Primary every candidate every election.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/10/29/throw_the_rascals_out_120481.html

"In other words, we need to think about what there is about current political practices that repeatedly bring to power such a counterproductive set of people. Those we call "public servants" have in fact become public masters. And they act like it."

If a average selection were put in power every time, we could be assured that there would be less corruption than now. No one person could assure an action so bribery would be more difficult. No longer seek unfair advantage for your state to "bring home the bacon"

Progressive pseudo intellects

Progressive pseudo intellects
http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2013/11/04/131104taco_talk_coll

"The Tea Party's anti-intellectualism reflects a longer, deeper decline in the Republican Party's ability to tolerate a diversity of ideas and public-policy strategies, and to adapt to American multiculturalism. "

These are facts not in evidence. That is unsupported slander, dressed up as intellectual musings.

If Joe Smith instead for saying Obama is a liar, said he is a serial prevaricator it would be similar though in the context of when he spoke, the utterance of another lie by Obama, Joe Smith was justified.

The trick is to mix the unsupported assertions in with some reasonable statements within a discussion, so the reader doesn't have the chance to challenge the thought.

The assertion that the republicans are descending into un intellectual positions is not supported. Of course in the liberal echo chamber it need not since a true progressive will not be startled by the lack of evidence since they are in agreement in supporting the group mentality.

A truly diverse intellectual community will occasionally entertain other that the preconceived notions from the past. Republicans do, Democrats don't.

Dems Own Obamacare

Dems Own Obamacare
http://www.salon.com/2013/10/26/gop_shares_blame_for_obamacare_glitches/


"So I definitely don't think the president and his administration should be let off the hook for the very real problems that have plagued the program this month.

Nevertheless, it's worth noting that whatever their own responsibility for what's gone wrong, the White House shares responsibility with the Republicans who have spent three years actively attempting to undermine the law. I'm not talking about repeal votes, which (while silly after a while) were totally legitimate, or about running against the program in subsequent elections, which was again entirely fair. No, I'm talking about actions designed — usually openly — not to make the law work better in their view, but to make it harder for the law to work well."

This is just political malpractice. You don't pass a half assed law and expect your political enemies to fix it. The democrats created a non workable law and defended it against even delay up to and including a government shutdown.

Even though the president feels free to alter the law illegally, he can't come up with a enough fixes to make it work, so what are the republicans to do, lie in support as the dems do?

he republicans haven't campaigned to inform the young what a rotten deal they would get if they sign up. They have pointed out that health insurance is not of much use f there are no doctors, but that is becoming obvious.

They say we republicans have no solutions, what about Ben Carson's suggestion we give everyone a health savings account.

Oh, you don't like that because it doesn't empower big government?

"Passing on state-run exchanges: With over half the states refusing to set up their own marketplaces, the job of the federal government was much larger than originally envisioned. And this was clearly not done with good intentions: ask 100 Republicans whether they believe the states or the federal government does a better job running things, and at least 99 are going to say the states."

This is a strange admission.  Obviously, any federal program will be less efficient than any other way to do it, so why have them. The state exchange option was part of the law, so this is a legitimate course, and possibly only correct course. Again, the passers could have anticipated resistance, so what is the big surprise?


"Myths and lies: How many times since March 2010 has someone at the White House or a Democrat in Congress called over to HHS to ask about some crazy rumor that the press or a constituent was asking about? How much time was dedicated to figuring out what it was all about so that it could be properly refuted?"

Refuting the truth is even harder than suppressing lies. Joe wilson had it right, the president lies, and he is not good at it.

"Suppressing outreach: The administration knew that it had a major task in publicizing the rollout. What made that harder (and, presumably, distracted them from the critical task of making everything work smoothly) was a bizarre and perverse effort to undermine outreach: organizations such as the NFL were threatened if they helped to publicize the law, and an advertising campaign attempted to scare young people away from wanting to carry any health insurance."

the NFL might have not wanted to be seen to endorse ObamaCare since it is seen as a sure loser.  The NFL doesn't want to be seen as stupid. I believe the mainstream media is walking up to this as well, though many will be out of business before it sinks in.


"again this kind of question is definitely not intended to deflect the share of the responsibility that the president and his administration should take."

