Ross Douthat is tracking some libs who are now free to tell us what they really think about the new health bill:
Last week, Reihan Salam predicted the appearance, among left-of-center writers, of “thoughtful, honest assessments of flaws in the Affordable Health Care for America Act that were largely overlooked” during the beat-the-Republicans phase of the debate. Now John Cassidy, The New Yorker’s financial writer, has delivered an impressive two-part contribution to the genre. Cassidy supports the health care bill on moral grounds, but he has deep doubts about its fiscal sustainability. On this front, he makes two points that many right-of-center wonks have been hammering on for a while now. First, the individual mandate is “a bit of a sham,” and lots and lots of people will probably just pay the modest fine (or dodge it) until they get sick, at which point they’ll show up demanding their guaranteed insurance policy, sending costs skyrocketing. Second, the subsidies for the individual market are so much more generous than the existing tax deduction for employer-provided health care that employers will have an enormous incentive to offload their employees onto the new exchanges
The example is shockingly simple and so accessible that even a Democratic Congressman could probably understand it.
Ross closes with this non-mystery:
I should note that Cassidy expressed similar doubts before the legislation passed, penning what he called “some vaguely heretical thoughts on health-care reform” back in November. What puzzles me is why an enterprising editor at The New Yorker didn’t suggest turning those thoughts into an actual magazine feature, instead of just letting them gather moss on Cassidy’s blog.
I don't think he is really puzzled.
AND IN THE LONG RUN: In the long run we are all dead, but before we die we may see the unfolding of the Dem's subtle plan. In Phase 1 the link between employment and insurance is severed (that, we like), based on the economic described above. Most people other than some high earners will expect to get their insurance from the government, with a subsidy.
Phase II eliminates the middleman - the Demon Insurers are cut back and we move on to modified single payer. High earners who have been paying for their insurance all along will still have the right to buy private insurance, but folks receiving subsidies will be offered either the public plan or the public plan.
He's as puzzled as Brooks is fast on the draw about the dilemma of choosing between an academy award and a cheating husband (a husband who IIRC was previously married to a porn star),
Posted by: Clarice | March 30, 2010 at 04:23 PM
Cassidy supports the health care bill on moral grounds, but he has deep doubts about its fiscal sustainability.
That's just great. If morality can disregard the laws of economics, why not just have free goodies for everyone? On moral grounds, of course.
Posted by: jimmyk | March 30, 2010 at 04:24 PM
If morality can disregard the laws of economics, why not just have free goodies for everyone?
A question which genuinely confounds liberals, if you can believe that.
Posted by: Porchlight | March 30, 2010 at 04:26 PM
The important thing for the Dems was to get this bill passed, so that the amendments would be to a bill expanding governmental intervention in the health care area, as opposed to tweaking a market incentives bill. That's why total repeal needs to be kept on the table. If not total repeal, substantial modification, as Clinton was forced to accept with AFDC (notwithstanding Clinton's slick rhetoric, I don't think AFDC reform would have passed without the 1994 GOP victories).
Posted by: Thomas Collins | March 30, 2010 at 04:28 PM
The pattern can be seen in student loans.
This thing must be repealed. Our country will never be the same if it is allowed to stand, and in fact it seems there will never again be a country like ours. The problem is that virtually the entire Democratic Party devoutly hopes for both outcomes.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | March 30, 2010 at 04:56 PM
I think the entire democrat party is just stupid. They don't understand the ramifications and care less. And it's about time we started looking for a reason to impeach.
Posted by: Jane says obamasucks | March 30, 2010 at 04:58 PM
From AmSpec. I am so disgusted:
Obama in Rude Denial
Posted by: Porchlight | March 30, 2010 at 05:02 PM
I tell you, he needs to be impeached. I think the Sestak bribe is a good place to start.
Posted by: Jane says obamasucks | March 30, 2010 at 05:05 PM
well thanks to a blind squirel-- Cassidy of the New Yorker -- we all now know what the Righties have been saying for years is true. Who knew? One more thing is true, Obamacare will run out of other people's money long before the evil plan is fulfilled. It is a financial train wreck.
