What To Do About Jonathan Gruber ObamaCare Lies

Update: It’s sadomasochism without the sex. We paid to get beaten. WaPo fact check: Yes, Gruber got $400,000 for ObamaCare work. This was done even as Gruber posed as an independent analyst of ObamaCare.

What did Gruber do for the money besides lie to the “stupid” public? Gruber created the “Gruber Microsimulation Model” which mimics the model used by the Congressional Budget Office to make evaluations of programs. The “Gruber Microsimulation Model” was a flim-flam scam to get the CBO numbers to come out as phony as needed to pass ObamaCare. The “Gruber Microsimulation Model” was a variant of “garbage in, garbage out”. Gruber provided the garbage lies to CBO and CBO provided garbage lies to the public. What once was your/our government at work is now our masters who lie to us.

Don’t think that Jonathan Gruber only got $400,000 for the ObamaCare scam. Gruber was grubby and grabby. Gruber got hundreds of thousands of dollars in state after state, possibly adding up to millions, as the Washington Times reports, for scams in various states too.

Some of those states should sue Gruber to get their money back. Force Gruber to testify under oath in a trial setting. Time to play sadomasochism with us holding the whip.

————————————————–

Courts have inherent power to sanction those who lie in any proceeding before the court. Jonathan Gruber has several times submitted amicus briefs in ObamaCare cases.

We wrote about the latest developments on the ObamaCare chessboard recently. We wrote about “ObamaCare architect” Jonathan Gruber back in April of this year in How Big??? ObamaCare Jonathan Gruber #HalBIG. In April the news about Jonathan Gruber was the discovery of a videotape in which Gruber explicitly undermined the contentions of his fellow ObamaCare scam artists. On the vital question of subsidies, Gruber is seen/heard on the video to uphold the central contention of ObamaCare opponents.

Soon after, another videotape of Gruber – in prepared remarks saying the very same thing again – appeared. We predicted the courts would take judicial notice of Gruber’s ObamaCare scam flim-flam remarks. Soon after, that is exactly what happened:

Gruber’s repeated remarks contradict the Obama administration’s legal argument, made in Halbig v. Burwell and three related lawsuits, that it is implausible that Congress would have conditioned those subsidies on states establishing Exchanges. His remarks likewise contradict the amicus briefs Gruber himself filed in two of those cases. [snip]

Gruber’s remarks, combined with other evidence the Obama administration knew it did not have legal authority to dispense these subsidies or impose the related taxes, call for further investigation into how the administration came to take these actions anyway.

Yesterday, the State of Oklahoma filed a motion to apprise a federal judge of Gruber’s remarks. Oklahoma attorney general Scott Pruitt was the first to challenge the Obama administration’s illegal taxes and subsidies way back in September 2012 (Pruitt v. Burwell). Solicitor general Patrick Wyrick noted Gruber’s remarks are highly relevant, because the government itself has repeatedly relied on Gruber as an expert in these cases:

Defendants themselves relied on evidence from Professor Gruber in an attempt to show the supposed “implausibility” of Congress having made something as important as the subsidies hinge on the States’ willingness to establish exchanges. Plainly, this newly-discovered evidence squarely controverts Defendants’ evidence on this point, and establishes that it is far from “implausible” that the drafters or Section 36B intended to withhold tax credits and subsidies from states who declined to set up exchanges in order to place pressure on those states to set up exchanges. To the contrary, it is not only plausible, it now appears to be demonstrably true.

As we wrote above, the courts have inherent power to investigate and sanction those that fed the courts false information under oath. But let’s be realistic. The courts generally avoid these types of sanctions and the courts here will likely do nothing to punish the ObamaCare liars.

Should the courts investigate and punish those ObamaCare supporters who lied to the courts? Sure. But that should not be the focus at this point. To borrow from Hillary Clinton, “what difference at this point does it make?”

The “point” right now for ObamaCare opponents is to continue to win the ObamaCare political fight for public opinion and ultimately to destroy ObamaCare root and branch. To that end, what should be done?

Let’s inventory the rather small problems for ObamaCare opponents. Problem #1: Big Media ignores Jonathan Gruber’s remarks. Problem #2: ObamaCare supporters other than Big Media mostly ignore Jonathan Gruber’s remarks. Problem #3: We are sure the Supreme Court will decide against the government but even if does the political landscape to make such a decision easier for the court to reach and the political battlefield after the Supreme Court issues such a decision must be prepared as well.

Those three small problems are intertwined. All three of those small problems can easily be overcome.

Consider the Big Media problem. There is a near total Big Media blockade of Jonathan Gruber’s remarks. Something has to be done to force Big Media to broadcast and publish Gruber’s grubby remarks.

Ditto the ObamaCare supporters near total blockade of Jonathan Gruber’s grubby remarks. Again, something has to be done to force ObamaCare supporters’ faces into the dung pile which are Gruber’s videotaped remarks.

Combine those two situations with the Supreme Court landscape “problem” and we see one obvious solution. Congress should hold hearings early next year, (not earlier, not during Thanksgiving and Christmas holiday season when no one will pay attention, but before the Supreme Court arguments in March are heard on ObamaCare) – which feature Jonathan Gruber. If necessary the rules of the hearings must be changed to allow the videotapes of Gruber to be played over and over and over again.

Senate hearings across various committees will force Big Media to cover and broadcast Jonathan Gruber’s remarks. Senate hearings across various committees will force ObamaCare supporters to confront the reality of Jonathan Gruber’s “stupid” remarks.

Most importantly Senate (and House) hearings before March of next year will prepare the political landscape for a Supreme Court rejection of ObamaCare subsidies contrary to the letter of the law.

Senate (and House) hearings will also prepare the post Supreme Court ObamaCare decision battlefield landscape. Be assured that after the Supreme Court restores the law as written, ObamaCare scam flim-flam artists will then try to force the states to impose exchanges on their citizens. Senate (and House) hearings will prepare the battlefield and put steel into the spine of the many states which have thus far refused to join in the ObamaCare scam.

The opportunities for ObamaCare opponents as we go forward are very good.

The disasters for ObamaCare flim-flam scam artists get worse day-to-day. Today Nancy Pelousy somehow even forgot who this “ObamaCare architect” Jonathan Gruber is. Pelousy used to quote Gruber on her website. Nancy Pelousy used to know who Gruber is:



Maybe Nancy Pelousy should call Howard Dean. You remember Howard Dean? Howard Dean, the man who did not notice the misogyny and woman hate of 2008 (directed against Hillary Clinton by his best friends, Barack Obama, and the leadership of the Democratic Party) because, as Howard explained – he did not have cable TV. Howard thinks we’re stupid. Now liar Howard is using the word “stupid” to describe Obama’s lies and liars:

Former DNC Chairman Howard Dean gave an excoriating critique of his own party’s key piece of legislation saying the Affordable Care Act, commonly known as Obamacare, was “put together by a bunch of elitists” who “don’t fundamentally understand the American people.”

Dean said was shocked that Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber said “the stupidity of the American voter” was a “political advantage” in passing Obamacare in an interview with MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski on Wednesday.

The problem is not that he said it–the problem is that he thinks it,” Dean said. “The core problem under the damn law is it was put together by a bunch of elitists who don’t fundamentally understand the American people. That’s what the problem is.

Brzezinski cringed after repeating Gruber’s quote.

“Jesus!” Dean exclaimed after hearing that one of Obama’s key health care advisers would call the lack of transparency “critical” in passing the massively unpopular law.



Howard Dean who one described himself as the “Democratic wing of the Democratic Party” – and proved it with his reign of misogyny and woman-hate bemoans the lack of transparency to pass the corruption flim-flam scam called ObamaCare. The totalitarian left that forced Obama and ObamaCare on the nation is now worried. Transparent? Who ever said Barack Obama and his gangsters would be transparent?



Gangster government will produce gangster lies.



Jonathan Gruber who has repeatedly lied to the courts in his sworn affidavits to uphold ObamaCare is a liar. Worse, Jonathan Gruber as the ObamaCare architect is a totalitarian of the left who thinks his job is to rule the “stupid” people. Jonathan Gruber thinks the people are revolting because the people are revolting against ObamaCare:

New video surfaces of Obamacare architect

A new video has surfaced of a key architect of Obamacare slamming voters once again.

American voters are too stupid to understand the difference,” Jonathan Gruber said in a clip of remarks he made last year discussing the passage of Obamacare. The clip aired Tuesday on Fox News’ “The Kelly File.”

It is the second video of Gruber, a professor at MIT and former Romney adviser, taking aim at the intelligence of the American electorate.

Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter, or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical for the thing to pass,” he said in a video that has recently emerged — and touched off an uproar. Those remarks as well, were from a separate event in 2013.



Today, more video emerged of Gruber:

As Congress voted on the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, in 2010, one of the bill’s architects, MIT economist Jonathan Gruber, told a college audience that those pushing the legislation pitched it as a bill that would control spiraling health care costs even though most of the bill was focused on something else and there was no guarantee the bill would actually bend the cost curve.

In recent days, the past comments of Gruber — who in this 2010 speech notes that he “helped write the federal bill” and “was a paid consultant to the Obama administration to help develop the technical details as well” — have been given renewed attention. In previously posted but recently noticed speeches, Gruber discusses how those pushing the bill took part in an “exploitation of the lack of economic understanding of the American voter,” taking advantage of voters’ “stupidity” to create a law that would ultimately be good for them.

In this fourth video, Gruber’s language is not as stark as in three previous instances, but his suggestion that Obamacare proponents engaged in less-than-honest salesmanship remains.

That’s on CNN. Just like ObamaCare, the Big Media blockade is crumbling.



The Big Media blockade is crumbling but it still stands:

Howard Kurtz, host of the Fox News Channel’s “Mediabuzz” slammed the media for failing to report the controversial comments of Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber, arguing that the “inexcusable,” “virtual blackout” was an example of liberal media bias on Wednesday’s “O’Reilly Factor” on the Fox News Channel.

It’s been a virtual blackout, Bill, and it’s inexcusable, nothing on the network evening newscasts. One mention on CNN, not a word in the New York Times. On what planet is this kind of embarrassing admission not news? Maybe on that comet where the spaceship just landed” he stated.



The Washington Post has discussed Gruber’s “stupid” remarks but in a context that smears Republicans. The point of discussion for the Washington Post is the GOP reaction to Gruber, not the insult of Gruber’s remarks. Still, we’re glad to see some talk about hearings:

GOP’s anti-Obamacare push gains new momentum in wake of Gruber video

The Republican Party’s ardent campaign against President Obama’s health-care law gained new momentum Wednesday as lawmakers reacted angrily to assertions by an architect of the policy that it was crafted in a deliberately deceptive way in order to pass Congress.

On both sides of the Capitol, leading conservatives said they may call economist Jonathan Gruber to testify about his remarks, which were made last year and surfaced this week in a video on social media. In the video, Gruber suggests that the administration’s signature health-care legislation passed in part because of the “stupidity of the American voter” and a “lack of transparency” over its funding mechanisms.

“The strategy was to hide the truth from the American people,” said Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), who is slated to chair the Senate Budget Committee next year. “That is a threat to the American republic.”

There should be hearings early next year on the ObamaCare flim-flam scam across many committees. Hold fire until very early next year, once the holiday season is over and Americans are ready to listen. It’s a fine idea from GOP Rep. Jim Jordan: Maybe it’s time for House hearings on Jon Gruber’s ObamaCare remarks. It’s not yet time. Let the momentum build until next year:

Hearings floated as Hill Republicans seize on Gruber Obamacare comments [snip]

We may want to have hearings on this,” said Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), an influential voice among GOP hardliners and a member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, in an interview at the Capitol. “We shouldn’t be surprised they were misleading us.” [snip]

This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure CBO did not score the mandate as taxes,” Gruber said. “Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the ‘stupidity of the American voter’ or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical to getting the thing to pass.”
[snip]

Jordan said House Republicans have been sending each other a blizzard of e-mails and text messages this week, and he expects the interest in “bringing [Gruber] up here to talk” will gain traction as members return to Washington. House Republicans will gather Thursday evening for their first series of votes since the election.

“I just had a colleague text me saying, ‘We’ve got to look into this!” Jordan said as he glanced at his phone outside the House floor Wednesday morning.

Investigate. Hold hearings with Gruber on the grill. But keep Darryl Issa away from this. Let the Senate take the lead on this then let the House follow. Issa is a loose cannon that does not know how to conduct an investigation nor a hearing. Wait until very early next year, before March, then hold hearings.

The American people must be informed of “ObamaCare architect” Jonathan Gruber’s comments. The media blockade and protection of ObamaCare must be broken. The time to do so is early next year.

Share

293 thoughts on “What To Do About Jonathan Gruber ObamaCare Lies

  1. http://online.wsj.com/articles/dan-henninger-it-wasnt-just-obama-1415837336

    It Wasn’t Just Obama
    The Democrats’ policies have been pillaging their own political base.

    The Democrats who were caught standing on the beach last week when the GOP’s 40-foot wave washed over them are now explaining why it wasn’t their fault.

    No. 1: It’s not us; it’s what’s his name, the unpopular president. (And that awful Valerie Jarrett. )

    No. 2: It was a midterm election with a bad map; we’ll be back in 2016. Hillary to the rescue.

    Official Obama Explanation : My ideas and policies are fine; I just have a messaging problem.

    USS Democrat Captain Nancy Pelosi : “There was an ebbing, an ebb tide, for us.” [snip]

    A few Democratic voices, mostly party professionals whose job is winning elections, have said the donkey herd that just ran off the cliff needs to rethink its sense of direction. No one is listening to them. Most Democrats, especially the left that took control of the party in 2008, deny any problem. And well they might. There is no Plan B. [snip]

    Over the past decade, Democratic politicians (and some Republicans) started imposing regressive fees on everyone. Which means the party’s pols are now siphoning cash straight out of the budgets of their blue-collar and middle-class base. That hurts.

    Traditional Democratic liberals understood that the private sector at least needed room to breathe. The party’s left, having self-deported from the private sector, does not. Thus at the same time their governors were bleeding the base, congressional Democrats voted through ObamaCare with its “Cadillac tax,” device tax, Transitional Reinsurance Fee and noncompliance penalties. As you can see, it’s just a messaging problem.

    It was good being the party of Robin Hood. Until they morphed into the Sheriff of Nottingham. In November 2014, the forest people in at least four states figured out who has been picking their pockets. What the Democratic Party’s answer will be in 2016 to this public rebellion is so far nonexistent.

  2. Charles Krauthammer suggests, almost word for word, what we suggest (regarding the Big Media blockade and hearings with Gruber early next year).

    We’ll try to get the video from Special Report as soon as it is available.

  3. WAS just watching Charles Krauthammer and thinking OMG …this is exactly what ADMIN wrote! ((made me wonder who admin is))

  4. I hope Gruber is still around in March. MSM blackout or not, people will find out and those that lost their insurance and maybe even a loved one, may not appreciate the joke. Then again, it may be advantageous to the totalitarian elites, if he disappeared.

    He really needs to be afraid for his life.

  5. Gruber is a small Obamacare fish. The person that the Senate needs to put under oath is the “most important person, no on has heard of”, Nancy Ann DeParle. She was the insurance company, health industry insider who was in charge of passing the “right” health reform law.

    “Nancy-Ann Min DeParle (born December 17, 1956) served as the Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy in the administration of President Obama from January 2011 to January 2013.[1] Previously, she served as the director of the White House Office of Health Reform,[2][3] leading the administration’s efforts on health care issues, including the passing of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.”
    ****
    “DeParle has drawn criticism for her lucrative service on corporate boards after her tenure in the Clinton administration. Msnbc.com reported that she was paid more than $6 million, and served as a director of half a dozen companies that faced federal investigations, whistleblower lawsuits and other regulatory actions. Many of these companies have a stake in the health care reform that she led.[10]

    She served as a director of Accredo Health Inc., Boston Scientific, Cerner Corp., DaVita, Guidant, Medco Health Solutions, Speciality Laboratories, and Triad Hospitals. She was a managing director of CCMP Capital.”

  6. Dot48. Let’s face it, we are trendsetters. Krauthammer followed our lead. But did you notice how after we started using the word “stupid” now everyone is using the word “stupid”? We surf the Zeitgeist.

    We started with the “stupid” before the Gruber videos emerged from their stinkhole. Now everyone has gone “stupid”. What can we say? We’re fashion forward trendsetters. Very smart. Smartly dressed, smart thoughts = Big Pink.

    🙂

  7. SHV, Nancy Ann DeParle will not testify on ObamaCare. As an Obama adviser Obama would move to assert executive privilege to keep her silent. Delay, delay, delay is the goal with ObamaCare supporters. Now they have to delay past March or June due to the Supreme Court. They have to delay and a fight over executive privilege would benefit Obama.

    But what to do about Gruber? Obama cannot assert executive privilege with Gruber because that assertion by itself would prove Gruber was the “ObamaCare architect”. So Gruber would have to testify. It’s a lovely trap.

  8. on cue…well, how de do…

    http://online.wsj.com/articles/burke-beu-this-democrat-is-giving-up-on-obamacare-1415919619

    Opinion

    This Democrat Is Giving Up on ObamaCare

    The disastrous rollout of the Affordable Care Act was the catalyst for my party’s midterm thumping.
    By
    Burke Beu
    Nov. 13, 2014 6:00 p.m. ET

    I grew up in a Democratic family. I have been a registered Democrat since age 18, a Democratic candidate for statewide office in Colorado and a party precinct captain in that caucus state. I’ve volunteered for numerous Democratic candidates and contributed to party causes and campaigns. The 2014 election results were extremely disappointing for me, but hardly a surprise.

    I voted for Barack Obama in 2008, then lost my job in the Great Recession. I was lucky; my brother lost his job and his house. I survived on part-time jobs while paying out-of-pocket for my health insurance.

    I voted for President Obama again in 2012, then received a cancellation notice for my health insurance. This was due to ObamaCare, the so-called Affordable Care Act. However, I couldn’t afford anything else.

    Midterm elections in the second term of a presidency are difficult on the president’s party, and the Obama administration’s crisis-of-the-month headlines weren’t helpful. Ultimately, though, ObamaCare was the catalyst for my party’s midterm thumping.

    ObamaCare is a failure. For anyone who thinks this is a misprint because no Democratic activist would make such a comment, let me add that it is too big, too complicated and too expensive. Without a public option within its network of exchanges, ObamaCare is a giant blank check to the insurance companies that pushed it through Congress. It punishes responsible consumers like me and treats younger individuals as fools who are expected to pay the bills while not paying attention.

    Now we learn in videos that came to light this week that Jonathan Gruber, MIT economist and a key architect of the Affordable Care Act, proudly relied on his perceived “stupidity of the American voter” as the basis for designing ObamaCare. Such comments, along with the program’s notoriously dysfunctional website and false
    assurances that people can keep their previous health plans, are insults to every citizen regardless of party.

    Contrary to Medicare, which was quickly accepted at a time of economic vitality as a meaningful complement to Social Security, ObamaCare was the sequel to an overpriced economic stimulus package that didn’t stimulate very much. Those least affected by the recession benefited the most from the stimulus. I think that’s called “trickle-down economics” when Republicans do it, and the economy continues to struggle for good jobs and a real recovery. ObamaCare is part of the problem, not a solution.

    For most Democrats in Congress, Medicare was originally a model for health-care reform. Single-payer, universal coverage was the favored approach. Then Republicans let loose the “socialized medicine” boogeyman and Democrats panicked.

    ,bFearful that doing nothing was worse than doing the wrong thing, Democrats gave up on Medicare for the masses and opted for a drastic alternative. ObamaCare is an outrageous combination of private-market inflation, government bureaucracy, excessive mandates and a ridiculously delayed implementation schedule. When the thing finally kicked in, it hit hard—and there is plenty more pain on the way.

    Worst of all, ObamaCare looks and feels exactly like what it is: a health-care plan devised by lawyers and corporate executives rather than true health-care providers. Democrats are top-heavy with attorneys, and this hurts the party on many issues.

    If Hillary Clinton is looking for an immediate opportunity to distance herself from the Obama administration, she should promise to appoint a licensed health-care professional, such as a physician or registered nurse, as her secretary of Health and Human Services if she is elected president. I know she hasn’t announced her candidacy, but the time has come to stop playing coy.

    We Democrats need to get over ourselves, start anew on a national health-care policy, and return to our progressive principles. We claim to be the party of the underdogs, but on ObamaCare we simply catered to a different set of fat cats.

    We resent Republicans who act morally superior and pretend to have a monopoly on patriotism, but an elitist attitude doesn’t look any better on us when we refuse to admit that ObamaCare is broken beyond repair. Measurable outcomes and actual effectiveness are the honest indicators of a successful program, not good intentions or high hopes.

    We say that we are the party of the people, but “the people” too often become a singular, monolithic concept for us. We speak for the people, don’t you know, because we can decide what is best for them so they really don’t need to speak for themselves.

    The people decided otherwise on Election Day. I hope my party is listening. When the next Congress convenes in 2015, Democrats need to work with the new Republican majority, repeal ObamaCare, override a presidential veto if necessary, and start from scratch on health-care reform.

    Mr. Beu, a nonprofit professional and former hospital insurance coordinator, currently works as a counselor at a social-services agency in Denver.

  9. Admin: if they gave out Pulitzers for best blogs–you would have a living room full of them. This current subject is a fine example. You have been on this trail all along, and you were doing what Republicans and the press failed to do to get to the truth of Obamacare. What you do every day is comparable to what Judicial Watch is doing namely to separate what is false from what is true which is the essence of wisdom, according to King Solomon.

    On a lighter note, I want you to know that I have filed a notice of appearance on behalf of my client Johnathan “Appleseed” Gruber, and his defenses will be as follows:

    1. first, this is a case of mistaken identity. That was another Jonathan Gruber (nee Groper)

    2. second, my client has an ironclad alibi. He and Zeke were acting as scrub nurses for Dr. Kervorkian when these dastardly deeds were done.

    3. third, the signature on the amicus brief is a forgery. Boehner and his fellow burglars broke into my client’s office at MIT
    found the document in question, and forged his signature.

    4. fourth, he is not the architect of Obamacare. If he had been then the legislative sponsor of the bill Nancy Pelosi, an unimpeachable source, would know who his is, whereas she has testified that she never heard of him.

    5. fifth, he was just kidding when he said Obama lied and the American People were stupid. How could anyone take those arguments seriously. Why can’t we all just lighten up and get along, like Rodney King and King Obama have pleaded.

  10. “SHV, Nancy Ann DeParle will not testify on ObamaCare. As an Obama adviser Obama would move to assert executive privilege to keep her silent.”
    ****
    They will also make the same claim for Gruber, since he was a paid consultant for the WH.

    “Gruber began negotiating a sole-source contract with the Department of Health and Human Services in February of 2009, for which he was ultimately paid $392,600. The contract called for Gruber to use his statistical model for evaluating alternatives “derived from the President’s health reform proposal.” It was not a research grant, but rather a consulting contract to advise the White House Office of Health Reform, headed by Obama’s health care czar Nancy-Ann DeParle, to “develop proposals” for health care reform.

    How did the feedback loop work? Well, take Gruber’s appearance before the Senate HELP Committee on November 2, 2009, for which he used his microsimulation model to make calculations about small business insurance coverage. On the same day, Gruber released an analysis of the House health care bill, which he sent to Ezra Klein of the Washington Post. Ezra published an excerpt.

    White House blogger Jesse Lee then promoted both Gruber’s Senate testimony and Ezra Klein’s article on the White House blog. “We thought it would all be a little more open and transparent if we went ahead and published what our focus will be for the day” he said, pointing to Gruber’s “objective analysis.”

    etc.,etc. All really dirty business run out of Health Care Czar, Nancy Ann’s office

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jane-hamsher/how-the-white-house-used_b_421549.html

  11. Wow. Old Harry is scamming his Dem peers. Guess Hillary knows who NOT to expect support from:

    _________________________________________________

    WASHINGTON — Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) got a promotion on Thursday. She now has a seat at the Senate Democratic leadership table and, in a role created just for her, she will serve as a policy adviser and voice for progressives.

    Her colleagues have no idea why this is happening.

    “A liaison to liberals? I’ve never heard of such a thing,” said Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), throwing his hands in the air. “I asked her about it and she said she was some kind of adviser. I don’t know what it is. I don’t know what that all means.”

    “I didn’t even know this was happening. I never knew it,” said Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.). “I mean, they can pick whoever they want to.”

    Asked if he thought it was to help position Warren for a potential 2016 presidential run, Manchin said, “I really couldn’t speak to that.”

    Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) was the driving force behind creating the role for Warren, and he and his leadership team worked privately to figure out where she would best fit ahead of a Thursday caucus meeting, where Democrats elected their leaders for the next Congress. As the new strategic policy adviser to the Democratic Policy and Communications Center, Warren will attend weekly leadership meetings and help shape caucus policies.

    The move to bring such a prominent progressive into Senate leadership will certainly fuel speculation about Warren’s interest in a White House bid, a topic she regularly brushes off. It also signals that Democratic leaders plan to keep pushing progressive polices, even as Republicans take control of the chamber next year.

    But Democrats didn’t get to vote on whether to put Warren in leadership. Reid appointed her, so the caucus held a voice vote affirming the move.

    “That wasn’t really discussed,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said of Warren’s new role. “It’s a fait accompli.”

    Asked what Democratic senators think about Warren’s new role, Feinstein said only, “That subject never came up.”

    “I don’t know. I have no comment. I have no comment,” Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.) said, when asked if he thinks Warren’s post is a good idea. “It was not a debatable issue.”

    “No,” said Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.), asked if there was much debate on Warren’s new post.

    To be sure, Democrats were quick to sing the praises of Warren, even if they were caught off guard by her new role. Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), a moderate member of the caucus, called it “terrific” that Warren was getting the post and said it’s wrong to brand the Massachusetts Democrat solely as a voice for progressives.

    “She is not a lonely voice when it comes to trying to make sure Americans in this country get a fair shot,” McCaskill said. “I think Elizabeth Warren speaks for a lot of us when she talks about those issues, not just the more liberal organizations out there.”

    “She’s going be a strategic adviser to Sen. Schumer and I … I think it’s a great idea,” said Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), a co-chair of Democrats’ policy group with Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.). “We are just reaffirming our commitment to do everything we can to make sure government works for folks so they have a fair shot to get ahead.”

    “She is smart, she’s effective, she knows how to deliver a message that really resonates with working families,” added Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.). “It’s a great choice by Leader Reid.”

    Still, in a sign of how quickly this new role for Warren appears to have come together, even Durbin said he doesn’t know her new title.

    “You’ll have to ask Leader Reid,” Durbin said. “I’m not sure.”

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/13/elizabeth-warren-senate-leadership_n_6154784.html

  12. The people decided otherwise on Election Day. I hope my party is listening. When the next Congress convenes in 2015, Democrats need to work with the new Republican majority, repeal ObamaCare, override a presidential veto if necessary, and start from scratch on health-care reform.
    ————–
    Good idea. But dead on arrival. How can I be sure? The just re-elected Reid and Pelosi.

  13. “SHV, Nancy Ann DeParle will not testify on ObamaCare. As an Obama adviser Obama would move to assert executive privilege to keep her silent.”
    ———–
    So Roberts . . . what are you going to do about that? Roll over? Again??

    Oh sure, that was just once. And then another just once. And another. Pretty soon you don’t know who you are. But it is crystal clear what you are not: a defender of the Constitution, which is the least we are entitled to expect from a chief justice. You make Roger Taney look like John Marshall.

  14. SHV
    November 13, 2014 at 8:42 pm
    ———–
    I am not sure it matters whether he testifies. His statements are damning enough and they are a matter of record. I would let the son of a bitch twist in the wind. I think he would give his left testicle to testify in the hope of setting the record straight. But the White House will not allow that to happen.

  15. I’m still reading your post Admin, but I clearly remember Gov. Jan Brewer talking to Greta about this on FoxNews…which had to be before 2012 when I stopped listening to Fox.

    “…Plainly, this newly-discovered evidence squarely controverts Defendants’ evidence on this point, and establishes that it is far from “implausible” that the drafters or Section 36B intended to withhold tax credits and subsidies from states who declined to set up exchanges in order to place pressure on those states to set up exchanges. To the contrary, it is not only plausible, it now appears to be demonstrably true.”
    —-
    Governer Brewer was outraged that states that couldn’t afford to set up these exchanges would be punished financially for not doing so.

