Sink, Sank, Sunk – Hillary Clinton 2016 And The Hell-Hole Called ObamaCare

At the end of last month Hillary Clinton 2016 began the inevitable run, away from Obamacare, on tiptoes.
Today we got a confession from Barack Obama: Yeah, a lot of you won’t be able to keep your doctor after all. Also today David Jolly was sworn in as the latest Republican member of the House of Representatives even though, according to Republican officials, lobbyist Jolly campaigned for office in a “Keystone Kops” manner which included the soon to be divorced candidate, with his 14 years younger squeeze in tow, trolling for votes. Shortly after Jolly’s romp to Congress Barack Obama made moves to trip Hillary Clinton 2016 and prevent the tiptoe slink-away from turning to a full canter then gallop away from ObamaCare. Let’s unpack these related events.

Hillary Clinton 2016 is in a bind. On the one hand Obama and ObamaCare are a disaster that must be run away from. On the other hand the rot that calls itself the Democratic Party and all its D.C. office contestants decided for various reasons (hint: money) to run on a strategy which worked so well for Bill Clinton years ago when the issue was affirmative action. Back then Bill Clinton declared “mend it, don’t end it” to great success. But Barack Obama is no salesman like Bill Clinton and ObamaCare is a threat against every adult American so there is no tactical manover such as “mend it, don’t end it” that will stave the “end” from arriving. We were not surprised when Hillary Clinton 2016 began to slink away.

In September of last year we predicted much of what has happened in regards to Hillary Clinton 2016 and ObamaCare along with our dire warnings:

“The central question for any campaign is whether the electorate must “stay the course!” or whether it is “time for a change!”. It’s one or the other. There is no other question. A merge, a double message won’t sell. A “let’s stay the course but change” concoction has as much appeal and logic as vegetarian pork chops. Hillary Clinton 2016 thus far mumbles non sequiturs hoping no one will notice the screeching echoes of the 2008 muddled message mess (which we tried to correct) when the campaign careened from message to message while the Obama campaign stuck to it’s simple and clear lie.”

As we wrote “a double message won’t sell”. The sunken Sink is proof if any proof is needed.

Hillary Clinton 2016 is in a bind. The entire party swears and promises to run as remorseless ObamaCare congregants – which places a fork in the road for Hillary Clinton 2016. The choice is this: lead by telling the truth about the Obamaination called ObamaCare; or gallop at the head of the Crimean War Light Brigade.

Don’t think Barack Obama does not know in which direction Hillary Clinton 2016 and others running for office are going as a consequence of Tuesday’s election results. Barack Obama read what Hillary Clinton said at the end of February. Further, Barack Obama knows a united front on ObamaCare is collapsing. So Barack Obama acted to prevent the near silent tiptoes from becoming a mass breakout run away from himself and ObamaCare. Obama issued new exemptions from ObamaCare.

The new ObamaCare exemptions expire shortly before the 2016 presidential elections. Whoever gets the party nomination for 2016 will be slaughtered if the exemptions are not extended past the 2016 election. If the nominee does as Obama wants, then election aid exemptions will be issued. If the nominee does not do as Obama wants, then no exemptions will be issued and the American public will visit its vengeance against the 2016 nominee. Barack Obama does not know how to run a lemonade stand but he is a brilliant strategist when it comes to self-advancement, self-protection, and self-interest.

And so, Hillary Clinton 2016 is in a bind. To break away or not to break away, that is the question. We’ve advised a brutal break away from Obama and ObamaCare and while that debate raged in HillaryLand, tentative tiptoe steps began the walkaway:

“HILLARY PULLS INTO THE PASSING LANE ON OBAMACARE

Democratic 2016 frontrunner Hillary Clinton nudged the accelerator in her effort to get past the problems with ObamaCare bedeviling the president and their party. Talking to a gathering of health information specialists in Florida, Clinton sounded more than open to substantial changes to President Obama’s signature law. From Reuters: “Part of the challenge is to clear away all the smoke and try to figure out what is working and what isn’t,’ Clinton, who served as secretary of state in Obama’s first term, was quoted by CNN as saying. ‘What do we need to do to try to fix this? Because it would be a great tragedy, in my opinion, to take away what has now been provided.’” Clinton previewed her expected talking points for the 2016 campaign, praising Obama’s goals but lamenting his poor execution: “But I would be the first to say if things aren’t working, then we need people of good faith to come together and make evidence-based changes,’ said Clinton, who led a failed effort to pass healthcare reform during the administration of her husband, Bill Clinton. Among issues she said should be addressed were small businesses of 50 or more employees providing health coverage and companies moving people to part-time from full-time work to avoid making healthcare contributions.”

That’s a “vegetarian pork chop” in the “mend it don’t end it” vein. For the discerning it was also quite a rebuke of Obama and ObamaCare. The mention of “evidence-based changes” needed to fix ObamaCare and the adverse impact on jobs echoed the most scorching of ObamaCare critics.

Reuters linked those late February remarks as “a hot-button campaign issue in congressional elections in November and possibly the 2016 White House race.” No kidding.

The problems for Hillary Clinton 2016 oddly enough were best summarized by conservatives/Republicans at HotAir:

“Hillary Clinton aims for middle of ObamaCare debate

We can talk about mending it instead of ending it, but there simply is no mending it. What’s broken is the system itself, because it’s based on the idea that government can competently run a command economy. That’s what needs to be “mended.” By 2016, most Americans will have personal experience with the endemic failure of a command health-care economy, and Hillary will have to find a new position.”

The “new position” for Hillary Clinton 2016 predicted in late February by HotAir is urgently required in the wake of the elections results in which ObamaCare sank Sink.

That prediction of a “new position” needed in future by Hillary Clinton 2016 came on the same day as a CBS/NYT poll in which “the difference between fix and repeal” further narrowed.

Hillary Clinton cited, as good, the least controversial aspects of ObamaCare such as children up to age 26 dependent on parental insurance for protection. The problems with a continued defense by Hillary Clinton 2016 or anyone running for election this year of ObamaCare are many:

“The first change hardly required a national takeover of the insurance industry to accomplish, even though it’s still of dubious value. In an economy that actually produced above-population-growth job creation, young adults would have an easier time of getting their own insurance rather than making Mom & Dad responsible for their upkeep well into adulthood. Access to preventive care was not a big issue, either; everyone had access to it with or without health insurance, and as the premium spikes in the last few months demonstrate, they don’t come free either way.

What’s missing from Hillary’s list of ObamaCare wins? Oh, items like bending the cost curve downward, insuring the uninsured, and if you like your plan/doctor, you can keep your plan/doctor. The first two were supposedly the primary reason that health-care reform had to take the form of a government takeover of the entire system and forced participation. The third was the promise that a government takeover of the entire system would have no impact on the 85% of Americans who were already insured, with 87% of those satisfied with their health care. Instead, ObamaCare has made the system unstable, more expensive, and made many Americans less able to keep their current providers while seeing more money come out of their pockets for plans they didn’t want.”

That last sentence should have been enough to keep awake through many nights Hillary Clinton 2016 strategists. Then it got worse.

The New York Times reports today it was ObamaCare that sank Sink:

Health Law Tied to G.O.P. Victory in Florida Race

CLEARWATER, Fla. — For Democrats hoping to claim a prized House seat in a swing district, Alex Sink seemed a shining candidate: a moderate, business-minded banker and former candidate for governor with ample experience in running a big race and raising money for it.

But in the end, Tuesday’s special election showed that her campaign could not outrun the tsunami of advertisements tying her to President Obama’s health care law. And, just as important, Ms. Sink was unable to step out of Mr. Obama’s shadow. Although he won twice in Pinellas County, where Tuesday’s vote took place, his approval ratings in Florida were a liability this year. [snip]

Mr. Jolly said he would vote to repeal the law. Ms. Sink said it had problems but should be fixed rather than discarded.”

‘Fix it don’t discard it’ is the less poetic sibling to “mend it don’t end it”. The voters decided to end it, not prolong it.

All the spin by Obama and ObamaCare apologists won’t twist the elemental truth that ObamaCare kills political careers. In 2010 ObamaCare killed a whole generation of Dimocratic Party elected officials. In 2014 the same will happen. In 2016 Obama will try to tie the party nominee to his sunken treasure.

Big Donors are hearing the very same prognosis we have been writing and that won’t encourage them to pay for suites on Titanic. Chris O’Tingles has seen the ghost of Christmas Future:



Joe Scarborough too:



For O’Tingles race-baiting and lies should be the only items on the electoral menu because ObamaCare kills political careers. Brent Budowsky has seen the ghost too:

Obama endangers Dems

Mr. President, Democrats are alarmed. About you.

The legacy of the Obama presidency could well include the destruction of Democratic control of the House, the Senate and a majority of governorships and state legislatures across America. Democrats can prevent this. My warning to Democrats and to Obama — whose presidency will effectively end if the outcome in 2014 is unfavorable — is that they must understand the gravity of the danger and the urgent need to improvise, adapt and do some things very differently.”

Paul Begala tweetedDems should not try to spin this loss. We have to redouble our efforts for 2014. Too much at stake.” If Begala looks out his window he can see Hillary putting on some running shoes and about to hit the road far far far away from Obama and ObamaCare.

Conservative Byron York laid out once again why fix = repeal:

“They have to say they want to fix the program because almost nobody (a bare eight percent in the latest Kaiser Foundation survey) wants to keep the law as is. But to fix the aspects of Obamacare that are imposing new burdens on millions of Americans — higher premiums, higher deductibles, a hugely unpopular mandate, and narrower choices of doctors, hospitals, and prescription drugs — Democrats would have to advocate fundamental changes in the law that they have so far steadfastly refused to accept. Get rid of the individual mandate? To do so would rip the heart out of Obamacare, tantamount to repealing it altogether. Many Democrats would rather lose than do that.”

At National Journal Josh Kraushaar sees a Republican wave already building offshore ready to sweep away the detritus which is Obama’s presidency.

Charlie Cook surmised that sunken Sink was not the worst news of the week, “even worse news came in the form of an NBC News/Wall Street Journal national poll released last night, along with four statewide surveys conducted by a highly-regarded Democratic pollster in key Senate race states.”

Hell’s bells, even Carney the Clown is getting out of the Obama circus (to go to Russia as Ambassador??? and give Putin more laughs???).

Such is the panic that Big Media Obama acolytes are banging the drum for Justices Ginsberg and Breyer to retire so that Obama can appoint young’uns to the court and thereby have some sort of legacy other than the soon to be dead death-dealing ObamaCare. The desperation is for Supreme Court retirements now because the Senate will likely go Republican this year and these acolytes don’t know when there will be another Democrat in the White House. “Yes, some Democrats (and perhaps some pessimistic Republicans) have convinced themselves that Democrats now have a demographic or electoral college lock on the White House, but that’s hooey. At best, Democrats have a very slim edge, one that could easily be swamped by the normal ebbs and flows of events, or disappear just as rapidly as it emerged.

If there is a swamp to be seen it is ObamaCare. Candidates running for office in 2014 and 2016 cannot continue with “mend it don’t end it”. To do so will be the end of them.

The flawed David Jolly has made Obama supporters and ObamaCare defenders sad.



Deceivers like Nancy Pelousy will lie to all willing to be deceived that she and her ilk are not worried that Sink sank. But even as the lies come from her mouth the Obama leadership is taking action which betray the lies as the lies they are:

“House Democrats are looking for a way to blunt their Obamacare woes.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, House Democrats’ campaign arm, is about to embark on a large-scale public opinion survey that will – in part – seek to uncover how voters in key districts across America feel about the 2010 Affordable Care Act.

The DCCC bi-annual National Research Project, which begins in the next several weeks, will also include focus groups across several dozens competitive districts. The DCCC is devoting much of its energy to uncovering how – and how much – they should talk about the battered health care law. [snip]

Key Democratic strategists, who spoke anonymously to discuss party strategy, were blunt about Obamacare’s problems, especially from the political angle. They said Alex Sink’s loss in the Florida special election was a “nightmare.” Sink campaigned on Obamacare, and couldn’t beat the deeply flawed Republican David Jolly. Democrats know they can’t ignore Obamacare — they need to find a successful way to talk about it. [snip]

A Democratic strategist involved in House races said, “We’re going to test the the hell out of this. We’re really hurting from Obamacare.”

At the same time, a number of other disparate dynamics are surfacing. There is a fear that more and more will join Republicans to vote to change the law – a phenomenon that has recently worsened.”

Perhaps by 2016 ObamaCare propagandists will devise new brainwashing techniques to fool the public. But we doubt it. It’s been years now and thus far all we have gotten is a potted plant selling ObamaCare between two ferns.



That potted plant is full of fertilizer.

Worse, the Obama/ObamaCare cult persists and demands that ObamaCare be defended without mending or tending. The Obama/ObamaCare cult screams, ‘give no quarter’ ‘ do not retreat’ ‘do not equivocate’ – It’s Time for Democrats to Embrace ObamaCare:

“Trying to pussyfoot around Obamacare was an awkward strategy, and, evidently, it didn’t work. If other Democrats are to avoid meeting Sink’s fate in November, they need something more convincing to say about the Affordable Care Act than “mend it, don’t end it,” which is now their default position. But what could that be?

Here’s a heretical idea. [snip]

What better way to do it than by turning Obamacare into a great progressive cause, rather than something to avoid or be embarrassed about.

“A great progressive cause”? This is madness!

How to explain “a great progressive cause” opposed by your strongest allies who demand change? How is it not madness to insist, fingers firmly in ears that all is well and no need to mend nor end when your strongest allies yell “stop!:

“Union: Obamacare will slash wages by up to $5 an hour

A national union that represents 300,000 low-wage hospitality workers charges in a new report that Obamacare will slam wages, cut hours, limit access to health insurance and worsen the very “income equality” President Obama says he is campaigning to fix.

Unite Here warned that due to Obamacare’s much higher costs for health insurance than what union workers currently pay, the result will be a pay cut of up to $5 an hour. “If employers follow the incentives in the law, they will push families onto the exchanges to buy coverage. This will force low-wage service industry employees to spend $2.00, $3.00 or even $5.00 an hour of their pay to buy similar coverage,” said the union in a new report.

“Only in Washington could asking the bottom of the middle class to finance health care for the poorest families be seen as reducing inequality,” said the report from Unite Here. “Without smart fixes, the ACA threatens the middle class with higher premiums, loss of hours, and a shift to part-time work and less comprehensive coverage,” said the report, titled, “The Irony of Obamacare: Making Inequality Worse.”

“Mend it don’t end it” is indefensible and cannot be sustained as an election year message. However, “don’t mend it and don’t end it” is certifiable lunacy. This is a cult mentality not politics. Two alternatives then remain: repeal or single payer. Single payer after Obama and ObamaCare is a double down on madness. Why? Because if Obama cannot manage to establish and run a website and made a mess of his singular legacy “achievement” how can anyone believe that he can run the entire health care system?

Today we heard of the latest resignation from the overseers of ObamaCare:

“A Department of Health and Human Services official resigned from his post in a scathing letter that ripped the agency for profound dysfunction.

David Wright headed the Office of Research Integrity for two years and wrote in his letter dated Feb. 25 that his time with the agency left him “offended as an American taxpayer.” [snip]

The letter, which was addressed to Assistant Secretary for Health Howard Koh, goes on to accuse top agency officials of caring more about their personal advancement than about doing their jobs well.

“Since I’ve been here I’ve been advised by my superiors that I had ‘to make my bosses look good.’ I’ve been admonished: ‘Dave, you are a visionary leader but what we need here are team players,’” the letter reads. “Recently, I was advised that if I wanted to be happy in government service, I had to ‘lower my expectations.’ The one thing no one in OASH [Office of the Assistant Secretary of Health] leadership has said to me in two years is ‘how can we help ORI better serve the research community?’ Not once.”

Wright went on to note that Koh himself once described the office as operating in an “intensely political environment.”

A “political environment” is a mild phrase for crony corruption and willful deceit. Bad enough in any government agency or department but corrosive to democracy in a government entity with the power of medical life and death.

* * * * * *

We began with some of Hillary Clinton’s tiptoe critiques of ObamaCare from late February. Little noticed, Hillary Clinton made additional remarks late in February when she spoke before that group of health care technology professionals:

“Clinton tells health-care conference: Good data make good decisions

Clinton was speaking to the Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society convention at the Orange County Convention Center. The former first lady, U.S. senator and secretary of state and presumed Democratic presidential candidate spoke mostly about information technology, sometimes making it a metaphor for governing, in her 22-minute speech.

Yet during a 38-minute question-and-answer period she assumed her past roles and often sounded as if she were talking about presidential politics.

Good data helps to make for good decisions. That’s true in medicine. That’s true in business. That’s true in government,” she said.”

What is it that is most sorely lacking, other than common sense, good policy, and decency, in ObamaCare? Why metrics of course. Obama does not know how many of the uninsured have enrolled in ObamaCare. Obama does not know how many of those enrolled in ObamaCare have paid for coverage. On question after question Obama does not have the metrics to substantiate his not to be believed claims about ObamaCare. This of course is from the man whose campaign supposedly relied so effectively on… metrics.

The metrics on ObamaCare doom ObamaCare. ObamaCare is simply not sustainable. For Hillary Clinton 2016 this truth requires a new strategy and a new mantra on ObamaCare: END IT, CAN’T MEND IT!!!

Share

215 thoughts on “Sink, Sank, Sunk – Hillary Clinton 2016 And The Hell-Hole Called ObamaCare

  1. Another endangered incumbent about to get killed by ObamaCare:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDlEF3nQYLA

    Scott Brown announced an “exploratory committee” today. Brown was courted by Republicans to run but he was not sure what he would do. Tuesday night must have been the clincher for him. Brown is not the only top notch Republican challenger lured to run for office by the prospect of campaigning against ObamaCare.

  2. Wasn’t the United States going to be loved by Muslims once Barack Obama was elected? That’s what Andrew Sullivan told us. John Kerry agreed and said it was Obama’s “black face” that would do the trick. Did it work? Did it?

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/03/12/shut-up-your-mouth-obama-egyptian-womans-rant-goes-so-viral-it-even-has-a-t-shirt/#

    “I’d like to convey the following message to Obama. Listen, Obama. We are Egyptian women. You are listen, Obama? Shut up your mouth, Obama. Shut up your mouth, Obama!” she says in the video.

    “Our message to you, you donkey: No matter what you do, we will not restore the ousted president [Mohammed Morsi],” she said according to a translation provided by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI).

    “Al-Sisi, yes. Al-Sisi, yes. Morsi, no. Morsi, no,” the woman chanted, referring to Egyptian Defense Minister and Commander-in-Chief of the Egyptian Armed Forces Abdel Fattah al-Sisi who played a key role in deposing Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated President Mohammed Morsi last summer.

    The audio of the woman has been remixed into a techno musical version posted on YouTube with the hilarious slug, “Shut up your mouse, Obama,” the alteration of the word “mouth” likely attributable to her mispronunciation of the sound “th,” as is often heard among non-native English speakers.

    Other memes online [on the hashtag #shutupyourmouseobama, of course] included a Photoshopped image of Obama seemingly watching the woman mouthing off at him and a T-shirt emblazoned with the slogan “Shut up your mouse, Obama!”

    Shut up your mouse Obama:

  3. U.S. aims to give up control over Internet administration 🙁

    U.S. officials announced plans Friday to relinquish federal government control over the administration of the Internet, a move that pleased international critics but alarmed some business leaders and others who rely on the smooth functioning of the Web.

    Pressure to let go of the final vestiges of U.S. authority over the system of Web addresses and domain names that organize the Internet has been building for more than a decade and was supercharged by the backlash to revelations about National Security Agency surveillance last year.

    The looming change ­ if successfully executed ­ would end the long-running contract between the U.S. Commerce Department and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, a California-based non-profit group that goes by the acronym ICANN. That contract is due to expire next year but could be extended if the transition plan is not complete.

    MORE:
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/us-to-relinquish-remaining-control-over-the-internet/2014/03/14/0c7472d0-abb5-11e3-adbc-888c8010c799_story.html?hpid=z1

  4. More on Internet story:

    http://www.politico.com/story/2014/03/internet-control-commerce-department-nsa-104686.html?hp=f3

    Some U.S. officials have warned about the dangers of ceding ICANN’s authority to the International Telecommunication Union, a United Nations agency, fearing countries like Russia and China could use it to allow online censorship. Congress unanimously passed a resolution ahead of a 2012 ITU meeting, highlighting the U.S. commitment to keeping the Internet free from government control.

    Daniel Castro, a senior analyst at the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, disputed the connection between NSA revelations and Internet governance in an op-ed Friday, and he warned that ICANN would not be held accountable without U.S. control.

    If the Obama Administration gives away its oversight of the Internet,” he said, “it will be gone forever.”

    Some criticism of the decision immediately started popping up on Twitter.

    Every American should worry about Obama giving up control of the internet to an undefined group,” former House Speaker Newt Gingrich tweeted shortly after the announcement. “This is very, very dangerous.”

    An NTIA official denied that this was a reaction to the Snowden disclosures, pointing out that the relationship between the Commerce Department and ICANN was always envisioned as temporary.

  5. Apparently, a lot of American women have a lot to learn from the Egyptian women.

    Don’t sink like Sink.

  6. Apparently the word that Obama had definitely given up control of the internet was released late today. A typical sneaky move to put the info out there on the weekend – rather than week night.

    WTF will this man/child do next?

  7. OK did I jump the gun – hopefully? I heard on the radio on the way home from work early this evening that it was a done deal about O giving up net. However, in looking at a few news sources online, I’m seeing nothing definite yet. Sorry if above is wrong. .

  8. “Cantor: Pelosi Should Apologize for ‘Hungry Children’ Comment (Updated)”

    By Daniel Newhauser
    Posted at 9:20 a.m. on March 14

    “Pelosi said over the weekend at the California Democrats State Convention in Los Angeles that an anonymous Republican friend told her that “struggling families and really hungry children” are “invisible, and the Republican caucus is indifferent to them.”

    http://blogs.rollcall.com/218/cantor-pelosi-should-apologize-for-hungry-children-comments/

  9. Great post Admin!!!

    Yes, the only way Hillary could ‘fix’ ObamaCare is to rip it apart, and start completely over. Hillary knows rewarding Big Pharma and the Ins. companies does not bring down the cost, nor give quality health care.

    The broken website is worthless and also has to be taken off line.

    Her dance will be to somehow not take the side of Republicans but to get back to HER idea of single payer healthcare.

    Sure she can keep the easy parts, like letting the kids be covered by ma and pa until they are 26, and to keep the protection for those with pre-existing conditions…the rest can be shredded.

