Have others noted the similarities between "Lonesome" Rhodes, the main character in "A face in the crowd" (1957) and Carlson? Rhodes was a cynical huckster with a contempt for his audience that was disclosed when he expressed it on a hot mic. Carlson is a cynical huckster with a contempt for his audience that was disclosed in the discovery phase of the Dominion lawsuit. The main difference between them is that Rhodes (played by Andy Griffith) was oddly likeable.
We had a similar insurance issue with Allstate. Used to live in Westchester and we had a stretch of five years where we filed three claims because of flooding (each time a different reason, and we worked to mitigate each individual issue each time…yay home ownership). After the third time, we were alerted we’d be dropped. Had no idea that was even a “thing”.
We had a broker try to find new insurance, only found one company that would do it…for more than double. AND they wouldn’t include sewer backup, which was the only class we’d ever claimed.
Our agent, whom I’ve personally known long before we used him for insurance, went to bat for us. He shared with me that his “boss” said they’d never make a dime off us. But our agent suggested they remove the sewer backup and keep us, at least lessening their exposure to our three previous claims and make some of their money back. He (Allstate) agreed, and while our rates went up slightly, nowhere near the other quotes.
So, apparently there’s SOME leeway there, but yeah, had I known we were at risk of being dropped for any arbitrary number of claims and/or payouts, I might have thought twice. But in my mind, isn’t that why we have insurance?
Funnest encounter with an insurance company: Got a letter from neighbor's company saying children in our home had damaged their 30-year-old, never been maintained wood fence and to notify our insurance company to pay to replace it. Sent them back a letter that said: "Re your letter of (insert date): Nope." Never heard from them again.
We live southwest of Springfield and between 2006-2009 we had three tornadoes. (We were all safe and only had a claim from the first one.) Our neighbors were hit by all three to varying degrees.
Not only were they dropped by their insurance provider and forced into the FAIR pool, the provider refused to cover the replacement of an outbuilding that had been repaired as part of a previous tornado claim. That outbuilding, a circa 1880 barn, simply disappeared. There was nothing left of it after the third tornado--it was picked up and distributed around Sangamon county. But since they had already paid a claim--too bad so sad, we won't pay again.
Aren't tornadoes natural disasters? How are folks supposed to prevent damage from them? Stand outside as a cyclone bears down on your house and family and say, "No, no, I've already had two claims and you need to hop over my house?" Unconscionable.
I would give Dylan Mulvaney a little slack. If you are transgender and the family and the culture in which you grew up forces you for years to be the sex you are not, that can cause you to develop a lot of self-hatred. When you transition, you are very fragile in a way. You are finally together, your innate sense of who you are for the first time in your life is congruent with your social presentation and, if you undergo medical procedures, congruent with your physical body. You are awash with new feelings. You embrace everything you missed in your first puberty. If you are a transgender woman, you experiment with makeup, you buy short skirts, etc. You tend to embrace the cultural gender expectations that you were prohibited from going anywhere near when you were forced for years to be someone you were not. It is often said in the transgender community for this very reason that publicity should not be given to folks who just transitioned. It takes time to become the person you would have been had your family and society not required you to live for years as someone you aren’t. I am fifteen years into my transition. I rarely wear makeup; I’m a ferocious feminist; a lesbian; and I wear jeans most of the time when I’m not in court. But when I first transitioned, I was a little like Mulvaney, a kid in a candy store, if you will.
Something is afoul in Bloomington. I also was dropped by State Farm after fifty one years post a roof claim. My parents and all the family have been State Farm customers since the sixties. After many back and forth calls with my agent, State Farm agreed to allow me back but under new conditions.
Previously, I had a thousand dollar deductible. Now it is a percentage of the value of my home. About three and a half thousand dollars. Their argument is that I am a new customer and must apply at the new rules. Obviously, the reason to drop me under conditions that were favorable for me.
It took me three meetings with State Farm adjusters to investigate my roof claim. All denied. I learned State Farm was using third party adjusters that I’m sure received bonuses for denying claims. All were from Texas.
My roofer told me to call Bloomingdale and get a State Farm in-house adjuster. The State Farm adjuster came, and as he as walking up to the house, he told me he did not have to go on the roof because the damage was visible from the ground. He only went on the roof to get photo confirmation.
