Election Time’s a Comin’

“There’s a certain level of vehemence, it seems to me, that’s directed at me [and] directed at the president,” Holder told ABC last month, per the Hill. “You know, people talking about taking their country back. . . . There’s a certain racial component to this for some people. I don’t think this is the thing that is a main driver, but for some there’s a racial animus.”

And Obama agrees, or seemed to think so in 2011, according to U.S. News and World Report’s Ken Walsh.

“A guest suggested that when Tea Party activists said they wanted to ‘take back’ their country, their real motivation was to stir up anger and anxiety at having a black president, and Obama didn’t dispute the idea,” Walsh wrote. “He agreed that there was a ‘subterranean agenda’ in the anti-Obama movement — a racially biased one — that was unfortunate. But he sadly conceded that there was little he could do about it.”

Good thing Crazy Uncle Joe (The VP) is not on board 🙂

Vice President Joe Biden staked his claim to the labor vote by declaring that “it’s time to take back America” in order to ensure that the middle class gets an “equal share” of prosperity in the country.

“If we don’t, America’s in trouble,” Biden said in Detroit Monday. (NRO)

Or maybe, being a white guy he’s just a crazy old racist! 🙂 Isn’t every white person these days?

I mean the election is 2 months away, so time to ratchet up the fear, and the hatred, and Divide & Conquer to hopeful victory!

Hope & Change is back! 🙂

Fear is Hope!

And Control is Change.

Or what could be the Democrat mantra: Racism for thee but not for me.

Democrats are using the tragic shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri earlier this month to mobilize black voters ahead of the midterm elections. It could impact the races in Georgia, North Carolina, Louisiana, and Arkansas, where black voters represent a significant part of the electorate. African-Americans represent thirty percent of eligible voters in Louisiana and Georgia alone. The New York Times’ Jonathan Martin indicated that African-Americans “played a pivotal role” in 1998 elections. Yet, trying to drive up voter turnout will be tricky since the states that will determine if Democrats keep the Senate are in the south, where Obama is deeply unpopular (NYT)

But we are dealing with the morally and ethically win-at-any-cost end justifies the means Liberals. So why not use a dead man and racism as a  campaign tactic. As long as it works, Liberals don’t care.

Which is why they are Sanctimoniously superior to you mere mortal and should rule everyone and everything with absolute power!. 🙂

They have no shame. Why should they? They are Homo Superior Liberalis, a superior form of life, you’re just too stupid to recognize it, so they have to force you any way they can to accept their superiority.

Now, that’s America, for you. 🙂





Just Shut The Hell Up!

Before you snatch defeat YET AGAIN from the jaws of obvious victory!

Principle: ObamaCare is failing and more unchecked immigration would ensure Republicans’ demise, yet GOP leaders are surrendering on both issues. Poised to win big in November, their best strategy may be to shut up.

Sometimes it seems as if top congressional Republicans have seen the movie “Animal House” one too many times, specifically the hazing scene with Kevin Bacon repeatedly saying, “Thank you, sir. May I have another?” each time he gets paddled on his rear.

Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington, chairwoman of the House Republican Conference, sees a very dubious stat claiming that more than 600,000 residents of her state got new insurance through the state exchange, and she proceeds to declare that ObamaCare is a permanent fixture of American life.

“We need to look at reforming the exchanges” instead of repealing ObamaCare, said the fourth-ranking House GOP leader, whose election to that post a year and a half ago was described by TheHill.com as “a victory for party leaders over insurgent conservatives.”

Wow, the Exchange Reform Party. That’s really what Ronald Reagan had in mind when he emphasized that ideas have consequences, so Republicans must raise “a banner of no pale pastels, but bold colors.”

What would Rodgers’ “reforming the exchanges” slogan be for the GOP congressional campaigns this year? “Fine-Tuning We Can Believe In”?

She — and, frankly, other GOP leaders, too — are allowing President Obama to set the political narrative.

Earlier this month, the president sneered that Republicans were going “through the stages of grief” over losing on ObamaCare. In other words, this is Social Security or Medicare all over again, with the GOP complaining and vowing to repeal a new entitlement, but eventually coming to accept and embrace it as irreversible.

