Though in that case I'd have put quotes around "phase." Oh, well. I'm just nitpicking.
Nice article, but it's not that jokes don't "phase" him. Jokes don't faze him.
And I would add that conservatives have no shame, and readily swallow Republican leaders' and media lies. It's sad. They're so eager to cut off their own noses to spite other people's faces. All their leaders have to do is hiss "Socialism!" and the right-wingers gleefully bash whatever they're told to.
Republican leaders shut down the government, causing billions of dollars of damage to America's economy and harming our reputation worldwide. Their objective? To make sure Americans don't have access to affordable health insurance. They've had their "due"--and look what they did with it. No more chances for them.
"The reduced reimbursements were meant to be offset by a mandatory expansion in Medicaid." LePage chose not to expand Medicaid/MaineCare--hanging thousands of Mainers out to dry with no access to Mainecare, and harming our hospitals' bottom line.
Right-wingers of course blame this problem on President Obama, not on LePage. Personal responsibility is great, but only for other people, not for Republican leaders.
"Rumford's biggest taxpayer — the NewPage mill — is the only benefactor of that budget reduction."
It's called blackmail, and it's done in every city, town, and state in the US--give us a special tax break or we'll leave your town high and dry, taking your jobs with us!
The town essentially pays the salaries of an ever-larger proportion of the mill's workers. But the deal is not binding on the corporation--only on the taxpayers. The corporation got what they wanted, and they're slicing away jobs anyhow. A great deal--for them.
We've been going to the same veterinary service for 40 years. We like and respect all the vets there, past and present.
We fed the cats the medication when they were in separate rooms--no chance to eat each other's medicated food.
The cats show no ill effects. I mentioned that Valium could be fatal IF you give a cat a human dose, or even half a human dose, just in case someone reading my comment might think they could save on a vet bill by using their own medication on a cat. A cat-sized dose, prescribed by a vet, is not harmful.
This method worked. Our 3 cats now tolerate each other even when unmedicated.
If you don't like this method, don't use it. I presented it because it worked for us, and others might want to discuss it with their vet.
Our vet prescribed cat Valium, the same that's for adults but in special *small* doses (even half a human-sized pill might kill a cat).
Once they'd had a few weeks to get used to the fact that there are now 3 cats in various parts of the house, we experimented. One Valium did nothing for the biggest cat but sedated the smallest so much that she wandered drunkenly into the way of both aggressive cats, like she was saying, "Uh, hi. I'm a cat. Are you a cat?" I had to grab her before she became their breakfast.
The best dose turned out to be 1-1/2 pills for the big angry/scared male, 1 pill for the middle-sized spitfire, and 1/2 a pill for the scaredy-cat.
I mash the pills in little bowls, mix the powder well with a couple Tbsp. of soft cat food, feed them separately, wait 30-45 minutes, and let them be together. At first they could only be together an hour, with me as guard and referee. Gradually they've come to tolerate each other pretty well for longer periods, even after the medicine wears off.
After 10 days we started letting all of them roam the house all day. Next step: no more Valium. Still not decided if we'll ever let them be on their own with open doors all night. We have 3 food dishes, 3 water dishes, and 3 cat boxes, but the spitfire is very territorial and tries to guard all three!
We chose Valium because their aggression seemed to be based in fear... that's often the case with people, too...
This is not about one non-millionaire and one multi-millionaire. This is about American society, which is turning into a 3rd world situation, with a tiny upper class high in the stratosphere that has siphoned off the nation's wealth for itself, leaving 99% of the population to get by on whatever crumbs might drift down.
It's about special tax breaks that favor the 1%, and policies that favor gargantuan salaries for corporation heads while ordinary people's wages and salaries stagnate or decline. This leaves you and me with a choice--pay higher taxes ourselves, out of our shrinking wallets, to make up for what the 1% unfairly get to skip over, or do without a social safety net.
Anyone who can convince himself that he or she will never possibly need any sort of social services will feel relaxed and happy. Anyone who recognizes that the middle class and working class are getting an ever-smaller share of the pie, and becoming desperate enough to accept abuse just to have a job, will be worried.
Maybe the "wealthy" people you know "worked longer and harder" and earned their fortunes. Most likely, you know ordinary citizens in your area who are business owners.
I'm talking about multi-millionaires. Are you pals with a lot of multi-millionaires? If not, the "wealthy" you're talking about are people like me and my husband, who have worked hard and are financially comfortable.
As for multi-millionaires, a large part of their income comes from sitting around watching their capitol gains mount up. Playing the stock market, often starting with an inherited fortune, is not quite the same as working 9 to 5 (or in my case, 10+ hour days) year after year.
Obviously didn't think about what I wrote.