Non White emerging Majority, The Dems are not Your
When no insurance is better than ObamaCare
""But it's not at all that simple. The biggest political challenge facing the GOP is the fact that "repealing" or otherwise damaging the Affordable Care Act, while ideologically satisfying, carries with it some very real consequences. The states that opted not to create their own health exchanges – the states that would lose their health insurance subsidies if SCOTUS rules against the government – are mostly Republican-governed states. The sudden unavailability of those tax credits would mean that a lot of newly insured people in those states would no longer be able to afford their health coverage. They will expect their elected officials to do something to mitigate the damage, which would be catastrophic. Close to 5 million people across the country would see their health insurance costs spike.""
This is incomplete. What about the 5 million who didn't qualify for the tax credits who gain the removal of the tax on those without insurance. Since insurance is meaningless without doctors and this uninsured group will need doctors, this could cause a migration of doctors to the uncovered states combined with a migration of newly unsubstituted to the remaining states. In fact the states could encourage this with tax relief.
Assuming the healthcare law has an increased level for health savings accounts (which are needed with the high deductibles), many in the uncovered states can self insure (that is pay cash). Cutting the government out of healthcare has been shown to be much more efficient, with many doctors charging the deductible levels for cash customers.
As a result the average income in the uncovered states will go up, the doctor availability will go up, and the federal insurance tax will be eliminated. What is not to like.
""The first time he said it was 10 years ago.
Back then, it seemed a brisk wind in a stuffy room, a reclamation of defining verities somehow lost in the smoke and haze of political expedience. He said it again last week and the effect was starkly different — somehow forlorn, like birthday cake after the party, or a Christmas tree set out on the curb on Jan. 2.
"I continue to believe," said President Obama, "we are simply more than a collection of red and blue states. We are the United States."
The first time he said this, it brought the Democratic National Convention to its feet and made him a rock star. Ten years later, he's a president halfway through his second term and he was speaking at a press conference the morning after the midterm elections, the morning after his party was drowned in a Republican deluge.
Doubtless, the president intended it as a statement of defiant principle. Instead it came across, to these ears, at least, as a rhetorical Hail Mary pass. It wasn't so much that the president's high-minded assertion was untrue as that it seemed immaterial. You wondered if anyone was still listening.
Even by the not-stellar standards of modern politics, the campaign of 2014 was a disappointment. It was the Year of No Ideas.
That is no ideas acceptable to the Obama mindset. Some say cynicism, others would say reality.
That this author and the president is trying to blame something else, other than his own performance indicates a state of denial.
It is up to the Republicans to drive the nail on the coffin by enacting those ideas (thought non existent.)
Whistling Past the Graveyard
''So onto the good news: With few exceptions, our candidates ran strong races in this adverse climate and ably stood up for Democratic values. The Clintons stood up for an inclusive national party, tirelessly campaigning across the Midwest and South. And Democratic donors and outside groups stood up, ensuring our candidates were financially competitive to the end.""
Republicans have "Democratic" value except they are serious. Many are former Jack Kennedy supporters, who expressed the ideals of individual contribution now are the republican mainstream.
'"The Tea Party caucus in the House is now stronger. The Republican presidential primaries are weighted to the right – and Senators Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, and Marco Rubio will invariably tack in that direction, exercising a gravitational pull over the internal processes of Congress. They will set off vicious rivalries, both among themselves and with the Republican older guard, which itself may fracture over which establishment horse to back in blocking a Tea Partier from the nomination. Mitch McConnell may run the Senate, but it often won't seem that way.""
The tea party has been primarily absorbed into the mainstream. It won't be business as usual, the tea party values are built in.
""First, extremism. Then, corruption. The special interests that paid for this victory know that in all likelihood it will be short-lived, and thus they will behave like pigs at the trough. Their real agenda will be revealed when they seek to undo and rewrite regulations for their own benefit, such as undermining environmental protections and seek all manner of goodies from Senate appropriators.""
Here we have projection. The Democrats have been the party of extremism and corruption. He is describing a reasonable projection of the Democratic way.
""The same dynamic will unfold with respect to all of the pseudo-scandals the Republicans will gin up and investigate; already, loose talk of impeachment permeates the outer reaches of the conservative movement.""