As Ronald Reagan would say: "There you go  again" (my delivery is not as refined so I will point out that this is really the intent despite the denial). The administration's share is 100%

An Obamacare Lifeline

An Obamacare Lifeline

With the poor initial showing of Obamacare, the administration needs a plan B. A plan that would be sure to be cheered would be one in which everyone got a big chunk of money (the standard Progressive solution), everyone gets to control his own medical care (the conservative solution). And the market forces will again be used to control costs.

The plan would be to add a new option to the Obamacare which has a different form to pivot to: A Health Savings Account (HSA). Using the obamacare web site, the new option would appear which would eliminate the penalty (as the other options), would allow the HSA to be subsidized (as in the existing options), It could allow the user to pay for all healthcare using a special debit card (like food stamps)

To each according to his needs: the HSA would be funded using the individuals financial status to determine the amount of money to add to the HSA to allow the individual to pay for his healthcare. To save money, the funding would be a one time thing, with new borns being funded when he is enrolled. Again to save money, the individual who had no money from government for his HSA, could fund it with the current unfunded liability he is owed due to Social Security or Medicare/Medicaid. Many could be allowed to transfer from tax-free retirement accounts (IRA, 401K) to fund their HSA. Finally the very rich could be allowed to transfer before tax funds into HSA to achieve a needed HSA balance.

Preexisting conditions and newly discovered sever conditions could be covered by addition infusions into the HSA to maintain its ability pay for needed healthcare.

Death panels: Make this an individual choice. Make the HSA so the balance is transferred to the individuals children upon death. When no limit is set, the individual would be cared for until out of funds. They would avoid treatments which are unreasonably expensive but only continue the very expensive end of life care for an affordable time. No child wants to pull the plug on a loved one. This allows the individual to create an end of life directive which would do the plug pulling via the directions of the individual. For those who are super Rich, the HSA could be funded to allow all possible unreasonably expensive treatments. This way the super rich will fund the leading edge of healthcare treatment development.

Throwing Insurers under the bus

Throwing Insurers under the bus

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/10/22/obamacare_in_need_of_a_doctor_120413.html


"No one even considered the scenario we are now seeing: a partially working system in which it is difficult to sign up but not impossible. This means that the most motivated consumers (the sickest) are likely to persevere in creating accounts, while the younger and healthier are more likely to skip an unpleasant process and risk a minimal fine. "If they don't get the necessary volume and demographic mix in the exchanges," Yuval Levin of National Affairs told me, "it could set off a catastrophic adverse selection spiral that would not only render the exchanges inoperable but badly damage our large health care systems.""

Not "large health care systems" but "large health insurance systems". Maybe it is time to throw them under the bus. The whole idea of health insurance was a distortion of the market created by wage controls in the 1950's (or was it 1940's ?). It is a governmental problem. It separated the individual from his health costs, causing inflation.

There is another way. Dr Ben Carson suggested it, Health Savings Accounts.

If all of your medical costs were born by a health savings account (HSA), no insurance is necessary. The HSA is the consumers money, so he has an interest in conserving it. The HSA is your lifeline, with it there is no need for death panels. In this age of ever increasing medical treatment options, the last few years or months are the most expensive, and the time left can now be the money left. That may be an over simplification, but it is clearcut. No greater public need component to be manipulated by politicians.

The major advantage is the sharpest people on the planet with a clear self interest in correct decisions are in control. well, at least those with a clear self interest in correct decisions.

And the HSA can grow. If at the start, when medical costs are low, the HSA grows. If a minimum HSA is needed, government can award each new born with an initial amount or parents could be expected to fund it.

With wise investing, the amount of money in the HSA could be very large. To assure the HSA was perceived as real money, some mechanism to reward good stewardship a portion could be transferred to a more general account. This is tricky though, a large amount of money in the account of a less able manager could result in all kinds of fraud.

A objection can be made that the least able to control themselves financially will be at a disadvantge. Of course that is the situation already.

When you can't argue the truth, shout racism

When you can't argue the truth, shout racism
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/20/race-central-fear-angst-us-right

"Finally, there is Obama – the black son of an African immigrant and white mother – who stands as an emblem for all this unease, personifying, in their minds, not only their political impotence today but their demographic irrelevance tomorrow. The word they're most likely to use to describe him is "liar". But their hostility goes beyond his policies and pronouncements to a deeply rooted suspicion of his authenticity."