Cheers
Posted by: NK | March 30, 2010 at 05:17 PM
Cassidy supports the health care bill on moral grounds, but he has deep doubts about its fiscal sustainability.
So if it was fiscally sustainable, degrading individual liberty, rationing benefits, and demanding that a few people pay for the benefits of the many would be just hunky dory.
Got it.
Posted by: Soylent Red | March 30, 2010 at 05:18 PM
I don't believe stupidity is grounds for impeachment. Carter proved that sheer incompetence won't do the trick either.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | March 30, 2010 at 05:18 PM
Cassidy's nonsense reminds me of liberals from a generation ago who would say "Of course socialism would be the best system, but it's just not practical." (I vaguely remember my father saying something like that to me when I was a teen.) It's hard to know where to begin attacking a statement like that.
Posted by: jimmyk | March 30, 2010 at 05:24 PM
Cassidy supports the health care bill on moral grounds
It's just as well I don't live in New York, so I don't have the temptation to mug people like Cassidy and tell them, "don't worry, the money's going to good causes - 45% to the Salvation Army, 45% to the NRA; I keep just 10% for myself."
He might benefit from the direct experience of getting shaken down to fulfill somebody else's moral priorities.
Posted by: bgates | March 30, 2010 at 05:40 PM
It's hard to know where to begin attacking a statement like that.
I heard nearly those exact words a couple of weeks ago from a woman at church. Know what she does for a living? Prosecutes Medicare fraud.
Posted by: bgates | March 30, 2010 at 05:43 PM
When I hear someone talk about the "morality" of legislation to tax some people for the benefit of others while restricting the liberty of all, I reach for my revolver. (Uh-oh--maybe that old chestnut is no longer in vogue.)
Posted by: Danube of Thought | March 30, 2010 at 05:49 PM
Sorry to go OT yet again, but don't miss this. Worth a thousand words and more.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | March 30, 2010 at 05:54 PM
Growing 'Frustration' With Steele Inside RNC
Posted by: Extraneus | March 30, 2010 at 06:02 PM
Ah, the joys of intended unintended consequences.
Sigh.
Posted by: Syl | March 30, 2010 at 06:15 PM
passaro
Get your free Barack Obama commemorative health care reform certificate today!
Posted by: kram1kram | March 30, 2010 at 06:23 PM
Tom - Here's another example for your list. Lefty cartoonist David Horsey expressed some mild doubts about the financing of ObamaCare -- on March 23rd. But he's still for it.
It's a good cartoon, but I do question the timing.
Posted by: Jim Miller | March 30, 2010 at 06:32 PM
"It's hard to know where to begin attacking a statement like that."
jimmyk,
It cannot be from reason for reason played no part in the development of the statement. Although my initial reaction when confronted by the idiocy of collectivist utopian sentiment is to search for a blunt instrument with which to gain close attention, I suppose "I want to go to a movie tonight, will you give me $20 for a ticket and snacks?" might serve a similar purpose.
There just isn't any common ground involved.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | March 30, 2010 at 06:54 PM
Insty's link to Grand Rounds-Health Care Reform left me depressed: the blogging medicos seem really happy that folks will *finally* get necessary help and even the dentist sees "good things" in the future. (No one worried about the bankruptcy of our country.) Just think -no more fat slobs, bad teeth, poor nutrition. Just think -idiots who will be free to follow their dreams.
LUN
Posted by: Frau Krankenhaus | March 30, 2010 at 07:00 PM
I am completely overwhelmed at how breathtakingly arrogant and incompetent this president is. How long can his fans ignore what he is doing to this country.
Posted by: Jane says obamasucks | March 30, 2010 at 07:02 PM
Not everyone was clueless there, but a disturbing number were,
Posted by: narciso the harpoon | March 30, 2010 at 07:12 PM
It is harder to fire Chairman Steele than it would be to fire someone of lighter complexion. My choice for a replacement would be Ken Blackwell.
