Nuclear Option

At the Los Angeles Times, "Senate Democrats invoke 'nuclear option' on filibusters":

WASHINGTON — Democrats made a historic change to Senate rules Thursday, ending the minority party's ability to use filibusters to block most presidential nominations and, in the process, virtually guaranteeing that the rest of President Obama's term will be dominated by executive actions and court battles rather than legislation.

In changing the long-standing rules with a near party-line vote in the middle of the session, Democrats brushed aside a century of congressional tradition and further embittered relations between the parties on an already deadlocked Capitol Hill.

The Senate Republican minority, which will see its power dramatically curtailed, threatened reprisals and characterized the rule change as a political power grab, comparing it to Obama's push to pass the landmark Affordable Health Care act in 2010 without bipartisan support.

The decision by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to deploy the so-called nuclear option means Senate confirmations of presidential appointments — except for Supreme Court justices — will proceed by a simple majority vote. Previously, a 60-vote threshold had become the norm to avoid a filibuster by the minority party. The change does not affect filibusters on legislation.

Over the years, Democrats and Republican have used filibusters to block nominations, but the practice became much more common in recent years.

"I realize that neither party has been blameless for these tactics," Obama said Thursday in supporting the rule change. "They've developed over years, and it seems as if they've continually escalated. But today's pattern of obstruction — it just isn't normal. A majority of senators believe, as I believe, that enough is enough."

Only three Democrats — Mark Pryor of Arkansas, Joe Manchin III of West Virginia and Carl Levin of Michigan — joined Republicans in the 48-52 vote...

Continue reading. The rest of the piece explains how the rule-chang passed and how the Obama White House expects to govern by executive fiat over the remainder of the term.

More at Memeorandum.

Read More

Che-Loving Kshama Sawant Exhorts Workers to Seize Boeing

Fits News has the report, "Seattle Socialist: Boeing Workers Should Rise Up."

Also at WND, "Socialist lawmaker urges workers to 'take over' Boeing."

She's a freakin' murder-loving communist, it turns out. At her election-night party headquarters, Che Guevara posters adorned the walls.



Che was a remorseless mass murderer. It's pretty sick he's held up as a icon by a top official in one of America's biggest cities, but it's no surprise. (See my previous Che blogging at the link.)

Read More

24 Grooms Seeing Their Brides for the First Time

This is cool, from BuzzFeed.

24 Grooms Blown Away By Their Beautiful Brides http://t.co/9kW8uyP5b7 pic.twitter.com/BpG9p8SoMB

— BuzzFeed Classics (@BuzzFeedClassic) November 21, 2013

Read More

There's No Substitute for American Power — And Decency

From Walter Lohman, at the National Interest, "What Typhoon Haiyan Taught Us about China":

If the Asia Pacific region ever needed a reminder of the difference between a U.S.-led order and one shaped by the People’s Republic of China (PRC), the respective reactions of the two to Typhoon Haiyan is a stark one. One nation sends its navy and Marines and pledges $20 million in assistance. The other sends $100,000 in government assistance until it folds to the hectoring of the international community and increases its contribution to a still-miserly $1.6 million.

American friends and allies in the region should seriously consider the implication of this comparison. It is not an aberration.

The U.S. has made mistakes over the years. Alliances with undemocratic regimes—whether Marcos in the Philippines or Suharto in Indonesia—were often necessary in winning the Cold War. In some cases, as in Taiwan or South Korea, our embrace was a critical factor in their eventual democratization. But certainly, there were occasions when we embraced autocrats longer and more fully than necessary.

It all seems so clear now. At the time, it was not. And operating in real time, we got the details wrong on occasion. The U.S., however, has always sought to exercise a basic decency in the conduct of its foreign policy. Its electorate demands it. And in the absence of a dominant, overarching strategic context like the Cold War, the judgment calls have only gotten easier...

Continue reading.

Read More

#ObamaCare's Redistribution Scheme Exposed

One of the very best recent commentaries I've read.

From Holman Jenkins, Jr., at WSJ, "How the GOP Should Fix ObamaCare":

Let's understand: The stumbling block to fixing Mr. Obama's broken promise is Democrats clinging to the central redistributive scheme embedded in ObamaCare. There is no reconciling the two.