First Obama isn't black. A black member of the minority class is a victim of the US history of slavery. Obama is from a privileged white family.

Post raciest whites along with post raciest blacks and post raciest hispanics are together the American majority. Also, the majority does not rule, but the majority of participants.

I grew up as a minority of one. I had a higher than average IQ, which many resented. I was fat, which meant I was to be dispised. I developed late so I endured being smaller than my antagonists. I developed a disrespect of the in-crowd, who were generally white, but now days can be black. I ran with a gang of poor white trash who accepted me because we were all paperboys.

I grown beyond that feeling of discrimination. Anyone can join the majority, and we can safely ignore the minority, because they are less likely to participate.

Dems recognize power of the Tea Party

Dems recognize power of the Tea Party

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/10/21/the-tea-party-not-democrats-or-republicans-is-the-problem.html

"The Tea Party is the most destructive force in American politics today. Over the last few weeks, it has demonstrated again that its intent is not to shake up the establishment but to burn down the village. As a Democrat, I disagree with its policy positions, but its policy positions alone are not what make the Tea Party so dangerous. What makes the Tea Party dangerous is its members' willful disregard for the most basic tenets of American democracy. They do not believe in the legitimacy of our president. They do not believe in the legitimacy of decisions handed down by our Supreme Court. Unlike President Obama, Harry Reid, Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, or a host of other Democratic and Republican lawmakers who grasp the basic reality of politics, they have never, not once shown a willingness to compromise on anything. Merely uttering the word is enough to draw a primary challenge."

"Shut up", he explains. The problem is millions of Americans using the political tools to advance an agenda? No, the problem is unthinking critics unable to articulate a coherent response.

"I will not compromise with a gun to my head", Obama. He will not compromise without a gun to his head. The house presented 7 bills that represented stages of compromise, the last of which was a delay of Obamacare, with a full funding of government.

For argument, let us suppose the Tea Party is the problem. Is the author demanding we all change our minds? Good luck with that.

finally, "burn down the village.", there are lots of villages that would do better is the DC village burned down. - Let my people go!

Dems double down on Obamacare

Dems double down on Obamacare

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/experts-working-to-fix-healthcaregov-insurance-marketplace-officials-say/2013/10/20/1e1a35ce-39b4-11e3-a94f-b58017bfee6c_story_1.html

"There is political pressure as well. The administration is eager to rebuff fresh assaults by congressional Republicans, who have been trying to undermine Obama's signature health-care law since its enactment 31 / 2 years ago. The GOP's last major strategy — forcing the recent government shutdown in an effort to unravel the law — failed. With the government back open, Republicans are trying to make the case that the exchange's technical defects are evidence that the law is misguided."

If the Republicans explained every tactic, the Dems might not step into the trap. It has been said the best course is to let Obamacare proceed to it ultimate demise, which is preordained. That will create create a huge hardship, but nothing can be done.

What has been done is to lock the Dems into their support. When Obamacare fails, suddenly it will all be George W. Bushes fault. To make that argument now will be a steep climb. Harry reed is on record as letting cancer children die rather than defunding Obama, and Ted Cruse has been pilloried for his opposition to Obamacare. How can even the most compliment media back this sudden switch with all those video clips saying just the opposite.

Solving Generational Theft and the Unfunded Medica

Solving Generational Theft and the Unfunded Medicare Liability

Seniors are continuing to retire at 65 even though life expectancy is rising. Expected lifespan for 65 year old people exceeds 100. The result is a ballooning unfunded liability. Suppose you offered seniors a buyout of their Medicare rights as a lump sum into a health savings account.

I expect that the buyout could be pennies on the dollar.

If the program included investment control of the his, the knowledgable investor might think he could grow his funds faster than the government does (or doesn't).

Suppose a auction were held with individuals bidding to buyout the government's responsibility, with the lowest percentage winning. The result could be a large number of knowledgable investors driving their own health savings account, with a large lump sum in the buyout of their rights. In addition this same large number of health care consumers developing an alternative heath care market.

Some individual companies have shown the ability of low cost healthcare when the insurance industry and the government workers are cut out, which they would if the consumer is directly purchasing the health services. And the consumers envisioned would be able to pioneer this approach with the large up front funding guarding against catastrophic illness.

