Friday, February 28, 2014

Cruising the Web

Here is how the disincentives of Obamacare work as a New York pet store owner says he won't expand his business because it would raise the numbers of his employees over the 50-employee limit in the bill. If he had 50 employees, he'd have to provide them with health care or pay a $2,000 fine for each employee.

Matthew Continetti ponders the empire that Obama's former campaign head, Jim Messina, is building.

Is Senator Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire the leader for the GOP vice-presidential nomination?

Peter Suderman contemplates the $1.2 billion on helping states build their own state-run health insurance exchanges. And the records of those exchanges is not a good one.

Mary Katharine Ham brings together some more stories of people who have been suffering due to Obamacare and wonders if they too are lying. NPR reports on how one doctor's office has to spend an hour or more on the phone to verify the insurance for each Obamacare patient they see. This was a routine they could do almost instantaneously before the Affordable Care Act. Imagine the burden on any small doctor's office.

Charles C. W. Cooke refutes the absurd idea that atheism and conservatism are incompatible. Whew! That's a relief to me. I can still be conservative.

The GAO has determined that the changes that the federal government has made to school lunch menus have been a disaster.

Charles Krauthammer explains what Putin is about when it comes to Ukraine. Michael Barone recommends that we look at the protesters in Ukraine and Venezuela as not fighting for democracy, but for the rule of law.

Bobby Jindal is taking some steps towards running for president in 2016.

Peggy Noonan captures the feelings of many Americans that we are beset by government.
People already enraged by canceled coverage, higher premiums, huge deductibles, lost doctors and limited networks, fume. And the highest-ranking Democrat on Capitol Hill, Majority Leader Harry Reid, goes to the floor of the Senate to say of the ObamaCare horror stories that "all of them are untrue." They're "stories made up out of whole cloth." spread by "the multibillionaire Koch brothers."

Imagine that—you have real problems caused by a bad law, and Mr. Reid tells you that what you are experiencing in your own life is a lie made up by propagandists. He sounded like Lenin. There is no cholera in the new Russia.

The NSA is a real and present threat to your privacy, HHS actually never has to come up with a true number on ObamaCare enrollments or costs, and at the EPA no one talks anymore about why Al Armendariz, a top regional administrator, felt free to brag in a 2010 speech that his "philosophy of enforcement" could be compared to the practice by ancient Roman soldiers of crucifying random victims. When it surfaced, he left the agency. Did his mindset?

People feel beset because they are. All these things are pieces of a larger, bullying ineptitude. And people know, they are aware.

Conservatives sometimes feel exhausted from trying to fight back on a million fronts. A leftist might say: "Yes, that's the plan."

But the left too is damaged. They look hollowed out and incoherent. Their victories, removed of meaning, are only the triumphs of small aggressions. They win the day but not the era. The result is not progress but more national division, more of a grinding sense of dislike. At first it will be aimed at the progressive left, but in time it will likely be aimed at America itself, or rather America as It Is Now. When the progressive left wins, they will win, year by year, less of a country.
That's a dismal thought to start your day, isn't it?


John A said...

Remember the confusion about whether in order to get subsidies for Obamacare you had to go through a State exchange or could also get subsidized via the Federal exchange?

Well, HHS has a p[atrial answer. Seems if you couldn't use a government exchange and used your insurance agent or direct to insurance company... you get subsidized!

Feb 28 2014

mark said...

Actually, it's Christianity that is incompatible with the Conservative movement of today.

Rick Caird said...

Actually, it is Mark who is incompatible with morality and common sense. But, what's new.

I assume he thought his comment was funny. But, even that says more about him than conservatives or Christians.

tfhr said...


You should've read the Charles C. W. Cooke article - you might have learned something and God knows you have a lot to learn.

I thought the piece presented an interesting, principled and sensible argument. Cooke also hit the ball out of the park when he said the following:

In my experience at least, it is Progressivism and not conservatism that is eternally hostile to variation and to individual belief, and, while we are constantly told that the opposite is the case, it is those who pride themselves on being secular who seem more likely and more keen to abridge my liberties than those who pride themselves on being religious. That I do not share the convictions of the religious by no means implies that I wish for the state to reach into their lives.


mark said...

Yes, I certainly do have a lot to learn. I suspect we all do.
Perhaps even you. Many so-called Christian conservatives make a mockery of true Christians because they make insane claims and lies about atheists, gays and other groups. I believe the Bible mentions something about "bearing false witness".
There are people right here who have made groundless claims and insane lies about liberals being rapists, pedophiles, enjoying "abortion as a bloodsport" and being the "personification of evil". Not sure if both you and Rick consider yourselves Christians, but if so, you should consider changing your identities to "Exhibit A" and "Exhibit B". (You won't even have to lie about changing your identity this time). Your respect for the Bible is as shallow as your respect for the Constitution.

tfhr said...

