"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt


One of Salem Oregon's Unofficial Top 1000 Conservative Political Bloggers!!!

Friday, November 29, 2013

MSNBC and CNN Both Lose Almost Half their Viewers



And it couldn't happen to nicer people.

Via John Nolte at Breitbart:

Over tofu turkey, the powers behind the extreme-left cable news network MSNBC must have expressed many thanks yesterday for CNN, because it is only by comparison to CNN that MSNBC's November ratings are not embarrassing. Compared to November of last year, MSNBC's viewership has nearly been cut in half and the "Lean Forward" network continues to get crushed by Fox News. 
MSNBC:  
Primetime (Mon-Sun): 645,000 Total Viewers / 190,000 A25-54
Total Day (Mon-Sun): 401,000 Total Viewers / 124,000 A25-54 
Fox News: 
Primetime (Mon-Sun): 2,011,000 total viewers / 348,000 A25-54
Total Day Mon-Sun): 1,201,000 total viewers / 248,000 A25-54 
In total viewers, Fox News beats MSNBC by nearly 3-to-1. In the advertiser-coveted 25-54 demo, the ratio is closer to 2-to-1.  
Compared to November of last year (a presidential election year), MSNBC is down 45% in total day viewers and 50% during primetime. Fox is down only 21% and 18%, respectively

Huh. I guess Martin Bashir's weirdo rant didn't help their ratings. How odd.

Meanwhile CNN isn't doing so great...

The left-leaning CNN had a terrible November. Compared to November of 2012, the cable news network lost 59% of its total day audience and 62% of its primetime audience in the all-important 25-54 demo. Granted, last November was the month of the presidential election and a drop-off in viewership is to be expected, but by comparison Fox News is down only 21% and 18% respectively.  
CNN has also lost its short-lived dominance over its left-wing competition at MSNBC in every conceivable measurement.  
CNN: 
Primetime (Mon-Sun): 481,000 Total Viewers / 153,000 A25-54
Total Day (Mon-Sun): 335,000 Total Viewers / 100,000 A25-54 
MSNBC: 
Primetime (Mon-Sun): 645,000 Total Viewers / 190,000 A25-54
Total Day (Mon-Sun): 401,000 Total Viewers / 124,000 A25-54 
For the 143rd consecutive month Fox News blew both CNN and MSNBC away. Last month, in fact, Fox News beat both of its left-wing counterparts combined in both total viewers and the advertiser-coveted 25-54 age group: 
Primetime (Mon-Sun): 2,011,000 total viewers / 348,000 A25-54
Total Day (Mon-Sun): 1,201,000 total viewers / 248,000 A25-54   

I remember when CNN was my go to station for news. It that way for years and years for me, and now it's just trash on that station.

I guess that's just the way it goes. After all, there was a time I when I actually subscribed to TIME.


Thursday, November 28, 2013

Happy Thanksgiving!





Happy Thanksgiving everyone!
 
 
 

Wednesday, November 27, 2013

Consumer Confidence in U.S. "Unexpectedly" Falls to 7 Month Low


"With my magic halo, I command that you will still be surprised at my continuing economic failures!"

I'm not just tired of the press continuing to use the word "unexpected" when delving out their economic bad news every month, I'm getting pissed off about that word. After five plus years of Obama's amateur, ideological, and catastrophic handling of the economy, we're still supposed to be surprised by economic bad news. Really? I'm not surprised. And this isn't unexpected news.

From Bloomberg (via JWF):

Confidence among U.S. consumers unexpectedly declined in November to a seven-month low as Americans grew more pessimistic about the labor-market outlook.  
The Conference Board’s index fell to 70.4 from a revised 72.4 a month earlier that was stronger than initially estimated, the New York-based private research group said today. The median forecast in a Bloomberg survey of 78 economists called for a November reading of 72.6. 
The drop in sentiment helps explain why some retailers such as Best Buy Co. see a need to match competitors’ discounts this holiday-shopping season. More employment opportunities and wage gains would help lay the groundwork for a pickup in household purchases that make up about 70 percent of the U.S. economy.  
“The economy just has not performed very well this year and has been disappointing relative to what most people were hoping for and expecting through the course of the year,” said Stephen Stanley, chief economist at Pierpont Securities LLC in Stamford, Connecticut. “It’s one thing when you have one or two years into the recovery and things aren’t progressing in the job market, but here we are four-plus years in.”

There has been no recovery! I'm sick of that b.s. too. Obama just pumped tons of money into the economy to keep things slightly buoyant in the very short-term. This is not a recovery.

The proportion of Americans who said jobs would become more plentiful in the next six months declined to 12.7 percent, the lowest since November 2011, from 16 percent.  
The share of respondents who said they expected a pickup in their incomes declined to an eight-month low of 14.9 percent in November from 15.7 percent a month earlier.

Hey, do you want to bet that these same people will be surprised when there's an "unexpectedly" weak holiday season for retailers this year?

Obamanomics... Retrying the failed economics of socialism with a willing media and the built-in shield of the race card. Yay!

CNN Poll: Majority Believe Obama is Untrustworthy and Not Someone to Admire


I guess b.s. images like this just aren't selling the image like it used to. He shall use the hoe and some book (definitely NOT Das Kapital) to lead us all to golden fields...


I guess I was ahead of the curve when I felt this way about Obama back in 2008.

From the Commentary piece by Peter Wehner:

The news for President Obama continues to get worse. 
According to a new CNN/ORC International survey, only four out of 10 Americans believe Mr. Obama can manage the federal government effectively. Fifty-three percent don’t view him as a strong and decisive leader. And 56 percent say he does not agree with them on important issues and he does not inspire confidence. 
But the numbers on the president’s personal characteristics should alarm the White House most of all. More than half (53 percent) believe he’s not honest and trustworthy, while 56 percent say he’s not a person they admire. 
Each of these figures are all-time records for Mr. Obama in CNN polling.

I guess Obama now has a whole bunch of more enemies to punish. Hmm... Is that what ObamaCare is about?

I wonder what these numbers would be like if the mainstream media didn't support Obama 110% and actively cover for the outrageous ObamaCare and the host of scandals (Benghazi, IRS, Fast & Furious, NSA spying, etc.) and failures (stimulus, record unemployment, record numbers of impoverished, record numbers of homeless, etc) under his watch.

My bet is his numbers would be just a tad lower. Again, I'm going out on a limb here.

Tuesday, November 26, 2013

City Orders Bar to Take Down "Thank a veteran for your freedom!” Sign


Good God...

And, of course, the city is in California.

