Welcome back, Evelyn!! Hope you had fun.

Welcome home, Evelyn! I've missed you.

Thank you all....Glorious trip. But it's good to be home....I guess, LOL.

OMG, what a fabulous story. Made me tear up. http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4696315n

I think this is a wonderful family portrait of the O's. http://news.aol.com/article/official-white-house-obama-family/733531

So he'll get no time for running for all that time? Polanski could face two years prison if extradited By Sam Cage and Lisa Jucca Sam Cage And Lisa Jucca � 1 hr 22 mins ago ZURICH (Reuters) � Film director Roman Polanski could face two years in prison if extradited to the United States after fleeing sentencing in California on child sex charges in 1978, the Swiss justice ministry said. "The United States want him to be extradited for sexual intercourse with a minor. This carries a maximum sentence of two years under U.S. law," justice ministry spokesman Folco Galli said on Friday. The United States had formally asked Switzerland to extradite Polanski, the ministry said earlier, adding it would reach a decision based on a hearing and information provided by Polanski's lawyer, but that there was no deadline. "If he agrees voluntarily to the extradition, the process can be concluded rapidly," Galli said. "If he fights it all the way, it will take months and months." Polanski will be able to appeal against any extradition decision to the Swiss Federal Criminal Court and, in the last instance, the Federal Supreme Court, the ministry said. The 76-year-old Oscar-winning director, who holds dual French and Polish citizenship, was arrested to comply with a U.S. warrant when he flew into Switzerland on September 26 to receive a lifetime achievement award at a film festival. Polanski fled the United States when he was due to be sentenced for having unlawful sex with a girl aged 13. U.S. judicial sources have said the extradition process is complex and could take years if Polanski challenges it. A Swiss court this week rejected a bid by Polanski for release on bail, saying the risk that he would flee was too high. Polanski's lawyer Herve Temime told Reuters that his client's strategy remained unchanged. "Mr. Polanski will continue to fight this extradition request and demand that he be freed," he said. TURBULENT LIFE Polanski was originally indicted on six charges, including rape, for having sex after plying the girl with champagne and drugs. He pleaded guilty to a single count of having sex with a minor and spent 42 days in prison undergoing psychiatric tests. But he fled the United States before the case was concluded because he believed a judge would sentence him to up to 50 years behind bars despite a plea agreement for time already served. The Swiss ministry noted that Polanski had admitted to unlawful sex with a minor during the U.S. investigation: "He is wanted by the U.S. authorities with a view to passing sentence for this offence," it said. U.S. law changed on July 1, 1977, reducing the maximum sentence Polanski could face for this offence to two years, the ministry said. "Although Polanski committed the offence before this date, he was not due for sentencing until after July 1, 1977, meaning that sentencing according to the new law applies," said Galli. Polanski has avoided countries such as Britain that have extradition treaties with the United States, but he repeatedly visited Switzerland, where he owns a chalet in the mountain resort of Gstaad, though he was only arrested on this occasion. He has never returned to Los Angeles, where his pregnant wife, actress Sharon Tate, was murdered by followers of Charles Manson in 1969. Polanski was born in Paris to Polish-Jewish parents in 1933. His mother died in the Nazi concentration camp at Auschwitz. His first full-length feature, "Knife in the Water", won a number of awards, and his reputation grew with "Repulsion", his study of a woman terrified by sex who becomes a murderer. Polanski, who is married to the French actress Emmanuelle Seigner and has two children with her, scored huge hits in the United States with his 1968 horror thriller "Rosemary's Baby" and his 1974 corruption thriller "Chinatown". He won his first and only Best Director Oscar in 2002 for "The Pianist", the story of a Polish-Jewish musician who sees his world collapse with the outbreak of World War Two. (Additional reporting by Jason Rhodes in Zurich and Elizabeth Pineau in Paris; Editing by Kevin Liffey)

World Series! Phillies vs. Yankees! So Mari, what should the bet be....cheesesteaks vs cheesecake like the mayors? Cheesesteak vs. our best pizza? I'd like my cheesesteak from Jim's on South Street thanks. Steak and Whiz, no onions. :-D

(Dorine)cheesesteaks vs cheesecake like the mayors? Cheesesteak vs. our best pizza?I'd like my cheesesteak from Jim's on South Street thanks. Steak and Whiz, no onions. :-D Ok, a Jim's "whiz/wit'out" for you if the Yanks win. If the Phils win, and in keeping with the cheese theme, I'll take a box of goodies from Ferrara's on Grand St., to include: Sfogliatella, Baba Ricotta, and Cannoli. *Heaven*! I've got tix for Sunday night's game! We went to Game 3 of the National League Championship series vs. the Ddodgers. Did you hear the "You took steroids!" chants whenever Manny Ramirez was up? We were just warming up for A-Rod.:-) I would say let the best team win, but that would be the Yankees, so I'll just say, let's have a great Series!:-)

*sniff, sniff* Is that Cheese Whiz I smell?? ;-)

Yes I guess it is. But you have to come down here to get it.;-) Congrats.

I would be happy to actually. Thanks!

Americans in the hinterlands can rest easy now. NY is steppin' up to the plate to take not just some Gitmo detainees, but the worst ones. Wonder how I'll sleep at night. AP Source: Gitmo 9/11 suspects to NY for trial By DEVLIN BARRETT, Associated Press Writer � 4 mins ago WASHINGTON � Self-proclaimed Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other Guantanamo Bay detainees will be sent to New York to face trial in a civilian federal court, an Obama administration official said Friday. The official said Attorney General Eric Holder plans to announce the decision later in the morning. The official is not authorized to discuss the decision before the announcement, so spoke on condition of anonymity. Bringing such notorious suspects to U.S. soil to face trial is a key step in President Barack Obama's plan to close the terror suspect detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Obama initially planned to close the detention center by Jan. 22, but the administration is no longer expected to meet that deadline. It is also a major legal and political test of Obama's overall approach to terrorism. If the case suffers legal setbacks, the administration will face second-guessing from those who never wanted it in a civilian courtroom. And if lawmakers get upset about notorious terrorists being brought to their home regions, they may fight back against other parts of Obama's agenda. The New York case may also force the court system to confront a host of difficult legal issues surrounding counter-terrorism programs begun after the 2001 attacks, including the harsh interrogation techniques once used on some of the suspects while in CIA custody. The most severe method � waterboarding, or simulated drowning � was used on Mohammed 183 times in 2003, before the practice was banned. Holder will also announce that a major suspect in the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole, Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, will face justice before a military commission, as will a handful of other detainees to be identified at the same announcement, the official said. It was not immediately clear where commission-bound detainees like al-Nashiri might be sent, but a military brig in South Carolina has been high on the list of considered sites. The actual transfer of the detainees from Guantanamo to New York isn't expected to happen for many more weeks because formal charges have not been filed against most of them. The attorney general has decided the case of the five Sept. 11 suspects should be handled by prosecutors working in the Southern District of New York, which has held a number of major terrorism trials in recent decades at a courthouse in lower Manhattan, just blocks from where the World Trade Center towers once stood. Holder had been considering other possible trial locations, including Virginia, Washington, DC, and a different courthouse in New York City. Those districts could all end up conducting trials of other Guantanamo detainees sent to federal court later on. The attorney general's decision in these cases comes just before a Monday deadline for the government to decide how to proceed against 10 detainees facing military commissions. In the military system, the five Sept. 11 suspects had faced the death penalty, but the official would not say if the Justice Department would also seek capital punishment against the men once they are in the federal system. The administration has already sent one Guantanamo detainee, Ahmed Ghailani, to New York to face trial, but chose not to seek death in that case. At the last major trial of al-Qaida suspects held at that courthouse in 2001, prosecutors did seek death for some of the defendants. Mohammed already has an outstanding terror indictment against him in New York, for an unsuccessful plot called "Bojinka" to simultaneously take down multiple airliners over the Pacific Ocean in the 1990's. Some members of Congress have fought any effort to bring Guantanamo Bay detainees to trial in the United States, saying it would be too dangerous for nearby civilians. The Obama administration has defended the planned trials, saying many terrorists have been safely tried, convicted, and imprisoned in the United States, including the 1993 World Trade Center bomber, Ramzi Yousef. Mohammed and the four others � Waleed bin Attash, Ramzi Binalshibh, Mustafa Ahmad al-Hawsawi and Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali � are accused of orchestrating the attacks that killed 2,973 people on Sept. 11, 2001. Mohammed admitted to interrogators that he was the mastermind of the attacks � he allegedly proposed the concept to Osama bin Laden as early as 1996, obtained funding for the attacks from bin Laden, oversaw the operation and trained the hijackers in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The charges against the others are: � Bin Attash, a Yemeni, allegedly ran an al-Qaida training camp in Logar, Afghanistan, where two of the 19 hijackers were trained. Bin Attash is believed to have been bin Laden's bodyguard. Authorities say bin Laden selected him as a hijacker, but he was prevented from participating when he was briefly detained in Yemen in early 2001. � Binalshibh, a Yemeni, allegedly helped find flight schools for the hijackers, helped them enter the United States and assisted with financing the operation. He allegedly was selected to be a hijacker and made a "martyr video" in preparation for the operation, but was unable to get a U.S. visa. He also is believed to be a lead operative for a foiled plot to crash aircraft into London's Heathrow Airport. � Ali allegedly helped nine of the hijackers travel to the United States and sent them $120,000 for expenses and flight training. He is believed to have served as a key lieutenant to Mohammed in Pakistan. He was born in Pakistan and raised in Kuwait. � Mustafa Ahmad al-Hawsawi, a Saudi, allegedly helped the hijackers with money, western clothing, traveler's checks and credit cards. Al-Hawsawi testified in the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui, saying he had seen Moussaoui at an al-Qaida guesthouse in Kandahar, Afghanistan, in early 2001, but was never introduced to him or conducted operations with him. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091113/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_guantanamo_us_trial;_ylt=AkEC1meKkNEiG1aDu1C7JSGs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTM4NmwzMGZ1BGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkxMTEzL3VzX2d1YW50YW5hbW9fdXNfdHJpYWwEY3BvcwM3BHBvcwM0BHB0A2hvbWVfY29rZQRzZWMDeW5faGVhZGxpbmVfbGlzdARzbGsDYXBzb3VyY2VnaXRt