  16. SHV, Nancy Ann DeParle will not testify on ObamaCare.

    As an Obama adviser Obama would move to assert executive privilege to keep her silent.”

    —————-
    She could move to assert executive privilege alright and undoubtedly would.

    However—

    Whether it would be accepted is a different matter.

    Executive privilege is not an inherent power of the executive branch. It is not set forth in the constitution. Rather it is grounded in the separation of powers, and much depends on the subject matter over which it is being asserted.

    When the subject matter over which is asserted falls within the province of the executive branch, e.g. national security foreign affairs, or a law enforcement function etc. then courts will grant deference to it based on the separation of powers principle. (Note: but even in that case, the Supreme Court has declared that the privilege is qualified–not absolute.)

    Here however the subject matter over which it will be asserted to prevent the testimony of this creature DeParle relates to matters which fall squarely within the province of the legislative branch. Therefore, the legislative branch as a right to request it–on penalty of contempt. Finally, the public statements by Gruber that Congress was lied to be the executive branch should compel her testimony notwithstanding an assertion of executive privilege.

    Which is why I say it is a matter for the Supreme Court.

    The following link is instructive: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_privilege

  17. I completely agree about holding hearings after the holidays and keeping Issa out of it.

    Pinning the tail on the donkey.

    Besides sanctions by the court, is there anything more ‘legal’ that holds specific people responsible, criminal in the sense that it has screwed with people’s health care and lives and stolen their hard earned money to not only pass this law, but to force people to participate in something that profits the insurance companies?

    Since sanctions by the court are not the punch to the gut that is needed…how do those that have been hurt by this scam get retribution

    Could there be a class action lawsuit, or is this all softball stipulations that do not repay the American people?

  18. Just to be clear, I am not suggesting that a mere lie about a piece of legislation is sufficient to compel testimony by executive branch officials. But this is more than a mere lie. This is the BIG LIE and it goes to the heart a massive piece of legislation which involves 20% of the economy which congress passed in reliance upon that lie. That is the equitable and constitutional basis for overruling an assertion of executive privilege. “Equity delights to do justice, and that not by halves.”

  19. Voting at 8:43

    Full Definition of FAIT ACCOMPLI

    : a thing accomplished and presumably irreversible

    Translation from the stupid unwashed:

    Wigwam is tucked under Reid’s wing…they will fly high with the Kooks.

  20. SHV

    I agree, I would like to see the person that concocked this mirage on the American public testify so that it can get to the heart of WHO is responsible, including their holy Dear Leader.

    But, it seems like every thing else…just another meat shield that will be protected by our crooked government.

    Jesse, what freakin’ country do I live in, anyway?

  21. wbb
    ” The just re-elected Reid and Pelosi.”
    ___________________

    And, they created a new leadership spot for One Drop – representing the progs. Actually, given the mood of the country, and the lessons learned from O’s term and 1/2 as POTUS. continued, public linking of Warren to the progressives will not endear her to the voting public across party lines. It won’t help the cause, with anyone other than the progressives, who are already pro-One Drop. You have to wonder if Reid, Pelosi and the rest of the Dims really see her as a viable candidate in the general election of 2016. If so, the disconnect between Dims and the public is even wider than it initially appeared to be.

    Do the Dims truly believe that their “in your face” response to losing the midterms is the best approach – for either their party or the country? Clearly O didn’t give a damn about the opinions of Americans when he announced immediately following the election that he would proceed with his amnesty plan ASAP. Maybe Reid thinks focusing on the progressive agenda right now, after big Dim loses is a good idea.

    These progs are either too proud to acknowledge that they have lost – not just the battle, but the war; – or they are too stupid to recognize the handwriting on the wall. Or, could they just be insane? The very definition of “insanity” is to continue to do the same thing over and over again, expecting a different outcome.

    The very definition of insanity ws to continue going the same thing over and over again, expecting a different outcome.

  22. Oops sorry bout the repetitiveness of that last sentence. My computer jacked up the comment window, and that sentence appeared to have been deleted. I see that it wasn’t.

  23. When the republicans take control of congress, they should slow walk any elimination of the employer mandate. I want those covered by employer insurance to feel the effects of Obamacare as I have—with a huge increase in deductible and the premium. Unless they feel it themselves they will remain indifferent. I used to talk about the practical wisdom of the American people, as seen in juries and elections. I no longer talk that way, because after electing Obama twice, this generation of Americans really is what Gruber says they are, and the only difference between me and him on that subject is I deplore their ignorance, whereas he celebrates it because it empowers him and people like him to do anything they want.

    I spoke with a guy today who went to the White House to meet with Obama after the financial crash of 2008 which was caused by banking organizations speculating on real estate and producing a bubble. He figured the new president would hold them accountable for what they had done to destroy the net worth of the middle class. But Obama did no such thing. He described the problem, and then he said you in the banking industry have a public relations problem and my people can help you overcome it.

    I told this guy I am not surprised at all. That is exactly the way Obama campaigns–no concern for the substantive issues, promises are like pie crusts made to be broken, focus only on theatrics. It is also the way he governs. And in the aftermath of the 2010 midterm where his party was resoundingly defeated because of his perverse policies, he told the media and his party, we do not have a policy problem, we have a messaging problem.

  24. http://www.politico.com/story/2014/11/elizabeth-warren-liberal-donors-112888.html

    Elizabeth Warren gets rock-star reception at liberal donors confab

    Elizabeth Warren insists she has no interest in running for president in 2016, but the rich liberals to whom she spoke Thursday afternoon seemed unwilling to take ‘no’ for an answer.

    The Massachusetts senator got a rock stars’ welcome during a closed-door speech to major donors, one of whom interrupted her by yelling “Run, Liz, Run!”

    Warren drew multiple standing ovations
    during her talk, held in a banquet room at Washington’s Mandarin Oriental hotel during the annual winter meeting of the Democracy Alliance, a club of major liberal donors.

    Throughout the day, donors repeatedly broached the question of whether Warren would run to Paul Egerman, a Democracy Alliance board member who was the national finance chairman of her Senate race and introduced Warren for her speech Thursday. He patiently but firmly told each that she would not seek the Democratic presidential nomination.

    That didn’t stop a donor from asking Warren herself with the first question during a question-and-answer session following her speech, according to a Democracy Alliance source who was in the room. She also answered definitively in the negative, said the source.

    Yet the continued interest in a Warren 2016 campaign from the ranks of the Democracy Alliance could, at the least, hint at trouble for Hillary Clinton, the presumed Democratic front-runner, when it comes to winning over liberal donors and activists.

    The Democracy Alliance has had an outsized influence in Democratic politics. It works to leverage its donors’ massive bank accounts to steer the party to the left on causes dear to liberals — including fighting to reduce economic inequality and the role of money in politics. Warren has emerged as a standard-bearer for those fights, and her address on Thursday dealt with economic inequality. [snip]

    POLITICO caught up with her as she made her way to a car waiting outside. But she ignored a question about whether her appearance — a closed-door speech to major donors who write huge checks, sometimes anonymously, to influence the political process — conflicted with her public denunciations of the role of conservative big money in politics. [snip]

    Clinton was not invited to any part of the Mandarin meeting, which some of her supporters interpreted as a snub.

  25. MoonOnPluto will love this:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2833967/Final-Senate-race-looks-Louisiana-laugher-internal-polls-GOP-s-Bill-Cassidy-opening-16-point-lead-Sen-Mary-Landrieu.html

    ‘Her campaign is running on fumes’: Final Senate race looks to be a Louisiana laugher as internal polls show GOP’s Bill Cassidy opening up 16-point lead over Sen. Mary Landrieu

    Poll commissioned by GOP candidate’s campaign shows massive advantage leading up to Dec. 6 runoff
    Win by GOP Rep. Bill Cassidy would bring total Republican pickup to a whopping 10 seats
    Landrieu is hoping a long-awaited vote on the Keystone XL pipeline will improve her fortunes
    Poll was leaked in Washington to send a message to energy lobbyists who think she can prevail
    Survey is an ‘automated’ phone poll that Landrieu’s campaign considers less credible than traditional surveys conducted by voice
    ‘Her campaign is running on fumes,’ the pollster told MailOnline

    Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu is trailing her Republican challenger by a giant 16-point margin in a runoff for one of Louisiana’s two U.S. Senate seats, according to poll results obtained by MailOnline.

    The survey, commissioned by GOP Rep. Bill Cassidy’s campaign, was leaked to media in order to fire a shot over the senator’s bow and send a signal to energy lobbyists that her ship is taking on water.

    It suggests that Democrats’ worst fears have been realized even though Landrieu edged Casssidy by 1 percentage point on Election Day.

  26. I wonder if Landrieu will ask Obama to campaign with her?

    ————–

    Amazing that Fauxcohantas has better political instincts that Hillary. At least she has the sense to play “hard to get” at this stage in the process, while Hillary is travelling far and wide putting up yard signs.

  27. Big media calls McConnell “shrewd”.

    How shrew?

    It depends on the subject.

    When it comes to pork, and getting donor money he IS shrewd.

    But when it thinking that Obama would change his stripes after losing the election,

    He is naive

    Did he really believe this, or is he preparing to go on the offensive

    For six years, he and his team have been on the defensive..

    You could argue that this was due to the fact that he did not have the votes

    But if you look at the House, his counterpart did have the votes, but he too was failed to answer the bell

    The thing both of them need to understand is they have a limited time frame

    To prove to those who elected them that they have the will and capacity to fight

    Mitch makes a big to do about issues voters do not care about but his contributors do

    Issues like repealing the Obamacare tax on medical devices—a complete red herring

    Obama is bent on rubbing the country’s nose in the dirt, and McConnell’s along with it

    He is pursuing his toxic agenda in violation of the constitution and the spirit of bi partisanship

    Must take Obama apart for this, rather than pussy footing.

    Is he shrewd enough to understand this?
    ————–
    McConnell: ‘Early Signs are Not Good’ for Obama Learning Lesson from Election

    by
    BRIDGET JOHNSON

    Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) acknowledged to reporters today that “the early signs are not good” for President Obama cooperating with the incoming GOP majority.

    “I’ve been very disturbed about the way the president has proceeded in the wake of the election, whether it was his intervention on net neutrality, his apparent decision to move ahead on immigration with executive orders, the rather ridiculous agreement with the Chinese under which they basically have to do nothing for the next 16 years while we’re losing jobs in this country as a result of EPA’s overregulation,” McConnell said after the caucus met for leadership elections today.

    “I had, maybe NAIVELY, hoped the president would look at the results of the election and decide to come to this political center and do some business with us. I still hope he does at some point.”

    McConnell argued, though, that Senate Democrats “did get the message” with Friday’s expected vote on the Keystone XL pipeline.

    Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), facing a Dec. 6 runoff versus Rep. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) to keep her seat, said on the Senate floor today that she didn’t have any hard “indication” President Obama would veto the bill. It’s widely expected, though.

    “They got the message on the Keystone pipeline, and I think that’s why you’ve seen the current Democratic majority of the Senate have an epiphany and decide to allow a vote they’ve been blocking for literally years,” McConnell said.

    McConnell also commented on the “stupidity” comments of Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber.

    “I think you have all heard the definition of a ‘Washington gaffe,’ when a politician mistakenly tells you what he really thinks. We were subjected during the Obamacare debate to a whole lot of stuff that we all knew was not true, not even close to true,” he said.

    “And what this insider is saying confirms that they were spinning tales from beginning to end because they knew they couldn’t tell the truth about Obamacare and have a chance of passing it, even with a Democratic Senate with 60 votes,” McConnell continued.

    “So, look, the American people hate, detest and despite Obamacare. Virtually all of us would like to see it pulled out root and branch. We understand that the president obviously is not sympathetic with that point of view. But we’ll be voting on these issues, both the overall Obamacare issue and the various pieces of it, like the individual mandate, the medical device tax, and trying to restore the 40-hour work week.”

  28. I hope Hillary has political detectives out sniffing to find out if the Kooks are gearing up to pull a 2008 Part II voter cheating scam on a grand scale again, to get a win for Wigwam woman in the primary.

    If she finds out this ‘anointed promotion’ of open doors is in play…Hillary needs to wait until the last minute to tell them ‘good luck, no thanks’ to running.

    It will break my heart, but no way should run for a party that doesn’t have her back. Time will tell.

    If Hillary doesn’t run, I will immediately sign up as an Independent.

  29. Shadowfax November 14, 2014 at 2:06 am

    It will break my heart, but no way should run for a party that doesn’t have her back.

    Look, she can’t expect to have the whole Party behind her before the primaries even begin! She should at least expect some competition!

  30. I hate to admit this, but words of wisdom from Axelgrease may be less treacherous than advice from Plouffe. HuffPo reports him saying:

    “Even when a president is popular, people tend to seek the remedy and not the replica. They want someone who has the qualities that they miss in the president,” Axelrod said…. I think in 2016 people are going to want someone who is a little less nuanced and a little less attuned to the complexity, someone who projects more of a sense of black and white certainty.”

    Axelrod added that such an environment “favors Hillary Clinton more than the 2008 environment because she tends to be someone who speaks in simple, declarative sentences with great certainty.”

    It looks like Axelrod knows her strengths. He’s not really a sworn enemy like Plouffe: he worked on her 2000 Senate campaign.

  31. Obama is the least transparent president in history.

    But the architect of Obamacare, Gruber, aka Grouper the fish, is a completely different story.

    Why?

    Because he admits they lied and they think the American People are stupid.

    Can’t get much more transparent than that, can you?

    Frankly, his candor is refreshing.

    And on his second point, he will get no argument from me.

    After all they elected Obama twice.

  32. Shadowfax
    November 14, 2014 at 2:06 am
    I hope Hillary has political detectives out sniffing to find out if the Kooks are gearing up to pull a 2008 Part II voter cheating scam on a grand scale again, to get a win for Wigwam woman in the primary.
    ————-
    Shadow, you can worry about that if you like. In 2008 I would have been right there with you. But now? No way I am on pins and needles. It is as nothing compared to the grave uncertainties we face with the jack ass in the White House. What Hillary does or does not do is her business, and since she is not going to consult with me, I regard the entire question with a sense of detachment–and boredom. She will get the nomination if she wants it, the pieces are falling in place. Beyond that I cannot abide the psycho drama, mainly because I went through it before and got it out of my system.

    Beyond that, I would rather have the left wing extremists devoting their time, energy and resources to pushing this no ball Warren than devoting those resources to co-opting Hillary to their platform and views. It makes it easier for her to say no to them which she needs to do in order to win the general election. Simply put, I am glad that a weak opponent like Warren is there. It is like Gresham’s law, i.e. the bad money (Warren) drives out the good (a more credible opponent). Furthermore, if Warren runs and Warren loses then it will break the death grip which the totalitarians now have over the party. That plus the implosion of Obama. The latter is what Axelgrease is worried about because that will diminish his relevance. He betrayed Hillary therefore he knows there will be no place for him in her campaign or administration. He will be out in the cold. And there will come a time when his phone no longer rings, because big media will see him as the one who helped Obama bamboozled them.

  33. Admin, I hope you are hearing from people far and wide on this post. It certainly deserves a significant response, and as always I need tutorials, so TY for continued dedication & excellence.

  34. TheRock: here is more on the question you asked about Lynch from a former deputy US Attorney in the Civil Rights Division:

    Some might rejoice at Holder’s departure, assuming a clean slate means a new approach. Beware. The Justice Department has suffered the same type of fundamental transformation the president promised for the country. Without stiff and sophisticated congressional oversight, Lynch may be Eric Holder 2.0.

    http://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2014/11/13/get-back-loretta-holders-successor-promises-more-of-the-same/

  35. Booker would be a stronger opponent than Warren. He would be catnip for big media and blacks in the party and Wall Street interests. Big media could just coast through the election because all the lies and deceptions they perpetrated on the American people to blind them to the truth could be re deployed, with the same lines and buzz words. They say in politics nothing changes. But when you are dealing with an electorate a majority of whom are even stupider than Gruber’s comments suggest, and an opposing party that has no mojo and a press that has no scrupples and acts as an agent of the democrat party, history can and will repeat itself. Look for Booker to disavow any intention of running, but reversing that decision at the behest of big media who will continue to play the race card and his legions of admirers in the minority community. Frankly, I doubt Hillary could beat him, since blacks control the party, leftists are in charge, and he has youth on his side. The presence of Warren makes it harder, but not impossible, for him to make his move. But if she falters, expect him to throw in his hat, and get ready for eight more years of race baiting. It is clear to me that the country has learned nothing and forgotten nothing. I don’t mean us. I mean them.

  36. “Even when a president is popular, people tend to seek the remedy and not the replica. They want someone who has the qualities that they miss in the president,” Axelrod said…. I think in 2016 people are going to want someone who is a little less nuanced and a little less attuned to the complexity,
    ———-
    There is nothing complex about an 8 foot put. It is a matter of assessing the conditions, controlling the putter head, geometry and p=1/2mv2.

    But if you freeze over the putt, they call it the yips.

    And when you have the yips, you cannot score.

  37. There is an article by Rick Moran (RINO Hour of Power) who suggests that the unstated premise of the Republican argument is a variation on Carry Me Back to Old Virginnie and the lost world of white privilege.

    As in:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhhcH6JLaQA

    He then argues that what the dwindling white majority see as halcion times gone by, was a world where women and people of color were in chains.

    This kind of hyperbole and misinterpetation is typical of Rick.

    After all, he is a RINO and unlike the old cigarette commercial he would rather switch than fight.

    At this point the democrat party stands for two things: the race card and expanding the powers of the state internally while withdrawing them internationally. No that is not how they would put it. But if they had the basic honest of Professor Gruber, that is exactly what they would say.

    And the Republican Party?

    What do they stand for?

    I don’t mean what is their rhetoric?

    I mean what are they willing to fight for, and if necessary die for?

    Well, we got part of our answer in Mississippi did we not?

    Perhaps the better question is what should they stand for at this point.

    Given the stupidity and child like credulity of the American voter.

    They must find a charismatic who is in tune with the culture.

    Who allies himself with the welfare of the American people.

    Who lays bare the corruption of Washington.

    Who draws on allies from all elements of society. .

    So far the Republican Party has done none of that.

    Yes, there are a few stars in the vast heaven–Gowdy, Lee, Sessions, Coburn.

    But the godless, money driven RINO rules the roost.

    What seems complicated must be made simple.

    So simple minded people with Harvard degrees can understand it.

    Perhaps

  38. It is all about the money. 😡

    MONTPELIER, Vt. — The Obamacare architect who admitted using misinformation to exploit “the stupidity of the American voter” is being paid $400,000 to advise Gov. Peter Shumlin on single-payer health care in Vermont.

    Jonathan Gruber, an MIT professor and policy guru of the Affordable Care Act, told an audience at the University of Pennsylvania last year that he

    http://watchdog.org/182774/gruber-single-payer/

  39. jeswezey

    Look, she can’t expect to have the whole Party behind her before the primaries even begin! She should at least expect some competition!

    ——

    Agreed, I just don’t want a rigged election against her by the Kooks.

    A semi-fair election, (I don’t think there are such things as ‘fair’ elections any more), with competition between candidates is a good thing…but the kind of election fraud we saw in 2008 was pure corruption.

  40. Wbb

    I wish I was able to detach myself from certain people I care deeply about, it sure would make my life a lot less stressful…but so far, I haven’t been able to accomplish that.

    Pretty much, I was just venting.


    Wbb
    …”Beyond that, I would rather have the left wing extremists devoting their time, energy and resources to pushing this no ball Warren than devoting those resources to co-opting Hillary to their platform and views.”

    This is the way I felt before yesterday, I guess having Reid take her under his tattered wing, in front of Congress…made me wonder if the backdoor fix is already going on.

    I was glad to hear that wigwam was ‘appointed’ by His Minor Highness, and other Dims were not in on it.

    Reid and Nasty are in bed with the Kooks and it makes me sick.

  41. “is being paid $400,000 to advise Gov. Peter Shumlin ”
    ****
    “This is an extraordinarily lucrative enterprise in the age of Obamacare that Mr. Gruber himself brought about. Individual states have lavished taxpayer cash on Mr. Gruber in return for cookie-cutter reports that describe the impact of Obamacare for each of the several states.

    Minnesota, for example, used federal Obamacare grants to pay Mr. Gruber to attend one meeting, participate in a biweekly email list and print a copy of the report, all for $329,000. Wisconsin paid Mr. Gruber $400,000 for the same material, requested by the office of then-Gov. Jim Doyle, a Democrat. When the report was presented, Gov. Scott Walker, a Republican, didn’t want Mr. Gruber at the news conference. Vermont is paying him another $400,000. Such a deal!

    West Virginia, Maine, Colorado and Oregon have partaken of Mr. Gruber’s services, too, guaranteeing him a tidy sum.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/nov/13/editorial-jonathan-grubers-payday/

  42. So little time. So many potential fuckees. Pray tell what is Ms Lubrack to do?
    —————
    These comments from LegalInsurrection are on point:

    Henry Hawkins | November 14, 2014 at 10:05 am

    Hmmm. She (Pelosi) says she doesn’t know Gruber, but there is much on the record proving she does. It’s inconceivable that an elected official would lie, let alone the House Minority Leader, so something’s really amiss here. Hmmm.

    Reply

    Anchovy | November 14, 2014 at 10:36 am

    Perhaps she is using “know” in the biblical sense.

    In this case, she was so busy “knowing” the rest of us she really never had time to “Know” Mr. Gruber.

  43. Occasionally I get bored with the Uni-Party street theater and look behind the curtain. The reality of Obamacare in seen the the stock charts of the “health care” companies. I looked at a few, Wellpoint, Unitedhealth, Cigna, Aetna. They are all basically the same. Beginning in mid 2012 the stock prices increase at a 45 degree angle on the charts. I suspect that Nancy Ann is being well compensated for her two years of work to make a law of the largest tax payer/corporate give away in history by her new employer at “Consonance Capital Partners”.

    If investigative journalism still existed, someone would be tracking the “bi-partisan” political contributions of the health industry.

  44. SHV

    Along with following the money to the insurance ho’s…it would be nice to know how many Congressmen have bought stock in these companies since 2008.

  45. S, the article you quoted has an analysis that is almost word for word a digest of our critique of ObamaCare from the start. The paragraphs you highlighted are a good distillation of the ObamaCare scam as posted by that Obama Dimocrat who is off the Hopium:

    http://online.wsj.com/articles/burke-beu-this-democrat-is-giving-up-on-obamacare-1415919619

    ObamaCare is a failure. For anyone who thinks this is a misprint because no Democratic activist would make such a comment, let me add that it is too big, too complicated and too expensive. Without a public option within its network of exchanges, ObamaCare is a giant blank check to the insurance companies that pushed it through Congress. It punishes responsible consumers like me and treats younger individuals as fools who are expected to pay the bills while not paying attention.

    If Hillary Clinton is looking for an immediate opportunity to distance herself from the Obama administration, she should promise to appoint a licensed health-care professional, such as a physician or registered nurse, as her secretary of Health and Human Services if she is elected president. I know she hasn’t announced her candidacy, but the time has come to stop playing coy.

    The people decided otherwise on Election Day. I hope my party is listening. When the next Congress convenes in 2015, Democrats need to work with the new Republican majority, repeal ObamaCare, override a presidential veto if necessary, and start from scratch on health-care reform.

    What Mr. Beu and probably Hillary don’t realize is that after ObamaCare few will want to trust the government with health care especially anything like universal health care.

  46. Here is the Charles Krauthammer video at Special Report which echoes our strategy to break the Big Media blockade with hearings early next year (Krauthammer’s comments start at 4:10 although the entire video is worth viewing:

  47. http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/11/13/3-things-white-house-doesnt-want-to-know-about-obamacare-plus-3-things-coming/

    3 things White House doesn’t want you to know about ObamaCare, plus 3 things coming in 2015 you aren’t going to like

    ObamaCare architect and MIT professor Jonathan Gruber’s remarks about the “stupidity” of the American voter and the passage of ObamaCare is bad enough. What is even more disturbing are his comments about the bill’s deliberate lack of transparency. White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest’s denials Thursday were also absurd.

    The arrogance and condescension that has too often characterized the Obama administration’s policies have put the American public in the unfortunate position of having to learn about the health care changes the hard way, on their own.

    Here are three crucial changes that the president clearly didn’t want you to know about:

    1. HUGE DEFICITS AND NEW TAXES. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the latest projections for the net cost of ObamaCare over the next ten years are just over $1.4 trillion. Whereas President Obama promised in 2009 that it would cost less than $1 trillion over ten years. In order to partially pay for this, ObamaCare has added more than 20 new taxes totaling over $500 billion.

    2. BUREAUCRACY. Speaking of Orwellian politics, ObamaCare includes 159 new boards and agencies to restrict and govern your health care choices. (me- who are these people? who do they answer to? where do they get their power from? what kind of medical training to they have?)

    3. STILL MORE BUREAUCRACY. Dysfunctional state exchanges with high deductible policies, narrow doctor networks, including federally-run exchanges in 36 states which may not be allowable under the law (SCOTUS currently considering this case).

    Here are three new things coming up in 2015 that you aren’t going to like:

    1. PENALTIES WILL RISE – INDIVIDUAL MANDATE. In 2014, people are facing a penalty of $95 per person or 1% of income.

    In 2015, the penalty will more than triple to $325 per person or 2% of income, whichever is higher.

    If an American failed to get coverage this year, the penalty will be taken out of their tax refund in early 2015.

    2. SERIOUS RATE HIKES FOR CHEAPER OBAMACARE PLANS. According to Investor’s Business Daily, the lowest cost bronze plan will increase an average of 7 % in many cases, the lowest cost silver plan by 9%, and the lowest priced catastrophic policy will climb 18 percent on average. Double digit rate hikes are anticipated in several southern and Midwestern states including Kansas, Iowa, Louisiana, North and South Carolina, Tennessee, Iowa, and Virginia.

    Subsidies will continue to be a huge part of the program. In 2014, subsidies provided ¾ of the premiums for the federally-run exchanges.

    3. EMPLOYER MANDATE WILL TAKE EFFECT. After being delayed for a year, large businesses (100 or more employees in 2015, 50 or more in 2016) will be required to offer affordable (and subsidized) health plans to at least 70 percent of their full time employees or face a $2,000-$3,000 penalty per employee.

    This mandate will lead to fewer full time employees being hired.

    The latest Kaiser Family Foundation poll in July revealed that 53 percent of those surveyed had an unfavorable view of ObamaCare.

    I expect this number to rise as more of ObamaCare’s “bells and whistles” are rolled out. Americans are experiencing ObamaCare as a cancer of the health care system. — The more it grows, the more it infiltrates and destroys healthy tissue.

    Dr. Marc Siegel, a practicing internist, joined FOX News Channel (FNC) as a contributor in 2008.

  48. Ugh, from the NYO’Times

    Spurred by Midterm Losses, Liberal and Moderate Democrats Square Off Over Strategy

    By JONATHAN MARTINNOV. 14, 2014

    Photo
    Senator Sherrod Brown, Democrat of Ohio. Credit J. Scott Applewhite/Associated Press
    Continue reading the main story Share This Page

    Email
    Share
    Tweet
    Save
    more

    Continue reading the main story
    Continue reading the main story

    WASHINGTON — The Democrats’ widespread losses last week have revived a debate inside the party about its fundamental identity, a long-running feud between center and left that has taken on new urgency in the aftermath of a disastrous election and in a time of deeply felt economic anxiety.

    The discussion is taking place in post-election meetings, conference calls and dueling memos from liberals and moderates. But it will soon grow louder, shaping the actions of congressional Democrats in President Obama’s final two years and, more notably, defining the party’s presidential primary in 2016.

    “The debate will ultimately play out in a battle for the soul of the Clinton campaign,” said Matt Bennett, a senior official at Third Way, the centrist political group.

    Hillary Rodham Clinton, should she run, will face tension between the business-friendly wing of the party that was ascendant in the economic boom during her husband’s administration and the populism of Senator Elizabeth Warren, Democrat of Massachusetts, that has gained currency of late.

    “I want her to run on a raising wages agenda and not cater to Wall Street but to everyday people,” Richard Trumka, president of the AFL-CIO, said of his expectations for Mrs. Clinton.

    Straddling the two blocs could prove difficult. Progressives have been emboldened to criticize party leaders after the Republican rout, particularly given a lack of a coherent Democratic message to address the problem of stagnant wages.

