Wednesday, December 29, 2010

The boomers took a running dive into adolescence and went on to redefine work and family, but getting old is making them nervous...

Aging Demographics
In the United States, the baby boom generation represents 76 million people.
On January 1, 2011, as the baby boomers begin to celebrate their 65th birthdays, 10,000 people will turn 65 every day—this will continue for 20 years.
By 2030 in the United States, about one in five persons will be over 65.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The first baby boomers will be old enough to qualify for Medicare Jan. 1, and many fear the program's obituary will be written before their own.

A new Associated Press-GfK poll finds that baby boomers believe by a ratio of 2-to-1 they won't be able to rely on the giant health insurance plan throughout their retirement.

The boomers took a running dive into adolescence and went on to redefine work and family, but getting old is making them nervous.

Now, forty-three percent say they don't expect to be able to depend on Medicare forever, while only 20 percent think their Medicare is secure. The rest have mixed feelings.

Yet the survey also shows a surprising willingness among adults of all ages to sacrifice to preserve Medicare benefits that most Americans say they deserve after years of paying taxes into the system at work.

Take the contentious issue of Medicare's eligibility age, fixed at 65, while the qualifying age for Social Security is rising gradually to 67.

Initially, 63 percent of boomers in the poll dismissed the idea of raising the eligibility age to keep Medicare afloat financially. But when the survey forced them to choose between raising the age or cutting benefits, 59 percent said raise the age and keep the benefits.

"I don't mind the fact that people may have to work a little longer," said Lynn Barlow, 60, a real estate agent who lives outside Atlanta. Especially if there's time to plan, laboring a few extra years allows people to save more for retirement.

Bring up benefit cuts and Barlow isn't nearly as accommodating. "I started working when I was 16 and I expect a benefit after putting into it for so many years," she said.

As Medicare reaches a historic threshold, the poll also found differences by age, gender and income among baby boomers. For example, baby boom women, who can expect to live longer than both their mothers and their husbands, are much more pessimistic than men about the program's future.

Medicare is a middle-class bulwark against the ravages of illness in old age. It covers 46 million elderly and disabled people at an annual cost of about $500 billion. But the high price of American-style medicine, stressing intensive treatment and the latest innovations, is already straining program finances. Add the number of baby boomers, more than 70 million born between 1946 and 1964, and Medicare's fiscal foundation starts to shake.

Here's the math: when the last of the boomers reaches age 65 in about two decades, Medicare will be covering more than 80 million people. At the same time, the ratio of workers paying taxes to support the program will have plunged from 3.5 for each person receiving benefits currently, to 2.3.

"The 800-pound gorilla is eating like mad and growing to 1,200 pounds," said economist Eugene Steuerle of the Urban Institute, warning about the imbalance. "The switch from worker to retiree status has implications for everything."

The government can't balance its books without dealing with health care costs, and Medicare is in the middle. Some leading Republicans and a few Democrats have called for phasing out the program and instead giving each retiree a fixed payment — or voucher —to help them buy private medical insurance of their choice. The poll found doubts about the idea, and a generational debate.

Overall, a narrow majority (51 percent) of Americans opposed the voucher plan. But those born after 1980 favored it by 47 percent to 41 percent, while seniors opposed it 4-to-1. A majority of boomers were also opposed, with 43 percent strongly objecting.

However, younger boomers like RoxAnne Christley of Roanoke, Va., were more likely to be favorable.

"I think that's a possibility if it brings choices and competition," said Christley, 47. "We don't need to stimulate the government; we need to stimulate the economy. A lot of people have different choices when it comes to medical coverage, and I see nothing wrong with that at all." Christley is self-employed, counseling new mothers on breast feeding.

Changes that don't involve a full-scale re-engineering of Medicare tended to draw more support in the poll, especially when the survey forced people to choose between giving up benefits or making some other kind of sacrifice.

For example, 61 percent of Americans overall favored raising Medicare taxes to avoid a cut in benefits. The current payroll tax is 2.9 percent on wages, evenly divided between workers and their employers. The new health care law added a surcharge of 0.9 percent on earnings over $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for couples filing jointly.

When forced to choose, even a majority of Republicans said they would rather pay higher taxes (53 percent) than cut benefits (38 percent). Among adults in their 20s, who'd face a whole career paying higher taxes, 61 percent said they would be willing to pay more to preserve benefits. Only 29 percent of boomers said keep taxes the same but cut benefits.