I hope ...keep all of them there...permanently ...safe and sound. (But, so far,by what I hear, it's only for the trial):-(((((

They can go to the Supermax jail in CO after the trial where all the other big terrorists are (Unabomber, 1st WTC bombers, etc).

*snort* Oh...so, NY is just "stepping up to the plate" for the trail. Big Deal Is it definite that they're going to the "hinterland " of Co? I thought Co didn't want them. They can go to Ca....they're hungry for $$$$.

Who knows where they'll ultimately end up.....hell, perhaps? ;-) But CO has had that Supermax jail there for years with the highest security, so I don't think they're worrying about it. As I said, the first WTC bombers, the Unabomber and I forget now who else is there. I think everyone there is in solitary confinement. If the 9/11 Gitmo people should get the death penalty (if that's even an option), CA won't want them either. Death row inmates cost more to house than the regulars.

They should be sent to a State that will not chicken out of the death sentense. IMO, Death row should last no longer than two weeks. Save tax payers money.

(Dorine)CA won't want them either. Death row inmates cost more to house than the regulars. They're Federal prisoners, the state gets paid for their "lodging". Your tax $$$$$$:-)))

States would not get paid for Federal prisoners held in a Federal facility, like Supermax. Only if they're housed in local facilities.

Well, though she's right about me..us...paying for them if their Federal prisoners, correct? This conversation reminded me of Timothy McVeigh. I couldn't remember for sure if he was convicted of federal crimes and possibly at the Supermax in CO (he was), so I looked him up. On his Wikipedia page, there was a link to an article about use of isolation as a punishment and I found this bit interesting. I didn't know there were more Supermax prisons around the country. I wonder why the "big name" criminals are all at the same one (though the guy they refer to in the article -not a big name, to me anyway- is in one in PA). "Gawande turns up shocking facts: The feds built the first Supermax prison in 1983. By the end of the 1990s there were 60 of them. There are now 25,000 inmates in Supermax prisons, and another 50,000 to 80,000 in "restrictive segregation units" that are pretty close to solitary confinement. The Supermax idea was sold on the hope of reducing prison violence. As Gawande admits, it makes intuitive sense: "If the worst of the worst are removed from the general prison population and put in isolation, you'd expect there to be markedly fewer shankings and attacks on corrections officers." But it didn't work. Studies of the violence rate show no correlation between the use of isolation and reduced violence, perhaps because prison violence has real causes such as overcrowding." Read more: http://www.esquire.com/the-side/richardson-report/federal-prison-reform-033109#ixzz0Wmoy0kMu

their = they are. Sheesh. The Supermax in CO is this ADMAX according to this. I haven't read the whole entry to see if they explain the difference between this one and other Supermax's. "The U.S. government houses a number of convicted terrorists, gang leaders, spies and similar prisoners in a Supermax prison known as ADMAX, the Federal administrative maximum security prison in Florence, Colorado, west of Pueblo. Al-Qaeda terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui was sentenced to life without parole at Florence upon his conviction on May 4, 2006. Residents also include Theodore Kaczynski, a terrorist otherwise known as the Unabomber who once attacked via mail bombs, Robert Hanssen, American FBI Agent turned Soviet spy, Terry Nichols, an accomplice to the Oklahoma City bombing, and Richard Reid, an Islamic fundamentalist jailed for life for attempting to detonate explosive materials in his shoes while on board an aircraft." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermax

Looks like the Gitmo people might be headed to a Drooler's neck of the woods. I'm quite confused over the line that states that the only Supermax prison is in CO in contrast to an article linked to above that states there are multiple ones. Source: Illinois prison eyed for Gitmo inmates AP By TAMMY WEBBER, Associated Press Writer � 31 mins ago CHICAGO � The Obama administration may buy a near-empty prison in rural northwestern Illinois to house detainees from Guantanamo Bay along with federal inmates, a White House official said Saturday. The maximum-security Thomson Correctional Facility, about 150 miles west of Chicago, was one of several evaluated by the Federal Bureau of Prisons, and emerged as a leading option to house the detainees, the official told The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because a decision has not been made. President Barack Obama wants alleged terrorism suspects from the controversial military-run detention center in Cuba to be transferred to U.S. soil so they can be prosecuted for their suspected crimes. Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn has been hinting at a possible new use for Thomson, and he issued a statement saying he would hold a news conference Sunday to outline those plans. Quinn's spokeswoman Marlena Jentz did not return a phone message from the AP Saturday. Thomson was built by the state in 2001 with 1,600 cells, but budget problems prevented it from fully opening, and it now houses about 200 minimum-security inmates. It is unclear how many Guantanamo detainees � many held without charges since the beginning of the war in Afghanistan � would be transferred to Illinois or when. Obama initially planned to close the Guantanamo Bay prison by Jan. 22, but the administration is no longer expected to meet that deadline. If the Federal Bureau of Prisons buys the facility, it would be run primarily as a federal prison, but a portion would be leased to the Defense Department to house a limited number of Guantanamo detainees, the White House official said. Perimeter security at the site would be increased to surpass that at the nation's only Supermax prison, in Florence, Colo., the official said. Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin, the Senate's second-highest-ranking Democrat, said in a statement Saturday he would support the plan. He said the prison would house fewer than 100 Guantanamo detainees and would have a "significant positive impact on the local economy" by generating more than 3,000 jobs. Thomson Village President Jerry Hebeler said the move would generate desperately needed revenue for the town of about 500 residents near the Mississippi River. "It's been sitting there for eight to nine years and our town is like a ghost town," Hebeler said of the prison, adding that a tavern recently closed and a planned housing development fell through. "Everybody moved or got different jobs." Some lawmakers opposed the idea of terrorism suspects being brought to Illinois. U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk, a Northbrook Republican running for Obama's old Senate seat, circulated a letter among elected officials asking them to write to Obama opposing the plan, saying bringing Guantanamo prisoners to the state would make it a target for terrorist attacks. U.S. Rep. Don Manzullo, whose district includes Thomson, said he adamantly opposed the proposal and that he has consistently joined with a majority of his colleagues "in fighting efforts to bring these terrorists onto our shores ... where they could one day be released into our communities." Guantanamo Bay "is set up to house these dangerous terrorists, and they should stay there," said Manzullo, an Egan Republican who serves on the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation and Trade. Illinois Rep. Jan Schakowsky, a Democrat, said Kirk and other Republicans were "pandering to irrational fears" and that closing the Guantanamo Bay facility would strengthen national security because al-Qaida used it as a recruiting tool. Phone and e-mail messages left with Jim O'Connor, a spokesman for Illinois Sen. Roland Burris, were not immediately returned. Thomson is not the only U.S. town that had hoped to lure Guantanamo detainees. Officials in Marion, Ill., Hardin, Mont., and Florence, Colo., also have said they would welcome the jobs that would be generated. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091115/ap_on_re_us/us_illinois_prison_obama;_ylt=AogWxbES0ilCt5srNIxcYmGs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTM2aWRrOXRuBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkxMTE1L3VzX2lsbGlub2lzX3ByaXNvbl9vYmFtYQRjcG9zAzIEcG9zAzUEcHQDaG9tZV9jb2tlBHNlYwN5bl90b3Bfc3RvcnkEc2xrA3NvdXJjZWlsbGlubw--

