The IRS has finally issued rules for the affordable implementation of ObamaCare. Sparking controversy is this:
WASHINGTON — In a long-awaited interpretation of the new health care law, the Obama administration said Monday that employers must offer health insurance to employees and their children, but will not be subject to any penalties if family coverage is unaffordable to workers.
...
The new rules, to be published in the Federal Register, create a strong incentive for employers to put money into insurance for their employees rather than dependents. It is unclear whether the spouse and children of an employee will be able to obtain federal subsidies to help them buy coverage — separate from the employee — through insurance exchanges being established in every state. The administration explicitly reserved judgment on that question, which could affect millions of people in families with low and moderate incomes.
Many employers provide family coverage to full-time employees, but many do not. Family coverage is much more expensive, and the employee’s share of the premium is typically much larger.
This was kicked around last summer (and details of the new rules are here and here.)
The gist is that employers are not obliged to weigh a worker's family status in deciding his total compensation, which makes sense - because the family insurance can cost an extra $10,000 per year, an employer would have a strong incentive to avoid family guys and gals when hiring for lower paying jobs.
Unfortunately, this means that a stay-at-home spouse becomes a tremendous financial burden due to lost federal subsidies; the employed partner's income can make the couple ineligible for Medicaid but the federal subsidy for health insurance may not be available either. Better never to marry - its the worst that could happen from a financial planning perspective, despite plenty of social science suggesting it has other benefits.
Well, we see through this game - Team Obama will eventually announce an interpretation of the rules such that families are eligible for the federal subsidies even if the employed partner is being offered affordable individual insurance. Delaying the announcement of that "unexpected" expense as long as possible is just part of the current budget imbroglio.
Remember - we had to pass the bill to see what was in it.
NO TIME LIKE THE FUTURE FOR BAD NEWS:
From Via Meadia:
So: will the new law bust government budgets, crush business under unaffordable costs or make health insurance prohibitively expensive for millions of working families? The wording of the law seems unclear on this point, and the Obama administration doesn’t want to give an answer. The new regulations seem to suggest that the administration realizes that business can’t pay these costs; at a time of fiscal cliff negotiations and massive public anxiety about deficits it doesn’t want to point to the potential new costs its cherished health care law could impose on the government. It is therefore waiting until a more opportune moment to take on the question of how the American health insurance system is going to work.
We still don’t know what kind of a health care system Congress created back in 2010. We still don’t know whether it will work or how much it will cost — and who will pay how much of the bill. The Affordable Care Act is not a solution to America’s health care problems.
ObamaCare - one more headwind for the US economy, which already has to contend with the frequent Washington cliff dives.
The good news is that it will discourage gay marriage as well.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet | January 01, 2013 at 12:08 PM
Isn't that first sentence, an oxymoron, TM, how else do we get, to the Huxleyan 'life of Julia'
Posted by: narciso | January 01, 2013 at 12:15 PM
He means affordable for the government, not us, narc.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | January 01, 2013 at 02:09 PM
Well thank goodness there are folks in this country still willing to stand up proudly for traditional marriage, regardless what onerous regulations Congress imposes on the blessed institution:
Hugh Hefnermarried his one time runaway bride girlfriend Crystal Harris last night at the Playboy Mansion.
"Today is the day I become Mrs. Hugh Hefner. Feeling very happy, lucky, and blessed," Harris tweeted
According to her Twitter account, The bride wore "a pale pink Mermaid dress." She also tweeted some Balzac:
Crystal Hefner @CrystalHarris
A woman knows the face of the man she loves as the sailor knows the open sea. Honore de Balzac
Hello Dreamboat!
Posted by: daddy | January 01, 2013 at 02:20 PM
Oh, goody!
OT: From a CNBC tweet.
"ALERT - Congressional Budget Office: Fiscal cliff bill passed by Senate would add $3.967T to the national deficit over the next 10 years."
Posted by: Jim Eagle | January 01, 2013 at 02:46 PM
"The good news is that it will discourage gay marriage as well."
Not sure it discourages marriage specifically so much as it discourages one income, stay-at-home mom, have kids style marriage. That hurts gay marriage less than traditional marriage.
Posted by: Jimmyk | January 01, 2013 at 02:50 PM
Hefner leapt the shark 25 years ago. He is a parody wrapped inside a farce wrapped inside a cartoon.