  10. IF the democrats lose the senate–an event which I deem unlikely but possible, and the Republicans gain 51 seats then that will be the green light for Hillary to double down on the idea that the policy goals of covering the uninsured are worthy of pursuit, but not at the expense of the destruction of our entire health care system for everyone. Obcare is not worth saving, but the goal of providing insurance for everyone, with choices, and keeping their doctor, must be achieved by less restrictive means, and bi partisan agreement. She has hinted at this approach, but that is as far as she should go at this point. Obama, the dims and big media must be thoroughly humiliated at the polls. Then and only then will they listen. And then the task will be to rein in Obama, because he will go the same way as Hitler did, and take his own personal failure out on the nation. He asn his wife has said it before–he is too good for this country. Hitler said about the same thing about himself in his final days.

  11. Admin, that video of the potted plants…it seems like an edit, but what was the original?

    It is really funny.

  12. Cummings and his fellow dims have launched their barrage of racist charges against Issa. Issa has said he will not dignify that scurrilous charge with a response. Cummings claims that Congress has no power to hold Lerner in contempt. Issa has told him he is wrong on the facts and wrong on the law. And Issa has accused him of the very thing I mentioned a few days ago, obstructionism and breach of his duty as a member of Congress. Finally Issa notes that Cummings was installed in the chairmanship by the White House to thwart the investigation. Cummings will howl like a banshee, to no avail. He is outed.
    —————————
    Republican Rep. Darrell Issa has penned a personal, scathing letter to his Democratic counterpart on the House oversight committee, escalating the public feud between the two high-ranking lawmakers amid the committee’s investigation into IRS targeting.

    The letter to Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., top Democrat on that committee, was obtained by Fox News. In it, Issa countered, point by point, a series of claims that Cummings and two legal experts made earlier this week about whether former IRS official Lois Lerner could be held in contempt for refusing to testify.

    Issa went further, effectively accusing Cummings of running interference on behalf of his party and the administration.

    “… rather than pursuing the facts where they lead — which is the function of effective congressional oversight — you have made yourself an obstacle to effective congressional oversight, in effect, a defense counsel for Lerner and others who acted to deprive Americans of their constitutionally-guaranteed rights,” the committee chairman wrote.

    In another verbal sting, he continued: “Even though the White House helped orchestrate your ascension to Ranking Member, I have encouraged, and continue to encourage, you to subordinate your political loyalties to the institutional interests of the Committee and the House, especially in cases like this where obstructing the Committee’s work risks permanently disadvantaging Congress in its interactions with the Executive Branch.”

    Lerner last week invoked the Fifth Amendment for the second time, leading Issa to weigh whether to pursue contempt proceedings. Cummings had cited “expert” opinion earlier this week in claiming Issa actually could not hold her in contempt because of his actions at that hearing.

    Issa and Cummings had a very public blow-up at the hearing, as Issa cut off Cummings’ microphone and shut the hearing down.

    Cummings and the legal experts argued that Issa erred by cutting the hearing short without first overruling Lerner’s Fifth Amendment claim and directing her to answer the committee’s questions. They argued he “forfeited” the ability to recall her. They argued that any claim that Lerner had previously waived her Fifth Amendment rights — which is what Republicans contend — is no longer valid.

    Issa called this analysis “wrong on the facts and the law.”

    Repeatedly in the letter, Issa used the derisive phrase “you and your lawyers and consultants,” a phrase not heard often on Capitol Hill.

    Since last week, Cummings and other Democrats have forcefully objected to Issa’s actions at the hearing, meant to investigate IRS targeting of conservative groups. Issa personally apologized to Cummings last week, but the two have continued to criticize each other publicly.

    House Democrats on Thursday tried to call up a resolution requiring Issa to formally apologize, but Republicans tabled it. House Republicans last week blocked a different Democrat-backed resolution to chastise Issa.

  13. I wish I could pipe in the ‘shut up your mouse Obama’ techno-psycho song to the Obama bedroom about 4 AM.

    Jammie sleeves would be flyin’

  14. Apparently the word that Obama had definitely given up control of the internet was released late today.

    ——-
    I think my mind must be in a Friday night haze.

    What do they mean, Obama is giving up CONTROL of the internet?

    No one has control of the internet, the last I heard. Sure there are worms, spam, etc, but who has control???

    What am I missing?

  15. Wbb
    …that will be the green light for Hillary to double down on the idea that the policy goals of covering the uninsured are worthy of pursuit, but not at the expense of the destruction of our entire health care system for everyone. Obcare is not worth saving, but the goal of providing insurance for everyone, with choices, and keeping their doctor, must be achieved by less restrictive means, and bi partisan agreement. She has hinted at this approach, but that is as far as she should go at this point

    ———-
    I agree.

  16. wbboei
    March 14, 2014 at 11:29 pm

    “Issa and Cummings had a very public blow-up at the hearing, as Issa cut off Cummings’ microphone and shut the hearing down.”

    _____________________________________________________

    This is the kind of crap reporting that makes me want to burn that waste of a journalism degree I have.

    The exact OPPOSITE occurred. Issa ajourned the hearing and THEN Cummings started his faux indignant rant.

    It is like Washington and its media lapdogs think none of us know what YOUTUBE is.

  17. Republican Messiah, as we all knew back in 2007:

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/luck-republicans_784911.html

    The Luck of the Republicans
    They owe it all to Obama.

    President Obama is a gift to Republicans. His policies, his partisanship, his allegiance to liberal interest groups, his indecisiveness​—​they all have served Republicans well. Without Obama’s self-destructive presidency, Republicans would probably be somber today. Instead they are bursting with optimism about the November midterm election.

    It didn’t have to be this way. And it wouldn’t be, had the president shown more foresight and less insistence on getting whatever he wanted, pretty much in the form he wanted. Congressional Democrats had a hand in this. But the policies were his. Obama was in charge. He’s responsible.

    For starters, the political impact of Obamacare could have been different. It was never popular, but the president made it less so by violating a rule of thumb in enacting an entitlement: It must have popular support and pass with a bipartisan majority. Obamacare had neither. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and the Medicare prescription drug benefit had both. [snip]

    The result: The president and Democrats own Obamacare, totally.

    Last week, the health care law, its calamitous rollout, and Obama’s broken promises claimed their first electoral victim. [snip]

    The reason was Obamacare. Jolly wasn’t an ideal candidate. [snip]

    All Jolly had was an issue, Obamacare. Sink hadn’t voted for it since she wasn’t in Congress. But in the campaign she embraced the Democratic mantra of “mend it, don’t end it.” That failed to connect with voters.

    If Sink’s defeat didn’t strike fear in the hearts of vulnerable Democrats, it was only because they were already fearful. Democratic senators like Kay Hagan in North Carolina, Mary Landrieu in Louisiana, and Mark Pryor in Arkansas had seen their poll numbers drop earlier, largely because they’d voted for Obamacare. [snip]

    In 2014, Republicans are the lucky party. Obama has given them powerful issues. Without them, they’d be talking about the deficit, the national debt, big government, entitlement reform, and Obama’s failure as a foreign policy president​—​legitimate issues but not the ingredients of a Republican landslide. The issues Obama fumbled​—​Obamacare, the economy, energy​—​are.

    The “stupid party” struck gold in 2008 in the form of a treacherous Chicago boob.

  18. Possibly one of the biggest issues regarding ObamaCare was not allowing catastrophic coverage only policies. This aspect is creating as big of a rancor as keeping one’s own doctor and/or being forced to have coverage or pay a tax for not having coverage.

    The further irony is that statistically speaking, forcing everyone into more complete coverage probably was the one thing that had to be done to give any type of healthcare coverage a chance to succeed, yet it has also become one of the biggest sources of complaints that is hurting the image of comprehensive healthcare.

    Elimination of catastrophic coverage only has become the gift of the Magi.

  19. Shadow, Admin quoted an article above regarding the internet issue.

    Here’s an excerpt from The Hill regarding it.
    ______________________

    “The U.S. government on Friday announced it is taking steps to relinquish control over the back end of the Internet.”

    The Department of Commerce announced it is beginning a process to transfer control over the technical system that operates the Internet’s domain name system, which ensures that Internet users can get to the websites they’re looking for.

    Currently, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration — an agency with Commerce — oversees that technical system, named the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA).

    Historically, it has contracted the operation of IANA out to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Number (ICANN) on a biennial basis. The current contract is set to expire in September of 2015.

    ICANN — which contains an advisory board comprised of government representatives — also manages the system for naming domains, ensuring that each web address is registered to only one person.

    “NTIA is asking ICANN to convene global stakeholders to develop a proposal to transition the current role played by NTIA,” NTIA Administrator Larry Strickling said during a press call Friday.

    (Snip)

    Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/200889-us-to-relinquish-internet-control#ixzz2w0ULg7uo
    Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

  20. Thanks Free for the update on the ‘control of the internet’.

    Rather than taking the word of political newspapers I decided to read up on Wired.com Here is their article that discussed the problems in detail.

    I guess part of me always hopes the geeks will keep the internet free.


    The U.N. Shouldn’t Make Decisions About an Open Internet Behind Closed Doors

    Behind closed doors, decisions will be made next week that could threaten the global, open internet. This isn’t a sky-is-falling cry: There could be very real consequences both in how we use the internet and how it’s governed.

    A relatively unknown United Nations agency called the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) is hosting the World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT) from Dec. 3 to 14. And it’s an opaque, government-controlled event.

    The goal is to update a decades-old treaty, the International Telecommunication Regulations (ITRs). But certain countries appear to be attempting a quiet “coup” in updating the ITRs – one that could violate our rights online while leaving users less secure and with slower service.

    It’s worth acknowledging that the ITU does a lot of important work. It sets spectrum and technology standards, has done much to improve global interoperability and efficiency, and helped increase access to information and communication technologies in developing nations.

    And let’s face it: Given the dominance of the U.S. government, the current model of internet governance is not perfect, and urgently needs to include more voices from around the world.

    Yet there’s an incurable, inherent problem with the ITU: Only governments get to vote. And that’s antithetical to how decisions about the internet are made. The ITU’s very nature should disqualify it from deciding how the internet is governed, especially when those decisions would be made by way of a binding international treaty.

    But it’s the process here that reveals the most about the ITU priorities, and who can participate.

    It’s missing information transparency. As an international NGO, we had to fight just to read the proposals. It’s only through leaks that we’ve been able to gain access to the actual documents to be debated at the WCIT.

    It limits stakeholder input. When the governments first meet, they will decide whether to shut out communities and experts who are not on government delegations – potentially excluding those who helped build and maintain the internet in the first place. Policies like these make the WCIT anathema to the “multi-stakeholder” process where all sectors are consulted – a model endorsed at the UN World Summit on Information Society (WSIS), which, ironically, was convened by the ITU.

    It costs money. While Secretary-General Touré notes here in Wired that 700 private organizations are ITU members, he neglects to mention the membership cost: $2,100 to $35,000 annually – as well as the fact that sector members can’t vote. This exorbitant fee effectively excludes most users and human rights groups from participating.

    It centralizes and slows things. Decisions made at the WCIT could put internet policymaking under a top-down international regulatory regime, replacing decades of merit-based, multi-stakeholder agreements. The current model of internet governance – the method by which norms and decision-making procedures are made and enforced – isn’t perfect. But it does allow for efficient, open, and sensible changes. Governments are anything but nimble, let alone open, in their decision-making processes.

    The Proposals Raise Serious Concerns…..

    [snip]

    We Need More Openness, Not Less

    The ITU and its member states have attempted to respond to our criticisms and other challenges about the WCIT, but they fail to address the critical flaw: It’s a closed, government-controlled agency that should not be making decisions about internet policy.

    Such decisions necessarily require the participation of governments and the private sector and civil society.

    Expanding affordable access and securing networks (which the ITU has stated are their main goals), are extremely important. And in a perfect world, all governments would arrive in Dubai with their citizens’ best interests in mind.

    But that’s not what’s happening. Repressive governments want to assail the disruptive power of the internet, our common platform for expression, and they’re all jostling to get the upper hand through this treaty.

    So what we’re seeing is a larger geopolitical fight playing out at the WCIT. Only this time it’s a battle over bits, and the free and open internet is at stake.

    http://www.wired.com/opinion/2012/11/you-cant-make-decisions-about-the-open-internet-behind-closed-doors/

  21. It sounds like what he is doing.
    ===

    D’Souza: “Obama Administration Wants To Remake The World”

    D’Souza, 52, a former policy adviser to President Ronald Reagan with professional affiliations to conservative organizations such as the American Enterprise Institute and the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, believes the Obama administration wants to remake the world.

    “Obama has an ideology, he wants to make America very different than it is. He would love to see the American era, which began in 1945, come to an end. He doesn’t want America to be the world’s sole superpower,” D’Souza said.

    “Now you can’t remake America in two years or four years, maybe not even in eight years, but you sure can do it in 16 years and that’s sort of Obama’s long-term plan.

    “He wants to make a baton hand-off to a hand-picked successor so that his project can be completed, if not by 2016, then shortly thereafter.”

    Obama, he believes, is “trying to reduce America’s footprint” globally.

    More: http://weaselzippers.us/179443-dsouza-obama-administration-wants-to-remake-the-world/

  22. President Obama warns youth: Sign up for Obamacare or we will charge you a penalty

    President Obama warned young people that if they don’t sign up for Obamacare by March 31, they will face a penalty — if they can afford it.

    During an interview with radio host Ryan Seacrest, Obama explained that young people might be charged a fine if they don’t get insured.

    “If you can afford it ­ you just decide you don’t want to get it because your attitude is ‘nothing’s ever going to happen to me’ ­ then you’ll be charged a penalty,” Obama explained.

    Obama was careful to specify that people who can’t afford Obamacare will not suffer a penalty, thanks to a “hardship exemption,” but encouraged everyone to sign up.

    “[Y]ou never know what kind of curveballs life throws at you,” he warned.

    http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/2545690

  23. Issa might even say, if you are a democrat, and someone denigns to question you, and you must answer their question, before the big media rides in to your rescue, you have three (3) choices on how to respond:

    1. if the law is on your side, argue the law

    2. if the facts are on your side, argue the facts

    3. if neither the law or the facts are on your side, hurl baseless charges of racism at the person who deigns to question you, and wait for big media to second those charges.

    Like Cummings and his fellow travelers do to a fair thee well.

    Bottom line: false charges of racism are the last bastion of scoundrels

  24. “[Y]ou never know what kind of curveballs life throws at you,”
    ——————
    Oh? You mean like . . . Obama? A curve ball? More like a knuckleball.

  25. I just got an email from “Barack Obama” title, “We can do better” where he outlines his continued behaviors. What impressed me is what an arrogant narcissist he is. He will self employ whatever mental defense he needs to to continue to run this country into the ground, with complete disregard for the realities that prevent most of us mortals from doing great things without the means to support them.

    Peter Pan Man.

  26. Palin still driving him Bonkers. 😆

    “I’ve been unfairly maligned about my jeans,” Obama told radio host Ryan Seacrest in an interview. “The truth is, generally I look very sharp in jeans. There was one episode like four years ago in which I was wearing some loose jeans, mainly because I was out on the pitcher’s mound and I didn’t want to feel confined while I was pitching, and I think I’ve paid my penance for that. I got whacked pretty good. Since that time, my jeans fit very well.”

    http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/03/obama_unintentionally_reveals_his_insecurity.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=facebook

  27. Superb offering, admin. In going through mail, Issa writes 4 pages worth. I especially am drawn to this segment and we’ve all found similar here at Pink. Many times:
    “Wallowing in the pit of unpopularity that he’s dug for himself, having lost the confidence of the American people, and never having begun the arduous work of building consensus in Congress, now our President has become defiant. He has vowed to rule by decree. Unilaterally acting to change both the interpretation and the letter of the law.”
    THere is just some extra satisfaction in knowing a Republican is thinking that way.
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    foxy at 12:08
    That’s really something Allan Harper (2 1/2 Men + “just the one time” ) would have said. 🙂 🙂

  28. foxyladi14
    March 15, 2014 at 12:08 pm

    “I’ve been unfairly maligned about my jeans,” Obama told radio host Ryan Seacrest in an interview. “The truth is, generally I look very sharp in jeans.

    *************************************************

    what a freaking narcissist…who cares how you look in your jeans…we don’t need your verbal selfie of you in your jeans…

    …grow up…you are now the Prez of the USA…the world is falling apart around you…there are many more important things than you talking to Ryan Seacrest about how good you look in your jeans…

    Is O punking us? I cannot believe the superficial quality of this man and MO…

  29. Saturday, March 15, 2014

    The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Saturday shows that 49% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Obama’s job performance. Fifty percent (50%) disapprove (see trends).
    ——————
    49% of the likely voters approve of Obama’s job performance??????

    The last time I looked at Gallup, his approval rate was 37%.

    This gaping discrepancy first appeared at or about the time Scott Rasmussen left that polling firm.

    To call it an outlier is to miss the fundamental point that this problem has been consistent ever since.

    Prior to 2012, they gave Romney a slight edge, which proved to be inconsistent with the actual outcome.

    That, I suspect, caused them to go too far the other way.

    There is no integrity to this polling firm now.

    They should not be relied on.

    I suspect their main function is to mask the real disapproval rating at the RCP average.

  30. wbboei
    March 15, 2014 at 1:58 pm

    Saturday, March 15, 2014

    The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Saturday shows that 49% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Obama’s job performance. Fifty percent (50%) disapprove (see trends).
    _______________

    ROFLMAO 😆 😆

  31. Breaking news update on the missing plane. 🙂

    Malaysia’s leader said Saturday the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 was the result of “deliberate action.”

    Earlier, a Malaysian official said it was “conclusive” the plane was hijacked. But Prime Minister Najib Razak said investigators are still looking at all possibilities.

    Najib said authorities now know the missing Malaysia airliner’s transponder was intentionally disabled, and it turned back from its flight to Beijing and flew across Malaysia.

    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/malaysia-airlines-flight-370-divert-andaman-islands-article-1.1721523?fgfsd&utm_content=buffer4bb47&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

  32. Truly Orwellian!
    ==

    Obama’s Orwellian View Of Freedom

    Liberty: President Obama wants Democrats to reclaim the word “freedom” as their own. But what he describes as freedom is little more than deeper dependence on government. Not exactly what the Founders had in mind.

    In a recent speech to the Democratic National Committee, the president lamented that “we’ve let the other side define the word ‘freedom’ for too long.” Then, as he often does, Obama set up a straw man argument, claiming to Republicans freedom means “what’s in it for me?” or “I’ve got no obligations to anybody.”

    So what is “freedom,” Mr. Obama?

    “Freedom,” he said, “is the peace of mind of knowing that if you got sick, you won’t lose everything.

    “Freedom is the ability to change jobs and start a new business, chase a new idea without fear of losing your health insurance.

    “Freedom is signing for that new home and knowing it can’t be taken from you because you actually understand what you’re signing.

    “Freedom is getting that new credit card and knowing the stakes and understanding how you’re going to manage it.

    “Freedom is the knowledge that … you’re not going to be treated like a second-class person once we fix our broken immigration system. That’s freedom.”

    No it isn’t. Everything Obama describes is based on government programs or intrusive market regulation.

    This isn’t new ­ FDR had the same view of freedom when he put forward his socialistic Bill of Economic Rights that included the right to “protection from economic fears.”

    Read More At Investor’s Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/031314-693258-obama-says-freedom-means-dependence-on-government-.htm#ixzz2w472TwtQ

  33. S, ain’t it so. No one cares what he looks like, we just want him to stop screwing over the country.

    We don’t care that he looks like he’s wearing “mom jeans”. lol

  34. New York Times today:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/16/us/politics/obama-factor-adds-to-fears-of-democrats.html?hpw&rref=us&_r=0

    Obama Factor Adds to Fears of Democrats

    WASHINGTON — Democrats are becoming increasingly alarmed about their midterm election fortunes amid President Obama’s sinking approval ratings, a loss in a special House election in Florida last week, and millions of dollars spent by Republican-aligned groups attacking the new health law.

    The combination has led to uncharacteristic criticism of Mr. Obama and bitter complaints that his vaunted political organization has done little to help the party’s vulnerable congressional candidates.

    The latest in a cascade of bad news came Friday when Scott Brown, a former senator from Massachusetts, announced an exploratory committee to challenge the incumbent Democrat in New Hampshire, Senator Jeanne Shaheen, and when the Republican-aligned “super PAC” American Crossroads said it would spend $600,000 to help his effort.

    Earlier, another top-tier Republican recruit, Representative Cory Gardner, decided to challenge Senator Mark Udall of Colorado; the two races create unanticipated opportunities improving Republicans’ chances to take control of the Senate. No prominent Democrats predict their party will win back the House.

    Interviews with more than two dozen Democratic members of Congress, state party officials and strategists revealed a new urgency about the need to address the party’s prospects. One Democratic lawmaker, who asked not to be identified, said Mr. Obama was becoming “poisonous” to the party’s candidates. At the same time, Democrats are pressing senior aides to Mr. Obama for help from the political network.”

    It’s almost as if the New York Times is taking our old articles and republishing them.

    Here’s more of the bitter clinging to Obama and hand-wringing that mess-iah is killing them:

    “When two senior White House officials — Jennifer Palmieri, the communications director, and Phil Schiliro, the health care adviser — went to the Capitol late last month to address Senate Democrats about the Affordable Care Act, they were met with angry questions about why Mr. Obama’s well-funded advocacy group, Organizing for Action, was not airing commercials offering them cover on the health law.

    Among those raising concerns was Senator Michael Bennet of Colorado, chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, who also has a low-key style and warm relationship with Mr. Obama.

    They did not want to hear about health care enrollment,” one source familiar with the meeting said, describing “a high level of anxiety.” [snip]

    Responding to these concerns, several Democrats said Friday that Organizing for Action would cut back its fund-raising activities so the group would not be in competition with the candidates for donors. [snip]

    Mr. Obama’s approval rating of 41 percent in a Wall Street Journal/NBC Poll last week matched that of a New York Times/CBS News survey in February and represents one of the clearest reasons for Democratic malaise. Since the post-World War II era, that measurement has been one of the most accurate predictors of midterm results, and any number below 50 means trouble for the party that holds the White House.

    The state of Democrats is very much tied to the state of the president, and in that regard, these are far from the best of times,” said Geoff Garin, a Democratic pollster.

    In addition to problems with the health law, the White House is losing the support of Democrats on key appointments such as Mr. Obama’s nominee to head the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division and his choice to be surgeon general. Also last week, Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, broke with the administration with a scalding criticism of the Central Intelligence Agency.