Americans are beginning to understand that the essence of the Affordable Care Act is that millions of people are being conscripted to buy overpriced insurance they would never choose for themselves in order to afford Mr. Obama monies to spend on the poor and those who are medically uninsurable due to pre-existing conditions. Both Mr. Obama and Republicans are blowing smoke in claiming that the damage done to the individual market by the forced cancellation of "substandard" plans (i.e., those that don't meet the purposes of ObamaCare) can somehow be reversed at this point. It can't be.

What can be done is Congress creating a new option in the form of a national health insurance charter under which insurers could design new low-cost policies free of mandated benefits imposed by ObamaCare and the 50 states that many of those losing their individual policies today surely would find attractive.

What's the first thing the new nationally chartered insurers would do? Rush out cheap, high-deductible policies, allaying some of the resentment that the ObamaCare mandate provokes among the young, healthy and footloose affluent.

These folks could buy the minimalist coverage that (for various reasons) makes sense for them. They wouldn't be forced to buy excessive coverage they don't need to subsidize the old and sick.

If this idea sounds familiar, it was proposed right here three years ago, after the 2010 elections in which Democrats lost the House due to public disquiet over ObamaCare.

Continue reading.

Read More

#ObamaCare Rollout is 'Lasting Mess' for Freaked-Out Democrats

Oh, this is harsh.

At the Hill, "Obama hits new low with Dems":

President Obama’s relationship with congressional Democrats has worsened to an unprecedented low, Democratic aides say.

They are letting it be known that House and Senate Democrats are increasingly frustrated, bitter and angry with the White House over ObamaCare’s botched rollout, and that the president’s mea culpa in a news conference last week failed to soothe any ill will.

Sources who attended a meeting of House chiefs of staff on Monday say the room was seething with anger over the immense damage being done to the Democratic Party and talk was of scrapping rollout events for the Affordable Care Act.
“Here we are, we’re supposed to be selling this to people, and it’s all screwed up,” one chief of staff ranted. “This either gets fixed or this could be the demise of the Democratic Party.

“It’s probably the worst I’ve ever seen it,” the aide said of the recent mood on Capitol Hill. “It’s bad. It’s really bad.”

Meanwhile, at a recent caucus meeting with Senate Democrats and White House chief of staff Denis McDonough, one senator stood up and asked for a political point of contact at the White House.

“There’s been an increase in frustration because people feel like they are continuing to be blindsided,” said one Democrat who attended the caucus meeting, adding that there’s a “check-the-box” mentality at the White House in dealing with lawmakers.

Democrats around Capitol Hill say there are lots of people to blame for the debacle that has engulfed them. But increasingly the anger is directed at one person only: Obama.

“Is he even more unpopular than George W. Bush? I think that’s already happened,” said one Democratic chief of staff.

Senior administration officials say they understand the frustration and anger on the opposite side of Pennsylvania Avenue and they realize Democrats are the ones who continue to take a hit.

But the senior officials say the most important thing the White House can do right now is to get the implementation of the healthcare law right. The feeling in the West Wing corridors lately is that once the rollout is fixed, the public will see all the positives behind ObamaCare.

“The policy will take care of the politics,” one senior administration official said.

But not everyone agrees with that sentiment — particularly those Democrats in both chambers who are up for reelection in 2014.

“They’re freaking out, as they should be,” said one senior Senate Democratic aide, adding that the rollout continues to be “a lasting mess.”

It's so bad House Dems won't be seen with Obama on the campaign trail. Talk about toxic, man.

Still more bad news at the link.

Read More

A Gold-Plated Insurance Exchange for Members of Congress

Man, a lot of people are going to be steaming if this becomes a political hot potato (or, another political hot potato).

At NYT, "Perks Ease Way in Health Plans for Lawmakers":

WASHINGTON — Members of Congress like to boast that they will have the same health care enrollment experience as constituents struggling with the balky federal website, because the law they wrote forced lawmakers to get coverage from the new insurance exchanges.