With its skyrocketing costs, botched bureaucracy and numerous promises betrayed, ObamaCare is one of the least popular government schemes in history, yet “leaders” such as Rodgers are keen to follow whatever socialist unknown it leads to.

Pale pastel indeed. And not content with only flagellating themselves on ObamaCare, House Speaker John Boehner and other GOP leaders continue their needless, self-destructive push for immigration “reform.”

As pointed out in the Washington Post over the weekend, registering a multitude of Hispanics through amnesty could quickly enhance their voting clout in now-solid red states such as Texas and Arizona, possibly “reducing Republicans’ already weak standing with the Hispanic voters (and future voters)” — an unthinkable shot in the foot for the party to inflict on itself.

When Democrats accuse the Tea Party of holding a gun to the heads of the GOP, they have it mixed up. Republicans are holding a gun to their own heads. Why? Certain big business interests insist they do this so they can employ the cheap, unskilled labor that our Democrat-friendly immigration policies produce — and that an amnesty-based “reform” would only perpetuate.

If Republicans wish to win — a big if — it’s time to stop the self-loathing, demand ObamaCare’s repeal and refuse to legalize millions of new Democrats.

But they have “Jar Jar” Boehner as a Leader!

And Jar Jar was the deciding vote for the Empire.

Coincidence? I hope not.


The Obama Decision-Making Pipeline

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Strange Bedfellows


So how do tax rates in the red states stack up against tax rates in the blue states? Using the 2012 election results to measure that, we find the average state income tax rate in states (plus D.C.) that Obama won is 6. 4 percent, while the average rate in states Mitt Romney won is 4.9 percent. (WP)

Harry Reid, tinpot demagogue? Maybe, from moment to moment, this guy just … doesn’t realize what’s coming out of his mouth.

Hard to believe he could forget saying on the Senate floor that all ObamaCare horror stories — all of them — are a GOP/Koch brothers fairy tale designed to besmirch the stellar reputation of the Affordable Care Act.

‘Never to My Recollection’: Harry Reid Scoffs at Idea He Ever Called ObamaCare Horror Stories ‘Lies’

He said they were all “untrue” not liars.

The Kings right hand Doublespeaker strikes again. You have learned well, My Apprentice, said The Sith Lord Obama.

But now to the real prevarication:

Writing in today’s POLITICO Magazine, Democratic Senators Heidi Heitkamp, Mary Landrie, Mark Begich, Mark Warner, Angus King and Joe Manchin are outlining some of the ways they think Obamacare can be fixed. Notice how many of these Senators represent red states.

First, we want to give consumers as many choices as possible when it comes to selecting their health plans. By providing a new, lower cost, high deductible option called the Copper Plan (in addition to the existing Platinum, Gold, Silver and Bronze-level options in the marketplace) we will give consumers more control over their own coverage, spur competition and, most importantly, increase affordability.

Sound VERY REPUBLICAN!…Besides, wasn’t this monstrosity supposed to do that already?  Oh right, $2500 less a year…So the 4 levels of shit will be joined by their pristine cousin the Elephino Plan! (not quote a republican plan).

We also propose directing state insurance regulators to develop models for their states to sell health insurance across state lines. These multi-state models will help us discern the benefits and challenges of selling health insurance in this manner, and determine if it is a means to increasing choice and competition among plans—potentially driving down costs while maintaining quality and value.

HOW VERY REPUBLICAN OF THEM!!! This was in the EVIL RYAN PLAN! Democrats get out your earplugs, the Minstry of Truth will be around soon to cleanse your memory of this proposal!

And proposed by The Republicans during the debate but was completely ignored by the Democrats. So much so they maintain to this day that “the republicans have no ideas of their own” 🙂

Second, to ease the transition for employers, we want to expand the option for voluntary coverage for employers with fewer than 100 employees, about 98 percent of all businesses. This will enable small and mid-sized businesses to make their own choices for their businesses, and employees can shop for coverage on the individual marketplace.

So change the rules. Will your Emperor Approve?? The people will still lose. But hey, it sounds better. You only have to stick your face in the lions mouth not you whole head. Much better!

