmeal. I could preview this blog more but you will just have to wait until the first official entry begins. So I guess.... cheers blogger.com heres to a good future together.
Thanks for taking the time to read. Hopefully, I'll make you laugh cry or think.
Thanks for taking the time to read. Hopefully, I'll make you laugh cry or think.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)