That is true. As long as their constituents have access to “in-person support sessions” like the ones being conducted at the Capitol and congressional office buildings by the local exchange and four major insurers. Or can log on to a special Blue Cross and Blue Shield website for members of Congress and use a special toll-free telephone number — a “dedicated congressional health insurance plan assistance line.”

And then there is the fact that lawmakers have a larger menu of “gold plan” insurance choices than most of their constituents have back home.

While millions of Americans have been left to fend for themselves and go through the frustrating experience of trying to navigate the federal exchange, members of Congress and their aides have all sorts of assistance to help them sort through their options and enroll.

Lawmakers and the employees who work in their “official offices” will receive coverage next year through the small-business marketplace of the local insurance exchange, known as D.C. Health Link, which has staff members close at hand for guidance.

“D.C. Health Link set up shop right here in Congress,” said Eleanor Holmes Norton, the delegate to the House from the nation’s capital.

Insurers routinely offer “member services” to enrollees. But on Capitol Hill, the phrase has special meaning, indicating concierge-type services for members of Congress.

If lawmakers have questions about Aetna plan benefits and provider networks, they can call a special phone number that provides “member services for members of Congress and staff.”

On the website run by the Obama administration for 36 states, it is notoriously difficult to see the prices, deductibles and other details of health plans.

It is much easier for members of Congress and their aides to see and compare their options on websites run by the Senate, the House and the local exchange.

Lawmakers can select from 112 options offered in the “gold tier” of the District of Columbia exchange, far more than are available to most of their constituents.

Aetna is offering eight plan options to members of Congress, and Blue Cross and Blue Shield is offering 16. Eight are available from Kaiser Permanente, and 80 are on sale from the UnitedHealth Group.

Lawmakers and their aides are not eligible for tax credit subsidies, but the government pays up to 75 percent of their premiums, contributing a maximum of $5,114 a year for individual coverage and $11,378 for family coverage. The government contribution is based on the same formula used for most other federal employees...

Yeah, it must be rough.

The Washington elite against the rest of us. Republicans should be ashamed they're getting special treatment, but at least they didn't vote for the monstrosity. They can at least partially redeem themselves by getting that clusterf-k repealed. ASAP.

Still more at that top link.

Read More

#ObamaCare Forced Mom Into Medicaid

Now this is just downright sad.

From Nicole Hopkins, at WSJ:

My mother is not one to seek attention by complaining, so her recent woeful Facebook post caught my eye: "The poor get poorer." It diverged from the more customary stream of inspirational quotes, recipes and snapshots from her tiny cottage in Pierce County, Wash.

The post continued: "I just received a notice: 'In order to comply with the new healthcare law, your current health plan will be discontinued on December 31, 2013.' Currently my premium is $276 and it is a stretch for me to cover. The new plan . . . are you ready . . . projected new rate $415.20. Now I can't afford health insurance."

The unaffordable ObamaCare-compliant plan that her insurer offered in a Sept. 26 letter is not what makes my mother's story noteworthy. Countless individually insured Americans have received such letters; many are seeing more radical increases in premiums and deductibles.

But most of these people are still being offered the chance to choose what health-care insurance they will receive, or to opt out before they are automatically enrolled in a state program. Not so my mother, Charlene Hopkins, as I soon discovered when I called after seeing her Facebook post.

Since she couldn't afford the new plan offered by her insurer, she told me she was eager to explore her new choices under the Affordable Care Act. Washington Healthplanfinder is one of the better health-exchange sites, and she was actually able to log on. She entered her personal and financial data. With efficiency uncommon to the ObamaCare process, the site quickly presented her with a health-care option.

That is not a typo: There was just one option—at the very affordable monthly rate of zero. The exchange had determined that my mother was not eligible to choose to pay for a plan, and so she was slated immediately for Medicaid. She couldn't believe it was true and held off completing the application.

"How has it come to this?" she asked in one of our several talks over the past few weeks about what was happening. When she was a working mother and I was young, she easily carried health insurance for our whole family. "How have I fallen this far?"

In 2011, she had to give up her real-estate license; as a newer agent, she did not stand to earn enough in the tough market to justify the fees to renew. She has since managed to eke out a living as a substitute para-educator in the Central Kitsap School District. "I'm not on the couch, watching TV," she said. "I'm out trying to find more work every day."