As the market builds, services to enable less capable consumers to follow in the initial consumers tracks. Medicare beneficiaries are generally life's winners. They can best survive the additional risk of leaving the government system. As the initial consumers are using the system, the evaluate the break even point of the percentage bid for the medicare rights buyout.

If, as I expect, the initial auctions result a higher than optimum percentage, the pioneers will have won, but the government still would have reduced its unfunded liability, and the true percentage would have been determined for the bulk of the buyouts. The growing market and auxiliary services will have reverted the previous rapid rise of healthcare for the participants to lower healthcare costs

This demonstration will reduce the unfunded liability of not just by the buyout amounts but for the remainder of the Medicare clients due to the lowering of health care costs.

This proposal takes advantage of the utilizing talents of self selected experts (based on previous investment success) currently waisting away in retirement. This proposal removes the many negative incentives in current legislation. This proposal expands opportunity for persons to create value in the auxiliary services to be needed by the pioneer consumers. This proposal is a free market solution to a government created problem.

If this works step and repeat for Social Security, and Medical.


Dave Farnsworth

An Alternate Approach To Fix Obomacare

An Alternate Approach To Fix Obomacare

Suppose an option were added to allow individuals to substitute cash for insurance. I would suggest individuals should be allowed to open health savings accounts which would allow untaxed funds to be used for an individual's health needs. To address those individuals with existing health needs and indigent people without funds to contribute, the government can directly fund those accounts.

For a minimum balance in the hsa, the individual would be exempt from the fines now being accessed. No restriction on acquiring insurance should be imposed if the hsa funds are depleted, including using the remainder of the has to acquire the new insurance.

The hsa funds would be owned by the individual which would give them an incentive to seek the best, most cost effective health care. Doctors could accept the hsa funds without the paperwork currently driving up costs.

With this system, the total health care cost could be lower than the excessive deductibles now being charged.

If the resulting market crowded out health insurance, with hsa's, all the expense in the insurance companies paperwork factory and the government over site would be saved. The initial savings would be multiplied by the market forces unleashed when millions of consumers critique the medical services. It would also remove the open loop control by government workers which is detrimental to the consumer.

Tyrone on why the government shutdown and the debt

Tyrone on why the government shutdown and the debt ceiling crisis were brilliant Republican strategy
by Tyler Cowen on October 19, 2013 at 7:29 am in Current Affairs, Political Science | Permalink
- See more at: http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2013/10/tyrone-on-why-the-government-shutdown-and-the-debt-ceiling-crisis-were-brilliant-republican-strategy.html

" With this sequence of events, combined with 2011, the Republicans convinced some of their opponents that they are crazy and irresponsible, without actually being crazy (though they were irresponsible, but that is the whole point). I peaked once into Tyler's Twitter feed, and I found several accomplished Democratic economists — yes brilliant economists, as all economists are — suggesting that any day now markets are going to notice the truly crazy character of the Republican House and price that into interest rates and stocks. Oh what a tale! (A more accurate reading of the more radical Republicans would in fact be more cynical and ordinary than most of the pablum served up by their critics.) Imagine that you control only the House and can manage to convince your opponents that you are stronger and more dedicated to your cause than in fact you are. Only the truly strong and dedicated can pull such a caper off! "

That was my though also

A Ted Cruz on Every Corner - God Bless Texas

A Ted Cruz on Every Corner - God Bless Texas
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/19/opinion/collins-a-ted-cruz-on-every-corner.html?ref=todayspaper

"In Texas, there's so much craziness, it's hard for a normal crazy to get attention. Imagine an election year with both Perry and Cruz on television every night. To get any airtime, the Texas guys in the House of Representatives would have to call for impeachment while bungee jumping. While waving "Secede!" signs. While carrying unconcealed weapons."

As a native Texan I am thrilled with this analysis. Just take you young out of you cheek, this is reality you liberal squish



Dave Farnsworth

An argument for smaller government to increase help

An argument for smaller government to increase help to the poor

from: http://www.american.com/archive/2013/october/setting-the-record-straight-about-the-white-working-class

"There is a very large difference between how southern and non-southern working class whites vote, one Levinson indirectly points toward. He finds, as one might expect, that evangelicals hold more conservative views on most issues than do mainline Protestants, especially those dealing with morality and religion. But on core issues of the size of government or the need for government to help the poor, both branches of Protestantism are largely in agreement, only slightly favoring a smaller government and largely supporting more help for the needy even if it means going further into debt. These findings give Levinson hope that progressives can win moderate working class voters."