Saw that last night...Il.can use the $$$ too. I know that the Fed prisons are not operated with state money, but the people who work there do live in that state...earn salaries and pay taxes. So indirectly, the state does benefit. Assuming of course, that they are convicted;-) Anyone see Attorney General Holder's interview with Jim Lehrer on The News Hour on Friday night? Interesting....mystifying and in some ways even disturbing.

No, I didn't see it. Why do you say that? Wonder if Jim Lehrer has interviews on his website like Charlie Rose. At this point, I'd bet any and every state can use the $$.

No, I didn't see it. Why do you say that? I am sure it's on the PBS website. I TiVo nightly. Best newscast on TV. Margaret Warner, and Jim are great. Always unbiased and no "gotchas". You would have to see it..I didn't take notes and I wouldn't want to misquote him.

(Dorine) Looks like the Gitmo people might be headed to a Drooler's neck of the woods. And, as you can see from the article, the people here want it and aren't ranting and carrying on like fools. Toward the end of the article, it even mentions the facility at Marion, which would also want them. I'm quite confused over the line that states that the only Supermax prison is in CO in contrast to an article linked to above that states there are multiple ones. CO's is entirely supermax, while only portions of existing facilities are maintained at that level.

Officials in Marion, Ill., Hardin, Mont., and Florence, Colo., also have said they would welcome the jobs that would be generated. I think Hardin, MT is the place they built some new prison that was going to be run by some slick outside security company that turned out to be run by frauds and/or criminals. It was empty for a while until they got these people, now they're back where they started. (Karen) CO's is entirely supermax, while only portions of existing facilities are maintained at that level. Got it.

A terrorism trial's myths By Andrew Cohen Saturday, November 14, 2009 It's official. Sooner rather than later, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, an al-Qaeda leader who by all accounts spearheaded planning for the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, will stand trial in a federal civilian court near the scene of the crime. A Mohammed trial for Sept. 11 crimes -- the case might actually be styled United States v. Mohammed -- could be one of the biggest legal landmarks in American history. It's not surprising that bringing one of the "faces of terror" to within blocks of Ground Zero would generate a lot of fear, trepidation and political hysteria. So let's try to separate sizzle from steak. Here are six myths about Mohammed and his trial that ought to be destroyed: -- One: Mohammed's lawyers are going to rely on the fact that he was waterboarded to get his case dismissed. Fact: Ain't gonna happen. Depending on who is running the show (Mohammed wanted to represent himself at his military tribunal at Guantanamo Bay), it's likely that the government's post-capture treatment of Mohammed will be a factor in the trial. But it won't determine the outcome, especially if the government does not seek to introduce any of Mohammed's post-torture statements to jurors. The fact that the feds are bringing him to New York to stand trial indicates that they have plenty of other evidence that they can use to get their conviction. -- Two: Mohammed's judge won't be able to find an impartial jury. Fact: Media saturation has made jury selection in America a perversion of what it once was. Judges and lawyers no longer even pretend that they are seating jurors who don't have preconceived notions about a case. All they ask of jurors is that they be able to set aside their pre-judgments and fairly evaluate the evidence shown at trial. Under this low standard, Mohammed will get a jury, and, after he's convicted, the jury's verdict almost certainly will be upheld on appeal if the defense challenges its fairness. ad_icon -- Three: Trying Mohammed in New York will significantly raise the risk of another terrorist attack there. Fact: No one can determine how big that increased risk would be. But New York has long been able to safely host trials of terrorism suspects -- including the trial that followed the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center -- and its security systems are among the world's finest. I have seen, during the Zacarias Moussaoui trial in 2006, just how intense security can be in terrorism cases. It's awe-inspiring. -- Four: The transfer of Mohammed to a federal civilian court is a concession of defeat by the government and a soft-on-terror approach to suspects. Fact: The Bush administration tried to prosecute these people in military tribunals but wasn't able to come up with a set of rules that were deemed constitutional. As a result, six years after Mohammed was apprehended, he still hasn't been convicted. A civilian trial is the best chance of ensuring conviction and sentencing. I don't consider that a defeat. I consider it progress. We are one step closer to the end of this guy's story. Remember, too, that the Republican senators who are crying loudest now about this civilian trial were the ones who precluded the use of military tribunals by insisting that they be constitutionally unfair to defendants. -- Five: Mohammed will be acquitted on some technicality endorsed by a federal judge. Fact: After eight years of reporting on terrorism law, I am not aware of any judge, anywhere, who is eager to pervert the law to give Mohammed a break. The idea that the federal courts are soft on terrorism is unfair to the hundreds of jurists who have repeatedly endorsed government policy on terrorism, both before and after the 2001 attacks. Capital murder suspects get off on "technicalities" (read: constitutional rights) far less often than you see in prime time. And even if Mohammed is somehow acquitted, which isn't going to happen, the feds will then immediately pick him up and put him back in the military brig. -- Six: Mohammed will turn his trial into political theater. Fact: Yes, he will try. But he will mostly fail. There are many rules in place to ensure that Mohammed behaves in court. There is upside here, too. It seems likely, given Mohammed's in-court conduct at Guantanamo Bay, that he will proudly declare in front of judge and jury his allegiance to al-Qaeda and his involvement in the Sept. 11 attacks. If this occurs, it will make it easier for jurors to convict him and for the appellate courts to endorse his sentence. The writer is chief legal analyst for CBS News. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/13/AR2009111303586.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

These are all speculations..not certainties. We shall see what transpires.

Before I get jumped on...;-) " *i* shall see what transpires"

Giuliani believes the trial should not be held in NYC. He fears other attacks as did happen after the first World Tower trial. I agree with him. The trial should not be in NYC.

Funny, I was just coming on here to comment about Giuliani. I could care less what Giuliani thinks....a guy who didn't listen to the FBI and experts who told him to put the Emergency Ctr in Bklyn, not under the WTC where he put it, because it was a prime target. As a result of his stellar judgement to ignore them, he literally almost lost his life and the life of the (now known corrupt) police commisioner he appointed. And to top it off, he either instituted or left in place the police and fire dept communication systems that were not compatable, highly likely to have contributed to an unknown number of NYPD/NYFD deaths/injuries. Yeah, I give a shit what Giuliani thinks.

LOL, Dorine. Tell me how you really feel. ;-) Granted he has made mistakes, but I believe he learned from them. I still think it's dagerous to hold the trials in NYC.

but I believe he learned from them Excuse me while I get back off the floor from laughing so hard. ;-) It's always dangerous and we're always a target. Just another day..... That being said, I'm not too keen on how much the security will cost. The city's already hurting for $$. Glad I don't have to really be downtown too much. Where would you suggest they have it? I think the logical choice would be D.C.