    Sifting through returns showing that lower-income voters either supported Republicans or did not vote, liberals argue that without a more robust message about economic fairness, the party will continue to suffer among working class voters, particularly in the South and Midwest.

    Mr. Obama’s wide popularity among activists and his attempt to transcend the traditional moderate-versus-liberal divide have largely papered over Democratic divisions on economic policy for the last six years. The party was also brought together by passage the health care law, a goal of Democratic presidents since Harry Truman. But with Mr. Obama’s popularity flagging, and an economic recovery largely benefiting the affluent, Democrats are clashing anew.
    Continue reading the main story

    Verbatim: A Kitchen Ambush for Hagel 11:09 AM ET
    Warren Opposes a Treasury Nominee With Wall Street Ties 10:21 AM ET
    First Draft Focus: A Peek at British Burma 09:15 AM ET

    Continue reading the main story
    Related Coverage

    Election 2016: Did Someone Say ‘2016’? Presidential Contenders CircleNOV. 3, 2014

    Unlike the 1980s, when heavy losses prompted moderates to plead with the party to move away from liberal interest groups and toward to the middle, it is now progressives who are the most outspoken.

    And they are seizing on the election results to reorient the party. “Too many Democrats are too close to Wall Street, too many Democrats support trade agreements that outsource jobs and too many Democrats are too willing to cut Social Security — and that’s why we lose elections,” said Senator Sherrod Brown, Democrat of Ohio.

    Mr. Brown said he had talked to over 60 Ohio Democrat leaders and activists since they got trounced in every statewide election and saw their state chairman quit. “The message I heard from all of them was: the Democratic Party should fight for the little guy.”
    Continue reading the main story

    To help provide a bridge to liberals, Senate Democrats on Thursday named Ms. Warren as part of their leadership.

    While overwhelmingly in sync on the substance of cultural issues, some of the populists believe Democrats placed too much emphasis on such matters and not enough on economic fairness, depressing voter turnout.

    “Gay marriage, abortion and birth control are important,” said Terry O’Sullivan, president of the Laborers International Union. “But people join our organization for their livelihood, and that’s what our people vote on: their economic self-interest. I do think the party needs to re-examine what it stands for and get back to bread-and-butter issues.”

    Labor is having its own struggles, with membership declining and Republican-controlled states moving to limit union power. Democrats lost crucial races in part because of their candidates’ struggles in traditional union enclaves like eastern Iowa, suburban Detroit and parts of Wisconsin.

    For example, in losing to the Republican they perhaps most wanted to beat, Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin, unions saw their members’ turnout slip. After making up 32 percent of all voters in the 2012 recall attempt against Mr. Walker, union households made up just 21 percent of the Wisconsin electorate last week.

    Part of that drop is a result of Mr. Walker’s pushing through changes to collective bargaining law that thinned the ranks of his state’s union members. But what exasperates some labor leaders is that Mary Burke, the Democrat who tried to unset Mr. Walker, would not even commit to undoing the changes that have crippled unions.

    Echoing many liberals, Steve Rosenthal, a longtime Democratic strategist with ties to labor, said progressive organizations and unions should become more engaged in primaries and push candidates to stand for their agenda just as the right tries to make Republican candidates hew to conservative orthodoxy.

    “I think it’s critical for folks on the left to do more of the same,” Mr. Rosenthal said

    There were a handful of bright spots in an otherwise dismal year for Democrats, and progressives are holding up as models the success of three Senate candidates who ran as populists: Senator Al Franken of Minnesota, Senator Jeff Merkley of Oregon and Senator-elect Gary Peters of Michigan.

    Mr. Merkley won by 19 percentage points with a campaign centered on the loss of well-paying jobs, the spiraling cost of college tuition and his opposition to trade deals that he said send jobs overseas. While Democrats nationally were losing whites without a college degree by 30 percentage points, Mr. Merkley narrowly carried that bloc of voters.

    “We didn’t lose them here in Oregon because we talked about what they care about,” Mr. Merkley said.

    But some center-left Democrats believe that this is the exception and that the party should give up on winning a majority of such voters.

    “Slowly and steadily since 1968, culture has trumped economics with voting and the white working class,” said Kenneth Baer, a former Obama administration official who has written a book on modern liberalism. “It’s become the great white whale for a shipful of Democratic strategists. Obama proved that while we cannot get wiped out with that demographic, the future of the coalition is among growing parts of the electorate which are neither white nor working class.”
    Continue reading the main story Continue reading the main story
    Continue reading the main story

    The question of which voters to pursue captures the party’s broader debate about its agenda. Centrist Democrats have chalked up the party’s losses to an insufficient performance among moderate and middle-class voters.

    “We talk about policies helping the middle-class, but the ones we promote the most are ones that don’t speak to the middle-class, like raising the minimum wage,” said Al From, who founded the moderate Democratic Leadership Council in the 1980s to counter the party’s move to the left and helped propel Bill Clinton to the White House in 1992.

    Many liberals believe the disconnect between the politics of the party’s grass-roots and the message they hear from Democratic administrations has left blue-collar voters unenthused. “We do not have to struggle for an agenda that connects with working-class voters,” said Representative Rosa DeLauro, Democrat of Connecticut. “We have an agenda that does that, but it does not get vocalized at the top.”

    Yet many progressives concur that simply pushing an increase in the minimum wage is an inadequate solution. Liberals want tougher restrictions on banks, more generous federal student loan aid, enhanced collective bargaining rights and a reassessment of the country’s trade policy.

    Mr. Obama has made clear he intends to work with congressional Republicans to push for fewer restrictions on trade. Some union leaders said they intended to fight those efforts, and would be looking for an ally in Mrs. Clinton.

    “The next six months we’re going to be relentless on trade,” vowed Larry Cohen, president of the Communications Workers of America. “I hope she comes to our side on this fight. The president is not starting out there.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/15/us/politics/democratic-party-iberals-and-moderates.html?_r=0

  49. “What Mr. Beu and probably Hillary don’t realize is that after ObamaCare few will want to trust the government with health care especially anything like universal health care.”
    ****
    Which was the ultimate long term goal of the PPAHC law. The law itself will have a financial implosion by 2019 no matter what else happens but the damage to getting to sustainable health care delivery will last decades. And that goal is the reason that Hillary never had a chance in 2008.

    I suspect that that the top three conditions that the DNC agreed to in return for unlimited money were: Continued financial bailouts, no prosecution of Wall Street/bank fraud and passage of the industry/lobbyist written (Senate version) of healthcare “reform”. Hillary wouldn’t have been trusted to abide by any of those conditions.

  50. Ron Fournier of National Journal was an is an ObamaCare supporter:

    http://www.nationaljournal.com/white-house/obamacare-s-foundation-of-lies-20141112

    Obamacare’s Foundation of Lies
    There is only one kind of lie, it’s apolitical, and it cripples the best of intentions. [snip]

    This truism came to mind when I read a Washington Post story headlined, “Who Is Jonathan Gruber?” It was an important and workmanlike report on the Obamacare adviser who bragged about the political advantages of deceiving voters, whom Gruber called stupid.

    “Those comments have struck a nerve on the right,” wrote Jose A. DelReal (emphasis added), “with some of the law’s critics pointing to Gruber’s comments as evidence that the administration intentionally deceived the American public on the costs of the programs.”

    My first reaction was, “No! No! Not just on the right!” I strongly support bipartisan efforts to expand the availability of health coverage to the working poor, and bending the cost curve that threatens federal budgets for years to come. While I think President Obama and congressional Democrats helped contribute to the 2009 standoff over what became the Affordable Care Act, I’ve openly rooted for Obamacare’s success. I’ve denounced the knee-jerk opposition from the GOP, a party that once embraced key elements of Obamacare. My ideology is amorphous; I am not “on the right.”

    All of that, and yet: Gruber’s remarks struck a nerve with me.

    Appearing on an academic panel a year ago, this key Obamacare adviser argued that the law never would have passed if the administration had been honest about the fact that the so-called penalty for noncompliance with the mandate was actually a tax.

    “And, basically, call it ‘the stupidity of the American voter,‘ or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical to getting the thing to pass,” Gruber said.

    He called you stupid. He admitted that the White House lied to you. Its officials lied to all of us—Republicans, Democrats, and independents; rich and poor; white and brown; men and women.

    Liberals should be the angriest. Not only were they personally deceived, but the administration’s dishonest approach to health care reform has helped make Obamacare unpopular while undermining the public’s faith in an activist government. A double blow to progressives.

    On top of that, Gruber has helped make the legal case for anti-Obamacare lawyers. In July, a year-old video surfaced in which Gruber said Washington legally withholds money from states that don’t create their own health care exchanges. That could be construed by the Supreme Court to buttress the case against health insurance subsidies.

    Back to The Post’s story: Gruber’s remarks are evidence that the administration intentionally deceived the American public on the costs of the programs. The author attributed that fact to “some of the law’s critics.” Not necessary; Gruber’s remarks may not be dispositive, but they certainly are evidence.

    Last year, The Post helped document how Obama and his advisers knowingly misled the public during his 2012 reelection campaign by repeatedly saying that, under Obamacare, people could keep their doctors and keep their health plans. To knowingly mislead is to lie. [snip]

    And so even I have to admit, as a supporter, that Obamacare was built and sold on a foundation of lies. No way around it, unless you’re willing to accept a political system that colors its lies—the reds, the whites, and the blues.

  51. SHV

    If investigative journalism still existed, someone would be tracking the “bi-partisan” political contributions of the health industry.
    _________________________

    It took all of 5 seconds to look up Blue Cross/ Blue Shield.

    Mitch McConnell, John Boehner and Lamar Alexander are the top 3 Republican recipients.

  52. My plan went up 35% starting 1/1/15. It happens to be a great plan, but it will eventually cost me what I was paying on my prior group plan which is not longer being offered .

  53. Fournier is a dirt bag, and it comes out in spades in that article.

    1. first of all, the thing that bothers him is not the deception and lies at the base of Obamacre. Trust me it is not that. If this had not been made public his reaction would have been no different than that of Gruber, namely, the end justies the means.

    2. second, just shut the fuck up with that faux moral outrage. You and people like you raised the red flag when Bush violated fourth amendment rights, and stood silent when Obama expanded what Bush did. Don’t you ever come to me again with an argument that the Constitution is violated because we have seen that whatever affinity you have for that document begins and ends with which party is in power.

    3. third, fuck you with your stupid elitist knee jerk reaction that whatever any criticism conservatives launch against the ultra vires actions and abuse of power by Obama are per force knee jerk and disconnnected from rational thought or empirical analysis. This is not a defense of Republicans, rather it is a searing indictment of you and your fellow travellers who are so sure that you are right that you let the country go to hell, so long as your little corner of it is protected.

    4. fourth, it is ironic to watch the elitists of the left deplore someone who is an elitist just like them, but gives their game away.

  54. To me Gruber is the hero.

    An honest man when he thinks no one is listening.

    Do not attack Gruber for giving the game away.

    Save your angst for those who rigged the game to enrich themselves and to fuck the American People.

  55. My plan went up 35%
    ———
    So . . .

    (I learned that introductory remark from worthless Danny Werthal of the glorious IRS when he lied to Congress)

    What does that increment represent?

    Adverse loss experience?

    You would know, but I doubt it.

    You know the Catholic Church forbade usery.

    And even the mafia put a lid on the vig.

    But when it comes to the party of hope and change.

    There are no limits on how far they will reach into your pocket.

    And, if you dare to object, then you must be a redneck—I mean racist.

    It is a fine kettle of fish, but it is a money maker for big media.

  56. the Charles Krauthammer video

    —–
    Intelligent comments by Krauthammer, as always. He is another R I respect.

    “…and no one should give speeches at the hearings.”

    Amen, they only turn people off and stop listening.

  57. Mormaer
    November 14, 2014 at 12:32 pm
    The Gruber videos capture him marketing his part of the scam.
    —————
    Well, ya know, consistency is the hobgobblin of small minds, not brillant ones like Gruber.

    The say the mark of genius is the ability to hold two contadictory thoughts in mind at the same time.

    Such as his amicus brief that federal subsidies apply to states without exchanges vs.

    His contemporaneous remarks that if the states failed to establish exchanges they would not receive subsidies

    And his insistence that Obamacare is the greatest civil rights victory since 1964 vs.

    His current admission that it is the progeny of lies, and the stupidity of the American People.

    Yes, he is a genius.

    But, as Milton said: truth comes like a bastard into the world bringing ill fame to him who wrought her.

    Keep your dauber up Gruber.

    You may not have Obama in your corner, but Milton is on your side.

  58. Update: It’s sadomasochism without the sex. We paid to get beaten. WaPo fact check: Yes, Gruber got $400,000 for ObamaCare work. This was done even as Gruber posed as an independent analyst of ObamaCare.

    What did Gruber do for the money besides lie to the “stupid” public? Gruber created the “Gruber Microsimulation Model” which mimics the model used by the Congressional Budget Office to make evaluations of programs. The “Gruber Microsimulation Model” was a flim-flam scam to get the CBO numbers to come out as phony as needed to pass ObamaCare. The “Gruber Microsimulation Model” was a variant of “garbage in, garbage out”. Gruber provided the garbage lies to CBO and CBO provided garbage lies to the public. What once was your/our government at work is now our masters who lie to us.

    Don’t think that Jonathan Gruber only got $400,000 for the ObamaCare scam. Gruber was grubby and grabby. Gruber got hundreds of thousands of dollars in state after state, possibly adding up to millions, as the Washington Times reports, for scams in various states too.

    Some of those states should sue Gruber to get their money back. Force Gruber to testify under oath in a trial setting. Time to play sadomasochism with us holding the whip.

    ————————————————–

  59. Shadowfax
    November 14, 2014 at 12:55 pm
    ——-
    Yes. He is a smart guy.

    But did you ever think that even though he is smart, he is like one of those peasants outside the castle wall, waving his spear and shouting, but eliciting no response, and certainly no modification of behavior by those in side the castle, except when they decide to amuse themselves by dumping buckets of flaming tar on the protesters below. In the final analysis it is all just words. The answer–if there is one, lies with an honest media and institutions. Today, those do not exist. The only way that will happen is when and if the power and hubris of Washington is removed from the governing equation.

  60. The stupid at MSNBC finally realize the smart we wrote long ago. For any chance of success Hillary Clinton 2016 needs to attack Obama in order to be completely separated from Obama:

    http://hotair.com/archives/2014/11/14/msnbc-panel-hillarys-biggest-problem-is-going-to-be-obama/

    Part of the problem is just Obama,” Stein observed. “Clearly voters have soured on the guy, and he’s going to be in bad straits with the poll numbers come then.”

    “They’re just tired of it,” Deutsch noted. “People are just ready to change the channel.”

    Huff n’ Puff’s Sam Stein and Donny boy have been among Obama’s most devoted cheerleaders.

  61. Admin: we need to be wise to the game WashPo is playing.

    First of all, they are trying to catch up with FOX who originally broke the story.

    Second, they are trying to impeach the credibility of Gruber so people will not accept the truth of what he is saying.

    Third, they are trying to make Gruber the scapegoat for the lies which all the Obama acolytes and WashPo told.

    I would like to see Gruber indicted, and then force him to trade up to get to the bigger fish in the administration.

    This must be done before WashPo and NYT can totally destroy his credibility.

    Because that is now the game, since their prior strategy of ignoring it has not worked.

  62. This is the same reaction we saw with Sebelius. People wanted to hang her out to dry. But what I wanted and did not get was the big fish behind this swindle.

  63. While Hillary mumbles and stumbles, Warren makes a very smart move:

    http://www.politico.com/story/2014/11/elizabeth-warren-antonio-weiss-treasury-undersecretary-112889.html?hp=r3_4

    Sen. Elizabeth Warren plans to oppose President Barack Obama’s nomination of Antonio Weiss, a Wall Street investment banker, to be Treasury Undersecretary for Domestic Finance, another sharp-elbowed move by the progressive movement’s most prominent leader.

    Weiss, head of global investment banking at Lazard, is widely respected on Wall Street. But he advised on Burger King’s acquisition of Canadian doughnut chain Tim Horton’s, a so-called “tax inversion deal.” Defenders say the deals are commonplace across Wall Street and Weiss did not advise on the tax portion. Such arguments have not swayed the Massachusetts Democratic senator, a persistent Wall Street critic who appears headed to a leadership role in the next Congress.

    A Warren adviser told POLITICO: “She is a no on Antonio Weiss. She was a Treasury official herself, she cares a lot about who is in the domestic finance role. It oversees Dodd-Frank implementation and other core economic policy-making.”

    The adviser added that Warren “agrees with Senator Grassley that his past work with corporate inversions is a major issue, and she’s had growing concerns with the Administration being loaded with so many appointees from Wall Street rather than more people who would bring different perspectives.”

    The adviser also argued that Weiss’ mergers and acquisitions background on Wall Street was not a good fit for the domestic finance post. “She also doesn’t believe that his investment banking background – which focuses almost entirely on Europe and on international mergers and acquisitions – puts him in a good position to oversee domestic issues like consumer protection and US financial regulation,” the adviser said.

    Warren is doing what Hillary should have done several years ago: fight Obama.

    This move by Warren is so smart we can’t stand it. Hillary, wake up.

  64. “Part of the problem is just Obama,” Stein observed. “Clearly voters have soured on the guy, and he’s going to be in bad straits with the poll numbers come then.”

    “They’re just tired of it,” Deutsch noted. “People are just ready to change the channel.”
    ————-
    Stein and Deutsche are a pair of dirt bags.

    This is a game of bait and switch.

    The would have you believe that the policies are not the problem, the mascot is.

    The mascot is not the problem except to the extent that he can no longer pull the wool over people’s eyes.

    What these two cocksuckers want is a new bamboozler now that brand Obama is spent just as brand Bush was spent.

    It is not the spokesperson for these policies, it is the policies themselves that are toxic.

    Those two are rabid ideologues.

  65. Wbboei, I truly don’t know how the middle class affords healthcare. I have a Cadillac plan and go to any doctor on plan without referral. Can get MRI’s, other tests with about a $250-300 co-pay. So before ACA, I was paying almost 2k a month just for my group. When the plan was not going to be renewed in 2015, my agent said you will actually save by going in the market place. True enough, the initial premiums starting last March were 1k less!!! However, the catch is that now that everyone with pre-existing or serious conditions are on, they have to naturally increase the rates. 35% is a huge increase. My prior group plan went up 10-14% a year. The po0int being that in a couple of years my rates may be higher than I was previously paying . I can afford it, but your average middle class person will be forced to either take huge deductibles and or a lesser plan. I think the ACA works out well for the poor because our increased premiums with off set their care.;

  66. wbboei
    November 14, 2014 at 1:11 pm

    ——
    I didn’t have the same vision of him as you do, but I did think that he isn’t even in Congress, so what can he do at all?

    On the other hand, he is one of the few intelligent forces on Foxnews that gives the station a sane voice, IMlessThanHO

  67. Wbb

    I would like to see Gruber indicted, and then force him to trade up to get to the bigger fish in the administration.

    —–
    Indited, that’s what I was talking about days ago. But hasn’t Admin said the only possible punishment for this guy is a sanction?

    Trade up, yes indeed…although someone besides Obama will end up as the sacrificial lamb.

  68. From jbstonesfan link above:

    Here’s what McAuliffe said:
    “She’s got to make that decision and she’s got to spend the next 60 days making that decision. Obviously I’m close friends with the Clintons, I chaired her last campaign. If you know Hillary, she’s going to make up her own mind. I tell you, I hope she runs. It’s time for a woman president of the United States of America. Put the woman issue aside for a minute – she’s tough, she is smart, she is very pro-business, she will get this economy going. She will help the middle class. So I’m hoping she runs, but you know, it’s her decision. But I’m really hoping she runs, but I’m leaving that decision to her.”

  69. When I did all that research on Soros years back I remember one of his quotes—something to the effect that he (Soros) was committed to policies which the democrat party could never advocate openly and transparently, because if they did, they could never be elected. That explains the success of Obama, the ability to lie early and often with a straight face.

    If I were advising the Republican Party on what to do when they take over Congress, it would be to take nothing Obama says at face value. About the Russians Reagan said trust but verify. About Obama the Republican Party must say distrust and grab for a club, because you will need it, sooner than you think.

  70. Someone is making sure this guy gets nowhere near Hillary’s campaign….

    http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/exclusive-read-secret-emails-men-run-hillary-clintons/story?id=26898758

    For the past five years, a prominent Democratic operative who is a leading contender to manage a Hillary Clinton presidential campaign has maintained a private email listserv for friends and associates that carries a provocative name: the “Mook Mafia.”

    The listserv, which one member said reaches more than 150 fellow campaign veterans, has been a means for Robby Mook and a close friend Marlon Marshall to stay connected with many of the operatives who would likely populate a Democratic presidential campaign in 2016. Mook and Marshall have both been mentioned as possible Hillary Clinton campaign managers.

    PHOTO: DCCCs Robby Mook speaks with members of Emilys List in this Oct. 25, 2010 file photo.
    Emilys List/Flickr
    PHOTO: DCCC’s Robby Mook speaks with members of Emily’s List in this Oct. 25, 2010 file photo.

    President Obama receives an update on the Affordable Care Act in the Oval Office, April 1, 2014. With the President, from left, are: Phil Schiliro, Tara McGuinness, Marlon Marshall, Jeanne Lambrew, DKristie Canegallo and Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett.
    Pete Souza/The White House/Flickr
    President Obama receives an update on the Affordable Care Act in the Oval Office, April 1, 2014. With the President, from left, are: Phil Schiliro, Tara McGuinness, Marlon Marshall, Jeanne Lambrew, DKristie Canegallo and Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett.

    Copies of a cache of the emails obtained by ABC News, and revealed publicly for the first time, show Mook and Marshall demonstrating an aggressive tone in rallying their friends behind political causes, in exchanges that are often self-mocking and sometimes border on being profane.

    They include rallying cries to, in Mook’s words, “smite Republicans mafia-style,” and, to quote Marshall, “punish those voters.” Mook sometimes calls himself “Deacon” in the emails, while Marshall, now a senior White House aide, refers to himself as “Reverend” in many of the exchanges.

    “This is even more exciting than walking through the back of the Bellagio.”

    Their inside jokes sometimes come at the expense of fellow Democrats, including former President Bill Clinton. A November 2009 mock news release announcing the listserv in addition to a new website and an upcoming reunion for the “Mook Mafia” included a fabricated quote from the former president.

    “The Mafia has finally built a bridge to the 21st century,” Bill Clinton is jokingly quoted as having said in an email that appears to have been written by Marshall. “This is even more exciting than walking through the back of the Bellagio.”

    The private emails were provided to ABC News by a Democrat on the listserv who has worked alongside Mook and Marshall on previous campaigns. The person who provided the emails is, like the vast majority of those on the listserv, supportive of Hillary Clinton, but does not support the idea of Mook or Marshall holding leadership roles in a second presidential bid. They were provided on the condition of anonymity.

    That the emails are emerging publicly reflects the ferocious intra-battle to populate the top positions of an expected Clinton campaign.

    Neither Mook nor Marshall responded to requests for comment. ABC News first reached out to both men Thursday morning, by email and phone.

    “Crushing it mafia style.”

    On one level, the listserv is a testament to the loyalty Mook, 34, has inspired over a decade in national politics. His resume includes stints on Howard Dean’s 2004 campaign, running a series of state efforts for Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential bid and managing Terry McAuliffe’s successful run for governor of Virginia last year.

    Marshall is also a veteran of Clinton’s 2008 campaign. He joined Obama’s field operation after the primaries, and he then served in top positions for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, often working alongside Mook along the way. He is now a special assistant to the president and serves as principal deputy director of the White House Office of Public Engagement.

    The exchanges provide a window into the clubby and pugnacious motivational styles of both Mook and Marshall, two stars of their party’s universe of field organizers and operatives.

    The two most-recent messages to the group came just last week, on Election Day. They included a reference to a team reunion that would likely be held in New York early next year.

    ………………..

    Read on…there is a battle for who is going to run her campaign and they are willing to knife each other….

  71. Interesting……so the Dems are fighting to get full force behind the Clintons, jockeying for positions, wanting to get in favor before the huge party switchover from Obama……it would seem that march has begun in earnest.

    Hillary needs to make sure she lets the right ones in and ejects the Doyle’s and other traitors before they get a shoe in…no room for traitors, betrayal should be met with extreme prejudice.

    From what i understand there is no appetite for a battle in 2016, this is not 2008 where they had Dubya to rail against, they need to keep casualties to a minimum as the GOP will have Obama to beat to death in the campaign.

    Most of the Dem party is going to rally behind her, if progressives think they can pull the shit they pulled in 2008, i don’t think its going to fly in 2016.

  72. foxyladi14
    November 14, 2014 at 2:57 pm
    Just look at the things coming in 2015 you aren’t going to like in Ocare. 🙁

    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/11/13/3-things-white-house-doesnt-want-to-know-about-obamacare-plus-3-things-coming/

    ———–
    Its all good, its all good, all good.

    The worse it is the better.

    The American people have as much foresight as the mouse the poet Burns wrote about:

    Still thou are bless compared to me.
    The present only toucheth thee
    But ouch I backward cast me ee
    On prospects drear
    And forward tho I cannot see
    I guess and fear

    Bottom line: until those aspects hit the American Public square in the kisser the treason which Obama has perpetrated against them and against future generations will not be recognized.

    I don’t think they get it, even now.

  73. As Hubert Humprey used to say I am pleased as punch.

    ?

    That St.Gruber has told us the truth

    Because when the full impact of Obamare comes to fruition

    It will sting even more knowing that it was signed sealed and delivered in bad faith.

    I just wish there was some way to innoculate those who did not vote for him.

    And put the entire onus of Obamacare on those who did.

  74. moononpluto
    November 14, 2014 at 2:57 pm
    ————
    They are fucking lemmings.

    When this same kind of sunumai occurred and it went the other way

    Hillary told a close friend who told a friend who told me

    They are not leaders.

    And the same could be said about those in the other party.

    With maybe five exceptions.

    From everything I can tell, there are five republicans and two democrats who are really on the side of the American People.

    The rest of them have been bought off.

  75. Mook, 34
    ————–
    Too old to abort. Too young for the Zeke’s death panel. Too radioactive to get near.

    Quite a name–Mooooooooook.

  76. Quite a feat….not even running yet and they are already at her table with begging bowls.

    Totally different than 2008.

    Maybe the info is right, the Dems have no one else, the front bench is depleted, there is no one else for 2016 and they know it.

  77. Most of the Dem party is going to rally behind her, if progressives think they can pull the shit they pulled in 2008, i don’t think its going to fly in 2016.

    I sure hope you’re right about the Kooks, seems as though they pulled similar crap in 2012, but not as rabid.

    Obola wasn’t winning against Mitt until the polls came in.

    There is no one better on the Dem bench then Hillary, and they know it.

  78. Quite a feat….not even running yet and they are already at her table with begging bowls
    —————-
    Hillary: never ever evah reward those who betrayed you in 2008.

    They betrayed the country, and there is no living with it.

    Party regulars, bundlers, media whores.

    Write them all out of the book of life.

  79. There is no one better on the Dem bench then Hillary, and they know it.
    ———————
    Its not just that there is no one better. There is no one–other than Hillary.

    I think the world of Jim Webb, but he is too good for the party.

    He is a man of high moral character in a party with no moral character.

  80. It is very important that if Hillary runs, and if Hillary wins, that she be a centrist rather than a progressive. That is the only way to drive a silver spike through the malignant heart of the progressive, and break their death grip on the party and nation. Salt should be poured over their lands so nothing grows there for a thousand years. The only peace they deserve is a Carthaginian peace. And let us thank Gruber for showing us by word and deed just how corrupt they really are–those grimy little progs.

  81. I am really interested to see if the Rethugs can actually accomplish anything to help the general public in the next two years, with a Congressional majority.

    What ever goodwill they are feeling now from the election bump, will be gone if they keep patting themselves on the back and don’t get to work.

    For six years they have passed moot bills that had no intention of getting passed, now they need to put their money where their mouth is or they will blow their 2014 win.

    I think they will cave on amnesty, thanks to guys like Bonar.
    There will never be a fence.
    If they are smart, they will slash at ObolaCare until it is on it’s death bed.
    They won’t pass anything that will help the economy, because of the veto pen.

