Other Ways the GOP is trying to Achieve a Failed Government

I really believe the Republican Party wants to destroy the federal government in order to make President Obama a failed President.  I am not sure why that is a goal.  He has won reelection and history will judge him.

But that does not stop the GOP from preventing the passing of any law.

Just in November, the GOP has:

(i)  failed to agree to unanimous consent for routine approval of the President's uncontested nominees;

(ii)  failed to complete a Farm Bill that every politician representing farmers wants (I don't have a problem with that myself, but it is emblematic of that all compromise is opposed if the President wants something);

(iii) are filibustering the annual defense authorization bill;

(iv) refusing to discuss immigration reform in the House after a compromise bill passed the Senate;

(v)  in the Conference Committee on the Budget continued to refuse ending tax loopholes that help the rich avoid taxes and use the money replace the worst effects of the sequester, which include the Department of Defense;

(vi) criticized the efforts to negotiate with Iran implying they would rather go to war with Iran (if Afghanistan is taking 12 years to exit, Iraq 10 years, who long would it take to exit Iran?  How would we pay for a war with Iran, a bigger budget deficit or higher taxes?)

and (vi) continued to filibuster any number of Presidential nominees motivating the Democrats to invoke the nuclear option on nominee approvals.

Where is GOP policy coherency?  How do they want to balance the budget?  How do they want to control the cost of healthcare?  How do they want to fix infrastructure?  How do they want to deal 11mm undocumented residents (deporting them will put the economy in a recession)?  I don't have any idea what the GOP stands for except opposing Obama and not allowing government revenues to be increased to pay for the government.

Rooting for Failure

I have commented on this before but not as well as Timothy Egan does today in the NYT.  It is so amazing to me that the GOP wants President Obama's Presidency to be a failure that I have trouble putting it into words.  It seems unpatriotic to me.  Here is the link and a copy below that.

Timothy Egan "Rooting for Failure"

I just spent 15 minutes on my local health care exchange and realized that I could save a couple hundred dollars a month on my family’s insurance. Of course, I live in Washington State, which has a very competitive market, a superbly functioning website and no Koch-brothers-sponsored saboteurs trying to discourage people from getting health care.

Enlarge This Image

Amanda Koster for The New York Times

Timothy Egan

Go to Author Page: Timothy Egan»

Connect With Us on Twitter

For Op-Ed, follow@nytopinion and to hear from the editorial page editor, Andrew Rosenthal, follow@andyrNYT.

Readers’ Comments

Share your thoughts.

• Post a Comment »
• Read All Comments (48) »

California is just as good. It’s enrolling more than 2,000 people a day. New York is humming as well. And Kentucky, it’s the gold standard now: More than 56,000 people have signed up for new health care coverage -- enough to fill a stadium in Louisville.

This is terrible news, and cannot be allowed to continue. If there’s even a small chance that, say, half of the 50 million or so Americans currently without heath care might get the same thing that every other advanced country offers its citizens, that would be a disaster.

But not to worry. The failure movement is active and very well funded. You probably know about the creepy Uncle Sam character in ads financed by the Koch brothers. Sicko Sam is seen leering over a woman on her back in a hospital exam room, her legs in stirrups. This same guy is now showing up on college campuses, trying to get young people to opt out of health care. On some campuses, he plies students with free booze and pizza -- swee-eeet!

The Republican Party started a failure campaign earlier this year, but then the strategy got sidetracked in a coercive government shutdown that cost us all $24 billion or so. With the disastrous rollout of the federal exchange, Republicans now smell blood. A recent memo outlined a far-reaching, multilevel assault on the Affordable Care Act. Horror stories -- people losing their lousy health insurance -- will be highlighted, and computer snafus celebrated.

Ron Paul, the nuttier of the two political Pauls, recently suggested to a crowd in Virginia that “nullification” of the health care law might be the best way to kill it. I’m not sure what he meant by that, but it sounds illegal.

It’s hard to remember a time when a major political party and its media arm were so actively rooting for fellow Americans to lose. When the first attempt by the United States to launch a satellite into orbit, in 1957, ended in disaster, did Democrats start to cheer, and unify to stop a space program in its infancy? Or, when Medicare got off to a confusing start, did Republicans of the mid-1960s wrap their entire political future around a campaign to deny government-run health care to the elderly?