LOL! There are maybe more Muslims in the DC tri-State area than NYC. I think not. The trial should be close to the prison, so that would be Chicago. Waving to Karen. ;-)

LOL, Dorine. Tell me how you really feel. ;-) LOL Besides he's member of the *other* party;-) Running for gov???? against Patterson???? ,(Dorine) I'm not too keen on how much the security will cost. The city's already hurting for $$. According to the Mayor they're broke. They'll probably send the bill to DC like Boston did for Kennedy's funeral.

(Evelyn) Besides he's member of the *other* party;-) Running for gov???? against Patterson???? I'm not shallow enough to dislike someone simply for their party. Just for their viewpoints. *snort* Patterson....he'll be lucky to make it out of the gate. If he even ultimately runs. Guiliani would be a horrible govenor. That being said, he did do some good things for the city, but he doesn't have the personality for the guv. According to the Mayor they're broke. I keep reading about the huge bonuses some Wall Street people are getting this year, so if they start spending more (and having bigger paychecks to take taxes out of), that'll help I suppose.

Escape From New York A new study says taxes are driving people away. In the Empire Center study, two of the top states to send taxpayers to New York�Illinois and Michigan�were also among the worst population losers overall. Greener pastures that drew New Yorkers included states like Florida, North Carolina and Pennsylvania, in addition to the usual suburban locales of New Jersey and Connecticut. Liberals continue to insist that they can raise taxes ever higher without any effect on behavior, but the New York study is one more piece of evidence that this is a destructive illusion http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703574604574499772371161800.html?mod=rss_Today's_Most_Popular Best to be young and poor, I guess.

Oops the dog must have eaten the first part of the article.... "An old saying goes that the time to live in New York is when you're young and poor, or old and rich�otherwise, you're better off somewhere else. That wisdom is getting an update this week from a study by the Empire Center for New York State Policy that shows middle-class people leaving the state in droves. Between 2000 and 2008, the Empire State had a net domestic outflow of more than 1.5 million, the biggest exodus of any state, with most hailing from New York City. The departures also have perilous budget consequences, since they tend to include residents who are better off than those arriving. Statewide, departing families have income levels 13% higher than those moving in, while in New York County (home of Manhattan) the differential was even more severe. Those moving elsewhere had an average income of $93,264, some 28% higher than the $72,726 earned by those coming in. In 2006 alone, that swap meant the state lost $4.3 billion in taxpayer income. Add that up from 2001 through 2008, and it translates into annual net income losses somewhere near $30 billion. That trend is part of a larger march for New York: In 1950 the state accounted for 19% of all Americans, but by 2000 that number had fallen to 7%. The city's main saving grace has been its welcome mat for foreign immigrants, who have helped to replace some of those who flee. As the study's authors, E.J. McMahon and Wendell Cox, suggest, no single reason can be fingered for a million migrants seeking their fortunes across state lines, but one place to start is New York's notorious state and local tax burden. According to the Tax Foundation, between 1977 and 2008, New York has ranked first or second in the country for its state-local tax burden compared to the U.S. average. In the years considered by the Empire Center study, New York's state and local tax burden ranged between 11% and 12% of income. The peak year for taxes, 2004, was followed by the peak year for departures�as New York lost nearly 250,000 people to other states in 2005. And that's before another big tax hike this year. That pattern is consistent with the annual migration patterns, showing that highly taxed and economically lackluster states were most likely to end up in residents' rear view mirrors. According to the annual study by United Van Lines, states like New York, New Jersey, Michigan and Illinois have been big losers in recent years. " ...........

Jon Stewart did a great piece on The Daily Show tonight on Giuliani's hypocrisy where 9/11 terrorists are concerned comparing his views from 2006 and now. I don't know how long it takes them to get clips up on their site.

Yes, the taxes here are horrible. I actually in concept don't have a problem with higher taxes if I thought we were getting value back. But we don't in many cases. Especially with the MTA (Metropolitan Transit Authority. A lot of people move out of NYC in search of better public schools and more housing space/land for the dollar. Or maybe even cheaper private schools, if there is such a thing.

Especially with the MTA (Metropolitan Transit Authority Charge more $$$$ Other countries do ...have better service and they're cleaner!

They already have! We don't get our money's worth for the most part with service interruptions, esp during the weekends. I feel very bad for tourists who come on the weekend when many trains are not running, running on other routes or skipping stations. I have to do some massive planning and rerouting to get around then, it is almost impossible for them to. One weekend recently, every single line but one was rerouted or interrupted for work. We have many brand new trains that are very clean. At one point it was discovered the MTA kept 2 sets of books. And don't get me started on the MTA's'union.

And don't get me started on the MTA's'union I will repeat what I have heard here: "They're only trying to make a living wage."

Heard from whom or where? Them? ;-)

You!

I find it almost impossible to believe I'd say something like that about them of all people. Find the facts: Something smells about the MTA-union wage arbitration Editorials Saturday, August 22nd 2009, 7:55 PM The Metropolitan Transportation Authority was ideally positioned to negotiate a contract that was fair to transit workers and protected straphangers - except the brass fled from their duty. Rather than fight to protect gains hard won after the Transport Workers Union's illegal 2005 strike, MTA Chairman Dale Hemmerdinger and former CEO Elliot Sander prematurely threw the matter into arbitration, presented, by all indications, a confused case and wound up getting the public's clock cleaned. The sequence of events and the questions of who did what why are murky at best. But a rising odor suggests that the agency and its political masters used arbitration as a cover for giving the TWU a sweet deal. There's the fact that Sander and Hemmerdinger went to arbitration without consulting the MTA board. There's the fact that the MTA's law firm bowed out, feeling that it was not allowed to engage fully. There's the fact that the MTA bounced all over the place on wage demands and suddenly withdrew its major request for contract reform - a provision that would have allowed for computerized train operation - after arbitration was well under way. There's TWU President Roger Toussaint's charge that Mayor Bloomberg gave his blessing to 4% annual hikes. And there's Bloomberg's denial - plus City Hall's assertion that he intervened with Gov. Paterson to prevent Sander from boosting pay that much. Accountability, please. New York must know what happened. The powers that be are determined to stay undercover. Which is why we thank and support former MTA Chairman Peter Kalikow for demanding answers under the freedom-of-information law. He has asked for all the inside documents, along with those relating to any communications with the governor's office. The MTA must turn all the records over, regardless of whether they are covered by the open-government law. The public must get the full story of the great train robbery. Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2009/08/23/2009-08-23_find_the_facts_something_smells_about_the_mtaunion_wage_arbitration.html#ixzz0XEltLsPO

And at the same time, it's more than absurd what salaries and perks the MTA managers and board members get that are forbidden in their contracts. That adds up to a pretty penny, too. All we get are higher fares.

Some say it's better to rent in Manhattan than own. So is it cheaper to live in London?

Yes, now it is better to rent than own.

I'd have thought with the real estate downturn, that now would be a time to pick up something more realistically priced. Anyway, I don't like New York being criticized. They face challenges that few other areas do--whether it's terrorism, absorbing new immigrants (both legal and not) with the enormous amounts of $$$$$$ they cost, etc.