Posted by: Buford Gooch | March 30, 2010 at 07:14 PM
..."in fact it seems there will never again be a country like ours."
Is that, in fact, a lamentation, or is it exultation? It seems to sound like the grief of the rich, (or the 'vote-against-my-own- interest semi-educated) which suddenly recognizes that the Golden Rule is not an option, but a requirement on civilized behavior.
Posted by: Purple Pimpernel | March 30, 2010 at 07:15 PM
How can you discuss the Golden Rule with those who have lost their spiritual compass?
The RightWing Christian Militias echo the (admittedly most extreme) sector of the Republican party.
http://kunstler.com/blog/2010/03/our-turn.html#more
"The Republican Party is doing a great job in provoking such a dangerous episode by making consensual governance impossible in a time of awful practical problems and challenges. They're in the process, right now, of transforming themselves from the party of "no" to the party of no decency, no common sense, no ideas, no conception of the public interest, and no respect for the traditions that they pretend to stand for, like due process of law. In the days since the passage of health care reform, they've gone as far as inciting mobs to violence against their fellow congressmen and senators -- bricks thrown through windows, death threats made, coffins placed in the yards of their adversaries. One day soon, somebody with a gun or an explosive device, someone with a very sketchy sense-of-self, and perhaps a recent record of personal failure and humiliation, is going to sacrifice himself to become the Tea Party's first martyr by shooting up a shopping mall in some blue district.
Republican leaders' avidity to ally themselves with the followers of hate-monger entertainers like Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter and the Fox News gang is only the beginning of the process that will lead to a political convulsion possibly worse than the one that started at Fort Sumter, South Carolina, 1861. If it comes, it will certainly be a far more incoherent conflict. The guerilla forces of the radical right will not know whether they are fighting for WalMart, or the Financial Services arm of General Electric, or against abortions, or for bigger and better freeways, or the rights of thoracic surgeons to drive families into bankruptcy, or against the idea of climate change, or evolution, or Jews-in-the-media, or their neighbors having something they feel envious about...."
Posted by: Purple Pimpernel | March 30, 2010 at 07:25 PM
"the Golden Rule is not an option, but a requirement on civilized behavior"
That would be an Iron Law, maintained by force alone and very fitting for collectivist slavery.
We have idiots popping up like mushrooms or less savory funghi today.
Hie thee hence, buffoon.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | March 30, 2010 at 07:29 PM
Why is it that each victory just keeps making the left more angry and bitter?
Posted by: Ranger | March 30, 2010 at 07:30 PM
The price for IMAX 3D in Manhattan just went up to $19.50. Tub-O-Popcorn and a diet coke will probably run you another $12.00 so better ask for $40.
Make it $50 if you want to really go in utopian style and hit the fellow traveller sitting in his own urine out front with a 10 spot..
Posted by: scott | March 30, 2010 at 07:33 PM
"Why is it that each victory just keeps making the left more angry and bitter?"
Because the onion domes of Moscow's churches are in sight and it's starting to snow?
Posted by: Rick Ballard | March 30, 2010 at 07:38 PM
I am completely overwhelmed at how breathtakingly arrogant and incompetent this president is.
Ditto, but don't limit your contempt to the prezOdonk, that would be RACIST!!!!!
Posted by: Strawman Cometh | March 30, 2010 at 07:54 PM
Because the onion domes of Moscow's churches are in sight and it's starting to snow?
Posted by: Rick Ballard | March 30, 2010 at 07:38 PM
I like it. Obamacare not as Waterloo but as the Russian Campaign. Obama has taken Moscow, but the city is already beginning to burn around him. The next few months will see the long retreat to November.
Posted by: Ranger | March 30, 2010 at 08:01 PM
Yep, pp, collectivist authoritarianism; that'll solve our country's problems.
=============
Posted by: So what are you fightin' for? | March 30, 2010 at 08:10 PM
"The next few months will see the long retreat to November."
That would be a relief, Ranger, but I think not. I think Obama, Pelosi & Reid will do a full court press on the entire agenda. There will be so many balls in the air that we will be exhausted trying to count them, much less bat them down.