    Historical trends over all also argue against the president’s party in a sixth year. In 1958, Republicans lost 48 seats in the House and 13 in the Senate; in 2006, Republicans lost 30 seats in the House and six in the Senate. In the past 50 years, only Bill Clinton in 1998, when his approval ratings were much higher than Mr. Obama’s today, did not drag down his party in a second midterm; Democrats picked up five House seats.

    Republicans also seem to be benefiting from the argument — reinforced by advertising and by their media surrogates — that Mr. Obama has presided over an activist government that has overreached and proved incompetent.

    Most Democrats up for re-election are trying to put some distance between themselves and the president, choosing surrogates such as Mr. Clinton to campaign for them, particularly in the South and parts of the West.

    Asked whether Mr. Obama is a liability, Representative Ami Bera, Democrat of California, demurred. “We haven’t really focused much on the president,” he said. “We’re focused on Sacramento County and the folks that are there.”

    Other Democrats are openly critical of the health care law in their advertisements. In one ad promoting Representative Ann Kirkpatrick, Democrat of Arizona, the narrator says she “blew the whistle on the disastrous health care website, calling it ‘stunning ineptitude,’ and worked to fix it.”

    Democrats also face a contradiction: As woeful as they are about their prospects in 2014, they are buoyant about their chances for winning the White House in 2016. Polls show that Hillary Rodham Clinton has clear leads over possible Republican challengers.

    Even though special elections are rarely reliable predictors for future elections, Alex Sink’s loss to David Jolly in Florida’s 13th District last week added to the Democrats’ negative story line. Frightening Democrats further, none of the Republican third-party money in the race came from the Koch brothers, the wealthy industrialists whose political groups have funded the bulk of the TV ads hammering Democrats this election cycle.

    This unease is also prompting Democrats to speak more candidly about what many see as the root cause for their political difficulties: the bungled unveiling of the health law, in particular the insurance website, and the White House’s failure to market the initiative effectively.

    The rollout left a bad taste in people’s mouth from Day 1, and it’s hard to create a new flavor now,” said Representative Steve Cohen, Democrat of Tennessee.

  35. There’s a PUMA growling at Legal Insurrection. PUMA Leslie Eastman (now a Republican) writes for Legal Insurrection and she is talking Hillary.

    http://legalinsurrection.com/2014/03/bebossy-were-in-this-mess-because-hillary-wasnt-in-2008-2//#more

    #BeBossy: We’re in this mess because Hillary wasn’t in 2008

    When I first heard about the #BanBossy movement, a movement that is backed by Facebook’s Sheryl Sandberg and The Girl Scouts, I was incredulous.

    First progressives emasculate America’s men; now, they are emasculating its women!

    Professor Jacobson was right to be concerned about the tendency of “low information voters” to respond to victimization campaigns, and that this approach might be poll-testing well in studies done by Democratic operatives. And it seems to be an obvious effort to hamstring Republican challenges to Hillary’s actions as Senator and Secretary of State, which are justifiable points of discussion during a campaign in 2016.

    As I Democrat, I wanted to remind Legal Insurrection fans of the Democratic primaries of 2008. I assert that part of the reason we are in the midst of the most inept presidency in the entire history of the country (about 400 years, according to Sheila Jackson Lee) is that Hillary wasn’t “bossy” enough.

    My first stint with citizen activism wasn’t with the Tea Party. It was with PUMA. There are several variations on that acronym, the most tasteful being: People United Means Action. [snip]

    I followed the convention from a distance, on PUMA boards where posts of convention-goers were visible. Hillary supporters were called “whores” and “bitches”. They were harassed in the elevators. Delegates were refused seating. In fact, here is a video reminder, when they were going to negate the votes of 600,000 Michigan voters in the push to select Obama.

    It’s been a long time, but I remember vividly a video showing a grandmother who was a longtime Democrat activist weeping because Hillary supporters were being railroaded at every turn. She couldn’t believe that, as a feminist, all her efforts at being respected were as nothing to the Democratic leadership. [snip]

    In conclusion: PUMAs never, ever forget.

  36. Other Democrats are openly critical of the health care law in their advertisements. In one ad promoting Representative Ann Kirkpatrick, Democrat of Arizona, the narrator says she “blew the whistle on the disastrous health care website, calling it ‘stunning ineptitude,’ and worked to fix it.”
    —————–
    The core problem is not inept execution.

    The core problem is the policy itself.

    “Obamacare is not just another costly, bureaucratic, top down regulatory scheme, of which we have had, alas, so many. There is something genuinely TYRANNICAL (despite the good intentions of many of its supporters)about Obamacare. It threatens not only to ruin our medical system, but directly and indirectly to SUBVERT OUR FORM OF GOVERNMENT AND OUR WAY OF LIFE, BY FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CITIZENS AND GOVERNMENT” (emphasis added)

    “Liberal (my comment: meaning progresssive) impatience with partisanship in general and the Tea Party in particular–that is with people who oppose their plans, arises from the fact that in progressivism there is no publicly acknowledged right of revolution as the Declaration of Independence proclaims. As liberals are fond of saying there is no right to turn back the clock (my comment: because whatever a progressive government does is ipso facto progress).”

    “No right to roll back bad government which is damaging both the safety and the happiness of the American People.”

    “Obama himself made this very point clear with respect to national health care. He said I am not the first president to take up this cause but I am determined to be the last.”

    “But in fact, Obamacare’s strained and narrow victory in 2010 looked not so much inevitable as desperate. It passed on a straight party line vote, with rampant side deals to buy out the relevant interest groups and against bitter resistance that has not gone away.”

    “(Only)then came the disastrous roll-out and its failure to meet any of its own targets for success.”

    “All of this suggests over-extension and hubris on the party of progressivism.

    “And in the wake of all this, the Tea Party (more so than the RINO) has confirmed itself as Obama and Obamacare’s chief nemesis. (Note: which is why big media–which is joined to the hip with Obama has worked 24/7 to destroy the Tea Party)

    ” The Tea Party rightfully concluded from the battle over Obamacare that what we are seeing in our politics these days is not two clashing views of the Constitutions, but TWO DIFFERENT CONSTITUTIONS in conflict: the Constitution of 1789 (my comment: where the people are sovereign, there is a separation of powers, and federalism and the progressive notion of a living constitution (my comment: in which the people are no longer sovereign, the state is supreme and power is consolidated in the executive branch).”

    “The failure of the Supreme Court to strike down Obamacare and the individual mandate played into the Tea Party’s suspicions. There were five votes to rule it unconstitutional under the Commerce clause before Chief Justice Roberts changed the subject to the taxing power, and allowed Obamacare to become law. ”

    “This suggested to the Tea Party that the old constitutional mechanisms of judicial review and separation of powers could no longer be relied on to defend the (old) Constitution against the progressive onslaught.”

    “To them (my comment: and no less to me) Justice Roberts about face revealed the failure, maybe even the treachery of establishment Republicans (aka RINOS) who nominated him , and backed him as Chief Justice.”

    “The Tea Party therefore concluded that it was necessary to raise the consciousness of the American People to this new (and dire threat) to our liberty.”

    “Last fall the Tea Party seized upon the latest Continuing Resolution to try to bring down Obamacare.” Obama concluded (rightly) that (my comment: with the help of big media) he could hold out longer than they could.”

    It was unrealistic to expect that they could persuade the public to reconsider the results of an election hardly a year old, or that they could in that short expanse of time generate a mandate to trump the election mandate.

    “The Tea Party has been right to recognize the threat posed by Obamacare and other brazen assaults on the Constitution such as Obama’s asserted prerogative to decide what laws to enforce and which to ignore.

    “The fattest target of Obamacare is the Independent Payments Advisory Board which is unconstitutional on its face. It consists of 15 members who are not elected by the people, but by Obama. Their mandate is TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO LIMIT MEDICARE’S BUDGET, BY REDUCING PAYMENTS TO DOCTORS–UNLESS BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS PASS THEIR OWN EQUAL OR GREATER CUTS TO MEDICARE. Even worse, Obamacare conspires to make Board recommendations permanent by mandating that no resolution to repeal it can be introduced before January 1, 2017 and February 1, 2017, and the repeal could not take effect until 2020.

    “This example serves to illustrate how adverse Obamacare is to the Constitution (my comment: to say nothing of the welfare of the old and sick members of our society—and they call this “progressivism”? As in progress? Progress toward precisely what?)

    “If conservative office holders do not (my comment: give off their dead asses) and correct these structural deformities and the Tea Party does not turn its formidable patriotism and energy to enlighten the American People about how we are losing control of our destiny (my comment: Lord knows big media will never do it–they are co-conspirators in this), then no matter how many good policies we endeavor to enact, or how low we set the tax rate, the body politic will continue to sicken and self government will slip through our fingers.”

    http://commonsensenewsusa.com/2014/03/05/the-tea-party-conservatism-and-the-constitution-by-charles-r-kesler/

  37. I am a subscriber to the Hillsdale College publication Imprimus, wherein the above article appears. Claremont College Professor of Government Charles Kessler has done a brilliant (I do not use the term lightly) job of laying out a possible basis for rapprochement between the two factions of the Republican Party–if they listen. It is not enough for Ann Coulter among others to say now we need to bury the hatchet–not in eachother’s backs. They must recognize eachothers contributions and unite around a common goal. Hillary faces the same challenge, and will be made possible if and only if the Democrat party is wiped out in November. Then and only then can the rebuilding begin. And only then will the party face up to the fact that the new president will have a short window to clean up the mess, starting with the payment board above. I was told by a high official in the Reagan administration that the administration has 90 days to set its direction from the beginning of the term to set its priorities, and begin pushing them aggressively while their mandate remains intact. If Hillary is the nominee and if she wins the general election, the time frame will be more like 30 days. Stay the course or time for change? If you look at the entire res gestae, the answer is self evident. And the time frame is non negotiable.

  38. The Reagan Administration official I referred to is the cousin of the late Princess Grace of Monaco. He is a great American.

  39. admin
    March 6, 2014 at 4:51 pm
    More troubles for ObamaCare defenders to defend against:

    Nearly 10,000 Las Vegas Casino Workers Might Go On Strike Because Of Obamacare
    &&&&&&&&&&&&

    What were the odds of THAT happening.

  40. In conclusion: PUMAs never, ever forget.

    freespirit

    Damn straight, we never forget.

    foxyladi14
    March 15, 2014 at 6:32 pm

    Right Freespirit and never forgive

    ——-
    Hell yea, Ladies! And we don’t shut up and sit down, nor donate, nor vote for a Dimocrat!!

    Not until Hillary runs as a true Democrat.

  41. Today my son talked about a short video, as he got into details, I reserved telling him I already saw it on the blog. He said that Obama was insulted many times and why would he go on such a show when he wasn’t running for office again, and he didn’t need the youth vote.

    He also said, I don’t think Obama will go down in history either as a good President, nor will many people remember him.

    Wow, this was a verbal revelation I never expected from a youngster that voted for him against my many warnings.

    This was the video he was talking about: Between Two Ferns with Zach Galifianakis: President Barack

    I told him Admin posted it on the blog and many of the ‘insults’ were actually true.

    Hark, there is hope.

  42. My son also said that Obama is making a movie to reach young people.

    I have no knowledge of this.

    I said, “While the country is burning to the ground because of his poor leadership, he is out having fun on tv shows and possibly making a movie?”

  43. Shadowfax

    March 15, 2014 at 11:50 pm

    ———————-
    Mr. Obama is the political equivalent of an arsonist.

    He does everything he can to ensure everything falls apart–after he leaves office.

    To ensure that his successor is blamed for the implosion he caused.

    As in: “Apres moi le deluge”. (King Louis XV)

    Translation: “After my reign, the nation will be plunged into chaos and destruction.”

  44. An Ode to Obama’s Metrosexual Pajama Boy @ pj media
    ———————–
    I’ll remember it forever as the day masculinity died, like the day the music died in a plane crash or the day Happy Days died when the Fonz jumped a shark on skis. On March 9, 2014, a man, Lee Palmer, a member of the human race known for taming tigers, building skyscrapers, leaping off tall things, and creating something out of nothing, called 911 because his house cat had trapped him and his family in a bedroom. He called police to rescue him and his family from this dire situation (a 22 lb. cat with an attitude problem). This cat had attacked his 7-month-old child and this man’s response was to run with the child and his wife into a room and lock the door (with the dog).
    ———————
    And a very apt comment:
    ———————
    I’m much too busy being embarrassed to be in the same species as Obama to worry much about some guy afraid of some cat.

  45. Here is a perfect example of why the RINO is dirty and will never ever represent the American People.

    The estimable Mark Levin lays out the details, and they relate to the victory of a non-RINO Jolly in the Fl-14 election.

    Simply put the Republican establishment of weak kneed Republican officials, consultants and more consultants were against him, and trashed him in the left wing rag Politico, and then after they won they were all for him.

    Rove’s internals indicated he would lose and he had a column ready for the WSJ which labelled him as another Tod Akin, entitled Lesson Learned from the Loss, which pointed out that he was not a RINO. Etc.

    You may wonder about the bona fides of a Repulbican establishment that torpedoes their own in a left wing rag like Politico.

    http://video.foxnews.com/v/3336229707001/mark-levin-on-david-jolly-winning-fla-special-election/?intcmp=obinsite#sp=show-clips

  46. Wow!
    ====

    US caught planning terror attacks in Ukraine

    Gordon Duff and Press TV, Tehran

    In a series of hacked emails received from “Anonymous Ukraine” it is clear that Pentagon officials working in concert with extremist elements in the Ukraine have carried out and are planning more attacks in Ukraine.
    What is also clear is that these attacks are to be blamed on Russia including blowing up planes at an airport. Other attacks may well include mass civilian casualties.
    The long series of emails include several that are frighteningly incriminating. This is first of the “worst,” three “smoking gun” false flag planning documents:

    Events are moving rapidly in Crimea. Our friends in Washington expect more decisive actions from your network.
    I think it’s time to implement the plan we discussed lately. Your job is to cause some problems to the transport hubs in the south-east in order to frame-up the neighbor.
    It will create favorable conditions for Pentagon and the Company to act.
    Do not waste time, my friend.
    Respectfully,
    JP
    Jason P. Gresh
    Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
    Assistant Army Attaché
    U.S. Embassy, Kyiv
    Tankova 4, Kyiv, Ukraine 04112

    MORE: http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/03/15/caught-us-planning-terror-attacks-in-ukraine/

  47. I might be preaching to the choir here, but about Issa:

    …As a senior in high school, Issa enlisted in the United States Army. Through his Army service, he received an ROTC scholarship and graduated with a degree in business from Sienna Heights University in Adrian, Michigan. Upon graduation, Issa was commissioned as an Army officer, and ultimately obtained the rank of captain. He completed his active-duty military service in 1980 and turned his interests to the private sector.

    At the height of his career in business, Issa served as CEO of California-based Directed Electronics, a company that Issa founded and built in the mid-1990s to become the nation’s largest manufacturer of vehicle anti-theft devices, including the highly-successful Viper system. In 1994, Issa was named Entrepreneur of the Year by Inc. Magazine, Ernst & Young and The San Diego Union Tribune. During his leadership of Directed Electronics, Issa served as chairman of the Consumer Electronics Association, an organization of 2000 companies within the consumer technology industry that hosts the annual Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas. When he stepped down as CEO to serve as a Member of the U.S. House of Representatives, Directed Electronics employed nearly 200 people….

    http://issa.house.gov/about/about-darrell

  48. More scientist than politician, I fail to see Obamacare as an insurmountable problem for HRC. To date, it has been handled as an emotional issue and I think she has the key to sorting things at as the metrics. I think that is a very wise position. Since there are no metrics right now, she can effectively evade the issue until there are. If she were to take Obamacare as a project to set the precedent for problem solving by her administration, then she could effectively and successfully navigate the shark filled waters around it. It would be an opportunity to demonstrate effective bi-partisan leadership. Making this her plan and stating this as her plan, is all a real leader needs to do. Not a dictator who issues decrees before all the facts are in, but a problem solver. That is what she needs to be a promote herself as to distinguish herself from O and win the Whitehouse.

  49. Jason P. Gresh
    Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
    Assistant Army Attaché
    U.S. Embassy, Kyiv
    Tankova 4, Kyiv, Ukraine 04112
    ——————
    He needs to be called before Congress to explain this. If Feinstein is more than mouth and gutwind, she will subpoena him to explain what is going on. Part of the reason I say that is because this is part and parcel of a pattern orchestrated by Soros and Brezneski in the 1990s to overthrow the communist governments in eastern Europe when the Russian empire collapsed. I think such testimony is, therefore, relevant and probative because it may help explain what was also going on thousands of miles away years earlier in Benghazi. Oh, excuse me, Feinstein does not care what happened in Benghazi, or here (since it will likely implicate Soros, who runs her party). Nor does she care that the military is spying on the American People. But when they (the army/CIA)spy on her staffers–the least important violation in the opinion of most people, only then does she raise objection and throw a hissy fit. I think she is pretty useless. Well, what about Mike Rogers? Possibly. He is a better bet than Feinstein. But because of his FBI background, this testimony would occur, if at all, behind closed doors, so as not to embarrass Obama.

  50. Lu4PUMA

    March 16, 2014 at 10:49 am
    ————–
    Under laboratory conditions, perhaps. But in the cauldron of politics, where fear and greed rule the day, no. There is no room for objective debate in the political process. Those who paint in bright colors which are in tune with the public mood generally win. Between now and then, the fires will get stoked, and it will such all the oxygen out of the room, unless numbnuzt Obama gets us into a war, or there is an economic collapse, which are not inconceivable the way things are going. But the bigger problem–and it is HUGE is that the program subordinates the American People to the political will of government, and marginalizes their control over their bodies, and their future, as elucidated in the article I posted above at 6:52. The best approach for her is to embrace the goals of Obamacare broadly defined, and to chuck the machinery. Mend it don’t end it is a losing strategy in this political climate. And why on earth would we want to mend it anyway. Just look at what it will do to those on medicare. It is a fucking disaster. Run don’t walk away from Obamacare, Hillary.

    March 15, 2014 at 6:52 pm

  51. Obama, Kerry, Power and Rice: one big embarrassment, jointly and severally.
    ————

    Crimea River

    By Larry Johnson on March 15, 2014 at 3:48 PM in Current Affairs

    What a ridiculous display of impotent rage by the United States on the eve of Russia’s official annexation of Crimea. I do not know who is more pathetic–Barack Obama, John Kerry or USUN Ambassador Samantha Power. Power should be renamed, “Powerless.” That’s what she is. A windbag hurling invective and empty threats and the Russians from her perch as the US rep at the UN.

    U.S. Ambassador Samantha Power accused Russia of violating the U.N. Charter’s key principles that prohibit the use of force to acquire territory and respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all nations – principles she said Moscow agrees with “and defends all around the world, except, it seems, in circumstances that involve Russia.”

    “Russia has rejected a resolution that had peace at its heart and law flowing through its veins,” she said.

    “Under the U.N. Charter, the Russian Federation has the power to veto a Security Council resolution, but it does not have the power to veto the truth,” Power said. “Russia – isolated, alone and wrong – blocked the resolution’s passage, just as it has blocked Ukrainian ships and international observers” from entering Crimea.

    In your dreams baby. In your dreams. Power, Obama and Kerry are delusional. The actually seem to believe that we can levy sanctions on Russia that will hurt them, compel them to back down and leave us unscathed.

    Drudge had a little item that points to some of the dynamics that Obama and his crew are ignoring:

    RUSSIANS PULL BILLIONS FROM WEST…

    The US economy already is limping along. The withdrawal of these funds have the potential to inflict further damage to a weak job market and stall the stock market.

    We need to take a good long look in the mirror. The Russians are simply doing what we have been doing for at least 150 years–i.e., when we perceive that a national interest is at stake we intervene militarily without any regard to international law.

    Looking at Russia, they will take over the Crimea and parts of eastern Ukraine. Some in the Ukraine will resist and there is the potential that the fighting could escalate quickly and dramatically. But Ukraine’s military is no match for the Russians and will be quickly squashed.

    Some politicians and many pundits seem eager to portray this conflict as an act akin to Hitler’s take over of Austrian and Czechoslovakia in the late 1930s–a prelude to world domination. Ignore that hyperventilating. Putin is no Hitler. He is a clear-eyed nationalist and understands Russians strategic interests and is will to fight to protect those interests. We better catch up and understand why he is doing what he does. Otherwise, we risk a gross miscalculation that could escalate things into a real shooting war with Russia. That’s not just madness. That would be suicidal.

    I suspect this will be sung with enthusiasm in Crimea comes Monday: (Russian National Anthem)

  52. The sheer incompetence of this administration is shocking.

    Picture a chimpanzee in a cage flipping a coin. Half the time, he would flip heads.

    This crew of dimwits would flip heads, never.

    Because they do not believe in consequences.

    All they believe in is intentions.

    By their definition, a policy or a strategy is good if it is intended to be good.

    If it does not work out the way they intended it is somebody else’s fault.

    And when the strategy is in ruins, they ignore the laws of cause and effect.

    All they say at that point is think how much worse it would have been if we had not acted.

  53. I would normally refrain from this but this is one grave i could happily dance upon for days for all the evil this man did.

    http://gawker.com/ex-westboro-baptist-church-leader-fred-phelps-is-finall-1544924334

    red Phelps, the one-time leader of the infamous “GOD HATES FAGS” church, is on his deathbed in Kansas. Hopefully, you can carry on with your day having learned of this terrible news.

    Phelps’ son Nathan, who left the church in 1980 and now lives in Canada working on behalf of LGBT rights, posted on Facebook late last night that his father is dying in a hospice in Topeka.

    I’ve learned that my father, Fred Phelps, Sr., pastor of the “God Hates Fags” Westboro Baptist Church, was ex-communicated from the “church” back in August of 2013. He is now on the edge of death at Midland Hospice house in Topeka, Kansas.

    I’m not sure how I feel about this. Terribly ironic that his devotion to his god ends this way. Destroyed by the monster he made.

    I feel sad for all the hurt he’s caused so many. I feel sad for those who will lose the grandfather and father they loved. And I’m bitterly angry that my family is blocking the family members who left from seeing him, and saying their good-byes.

    The legacy Phelps will leave is of having turned his religion into a sideshow, and of having made the notion of the protest a farce. We may never know the extent to which Phelps realized that his church moved the “cause” backwards, or whether he even gave a shit.

    But we know that above all the Westboro Baptist Church loved attention, and now its ex-leader will die quietly as the world spins uninterrupted.

  54. Well . . . here is Moe Lane’s assessment of the senate picture for this fall, if the election were held today.

    52 R

    44 D

    4 undecided

    I think he this is overly optimistic

    But if it is true, it spells a landslide.