"If people are forced to the wall and something has to be done about the financial shape of the program, they would rather take their medicine by raising taxes and moving the eligibility age than having the benefits cut when they retire," said polling analyst Robert Blendon of the Harvard School of Public Health.

A narrower majority of Americans — 54 percent — also favored requiring people on Medicare to pay higher copayments and deductibles so that payments to doctors don't have to be cut.

Support was surprisingly strong among seniors, 62 percent of whom said they'd be willing to pay more so that doctors' fees don't have to be cut and more doctors keep accepting Medicare payments.

"In its present form, Medicare will be insolvent before my grandkids get there," said Fred Wemer, 73, a retired dentist from Seattle. He says Medicare's biggest problem is that it rewards inefficiency by not paying doctors enough to keep people healthy and then paying for just about everything — even botched procedures — when patients get into trouble.

"We've got a discrepancy in how doctors are paid," said Wemer. "Primary care doctors, the ones who listen to you, they're underpaid. But specialists get paid way over what they're worth."

The AP-GfK Poll was conducted Nov. 18-22, 2010, by GfK Roper Public Affairs and Corporate Communications. It involved landline and cell phone interviews with 1,000 adults nationwide, and has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 4.3 percentage points.

Saturday, December 25, 2010

I got my Kindle 3G for my birthday this year... and there are lots of Free ebooks for Kindle users and other eReaders users, too.

Merry Christmas to All for 2010!

If Google Trends are anything to go by, a fair number of you were fortunate enough to unwrap a Kindle 3 this Christmas (currently, “free kindle books” is trending at number 9).

As such, we thought we’d alert you to some of the following resources for getting free Kindle books on your new device (as well as your smartphone and desktop). For all but the Kindle Store, you’ll need to transfer the books manually using a computer and USB cable.

I.Project Gutenberg: 33,000 free e-books, including all of the classics, available in Kindle, HTML and simple text formats.

II.Google E-Bookstore: The free section is filled with thousands of free, scanned copies of books, available in Kindle-friendly PDF formats.

III.Internet Archive: Millions of primarily rare, out-of-print works in multiple languages and formats (including Kindle), especially useful for academic work.

IV.Open Library: 20 million user-contributed items in multiple editions and formats (including Kindle). Nearly 30,000 titles, many of which have been pulled from Project Gutenberg. Has a good collection of little-known Creative Commons works.

VI.LibriVox: Thousands of free audiobooks.

Looking for more Kindle resources?
Check out our complete Kindle User guide here.

Monday, December 13, 2010

According to Chuck Todd this might be the Big Week for this Lame Duck Session....

First Read

From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Ali Weinberg

*** A consequential week: This is shaping up to be another consequential week for President Obama and his administration. There’s the tax-cut deal, which will see its first Senate vote today and which has become a big test of the president’s leadership after his party’s midterm losses. There’s the New START treaty, which the Senate will consider after the tax deal and which the administration sees as a must-pass measure for its international credibility. And then there’s the White House’s Afghanistan-Pakistan review, which also will consume Obama’s time this week and which remains the most important issue few in Washington are talking about. What happens this week, and HOW it happens, could definitely impact his presidency, even if most of the country isn't paying much attention (because of the holidays or the weather).

*** The Democrats’ tax-cut dilemma: On the tax deal, do some Democrats realize that perhaps the biggest danger of not cutting this deal is ceding the economic debate to the GOP for at least one election cycle, if not more? Play it out: Dems decide to fight and get nothing when the tax cuts expire at the end of the year. Then, on Jan. 6, the new GOP-led House “comes to the rescue” and passes legislation to extend the Bush-era tax cuts. So say the economy recovers a bit but not gangbusters. Well, the GOP will criticize Democrats for creating uncertainty at fragile time. Or say the economy recovers gangbusters in 2011-12, the GOP will have an argument to take much of the credit. Bottom line: If Democrats line up and try to kill the compromise, the political price they could pay might be much higher than they fathom as they'll be on the wrong side of the economic argument -- no matter the outcome. At least they can control the process for now.