Well, the mantra of the day seems to be: "Tax the rich some more". Ya' know....re-distribution of wealth and all that stuff. ;-)

I was actually looking at govt job listings last week. Most of them were for people with finance backgrounds (IRS, jobs that deal with large dept budgets). State, local budget cuts a "time bomb" for U.S. jobs Reuters 42 mins ago NEW YORK (Reuters) � Budget shortfalls pose a direct threat to millions of U.S. jobs, many in the private sector, as state and local governments lay off workers and cut spending on contracts and other business services, a think tank said on Thursday. State and local governments will have to raise taxes and cut spending in the current and next two fiscal years to cover shortfalls totaling $469 billion, according to an Economic Policy Institute report. The think tank -- where White House adviser Jared Bernstein spent years developing ideas found in the $787 billion economic stimulus plan he oversees -- said the U.S. government must give states and cities $150 billion in direct budget relief to save between 1.1 million and 1.4 million jobs. "Given the fragility of the economy, already high unemployment and the magnitude of the budget shortfalls, it is clear that we cannot afford inaction," the report said, calling the gaps "a ticking time bomb for the economy." While many economists believe the worst recession in decades ended recently, cities' budget deficits are expected to continue at least through 2012. "The low point for cities typically comes 18 months to 24 months after the low point for the recession," said Christopher Hoene, research director for the National League of Cities, at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C. on Thursday. States, too, face future hardship, with the National Governors Association recently saying they are at the beginning of a "lost decade" of budget struggles. Those struggles will trickle out to the private sector, EPI said. According to its estimates, for every dollar of budget cuts, more than half the jobs and economic activity lost will be in the private sector. When asked at the Brookings meeting about the aid their cities need most, four mayors representing both political parties and cities large and small said the federal government must make credit more available to small businesses. "I'm not looking for a sugar high," said Mayor Scott Smith, a Republican from Mesa, Arizona, about direct federal aid that could be withdrawn after a short time. "On Main Street the credit market is completely shut off." If banks were to lend again to small businesses in her town of Bowling Green, Kentucky, then businesses would hire more people, increasing the city's income tax and job fee collection for years, said Democratic Mayor Elaine Walker. SPENDING CUTS SLASH NUMBERS OF WORKERS State governments, too, have had to lay off workers, shedding 26,000 jobs from October 2008 to last month, according to the Labor Department. But nearly one-third of state spending goes to public provisions such as infrastructure, which is usually awarded to private contractors, said EPI, which says it is an independent nonprofit nonpartisan institute that researches the impact of economic trends and policies on workers. Direct government services, such as fire departments and education, also affect the private sector through supply orders. Bernstein, speaking at the Brookings meeting, said that without the stimulus plan passed in February, job losses would have been deeper. When indirect spending is taken into consideration -- on things such as equipment for the roads projects in the bill -- the stimulus was responsible for more than 1 million jobs, he said. The plan has already allocated about $144 billion in relief to state and local governments, which has likely saved at least 360,000 jobs, EPI said. Most of that money has gone to state governments and has yet to reach cities and counties. Cities have only seen direct help through community development block grants to combat blight and police force funding. They also will soon receive grants for energy efficiency. And while they would like to see credit flowing, the mayors said they also need some direct stimulus. "I have no complaints, other than I can't use a dime for budgetary challenges," said Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter, about the stimulus. "On one day we could announce ... in the morning a new grant opportunity from the federal government and later that afternoon announce more layoffs and service cutbacks. The public is confused," he said. (Reporting by Tom Ryan; Additional reporting by Lisa Lambert in Washington; Editing by James Dalgleish) http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20091120/pl_nm/us_usa_economy_states_jobs;_ylt=Akp52ZFdAiRgHnBYy2yYpWus0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTM4a25xaWtiBGFzc2V0A25tLzIwMDkxMTIwL3VzX3VzYV9lY29ub215X3N0YXRlc19qb2JzBGNwb3MDMQRwb3MDMwRwdANob21lX2Nva2UEc2VjA3luX3RvcF9zdG9yeQRzbGsDZnVsbG5ic3BzdG9y

"I have no complaints, other than I can't use a dime for budgetary challenges," said Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter, about the stimulus He has two choices: Cut the budget or raise taxes. If the FEd govt has no input into their budget, why should they be part of the solution?

He has two choices: Cut the budget or raise taxes. Nutter has already cut the budget and now he's down to bone. A number of libraries throughout the city have been closed. It's the poor kids who will suffer.

Completely closed up or hours reduced/some days closed?

Completely closed.

Well then he has to raise taxes. People wouldn't mind if they knew it was going to libraries or some public benefit; not to build another stadium or state of the art jail. Every state/city has had to cut back. Even my city, which is not in dire need, is cutting the police force...."just in cases", before the shortfall becomes too overwhelming.

This story gets better every minute....now the WH admits this couple even met the president... Doubt Michaele would have made it if she hadn't been such a beautiful blonde. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_state_dinner_uninvited_guests;_ylt=AqEqDHhnUry913uzGK43VLas0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTNldGhhbXVlBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkxMTI4L3VzX3N0YXRlX2Rpbm5lcl91bmludml0ZWRfZ3Vlc3RzBGNwb3MDMQRwb3MDMgRwdANob21lX2Nva2UEc2VjA3luX3RvcF9zdG9yeQRzbGsDc2VjcmV0c2Vydmlj

*Somebody's* getting so fired. A bunch of somebodies.

Evelyn, your honey's getting beat up. Italian Premier Berlusconi punched in the face AP Italy's Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi leaves Duomo's square with blood on his face after a political party meeting in Milan Reuters � Italy's Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi leaves Duomo's square with blood on his face after a � By FRANCES D'EMILIO, Associated Press Writer � 10 mins ago ROME � Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi was punched in the face at the end of a rally on Sunday by a man holding a small statue in his hand, leaving the 73-year-old media mogul with a bloodied mouth and looking stunned, police said. The 42-year-old man accused of attacking Berlusconi in Milan as he signed autographs was immediately taken into custody. TV showed the stunned leader with blood under his nose, on his mouth and under one eye being lifted to his feet by aides after the attack. Berlusconi was hustled into the back of a car, but he immediately got out, apparently in an effort to show he was not badly injured. After looking out into the crowd, the premier, without saying a word, was pulled back into the vehicle. The attack occurred after Berlusconi had just finished delivering a long, vigorous speech at the rally to a crowd of applauding supporters from his Freedom People party at about 6:30 p.m. Officials at Milan's police headquarters, speaking on customary condition of anonymity, said the premier was conscious and apparently not badly injured. They said the attacker was wielding a miniature statue of Milan's Duomo, the city's gargoyled cathedral and symbol, but couldn't say what the souvenir was made of. Berlusconi's spokesman, speaking by telephone from the emergency room from San Raffaele hospital where the premier was taken, told Sky TG24 TV that doctors had decided to keep the premier in the hospital overnight for observation. "We'll see what the doctors say tomorrow morning," spokesman Paolo Bonauiti told Sky. The exams of his jaw area included a CT scan, Bonaiuti said. Police identified the man they were questioning as Massimo Tartaglia, 42. They said Tartaglia didn't have any criminal record. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091213/ap_on_re_eu/eu_italy_berlusconi;_ylt=Ahrzzo3bfahpSdX.HTVXLtOs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTNuYjBscjV1BGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkxMjEzL2V1X2l0YWx5X2Jlcmx1c2NvbmkEY2NvZGUDbW9zdHBvcHVsYXIEY3BvcwM0BHBvcwMxBHB0A2hvbWVfY29rZQRzZWMDeW5faGVhZGxpbmVfbGlzdARzbGsDaXRhbGlhbnByZW1p

Oh, mio Dio, Poor baby. Them Italians really take their politics seriously, don't they.

Taking this over here (Dorine) Re. House to house Vs apt to apt trick or treating.....no one outside of NYC lives in apts? ;-) Of course they do, but not like the Manhattan doorman-attended bldgs, except to a limited degree. We have high rises with doormen, of course, and kids wouldn't be allowed to gain entry and run amuck in the hallways, knocking on doors. I watched some program that showed kids in LA being chauffered around, house to house, by their parents.

Can't speak for other buildings, but in mine generally at least one parent goes along. Plus u know I was playing and wasn't in complete disagreement with your sentiment.

The three wealthiest states are down at the bottom of the Happiness Barometer? What's going on ? http://www.livescience.com/culture/091217-happy-state-list.html

LOL, very different from their survey just last month. http://www.livescience.com/culture/091110-fifty-happy-states.html

Here's more from your source: "Happy States are Wealthy and Tolerant." http://www.livescience.com/culture/091110-happy-states.html Of course no one takes these "polls" seriously. I have to say: I've been poor in my life, and I've been comfortable, and I'm much happier being comfortable, LOL! Having seen both sides of the coin, I'm very thankful for what I have, and never take it for granted.

The data were taken pre-Katrina, so even the study people believe the "happiest" state (Louisiana) no longer would be. ;-)

Can't wait for next month's poll Watch this space:-D

I often wonder if stuff like this is real, but it is funny:

LOL!!! I have to pass that one along to a few people. It's hilarious! Thanks Karen.