Finally, we simply want to make it easier for individuals and families to access quality health coverage by offering more than one way for individuals to enroll. We seek to provide a permanent path—in addition to HealthCare.gov—for consumers to seamlessly enroll directly through insurers, while improving access for the agents and brokers whom many families and small businesses trust and rely upon for help with these decisions.

Yeah, because the current way is so broken it’s hilarious so lets propose another broken way to screw this up with. Maybe we can super glue over the massive cracks…

Offering a “Copper high deductible” plan?

Kinda of like offering New Coke?

And I’m sure more high deductibles is exactly what will entice people. 🙂

All Obamacare plans already have high deductibles and the law has forced deductibles in the private insurance market to skyrocket. Making healthcare more affordable through government programs? Wasn’t that what Obamacare was supposed to do? Eliminating coverage mandates for businesses? All for it, but that would essentially mean a permanent repeal of the employer mandate, an essential part of holding Obamcare together. Adding another layer of government bureaucracy to insurance companies in order to expand enrollment options? Sounds like even more government involvement that will only lead to more nightmares. Allowing insurance companies to sell across state lines? Sounds great, but this is an idea Republicans have been proposing for years. (Townhall)

How very Paul Ryan of them…Maybe we should have a Health Care Summit to discuss some of these ideas…oh wait we did…and the same Democrat Party ignored them, mocked them…

” …You hadn’t exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them had you? I mean like actually telling anyone or anything.’ But the plans were on display…’ on display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.’ `That’s the display department.’ `With a torch.’ `Ah, well the lights had probably gone.’ `So had the stairs.’ `But look you found the notice didn’t you?’ `Yes,’ said Arthur, `yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying “Beware of The Leopard”.’ — Douglas Adams.

But when you’re politically desperate anything sounds good, even if it starts to sound an awful lot like the enemy’s plan.

Politics does make strange bedfellows. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson





The Monster

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Health Care: ObamaCare is turning out like the nine-headed Hydra monster of Greek mythology. Every time President Obama tries to lop off one of its failures, two more emerge. Recent news provides a good case in point.

On Wednesday, Obama decreed that those who had plans they liked before ObamaCare could keep them for two more years.

The move helped solve a huge political problem Obama himself created when he first made it possible for some people to keep plans they liked.

Obama had allowed just a one-year extension — where he gets the authority to do any of this is beyond us — but in doing so, he created a worse political problem: Cancellation notices on these extended plans would start going out just before the November elections.

So, whack! Obama extended the deadline to protect Democrats facing tough re-election bids.

Soon after Obama decapitated that problem, however, two more ObamaCare fiascoes surfaced:

First, hardly any uninsured are signing up.

A McKinsey & Co. survey finds just one in 10 previously uninsured people have signed up for ObamaCare.

What’s more, it finds that the most common reason for not signing up was … affordability.

Since the justification for the “Affordable Care Act” was to make insurance available to those “locked out” of the market, this is a real problem for ObamaCare.

Amazingly, the administration can’t even determine how many ObamaCare enrollees were previously uninsured because they forgot to include this question in the online sign-up form (it’s in the paper version).

Second problem: A huge number aren’t paying their premiums, which means they actually aren’t covered.

The McKinsey survey found nearly a quarter of those enrolled haven’t paid for their coverage. Among those who were uninsured, the number climbs to 47%.

This fits with data from the seven states that are reporting nonpayment rates. Overall, 24% of those enrolled haven’t paid their ObamaCare premiums. In some states, such as Maryland and Washington, the nonpayment rate tops 40%.

Well, after all, it was supposed to be “free” wasn’t it? 🙂

Apply the 24% average nationwide, and the 4 million the administration claims have joined ObamaCare suddenly drops by almost 1 million, putting Obama still further from his first-year enrollment target.

In the myth, Hercules eventually figured out how to kill the Hydra monster, which had been terrorizing the countryside, for good. One can only hope Republicans find a way to do the same to ObamaCare. (IBD)

But I doubt it. Republican are acting more like the Comic Fool than a Dragon Slayer.

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

All The King’s Men

“The most the attorney general has said is that he still has a lot he wants to accomplish on issues like criminal justice reform, voting rights and LGBT equality. He did not speak about his plans any further than that,” said Justice spokesman Brian Fallon.