I live in a fifty-five and over community where all of the seven hundred houses are the same age. Neighbors that were denied State Farm claims or having been dropped from State Farm were many. If they left State Farm, they were denied claims with other firms.
Those that were allowed to return to State Farm (after being dropped) all were subject to higher rates and much higher deductibles.
I wonder if State Farm uses this tactic to get out from under low deductibles. Seems like it to me.
State Farm’s response was to hide behind having to pay for natural disasters in Florida and California so the rates must rise.
So, after two years during Covid when auto claims went down and years of billion dollar profits for stockholders, the average homeowner is expected to cover State Farm’s profit loss.
I feel for Mr. Strickland, but his final sentence ("how does it make sense...") is exactly what we should expect from a for-profit company. I think we should be prepared, as much as we individually can be, for the increasing costs of climate change.
I still think the visual Tweet winner from Tuesday has been photoshopped.
On your friend's cancellation of his homeowner's policy by State Farm, you state: "And how does it make sense to punish individuals for weather-related damage at a time when we’re seeing more and more extreme weather events?" From the insurer's perspective, it makes perfect sense. Insurers are in the business to collect premiums, not to pay claims (their advertising to the contrary notwithstanding). As climate change-driven weather "extremes" become increasingly common, you're going to see insurers start placing certain limits on weather claims and increase premiums for coverages that payout for weather damage. I am a bit surprised that your friend was surprised that his insurance was cancelled after submitting 3 claims in 4 years (2019-2022). As homeowners of a certain age, if we ever suffered a claimable loss, my wife and I always went through the mental exercise of balancing the out-of-pocket expense against what we presumed would be the likelihood of a cancelled insurance policy for making a claim. (E.g., we replaced at our own expense [$1,000] wet basement carpeting when we discovered [too late] that our sump pump motor had burnt out prior to/ during a heavy rainstorm.)
We've made similar mental calculations when it came to damages suffered by our car(s). Is it worth making the claim against our policy or not? To maximize your coverage protection and keep your premiums at a modest level, it may be in your overall best interests to limit your insurance claims to truly (or near) catastrophic claim amounts. It sucks, but them's the breaks.
“On balance, she’s been doing a good job during challenging times to marshal the resources of the prosecutor’s office in a constructive fashion.” --Zorn
Maybe before she leaves, Ms. Foxx will advance reform in the criminal justice system by reducing crimes like murder, vehicular hijacking (carjacking), and strong-armed robbery to misdemeanors; it will reduce the prison population significantly, reduce felony-crime, and help the “desperate” people committing the crimes to get a second chance. She could get government jobs, housing, transportation, and education to secure for them a leg-up because the life-of-crime may pay better than a job. If by chance there is a prison overflow, the accused may be accommodated at the Chicago Hilton LondonHouse with cash for tips.
FOX: "It’s not the messenger that sells, but the message." That is what Fox is counting on. Due viewers enjoy the talking head or its message. Many worried about Rush Limbaugh. OMG who can take his place! That void was quickly filled in by others. Johnson: The Left is never left enough, the Right is never right enough. Time for the moderates to take control.
It is a sad example of our ineffective government and media that no one asked Foxx about the Tribune series on the dilatory Cook County Courts, and of course she offered no comment. Same with Periwinkle, Evans, Martinez, Lightfoot/Johnson, or Mitchell. I have no doubt that the issue will not come up in the selection of a new Superintendent of police.
Johnson would have been a much savvier politician if he had said nothing about Biden. Since the nomination is a long way off and he has no idea who might challenge Biden (including Pritzker) and he has nothing to gain from the comment. If asked, Johnson could have just said that he preferred Biden to any GOP candidate. and that Biden was someone that he would be happy to work with.
Apr 27, 2023·edited Apr 27, 2023Liked by Eric Zorn
My mother had a "Word a Day" calendar for at least 30 straight years. She was 91 when she passed away on December 7th 2021. The word on her calendar that day was "emancipation" - "the act or process of freeing from bondage". We thought that was pretty cool.