    We’ll see…

  82. Seems the Justice Dept is trying to delete any mention of Gruber in their legal briefs now. WHAT does that tell you? There is MUCH more out there I do believe.

  83. It is very important that if Hillary runs, and if Hillary wins, that she be a centrist rather than a progressive.

    —-
    I think in many ways she will run that way on issues that she has always supported, like the economy, jobs, and support for our military without being a Cowboy that goes rogue.

    She also believes in working across the isle with the R’s to get the work of the Congress done. First Dude will be able to give her the best counsel.

    She will stand firm on the things she feels strongly about, that are more to the left then I am…but she will not go all batshit crazy doing so…IMO.

  84. wbboei
    November 14, 2014 at 12:59 pm
    Yes, he is a genius.
    But, as Milton said: truth comes like a bastard into the world bringing ill fame to him who wrought her.Unel
    Keep your dauber up Gruber.
    You may not have Obama in your corner, but Milton is on your side

    I’m starting to think of Gruber as the idiot savant. Rainman comes to mind. The next thing might be that a grad student developed the “model” instead of the Groob.

  85. http://www.politico.com/story/2014/11/hillary-clinton-liberal-media-112841.html?hp=rc2_4

    The liberal media’s not ready for Hillary

    She has no viable opponent, so progressive outlets are trying to create one.

    By Maggie Haberman [snip]

    Elizabeth Warren says she’s not running. Kirsten Gillibrand and Amy Klobuchar have said the same. Even Martin O’Malley has refused to take shots at Hillary Clinton.

    So the liberal media is taking matters into its own hands.

    Absent a strong challenge to Clinton from the left so far, progressive media outlets are trying to fill the void — propping up Warren, the Massachusetts senator, Jim Webb, the former Virginia senator who has made noise about running for president, and outgoing Maryland Gov. O’Malley, the only one laying any groundwork toward a run. Even Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, who styles himself a “Democratic socialist,” is getting some play in an effort to avoid a coronation. [snip]

    The anti-Clinton drumbeat in progressive outlets picked up quickly as soon as the midterms were over.

    “The Lesson from the Midterms: Elizabeth Warren Should Run in 2016,” read the headline the day after the elections from In These Times. [snip]

    The Nation, which has been flexing muscle after a wave of economic populism swept over the Democratic Party, has been beating the drums for a Clinton challenger for months. At times, The New Republic has chimed in about Clinton’s weaknesses. And in October, Harper’s Magazine ran a piece by far-left writer Doug Henwood that ripped Clinton as a hawkish centrist out of step with the spirit of the times.

    Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor and part owner of The Nation, is blunt about her motives: The magazine, still an influential voice on the left and an outlet experiencing renewed relevance in a populist Democratic Party, plans to play a role in shaping the primary — with or without Warren.

    “We believe that there’s a kind of economic populism and an agenda … that we hope to drive into 2015 and 2016,” Vanden Heuvel said in an interview. “And Hillary Clinton, because of her history, because of her team, has not been part of that wing of the Democratic Party. … [E]ven the most ardent Hillary fans should understand that sometimes not only her party and the country — but her candidacy — would be better served if she has competition.” [snip]

    Progressive media outlets are less attempting to prop up Warren as a potential candidate than to make sure her populist crusades — like cracking down on the banking industry — will define the debate. [snip]

    If The Nation and The New Republic, which ran its own pro-Warren cover in November 2013, are all about encouraging reasoned, healthy debate on the issues, Harper’s Magazine is going in the opposition direction. In bright, shining neon.

    “Stop Hillary!” blared the headline on the magazine’s October cover.

    “It was just commissioned to be critical, and they got what they asked for,” Henwood said in an interview about his article, in which he described Clinton as part of a “widespread liberal fantasy of her as a progressive paragon … in fact, a close look at her life and career is perhaps the best antidote to all these great expectations.” (David Brock, a Clinton ally who runs both Media Matters and the pro-Clinton group Correct The Record, attacked Henwood’s story as a “liberal screed” that would have “no effect other than bolstering the Republican case against her, and so we’re going to push back on them.”)

    The Clinton-questioning chorus isn’t just lefty magazines, either. Mika Brzezinski, the co-host of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” has repeatedly encouraged Warren to go for it, and she was critical of Clinton’s gaffes about her wealth during her book tour. On Wednesday, Brzezinski said Warren challenging Clinton in a primary “would be great.” Her MSNBC colleague Chris Hayes has publicly questioned Clinton in recent months, including what he called her “bizarre” silence on the police shooting in Ferguson of an unarmed black teen. [snip]

    But the doubt among progressives is real, even though Clinton may be better positioned with the base of the Democratic Party now than in 2008. Back then, her media critics had more alternatives to work with — a slew of sitting senators were openly running for the Democratic nomination, including Barack Obama and John Edwards, a progressive favorite until his marital troubles came to light.

    Clinton’s record, particularly her vote for the Iraq War in 2002, was also more unsettling to the left in 2008 — a weakness that Obama skillfully exploited. Now, most of the debate over social issues such as same-sex marriage has been settled within the Democratic Party, and the new frontier is economic populism — the very cause that has fueled Warren’s rise. [snip]

    Of all the anti-Clinton narratives, the Warren bubble remains the most sustained. It swelled late last year when TNR, which enraged many on the left when it endorsed Joe Lieberman over John Kerry in 2004, profiled her. The reported essay by writer Noam Scheiber was headlined, “Hillary’s Nightmare? A Democratic Party That Realizes Its Soul Lies With Elizabeth Warren.”

    Warren gave a rare interview for the story, in which Scheiber concluded that “if Hillary Clinton runs and retains her ties to Wall Street, Warren will be more likely to join the race, not less. Warren is shrewd enough to understand that the future of the Democratic Party is at stake in 2016.” [snip]

    Still, the progressive outlets remain a potential force against Clinton — their publishers have shown a willingness to lob a grenade in her direction, and get attention doing it.

    “You don’t have to be ‘left’ to object to stasis in politics,” said John MacArthur, the president of Harper’s.

    “Anytime you challenge the received wisdom, the people who benefit from the received wisdom are threatened,” he added. “She’s happy with the situation where people think it’s inevitable, she can’t lose … and somebody suddenly raises the possibility of a challenge or the wisdom of a challenge. So yeah, it has to make them somewhat nervous because it gives people ideas.”

    Michael Tomasky, the Daily Beast columnist who has covered Hillary Clinton as a candidate since her 2000 race for U.S. Senate, predicted the noise against her will be more about trying to get the potential White House candidate to embrace progressive economic issues like student loans and ending tax breaks for the wealthy than genuine attempts to drum up a strong primary challenger.

    There’s going to be a lot of anti-Clinton [sentiment] in the Democratic, liberal left end of spectrum,” Tomasky told POLITICO. “Some of it will be genuinely against her, and some of it will be for the purpose of trying to push her in that direction.”

    It gives Clinton an opportunity, he said, and she should view it that way – and craft positions that appeal to the left accordingly: “She’ll have a galvanized Democratic Party behind her, versus half a party which felt only a little enthusiastic.”

    As the field becomes clearer and Republicans ratchet up their attacks against Clinton, those who might not be too happy with Clinton will quiet down, David Corn, Washington bureau chief for Mother Jones magazine, said in an interview.

    “It’s easy to gripe about Hillary. It’s a lot harder to find a solution.”

  86. SHV
    November 13, 2014 at 8:13 pm
    ___________________

    Good to know, I have never heard of her but have worked with women, very much like her. Step on anyone, at any cost to get what they want. Scary. Not that men do not. Of course they do, it just is, as a woman, unsettling when I meet these woman, and very unsafe when I work with them.

  87. Liberal Media is having its sour grapes moment, its going to have to swallow its bitter pill sooner or later because i don’t think their liberal progressive savior is going to put in an appearance.

  88. The liberal media’s not ready for Hillary
    —————-
    Well then . . . fuck them.

    And stop using the word liberal to refer to totalitarians.

    In this twisted lexicon Stalin and Mao were just good liberals.

    The word liberal has a western connotation grounded in freedom for the individual.

    That is the opposite of what these assholes stand for.

  89. S
    November 14, 2014 at 4:47 pm
    ————–
    But it does not tell us the why, does it.

    What good does this do for the country, and more specifically the middle class.

    This is a solution looking for a problem.

    There is no limiting principle attached to it.

    What is it that they want?

    Social chaos????

    I know what Soros’s goals are.

    But what about the rest of them.

    They avoid that question.

    And so does the New York Times.

    But if ever plutocrat pushing this obscene proposal

    Was compelled to fork over half of his net worth

    And if 100 immigrant families moved in on their estates.

    Then we would have a level playing field.

    And the need for limiting principle would be manifest.

    This is a variation on the old argument that a liberal is someone who has never been mugged.

  90. It is like the old saw about the lady who goes into the dentists office and when the dentist pulls out the drill she grabs his testicales and says–now Doctor Zukerberg–we won’t hurt each other—will we. But as long as they have corrupted the political class with money the American People have no leverage, and become, per force, the victim of all these schemes. It is like the observation about Dodd Frank: Hi my name is Obama. I am here to privatize the profits, and socialize the losses. Whereupon the ignoranti, encouraged by the dead souls of big media applaud their own destruction.

  91. Well, Larry is certainly impressed with those two addled fools Harry and Nancy. He make no bones about it. Re-elected to their leadership position almost unanimously. Evidently, the party liked the shellacking they took in the mid terms and is looking forward to more of same. And why not? When you have got an asshole like Obama watching over you, who could ask for anything more?

    Won’t you tell em please
    To put on some speed (or choom)
    Follow his lead (liar in chief)
    Oh how they need
    A sociopath to watch over them.

    http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/77647/thank-god-for-harry-reid-and-nancy-pelosi/#more-77647

  92. Now, Washington Democrats have a new message: He’s not with us.
    ————–
    Of course not.

    (And Himmler was not a Nazi.)

    All kidding aside, he merely said what the rest of them were thinking.

    His view that the American People are stupid is an opinion.

    He is entitled to his opinion.

    And I do not need to hear Chris Coons, Chris Murphy and Schumer

    Ginning up false moral outrage over that assertion.

    What we need to focus on is the important part of what he said.

    That the promises made to sell Obamacare were a lie.

    Because that is the critical part of his testimony.

    And that is the part that makes Roberts look like an ass.

  93. ‘Obama’s insurance policy’: DC chuckles after GOP congressman rules out impeaching Obama because – ‘Have you met Joe Biden?’
    Trey Gowdy said his party can’t impeach the president over his threatened immigration overhaul – but only because Biden would become president
    The folksy Biden wants the top job for himself but Republicans see him as a potentially embarrassing one-man gaffe factory
    One senior House GOP aide said Biden is ‘two floppy shoes short of a complete clown outfit’ and Obama’s ‘insurance policy’
    Gowdy hinted that impeachment is being dangled by the White House as bait in the hope that the GOP will destroy its own credibility by trying it
    A Texas Republican congressman and a judge-turned-news-analyst floated the idea this week
    By DAVID MARTOSKO, US POLITICAL EDITOR FOR MAILONLINE
    PUBLISHED: 14:00 EST, 14 November 2014 | UPDATED: 15:41 EST, 14 November 2014

    253
    shares
    155
    View comments
    A Republican congressman known as a pit bull in Washington said Thursday that he doesn’t support the idea of impeachment proceedings against President Obama because winning that fight would elevate the vice president to the Oval Office.
    ‘Have you met Joe Biden?’ South Carolina Rep. Trey Gowdy asked during a Fox News Channel interview.
    Impeachment talk has swirled around Washington since the president announced that an executive order overhauling America’s immigration system is imminent.
    But some in the GOP see Biden as Obama’s hedge against removal from office, since much of his public exposure has come in conjunction with a series of embarrassing gaffes.
    SCROLL DOWN FOR VIDEO
    ‘Have you met Joe Biden?’ – South Carolina Rep. Trey Gowdy created a memorable one-liner on Thursday by explaining why Republicans can’t impeach President Barack Obama
    +4
    ‘Have you met Joe Biden?’ – South Carolina Rep. Trey Gowdy created a memorable one-liner on Thursday by explaining why Republicans can’t impeach President Barack Obama
    Just Joe being Joe: Vice President Biden has a reputation as a one-man gaffe machine, making some Republicans see him as ‘Obama’s insurance policy’ against impeachment
    SHARE PICTURE
    +4
    Just Joe being Joe: Vice President Biden has a reputation as a one-man gaffe machine, making some Republicans see him as ‘Obama’s insurance policy’ against impeachment
    A senior aide to a House Republican told MailOnline on Friday that ‘Avoiding the “I” word’ is a case of ‘better the devil you know than the devil you don’t.’
    ‘Only in this case, we’re pretty sure we know both devils. And Biden – he’s two floppy shoes short of a complete clown outfit. Let’s be honest: He’s Obama’s insurance policy.’
    In a speech this year, Biden told a gathering of African leaders that Africa was a country, not a continent.
    It brought back memories of a 2008 photo-op outside Biden’s home where he told journalists that he had just returned from ‘a successful dump,’ which turned out to be a trip to a nearby landfill.
    In 2010 he had a diplomatic face-palm moment by consoling Irish Prime Minister Brian Cowen on the loss of his mother – who was very much alive.
    In 2012 he made the sign of the cross while on stage to address a group of more than 1,600 Jewish rabbis.

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2835048/He-s-two-floppy-shoes-short-complete-clown-outfit-Republican-congressman-says-GOP-shouldn-t-impeach-Barack-Obama-met-Joe-Biden.html#ixzz3J6I6IyrF
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

  94. moononpluto
    November 14, 2014 at 4:44 pm
    Liberal Media is having its sour grapes moment, its going to have to swallow its bitter pill sooner or later because i don’t think their liberal progressive savior is going to put in an appearance.


    Good point, Moon.

    The Kooks are still in denial and blistering mad that the smartest man on the planet did not make the American public swoon and didn’t please Hillary’s supporters after she TOLD them to kumbaya.

    Barry isn’t going to part the oceans any longer so they need to find someone that is as jacked up as they are…

    they see feathers…

    there she is, the next gullible candidate to hoist up onto the recycled plastic pillars…

    Wigwam woman herself.

    After all, she has all the lady parts that the pantsuit lady has- so that should be good enough for women to vote for her,

    and Wigwam sings their song and lets them treat her like a disposable doormat…what could be better?

  95. Admin: it case you did not see this one:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/15/us/politics/democratic-party-iberals-and-moderates.html

    At the end you will see an opening for Hillary with big labor, which the progs are not likely to capture. After betraying Hillary and pimping for Obama, big labor is seeing the liar in chief moving away from them and in the direction of big business–WHICH IS WHERE HE WAS ALL ALONG, ONLY THEY —MEANING PIG BOY TRUMPKA and his ilk were too dumb to see it. That goes for Jim Hoffa too. This is the classic conflict seen in the labor movement between the bread and butter unionism of working class heros like Samuel Gompers and elitist working class sell outs like Debbs who saw the labor movement as a socialist regime. By supporting Obama over Hillary, Trumka and Hoffa allied themselves with big business, without realizing it. And now they are running scared and hoping Hillary will forget their betrayal in 2008.

  96. Now that Robin Williams has slipped the moral coil, the only remaining comic genius we have left is Biden. If Obama is impeached, he would make a fine interim president. How could he be any worse than what we have now. So what if he pushes the button for room service, hits the red button and starts world war III.

  97. Now that Robin Williams has slipped the moral coil, the only remaining comic genius we have left is Biden. 😉

    At least he thought Obama was clean enough.

  98. I suspect that that the top three conditions that the DNC agreed to in return for unlimited money were: Continued financial bailouts, no prosecution of Wall Street/bank fraud and passage of the industry/lobbyist written (Senate version) of healthcare “reform”. Hillary wouldn’t have been trusted to abide by any of those conditions.
    —————–
    That was the deal. . .

    No question about it.

  99. The Fournier comment in the video is closer to the truth than the bullshit he peddled in that article.

    In the video he agreed that the Gruber “revelation” of the fraud of Obamacare will in fact alter its perception, but only in three ways, which should not make much difference:

    1. first it will undermine O’s credibility even further. (Question: how deep is the ocean? How wide is the sky?)

    2. second, it will undermine the central premise of the democrat party, that government can be trusted. (Government trust is like military intelligence—an oxymoron.

    3. third, it will undermine the public’s faith in big media who have given the issue a pass.(Question: assumes facts not in evidence–that anyone who is not stupid has any faith in big media to do anything more than lie to them.)

    As for Professor Gruber I salute him for telling the truth, and if he wants to call me stupid I am not offended. The point is he raised the curtain on the massive fraud and lies of Obama, and did what no Republican has managed to do. He has saved the republic! In saner times, they would have given him the medal of honor. Not for nothing did I mention when I first heard of this that insiders like him and forty years ago John Dean are in the best position to show the corruption that infests the sanctor sanctorium of the big media beloved messiah.

    Gruber for president!

  100. At least he thought Obama was clean enough.
    ————-
    You mean like . . . likable enough?

    Obama is no soiled dove.

    He is a ebola infected vulture.

  101. You know Biden is more of a Jonathan Winters than a Robin Williams kind of comic.

    Frankly, I found comics like Fallon, Maher, Stewart, Letterman and Leno to be a crashing bore.

    But Biden is hysterical–and I mean that, really, honest injun

    He puts me in stitches with such memorable comments as:

    Telling a parapalegic to stand up and take a bow

    Making the sign of the cross in front of 1000 rabbis

    Telling big media (protologists of a different kind) that he had just returned from a successful dump

    Consoling world leaders on the loss of their loved ones while those loved ones are still alive and well

    Calling Africa a country rather than a continent

    Thinking that he is of presidential timber

    We have had an incompetent president with no sense of humor

    Isn’t it high time we had an incompetent president who was at least funny

    And if perchance he won the election

    You should expect him to demand a recount

    Honest injun

    (As opposed to Lizzy Boren who is by all credible accounts a dishonest injun)

  102. IMPORTANT!

    Richard Fernandez is, for my money, the deepest thinker and best writer of this generation.

    This article is one of many examples of his brilliance.

    In a nutshell he says this:

    Obamacare and amnesty share a common defect and a common destiny: failure. Why? Because both of them are based on a narrow progressive consensus which does not reflect the views or the interests of the nation. Failure is a problem. But the greater problem is their adverse impact. Prohibition failed and it did not take down the country with it. But here it is different. The failure of these two massive initiatives may take down the nation itself, Richard explains.

    “The amount of self-deception was immense from the outset. ’Nothing could stop Obamacare, the law of the land’, except that something already has. But instead of learning his lesson, he is going to launch yet another catastrophe with the same narrow base and the same the reckless abandon. Why does he think he’ll succeed? Because somewhere along the line the little group of decision makers in the White House has gotten the biggest ticket item, the strategy, dead wrong. HOW CAN YOU BREAK DOWN THE BORDERS OF YOUR OWN COUNTRY AND EXPECT IT TO END WELL????? Most historical tragedies are tragic not because nobody saw it coming; they are sorrowful precisely because anyone could see it coming and didn’t.”
    ——————

    The Strategic Failure of Barack Obama

    November 13th, 2014 – 6:47 pm

    Share on facebook135 Share on twitter51 Share on email Share on more

    Email

    Print

    Decrease Font Size Increase Font Size

    “A gaffe,” Michael Kinsley once said, “is when a politician tells the truth.” Unfortunately for the Obama administration, Jonathan Gruber, an economist hired to design Obamacare, was fecklessly candid about how the Obama administration misrepresented their flagship program to the rubes.

    Nancy Pelosi quickly stepped in to show him how pros do it by denying she ever met Gruber, though the Washington Post produced transcripts of the former speaker copiously buttressing her arguments with references to Gruber. The biggest laugh, however, came from Mother Jones, which writes that “the Supreme Court Might Gut Obamacare. Your State Could Save It.” This is a reference to King vs Burwell, the case which Paul Krugman declared no lawyer would take seriously and which is now scheduled to go before the Supreme Court.

    Mother Jones explains King vs Burwell is nothing but a ‘law-o’, a ‘moops’. “The King plaintiffs base their argument on the fact that in parts of the Affordable Care Act, the text says subsidies will be available for people ‘enrolled through an Exchange established by the State.’ … Salon’s Simon Maloy calls the conservative case the ‘Moops’ argument,” because the law can’t ever mean what it actually says when that conflicts with what the president intends. Even so, Mother Jones argues the states can still save Obamacare if only Republican governors agree to offer subsidies should the Supreme Court decides the feds can’t.

    What’s funny isn’t that the Republicans have discovered Gruber. The what’s really hilarious is that the Obama administration has just rediscovered the States, the US Supreme Court and the Republican Party after a long period of ignoring them completely. Suddenly it’s “help! Save Obamacare!”. The biggest political weakness of Obamacare, which is only now becoming apparent to Democrats, is that it was attempted on the back of a very narrow “progressive” consensus; without a single Republican vote in either House, in the teeth of the fact that 36 states did not establish exchanges and on the assumption the Supremes would not dare to raise a hand against it.

    The 2014 midterm elections finally collapsed the fiction that Obamacare is somehow the immutable ‘law of the land’. Gruber’s frankness exposed the fact that the attempt to present an entire country with a fait accompli was really just a bunch of garbage cloaked by an elaborate deception operation. At bedrock it hadn’t a strategic leg to stand on and was doomed to fail when someone called its bluff.

    The biggest reason to focus on this problem is because president Obama is about to do the same thing again. The New York Times reports that the president is planning to legalize up to 5 million illegal immigrants in complete defiance of the Republican majority in both Houses and polls which show public hostility to such a move.

    President Obama will ignore angry protests from Republicans and announce as soon as next week a broad overhaul of the nation’s immigration enforcement system that will protect up to five million undocumented immigrants from the threat of deportation and provide many of them with work permits, according to administration officials who have direct knowledge of the plan.

    Asserting his authority as president to enforce the nation’s laws with discretion, Mr. Obama intends to order changes that will significantly refocus the activities of the government’s 12,000 immigration agents. One key piece of the order, officials said, will allow many parents of children who are American citizens or legal residents to obtain legal work documents and no longer worry about being discovered, separated from their families and sent away.

    You can do these things with a strong consensus; and if the policy change pays off in ways that confirm its fundamental rightness. But you can’t do it in the teeth of a contrary gale and not even break-even for the average man in sight. Yet it’s deja vu all over again; in amnesty we have a huge undertaking attempted on the narrowest ’progressive’ consensus advanced under a deception operation with barely concealed contempt for the practical consequences on the American people. The presidential amnesty bids fair to repeat every mistake Obamacare made, and then some.

    Grand strategy is the highest level of sanity check. It’s a consideration of whether an undertaking is plausibly feasible. Grand strategic failures occur when huge risks are run without any realistic chance of success. They occur when the means are manifestly inadequate to achieve the ends. Obamacare was a grand strategic failure. An overarching, ambitious project that hadn’t a hope in hell of being realistically implemented. Obamacare’s planners did more than lie to the public. They lied to themselves.

    Modern scholars now believe that both Hitler’s invasion of the Soviet Union and Japan’s Pacific offensive against the United States were grand strategic failures because the goals were unrealistic from the outset. They could not possibly have been attained. For example, the strategic goal of Barbarossa was to seize the whole continental landmass to the east; to conquer the Soviet Union and implement “a secret Nazi German plan for the colonization of Central and Eastern Europe [which] would have necessitated genocide and ethnic cleansing on a vast scale.” This would require among other things, exterminating whole nations including but not limited to the physical elimination of 85% of the Poles, 60% of the Russians, 75% of the Belarusians, 65% of the Ukranians, etc, etc and 100% of the Jews.

    To accomplish this goal Hitler only had the forces available in the summer of 1941, but no new tank factories or AFV designs, no plans for industrial mobilization, no rational strategy for winning the Battle of the Atlantic and preventing a second front. That came later as an afterthought. But by then it was too late.

    As Robert Forczyk pointed out, even if the Panzers had run unopposed to Moscow only 10% of them would have mechanically survived the road march over such a distance. David Stahel concluded in his study Operation Barbarossa and Germany’s Defeat in the East, the Germans lost the war when they failed to win in the first few months. Once the wild strategic gamble failed it was all over bar the shouting.

    It was a dream too far. Obamacare has been failing for some time for lack of practicality. Most of its “accomplishments” are Medicaid expansion. Its website was a joke. Its premiums are high and its deductibles are higher. The HHS now projects a very slow growth for Obamacare’s “metal plans”, expecting only a net 2 million more to sign up this year. If all goes according to plan, that means it will only take about 8 years to get to the breakeven number of 25 million members at this rate.

    The problem isn’t the Republicans. The difficulty is that the Obamacare Urals are unattainable. Even if nobody opposed Barbarossa by the time it got there it would have been reduced to Sergeant Schultz on a horse. Now if only the Germans had bothered to make nice to the Poles, the Balts, the Ukranians and the Jews — developed a consensus in other words — there might have been some company for Schultz. If Obamacare had sought allies, listened to the States instead of heeding only their ideological imperatives, it might not be as isolated as it is today.

    The road march for Obamacare has been equally cruel. That’s because its policies are unattractive and its managers are hacks. The metaphorical healthcare Blitzkrieg bogged down a long time ago; it is not going to reach Moscow, it may not even reach the metaphorical Kiev. The difficulty wasn’t that Gruber talked, but that nobody listened. As Howard Dean said about Gruber’s comments:

    “The problem is not that he said it. The problem is that he thinks it. I’m serious. The core problem under this damn law is that it was put together by a bunch of elitists who don’t really fundamentally understand the American people. That’s what the problem is.”

    Or as I would put it: the problem was not operational, it was conceptual. You can’t successfully execute a crazy idea. One commenter observed that if Obama had simply focused on providing medical care for indigent Americans, he would have fared better instead trying to take over the entire American health care system. But no; Obama was aiming for nothing less than a ‘fundamental transformation’ and planned to achieve it without reference to the States, the cooperation of the Legislature or even the Supreme Court. And he is failing.

    The amount of self-deception was immense from the outset.’Nothing could stop Obamacare, the law of the land’, except that something already has. But instead of learning his lesson, he is going to launch yet another catastrophe with the same narrow base and the same the reckless abandon. Why does he think he’ll succeed? Because somewhere along the line the little group of decision makers in the White House has gotten the biggest ticket item, the strategy, dead wrong. How can you break down the borders of your own country and expect it to end well? Most historical tragedies are tragic not because nobody saw it coming; they are sorrowful precisely because anyone could see it coming and didn’t.

    http://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2014/11/13/the-strategic-failure-of-barack-obama/#more-40401

  103. As Jeremy Peters of the New York Times wrote in the paper’s lead story a week before the elections:

    “Democrats in the closest Senate races in the South are turning to racially charged messages — invoking Trayvon Martin, the unrest in Ferguson, Mo., and Jim-Crow era segregation. …

    “The images and words they are using are striking for how overtly they play on fears of intimidation and repression.”

    The ads worked. But while Dixie Democrats rolled up landslides among black voters, Michelle Nunn, daughter of Sen. Sam Nunn, carried only 27 percent of the white vote in Georgia, and was wiped out.

    Ironically, as Republicans capture state legislatures across the South, they will wield their power as energetically to guarantee black Democrats get safe districts as the old Dixiecrat Democrats wielded their power to ensure that black folks could not vote.

    This weekend, 2 million Catalans went to the polls in Spain and in a non-binding referendum voted 4-1 to secede. This follows the vote by 45 percent of the Scottish people to secede from Britain.

    As ethnonationalism pulls at the seams of many countries of Europe, it would appear it is also present here in the United States. When political appeals on the basis of race and ethnicity are being made openly by liberal Democrats, as in 2014, we are on a road that ends in a racial-ethnic spoils system — and national disintegration.

    “There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism,” roared Teddy Roosevelt, “a hyphenated American is not an American at all.” Typical hate crime by a man unappreciative of our diversity.

    http://buchanan.org/blog/new-south-black-conservative-7095

  104. Yup, that pretty much sums it up, OCare, amnesty, open borders to anyone from anywhere, the Stimulus, the Green solar tax money give away, the frickin’ map, every idea and plan coming from the ‘smartest man in the solar system’……..

    “You can’t successfully execute a crazy idea.”

  105. admin November 14, 2014 at 12:06 pm

    ObamaCare is a failure…. Without a public option within its network of exchanges, ObamaCare is a giant blank check to the insurance companies.