*** Watch the GOP votes: Most of the public anger over the tax-cut deal, of course, has come from the Dem side. But when the Senate holds its first test vote on the legislation at 3:00 pm ET, it will be interesting to see which Senate Republicans vote against it. Remember, Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell has said a "vast majority" of his caucus would support this deal. We'll define "vast" as 25-30 GOP senators. But is that a high bar? After all, the bill has a price tag of nearly $900 billion, and it isn’t paid for -- meaning that it will add that amount to the budget deficit. In fact, columnist Charles Krauthammer last week provided the conservative argument to vote against the deal: “Obama is no fool. While getting Republicans to boost his own reelection chances, he gets them to make a mockery of their newfound, second-chance, post-Bush, Tea-Party, this-time-we're-serious persona of debt-averse fiscal responsibility.” As one Democratic Hill aide predicted to us, the tax-deal vote COULD become a primary issue for Republicans in 2012 (a mini TARP?). Then again, as John Boehner suggested on “60 Minutes” last night, Republicans don’t consider tax cuts adding to the deficit. “Washington does not have a revenue problem. Washington has a spending problem.” and

*** Passage with “relative ease”? Still, most observers expect that there will be more than 60 votes to defeat the filibuster on the tax-cut agreement. The Washington Post: “Despite the lingering reservations of many Democrats, the latest tallies by party leaders suggest that the Obama-GOP package will clear the Senate with relative ease, Senate Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) told CNN's ‘State of the Union’ on Sunday. ‘We're counting votes in the Senate,’ he said. ‘Harry Reid and I have been on the phone over the weekend and I can say that we have a good cross-section of the Senate Democratic caucus, from left to right, who are prepared to accept this,’ he added.” What’s the over-under? 65 votes? 70 votes?

*** Steele the one? Politico broke the news over the weekend that RNC Chairman Michael Steele will hold a conference call tonight with RNC members to discuss his re-election plans. The smart money: He won’t run (but wouldn't it be just like Steele to hint one way and then surprise folks by running?). Here’s Politico: “Steele … has built no known reelection team or structure, making the prospect of a campaign unlikely in the face of competition that grows fiercer by the day. But allies said Steele has not revealed his plans, and the chairman has been nothing if not unpredictable.” If Steele doesn’t run, do we see some bigger names get into the race? Right now, here’s your field: Michigan committeeman Saul Anuzis, former Bush administration official Maria Cino, Wisconsin GOP chairman Reince Priebus, former RNC political director Gentry Collins, and former Missouri GOP chair Ann Wagner. Then again, as some Republicans have pointed out, didn't the 2010 cycle prove that the RNC is irrelevant?

*** Bloomberg’s “No way, no how” for 2012: On “Meet the Press” yesterday, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg pretty much ruled out a presidential bid in 2012, despite making some moves (like his big political speech last week) that suggest otherwise. “I'm not going to run for president, for the, the job,” he told NBC’s David Gregory. “I've got a great job. I'm going to finish out my 1,100 and whatever number of days it is left to go, and I'll leave the politics to the experts.” When Gregory followed up to see if there was wiggle room, Bloomberg added, “No way, no how.”

*** No Labels’ launch: However, today Bloomberg and other centrist politicians -- like Evan Bayh, Joe Lieberman, and former Rep. Tom Davis -- are participating at the launch today of No Labels, a political group seeking to bring together Americans to find common ground on issues. The launch begins at Columbia University at 9:00 am ET.

*** Court watch: Here’s another political event to watch today: the expected federal court ruling in Virginia on the Obama health-care law. Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, who filed this particular suit, will hold a news conference two hours after the ruling by Judge Henry Hudson comes out. The liberal group Health Care for America Now (HCAN) released this memo to reporters: “To date, 14 federal district judges have rejected lawsuits seeking to invalidate the new law. While the Virginia case is important and has drawn strong media interest, it is no more important than the many other rulings by judges of equal rank who have determined that the law is constitutional or have issued dismissals on procedural grounds. The fundamental issue is essentially the same in all these cases – whether the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution empowers Congress to require everyone to have coverage. So far, the judges say yes.”