Of course not. But for the entirety of the Obama era, Republicans have consistently been cheerleaders for failure. They rooted for the economic recovery to sputter, for gas prices to spike, the job market to crater, the rescue of the American automobile industry to fall apart.

I get it. This organized schadenfreude goes back to the dawn of Obama’s presidency, when Rush Limbaugh, later joined by Senator Mitch McConnell, said their No. 1 goal was for the president to fail. A CNN poll in 2010 found 61 percent of Republicans hoping Obama would fail (versus only 27 percent among all Americans).

Wish granted, mission accomplished. Obama has failed -- that is, if you judge by his tanking poll numbers. But does this collapse in approval have to mean that the last best chance for expanding health care for millions of Americans must fail as well?

Does this mean we throw in the towel, and return to a status quo in which insurance companies routinely cancel policies, deny health care to people with pre-existing conditions and have their own death panel treatment for patients who reach a cap in medical benefits?

The Republican plan would do just that, because they have no plan but to crush the nation’s fledgling experiment. Sometimes they bring up vouchers, or tort reform, or some combination of catchphrases. Here was Sarah Palin, who is to articulate reason what Mr. Magoo is to vision, on the Republican alternative, as she told Matt Lauer:

“The plan is to allow those things that have been proposed over many years to reform a health care system in America that certainly does need more help so that there’s more competition, there’s less tort-reform threat, there’s less trajectory of the cost increases. And those plans have been proposed over and over. And what thwarts those plans? It’s the far left.”

Yes, it is a big and legitimate news story, for a presidency built on technical expertise, that the federal exchange is not working as promised. Ditto Obama’s vow that people could keep their bottom-feeder health care policies.

But where were the news conferences, the Fox News alerts, the parading of people who couldn’t get their lifesaving cancer treatments under the old system? Where was the media attention when thousands of people were routinely dumped once they got sick? When did Republicans in Congress hold an oversight hearing on the leading cause of personal bankruptcy -- medical debt?

All of that is what we had before. And all of that is what we will return to if some version of the Affordable Care Act is not made workable. Republicans have a decent chance, in next year’s elections, of killing the dream of progressive presidents going back to Teddy Roosevelt. But they shouldn’t count on it. What’s going against them, or any party invested in failure, is that Americans are inherently optimistic. That alone may be enough to save Obamacare.

2 Columns Today Mirror my Thoughts

Where is the empathy and compassion in current Tea Party politics?  They believe prudent self-reliance is the cure-all for all problems.  It isn't that simple.

Kristoff on the limitations of self-reliance as a policy


Blow on the value of empathy

RIP Heritage Foundation

The New Republic has an article this week describing how Michael Needham, an Upper East Side private school/Williams College/Stanford MBA, has parlayed his connections into a political activist role that has taken over the Heritage Foundation and transformed it from a respected creator of conservative policy ideas to judge and jury on whether any particular Republican is conservative enough to get the approval of Jim DeMint and Needham.  In the process, they have destroyed all respect for the ideas that will come out of this once well respected alternative to the Brookings Institute. In fact, Heritage Foundation papers are now being published by the Brookings Institute as researchers leave the Heritage Foundation to work elsewhere.

This is sad because most of the balance to a pure liberal approach to the world (think Bernie Sanders when you want to envision that) has come from ideas that were spawned by the Heritage Foundation and implemented in the Clinton/GOP Congress welfare reform.  Good stuff happens in the middle.

In describing Michael Needham, the article reminded me of some of the people I went to college and business school with.  People of privilege  who get on the gravy train of conservatism; all aimed at lowering taxes for the rich, and to keep the budget balanced by cutting the social safety net.  This is the thought process that led to Bush II and his GOP Congress believing it prudent to cut taxes and wage a War on Terror by borrowing money from the current account surplus countries.  That ultimately led to the Financial Crisis, which was this generation's version of the borrowed war in Vietnam that led to the 1970's inflation.  Deficit spending in boom times has a bad outcome.  Deficit spending should only occur in a recession.

But people of privilege who only work in politics don't understand this.  They have never worked in business where they need to compromise on any number of things and manage a workforce that demands respect and to be listened to.  These conservatives believe that trickle down economics solves everything; when education, healthcare and sufficient nutrition are needed to nurture a fair society.