    Hillary Clinton… should promise to appoint a licensed health-care professional, such as a physician or registered nurse, as her secretary of Health and Human Services if she is elected president….

    When the next Congress convenes in 2015, Democrats need to work with the new Republican majority, repeal ObamaCare, override a presidential veto if necessary, and start from scratch on health-care reform.

    What Mr. Beu and probably Hillary don’t realize is that after ObamaCare few will want to trust the government with health care especially anything like universal health care.

    Yes, this bears out what I’ve been saying these last few days: The Republicans are under pressure to repeal all or parts of ObamaCare, but don’t have enough trust from the people to set it aright or replace it with another bill. Hillary’s dream of universal healthcare is done for.

  106. wbboei November 14, 2014 at 12:40 pm

    To me Gruber is the hero.

    An honest man when he thinks no one is listening.

    Do not attack Gruber for giving the game away.

    wbboei November 14, 2014 at 11:15 pm

    As for Professor Gruber I salute him for telling the truth, and if he wants to call me stupid I am not offended. The point is he raised the curtain on the massive fraud and lies of Obama, and did what no Republican has managed to do.

    wbboei November 14, 2014 at 1:23 pm

    … the game WashPo is playing:

    … they are trying to impeach the credibility of Gruber so people will not accept the truth of what he is saying.

    … they are trying to make Gruber the scapegoat for the lies which all the Obama acolytes and WashPo told.

    I would like to see Gruber indicted, and then force him to trade up to get to the bigger fish in the administration.

    Shadowfax November 14, 2014 at 2:05 pm

    Indicted, that’s what I was talking about days ago.

    Yeah, I remember: you wanted to jail Gruber. But Gruber is a private individual exercising free speech, first off; and secondly, as wbboei points out above, in his most shocking revelations, he was telling the truth! He deserves an award!

  107. jbstonesfan November 14, 2014 at 1:50 pm

    … before ACA, I was paying almost 2k a month just for my group. When the plan was not going to be renewed in 2015, my agent said you will actually save by going in the market place. True enough, the initial premiums starting last March were 1k less….

    the catch is that now that everyone with pre-existing or serious conditions are on, they have to naturally increase the rates. 35% is a huge increase. My prior group plan went up 10-14% a year. The point being that in a couple of years my rates may be higher than I was previously paying.

    First of all, using the figures you give, a 35% increase on $1000 brings you to $1350, which is substantially less than the $2000 you were paying before.

    Secondly, you have put your finger on exactly the cause for the increase: The influx of people with pre-existing conditions. However, the elimination of cherry-picking was the one thing about the PPACA that everyone could agree upon across the political spectrum. The resulting increase could only be expected by anyone who gave it a moment’s thought. Obviously you have, and that’s why you found the reason right away.

    I can afford it, but your average middle class person will be forced to either take huge deductibles and/or a lesser plan. I think the ACA works out well for the poor because our increased premiums will offset their care.

    “The poor,” on the other hand, do not affect the premiums of the middle class. They are on Medicaid, which the states are supposed to expand, and are helped by federal subsidies that may be stymied by the Halbig & King suits.

    The deductibles are a major problem that I don’t understand. At least, I don’t understand how to solve that problem except by simply banning deductibles, which don’t exist in other countries. This would prompt another rate increase, though.

    However, there is no option for a “lesser plan.” That is one of the “glories” of the PPACA, to upgrade deficient plans so that people pay for actual coverage rather than pay for insurance that doesn’t come through for you when you’re sick. (It used to be that a large part of insurance company overhead went to paying people to find ways to deny treatment.)

    The bottom line is: How much of GDP goes to the healthcare sector (via insurers)? Before the PPACA, that figure stood at 16.7%, which is about 6% more than any other country in the world. I have a feeling that 16.7% figure has actually increased since 2010, but not because of premium increases, rather because GDP in other sectors of the economy is stagnant while healthcare costs increase independently of the agricultural, industrial and other services sectors.

    I repeat for the hundredth time that the solution to spiraling costs would be to introduce a public option, which could be done with no further bureaucracy by letting the middle class buy into Medicaid. The public option was part of HRC’s plan and, for that matter, Obama’s too.

    So, I doubt the Republicans will go for it: Such things are not in their DNA. As Shadowfax says:

    Shadowfax November 14, 2014 at 4:14 pm

    I am really interested to see if the Rethugs can actually accomplish anything to help the general public in the next two years, with a Congressional majority.

    Yes, that is indeed what is at stake: Whatever will the Republicans do?

  108. moononpluto November 14, 2014 at 2:57 pm

    … the Dems are… jockeying for positions….

    Hillary needs to make sure she lets the right ones in and ejects the Doyle’s and other traitors before they get a shoe in…no room for traitors, betrayal should be met with extreme prejudice.

    … no appetite for a battle in 2016, this is not 2008 where they had Dubya to rail against, they need to keep casualties to a minimum as the GOP will have Obama to beat to death in the campaign.

    Most of the Dem party is going to rally behind her, if progressives think they can pull the shit they pulled in 2008, I don’t think it’s going to fly in 2016.

    In my book, moon, you’re right on track with a good analysis of the battle ahead.

    And these guys Mook and the other one are going to get nowhere. Keep confidence, ‘cause I think HRC learned a lot from 2008, especially about traitors and skullduggery. Her current pick for campaign manager is John Podesta: no question of disloyalty or incompetence. Cheryl Mills will be in on it too (and a future Attorney General).

    As for the Party, I think you’re right too: They’ve had enough of soaring rhetoric and will rally behind competence and grit. One Drop doesn’t stand a chance.

    Shadowfax November 14, 2014 at 4:02 pm

    There is no one better on the Dem bench than Hillary, and they know it.

    But there will be competition, and that’s a good thing. It will come from O’Malley and Webb, mainly. Sanders may jump in, just as Wigwam may, but they will make about as much of a blip as Kucinich did — or at best, the “Are-you-my-daddy” man.

  109. gonzotx November 14, 2014 at 4:43 pm

    I have… worked with women…. Step on anyone, at any cost to get what they want…. Not that men do not. Of course they do, it just is, as a woman, unsettling when I meet these women, and very unsafe when I work with them.

    A very interesting statement. I have known only one woman (my ex-wife) who fits this model. I can tell you from that experience that she was more than “unsettling,” and it wasn’t just me who found it scary and unsafe: She was fired from her high-paying editorial job because she took a swipe at her secretary. At about the same time, I filed for divorce on the grounds of violence (by which I meant perpetual screaming at home, and occasional physical violence).

    I’ve often wondered what made her tick; and now, 25 years later, all I can think of is that she was the most self-centered person I’ve ever known, and very possessive — everything was 100% her private property, including our son, which she still refers to as “her” son. (One reason our son decided to live in Japan was to get away from his mother.)

    As you say, some men act the same way; but do you think it’s natural for men? Or less “unsettling” and scary? Personally, I’ve never known a man who is as self-centered or possessive as my ex-wife.

    This is one leg of my feminist stool: The fact (I see it as a fact) that women are less ruthless than men and this is a handicap on the way up the ladder, but actually an advantage once a woman arrives at executive leadership. What do you think of that?

  110. I don’t know where the organ The Intercept stands on the political spectrum, or the author of this article, Glenn Greenwald; but this article is titled “Cynics, step aside: There is genuine excitement over a Hillary Clinton candidacy,” asserting that such excitement can be found in:

    Wall Street
    Israel lobby
    Interventionists (i.e., war zealots)
    Old-school neocons

    https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/11/14/despite-cynicism-genuine-excitement-hillary-clinton-candidacy/

    The author is nonetheless cynical, I believe, because he doesn’t think much of these sources of excitement, and he prefaces his remarks by stating outright that he finds the Hillary candidacy as pretty boring. Also, he doesn’t explain the difference between the “Interventions,” which he describes alternatively as “war zealots,” and “old-school neocons,” who are the war zealots that backed Dubya.

    But his descriptions are genuine if incomplete.

  111. jeswezey
    November 15, 2014 at 5:08 am
    But Gruber is a private individual exercising free speech, first off; and secondly, as wbboei points out above, in his most shocking revelations, he was telling the truth! He deserves an award!

    Gruber was marketing himself and his part in a scam. He was working as an agent contractor of the US government which is the opposite of a private citizen. He sold his model (I presume it is a computer program something like a spread sheet) in which you plug in data, rig it, and out spits what the buyer wants to facilitate the game/scam of farming of tax dollars. He is telling the truth about his part of a lie, scam, fraud. It is the equivalent of a safe cracker bragging about his skills at robbery and citing a specific heist. He got paid for the Obamacare legislation fraud, probably got paid for the fraudulent amicus briefs, sold the same rigged model to Democratic run states (eleven at last count), has been paid about 2 million for this same model to generate fake data for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid since 2010, and is out drumming up safe cracking jobs to be paid for by taxpayer dollars like a champ in his videos. Advocating and selling fraud is fraud. Numerous federal and state statutes say it is. Admitting fraud does not eliminate the fraud. Making fun of the defrauded does not make the fraud go away either. It does make people angry as it is taunting. This is not a cute stunt by a geeky goofball. Gruber particiapated materially in a multi-trillion dollar conspiracy to defraud the public. As each drip of videos is more disgusting the risk of his prosecution by a Republican DOJ in the future goes up. We fundamentally disagree on the definition of a private citizen. He was not working as a private citizen but as a public one. Taking public money for public policy work makes you a civil servant at hire with the same responsibilities. He has violated about every public employment ethic that I can think of and a bunch of laws too.

  112. dot48
    November 14, 2014 at 4:21 pm

    Seems the Justice Dept is trying to delete any mention of Gruber in their legal briefs now. WHAT does that tell you? There is MUCH more out there I do believe.
    ____________________

    Stock tip~~~ invest in Popcorn. 😀

  113. Agitators Busy in Ferguson

    No decision yet. I guess they are waiting for the agitators to wear themselves out.

    It is COLD out there with snow-showers predicted for tonight and snow (15 degrees F) tomorrow night. Maybe they will announce Monday

    http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/23/us/ferguson-michael-brown-protests-mood/index.html

    In recent days, The New York Times received information from a federal source and the St. Louis Post-Dispatch was given Brown’s autopsy report and spoke to a source with knowledge of the investigation. The Washington Post, meanwhile, reported that at least six black witnesses gave grand jury testimony that supported Wilson’s side of the story.

    The proceedings in a grand jury inquiry, by law, are not supposed to be made public, and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has told his staff it’s “inappropriate and troubling” that information is trickling out while the grand jury and federal investigations are ongoing. He further said that the “selective flow of information coming out of Missouri” is diminishing his faith in local authorities, a Justice Department official said.

  114. foxyladi14
    November 15, 2014 at 10:03 am
    Barry says he wants a study. Delay much? 😡
    —————
    He has had 6 years to conduct that study, which will confirm the political result he is looking for. And who would he tap to conduct that study? Holder? Fuck the study. Pass the bill and make the son of a bitch either fold his hand or veto it. If he elects the latter, then Congress would have to override that veto, and that would mean getting some democrat votes, besides Manchin. Barry is on the hook to Soros, Soros wants green energy because it gives him an asset play and if the middle class go bankrupt because of it, then Soros would view them the same way he told Steve Croft on 60 Minutes that he viewed his fellow Jews who were sent to the death camps while he collected their personal assets—on the wrong end of a commercial exchange. The keystone pipeline would make energy cheap and reduce our reliance on middle east oil. But Obama wants none of those things because he is hell bent on destroying the nation and anyone who claims otherwise is has the same credibility as a Holocaust denier. That means you broken Tom Brokaw.

  115. jeswezey

    I am sorry I got upset with you the other day for insisting that that consumption (rather than businesses) is the source of job creation. I know Steve Wynn, the head of Office Depot, and the manager of Wendy’s would agree with me on that, because I have either asked them or listened to what they had to say. But upon reflection, I realized what you were really talking about was Keynsneian theory, which advocates a manipulation of the money supply by government, to create aggregate demand and to smooth out the peaks and valleys of the economic cycle. That doctrine has many advocates in academia, the most current example being Paul Krugman. And when you behold the obscene wealth acquired by venture capitalists and dot com billionaires like the head of goggle who for my money is one of the real villains of our era, it is tempting to think that government is capable of achieving a more egalitarian outcome. But hasn’t the experience of the past several years disproven that theory? The government has enacted a barrage of Keynesian initiatives—a trillion dollar stimulus, zero interest rates on money, and we still have 92 million people of working age not working. In other words, the theory has been pressure tested in the cauldron of the real world and it has produced failure. Perhaps that is why Krugman has become the Howard Beale of the economic community.

    , rather than businesses. to recognize that businesses are the engine that create jobs,

  116. I can imagine an argument that in the aftermath of a stock market collapse and the loss of American competitive position in the world, Keynsian solutions which might have been viable in more stable times, could not reverse a trend any more than a the high performance of an excellent stock can hold its position in the midst of a furious market decline. But regardless of the reasons, its failure to produce the promised results should produce a more open mind about other alternatives, and if the theories of Von Misces, and Laffler hold part of the answer it would be improvident to ignore them, or double down on something which has not been working as Krugman wants to do with his demand for more trillion dollar stimuluses, which invites comparison to Einstein’s definition of insanity. That said, I am no more qualified to be an economist than the big media beloved messiah is to be president. The difference is, I know it, whereas he and his big media cohorts do not.

  117. Apart from his failure to uphold the standards of journalism, the thing I most dislike about Brokaw is that in his declining years, and although steeped in vast wealth, he has become not just arrogant, but whiney.

  118. “The keystone pipeline would make energy cheap and reduce our reliance on middle east oil.”
    *****
    Keystone XL is more street theater. The important, Southern Keystone pipeline, was completed in August, after being expedited by an Obama Exec. order. The Northern segment is “optional”. The big winners for not building the Northern segment are Warren Buffet, owner of the BNSF railroad and GE Services, Railroad. The Canadian oil needs to get to Texas Gulf Coast refineries so that it will sell at higher international prices. Land locked Canadian oil is priced at a significant discount, costing the oil companies and the Canadian govt a lot of money. No matter the end result, the American consumer gets screwed.

  119. Apart from his failure AS AN ELDER STATESMAN FOR THE INDUSTRY to uphold the standards of journalism, the thing I most dislike about Brokaw is that in his declining years, he has become arrogant, PETULANT, and whiney. OLD AGE IS NOT FOR SISSIES, WHAT WITH THE ACHES AND THE PAINS, AND THE DECLINING POWERS UNTIL YOU BECOME A CHARACTURE OF YOUR FORMER SELF. BUT WHEN IT GOES TO THE HEAD, AS IT HAS WITH TOM, THEN SOMEONE NEEDS TO TELL HIM YOU NEED TO MOVE ON, AND IF IT IS WEALTH YOUR ARE AFTER, YOU CAN’T TAKE IT WITH YOU. HIS INITIAL REACTION TO THAT SUGGESTION WOULD BE HOSTILE I AM SURE. IF SO, THEN HE SHOULD REFLECT ON THIS POEM–THE FOLLY OF BEING COMFORTED:

    One that is ever kind said yesterday:

    “Your well beloved’s hair has threads of grey,

    And little shadows come about her eyes;

    Time can but make it easier to be wise,

    Though now it’s hard, till trouble is at an end

    And so be patient, be wise and patient, friend.”

    But heart, there is no comfort, not a grain;

    Time can but make her beauty over again,

    Because of that great nobleness of hers;

    The fire that stirs about her, when she stirs

    Burns but more clearly. O she had not these ways,

    When all the wild Summer was in her gaze.

    O heart! O heart! if she’d but turn her head,

    You’d know the folly of being comforted.

  120. Back for a moment to the theater of the absurd.

    Most mergers fail.

    They fail for one of two reasons:

    Poor strategic fit, or poor cultural fit.

    And sometimes the fail for poor execution.

    The failure of Obamacare hits on all three cylinders.

    Implementation involves credible change agents, consensus at all levels, milestones and rewards.

    Can you imagine two worse change agents than Zeke (oh bury me not on the lone prairie until I am 75)?

    And Grouper (Obama’s the name, deceptions the game)

    At some point, this whole thing takes on the same dark comedy charater as Springtime for Hitler.

    Obama and his cohorts have sold 1000 tickets in a theater with 100 seats.

  121. Browkaw is like Babawawa–no that is not swawheli

    They don’t die—like mere morals do

    They don’t fade away—like old soldiers are supposed to do

    They just hang on, and on, and on . . .

    To trouble the living stream

  122. To answer the question above, it looks like the Keystone bill will be one short of the 60 needed in the Senate. They are at 59 now with 14 of the 15 Dems needed (all 45 Republicans are YES).

    I don’t expect this to change. IMO, Reid would have never allowed Landrieu’s stunt unless he already knew she didn’t have the votes.

    Even if it passes, Obama will veto it (although Reid would have failed to protect the President).

  123. Attorney General Eric Holder has told his staff it’s “inappropriate and troubling” that information is trickling out while the grand jury and federal investigations are ongoing. He further said that the “selective flow of information coming out of Missouri” is diminishing his faith in local authorities,
    ————–
    Well, now, there is another oxymoron for you.

    Holder maintained from the outset that he had no faith in the local authorities.

    That was his justification for going in there and meeting with the protesters.

    Later we get information that preempts his clear intention to play the race card.

    And Holder says this diminishes his faith in the local authorities who he had no faith in from the beginning.

    Was he lying then, is he lying now, or is he not in fact a chronic and habitual liar—like his boss?

  124. Act I Scene I: Professor Guber saunters on stage and shouts:

    Hey Nannie Poopie . . . hey poop shit—wake up . . .

    I’m Gruber, p’raps you’ve heard of me
    Gruber, you’ve had word of me,
    Jogging along, hearty and strong
    Cooking the books for the d’s
    I’m a genius alright
    Not rapped very tight
    Which can be a problem at times
    Like when I’m depressed
    And pressed to confess
    I confess to my lies
    And sneer at the dupes
    After Obama gives me my prize

    And to the American People—

    I smile condescendingly
    While bots are extending me
    Cheer upon cheer when ‘er I appear
    So strict are my people
    They’re William the Conqueror’s strain
    If they ever knew I’d been talking to you
    Why they’d never look at me again . . .

  125. SHV: if you are right, and it is all just theater that the political class qua media are playing then you have to admit this much:

    It is pretty bad theater.

    How bad?

    Well, I can tell you this much:

    Rogers and Hart would not touch it.

    However, it might inspire a remake of the Three Stooges.

    Stooge #1: Obama (Soros’s stooge)

    Stooge #2: Dimocrat Party (A ship of fools)

    Stooge #3: Big Media (The root of all evil, the crooked card dealer who never let a little thing like the truth stand in the way of their perverse narrative of race baiting, phony polling, censorship and an avalanche of lies–a failed institution.)

  126. Mormaer
    November 15, 2014 at 7:53 am

    ———-
    Hallelujah! Thank you for making the point much better than I did!

    I couldn’t agree with you more, and although this guy was paid to defraud the American public, he isn’t the only person responsible for the cooked numbers, the O’administration gave it’s input and pushed though this snake oil. (This is why I agreed with Wbb that by prosecuting him in court, he will have to squeal on the administration – those that were well aware of the fraud.)

    That’s why Nasty and Reid said it needed to be passed quickly, before anyone could find out what’s in the bill and do the analysis.

  127. “The Washingon Post reported Friday that the National Institutes of Health put about $2.05 million in Gruber’s pocket since 2008 for consulting work related to Medicare Part D prescription drug plans.
    The Justice Department has added $1.7 million more – mostly for ‘expert witness’ testimony – since 2000.
    And the State Department paid Gruber $103,500 in 2008 and 2009 for what the government vaguely calls legal services, according to an analysis by The Daily Caller.” http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2835384/Obamacare-architect-Jonathan-Gruber-billed-federal-state-governments-5-9-million-advice-videos-surface-showing-undercutting-landmark-law.html

    Gruber the Goober is a billing machine. I said in an earlier comment that he probably billed for the amicus briefs (and he does all the time! Surprise, surprise, surprise!) and he don’t come cheap. He appears to be an expert on anything you need to defraud or confuse. What a parasitic worm.

  128. I also disagree that the American public are stupid.

    2008 the first glimpse of massive election fraud that most of us have never seen before, but many of us had a sick feeling it was going on…years before.
    2012 election
    2014 election
    2008 though present – division that is brought the Democratic Party to it’s knees.

    If there was a real fair, balanced and honest media outlet that American’s had easily available, they would flock to it. No one would need to make a choice on which party they respected more to find their news. Foxnews or the other guys.

    News isn’t opinion, now it is…and most of the public doesn’t have the time nor the Pink gift we do, that brings in information from multiple opinions (news these days) and breaks it down and discusses it’s value or perspective. Thank you Admin for giving us this gift along with analysis that is more accurate than anything else out there.

    Sometimes bloggers pride themselves on how they have discovered the truth on what’s going on, but it has been a long investment in time to get there.

  129. I agree Wbboei when you say.

    Fuck the study. Pass the bill and make the son of a bitch either fold his hand or veto it. If he elects the latter, then Congress would have to override that veto, and that would mean getting some democrat votes, besides Manchin. Barry is on the hook to Soros, Soros wants green energy because it gives him an asset play and if the middle class go bankrupt because of it, then Soros would view them the

  130. There is an op ed in today’s WSJ entitled “The Loneliest President Since Nixon” which compares the current trials and tribulations of the Big Media Beloved Messiah Obama to those his predecessor of four decades ago Tricky Dick Nixon. It recounts how, when the opposing party was bent on impeaching him and the big media piranhas were shooling around his door, and his own party was falling back, Barry Goldwater went to see him and told him on no uncertain terms: its over. The only party who mourned his demise were foreign leaders of all stripes who saw Nixon as a great leader.

    The world has turned upside down many times since then–particularly in the last six years. For today, there is no one in the party who can veto Obama. The media continues to protect him, because to do otherwise would subject them, his most ardent supporters and agents, to the death of a thousand cuts. And foreign leaders see Mr. Obama for what he is: a bad joke. And a rube to be fleeced, e.g. climate change give away to China.

    But the open question is does he realize the bind he is in. And does he have the will and capacity to deal with it. The following excerpt from that article is consistent with my own view, which is based on his mental pathology and life experiences.

    “It is possible that Obama will respond to (the aforesaid) changed conditions with rigidity BECAUSE NO ONE HAS EVER STOOD IN HIS WAY BEFORE. . . HE WAS ALWAYS MAGIC. LIFE NEVER INTRUDED AND GAVE HIM A GOOD HARD ONE TO THE JAW. SO HE DOESN’T KNOW HOW TO GET UP FROM THE MAT. HE DOESN’T KNOW HOW TO STRUGGLE TO HIS FEET AND REGAIN HIS BALANCE. HE ONLY KNOWS HOW TO THROW PUNCHES. BUT YOU CAN’T PUNCH FROM THE MAT. He only knows how to do what he is doing.

    IN THE MEANTIME, HE IS KILLING HIS PARTY.

    POLITICIANS DON’T HAVE A VAST REPERTOIRE. WHEN THEY GET IN A JAM, THEY JUST DO WHAT THEY HAVE ALWAYS DONE.

    EVEN IF IT IS NOT WORKING ANYMORE.

  131. Yes, the Messiah has come a long way baby from those halcion days when he strode across the world like a Greek God, bellowed his hope and change message to radicals in the middle east, got little children to tell their parents Obama’s gonna change the world, got middle aged morons like Maria Shriver to lead evening prayers chants prolaiming he is the one we have been waiting for, got obtuse Pulitzer Prize winning jackasses like Eugene Robinson to call him an intelligent man in an intelligent house in an intelligent city, and got fat donna and roly poly Roland Martin rolling around on a sawdust floor in Denver celebrating his nomination—sweeeeeeeeeee hog.

    Yup. A long ways.

  132. You have got to get a copy of that article. It is chalk full of so many gems.

    Like this one:

    Vladimir Putin (my man!) delivered the unkindest cut to the (has-been) messiah.

    He patted Obama’s shoulder reassuring you. (like you might do with your puppy–or lap dog)

    Now normally that is Obama’s power move. (and haven’t we seen that one a hundred times–to Hillary, to Kate Sebelius–but never evah to McCaskill–I will give him that much credit. In her case, when she sat with him on the plane and put her paw on his shoulder he did the right thing and removed it–her hand, and it it did not come off then he would have removed his shoulder)

    He’s been pulling this shit now for 6 years—this dominance move, subject to the McCaskill exception.

    This time, it was Putin’s turn to do it to him.

    He-did-NOT-like-it.

    It’s beautiful, this room we are in, right messiah–sayeth Putin–toying with him a bit.

    Whereupon Obama answered coldly “yes”.

    And among the world leaders there was no sign that they had any particular respect for Him.

    They can read election returns.

    They respect power and see it leaking out of him through every pour.

    Earlier he met with leaders on Capitol Hill.

    And no one looked at the big media beloved messiah with colder beadier eyes than the outgoing senate minority leader Harry Reid. (That must have been quite a look because even in one of his jovial moods, Reid has the eyes of a rattle snake. Yes, Search Light Nevada, population 1, has been known for its rattle snakes.)

  133. Shadowfax
    November 15, 2014 at 4:09 pm
    I also disagree that the American public are stupid.
    ————-
    Well not shadow, if they were not stupid, then how do you explain the continuing support for Obama among your colleagues, despite clear cogent and convincing proof of his misfeasance and his malfeasance? They may be highly credentialed mesna material. But on the only question that matters here, their judgement is fatally flawed. Gruper was right. Res ipsa locitur.

  134. If Gruber testifies, let us hope that the Republicans forgo their usual hammer and tongs treatment which typically fails, and leaves the jury sympathizing with the witness. Take the opposite tack, appeal to his ego, and refer to him as the top architect of Obamacare. Build him up and tie him to key dimocrats. Once they see the game, those dims will try to tear him down. Stop them in their tracks, accuse them of badgering the witness, and present him as a one man band who can shed new light on this tragic riddle.

  135. The lead editorial in the WSJ takes the same tack I did in re. the estimable Mr. Gruber:

    As a general rule, Americans do not like to be called stupid as Mr. Gruber is now discovering. (But) whatever his academic contempt for voters the “architect of Obamacare” and M.I.T. economist DESERVES THE PRESIDENTIAL MEDAL OF FREEDOM FOR HIS CANDOR ABOUT THE CORRUPTION OF THE FEDERAL BUDGETING PROCESS.

    The CBO director responsible for the switcheroo that MOVED much of ObamaCares REAL SPENDING OFF THE BOOKS was Peter Orszag who became Obama’s budget director. Orszag nevertheless assailed the CBO for not giving him enough credit for the law’s PHANTOM SAVINGS. (Orszag was an apple of WashPo editor’s eye. She did heart a heart warming story of a 21st century dad dropping off his little monsters at private school on his way to work where he could lie for Obama.)

    Gruber’s honesty is another warning that that the budget rules are rigged to expand government and hide the true cost of entitlements. The CBO figures are not hard facts, but guesses about the future, based on Keynsian assumptions and models its congressional masters instruct them to lose.

    Democrats are now pretending they never heard of Gruber, though they used to appeal to his authority when he still had some. His commentaries (however) are no less valuable just because he is now a political liability for Democrats.

  136. It was not a case of love at first sight. What I saw in the beginning was an arrogant academic geek. But as more videos come out, and with every glass of hard apple cider–12.5% proof I am developing a level of respect for Gruber which would be useful if in the world of Walter Middy, I was called upon to defend him. Question: what is it that we have here? A political staff member. At that task he has not been a success. For as every political staffer knows, his first job is to not scare the horses, whereas here the jackass dims are running from him faster than they would from an ebola effected passenger entering the country on a commercial flight King Obama refused to ban. But don’t lets forget he is also a professor–a real one, not a poseur. And what is the goal of a professor? To challenge his students, to provoke them, to make them want to learn, and hopefully but not always given the sorry state of public education given the march of progressivism through the institutions to educate them so they are well equipped to deal not with the virtual world but the real world. In that respect, the videos he produced are suffused with real world wisdom, and they lay out the truth with the bark off. Why is it that the forces of political correctness who blanch at the idea of a student wearing the cross, revolt against the idea that a professor should be candid about the deceit which the political class has been perpetrating on this nation. Why is it that they should revolt against a man who offers an elegant and sustained argument for why a house you could buy for $4500 in 1945 now costs $500,000. The forces of corruption are eager to shut him up. But we–the American People should listen and learn from what he has to say.