While I concede that most christians want to provide assistance to the needy, I do not agree that the current Federal government is the best way to do that. First local and state governments or independent groups, are better at tending to the poor. All government program lack the follow up to assure they are achieving the goals originally intended. Instead of replacing programs the tendency is to add new programs leaving existing programs running. They do the same thing with people working in the programs, leaving ineffective people in place while adding new people to do the actual work. It soon becomes obvious to new people that they are being taken advantage of by the non workers, they slack off and a new wave is hired.

A commercial or non profit operation has much better over site to assure effectiveness. Costco, for instance has well paid, well motivated people and they are constantly being judged by customers and supervisors. Non profits (if not tainted by government grants) are also concerned about the effective use of money.

An objection is that the Federal government has all the money, so failing to go to the federal government as a source of free money, is a injustice to the needy. This is true in the short term, but in the long term, government waste causes the needy to be less well provide than if the money went directly to non government entities, or through local government agencies that can be closely watched by christian or other religious people.

As christians, we are asked by God to be good Stuarts of our God given wealth. That includes resisting allowing government to take money and then waste a large percentage.

For GOP, the Damage Is Undeniable-Not!

For GOP, the Damage Is Undeniable-Not!

http://www3.blogs.rollcall.com/rothenblog/for-gop-the-damage-is-undeniable/

"The deal to open the government and raise the debt ceiling may be done, but the damage to the national Republican Party is considerable.

One GOP consultant — who clearly hails from the more conservative end of his party — didn't hold back recently in slamming the "no compromise" conservatives who led House Republicans off the political cliff with a government shutdown and by flirting with a debt default."

One GOP consultant may be right that his world is ending, he has a target on his back. All of the existing consultants will bring a stink to any republican which hires them. The Tea party doesn't control a majority, but they have shown they can wag the dog. Both republican and democratic representatives have shown their true colors which may influence their reelection.

"The problem, of course, is that the Ted Cruz/Ted Yoho wing of the party doesn't really believe in negotiation, which, at its core, requires compromise. And while they don't like compromise, they are particularly unwilling to negotiate with a president they regard as illegitimate and at war with fundamental American values."
It is the Senate and the President who said they wouldn't negotiate. Bill after bill were passed giving ground to the president which were not accepted. It is the Senate who wouldn't pass even the smallest bill to elevate pain. It is the President who took hostages then proceeded to shoot them. And by the way, the President has been shown to be willing to default to save the Progressive drift (i.e. the war with the American way).

"Small donors will be disenchanted that Republican officeholders caved on both the shutdown and debt ceiling, " ??, wait how can this be, just above we are told the republicans wouldn't compromise, now they caved? The grass roots have had it, the resulting strength will be felt in 2014.

"while the larger donors, who tend to be more pragmatic, are likely to sit on their cash for fear that the GOP will do something else crazy to threaten the economy and the party's electoral prospects." The democrats have been shown to be the party of crony capitalism, and the big corporations are already in the Dem camp

"GOP insiders point out that while the party clearly has lost some ground in recent years among swing voters because of its position on cultural issues, the party's great strength — at least up until now — was that it was generally seen by independents as fiscally responsible and prudent on economic matters. Now that argument may be more difficult for Republicans to make." The states make the argument that the Republicans are competent to lead. GOP insiders are the problem. The DC bubble has been exposed as dysfunctional, and the Tea party has been shown to be principled.

"Of course, polls have also shown that Obamacare has become more popular over the past few weeks, in spite of the inept rollout of the program. Instead of being able to capitalize on the snafus, Republicans have talked about the legislative deadlock, robbing themselves of a potentially useful talking point."
Now the author is just delusional. The Obmamacare albatross has been security tied to the Democratic necks. Over and over, the Dems went all in for ObamaCare. It is failing now and will continue to fail and the scapegoats have identified themselves.