    A landslide by the other party, plus Obama behaving like a loud, irrational lame duck will set the right forces in motion

    Faced with imminent death, panicking democrats will crawl to Hillary

    And Hillary will have the latitude to begin talking about change, rather than stay the course

    The only ones who will continue to worship a man who has destroyed the country will be the Congressional Black Caucus (sans Tim Scott), and the denizens of Big Media–who deserve to be flushed down the toilet.

    http://www.redstate.com/2014/03/15/senate-2014-election-map/

  55. Big Media is beneath contempt. . . . . And Obama is a gas bag.

    —————

    The president’s appearance on a comedy website this week for a spoof interview received 99 times as much news coverage as the actual issue he was plugging — ObamaCare enrollment.

    On Tuesday, the website Funny or Die posted President Obama’s interview with actor Zacharia.

    The network morning shows repeatedly ran clips more than eight minutes that morning alone.

    Later that day, the HHS Department released enrollment numbers, showing that 4.2 million people have signed up for ObamaCare — 25 percent of them young people — far below the original goal of seven million participants, and about 40 percent of them supposed to be young people.

    CBS devoted a total of eight and a half minutes to the interview on their morning and evening news on Tuesday and Wednesday.

    NBC and ABC spent four and a half and three and a half minutes, respectively.

    CBS was the only network to mention the low enrollment numbers and they spent just 10 seconds on that subject.

  56. Whether he likes it or not and he won’t, if Nov turns into a total meltdown for Dems, Obama will be swept aside and castigated by the next morning and dethroned as leader.

    The Clintons will effectively take over the party on that day and motions for 2016 will be kicked in.

    The Clintons will have to run on a rebuilding and restructure theme for the whole party and the Dem party knows it.

    The progressives will be knifed to death on that morning for bringing ruin and rightly so.

  57. In a Time, in an Age, at a Moment …

    Strobe Talbott’s Twitter feed said some hours ago:
    Malaysian plane mystery: Direction, fuel load & range now lead some to suspect hijackers planned a 9/11-type attack on an Indian city.

    The rich and famous have rumor networks too which but for their eminence are apparently indistinguishable from those of your Black Helicopter and White Van believer. The unknowable is a great leveler. The Czarina of Russia believed in Rasputin so its unsurprising that the rich and famous can believe foolish things about the future. No man is infallible before the unknown, but we usually leave the guessing to the great and the good.

    SNIP

    What if Obama’s core assumptions are wrong in themselves; not just slightly wrong but completely, utterly and comprehensively wrong? That is the unthinkable possibility which ordinary voters would never believe their leaders to be capable of. We may think of our leaders fallible; as capable of occasional error, but it is hard to accept them as completely and ridiculously fatuous.

    http://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2014/03/15/in-a-time-in-an-age-at-a-moment/

  58. Kremlin says Russian & U.S. Presidents have spoken by phone and that Putin told Obama the Crimean referendum complies with international law

    ………….

    So basically Putin said “Up Yours”

  59. Russian TV Host: Russia Is the Only Country With Capability to Turn US into “Radioactive Dust”

    Russian journalist Dmitry Kiselev threatened to turn US and EU into “radioactive dust.

    Dmitry Kiselyov, is the most powerful man in Russian media.

    The Washington Post reported:

    Russia, news anchor Dmitry Kiselyov took to the Rossiya 1 news channel to put the situation into a broader geopolitical context for views.

    One part of his explanation, however, has caught a lot of attention: Kiselyov explained to his viewers that Russia is the only country capable of turning the United States into “radioactive ashes.” He then went on to use animated maps to show exactly how Russia would automatically respond with nuclear missiles if command and control were attacked or disabled by a U.S. attack.

    He also took a swipe at Obama.

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/03/russian-tv-host-russia-is-the-only-country-with-capability-to-turn-us-into-radioactive-dust/

  60. Emirates flight EK232 (B777-300) from Washington to Dubai just diverted to Keflavik on Iceland. Reason unknown

  61. Venezuela Also Is Being Overthrown By The Criminal Regime In Washington

    The Washington orchestrated coup in Ukraine has kept Venezuela out of the headlines.

    A confrontation with nuclear armed Russia is more dangerous than with Venezuela. But the violence that Washington has unleashed on Venezuela almost simultaneously with Ukraine is testimony to Washington’s stark criminality.

    South America has always consisted of a tiny Spanish elite with all the money and power ruling over large majority populations of indigenous peoples who have not had political representation. In Venezuela, Chavez broke this pattern. An indigenous president was elected who represented the people and worked in their behalf instead of looting the country. Chavez became a role model, and indigenous presidents were elected in Ecuador and Bolivia.

    Chavez was hated by Washington and demonized by American presstitutes. When Chavez died of cancer, Washington celebrated.

    http://www.fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/venezuela-also-is-being-overthrown-by-the-criminal-regime-in-washington/80223#more-80223

  62. White House: President Fuck All tells Russia’s Vladimir Putin that Crimea referendum will never be recognized by the United States.

    Well Putin will be tossing and turning all night at that stinging rebuke, won’t he?

  63. moononpluto
    March 16, 2014 at 5:08 pm
    Kremlin says Russian & U.S. Presidents have spoken by phone and that Putin told Obama the Crimean referendum complies with international law

    ………….

    So basically Putin said “Up Yours”
    &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
    NBC correspondent in Russia (6:30 PM) said Obama’s call to Putin today will make other regions in the area think twice before returning to Russia. 🙂

  64. Here’s another unwitting forecast of 2014 and 2016 by an Obama supporter to add to the ones cited in our article. They essentially know Obama has destroyed the Dem party and so they are desperately calling for resignations – of Supreme Court Justices. Here’s another “please quit” gem:

    http://www.latimes.com/opinion/commentary/la-oe-chemerinsky-ginsburg-should-resign-20140316,0,6883426.story#axzz2w7qLflzb

    Much depends on Ginsburg
    The 81-year-old Supreme Court justice should retire this summer to ensure Obama can choose a like-minded successor.

    Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg should retire from the Supreme Court after the completion of the current term in June. She turned 81 on Saturday and by all accounts she is healthy and physically and mentally able to continue. But only by resigning this summer can she ensure that a Democratic president will be able to choose a successor who shares her views and values. [snip]

    There likely will be many calls, publicly and privately, for Justice Ginsburg to resign before President Obama leaves the White House to prevent the risk of a Republican being able to appoint her successor. But simply leaving before the next election isn’t enough. If Ginsburg waits until 2016 to announce her retirement, there is a real chance that Republicans would delay the confirmation process to block an outgoing president from being able to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court. In fact, the process for confirming nominees for judicial vacancies usually largely shuts down the summer before a presidential election.

    Moreover, there is a distinct possibility that Democrats will not keep the Senate in the November 2014 elections. [snip]

    Besides, if Democrats have control of the Senate, they could change the rules to eliminate the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees, just as they did for lower federal court judges and presidential appointments to executive positions.

    In the end, the only way to ensure that President Obama can pick someone who will carry on in Justice Ginsburg’s tradition is for the vacancy to occur this summer. Indeed, Justice Stephen G. Breyer, who will turn 76 this summer, should also carefully consider the possibility of stepping down this year.

    Erwin Chemerinsky is dean of the UC Irvine School of Law.

    War on Women!!! Ginsberg should retire but Breyer should only consider it??? At least the resigation demand cited in our article is for both to retire. This call for “woman get out of the way” only targets Ginsberg.

    This also shows that the well connected Erwin Chemerinsky has been read the writing on the wall by DailyKooks allies and therefore issuing this demand.

    BTW, we know quite a bit about this writer. He is extremely influential. We won’t say how but we know (from personal experience having participated in the network in the past) he is part of a network that responds to “calls to action” from very top left operatives (mostly lawyers). When those on the network get a request to write something they usually get on the horn and respond quickly. We are sure this is part of a coordinated campaign to get Ginsberg to resign. The calls, privately and publicly, will escalate for Ginsberg to get out.

  65. State TV says Russia could turn USA to ‘radioactive ash’… Obama says would be bad for climate change…

  66. Toxic garbage scow Maureen Dowd reads and repeats the writing on the wall:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/16/opinion/sunday/dowd-dems-in-distress.html?hp&rref=opinion&_r=1

    Dems in Distress

    This is what’s really freaking out Democrats: They know that Brown, after making some real money working for Fox News since his loss to Elizabeth Warren two years ago, wouldn’t even be getting into the race if the political environment weren’t so toxic for Democrats.

    Republicans have been white-hot for Brown to get in, and he finally pulled the trigger Friday, establishing an exploratory committee and asserting that “the Obamacare Democrats are on the wrong side” of a big political wave.

    G.O.P. leaders think that even if Brown can’t win, he will force Democrats to spend a bunch of money in New Hampshire and curtail what they can spend in other more crucial races like Colorado, Alaska, Montana, Louisiana, Arkansas, North Carolina and Michigan.

    Brown jumping in was just one blast of bad news for Democrats. They also lost a special election last Tuesday in Florida by a hair, a defeat David Plouffe called “a screaming siren.” Alex Sink, a promising candidate, sunk after she could not overcome the blast of ads linking her to President Obama and his health care law.

    Republicans had been so worried about losing the Florida election that they prematurely trashed their own candidate, a former lobbyist named David Jolly, telling Politico that his campaign was a Keystone Kops operation. Then they ended up swearing him in on Thursday, murmuring “bygones.”

    So now Democratic panic has set in.

    With the health care sign-up period coming to an end this month, Democrats in Congress are looking over at the White House and realizing that the president is not only incapable of saving them, but he looks like a big anchor tied around their necks.

    The president is still a good fund-raiser for Democrats. But while the Koch brothers are pounding the party’s Senate candidates and a few House candidates around the country, congressional Democrats are wondering when Obama’s vaunted powerhouse national advocacy network, Organizing for Action, will finally step in with some money to offset the wave of outside spending by the Republicans.

    The state of relations between congressional Democrats and the administration has been deteriorating every week, but now it’s hitting a new bottom — and not only with the extraordinary open feud between the C.I.A. and the Senate intelligence committee. Hill Democrats are seething at Obama, fearing that the onetime messiah is putting them in a slough that will last until — or through — 2016.

    Top Democrats who were fans of the president and prone to giving him the benefit of the doubt now say they’ve completely lost confidence in the White House’s ability to advance an agenda and work with them in a way that’s going to give Democrats a fighting chance in November.

    At the heart of all this, really, is that the White House totally blew the rollout of the health care law and Democrats have not recovered. It provided a huge opening for Republicans, who had just shut down the government and were tanking in the polls and in despair themselves.

    Now there’s a lot of spring in the step of Republicans as spring approaches.

    It’s not just congressional Democrats who are kvetching. Mark Zuckerberg called the president to vent about government incursions on privacy. And the New Yorker editor, David Remnick, talked to The New Republic about Obama’s “locutions,” his habit of going, “On the one hand. On the other hand. That is to say.”

    “On the other hand, excuse me,” Remnick said, laughing, “I wish I could hear a lot more from him about, say, Ukraine, than I have, other than just ‘We are keeping out.’ ”

    Obama’s approval ratings will shape the midterms, and some Hill observers compare his crumpling numbers to an illness. The president didn’t do the basic things to take care of himself, and now he’s gone terminal and contagious.

    The closest the president came to getting a leg up on mounting a defense was on Friday when he told Ryan Seacrest in a radio interview that he had been unfairly maligned for his mom jeans: “Generally, I look very sharp in jeans.”

    Are they (Big Media) just stealing what we write wholesale now? Other than Dowd’s subtle and not so subtle attempts to praise Obama and ObamaDimocrats by “blame the Republicans who are worse” apolgetics she is taking stenography from us. Or is it that everyone has finally caught up to where we were years ago?

  67. Drudge :

    Putin approval 72% in Russia.
    Reagan, Clinton were 63% in Gallup at this point.
    O, increasingly out of touch and shady, polls 40%. Dangerous

  68. No Shit Sherlock, do these muppets want an award for stating the blindingly obvious……and they get paid for nicking our writings….

  69. One of the interesting trends here is that in the past the system of international law and international governing bodies has rested on the bedrock of sovereignty, whereas today under Obama, there is an elite class of billionaires, Davos men, and international bureaucrats who see sovereignty as THE PROBLEM, and, in its more virulent form, the cause of the wars of annihilation of the twentieth century. George Soros, Chairman Mo, and others are leading exponents of this view. They dream a word market regulated by world bodies where goods and labor flow freely throughout the world, and where the governing elite acquires the status of Mandarins. The net effect of this transformation is to negate the effective political voice of the people, who then become little more than subjects. If these Mandarins had a proven track record of success, and were capable of acting for the common good, than for their own good, then I could imagine an argument in favor of this transformation, if for no other reason than like it or not final authority must rest somewhere, because the lack of it eventuates in chaos. But as you move from a theoretical premise to a real world application, whom do we see in the current mix of leaders who is capable of running the world. One of the more obvious contenders would be John Kerry with his Harvard credentials, his Boston Brahamin pedigree, his professional background. But in spite of all this, he turns out to be a pompous, slow witted, often wrong but never in doubt sort of figure–tragic in one sense, ridiculous in another, and always keen to promote his own interests. He and his ilk have no business trying to run the world. Thus, the argument reverts back to its original premise which is through the competition between nations, and the preservation of a sense of national identity, and a conscious rejection of this citizen of the world paradigm of which Mr. Obama is the most conspicuous manifestation, the greatest good for the greatest number will be achieved. Finally, it is well to understand the derivation of the word citizen of the world. It is synonymous with the term rootless cosmopolitan which was an anti_Semitic phrase invented by Comrade Stalin.

  70. White House Seeks to Replace Netanyahu?

    TEL AVIV – In recent weeks, representatives for the Obama administration have held meetings with a senior politician here in which the U.S. delegates brought up the possibility of replacing Benjamin Netanyahu as prime minister, according to an informed Jerusalem diplomatic source.

    The meetings were held with Israel’s popular finance minister, Yair Lapid, founder and leader of the Yesh Atid Party, which became the second-largest party in the Knesset winning 19 seats in the last election.

    The diplomatic source said the Obama administration identified Lapid as a moderate who could be helpful in pushing the Israeli government into accepting the framework to create a future Palestinian state.

    According to the source, the talks included the possibility of Lapid bolting Netanyahu’s government if the prime minister rejects the U.S.-brokered regional talks.

    Lapid, however, is unlikely to abandon his government post over talks the Palestinians themselves have been less than enthusiastic about.

    Such a move could be politically dangerous for Lapid, with polls showing a significant segment of the Israeli public has grown weary of the bid to create a Palestinian state amid regional turmoil, including the Syrian civil war, recent changes of leadership in Egypt and fears over Iran’s nuclear program.

    http://www.fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/white-house-seeks-to-replace-netanyahu/80272#more-80272

  71. Medicare robbed to fund the ObamaCare scam, costs rise, worse treatment, longer waiting times… is that all there is?

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/mar/16/curl-we-completely-overhauled-american-health-care/?page=all

    We completely overhauled American health care — to insure 4.2 million people?

    The number bounced around for years — 46 million.

    President Obama said it in August 2009: “I don’t have to explain to you that nearly 46 million Americans don’t have health insurance coverage today. In the wealthiest nation on Earth, 46 million of our fellow citizens have no coverage.”

    He said it dozens more times, including in June 2013: “We are not a nation that accepts nearly 46 million uninsured men, women and children.”

    The Obama administration pumped the number with official reports. The White House Council of Economic Advisers said, “Perhaps the most visible sign of the need for health care reform is the 46 million Americans currently without health insurance.” The Census Bureau got in on the act, too, saying some 48 million Americans lacked health insurance.

    It was official: Nearly 15 percent of America’s 313 million citizens had no coverage and were, as Mr. Obama loved to say over and over to hype the fear, “one illness away from financial ruin.”

    So, he created Obamacare. The crux of the biscuit: The United States would completely change its entire health care system to make sure those 46 million got insured. Well, at least that’s what every rational American thought. If there are 46 million uninsured, and the president and Congress are overhauling the system, it must be to solve the whole problem — not just part of it.

    But last week came word that with just 15 days left for people to enroll for federal coverage, just 4.2 million had. The math is simple: That’s just 9 percent of the supposedly 46 million uninsured. [snip]

    Still, the obvious question is: We changed the $2.7 trillion health care system to sign up 4.2 million people? [snip]

    What’s more, it turns out many of those signing up to the program already had insurance. “Few uninsured Americans are gaining coverage under Obamacare,” CNN reported in early March. Just 27 percent of the enrollees were previously uninsured, according to a survey conducted in February by McKinsey & Co.

    To top it all off, reports have emerged that many of the enrollees are more elderly and more unhealthy, which is likely to tax the system heavily just as it gets started.

    What’s surprising is how little the mainstream media cares. The White House now says it was hoping to enroll 8 million in the first year — but does anyone remember that being a big selling point as the president crisscrossed the country scaring Americans? And no one in the MSM blinked an eye when the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said that in 2023, Obamacare will still have left 31 million people without health insurance while adding more than $1.7 trillion in federal spending.

  72. Crimea referendum: Wide condemnation after region votes to split from Ukraine
    ———————
    And it wasn’t even close . . .

    There is a lesson here.

    Political science 101 teaches us that the building blocks of society are:

    first, the family

    second, the community

    third, the nation

    fourth, the world

    In that order . . .

    Obama is a citizen of the world

    He has no patience with that paradigm

    He sees the protocol this way

    first, racial identity and solidarity

    second, the world

    He is, in that sense, the worst kind of tyrant

    In order to institutionalize that protocol

    You must invalidate the family

    He does this by interposing the state between the child and parents

    You must also invalidate the community

    He does this by exerting federal control over community decisions

    You must subordinate local government to national politics

    He does this by his sustained attacks on federalism and the power of the states to control voting

    You must make the federal government the tool to exert your will

    He does this through a corrupt big media and by weaponizing federal agencies against the people

    And you must obliterate sovereignty

    He does this by turning over the internet to world bodies, to promote his own status as an iconic world figure

  73. ” We changed the $2.7 trillion health care system to sign up 4.2 million people? [snip]”
    *******
    And best case is that 80% of the 4.2 million have paid the first premium and now have junk insurance and of those, an estimated 10% were previously uninsured. So a WAG would be that of the previously uninsured 46 million, 336,000 now have “insurance”.

  74. The Crimean vote demonstrates the shallow thinking of people like Obama, and their hubris in dismissing the importance of culture, history, religion and national identity. Everywhere in the world where people like Obama have presumed to draw legalistic boundaries to paper over cultural differences, there has been instability and war. This is the lesson of history. The theories of Obama, and Power have the smell of the lamp. And when they intersect with reality, their advocates are reduced to chatter boxes like the ignorant Power who drones on and on about how Putin’s actions were a violation of international law. She sounded like the Pope when he condemned Russian aggression, to which Stalin aptly replied: how many divisions does the Pope have? (Note: if he has any at this point, he would do well to position them on the outskirts of Venice as they vote on whether to separate themselves from Rome, thus raising the spectre of a Crimean parting of the ways.)

  75. Yup, and most of the people that signed up for ObamaCare are the same people that lost their health insurance because of ObamaCare.

  76. admin

    March 16, 2014 at 7:38 pm

    Are they (Big Media) just stealing what we write wholesale now? Other than Dowd’s subtle and not so subtle attempts to praise Obama and ObamaDimocrats by “blame the Republicans who are worse” apolgetics she is taking stenography from us. Or is it that everyone has finally caught up to where we were years ago?

    everyone has finally caught up.

    asshats.

    Hillary 2016

  77. everyone has finally caught up.
    —————–
    unfortunately, the train has already left the station where the middle class is concerned.

    how do you spell failure?

    O-B-A-M-A

    going on 6 years of this prick

    six years ago, we were at a point where we could return to prosperity, or tank the middle class

    buffaloed by big media every step of the way, a majority of the electorate through snake-eyes

    and voted for Obama

    beltway denizons are still thrilled

    I will be thrilled when we take the head of big media and flush it down the toilet

    they are primarily responsible for this

    and they do need to be held accountable in spades

    the next president will have a nanosecond to reverse so much harm

    a hundred trillion in unfunded liability now

    eighteen trillion in national debt

    and a gaping budget deficit

    from a total fucking prick who claims that after retirement he will work with minority youth

    to do what? to complete this revolution

  78. My earlier response got spammed out, but here in essence is what it said:

    Obama’s response to the Crimean situation is exactly what you would expect. While that witless ninny Power delivers purple prose about what flows through the veins of whoever (heroin in her case, without the e), and protests that Putin’s actions are in violation of international law (which is hypocritical in the extreme, given the sustained attack her own benighted boss has launched against the law of this land, the bill of rights, and the separation of powers), his impotence is drawn into high relief by something Stalin said when the Pope registered a similar complaint: how many divisions does the Pope have? In Obama’s case, the question is modified only slightly: how many is he willing to commit, after running his mouth. Obama continues to talk even though he has nothing to say. And the whole of progressive doctrine contains the two ss’s which are synonomous with Hitler’s elite guard. Shakespeare said, first kill all the lawyers. If he had known the likes of Lying Brian, Step and Fetch it, and the rest of those jamokes, he might well have reconsidered the merits of that statement in favor of an even more deserving target. Pitchforks in Chevy Chase.

  79. Garry Kasparov:

    http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/03/vladmir-putin-crimea-hitler-1938-104711.html?hp=t1#.UyZ44s5FmQA

    Vladimir Putin and the Lessons of 1938

    He’s not Hitler. But we’ve got to stop him all the same.

    It’s been a busy few weeks for Vladimir Putin. In the last month, the Russian president has hosted the Olympic Games, invaded a neighboring country and massed troops along its border. Back in Moscow, the Kremlin has cranked up the volume of hysterical anti-Western propaganda to a roar while cracking down on the last vestiges of the free media. All the while, he proclaims he wants peace and accuses Western leaders of hypocrisy and anti-Russian sentiment. If Putin wanted to do a better imitation of Adolf Hitler circa 1936-1938, he would have to grow a little mustache. Equally troubling is that the leaders of Europe and the United States have been doing a similarly good impersonation of the weak-kneed and risk-averse leaders who enabled Hitler’s rise in the 1930s.

    I know full well that any mention of the maniacal Nazi leader is viewed as being in poor taste by many. The good news is that it took many years for the West to finally admit that Putin is a dictator and only a few weeks for respected public figures such as Hillary Clinton to acknowledge how closely he is following in Hitler’s footsteps right now. Nobody except the most naked of Kremlin apologists is debating whether Putin’s anything but a tyrant anymore. Instead, we’re searching for the right historical analogy: Is it Budapest 1956? Prague 1968? Austria 1938?