Posted by: Old Lurker | March 30, 2010 at 08:11 PM
Is that, in fact, a lamentation, or is it exultation? It seems to sound like the grief of the rich, (or the 'vote-against-my-own- interest semi-educated) which suddenly recognizes that the Golden Rule is not an option, but a requirement on civilized behavior.
The question, standing alone, is comprehensible, and so I will answer it: It is a lamentation, as would be clear to any truly literate reader.
The balance of the material I have quoted makes no sense whatsoever, and so I decline to respond.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | March 30, 2010 at 08:15 PM
OL, I think you may be right, but the troops won't be with them. Remember the old map of western Russia with the temperatures and the size of Napoleon's forces all graphically displayed, how tiny were the ranks as they finally left Russia? And remember, Napoleon abandoned them early and galloped to Paris.
The analogue is, of course, Obama; he's plenty safe in this campaign. But's it's Russian Winter for the Democrats and Waterloo for Obama in 2012.
====================
Posted by: So send Sarah a book on Wellington. | March 30, 2010 at 08:17 PM
http://kunstler.com
Ain't it grand? This moron cites us to Kunstler, and expects us to read his excerpt, or perhaps even to go to the site.
You're way out of your league here, pal.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | March 30, 2010 at 08:17 PM
pp is channeling Chris Matthews who said during the 5 minutes I watched, that the right incited the guy who threatened Eric Canter, to violence.
Posted by: Jane says obamasucks | March 30, 2010 at 08:18 PM
"You're way out of your league here, pal."
To use Lurkers basketball metaphor, we're the NBA, you're the ABA League.
Posted by: Purple Pimpernel | March 30, 2010 at 08:20 PM
"You're way out of your league here, pal."
To use Lurker's basketball metaphor, We're the NBA, you're the ABA League.
Posted by: Purple Pimpernel | March 30, 2010 at 08:23 PM
Ooh, thanks for the link Porchlight, to American Spectator. I got 'Chains you can bereave in.' over there and am eternally grateful. Speaking of eternity and bereavement, we can be consoled with the thought that Bad is eternally spreading the word, too.
==================
Posted by: Probably laughing it up with Peter as we speak. | March 30, 2010 at 08:26 PM
Whoa, think of the internet they must have!
=================
Posted by: Peter strums, Bad hums. | March 30, 2010 at 08:29 PM
AIR BALL.
====
Posted by: Two in a row. | March 30, 2010 at 08:30 PM
k's d is a pretty good md.
==============
Posted by: He's just mt. | March 30, 2010 at 08:31 PM
Or maybe we should just start calling her the Iron Duchess.
Posted by: Joan of Arc is so last year. | March 30, 2010 at 08:34 PM
===============================
Posted by: Dang! | March 30, 2010 at 08:35 PM
OL,
I would think the 41st vote in the Senate might slow things down a bit. Neither Collins nor Snowe faces election this year but they will still be attentive to wind direction - and the stench of fear that is already emanating from Democrat incumbents. I don't doubt that the prog slavers will give it their worst shot but the window of opportunity is closing.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | March 30, 2010 at 08:35 PM
I agree with OL that they're gonna try. And don't discount what the lame-duck congress might try to put over between November 2 and the end of this congress's final session.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | March 30, 2010 at 08:47 PM
For a week, we have heard about the vitriol, violence, and racism of the Tea parties. These are crazy, unstable white people who cannot accept that the world has moved on. Most of them have a Limbaugh, Beck or Palin fixation, or else they are just deranged from watching FOXNews. They can't accept that the Democrats won, and they can't accept our President.
These messages are everywhere, and are being strictly reinforced.
No refutation is possible. This is front page; and in the event of a correction, should one be offered, you will find it at the bottom of E16 in small print.
Last week, some goof with a blog posted a call for people to protest on Sunday outside the home of my local rep. Goof's "call to protest" got picked up by the media, and we spent 4 days hearing about it. The local tea party organization denounced it as inappropriate, and urged their members to stay home. The Congressman went on local radio and CNN to express his disapproval. The Washington Post gave ominous coverage to the threats and intimidation.