From CBSLA.com (via Drudge):

Veterans are rallying around a local bar whose owners say they have been ordered to removed a sign that salutes their service. 
“Thank a veteran for your freedom!” says a large sign perched above Johnny’s Booze and Pool. Vets love it and make up a significant part of the establishment’s clientele. 
“I love this place. The sign gives me the pride back that I lost … I struggled a lot when I first came back,” an Army vet told CBS2′s Stacey Butler.  
But someone complained to the city about the sign, and now the bar’s owners say they’ve been ordered to take it down. 
“We received a letter in the mail from the city stating that we have to remove it within two days or they were going to fine us, like, $940,” says co-owner John Marovic. 
Co-owner Johnny Kresimir says he has until Tuesday to remove the sign or pay the fine. He plans to fight it, and has issued a plea on Facebook for support.  
[...]  
The issue has some of the sign’s supporters scratching their heads. 
Said one veteran: “I can understand city ordinances, but it’s been up there for 10 years. I don’t understand why it’s a problem now.”

It could be worse. The bar might put up a cross. Or even a nativity scene during the Christmas season. Steps have to be taken to control such aberrant displays.

It's good to see that the freedom of speech is alive and well in Huntington Beach.

ObamaCare Running Smooth: Colorado ObamaCare Sign-ups is Half of State's Worst Case Scenario


"You know, if it wasn't for the GOP, the Tea Party, and other racists, ObamCare--- I mean, the Affodable Care Act-- would be a rousing success. It's their fault that all the American people are not bending to the Light-Bringer's  will."

What?! You mean those "Brosurance" and "Party Girls" ads didn't work?!

From The Denver Post article by Michael Booth (via JWF):

Enrollment in the Affordable Care Act through Colorado's health insurance exchange is barely half the state's worst-case projection, prompting demands from exchange board members for better stewardship of public money. 
The shortfall could compromise the exchange's "ability to deliver on promises made to Colorado citizens" and threatens the funding stream for the exchange itself, according to board e-mails obtained by The Denver Post in an open records request. 
The exchange, meant for individuals and small groups buying insurance, had projected a lowest-level mid-November enrollment of 11,108, in a presentation to a board finance committee. The exchange announced Nov. 18 that it had signed up 6,001 Coloradans so far.  
The midlevel scenario for November was 20,186 members, and the highest projection 30,944 members. [Heh. Right...] 
As federal startup grants taper off under Obamacare funding, the exchange is meant to pay for itself with per-member charges on the private insurance companies offering policies. It needs 136,300 enrollees in 2014 to raise $6.5 million of its $51.4 million expenses.  
[...]  
The exchange has not hit either internal projections or those made earlier by consultants supportive of the Affordable Care Act, said board member Dr. Mike Fallon, a conservative voice on the board who calls the act overly complex and expensive. 
"None of this surprises me," Fallon said of the shortfall. "I don't know what we as a board could have done. Health insurance is a difficult product to sell." [emphasis mine]

So the Colorado exchange won't be able to pay for itself so it will have either collapse, raise taxes to pay for it thus subsidizing people's medical insurance even further, or be bailed out by federal funding. And they haven't even started yet. I mean it usually takes a little time before a federal program starts running this far in the red. I guess Colorado is too racist... or something.

Quite a success story, this ObamaCare. Quite a success...

Monday, November 25, 2013

Cleveland: At Least We're Not Detroit



I saw these video on You Tube (h/t Ace of Spades) and thought I'd post it. I've been to Cleveland a number of times and, well, it's not the funnest city that I've ever been to.

Anyway, enjoy:


And number two:



Not Much Changed in IRS Following Election Year Scandal


"Look, let's forget about the IRS scandal... That's old news. Let's just watch as the IRS objectively enforces ObamaCare. No pressure on conservatives and their evil corporations will be applied. Trust me."


The IRS was effective in helping to sway the election, allowing this super successful roll out of ObamaCare. Would the Democrats really want to change anything that targets conservatives and helps the Dems retain control of the federal government?

From the USA Today article by Deirdre Shesgreen and James Pilcher (via Instapundit):

More than six months after a top Internal Revenue Service official acknowledged the agency inappropriately scrutinized the applications for tax exemption by tea party and other conservative groups, the scandal has faded from the headlines and moved to Congress' back burner. 
But it's unclear how much has changed inside the IRS to fix the underlying problems that led to the targeting. 
Some argue the agency has taken significant steps to revamp a flawed review process that left certain groups waiting years for approval and subjected others to intrusive, burdensome questioning. 
"A great deal has changed at the IRS to prevent this from happening again," said Rep. Elijah Cummings of Maryland, the top Democrat on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, one of three congressional panels to investigate the matter. Cummings cited leadership changes, better training for managers and screeners, and a streamlined application processes, among other things.

It's somewhat amusing that Democratic Rep. Cummings has pretty much admitted that the IRS was indeed pretty much toting Obama's water during an election year. But don't worry, it won't happen again... until it does and then they'll "fix" things again.

Here's a rundown of what's changed — and what hasn't: 
• The IRS' top ranks have been purged 
The Obama administration has installed new leadership in key posts at the agency. Lois Lerner — who as the director of the IRS' exempt organizations division became the public face of the scandal — has resigned. And the IRS' commissioner, Steven Miller, is long gone. 
"The IRS has removed five of its most senior managers," said Rep. Sander Levin of Michigan, the top Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee, another panel investigating the matter. 
But not everyone thinks the leadership turnover at the IRS has translated into a better review process. 
Marcus Owens, a Washington-based tax attorney and former director of the IRS' exempt organizations division, said he fears the IRS unit has been weakened by the departures of senior staff. Seasoned lawyers such as Holly Paz, who served as a senior technical manager, helped create the legal standards that front-line agents followed, he said. But Paz left and was replaced by a non-lawyer, Owens said. 
With her and others out, "That's a lot of new faces in new roles, with a lot of backlog facing them from the get-go," Owens said. "I worry that delays (in reviewing applications) are only going to get worse at this point." 
• A ban on BOLOs 
One of first steps by the new IRS commissioner, acting chief Danny Werfel, was to ban the use of watch lists — also known as BOLOs, for "Be On the Look Out" lists. Such lists were used by workers in the Cincinnati field office to flag certain applications for extra scrutiny. 
An inquiry by the Treasury's internal watchdog concluded Cincinnati-based IRS employees used "inappropriate" criteria — by targeting applications from groups with words such as "tea party," "patriot" and "9/12" in their names — to send applications into a lengthy review process. Werfel said officials later discovered the use of other BOLOs, some with terms describing liberal groups. 
The IRS chief subsequently barred the use of all such watch lists. Now, screeners in Cincinnati are instructed to make assessments based on a group's activities and purpose, "not names or labels," Werfel said at a September hearing before the Ways and Means Committee. 
• New review process with more neutral instructions for front-line workers 
Werfel said in September that he's moved "aggressively" to improve screening methods and bolster training for IRS employees charged with reviewing applications for tax-exempt status. It's an often difficult task, requiring screeners to figure out how much political activity these non-profit groups are engaged in — and whether it is extensive enough to preclude them from receiving tax-exempt status. Werfel said the IRS has issued new instructions to screeners on the best ways to determine the extent of an organization's political campaign intervention. 
But the IRS has not detailed what specific guideposts have taken the place of the BOLOs. And there's some indication that the new guidance isn't all that clear.
One IRS worker told congressional investigators that he was giving all applications from political advocacy groups a secondary screening, no matter what. Without the BOLOs, "we really don't have any direction," this Cincinnati agent, whose name was not released, told the panel's staff. 
• Murky decades-old rule still in place 
The law governing certain tax-exempt groups — those organized under the 501(c)(4) section of the IRS code — states that they should be "operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare." But in 1959, the IRS issued a rule saying such organizations could participate in other activities as long as it was not their "primary" activity. 
The switch from requiring such groups to operate "exclusively" for social welfare to making that their "primary" purpose opened the door for such groups to become involved in politics. And the IRS has never given its screeners a clear definition of "primary."
"There's no bright-line test," Paz told congressional investigators — a complaint echoed by others. 
Critics say that until the rule is changed or clarified, the underlying problem will remain, with IRS workers struggling to measure a group's political activity without a good sense of how much is too much. 
"The problems here ... are not going to be solved by training workers in Cincinnati, even though that's fine," said Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21, a campaign finance reform advocacy group. "The solution to this problem is a clear, bright-line test that properly implements a statute that says c4s should engage only in social welfare (activities)."

Another scandal under-addressed and then swept into the "I-sure-hope-they-forget-about-this" bin.

And the Obama machine rolls on...

Friday, November 22, 2013

Number of People on Disability Jumps Up 20% During Obama Presidency



"If folks are making such a big deal out of this, then they must hate disabled people and graft. Oh, I mean, just hate disabled people. And the critics are all racists besides. Isn't that right, Oprah?"

 Obamanomics in action.

From CNS News (via Drudge):

In the fourteen fiscal years that preceded President Barack Obama’s inauguration in 2009, the tax receipts coming into the federal government’s Disability Insurance Trust Fund exceeded the benefits paid out, and the trust fund ran a surplus. 
In each of the five fiscal years Obama has served as president, the trust fund has run a deficit as the number of people receiving disability benefits has surged. The Disability Insurance Trust Fund has never before run five straight years of deficits. 
In fiscal 2013, which ended on Sept. 30, the Disability Insurance Trust Fund ran a record deficit of $31.494 billion, according to newly released data from the Social Security Administration. That followed deficits of $8.462 billion in fiscal 2009, $20,831 billion in fiscal 2010, $25.264 billion in fiscal 2011, and $29.701 billion in fiscal 2012. 
From fiscal 1995 through fiscal 2008, the Disability Insurance Trust Fund ran surpluses, as receipts from the disability insurance taxes paid by people who were working exceeded the value of the benefits paid to those claiming disability.  
[...]  
When President Obama took office in January 2009--which was the fourth month of fiscal 2009--there were 7,442,377 workers on disability, according to the Social Security Administration. As of October 2013, there was a record 8,936,932. That means the number of people on disability has increased by 1,494,555 while Obama has been in office--a jump of 20 percent.  
In addition to the 8,936,932 workers collecting disability in October, there were also 157,676 spouses of disabled workers who collected additional benefits, and 1,871,127 children of disabled workers who collected benefits.  
All told, 10,965,735 people collected federal disability benefits in October.  
At the end of fiscal 2008, there was a net balance of $216.239 billion in the Disability Insurance Trust Fund—meaning the Treasury owed $216.239 billion in IOUs to the trust fund for surplus disability insurance tax receipts it had taken in previous years and used for other government expenses.  
At the end of fiscal 2013, the net balance in the Disability Insurance Trust Fund had dropped to $100.486—a decline of $115.753 billion.  
That $115.753 billion, the cumulative five year deficit of the disability insurance program, equals the amount of money the Treasury had to borrow from other sources to pay disability benefits during that time.  
From the last day of January 2009 through the last day of September 2013, the total debt of the federal government climbed from $10,632,005,246,736.97 to $16,738,183,526,697.32—an increase of $6,106,178,279,960.35.  [emphasis mine]

This is what you get when you elect an amateur, who believes that he's smarter than he actually is, to a high office.

Hey, but at least race relations are better... Uh, right?

Thursday, November 21, 2013

ObamaCare 2014: 50 to 100 Million Insurance Cancellations


The Light-bringer knows your health insurance needs. Do not resist his enlighted will-- no matter how much it costs you or your health.


 There was a reason why Obama delayed the employer mandate...

From Fox News:

A new and independent analysis of ObamaCare warns of a ticking time bomb, predicting a second wave of 50 million to 100 million insurance policy cancellations next fall -- right before the mid-term elections.

The next round of cancellations and premium hikes is expected to hit employees, particularly of small businesses. While the administration has tried to downplay the cancellation notices hitting policyholders on the individual market by noting they represent a relatively small fraction of the population, the swath of people who will be affected by the shakeup in employer-sponsored coverage will be much broader.
An analysis by the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank, shows the administration anticipates half to two-thirds of small businesses would have policies canceled or be compelled to send workers onto the ObamaCare exchanges. They predict up to 100 million small and large business policies could be canceled next year.  
[...] 
 As reported by AEI's Scott Gottlieb, some businesses got around this by renewing their policies before the end of 2013. But the relief is temporary, and they are expected to have to offer in-compliance plans for 2015. According to Gottlieb, that means beginning in October 2014 the cancellation notices will start to go out.  
Then, businesses will have to either find a new plan -- which could be considerably more expensive -- or send workers onto the ObamaCare exchanges.  
For workers, their experience could mirror that of the 5 million or so on the individual market who already received cancellation notices because their plans did not meet new standards under the Affordable Care Act.  
President Obama announced last week that insurance companies could offer out-of-compliance plans for another year. But that only means the cancellation notices will resume late next year.  
Obama met Wednesday with state insurance commissioners about the change. In a statement afterward, National Association of Insurance Commissioners President Jim Donelon voiced concern with the change but said: “We will work with the insurance companies in our states to implement changes that make sense while following our mandate of consumer protection.” 
The business community has already been hit with another side effect from ObamaCare. Because the law will require businesses with more than 50 full-time workers to offer health coverage, there are reports that companies are shifting employees to part-time status to avoid hitting the threshold.  
Though the administration describes these accounts as anecdotal -- and has already delayed the employer mandate by a year -- studies suggest otherwise.  
The International Franchise Association and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have studied the impact and say the president's health care law has resulted in higher costs and fewer full-time positions.  
A survey showed 31 percent of franchise businesses, and 12 percent of non-franchise businesses, have already reduced worker hours. It also showed 27 percent of franchise businesses, and 12 percent of non-franchise businesses, have replaced full-time workers with part-time employees.

Of course myself and other "racist" and "stupid" and "ignorant" bloggers have been saying this for some time now.

This law is designed to take your health insurance and force you to buy federally approved health insurance or pay a hefty fine... no wait, it's now considered a tax. You will no longer be allowed to customize your insurance to your needs. And this will apply to every American. The grandfathering clauses were written so that any change  in an insurance policy-- rates, coverage, etc.--will nullify it's grandfathered status and you will be forced to buy federally approved insurance policies. No choice.

Ah yes, ObamaCare the gift that just keeps on taking. It'll take your health insurance policy, your full-time job, and your money.

Thanks Obama!

Wednesday, November 20, 2013

Issa Demands Info from Census Bureau Regarding Faked Jobless Data Before 2012 Election


"No, it was not the Census doctoring their numbers that caused a fortuitous drop in the unemployment rate immediately before the 2012 election. It was providence and my own super powers that caused it."


And he will be stonewalled. Well, at least Issa's putting forth the effort.

From the article in the Washington Examiner:

The House Oversight and Reform Committee is demanding answers from the director of the Census Bureau after a news outlet reported that Census employees may have fabricated data for a jobs report that showed a significant drop in unemployment under President Obama just a month from Election Day 2012. 
Committee Chairman Darrell Issa, R-Calif., wrote Tuesday to Census Bureau Director John Thompson calling the allegations in the New York Post "shocking." Issa requested information about Julius Buckmon, the employee the Post said fabricated data after being unable to reach the people who had the information he needed. 
The jobs report, released in October 2012 just ahead of Election Day, showed that the unemployment rate had dropped under Obama from 8.1 percent to 7.8 percent even though the economy had added only 114,000 jobs. 
Issa wants all of Buckmon's emails, his list of supervisors and any material related to a government investigation of Buckmon's actions, which according to the Post took place in 2010 and escalated in the months leading up to the election. Issa gave the bureau until Dec. 3 to produce the information. 
[...] 
The Post reported that the Census Bureau never reported the faked data to the Department of Labor, which computes the unemployment numbers, and that the fabrication may have been ordered by Census supervisors. 
"Since the Bureau relies on the American public for its data, it is important that the Census Bureau cooperate with all investigations into this matter," Issa wrote. "Any erosion of trust by the Census Bureau would have an immediate impact on other important Census surveys such as the American Community Survey or the planning and implementation of the 2020 Decennial Census." 
The Census Bureau is part of the Commerce Department. In January 2009, however, Obama changed the bureau's command structure so that the director also reports to the White House, prompting objections from Republicans who feared the move would politicize the independent agency.

Baseless fears and objections from the GOP, of course. I mean Obama never lies nor uses government agencies to promote his b.s. agendas. *cough* IRS scandal *cough* Never.

Tuesday, November 19, 2013

White House Controlled Census Faked 2012 Election Jobs Report


"Now look, this is old news that continues to just divide folks. Why don't we just focus our attention on my stirring successes in the form of ObamaCare and selling out Israel and Egypt?"

Gee, it almost seems like they were manipulating data to make Obama look better during a bitterly contested election.

Adding even further questions to Obama's 2012 win. I guess he proved political thuggery (as in the IRS intimidation of conservative groups) combined with outright lies from government agencies can sway elections. How progressive.

From John Crudele at The New York Post (via Instapundit):

In the home stretch of the 2012 presidential campaign, from August to September, the unemployment rate fell sharply — raising eyebrows from Wall Street to Washington.
The decline — from 8.1 percent in August to 7.8 percent in September — might not have been all it seemed. The numbers, according to a reliable source, were manipulated. 
And the Census Bureau, which does the unemployment survey, knew it. 
Just two years before the presidential election, the Census Bureau had caught an employee fabricating data that went into the unemployment report, which is one of the most closely watched measures of the economy. 
And a knowledgeable source says the deception went beyond that one employee — that it escalated at the time President Obama was seeking reelection in 2012 and continues today.  
“He’s not the only one,” said the source, who asked to remain anonymous for now but is willing to talk with the Labor Department and Congress if asked. 
The Census employee caught faking the results is Julius Buckmon, according to confidential Census documents obtained by The Post. Buckmon told me in an interview this

As Glenn Reynolds at Instapundit pointed Obama moved census control to the White House early in his first term.


Monday, November 18, 2013

ObamaCare Deconstructed Video


Check out the video below (h/t Patterico's Pontifications and Legal Insurrection). It's fairly long, but well worth your time. Enjoy.



But remember, it's all for the greater good... or something.


Saudi Arabia and Israel Unite Against Iran?

 
"This is all part of my master plan to bring together the majority of the Middle East with a shared hatred of Iran and the U.S. Such is the work of the Light-bringer."

It's quite possible... especially since Obama has steered the U.S. toward the Muslim Brotherhood and accepting Iran as a nuclear power. Quite the "change" there. Thanks Obama.

From the UK's Times article by Uzi Mahnaimi (via Drudge):

ONCE they were sworn enemies. Now Israel’s Mossad intelligence agency is working with Saudi officials on contingency plans for a possible attack on Iran if its nuclear programme is not significantly curbed in a deal that could be signed in Geneva this week. 
Both the Israeli and Saudi governments are convinced that the international talks to place limits on Tehran’s military nuclear development amount to appeasement and will do little to slow its development of a nuclear warhead. 
As part of the growing co-operation, Riyadh is understood already to have given the go-ahead for Israeli planes to use its airspace in the event of an attack on Iran. 
Both sides are now prepared to go much further. The Sunni kingdom is as alarmed as Israel by the nuclear ambitions of the Shi’ite-dominated Iran.

Obama's appeasement policy (there's really no other way to describe what the U.S. is doing with Iran) could very well create these strange friends. I mean, the U.S. and the U.K. allied themselves with Stalin, remember? And the enemy of my enemy is a friend-- for a time.


Sunday, November 17, 2013

Just a Reminder: Democratic Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley Promised that You'd Be Able to Keep Your Insurance


A bald-faced lie from Sen. Jeff Merkley: "The HELP Committee bill sets forward a historic plan that will, for the first time in American history, give every American access to affordable health coverage, reduce costs, and increase choice, while ensuring that those who like their insurance get to keep it.”

Just sayin'.

From The Washington Examiner:

SEN. JEFF MERKLEY (D-Oreg.): “[E]nsuring that those who like their insurance get to keep it” “The HELP Committee bill sets forward a historic plan that will, for the first time in American history, give every American access to affordable health coverage, reduce costs, and increase choice, while ensuring that those who like their insurance get to keep it.” (Sen. Merkley, Press Release, 7/15/09)

Now to be fair, Merkley was talking about the Senate's HELP Committee Bill. However I read that monster bill in its entirety and, believe it or not, it was even worse than the ObamaCare law that we got jammed down our throats. Not only was it going to take away your health insurance, it was a Trojan Horse for a single-payer system to be introduced-- so there was absolutely no way anyone was going to keep their current health insurance under what the bill.

So, even in that context, Sen. Merkley is among the lying liars that lie to our faces again.


Thursday, November 14, 2013

Does Obama's Fix for ObamaCare Violate the Law?



"I can work miracles... I mean look at this big ol' glowing globe of light... and I can fix ObamaCare with an Imperial decree. Remember I can make this work I just need more power."

Of course it does, but Obama regards the law as really only a suggestion to him and his ilk. Only little people need to regard the law as something inflexible.

From The Foundry piece by Chris Jacobs:

President Obama has told Obamacare’s critics that the law is “settled” and “here to stay.” But today he is saying he’ll violate the law to put a Band-Aid on it for another year. That’s in addition to the one-year delay in the employer mandate and numerous other “fixes” and delays. 
The President is announcing his “fix” to the problem of millions of canceled policies: According to press reports, the President’s “plan would allow people to keep their plans into 2014,” by allowing the sale of insurance plans that don’t meet the law’s new requirements. 
There’s one problem—the President’s promise that his new “plan” can allow people to keep their plans is just as flawed and false as his original “like your plan/keep it” pledge. The law itself is clear: Obamacare’s new benefit mandates—the requirement to cover all individuals with pre-existing conditions, the new “essential benefits,” and mandates increasing the percentage of health costs insurance plans must cover—all take effect on January 1, 2014. 
As any follower of Schoolhouse Rock will know, there’s only one institution that can change the law: Congress. President Obama’s “plan” attempts to ignore them entirely. The President’s proposal is but the latest in a long line of waivers and unilateral changes made in a futile attempt to repair an inherently unworkable law. 
The ultimate “fix” lies with Congress, and it’s a simple one: Undo this unfair, unworkable, and unpopular law that never should have been passed in the first place.

There comes a time when laws and processes get in the way of political gain and public relations. At this point it must be ignored. Uh... right?

Jonah Goldberg Hits the Nail on the Head Regarding ObamaCare and Hubris


Jonah Goldberg in an unbeliever in the majesty of the Light-bringer.


Gotta love Jonah Goldberg's take on Obama's unraveling after ObamaCare.

From the National Review Online (h/t Ace of Spades):

The hubris of our ocean-commanding commander-in-chief surely isn’t news to readers of this website. He’s said that he’s smarter and better than everyone who works for him. His wife informed us that he has “brought us out of the dark and into the light” and that he would fix our broken souls. The man defined sin itself as “being out of alignment with my values.” We may be the ones we’ve been waiting for, but at the same time, everyone has been waiting for him. Or as he put it in 2007, “Every place is Barack Obama country once Barack Obama’s been there.”
In every tale of hubris, the transgressor is eventually slapped across the face with the semi-frozen flounder of reality. The Greeks had a god, Nemesis, whose scythe performed the same function. It was Nemesis who lured Narcissus to the pool where he fell in love with his own reflection. Admittedly, most of Nemesis’s walk-on roles were in the Greek tragedies, but in the modern era, comeuppance-for-the-arrogant is more often found in comedies, and the “rollout” of Healthcare.gov has been downright hilarious. (I put quotation marks around “rollout” because the term implies actual rolling, and this thing has moved as gracefully as a grand piano in a peat bog.) But, as the president says, “it’s more than a website.” Indeed, the whole law is coming apart like a papier-mâché yacht in rough waters. The media feeding frenzy it has triggered from so many journalistic lapdogs has been both so funny and so poignant, it reminds me of nothing more than the climax of the classic film Air Bud, when the lovable basketball-playing golden retriever finally decides to maul the dog-abusing clown. 
During the government shutdown, Barack Obama held fast, heroically refusing to give an inch to the hostage-taking, barbaric orcs of the Tea Party who insisted on delaying Obamacare. It was a triumph for the master strategist in the White House, who finally maneuvered the Republicans into revealing their extremism. But we didn’t know something back then: Obama desperately needed a delay of Healthcare.gov. In his arrogance, though, he couldn’t bring himself to admit it. The other possibility is that he is such an incompetent manager, who has cultivated such a culture of yes-men, that he was completely in the dark about the problems. That’s the reigning storyline right now from the White House. Obama was betrayed. “If I had known,” he told his staff, “we could have delayed the website.” 
This is how you know we’re in the political sweet spot: when the only plausible excuses for the administration are equally disastrous indictments. 
In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, it took about five minutes for liberals to cast the chaos and confusion of the disaster as a searing indictment of not just the Bush administration but of conservatism itself. Whatever the merits of that argument (and there are not many), Katrina was at least a surprise. The October 1 deadline for Obamacare was set by Obama’s own administration years ago — and it caught them completely off guard. The president may now claim that he knew nothing, but he must have wondered why Henry Chao, Healthcare.gov’s chief project manager, set the bar of success at sea level last March: “Let’s just make sure it’s not a Third World experience.” At this point, it could only be more of a Third World experience if Healthcare.gov required enrollees to pay with chickens.  
[...]  
To be sure, there was some apparent plausibility to the claim that the website was working only too well, because the White House lied so confidently about what was going on. Few critics grasped at first that this was going to be the Charlie Sheen of IT launches — a spectacularly mortifying failure, punctuated with desperate shrieks of “Winning!” 
It wasn’t until later that we learned that, of the uncountable hordes flocking to the federal exchanges that first day, the number who actually registered for an insurance plan totaled exactly six. At that rate, Obamacare would reach its target of 7 million enrollees around the year 5013, or 3022 a.o. (Anno Obamae).  
[...]  
More recent numbers suggest that the federal exchange has enrolled about 27,000 customers since October 1, which amounts to about half an enrollee for each Obamacare “navigator.” (Someone in the White House is surely thinking, “Hey, let’s just hire another 14,000,000 navigators! Problem solved.) In order to rationalize that dismal performance the White House now must insist that they always knew the numbers would be tiny at the outset.  
Here’s a number that isn’t tiny: Five million people — and counting — have lost their health insurance, despite the president’s years of “you can keep your plan” promises. The president has apologized, sort of. He says he’s “sorry” that people have found themselves in a bad situation because of “assurances” he made. But no one has lost their insurance because of the president’s assurances, they’ve lost their insurance because of the president’s law. If a captain has the lifejackets filled with cement, his assurance that “you can keep your lifejacket” is only half the crime. Obama knew the lifejackets wouldn’t work. In 2010 he admitted that 8 to 9 million people in the individual market might “have to change their coverage” because of the law. And that’s just the individual market. Millions more will eventually lose the insurance they like because of Obamacare, according to the administration’s own internal estimates.

The cancellations aren’t a bug, they’re a feature, and the president lied about it over and over again.

I've quoted here much more than I should, but click on the link above and read the whole thing. It's well worth it.

Puny Numbers for ObamaCare Sign-ups


"You will bow down before ObamaCare, I swear it! Both you, and one day, you heirs!!"


A real shocker, I know.

You know if this wasn't so serious, I'd be laughing my butt off watching the Democrats and the MSM spin, duck, hurl blame, and look for cover.

From The National Journal:

Roughly 100,000 people enrolled in health insurance through Obamacare last month – far short of the administration's goal.  
The Health and Human Services Department said 106,185 people have successfully applied for and chosen private insurance through the health care law's new marketplaces. That total is only about 20 percent of the administration's initial enrollment target for October, the first month in which consumers were able to sign up for coverage. 
Officials have long acknowledged they would fall short of that target because of the problems surrounding HealthCare.gov, the problem-plagued website that handles enrollment for 36 states. 
HealthCare.gov has performed even worse than expected. Fewer than 27,000 people selected a plan through the website, compared with roughly 79,000 who picked a plan through the 15 state-based insurance exchanges. Unofficial estimates leaked earlier this week suggested the federal website had done slightly better.

And let's remember that these are numbers are inflated by a method considered fraudulent in the private sector.

Health and Human Services just released numbers on enrollment. The press release states that “Secretary Kathleen Sebelius announced today that 106,185 individuals have selected plans from the Marketplace.” Notice that it says “selected,” not “enrolled.”  
If they were enrolled, that would mean they have qualified and are ready to make payments for a plan that begins January 1st. However, selected can also mean that they have a plan in the “shopping cart” of their Obamacare exchange account. As the report that accompanies the press release notes:

“Individuals Who Have Selected a Marketplace plan” represents the total number of “Individuals Determined Eligible to Enroll in a plan Through the Marketplace” who have selected a plan (with or without the first premium payment having been received directly by the Marketplace or the issuer) during the reference period. This is also known as pre-effectuated enrollment.
But don't worry. Obama will make it all better with useful lies. Or something.

Tuesday, November 12, 2013

Really? New (at Least to Me) ObamaCare Ad is Embarassing Even for ObamaCare Ads


I don't have a lot of words for this one. It's likely a part of the "brosurance" campaign.


CLICK PIC TO ENLARGE...Pic from Rep. Stockman's Twitter Feed

So, the girl is screechingly happy because she's about to get lucky with a cardboard cut out? Is that the gist?

I guess Ali here is saying that it's totally worth it to pay $700 a month for health insurance so she doesn't have to worry about getting pregnant during an imaginary fling with Ryan Gosling. Great stuff...

You know, tax dollars probably paid for this advertisement. Just sayin'.

UPDATE: Oh, and there's this one too:


I guess the people running these ads have a really high opinion of young women, huh?

I mean the girl in this picture seems to have just met this guy, so hey, it's  good thing she has birth control to increase her chances of "getting him between the covers."

And I like how they've helpfully noted that the pill doesn't protect you from STDs. But then again, so what? I mean, if these ladies get something from hot guys, no worries... they have health insurance!

A whole series of these silly ads can be seen at Twitchy.com

Quinnipiac Poll Shows Obama Approval Rating at Lowest Ever



"Don't you folks know I know what's best for you?! Don't you know that if I lie... er, make a factual mistake of some sort... it's only for your best interests... in the form of Big Government ruling over your lives?! Ingrates!"

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that ObamaCare is the cause of the drop. I'm a risk taker, I know.

Honestly, the only thing surprising about all this is that his numbers aren't lower and that it has taken the implementation of ObamaCare to cause this drop. I mean the "stimulus," and high unemployment, and "you didn't build that," and Fast & Furious and a lot of Mexicans murdered with those guns didn't cause a monumental drop?

From Quinnipiac:

American voters disapprove 54 - 39 percent of the job President Barack Obama is doing, his lowest approval rating in any Quinnipiac University national poll since he became president, as even women disapprove 51 - 40 percent, according to a national poll released today.
 
Today's results compare to a slight 49 - 45 percent disapproval October 1. President Obama's lowest score before today was a 55 - 41 percent disapproval in an October 6, 2011 survey by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University.
 
Today, disapproval is 58 - 37 percent among men, 91 - 6 percent among Republicans and 63 - 30 percent among independent voters. Democrats approve 79 - 14 percent. White voters disapprove 62 - 32 percent while black voters approve 75 - 15 percent and Hispanic voters disapprove by a slim 47 - 41 percent margin.
 
Voters in every income and age group disapprove of the job Obama is doing, with the biggest disapproval, 59 - 36 percent, among voters over 65 years old.
 
For the first time today, American voters say 52 - 44 percent that Obama is not honest and trustworthy [Really?! Do you think?!]. His previous lowest marks on honesty were May 30, when 49 percent of voters said he was honest and 47 percent said he wasn't. [emphasis mine]
Things are looking a little gloomy for Obama. Well, he's got the Black voters and, of course, the Democrats... and that seems about it. Oh, and Obama probably has the MSNBC crowd so he's fine.

10 Nasty Facts Regarding Obama's Handling of Jobs


"Who are you going to believe on the economy, folks? Me? Or your own lying and racist eyes?"


From Tyler Durden at Zero Hedge:

#1 The percentage of working age Americans with a job fell to 58.3 percent in October. The lowest that number has been at any point since the year 2000 is 58.2 percent. In other words, there has been absolutely no "jobs recovery". During the last recession, the civilian employment-population ratio dropped from about 63 percent to below 59 percent and it has stayed there for 50 months in a row. Will the percentage of working age Americans with a job soon drop below the 58 percent mark?... 
#2 The U.S. economy lost 623,000 full-time jobs last month. But we are being told to believe that the economy is actually getting "better". 
#3 The number of American women with a job fell by 357,000 during the month of October. 
#4 The average duration of unemployment in October 2013 was nearly three times as long as it was in October 2000. 
#5 The number of Americans "not in the labor force" increased by an astounding 932,000 during October. In other words, the Obama administration would have us believe that nearly a million people "disappeared" from the U.S. labor force in a single month. 
#6 The number of Americans "not in the labor force" has grown by more than 11 million since Barack Obama first entered the White House. 
#7 In October, the U.S. labor force participation rate fell from 63.2 percent to 62.8 percent. It is now the lowest that it has been since 1978. Below is a chart which shows how the labor force participation rate has been steadily declining since the year 2000. How can the economy be "healthy" if the percentage of Americans that are participating in the labor force is continually declining?...

Labor Force Participation Rate
#8 If the labor force participation rate was still at the same level it was at when Barack Obama was elected in 2008, the official unemployment rate would be about 11 percent right now.

#9 Even if you are working, that does not mean that you are able to take care of yourself and your family without any help. In fact, approximately one out of every four part-time workers in America is living below the poverty line.

#10 In January 2000, there were 75 million working age Americans that did not have a job. Today, there are 102 million working age Americans that do not have a job.

So what are our politicians doing to fix this?

Shouldn't they be working night and day to solve this crisis?

After all, Barack Obama once made the following promise to the American people...

"But I want you all to know, I will not rest until anybody who's looking for a job can find one -- and I'm not talking about just any job, but good jobs that give every American decent wages and decent benefits and a fair shot at the American Dream."
Unfortunately, things have not improved since Obama made that promise, but he has found the time to play 150 rounds of golf since he has been president.

Meanwhile, because there aren't enough jobs, the number of Americans living in poverty continues to grow.

As I wrote about the other day, according to new numbers that were just released an all-time high 49.7 million Americans are living in poverty.

It's enough to keep you up nights.

Obama has done the worst job of handling the U.S. economy then any previous president. Hands down.


Forbes Article Predicts Repeal of ObamaCare


"The foolish mortals do not know what is best for them. Imagine, wanting to determine their own needs in health insurance. The hubris!"

Hayward may be right, but I doubt it.

From the Forbes article by Steven Hayward (via Drudge):

Prediction: even if HealthCare.gov is fixed by the end of the month (unlikely), Obamacare is going to be repealed well in advance of next year’s election. And if the website continues to fail, the push for repeal—from endangered Democrats—will occur very rapidly. The website is a sideshow: the real action is the number of people and businesses who are losing their health plans or having to pay a lot more. Fixing the website will only delay the inevitable. 
It is important to remember why it was so important for Obama to promise repeatedly that “if you like your health insurance/doctor, you can keep your health insurance/doctor.” Cast your mind back to the ignominious collapse of Hillarycare in 1994. Hillarycare came out of the box in September 1993 to high public support according to the early polls. This was not a surprise. Opinion polls for decades have shown a large majority of Americans support the general idea of universal health coverage. But Hillarycare came apart as the bureaucratic details came out, the most important one being that you couldn’t be sure you’d be able to keep your doctors or select specialists of your choice. The Clintons refused to consider a compromise, but even with large Democratic Senate and House majorities the bill was so dead it was never brought up for a vote.  
Remember “Harry and Louise”? Obama did, which is why he portrayed Obamacare as simply expanding coverage to the uninsured, and improving coverage for the underinsured while leaving the already insured undisturbed. But the redistributive arithmetic of Obamacare’s architecture could never add up, which is what the bureaucrats knew early on—as early as 2010 according to many documents that have leaked. The wonder is that Obama’s political team didn’t see this coming and prepare a pre-emptive strategy for dealing with the inevitable exposure of the duplicity at the heart of Obamacare’s logic. Now that people are losing their insurance and finding that they may not be able to keep their doctor after all, Obamacare has become the domestic policy equivalent of the Iraq War: a protracted fiasco that is proving fatal to a president’s credibility and approval rating. The only thing missing is calling in FEMA to help fix this Category-5 political disaster. 
Senate Democrats endangered for re-election will lead the charge for repeal perhaps as soon as January, after they get an earful over the Christmas break. They’ll call it “reform,” and clothe it in calls for delaying the individual mandate and allowing people and businesses to keep their existing health insurance policies. But it is probably too late to go back in many cases. With the political damage guaranteed to continue, the momentum toward repeal will be unstoppable. Democrats will not want to face the voters next November with the albatross of Obamacare.

The problem is that I don't believe Obama will budge on this. He's convinced that (a) he's right about this issue-- and everything else (b) the rest of us dummies who don't know anything about our own health will come around to his way of thinking if we have enough propaganda and lies slammed down out throats by the media (c) he's a Light-bringer and is invincible to political blow back.

OK, I'm exaggerating slightly. But Obama's name is attached to this and I really believe that he's willing to lose Congress to this and then attempt to administer his agendas by fiat.

We'll see, but I predict "fun" times are ahead.

Monday, November 11, 2013

U.S. Abandoning Allies in Afghanistan-- On a Very Personal Level

 
"Hey, I'm getting ready to deny expensive life-saving procedures to Americans... Do you think I care about a few folks in Afghanistan?"

 The U.S. is now teaching everyone to not cooperate with Americans as they will abandon you when you're politically inconvenient.

From the Washington Post (via Instapundit):

A growing number of Afghan interpreters who worked alongside American troops are being denied U.S. visas allotted by Congress because the State Department says there is no serious threat against their lives. 
But the interpreters, many of whom served in Taliban havens for years, say U.S. officials are drastically underestimating the danger they face. Immigration attorneys and Afghan interpreters say the denials are occurring just as concerns about Taliban retribution are mounting due to the withdrawal of U.S. forces. 

“There are tons of Talibs in my village, and they all know that I worked with the Americans,” said one interpreter, Mohammad, who asked that his last name not be published for security reasons. “If I can’t go to the States, my life is over. I swear to God, one day the Taliban will catch me.” 
Mohammad received a U.S. form letter saying he had failed to establish that there was a “serious threat” against his life. He had explained in his application that the Taliban had spotted him on the job and spread word in his village that he was a wanted man. 
In one particularly dangerous assignment, he was asked to mediate between U.S. soldiers and locals after an American convoy ran over and killed an Afghan child, he said.  
[...]  
Another interpreter who was denied a visa had worked for years at a U.S. military prison screening visitors. U.S. military officers wrote several letters stating that his job put him in particular danger because of his constant contact with the families of detained militants. 
But the State Department review board said those concerns didn’t amount to a “serious threat,” the man said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of concerns for his safety. 
A third interpreter, who received a similar denial and gave only his partial name, Naseri, survived three attacks by improvised bombs on the military units he accompanied during a five-year stint. He said he explained in a visa interview at the U.S. Embassy that he had been called a “spy and a traitor” while on patrol with his American unit and that the Taliban knew where he and his family lived. This year, he said, someone called his father and threatened to kill members of his family. 
Several U.S. military officers wrote letters to the State Department about the role Naseri played. 
“Every house we went into, he went into. Every firefight we went into, he went into,” said Lt. Matt Orr, who worked with Naseri in one of the most dangerous corners of eastern Afghanistan. He said he was baffled when Naseri was denied a visa.
It's all part of the current trend to devalue the individual. Why waste time on a few Afghan allies when it's much more important to Obama's image to just pull us out of Afghanistan.

It's a deplorable attitude, but one that is getting more an more popular.

Saturday, November 9, 2013

Thought Police Raise Ugly Head in UC Berkeley



It is just UC Berkeley, but still...

From the College Fix (via Drudge):

The UC Berkeley student government has banned the term “illegal immigrant” from its discourse, deeming the phrase racist, offensive, unfair and derogatory. 
In an unanimous vote, student senators passed a resolution that stated the word “illegal” is “racially charged,” “dehumanizes” people, and contributes to “punitive and discriminatory actions aimed primarily at immigrants and communities of color.” 
The “resolution in support of drop the I-word campaign” was approved 18 to 0 with one abstention on Oct. 30, according to a copy of the meeting’s minutes obtained by The College Fix. 
Its approval marks at least the second time this semester that a public university’s student government has voted to eradicate the phrase. UCLA passed a nearly identical measure in late August. 
There are an estimated 900 students in the country illegally who are currently enrolled in the 10-campus, University of California system, according to UC officials. These students live in “fear” because former Homeland Security secretary Janet Napolitano is now president of the UC system, according to the resolution, which aims to “create a safe campus environment for all students.” 
“The ‘I’ word is legally inaccurate since being out of status is a civil rather than criminal infraction,” states the resolution, which notes some journalists have stopped using the term. 
“No human being is illegal,” the resolution continues. “ ‘Foreign nationals,’  
‘undocumented immigrants,’ ‘immigrants without papers’ and ‘immigrants seeking status’ are examples of terms we can use that do not dehumanize people.” 
The resolution also calls for administrators and faculty to attend an “UndocuAlly training workshop.”
Yeah, let's force the people to attend the pro-illegal immigrant workshop. Let's make them think "correctly."

Fortunately these aren't the leaders of the future anymore. More like the future disappointed Psych and Literary majors on food stamps and looking for work in the public sector inside business bare California.

Good luck, future wannabe bureaucrats of America.

Friday, November 8, 2013

CBS News Article is an Exercise in 1984's "Doublethink"



Apparently it's trying to show how many people have successfully signed up for ObamaCare.


From JWF:

That’s not a typo, and the story is dated today.
Millions of Americans are being informed they’re being dropped from their insurance plans because the plans don’t meet minimum Obamacare standards, but President Obama so far has stood by his promise that “if you have insurance that you like, then you will be able to keep that insurance.”
You can't make this stuff up. If I wrote this in one of my sci-fi stories, people would say "But the media's not that dumb! They're not that malleable." Well, guess again.

And in other news, the government is RAISING our chocolate rations to ten grams a day!


Record Numbers of People Falling Out of Labor Force


Do not fret! Obama stands ready to battle the greed... or whatever capitalist nonsense that is destroying our economy!


It's Obamanomics in action!

From Zero Hedge:

First, the labor force participation rate, which plunged from 63.2% to 62.8% - the lowest since 1978!

But more importantly, the number of people not in the labor force exploded by nearly 1 million, or 932,000 to be exact, in just the month of October, to a record 91.5 million Americans! This was the third highest monthly increase in people falling out of the labor force in US history.

At this pace the people out of the labor force will surpass the working Americans in about 4 years.

Hey, don't worry... Obama will give everyone food stamps and print up more money to pat for it all. And then the Light-bringer will give you free ice cream and balloons!

When will people learn that these sort of economic policies have been tried before and failed miserably. But keep plugging away... keep kicking working people while their down... take away their full-time jobs and their health insurance. It's the Obama way.


Thursday, November 7, 2013

Hey Obama, if You're Really Sorry then Repeal ObamaCare


"I'm sorry folks have lost their health insurance because of the plan that bore my name and that I signed into law. *sniff* I mean this is embarrassing for everyone-- including me. I'm a victim myself. *sniff* Now, back to the golf courses to work tirelessly at taking away your money, opportunities, Constitutional rights and jobs..."


Can you believe this guy? Obama's reeaaalllly sorry that the plan that has his name plastered all over it, and was designed from the ground up to take away your insurance, has caused you to lose your health insurance.

I haven't seen such a lame apology since Michael Richards' apology tour.

"Garsh, I'm sorry I lied to all you folks repeatedly and decided to essentially nationalize your health care which will inevitably lead to worse care, lower life expectancies and a near-freeze on medical research. Sorry... Now on to waiting for the next mass shooting (hopefully kids) so I can once again try to take away your gun rights by standing on their dead backs. Oh, and let's not forget about spending billions more on 'green' companies that go bankrupt right after our payments."

Man, do I get tired of the crud from this president. It is without precedent.

As Senator Cruz said "Mr. President, if you're really sorry, then we need a #FullRepeal."

Fat chance on that. He's not that sorry. Obama's just sorry that you're sorry. And he has to make sure that people don't feel that they were betrayed as he's betraying them (a hallmark of the Left, isn't it?). Such a pal...

I suppose this at least some good news in that even Obama now realizes that his support is in free fall, and blaming the GOP and the TEA Party isn't cutting it.