    To which I say: Welcome to the club! It remains to be seen, however, if the media figures and politicians who have so quickly adopted my Anschluss rhetoric are willing and able to do what is necessary to stop repeating the past. [snip]

    Even now, with Russian troops occupying Crimea in preparation for annexation, European countries are terrified of losing any Russian oligarch money. They are afraid of using the very thing that gives them so much potential leverage over Putin—exactly as he hoped.

    Of course Putin isn’t Hitler, although his potential for devastation is even greater due to a massive nuclear arsenal under the control of what appears to be a shrinking and desperate inner circle. I would never minimize the horror of the Holocaust, the millions of war dead or the heroism of those who defeated the Nazis. My goal is to scrutinize how the rest of the world did and did not respond while Hitler the popular German statesman was becoming Hitler the monster in the 1930s. Today’s dictators are not so averse to learning from their predecessors. Putin imitating Hitler’s 1936 propaganda methods and Hitler’s 1938 invasion tactics does not mean he will also declare a new Reich and head straight for Poland. But we should draw lessons from that history, too.

    When I tweeted about the possibility of a “Ukrainian Anschluss” on Feb. 20, the Sochi Games were still underway. I noted that Putin’s invasion of Georgia took place during the Beijing Olympiad in 2008 and wondered what would dissuade him from similar action in Ukraine since Russian troops still occupy South Ossetia and Abkhazia, Georgian territories, with no visible harm to Putin’s international relations. By the way, Russia was never sanctioned by the European or the United States over Georgia, and just a few months after the brief war ended the EU restarted talks with Russia on a formal partnership and cooperation agreement. It was quite high-minded of them, but when dealing with Putin, turning the other cheek just gets you slapped again.

    A week or so later, to my surprise, “Anschluss” was on the front page of a Polish newspaper and on the lips of Hillary Clinton. And yet, those who oppose taking any serious action against Putin’s invasion of Crimea still enjoy scoffing at the now-obvious parallels with Hitler’s seizure of Austria and the Czech Sudetenland. It’s a hard habit to break, apparently.

    It’s one thing for academics and pundits to calmly sympathize with Putin and his “vital interests” and his “sphere of influence,” as if 50 million Ukrainians should have no say in the matter. It’s quite another thing for Barack Obama, David Cameron and Angela Merkel to fret about the “instability” and “high costs” caused by sanctions against Russia—as if that could be worse than the instability caused by the partial annexation of a European country by a nuclear dictatorship, carried out with impunity.

  80. Garry Kasparov has been fighting against the likes of Putin for awhile, and it’s good to hear him agree with Hillary.

  81. The Kasparov article is powerful and compelling. It’s one of a few articles Politico has published recently, casting the Foolish Prince in a less than flattering light. It’s a little surprising to see this article from the Obama Defenders. Does this mean they’re racist/

  82. From Admin’s Dowd excerpt:

    “Democrats are wondering when Obama’s vaunted powerhouse national advocacy network, Organizing for Action, will finally step in with some money to offset the wave of outside spending by the Republicans.”

    __________________

    OFA, which Obama refers to as a grass roots movement, even tho they’re obama manufactured astro-turf, publicly prides itself on raising money solely from small pirate donors devoted to Dem initiatives. But that’s not entirely true.

    ____
    “Group Close to Obama Says It Erred on Donation”

    By NICHOLAS CONFESSOREMARCH 4, 2014

    A political advocacy group backed by President Obama acknowledged Tuesday that its executive director had set up a White House meeting for a New Jersey businessman entangled in a lawsuit with a federal agency, who then pledged to raise $100,000 for the group one day after the meeting.

    The group, Organizing for Action, also said that on three occasions its fund-raisers or other employees had tried to steer potentially controversial donations to allied liberal groups that did not disclose their donors. The contributions include the check promised by the businessman, written by an acquaintance reportedly seeking a presidential pardon for a 1991 Medicare fraud conviction.

    Organizing for Action did not accept the contribution, and no evidence has emerged that the administration took action to help either man. Last week, the group fired the fund-raiser involved in soliciting the $100,000 contribution, Samantha Maltzman.

    But the revelations, first reported by NBC News, thrust into controversy an organization that had hoped to play a major role in advancing Mr. Obama’s second-term agenda but has faced criticism since its inception for providing big donors with access to the president and some of his closest aides.

    Jon Carson, the group’s executive director, met last December in New York with the businessman, Munr Kazmir, a philanthropist and Republican fund-raiser who founded an American school in Pakistan. In an interview, Mr. Kazmir said that Mr. Carson had initiated the meeting, in which the two discussed immigration reform as well as Mr. Kazmir’s problems with a federal agency, the Overseas Private Investment Corporation, that had provided a loan for the Pakistan school but sued Mr. Kazmir after several payments were missed.

    Mr. Kazmir said that Mr. Carson also asked him whether he would be interested in raising money for Organizing for Action events with Mr. Obama.

    In January, a fund-raiser for the group emailed Mr. Kazmir about ticket prices for a planned February dinner with Mr. Obama. Two weeks later, Mr. Carson arranged for a meeting at a Washington coffee shop between Mr. Kazmir and a White House aide, Yohannes Abraham, Mr. Carson’s former subordinate.

    “As soon as Mr. Abraham learned that this meeting involved ongoing litigation, he immediately terminated it and made clear he could not get involved,” said Eric Schultz, a White House spokesman.

    The next day, Mr. Kazmir told the fund-raiser he had found a donor. In early February, he sent the fund-raiser a copy of a $100,000 check written by a New Jersey doctor, Joseph Piacentile.

    “I did not know he had an issue with this mishegas, this pardon,” Mr. Kazmir said. Efforts to reach Dr. Piacentile by phone on Tuesday evening were unsuccessful.

    In a statement, Mr. Carson said he “fell short in meeting my responsibility as the executive director of O.F.A. to assure that no question about our standards could even be reasonably raised.”

    Officials of the group also said it would no longer make recommendations to donors about where they should direct their money.

    (snip)

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/05/us/politics/group-close-to-president-says-it-erred-on-donation.html?_r=0

  83. Above – it should say “private donors” – not “pirate donors” – tho some of them may very well have been of the pirate persuasion. The damned autocorrect got me again.

  84. Admin, you’re right about MSM finally catching up. At least for now.

    The Obama mystique turned out to be a manufactured illusion – like everything else about his contrived public image.

    I just want to see Donna Brazille’s smart-ass on CNN explaining WTF happened to the New Dem Coalition that was supposed to so handily replace working class and older white Dems. Non of us were needed – or even welcome, according to Donna.

    Where are the new Dems, Donna? After 6 years of Obama, they’re probably still unemployed, uninsured, and really pissed about all the spying on them and other Americans on their idol’s watch. Where ever they are, they’re not as into barack and the Dems as you thought they would be at this point in time, Donna.

    It must suck to be Donna Brazille right now. That “new coalition” thing just did not work out for her. Plus, it’s becoming harder and harder for even MSM and rabid Dem fanatic pundits, strategists, etc., to defend O and his idiocy. Donna and the Dims will be screaming “racism” even louder and longer now. That made-up defense is the only one they’ll be able to come up with, now.

  85. Poor George is upset.
    =====

    George Soros Predicts Ukraine Could Ruin The EU

    The billionaire financier says in its tepid response to Russia’s Crimea land grab, the EU flubbed a key chance to breathe new life into the stale union.

    George Soros, one of the world’s leading investors, has warned that the European Union is in danger of falling apart if it fails to confront Vladimir Putin’s naked aggression in Ukraine.

    The billionaire financier told The Daily Beast that European governments should have seized on Russia’s land grab in Crimea to breathe new life into a union that is disintegrating and stumbling towards oblivion. Instead, he argued, squabbling European nations have failed to meet the challenge and continued to act in their own narrow self-interest. “Europe was totally unprepared for this crisis and Putin outmaneuvered Europe with no difficulty,” he said.

    Soros, who became known as the Man Who Broke the Bank of England after making $1 billion by betting against Europe’s previous financial union, has long insisted that the Euro was being fatally mismanaged. His latest book, published this week, is entitled The Tragedy of the European Union. A loud supporter at the launch of the Euro currency and a cheerleader for a united Europe, Soros has been confounded by what he calls the “nightmare” reality 15 years after its introduction.

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/03/14/george-soros-predicts-ukraine-could-ruin-the-eu.html

  86. Obama Admin Says It Remains In Constant Contact With The Muslim Brotherhood In Egypt…

    Why?

    Via State Department website:

    MODERATOR: Good afternoon, everybody. I’m very happy to be able to welcome Deputy Spokesperson Marie Harf back to the FPC. This is now her third briefing here, so we are being – I think we’re able to call it a regular briefing now, and there’ll be many more. She’ll make a few brief comments, and then we’ll open – the floor to questions. She does have to leave fairly soon, so we’ll get right to it. Thank you.

    MS. HARF: Thank you. And if you saw the end of my briefing today at the State Department, I told them I had to leave early there to come brief you, so I just want to make sure everyone knows I’m trying to make time. […]

    QUESTION: Okay. The second question is: The State Department has recently said that it is in constant contact with the Muslim Brotherhood, as with the other political groups, you see?

    MS. HARF: Mm-hmm, yes.

    QUESTION: So do you think that these contacts have any effect on the United States relations with Egypt? And are these just mere contacts or support? Because this is very important for the Egyptian public opinion. Thanks.

    MS. HARF: Well, they’re contacts, and let’s just – I’ll put it in a little context here. We think it’s important to have contacts with all the parties in Egypt, because all the parties in Egypt ultimately are going to need to be a part of Egypt’s future, and that we want to help them be a part of that future and move Egypt out of the situation it’s in today. So we think this is important to do. Do we always agree, do they always agree with what we’re saying? Of course not. But we believe it’s important to have the dialogue.

    Keep Reading: http://weaselzippers.us/179608-obama-regime-say-it-remains-in-constant-contact-with-the-muslim-brotherhood-in-egypt/

  87. The Spoils of War and Regime Change

    At 2 a.m. this morning [March 7] an unmarked transport plane was on the runway at Borispol Airport (above) [east of Kiev]. According to airport staff, before the plane came to the airport, four trucks and two Volkswagen minibuses arrived, all the truck license plates missing.

    Fifteen people in black uniforms, masks, and body armor stepped out, some armed with machine guns. They loaded the plane with more than 40 heavy boxes.

    After that a mysterious man arrived and entered the plane.

    All loading was done in a hurry.

    The plane took off on an emergency basis.

    Those who saw this mysterious special operation immediately notified the airport officials, who told the callers not to meddle in other people’s affairs.

    Later a returned call from a senior official of the former Ministry of Revenue reported that tonight, on the orders of one of the new leaders of Ukraine, the United States had taken custody of all the gold reserves in Ukraine.” “ ” , iskra-news.info. Zaporozhye, Ukraine, March 7, 2014, translated from Russian by the Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee Inc (GATA), emphasis added)

    Following this disclosure, GATA’s Secretary Treasurer Chris Powell requested the New Federal Reserve and the US State Department to indicate whether the NY Fed had “taken custody” of Ukraine’s Gold.

    A spokesman for the New York Fed said simply: “Any inquiry regarding gold accounts should be directed to the account holder. You may want to contact the National Bank of Ukraine to discuss this report.”

    GATA’s similar inquiry of last night to the U.S. State Department has not yet prompted any reply.

    http://www.dcclothesline.com/2014/03/16/ukraines-gold-reserves-secretely-flown-confiscated-new-york-federal-reserve-2/

  88. HAPPY ST. PATRICK’S DAY!!
    =====

    Secret of Chicago’s green river: St Patrick’s Day tradition first began when a dye testing for pollution turned emerald if toxic sludge was detected

    The Chicago River’s bright emerald green in honor of St Patrick’s day is a tradition that’s been upheld in the city for more than 50 years – but how did it begin?

    The tradition has its origins in the city’s efforts to detect illegal sewage dumping back in 1962.

    Plumbers would use fluorescein dye along the river, which would turn bright green if toxic sludge was detected.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2581704/Chicago-River-dyed-green-St-Patricks-Day.html#ixzz2wDWn9WOx

  89. Here we Go, now we’ll see what Russia does back….idiots.

    Reuters: EU agrees to impose sanctions against 21 Ukrainian and Russian officials including travel bans and asset freezes

  90. Commander of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet (and this c/o of troops who invaded #crimea 2+ weeks ago) put on EU sanctions list.

    The response from Russia is not going to be pretty……

  91. The billionaire financier told The Daily Beast that European governments should have seized on Russia’s land grab in Crimea to breathe new life into a union that is disintegrating and stumbling towards oblivion. Instead, he argued, squabbling European nations have failed to meet the challenge and continued to act in their own narrow self-interest. “Europe was totally unprepared for this crisis and Putin outmaneuvered Europe with no difficulty,” he said.
    ——————-
    The mindset you see here is precisely what I described above:

    One of the interesting trends here is that in the past the system of international law and international governing bodies has rested on the bedrock of sovereignty, whereas today under Obama, there is an elite class of billionaires, Davos men, and international bureaucrats who see sovereignty as THE PROBLEM, and, in its more virulent form, the cause of the wars of annihilation of the twentieth century. George Soros, Chairman Mo, and others are leading exponents of this view. They dream a word market regulated by world bodies where goods and labor flow freely throughout the world, and where the governing elite acquires the status of Mandarins.

    In the process, they discount the influence of history, culture and religion on human behavior. However, those forces are most definitely in play here. He should no better. Soros cannot manage the domestic squabbles in his own bedroom, where his mistress sued his ass in Superior Court. Part of the reason he is miffed about this is his own CIA unit, the one that he and Brzeznski used to overthrow the governments in eastern Europe after the collapse of the Soviet Union was countered masterfully by Putin, thus producing the exact response from a former Nazi collaborator like him to freeze asset. All you need to do to do that is push a button, with no repercussions.

    His entire premise, i.e. that world bodies will supercede nation states as the ultimate source of authority is doomed to failure for the foreseeable. But in pursuit of that false god, this asshole is perfectly willing to destroy the United States, crash the British pound (in 1992) and generate the Asian crisis (1998) and claim to a reporter that the old Soviet Empire is now the Soros empire, run by crony capitalists like him, and his puppet on a string, Obama.

  92. White House: President Obama freezes assets of #Russia officials involved #Crimea incursion

    this is going to get out of hand and we have an asshole in charge…..

    Putin is going to whallop back and whallop hard.

  93. If you’re not fired up about getting health care advice Beyonce, Scarlet Johanson, and other hollywood types, not to worry. Basketball stars are available to advise us, as well. In fairness, the profession of the advisor is not a big deal. What matters is that they have a thorough understanding of health care and insurance in general, and Ocare, specifically – oh wait, they don’t.

    -________________

    March 16, 2014, 07:45 pm
    “White House courting basketball fans in ObamaCare push”

    Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/health-reform-implementation/200945-white-house-targeting-basketball-fans-in-o#ixzz2wEXqMpTU

  94. Obama’s Change is Coming to the Heartland – Mega Mosque Construction to Begin

    What the good people of Memphis, TN may be asking themselves now is what will be the size of the population bomb that is about to go off in their city and from which Middle East nation will it be imported?

    As a designated “gateway city,” it’s Memphis’ turn to join its sister city Nashville in being the recipient of an unwanted sudden explosion in their population of Islamists, some of whom will likely fall into the new “minor terrorist” category recently created by the occupant of the White House.

    Plans are approved and the wheels are in motion for The Memphis Islamic Center. Construction should begin in just a few short months for the first phase of a $6.5 million recreational center in Shelby County.

    Bids are being solicited from general contractors now for the project, which includes a multi-function hall, indoor gym, exercise rooms, classrooms, daycare center, library and mosque space. The new construction will be adjacent to an existing 6,000 square foot facility, ultimately encompassing over 60,000 square feet of space.

    Dr. Bashar Shala, chairman of the MIC board said that the project is expected to take three to five years to complete and is to be open to the entire Memphis community. He said, “We hope this building will help us build bridges between the Muslim community and the community at large.”

    Though not presently a part of the project, Shala said there are tentative plans to incorporate an elderly care center as well as a community medical facility.

    The project engineer and architect is a Memphis company, Pickering Firm Inc.

    http://www.conservativeinfidel.com/obama/obamas-change-is-coming-to-the-heartland-mega-mosque-construction-to-begin/

  95. I hope any pinkers in LA don’t get any larger earthquakes than the 4.4 that might have hit you this morning.

  96. remember when MO recently essentially said young people had to be brainwashed to buy Ocare because they were “knucklheads”…

    well…they, those “knucklehead” kids, and we, are not quite as stupid as O, MO and their crew and marketeers think we are…

    http://www.reviewjournal.com/opinion/we-re-young-we-aren-t-stupid

    We’re young, but we aren’t stupid

    By EVAN FEINBERG
    SPECIAL TO THE REVIEW-JOURNAL

    The White House is desperate to sign up Nevada’s Millennials for Obamacare. With the March 31 enrollment deadline closing fast, the latest figures show that only 22 percent of the state’s Obamacare sign-ups are between ages 18 and 34. That’s a far cry from the 40 percent that the White House wants.

    Blame the Obamacare marketing team. Since the exchanges launched in October, the team’s attempts to persuade us to sign up have been inappropriate, incoherent and simply insulting.

    The list of examples is long and painful, but the “Brosurance” ads, which have gone viral across the country, are the most famous flop by far. In print and social media, these ads paint the picture of Millennials as drunks and dolts.

    One ad shows three young men — “bros” — doing a keg stand. Its tagline: “Don’t tap into your beer money to cover those medical bills.” Another tries to link flu shots to liquor shots. The worst ad shows a guy and a girl about to hook up. It reads, “I hope he’s as easy to get as this birth control.”

    This insulted more Millennials than it convinced. The spots ultimately reached a huge portion of the youth market, but only because the outrage was so intense that the ads were lampooned on national television. When Comedy Central showed the ads to a group of 20-somethings, every last one expressed disgust and disappointment.

    Those same Millennials were likely left scratching their heads at some of the White House’s other marketing ploys.

    Take the recent Magic Johnson ad, for instance. It was clearly made by someone who doesn’t understand anyone younger than 30. Most Millennials don’t even know who Magic Johnson is. He retired in 1991. Today’s college students were all born after that, meaning they couldn’t tell you if he played baseball, basketball, or maybe cricket.

    Other ads have drawn scorn and ridicule. The “pajama boy” social media campaign led to scathing responses from the media for making Millennials look self-absorbed and annoying. The “Mom jeans” campaign tried, and failed, to link health coverage with awkward-fitting pants. The case for health care had never been less clear.

    One of the administration’s allies, Get Covered America, took the confusion a step further. It created a two-minute original song featuring singing cats, dogs, and birds. Intended to spark a nationwide increase in enrollments, the ad was greeted by silence, receiving only 60,000 views on YouTube.

    Given such pitiful attempts at reaching the young and the healthy, it’s no surprise that Millennials haven’t responded by signing up for Obamacare in droves. In reality, it’s too expensive for too many Millennials — and none of the marketing campaigns have been slick enough to bury this fact.

    Obamacare leaves the average 27 year old facing a gender-averaged 47.5 percent premium increase, according to Forbes. Even after subsidies, that’s an expense that many Millennials can’t afford.

    Perversely, such high costs make it even harder for us to purchase health insurance in the future, when we can afford it. By not signing up for expensive plans now, insurance rates will increase as soon as next year — for everyone. That leaves us with two choices: Buy an unaffordable plan now, or wait and buy an unaffordable plan later.

    Our only remaining option is to opt out of Obamacare entirely. If the latest numbers are any indication, that’s exactly what Millennials in Nevada are doing. We know a bad deal when we see one —and we’re not as dumb as Obamacare’s marketers seem to think.

    Evan Feinberg is the President of Generation Opportunity.

  97. Shadowfax…i miss alot of things about LA but not the quakes…although, imho…hurricanes are worse…they go on forever…

    but one never, ever gets used to that unpredicable sudden shaking, especially when they hit when it is dark…or you are asleep…and that’s when they usually hit…

  98. S

    Yes S, the worse is in the dark. You have to wake up, your heart is pounding through your chest, gather your family and get the heck out of your home.

    CA is due for the big one, and we have worried about it for decades.

  99. yes, Shadowfax…the threat of the big one is very scary…

    i went thru Northridge quake while living in Santa Monica and the building went off the foundation 2 feet front and 3 feet on side…I could not even get out…had to wait for them to break the doors in and to had to crawl out in pj’s…

    very scary…then got caught up in Wilma hurricane in Fla then went on for over six hours … stuck in fear for hours praying the building won’t blow away with you in it…in a hurricane there is no where to run…you are stuck…

  100. Reuters: Russian news agency RIA reports Russian President Vladimir Putin has signed an order recognising Crimea as a sovereign state

    Game,set and match to Putin.

  101. Exclusive: Russia Will Sanction U.S. Senators

    Putin is set to respond to Obama’s sanctions of Russian officials with his own list. Several U.S. Senators and officials will be banned from visiting Russia, including Sen. Dick Durbin.

    U.S. senators, congressmen and top Obama administration officials are sure to be on Vladimir Putin’s sanctions list; a response to the Obama Administration’s announcement on Monday that 7 Russian officials and 4 Ukrainian officials would be barred from holding assets or traveling to the United States.

    Putin is expected to release his retaliation list as early as Tuesday and while the final list is still being crafted, it will include top Obama administration officials and high profile U.S. senators, in an effort to roughly mirror the U.S. sanctions against Russian officials and lawmakers, according to diplomatic sources. At the top of the list in Congress is Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin, who recently co-authored a resolution criticizing Russia’s invasion of Crimea.

    More: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/03/17/russia-will-sanction-u-s-officials.html

  102. Putin is set to respond to Obama’s sanctions of Russian officials with his own list. Several U.S. Senators and officials will be banned from visiting Russia, including Sen. Dick Durbin.
    ——————-
    No.

    This time, Vladimir has gone too far.

    Rather than banning that Illinois Combine prick.

    He was supposed to let him in and send him to the Gulag where he belongs.

    Can’t do that if you never let him in.

    I wonder if I have standing to protest this decision.

    If the NAACP has standing to protest the Republican Party before the United Nations.

    Then surely the millions of people aggrieved by the very existence of Dickhead Durbin

    No relation to Deanna Durbin

    Before that same ridiculous body,

    To whom Durbins boss

    Tell Vlad I will have more flexibility after the election Obama

    Wants to cede our soverignty

  103. I don’t think there has ever been a more RIDICULOUS critter in the White House than Barack Hussein Obama.

    Since he has failed as president, he is reduced to being the frequent guest of lightweights like Jimmy Fallon on late night comedy shows.