Not everyone who comes from privilege falls into this catagorization.  It just seems that hardcore conservative political operatives use the protection of privilege as the raison d'être for their own economic sustenance and they tend to come from privileged backgrounds.

Quick Thoughts Before I Bake Grandma's Apple Pies

My friend RedStateVT always reminds me that both political parties have billionaires and the GOP needs to a level playing field with Union (organizations, not my alma mater college) money (my alma mater is always looking for $, not giving $ away).

So, you would think the GOP would welcome new rules on the roles that non-profit money raisers can play in elections by embracing it and having it apply to all such contributors.

US politics would be much cleaner if there were fair limitations on all contributions.


NY Sports teams have their lowest winning percentage since 1966.  No wonder I am so miserable when it comes to the part of me that roots for sports teams.



My favorite Business Development Corporation ("BDC") runs itself like a real bank.  It is independent of any other organization and it has a diverse portfolio with no concentration of risk, other than US middle market borrowers in general.  This a.m. I read how US private equity ("PE") firms have set up BDC's to be captive lenders to the PE LBO's.  And the PE firms gets 20% of any profits that accrue to the associated BDC, which has issued stock to the public.  So the public investors in the associated BDC get 100% of the risk, but only 80% of the upside.  That stinks to high heaven, but I don't think regulation is the answer as the writer of the article did.  The answer is full disclosure with sufficient detail that all investors can understand what is going on .  My BDC, PSEC (which RedStateVT clued me into although I did my own investment analysis) is a far different entity than one of these captives.


Much is being made of the Democrat's reluctance to discuss redistribution in the ACA.  Insurance is all about risk sharing and redistribution.  The healthy may get sick, so they should have insurance just like the sick people do.  It makes no sense to have people who work have easy access to health insurance and have it be difficult/impossible to get health insurance for those who do not work.  That is how the old system was constructed.   Yes, there is redistribution, but that is how insurance works.  The Democrats should broadcast that far and wide with pride and anger at the GOP's failure to propose a viable alternative to the old system that insures access to health insurance for everyone with equal ease.

Off to cut up apples.

People need to look at details before they kvetch about Obamacare Costs

They are frequently making a mistake in their analysis.  I paste a copy of a Consumer's Report column.

Q. I used all my savings to pay medical expenses during a prolonged period of unemployment and health problems. I now have a job paying $40,000 a year to support myself and my son, a college student. My new employer doesn’t offer health insurance. The Kaiser subsidy calculator says I’ll be paying a monthly premium of $3,267. I can’t afford this! Obamacare will destroy me.

Q. I’m a Florida retiree on Medicare, but my wife is 57 and needs insurance. We live on my Social Security, $19,000 a year. What’s my choices? I hate Obummercare. Higher prices. High deductibles.

In fact, both these people are in line for major financial help to purchase health insurance.  

The distraught Pennsylvania dad's mistake was easy to spot. He didn’t notice that the Kaiser Family Foundation’s subsidy calculator presents its results by the year, not the month. This father and son will actually be able to buy a Silver (midpriced) plan for $272 a month for both of them on their state’s Health Insurance Marketplace.

I used that same calculator to determine the cost of an “Obummercare” plan for the Florida man’s wife. The results showed pretty much the opposite of the “higher prices, higher deductibles” he was apparently led to expect. Because their income is barely above the poverty level, they will receive an enormous premium subsidy and his wife’s plan will cost $32 a month, less than the tab for a dinner for two of them at a sit-down chain restaurant.

Again because of her very low income, this premium entitles her to a special “Silver 94%” plan with extremely low out-of-pocket costs. I don’t have access to the specifics of these plans in Florida, but in California, a Silver 94% plan has a $0 deductible, a $3 copay for doctor visits, lab tests, and generic drugs, a $5 copay for specialist visits, X-rays, and brand name drugs, 10 percent coinsurance for hospitals and other high-cost services, and an annual out-of-pocket limit of $2,250.

It is true that not everyone will come out so well. A small number of people really are having to give up decent individual insurance that will be replaced with more costly or less generous coverage. But don’t let the politics surrounding the law discourage you from exploring your  options.