Posted by: matt | January 01, 2013 at 02:54 PM
--"ALERT - Congressional Budget Office: Fiscal cliff bill passed by Senate would add $3.967T to the national deficit over the next 10 years."--
So, instead of jumping off of Half Dome they decided to hike up to El Capitan before taking a flying leap.
Brilliant, as the Brits say.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | January 01, 2013 at 02:58 PM
The word on the street is that the House is going to send it back with spending cuts. The lack of cuts and postponment of the sequestered cuts seem to be the highest ranking concern with the GOP caucus.
Posted by: Jim Eagle | January 01, 2013 at 02:58 PM
Only a 60 year difference in age between bride and groom, Matt. Anna Nicole Smith redux?
Posted by: Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet | January 01, 2013 at 03:01 PM
Btw, we found the real Aaron Greene;
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/baby_break_for_village_bomb_gal_dsI4TJwX6gVx48G33vmvIM
Posted by: narciso | January 01, 2013 at 03:01 PM
From Narc's 3:01 link to the Aaron Greene pic:
"Police Commissioner Ray Kelly said cops — acting on a tip from a couple whom Gliedman and Greene let use their shower after meeting them in Washington Square Park — found seven grams of HMTD, a highly explosive white powder, in the apartment."
So, how many of you out there, let perfect strangers you meet in a park take a shower in your house? I smell New York Police counter-terror task force at play. They suspected them and got themselves invited into the house to case it out.
Posted by: Jim Eagle | January 01, 2013 at 03:08 PM
I had an experience at the Playboy Mansion many years ago, and the playmates are some of the hardest looking sharks I have ever seen.
That is no match made in any heaven I would want to consider. Sponsored by Viagra, Twitter, and TMZ most likely.
And how bout Kim n Kanye? What a great example for 'Merica. One sullen, no talent media whore impregnating another for the purposes of keeping their names on the funny pages for another 9 months.
Posted by: matt | January 01, 2013 at 03:10 PM
And how bout Kim n Kanye? What a great example for 'Merica. One sullen, no talent media whore impregnating another for the purposes of keeping their names on the funny pages for another 9 months.
Bite your tongue, Matt!
From the new Mrs Hefner: Crystal Hefner @CrystalHarris
Congratulations on your pregnancy @KimKardashian!
Posted by: daddy | January 01, 2013 at 03:20 PM
If $1 IN CUTS FOR EVERY $41 IN TAXES... is some kind of victory for America, I'd hate to see what a defeat for America looks like.
Worth while to again reread the opening few paragraphs of Tacitus's Annals.
Off with my eldest to see "Lincoln." Later.
Posted by: daddy | January 01, 2013 at 03:25 PM
--And how bout Kim n Kanye?--
That kid is gonna wear out a platoon of therapists.
Is there such a thing as preemptive CPS?
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | January 01, 2013 at 03:33 PM
daddy...let us know what you thought of "Lincoln". We saw it Christmas night.Daniel Day-Lewis is a great actor.
Posted by: marlene | January 01, 2013 at 04:22 PM
Tacitus, reminds us of how brief the experiment with representative government was, in the big scheme of things, authoritarians of various types, kings, princes have been the lot,
Posted by: narciso | January 01, 2013 at 04:33 PM
What a game!
Gamecocks just scored on 30 yard throw wtihh 11 seconds left. Big Blue is very Big BLUE right now. 2nd string QB, hell'va thrown under blitzing pressure. Unbelieavable.
Posted by: Jim Eagle | January 01, 2013 at 04:40 PM
Posted by: Extraneus | January 01, 2013 at 04:51 PM
Ex,
Corn comes from the latin word for "grain". In literal translations grain comes out corn at times. The Romans did not have corn as we know it but did trade and gift in grains.
/another gem of knowledge from a Jesuit education and Father Burley's Latin classes.
Posted by: Jim Eagle | January 01, 2013 at 04:56 PM
No, no Extraneus...wasn't it the Muslims? Corn & calligraphy.
Posted by: Janet | January 01, 2013 at 04:57 PM
"Better never to marry - its the worst that could happen from a financial planning perspective, despite plenty of social science suggesting it has other benefits."
The deliberate destruction of the married family has been an overarching long term policy goal of the left for a century now.
And it has paid enormous dividends for them. Look at the rate at which young single women voted for Obama.