LOL!!! *shakes head*

One has to wonder what "John" would have said if it had been the other way around. The rat.

A different take on Xmas traditions...and why not?! LOL! I think 99% of the commenters need a bit of a sense of humor. The Boston Globe (Susan Levin for The Boston Globe) Have yourself a twisted little Christmas By Clif Garboden December 24, 2009 MY CHILDHOOD Christmas memories include a three-foot-diameter silver-plastic wreath with a red Styrofoam reindeer leaping through its center that my father won as a door prize at some neighborhood bar. The thing was beyond garish, way past hideous. It redefined tacky, and Pop knew it. So each December, we faithfully hung it above the couch, right below the likewise traditional/likewise low-taste aluminum-foil “Happy Holidays’’ sign. Sometimes we hung beer cans on our Christmas tree. Mostly we did these things to tease my mother, who, we sensed, had confused Christmas with a religious occasion fraught with sacred traditions. When Mom hung a more tasteful wreath from the living room ceiling fixture, we improvised a game keeping score as we aimed balls of crumpled-up wrapping paper at its center. We invented our own traditions, the unifying theme of which was making fun of things other people had been convinced to hold dear. No shrink-wrapped off-the-rack Hallmark holiday for us. As an adult, with a family and living room of my own, I’ve done my best to keep those values alive. When my son, Phil, was about 2, we sent out a photo card showing him trashing a miniature manger display with a two-headed-dragon action figure. Sacrilege? I beg your tinsel-tangled pardon. As far as celebrating the birth of Christ is concerned, the sacrilege boat sailed a long time ago - long before “Grandma Got Run Over by a Reindeer’’ retired the label.Look at it this way: whatever its one-time significance, Christmas is largely a secular celebration reliant on packaged traditions - talking cards, inflatable lawn snowmen, special-edition M&Ms - contrived to stimulate the marketplace. But why buy when you can do it yourself? Who wants to celebrate someone else’s holiday? Do it your way and steal Christmas back from the holiday hucksters. Trim your tree in high-concept kitsch. Back when you could still get Polaroid film, I would shoot pictures of our tree, before and after trimming, and then hang the instant prints on the tree itself. I found that quarter-inch reel-to-reel audio tape was an only fair substitute for garland unless I personalized it by recording something on it first. To this day I festoon our tree with a 40-second track of my infant son’s colic cry. (Those are technologically dated examples, but you get the idea.) And as my family decorates the tree, we always listen to, not carols or even the Atco Records “Soul Christmas’’ anthology (classic concept-kitsch though it is), but the Beatles’ “Please Please Me’’ album. Continuing the monster-in-the-manger theme, the kids and I annually desecrate our table-top porcelain Dickensian Village with Godzilla and Mothra figures, axe-wielding Lego guys and dismembered Nutcracker dolls, hoards of plastic ants, blood-dripping snowmen, and simulated house fires. We call it Calamityville. Even the kitchen can be yours again. Traditional cut-out cookies take on renewed energy when you mutate them. Drape half a rectangle of rolled dough over the edge of a cutting board and stamp out the outline of half of a given cookie cutter, leaving the shape unfinished at the fold. Then turn the dough around so the cut half hangs over the edge and complete the shape using a different cutter (carefully matching the points where the two cuts intersect, of course). You’ve got a reindeer head atop a Christmas tree, a Santa torso on a half-star, an combo angel/gingerbread boy. Experiment. Don’t go for cute; seek the ridiculous. Remember, this is all about scaring Aunt Mildred at Boxing Day tea.Of course, those are my family’s home-grown rituals, offered here as inspiration. To make Christmas yours, you need to come up with some things your family does that nobody else exactly understands. So trim your tree with travesty; deck your halls with disrespect; croon your own carol. Embrace the season without fea of breaking any molds. Celebrate December 25 as if you owned it. Christmas is for everybody, but it doesn’t have to be the same for everybody. Clif Garboden is a Boston-area freelance writer. http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009/12/24/have_yourself_a_twisted_little_christmas/?comments=all

Comment: "Can you even imagine the UPROAR it would cause if this paper (or any other) chose to run a similar story about Hanukkah or Kwanzaa??? Don't worry, THAT will NEVER happen." Says it all. Christians are wimps.

Seniors worry about Medicare Advantage cuts AP By MATT SEDENSKY, Associated Press Writer � Sun Dec 27, 10:24 am ET MIAMI � Insurers constantly caution seniors that their Medicare Advantage perks such as hearing aids, dental payments and even gym memberships will fizzle if Democrats get their way and cut government subsidies for them. But tens of billions of Medicare dollars funneled through insurers also pay for extras that never reach beneficiaries: multimillion-dollar salaries, executive retreats in Hawaii, Scotland and Cancun, and massive expenditures on marketing to lure more customers to the privately administered Advantage plans that serve as an alternative to government-provided Medicare. The government-subsidized benefits that seniors on Advantage plans receive � often at premiums lower than Medicare premiums � are real, and are legitimately in danger in some cases if Democrats succeed in their health care overhaul. Medicare Advantage subsidies are on the chopping block to pay for the overhaul. Though there are marked differences between House and Senate versions, both bills would lower payments to private Medicare Advantage plans, which on average cost the government 14 percent more than traditional Medicare. The harshest critics of the Advantage program say patients are exchanging hassle-free coverage for a plan with cheap perks that may ultimately deny them necessary treatment. "They're giving special benefits that are valuable," said Mary Johnson, policy analyst for The Senior Citizens League, a nonpartisan, 1.2-million-member group. "But what people don't understand are the trade-offs." Though AARP � which lends its name to a Medicare Advantage plan � and other senior advocacy groups support the Advantage cuts, it is likely that at least some seniors will see their premiums rise, benefits cut or plans close. "I get too upset over it," said 71-year-old Charlotte Casey of Miramar, Fla., who is on an Advantage plan through Coventry Health Care. "The seniors are going to get the worst of it." Casey first enrolled in a Humana plan, but she dropped it over problems with its prescription drug coverage. She plans to switch from her current plan, too, because her primary care doctor will no longer be covered and she'd have to travel farther for non-emergency hospital services. She has had to fight for payment sometimes, but overall she says it is the best fit for her because she doesn't need a costly MediGap plan to cover what traditional Medicare would not. "Regular Medicare is the best one, but you have to pay for a supplement," she said. "With this, sometimes you want something and they don't want to give it to you." Despite the belief that Advantage plans offer broad savings for seniors, a Government Accountability Office report last year found wide differences depending on the plan, including home health service costs that could be up to 84 percent more than traditional Medicare. A half-million Advantage enrollees were in plans with no co-pay for hospital stays. But a roughly equal number were in plans with high hospital co-pays and no limits on out-of-pocket inpatient expenses, potentially costing patients thousands more. The disparity was greatest for some of the sickest seniors, those who return to the hospital within 60 days of discharge, the GAO found. Under traditional Medicare, those patients would not pay any deductible. Under many Advantage plans, the deductibles can be steep. Many of the perks offered by Advantage plans are relatively cheap. Vision coverage cost insurers $3.37 a person each month, on average, according to 2007 filings with the government. Hearing coverage cost less than a dollar. "The little stuff, the nickle-and-dime stuff, it's good," said John Arline, who was faced with a huge bill for his 84-year-old grandfather Mervyn Urquhart earlier this year. "But people don't need coverage for the nickle-and-dime stuff." Urquhart, though suffering from Alzheimer's disease, is a reasonably healthy engineering retiree living in Wheatley Heights, N.Y. After treatment for a stomach virus and deep vein thrombosis in January, he was so weak from time in a hospital bed that doctors agreed he needed rehabilitation and physical and occupational therapy. His Advantage plan turned him down, even though Medicare covers such treatment. Arline and other relatives footed the roughly $12,000 bill for rehab. With it, Urquhart is now able to walk, to feed himself and to live a fairly normal life. "They violated this patient's rights," Arline said. "They did that because it was cheaper." Insurers participating in the Advantage program responded to inquiries by Senate Democrats that led to a report this month providing some fuel in their fight against the subsidies. The companies reported, on average, spending more than 15 percent of premium revenues on profits, marketing and corporate expenses, nearly 10 times the rate of traditional Medicare. Meanwhile, Advantage companies were paying for multimillion-dollar corporate retreats in exotic locales and hundreds of their executives were being paid more than $500,000 annually. Government reports have shown Medicare Advantage providers continually outpace profit projections. The congressional review released this month showed 34 Advantage companies devoted $27 billion in government subsidies from 2005 through 2008 to profits, marketing cost and other corporate expenses. Still, Advantage enrollment has burgeoned, doubling to nearly 11 million people in the six years since Congress approved lucrative subsidies to insurers that allowed them to expand their reach. About one in four seniors are now on private plans. Provisions were added to the Senate legislation to grandfather in beneficiaries in some areas and to provide emergency funds to others to avoid disruptions. The insurance industry still contends the majority of Advantage enrollees remain in danger. "Seniors are going to lose many of the benefits that seniors like and rely on today," said Robert Zirkelbach, a spokesman for America's Health Insurance Plans, an industry group. "And in some parts of the country, seniors will lose access to their Medicare Advantage plan altogether." Private plans have existed under Medicare since the 1970s and many have persisted through previous cuts. Plans shuttered after reductions in funding during the Clinton administration. And changes approved by the Obama administration earlier this year are at least in partly responsible for the 18 percent fewer plans operating in 2010 and higher premiums systemwide. Neal Bulla, a 70-year-old retiree from a marketing job in Fort Wright, Ky., belongs to an Advantage plan through United Healthcare and receives a gym membership, vision and hearing coverage, and is immune to the prescription drug "doughnut hole" that plagues many seniors. He is so upset at AARP's support of Democrats' health care bills that he tore up his AARP membership card. "It's the best insurance plan that I've ever had," he said. "They're going to ruin the best medical system in the world." http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091227/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_overhaul_medicare_advantage