Sunday came and three people turned out to protest. The Monday WaPo dutifully reported the "political vitriol" that had followed the rep home, complete with comments about the angry white conservatives who oppose the rep. (Ironically, the accompanying photo depicted two people, neither of them looking angry, and one of them not male or white.)
More and more, this seems like Geraldo opening Al Capone's vault...except the ending is being left to your imagination, with the hope that you will agree with the media verdict.
Posted by: JeanD | March 30, 2010 at 08:59 PM
You forget Lindsey, Rick. Already doing the nasty with Kerry on Cap&Tax...idiots like that are hard to predict.
DoT you are right to fear the Lame Duck session I think. HCR revealed their unique disregard for the will of the public so that means they might react in spite should November go badly for them. Plus some of them are dumb as rocks. The others are simply evil.
But I do like Kim's reminder of that monument on the road to Moscow...X number passed this way going to Moscow, Fraction of X on the back side of the same monument of the number returning. We can dream (note I did not say Hope.)
Posted by: Old Lurker | March 30, 2010 at 09:02 PM
We can dream (note I did not say Hope.)
And we can expect.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | March 30, 2010 at 09:18 PM
" he clearly had not been briefed and didn't know what was in the bill."
Didn't the Speaker of the House tell us the bill had to be passed so we could find out what was in it. It appears obvious that no one knew or cared what was in the bill except the communists who wrote it.
"Cassidy supports the health care bill on moral grounds,"
I don't see how leftist can talk about moral ground while supporting a bill that seeks to have every American paying taxes to help them murder their inconvenient children.
Posted by: Pagar | March 30, 2010 at 09:19 PM
Actually it's quite easy to predict, once you have his m.o., He's trying for the decade "Strange New Respect Award"
If it's consolation, the Dems may have overplayed the victim status, if these poll
results are any indicatioN, in the LUN
Posted by: narciso the harpoon | March 30, 2010 at 09:20 PM
"seeks to have every American paying taxes to help them murder their inconvenient children."
I see. It's the money
Posted by: Nerdblossom | March 30, 2010 at 09:23 PM
He's trying for the decade "Strange New Respect Award"
Who is?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | March 30, 2010 at 09:34 PM
I see. It's the money
It's the coercion. Money, we give to family, friends, and charities. Taxes, we give because otherwise we go to jail.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | March 30, 2010 at 09:35 PM
OL,
Remember that Lady Lindsey likes to hide behind My Friends and My Friends has to lurch right or get his sorry butt booted in AZ. I would never place a bet on Lady Lindsey's behavior but he has absolutely no cover.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | March 30, 2010 at 09:38 PM
Obama, after all his epic fails. That's funny, n.
======================
Posted by: Really, he can't do any worse. So what are the odds he'll do better? | March 30, 2010 at 09:38 PM
So 'Really, he can't do worse.' Oh yeah, wanna bet?
============================
Posted by: That was a joke. Or a triumph of hope over experience. Not that I kind find a difference between them. | March 30, 2010 at 09:43 PM
Actually I meant Lindsey, but it fits for Obama. So after a week of full saturation
only 40% believe that the protests are out of bounds, as opposed to 53% that say they are
well within the norm
Posted by: narciso the harpoon | March 30, 2010 at 09:44 PM
Getcher free Barack Obama Commemorative Health Care Certificate here!
Is there nothing this guy can't slap a logo on? Years from now people are going to find these things in Grandma's attic, junk shops etc. and laugh their asses off. What an embarrassment.
Posted by: Porchlight | March 30, 2010 at 09:44 PM
Why don't we just eliminate the tax deduction for mortgage interest and replace it with a tax deduction for health insurance? It did a great job increasing the supply of housing..why not health care??
Posted by: jorod | March 30, 2010 at 09:48 PM
I love it, narciso, your jokes are funny even when I get them wrong. Kind of like how you can be so dead right even if you write things wrong.