  137. And then there’s Hillary.

    February she announces?

    February is too soon.

    If she announces in February–for the ostensible purpose of pre empting the field, big media will rush to that story and not cover the demise of messiah obama.

    It will not do her any good to announce then.

    As a practical matter, don’t lets make the mistake of the US Navy, i.e fighting the last war–not the next one.

    It is important that Obama and his fellow travelers be thoroughly rebuked, and repudiated.

    If they are not then they will still control the party.

    That process will take months.

    The Republicans will take power on January 21.

    If she announces on February 1, then the window is too short.

    Postpone the announcement for as little as a month.

    If you do that much–which ain’t much, then momentum will be on your side.

    The dims will be desperate, and that is where we want them.

    Will Hillary listen to my advice? Not a chance.

    But that is the way to play the card she has been dealt.

  138. We need a better adversary.

    The law firm representing the RNC are mushballs, just like the RNC.

    They need lawyers like Andy McCarthy who stand by the constitution.

    We cannot be expected to do all the heavy lifting ourselves.

    We need help from the other side—not RINOs.

    Only then can there be a middle ground acceptable to the American People.

    Based on a Democrat Party and a Republican party devoted to the welfare of the nation.

  139. Wbb
    Well not shadow, if they were not stupid, then how do you explain the continuing support for Obama among your colleagues

    ———
    Because the Obola supporters are not the majority of Americans. I didn’t say, all American’s are not stupid, corrupt and full of themselves…we are going to have these corrupt fringe groups and the American public is realizing that just ignoring the corruption isn’t good enough to make it stop.

    Obama was hammered in the election of 2010, cheated in the election of 2012…I don’t believe he ‘won’ by an honest count of the votes…he didn’t win the primary in 2008 and he was hammered to a pulp in this past election.

    That was from the majority of voters that cared enough to vote, and his past disciples didn’t support his D’s in congress nor his corrupt policies or they would have voted to support them.

    Therefore, I don’t think the majority of American’s are stupid.

  140. And then there’s Hillary.

    February she announces

    ——-
    Did I miss something, who said she is going to announce in Feb??

    Needless to say, she should wait until as late as possible to either say she isn’t interested again, or let them come crawling to her on bloody knees…begging.

  141. wbboei November 15, 2014 at 10:41 pm

    And then there’s Hillary.

    The Republicans will take power on January 21.

    If she announces on February 1, then the window is too short.

    Postpone the announcement for as little as a month.

    The dims will be desperate, and that is where we want them.

    My feeling is that she should open an Exploratory Committee in February and announce her candidacy only late in the summer or Labor Day. That’s what I wrote in my letter to Chappaqua early this year.

    It would open a window of 7 months during which she could ply the country in a “listening tour” of town hall meetings, plus work for CGI, plus relax with granddaughter.

    Plus, Obama will have time to go down or come back up in the polls as the Republicans fuck things up completely and the Dims will be, as you say, desperate either way.

    What do you think of that?

  142. From an article in a wbboei comment:
    He then argues that what the dwindling white majority

    I know it’s common to hear whites are becoming a minority, but blacks are 12% of the US, asians are 3%, and whites are 85%.

    “Hispanic” is an American political term created in the 70s. It’s not a race, it’s not even an ethnicity – it’s a term created to group together disparate ethnicities that share Spanish as an original language – to create more of a power group. Hispanics are either white or black (or a combo), but most in the US are white.

    I’d say rather than “white” * becoming less prevalent, it’s rather the European values and heritage that founded the country that is being diluted and attempted to be minimized.

    * Although, I *have* noticed that it’s only traditonally white (non-“hispanic” and non-Arab) countries in which diversity is pushed all over the world. No one’s insisting that black or asian countries become diverse…. it’s rather interesting….

  143. S
    November 16, 2014 at 6:49 am
    ….Turley states this is a very dangerous move…

    Obama is morphing into a full fledged dictator. The Democrats have to put the kibosh on him now or they become the party of dictators. It really is pretty simple. They have enabled this and will continue to be punished by the electorate. Remember all the adoration because he is a constitutional scholar?

  144. My feeling is that she should open an Exploratory Committee in February and announce her candidacy only late in the summer or Labor Day. That’s what I wrote in my letter to Chappaqua early this year.
    ——————
    Good thinking.

    If there as a serious competitor in the race, then I would be recommend a formal announcement sooner rather than later.

    But as there is not, I think it is imperative for several reasons that she approach this thing slowly even if she has given an informal nod to people she can trust. By my lights, big media would be last to know.

    As the crisis surrounding Obama widens and deepens, they would love nothing better than to drag her into it, and that is not in her interest.

    Simply put, there is a time to be forthright and a time to be enigmatic. Now is not the time to be forthright, it is the time to sit back and wait for the pitbulls to devour Obama. Given the death grip his people have over the party, the most prudent course of action for her would be to let the pressure to a threshold, so her announcement elicits a hail Mary from her fellow democrats

    The experience of 2008 must not be forgotten. So when Axelgrease warns her that her nomination is in doubt, and uses that for leverage to seed his people in her government, because that is what he and other progs are doing now, she should call his bluff, and when he moves to act crush whoever they put forward. Frankly, they will be too wrapped up in the self immolation of dear leader to press the issue.

    As for the party, as they approach the 2016 election, even though the number of open seats is not as bad for them as it was in 2016, the need to distance themselves from Obama will become more and more acute. As that happens, and they face the imminent prospect of being hanged, their enthusiasm for her candidacy will peak and because she has not rushed in to save Obama, her prospects in the general election will improve.

    Where they are concerned, with the impending demise of the leader of their party and the approach of the next election: nothing so fixates the mind as the imminent prospect of being hanged again by the voters.

  145. Some men run to the sound of gunfire–marines who have been trained to do so. Others, indeed most, run the other way. That is true of the public in general. It is also true of Supreme Court justices. Roberts melted under fire once. I think the mold is set that way. Others claim it was simply the politics of the situation, and now that the voters have done the heavy lifting for him, it will be easier for him to do his job. They point to a wide range of less important, and less controversial issues, he has done exactly that—recess appointments being one example. Those examples, however, are as nothing compared to the way Obama put water between his legs on the pivotal issue of our time. So for all those pundits who are so cockfire sure that he will defend the constitution this time, all I can say is I too was once of that faith, but experience has taught me to be agnostic.

  146. Predicting political outcomes is a perilous undertaking and whenever a pundit with a reputation to protect ventures down that path typically they hedge their bet. It is dynamic, as in war, because each side to the controversy reacts to what the other does. But what if the opponent was predictable, what if his mindset fit the textbook definition of a sociopath and what if his power was such that no one in his own entourage had the power to restrain his worst instincts. In that case, the range of uncertainty about what he might do is narrowed substantially, and is not only predictable, but can be manipulated through the right set of moves. That is Obama’s situation. Moreover, the insight set forth above makes such a result even more certain, namely the fact that politicians do not have an infinite repertoire of tactics, but instead tend to react to new crises the same way as they have reacted in the past, even though it no longer works. This is what leads me to believe that he will not sidestep a crisis, or finesse a situation, but forge ahead to his own doom, and that of his party.

  147. The other subtle change is that for six years, Obama has been the moving party on everything, and any attempt by the House to oppose him or reign him in was bottled up by Reid. On January 21 of next year however Obama will become the party who will be acted upon and forced to react. He has the veto pen and he has the ability to compromise. Which one do you think he will choose. This is the strategy behind the plan to pass various pieces of legislation which are adverse to the actions he has taken, and serve to restore control of the legislative function in them. A normal president would adapt. Obama, on the other hand, is incapable of doing so. And as the walls around him close in, we will see more of the angry ossified child which exists beneather his charming hail fellow well met facade.

  148. wbboei November 16, 2014 at 9:39 am

    …. the range of uncertainty about what he might do is narrowed substantially, and is … predictable…. This is what leads me to believe that he will not sidestep a crisis, or finesse a situation, but forge ahead to his own doom, and that of his party.

    Yes indeed. Not to blow my own horn, but this is what I predicted before the elections: The elections would have no effect on Obama. He would remain the same and predictable. admin called me delusional, but for once I was right.

  149. S

    The Democrats have to put the kibosh on him now or they become the party of dictators. It really is pretty simple. They have enabled this and will continue to be punished by the electorate. Remember all the adoration because he is a constitutional scholar?
    _________________

    Yes. It’s his own party who bears the responsibility. They need to set Barack straight and stop the damage he is doing to this country. If they want to let him drive the party into the ground even further, so be it. But, when it comes to the well-being of this Republic and of democracy, itself, they need to be loyal enough to Americans and patriotic enough to do the right thing, and stop this wannabe king.

  150. wbboei
    November 15, 2014 at 10:41 pm

    And then there’s Hillary.

    February she announces?

    February is too soon.
    ____________________

    I hope she listens Wbboei.
    Make em beg her to run. 🙂

  151. wbboei November 16, 2014 at 9:49 am

    On January 21 of next year however Obama will become the party who will be acted upon and forced to react. He has the veto pen and he has the ability to compromise.

    This assumes that the Republicans are going to be able to get their shit together, which is a tall deal considering they need some Democratic support to get anything done. There is a good chance that the gridlock will continue.

  152. I’d say rather than “white” * becoming less prevalent, it’s rather the European values and heritage that founded the country that is being diluted and attempted to be minimized.

    * Although, I *have* noticed that it’s only traditonally white (non-”hispanic” and non-Arab) countries in which diversity is pushed all over the world. No one’s insisting that black or asian countries become diverse…. it’s rather interesting….
    ____________

    lorac, you are absolutely spot-on.

    I’ve said this before, but some of the college material, particularly in schools of sociology, portray Europeans as the devil incarnate. Some courses include graphic films depicting Europeans committing heinous violence against “people of color”, much disparagement of the European mindset of “superiority” and their role in oppressing people of color all over the world. No mention of the historical reality – of one group identified as “oppressed” perpetrating violence against other “oppressed” groups within a particular country or culture, and attempting to dominate and/or enslave.

  153. freespirit November 16, 2014 at 11:18 am

    …. No mention of the historical reality – of one group identified as “oppressed” perpetrating violence against other “oppressed” groups within a particular country or culture, and attempting to dominate and/or enslave.

    BASIL99 repeated this a number of times: The fact that black Africans were sold into slavery by other black Africans, and that slavery is still widely practiced in Africa today.

  154. A friend of mine who is highly credible tells me that Obama also plans to give the illegal aliens social security, disability, and all those things otherwise reserved for citizens. The American People need to understand that he is giving away their standard of living, their jobs, their entitlements, their health and their safety to the teeming masses of the third world. It is the tragedy of the commons in spades. Do they understand this? No. They are hooked on Tom Brokaw, and he aint tellin. Instead he is whining and he is throwing violent hissy fits over what unknown sources on talk radio are saying about Obama–comparing him and is supporters to excrement. Seems like a fair and accurate comparison to me. But the truth is more than Broken Tom can handle. No elder statesman he.

  155. The demographics stuff is B.S. the whole open borders crap is a Soros initiative based on his unresolved childhood issues, being stripped of his national and ethnic identity. All he has to hold on to is power and money and he uses it to take from others what he does not have. Well, he is now 84 years old, according to his website so by Obamacare standards he needs to serve the state by dying. In 2008 his net worth was around $9 Billion and now it is around $30 Billion. I guess he is going to take it with him.

    Obola is permanently bent over for him. Even those “no quarantine’ policies supposedly come from him http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/10/soros-latest-social-justice-tool-ebola/

    I believe that what the American People have rejected in rejecting Obola, is Soros. And he is not going to let Obola off the hook for going forward on his dementia. Obola is spineless and would rather just go golfing, but he has to answer to his master.

  156. I have never asked anyone in my chain of command to do anything I would not do myself.

    If a Force Recon Marine, a Navy Seal, or an Army Ranger says that I take it seriously.

    When other people say it, I take it with a grain of salt, unless they can show me they have done this in the past.

    Nevertheless, it is an honorable custom, more honored in the breach than in the observance.

    And it points the way forward on so many issues facing this country.

    Facebook Fuckerberg an advocate of unlimited immigration should be forced to collapse the borders of his vast estate and welcome in 10,000 illegals to live with him and gain title to his land through adverse possession.

    Then he could look the American People in the eye and say:

    With respect to illegal immigration, I am not going to ask you to do anything I would not do to myself.

  157. This assumes that the Republicans are going to be able to get their shit together, which is a tall deal considering they need some Democratic support to get anything done. There is a good chance that the gridlock will continue.
    ————
    I guess so.

    If my math is right, after they win Louisiana, the Senate will look like this:

    Republicans: 53

    Democrats: 44

    Independent Democrats: 2

    They need 60 votes to overcome

    1. a filibuster

    2. a veto

    In other words, the will need 7 democrats

    If I am looking at this the right way

  158. It must be 54-44-2.

    (Shit, I don’t know. And at this point, I am too lazy to look it up. If I am wrong feel free to correct me.)

  159. freespirit
    November 16, 2014 at 12:24 pm
    I had forgotten BASIL99. You’re right, jes.
    ———-
    Yes, she was a great colleague and a valued contributor.

  160. It’s just NOT right that the illegal aliens should have access to social security, disability, food stamps, obamaphones and obamacare.

    They will work, under the table, send that $ back to Mexico and south and we are stuck footing their bills.

    HE has to be stopped. This is out of control.

  161. First, shoot all the lawyers—Shakespeare

    I can well understand the sentiment

    But that might be taking it a bit too far

    At the very least, we should be selective

    Take Mike Rogers from Alabama (R)

    Never heard of him?

    Neither had I.

    There was an ex FBI agent from Michigan by that name.

    Who is stepping down because a connection has been shown between legislation he sponsors and his wife’s professional endeavors.

    That son of a bitch looked the part, but he always managed to fall through his ass, and we now know why.

    But this other (son of a bitch)

    What is his claim to fame?

    Besides vigorously advocating a return to the obscene practice of earmarks.

    Well, he is a lawyer. And-

    He was a lawyer. And-

    He practiced law. And-

    He went to law school.

    He is not alone.

    Rather than invoke all the shop worn lawyer jokes

    Let me just say this–with endless apologies to Shakespeare

    First, get rid of all the lawyers in congress

    Get businessmen, doctors, clergy, Taliban–

    Anything but more lawyers

    Like the old saying: more nukes less kooks.

  162. Let me add, the thousand pages of ambiguous, unintelligible, self serving, authoritarian satanic verses otherwise known as Obamacare are the proud work product of Harvard trained lawyers . . . where would we be without them?

  163. Lu4PUMA
    November 16, 2014 at 12:44 pm
    The demographics stuff is B.S. the whole open borders crap is a Soros initiative
    ————–
    The research I did six years ago confirms the truth of your statement.

    I ran into a neighbor of mine who is a stock broker, a market maker on Berkshire Hathaway stock and a big supporter of the Democrat Party.

    He knows all about the Koch Brothers, but tells me he never hears anything about Soros. Yes, this could be a Sergeant Schultz reaction, but I doubt it. He has no reason to lie to me about it. When he says he does not know I believe him.

    But that is what we run up against constantly from the educated professional class.

    When it comes to politics they are, to borrow an expression from that venerable art historian Sir Kenneth Clarke–ignorant as swans.

    So when we bring up the name Soros, they look at us cross eyed–the same way I look at Time Magazine when they dub the two headed dentist lusting for the support of Mich McConnell, the most interesting man in politics.

    If I had any money, I would not entrust it to either one of them. He would try to give it to Buffet, end up giving it to Soros and it would go into the coffers of the despicable Adam Schiff (D-CA)

  164. A wise man makes his own decisions
    An ignorant one follows public opinion

    How else to explain the electorate’s fatal attraction to candidate Obama.

  165. dot48 November 16, 2014 at 2:10 pm
    It’s just NOT right that the illegal aliens should have access to social security, disability, food stamps, obamaphones and obamacare.
    They will work, under the table, send that $ back to Mexico and south and we are stuck footing their bills.
    HE has to be stopped. This is out of control.
    ————————
    True. It would be the end of everything I/we? believe in. So strange that Gates Jr and PBS invested heavily in unearthing AA roots. Now skinny bones methodically destroying mine (ours if you please). My heritage is mixed WASP with Germany, Salesia. And all of it involves 10 commandments AWA work ethic.

    One side of my family helped establish a Presbyterian church in 1818, western PA. Other side founded a whole new religion: Schwenkfelder about the same time. Still a dozen or so of them in SE PA.

    Just don’t know how far Congressional are members willing to be dragged. Just cannot see how any sane one would support it. Very uneasy times.

  166. wbboei
    November 16, 2014 at 12:16 pm
    I hope they are smart enough to put Gruber in witness protection.
    ____________

    I thought the thing thing, wbb. If not, something may happen to him as it did to the head of the Arkansas Dem Party in 2008, the choir director in the goddamn America church of the Rev. Wright, STJ, and a couple of others.

  167. Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, D.C., which advocates more restrictions on immigration, says voters often are befuddled by complex immigration proposals and polling questions, overstating the actual support for an immigration overhaul.

    The Oregon vote, he said, is proof of that.

    “Whenever the public gets that sort of clear-cut, black-and-white issue for tougher controls on illegal immigration — even in Oregon, when they’re legalizing dope — they support them,” Krikorian said.

    “It really highlights how this issue is not a Republican-liberal issue like, say, taxes and abortion, but an up-down issue, elites versus the public.”

    ———————
    Question: and why do you think that is?

    Simple: the elites are insulated from the effects of illegal immigration–the job loss, the collapse of safety nets, crime, etc. They have plush jobs, live in gated communities, etc.

    Since they do not live in the real world, their views ought not to count.

  168. Gruber and others are rolling in the dough thanks to Ocare, about which he and the Obama-Dims told lie upon lie in order to force it upon us “stupid” Americans
    ____________

    Grubergate shines spotlight on Obamacare profiteers

    BY BYRON YORK | NOVEMBER 16, 2014 | 1:56 AM

    Jonathan Gruber, an Mass. Institute of Technology economist and advisor to President Obama, poses…
    Remember when Nancy Pelosi declared that Obamacare was a jobs bill? “It’s about jobs,” Pelosi said in 2011, during a news conference to mark the first anniversary of passage of the Affordable Care Act. “Does it create jobs? Health insurance reform creates 4 million jobs.”
    Like many other promises about Obamacare, that hasn’t worked out.

    (Snip)

    The bottom line is that Obamacare has been very, very good to Jonathan Gruber. Now that he is in the news for other reasons, the public is also learning how much he profited from the bill he did so much to promote.
    Of course others profited from Obamacare, too, and still are. Republican Mike Leavitt, a former governor of Utah and Mitt Romney adviser, has a consulting firm that has made millions off the exchanges. But Gruber’s recent admissions might put him in a special category. He is, by his own account, a man who intentionally deceived the public in order to pass a measure from which he stood to profit handsomely.
    (snip)

    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/grubergate-shines-spotlight-on-obamacare-profiteers/article/2556239

  169. Obama tells Aussies they didn’t lie about Ocare, Gruber wasn’t on his staff, he disagreed with G’s assessment of Americans.

    In other words, He didn’t know kothin’ bout nothin’ – Who’s the real stupid American?

    Notice that O doesn’t refer to the public as Americans but as “voters”.
    _________________

    Obama: We didn’t mislead on health care
    By JOSH GERSTEIN 11/16/14 7:12 AM EST

    BRISBANE, Australia — President Barack Obama denied Sunday that his signature health care reform law was deceptively marketed, rejecting statements by a consultant on the plan who said aspects of Obamacare were designed to take advantage of the “stupidity” of voters.

    “The fact that an adviser who was never on our staff expressed an opinion that I completely disagree with in terms of the voters is not a reflection on the actual process that was run,” Obama declared at a press conference here, speaking for the first time about the comments by MIT economist Jonathan Gruber.

    (snip)

    Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/11/barack-obama-health-care-112930.html#ixzz3JGwcYobM

  170. Obama: We didn’t mislead on health care
    —————-
    If you like your health care plan you can keep it.

    If you like your doctor you can keep him

    My plan will save an average family of 4 $25000/yr.

    We didn’t mislead on health care.

    Res ispa locitur, i.e. the thing speaks for itself.

  171. Well, Gruber has accepted my offer to represent him.

    (Yes. I am back in the cups)

    As Michael Barone states, other profited from the Obamacare fraud as well. And not ALL of them were democrats. I am shocked to learn that RINOs were in on the heist as well.

    So here is my client’s defense, set to music for your listening pleasure.

    [youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iN_ftQAVcl4&w=640&h=390%5D

  172. What has happened to big media? Why do the bury the truth? Why do they perpetrate lies?

    For the full answer, I would encourage you to read Sharyl’s book: Stonewalled.

    But here is a short excerpt which appears at pp. 82-3 which confirms what so many of us long suspected.

    That network producers get their stories from other outlets as opposed to their own reporters. NYT and HuffPo top the list.

    That once they have that story, they direct their reporters to ignore their own stories, and cover the same ground.

    That talented reporters are instructed to paint by the numbers–what to say, what to avoid, stay within the numbers.

    That network producers in New York are little more than casting agents.

    That reporters are forced to create a reality which conforms to the preconceived notions of what the NY producers believe.

    That these NY producers and managers are a hermetically sealed cultural village of elitists who hold the same beliefs and live together, socialize together, hold the same rootless cosmopolitan perspective on life and disdain for America

    That when the stories originate outside the beltway these NY sophisticates routinely make fun of the people living there.

    That not everyone at CBS is a raving left winger–there is a diversity of views among reporters and even producers.

    That the core problem resides with a small group of managers in New York who are determined to force their views on the American People with an attitude that the truth is immaterial unless it conforms to their pre determined elitist narrative.

    That narrative is false on its face. But worse than that, it is a fairy tale that does not reflect the views and interests of the American People.

    Frankly, after reading this, I know exactly who these people are–not always by name, but in all other respects. This explains why we are being lied to, why we should not go to big media for the truth, and why FOX news–which despite its own faults lacks that same elitist bias is cleaning their clocks.

    Speaking personally, I have no interest in listening to these people. Their socioeconomic situation is not mine. Their values are foreign to me. They trade in lies not truth. There is nothing constructive nothing worthwhile nothing worth knowing that I can learn from them.

    As Shakespeare said in one of his plays nothing will come of nothing. Or, in the venacular, friends don’t let friends listen to and be brainwashed by big media.

  173. Today, the disconnect between big media and the American People is wide, gaping, profound. There is dry rot in the sanctor sanctorium of big media, and that is what stupid voters like me are reacting to and railing against hoping that someone will hear the sounds we make—we canaries in the coal mine.

  174. Another day, another beheading of another US Citizen.

    http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2014/11/16/isis-claims-it-has-beheaded-american-peter-kassig/

    Not to make light of it, but this is becoming a habit.

    What will the big media beloved messiah do in response?

    Will he huff, puff and go play golf–again?

    Will he go on the fundraising trail to evade responsibility–again?

    Will he go on a new apology tour after seeing how swimmingly his first round went?

    I like door 3.

    But if he does that, he had better realize that either his mata hari seduction routine ain’t scoring

    Or else, ISIS is just playing hard to get

    As more heads roll

  175. How ironic that ISIS would call Muslim Obama “The Dog of Rome”.

    If they want to call him a dog, they will get no argument from me.

    Except a jackal might be a more accurate description.

    But a dog of Rome–meaning that he is what? Catholic?

    I guess I missed something.

    Jerry Wright struck me as a racist anti semitic white hating ideologue.

    But those are not the core tenets of Catholicism, as I understand them.

    Maybe Bill Mahr can go over there and talk sense to Abul Abulbul Amir.

    The sons of the Prophet are brave men and bold
    And quite unaccustomed to fear,
    But the bravest by far in the ranks of the Shah,
    Was Abdul Abulbul Amir.

  176. wbb

    “That network producers get their stories from other outlets as opposed to their own reporters. NYT and HuffPo top the list.”
    ________

    No surprise there.

    You have to wonder at what point would Obama-meida ever consider ending their defense of the indefensible Obama Administration. What would he have to do to get them to honestly, openly report on him and his WH? Do they even have the ability to speak the truth about The One who makes their thighs tingle?

    When MSM actually does a semi-honest piece about Barack- once in a blue moon, it must be just to fake out the public, to give the appearance of objectivity in order to gain a bit of public trust while they busily cover up and bury some more of O’s trash, and that of his peeps.

    I would so love to see media pay a price for this abuse of power and betrayal of the public trust.

  177. McCaskill on Face the Nation. She does the party line to a point, then listen to her comments about Reid and Warren. The Dems have a split in there party.

    BTW, shame on Scheiffer for saying Warren was “voted” in by the Dem Senate. She was appointed by Reid, then a token voice vote was taken….and Scheiffer knows that.

  178. freespirit
    November 17, 2014 at 12:19 am
    ————
    There is no limiting principle on their delusions, they are fully insulated from the consequences of the adverse policies they support and they consider love of country to be the last bastion of soundrels. With power however comes an obligation to exercise it responsibly, and they do not meet that test.

    My late friend the Cuban banker rubbed shoulders with this crowd on his days on Wall Street. Straight out of Princeton he landed a top staff position with the legendary president of City Bank. My friend reminded me in some ways of Orson Wells, a Jesuit education, a razor sharp mind, a wonderful sense of humor, a great debater and an even greater raconteur. Those were the qualities that got him invited on one or more occasions to the brownstones of the upper east side, and the parties of the insular New York crowd I believe Sharyl was referring to.

    These people were at the top of their professions, secular, money oriented and interested primarily in what they referred to as “the game”. Some of them were content to sit back and quietly make money whereas others, particularly the younger ones wanted to make their mark in a much more visible way. The game they referred to was, among other things, to exert their influence if not control over the national political system, and to manipulate the public mind. This is not some James Bond movie, rather it simply a group of very self interested people with a world vision and a tenuous commitment to the welfare of the nation. Beneath his ebullient exterior my friend loathed these people, and being a Vatican I Catholic didn’t make him like them any better.

  179. VotingHillary
    November 17, 2014 at 12:06 am
    wbboei, please take a stiff drink and blood pressure meds before you view this one:

    ——————–
    Stiff drink: check

    Blood pressure meds: check

    I still can’t do it.

  180. The reason I mention that group is because, if I am right, that is the social group the young Harvard trained progressives, like Matt Tabbi, Dana Milbank write for, seek to ingratiate themselves to, and are seeking the golden handshake from.

  181. To complement the 10th anniversary of the Clinton Presidential Center in Little Rock, the Miller Center at the University of Virginia has released transcripts from interviews for its “Clinton oral history” project, with a lot of material from the 1990s showing a lot about how HRC was at that time, and in some respects she has not changed since.

    A quote from Panetta:

    “There’s no question that she was smart, she was dedicated, she understood the issues and people were a little intimidated by her. There were several meetings where she basically walked in and let everybody have it, very different from what the president would do. If she thought something was going wrong, she’d say it. She was much more confrontational in that sense.

    I’ll never forget, Pat Griffin came out of that meeting and his eyes were that wide and he said, … ‘I can’t believe it, I can’t believe what I’ve just been through.’ I said, ‘What’s the matter?’ He said, ‘The first lady just tore everybody a new asshole.’ I said, ‘Really?’ It was that first experience.

    When I became chief of staff, recognizing that she was an important factor, I went out of my way to make sure I briefed her on what was going on as chief of staff. But if she ultimately believed that you had the capacity to do a job, she backed off. She served as what I would call a chief of staff-in-waiting, in the sense that if she felt the chief of staff or whoever was not doing the job, she was prepared to protect the president. And she was very good at that.”

    From Marjorie Margolies:

    “I’m doing women’s leadership around the world. You don’t fold in that if you run as an outsider and you do something that they think is folding to the politics, as opposed to sticking up for what you believe in, you hope that that makes sense. But with women especially, the pedestal is then pulled out precipitously. ‘She’s just like all the rest of them.’

    There’s also something that I’ve gotten into because we do a lot of polling in the classes that I teach and some stuff around the world. In polling, there is the minority factor. The one thing that you can’t measure is jealousy. It’s a very difficult thing for women. It never entered my mind that that would be a problem. But there is a lot of, ‘Who does she think she is?’ When you look at Hillary, too, there is this.”

    This “who does she think she is?” jealousy is perhaps something that it stopping a lot of women from supporting Hillary.