Unable to secure employer-sponsored health care, she had, until this fall, chosen to pay $276 a month for bare-bones catastrophic coverage. "I think that we should be able to take care of ourselves and to earn enough money to pay for basics, and health insurance is one of them," she told me. For two years she had paid out of pocket for that plan, but now she is being told that the plan isn't good enough for her.

The Sept. 26 letter from my mother's insurer promised that the more expensive plan "conforms with the new health care law"—by covering maternity needs, newborn wellness and pediatric dental care. My mother asked: "Do I need maternity care at 52?" In addition to requiring her to pay an extra $1,677 annually, the plan would have increased her deductible by $1,500.

But she had at least been presented with an option that she could turn down, unlike on the state exchange...

Continue reading.

Leftists will say they're making the woman better off. But she liked her plan, because it preserved her dignity. ObamaCare robbed her of it. We're all caught in the maw of the vicious Democrat healthcare tyranny. Only complete repeal --- and the utter decimation of the menacing Democrat Party --- will begin to turn things around, and restore some dignity.

Read More

Dems Calling for #ObamaCare Repeal?

From Megan McArdle, at Bloomberg, "Wishful Thinking Can't Hold Obamacare Together":

The Obamacare story is as much a political story, and a media story, as it is a policy story. If people think that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act won’t work, then it probably won’t; the politicians will start passing “fixes” that undermine the functionality of its interlocking parts, and companies and consumers will abandon the fledgling markets. If people think that Obamacare will work -- well, it might not work anyway, because the real world does not always deliver rhetorically pleasing symmetry. But it certainly has a much better shot.

Of note, then, is one development you saw over the weekend: People are starting to talk about repeal. In early October, most people -- including me -- would have ranked this as wishful Republican thinking, along the lines of “repeal the Fed.” But the weekend brought us the National Journal’s Josh Kraushaar suggesting that Democrats might begin calling for repeal if things don’t get better soon...

Lots more at the link.

Read More

New AFP Ads Target Democrats on #ObamaCare

From Americans for Prosperity.



Make those f-kers eat it.

Read More

Dream Angels Holiday 2013

These babes are wild.



And it's just over three weeks now until the fashion show. Lovely.

Read More

Deep Danger for Democrats in 2014

From Stan Veuger, at the National Interest, "Obamacare Reforms Could Doom Dems in 2014":

Things aren’t exactly looking up for President Obama these days. The rollout of the Affordable Care Act’s central feature, the exchanges where people without employer-provided health insurance are meant to purchase plans, has been disastrous, marked by IT problems and astonishingly low enrollment numbers. The President’s promise that “If you like your plan, you can keep it” has been shown to be knowingly false. The number of people losing coverage is so far rapidly outpacing the number of people gaining coverage. And the administration’s haphazard fixes may only be worsening the situation, promising even deeper political trouble down the road.

First the administration delayed the employer mandate, which, now starting in 2015, will force employers with more than fifty quasi-full-time employees to provide health insurance or pay a new tax. The administration’s decision to delay the mandate, welcome as it may have been to businesses that gained an additional year to deal with the new regulations and obligations they will face, will almost surely lead to political damage at a very unhelpful time. Right before the 2014 midterm elections, about half of all employer plans would have to be canceled or replaced. This would show an immense number of Americans, more than ten times as many as those who are now receiving individual-market cancellation notices, that the administration’s promises that you can keep your doctor were false, and it will show them this in a direct, personal manner. It seems unlikely that congressional Democrats would be willing to deal with the political fallout from such unpleasant news right before facing reelection.

Having delayed the employer mandate, the administration then had to deal with the individual mandate, and the exchanges on which individuals were supposed to purchase health insurance policies to comply with it. All was working wonderfully well in the President’s mind until October 1, when the glory of Kayak, the beauty of Amazon Prime, and the convenience of Uber would converge, creating Healthcare.gov, a website that would win the Internet instantly and put Facebook and Google to shame. That didn’t happen, and after initially downplaying the problems with the infrastructure sustaining the exchanges the administration announced that it had finally found a shovel-ready project: by December 1, the website should be working for 4 out of every 5 people looking for health insurance—a pretty high bar, given how things have gone so far. The problem, of course, is that millions of people will now have only a two-week window to ensure that they have health insurance starting on January 1. And quite a few of those people will find that the prices and policies available to them are not particularly wonderful, especially those who had individual coverage already.