Who said I was a Christian?

You make too many assumptions about subjects and people you do not know. Moreover, you could have avoided embarrassing yourself (once again) by not throwing that line of garbage about conservatives and Christianity.

Instead of doing that you could have engaged in a supportive effort on ObamaCare or Obama's foreign policy. I know that's just about impossible but I'd like to see someone attempt to do that because it seems like Progs are hiding under their beds these days.

No, instead of engaging in a substantive debate you do a drive-by. I really do think you should read Cooke's article if you want to engage on subject matter like that because your entry into this thread was one of your weakest ever.

mark said...

Clearly, my words "Not sure if both you and Rick consider yourselves Christians..." undermine your claim that I made that assumption. Even on this, you see a need to lie.

Linda said...

One of the most puzzling parts of Obamacare is the insistence on birth control coverage.

It makes little sense - BC is relatively cheap, even free for many, even before the act.

It only makes sense if you realize that temporary fertility blocking is NOT what the act is about.

Read more about LARCs.

tfhr said...


If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. Period.

If you like your insurance, you can keep your insurance.

An entire program - Obama's signature legislative accomplishment and the keystone of Progressive zealots for decades - all built on lies. It was sold with lies and it is nothing but a lie. But go ahead and continue whining about my retort to your drive-by.

It's pretty clear that you don't care about the people that were thrown off of the programs they had, can no longer access the doctors they once had, and never saw those promised $2500.00 savings Obama pledged but your priority hasn't changed. These results were predictable and desired by Obama and sleazy Progressives because the unAffordable Care Act - ObamaCare - is about giving a fifth of the economy of the United States to the government to control while making more Americans more dependent on the government than ever before.

If you cannot see ObamaCare as a lie and the man it is named for as an outrageous liar, why on Earth would anyone listen to you?

mark said...

As you well know, I've already acknowledged Obama's lies and incompetence regarding Obamacare. I suppose it would be easier to take a page from conservatives who deny Bush lied us into war and caused thousands of deaths through incompetence and playing politics with the troop levels.
But to be honest, it's more enjoyable to mock you for your petty gossip-mongering to defame Gen. Petraeus. Or your pathetic excuse that, while you said OBL was dead based on a "decrease in communiques", you never said you were absolutely "certain".
Again, Christian or otherwise, it's the nutjobs like you who will hand the presidency to Hillary should she decide to run. No worries, then you'll have eight years to whine about the media.

tfhr said...


You've "acknowledged Obama's lies and incompetence". Period. But you don't condemn those lies and you voted for more incompetence and reinforced those lies, didn't you?

What does that say about you?

Blaming me for making you vote for Hillary is a bit of a stretch but go ahead, Progs never take responsibility for the messes they make.

mark said...

I've clearly criticized Obama for his lies and incompetence regarding Obamacare, and a number of other issues. "Condemn" is more your style, whether it's your unfounded rape charges or your tawdry gossip regarding Petraeus (so that's what you mean by "military-intelligence")
The Republican party is finally wising up and trying to shut down the nutjobs, knowing they have cost the party control of the senate and will help Hillary. Fools like you have already let her off the hook on Benghazi by mixing fact with fantasy. Apparently, you're still safe here. So keep spinning the crazy and keep those conspiracy theories coming.

tfhr said...

Who is letting Hillary off of the hook for Benghazi? Conspiracies? You're losing your mind, mark. I'm not sure there are any conspiracies now that we've all agreed that the YouTube video gambit was just a pathetic excuse to duck an embarrassing campaign slogan about killing AQ and saving Detroit.

Not sure why you want to blame me for Hillary. You won't hold Bill Clinton's doormat accountable for her failures as Secretary of State and you know you'll vote for her if she runs. You voted for Obama twice even though he lied to your face from day one. I can't figure out if you are just stupid and gullible or if you are simply on board with it all and don't care about the harm Obama is doing to this country and so many of its citizens.

As for "condemnation", I don't care if you condemn anyone, mark. History will condemn Obama/Prog policies because they are garbage.

mark said...

No Benghazi conspiracy theories? Stand-down orders, Benghazi fever/fake head injuries, watching the attack on a live feed.
All insane ideas that you and others shamelessly flogged. Another day, another lie.

Of course, you alone own the most perverse anti-Hillary charge: That she enjoys abortion as a blood sport.

So yes, when you mix up the legitimate issues with all the crazy b.s., you're doing her a favor.

tfhr said...

You're confabulating your hysterics, mark.

Find where I've ever made claims about stand-down orders. I'd just like to know what Obama did because as far as we can tell, he did nothing and hasn't had the guts to answer up for himself. We have absolutely no information on orders he may have given or if he made any decisions at all. So when you say "another day, another lie", I think that is an autobiographical comment on your part. Or perhaps that was some sort of directive for Rice to follow on her infamous YouTube smoke-blowing tour. You tell me where that yarn came from because it sure wasn't from the Intelligence Community.

Find where I've used the term blood-sport when describing Hillary's view on abortion. Find it. I've said that she accepts the accolades of a group that considers the world's foremost proponent of eugenics to be something of a patron saint, so if you admire that sort of thing, then you can call it what you want but don't attribute words to me because based on the racist history of Sanger, bloodsport might be an improvement.

As for ever doing Bill's doormat a favor, I would have long ago advised Hillary to get a spine, dump her cheating husband, and walk away with some dignity. Instead she clings desperately to his pants leg in the hope that he can help drag her across that Dem primary finish line were you'll be waiting to give her a big, juicy smooch on the behind and that,mark, is why you are the perfect lick-spittle.

mark said...

You're now going to deny claiming that "liberals enjoy abortion as bloodsport"? Okay. I suppose if you don't have the "guts" to acknowledge your disgraceful comments, pretending you didn't say them might be a slight improvement. (And certainly better than blaming your comments on computer problems).
You have lots of lies and insane claims to deny. Keep (back)pedaling. Or, at least, spinning.

tfhr said...

OK, so you still have not found where I applied that term to Hillary. I knew you wouldn’t.

That said, I think there are more than a few “liberals” (that term has become meaningless) that do take a particularly gleeful attitude toward killing babies. Some are quite proud of exercising their “choice” to kill a baby. I remember an exchange in these threads with one individual that was absolutely sure that her decision to kill not one but more than one child, so that she could go on to live the life she has today, was somehow the right “choice”. She voiced no regret; in fact she celebrated her accomplishments. It wasn’t about the health of the mother in her case and I find it terribly sad that there was no choice available to these to two babies. Why not put them up for adoption?

I cannot imagine that all “liberals” think the way she does but it doesn’t take the discovery of a Gosnell in the bunch to recognize that the industry that has developed around abortion practices and the people that go to great lengths to justify it have done more to cheapen the value of life than to give humanity a choice.

Your feigned indignation over being labeled as one that partakes in a blood sport does not impress. Abortions rake in millions of dollars for the industry that performs them. Those that defend the industry – and I include Hillary Clinton here specifically - take campaign contributions from groups like Planned Parenthood. Maybe there is a different thrill associated with the kill in a blood sport like dog fighting but in the end something alive is dead and money has changed hands. It’s business – big business – and tens of millions have been served. Some customers limp out the door and some end up in the trash. Hillary walks away with the cash - while you cheer enthusiastically from the sidelines.

mark said...

Once again, you're very mistaken, lfm. I have no indignation, fake or otherwise, about anything you write. I merely bring up your insane claims about liberals and abortion, and your disgraceful attacks on Menendez and Gen. Petraeus because they expose you as a fraud. And as no conservative here has ever called you out, it undermines every principle conservatives claim.
If you did "cannot imagine that all “liberals” think the way" then you shouldn't have made that claim in the first place, right?

tfhr said...

I'm touched to hear that you stand to defend a couple of creeps like Menendez and Petraeus. You're nothing, if not consistent, when it comes to finding some special virtue in people that abuse the public's trust while in office. They'll make such awesome character references for Hillary! You go girl!

So after all of this you still didn't find any example where I played the bloodsport card on Hillary and thus you are now trying to claim that I described all liberals as participants in the bloodsport that is abortion. Bet you won't find an example of that either. I like to think that the left isn't as pure and monolithic as you seem to believe. For example, are you saying that it is impossible for a person to be liberal and opposed to the act of killing a child in the womb? How is that? Is there now only one degree of liberalism? Who decided that? I've got more than a few Catholic in-laws that are quite liberal on a number of social issues but consider abortion to be abhorrent. I hope whoever it is that gets to sanction "correct" liberal thought isn't going to have them shipped off for reeducation. I kind of like them the way that they are - particularly since they tend to think for themselves rather than resort to talking points.

It's time to put a wrap on this thread and I'll close by revisiting your penchant for calling others frauds and liars because they disagree with you. I get that you have very little to strike back with in the way of facts that could be used to support your position but what really amuses me is that you have this supposedly keen eye for spotting fraud but when it rolls over millions of Americans and calls itself ObamaCare, you're as blind as a bat.