Things to look forward to after Thanksgiving

The House of Representatives will be back in Washington for all of 4 days in December.  Somehow they are supposed to make progress on budget negotiations while no one is there.

However, that does not stop some politicians for finding new ways to show they are against healthcare for poor people.  Tim Heulskamp (GOP Kansas and card carrying member of Tea Party) has a proposal  for when budget negotiations break down between the Senate and the House, he will ram through the House a plan to cut Medicaid spending by $20 bn and transfer the spending to the Department of Defense.

Of course, it was just yesterday that I read an article on how the DOD supposedly has wasteful spending of some $300 bn per year.  I know anybody who is the military can point out how hard it is to prevent such waste when you cannot ration ammunition or any other necessary supplies to combat troops, have to keep the troops behind them happy and have to pay the contractors who are somehow cheaper than active military personnel.  I have been skeptical of the widespread use of contractors, given they were not necessary in WWII, but this does not get any attention from anyone looking to control spending in D.C.

I deviate from my main point.  Getting the uninsured into the insurance system is one of the keys to controlling costs.  It will also lead to a healthier population and maybe allow them to find jobs and leave   Medicaid.

I fail to see how a Tea Party attack on Medicaid is going to help prevent a government shutdown from happening again in January, and unless House leadership holds votes on stuff Democrats can support, I anticipate that the markets will have to react very negatively for a budget to emerge from the Congress.

Healthcare Overview & Iran in this week of Thanksgiving

We can only be thankful that medical insurance works for people with money today and my family personally.  And we can be thankful that people with pre-existing conditions will have access to affordable health insurance in 5 weeks in states that embraced Heritage Foundation/Romney/Obamacare.

The ACA is working great in states that managed to build a functioning website.  In California, even young people are signing up.  Read this column.

The ACA is working well somewhere

And a case can easily be made that a single payer plan would eliminate much of what the complaints have been about the ACA by consumers.  And it would have the advantage of getting companies out of the business of providing health insurance.  Then companies that object to providing birth control would not have any perceived rights violated.  Read this column.

Single Payer Plan Positives

And as for Iran.  The deal is a positive if it can be verified.  I think the nattering nabob's who have objected in a knee jerk fashion should focus on how verification will work before they do something that prevents things from moving forward in a potentially positive manner.  And the West must be alert to Iran cheating on this and reinstall every sanction and potentially more if they cheat on this.

Nice Short Explanation of the Deal

The GOP needs Obama's Health Insurance Exchanges to Work

Because they are at the core of the GOP plan to privatize Medicare and Medicaid.

Finally, a GOP Healthcare Alternative

That addresses the issues that created the need for the Affordable Healthcare Act. This comes from the American Enterprise Institute.

It starts with divorcing Health Insurance from employment which I am all for, but if you think people are screaming about losing their current individual policy even though it was a risk that if they got sick, the policy might not be offered to them again next year; wait until those who get health insurance from their employer start screaming about being thrown into the individual market.

But this would be an improvement on repealing the ACA with no ideas.  I also note that the columnist I link this to below states, "the programming complexities to administer this would greatly exceed those that have held up the ACA."


A conservative Health Insurance Program

The GOP Senate Cannot Have It Both Ways

Mitch McConnell, the GOP Senate Minority Leader, stated he wanted President Obama to have a failed presidency.  He cannot make that a reality by denying votes on appointees and then be surprised when the majority Democrats take a step to allow President Obama the ability to perform his Constitutional duties to appoint Judges and Administrators with up or down votes on those appointees.

I understand the precedent, but even Norman Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank, has stated:  "We have never seen judges filibustered on the grounds that the President does not have a right to fill open spots on a court, regardless of qualifications and temperament of the nominees.  That is nullification, plain and simple."


In case you were wondering how many nominations were held up, after being approved by appropriate committee in the Senate, and area awaiting a vote as of yesterday, it is 76.  A mix of Judges, Ambassadors and administrative posts across a wide range of agencies including the Defense Department.

Income Inequality is not Just a US Problem

In fact, it may be worse elsewhere.

A Credit Suisse study of 20 countries reveals that there has been a large increase in income inequality with the largest increase in China over the last 15 years.  Russia, Brazil, and Mexico saw declines in income inequality.