*** Obama’s day: At 10:25 am ET, President Obama -- along with the first lady -- signs the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 into law at an elementary school in DC. Later in the day, he participates in a service project with LA Lakers coaches and players. And after that, he delivers remarks marking the Lakers' NBC championship last season.
Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
Check us out on Facebook and also on Twitter. and

OBAMA AGENDA: Focusing on the middle
The New York Times says “a hefty portion of the $858 billion tax package will benefit middle- and upper-middle-income Americans — precisely the demographic that felt neglected the last two years as the White House and Congress focused on the major health care law and on helping the unemployed and people facing foreclosure. These new tax breaks are in addition to the cuts Mr. Obama had always planned to maintain on all but the highest incomes, and they could pay big political dividends to Mr. Obama and other Democrats in 2012 — a point that the president and some senior advisers are counting on, and one reason that they were willing to give in to Republican demands to extend all Bush-era tax rates.”

“President Barack Obama's approval ratings have sunk to the lowest level of his presidency, so low that he'd lose the White House to Republican Mitt Romney if the election were held today, according to a new McClatchy-Marist poll,” McClatchy’s Thommas writes. “The biggest reason for Obama's fall: a sharp drop in approval among Democrats and liberals, apparently unhappy with his moves toward the center since he led the party to landslide losses in November's midterm elections. At the same time, he's gained nothing among independents.” Obama’s approval is just 42%/50%. He loses to Romney 46%-44%, beats Huckabee 47%-43%, handily beats Sarah Palin 52%-40%.
“House Republicans don’t take power for another three weeks, but the White House is already engaged in a behind-the-scenes charm offensive designed to build relationships with incoming committee chairmen before they become powerful adversaries,” Politico writes. “The GOP chairmen are getting congratulatory phone calls from President Barack Obama, and private meetings with Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and Attorney General Eric Holder.”
“A Virginia federal judge is expected to issue a decision on the constitutionality of the healthcare reform law Monday, a court employee confirmed to The Hill late Friday afternoon.”
“Richard Holbrooke, the US special envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, underwent more surgery yesterday to fix a tear in the large artery that moves blood from the heart, the State Department said. The operation came after 20 hours of surgery that ended Saturday,” the Boston Globe writes.

CONGRESS: Hoyer’s call
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD), the second-ranking Democrat in the House, in a 9:30 am ET speech at the National Press Club will urge Congress to look beyond elections, which happen every two years for the House, and take “on the long-term, structural problems that defy quick answers.” He’ll say, according to prepared remarks, “Our politics may run on two-year cycles—but our problems do not. We won’t get to full employment in two years. We won’t get out of debt in two years. We won’t get our middle class out of this historic hole of inequality and lost opportunity in two years, either.” More: “America isn’t convinced that either party has all the answers. And on November 2nd, I believe that the voters called us to find common ground on real solutions to real problems—unemployment, economic growth, and debt.”
He touts a need to increase manufacturing, calls for bipartisanship, and lauds the work done by the president’s debt commission. He draws a line in the sand, however, on bipartisanship when it comes to funding health care, the environment, “and protecting our consumers from unfair practices that put them unknowingly at great economic risk.” Programming note: Hoyer will be on MSNBC’s The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell tonight.
“In a sign of fading resistance to President Obama’s tax cut deal with Republicans, a Democratic leader said yesterday that the House will try to make changes but will not block the bill,” the Boston Globe writes, adding, “Representative Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, a member of the Democratic leadership who represented the House in negotiations with the administration, made clear that Democrats strongly object to extending breaks to estates as large as $5 million. But he indicated that the issue would not be a deal-breaker if Republicans refuse to relent and said middle class families will get their tax relief. ‘We’re not talking about blocking the whole thing,’ Van Hollen said on ‘Fox News Sunday.’”
GOP WATCH: Common ground vs. compromise?
So what’s the difference between finding “common ground” and “compromise?” On 60 Minutes, incoming Speaker John Boehner refused to use the word, saying it “is a dirty word,” especially among Tea Partiers. Here was the exchange:
Stahl: You’re saying, “I want common ground, but I’m not gonna compromise.” I don’t understand that. I really don’t.
Boehner: When you say the word “compromise”…a lot of Americans look up and go, “Uh-oh, they’re gonna sell me out.” And so finding common ground, I think, makes more sense. Stahl reminded him that his goal had been to get all the Bush tax cuts made permanent.
Stahl: So you did compromise.
Boehner: I’ve, we found common ground.
Stahl: Why won’t you say you’re afraid of the word.
Boehner: I reject the word.
One reason is because half of his new members are Tea Partiers who think compromise is a dirty word – even when it comes to raising the national debt limit, which Boehner has said the new Congress will have to deal with as adults to keep the federal government from defaulting.
“Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele intends to announce his reelection plans on Monday evening, and key supporters expect him to drop out of the hotly contested race, top Republicans tell POLITICO.”
Former Bush administration official Maria Cino is officially in the RNC Chair race.