""We need to have good years in (what should be) good years, because you know we are going to have bad years in bad years," he continued, worrying that the last two weeks have turned lemonade back into a lemon for House Republicans.

All of this leaves two questions. First, are we going to see a replay of the last few weeks in January and February, when the current budget deal expires? And second, will a full-scale Republican civil war — which could be played out in Senate races from Kentucky to Kansas and Mississippi — follow?"

The script seems to be the rise of the confederacy due to the emphasis on state rights. The real story is the tremendous overreach of the federal government under this administration. Only the left coasts are exempt from the disgust Americans feel for the trampling of their rights. The constitutional authors times are very relevant to todays conflict. Those get along go along GOPers, may feel they are being betrayed, since they feel deserving of being in charge. King Obama and his minions are law breakers and un american. We have had enough and won't take anymore. This is bigger than the political parties and we should be willing to sacrifice the republican party to defeat the Dems.

Into the vacuum, new and better representatives will appear.

The silver lining of Obamacare

Obamacare deductibles are huge, Doctors are dropping out. Finally, there are doctors who can work for much lower fees if no insurance is involved. Ditto if the federal government is cut out. Suppose there are doctors who can get fees from the patients, and the fees are less than the deductibles. The market will reward hard working doctors again, and the working public will not lose thier healthcare.

As a bonus, health Insurance will cease to exist, and the federal masters of Medicine  will be surplus.

Dems Win? No Way

Dems Win? No Way


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/10/16/gop-shutdown-disaster-could-give-dems-a-big-lift/

"With the news breaking that John Boehner will allow a House vote on a Senate deal to end the crisis, meaning Republicans surrendered with nothing to show for weeks of crisis brinkmanship, how does that impact GOP fortunes heading into 2014?
Though the shutdown mess has given Dems a sizable lead in the generic House ballot matchup, that will almost certainly fade. But it could have a lasting impact if it enables Dems to recruit good candidates right now, which could matter to the outcome."


The liberals are counting their chickens before the vote in the house. Suppose the Republicans all vote against this measure followed by a bill including the removal of health care payments to congress and the executives.

It has been shown the Dems are all in for ObamaCare. Now if they are shown to be willing to default based on defending their own perks, they will be toast in the next elections.

The Dems will ride Obamacare into oblivion.

The republican votes need to be watched, and all votes for the deal, should put a target on the back of the republician house voters. As a sub topic, all incumbents need to primaried every time.

Leftist Hate Speech

Leftist Hate Speech

U.S. Would Be Better Off if Boehner & Cruz Drown - Roger Simon, Politico

"Harsh? Look around you at what is happening to America and you will see harsh. I am not talking about closed parks and monuments. I am talking about the funds cut to nearly 9 million mothers and young children for food, breastfeeding support and infant formula.
That is harsh. Making a war against babies is harsh. And for what? Because Cruz, Republican senator from Texas, has grown so drunk on the sound of his own voice and so besotted with illusions of his own grandeur that he believes halting government today will propel him into the White House tomorrow?"


Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/10/government-shutdown-racism-roger-simon-98272.html

I'll see that hate and raise: America would be better off if a localized global warming were to drowned all of DC and its inhabitants, ( hopefully N.Y city is somehow included.) The funds cut off is directly the responsibility of the president of the United States. He will not negotiate. He demands unconditional surrender. His Harry asks why he would want to save cancer patent children.

Harry also specifically is saying he doesn't want the House to pick and choose which parts of the government to be funded. Harry hasn't passed Constitution 101. That is the specific job of the House.

"That is undemocratic, they shout", In Constitution 102, we learn that we are in fact a republic with checks and balances on pure democracy. The House's ability to defund is one of those.

Hate on you mentally deficient, leftist, egotist.

When hate speech is appropriate

When hate speech is appropriate


http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/10/14/rand-paul-s-hate-speech-sounded-just-like-al-qaeda.html


"The Tea Party senator's attack on Muslims was nothing short of 'hate speech,' says Dean Obeidallah, who compares Rand Paul's words to the bad arguments and vitriol used by al Qaeda recruiters."

The Muslim terrorist enablers are as guilty of terrorism as well as the terrorists themselves. The majority of Muslims world wide are at least enablers. Fatwas are hate. Pledging themselves to the destruction of our allies makes Muslim countries our enemies.