Youth unemployment is a primary driver of income inequality and a serious problem from any number of standpoints.

The Gini coefficient is the measure of income inequality and here are the rankings.

Brazil:  54.7
Mexico: 47.2
China: 42.1
Russia:  40.1
Turkey:  40
U.S.A. 38.0
Greece, U.K., Spain, Portugal, India, Australia, Japan:  33 to34
Canada, Italy France:  31
Germany, Switzerland 29

Fracking Can Be Safe, GOP Medicare Part D, Liz Cheney: Quick Thoughts

Regular readers know I think NIMBY's are selfish and shortsighted and a general blight on society.  @#$%^&* has to be somewhere.

Fracking has been one major contributor to US economic growth when we desperately need it.  That is why President Obama supports it.  This article discusses how it can be done safely and how regulation can insure it is done safely.  But even this will not cause NIMBY's to fear what they don't know and are not willing to devote the resources to getting educated so they know what they don't know presently  should not be feared.

Link to Joe Nocera column

Once upon a time the GOP cared about improving heath care insurance for people even if it created a bigger budget deficit.  And they would not even consider raising revenues to pay for it.  Kind of reminds me about the unfunded War on Terror another GOP invention.  Oh, wait, it was the same Congress and President that promoted Medicare Part D and the War on Terror.  Bruce Barlett's column on Medicare Part D.

Senior Reagan Official on how the GOP created a $400 bn hole in budget deficit

Does this mean that if John McCain had been elected Heritage Foundation/Romney/Obamacare would be Heritage Foundation/Romney/MeCaincare?

And lastly, the Cheney family demonstrates the problems of pandering to the Tea Party and other social conservatives for political gain when the position is flat out wrong on something.

Frank Bruni on Cheney Family Values in Politics

Sunday Musings 2 weeks before Thanksgiving

I was having a slice of cheese pizza at my old favorite in White Plains yesterday.  They pipe in the local FM station which is a mix of music that appeals to adults of all ages and local news.  They were playing Xmas music.  It is too early.  While I enjoyed it for a minute, I knew that 6 1/2 weeks of endless Xmas music is too much.  I will be sick of hearing it before I eat Turkey and avoid Black Friday.  Black Friday is when you start Xmas music.

Who knew?  I didn't and I know the Tea Party doesn't.  Thomas Jefferson had a copy of the Quran in his library and a new book documents how his study of that book helped develop his sense of religious tolerance.  He wanted Islamic immigration to the U.S.

Meanwhile, there is now documented evidence that hiring managers discriminate against the long term unemployed.  I know many conservatives believe that the long term unemployed just need to get off their derriere and look for a job, but this article shows that it isn't that simple and that creates a political problem for both parties in that these people will drain the safety net in some manner when they could be taxpayers and self-supporting.  Lord knows, I don't have an answer for the long term unemployed because the 53 year old college graduate who worked for 30 years and is now homeless, has been told  "you are too articulate" (to work at McDonalds); "need to speak Spanish" (to clean toilets); "too pretty" (to work in a laundromat); and "we don't hire the unemployed or bankrupt."  And she is not even on welfare and wants to work, but has no health insurance because she doesn't have a permanent address.  I know any one person can have psychological problems, but there are millions of long term unemployed and they do not all have psychological problems.

Unemployment is a trap

Of course, my regular readers will know where this is going.  The House GOP has dusted off their desire for a Farm Bill that maintains Agricultural Subsidies for Farm Producers (who have jobs and make a lot of money) while cutting Food Stamps for people with income below the poverty level (80% to 90%) and 2/3's of recipients are children, elderly or disabled.

There are no limits on the income of farmers who get Ag subsidies so a little bit of means testing might go a long way on this subject while the Free Market Me would just get rid of them entirely.  Even Nicholas Kristoff, who wrote one of the linkages below, gets $588 a year to not grow crops in a forest that intends to keep as a forest.  You think that kind of sh*t would get the GOP to address waste in Agricultural subsidies, but no it does not.  Unbelieveble.

Ag Insanity

More Ag Insanity


And last, a good short overview of Israel's history and current reality.