==============
Posted by: Mysteries of Cognition, The Twilight Aroma. | March 30, 2010 at 09:49 PM
Did you know that the least of BOzo's brothers was as big a thug as BOzo himself? Perhaps if he makes enough on the book deal he'll give up armed robbery.
Brother George, that is.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | March 30, 2010 at 10:02 PM
This is the promo, for the special on Thursday, what do you think, in the LUN
Posted by: narciso the harpoon | March 30, 2010 at 10:06 PM
"53% that say they are
well within the norm"
100% of pedophiles polled agree that child porn hurts no one.
Posted by: Tattletale | March 30, 2010 at 10:06 PM
"Really he can't do worse"
There is a lot of worse stuff contained in some of the bills that have have already been passed that doesn't get mentioned until it has been Signed.
"It couldn't have happened to a nicer country. On March 18, with very little pomp and circumstance, president Obama passed the most recent stimulus act, the $17.5 billion Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act (H.R. 2487), brilliantly goalseeked by the administration's millionaire cronies to abbreviate as HIRE. As it was merely the latest in an endless stream of acts destined to expand the government payroll to infinity, nobody cared about it, or actually read it. Because if anyone had read it, the act would have been known as the Capital Controls Act, as one of the lesser, but infinitely more important provisions on page 27, known as Offset Provisions - Subtitle A—Foreign Account Tax Compliance, institutes just that. In brief, the Provision requires that foreign banks not only withhold 30% of all outgoing capital flows (likely remitting the collection promptly back to the US Treasury) but also disclose the full details of non-exempt account-holders to the US and the IRS. And should this provision be deemed illegal by a given foreign nation's domestic laws (think Switzerland), well the foreign financial institution is required to close the account. It's the law. If you thought you could move your capital to the non-sequestration safety of non-US financial institutions, sorry you lose - the law now says so. Capital Controls are now here and are now fully enforced by the law."
There are already reports of foreign banks telling Americans that they (the banks) are closing the accounts of Americans or telling Americans that they will not open an account for them because the the paperwork/reports the US is demanding.
Posted by: Pagar | March 30, 2010 at 10:10 PM
Great quote in the new Weekly Standard. FDR's 1932 convention speech:
"This convention wants repeal. Your candidate wants repeal. And I am confident that the United States of America wants repeal."
Can't you hear those words from unnamed candidate in the summer of 2012? Are we talking applause line or what?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | March 30, 2010 at 10:12 PM
'There are already reports of foreign banks telling Americans that they (the banks) are closing the accounts of Americans or telling Americans that they will not open an account for them because the the paperwork/reports the US is demanding."
You mean no more safe havens for drug cartels and Bankers?
Pity
Posted by: Noseminer | March 30, 2010 at 10:12 PM
Association of American Physicians and Surgeons Files Suit to Overturn Obamacare
They only have five thousand docs as members. I wonder why they would think they have any standing in the matter?
Posted by: Rick Ballard | March 30, 2010 at 10:23 PM
I assume that was a reference to the Prohibition amendment, but I can the contemporary capital. There is nothing
they propose that doesn't have a poison
pill
Posted by: narciso the harpoon | March 30, 2010 at 10:26 PM
Somewhere over 5 million Americans (not US Govt employees) live Overseas.
I seriously doubt that many drug cartels or bankers are so unaware of US laws that any foreign bank will be withholding 30 percent of their account and forwarding it to the US government.
Posted by: Pagar | March 30, 2010 at 10:31 PM
How bad are the internals for Obamacare at the White House? Well, they are about to embrace "Drill Baby Drill"
Acording to Drudge:
OBAMA TO OPEN OFFSHORE AREAS TO OIL DRILLING...
Open vast expanses of water along Atlantic coastline, north coast of Alaska, eastern Gulf of Mexico to drilling for first time...
Posted by: Ranger | March 30, 2010 at 10:33 PM
pp is channeling Chris Matthews...
PP is 'cleo.
Who is still too much of a coward to use his real name.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | March 30, 2010 at 10:35 PM
And, seriously -- talking about the Golden Rule while stealing the earnings of generations unborn? While forming a structure of nanny-state regulation that will reach into our every daily decision?
