Good morning!

Let’s see – what did I do to sleep better last night, after two wretched nights of tossing & turning?

Well, foolishly was still on the computer at 10:00 p.m., which did absolutely NOTHING to help smooth the way for sound slumbers!  That has to change.

But, following Jim Junge’s advice, I had a banana before heading “up the wooden hill.”  And the bathroom window was open about ½”, so fresh air came into the bedroom without chilling John.  

Best of all, when I awoke – at 2:30ish, as has become my norm  - instead of being the victim of tense thoughts (envisioning kitties caught in impossible-to-get-out places), I just told myself, “This is time to restore your body through sleep.  Let go of those sad thoughts & welcome ones that send you off to slumbers.”

And they all worked!  I slept fairly soundly straight through to when the alarm went off at 5:15 a.m., my best time for getting up.  I didn’t have to “get over myself” to get out of bed, it was a natural thing to do.  Am feeling rested & looking forward to a productive day.  A productive day of being the best ME possible, whatever that brings up over the next seventeen hours.

Nap thoughts

 

Taking a non-sleeping nap ~ I am mucho tired after two tossing & turning nights, but also (sad to say) not sleepy ~ and reading Paul Tobolowsky' Stardust Dancing combined for an funky AH HA! moment.  Strange, the thoughts that came up.

Earlier today, I commented on Facebook about the annual fund-raising "Squirrel Slam" in Holley, NY.   Although a lawsuit was filed against the event, a judge ruled it was no different than a fishing derby.  

I was outraged.  It's not at all like a fishing derby, unless the fishermen are able to gain the fishies' trust by feeding them, plumping them up to better win the "biggest" competition, ensuring they feel safe coming when beckoned.  Not likely.  But that is what some of the Squirrel Slam do.  They cultivate trust while bulking up the furry rodents, then one day - BAM!  

Stretched out on our bed, the warm afternoon sun on my legs (along with Sky, also basking in its warm), it struck me that many of my friends who feel outraged at squirrels hunted down & slain by the dozens have no sense of the inhumanity of restricting access to health care because someone can't afford it. 

It that ain't inhumane, I don't know how to describe it.

 

We live at a time of poor employment opportunities.  Lots of jobs that once supported American families have shipped overseas.  Many jobs are inaccessible to people without transportation.  It seems that most jobs are low wage & part time, without benefits.  So, those who still find it a struggle to find work in post-2008 USA often end up with a job that requires shelling out money to get to & from, don't work a full week's hours, are paid minimum wage, and have no benefits.

 

Yet, politicians & pundits lumped them in with a slim minority who make no effort to work in being denied affordable health care.  And as much it's reviled by conservatives, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) doesn't do much for folks in those situations other than require them to pay $$ for health care coverage that typically includes $3,000 per year deductibles.  Left out "applicable co-pays." 

Then there are the folks like me, making too little taxable income to qualify for the ACA, but living in a state that's restricted Medicaid expansion that covers those of us falling through the cracks.

The fact is that having a squirrel hunt to raise money, encouraging average (licensed) citizens to track down & kill the most and/or the largest (by weight) squirrels.  Not accidentally, during gestation season.  Wonder how much a pregnant squirrel weighs in?  

 

Holley - take care of your squirrel problem, but not in such a blood-thirsty way.  No matter how much it brings in.

And America - health care access is limited to those with enough money to afford it.  The ACA is not a solution, benefiting the insurance behemoths waaay more than patients & their families.  We tout ourselves as the wealthiest nation on the planet, yet turn people away from physician's offices & hospitals.  

It that's not barbaric, don't know what is.  

The weird things that come to mind being sleep deprived & reading a way-out-there, perspective shifting book.    

Hell hath no fury like "proven" conservatives scorned

Okay, so the House passed a bill that requires another vote within the week to fund or not to fund the Department of Homeland Security.  And Speaker John Boehner finds himself in interesting cross hairs - again.  All because of the Hastert Rule.

Count me in with the countless millions who'd never heard of the Hastert Rule until the GOP took control of the House & Speakership.  Since Republicans took the House in 2010, have heard it a lot.  

According to Taegan Goddard's political dictionary, The Hastert Rule refers to a philosophy that requires the “majority of the majority” to bring up a bill for a vote in the House of Representatives.  First used by Speaker Dennis Hastert in the mid-1990s, it shuts out  limits the minority party from wielding any power.  

Here is the growing problem for the current speaker.  John Boehner doesn't always follow the Hastert Rule, which party faithful believe should ALWAYS be used, no matter what the situation.  

 

Right now, House conservatives are feeling especially riled.  Not only is their own Speaker NOT playing by their rules, Senate party leaders are balking at outlawing the filibuster (on the pesky but correct grounds it would make them look like flaming hypocrites).  Their will - which they utterly totally completely believe is the will of THE PEOPLE - is being thwarted & that is against God's plan for the United States of America.  (I wish that was just me being snide, but lots of House & Senate members seem to believe it.)

What does all that mean, in real life terms?  The bill authorizing Department of Homeland Security would never be voted up or down because it would never make it to the floor.  Only bills that will pass courtesy of  a Republican majority make it to the floor, if you follow the Hastert Rule.  Then, the party would never face the humiliating headlines that greeted their failure to pass stop-gap funding.  (They ultimately passed a stop-gap of the stop-gap.)
 

I am getting confused.  It's sounding a lot like Republicans are fighting amongst themselves, something this 63-year old, formerly identified as conservative, registered as Republican until 2008 American has trouble fathoming.  For decades, the GOP embraced the 11th Commandment (frequently attributed to no less than Ronald Reagan) - - "Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican."  

Those days are sure gone with the wind!  

Members of a small but mighty GOP enclave are going bonkers over how the Speaker handled DHS funding.  To them, it should never have come to the floor - on principle.  Send it back to the Senate demanding that immigration funding be stripped out before it would make it to a vote.  

A vocal sub-section of Speaker Boehner's base is clear - -  Stand by your values, your principles.  If it means the Department of Homeland Security - the Department of Homeland Security! - goes unfunded, then let it be on the heads of the Senate ~or~ where it really rests, on the President.  Let the House follow the Hastert Rule to ensure that only pure legislation is passed.

FACT:  the Speaker of the House has that power.  John Boehner consistently refuses to use it.  In spite of knowing that Hell hath no fury like a true conservative scorned.  Not sure if that means he's courageous & brave or that he just can't figure out how to keep his base happy & the country well governed.  

As tough as it is being President Obama, right now it's gotta be easier than being John Boehner.