It's considerably easier to convince people of the merits of cradle to grave socialism if they operate in a culture where the only entity which is there to stand by them at cradleside and graveside is the government, for lack of anyone else there to take over the job.
Posted by: torquewrench | January 01, 2013 at 05:01 PM
Don't forget the number zero, Janet. And the harem, of course.
Posted by: Extraneus | January 01, 2013 at 05:09 PM
It's considerably easier to convince people of the merits of cradle to grave socialism if they operate in a culture where the only entity which is there to stand by them at cradleside and graveside is the government, for lack of anyone else there to take over the job.
That's just sad.
Posted by: Jane - Mock the Media! | January 01, 2013 at 05:13 PM
BTW, Greta had a poll on the Rose Bowl game:
Who do you want to win?
Badgers
Wisconsin
Madison
I didn't know she is also a Wisconsin grad or native.
Posted by: Jim Eagle | January 01, 2013 at 05:15 PM
She's is both.
Posted by: Jane - Mock the Media! | January 01, 2013 at 05:19 PM
What a travesty of television: Kathy Griffin kisses Anderson Cooper's crouch on live TV during CNN's New Years coverage.
And they keep inviting her back. No wonder no one except perverts and air travelers watch it anymore.
Posted by: Jim Eagle | January 01, 2013 at 05:19 PM
By the numbers:
1,200
The number of car burnings so far in France by the muzzie yutes.
Pam Geller is on it like a hound dog on a ham bone.
Posted by: Jim Eagle | January 01, 2013 at 05:40 PM
What a travesty of television: Kathy Griffin kisses Anderson Cooper's crouch on live TV
I'd bet money that 53% of voters loved it.
Posted by: Extraneus | January 01, 2013 at 05:44 PM
Because she is a wretched nazgul, and one can't forget the derision, she helped facilitate against one in particular, with the ccoperation of one likeminded slime, whose name I won't repeat;
http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2013/jan/1/palin-keep-faith/
Posted by: miguel cervantes | January 01, 2013 at 06:26 PM
My standards have gotten so low that I'm just glad that I don't have to pay a tax whenever Griffin kisses someone's crotch.
Posted by: Janet | January 01, 2013 at 06:28 PM
Regarding the Gliedmans, does it strike that is an awfully small cohort to be planning this, in the original cell, which they seem to modeling,
there were five, Ayers, Doehrn, Robbins, Boudin,
and Oughton,
Posted by: narciso | January 01, 2013 at 06:29 PM
Who would let crusty Kathy kiss his crotch besides some gayblade who is confident a little saliva on the outside of his trousers is as far as he has to worry about it going?
Honestly, is there a single straight guy who wouldn't shrink [heh] from the approach of this thing?;
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | January 01, 2013 at 07:06 PM
Well this is all I could come up with on short notice,
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2255521/Why-long-face-Jennifer-Aniston-grimaces-Jimmy-Kimmels-fianc-shows-trim-bikini-body.html
Posted by: narciso | January 01, 2013 at 07:15 PM
Ig@7:06 - You've caused my first cringe of 2013...
Posted by: Beasts of England | January 01, 2013 at 07:20 PM
And this as a follow up;
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2255526/Stephanie-Seymour-shows-bikini-body-takes-mini-daughter-Lily-dip-sea.html
Posted by: narciso | January 01, 2013 at 07:24 PM
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | January 01, 2013 at 07:35 PM
Spending cuts abandoned in House.
On to the vote.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | January 01, 2013 at 08:05 PM
On Wisconsin and find a defense. Geez! Awful stuff from them and brillance from Stanford.
Posted by: Jim Eagle | January 01, 2013 at 08:05 PM
That's what I'm talking about, Iggy.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet | January 01, 2013 at 08:07 PM
Well, even if Wisconsin loses, Northwestern held up the honor of the Big Ten today.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | January 01, 2013 at 08:17 PM
Boehner wil vote yes.
Go back to the bar, John. You are better there then representing the people.
Posted by: Jim Eagle | January 01, 2013 at 08:21 PM
Boehner wil vote yes.
Unbelievable. Or maybe not.
The only thing that is remotely "good" in the sense of "not as bad as I feared" was the estate tax.
Steve Landsburg:
"There is, as far as I can see, nothing — let me repeat that, nothing to like about this agreement."
http://www.thebigquestions.com/2013/01/01/why-do-i-feel-like-i-fell-off-a-cliff/
Posted by: jimmyk | January 01, 2013 at 08:35 PM
The Duke and Duke party are now in big trouble. The Twittersphere is absolutely livid over the cave on the cliff. I too am very disappointed. What the hell do they think they are serving? It would have been better to just vote present on the Obama proposal to begin with. Now you get a shit sandwich which you voted for - stupid party lives among us.
Posted by: Jim Eagle | January 01, 2013 at 08:37 PM
Yow! Scott Brown's daughter Ayla just sang the National Anthem to open up the Orange Bowl. More applause then her Dad got in November.
Posted by: Jim Eagle | January 01, 2013 at 08:40 PM
In Britain, corn by itself just means grain.
(When they want to talk about our corn, they say maize.)
And there is the difference in the meanings of "tailback" on the opposite sides of the Atlantic.
Posted by: Jim Miller | January 01, 2013 at 08:40 PM
The biggest problem for me (aside from the major problem that the deal is extraordinarily bad policy) is the appearance that this is a "bi-partisan" bill. The Republicans become aiders and abettors, giving the loathsome jug eared jerk in the White House the opportunity to tout his ability to "work across the aisle". It's crap.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet | January 01, 2013 at 08:50 PM
What opposition party?
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 01, 2013 at 08:53 PM
Small wonder we can't win an election.
I am reminded of France in 1940.
Posted by: MarkO | January 01, 2013 at 08:55 PM
We need to send a message in 2014: Run Tea Partiers in the primaries against any Republican who votes for this embarrassment. I hope Boehner gets tossed as speaker. I'm afraid to even ask how Ryan is voting, though I suspect it's "nay."
Posted by: jimmyk | January 01, 2013 at 08:59 PM
Well that was a pointless exercise, but somehow not surprising, was my surmise about the modern day 'Bonnie and Clyde' on target, only two members to a cell?
Posted by: narciso | January 01, 2013 at 09:00 PM
Wow. BREAKING: Illinois Bill to Ban All Modern Firearms
Press release:
Posted by: AliceH | January 01, 2013 at 09:16 PM
Evening all. Catching up. So we didn't go over the cliff after all, the House passed a bill that "we have to pass to see what's in it". Great.
What was the Rose Bowl score?
Posted by: RichatUF | January 01, 2013 at 09:18 PM
Which will put an end to gun crime in Greater Illinois, oh wait,
Posted by: narciso | January 01, 2013 at 09:18 PM
Perspecitve from IowaHawk:
"Washington cutting spending by $15B over 10 years is equivalent to a 2-pack / day smoker promising to forgo 1 cigarette. Per year"
Light them up!
Posted by: Jim Eagle | January 01, 2013 at 09:19 PM
jimmyK,
If you can make it, NK and I are meeting at Randolph's Bar at the Warwick Hotel on the 3rd at 5:15pm. I have a dinner with friends at 6:30 at NYAC. Try to make it.
Posted by: Jim Eagle | January 01, 2013 at 09:22 PM
I'm afraid to even ask how Ryan is voting, though I suspect it's "nay."
Speaking of Ryan, where was he during all this fiscal cliff crap? He's the resident expert on the budget, right? And has shown himself to be well prepared and articulate.
Why was he not front and center?
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 01, 2013 at 09:29 PM
Rich,
This is the biggest news since Chamberlain returned from Munich with the "peace in our time" accords. I can't imagine why you aren't thrilled to your toes.
I just wish I knew when ZIRP ∞ will be accepted as the final answer.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 01, 2013 at 09:34 PM
CH,
Ryan is waiting to see if Mitt will take the bait and go for Goldilocks 2016 on a "third time's a charm" basis. I feel Governor Romney certainly has the hubris to believe he's the answer - and the money to piss away proving himself wrong.
Again.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 01, 2013 at 09:38 PM
JiB,
If you can make it, NK and I are meeting at Randolph's Bar at the Warwick Hotel on the 3rd at 5:15pm.
I should be able to make it. Looking forward.
Wow, two JOM meetups in one week.
Posted by: jimmyk | January 01, 2013 at 09:41 PM
Evening Rick. Happy New Year. Hope your holidays went well.
And what can I say. I was sure we'd go over the cliff especially after Obama's press conference. Regardless, I'm more worried how I'll be able to scale back to something less than full time and what that will entail (I can afford to drop to 28/wk). I'd hate to find out that I won't be able to because of ACA (so much for the Dems "looking out").
Posted by: RichatUF | January 01, 2013 at 09:44 PM
Gov. Romney to spend another 25 million purchasing most electable. Maybe the GOP should run a Huntsman-Vonivich ticket on a "Vote for us were Dems" theme.
Posted by: RichatUF | January 01, 2013 at 09:47 PM
Wow, two JOM meetups in one week.
Lucky dog.
Posted by: RichatUF | January 01, 2013 at 09:47 PM
Light them up!
Posted by: Janet | January 01, 2013 at 09:51 PM
Evening Janet.
Posted by: RichatUF | January 01, 2013 at 09:52 PM
Why was he not front and center?
The deal is a turd and he doesn't want his name anywhere near it.
Posted by: RichatUF | January 01, 2013 at 09:53 PM
Hey Rich.
Posted by: Janet | January 01, 2013 at 10:02 PM
The deal is a turd and he doesn't want his name anywhere near it.
That deal, yes; but why not anything previously? Seriously, is there any evidence Boehner has done one effing thing worthwhile in the last 2 months?
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 01, 2013 at 10:10 PM
Sowell hits the right notes of DOOM in his NR piece.
Posted by: RichatUF | January 01, 2013 at 10:15 PM
CH,
He's certainly protected the oligarchy quite well - does he have any other function?
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 01, 2013 at 10:16 PM
If you can make it, NK and I are meeting at Randolph's Bar at the Warwick Hotel on the 3rd at 5:15pm.
Hey, peter, if you're around, you should come too. (And any other NYers I may not be aware of.)
Lucky dog.
On opposite coasts, consecutive days.
Posted by: jimmyk | January 01, 2013 at 10:18 PM
Grover Norquist is more optimistic than I am.
Grover Norquist @GroverNorquist
Now the fight moves to spending cuts. Rs have leverage of Continuing resolutions (since no senate budget) and debt ceiling.
Now the "Boehner Rule" will demand that any debt ceiling hike be matched dollar for dollar by spending cuts. Obama failed to change that.
Posted by: jimmyk | January 01, 2013 at 10:20 PM
There's a scene in ZD 30, which according to this account, from the record actually happened;
The CIA prepared a formal reception for their new star agent. One of the CIA’s top experts on al Qaeda, Jennifer Matthews, eager to make Balawi feel welcome, had the base’s chef bake a birthday cake. Scott Roberson, the base security chief, had been following the preparations with unease. When a colleague told him he wanted to witness the arrival of the informant who had caused all the commotion, Roberson replied, Stay far away from this.
His recommendation was ignored, and the outpost blows up,
Posted by: narciso | January 01, 2013 at 10:21 PM
jimmyk,
Are out cuts scored the same as current cuts? If they are, there ain't no Boehner Rule.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 01, 2013 at 10:25 PM
THey'll have a dozen fewer members in the next session, why didn't they do something now,
Posted by: narciso | January 01, 2013 at 10:26 PM
Narciso,
Eight fewer members, 35 new faces. I still don't have a firm count on the new Tea Party Caucus numbers.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 01, 2013 at 10:30 PM
I think Norquist may well be right.
Posted by: Clarice | January 01, 2013 at 10:31 PM
How was the week with the Wolverine, Clarice,
Posted by: narciso | January 01, 2013 at 10:39 PM
I'm doubtful Norquist is right on this (but unsuprised he'd be looking for a microphone) and the debt ceiling fight will end up much like the previous one (with a dash of this lastest debacle). The Reps will cave and the US will get another debt downgrade.
The "doc fix" was supposed to be Medicare cuts in the out years to create "surpluses as far as the eye can see". How has that worked in principle?
narciso-
Was that the Afghan station that was bombed a few years ago?
Posted by: RichatUF | January 01, 2013 at 10:47 PM
Yes, that was the one, FOB Chapman, the security chief who gave the warning, was killed along with practically everyone else, including one of our top AQ targeters,
Posted by: narciso | January 01, 2013 at 10:50 PM
On opposite coasts, consecutive days.
Frequent flyer. Hope the TSA doesn't feel you up. Yuck.
Going out there for work?
Posted by: RichatUF | January 01, 2013 at 10:51 PM
Looks like FSU is handling business against NIU. Oh well.
Posted by: RichatUF | January 01, 2013 at 10:53 PM
I'm not personally fond of Norquist, but I think he and Kristoff have a point here. Obama got very little, the fight continues, with taxpayers now getting a taste of what "redistribution" means when they get the new tax bills and the Republicans will live to fight again the spending cut war without being hated for the increases.
Posted by: Clarice | January 01, 2013 at 10:54 PM
Oh, great.
The "Big Push" has arrived. And they have the "Default" gun in their hand.
Use Argentina(1991) as your guide, please.
Later.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | January 01, 2013 at 10:56 PM
You mean 2001, under De La Rua, whose son thinks he is Shakira's agent,
These are the insights of the Triskelion collared serfs at the 'baby momma's alma mater'
http://fnewsmagazine.com/2012/11/election-aftermath/
Posted by: narciso | January 01, 2013 at 11:00 PM
Oh, btw, here's one of her professors;
Quinn co-edited the Handbook of Social Justice in Education with 1960s radical and domestic terrorist William Ayers and another editor in 2008 while teaching at SAIC.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/01/greenwich-village-bomb-making-suspects-have-upper-class-left-wing-ties/#ixzz2GmscR2XK
Posted by: narciso | January 01, 2013 at 11:02 PM
No.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | January 01, 2013 at 11:02 PM
There will be a currency crisis, soon, since it was the plan all along.
More later.
G'night all.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | January 01, 2013 at 11:04 PM
C'mon..the alternative was even greater taxes on everyone and being in a worse position politically to keep fighting for spending cuts.
It's a long war.Pretend it's a chessboard and a couple of pawns were sacrificed to protect the bishops, knights, king and queen.
Posted by: Clarice | January 01, 2013 at 11:04 PM
And at 11:30 the last vote will be cast, by BHO.
FYI. No penalties for spiking, of course.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | January 01, 2013 at 11:08 PM
If they require cuts in the same amount as the raise in the debt ceiling, why raise it at all?
The only up side I see here is people will realize all those new taxes come directly from Obamaville, and there will be a lot of them.
Posted by: Jane on Ipad | January 01, 2013 at 11:11 PM
"The only up side I see here is people will realize all those new taxes come directly from Obamaville, and there will be a lot of them."
BINGO
Posted by: Clarice | January 01, 2013 at 11:12 PM
There's no Cavallo in this rodeo, this time, Greene pere, a 'wonderful chap', decorating instead of utilities, but the same mindset,
Posted by: narciso | January 01, 2013 at 11:12 PM
No.
The spike is about to be nailed in what will be left of the Republican Party. This was the goal, not the results.
Watch the speech.
Illinois is going for full gun confiscation in their next bill tonight. So you can see the model in action.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | January 01, 2013 at 11:13 PM
I'm with Rich, that the Reps will make a half-hearted attempted at wielding the debt ceiling as a club, and then give in at the first media-created sign of public dismay over delayed Social Security checks.
Incidentally, another gem hidden inside this bill is another extension of UI benefits. Europe here we come.
Posted by: jimmyk | January 01, 2013 at 11:14 PM
Going to try and sleep.
G'night again, all.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | January 01, 2013 at 11:15 PM
Here was the choice:Insist on a spending cut which the Senate would not agree to and be tagged with causing the drop off the cliff or hammer out the best deal possible on limiting tax raises and live to fight the spending cut another day without being the bogeyman.
Posted by: Clarice | January 01, 2013 at 11:21 PM
This month the Obamacare monstrosity starts to become fully known to the dopes who voted for him.
Posted by: Clarice | January 01, 2013 at 11:23 PM
Narciso's 11:02 link to the Daily Caller leads to a bit more on nouveau-hippie terrorist Gliedman, and it also leads to a story Gliedman wrote about her boyfriend Aaron Greene back in 2009. The Daily Caller cites another mention of him but misses her story about him in this 2009 article: Can Neon and Holography Programs be saved?
Greene's write up starts about half way down, organizing the student community to save some Arts class, but here's pretty much all you need to know:
Aaron Greene, who decided to transition from being a Continuing Education student to a fulltime Undergraduate after taking Neon Animation in Fall 2008, has been working hard to save these labs. He recently founded the Neon Underpanties, a student group working to save the integrity of the Art and Tech curriculum...
Posted by: daddy | January 01, 2013 at 11:34 PM