Posted by: Rob Crawford | March 30, 2010 at 10:39 PM
Rob:
Who is still too much of a coward to use his real name.
The sting of the narcisolator was devastating.
Which is not to be unexpected for someone for whom attention is more important than argument.
Posted by: hit and run | March 30, 2010 at 10:44 PM
Ranger,
This week the EPA quietly booted the CO2 Monster rules a year down the road. If the lying thieves can't impose Air Taxes then the drilling may be necessary to try and fill a tiny part of the huge (and deepening) deficit chasm. The real hit re Obamacare in the polls isn't even here yet. Wait 'til the condo commandos find out about the Part B tax increases on doctor visits.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | March 30, 2010 at 10:49 PM
Btw, for those inquiring whether the mandate was real or not, based on the JCT report, the
answer is yes, in the LUN
Posted by: narciso the harpoon | March 30, 2010 at 10:57 PM
You mean no more safe havens for drug cartels and Bankers?
This dunce senses dimly that a baby has been thrown out, so he's searching in vain for some bathwater. Nice try.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | March 30, 2010 at 10:59 PM
100% of pedophiles polled agree that child porn hurts no one.
The 53% were from a random sample of Americans. Those who want to equate such a sample with pedophiles are free to do so, while the rest of us wonder about the outer bounds of stupidity.
I note also that 100% of phony marines can be contacted by Ouija board, so there's hope.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | March 30, 2010 at 11:04 PM
Dot:
I have to help you show off those pictures of two presidents visiting U.S Troops.
The first is Zero:
Posted by: Ann says Obama Sucks! | March 30, 2010 at 11:04 PM
The second is the one we are so badly missing:
Posted by: Ann says Obama Sucks! | March 30, 2010 at 11:05 PM
The troops know, Ann. The troops always know.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | March 30, 2010 at 11:11 PM
Tom, I don't see how any of this is a big deal.
Under the new law you could ignore the mandate, but if you show up at an emergency room with a medical problem, then you are going to pay the full freight. So in regard to your costs to the rest of us, there is no change from the current system. We are already paying for the cheaters now, in our own higher premiums and taxes.
Employer incentives to offload employees' healthcare is not a new problem, it is already happening. But this doesn't necessarily increase healthcare costs, as Cassidy writes -- it is more likely to reduce costs overall.
The new law doesn't have a public plan or a public plan, but if there ever is one, that would save another 5 to 10% of healthcare costs right there, by eliminating private insurers' profits and excess administrative and marketing costs, which you pay now, for no real value added.
Posted by: Lee A. Arnold | March 30, 2010 at 11:12 PM
And why not savor this delightful item?
Perhaps it's not the hosts. Perhaps it's the material they are given to read. ("Dozens spotted at Searchlight rally.")
Posted by: Danube of Thought | March 30, 2010 at 11:13 PM
Ann, it was nice of him to visit the corpse men, though.
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | March 30, 2010 at 11:17 PM
Zero's face is green in the photo Ann. Wonder who let that image go through that way.....;-)
Posted by: glasater | March 30, 2010 at 11:29 PM
Dave:
Yes, it was nice to see him touch down at the Bagram Airfield for a meet and greet in a very small tent with honorable soldiers barricaded by a fence. HA!
I am just surprised the L.A.Times published the glaring difference of respect both pictures portrayed of not only the soldiers but the two presidents.
Posted by: Ann says Obama Sucks! | March 30, 2010 at 11:30 PM
Ranger-
The Reuters write up is more circumspect than Drudge's headline (and I'm sure the Obama policy will be sound and fury, signifying nothing, and I'd like to be wrong). The Virginia Atlantic leases will be jammed up past 2011 and the USG may allow some exploriation. Florida (go figure) would still probably say no, even with a Republican governor and legislature. I'd be surprised if CA would go for it either (most, probably all, of the 10 billion in the Pacific OCS region is there, and the last budget showdown had CA doubling down on stupid).