    And why not?

  104. If Vlad had any idea how many patriotic Americans are rooting for him . . . he would be surprised.

    It is hard to worry about a hypothetical enemy 10,000 miles away when you have the enemy within occupying the White House.

    Somehow I think Vlad would understand that.

    Even more surprising, many of us were hard line cold warriors once upon a time.

    We see a connection between Obama’s efforts to control people half way around the globe and his efforts to control us.

    We see the same strategy deployed there that was deployed here in order to install Obama, i.e. the Dean Plan.

    But again, it is not Obama per se.

    He is nothing more than a puppet.

    It is the string pullers I am talking about.

    As in “the old Soviet Empire is now the Soros empire”.

  105. Vlad can rig a vote even better than Obama can.

    98% approval to separate Crimea from Ukraine.

    And he did it without big media running interference for him.

    I am sure Obama and Soros are envious.

    I am equally sure that Soros will adopt this as his new template

    For stealing future elections.

  106. Take the recent Magic Johnson ad, for instance. It was clearly made by someone who doesn’t understand anyone younger than 30. Most Millennials don’t even know who Magic Johnson is.

  107. Well, it’s almost over but Happy St. Patrick’s Day to all!

    Foxy, that “if you like your pot of gold” funny was an absolute crackup.

    Re: the really crappy, insulting ads for Ocare – I just don’t get it. Obviously the product ain’t great, and the price is too high, so it would be a hard sell to anyone. But, there are talented ad people who can create commercials that will sell electric heaters to the occupants of hell, and there are currently some really creative, well-written, persuasive ads for everything from car insurance to floor cleaner. You would think that given the money spent by the Obama peeps to push Ocare, they could find someone who could create a decent advertisement.

    Don’t get me wrong. The product would still be crappy, and would still not likely sell. I’m talking only about how bad the ads are, and how out of touch they are with their target audience.

  108. National Journal goes Big Pink:

    http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/hillary-clinton-steps-away-from-obama-on-foreign-policy-20140317

    Hillary Clinton Steps Away From Obama on Foreign Policy
    She rolls out tough rhetoric on Russia as the president treads lightly with Putin.

    In recent weeks, as the standoff over Ukraine escalated, Hillary Clinton did something that she never did as secretary of State: She put considerable distance between herself and the president she served loyally for four years. While Barack Obama cautiously warned Vladimir Putin to back off his claims on Ukraine, Clinton rolled out a rhetorical cannon, comparing the Russian president’s moves to the seizure of territory by Adolf Hitler that set off World War II. Her comments were so harsh and controversial that she was forced to walk them back a bit, saying, “I’m not making a comparison, certainly, but I am recommending that we perhaps can learn from this tactic that has been used before.”

    Clinton’s remarks appeared to be an indication of two things. One, she’s concerned enough about shoring up her reputation for toughness that she may indeed be thinking about running for president in 2016. Clinton offered up, in other words, a rare and enticing hint about the question that everyone in the politics game is asking these days. Undoubtedly she knows that the effort she led as secretary of State in 2009, an attempted “reset” of relations with Russia that included a new arms treaty, now looks naive in the face of Putin’s repudiation of Obama over Ukraine and his lack of cooperation on other issues, such as resolution of the Syrian civil war. Two, Clinton could be worried that by the time the next presidential season rolls around, what was once seen as one of Obama’s stronger points—foreign policy—could easily become a liability to whomever is seeking the Democratic nomination.[snip]

    Putin’s continued recalcitrance, and Obama’s hesitancy over how to react to the biggest foreign policy test of his presidency, is only the capstone to a series of apparent failures and abortive efforts to avert war in Syria, resolve the situation in Afghanistan, and tamp down the resurgence of al-Qaida. If, as is likely, Russian forces are still occupying Crimea come 2016—or worse, advancing westward—if chaos and bloodshed still reign in Syria, and if Afghanistan begins to look as chaotic as Iraq has in the aftermath of the planned U.S. troop withdrawal at the end of this year, the narrative will be very different in the next presidential campaign.

    Republican attacks on Obama in recent months are an early indication of what’s to come. Sen. John McCain, Obama’s 2008 opponent, has been almost beside himself with fury in condemning the president as weak on Ukraine, Syria, China, and Iran. With negotiations failing over Syria, Egypt becoming a military-run state, and Putin indicating he intends to stay where he is in Crimea, the killing of bin Laden will be but a distant memory in 2016. Even some prominent Democrats, such as Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Robert Menendez, have turned into persistent critics of Obama’s policies abroad. “Our policies toward Russia require urgent reexamination,” Menendez wrote in The Washington Post this week.

    “It’s absolutely true that things are tough for the president all around right now, whereas before, his foreign policy and relations with the world were one of the high points for a long time,” Campbell says. “She can credibly create the separation for herself. It’s going to be a lot tougher for Vice President Biden.”

    Hillary Clinton 2016 must run from and attack Barack Obama on foreign policy and domestic policy – especially the ObamaCare scam.

  109. It’s absolutely true that things are tough for the president all around right now, whereas before, his foreign policy and relations with the world were one of the high points for a long time,”
    ——————-
    What?

    Before this, his foreign policy performance was one of the high points for a long time?

    Oh give me a break.

    A couple years ago, someone asked Kissinger to evaluate Obama’s foreign policy.

    Weakness ever where I look–he replied.

    And retreat–as we saw in Syria.

    Far from a high point, his prior actions were an open invitation for Putin to do what he did.

    And now things are tough you say?

    Wrong again.

    He is boxed in by his own prior actions.

  110. The trend line here is interesting. Obama has pretty much eliminated white men and married women from the base. The base is now minorities and single women.

    And, interestingly enough, one of the key factions in that base has stepped into the shoes of white people and is bearing the brunt of affirmative action policies—and they are not happy about it. California is ground zero.

    ——————————–

    Asian-American Voters Thwarting Affirmative Action Push in California
    Reliable Liberal Voters Hate Actions That Affirmatively Shortchange Their Children

    By: Repair_Man_Jack (Diary) | March 17th, 2014 at 09:30 PM | 8

    Voters typically vote Democrat because they expect to be given something. The current coalition empowering Democratic victories is a Visigoth Holiday at taxpayer expense. The Democrats have a problem when they run out of White, Republican taxpayers to flense in order to finance the unabated stream of candy. In California; they’ve just about run out of Republicans period. This has caused them to have to cannibalize their own. When the beer party starts charging for the adult beverages, a funny thing happens. In California, that funny thing is happening to the Affirmative Action Amendment that was supposed to overturn Proposition 209.

  111. When I say that the base of the party is now minorities, this does not preclude the possibility of attracting white voters if the policies are the right ones. In unions, there are some white yellow dogs, but not like before. Yes, Obama has been the change agent he said he would be, but only in a negative sense.

  112. S

    Yea, anyone that’s lived in CA has been in one of the memerable ones, one way or the other. You had an angel on your shoulder, in LA and Fla.

    You don’t mess with Mother Nature.

  113. Leanora March 15, 2014 at 3:31 pm

    Obama’s Orwellian View Of Freedom

    Liberty: President Obama wants Democrats to reclaim the word “freedom” as their own…

    “we’ve let the other side define the word ‘freedom’ for too long.” Then, as he often does, Obama set up a straw man argument, claiming to Republicans freedom means “what’s in it for me?” or “I’ve got no obligations to anybody.”

    Maybe Republicans aren’t the only ones to have this idea of irresponsible freedom, but it is certainly very American.

    So what is “freedom,” Mr. Obama?

    …. Everything Obama describes is based on government programs or intrusive market regulation.

    This isn’t new ­ FDR had the same view of freedom when he put forward his socialistic Bill of Economic Rights that included the right to “protection from economic fears.”

    This is quite true about FDR. He was advised by socialists and was among the most popular and successful presidents we’ve ever had. And he did propose a “Bill of Economic Rights”, which he did not live to see passed into law, but which would have brought the Constitution forward into the 20th century.

    The “Bill of Economic Rights” would have served as a basis for universal health care, among other things, which Republicans oppose… why? Because Republicans, and conservatives in general equate less law and regulations with more freedom.

    You can see this in the article you quote, where the author inserts the spin word “intrusive” in front of “market regulation”. There is no such thing as a regulation that is not intrusive, so the word is unnecessary and plays on the American reader’s penchant for privacy.

    This argument favoring small government in the name of freedom is pernicious and should be criticized vigorously. Mitt Romney said several times that “the markets need regulation” and I thought maybe the Republican party was coming out of its long-term darkness on this theme. But no, his statement just lost him the enthusiasm of the right wing of his party.

    Obama doesn’t explain his idea of freedom well, mainly because he frames his definition in terms of not losing health insurance, which is contradictory with Obamacare in which a lot of people are losing their insurance.

    However, his basic idea that Democrats should reclaim the word “freedom” from the doldrums of the “small government” crowd (mainly Libertarians and Tea Party) is spot on. Sorry to have to say it, but Obama is not always 100% wrong on everything.

    And when we express the wish to see “the Democratic Party of FDR, JFK and HRC” revived and returned to the White House, we should take a good look at what we are asking for: Think about FDR in particular.

  114. Lu4PUMA March 16, 2014 at 10:49 am

    More scientist than politician, I fail to see Obamacare as an insurmountable problem for HRC. To date, it has been handled as an emotional issue and I think she has the key to sorting things at as the metrics…. she can effectively evade the issue until there are…. could effectively and successfully navigate the shark filled waters around it…. demonstrate effective bi-partisan leadership.

    Bravo, Lu4PUMA, I certainly couldn’t have said it better. I am also more scientist than politician, but wbboei is not:

    wbboei March 16, 2014 at 11:04 am

    Under laboratory conditions, perhaps. But in the cauldron of politics, where fear and greed rule the day, no. There is no room for objective debate in the political process….

    This is just too cynical for me. If we rule out objective debate and play around with fear and greed, there’s no reason to support HRC because metrics and debate are her tools and she is not driven by greed nor deterred by fear. You are arguing that there is no place for her in the political maelstrom or in the hearts of Americans, whereas, at this point, she is (still) the most popular politician in America.

  115. wbboei March 16, 2014 at 3:12 pm

    the senate if the elections were held tomorrow:

    52 R
    44 D
    4 undecided

    … a landslide…. will set the right forces in motion: Faced with imminent death, panicking democrats will crawl to Hillary.

    And Hillary will have the latitude to begin talking about change, rather than stay the course.

    And moononpluto agrees with you:

    moononpluto March 16, 2014 at 3:54 pm

    … if Nov turns into a total meltdown for Dems, Obama will be swept aside and castigated….

    The Clintons will effectively take over the party on that day and motions for 2016 will be kicked in.

    The Clintons will have to run on a rebuilding and restructure theme for the whole party and the Dem party knows it.

    Considering that you’re both more politically astute than I, and your picture makes sense, anyway, so I hope you’re right.

    Only one possible hitch that I can see: If the Rs control the Senate plus the House, they will be in a position to impeach Obama for one or more of his many sins. That leaves us with Biden and the whole 2016 picture turns sour… again.

  116. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/03/17/republicans-seize-edge-in-the-fight-for-the-senate-majority/

    The Senate playing field has shifted in Republicans’ favor over the last several weeks thanks to recruiting successes in Colorado and New Hampshire, as well as a national political environment that looks increasingly treacherous for Democrats.

    That shifting has led to rising confidence among Republican strategists about the party’s chances of retaking the six seats the party needs to regain the Senate majority in 2014. [snip]

    Even Democrats have begun to acknowledge the problems in the fight for the Senate — albeit privately.

    “There is no doubt that the Senate outlook has deteriorated significantly in the past six weeks,” admitted a prominent Democratic strategist. “Between the map and the [Affordable Care Act’s] unpopularity in the states on the map, it has gone from being a jump ball to advantage Republicans.”

    Viewed broadly, there are now 11 Democratic-held seats in varying levels of peril — and 12 if you consider the Virginia seat held by Sen. Mark Warner. [snip]

    That broader playing field matters for two big reasons. First, it gives Republicans a wider margin for error. [snip]

    Second, a broader playing field — particularly in expensive media markets like Boston’s, which covers the southern half of New Hampshire, Denver and, possibly, Washington, D.C. — means that Senate Democrats and their corresponding outside groups will have their dollars stretched as they attempt to retain the majority. [snip]

    And, it’s not simply that there are more Republican opportunities on the board. It’s that a closer look at the 11/12 competitive seats suggests that where and how the races are playing out makes the GOP’s hand even stronger. In three states — Montana, South Dakota and West Virginia — independent handicappers like Charlie Cook and Stu Rothenberg rate Republicans as favorites to take over. If you accept that premise — and we do, although Montana has the potential to be more competitive than the other two — that means Republicans must win three out the following eight states to win back the majority: Arkansas, Alaska, Colorado, Iowa, Louisiana, Michigan, New Hampshire and North Carolina.

    Of those eight states, Mitt Romney carried four of them — Arkansas, Alaska, Louisiana and North Carolina — in his unsuccessful bid for president in 2012. He won 45 percent in Michigan in 2012 and 46 percent in Colorado, Iowa and New Hampshire. In short, none of this octet of states are solidly Democratic. And, if Republicans were only to win the states that Romney carried in 2012 — a reasonable prospect given the national political environment (more on that below) — they will be in the majority come 2015.

    Step back from that granular look at the states and you see a national picture dominated, at the moment, by two things: The unpopularity of President Obama and the unpopularity of the Affordable Care Act.

    The Real Clear Politics polling average puts Obama’s job approval at 42.9 percent, a dangerously low spot for his party if history is any guide. Ben Highton, writing on the indispensable Monkey Cage blog, notes that:

    Presidential approval is strongly correlated with midterm congressional election outcomes. [snip]

    Obama’s unpopularity is matched by the continued unpopularity of his signature health-care law. In a recent NBC-Wall Street Journal national poll, just 35 percent of those surveyed said the Affordable Care Act was a good idea, while 49 percent said it was a bad one. Dig deeper and the Democrats’ political problem with the law becomes clearer. Twenty-six percent of people felt strongly that Obamacare was a good law, while 42 percent felt strongly that it was not.

    And, it’s not just polling data where Democrats’ problems are becoming apparent. In the House special election in Florida’s 13th District last Tuesday, Republican candidate David Jolly — and a panoply of outside groups that came in to support him — ran on a message focused relentlessly on the Affordable Care Act.

    Jolly’s victory over Democrat Alex Sink in a district that Obama won twice and that Sink herself carried when she was the Democratic gubernatorial nominee in 2010 has made Democrats even more skittish about the political peril present for them in the midterms, and increased Republicans’ confidence about their chances of solidifying their House majority and retaking the Senate.

    Add it all up and you have a shift in the battle for the Senate majority. What began as a toss-up has now tilted in favor of Republicans taking the Senate majority this November.

    Whistling past the Obama/ObamaCare graveyard is not a wise tactic or strategy. Hillary Clinton 2016 better stop whistling and start running from the Obama/ObamaCare graveyard.

  117. Obama/ObamaCare will be worse for those running in 2016 than even in the very bad year of 2014. Hillary Clinton 2016 should think about the below and innoculate itself before it is too late. Stop whistling past the ObamaCare graveyard and run away fast:

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/03/15/the_health_care_numbers_are_stacked_against_obama_121941.html

    The Health Care Numbers Are Stacked Against Democrats

    Critics contended that perhaps a million of those who enrolled shouldn’t be counted because they haven’t paid their premiums. That means the official numbers are overstated and will almost certainly be revised downward by a wide margin. Additionally, it appears that the vast majority of those signing up had insurance before the president’s law was passed. Only about a million were previously uninsured.

    Both sides are so busy arguing the details that they’ve missed the larger picture. It’s not how they spin the numbers that matters; it’s the reality of how the numbers affect the American people. From that perspective, the numbers are far more troubling for Obama’s team.

    While political insiders debate the significance of the 4.2 million people that enrolled through the exchanges, 10 times as many have either been forced into a new plan or been notified that their plans will have to change. That number is certain to grow. Some will find comparable plans, and some won’t. All are nervous.

    Obama supporters dismiss these concerns because they believe the new insurance coverage will be superior. In some cases, they will be right. But they seem to think that having the government mandate a product that is better for some is more important than letting individuals choose their own insurance plans. A recent New York Times column, written by an Obama adviser involved in designing the law, went so far as to say, “In health care, choice is overrated.”

    That attitude is the heart of the problems facing the health care law in the real world. Americans are used to making such choices on their own. If, for example, people had a choice between paying a lower premium and having to switch doctors, many people would select that option. Others would choose to keep their doctors and pay more. Being able to decide is more important than the end result.

    And the vast majority of Americans believe they have the right to do so. Another New York Times column, by David Brooks, correctly noted that “millions of Americans — and not just Tea Party types — do not accept the legitimacy of the government to overrule individual decisions, even on something like health insurance.”

    The political problems for Democrats are compounded by a reality that every retailer knows. Disgruntled customers are nine times as likely to talk about their experiences as happy customers. For the president’s law, that means most Americans are far more likely to hear of unhappy encounters with the new health care law than anything else. Personal testimonies of troubles will be seen as far more credible than media coverage or political rhetoric.

    Obama’s law has upset tens of millions of Americans by eliminating their right to choose while providing insurance for perhaps a million previously uninsured Americans. Those are the numbers that spell trouble for the Democrats in November.

    The new pro-choice movement.

  118. The element of choice is tantamount in attacking the worst public policy debacle in the history of this country. The administration is still harping on the “cheapness” and “affordability” of the premiums. And the piddly, grossly over-stated and over-marketed “exchange” subsidies are pittances. The insurance could be free, literally no cost in monthly premiums, and it would still be worthless with the grotesque deductibles and co-pays calculated per person annually. The wretched and incompetent websites (all of them are terrible and you will start seeing lawsuits against the states soon for medically harming people) was the high point. The public is finally figuring out that Obamacare will bankrupt them personally and nationally. This entire overturning of the health system of the US was just another rent seeking scam for corrupt Democrats to skim off money just like the carbon tax market that they failed to get enacted. The insurance and health care corporations were hooked by the promise of enormous profits with just a tiny cut for the Democrats. The Democrats saw money, patronage, and power over the public. What could go wrong? This is Chicago graft gone national.

  119. This is just too cynical for me. If we rule out objective debate and play around with fear and greed, there’s no reason to support HRC
    ————————-
    We are not talking about individual behavior. Individual behavior can see shades of grey, even justice. But people in groups are a completely different story. Wall Street knows this. So did Aristotle–ethos, pathos, logos. So did Marc Anthony–friends Romans countrymen . . . mischief thou art afoot. So did Mencken: patriotism is the last bastion of scoundrels. And so does every Yankee fan when their team plays in Fenway Park.

    The fact that it is a frustration to you–and an even greater frustration to me, as evidenced by my continuing and tedious to some rant against the beltway denizons who still love Obama, and the fact that it is one of the great human flaws in the tragic view of human nature does not make it any less of a fact.

    But it is no less of a fact that these determinants of group behavior can in fact operate to Hillary’s advantage. Roughly half the electorate is on some form of government assistance. Few of them care about Benghazi. And even though there. The next Republican candidate will be compelled to cut government and social programs, upon which many of them depend.

    One evening twenty years ago, I happened to be at a party at the home of a partner in Ted Cruz’s future law firm, Morgan Lewis and Bockius, for whom I have the highest respect. This was a neighborhood affair, no black tie deal. Everyone in that home except for me was a democrat. And every one of them was appopletic over what Newt had done, and none of them saw how adeptly Bill had outsmarted him. My friend was in Newt’s inner circle, he called her Atilla the Hun, and even she saw what power did to Newt. She was a highly principled conservative, which drove big media nuts, so much so that one time we went to a restaurant, and began talking politics, people at other tables recognized her and got up and left. We found it safer as well as more convenient to retire to the Congressional dining room.

    So when we say that groups of people are capable of making informed, evidence based decisions, I say if only that were true. The Dean Plan which was the electioneering stratagem of Soros in getting Obama installed operates on the precise opposite. My sense is that the 2016 election will turn out to be the most bitter and acrimonious in this nation’s history, because a large part of the electorate is unemployed, and/or in financial difficulty. Therefore, they will believe in their hearts that their survival depends on getting their candidate elected.

    As to your final point, your analysis is always excellent and well thought through. In some ways you have an advantage over the rest of us, because living abroad, you have access to a wider range of information than we do here, thanks to the predations of big media (there I go again, but I cannot help it, its true). But living abroad, you cannot feel it the way you would if you were here, watching a system of ordered liberty which has brought freedom and prosperity to millions be systematically dismembered by a man who in his heart hates white people and this country, if the truth were known.

  120. FTA – “before they came here to the White House, Mrs. Robinson had not done any travel internationally”. Well of course not. She would have had to pay for it herself!!!
    =======

    WH: ‘Real Treat’ for Michelle Obama to Take Her Mom and Daughters to China

    First lady Michelle Obama “has been looking for an opportunity to go to China,” a White House official said on Monday. And she considers it a “real treat” to take her daughters and her mother with her — a trip she’s making at considerable expense to taxpayers, although the White House refused to give a dollar figure.

    “You know, the first lady has talked about the importance of young people here in the United States learning about other cultures. She believes that about her own children, and has seen this as a really unique opportunity to share a very different part of the world with her two daughters and with her mother as well,” Mrs. Obama’s Chief of Staff Tina Tchen told a conference call on Monday.

    “I think, as she said before, before they came here to the White House, Mrs. Robinson had not done any travel internationally, so the opportunities when she’s been able to do that have been a real treat, I think, for Mrs. Robinson, for the first lady, for her daughters as well to travel together and to see these places and experience them together.”

    See more at: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/wh-real-treat-michelle-obama-take-her-mom-and-daughters-china#sthash.LMxEcJbB.dpuf

  121. There is one element missing from wbboei’s and moononpluto’s doomsday-to-salvation theorem of how HRC will recoup the losses of 2014 in 2016, and that is that Ready for Hillary is gearing up to get involved in the 2014 races:

    http://www.sacbee.com/2014/03/17/6244124/hillary-clinton-supporters-to.html

    Kirsten Kukowski, a spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee, said it appears that outside groups, including Ready for Hillary, are merely trying to fill a void left by a “nonexistent” Democratic National Committee, which is nearly $16 million in debt. In recent weeks, the DNC has announced plans to ramp up its efforts to support Democrats running for office up and down the ballot.

    “Anything we can do to get more people involved,” she said. “There are so many (people) that might not give to the Democratic Party but will give to Ready for Hillary.”

    If she runs for president, Clinton could benefit from having helped Democrats in 2014.

    “They’re aren’t many national figures as popular as her,” he said. “Anybody should be getting as much Hillary Clinton as they can right now.”

    The article adds:

    Some candidates are already distancing themselves from Obama in places that Clinton remains popular.

  122. This is quite true about FDR. He was advised by socialists and was among the most popular and successful presidents we’ve ever had. And he did propose a “Bill of Economic Rights”, which he did not live to see passed into law, but which would have brought the Constitution forward into the 20th century.
    —————————————
    Yes. He did provide an economic bill of rights, and he believed the Constitution of Madison was a constraint upon government. His ideological successor Earl Warren spoke of a living constitution, as opposed to the original one, which in the purple prose of Power was an eternal verity which applies backward and forward with equal dignity, amplified by the comment of Justice Jackson, the goat of Nurenmberg that the Supreme Court is not final because it is infallible, but infallible because it is final. The missing elements in all this are, first apart from Natural Law which was negated by Legal Positivism, only to be revived with the State rather than God as the law giver, every new right defined by the legislature or the courts, implies a reciprocal obligation on someone else to pay for it, or to curtail their own liberty to make room for it. Therefore, where should that authority to make such laws be vested, through what sort of process, and should politics or justice be the criterion. The more we expand government, the more control we give to a Bevy of Platonic Guardians and a faces army of bureaurats with a gaze blank and pittliless as the sun.

  123. Wbboei, it becomes harder to make sense of what Obama does if one takes out the probability that his aim is destruction of this country. We’ve noted this before, in for instance articles about Egypt in which we pointed out that Obama defends the Muslim Brotherhood for actions he demanded American ally Mubarack be thrown out for. We never thought we would reach that conclusion but on issue after issue that “God Damn America” mentality of Obama’s is the only way to understand what he does.

    Here’s Pat Caddell:

    http://nicedeb.wordpress.com/2014/03/17/pat-caddell-the-government-has-decided-to-surrender-the-country-video/

    Fox News’ Political Insiders, Pat Caddell, Doug Schoen, John LeBoutillier joined Harris Faulkner, Sunday evening to talk about the big news stories, this week – starting with the missing Malaysian airliner and then moving on to the Obama administration’s decision to give up control of the internet, always leading from behind on the world stage and letting Putin eat their lunch, and finishing on domestic politics. [snip]

    The Insiders unanimously disapproved of the Regime’s plan to give up control of the internet, calling it a huge national security risk. Schoen, said, “again, our government is silent.”

    But ”it’s worse than silent”, Caddell piped in. “Let’s understand something. They do what they do all the time, which is surrender whatever advantages the country has – whichever advantages, wherever we dominate – their idea is – we should get out, we should lead from behind, we should give it up, and just like they let Eastern Europe go, they’re letting the internet go….This government in Washington, and I hate to say, our party, has decided to surrender the country. The internet is just part of it.”

    LeBoutillier called what is going on since Obama bowed out of the space race, “a pattern of retreat and psychological surrender.” And Caddell lamented that the Republican party won’t fight for any of these things.

    The insiders then took turns slamming Sec. of State John Kerry for his latest weak inanities vis a vis the Ukraine.

    There is also this important fact about the Florida elections that we have neglected to give its proper due to but which Caddell nicely points out – the role of the Libertarian and the bumbling Republicans.

    After the break, they shared their thoughts on the Jolly win in Florida. Schoen called it an a “huge huge setback for Democrats.”

    Caddell said, “this race would have been 7 points without the libertarian (which somehow the Democrats always manage to have in the race – Republicans are too stupid to have Green Party people) but what you had there was a terrible candidate – a lobbyist for God’s sake – running instead of an insurgent – against a candidate that almost won for Governor – was quite good and was expected to win.”

    “Here’s the thing”, he continued, “Democrats said, we’ve got this slogan, we’re going to fix ObamaCare yet the Republicans let them get away with the fact that they never proposed any solutions …and on the other side the Republicans refused to have something to replace ObamaCAre with.

    The spin that the Florida race was close leaves out that if the Libertarian was not in the race Sink would have been sunken deeper and sank lower. Republicans better see that third party candidates are being used and funded by Obama allies in order to try to win elections via subterfuge.

  124. “Sorry to have to say it, but Obama is not always 100% wrong on everything”.
    **********************

    Jeswezey…sooo wrong

  125. admin March 18, 2014 at 5:11 am

    “In health care, choice is overrated.”

    Indeed it is. I made a big spiel about this a few months ago when trying to explain the particular feature of the healthcare “market”.

    When you look at the healthcare “market” from an economist’s – or a businessman’s – viewpoint, you notice a few things that make it a very special market that escapes any attempt to find the “market-based solutions” Republicans are always touting.

    The market looks like this:

    It is absolutely essential to understand that both the Supply and Demand curves for healthcare, as a whole or in any one of its component parts, are vertical straight lines and that a vertical straight line is, in economic parlance, perfectly inelastic. Both the Supply and Demand are perfectly inelastic.

    “Perfectly inelastic” means that people don’t just decide to go out and buy more healthcare if the price goes down, or to refrain from getting an operation if the price is too high. The demand is set: They buy what they need, no more or less.

    The same goes for the Supply. Surgeons don’t just decide to do more brain surgery than gall bladder operations because brain surgery pays better, or to do fewer appendectomies because they don’t pay enough. The supply is set: The surgeon will only deliver what the patient needs, no more or less.

    In healthcare, therefore, as far as determining the treatment itself goes, the “free” market doesn’t exist, nor does “free” competition, “free” enterprise or “free” choice. Talking about market-based solutions is a crock.

    “Choice” is limited only to choosing your doctor, surgeon, nurse or hospital and, in fact, you have very little choice in such matters (with or without the Affordable Care Act) because your insurer is the one that chooses and almost nobody would know how to choose a professional anyway.

    But let’s say for the sake of argument that you do know how to choose a doctor. Why is it then that, in every other country I know (Canada, England, France, Germany, Netherlands, Belgium), no one is stopping you from choosing any doctor you want, even at the other end of the country, whereas in the US, you only get to choose from a handful of practitioners nearby?

    The answer is simple, in economic terms (you want some metrics? Here goes….):

    There are 1600 insurers in the US, currently insuring 250,000,000 people. That means an insurer insures an average of about 130,000 people. Also, these insurers are limited geographically. If they insure people in Florida, they don’t include practitioners in Minnesota and so forth.

    This is much too small a base for any viable insurance company. Even the smallest of the countries I’ve named, Belgium, has a population of 11 million, and all the people are covered. Running an insurance company on such a small population and in a limited geographical area is highly inefficient.

    So, it is delusional to think that because there are 1600 insurers, “free” competition is going to do the trick as it does in so many other markets, and bring down prices.

    So, when the author says

    “That attitude is the heart of the problems facing the health care law in the real world,”

    it is the author that is not living in the real world.

  126. The Duma drew up a draft response denouncing the sanctions Tuesday morning. Olga Batalina, of the ruling United Russia party, said in presenting the statement, “The U.S. has gotten so absorbed with playing the policy of double standards that it has stopped distinguishing black from white and patriots from fascists. They are so convinced of their own impunity that they allow themselves to pursue any stance just for the sake of it.”

    http://hotair.com/archives/2014/03/18/putin-pushes-forward-with-crimea-annexation/

  127. Jeswezey, your comment confuses. While you attack “market-based solutions” as a “crock” you do appear to be making exactly that argument. Your entire comment can easily be viewed as a call for the Republican “market-based solutions” that Obama refused to even listen to.

    First of all your argument that in health care “the Supply and Demand are perfectly inelastic” and that “They [people] buy what they need, no more or less” ignores the fact, yes fact, that with ObamaCare people are getting what Obama is telling them they must get whether they need it or not. Men have to pay for services they don’t need or want, anti-abortion religionists have to pay for such services even if they are opposed to the practice, the young are getting gouged, Medicare recipients are getting robbed, etc., etc.

    As to services rendered (“Supply”) indeed many hospitals and medical practitioners do make decisions (the insurance providers also make these decisions in another layer) for services not needed. Why you insist that “The surgeon [and presumably all medical practitioners] will only deliver what the patient needs, no more or less.” is bewildering. Your “vertical straight lines” really lead nowhere. That last bit is true for the rest of your assertions as well.

    One of the reasons that medical practitioners provide unnecessary services is indeed for profit. That is simply “living in the real world.” Aside from profit another motivation is protection from lawsuits. In America we have lots of big law firms that make a very good living from filing lawsuits. Usually when the law firms litigate on behalf of a patient or a class of patients the lawyers profit nicely (usually having borne the cost) but the client/patient on whose behalf the lawsuit was filed do not do so well. So you see, here in America we have a system in which costs escalate because, unlike in the countries you cite, legal costs are a cost of doing business in an extreme manner. Republicans have long argued for “tort reform” to limit the burden of lawsuits which mostly profit lawyers. Are you making a subtle Republican call for “tort reform” or did you just overlook this aspect of the American health system?

    As to your “metrics” we are especially confused. You surely recall that Republicans proposed repeatedly that insurance companies be allowed to sell insurance anywhere/everywhere they chose to do so. This was a Republican “market-based solution” which you have so derided in the first section of your comment.

    In the end section of your comments however you seem to be fully endorsing the Republican “market-based solution”. If the Republican “market-based solution” had been adopted by Obama and his automaton Dimocrats then your healthcare Nirvana would have come to pass. With this “market-based solution” insurers would not have been “limited geographically”. Insurers would then not be in “too small a base for any viable insurance company.” You are certainly aware that you make the Republican “market-based solution” when you write “Running an insurance company on such a small population and in a limited geographical area is highly inefficient.” Are you really Jeswezey or are you a sly Ted Cruz out to perplex us?

    One last point that you must have missed from one of Wbboei’s recent comments replying to you. The sentence you quote in your penultimate paragraph ends with the words “in the real world.” Wbboei at 7;44 gave a variation of the argument of what happens in the real world versus what planners plan. Sayeth the poet:

    But, Mousie, thou art no thy lane,
    In proving foresight may be vain;
    The best-laid schemes o’ mice an ‘men
    Gang aft agley,
    An’lea’e us nought but grief an’ pain,
    For promis’d joy!

  128. JesW up yonder…

    Only one possible hitch that I can see: If the Rs control the Senate plus the House, they will be in a position to impeach Obama for one or more of his many sins. That leaves us with Biden and the whole 2016 picture turns sour… again.

    —-
    Not necessarily. First, I think the Rs are too weak to do much of anything right, except talk, talk, talk.

    Second, if by some freakin’ miracle they did impeach the fraud, I would say, “Hallelujah, put him in jail.” I digress, if Joe became the step in President, it would be for only part of the term, since it takes awhile to impeach a President.

    I believe, if both houses were in the hands of the Rs at that point, Joe would be smart enough to swing more to the center and just try to keep himself in balance as the Rs toss pies at him. I don’t think Joe would have the guts nor stamina to run against Hillary, and if he did, he would lose.

  129. ‘Most transparent’ White House ever rewrote the FOIA to suppress politically sensitive docs

    It’s Sunshine Week, so perhaps some enterprising White House reporter will ask press secretary Jay Carney why President Obama rewrote the Freedom of Information Act without telling the rest of America.

    The rewrite came in an April 15, 2009, memo from then-White House Counsel Greg Craig instructing the executive branch to let White House officials review any documents sought by FOIA requestors that involved “White House equities.”

    That phrase is nowhere to be found in the FOIA, yet the Obama White House effectively amended the law to create a new exception to justify keeping public documents locked away from the public

    A serious breach

    The Greg memo is described in detail in a new study made public today by Cause of Action, a Washington-based nonprofit watchdog group that monitors government transparency and accountability.

    More @ http://washingtonexaminer.com/most-transparent-white-house-ever-rewrote-the-foia-to-suppress-politically-sensitive-docs/article/2545824

  130. Wbb

    As to your final point, your analysis is always excellent and well thought through. In some ways you have an advantage over the rest of us, because living abroad, you have access to a wider range of information than we do here, thanks to the predations of big media (there I go again, but I cannot help it, its true). But living abroad, you cannot feel it the way you would if you were here, watching a system of ordered liberty which has brought freedom and prosperity to millions be systematically dismembered by a man who in his heart hates white people and this country, if the truth were known.

    —-

    I agree.

  131. admin
    March 18, 2014 at 8:16 am

    —-

    This is one of the best tv discussions I have heard in a very long time.

    If they had something like this on tv weekly, I would speedball home from work to listen to it.

    They touched down on many serious problems Obama has caused, including closing down the Space Program, which is dear to my heart since my dad worked at Cape Canaveral during that time, for NASA.

    Thanks for posting it Admin.

  132. wbboei March 18, 2014 at 7:44 am

    … living abroad, you have access to a wider range of information than we do here, thanks to the predations of big media (there I go again, but I cannot help it, its true)…, you cannot feel it the way you would if you were here….

    You’re right about the predations of big media, I’m with you there. In fact, I think that’s the larger reason why my opinions so often differ from those of others here.

    In other words, while a wider range of experience from living abroad has its importance, it is more decisive still that I am totally removed from the media and have been for more than 41 years now.

    What I see of the media in the occasional videos posted here shocks me by the paucity of information, the spin, and the limited scope of analysis of the journalists – even investigative journalists (are there any left?) and those I can consider objective, like Greta.

    I’m not saying that the news coverage is any better in European TV – I wouldn’t know that either! But since 1972 I’ve picked up my news from reading several newspapers every once in a while when a headline grabs me, but mainly by listening to other people talk about the news, and discussing it with them. That way, I get different vantage points and also get to give some input myself.

    That’s what I do here at HillaryIs44, among other venues. I don’t think it’s that much different from what you do, now that you’ve dropped out of the media world yourself (you said you did that in 2009).

    As to your assertion that I

    “cannot feel it the way you would if you were here, watching a system of ordered liberty that has brought freedom and prosperity to millions be systematically dismembered by a man who… hates,”

    I can only say that I was never favorably impressed with America’s “ordered liberty” even as a child because, as I have pointed out repeatedly here, we have an idea of what I call “unfettered” freedoms, which is irresponsible and antithetical to “ordered liberty”. Seriously, I don’t think you’ll find any visible group in the US to support the idea of “ordered liberty” as it would apply to freedom of speech, internet freedom, gun “rights” or any other rights.

  133. Shadowfax: “I don’t think Joe would have the guts nor stamina to run against Hillary, and if he did, he would lose.”

    Joe is only VP now and he’s already saying there’s nothing stopping him from running in 2016. If he were president, there would be no doubt about it.

    He would lose? Yes; if not to HRC, then definitely in the General Election without a doubt: He would go over as “Obama III” and nobody wants that, not even the dimmest of Dims.
    ********

    On another note: (I’d like your feedback on this) I’ve stopped referring to HRC as “Hillary” because I think it’s sexist. Women in the public eye are always referred to by their first names, sometimes with the family name as an afterthought, while men are referred to by their family name alone.

    There’s some logic to this, because traditionally a man has the same name all his life while a woman will change her last name when she marries. Already, I disagree with that tradition.

    In the case of Warren, Klobuchar, McCaskill, Feinstein, Boxer, actually, the last names would suffice but people always add the first name. Not so with men.

    In the case of HRC, “Clinton” is usually not enough because you often have to distinguish her from her husband; so you say “Hillary Clinton” and your back to the paradigm of the woman’s first name. Plus, “Hillary” alone is enough because the name is unusual and everyone knows who you’re talking about. So there, the male politicians are called by their last names alone and HRC is called by her first name alone. That’s what I find to be sexist. So I don’t call her “Hillary” or stretch it out to “Hillary Clinton” but rather shorten it to HRC, presidential fashion (FDR, JFK, LBJ) and save space on the page too.

    Besides, that’s how people on the Hill refer to her, and the name of the new book I’ve ordered.

  134. JesW

    As far as calling Hillary, ‘Hillary’…I don’t think it’s sexist at all. To people that admire her, it’s more personal and endearing. For anyone else, it’s name recognition and I doubt if Hillary would be offended by it.

    For a woman in any field to be called, just by her last name, I find offensive. Family names are normally carried by the male and duplicated by many women that might choose to drop their family name. To refer to Hillary as just Clinton, if Bill wasn’t a past President or Governor, would be offensive to me.

    The one time I was able to see Bill Clinton, he was being driven by in a black SUV,had his window rolled partly down and I was four feet away from him when I waved and yelled to him, “Hi Bill!” I was excited and had a big smile on my face. He got a huge smile on his face and waved back at me with a twinkle in his eye.

    I would never think to call Hillary HRC, that seems too cold and distant to me.

    I use the following names to talk about other females:

    Nasty (First name)
    Diane Feinstein (Both)
    Barbra Boxer (Both)
    Jan Brewer
    Sarah

  135. Now that Putin knows the fraud is a paper tiger and ready to roll into the Ukraine, will Bill step up?

    He did convince the Ukraine to give up nuclear weapons, guaranteed America’S support….

    Bill…we’re listening

    ( yes, I presume the fraud is useless, he is 100% wrong ALL the time )

  136. HorseFace, go back to the barn before you embarrass yourself any further.

    Dig out that old ‘reset button’ that was broken and see if Putin will fall for it this time.

    Hee-haaaaw!

  137. foxyladi14
    March 15, 2014 at 11:45 am

    admin
    March 16, 2014 at 8:33 pm

    admin
    March 18, 2014 at 5:03 am

    admin
    March 18, 2014 at 5:11 am

    Mormaer
    March 18, 2014 at 6:46 am

    ***************************************************

    excellent information…it amazes me that people either cannot see or refuse to see ‘the writing on the wall’…

    O is Ocare

    the Ocare supporters ignore those that Ocare has hurt…they wish them to be invisible…and nonexistent…

  138. http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304747404579445120830880670

    Maybe Barack Obama should have given Zach Galifianakis an off-ramp, like the one he keeps trying to offer Vladimir Putin. Those were some pretty barbed lines the president unloaded on the comic actor last week in their semi-parodic “Between Two Ferns” interview.

    In case you’re wondering why I’m writing about this—well, I am too. A Malaysian jetliner has vanished into thin air, while Russia has completed its seizure of Crimea and may yet invade other parts of Ukraine. Serious stuff, you might say. But the big story of last week as far as the president is concerned is his appearance alongside the star of “The Hangover” movies, the guy who last year smoked a joint live on the Bill Maher show.

    Enlarge Image

    President Obama in his ‘Between Two Ferns’ interview with actor Zach Galifianakis. Associated Press

    “Zach actually was pretty nervous,” Mr. Obama later told Ryan Seacrest, the”American Idol” impresario, in a radio interview. “His whole character is to go after the guest and I think he was looking around and seeing all these Secret Service guys and thinking, ‘I wonder what happens here if I cross a line?’

    “But we had a great time.”

    Incidentally, I quote these lines from the Us Weekly report of the Seacrest interview. Us magazine is where I go for my political news these days. The online article also had a link to a photo gallery of Mr. Obama hanging out with various celebrities, like Justin Bieber. “What’s up, my dude!” the Canadian teen star says to the president of the United States. “What’s up, Biebs!” the president of the United States answers back.

    In fairness, this was before Biebs’s Miami DUI. In fairness, also, the president does important work. Just the other day, he was photographed standing by his Oval Office desk, casually dressed in jeans, speaking to Vladimir Putin on the phone. The president had been savaged by Sarah Palin “as one who wears mom jeans and equivocates and bloviates.”

    Retorted Mr. Obama: “The truth is, generally I look very sharp in jeans.” The sole exception, he added, “was one episode like four years ago in which I was wearing some loose jeans, mainly because I was out on the pitcher’s mound and I didn’t want to feel confined while I was pitching.”

    Thanks for clearing that up, Mr. President.

    In the meantime, Mr. Obama is imposing the sanctions he had previously threatened on Russia in the event Mr. Putin went ahead with his Black Sea conquests. “These are by far the most comprehensive sanctions applied to Russia since the end of the Cold War—far and away so,” crowed one administration official to reporters.

    By which the White House means a total of seven Russians and four Ukrainians. The sanctions were so light that one of the intended targets, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin, instantly spat back his contempt in a tweet: “Comrade Obama, what should those who have neither accounts nor property abroad do? Or maybe you didn’t think of that?”

    Maybe he did, maybe he didn’t: Even now the unanswered question about Mr. Obama’s personality is whether his insouciance is a mask for ideology, ignorance, or simple indifference. When the president goes before the cameras to announce tough sanctions, and the sanctions are not only not tough but laughably weak, what’s going through his head?

    Should he be wearing loose jeans more often so he can feel less confined geopolitically?

    Alternatively, the president might consider rearranging his work schedule. Last year came the news that Mr. Obama was unaware of the problems plaguing his health-care website until after its rollout and that he never once had a private meeting with Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius between July 2010 and November 2013. How does something like that happen?

    An answer of sorts comes in an article by Sean Blanda on “How Barack Obama Gets Things Done” on the 99U website. The president, Mr. Blanda reports, wakes up at seven o’clock. He works out 45 minutes a day every day, not including his regular basketball games. He watches a lot of “SportsCenter.” Dinner each night with his family. To limit “decision fatigue,” he likes to set policy via memos where he can check the box on “agree,” “disagree,” or “let’s discuss.”

    What do I take away from all this?

    The obvious: A cavalier foreign policy by an inattentive president that elicits the contempt of the people it intends to punish ultimately encourages their aggression
    as well.

    The less obvious: We need a fat president. Or at least one who rarely thinks and never speaks about how he looks in jeans. And one who doesn’t spend his day testing his wits against a Hollywood stoner or bantering with Ryan Seacrest while a European ally is being pummeled by Russia. And one who would rather spend his time working than working out, even if it means putting on a few pounds. And one who can pitch from the mound and reach home plate. However confined.

    Barack Obama is probably the coolest president this country will ever have. But with Vladimir Putin trying to step on the West’s throat, I’ll take President Mom Jeans any day.

    *********************************

    if Americans are making these observations, what pray tell, are enemies of the USA thinking and conjecturing…

    instead as Wbboei keeps saying, we have a press that focuses on being “cool”

    O will go down as the ‘Kadashian Era President’ easily distracted and all hype…when the USA lost it substance to silly style…

  139. There is soon to be a parade of these stories coming out…

    Obamacare leaves Las Vegas man owing $407,000 in doctor bills

    Las Vegan Larry Basich paid the premium on his Nevada Health Link insurance plan in November, but as of Feb. 25, it wasn’t clear who was covering Basich. The retired civil engineer had a triple bypass on Jan. 3 and now has $407,000 in medical bills.

    http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/obamacare-leaves-las-vegas-man-owing-407000-doctor-bills

    Update, my loved one is still fighting to get his healthcare covered for two serious illness. Obamacare caused him to be in a similar boat as this man above.