Have others noted the similarities between "Lonesome" Rhodes, the main character in "A face in the crowd" (1957) and Carlson? Rhodes was a cynical huckster with a contempt for his audience that was disclosed when he expressed it on a hot mic. Carlson is a cynical huckster with a contempt for his audience that was disclosed in the discovery phase of the Dominion lawsuit. The main difference between them is that Rhodes (played by Andy Griffith) was oddly likeable.
We had a similar insurance issue with Allstate. Used to live in Westchester and we had a stretch of five years where we filed three claims because of flooding (each time a different reason, and we worked to mitigate each individual issue each time…yay home ownership). After the third time, we were alerted we’d be dropped. Had no idea that was even a “thing”.
We had a broker try to find new insurance, only found one company that would do it…for more than double. AND they wouldn’t include sewer backup, which was the only class we’d ever claimed.
Our agent, whom I’ve personally known long before we used him for insurance, went to bat for us. He shared with me that his “boss” said they’d never make a dime off us. But our agent suggested they remove the sewer backup and keep us, at least lessening their exposure to our three previous claims and make some of their money back. He (Allstate) agreed, and while our rates went up slightly, nowhere near the other quotes.
So, apparently there’s SOME leeway there, but yeah, had I known we were at risk of being dropped for any arbitrary number of claims and/or payouts, I might have thought twice. But in my mind, isn’t that why we have insurance?
Funnest encounter with an insurance company: Got a letter from neighbor's company saying children in our home had damaged their 30-year-old, never been maintained wood fence and to notify our insurance company to pay to replace it. Sent them back a letter that said: "Re your letter of (insert date): Nope." Never heard from them again.
You really need to add a “none of the above” option for weeks like this where the tweets aren’t good
We live southwest of Springfield and between 2006-2009 we had three tornadoes. (We were all safe and only had a claim from the first one.) Our neighbors were hit by all three to varying degrees.
Not only were they dropped by their insurance provider and forced into the FAIR pool, the provider refused to cover the replacement of an outbuilding that had been repaired as part of a previous tornado claim. That outbuilding, a circa 1880 barn, simply disappeared. There was nothing left of it after the third tornado--it was picked up and distributed around Sangamon county. But since they had already paid a claim--too bad so sad, we won't pay again.
Aren't tornadoes natural disasters? How are folks supposed to prevent damage from them? Stand outside as a cyclone bears down on your house and family and say, "No, no, I've already had two claims and you need to hop over my house?" Unconscionable.
I would give Dylan Mulvaney a little slack. If you are transgender and the family and the culture in which you grew up forces you for years to be the sex you are not, that can cause you to develop a lot of self-hatred. When you transition, you are very fragile in a way. You are finally together, your innate sense of who you are for the first time in your life is congruent with your social presentation and, if you undergo medical procedures, congruent with your physical body. You are awash with new feelings. You embrace everything you missed in your first puberty. If you are a transgender woman, you experiment with makeup, you buy short skirts, etc. You tend to embrace the cultural gender expectations that you were prohibited from going anywhere near when you were forced for years to be someone you were not. It is often said in the transgender community for this very reason that publicity should not be given to folks who just transitioned. It takes time to become the person you would have been had your family and society not required you to live for years as someone you aren’t. I am fifteen years into my transition. I rarely wear makeup; I’m a ferocious feminist; a lesbian; and I wear jeans most of the time when I’m not in court. But when I first transitioned, I was a little like Mulvaney, a kid in a candy store, if you will.
Something is afoul in Bloomington. I also was dropped by State Farm after fifty one years post a roof claim. My parents and all the family have been State Farm customers since the sixties. After many back and forth calls with my agent, State Farm agreed to allow me back but under new conditions.
Previously, I had a thousand dollar deductible. Now it is a percentage of the value of my home. About three and a half thousand dollars. Their argument is that I am a new customer and must apply at the new rules. Obviously, the reason to drop me under conditions that were favorable for me.
It took me three meetings with State Farm adjusters to investigate my roof claim. All denied. I learned State Farm was using third party adjusters that I’m sure received bonuses for denying claims. All were from Texas.
My roofer told me to call Bloomingdale and get a State Farm in-house adjuster. The State Farm adjuster came, and as he as walking up to the house, he told me he did not have to go on the roof because the damage was visible from the ground. He only went on the roof to get photo confirmation.