Israel's Reality

Who Reads My Blog

It must be people like me who are now despondent that things that were obvious to us are now potentially going to cause HeritageFoundation/Romney/Obamacare to fail.  Well take heart, the Affordable Health Care Act ("ACA") is going to happen and we can only hope that all the uninsured sign up.  Because once that happens, the ACA will be seen as a success by most people.

I put that title on this post because my readership has dropped like a stone since the problems emerged for the President with the implementation of the ACA.

But there is a much bigger issue brewing in American politics and that is the emergence of income inequality and the stagnant middle class dream wasting away from the middle class.  That is at the heart of both the Tea Party and a burgeoning wing of the Democratic Party.  Bill DeBlasio was not my choice for NYC Mayor, but Stop & Frisk, which I support, and resentment of the 1% is very real in much of the NYC electorate.

Now the NYC electorate is hardly representative of anything other than the NYC electorate.  But in catching up with David Brooks Newshour discussions tonight I heard him say than what happened in NYC is very much indicative of how the whole country feels about the 1%.  And it is a real political issue.

There is also a New Republic article on Elizabeth Warren vs Hillary Clinton that touches on this.  Hillary has a lot of support in the banking community from which I come.  Middle of the Road, the bankers are good guys, conservative values need to be incorporated into liberal ideas.  The country is possibly leaving us behind in resentment at the banks getting off with fines for their misbehavior 5 to 8 years ago.  Well, what else can you do to corporations?  We who own stocks also lost out in 2008.  But it may not matter to the Democratic electorate.

The New Republic article speculates that Elizabeth Warren could beat Hillary in the Primary by tapping  into this hatred of the successful.  That would leave me in a quandary.  I do respect Conservative Ideas when they are aimed at making the government work more efficiently, when they propose private sector solutions to government inefficiencies, and when they prevent some of the really crazy Democratic ideas from happening (e.g. Bernie Sander who I never voted for).

But I cannot vote for a Republican who advocates dismantling the government.  We need a safety net.  We need a functioning court system.  $%^&* we need a functioning government.  The Tea Party does not represent that and I may have to vote for a Bernie Sanders type person on the lesser of 2 evils principle because RINO's get no respect in the current GOP.

I guess I am MAD and I am going to have to just keep taking it.

Investment Commentary

I don't usually comment on equities here because I am a bond guy and I usually relate my comments to the linkages between bonds and economics and politics.

However, I cannot help but regret that I did not sell something today as the stock market hit all time highs.

I did buy a Chinese company that makes diapers as the Chinese 2 kid policy will increase demand (and I shorted a condom company).  Just kidding as we were in the office.

I do think US valuations are getting a bit stretched, and I can only observe that the market likes a functioning government.  The stock market has gone up virtually every day single day since the US government did not default and the government shut down ended.

While the Tea Party may be unhappy, is there any wonder the business wing of the GOP does not want a government default.

Sunday Musings in a Post Election November

I note the following book on the Non-Fiction Best Seller List:  Extortion by Schweizer;  The Blurb reads, "A Hoover Institution fellow argues that politicians shape legislation in order to extract donations."  Daaaah!!!  That is so obvious I see no need to write or read the book and I wonder how it made it onto the best seller list.

More importantly, Nicholas Kristof highlights a program in Oklahoma developed in a bipartisian manner over the last 20 years that promotes preschool for all 3 and 4 year olds.  I know there is a train of thought in parts of the conservative blogosphere that says Head Start is a waste of money, but Oklahoma is as Red as you can get politically, and they believe that the only sure way to address the cycle of poverty is early childhood education.  And they believe that is an appropriate role for state government.  Worth a read in the following link.

Link to Where the Kids Learn Early

In a continuation of titles that I have used on how the world is a complicated place and why that creates a necessity for capitalistic solutions, not socialistic solutions, but also creates a need for government solutions when public welfare is not priced appropriately in the private economy (pollution, safety, transportation infrastructure), Thomas Friedman lays out the capitalistic rationale (support for job creation) for HeritageFoundation/Romney/Obamacare.  The world is a complicated place and I leave it to you to click on the link to read Friedman's column.

Link to Friedman's column

And finally, Ross Douthat hits the nail on the head with the problems the GOP has winning national elections while discussing what Chris Christie cannot do if he wants the 2016 nomination.  He states:  "As a would be nominee, you have to woo base voters, not run against them, and make them feel respected even when they disagree with you."  

Yes, and then you have to run a general campaign where you show respect for the values of the middle of the political spectrum.  It is that lack of respect for compromise and solutions that respect that balance is needed in matters of government that has driven this centrist voter (I am a Scoop Jackson Democrat/Rockefeller Republican) into a straight Democratic voter for any office above the County level.  I am not alone.  Calling people like me RINO's is disrespectful when people in the middle's votes might help you win an election.

Link to Douthat's Advice to Christie

Follow the Money Again

A Gun Advocate wrote a story suggesting every gun owner go through a training program (not unlike driver education) and for that he lost his job, his editor lost his job because some advertisers in and some readers of their gun magazine did not approve of such an article.  They are so busy supporting the 2nd Amendment (Right to Bear Arms), they cannot acknowledge the 1st Amendment (Freedom of Speech) and tolerate a little debate within their ranks.  There can be no deviation from the NRA position of no control over any aspect of gun ownership.  That is the obstacle that sensible people face.

Link to Gun Advocate Dissents

And while the House of Representative Republicans are busy trying to reduce spending on Food Stamps which poor people use to feed themselves, they are blocking any reduction in Farm Subsidies for farmers.  I have never understood the GOP fascination with Farm Subsidies.  Either you believe in the Free Market or you don't.  I have supported the cessation of Farm Subsidies almost my entire adult life because I believe in the efficiency of a market economy.  But I recognize that a number of Farm State senators oppose what I believe in and so I don't get on my soapbox to state my position.  However, the hypocrisy being demonstrated by the House GOP by supporting reduced payouts to poor people while continuing to maintain payments to well off farmers who then give political contributions to the GOP must be fought against.  Either restore the Food Stamps levels or cut the farm subsidies.  I support the latter.

Gail Collins points out How Follow the Money explains Farm Subsidies

I hope Healthcare.gov starts to work well soon

Maybe then the hubbub over the cancellation of individual policies will end as people realize that the new individual policies are better public policy.

I quote someone:

"The individual market - which serves 5% of the population, and which is where the disruptions are happening - is a horror show.  It's a market where healthy people benefit from systematic discrimination against the sick, where young people benefit from the systematic discrimination against the old, where men benefit from the systematic discrimination against women, and where insurers benefit from the systematic discrimination against the uninformed."

"The result, all too often, is a market where the people who need insurance most can't get it, and the people who do get insurance find it doesn't cover them when it's most necessary.  All that is why the individual market shows much lower levels of satisfaction than every other insurance market."


I know how the old individual market works.  I am an intelligent consumer and I bought a policy based on a low price (vs the alternative) that I thought would work and it didn't based on things I couldn't figure out before I bought the policy.  Fortunately, I only had that policy for one month and I could afford the net $3,5000 it cost me.

As for the issue of you can't keep your Dr's or figure out which Dr's take which insurance.  Well, there is nothing new about that.  RSL had to figure that out for Medicare and even the DR's offices don't know for that.  So I am not surprised they don't know which of the new insurance policies which start in future they will take.  They have agreements with insurance companies and they take all the policies that insurance company issues, is how I think it works.  But the problem is not with Obamacare, it is a problem with not having a Universal Single Payer Plan.

And while the GOP is having fun bashing Obamacare implementation, why is the structure of Obamacare still their preferred reform for Medicare?

This is not helpful

"NewsMax.com is the #1 conservative news agency online. ... is the one publication in America breaking news that the liberal media gatekeepers can't censor."

That quote is from their website.  I get emails from them because I do get an education from them sometimes.  They are also shills for some other websites that want to sell you something.

But this was over the top today.

"Dear Fellow Americans:

Retirees have received an insulting 1.5% increase to their Social Security checks this past year.

And the rumors around D.C. suggest certain politicians want to drastically decrease these payments, and soon!"

Aren't these guys supporting people who want to privatize Social Security.  I am sure if I clicked on the link, they would want me to buy something.  And how is this helpful to ever getting to the Grand Bargain that will balance everything that needs to be dealt with?

This self serving is why I do not trust anything I find on anything other than a real newspaper website.