John is an executive recruiter & speaker sharing his thoughts on healthcare, recruiting, digital technology, career management & leadership. 

Subscribe to the Blog via Email

Archives

Recommended Reading

Michael Lewis: Boomerang: Travels in the New Third WorldMichael Lewis: Boomerang: Travels in the New Third World Next up on my reading list. Lewis, author of Liar's Poker, The Big Short and Money B
6 February, 2012 Posted by John G. Self Posted in Current Affairs, Stories
2 comments

Gingrich, Grizzard & Marriage

Posted February 6th, 2012 | Author: John G. Self

Whether you love her or hate her, you have to admit that New York Times’ columnist Maureen Dowd is the Queen of last sentences. She produced another memorable closing remark in her column for the Sunday editions.

Referring to Republican Presidential hopeful  Newt Gingrich and his very focused wife Callista, a former congressional aide in the Speaker’s office, Ms. Dowd concluded:

“As the maxim goes, ‘when a man marries his mistress, he creates a job opening.’ “

Mr. Gingrich, as the entire world now knows, has been married three times.  Since I am a resident of a very fine glass house, I am not in a position to offer any moral pronouncements on that number, the timing of when he broke the news of the impending divorces to his then wives, or the reasons or phrases he might have used in discussing his future relationship plans.  I am reminded, however, of the famous, or some would say infamous, Alanta Journal-Constitution columnist , the late Lewis Grizzard, a fellow Georgian, whose marital trackrecord was equally uneven.

In a PBS interview, Mr. Grizzard reportedly was asked:

Interviewer: ”Is it true that they have signs in Atlanta that say: ‘Honk if you’ve been married to Lewis Grizzard’?”

Grizzard: ”I don’t know about that, but I can tell you I’m not against women’s liberation. I’ve liberated three of them. Can’t remember their names. I call them all ‘plaintiff.’ ”

I heard the message was actually posted on a lighted billboard on a busy freeway…

I think I will just leave it there.

© 2011 John Gregory Self

To book John G Self for your group, contact Kathleen Sullivan.  He is an entertaining and dynamic speaker who finds irony, surprises and good humor in all of life, from the board room to the church pew.

© 2014 John Gregory Self

2 comments

  1. WASHINGTON — In a major surprise on the politically charged new health care law, the Obama administration said Friday that it would not define a single uniform set of “essential health benefits” that must be provided by insurers for tens of millions of Americans. Instead, it will allow each state to specify the benefits within broad categories.
    The move would allow significant variations in benefits from state to state, much like the current differences in state Medicaid programs and the Children’s Health Insurance Program.
    By giving states the discretion to specify essential benefits, the Obama administration sought to deflect one of the most powerful arguments made by Republican critics of President Obama’s health care overhaul — that it was imposing a rigid, bureaucrat-controlled health system on Americans and threatening the quality of care. Opponents say that the federal government is forcing a one-size-fits-all standard for health insurance and usurping state authority to regulate the industry.
    This criticism has inspired legal challenges to the new law — with the Supreme Court set to decide next year whether the government can require Americans to buy health insurance — and helps explain why public opinion of the law remains deeply divided.
    The law is looming as a central issue in the 2012 presidential race, with Republican presidential candidates being evaluated on the strength of their opposition to it. The announcement by the administration follows its decision this year to jettison a program created in the law to provide long-term care insurance, a move that disappointed liberal backers of the program championed by the late Senator Edward M. Kennedy.
    The action Friday prompted questions among supporters of the new health care law. Prof. Timothy S. Jost, an expert on health law at Washington and Lee University, said, “The new bulletin perpetuates uncertainty about what benefits an insurer will be required to cover under the Affordable Care Act.” From the consumer’s point of view, Professor Jost added, “I wish the Department of Health and Human Services had signaled that there would be more uniformity and less flexibility.” …

  2. WASHINGTON — In a major surprise on the politically charged new health care law, the Obama administration said Friday that it would not define a single uniform set of “essential health benefits” that must be provided by insurers for tens of millions of Americans. Instead, it will allow each state to specify the benefits within broad categories.
    The move would allow significant variations in benefits from state to state, much like the current differences in state Medicaid programs and the Children’s Health Insurance Program.
    By giving states the discretion to specify essential benefits, the Obama administration sought to deflect one of the most powerful arguments made by Republican critics of President Obama’s health care overhaul — that it was imposing a rigid, bureaucrat-controlled health system on Americans and threatening the quality of care. Opponents say that the federal government is forcing a one-size-fits-all standard for health insurance and usurping state authority to regulate the industry.
    This criticism has inspired legal challenges to the new law — with the Supreme Court set to decide next year whether the government can require Americans to buy health insurance — and helps explain why public opinion of the law remains deeply divided.
    The law is looming as a central issue in the 2012 presidential race, with Republican presidential candidates being evaluated on the strength of their opposition to it. The announcement by the administration follows its decision this year to jettison a program created in the law to provide long-term care insurance, a move that disappointed liberal backers of the program championed by the late Senator Edward M. Kennedy.
    The action Friday prompted questions among supporters of the new health care law. Prof. Timothy S. Jost, an expert on health law at Washington and Lee University, said, “The new bulletin perpetuates uncertainty about what benefits an insurer will be required to cover under the Affordable Care Act.” From the consumer’s point of view, Professor Jost added, “I wish the Department of Health and Human Services had signaled that there would be more uniformity and less flexibility.” …

Leave a Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title="" rel=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>