    From Alan Simpson (R) after the 1993 inauguration:

    “About two weeks, three weeks later, we were invited to the White House. I don’t remember what it was; it wasn’t a large group, maybe 50, 40. I watched Hillary as she began to visit with Ann. Hillary never turns her head when she’s talking to someone. She is absolutely riveted. She doesn’t look around like, ‘Oh, hi there Tilly; how are you?’—or divert her attention from the person she’s talking to. That’s a gift. You have to have that in politics. There were people around—it was adulation: ‘We want to talk to Hillary.’ She must have spent about 15 or 20 minutes with Ann on mental health issues… Anyway, I thought that was fascinating.”

    From Alan Blinder (economis): “She’s really smart. She learns, and she knows she made mistakes.

    From Roger Altman (investment banker and deputy treasury secretary):

    “There’s an interesting difference [between HRC and WJC] that always has struck everybody who’s watched it up close, which is that she inspires fierce loyalty and he doesn’t. You look at the turnover that she had—or in her case did not have—on her staff, and the turnover that he had. You look at the relationships he ended up having with a lot of people that he was initially close to and were central to his administration, whether it’s George Stephanopoulos or whoever else it may be.

    She inspired, continues to inspire, fierce loyalty, and he doesn’t. It’s quite a difference and I ascribe it to the fact that she does not look at the world as, or at least in my experience, as solely and only political. She wears her heart on her sleeve much more than he does. Less and less now that she’s her own public figure, but that’s her nature.”

  182. freespirit
    November 17, 2014 at 12:19 am
    …I would so love to see media pay a price for this abuse of power and betrayal of the public trust.

    It is taking a very long time relative to their losses both financially and in market share, but the progressive tilted media is dying. MSNBC was told by Gates to take the MicroSoft out of their name and divorced them. Their market share of audience is lower than “The Peanut Channel” and ad buys are out of pity. Eventually stockholders of their parent companies will get sick of hauling their freight. CNN is like a beached whale. They are being pecked to death by competitors and in a constant state of downsizing (again like a beached whale being consumed by natural forces). CNBC has ex-employees telling of their management being agitprop and propaganda handlers openly. CBS has Sheryl Atkisson blabbing. Their flagship newspapers are broke. Their influence is slowly petering out and the self-reference effect is growing where they only have each other for an audience. It all has a Blanche Dubois aura about it.

  183. Mormaer
    November 17, 2014 at 7:05 am
    freespirit
    November 17, 2014 at 12:19 am
    ———————-
    Then you discount the rumor that when Obama legalizes 34 million illegals, tells them they can bring in all their relatives, waives the oath and makes them citizens with the proviso that they vote democrat or lose their benefits, and throws them on the welfare rolls provided they swear they broke our law to get a better life and it is just and proper to reward them for it, because the end always justifies the means, and the law does not apply to them, that he will not give them free televisions with the msnbc and cnn piped in 24-7 unless John Roberts does the unthinkable, stands up, cries halt, and says you must abide by the constitution without mussing the crease in his blue suade pants. Obama: I can do anything I want, I need a legacy, and whatever my ambition costs this racist nation is not my problem. To his Costco donors: hey bro–show me the money. Big media swoon. Yes it may cost us but we will survive. In the interim destroying the nation is such fun that we have to say forget domani.

  184. Obamacare and Obamaimmigration deform will collapse under their own weight, for the reasons described by Richard Rodriguez. At that point, the progs will suddenly discover that we have a federal system, and stick the turd in the pockets of the states. If those states are controlled by dimocrats they will gladly accept them out of party loyalty, over the objection of the thinking minority of their citizens. If they are controlled by republicans they will say oh anything for Obama, he need only ask–but not this.

  185. Jes, each of those quotes seemed quite accurate – or at least, consistent with my (and I think, others’) impression of her, which has developed over the years. Smart, fierce, loyal, inspirational , passionate, compassionate, and yes – some other women are jealous. I’m not sure than men don’t feel every bit as much jealousy of each other as do women. They just hide it better. It’s very discouraging to see so many women who cannot be allies of each other. Of course millions of us ordinary, regular American women were and are right there on Hillary’s bandwagon. But women with some political power, or who want to have some power and influence just can’t support other women who have it.

    And we know they all have a “special place” waiting for them at the end of the road.

    The one additional adjective that we used to hear mentioned about Hillary a lot was “funny”. When you see those pics of her just cracking up, you can tell she has a great sense of humor.

    I really hope Hillary will not lose herself in the process of becoming electable. Those pols who do so are little more than products – manufactured, packaged, and sold to the public, with little on the inside that resembles their true nature or character. No job or position is worth selling your soul for.

  186. mormaer

    “It all has a Blanche Dubois aura about it.”

    _____________

    What an apt description! The devolution of prog-media to these depths would be sad and pathetic, if it weren’t so damn well deserved. Maybe once out of office, Barack will give jobs to all of his media people who no longer have them when he opens his consulting firm, or writes his next 200 works of fiction – he’s a prolific sucker, if nothing else. He’ll probably name both his consulting firm and books “Conversations with God” – volumes one through 200.

  187. If these two senators elect are any indication, the dims in congress and the great big really big media beloved scumbag in the white house will have his unclean hands full. I have seen Langford before, and been very very impressed. He is a no bullshit kind of guy. This is the first time I have seen Cotton, but man is he very impressive as well–with presidential possibilities in the next decade. I am so used to judging their party by the old guard–Roberts, Cochran, Boehner, McConnell, Murkowski, etc who are risk adverse, bereft of new ideas, and more committed to their donors than the county that this piece gives me some faith that the cause is not as hopeless as it might appear. These two new senators defy that stereoptype and give me some hope that in the future, Ted Cruz, Mike Lee and Jeff Sessions will not have to go it alone, surrounded by toothless colleagues he tell them, I will support you all the way, but don’t ask me to do anything.

    http://video.foxnews.com/v/3894070926001/how-far-will-gop-to-block-executive-action-on-immigration/#sp=show-clips

  188. freespirit November 17, 2014 at 10:20 am

    I’m not sure that men don’t feel every bit as much jealousy of each other as do women.

    I have a feeling they don’t. I have a feeling that most women make a compromise with themselves early in life, accepting a subordinate position and letting the man take the lead and bear the responsibilities in all things; and when they see a woman taking the lead, they think she’s a dike or being uppity.

    Hillary is from an unusual background where subordination was not in the rules: the eldest child and the smartest of the three, told outright by her mom that she couldn’t count on getting a free ride through life, not to be dependent or a parasite, many childhood experiences made a natural leader of her.

    I don’t think men are generally jealous of other men who have leadership skills. I’ve never heard of a man who was brought up to be a subordinate, or told that being a parasite was an honorable possibility for him in life.

  189. He’ll probably name both his consulting firm and books “Conversations with God” – volumes one through 200.
    ——————
    Or better yet, Satanic Verses–the non-abridged edition.

    It will occupy a prominent place in the Obama Presidential Library which will attract the stupidest segment of the population.

    On a related topic, I just got a call from the White House.

    They want Gruber to take a plea, and allocute that he never visited the White House, never discussed the parameters of Obamacare with Obama, never spoke with Pelosi before she quoted him, and is criminally insane.

    I told them that we would take their offer under advisement, on three (3) conditions:

    1. first, that he receive no jail time and no probation for telling the truth.

    2. second, that this retraction was coerced and elicited in violation of Miranda.

    3. third, that they admit on the record that Obamacare is, like its namesake, a fraud.

    I am awaiting their response with high hopes that it will be accepted on the premise that they will do anything to shut Gruber up, which is why he is now in witness protection.

  190. I’ve never heard of a man who was brought up to be a subordinate, or told that being a parasite was an honorable possibility for him in life.
    ————-
    But isn’t that the central thrust of the democrat party under Obama? Isn’t that the clear implication of their I know better than you do mantra? And, isn’t that the subtext of their welfare state policies. As a practical matter, the answer to those question is yes. And the Obamaites were given a truth serum, I have no doubt they would admit this.

  191. Sometimes, it is a good thing to take important matters under advisement rather than reacting on the spur of the moment. Often we do not see the fatal flaws at first blush.

    Case in point: my (hypothetical) counter offer to the White House on behalf of my (hypothetical) client and speaker of wisdom and truth Professor Gruber, aka Comrade Video Index.

    Thank God I took their offer and my counter offer under advisement, rather than reacting immediately without thinking it through. For now, upon (reasonably) sober reflection (below 1.2), I have spotted its fundamental flaw–and trap.

    Assume, for the sake of argument, that we agreed to their offer, as modified by my counter offer, whereby my client promises to stop telling the truth about Obamacare, and in exchange the Obama Administration promises to admit on the record that the program is a fraud and so is Obama. On the surface it is tempting but the devil is in the details.

    For if we agreed to these terms, then experience shows that the moment the ink is dry, the messiah would disavow it, blame others, claim his signature is a forgery and refuse to uphold his end of the bargain, while insisting that we uphold ours.

    Moreover, when we objected, he would say, well, if you don’t like it then go win an election. Whereupon Axelgrease would intervene and say, what messiah Obama meant was sue me. Elections he loses mean nothing.

    Then Obama would have his New York Cabalists who control big media accuse us of racism, and trying to impeach our first black president. They will also tell Justice Roberts that his legacy hinges on whether he protects Obama. We know what he would do.

    Therefore, I have instructed Dr. Gruper to reject this illusory bargain, and keep his powder dry.

    Whereupon, he inquired, if I cannot secure relief because no one in power in this country has the balls to take on the Big Media beloved, then to whom can I turn. The only name I could suggest to him was Vladimir Putin, if he agreed to take the case. As I explained, Putin has put Obama in short pants before, made him bark, heel, and roll over, like the dog of Rome he is.

    It sad to think that the best hope for this country is a Russian despot. I guess that is the true meaning of hope and change.

  192. Hope apropos. And exactly what Peggy Nooan said: politicians do not have an infinite repertoire of responses to problems. On the contrary, they rely on what has worked in the past even though it is no longer working, i.e.

    “It is hilarious to see how Obama continues to use the Sergeant Schutlz excuse of being uninformed about everything in his administration:

    Also revealing is how his denials (dutifully parroted by the New York big media cabal) cannot quite keep up with the continuing cascade of inconvenient videos which serve to rebut the most recent lie, and all those that preceded it.

    “What is more delicious is that another Gruber video surfaced shortly before Obama issued yet another in what is becoming the serial denial of Jonathan Gruber.”

    Finally, at some point, Obama’s continuing contention “I did NOT mislead the American People” begins to sound like Nixon’s famous dictum “I am NOT a crook!”. In both cases, the weight of the evidence suggests otherwise.

    ———————-

    Obama denies Gruber as yet another video surfaces
    By: streiff (Diary) | November 17th, 2014 at 02:00 PM | 9

    At the G20 meeting in Brisbane, Australia, Barack Obama was finally asked a question about Obamacare guru Jonathan Gruber’s rather gleeful comments detailing how Congress, the CBO, and the American people on how Obamacare was intended to function (short story, it is performing exactly as planned):

    ED HENRY, FOX NEWS: At your Burma townhall a couple of days ago, you tried to inspire young leaders by saying, “governments need to be held accountable, need to be responsive to the people.” I wonder how you square that with your former adviser, Jonathan Gruber claiming you were not transparent about the health law because in his words the American people, the voters are stupid. Did you mislead Americans about the taxes, about keeping your plan in order to get the bill passed?

    PRESIDENT OBAMA: No, I did not. I just heard about this. I get well-briefed before I come out here. The fact that some adviser who never worked on our staff expressed an opinion that I completely disagree with in terms of the voters, is no reflection on the actual process that was run. We had a year-long debate, Ed. I mean, go back and look at your stories. The one thing we can’t is that we did not have a lengthy debate about health care in the United States of America. Or that it was not adequately covered. I would just advise — every press outlet here, go back and pull up every clip, every story, and I think it will — it’s fair to say there was not a provision in the health care law that was not extensively debated and was fully transparent. Now, there were folks who disagreed with some of the various positions. It was a tough debate.

    Though it is hilarious to see how Obama continues to use the Sergeant Schutlz excuse of being uninformed about everything in his administration:

    What is more delicious is that another Gruber video surfaced shortly before Obama issued yet another in what is becoming the serial denial of Jonathan Gruber:

    A transcript is provided courtesy of HotAir:

    The problem is it’s a political nightmare, and people say ‘no, you can’t tax my benefits’…so what we did a lot in that room was think a lot about well how could we make this work? … And [Obama] is really a realistic guy. He was like, ‘look, I can’t just do this.’ He said ‘it’s just not going to happen politically. The bill will not pass. How do we manage to get there through phase-ins and other things?’ And we talked about it. He was just very interested in that topic.

    This establishes that Obama was acquainted with Gruber and while he trots out the non sequitur about Gruber not being on his staff, he ignores the fact that Gruber was paid some hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars in order to, to use the phrase made so popular by climate alarmists, “hide the decline.” He also substitutes a truthful statement, that there was a lot of debate in the press on health care, for how Obamacare was actually constructed, thereby telling two huge lies in the space of a single breath. Nancy Peolsi gave the game away when she said, “But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.” This is exactly how Gruber and the Administration were operating. It was obvious then and it is more obvious now.

    http://www.redstate.com/2014/11/17/obama-denies-gruber-yet-another-video-surfaces/

  193. They tracked down Sebelius, the former empress of Obamacare, at an American Actuaries event in Kansas last Friday.

    And they asked her to comment on Gruber’s allegation that the Obama Administration tricked the American People into supporting that perverse act. (Note: to be clear, it was big media at the behest of Obama who tricked the American People on that score.)

    This was a fair question inasmuch as Gruber was the Architect of the law and Kate was charged with its implementation. Not surprisingly, she declined to comment.

    Furthermore, she did not deny that the American people were tricked into supporting that law, nor does she quarrel with Gruber’s characterization of them as stupid. (Question: is silence an admission, in these circumstances?)

    Kate was born into a political family, and showed much promise in her career. She is capable, articulate and hard working. She concedes that she made some mistakes with respect to Obamacare. But those mistakes are as nothing compared to the mistake she made in supporting Obama over Hillary, and accepting an impossible job in his administration.

    It is tragic for her, because she might have become vice president at some future time, whereas now her career in public service is clearly over. It is equally tragic for us because Obama has ruined our health care system.

    Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/nov/15/sebelius-dodges-gruber-question-i-dont-have-commen/#ixzz3JO6e5n6X
    Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

  194. Like the blind pig finding an acorn, Morris gets this one right. Obama support for amnesty and green cards for millions of illegal aliens who will flood our safety nets places him–and more importantly, his party, on a collision course with the working class portion of his base. The first instinct of unions like the Teamsters will be to relish the potential for all these new members. But their membership will lose jobs and income earning opportunities under this illegal action, and that is where the rubber meets the road. The most interesting unintended consequence of Obama’s actions will be to re define the term progressive vs. liberal. It has the potential to produce a real rift in the party, which, with the right leadership could marginalize Obama’s death grip over the party and the federal government. But of course, as with every other prediction, time will tell.
    ————
    Why Dems Lack Working Class Appeal: It’s Immigration, Stupid

    By Dick Morris on November 17, 2014

    After their massive defeats in the midterm elections, many Democrats are calling for the party to move away from its emphasis on social issues and embrace a call for higher wages and an end to stagnant working class incomes. But they miss the point. Both in fact and in perception, their pro-immigration stance puts them on the wrong side of the issue.

    AFL-CIO President Richard L. Trumka called on Hillary to “run on a raising-wages agenda and not cater to Wall Street but to everyday people.”

    The New York Times notes that as Democrats sift through the returns, they see that “lower-income voters either supported Republicans or did not vote.” The paper said that “liberals argue that without a more robust message about economic fairness, the party will continue to suffer among working-class voters, particularly in the South and Midwest.”

    But both Trumka and the Times miss the key point: You can’t be for raising downscale wages and opening the doors of our nation to millions of low income immigrants at the same time. They are mutually contradictory both economically and politically.

    Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown, an ultra-leftist, came closer to the mark when he said that “Too many Democrats are too close to Wall Street” and that “too many Democrats support trade agreements that outsource jobs, and too many Democrats are too willing to cut Social Security — and that’s why we lose elections.”

    But Brown’s argument collapses when he leaves immigration off his list.

    Under Obama, three out of every four newly created jobs went to people not born in the United States according to the Census Bureau. The resultant downward pressure on wages makes income inequality worse. Proposals to raise the minimum wage are largely beside the point — only ten percent of those at this wage level are in poverty, the rest are second and third incomes in their families.

    To raise the wages of the heads of households, the left cannot continue to force them to compete with newly arrived immigrants who are willing to work for next to nothing.

    The liberal agenda of tougher regulation of banks, student loan forgiveness, and even revisions in trade policy simply won’t address the problem sufficiently.

    In one stroke of the pen, President Obama will justify working class angst about the Administration’s economic policy when he ends deportations of illegal immigrants.

    Message to Obama and the left: Immigration is the economic issue of our time.

  195. This action could actually kill the private sector unions. The success of a union depends on its ability to control not just a company but an entire labor market within an industry and a geographic area. In times past this was done through aggressive organizing efforts directed a new companies entering that market and by the inclusion of area standards limitations on subcontracting by signatory companies. This flood of new people willing to work at slave wages under independent contractor and other arrangements will happen so quickly that union companies will be unable to react. We saw the same thing when the trucking industry was de regulated in 1980 and overnight hundreds of union companies signatory to the National Master Freight Agreement went belly up so that within roughly 2 years the total membership of the Teamsters Union fell from 1.8 million to 1.2 million. Any serious union economist will be warning the head of the union of this eventuality and urging him to tell Obama to go slow. The stated desire of people like Schumer to enjoy perpetual power, and the greed left wing billionaires like Zuckerberg can have a very destabilizing and dislocating impact on working families, despite the greasy handshake and mawkish grin of Schumer.

  196. National Review’s Jonah Goldberg said Monday on “Special Report with Bret Baier” that embattled ObamaCare architect Jonathan Gruber’s comments about the “stupidity” of American voters “exemplify problems that go far beyond the Affordable Care Act.”

    “This spectacle represents not just everything that’s wrong with the Obama administration, but sort of everything that’s wrong with liberalism, and a lot that’s wrong with America itself,” Goldberg said, adding, “You’ve got this guy who is pretending to be an objective, independent analyst… being touted around through a transmission belt of liberal journalists, who all are pretending to be objective analysts too, quoting each other… all with the help of the White House, which went along with this soup to nuts, a process this guy says was all about lies and misleading the American people.”

    Moreover, Goldberg said the White House has continued to mislead the public since news broke on the Gruber comments.

    “When caught about it, the same administration tries to dismiss him as if he was some sort of… random White House intruder,” he said. “The whole thing stinks.”

    As for the Affordable Care Act itself, Goldberg called it a law that “makes American life more complex” and allows a “leeching new class of people… [to] profit from the complexity they’re imposing on the society

  197. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, of Kentucky, who will lead the majority in the next Congress, has also warned the president of potential consequences if he proceeds sans congressional approval.

    But McConnell has also vowed to keep the federal government operating regardless of what action Obama might take.

    “Let me make it clear – there will be no government shutdowns and no default on the national debt,” McConnell said the day after winning election to a sixth term.

    But McConnell could face some pushback from the delegation he has been selected to lead. Sen.

    Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), who is expected to assume the chairmanship of the Senate Budget Committee, characterized the potential for an executive order on immigration as “shocking” and is pressing the GOP leadership to seek only a short-term budget that will keep the government open only through the beginning of next year to exert pressure on the White House.

    “The president cannot, having had his policies defeated at the ballot box, impose them through executive decree,” Sessions said. “A Republican Congress will defend itself and our citizens from these lawless actions. Surrendering to illegality is not an option. Democrats will have to choose sides — protect the president’s agenda or protect your constituents. Americans do not want their borders erased.”

  198. “McConnell could face some pushback from the delegation he has been selected to lead.”

    Yes, in this and in all matters. This only means he needs more Democrats on his side. Tough deal.

    And it’s not only the Senate that will prove difficult to lead: There are dozens of Tea Party representatives in the House who enjoy being a thorn in the Republicans’ side, especially on budget matters.

  199. Conclusion: The stalemate will continue.
    ————–
    Maybe not.

    If McConnell does not weaken, I think Obama will be forced to soften his position on executive amnesty.

    If he does not, then he will discover that although he can declare amnesty, he cannot compel the republicans to fund it.

    He can seize the bully pulpit and call on big media to blame the Republicans like they always do.

    But because his action is unconstitutional and is opposed by 75% of the electorate, and he lost an election over it, he will lack the moral high ground and leverage to move them.

    As a result, if he presses the issue, then he is likely to find that he is not only a lame duck, but a leader in limbo, hated by all sides.

    And when he looks across the aisle he will see not just McConnell, but a new class of conservatives who will make it hard for McConnell to give him what he wants and declare victory, as he has done in the past, too often.

  200. In other words, I sense that there is some theater going on here.

    On the other hand, it is possible that even though Obama would like to get off the limb he is on, he may lack the finesse and the willingness to compromise. Or, he may become a prisoner to his own tactics and ego.

    That is the hallmark of an inexperienced negotiator, which if you strip away the hype, is what Obama really is.

  201. Correct the record has generated major blowback against the right-wing meme,

    “What did Hillary Clinton accomplish as Secretary of State?”

    with the new app:

    http://map.correctrecord.org

    Any of us here who spent those four years concentrating on Obama and missing out on what Hillary was doing, or have not bothered to read Hard Choices, the QDDR or anything else, for that matter, about her or her effort at State, would do well just to take a look at this new app.

    You can’t read it all, because for all 112 countries visited, you get the Travel schedule, the International Diplomacy, statements and steps taken on the Economy and Jobs, Human Rights, Energy and Environment, Women and Girls, Counterterrorism and Security, Education, Nuclear Nonproliferation — and that’s just for China.

  202. wbboei
    November 18, 2014 at 12:03 am

    Like the blind pig finding an acorn, Morris gets this one right. Obama support for amnesty and green cards for millions of illegal aliens who will flood our safety nets
    _________________

    Too late Wbboei Schools are already at the breaking point from all those kids being bussed in. 😡

  203. Your right Wbb, Morris is right, and a very smart man politically speaking, when he can leave his Clinton Derangement Syndrome home.

  204. a very interesting development

    http://www.politico.com/story/2014/11/gop-lawsuit-jonathan-turley-112980.html

    GOP hires legal scholar to oversee Obama lawsuit

    By Lauren French
    |
    11/18/14 9:36 AM EST

    House Republicans have hired a noted constitutional lawyer to oversee a lawsuit against President Barack Obama for alleged executive overreach.

    Jonathan Turley, a professor at The George Washington University, has argued in favor of the suit against Obama’s executive order delaying the employer mandate provision of Obamacare.

    This is Republicans’ third lawyer since the suit was initially passed in July. Two previous lawyers dropped the case and the House has yet to file the lawsuit in federal court.

    (Also on POLITICO: Reid releases iron grip on Senate floor)

    “Professor Turley is a renowned legal scholar who agrees that President Obama has clearly overstepped his constitutional authority,” said Michael Steel, a spokesperson for Speaker John Boehner. “He is a natural choice to handle this lawsuit.”

    Republicans argue that Obama overstepped when he delayed the provision in Obamacare that mandated that employers provide health care to their workers.

    Democrats quickly criticized the selection.

    “Even for $500-per-hour in taxpayer dollars, Speaker Boehner has had to scour Washington to find a lawyer willing to file this meritless lawsuit against the president,” said Drew Hammill, a spokesperson for Minority Leader Pelosi. “Now, he’s hired a TV personality for this latest episode of his distraction and dysfunction.”

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

    I wish Turley would partner with Bruce Fein on this…

    smart move by GOP

  205. isn’t this charming…all inflicted by O and Dims on the American people/taxpayers
    lies…lies…lies…they cannot be trusted…

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/18/us/politics/health-law-turns-obama-and-insurers-into-allies.html?_r=0

    WASHINGTON — As Americans shop in the health insurance marketplace for a second year, President Obama is depending more than ever on the insurance companies that five years ago he accused of padding profits and canceling coverage for the sick.

    Those same insurers have long viewed government as an unreliable business partner that imposed taxes, fees and countless regulations and had the power to cut payment rates and cap profit margins.

    But since the Affordable Care Act was enacted in 2010, the relationship between the Obama administration and insurers has evolved into a powerful, mutually beneficial partnership that has been a boon to the nation’s largest private health plans and led to a profitable surge in their Medicaid enrollment.

    The insurers in turn have provided crucial support to Mr. Obama in court battles over the health care law, including a case now before the Supreme Court challenging the federal subsidies paid to insurance companies on behalf of low- and moderate-income consumers. Last fall, a unit of one of the nation’s largest insurers, UnitedHealth Group, helped the administration repair the HealthCare.gov website after it crashed in the opening days of enrollment.

    “Insurers and the government have developed a symbiotic relationship, nurtured by tens of billions of dollars that flow from the federal Treasury to insurers each year,” said Michael F. Cannon, director of health policy studies at the libertarian Cato Institute.

    So much so, in fact, that insurers may soon be on a collision course with the Republican majority in the new Congress. Insurers, often aligned with Republicans in the past, have built their business plans around the law and will strenuously resist Republican efforts to dismantle it. Since Mr. Obama signed the law, share prices for four of the major insurance companies — Aetna, Cigna, Humana and UnitedHealth — have more than doubled, while the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index has increased about 70 percent.

    “These companies all look at government programs as growth markets,” said Michael J. Tuffin, a former executive vice president of America’s Health Insurance Plans, the main lobby for the industry. “There will be nearly $2 trillion of subsidized coverage through insurance exchanges and Medicaid over the next 10 years. These are pragmatic companies. They will follow the customer.”

    The relationship is expected only to deepen as the two sides grow more intertwined.

    Consumers are already hearing the same messages from insurance companies and the government urging them to sign up for health plans during the three-month enrollment period. Federal law requires most Americans to have coverage, insurers provide it, and the government subsidizes it.

    “We are in this together,” Kevin J. Counihan, the chief executive of the federal insurance marketplace, told insurers at a recent conference in Washington. “You have been our partners,” and for that, he said, “we are very grateful.”

    Despite Mr. Obama’s denunciations of insurers in 2009, it became inevitable that they would have a central role in expanding coverage under the Affordable Care Act later that year when Congress ruled out a government-run health plan — the “public option.” But friction between insurers and the Obama administration continued into 2013 as the
    industry bristled at stringent rules imposed on carriers in the name of consumer protection.

    A turning point came last fall, after the chaotic debut of HealthCare.gov, when insurers waived enrollment deadlines and helped the White House fix the dysfunctional website.

    Now insurers say government business is growing much faster than the market for commercial employer-sponsored coverage. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that 170 million people will have coverage through Medicare, Medicaid and the insurance exchanges by 2023, an increase of about 50 percent from 2013. By contrast, the number of people with employer-based coverage is expected to rise just 2 percent, to 159 million.

    In addition, the Affordable Care Act has engendered growth in the role of private insurers in Medicaid. The law expanded eligibility for Medicaid, and most of the new beneficiaries receive care from private health plans under contracts awarded by state Medicaid agencies. As a result, Medicaid enrollment is up more than eight million, or 15 percent, in the last year.

    In a survey of 10 insurance companies, Joshua R. Raskin, an analyst at Barclays, reported that their revenues from the Medicare Advantage program were up about 10 percent this year. UnitedHealth Group’s Medicaid enrollment surged by nearly one million people, or 24 percent, in the last year, said Stephen J. Hemsley, the chief executive. At another large insurer, WellPoint, the expansion of Medicaid “is proving highly profitable,” Christine Arnold, a managing director of Cowen and Company, wrote in a recent report.

    WellPoint is a case study in how companies have adapted to the law.

    In 2010, as Democrats attacked the insurance industry for what they said were its high prices and discriminatory practices, no company was more of a target than WellPoint, which had sought rate increases of up to 39 percent in California. But WellPoint, which operates Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans in a number of states, is now prospering.

    WellPoint announced recently that it had gained 751,000 subscribers through the health insurance exchanges and 699,000 new members through Medicaid. Since the end of 2013, WellPoint’s Medicaid enrollment has increased by 16 percent, to a total of five million.

    “Our government business is growing along multiple fronts” and accounted for about 45 percent of the company’s consolidated operating revenues, said Joseph R. Swedish, the chief executive of WellPoint.