Saturday, December 11, 2010

If only the ROTC student had Googled: How to Stowaway on a plane... he would have discovered it was NOT in the wheel well.

Do Jet Stowaways Ever Survive?
The dangers of traveling beneath business class.
By Brendan I. Koerner
Updated Wednesday, Dec. 31, 2003, at 2:07 PM ET

For the second time in a week, police at New York's Kennedy Airport have discovered a body in the wheel well of an arriving jet. What are the hazards of traveling in an airplane's wheel well, and do any of these desperate stowaways ever survive?

The odds of survival, always slim at best, decrease in proportion to the duration and altitude of the flight. Few stowaways are equipped to handle the frigid temperatures, which can dip below minus-50 degrees Fahrenheit on some flights. The bodies of stowaways usually show signs of severe frostbite and the longer the flight, the more likely that the illicit passenger will succumb to the elements.

Others perish due to asphyxiation, as the air at high altitudes lacks sufficient oxygen and the wheel wells are unpressurized. Think of how mountaineers scaling Mount Everest are forced to carry oxygen tanks, and that peak measures shy of 30,000 feet—just below the altitude that many planes reach. The chilliness and the oxygen deprivation become more severe the higher a plane climbs, so stowaways on high-flying transoceanic voyages face the worst odds.

A third danger is the likelihood of tumbling from the wheel well prior to arrival. Landing gear is typically deployed at an altitude of around 1,500 feet, and the stowaways are given little warning. Unless they're holding onto something inside the compartment, a fatal plunge is difficult to avoid. Blackouts caused by oxygen deprivation are common, so many stowaways are likely unconscious at the crucial moment.

Few hopeful refugees attempt wheel-well arrivals every year. In 2000, for example, the FAA counted 13 such stowaways, three of whom survived. In 2001, six tried to enter the United States in such a fashion, with no survivors. In 2002, five perished and one survived. (The wheel-well survival rate since 1947 is 20.3 percent.) The death estimates may be low, as some bodies may have tumbled out into water or remote areas, never to be recovered.

There is, however, the occasional miracle case, none more fantastic than the tale of Fidel Maruhi. The Tahitian native lived through a 7-and-a-half-hour flight from Papeete to Los Angeles. When he was discovered, Maruhi's body temperature was just 79 degrees, about 6 degrees colder than what's usually considered fatal. Repatriated to Tahiti after his feat, Maruhi later said that he remembers nothing of the trip, having blacked out just after takeoff.

Last December, a Cuban refugee named Victor Alvarez Molina made it to Montreal in the wheel well of a DC-10, enduring four hours in temperatures that dropped to minus-40 F. His saving grace was a leak in a compartment pipe, which seeped out warm air. The pipe also provided him a convenient lifeline to hold onto when the landing gear deployed. Unlike Maruhi, Molina was granted refugee status and now hopes to bring his family to Canada. Presumably in more comfortable circumstances.

Friday, December 10, 2010

Ghost of Christmas Future seen in Louisiana woods?

BERWICK, Louisiana (WVLA) - A deer hunter captures a spooky image wandering through the Louisiana woods at night.A hunter near Baton Rouge says he found this freaky photo on his deer stand camera.The hunting camera was broken but the memory card was still there and so was this bizarre image.It looks like a cross between a human and an animal, with long slender appendages and glowing eyes.The hunter says he just hopes it's a vegetarian, if he runs into it in the woods again.