Holder’s most high-profile project at the moment is comprised of two separate cases that he is taking against the states of Texas and North Carolina.

In these instances, the Justice Department is arguing that laws pertaining to voter ID and early voting have the effect of disadvantaging minority voters and should be struck down. Most observers see the battle as part of a larger war that pits Holder against a Supreme Court decision last year that gutted the Voting Rights Act.

Also last week, Holder urged states to reinstate the rights of felons to vote in a speech at Georgetown University. The attorney general has no power to change those laws but he was emphatic in his argument.

“This isn’t just about fairness for those who are released from prison,” Holder said. “It’s about who we are as a nation. It’s about confronting, with clear eyes and in frank terms, disparities and divisions that are unworthy of the greatest justice system the world has ever known.”

The speech was just one more negative mark against Holder in conservative eyes.

“That speech showed how political he is,” said Hans von Spakovsky, a former Justice Department official who is now affiliated with the Heritage Foundation and is the co-author of a forthcoming book about Holder’s tenure.

“All he talks about is the restoration of voting rights for felons. What he fails to mention is the fact that you don’t just lose your right to vote. In most states, you lose your rights to own a gun, to sit on a jury, to engage in certain kinds of employment like being a police officer. Nowhere does he say a word about restoring those rights. That tells me he is only interested in the potential votes.”

Responding to the suggestion that the attorney general’s speech on felons’ rights could be seen as an overreach, Nicole Austin-Hillery, head of the Washington office of the liberal Brennan Center for Justice, stressed her backing for Holder.

“He has a bully pulpit and speaking from that bully pulpit is massively important,” she said. “Members of Congress, state leaders, state legislators listen to what the attorney general has to say. The mere fact that he has spoken out can have influence.”
(the Hill)

Things like the Black Panther case, Benghazi, The IRS, etc are not even in his memory anymore. They don’t exist.

He’s perfect. 🙂

“I doubt that the president would want him to leave because he has in many ways acted as a heat shield for the administration” said von Spakovsky. “I can’t imagine what kind of grilling a new nominee would have to take to come in.”

And then there’s Pelosi…

House Democrats are determined to cast an election-year spotlight on Republican opposition to raising the minimum wage and overhauling immigration laws.

To try to accomplish that in the GOP-controlled House, Democrats are planning to rely on an infrequently used, rarely successful tactic known as a “discharge petition.”

It requires the minority party — in this case, Democrats, who are unable to dictate the House agenda — to persuade some two dozen Republicans to defy their leadership, join Democrats and force a vote on setting the federal minimum wage at $10.10 an hour.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California said Democrats will push the wage issue when Congress returns from its break Feb. 24. Forcing a vote on a comprehensive overhaul of immigration laws could occur in a few months.

Democratic leaders argue that a majority of Americans favor both steps, which are priorities for President Barack Obama, and say the House GOP is the obstacle. Republicans say Democrats are embarking on an approach that they know has little chance of success in an attempt to circumvent the will of the GOP-led House.

The odds are daunting for Democrats in what clearly is political maneuvering ahead of the elections this fall. (Townhall)



On The Cusp of 2014

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Victor Davis Hanson: That the president of the United States serially lied over Obamacare earns a “duh.” The NSA mess warrants a “whatever.” Each time we witness something akin to the NSA, IRS, AP, and ACA machinations in the future, the supporters of the next untruthful or immoral president will no doubt offer in defense, “But Obama did worse and nobody cared.”

Thomas Sowell: Whenever we stand on the threshold of a new year, we are tempted to forget the hazards of prophecy and try to see what may lie on the other side of this arbitrary division of time.

Sometimes we are content to try to change ourselves with New Year’s resolutions to do better in some respect.

Changing ourselves is a much more reasonable undertaking than trying to change other people. It may or may not succeed, but it seldom creates the disasters that trying to change others can produce.

When we look beyond ourselves to the world around us, peering into the future can be a very sobering, if not depressing, experience.

ObamaCare looms large and menacing on our horizon.

This is not just because of computer problems, or even because some people who think that they have enrolled may discover at their next visit to a doctor that they do not have any insurance coverage.