Since the scandal's are real, and the perpetrators will be lining up to rat out their fellow democrats we might consider this after the legal system finishes with the democrats, but by then, it may be unnecessary. Impeachment is a path Obama doesn't deserve. He lives for the spotlight, irrelevance is a just reward.
When the parties are extremely far apart, who is to say which is extreme. If we capture a group of true politicians among the democrats, we can generate bipartisanship.
We are truly Screwedhttp://m.newsok.com/health-care-law-winds-up-discouraging-work-upward-mobility/article/5356773/?page=2""For millions of workers, Mulligan writes, "a part-time schedule can yield more disposable income than a full-time schedule …" The individuals most likely to fall into that category are low-wage employees who worked 30 to 40 hours per week before Obamacare, a group that may include 32.9 million people, or roughly 20 percent of the potential workforce. Mulligan estimates that members of this group must, on average, work an additional 5.5 hours per week to make up for the subsidies lost upon working full time.""This is slavery. We are owned. We are trapped. Nancy Pilose said "we have to pass it to see what is in it". We now see, and we are screwed.
"" With two weeks to go until the midterms, and with polls pointing to the prospect that Republicans could take control of the Senate, the stakes are high — not just for the Obama administration and congressional Democrats, but for the United States. The consequences of Republican control of both the House and Senate could be catastrophic for the environment, workers, women and minorities"
This progressive newspaper has just figured this out? We are already voting, they are too late. I hope this will be a disaster for progressive america, and it couldn't happen to a more deserving group.
The washing post and the rest of progressive media have deserted their posts as the independent arbiters of the news. They inserted them selves into the story. They have lied to the American people in affirming the democrat party and politicians lies.
Washington Post, RIP
The President Has no Class
"" Did they really not see good old Republican obstructionism lurking during those long months of fruitless negotiation over Obamacare? Did they never give serious thought to some way of cross-pressuring or deflating the Tea Party upsurge? And why does it never seem to occur to the Democratic leadership that turning over economic policy to arrogant Wall Street revolving-door types—a.k.a., the experts—might stoke public outrage?""
All negotiation with democratic representatives and senators out for their cut.
""One reason for this, according to a memo Greenberg's consultancy issued that year, was a perceived lack of accountability in Washington; another was the perception that the government cared only for the views of the rich.
Even when cynicism of this sort is caused by Republican misbehavior—as it was in 2007—it is poison for liberalism, a philosophy which is attached inescapably to government. Let such toxins work for long enough and they will kill our movement. That's why Stanley Greenberg pointed these things out and urged Democrats to take heed. Maybe that's also why Barack Obama used to promise a war on lobbying and to bring "new ideas and new leadership" to Washington.""
Poison for liberals is a good thing.
""And that, folks, leads us to the greatest disappointment of them all: This administration's utter failure of imagination. I admit that this beef might be peculiar to me, since one of the reasons I was once so psyched to see Barack Obama in the White House is because I thought he was a man who respected learning, intelligence, new ideas. Maybe he still does, in his private life. But as president, he couldn't seem to see what is obvious to everyone who is not a regular golfer at Congressional: That ignoring the conventional and facing down the Republicans and doing the right thing—on the stimulus, on the banks, on inequality—would also have made him enormously popular, not to mention consequential and successful. It might even have spared him the electoral comeuppance he received in 2010, and whose second installment he seems likely to take delivery on just a few weeks from now.""
The Obama administration was very imaginative, they thought, and think they can corrupt every executive department and it would not be noticed. Now they can start imagining themselves in orange jump suits.
Obama has fashioned himself as a superior intellect, in a country that knows he is not. This atitude is very unpopular in the united states. Philosopher Princes do well not to advertise their superiority complexes, especially when they are less than superior.
Children Have Intrinsic Value
""We need to stop seeing children as a hobby, a checkbox on our bucket list, or a material good whose value fluctuates with market demand, just as a car is worth only as much as someone is willing to pay for it. It's time to stop seeing them as just another cog in the microeconomic wheel. Children—now stripped of their natural value—are worth only as much as the parents' desire for them, assuming the father has a say in the decision at all. The wanted child, the planned child, is precious and worthy. The unwanted child is a burden, a mistake, a blemish. It is a nonentity and therefore easily discarded.""
The "pro choice" crowd is essentially valueless therefore without value to society. Should they be discarded? 'Judge not lest you be judged' becomes 'discard not lest you be discarded'.