Tuesday, December 7, 2010

You’ve gotta know when to hold’em…

*** You’ve gotta know when to hold’em… :
As former Bush 43 Chief of Staff Andy Card once quipped, you never roll out a policy proposal in August because no one is paying attention. Similarly, you probably don’t pick a legislative fight to make a larger political point during the December holiday season. Last night, President Obama announced the framework of a compromise that would extend the Bush tax cuts for all income levels in exchange for a 13-month extension of jobless benefits, as well as a payroll-tax holiday. ”Sympathetic as I am to those who prefer a fight over compromise, as much as the political wisdom may dictate fighting over solving problems, it would be the wrong thing to do,” Obama said. “The American people didn’t send us here to wage symbolic battles or win symbolic victories.” There are plenty of ways to look at this -- pick your term – compromise/pragmatism/retreat/capitulation.

*** Know when to fold’em… :
The White House knew that they were holding a weak hand.
With all the tax cuts set to expire at the end of this month, and with Republicans set to control the House and have extra Senate seats in January, Dems could have picked a fight. But if that happened, it would have likely meant that tax rates would go up in this struggling economy, creating havoc on Wall Street and in biz community; that there would be almost no chance to pass New START and the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” during the lame duck; and that there would be little chance of the next Congress being able to clear jobless benefits and even a payroll-tax holiday to stimulate the economy. You pick a political fight when the public is paying attention – and when you think you can win.

*** And know when to fight’em:
The other way to look at this is that the Obama White House just doesn’t know how to fight and play political hardball.

We recently heard this frustration from an advocate of comprehensive immigration reform, who wishes that the White House would fight on this issue to put Republicans in a box with Latino voters. "They just didn't want to play politics in the past two years,” this advocate said. “I hope they know that didn't work out for them." Make no mistake: Obama has to show some spine once John Boehner controls the gavel in the House. Maybe it comes in the State of the Union; maybe afterward. Yet we’ll re-raise our question from yesterday: For congressional Dems who want the president to fight on the Bush tax cuts, where were their spines during the spring and the summer, when THEY had a stronger hand to play? They were the ones who decided to punt on the issue until after the midterms. And question to progressive blogosphere: Why are you directing so much anger at the president when it's your congressional leaders who let you down?

*** What happens in 2012?
The spin we’re hearing from the White House is that they want to re-litigate the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy heading into the re-election in 2012.

If Obama wins re-election, they believe, that will serve as a mandate to get rid of those tax cuts once and for all. (However, critics will likely point out that Obama also got that mandate after 2008.) But imagine this: What if Obama used his State of the Union address to call for comprehensive tax-code overhaul -- like the deficit-reduction commission proposed -- to be implemented between now and 2012? That would end the Bush tax cuts and also serve as a realistic accomplishment that a Democratic White House and a GOP-controlled House could achieve. And speaking of deficit reduction, this whole deal adds approximately $1 trillion to the deficit -- $1 trillion that the GOP will now partly own. That has the potential to compel Republicans to become serious partners in deficit reduction for 2011-2012. Not to mix our poker-chess metaphors, but if the president is playing chess, then tax reform seems to be the most logical long-term policy fight to have, no?

*** Can the White House (and Biden) convince skeptical Dems?
But before we truly begin to map out how this deal might impact 2011 and 2012, it first has to pass. And congressional Dems aren’t yet sold. The Washington Post: “The agreement has yet to win the support of Democratic leaders in either chamber, and senior aides said the White House will need significant Republican support to push the package through Congress.” So enter Vice President Biden, who heads to Capitol Hill to attend the Senate Democratic Caucus lunch at 1:30 pm ET. One particular Democratic is the deal on the estate tax, which would impose a 35% tax on individuals’ estates worth more than $5 million. In fact, Obama addressed this in his statement yesterday. “The Republicans have asked for more generous treatment of the estate tax than I think is wise or warranted. But we have insisted that that will be temporary.”

Saturday, December 4, 2010

American Friends Service Committee

If you are either Fan (like me) or Foe of NASA, and you like OVER THE TOP satire, here is NASA's latest announcement: "There is strange life on ...

This is only the intro to the whole news conference reporting of

Nasa Discovers Strange Life on Earth

Hello, I’m Dwayne Brown, NASA’s token black guy. And I’m here to introduce a bunch of white folks who called this news conference to announce that they’ve discovered strange life on Earth.

Seriously. These crackers here have taken your hard-earned money that your Congressmen gave them and, rather than look for life on Mars or, as some in the media speculated, Saturn’s moon Titan, they went to some lake in California and found microbes

Hell, you can find all sorts of strange life in California. I mean, it’s freakin’ California! You ever walk the streets of some of those towns