Our enemies should not be allowed free economic access to our markets.

This is not hate speech but if the politically correct May view as such, it is just name calling. Be careful, incorrect speech can earn you a death sentence from peace loving Muslims

The best deal is no deal.

The best deal is no deal.

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/328205-house-gop-furious-with-senate

The Treasury Department has warned it will not have enough money to meet U.S. commitments as of Oct. 17. With no hike to the debt ceiling by then, there is a chance the U.S. could default on its debt, or not make Social Security payments or checks to the military.
The division between the House and Senate Republicans has also given the White House increased leverage. Polls also show the Republican Party's approval rating plummeting, raising pressure on the GOP to concede. And Senate Republicans have been cool to the House GOP plan.
Rank-and-file members expressed anger at the White House and frustration with the Senate GOP.
"Clearly the president can't be trusted," said Rep. Aaron Schock (R-Ill.). "It is up to Senate Republicans to grow a backbone and stand with House Republicans like they said they were going to do."


No deal is 40% sequester. If republicans are allowed to fund the need parts of the federal government, This will be painful, but not so much as when Obama gets more entrenched.

Maybe firing the Obama operatives would be sufficient.

The principle is that the separation of powers need to be defended. It is not the Republicans the president wants to crush, but the house, and the people represented.

If DC is crushed along with the Obama corporate supporters, we win.


Dave Farnsworth

Take up Archery

Take up Archery
http://my.chicagotribune.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-77766359/

I have tried to say this before but this satire is much better.


"But no matter which political tribe you belong to — Democrat, Republican, Socialist or Libertarian — there's one Halloween issue we can all agree on: the costume all young Americans will wear on Halloween.

We're not talking about their costume for this Halloween or the next, but for future Halloweens, when their jobs and prospects are crushed under a massive federal debt that will make today's $17 trillion figure look like couch change.

The costume for the young of the future is easy. They'll go as characters from "The Hunger Games."

Just as in the novels and the movies, the young will hunt each other down in a fight for survival. Yes, it may be a desperate, bloody business, but their antics will amuse the government/political elites.

Only it won't be dress-up or a fantasy. And there won't be any candy, not even Reese's Pieces.

Unemployment among young people in Greece hit 55 percent last week. We're on a similar track — bloated federal bureaucracy, unsustainable social programs, unprecedented millions of Americans on the public dole and more debt to come — it might be time for the young to stop listening to the music of the pipes on their electronic devices."


Dave Farnsworth

The destruction of the Phoenix

The destruction of the Phoenix

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/115134/gop-death-watch-final-days-republican-party

This article is discussing the destruction of the Republican Party from the viewpoint of the GOP leadership. The destruction is driven from the right by grass roots organizations. It may well be the death of get along go along business as usual, but break out the marshmallows, there is a brighter side. The is a energized base ready to recreate the party. Jefferson said that the country is not a democracy of all people, but of the people who participate. We are gaining participants.

on specific issues: " DeLay took ethical end-runs " is a lie now proven to be so in court. This is the Democratic politics of personal destruction. A partisan prosecutor disobeyed his oath of office to make a political vendetta against an effective Republican. This is like the IRS persecutions of individual republicans. This overreach is what is fueling the ground roots backlash, of both democrats and republicans with a fair number of independents. We are as mad as hell and won't take any more.

"What has happened over the last two months, leading to the shutdown, and political paralysis in Washington, is the result of deeper factors " One factor is that the view that a partial paralysis of the federal government is a bad thing is not shared universally. The federal government is the cause of not the solution to many bad things. The reason the shutdown is necessary is to save the pork. If identified beneficial programs were separately funded, than all the others would be exposed as non beneficial. We can't have that, say our masters in Washington.