    Aetna, in reporting its third-quarter results, said many people thought 2014 would “spell the death of our industry.” But, the company said, it is having “a very good year,” thanks in part to “excellent performance in our government business, which now represents more than 40 percent of our health premiums.”

    Insurers and the administration still have many disagreements, but open conflicts are rare.

    “With all the politics of the Affordable Care Act, people don’t realize how much the industry has benefited, and will continue to benefit, from the law,” said Jay Angoff, the Obama administration’s top insurance regulator from 2010 through 2012.

    One insurer, Humana, derives about 65 percent of its revenue from its Medicare Advantage plans. Enrollment in these plans climbed 17.5 percent, to 2.9 million, in the year that ended Sept. 30, the company said.

    At UnitedHealth Group, Medicaid and Medicare Advantage together are expected to provide more than $60 billion in revenue, or slightly less than half of the company’s total, this year. United expects to participate in insurance exchanges in 23 states next year, up from four this year.

    “The government, as a benefit sponsor, has been increasingly relying on private sector programs,” United said in a document filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. “We expect this trend to continue.”

    In another sign of the close relationship, the administration has recruited experts from the industry to provide operational expertise. Eight months after the unit of UnitedHealth Group, called Optum, helped repair HealthCare.gov, the administration hired a top Optum executive, Andrew M. Slavitt, as the No. 2 official at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. The administration waived conflict-of-interest rules so Mr. Slavitt could participate in decisions affecting UnitedHealth and Optum.

    Now, as millions of Americans shop for insurance, federal officials are eager to collaborate with an industry they once demonized.

    “The relationship between the marketplace and insurers is really critical to a successful program,” said Ben Walker, director of open enrollment for the federal exchange. “Without that, we don’t have any coverage.”

  206. Now those dubs of Obama vs Obama need to be bought and paid for advertisements on TV .. whole shows to point out all his lies./

  207. S
    November 18, 2014 at 1:31 pm
    ——–
    I looked up the author of this article. Robert Pear. He is an Obama cheer leader. He boasts that “the health law is doing well.”

    First of all this isn’t a health law. If it was a heath law then government would be responsible for your health. Therefore, they would have the right to direct you how to live your life in order to be healthy, as they–not you define the term. This is a health INSURANCE law, and, ultimately, a rationing law. That is what it is. Through clever semantics they disguise what it is. The first one to describe it as a health law was Axelrod. That right there ought to tell you something.

    Second, according to Pear it is doing well, despite a slow start. In fact it is doing wunderbar. No mention of the Halbig decision, so he is whistling past the grave yard. Pear is a goon for the New York cabal Sharyl describes, who believe everything about the American People that Gruber does, and know this is a fraud. Pear does not mention Gruber either. He just says the health law is doing well. This is par for the course for NYT which has become a tower of Babel and a prime source of disinformation which spreads like cancer through this society.

  208. Now, as millions of Americans shop for insurance, federal officials are eager to collaborate with an industry they once demonized.
    ——————-
    Is that the bottom line for Pear?

    Crony capitalism.

    And he loves it, because he is an elitist with no concern for the common man.

    They should kick his fucking ass back to journalism school, and stick him in a closet with a dunce cap on.

    Next to young Arthur.

  209. When someone like Pear gives you his vision of a happy ending, you can tell whose side he is on, and whether he can be trusted. Pear is a rotten apple.

  210. wbboei…

    it is surprising to see anything in the NYT…the article does point out the coziness with O and the Dims and the insurance co and their big profits

    in my mind, the O admin and the Dims have become the party of the Insurance companies and Illegal immigrants…a far, far cry from Clinton and the middle class
    **********************

    tough luck for us little people and the increasing costs we will get stuck with while the insurance co get richer and the fed govt grows money on trees…

    ***********

    I am encouraged by Turley’s involvement and with all this continous expose of Gruber and the lies, lies, lies…how can the supreme court turn a blind eye this time around…unless they are in the tank with insurance companies

    How can roberts ignore all this? ocare build on house of cards (lies)…you can’t keep your doctor, you can’t go to your hospital, your bills, premiums, and deductibles will get more and more expensive, your penalty tax will get larger and larger and taken out of your taxes and give you nothing in return, you will get less and less and pay more and more…and the govt will break its own law by subsidizing everyone it can get away with…you were misled and lied to by the O admin every step of the way…and it will get worse unless the Supreme Court steps in and does its job…

  211. “I’m still mulling whether I think “unauthorized” is more insultingly euphemistic than “undocumented”. It is always best to be precise so I will continue to refer to them as “ILLEGAL ALIENS” as to avoid any confusion.”
    —————

  212. The results are now in.

    Attention world: The arbitrary and capricious actions by Senator Ted Cruz (gasp) in shutting down our beloved federal government (has there ever been a dastlier deed?) caused Republicans to be severely punished within an inch of their lives by voters in the 2014 election causing them to lose the House and fall further behind in the Senate in 2014 . . .

    Just like Sydney Greenstreet i.e. Karl Rove and– RINO Bob Corker (R-Tn)– he’s a New Yorker, donors buy him everything to keep him in style, he’s got a pair of lips wrapped round Obama’s dick, hey boys that’s where their money goes—predicted.

    In fact, the Republicans won control of the Senate by a significant margin, and increases their margin of victory in the House, which leads one to wonder whether the money lies and distortiond by Rove and the fellatio by Corker are all that necessary. But inasmuch as it is all about money, I am certain they feel that they were the architects of success, when the opposite is true.

    Oh well, Erickson is more civilized than I am:
    —————-

    Shut. It. Down.
    By: Erick Erickson (Diary) | November 18th, 2014 at 04:30 AM | 95

    RESIZE: AAA
    Share on Facebook

    Yes, yes, yes, let us concede up front that the GOP will always get blamed for a government shutdown.

    Yes, yes, yes, let us concede that, in fact, polling for the GOP declined after the 2013 shutdown. But, we must caveat, some of their decline was from Republicans who decided their side had caved and were unhappy.

    Now let us also concede this: many Republicans were hysterically outraged that Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)93% had cost the GOP the Senate and they could potentially lose the House because of the shut down.

    And finally let us concede that this did not happen.

    In fact, this is the second shut down where the GOP got blamed and saw no catastrophe at the ballot box. Again, after the shutdown the Clinton years, the GOP picked up Senate seats.

    Every horror story every talking head within the GOP Establishment trotted out to scare congressmen and senators into caving turned out to be crap.

    And there was a wave in 2014. In fact, it is a wave of such magnitude it is pretty hard to claim that if only the Congress had not shut down the wave would have been larger.

    Now, let us be clear on the parameters of the debate moving forward. I am not suggesting the GOP just say “to heck with it” and shut down the government. What I am suggesting is that the GOP pass everything except Obamacare funding and funding for any immigration actions the President wants to take.

    And he will most certainly balk at all that.

    But the voters did not elect the GOP to do any part of their own agenda. Hell, the GOP ran on absolutely nothing other than “we are not Obama” and “we will defund Obamacare.” Post-election polling shows most Americans want the GOP to set the course for the country. That’s not because the GOP’s image is suddenly rebuilt, but because people are finally tired of Obama and the Democrats.

    Contrary to Karl Rove from over the weekend, the GOP did not rebuild their image over the past ten months from a government shutdown. The GOP did absolutely nothing but run on “we are not Obama.” If that is the image they rebuilt, then they need to not be Obama and need to not fund Obama’s agenda.

    So set the course. Defund Obamacare and block amnesty. Obama can defy the will of the people and refuse to work with Congress. Sure, the GOP may get blamed. But so what?

    And that is key here — so what. They got blamed last time and the public rewarded them with the biggest election wave in modern American political history from the local level to the federal level.

    Block Obama. Let him show himself again to be the petulant man-child Americans have started recognizing. And this time, when he shuts down the government, keep it shut till you have your way and then hold public hearings to show how Obama selectively shut things down to hurt the voters intentionally.

    At the end of the day, there is no other choice. Either the President will cave to a Congress just elected to stop him or the GOP will cave to a President no one likes.

  213. Washington Free Beacon article – O said he stole a lot of his ideas from young libs including Gruber. That statement was made, of course, before Obama, Pelosi, and the rest of the Dim wits forgot who Gruber was.
    ________________

    BY: Washington Free Beacon Staff
November 17, 2014 4:56 pm

    During a Brookings Institution panel in April 2006, then-Sen. Barack Obama claimed he had “stolen” ideas from a gang of liberal economists and academics, including the now-infamous Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber.

    “You have already drawn some of the brightest minds from academia and policy circles, many of them I have stolen ideas from liberally,” Obama said. “People ranging from Robert Gordon to Austan Goolsbee; Jon Gruber; my dear friend, Jim Wallis here, who can inform what are sometimes dry policy debates with a prophetic voice.”

    Despite Obama’s attempt to distance himself and his unpopular signature health care legislation from Gruber, it is clear that 2006 Obama never anticipated videos of his once-trusted adviser calling American voters ‘stupid’ would surface in 2014.

    http://freebeacon.com/politics/obama-flashback-ive-stolen-ideas-from-jonathan-gruber/

  214. Landrieu was hoping the Keystone Pipeline vote would help her win the election. Sadly for her, the Dims voted it down. I’d bet Mary is feeling “quite contrary” today:

    ____________________

    Landrieu Fails to Get Keystone Passed
    Democrats don’t bail out Mary

    Sen. Mary Landrieu (D., La.) prior to the Senate’s vote on the Keystone XL oil pipeline / APSen. Mary Landrieu (D., La.) prior to the
    Senate’s vote on the Keystone XL oil pipeline / AP
    BY: Elizabeth Harrington

    http://freebeacon.com/issues/landrieu-fails-to-get-keystone-passed/

  215. Well, here it comes. Obama has broken many many promises he made to Americans. Ironic that this is one of the few he decides to keep. No doubt, this is, at least in some small part, an “In Your Face” gesture, not just to Repubs who won the Senate, and captured quite a few extra House seats, but to us middle class, Middle America, redneck, xenophobe, rubes. The country – including the Hispanics who are legal citizens of the country – should take this as a big “F – you” from their so-called President.

    He is well aware that this is not what this country wants, at least not the majority of Americans. He knows. He just doesn’t give a damn.
    ______________

    Sources Tell ABC Obama Could Grant Executive Amnesty ‘As Early as Tomorrow’

    http://freebeacon.com/politics/sources-tell-abc-obama-could-grant-executive-amnesty-as-early-as-tomorrow/

  216. Well, if he does that, then it is game over for many of us.

    Why? Because with executive amnesty you no longer have a country, a constitution or the rule of law.

    The RINO will do nothing effective to stop this. On the night they won the election, they surrendered, on the assumption that they could negotiate with Obama. How? McConnell announced that he was taking the only effective measures for stopping Obama off the table, i.e. impeachment and shutting down the government. Far from shrewd, the man is absolutely positively pathetic.

    Truth to tell, the RINO believes he can step around this issue. He believes, in error, that he can forgo protecting the nation by preventing this destruction of our borders, by politiking over Obamacare. That dog will not hunt, because even if they were serious about stopping Obamacare–which they are not since it has produced a symbiotic relationship between big government and big insurance, it will never go away, and all we are talking about here, really, is tinkering around the edges.

    By now I have a pretty good feel for how this thing operates. I would not have said so in 2008, but I do now. And that is because I have spent the past six years studying in and seeing what is happening. I have written half a dozen papers predicting just about everything which has unfolded, which is why I believe what I am saying now will come to pass.

    The RINO will fall through his ass, and we are headed into deep trouble. I will say I have confidence in a handful of Republican Senators, but they will never control the party. The game is more rigged than it ever was against the interests of the middle class, and the future of this country.

    Perhaps the answer lies with jujitsu. Stop worrying about the Constitution. Put all power in the President. And elect a president who reverses Obama and serves the American People. No democrat and few Republicans today can honesty say they meet that test, even though it is not that rigorous. No member of big media is capable of it. Yes, I know Sharyl says that some reporters are frustrated that the New York cabal that controls their industry, and determines not only what they write but how they write it are frustrated, and feel that the standard of their profession are being torn asunder. But unless they are willing to put their own careers on the line, like Sharyl did, their objections are irrelevant.

    The idea of pushing in the other direction may sound fanciful, or worse. But consider this: Maybe the idea of retaining an imperial presidency but electing a completely different kind of president should be the goal. The constitutional framework provides order, stability and predictablity. But when that order is defiled by a sociopath, and in government the best lack all conviction and the worst are full of passionate intensity, it makes no sense to play by the old rules. Put differently: THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE AT A GRAVE DISADVANTAGE WHEN WE PLAY BY THE RULES, AND OUR ENEMY DOES NOT.

  217. One final observation: here is how they will try to bamboozle you, so just be prepared, and by all means, do not swallow it:

    After the sociopath achieves his objectives with respect to the illegal aliens, and the republicans pass a law eliminating the taxes on mendical devices–a promise the RINO persists in making because he thinks he can make what is insignificant significant if he repeats it often enough. Whereupon, the sociopath will sign it and the New York cabal will put McConnell’s mug on the cover of Time Magazine, calling him shrewd, and a modern day John C. Calhoun author of the Great Compromise, without telling us that this merely deferred the civil war. The headline will read, the era of bipartisanship has arrived and democracy is vibrant and the future is bright, even though 85 million Americans of working age are not working. In other words, one big happy Potemkin Village.

  218. Landrieu was hoping the Keystone Pipeline vote would help her win the election. Sadly for her, the Dims voted it down. I’d bet Mary is feeling “quite contrary” today:
    ————
    And the subtext here is even more important: she could not move her own party–so what good is she to the citizens of her state. Obviously, they are an energy state, and she–she cannot deliver.

  219. Obama to announce immigration order in Las Vegas on Friday
    John Harwood

    President Barack Obama plans to announce an executive order in Las Vegas on Friday to address immigration reform, CNBC has confirmed.

    Another source familiar with the situation told CNBC that Obama could yet give a broader outline on an immigration order on Thursday and add detail on Friday.

    The president has been long expected to make an announcement that would protect up to five million unauthorized immigrants from the threat of deportation and provide work permits.

    Partisan fighting erupted in the summer over how to address the increased flow of unaccompanied minors from Central America at the U.S. border with Mexico.

    Read MoreObama draws line: Won’t sign repeal of Obamacare

    Obama has asked for $3.7 billion to address the border crisis. In the summer, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, however, passed a measure that only gave Obama a fraction of what he sought and made it easier to deport the young migrants arriving at the border, a provision opposed by Democrats and immigration advocates. In the end, Congress adjourned without a final bill.

    The Democratic-led Senate last year passed a broad overhaul of immigration with support from some Republicans that boosted border security, increased visas for legal immigrants and a provided a path to citizenship for immigrants illegally in the country.

    But the Republican-controlled House balked at acting on any broad measure and House Speaker John Boehner informed Obama earlier this year that the House would not act in 2014. That led Obama to declare he would act on his own by issuing executive orders.

    Read MoreGOP, Obama immigration battle’s big risk: A shutdown
    One Republican leader on Sunday held open the possibility that his party could move to shut down the government in an attempt to stop the president from taking executive action on immigration policy.

    Wires contributed to this report.

  220. The proposal on the table calls for a 5-10 year residency requirement.

    That too is an invitation to fraud.

    If you have been “living in the shadows” how can you prove you have been here that long–except getting relatives to lie for you.

    What about the anchor baby problem?

    Forget about pay a $5000 fine.

    They pay a $5000 fine and take $100,000 out of our safety nets and jobs from American citizens?

    Sounds like an invitation to more illegal immigration.

    This is just like the tax on medical devices–an insult to our intelligence.

  221. I not sure what strategy, if any, the republicans
    —————
    Trust me, jb. Neither do they. The conservatives want to fight this thing tooth and nail. McConnell is angling to make a deal. I do not think they will do much more than scratch themselves.

  222. There is absolutely positively nothing the RINO stands for other than self enrichment. Nothing worth fighting for but his own pocket book. A bigger bunch of cowards I have never seen. They will try to pass this off to the supreme court, and roberts will take another dive, so as not to sully the court’s robes. He is a controlled beast.

  223. In the lore of jurisprudence, Wellman or somewhere, I do not honesty recall, there is the account of a Boston Braham who was the celebrated trial lawyer of his geographical area in the post civil war era– Joseph Choate.

    He represented the clerk of a famous industrialist of that era, Russel Sage–there is a college named for him who was attacked by an anarchist with a bottle of acid in his hand.

    Instinctively, the industrialist grabbed his secretary and used him as a human shield, which caused the secretary to be grievously injured and gave rise to a legal action by Choate for money damages, which the industrialist, like all elitists who damage society feel no obligation to pay.

    This phenomenon has been true throughout the ages, and a current example of it is this clown Zuckerberg.

    Be that as it may, the industrialist took the stand and told his self serving story to the jury. Thereafter, Choate rose to cross examine him. He attacked the character of the industrialist, and inquired about a stock scam which Sage had concocted with his wife’s money, and then asked him the killer question:

    If the market went against you whom did you intend to cheat: your wife or your broker?

    How say ye, oh RINO?

  224. The “bite” of this amnesty fiasco must be on the question of citizenship.

    Bottom of the list behind those who applied for citizenship legally.

    They must be given no credit whatsoever for their violation of our sovereignty and our laws.

    It should be like the old Viet Nam draft—their names go into a lottery and their place at the bottom of the line should be determined by a lottery, and not by how long they have been in our country in violation of our laws. No credit for time served.

    Furthermore, they should have no access to unemployment insurance until they become citizens, and no right to social security if they become disabled. That burden should be placed on their employers, along with minimum wage requirements.

    We must take the profit out of illegal immigration on the employers side, since no one seems to have the stomach to throw these people in jail.

  225. Obamacare is About to Bankrupt a Whole Bunch of Small Businesses
    By: Leon H. Wolf (Diary) | November 19th, 2014 at 12:01 PM | 4

    RESIZE: AAA
    Share on Facebook 35 91 SHARES
    cobra-compliance-business-closedThe crushing costs of compliance with the regulatory burdens of Obamacare have already been well documented, especially as they pertain to small businesses. But as small businesses prepare their corporate tax returns next year, many accountants are warning that, based on Department of Labor guidelines issued after the election, countless small businesses are about to be hit with a huge tax penalty that they simply cannot afford.

    The issue here is somewhat complex, and is exactly the sort of issue that most small business owners trust to professionals to handle for them. When these businesses were notified that the health plans they offered their employees were not compliant with Obamacare, many of them sought to avoid dumping their employees on the exchanges. At the time, insurance vendors, based on a colorable reading of the law, encouraged many small businesses to work with them to either provide so-called section 105 plans where the employer would reimburse a broker for the cost of coverage bought by the employees, or to encourage their employees to buy their health insurance directly from brokers and to reimburse them for the purchase of this healthcare coverage. All year long, the Department of Labor allowed this practice to continue, only to declare at the 11th hour that this arrangement would be treated as noncompliant with Obamacare and thus subject employers to a penalty. The reasons for this decision are obvious and disgustingly political: the Obama administration wants to boast of larger numbers of people enrolled in the exchanges for political reasons:

    This answer is very clear that ANY reimbursement of health insurance payments by an employer for an employee is subject to the ACA rules and therefore are subject to possible penalties under Section 4980D of the Code. These penalties can be substantial (up to $100 per day per employee). Therefore, it is extremely important to make sure that any payment of premiums for employees is as a direct result of payments withheld from an employee’s paycheck and then directly transmitted to the health insurance provider. Any gross of up wages directly related to payment of premiums may be problematic.

    Additionally based on this Q & A, it is probably better for the employer not to pay any health insurance premiums (unless a qualified group plan or for only one employee employers). It appears that the DOL and the Administration is pushing all non-qualified premiums onto the exchange and those premiums are usually paid directly by the employee (and may not be reimbursed). This will increase the number of persons covered by the exchange which is the primary goal of the administration (this last part is strictly my opinion).

    If you can do basic math, you can probably figure out that many small businesses are about to get hit with a penalty of $36,500 per employee through no fault of their own. If you have any familiarity with small businesses, you know that the overwhelming majority of them are simply not going to be able to pay an unforeseen penalty of $36,500 per employee and are going to be forced to simply shut their doors. As a result, who knows how many employees are about to have no health coverage at all or be forced onto the subsidies (provided that they aren’t eliminated in most states via King v. Burwell). It’s yet another example of the twisted incentive created by Obamacare where the government would actually prefer that taxpayers be on the hook for these people’s health insurance than their own employer, just because they oppose the specific payment mechanism for political reasons.

    And the saddest thing of all is that many small businesses are going to get caught in the crossfire of this political fight and snuffed out. The monstrosity that is Obamacare must be repealed, and fast, no matter the political cost, or the damage it wreaks on our economy might well be permanent.

  226. If I ran a company and my accountant told me that I would be forced to pay a penalty of $36, 000 per employees, I would send a letter to the union announcing the shutdown of my business and inviting them to bargain the effects. During that negotiation, I would be careful not to waive my position that the decision is non negotiable, but I might say something like, before making the decision, I asked my accountant what it would take to keep my business viable, and you know what he told me: he said, it would require a 20% reduction across the board, including my net income and that of my employees. And you know what I told him? I told him, well, I might be willing to tighten my belt that way, but my employees could not afford to do so. . . (let that idea sink in). So I am here to show you the numbers, so you can see for yourself why you will no longer have a job. I will pay you one week of severance for every year of service but that is the best I can do. I suppose we can all look at the bright side of this and say, we may not have a job, a house, a college fund, or a marriage, but we have got Obamacare, thanks to the big media beloved messiah. Perhaps some some of you who failed to see this president for what he is, a shill for big business, will see that you and millions of others were bamboozled.

  227. Do not think for one minute that this scenario bothers the RINO. Lindsey Graham for example. His commitment to small business is marginal at best. His goal is to roll the democrats out of bed with big business, and to hop in the sack with big business himself. Until people of good sense, not those deranged leftist, but average normal sane people see that party labels mean absolutely nothing any more, and the battle which will determine our future is between those in the Washington interests vs. America all they will get from politics is bread, circuses, looting and an unending procession of lies.

  228. WATCH ALL THIS BLOW UP IN HIS FACE……

    Confirmed: Obama didn’t invite top GOP leaders to attend his #immigration dinner tonight with senior Democrats.

    Top aides say that the president will go big on immigration. http://politi.co/1wZ1RlV

    …………………

    This muppet thinks he is going to get away with this……

  229. Hi Moon.

    Glad you are back.

    And, as always, hope you are right.

    I would expect the internal pressure on McConnell and his fellow RINOS may be increasing.

    Not only do they not get credit from the Hispanics, they get no respect from their base.

    I know of no other way to force the RINO to fight–which runs against all of his cowardly instincts.

    Knowing how the New York big media cabal bent on destroying America will react if he lifts a finger against their puppet.

    The temperture’s rising, it isn’t surprising, it certainly can–CAN-CAN.

  230. Sharyl points the finger at the New York cabal. And so does Todd:
    ————
    STEVE MALZBERG, HOST: Bias in the media.

    CHUCK TODD, NBC: Yes, sir.

    MALZBERG: Is there bias in the media on the left?

    TODD: I think there is CULTURAL BIAS is what I always talk about. The bias stems from the fact that the news media is headquartered in New York City. I’ve always felt that the cultural bias on issues on like religion, particularly social issues, where there is this feeling, middle America feels New York imposes more of its cultural values. I think that is what has created this perception that therefore all media leans left. I think culturally it is there. I don’t think it’s as pervasive as some believe on the right. I think that the cultural stuff is what makes it credible.

    MALZBERG: Why did it take nine days once the Gruber video came out, you talked about it on Meet the Press just the other day, but the networks, nine days before they talked about it.

    TODD: Well, you know –

    MALZBERG: And now it’s a huge story!

    TODD: I’m not saying it’s not a story. Look, I’M NOT IN CHARGE OF ANY OF THOSE NEWSCASTS.

    (Note: who is in charge of it. The same people who he are in New York–meaning the cabalists Sharyl mentions)

    (Note: by “cultural bias” he means the cabalists hate America and consider themselves to be superior to it. The garbage they put out on the airways, under their FCC licenses wreaks of this bias–which is a euphemism for hate.)

  231. The New York cabal ensured that Obama got elected twice, and the day it occurred, Matthews, who is prone to Freudian slips because his mouth always outraces his brain, let the cat out of the bag, saying “our job as journalists is to make Obama successful”.

    And the head of MBNBC told the young Turk: we are insiders in the Obama Administration.

    And a reporter with CNBC was warned by the owner of NBC not to critize Obamacare, because it would make Obama look bad.

    And now?

    “The (New York cabal) is heavily invested in Obama. As his reign of fear and incompetence winds down they will be working overtime to create a Mount Rushmore-sized legacy for him. Reporting on the stark duplicity used in reordering America’s health industry does not serve that agenda.—Streiff at Red State.

  232. Again, the problem is the New York cabal.

    The American People are just as entitled to know who they are, as they are entitled to know who contributes how much to each of their representatives.

    They talk about the need to bring illegal aliens out of the shadows.

    We need to bring the New York cabalists out of the shadows as well, before they destroy what is left of our liberty.

    Now there is a task worth of a solid investigative journalist.

  233. Some names we do know. I came across them in my research into Soros. Peter Lewis is one name I recall. But there is a long list and the short list I once had is far from exhaustive. And what you will find in this group, when and if it is exposed, is a collection of dot com billionaires, trust fund babies, and heads of non profits, each of whom are several degrees divorced from the concerns of average people, and used to getting their way through a wall of money, which is now directed with furious intensity at our political system and the middle class. All I can say about that is on this very blog six years ago Patty4Hill warned us about this from her office in China. I wish she would resurface and give us her current assessment.

  234. Wbboei….why not…everything else this horse’s ass has done has blown up spectacularly in his face, why would i expect this pile of horsecrap not to…..

    Its a fairly good bet that it will as they couldn’t organize an orgy in a whorehouse if they tried.

  235. Their practices are, in short, canabalistic.

    Yesterday, Richard Rodriguez had an interesting discussion about these people as he commented upon the double standard which exists in the world, whereby Christians are stoned and Muslims are forgiven for stoning them, buy our “cultural elites”. He maintains that at the heart of their unwillingness to defend western values is an cultural assumption of superiority on their party, and a confidence that we are moving in the direction of a uniform world society. Ironically, all the evidence extant points to the very opposite conclusion, namely, that the 19th century assumption of global governance is failing in Scottland, Spain and all other points in the compass including here. Nevertheless, the cabalists seem to persist in this illusion. This point was raised to high relief in the book Governing the World which I have quoted from here in the past.

  236. moononpluto
    November 19, 2014 at 2:31 pm
    Wbboei….why not…everything else this horse’s ass has done has blown up spectacularly in his face, why would i expect this pile of horsecrap not to…..
    ———–
    Correct.

    But they have been unable to stop him.

    Which is conclusive proof of systemic failure.

  237. Moon, I posted this one in text form above. In case you did not see it this is the link. It explains why immigration and obamacare will fail. This gives me no comfort however, because I know the responsible parties will make a profit and the American People will get stuck with the bill. It is like Dodd Frank: the profits are privatized, while the losses are socialized. These things pose a grave threat to our society, but the American People are too stupid to see it–to see past the party labels and the false mantra of bi partisanship as any kind of solution. That said, this writer is brilliant:

    http://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2014/11/13/the-strategic-failure-of-barack-obama/

  238. The problem with bi partisanship is it assumes good will and good faith and good intentions by both parties.

    When neither party means what it says and self interest alone is the determining factor, it does not advance the interests of the county.

    I do not recall any time in my life when the elites of this nation were more indifferent to its survival. They have taken the concept of self interest to the point that it becomes a destructive force. And nowhere has that been more apparent than in our financial industry, in the run up to the collapse of 2008, and the faux solution to same embodied in Dodd Frank.

    Where health care is concerned it is more of the same. Facing a demographic tsumami with the retirement of the baby boom generation health insurers decided to ally themselves with a scumbag opportunist like Obama who would con the American People into accepting a program which would force them to pay more and reduce their benefits.

    I could give you more examples, but the main point is whenever you hear about comprehensive legislation to deal with an emerging crisis, just stand the fuck by because you are about to get raped. It will cost you money, it will not fix the problem, and the elites will take curtain calls, collect their money and ignore feedback from reality which says it was a bad idea to begin with, and now the unintended consequences are even worse than anticipated. Now, it is your duty as a patriot to bail them out.

Comments are closed.