It could also be an attempt to get oil and gas prices down. My back of the envelope numbers has the recessionary price of crude oil in the 72$-74$ bbl range. 80+ and an around 150% increase over the last year (with a less dramatic, but large nonetheless, move in gas) would seem to be the ingrediant needed to get the next leg of the double dip recession started.
Posted by: RichatUF | March 30, 2010 at 11:30 PM
When did the Dumont network go out of business, they are in a death spiral, deeper
than a Zero on a strafing run.
The mandates are there, it takes skill of the JCT to actually avoid reading the bill, and not finding them, but as they say, Sebelius
will determine all
Posted by: narciso the harpoon | March 30, 2010 at 11:33 PM
LOL, glasater!
I was so firmly fixed on the soldiers faces I missed the wicked witch color on Obama's face. Good One!
Posted by: Ann says Obama Sucks! | March 30, 2010 at 11:34 PM
Obama is a liar. For him, health care is only about establishing himself as an historical figure. Nothing else matters and he probably can't tell you much of anything that is really in the new law he signed. He just doesn't care.
He can be and has been as inarticulate at Bush, but he has his media handlers. How long will we wring our hands (an action P. G. Wodehouse recognized to be an impossibility) as we cluck cluck about media hypocrisy? Has it helped?
He's a liar. And, his lies have consequences. There will be death panels. There is no alternative. Iran will get the bomb. He's not up to the task of stopping it. Illegals will get the vote. He needs them.
This job will require larger and stronger figures than currently appear on the radar. When someone on the left makes up a race baiting quote, someone needs to call him a liar and demand proof. There won't be any. When someone claims the tea party is full of nuts, demand specifics and call them liars for not giving it.
Others need to make little Matty Lauer more and more uncomfortable. Not just Laura. There is no point in being civil to the incivil. Can we not point out that CNN's legal whore fathered a child with someone other than his wife?
I wouldn't ordinarily advance such tactics, but they work and we are facing similar tactic and worse. They are counting on our good will (Just like John McCain in the last election.)
He's a liar.
Posted by: MarkO | March 30, 2010 at 11:34 PM
CNN? It's watched by at least dozens of viewers.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | March 30, 2010 at 11:38 PM
Narciso:
I have not been able to follow all the threads but Dot asked about your link to a Goldberg article on Chris Buckley. Can you link it again.
Sorry, it is Lacrosse season here and I am not catching up as usual. Btw, we won 20-4 against the number one team tonight. It was a slaughter. WooHoo
Oh, and I can't wait to see Sarah on Thursday night.
Posted by: Ann says Obama Sucks! | March 30, 2010 at 11:46 PM
Well neither Jeb nor Charlie, will go for OCS drilling, but McCollum might, and he seems to be beating Sink, in part because her husband
who ran against Jeb back in 2002, she is such a poor candidate.
Posted by: narciso the harpoon | March 30, 2010 at 11:46 PM
Wolf Blitzer, Fareed Zakaria, Campbell Brown, Anderson Cooper (to name a few) are not partisan? CNN, long may you sleep.
Posted by: Alien for Amnesty | March 30, 2010 at 11:47 PM
Fox News had a piece where Louis Farrakhan was whining that all this hate is going to provoke right wing extremists to get Zero assassinated.
What a dumbass. I have a fate much worse in mind for the stupid socialist. He resigns in disgrace after the 2010 elections, and spends the next few years being interviewed on the only remaining MSM outlet - the Dan Rather Network.
Posted by: Bill in AZ | March 31, 2010 at 12:00 AM
Caught a quick comment from a fellow on Kudlow's show that pointed out we need illegals in the country.
They pay into SS but never benefit.
Posted by: glasater | March 31, 2010 at 12:22 AM
No citizen under 50 will benefit, either, glasater.
Plus, the argument assumes that the jobs would not exist were there not illegal aliens to fill them. That may be, but I doubt it. You might fill them by paying Americans higher pay rates. This would result in even higher SS revenue.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | March 31, 2010 at 12:28 AM