"Since the late 1960s, America has seen the growth of what the late Donald Warren in a 1976 book The Radical Center called "middle American radicalism." It's anti-establishment, anti-Washington, anti-big business and anti-labor; it's pro-free market. It's also prone to scapegoating immigrants and minorities. It's a species of right-wing populism. It ebbed during the Reagan years, but began to emerge again under the patrician George H.W. Bush and found expression in support for Ross Perot and for Pat Buchanan with his "peasants with pitchforks." And it undergirded the Republican takeovers of Congress in 1994. It ebbed during George W. Bush's war on terror, but has re-emerged with a vengeance in the wake of the Great Recession, Obama's election and expansion of government, and continuing economic stagnation." Surprisingly I agree completely. But I think it is a good thing. Middle America is by definition "Normal". The radicalism is on the other side. The DC masters have grown too big for their britches. It is time to take them down

Save my bacon- Obama

Save my bacon- Obama
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/10/03/wrong-side-of-history/?_r=0

"Republicans closed the government to keep millions of their fellow Americans from getting affordable health care."

Can we have a little bit of honesty? No, probably not from this author.

The republican position is to delete Obamacare, true. The problem is that the republicans truly feel the government run healthcare will be neither affordable, or effective healthcare. Nor did the republicans hold the country hostage. Obama did that by not accepting even a fig leaf of comprimise. In so doing he reveled who he was protecting, not the people but the pork.

"When Bobby Jindal said Republicans have to “stop being the party of stupid,” he swallowed a teaspoon of common sense. That’s been washed away by a river of stupid."
But little did Bobby know that republicans need not get smarter, the democrats unfailingly do stupid. The winners!

It's a Lie, It's a Lie, and We Know It Isn't true

It's a Lie, It's a Lie, and We Know It Isn't true
The boy is crying "Wolf" again, why believe him this time

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2013/10/03/jack-lew-debt-limit-government-shutdown-obama-column/2918587/

"This is not a debate about reducing future spending or cutting the deficit. This is about making sure the United States can meet its existing obligations to our citizens, businesses and investors — and the stakes could not be higher.

If the United States cannot pay its bills in full and on time, each and every American will be affected, including seniors who rely on Social Security, veterans who depend on disability payments, children in need of food assistance, and doctors and hospitals who treat Medicare patients, among others.

The stock market, including investments in retirement accounts, could tumble, and it could become more expensive for Americans to buy a car, own a home and open a small business."

There are plenty of obstacles now to do either. The economy is a politically inflated bubble create by Jack Leu, and others. If it is not deflated now, the destruction will be much greater later. Also, the full faith and credit of the United States is only destroyed if Obama fails to pay his bills. Prioritizing the bills to favor those needed to be paid to retain the "full faith and credit", by statute or executive order, would let the government function as any company would do. They scale back other areas to retain the ability to pay the bills.

There are some payments which are being made under the radar. These need to stop. The keep the government from the flexibility needed.

The priority should be: obligations for loans outstanding, obligations as expressed in contracts to government vendors, with welfare being last since it is arguably harmful.



Dave Farnsworth

If the Republicans are the, extortionists, Why is

If the Republicans are the, extortionists, Why is Obama shooting the Hostages?


http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/02/opinion/friedman-our-democracy-is-at-stake.html?_r=0

"the 11th-hour debate in Congress to avert the shutdown. Noting a shameful statement by Speaker John Boehner, Milbank wrote: "Democrats howled about 'extortion' and 'hostage taking,' which Boehner seemed to confirm when he came to the floor and offered: 'All the Senate has to do is say 'yes,' and the government is funded tomorrow.' "

Obama is so set on his story, he has failed to notice he is overplaying is hand. It is obvious he has removed all the stops to make us suffer. It is like any crooked small time mayor, who gets mad when he does't get his way.


Dave Farnsworth

Obama needs better political skills

Obama needs better political skills

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2013/10/the-real-fight-the-debt-ceiling.html

"The ability to push through legislation would no longer be about which party was better at winning elections; it would be about which party was more willing to take the government, and with it the economy, over the cliff. Indeed, if the Republicans were to win this standoff, the result would be far more general uncertainty, since every debt-ceiling increase would become an occasion for rewriting laws."

A simple way to deny this leverage is to live within your means. Don't spend more than you make. Appropriation bills have to start in the House. Obama has little respect for constitution (or the law, for that matter), but it is in there. This gives the people's direct representatives the power to deny funding.

Obama is leading a criminal organization. Multiple branches of the executive have been shown to be breaking the law, with the disregard of ObamaCare only the latest instance. Any tactic to return this administration to legality, is justifiable.

Obama is disrespecting the constitution and as a minimum, he needs to acknowledge the house's power in this instance.


Dave Farnsworth