I live in a fifty-five and over community where all of the seven hundred houses are the same age. Neighbors that were denied State Farm claims or having been dropped from State Farm were many. If they left State Farm, they were denied claims with other firms.
Those that were allowed to return to State Farm (after being dropped) all were subject to higher rates and much higher deductibles.
I wonder if State Farm uses this tactic to get out from under low deductibles. Seems like it to me.
State Farm’s response was to hide behind having to pay for natural disasters in Florida and California so the rates must rise.
So, after two years during Covid when auto claims went down and years of billion dollar profits for stockholders, the average homeowner is expected to cover State Farm’s profit loss.
Something stinks in Bloomington.
While growing up I heard about mushroom management, which is similar to seagull management: Keep 'em in the dark and pile on the manure.
Don't forget R.J. Kelly in Kim Foxx's obituary and the women victims whom she discounted in her lack of action on Kelly.
I feel for Mr. Strickland, but his final sentence ("how does it make sense...") is exactly what we should expect from a for-profit company. I think we should be prepared, as much as we individually can be, for the increasing costs of climate change.
EZ -
I still think the visual Tweet winner from Tuesday has been photoshopped.
On your friend's cancellation of his homeowner's policy by State Farm, you state: "And how does it make sense to punish individuals for weather-related damage at a time when we’re seeing more and more extreme weather events?" From the insurer's perspective, it makes perfect sense. Insurers are in the business to collect premiums, not to pay claims (their advertising to the contrary notwithstanding). As climate change-driven weather "extremes" become increasingly common, you're going to see insurers start placing certain limits on weather claims and increase premiums for coverages that payout for weather damage. I am a bit surprised that your friend was surprised that his insurance was cancelled after submitting 3 claims in 4 years (2019-2022). As homeowners of a certain age, if we ever suffered a claimable loss, my wife and I always went through the mental exercise of balancing the out-of-pocket expense against what we presumed would be the likelihood of a cancelled insurance policy for making a claim. (E.g., we replaced at our own expense [$1,000] wet basement carpeting when we discovered [too late] that our sump pump motor had burnt out prior to/ during a heavy rainstorm.)
We've made similar mental calculations when it came to damages suffered by our car(s). Is it worth making the claim against our policy or not? To maximize your coverage protection and keep your premiums at a modest level, it may be in your overall best interests to limit your insurance claims to truly (or near) catastrophic claim amounts. It sucks, but them's the breaks.
“On balance, she’s been doing a good job during challenging times to marshal the resources of the prosecutor’s office in a constructive fashion.” --Zorn
Maybe before she leaves, Ms. Foxx will advance reform in the criminal justice system by reducing crimes like murder, vehicular hijacking (carjacking), and strong-armed robbery to misdemeanors; it will reduce the prison population significantly, reduce felony-crime, and help the “desperate” people committing the crimes to get a second chance. She could get government jobs, housing, transportation, and education to secure for them a leg-up because the life-of-crime may pay better than a job. If by chance there is a prison overflow, the accused may be accommodated at the Chicago Hilton LondonHouse with cash for tips.
FOX: "It’s not the messenger that sells, but the message." That is what Fox is counting on. Due viewers enjoy the talking head or its message. Many worried about Rush Limbaugh. OMG who can take his place! That void was quickly filled in by others. Johnson: The Left is never left enough, the Right is never right enough. Time for the moderates to take control.
It is a sad example of our ineffective government and media that no one asked Foxx about the Tribune series on the dilatory Cook County Courts, and of course she offered no comment. Same with Periwinkle, Evans, Martinez, Lightfoot/Johnson, or Mitchell. I have no doubt that the issue will not come up in the selection of a new Superintendent of police.
Johnson would have been a much savvier politician if he had said nothing about Biden. Since the nomination is a long way off and he has no idea who might challenge Biden (including Pritzker) and he has nothing to gain from the comment. If asked, Johnson could have just said that he preferred Biden to any GOP candidate. and that Biden was someone that he would be happy to work with.
My mother had a "Word a Day" calendar for at least 30 straight years. She was 91 when she passed away on December 7th 2021. The word on her calendar that day was "emancipation" - "the act or process of freeing from bondage". We thought that was pretty cool.