What ObamaCare has done, thanks to Chief Justice Roberts’ Supreme Court decision, is reduce us all from free citizens to cowed subjects whom the federal government can order around in our own personal lives, in defiance of the 10th Amendment and all the other protections of our freedom in the Constitution of the United States.

ObamaCare is more than a medical problem, though there are predictable medical problems — and even catastrophes — that will unfold in the course of 2014 and beyond.

Our betters have now been empowered to run our lives, with whatever combination of arrogance and incompetence they may have, or however much they lie.

The challenges ahead are much clearer than what our responses will be.

Perhaps the most hopeful sign is that increasing numbers of people seem to have finally — after nearly five long years — begun to see Barack Obama for what he is, rather than for what he seemed to be, when judged by his image and rhetoric.

What kind of man would blithely disrupt the medical care of millions of Americans, and then repeatedly lie to them with glib assurances that they could keep their doctors or health insurance if they wanted to?

What kind of man would set up a system in which people would be forced by law to risk their life savings by divulging their financial identification numbers to strangers who could turn out to be convicted felons?

With all the time that elapsed between the passage of ObamaCare and its going into effect, why were the so-called “navigators” who were to be handling other people’s financial records never investigated for criminal convictions?

What explanation could there be, other than that Obama didn’t care?

Caring is not a matter of words.

“By their fruits ye shall know them” — not by their rhetoric, image or symbolism.

Those who have still not yet seen through Obama will have many more opportunities to do so during the coming year, as the medical, financial and other painful human consequences of ObamaCare keep coming out in ways so clear that not even the mainstream media can ignore them or obscure them.

The question then is: What can be done about it? Nothing can be done about Obama himself. He has three more years in office and, as he pointed out to the Russians, he will no longer have to face the American voters.

ObamaCare, however, has no such immunity. It is always hard to repeal an elaborate program after it has gone into effect. But Prohibition was repealed, even though it was a Constitutional Amendment that required super-majorities in both houses of Congress and super-majorities of state legislatures to repeal.

In our two-party system, everything depends on whether the Republicans step up to the plate and act like responsible adults who understand that ObamaCare represents a historic crossroads that will determine what kind of people we are going to be, for this generation and generations yet unborn — citizens or subjects.

This means that Republicans have to decide whether their top priority is internal strife among the different wings of the party — another circular firing squad — or whether either wing puts the country first.

A prediction on how that will turn out in the new year would be far too hazardous to attempt.

My Guess: Circular Firing Squad. After all, it’s all about them, not us.It’s FOR them, not us, or even U.S. 🙂

Welcome to ObamaWorld, Comrade. Now you don’t want to be a Thought Criminal Do you, Citizen?

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

The Dance Continues…

“I think we need to do a better job of explaining to the American people exactly what is kept, what are the real restrictions on how—I’m just talking now for DHS, Department of Homeland Security–how we use it, how long we can keep it, how we share it, all those thing,” she explained.

Sound like ObamaCare. If we explained it better you’d love it?

On Tuesday, the Department of Health and Human Services announced $54 million in grants for Affordable Care Act navigators — people or organizations that will help explain the health law’s new programs.

$54 Million dollars to hire PR people. Wow! And they complain about the Sequester!

“they have a more educational role of providing “information and services in a fair, accurate and impartial manner,”

Bwah hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

So they’ll tell you you’re screwed in a happy, hapy joy joy kind of way.

No, that’s not creepy at all! 🙂

But here’s the funny part:

The White House wants to reverse $500 million in cuts to the Medicaid program meant to start in 2014, aiming to ensure that states have adequate funds to assist those that remain uninsured under the Affordable Care Act.

This was the little discussed and lot denied double counted “savings” that was going to make ObamaCare “affordable” back in 2009 when it was being hotly debated.

Counting these cuts as “savings” was half of the savings designed.


During a hearing on Capitol Hill Thursday, the secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) admitted to double-counting in the Obamacare budget.

In her first appearance before the House Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee since the health-care law passed, Kathleen Sebelius responded to a line of questioning by Republican Rep. John Shimkus of Illinois about whether $500 billion in Medicare cuts were used to sustain the program or pay for the law.