Medi-gap insurance (which pays the 20% that Medicare doesn't pay)is expensive for seniors on fixed,limited incomes that rank above the poverty level. The latter get a Medicaid allowance. Hey, the gov't cuts Medicare $830 B and you don't expect benefits to be cut? Puhleeze.

I have no problem with $$ for Medicare Advantage being cut. I'm not a particular fan of that concept. Or perhaps it's the execution...M.O.....method of delivery (or mechanism of action as we used to say in the pharma biz) that I'm not fond of.

Here we have Medicare Advantage called "Community Care", an HMO. Yes, it had limitations but every subscriber I know is happy with it. I don't know anything about the "execution" or providers; just the members who are contented with the medical services available. Saves them a bunch of $$$$$ .

Yes, it had limitations but every subscriber I know is happy with it. How many of those had catastrophic illnesses or have chronic conditions? If they need hospital/rehab/long term placement....do those plans measure up to straight M'care in terms of options available. Of course, some plans are better than others. But it's the type of things people need to think about depending on their own situations. Not just how many pairs of eyeglasses and other things they provide. If the rx plans work well costwise with their regimen (ie, can take generic vs. needing brand drugs), that's, of course, an added bonus. the members who are contented with the medical services available. Saves them a bunch of $$$$$ . I have nothing against that and I am glad the plans can provide other things that straight Medicare doesn't cover such as glasses, hearing aids, etc.....BUT, at what cost in other areas. After they skim their administrative costs off and then provide (or deny) other services, how much profit margin are those companies making that could be going to providing more services to make denials or restrictions on services less likely like with regular Medicare. I've always said, managed care is great for the healthy.

And another reason Medicare (and Medicaid) are in such trouble...fraud. We (and every home care agency) are going through a tremendous audit mandated by the federal govt on dually eligible patients (Medicare/Medicaid). It boggles the mind how much $$ and manpower the company must've spent so far to get the information together to send to CMS (Center for Medicare/Medicaid Services). I mean the literal forests of paper we must've used for copies to send out to CMS first, then make copies to be sent to Univ of Mass, the entity who deals with claims after they've been denied (and no one doubts there will be denials) and finally copies to keep on record so we know exactly what was sent to one, if not both of them. There are rumors the govt has hired a ton of people to review the info we send them and have incentives for the number of claims they find in error. To top it off, the state OMIG (Office of Medicaid Inspector General) is expected inhouse in Feb.

This is the article that reminded me to mention the fraud aspect, too. I've heard stories of this from people myself, though with smaller ticket items. Senior-citizen volunteers fight Medicare fraud AP By MATT SEDENSKY, Associated Press Writer � Tue Dec 29, 4:25 pm ET MIAMI � The first box that arrived at Shirley Shupp's door was filled with braces to help with her arthritis. Then came a motorized scooter, just like the one the 69-year-old already owned. She hadn't asked for any of it � but Medicare was apparently footing the bill. "There was just something that wasn't right about it," the Houston woman said. So Shupp contacted her local Senior Medicare Patrol, which did its own research and then referred the matter to investigators. The equipment, worth thousands of dollars, was returned, the case was handed over to prosecutors and the perpetrators were charged with Medicare fraud. The Senior Medicare Patrol is one of the least-known forces in the government's effort to eliminate such fraud, which drains billions of dollars a year. But it is seen as a valuable part of the Obama administration's bid to overhaul health care and bring down costs. The 4,700 senior citizen volunteers who serve as the government's eyes and ears have been credited with saving taxpayers more than $100 million since 1997. The program relies on elderly people to apply a lifetime's worth of common sense and skepticism. "They can tell when something just doesn't feel right to them," said Anne Gray, who works on the SMP program in Santa Ana, Calif. The patrol, which evolved from another program founded in 1995, now has at least one unit in every state. SMP sends its volunteers to senior centers, retirement communities and elsewhere to encourage Medicare beneficiaries to guard their personal information, beware of too-good-to-be-true offers on medical equipment and carefully review their benefit statements. The patrol also collects tips on potential scams and fields calls from senior citizens who believe their Medicare accounts have been fraudulently billed. When all they have is a whiff of something fishy, SMP participants often keep probing until they have enough information to send on to the FBI and investigators with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. "It really is detective work," said Barbara McGinity, director of the SMP in Houston. Patrol volunteers have witnessed all kinds of schemes. There are fly-by-night clinics where patients endure multiple tests at the hands of staff members with dubious credentials. Patients may be followed home from the hospital by companies selling home health services, scooters, glucose monitors or psychotherapy. Often, senior citizens are persuaded to give up their personal information with an offer of something they need, such as transportation to kidney dialysis appointments. "They get their number and they pass it around," Gray said. "They have a ring where they're selling it." Beneficiaries may have no idea their identities have been wrongly used unless their accounts are frozen for unusual activity or they try to obtain something the government already bought for them, such as a pricey hospital bed or wheelchair. The Obama administration says eliminating Medicare fraud is key to overhauling the health care system. But agents and prosecutors tackling the issue are relatively sparse. The patrol helps fill in the gaps. "There is no substitute for beneficiaries and on-the-ground resources to help us know where fraud is occurring and where problems are arising," said Kimberly Brandt, who oversees Medicare anti-fraud efforts at CMS. All told, scam artists are believed to have stolen about $47 billion from Medicare in the 2009 fiscal year, nearly triple the toll a year earlier. Medicare spokesman Peter Ashkanaz said that since the Justice Department and Health and Human Services formed a task force after President Barack Obama took office, charges have been filed against 103 defendants in cases involving more than $100 million in Medicare fraud. For every Medicare thief the senior citizen volunteers successfully pursue, McGinity said, it seems there are dozens more. "Sometimes we feel like we're really beating our heads against the wall," she said. ___ Associated Press writer Jennifer Kay in Miami contributed to this report. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091229/ap_on_bi_ge/us_medicare_patrol

(Me) How many of those had catastrophic illnesses or have chronic conditions? If any do, they may be in this type program. We have a Medicaid long term/chronic illness program. But then again, Medicaid pays for almost anything and everything in NY state. That will be changing, too, from what I understand. http://healthplans.hcpro.com/content/HEP-229212/Mr-President-Use-the-Scalpel However, by using a chainsaw on Medicare Advantage, the president is also slashing payments to a subset of plans called special needs plans (SNPs). SNPs were created under the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003 as a way to bring managed care to seriously chronically ill beneficiaries who are institutionalized, dually eligible, and suffer from severe and disabling chronic conditions. Congress has since established specific chronic condition SNPs that focus on such high-cost ailments as end-stage renal disease, chronic heart failure, dementia, cancer, HIV/AIDS, stroke, and chronic lung diseases. SNPs are under the Medicare Advantage umbrella because the plans feature private entities (health insurers and disease management companies) that provide care coordination for chronically ill Medicare beneficiaries. One of the largest providers of SNPs is XLHealth, a disease management company based in Baltimore. XLHealth's Care Improvement Plus offers SNPs to chronically ill beneficiaries with diabetes, heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and end-stage renal disease.

FYI Most old folks have chronic conditions ...different varieties and on different levels. I don't have statistics of the country at large, I'm just telling you what I know *first hand*. They like their local Medical Advantage. No one is too excited about its demise however... Hey, that law doesn't go into effect til 2014. There could be changes in Congress by then and that component could be revoked. I tried to report a fraud (to me) once to the state Medicare office; they could have cared less.

FYI Most old folks have chronic conditions ...different varieties and on different levels. Sorry, too blanket. And perhaps I was almost "jargoning" you. By chronic, I mean conditions that require chronic treatment, that has at least moderate impact on activities of daily living/ambulation. Even if it's diabetes (esp those with amputations), renal disease (likely on dialysis), significant spinal issues, cardiac or pulmonary issues (esp those that require O2 or frequent rest periods), etc. I wasn't necessarily thinking of someone with chronic orthopedic (back/hip/knee) issues or the like, unless they are such that the person is somewhat debilitated. I don't have statistics of the country at large, I'm just telling you what I know *first hand*. I wasn't asking about the country at large. I copied your statement and was asking you in direct relation to your statement, which was....of the people you know that you mentioned. Are they relatively healthy? Or do you not know them that well? I tried to report a fraud (to me) once to the state Medicare office; they could have cared less. Really?? What did they say? Or not say? Though, in a way not totally surprising. It's gone on forever with no one much caring until it's an election year or a big budget issue. ;-) They have cracked way down on DME companies, but they still find loopholes or are just very aggressive until they get caught.

DME= Durable Medical Equipment.

My dear little friend;-)....when one gets to a Medicare "certain age", no one is completely healthy. Only my Jazzcercise/Aerobic crowd can boast of that. And some of them have back/knee issues. What did they say? Courteously: "Thank you." Dorine, I'm done with Medical Advantage. I'm just telling you what I hear from my Starbuck's Senior coffee crowd. Let's pick another topic

Only my Jazzcercise/Aerobic crowd can boast of that. And some of them have back/knee issues. You've managed to answer my question. In a roundabout way. ;-) It's a discussion everyone should be having at this point. :-) How 'bout them......???? I don't know. Who's in the playoffs? Probably not the Steelers and definitely not the Dolphins, so I'm not paying a whit of attention to it all. ;-)

It's a discussion everyone should be having at this point. :-) *snort* Not me;-) (I 've told you everything I know)

Scary.....From Bumberg News: Mayo Clinic in Arizona to Stop Treating Some Medicare Patients "The Mayo Clinic, praised by President Barack Obama as a national model for efficient health care, will stop accepting Medicare patients as of tomorrow at one of its primary-care clinics in Arizona, saying the U.S. government pays too little. ...." http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aHoYSI84VdL0 Maybe they should switch to Medicare Advantage;-D

oh crap. Too much champ....

It's not that new of a concept. I can only speak for here, but that kind of action has happened for years, whether at clinics or individual/group offices. But then overhead here is generally very high here compared to other areas. Now I haven't noticed specifically that there's a change in Medicare reimbursement payments scheduled for Jan 1 or anytime soon, but when they have come up before, Congress has at times in the past put a hold on the cuts as MD's threatened to do just that, stop seeing Medicare pts. And some did anyway. Here I tend to find more that MD's/clinics will cut out people with mananged care plans. Not just because of the size of reimbursement, but the significant time it takes administratively to get that money in the end (through repeated denials, appeals, etc). It depends what kind of services the office/business has really. Certain companies we deal with to concurrently treat patients only want managed care because the cost of the IV drugs they provide services with are either not at all or just minimally covered by Medicare/Medicaid. In that case (with Medicare/Medicaid), the patient generally has a giant co-pay. This is all in home health care. At times they have the option to go to a skilled nursing facility for 2-3 weeks to have the treatment, but most people don't want to do that. I'd need to know more info about the clinic itself to understand a bit better their reasoning. Maybe it is simply because of the rates and increasing costs, but it's possible they had a grant(s) that they used to help run the place that's no longer available to provide certain services that was utilized by Medicare pts more, but for whatever reason they feel they need to continue to provide them. Or not. It's quite different in my job. I'm told to market primarily for business involving Medicare/Medicaid pts as our total of pts with managed care is too high to maintain a certain level of revenue (we are a non-profit, too). Skilled nursing facilities also generally want M/M pts, though we're expecting some big Medicaid cuts at some point, so we will probably be scrutinizing them more closely soon, too.

This is an interesting article highlighting attempts at Medicare reform historically. It's kind of long. I'll just link. http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2009/November/03/medicare-pilot-projects.aspx A quick blurb: "Vladeck included the program in President Bill Clinton's attempt at a sweeping Medicare overhaul in 1997 as part of the Balanced Budget Act. " And on a trivial note, Medicare changes can and have affected me personally and professionally, after the above BBA that took effect in 1999. It's how I ended up in NY, the only place I could get a job quick. I was doing travel staffing in CT at the time and NY was the only place that had anything. It was in an area I hadn't worked in before (and only studied in school), but I took it or I was about to be literally jobless and homeless as they provided the housing and the job. NY was a demonstration state, so they'd started the program a year to 18 mos earlier and providers had some kinks worked out and systems in place to maximize reimbursement in the new structure. So Happy Anniversary to me. Moved to NYC 11 yrs yesterday. Moved here out of necessity, but since I'd wanted to live here anyway and thought I never would, it worked out. :-)

At least the people in Arizona can easily cross the border, move (establishing residency) and get cheap (and apparently quite good) health care in Mexico. I can't beleive how many news segments I've seen about retirees moving to Mexico for health care. I think Colbert or Stewart had a segment too. Boy, what does that say about this "great" country? :-(

(Karen) I've seen about retirees moving to Mexico for health care. Interesting. I've never seen about them moving there. Just people going there for medicines and treatments.

Lots of meds , dental and cosmetic. Methinks I would scrub floors to have treatment here. Though I know medics who won't take generics. But that's another topic. I think Colbert or Stewart had a segment too. Authorities on the subject.....

Canadian patients give Detroit hospitals a boost. http://www.britannica.com/bps/additionalcontent/18/31791887/Canadian-patients-give-Detroit-hospitals-a-boost Written in 2008. Probably has changed this past year. After looking at Stewart and Colbert...they are no doubt going on down to Mexico.

Here's the CBS Nightly News report: http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=5993096n&tag=contentMain;contentBody Something from PBS this month: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/health/july-dec09/mexico_12-28.html This isn't the old go-down-to Mexico for some treatment. This is retirees buying oceanside homes for cheap and getting excellent health care at little cost. In the meantime, some retirees are taking advantage of the insurance offered by the Mexican government's social security system, called IMSS, or IMSS. For only $300 a year, Americans who can establish residency are offered an array of medical services with no deductible. And the Daily Show video: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-november-30-2009/american-refugees-seek-health-care-in-mexico San Miguel Allende has always held an allure for me....

Scrub floors? Presumes that (1) you can find enough floors to scrub to pay for health care services in this country and (2) you knew years in advance to scrub those extra floors, as no hospital is going to provide the service without cash upfront. Sad, putting the onus on the people. Like it's their fault they can't afford. :-( Anyway, it seems appropriate that we're outsourcing health care, as just another example of things Americans can't provide or make.