Paul McCartney Did The Right Thing

Have you heard The International Player's Anthem?



Yes. No. Maybe. Well, there's a chopped and screwed line in Big Boi's verse talkin' 'bout:

Ask ask Paul McCartney the lawyers gettin sloppy
Slaughter slaughter of them pockets, had to tie her to a rocket
Send her into outer space, I know he wish he could
Cause he payin 20K a day, that bitch is eating good

While that is a little premature, their point is made: Sir Paul effed up by not signing a pre-nup.

I gotta disagree, though.

I'm not married. I'm not rich, either. I have been known to be a love-struck bastard. And the way I figure it, if you're really in love then there's no such thing as tomorrow.

There's only today. And today is as long as forever. Forever doesn't have a contingency plan. It simply is. If it becomes an isn't, then what good is anything that is not forever gonna do you? The value of forever, after all, can't really be calculated.

Sir Paul is an artist. Surely, he falls behind that line of thinking.

If he doesn't, then he must be a bad businessman. So say UGK and Outkast.

According to that article above, the soon-to-be-former-Mrs. McCartney is only asking for 50 million pound while Sir Paul is supposed to be worth 800 million.

One sixteenth.

That seems like a good bargain for losing forever.

Then again, maybe not.

The Considerate Shitter

I work in a four-story office building.

Three companies fill up the entire first floor.

Two companies--including mine--occupy half of the second floor.

One company takes up the third floor.

And the fourth floor is empty. Completely. Been so for over a year now. During that time, a silent society has coalesced on that floor.

I'm a member. There are others. But I have no idea who any of them are. One of my co-workers might be one. I've never mentioned this society to him, though. Nor has he to me. In fact, I've never actually come face to face with any of the other members. I know them only by the evidence they leave behind.

This society, you see, is made up of men who work in the building and choose to trudge up to the top floor of our building in order to, ahem, "do their business."

We're a considerate bunch. We all need to make our drop-offs. And we choose to do so on the floor where no one else will unwittingly encounter the smells, sounds or *gasp* sights some of us leave in our wake.

It is a necessary thing that we do. We are not proud of it. Which is probably why we do not acknowledge each other. Occasionally, I will sit down to make a 3 o'clock delivery and hear someone zipping up and flushing in the stall next to me. Never does the other member of the Society of Considerate Shitters speak. Nor do I. I do hear the other member wash his hands and exit. After the coast is clear, I do the same. Only to return the next day when duty calls.

Regrettably, this society is not comprised of every man who works in my building. There are those less considerate souls who utilize the bathrooms on the floors where they work. We all know who they are.

And none of us considerate shitters want to be ranked among them.

Un-Sick

I just saw Sicko.

It's pretty standard Michael Moore. Which means that it's heavy on editorial, highly provocative and, um, heavy on the heavy-set storyteller/demagogue.


I'm not all that concerned with Moore himself. Nor am I interested in analyzing his style. But I do give a dinosaur shit about the latest problem he's chosen to tackle: U.S. health care.

I personally have never heard anyone describe the current state of our health care as ideal. Or, for that matter, as sound. Even folks who loathe the work and opinions of Michael Moore think we have a crisis in dire need of a fix.

The way I figure it, there are two lessons to take from Sicko:

1) Doctors should not have to be businessmen.

2) The marketplace that guides U.S. health care needs to be turned upside down.

Any doctor who is in it strictly for the money is doing it for the wrong reason. Simple and plain. With so much of American life defined by how it generates profit, aren't there some things a little bit sacred that should be held above the bottom line? I get that capitalism requires all of us to think of ourselves as corporations, but I recall reading something somewhere about "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." And doesn't health care fall into the "life" category? We all do need it at some point. And no entity seems to be able to afford evolving costs. Rather, no entity wants to bear the costs as they are. Why not dial down the profit motives on all sides and let doctors just practice medicine?

As for the marketplace, the thesis statement from Sicko appears to be that the fundamental difference between U.S. health care and those systems employed by the U.K., France, Cuba, etc is this:

The U.S. system rewards deprivation of care while systems in other countries (notably France) reward proficiency of care.

IMO...that's pretty effed up.

It's not necessarily an endorsement of a single-payer system. But I do believe the private-public partnership that governs U.S. health care needs to be overhauled. Personally, I'd start with the incentive system. No one and no thing should ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever be rewarded for denying health care. Period.

I'm not sure exactly how to accomplish that. Other people have some ideas, though. The French, for one, don't have a perfect system. But they do seem to have their hearts in the right place.

I also think the guys who hate on Michael Moore might be onto something. Link again for the lazy.

I haven't found any other ideas that I'd be willing to subscribe to.

Yet.

Then again, I've only been trolling around the internet for an hour or two.

The answer ought to be in there somewhere. I'll keep digging and get back to you.

Read My Palms

Or your own palms.

Or someone else's palms.

Or maybe another part of their body entirely.

Confused? Read this.

Be forewarned, some folks find it to be a little gross.

Vice President Gerald Ford?

No presidential scholar am I. Nor any other type of scholar. But I am a curious dude. And I found this hella interesting:

In 1980, as Ford was being wooed to run for vice president, Dick Cheney played a key role in re-imagining the job.

Pollsters spoke of a "dream ticket" after Ronald Reagan won the 1980 Republican nomination and talk turned to Gerald Ford as his No. 2. Aides to both men tried to negotiate arrangements that might lure a former commander in chief into a secondary position.

"Ford made a number of requests in terms of his influence over the budget, personnel, foreign policy, et cetera," (Dick) Cheney said. "I can remember sitting in a session with Bill Casey, who later became CIA director. Bill had a list of items that in fact the Reagan people were prepared to discuss. They went a long way toward trying to accommodate President Ford."

Tempted, but wary of splintering presidential authority, Ford finally withdrew his name.

I've never heard that before. That Gerald Ford was Reagan's choice prior to Bush the First. Makes sense, though. The Republicans are an especially incestuous bunch when it comes to filling offices.

And there's no better example than the Bushes and Dick Cheney. Who has reconstructed the office of the Vice Presidency so that it's a COO-type position that builds and maintains the legal structure within which the President-as-CEO operates. That's particularly important when the Executive Branch exerts a monarch-ish kind of power.

The Washington Post has exhaustingly chronicled the transformation of the VP's office. And gets credit for the Gerald Ford anecdote above.