  140. Barack Obama does not know how to run a lemonade stand but he is a brilliant strategist when it comes to self-advancement, self-protection, and self-interest.
    ********************

    This is exactly the words I was struggling for when I said the fraud wasn’t dumb, that he had self promotion smarts…thanks Admin.

  141. “The conflict is shifting from a political to a military stage,” Ukraine’s Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk told an emergency government meeting.

    “Russian soldiers have started shooting at Ukrainian military servicemen, and that is a war crime,” he said at the nationally televised session.
    ****************

    Calling BC and the Western Governments…you took my Nuclear protection, what are you going to do about it?

  142. Associated Press, Obama invites G7 leaders for meeting on Ukraine:

    President Barack Obama on Tuesday invited allied leaders for an emergency meeting in Europe next week to discuss further action in response to Russia’s involvement in Ukraine, as world economic powers considers whether Moscow’ should keep its membership in their organization.

    White House spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden said Obama wants to gather leaders of the Group of Seven nations and the European Union to meet on the sidelines of a nuclear summit next week in the Netherlands. Russia is one of 53 countries which will participate in the nuclear meeting in The Hague.

    In a statement, Hayden said the meeting that Obama is organizing “will focus on the situation in Ukraine and further steps that the G-7 may take to respond to developments and to support Ukraine.”
    ****************

    I can see MEchelle rattling her eyeballs as I type.

    Putin be scared…very scared…

  143. looks like my article posting at 4:48 pm got swallowed up in the moderation abyss

    this was it and you can find it at the WSJ

    Stephens: How Obama ‘Gets Things Done’

    We need a president who rarely thinks and never speaks about how he looks in jeans.

    By
    Bret Stephens

    ******************************************

    just makes you wonder if Americans are thinking this about the Prez…what are our enemies thinking and observing about our Prez…

    the ‘Kadashian Era President’ – all style (?) little substance

  144. WSJ article:

    “Maybe Barack Obama should have given Zach Galifianakis an off-ramp, like the one he keeps trying to offer Vladimir Putin. Those were some pretty barbed lines the president unloaded on the comic actor last week in their semi-parodic “Between Two Ferns” interview.

    In case you’re wondering why I’m writing about this—well, I am too. A Malaysian jetliner has vanished into thin air, while Russia has completed its seizure of Crimea and may yet invade other parts of Ukraine. Serious stuff, you might say. But the big story of last week as far as the president is concerned is his appearance alongside the star of “The Hangover” movies, the guy who last year smoked a joint live on the Bill Maher show.

    “Zach actually was pretty nervous,” Mr. Obama later told Ryan Seacrest, the”American Idol” impresario, in a radio interview. “His whole character is to go after the guest and I think he was looking around and seeing all these Secret Service guys and thinking, ‘I wonder what happens here if I cross a line?’

    “But we had a great time.”

    Incidentally, I quote these lines from the Us Weekly report of the Seacrest interview. Us magazine is where I go for my political news these days. The online article also had a link to a photo gallery of Mr. Obama hanging out with various celebrities, like Justin Bieber. “What’s up, my dude!” the Canadian teen star says to the president of the United States. “What’s up, Biebs!” the president of the United States answers back.

    In fairness, this was before Biebs’s Miami DUI. In fairness, also, the president does important work. Just the other day, he was photographed standing by his Oval Office desk, casually dressed in jeans, speaking to Vladimir Putin on the phone. The president had been savaged by Sarah Palin “as one who wears mom jeans and equivocates and bloviates.”

    Retorted Mr. Obama: “The truth is, generally I look very sharp in jeans.” The sole exception, he added, “was one episode like four years ago in which I was wearing some loose jeans, mainly because I was out on the pitcher’s mound and I didn’t want to feel confined while I was pitching.”

    Thanks for clearing that up, Mr. President.

    In the meantime, Mr. Obama is imposing the sanctions he had previously threatened on Russia in the event Mr. Putin went ahead with his Black Sea conquests. “These are by far the most comprehensive sanctions applied to Russia since the end of the Cold War—far and away so,” crowed one administration official to reporters.

    By which the White House means a total of seven Russians and four Ukrainians. The sanctions were so light that one of the intended targets, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin, instantly spat back his contempt in a tweet: “Comrade Obama, what should those who have neither accounts nor property abroad do? Or maybe you didn’t think of that?”

    Maybe he did, maybe he didn’t: Even now the unanswered question about Mr. Obama’s personality is whether his insouciance is a mask for ideology, ignorance, or simple indifference. When the president goes before the cameras to announce tough sanctions, and the sanctions are not only not tough but laughably weak, what’s going through his head?

    Should he be wearing loose jeans more often so he can feel less confined geopolitically?

    Alternatively, the president might consider rearranging his work schedule. Last year came the news that Mr. Obama was unaware of the problems plaguing his health-care website until after its rollout and that he never once had a private meeting with Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius between July 2010 and November 2013. How does something like that happen?

    An answer of sorts comes in an article by Sean Blanda on “How Barack Obama Gets Things Done” on the 99U website. The president, Mr. Blanda reports, wakes up at seven o’clock. He works out 45 minutes a day every day, not including his regular basketball games. He watches a lot of “SportsCenter.” Dinner each night with his family. To limit “decision fatigue,” he likes to set policy via memos where he can check the box on “agree,” “disagree,” or “let’s discuss.”

    What do I take away from all this?

    The obvious: A cavalier foreign policy by an inattentive president that elicits the contempt of the people it intends to punish ultimately encourages their aggression as well.

    The less obvious: We need a fat president. Or at least one who rarely thinks and never speaks about how he looks in jeans. And one who doesn’t spend his day testing his wits against a Hollywood stoner or bantering with Ryan Seacrest while a European ally is being pummeled by Russia. And one who would rather spend his time working than working out, even if it means putting on a few pounds. And one who can pitch from the mound and reach home plate. However confined.

    Barack Obama is probably the coolest president this country will ever have. But with Vladimir Putin trying to step on the West’s throat, I’ll take President Mom Jeans any day.”

    http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304747404579445120830880670

  145. Repeal is the antidote to the ObamaCare disease:

    http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/18/report-premiums-rising-faster-than-eight-years-before-obamacare-combined/

    Report: Premiums rising faster than eight years before Obamacare COMBINED

    Health insurance premiums have risen more after Obamacare than the average premium increases over the eight years before it became law, according to the private health exchange eHealthInsurance.

    The individual market for health insurance has seen premiums rise by 39 percent since February 2013, eHealth reports. Without a subsidy, the average individual premium is now $274 a month. Families have been hit even harder with an average increase of 56 percent over the same period — average premiums are now $663 per family, over $426 last year.

    Between 2005 and 2013, average premiums for individual plans increased 37 percent and average family premiums were upped 31 percent. So they have risen faster under Obamacare than in the previous eight years.

    An important caveat is that eHealth’s prices don’t include subsidies, so the prices for anyone earning between 100 and 400 percent of the federal poverty level will be lower. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has repeatedly claimed patients will pay as little as $18 per month, without noting the taxpayer cost.

    Premiums are being hiked across the board for several reasons, but the biggest contributor is the Obama administration’s highly touted “essential health benefits,” services that insurers on and off exchanges must provide.

    Some benefits, such as emergency and laboratory services, are uncontroversial. But others, like maternity, newborn and pediatric services, are causing headaches for huge swaths of the population that don’t need them. Anyone past childbearing age, single men, the infertile, even nuns — their premiums are rising as well, because their plans must, by law, provide more services.

    But premiums aren’t the only key to health care costs — deductibles and out-of-pocket costs like co-pays are also rising. When it comes to employer health plans alone, four out of five U.S. companies have increased deductibles or are considering doing so.

    Prices may be people away from purchasing health insurance. The latest survey from consulting firm McKinsey found that half of those who haven’t purchased health insurance yet this year cited their inability to pay the premium.

    ObamaCare is making prices rise. The excuse that subsidies will save the day are uninformed drivel. That mounting cost will be paid by taxpayers. Bottom line is that the cost curve is going up under ObamaCare even though the main argument of the most insipid of ObamaCare defenders is that it had to be passed because the cost curve had to be bent downwards. Now we know that even this last line of defense is an indefensible scam to defend an indefensible scam.

  146. VH, that WSJ article seemed to pretty much capture Obama’s laziness, incompetence, and failure to give a damn about this country. The author implied that O was either incompetence or indifferent. As Admin posted above, there’s a third option that must be considered – that O is intentionally attempting to weaken this country..

    Whatever the reason, significant damage has been done by this small-minded president, who is all image and no substance,

  147. For those that have never seen a penis:

    🙂 It was an accident but notice how no one said anything about the the penis photobomb.

  148. gonzotx

    March 18, 2014 at 9:26 am

    http://www.politico.com/multimedia/video/2014/03/bill-clinton-vladimir-putin-is-one-smart-russian.html?ml=vi_3

    BC on Putin…and really, only way he does, clown in the WH.

    Leadership is not an act. Leadership does not imply celebrity. Leadership, when it exists (just because you have the title of a leader does it mean you are an actual leader), can protect or propel a people. Contrast gonzo’s video of President Clinton describing how he would deal with Putin with the video of former Israeli PM Ehud Barak with Charlie Rose talking about Iran and Syria (the first 4m17s is all you need to see, but the entire interview, minus the obligatory ‘don’t talk TOO bad about bumbles’ portion if the interview, is very very good).

    http://www.bloomberg.com/video/israeli-prime-minister-barak-charlie-rose-09-20-blc81QjLSWGC3eZiu1Kyiw.html

    And I am positive that Putin did exactly what those leaders described in Crimea to get his way. I’ll bet my last dime on that. So with all these world issues, what do we have leading us in the right direction through this world?

    we got bumbles.

    asshat.

    We are so F*^&$d.

    Hillary 2016

  149. U.S. Orders Syria Govt Out Of United States, Requires Those Personnel Not Legal Residents To Leave U.S.

    WASHINGTON (AP) ­ The Obama administration ordered the Syrian government on Tuesday to suspend its diplomatic and consular missions in the United States, requiring all personnel who are not legal U.S residents to leave the country.

    The order, three years after the start of Syria’s bloody civil war, essentially shutters the Syrian embassy in Washington and its honorary consulates in Troy, Mich., and Houston, Texas. It comes in response to a decision by President Bashar Assad’s government to suspend consular services for Syrians living in the U.S.

    “We have determined it is unacceptable for individuals appointed by that regime to conduct diplomatic or consular operations in the United States,” U.S. special envoy to Syria Daniel Rubenstein said in a statement.

    More:
    http://weaselzippers.us/179899-u-s-orders-syria-govt-out-of-united-states-requires-those-personnel-not-legal-residents-to-leave-u-s/

  150. Shadowfax March 18, 2014 at 3:34 pm

    Thanks for your reaction – I get it, “HRC” is less endearing, true; but I think I’ll still use it anyway because it sounds and looks presidential.

    Also, if you’re going to use Feinstein’s first name, spell it with two n’s = “Dianne”

    On the same theme, your shortening of my moniker to “JesW” is cute but unsettling – my initials are J and E and family name is Swezey, not Wezey. To abbreviate the moniker, use “JES”.

    I like your moniker a lot. Fascinates me. How did you think that up?

  151. Dianne with two n’s earned the experience she suffered here:
    Toy helicopter helped change Feinstein’s mind about surveillance drones
    Published time: March 17, 2014
    …But speaking to journalists at the CBS News program 60 Minutes recently, Sen. Feinstein shared a personal story that put into better perspective why exactly she’s so worried about spy drones. During an episode that aired Sunday evening, Feinstein said an experience that she recently had with a “drone” outside of her home had something to do with how she now views UAVs.
    “I’m in my home and there’s a demonstration out front. And I go to peek out the window and there’s a drone facing me. Well, whoever was running it turned it around quickly and it crashed,” Feinstein said….
    http://rt.com/usa/feinstein-drone-minutes-pink-418/

    As noted recently, when bad things happen to her, she reacts. 🙂

  152. admin March 18, 2014 at 11:16 am

    Thank you very much for the lengthy rebuttal. I can see the reason for the confusion.

    Concerning the inelasticity of the healthcare supply and demand “curves”, which are in fact vertical straight lines, I confess I am living in an ‘ideal’ world where health insurance has no geographical constraints and full coverage is applied to everyone – that is, health insurance is transparent as well as low cost.

    People in this world have no choice (and that was the starting point of my discussion) but to pay into a system that pays for other people’s healthcare even if they are healthy.

    For example, I paid into a system that was helping other people’s bouts with cancer for 40 years until it came my turn to benefit from the system. And now, I am paying into a system with generous benefits for mothers and young children while I’m divorced and my son has gone off on his own. Choice does not enter into my decision-making and, in fact, I have no decisions to make.

    In such a world, the inelasticity of healthcare supply and demand is obvious, for the obvious reasons I stated. One of the main differences with the US world is due to the transparency of the insurance system, which is all but single-payer. Introducing “competing” insurers into the mix obscures the inelasticity of the supply and demand curves.

    I have never denied either that for-profit medicine in the U.S. is another pernicious money-waster that distorts the supply curve and, to some extent, the demand curve too. Practitioners in single-payer or global insurance systems earn a good living but have no interest in resorting to the tricks you describe in order to live high off the hog on people’s illnesses.

    In my world, then, the perfectly inelastic healthcare supply and demand curves are not ideals but are indeed the real world.

    In the U.S. world of for-profit drugs, for-profit hospitals, for-profit practitioners, for-profit insurance and for-profit lawyers suing everybody, we have all the makings of a white-collar criminal organization that results in denial of proper care, makes analysis of the situation nearly impossible and, at the very least, distorts both supply and demand.

    Nevertheless, my description of inelastic supply and demand may seem ideal to you, but it is based on very real experience in the real world, assuming you will allow me to view countries other than the U.S. as “real world” countries.

    If Republicans proposed allowing insurance companies to compete in overlapping geographical areas, or nationwide, kudos to the Republicans. It’s a good idea. But in fact, I was surprised to find only last November that this was not part of the Affordable Care Act, because I was certain I saw a video of Obama (during the 2012 campaign) touting the possibility of someone from NH buying insurance from a NV company if the NV insurer had a better plan. I guess that was just more of his lies. Anyway, that’s a market-based idea that would do some good, and something that would easily pass Congress too, I think, as a rider to the ACA.

    I remember Republicans also wanted to reform tort law, and the Dims didn’t want to listen. That would have been a good idea too, though not really market-based.

    Another “market-based” idea would be to bring insurers together into bargaining units to negotiate prices with drug companies, hospitals and practitioners. That would bring down prices.

    Yet another “market-based” idea would be to let everyone buy into Medicaid, which would become the “public option” HRC talked about in 2008.

    All of these “market-based” ideas are, imo, valid and would go a long way toward making the Affordable Care Act palatable to the public.

    The main reason that I poo-poo “market-based solutions” is when I hear Rand Paul say that he had competition from WalMart making contact lenses. The guy is delusional.

  153. Mitt Romney:

    “President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton traveled the world in pursuit of their promise to reset relations and to build friendships across the globe,” Romney said. “Their failure has been painfully evident: It is hard to name even a single country that has more respect and admiration for America today than when President Obama took office, and now Russia is in Ukraine. Part of their failure, I submit, is due to their failure to act when action was possible, and needed. A chastened president and Secretary of State Kerry, a year into his job, can yet succeed, and for the country’s sake, must succeed. Timing is of the essence.”

    http://www.politico.com/story/2014/03/mitt-romney-op-ed-hillary-clinton-president-obama-ukraine-104758.html

  154. jeswezey
    March 19, 2014 at 6:29 am
    Wow, you are pretty harsh on the name thing… 🙂

    —-

    Thanks for your reaction – I get it, “HRC” is less endearing, true; but I think I’ll still use it anyway because it sounds and looks presidential.

    —> Where I work, acronyms are tossed around by the bucket full, so HRC is not presidential to me, just another meaningless acronym.

    ——–

    Also, if you’re going to use Feinstein’s first name, spell it with two n’s = “Dianne” —–> Thanks for the tip, unfortunately, I will probably just end up forgetting it. That’s how my brain rolls.

    ——-

    To abbreviate the moniker, use “JES”.
    —> I’ll try to remember that too.

    ——

    I like your moniker a lot. Fascinates me. How did you think that up?

    From Lord of the Rings –

    Shadowfax (“Sceadufæx” in Rohirric) was the Lord of all horses. He was a descendant of Felaróf, of the race of the Mearas, the greatest horses of Middle-earth. Shadowfax was capable of comprehending human speech and was said to run faster than the wind. Originally belonging to the House of Eorl, Lord of Rohan, Shadowfax was too wild to be tamed by the Rohirrim. Eventually he was given to Gandalf the White by Théoden, the then-king of Rohan.

  155. Shadowfax March 19, 2014 at 12:30 pm

    “Shadowfax was the Lord of all horses.”

    Great! I never read Lord of the Rings, but I must have sensed something horsey going because I adore horses, my favorite animal, more than humans!

    “Shadowfax was capable of comprehending human speech” … but I bet he made a lot of typos! (I’m just guessing he’s your “roll” model !)

  156. Edward Snowden made a surprise appearance at TED today, telling the mostly supportive crowd to expect more revelations from his vast cache of secret National Security Agency documents.

    The NSA whistleblower took to the stage during the conference’s second day via a video chatbot he controlled from what TED organizer Chris Anderson called an “undisclosed location.” Snowden said there are still revelations to be made and stories to be told about the intelligence agency. “I don’t think there’s any question that some of the most important reporting to be done is yet to come,” Snowden said, just one week after appearing at SXSW in Austin, Texas.
    ‘To people who have seen and enjoyed the free and open internet, it’s up to us to preserve that liberty for the next generation to enjoy.’
    —Edward Snowden

    Rather than the traditional 18-minute TED talk, in which a single speaker addresses the audience, Anderson essentially interviewed Snowden. Through a strikingly clear connection, the bot-ified Snowden was poised and good-humored as he called on tech companies to make SSL encryption the default for browsing the web. “To people who have seen and enjoyed the free and open internet, it’s up to us to preserve that liberty for the next generation to enjoy,” he said.

    Anderson suggested that Snowden’s sentiments parallel those of Tim Berners-Lee, the inventor of the web, who has recently used the 25th anniversary of the world wide web to call for an “internet bill of rights.” But because this was TED, Anderson didn’t have to speculate on the similarities between the goals of Snowden and Berners-Lee. He simply brought Berners-Lee on stage to find out.

    Asked by Anderson whether he thought Snowden was a traitor or a hero, Berners-Lee went with “hero, if you have to make the choice between the two.” Snowden said internet rights were not just about principles but about technology. “I believe a magna carta for the internet is exactly what we need,” Snowden said. “We need to encode our values not just in writing but in the structure of the internet.”

    http://www.wired.com/business/2014/03/ed-snowden-meets-father-web-stage-ted/

  157. admin

    March 18, 2014 at 8:16 am

    Wbboei, it becomes harder to make sense of what Obama does if one takes out the probability that his aim is destruction of this country
    ——————
    I agree.

    What I cannot decide is what is the motivation.

    One theory is that Mr. Obama is executing the agenda of those who believe in world government. In order to achieve world government, they must undermine the existing system which is based on national sovereignty and where the United States by virtue of its military, its financial system, and its commitment to the rule of law represents the primary obstacle. The primary exponent of this view is Soros who dreams of a world without borders where goods and labor can flow freely. Soros played a pivotal role in installing Obama, financially and strategically. Under this theory Obama is engaging in a form of creative destruction, which is one premise of capitalism as Schumpter noted.

    The other theory is that Mr. Obama is a narcissist, and the actions he is taking fit that profile like a glove.
    http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html. The leading expert on narcissism in the world, Sam Varkin has diagnosed Obama as a classic case, and he would say that he has entered the act out stage where the angry ossified child who lurks behind the mask everyone sees, had emerged and is now calling the shots, to the same end, i.e. the destruction of this country.

    One determining factor in the development of a narcissit is childhood abuse. “Obama’s early life was decidedly chaotic and replete with traumatic and mentally bruising dislocations,” says Vaknin. “Mixed-race marriages were even less common then. His parents went through a divorce when he was an infant (two years old). Obama saw his father only once again, before he died in a car accident. Then his mother re-married and Obama had to relocate to Indonesia, a foreign land with a radically foreign culture, to be raised by a step-father. At the age of ten, he was whisked off to live with his maternal (white) grandparents. He saw his mother only intermittently in the following few years and then she vanished from his life in 1979. She died of cancer in 1995”.

    One must never underestimate the manipulative genius of pathological narcissists. They project such an imposing personality that it overwhelms those around them. Charmed by the charisma of the narcissist, people become like clay in his hands. They cheerfully do his bidding and delight to be at his service. The narcissist shapes the world around himself and reduces others in his own inverted image. He creates a cult of personality. His admirers become his co-dependents.

    Narcissists have no interest in things that do not help them to reach their personal objective. They are focused on one thing alone and that is power. All other issues are meaningless to them and they do not want to waste their precious time on trivialities. Anything that does not help them is beneath them and do not deserve their attention.

    If an issue raised in the Senate does not help Obama in one way or another, he has no interest in it. The “present” vote is a safe vote. No one can criticize him if things go wrong. Those issues are unworthy by their very nature because they are not about him.

    Obama’s election as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review led to a contract and advance to write a book about race relations. The University of Chicago Law School provided him a lot longer than expected and at the end it evolved into, guess what? His own autobiography! Instead of writing a scholarly paper focusing on race relations, for which he had been paid, Obama could not resist writing about his most sublime self. He entitled the book Dreams from My Father. Not surprisingly, Adolph Hitler also wrote his own autobiography when he was still nobody. So did Stalin. For a narcissist no subject is as important as his own self. Why would he waste his precious time and genius writing about insignificant things when he can write about such an august being as himself? Narcissists are often callous and even ruthless. As the norm, they lack conscience. This is evident from Obama’s lack of interest in his own brother who lives on only one dollar per month. A man who lives in luxury, who takes a private jet to vacation in Hawaii, and who has raised nearly half a billion dollars for his campaign (something unprecedented in history) has no interest in the plight of his own brother. Why? Because, his brother cannot be used for his ascent to power. A narcissist cares for no one but himself. This election is like no other in the history of America. The issues are insignificant compared to what is at stake.

    What can be more dangerous than having a man bereft of conscience, a serial liar, and one who cannot distinguish his fantasies from reality as the leader of the free world?

    Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/vaknin.asp#HFPqJ5qdq8QvgQcW.99

    ——-
    A Manchurian Candidate, or A Narcissist? I see no reason why he cannot be both.

Comments are closed.