“There is an issue here on the budget because your own actuary has said you can’t double-count,” said Shimkus. “You can’t count — they’re attacking Medicare on the CR when their bill, your law, cut $500 billion from Medicare.”

He continued: “Then you’re also using the same $500 billion to what? Say your funding health care. Your own actuary says you can’t do both. […] What’s the $500 billion in cuts for? Preserving Medicare or funding the health-care law?

Sebelius’ reply? “Both.” (DC)

“To better align DSH payments with expected levels of uncompensated care, the Budget proposes to begin reductions in 2015, instead of 2014,” the White House proposes.

The DSH cuts are supposed to start in 2014 with $500 million in reductions and get bigger each year. In 2022, the DSH program faces a $4 billion reduction.

In other words, do it AFTER the election. 🙂

What do you want to bet there will quietly be some more maneuvering when Hilary officially starts running for the post of Obama’s hand picked successor. 🙂

One of the enduring mysteries of President Obama’s health law is how its spending constraints and payroll tax hikes on high earners can be used to shore up Medicare finances and at the same time pay for a massive new entitlement program. Isn’t this double counting?

The short answer is: Yes, it is. You can’t spend the same money twice. And so, thanks to the new health law, federal deficits and debt will be hundreds of billions of dollars higher in the next decade alone.

Here’s how it works. When Congress considers legislation that alters taxes or spending related to Medicare’s Hospital Insurance Trust Fund, the changes are recorded not just on the Hospital Insurance Trust Fund’s books, but also on Congress’s “pay-as-you-go” scorecard.

The “paygo” requirement is supposed to force lawmakers to find “offsets” for new tax cuts or entitlement spending, and thus protect against adding to future federal budget deficits. Putting the Medicare payroll tax hikes and spending constraints on the “pay-as-you-go” ledger was instrumental in getting the health law through Congress, because doing so fostered a widespread misperception that the law would reduce future deficits.

But the same provisions add to the Hospital Insurance Trust Fund’s reserves, which expands Medicare’s spending authority. Medicare can only pay full benefits so long as its trust fund has sufficient reserves to meet these obligations. If the trust fund has insufficient resources, then spending must be cut automatically to ensure the fund does not go into deficit. The health law’s Medicare provisions prevent these spending cuts from taking place for several more years.

In short, the scoring convention is not widely understood and thus obscures the double-counting.

Perhaps the easiest way to understand this is to look at Social Security. If we generate $1 in savings within that program, then that’s $1 that Social Security can spend later. If we also claimed this same $1 to finance a new spending program, we would clearly be adding to the total federal deficit. There has long been bipartisan understanding of this aspect of Social Security, which is why Congress’s paygo rules prohibit using Social Security savings as an offset to pay for unrelated federal spending.

No such prohibition exists in the budget process against committing Medicare savings simultaneously to Medicare and to pay for a new federal program. It’s this budget loophole, unique to Medicare, that gives the health law’s spending constraints and payroll tax hikes the appearance of reducing federal deficits. But it is appearance, not reality. If you have only $1 of income and are obliged to pay a dollar each to two different recipients, then you will have to borrow another $1. This is effectively what the health law does. It authorizes far more in spending than it creates in savings.

How much more? Charles Blahous’s study, “The Fiscal Consequences of the Affordable Care Act,” published last month by the Mercatus Center, found that the health law would add over $340 billion to federal deficits over the next 10 years. Over the longer term, deficits would run into the trillions.

Medicare spending cuts and tax increases have always been double-counted—recorded both on the paygo scorecard and added to the Hospital Insurance Trust Fund. No budgetary rules were bent. But the fiscal stakes in the Affordable Care Act are extraordinarily high. The health law’s Medicare hospital insurance spending cuts and tax hikes are now claimed to have eliminated most of the program’s medium- and long-term deficits—even as they have also paved the way for the most expensive entitlement expansion in a generation.

The government now has on its books two large, expensive and permanent entitlement commitments—the health law’s premium subsidies and the Medicare hospital insurance program—yet Congress has only identified enough resources to pay for one of them. (WSJ)

Now it wants to delay it until after the next election.

No, that’s not cynical and narcissistic at all… 🙂

They aren’t trying hide it again….No No not at all…

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez