First time visitor? Learn more.

When offered the chance to be magnanimous, don’t be a smart-ass

by Speranza ( 140 Comments › )
Filed under George W. Bush at October 15th, 2013 - 7:00 am

I give the fat man credit, he handled his opponent beautifully in the debate.

by Eric Fettmann

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie did what’s being called a reverse Rick Lazio last week in his first debate with his Democratic opponent, state Sen. Barbara Buono.

In fact, it’s more accurate to call it a George W. Bush moment.

Moderator Kristine Johnson of WCBS asked both candidates to say one nice thing nice about the other. Buono snapped sarcastically: “Well, he’s good on late-night TV; he’s not so good in New Jersey.”

Her supporters greeted the line with “whoos” and howls of laughter and applause. As Buono stood at the podium with a self-satisfied grin on her face, they probably expected Christie to respond with one of those trademark tirades he often reserves for his most in-your-face hecklers.

But the governor had a surprise in store: “She’s obviously a good and caring mother and someone who cares deeply about public service in this state, ’cause she’s dedicated a lot of her life to it,” he said. “And while we have policy disagreements, Kristine, I would never denigrate her service.”

Added Christie: “We need more people who care about our communities to stand up and do the job she’s done over the last 20 years.” As the audience replied with sustained applause and cheering, the smile slowly — but very surely — vanished from Buono’s face.

She’d just learned a basic lesson in political debating: When offered the chance to be magnanimous, don’t be a smart-ass.

Lazio learned that lesson in 2000, when his campaign for the US Senate from New York imploded when he charged across the debate stage, thrust a document containing a pledge not to raise any more soft money in Hillary Clinton’s face and demanded she sign it. Voters (unfairly) believed he came off as a bully.

Christie may have had Lazio’s unfortunate experience in mind. Or he may have recalled events six years earlier, when a political novice named George W. Bush took on Ann Richards, the Texas governor — who remains so popular, even after her death, that she was the subject of a recent one-woman show on Broadway.

Richards was known for her barbed wit; she’d famously skewered Bush’s father at the 1988 Democratic convention, declaring that he’d been “born with a silver foot in his mouth.” In 1994, she applied that sharp tongue to the younger Bush, referring to him in one speech as “some jerk.” As they prepared backstage before their lone debate, Richards came over and said, “Are you ready for this, boy? This is going to be rough on you.”

Which is what everyone was expecting. But Bush refused to take the bait.  [........]

Throughout the debate, the more Richards tried to goad him, the more deferential and respectful Bush became, always calling her “governor.” He was gracious, in sharp contrast to his opponent, even as he pressed home his message. The comparison wasn’t lost on the voters, and Bush ended up defeating a Democratic icon.

As UC-Berkeley linguist George Lakoff told The Atlantic’s James Fallows back in 2004, “Debates are not about scoring points. They are about emotional identification.”

In New Jersey, of course, Christie has been more of an Ann Richards than a George W. Bush. But with re-election seemingly assured — the latest Quinnipiac Poll has him 29 points ahead — and his eyes on 2016, it’s been a gentler Christie on the campaign trail. [.........]

That’s just one of many balancing acts Christie will have to perform if he has any hopes for the GOP presidential nomination. The party’s increasingly dominant Tea Party faction has no tolerance for a candidate who walked the post-Sandy beaches with President Obama and is actively trying to distance himself from congressional Republicans. And despite the fiscal strides New Jersey’s made under Christie, other GOP governors have more demonstrable records of success.

Not that he’ll want to become too much of a pussycat — that Garden State swagger and in-your-face attitude, after all, is a major reason for his enormous popularity, [........]

Still, Chris Christie has shown that it may no longer be that easy to goad him into a hot-tempered outburst, much as Ann Richards discovered about George W. Bush. And you remember where he wound up.

Read the rest -  Christie’s debated comeback is his Bush moment

Tags: , , , ,

Comments

Comments and respectful debate are both welcome and encouraged.

Comments are the sole opinion of the comment writer, just as each thread posted is the sole opinion or post idea of the administrator that posted it or of the readers that have written guest posts for the Blogmocracy.

Obscene, abusive, or annoying remarks may be deleted or moved to spam for admin review, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their content by any other commenter or the admins of this Blogmocracy.

We're not easily offended and don't want people to think they have to walk on eggshells around here (like at another place that shall remain nameless) but of course, there is a limit to everything.

Play nice!

140 Responses to “When offered the chance to be magnanimous, don’t be a smart-ass”
( jump to bottom )

  1. 1 | October 15, 2013 7:33 am

    Even when he goes off on one of his tirades, he’s always very measured with it. I get the sense that Christie never really loses his control.


  2. 2 | October 15, 2013 7:53 am

    As a politician, Christie gotz mad skilz and I agree that he’s never “out of control”. He also never let’s an opportunity go to waste, regardless of who it pisses off. He could reasonably be called a “ruthless opportunist”.


  3. 3 | October 15, 2013 8:18 am

    He’ll still never be President of the United States. He is apparently good enough for his reason, but it isn’t a State I would ever consider moving to. The state itself is hostile to basic freedoms. If I want to live in a police state, I’ll move to China.


  4. 4 | October 15, 2013 8:21 am

    And despite the fiscal strides New Jersey’s made under Christie, other GOP governors have more demonstrable records of success.

    If we want a candidate that is tough on Unions, I suggest that we go with Scott Walker of Wisconsin rather than Christie. He is more of a mainstream Republican. He is more in touch with the base on critical issues (ie.e gun control; he can’t be any more Muslim-friendly than Christie, though I am not sure about his stance on that issue).


  5. Speranza
    5 | October 15, 2013 8:36 am

    If the choice is between Christie or Hillary I know exactly who I am voting for.


  6. 6 | October 15, 2013 8:45 am

    OT, but WTF is a “dry ice bomb”? I can’t decide whether this is much ado about nothing….physics wasn’t my forte.


  7. 7 | October 15, 2013 8:49 am

    @ Speranza:

    I won’t vote for President. I’ll go vote a straight Republcan ticket otherwise, but I will never vote for Christie. In fact, I am not sure that Hillary wouldn’t be the better of the two. She knows from her husband’s Administration not to tack too far Left, whatever her personal prefferences. She won’t be a good President, no, but neither would Christie. There really isn’t a choice between them. But I don’t think Christie will get the nomination. Right now all the polls measure is name recognition. We need to do better than that if we are to win in 2016. Like I said, if we want someone who’ll take on the Unions, Scott Walker is the man we should run. Since he won his recall pretty handily, I think he’d likely bring at least Wisconsin into our column. I don’t know that he will win. That’s why we have elections. But he’d be better positioned than Christie.


  8. 8 | October 15, 2013 8:49 am

    Speranza wrote:

    If the choice is between Christie or Hillary I know exactly who I am voting for.

    I’m about minimizing damage to the country at this point, I’ve pretty much given up on having a “good” president for some time.


  9. 9 | October 15, 2013 8:53 am

    @ MacDuff:

    Authorities said there was no indication that either incident was part of a terrorist act.

    It was a freaking bombing. How can that not be a terrorist attack? We don’t know the motives of the bomber, but bombing civillians in a public place is the very definition of terorism. What the “dry ce bomb” is, though, I haven’t a clue. The nearest thing I can think of is that you somehow use the sublimation of the dry ice into a gas as a timer for more convential explosives. That is just a guess on my part. I am certainly no explosives expert.


  10. 10 | October 15, 2013 8:56 am

    @ MacDuff:

    If you contain dry ice (or dry ice and water) in a packed container that is air-tight, when the build-up in pressure exceeds the capacity of the contained to handle it, it will go “pop”. Or “boom”, depending on the specifics. Of course, any chemical “explosion” is pretty much nothing more than a sudden increase in volume and pressure.


  11. Speranza
    11 | October 15, 2013 8:59 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    I won’t vote for President. I’ll go vote a straight Republcan ticket otherwise, but I will never vote for Christie. In fact, I am not sure that Hillary wouldn’t be the better of the two. She knows from her husband’s Administration not to tack too far Left, whatever her personal prefferences. She won’t be a good President, no, but neither would Christie. There really isn’t a choice between them. But I don’t think Christie will get the nomination. Right now all the polls measure is name recognition. We need to do better than that if we are to win in 2016. Like I said, if we want someone who’ll take on the Unions, Scott Walker is the man we should run. Since he won his recall pretty handily, I think he’d likely bring at least Wisconsin into our column. I don’t know that he will win. That’s why we have elections. But he’d be better positioned than Christie.

    You saw the real Hillary as Sec. of State, if you are comfortable with that then you should vote for her as the better of the two candidates.


  12. 12 | October 15, 2013 9:01 am

    MacDuff wrote:

    OT, but WTF is a “dry ice bomb”? I can’t decide whether this is much ado about nothing….physics wasn’t my forte.

    It aint a physics question, it’s a chemistry question. They are basically harmless noise makers. Fill a 2 liter soda bottle half full of water and put a quarter pound of dry ice in it. When the water causes the dry ice to turn into carbon dioxide gas, the volume of carbon dioxide gas causes the soda bottle to explode. It make one hell of a lot of noise, but doesn’t really do much in the way of damage.

    The cops in L.A. are thinking it might have been a terrorist dry run, could be they are right, or it could more likely have been a occuturd or anarchist prank.


  13. 13 | October 15, 2013 9:04 am

    While we’re out hunting RINOs, they’re winning elections.


  14. 15 | October 15, 2013 9:05 am

    @ MacDuff:

    I agree on that, and I know that this is all rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, anyway. Neither party has the leadership to sell the American people on what needs to be done to avoid economic collapse. A starting point would be trimming government expenditures back to 1998 levels. While the budget wasn’t really balanced even then, we were blowing a lot less money then. But even Ryan’s “extreme” budget didn’t do that, and it relied on a robustly growing economy to get the figures that would balance the budget in ten years. Since Congress can’t really bind subsequent congresses, that is essentially saying that the budget will never be balanced. At some point in time, our creditors are going to get tired of loaning us money for effectively 0% interest. That is the real Debt Ceiling, and nobody really knows when that is going to happen, but it will happen. We’re not going to elect a President that is serious about tackling those problems. If someone were to run who is serious about it, they’d never stand a chance in the general election. Too many people wanting their government handouts for that to happen.


  15. 16 | October 15, 2013 9:06 am

    @ Speranza:

    Christie would be no better, and possibly will be worse. Will you vote for Jeb Bush if he is the nominee?


  16. 17 | October 15, 2013 9:07 am

    @ doriangrey:

    Thanks, chemistry wasn’t my forte, either.


  17. 18 | October 15, 2013 9:07 am

    @ MacDuff:

    There is an element to today’s Republican Party that has become like the Jacobins. Anyone who is off on one issue, must be purged.

    Here is a good article on this subject.

    An Open Letter to the Ayatollahs


  18. 19 | October 15, 2013 9:09 am

    @ MacDuff:

    Not at the State level, though. We are cleaning the Democrat’s clocks at the State levels. We should be looking at the reasons why we are winning at the state level, and try to emulate them on a national level. It isn’t that we are hunting RINOs that is the problem, though. It is that the RINOs would rather beat the Tea Party and lose the general election than to have the Tea Party win the primary and go on to win the general election.


  19. 20 | October 15, 2013 9:10 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    The nearest thing I can think of is that you somehow use the sublimation of the dry ice into a gas as a timer for more convential explosives. That is just a guess on my part. I am certainly no explosives expert.

    I’m pretty sure that would not work, large volume of carbon dioxide gas tend to render other forms of explosives inert. Most explosives require a oxygen source. Without that oxygen source, they just don’t explode. Carbon dioxide displaces oxygen. Dry ice bombs just don’t produce the kind of heat required to set off a chain reactions in stabilized oxidizers.

    Dry ice bombs have been a favorite prank of high school chemistry students, since the late 60′s. Easy to make, make a hell of a lot of noise, but are basically harmless.


  20. 21 | October 15, 2013 9:12 am

    Well, the water doesn’t turn the dry ice into CO2 gas -- dry ice is already CO2, just in a solid form. The water takes up more volume (leaving less for gas expansion) and also speeds up the sublimation as it has a higher specific heat than air, which would otherwise be occupying the space the water takes up.


  21. 22 | October 15, 2013 9:12 am

    Goldwaterite wrote:

    Anyone who is off on one issue, must be purged.

    Some issues are like that, though. Would you ever vote for a sgregationist, no matter what his opinions are on other matters? Christie is on the record for saying that the Bill of Rights doesn’t bind New Jersey. The Supreme Court disagrees with him, but he has not backed down from that position. That’ s a deal-killer to me. He isn’t going to have some epiphany once he is elected and suddenly love the Bill of Rights. He’ll bring his New Jersey take on the Bill of Rights to the Presidental level, and try to do nationally what he has done in New Jersey. And that is just one issue where I disagree with Christie. There are a number of others as well.


  22. 23 | October 15, 2013 9:16 am

    @ doriangrey:

    Like I said, I am not an explosives expert. What does surprise me is that we’ve not seen car bombings using Oxygen and Acetyline as the bomb. You can buy that shit at the hardware store (or maybe a gas retailer; I don’t know if Home Depot carries Acetyline), just toss it in the back of a trunk laying down (you should never lay an Acetyline tank on its side), Crack the valve on a tank, and drive away. It’ll explode when the Acetyline in the trunk reaches a certain pressure. When I was in welding school they really emphasized safety when dealing with Acetyline.


  23. 24 | October 15, 2013 9:17 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    There is nothing honorable about loosing. Look at Virginia, Republicans choose the pure Conservative over the more electable one. The criminal McAuliffe is on the verge of winning. Was it worth it?


  24. 25 | October 15, 2013 9:21 am

    @ Goldwaterite:

    So you’d vote for a segregationist? There is nothing honorable about pre-emptive surrender, either. It is funny. You’d never vote for Jeb Bush, and have repeatedly stated that you’ll vote Libertarian in 2016, but are taking me to task because I won’t pull the lever for a man I know is unsuited for the task of President.


  25. 26 | October 15, 2013 9:21 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Much easier to make a carbide bomb. Calcium carbide + water yields acetyline, so you get the volume increase (as with the dry ice) and if there’s enough oxygen, it’s flamable (explosive) as well. See carbide cannons…


  26. 27 | October 15, 2013 9:26 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    I’m not taking you to task over Christie, just commenting in general.

    See my #14 on the guy pushing the Redskins name change. He’s not a tribe member and is an Obama crony.


  27. 28 | October 15, 2013 9:29 am

    Goldwaterite wrote:

    See my #14 on the guy pushing the Redskins name change. He’s not a tribe member and is an Obama crony.

    I saw that. Not suprising, really. All of the angst about sports team names is mostly a White Liberal thing. I remembr as a kid one of the local high schools called themselves the “Rebels”, and had a mascot dressed in a grey Confederate Uniform and all. I bet the PC police have changed that by now.


  28. Fritz Katz
    29 | October 15, 2013 9:31 am

    MacDuff wrote:

    OT, but WTF is a “dry ice bomb”? I can’t decide whether this is much ado about nothing….physics wasn’t my forte.

    The Inner-tubes explains how to make a “dry ice bomb”.


  29. MikeA
    30 | October 15, 2013 9:32 am

    Christie also just came out in favor of in-state tuition to illegals. If I ever had a kid who want to go to a Jersey college, I’d tell them to say they were illegal to get the lower tuition.


  30. 31 | October 15, 2013 9:35 am

    @ MikeA:

    Yeah, that was one of the places that I disagreed with Rick Perry. It is really insane that Illegal Immigrants are put on a different ( and more priviledged) level than students who are American citizens from another State. The only way I was able to go to FSU is that they waived my out of state tuition as part of my scholarship.


  31. 32 | October 15, 2013 9:38 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    @ doriangrey:
    Like I said, I am not an explosives expert. What does surprise me is that we’ve not seen car bombings using Oxygen and Acetyline as the bomb. You can buy that shit at the hardware store (or maybe a gas retailer; I don’t know if Home Depot carries Acetyline), just toss it in the back of a trunk laying down (you should never lay an Acetyline tank on its side), Crack the valve on a tank, and drive away. It’ll explode when the Acetyline in the trunk reaches a certain pressure. When I was in welding school they really emphasized safety when dealing with Acetyline.

    The kind of explosion you are talking about, is all about getting the most explosion for your buck. While Acetylene is highly explosive, it just don’t hold a candle to things like sugar, in the bang for your buck catagory.


  32. RIX
    33 | October 15, 2013 9:51 am

    Good morning. More is coming out abut CGI Federal, FNC is reporting that they did such a shoddy job on a government contract job in Canada that they were denied payment. Yet Obama let the contract for Federl Exchanges to them.
    It’s pretty clear that this is an archetecture problem with the exchanges , not too many clicks.
    I haven’t heard one word about liquidated damages.
    it raises two questions, why did they go to a troubled foreign company when we have Silicon Valley and how corrupt is this process?


  33. MikeA
    34 | October 15, 2013 10:01 am

    @ RIX:

    Also heard that by design, they make sure you sign up before seeing the price since they knew if people would be able to see the price quickly, they would freak out and there would be more flak.


  34. MikeA
    35 | October 15, 2013 10:02 am

    doriangrey wrote:

    While Acetylene is highly explosive, it just don’t hold a candle to things like sugar, in the bang for your buck catagory.

    Gives a whole new meaning to the term… Give me some sugar, baby… ;)


  35. 36 | October 15, 2013 10:02 am

    @ Goldwaterite:

    Doing Tribal Law for about five years now, I can tell you, the nations have kept detailed records. And you have a lot of people acting as pretenders to position of power in various tribes. They’re like Ward Churchill and Elizabeth Warren -- Fraudy McIndians who have no tribal standing. And the Nations do not take kindly to these pretenders. It amazes me, for instance, that Warren persisted in her ridiculous claims to Cherokee ancestry when she could produce no evidence of ancestral tribal enrollment.

    After reading the article, it is clear to me that he’s nothing more than an Obama crony who got the call from OFA to use his Indian “credentials” to go after the Redskins. However, Obama forgets that the alternative media will always vet when then MSM won’t.


  36. 37 | October 15, 2013 10:02 am

    Sorry I brought up the question about the “dry ice bombs”, the watchers may get the wrong idea…..


  37. Mars
    38 | October 15, 2013 10:04 am

    MikeA wrote:

    @ RIX:
    Also heard that by design, they make sure you sign up before seeing the price since they knew if people would be able to see the price quickly, they would freak out and there would be more flak.

    Also, apparently when you sign up to look at prices and decide they are too much they automatically send your info to the IRS and issue your fine letter.


  38. 39 | October 15, 2013 10:04 am

    RIX wrote:

    Good morning. More is coming out abut CGI Federal, FNC is reporting that they did such a shoddy job on a government contract job in Canada that they were denied payment. Yet Obama let the contract for Federl Exchanges to them.
    It’s pretty clear that this is an archetecture problem with the exchanges , not too many clicks.
    I haven’t heard one word about liquidated damages.
    it raises two questions, why did they go to a troubled foreign company when we have Silicon Valley and how corrupt is this process?

    It’s all about plausible deniability. They wanted a product with an extremely high probability of failure and they wanted to be able to deny that failure was their objective. So they issued a no bid contract to a company with a proven track record of failure.


  39. 40 | October 15, 2013 10:04 am

    RIX wrote:

    how corrupt is this process?

    It is the Obama Administration. Somebody no doubt got a large kickback on this deal. It may go all the way to the top. I haven’t seen any outrage on the Part of Obama and his cronies about getting ripped off by this company. You’d think Obama would be calling for he heads of everyone in the command structure that let this project fail, but I have heard nothing of the sort from him. I believe ObamaCare was planned to fail as a precursor to Single-Payer, but I don’t think the Exchanges crashing and burning was in that plan. People aren’t thilled with ObamaCare now, and they’ll be even less pleased when they see how much the “free” Healthcare is going to cost them, and what their deductible is (I’ve seen the figures of $1000 a month for insurance with a $10K deductible. That is unreal). But they aren’t even getting to the part of the software that controls that.


  40. 41 | October 15, 2013 10:07 am

    MacDuff wrote:

    Sorry I brought up the question about the “dry ice bombs”, the watchers may get the wrong idea…..

    The watchers already had the wrong idea, that’s why they are watching US Veterans and TEA party folks.


  41. 43 | October 15, 2013 10:09 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Don’t worry Fist, the Democrat fix of single payer is on the drawing board.

    Dad was in the military. I remember waiting months for a non-critical appointment and I also remember “sick call” if I needed treatment right away. Hours and hours and hours in the waiting room. You know, like the DMV.


  42. 44 | October 15, 2013 10:10 am

    MikeA wrote:

    doriangrey wrote:
    While Acetylene is highly explosive, it just don’t hold a candle to things like sugar, in the bang for your buck catagory.

    Gives a whole new meaning to the term… Give me some sugar, baby…

    I’m actually surprised that chemistry is even allowed to be taught in high schools anymore considering how paranoid these Marxist fucks ruling over us have become.


  43. 45 | October 15, 2013 10:12 am

    Waiting out the BART negotiations angering me no end. Of course, the state legislators from the Bay Area all shows up for their photo ops at the bargaining table over the weekend. Management’s final offer -- 12% increase over 4 years, 5% contribution to pension, 9.5% contribution to full family coverage for health costs. State legislators sneered at BART management and blamed them for the problem. Because I guess those 2000 union workers that pay money into their campaign coffers are much, much more important than the 400,000 workers from their districts that will bear the burden of a strike.


  44. 46 | October 15, 2013 10:12 am

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    Warren persisted in her ridiculous claims to Cherokee ancestry when she could produce no evidence of ancestral tribal enrollment.

    I, myself, have some Cherokee ancestry, but I am not sure how much. I have a cousin that is Mormon, and he could probably tell me how much comes from my mother’s side of the family, but on my father’s side there simply are no records. So I’ll cut Granny Warren some slack on that. But the difference between her and I is that she was trying to parlay her putative ancestry into special breaks and Affirmative Action goodies for herself, and I have not. That is a significant difference. What is mazing is that people have bought her line for decades without ever asking to see her bonafides. Harvard gave her special breaks becaus eshe ticked a check-mark in their “Diversity” checklist. As far as I am concerned, that is a problem even if she were full-blood straight off the reservation. either racial discrimination is wrong, in which case it isalways wrong, or it is not, in which case there is no reason not to discriminate in the favor of whatever group swings the biggest vote. In the USA, that would be the White vote. This business of saying that “:white” discrimination is the worst evil in the world coupled with saying discrimnation for certain minorities is a positive good, is just insane. It is, in and of itself, racial dicrimination against whites.


  45. Speranza
    47 | October 15, 2013 10:13 am

    MacDuff wrote:

    As a politician, Christie gotz mad skilz and I agree that he’s never “out of control”. He also never let’s an opportunity go to waste, regardless of who it pisses off. He could reasonably be called a “ruthless opportunist”.

    Oh he is a selfish S.O.B.


  46. 48 | October 15, 2013 10:15 am

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    Dad was in the military. I remember waiting months for a non-critical appointment and I also remember “sick call” if I needed treatment right away. Hours and hours and hours in the waiting room. You know, like the DMV.

    ROTFLMAO…. Oh the memories we share… Nothing like waiting hours and hours for a Navy corpsman to finally find time to set a broken bone or put 7 or 8 stitches in a laceration… :shock:


  47. RIX
    49 | October 15, 2013 10:18 am

    MikeA wrote:

    @ RIX:

    Also heard that by design, they make sure you sign up before seeing the price since they knew if people would be able to see the price quickly, they would freak out and there would be more flak.

    I heard that too. First they may you calculate the subsidy, which there is no way to verify the info.
    FNC is reporting that even if you are unable to sign up for O Care, you can still register to vote.


  48. 50 | October 15, 2013 10:18 am

    Goldwaterite wrote:

    @ Iron Fist:
    @ MacDuff:
    @ Speranza:
    @ doriangrey:

    Documents: Anti-Redskins Indian leader not a legitimate member of his tribe

    I’m just about as fed-up with whiney “noble red men” as I am whiney “noble black men”. As Gump would say, ‘noble is as noble does” and that doesn’t include pissin’ and moanin’…..at least not in my book.


  49. 51 | October 15, 2013 10:19 am

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    Because I guess those 2000 union workers that pay money into their campaign coffers are much, much more important than the 400,000 workers from their districts that will bear the burden of a strike.

    Typical Marxist mentality, they really don’t give a rats ass why the trains are running, just that they run on time. Customers do not make the trains run, train employes do, customers are just baggage to be taken from place to place. The trains must run on time, give the train employes whatever is required to ensure that the trains are on time.


  50. 52 | October 15, 2013 10:21 am

    Looks like Bonehead Boehner has finally decided it’s time to cave.

    Breaking: Boehner to caucus: We’ll move our own bill today


  51. RIX
    53 | October 15, 2013 10:23 am

    It is the Obama Administration. Somebody no doubt got a large kickback on this deal. It may go all the way to the top. I haven’t seen any outrage on the Part of Obama and his cronies about getting ripped off by this company @ Iron Fist:

    I am sure that Obama, Jarrett , Sebelius and others are getting kick backs, or they would be screaming.
    They can accept this shoddy work if they have to, to get us to single payer.
    Then all Comrades will be equal, except for the more equal comrades.


  52. 54 | October 15, 2013 10:24 am

    @ Carolina Girl:

    Interesting that you should mention the DMV. We had to go down to the DMV on Saturday for our license tag renewal, and I don’t believe I’ve ever came across such good and timely service from a government entity before. We went in about an hour after they opened. There was no line, no wiat, straight from the door to a desk, and the woman that did it for us was courteous and friendly. It was disconcerting. I don’t expect that kind of performance from a government entity. I might should be able to, but I don’t.

    ObamaCare, though, is a disaster, and it is not likely to get anty better anytime soon. If there were a simple fix for the ObamaCare website, they’d have already implemented it and been done. The real question is how hosed is the application really? It could take months to fix. And that isn’t even countiing the security. This is most concerning:

    The launch of federal government’s Obamacare insurance exchange, Healthcare.gov, has been plagued with delays, errors, and poor website design, even prompting USA Today to call it an “inexcusable mess” and a “nightmare”. Now comes another example of why the website’s reputation is in tatters. Buried in the source code of Healthcare.gov is this sentence that could prove embarrassing: “You have no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding any communication or data transiting or stored on this information system.” Though not visible to users and obviously not intended as part of the terms and conditions, the language is nevertheless a part of the underlying code for the “Terms & Conditions” page on the site.

    After creating an account on Healthcare.gov, users are asked to click an “I accept” button under some routine Terms & Conditions prohibiting unauthorized attempts to upload information or change the website. Once users click the button, they may proceed to shop for insurance and enter detailed personal information. However, when the Terms & Conditions page is visible, the hidden sentence mentioned above along with several others can be seen by using a web browser’s “View Source” feature. A screen grab below shows the visible Terms & Conditions page along with a simultaneous view of the code underlying it:

    In other words, Welcome Identity Thieves! Also, count on any priviledged information making it to whatever authorities might be interested in it. Have a drug problem? The DEA wants to know about it. It isn’t paranoid when they really are out to get you. And they aren’t doing it to catch terrorists. If they were, they’d have caught Nidal Hasan and the Brothers Tsarnaev before they comitted theeir respective acts of terrorism. They are spying on all Americans basically because they can, and if they happen to come across something that interests law enforcement along the way, they will further that information to the respective authorities, Fourth Amendment be damned.


  53. 55 | October 15, 2013 10:30 am

    Shamelessly stolen from C2…

    The Liberty Amendments: Restoring the American Republic

    by Mark R. Levin

    This book is a response to the current Constitutional Crisis and the oft asked question, “but what do we do?”

    Mark Levin lays out a Constitution method of restoring the Constitution to our Constitutional Representative Republic.

    The book has two section in eleven chapters. The first section is the method, the first chapter, the next 10 chapters contain 11 proposed Constitutional Amendments.

    However it is the first chapter, the method that is critical. Understanding the method, the means is the key. Any misunderstanding to the means will render the rest moot.

    Levin proposal a Constitutional Method, laid out in Article V.

    Article. V.

    The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

    Article V holds two methods for Amending the Constitution. First is Amendment originating in the Congress. Second originating in a State Amendment Convention.

    Article V as first drafted did not include the second provision, only the first. This was not acceptable to many of the Framers who asked, “what if the Congress is out of control, as well as the executive and courts, how then is Federal Government controlled?”

    That is the situation where we now find ourselves. A Congress unwilling and unable to control itself, an executive branch even more out of control, and unelected, unaccountable courts writing legislation, finding patently unconstitutional laws constitutional with internal contradictory reasoning.

    Since the Federal Leviathan is out of control, and unresponsive to The People. The las remaining control put in place by the Framers is a States Amendment Convention.

    Levin carefully lays out the history and argument for this process.

    This is the important crux; this is not a Constitutional Convention. The locks on the Constitution are not removed, and the Constitution subject to editing. The Constitution remains untouched.

    First is the application of 2/3 of the States for an Amendment Convention. 30 governors are (R), 27 State Houses are in (R) control, 5 are split.

    This puts the required 33 within striking distance, and highlight the importance of State elections.

    With the application of 33 States, Congress SHALL, they have no choice, they SHALL call a Convention for proposing Amendments.

    This would be a convention of the Several States, with representatives sent by the States to represent the States.

    This is key, for the rest of the Process, the Federal apparatus is cut out of the process. They are voiceless, powerless. The Congress, Executive Branch, Courts and the Bureaucracy are hog tied and neutered.

    This State’s Amendment Convention then proposes Amendments that go to the States for ratification by 37 States.

    This process preserves the Constitution, and allows the States to Check and Balance the Federal Government, remembering the Federal Government was created BY the States and is in service to the States.

    Chapter One is the critical feature of the book, the HOW to do. The WHAT to do is still up to us. Levin proposes 11 Amendments as a starting point, to kick of the discussion of Amendments to apply as corrective measures, to further check, rein in the Federal Leviathan.

    Amendment to Establish Term Limits for Members of Congress.

    Term limit congress, put an end to the professional political class. Congress is now by and large service, not public service.

    Amendment to Repeal the 17th Amendment and Restore the Senate.

    The Senate originally was to represent the States, not a “super” representative of The People. This restores original intent.

    Amendment to Establish Term Limits for Justices and Legislative Override.

    We are stuck with life time Justices, no matter how radical or senile. Term limits would limit the damage.

    Maybury v. Madison got one with right, the Court should review Constitutionality, and one thing wrong, the Court as the supreme and final arbiter of Constitutionality. This restores a balance of power between the branches, and allows for Congress and Executive to correct court errors.

    Amendment to Limit Federal Spending.

    Limits government spending to 17.5% of GDP, except in time of war.

    Amendment to Limit Federal Taxation.

    Limits Federal Taxes to 15% of gross income. Also move tax day the day before election day.

    Amendment to Limit Federal Bureaucracy.

    Places a sunset provision on all executive branch departments, and those departments must be affirmatively continued by Congress.

    Place limits on the economic impact that can be caused by bureaucracy, if such impact exceeds $100 million Congress must authorize the proposal.

    Amendment to Promote Free Enterprise.

    Restores the Commerce Clause to original intent.

    Amendment to Protect Private Property.

    Extends protection to private property to included losses caused by regulations and requires compensation for such real value losses.

    Amendment to Grant States the Authority for Direct Amendments.

    Allows for Constitutional Amendments to be adopted by the States with out the State Amendment Convention.

    Amendment to Grant The States Authority to Check Congress.

    Grants authority to The States with a 3/5 vote to overturn a law passed by Congress.

    Amendment to Protect the Vote.

    Would make voter ID a Constitutional requirement, limits early and absentee voting. Electronic voting would be proscribed, unless it can be proved reliable.

    Levin puts forth the method for using a Constitutional formula put in place by the Framers for just this situation.

    There is a way forward, a way to restore the Republic. It is neither short nor easy. It will require vigilance, and our participation.

    The main point is in chapter one, the method, given us by the Framers in Article V.

    Levin has show us the way. We just have to lace up or boots and start. Get you State Legislators on board, vote for ones who are on board.

    There is a Republic to save and Liberty to restore.

    Levin’s Liberty Amendments, a must read IMHO.


  54. 56 | October 15, 2013 10:30 am

    @ doriangrey:

    I remember sitting in the night call room for HOURS with an ear-ache and the pain was excrutiating. Actually, ear “broke” before the doctor could see me. It wasn’t “meanness” on the part of the system -- it was just there were people with greater injury ahead of me.

    But it was free.


  55. 57 | October 15, 2013 10:30 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    Interesting that you should mention the DMV. We had to go down to the DMV on Saturday for our license tag renewal, and I don’t believe I’ve ever came across such good and timely service from a government entity before. We went in about an hour after they opened. There was no line, no wiat, straight from the door to a desk, and the woman that did it for us was courteous and friendly. It was disconcerting. I don’t expect that kind of performance from a government entity. I might should be able to, but I don’t.

    I stand in defense of our County Clerk’s Office (aka DMV) as well. I can’t remember anything but a good experience with those folks. BTW, that office has been in the hands of a Republican since the 80s, I believe, which is highly unusual for a local elected office around here.


  56. 58 | October 15, 2013 10:31 am

    @ doriangrey:

    Told family I want a copy for Christmas -- Levin’s books, like Sowell’s, are ones I want in HARD copy.


  57. 59 | October 15, 2013 10:33 am

    Speranza wrote:

    MacDuff wrote:

    As a politician, Christie gotz mad skilz and I agree that he’s never “out of control”. He also never let’s an opportunity go to waste, regardless of who it pisses off. He could reasonably be called a “ruthless opportunist”.

    Oh he is a selfish S.O.B.

    Absolutely. Masterful politicians often are.


  58. 60 | October 15, 2013 10:33 am

    @ MacDuff:

    Was this in California? If so, am pleasantly surprised!!


  59. 61 | October 15, 2013 10:34 am

    RIX wrote:

    They can accept this shoddy work if they have to, to get us to single payer.
    Then all Comrades will be equal, except for the more equal comrades.

    That is the real goal here. Everything else is just a smoke screen. Single-payer and rationing are the desired end product. That way they’ll be able to deny you medical coverage based on your political reliablity just like the held up the Tax Status of the Tea Party groups for years. When it is treatment for cancer that they are holding up, it is really a way for them to kill off undesirables.


  60. 62 | October 15, 2013 10:36 am

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    @ MacDuff:

    Was this in California? If so, am pleasantly surprised!!

    Nah, Louisville, KY.


  61. 63 | October 15, 2013 10:40 am

    @ MacDuff:

    You have to see a DMV in California to understand what true crazy is. First of all, you have a boatload of non-English speakers taking the written test -- in the language of their choice. I was waiting (car sale to a friend -- have to go in physically) and said to the woman next to me “why should you be allowed to take the test in anything but English? Road signs are in English and the officer who pulls you over will probably not be bi-lingual?” She agreed. But it’s California -- pull up your illegal ass to the table and will bend over backwards to accommodate you. Right down to your killing our citizens on the freeways as you drive without knowing the rules.


  62. 64 | October 15, 2013 10:44 am

    @ doriangrey:

    You’ll never get to the magic number of States, though. We have thirty of the State legislatures. We’d need 37. The thing is, if we had the numbers to do the Constitutional modifications necessary, we’d have the power to just do it legislatively and be done with it. But Congress and the Executive Branch just ignore the Constitution as it is. There are numerous gun control laws on the books at the Federal Level despite the clear wordin gin the Constitution that such things are not permitted (“shall not be infringed is the strongest wording in the Bill of Rights). So what good is it to pass another amendment, if they are just going to ignore it as well?


  63. RIX
    65 | October 15, 2013 10:48 am

    That is the real goal here. Everything else is just a smoke screen. Single-payer and rationing are the desired end product. That way they’ll be able to deny you medical coverage based on your political reliablity just like the held up the Tax Status of the Tea Party groups for years. When it is treatment for cancer that they are holding up, it is really a way for them to kill off undesirables. @ Iron Fist:

    Sometimes they let the mask slip, like Jan Shankowsky & Barney Frank did & admit that this is a segue to Single Payer.
    They can mock & ridicule Sarah Palin all they want , but she was right about the “Death Panels”, Payment Accountability Boards. Coverage will be denied to the unworthy by non medical professionals.


  64. 66 | October 15, 2013 10:49 am

    @ Carolina Girl:

    Geez. I enjoy my podunk town, wouldn’t trade it for the world. CA is the canary in the coal mine (big-ass canary) and the rest of us, rather than learning, seem to be driving headlong to join in the madness. It’s not here yet, but sometimes you can hear the sound of distant thunder.


  65. RIX
    67 | October 15, 2013 10:52 am

    @ Carolina Girl:
    A couple of years ago , I was renewing my license in Illinois.
    A screener said very firmly to a woman, “You come back when you have proof of citizenship.”
    I assume that the screener now cleans the bathrooms.


  66. 68 | October 15, 2013 10:53 am

    This is interesting:

    This, in turn, creates a massive traffic bottleneck, as the government verifies your information and decides whether or not you’re eligible for subsidies. HHS bureaucrats knew this would make the website run more slowly. But they were more afraid that letting people see the underlying cost of Obamacare’s insurance plans would scare people away. . . . It’s quite possible that much of this disaster could have been avoided if the Obama administration had been willing to be open with the public about the degree to which Obamacare escalates the cost of health insurance. If they had, then a number of the problems with the exchange’s software architecture would have been avoided. But that would require admitting that the ‘Affordable Care Act’ was not accurately named.”

    I have no way of knowing how accurate that is, but it is interesting. The costs I’ve ssen bandied about are something like $1000 a month with a $10K deductible. That is hardly “affordable”. It is, indeed, much worse coverage than I get through my employer. It woul certainly be out of my price range had this been the law of the land when I was working my way through college. $12K a year for health insurance, when you generally don’t use that insurance (i.e. you are in your twenties and have normal health) is ridiculous. I don’t think they will be getting many people to sign up for that if they ever get the Exchanges working.


  67. 69 | October 15, 2013 10:55 am

    RIX wrote:

    Coverage will be denied to the unworthy by non medical professionals.

    And ever since the IRS scandal broke, we know that we can count on political affiliation to affect the way such things are decided, at least while a Democrat is in office. What they are settin gup is really frightening. It’ll all go under in about ten years, though. What kind of healthcare system we’ll have left by that time is questionable, though.


  68. 70 | October 15, 2013 11:01 am

    Hmm. From Forbes, not generally a hotbed of crazy internet conspiracy talk:

    Obamacare’s Website Is Crashing Because It Doesn’t Want You To Know How Costly Its Plans Are

    A growing consensus of IT experts, outside and inside the government, have figured out a principal reason why the website for Obamacare’s federally-sponsored insurance exchange is crashing. Healthcare.gov forces you to create an account and enter detailed personal information before you can start shopping. This, in turn, creates a massive traffic bottleneck, as the government verifies your information and decides whether or not you’re eligible for subsidies. HHS bureaucrats knew this would make the website run more slowly. But they were more afraid that letting people see the underlying cost of Obamacare’s insurance plans would scare people away.

    Obama and the Dems are so arrogant that they think they can pull off the biggest premeditated and coordinated fraud in the history of man, and from what I can see, they’re probably right.


  69. The Osprey
    71 | October 15, 2013 11:02 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    Goldwaterite wrote:

    See my #14 on the guy pushing the Redskins name change. He’s not a tribe member and is an Obama crony.

    I saw that. Not suprising, really. All of the angst about sports team names is mostly a White Liberal thing. I remembr as a kid one of the local high schools called themselves the “Rebels”, and had a mascot dressed in a grey Confederate Uniform and all. I bet the PC police have changed that by now.

    The “Ole Miss” mascot used to be “Col. Reb”. Now it’s some dumb bear.


  70. 72 | October 15, 2013 11:02 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Ya beat me by this much!


  71. 73 | October 15, 2013 11:06 am

    @ MacDuff:

    Rush read this article on air yesterday. There are elements within that make sense. When it comes to this administration, there are no limits on the deception and lies they will use to get their way. For instance, Treasury said the other day if debt ceiling isn’t raised, U.S. will default. Pure B.S. -- tax revenues per month are more than 10 times the amount needed to service the debt. The Conman in Chief is pulling out all the stops so that he doesn’t have to admit he’s been all hot air about the debt ceiling all this time.


  72. 74 | October 15, 2013 11:09 am

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    For instance, Treasury said the other day if debt ceiling isn’t raised, U.S. will default. Pure B.S. — tax revenues per month are more than 10 times the amount needed to service the debt.

    Yeah, if we default, it will be because Obama chooses to default. He may very well make that choice, though, if he thinks he can blame it on the Republicans. Default is coming sometime, though. You simply cannot keep borrowing the way we’ve been borrowing. We are borrowing the equivilent of the entire National Debt as it was under Reagan every year. Nobody can believe that that can go on for very long, but the Republicans refuse to accuse the Democrats of deliberately spending us in to bankruptcy even though that is clearly their goal.


  73. The Osprey
    75 | October 15, 2013 11:09 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    @ MacDuff:

    Not at the State level, though. We are cleaning the Democrat’s clocks at the State levels. We should be looking at the reasons why we are winning at the state level, and try to emulate them on a national level. It isn’t that we are hunting RINOs that is the problem, though. It is that the RINOs would rather beat the Tea Party and lose the general election than to have the Tea Party win the primary and go on to win the general election.

    Well, one reason is that the Fifth Column Treasonous Media smear machine is unable to affect local races to the extent they are the national ones, so the playing field in local races is already more level, with the exception of large blue urban areas like NY and LA.


  74. 76 | October 15, 2013 11:11 am

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    @ MacDuff:

    Rush read this article on air yesterday. There are elements within that make sense. When it comes to this administration, there are no limits on the deception and lies they will use to get their way. For instance, Treasury said the other day if debt ceiling isn’t raised, U.S. will default. Pure B.S. — tax revenues per month are more than 10 times the amount needed to service the debt. The Conman in Chief is pulling out all the stops so that he doesn’t have to admit he’s been all hot air about the debt ceiling all this time.

    Rattling world markets with loose talk of US “default” for political purposes marks a new high in irresponsibility for this administration. The thing is, it seems that “smart money” in the world markets would know this, doesn’t it? The rubes out there will be in panic, whist people like Soros will be cleaning up.


  75. 77 | October 15, 2013 11:12 am

    The VA DMV has done a fine job of making itself more user-friendly over the last however many years. Tag renewal? License renewal? Just do it online -- takes a couple of minutes at best. At the physical office, they have a drive-though for mundane things.


  76. 78 | October 15, 2013 11:12 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Indeed. When he said “if you don’t pay your mortgage, you’re a deadbeat” it was a ridiculous analogy to prove HIS point, but an excellent analogy for OURS.

    If you are coming up short in your mortgage payment, you CUT your spending elsewhere to make up for it; you don’t run down to the bank and take out a damn LOAN.


  77. lobo91
    79 | October 15, 2013 11:13 am

    @ MacDuff:

    Obama and the Dems are so arrogant that they think they can pull off the biggest premeditated and coordinated fraud in the history of man, and from what I can see, they’re probably right.

    They have good reason to be confident. After all, they managed to elect Obama twice, didn’t they?


  78. 80 | October 15, 2013 11:14 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    I remember Reagan warning that the entire National Debt was about to reach $ONE TRILLION (obligately “Dr Evil” face).


  79. 81 | October 15, 2013 11:15 am

    lobo91 wrote:

    They have good reason to be confident. After all, they managed to elect Obama twice, didn’t they?

    Sure! Keep running the same play until the defense figures it out! We haven’t.


  80. 82 | October 15, 2013 11:16 am

    @ Mike C.:

    California does tag renewal and license renewal online as well, and it’s great. However, selling a car and a few other things still need to be done at the DMV office. Now you can make appointments, but the illegals going in there to try to obtain themselves a fraudulent ID card need to do so in person.

    It’s become commonplace in California for illegals to peel off the renewal sticker on people’s cars and put them on their own unregistered ones so that cops don’t stop them immediately for expired tags. Our solution is to cut an X across the sticker and then apply thin coat of nail varnish. Keeps sticker from “curling” but if you try to remove, the tag falls apart.


  81. lobo91
    83 | October 15, 2013 11:17 am

    @ Mike C.:

    We have online renewals here, which works fine (although they aren’t very good about sending out the notices). If you have to go into the office for anything (like registering a new car) you’ll be there for awhile.

    The biggest problem I’ve seen is that they keep moving the damn office. I’ve lived here for 10 years, and I’ve never gone to the same place twice. And I don’t mean moving it from one room to another in the same building. They keep moving it all over the city.


  82. 84 | October 15, 2013 11:19 am

    Here’s some hard numbers on the cost of ObamaCare. It is worse than I originally reported:

    Many Americans shopping for better health insurance deals promised by the two-week-old Obamacare system are instead being slapped with rate shock, including savings-sapping deductibles and co-pays, according to multiple reports from around the country.

    For some able to get the problem-plagued Obamacare website to work, the so-called “deals” the system is coughing up around the country include $12,600 deductibles, co-pays of up to 40 percent, zero competition, and rate hikes of 260 percent.

    The huge cost increases that some Obamacare applicants are seeing are feeding the effort in Congress to change the system and delay implementation until January 2014.

    Affordable health care? To whom? I couldn’t afford to have a $12K deductible and 40% copays no matter how much FedZilla subsidizes the monthly bill. That is no different than having no health insurance at all, and I’d be paying for the privilege. You could surely get a catastrophic high-deductible plan for less than that will run you a month. Read the whole linked article. Health insurance is going up for just about everybody. I know my employer has put in place a health screening that if you don’t pass it adds $800 a year to your premiums. I passed it this year, but I’ve gained some weight since then. I have to get my weight back down to under 190 before this time next year. At least I don’t smoke.


  83. lobo91
    85 | October 15, 2013 11:19 am

    @ Carolina Girl:

    Our solution is to cut an X across the sticker and then apply thin coat of nail varnish. Keeps sticker from “curling” but if you try to remove, the tag falls apart.

    Our stickers are made like that in the first place. You can’t peel them off in one piece.


  84. lobo91
    86 | October 15, 2013 11:22 am

    MacDuff wrote:

    @ Iron Fist:

    I remember Reagan warning that the entire National Debt was about to reach $ONE TRILLION (obligately “Dr Evil” face).

    I remember Reagan saying that when he was in school, they didn’t learn about the national debt--because there wasn’t one.


  85. 87 | October 15, 2013 11:25 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Ya know, the young and/or healthy pay the medical bills for the old and/or sick the same way the living pay death benefits for the dead. That’s the way insurance works and that’s not a particular revelation to either of us.

    It’s positively comical to watch these people who call themselves “educated” acquiring this elementary fact with such shock.


  86. 89 | October 15, 2013 11:28 am

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    If you are coming up short in your mortgage payment, you CUT your spending elsewhere to make up for it; you don’t run down to the bank and take out a damn LOAN

    Yep, and you don’t increase your spending every year just because you want to spend more. If your salary remains flat, you have to reign in your spending. Oh, you can borrow money, and I had to to get out of my house, but you can’t keep borrowing money forever. When I reach my credit limit on my MasterCard, I can’t just call them up and ask for my limit to be increased. I guess I could do that, but they are under no obligation to grant my request. President Stompy Foot believes that because he says so is a good enough readson for doing something. Frankly, I don’t just want them to leave the debt ceiling where it is, I want some real cuts in expenditures. At least a trillion dollars a year in cuts. What we need to do is go back to the spending levels we were at in 1998. I don’t recall children starving in 1998, do you? Nor did we eviscerate the Military, or close all the national parks. What we did do was pass a budget, something the Democrats have been unable to do ever since Obama was elected. Yet the Republicans get blamed for it. Propaganda is a powerful thing. We don’t seem to do propaganda, and worse, we allow the Left’s propaganda to stan unchallenged.


  87. RIX
    90 | October 15, 2013 11:31 am

    @ Iron Fist:
    The U.S Medical Delivery System leads the nation in all categories, wit the exception of Infant Mortality.
    That has to do with behavior of a lot of expectant mothers.
    The real issues are cost & the uninsured.
    Those issues do not need a radical overhaul to fix . This is about power & putting people in their place.


  88. lobo91
    91 | October 15, 2013 11:31 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    What we need to do is go back to the spending levels we were at in 1998. I don’t recall children starving in 1998, do you?

    If there were any, we didn’t hear about them, because Clinton was president.


  89. RIX
    92 | October 15, 2013 11:32 am

    lobo91 wrote:

    Assploding Hypocrisy: DNC Chief Wasserman Schultz Lectures About Need For “Civility” In Politics…

    Next , I am sure that she will share her beauty secrets./


  90. 93 | October 15, 2013 11:33 am

    @ MacDuff:

    Yeah, it is all about spreading risk. ObamaCare throws that on its head by requiring, among other things, insurance companies to only make a 15% profit. That simply won’t build up enough of a cushion to hold them when thimes get tough. If too many people get sick, the insurance company will close upshop, and then nobody will have insurance. Which will leave it open to the Democrts to come in with Single-Payer and “save” everyone. I am afraid that the LIVs believe all of this. They are too lazy to find the information themselves. They don’t want to make an informed decision. They want the easy thing, and they think that the government should pay for everything for them because they believe the government has an unlimited supply of money. They don’t want to hear anything about the National Debt of Fiscal Responsibility. That attitude on the part of the voters is what is going to allow the Democrats to destroy this country.


  91. lobo91
    94 | October 15, 2013 11:34 am

    @ RIX:

    I’m guessing this book will be in the dollar store within a month.


  92. RIX
    95 | October 15, 2013 11:35 am

    lobo91 wrote:

    @ RIX:

    I’m guessing this book will be in the dollar store within a month.

    And a very small book, hopefully without photos.


  93. 96 | October 15, 2013 11:37 am

    RIX wrote:

    The real issues are cost & the uninsured.
    Those issues do not need a radical overhaul to fix . This is about power & putting people in their place.

    You could fix about 90% of those problems with tort reform (we don’t need lawsuit lotteries) and by allowing insurance companies to sell across State lines. Competition would bring out policies that the majority of the uninsured could afford if they elected to do so. The problem with those solutions is that there isn’t sufficient oppertunity for grafty and, even more importantly, rationing health care so that undesireables (like Republicans, especially Tea Party Republicans) simply can’t get treatment. I think that last is the big thing that they are going for. They want to micromanage everyone’s lives, and they want the ability to punish their enemies through the coercive power of the State.


  94. RIX
    98 | October 15, 2013 11:40 am

    @ Iron Fist:
    The number that I have always heard for the uninsured is 12 million, the working poor.
    How Obama found 30 million is magical.


  95. lobo91
    99 | October 15, 2013 11:40 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    I think that last is the big thing that they are going for. They want to micromanage everyone’s lives, and they want the ability to punish their enemies through the coercive power of the State.

    That’s the ultimate goal of every policy put forth by the Democrats.

    There’s no fiscal reason for having a 74,000 page tax code, for example. You could write the tax code on one page, if you wanted to.

    But that wouldn’t give them the ability to control everyone’s behavior.


  96. lobo91
    100 | October 15, 2013 11:41 am

    RIX wrote:

    @ Iron Fist:
    The number that I have always heard for the uninsured is 12 million, the working poor.
    How Obama found 30 million is magical.

    Obama claimed 45 million.

    And they’re saying that after Obamacare is fully implemented, there will still be 30 million.


  97. RIX
    101 | October 15, 2013 11:49 am

    lobo91 wrote:

    RIX wrote:

    @ Iron Fist:
    The number that I have always heard for the uninsured is 12 million, the working poor.
    How Obama found 30 million is magical.

    Obama claimed 45 million.

    And they’re saying that after Obamacare is fully implemented, there will still be 30 million.

    I think that O is creating more uninsured as hours & jobs are cut back.
    He seems like a guy who avoided business and economic courses in College.
    The little kids down the block have more business acumen with their Kool Aid.
    This is odds on to lead to single payer & rationing.


  98. 102 | October 15, 2013 11:49 am

    @ RIX:

    The number I’ve seen is 15% of the workforce was uninsured, but I’ve never seen it broken down by age. It makes sense that younger people have less insurance. Barring extreme situations, they don’t need insurance as much as someone my age needs it. They won’t use it. What we got with ObamaCarewas a powergrab in the name of correcting some mystical “wrong” that the Lefte perceived or, just as likely, conjured out of hin air. As I’ve said many times, the woman I was living with it the early 2000s was diagnosed with malignant melanoma skin cancer when she was about 30. That is potentially a lif-ending disease, and she had no insurance. She got treatment within the week of being diagnosed. Full treatment, just like anyone with insurance would have gotten. The plastic surgeon that removed the cancer from her legeven offered to do reconstructive surgery to repair the rather unslightly scar that she had from the surgery, but she didn’t want to go that route. Much of that was donated by the doctors themselves (the reconstructive surgery would have been) or paid for with medicaid. That is a pretty damned good system. Now, she had to buy her own birth control pills and prescriptions when she was sick, but when she had a serious illness she was taken care of just like anybody else. Why do we need to thoroughly rework a system that is working? It may not be perfect, but it was better than what will come out of ObamaCare. That is guaranteed.


  99. 103 | October 15, 2013 11:51 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    Yeah, it is all about spreading risk. ObamaCare throws that on its head by requiring, among other things, insurance companies to only make a 15% profit.

    The concept of stockholders, and 401Ks invested in Big Insurance, Big Oil, Big Pharma and Big Medicine are apparently over Harvard Boy’s head.

    Meanwhile, my wife is one of those people not getting a paycheck and that, combined with the past five years are starting to piss me off to the point starting my own veteran’s march but my bulldog mouth has been known to override my hummingbird ass and paying to get outta jail isn’t in the household budget right now.


  100. 104 | October 15, 2013 11:55 am

    lobo91 wrote:

    And they’re saying that after Obamacare is fully implemented, there will still be 30 million.

    These young people, mostly healthy, will have either a fine or premiums as well as (at least) a several thousand dollar deductible. How long will it take them to figure out that they’re better off uninsured?


  101. RIX
    105 | October 15, 2013 11:57 am

    @ Iron Fist:
    The working uninsured could have been addressed with expanded Medicaid.
    Or a Plan with typical benefits, reduced out of pocket and stop loss.
    Or expanding the state High Risk Pools for Pre Existing conditions.
    There are any number of options available, but he wanted to do health reform in the worst way & he did.


  102. 106 | October 15, 2013 11:57 am

    MacDuff wrote:

    paying to get outta jail isn’t in the household budget right now.

    Paying to get out of jail is never in the budget! I try to avoid situations like that myself. There really is no point in letting it get to you that much. It is very frustrating, I know, but sometimes you just have to roll with the punches. Politics and government have always been frustrating to me, because so few of our so-called leaders want to do anything besides line their pockets and the pockets of their cronies. It would be nice if we could go back to the Athenian-style Democracy, and everybody vote on the big issues. It wasn’t perfect, by any stretch of the imagination, but you didn’t have a block of people that were voting themselves free money out of the public treasury.


  103. RIX
    107 | October 15, 2013 12:05 pm

    Yeah, it is all about spreading risk. ObamaCare throws that on its head by requiring, among other things, insurance companies to only make a 15% profit -- @ Iron Fist:

    It’s worse than that. The 15% is what they retain to cover all expenses, rents, salaries , reserves etc.
    There won’t really be much of a profit , if any.
    It can’t be sustained for more than a few years & the insurance companies know it.
    He is crashing the Insurance industry like the coal industry


  104. lobo91
    108 | October 15, 2013 12:05 pm

    @ RIX:

    The 30 million who will be uninsured after Obamacare aren’t the same people who don’t have insurance now, although there will probably be some overlap.

    Basically, they’re causing 30 million people who currently have full time jobs and insurance to lose them, in order to provide unaffordable coverage to 15 million other people.

    Makes perfect sense. If you’re a fucking moron.


  105. lobo91
    109 | October 15, 2013 12:07 pm

    @ RIX:

    Right. It’s not 15% profit. They have to spend 85% of the premiums they take in on health care. That remaining 15% has to cover all their costs, including taxes.


  106. 110 | October 15, 2013 12:13 pm

    @ lobo91:

    So it is worse than I thought. The insurance companies couldn’t survive on 15% profit, but if their operating costs have to come out of that, then they will have nothing to build up for the times when they have to pay out. Why aren’t the Republicans pointing this out? This is designed to eventually take away everybody’s health insurance to get everyone but the very wealthy into government controlled healthcare. The very wealthy, of course, will be able to go overseas to get quality healthcare. Though where they will go is up in the air right now. America is where most of the advances in Medicine has come from over the last 100 years. They are going to kill that off, as well.


  107. lobo91
    111 | October 15, 2013 12:19 pm

    @ Iron Fist:

    When people did point that out, the idiot Dems said “They’ll make it up on volume,” basically.


  108. RIX
    112 | October 15, 2013 12:19 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    @ RIX:

    The 30 million who will be uninsured after Obamacare aren’t the same people who don’t have insurance now, although there will probably be some overlap.

    Basically, they’re causing 30 million people who currently have full time jobs and insurance to lose them, in order to provide unaffordable coverage to 15 million other people.

    Makes perfect sense. If you’re a fucking moron.

    That’s exactly right. ‘For Our Obama so loves the Uninsured that he created more of them.”


  109. RIX
    113 | October 15, 2013 12:21 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    @ RIX:

    Right. It’s not 15% profit. They have to spend 85% of the premiums they take in on health care. That remaining 15% has to cover all their costs, including taxes.

    Can’t be sustained. it’s simple math. But hey, when your are a minority set aside president, you operate by different rules.


  110. eaglesoars
    114 | October 15, 2013 12:21 pm

    Iron Fist wrote:

    Yeah, if we default, it will be because Obama chooses to default. He may very well make that choice, though, if he thinks he can blame it on the Republicans. Default is coming sometime, though.

    Why do I keep seeing people who say we won’t default because we have the money to pay sovereign debt -- apparently 10x the money. So what is this default talk?


  111. lobo91
    115 | October 15, 2013 12:23 pm

    @ RIX:

    Of course, unlike the asshats who were bused in to protest, the people who dreamed this up aren’t actually morons. They fully understand what’s going to happen. It’s been the plan all along.

    As George C. Scott said as Patton, “I read your book!”


  112. lobo91
    116 | October 15, 2013 12:26 pm

    @ eaglesoars:

    Why do I keep seeing people who say we won’t default because we have the money to pay sovereign debt — apparently 10x the money. So what is this default talk?

    There’s absolutely no financial reason we would default on the interest and principal payments on the debt. That currently amounts to around $35 billion a month, and we take in around $230 billion a month in taxes.

    It’s also unconstitutional for us to default.

    All the talk about default from the Dems is just fear mongering aimed at the uneducated masses.


  113. RIX
    117 | October 15, 2013 12:29 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    @ RIX:

    Of course, unlike the asshats who were bused in to protest, the people who dreamed this up aren’t actually morons. They fully understand what’s going to happen. It’s been the plan all along.

    As George C. Scott said as Patton, “I read your book!”

    Yup, this is a well thought out strategy abetted by the MSM.


  114. RIX
    118 | October 15, 2013 12:29 pm

    See ya later.


  115. 119 | October 15, 2013 12:30 pm

    @ lobo91:

    Yeah, I love it when you are losing money on an item but you”ll “make it up in volume”. That was Netscape’s business plan, essentially, and they didn’t last ten years. If ObamaCare is allowed to stand (and I don’t see the Republicans breaking their necks to repeal much of anything the Democrats have saddled us with for the last 100 years), in ten years private insurers will be virtually nonexistent. Which, of course, is how Obama wants it. While I think the Exchanges crashing and burning the way they did was not planned for, most of these “unforeseen” consequences of ObamaCare have been foreseen and warned against, but Obama wants to go forward anyway. He is getting what he wants out of ObamaCare.


  116. eaglesoars
    120 | October 15, 2013 12:32 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    It’s also unconstitutional for us to default.

    The last time I read thru that doc was about 7 yrs ago (and I’ve forgotten why) but I THOUGHT I remembered something about that.

    I must say it’s more than irritating to be lectured (even if it’s deserved) by Christine Lagarde. I just want to tell her to iron her face.

    back to work


  117. lobo91
    121 | October 15, 2013 12:34 pm

    @ Iron Fist:

    While I think the Exchanges crashing and burning the way they did was not planned for, most of these “unforeseen” consequences of ObamaCare have been foreseen and warned against, but Obama wants to go forward anyway. He is getting what he wants out of ObamaCare.

    Right. Don’t confuse the website clusterfuck with Obamacare itself. They’re both disasters, but only one of them was planned.

    They knew very few people would voluntarily sign up once they saw the cost, but that was intentional. It’s part of the plan to move toward single-payer.

    The website mess was caused by incompetence.


  118. lobo91
    122 | October 15, 2013 12:37 pm

    @ eaglesoars:

    The last time I read thru that doc was about 7 yrs ago (and I’ve forgotten why) but I THOUGHT I remembered something about that.

    The very clause from the 14th Amendment that some of them are trying to use as justification for Obama to unilaterally raise the debt ceiling actually means that they have no choice but to prioritize what they pay out of the funds that come in.

    Debt payments and pensions have to be paid first. Everything else comes out of what’s left.


  119. 123 | October 15, 2013 12:41 pm

    eaglesoars wrote:

    So what is this default talk?

    It’ll depend on what Obama wants to do, essentially. The money is there to pay for interest on the debt to service our loans right now. If the debt ceiling stays the same, Obama will have to budget to pay the bills insted of just running a firehose of money at it. Bu tif he chooses not to, I don’t think there is a lot that Congress can do to make him. Oh, it would be an impeachable offense. It is clearly against the Constitution of the United States, but when has the Constitution ever stopped Democrats? It would be his choice to default now. The reason I say default is cming though, is that the bond market is simply not going to be content to loan us money at effectively 0% interest (it is something like 2% right now, but inflation eats that up) forever. If they bump the interest rates up to about 5% we are in serious trouble. We are borrowing over a trillion dollars a year. When they start demanding return on their investment, we’ll probably just print that money. That is what Paul Krugman would say to do. That can only go on so long and the currency will crash. When that happens, the economy comes down, and we are left with lots of liabilities with a limited revenue stream. That is when the real default happens. We simply won’t be bringing in enough money to cover our liabilities. From what I’ve read, sometime about 2025 we will have entitlements and interest payments that total the entire revenue of the United States. We’ll still maybe technically be ble to borrow, but who will loan money to us? What worries me is that we may not have much of a warning when the bond market goes south on us. What would happen if hey had a treasury auction and nobody bid? I don’t know. I am not an economist, but I know that I don’t trust teh people who are making these decisions right now. They are either abysmally stupid or actively malevolent.


  120. lobo91
    124 | October 15, 2013 12:43 pm

    @ Iron Fist:

    If Obama does choose to default, that will trigger those higher bond rates and start the ball rolling.


  121. 125 | October 15, 2013 12:43 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    Debt payments and pensions have to be paid first. Everything else comes out of what’s left

    That’s what the Constitution says, but what happens if Obama doesn’t do that? Obama’s bulletproof when it comes to impeachment. It simply isn’t going to happen no matter what Obama does. If Obama choses to default, then I really don’t kno wwhat happens. I don’t think anybody does. We’ve never had a President like this before.


  122. 126 | October 15, 2013 12:46 pm

    @ lobo91:

    That could be all part of his plan. We really are headed into looking glass territory now. Obama is required by the Constitution not to default, but Obama has never showed particular respect to the Constitution. He has already shown a propensity for doing things that aren’t exactly legal. The way he unilatterially postpones the Business Mandate in ObamaCare is an excellent example in point. I don’t think there was any statutory support for the move, but he did it anyways.


  123. lobo91
    127 | October 15, 2013 12:51 pm

    @ Iron Fist:

    That’s what the Constitution says, but what happens if Obama doesn’t do that? Obama’s bulletproof when it comes to impeachment. It simply isn’t going to happen no matter what Obama does. If Obama choses to default, then I really don’t kno wwhat happens. I don’t think anybody does. We’ve never had a President like this before.

    I’ve said all along that Obama has exposed one of the real flaws in our Constitution, which is the fact that there’s no real enforcement ability. The founders never considered what would happen if a president chose to simply ignore the Constitution, because they didn’t think we would be stupid enough to elect someone who would do it.

    When I say Obama, of course, I mean the Democrat leadership in general. Congress is required to pass a budget every year, but they haven’t done so in 5 years. What’s the penalty? Not a damn thing. The executive branch is in violation of numerous court orders. So what? The attorney general is in contempt of Congress. Yeah, and?


  124. lobo91
    128 | October 15, 2013 12:58 pm

    @ Iron Fist:

    The way he unilatterially postpones the Business Mandate in ObamaCare is an excellent example in point. I don’t think there was any statutory support for the move, but he did it anyways.

    He had absolutely no authority to do that. He also had no authority to order the Border Patrol to stop enforcing immigration laws, but he did that, too.

    They try to use “prosecutorial discretion” as a justification, but that’s BS. That term means just what it says. A prosecutor has the discretion to not prosecute a particular case, usually either because they know the case is weak and they’ll likely lose, or because it’s just not worth the trouble (like spending tens of thousands of dollars to prosecute someone for a $5 shoplifting charge).

    Prosecutorial discretion doesn’t give the president the authority to simply ignore laws he doesn’t agree with, though. If he has that power, then the laws are meaningless, and we live in a dictatorship.


  125. 129 | October 15, 2013 1:06 pm

    @ lobo91:

    This is the way Republics fall. When the government becomes lawless, the people will follow suit, and we are seeing that. Not so much in the crime rate, which is down, but in a lack of respect for the laws that are on the books and a lack of respect for the government in general. Is anybody proud of the government we have? I know I am not.


  126. lobo91
    130 | October 15, 2013 1:10 pm

    @ Iron Fist:

    Actually, the crime rate is starting to go back up, for the first time in 30 years.

    Another Obama accomplishment.


  127. 131 | October 15, 2013 1:11 pm

    @ lobo91:

    He did that with DOMA, as well, saying that he, in his infinite wisdom, had decided that it was unconstitutional so he simply wouldn’t defend it in court. I wish we could get a Republican with the balls to do that to gun control laws. I really don’t think the United States has a long-term future. We simply are spending ourselves to death, and nobody is saying “Stop!”, not even the Republicans. It may not come this year, but I government will not last. Rome fell and the world went on. I am sure the same will be true after America falls.


  128. 132 | October 15, 2013 1:14 pm

    @ lobo91:

    I hadn’t seen that, but it doesn’t really surprise me. Things around here are fairly calm. I tried to find statistics on the crime in my city the other day, and a site for comparing real estate that had crime stats for Memphis didn’t even bother with them for Knoxville. They do happen, though, and usually in the groups that you expect them to happen. Some things are always with us.


  129. lobo91
    133 | October 15, 2013 1:21 pm

    Louie Gohmert just said that if Obama instructs the Treasury Department to default, “we’re getting dangerously close to a high crime or misdemeanor.”


  130. 134 | October 15, 2013 1:36 pm

    @ lobo91:

    I think it would be an impeachable offense, but there is no way that the Democrats in the Senate would vote to remove the FIRST BLACK PRESIDENT. Obama could cut off Sasha’s head in an honor killing on live TV and the Democrats wouldn’t vote to remove him from office.


  131. 135 | October 15, 2013 1:36 pm

    @ lobo91:

    “Dangerously close”? How about we’re there?


  132. 136 | October 15, 2013 1:40 pm

    @ Iron Fist:

    Irrelevant. At some point a stand will have to be taken, and what Lobo described would definitely be one of those points. Otherwise, just pack it in now and live (or die) with the consequences.


  133. 137 | October 15, 2013 1:47 pm

    @ Mike C.:

    Then we impeach him, and the Senate fails to remove him. I don’t see what we gain by going through that exercise. The government as it is is already out of control. We are forty years too late to really stop this. Reagan was a bright spot in there, but he never had a Republican Legislature, and we don’t really know how much would have been different if he had. Certainly the Republican controlled government of 2001-2006 didn’t impress me. They could have done so much more, but they were content with a small tax break, and that was really it.


  134. lobo91
    138 | October 15, 2013 1:50 pm

    @ Iron Fist:
    @ Mike C.:

    I agree that we passed that point awhile back.

    And I don’t think there’s much of anything we can do about it, at least within the bounds of the Constitution. The only remedy we have is impeachment, which is never going to be successful.


  135. 139 | October 15, 2013 2:00 pm

    Win, lose or draw, you either take a stand somewhere, or just submit now and save yourself the effort.


  136. 140 | October 15, 2013 2:05 pm

    @ lobo91:

    Yeah, I am trying to get my finances in order and prepare me and my wife as best we can for a very unpredictable future. Since the end of World War Two we’ve had a really good run in the United States (even if the rest of the world was going to hell in a handbasket), but I think that long run is coming to an end. We’ve elected the first anti-American President, and he is fundamentally transforming American society. Just the debt he will run up in his tenure is staggering. He will double the US Debt load if he keeps it up at this rate, borrowing and blowing as much as all of his predacessors combined. And I do mean blowing. What have we gotten for his trillion dollar a year plus spending binge? Very little that I’ve seen. We sent some guy to China to teach the hookers how to drink. That was only $2.6 million. Chump change compared to the rest of the money he’s blown, but all of it has been simply to drive America deeped into debt. That was the intent of it.


Back to the Top

The Blogmocracy

website design was Built By David