Ah yes, the people who had managed to navigate the individual market before the exchanges came into being! A lot of their plans got canceled. After attempts to spin their loss as a victory for Western civilization failed, President Obama saw himself forced to introduce yet another potentially damaging fix. During an impromptu press conference, he announced that in his infinite benevolence he would give insurance companies the chance to uncancel canceled insurance policies. This was certainly not planned for, and involves the following risk: if relatively healthy people choose to stay on their preexisting plans, and relatively unhealthy people join the exchanges, insurers will have to deal with a much costlier group of people buying new ACA-approved policies. And that will inevitably lead to rising premiums and significant sticker shock… again, right before the 2014 elections.

Continue reading.

IMAGE CREDIT: iOWNTHEWORLD.

Read More

Time to Ditch #ObamaCare and Move On

From Liz Peek, at Fiscal Times, "Time to Ditch Obamacare — a Plan to Rob Taxpayers":

Where do we go from here? With 57 percent of Americans now opposing the Affordable Care Act according to an ABC/Washington Post Poll, and with a steady drip of bad news likely to further undermine the president’s signature law – is it time for Obama and the Democrats to admit failure and throw the law out? Maybe.

If Republicans campaign on overturning Obamacare and win the Senate in 2014 – not an impossibility – it is conceivable that the bill could be jettisoned. It won’t be easy, since President Obama has promised to veto the measure. However, with the bill being hacked to bits by a White House frantic to salvage some vestige the deal, arguing its merits becomes even tougher, and tossing it overboard may become easier.

Continue reading.

Read More

Here Comes the Second Wave of #ObamaCare Cancellations

At Fox News, "Second Wave of Health Plan Cancellations Looms":

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.

"The impact I'm mostly worried about is on small young, entrepreneurial firms that will suddenly face much higher health insurance premiums if they want to offer health insurance to their employees," said AEI resident scholar Stan Veuger. "I think for a lot of other businesses ... they can just send their employees to the exchanges or offer them a fixed subsidy every month to buy health insurance themselves."

Under the health care law, businesses with fewer than 50 workers do not have to provide health coverage. But if they do, the policies will still have to meet the benefit standards set by ObamaCare.

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.

Following the links takes us to Forbes, "Thousands Of Small Businesses Will Also Start Losing Their Current Health Policies Under Obamacare. Here's Why."

Read More

Wham! #ObamaCare Creates 'Two-Tier' Health System as Insurers Restrict Choices to Cut Costs

And you know what, this isn't a bug. It's a feature.

All is proceeding just as the Democrats planned.

At the Washington Post, "Insurers restricting choice of doctors and hospitals to keep costs down":

As Americans have begun shopping for health plans on the insurance exchanges, they are discovering that insurers are restricting their choice of doctors and hospitals in order to keep costs low, and that many of the plans exclude top-rated hospitals.

The Obama administration made it a priority to keep down the cost of insurance on the exchanges, the online marketplaces that are central to the Affordable Care Act. But one way that insurers have been able to offer lower rates is by creating networks that are far smaller than what most Americans are accustomed to.

The decisions have provoked a backlash. In one closely watched case, Seattle Children’s Hospital has filed suit against Washington’s insurance commissioner after a number of insurers kept it out of their provider networks. “It is unprecedented in our market to have major insurance plans exclude Seattle Children’s,” said Sandy Melzer, senior vice president.

The result, some argue, is a two-tier system of health care: Many of the people who buy health plans on the exchanges have fewer hospitals and doctors to choose from than those with coverage through their employers.

A number of the nation’s top hospitals — including the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota, Cedars-Sinai in Los Angeles and children’s hospitals in Seattle, Houston and St. Louis — are cut out of most plans sold on the exchange.

In most cases, the decision was about the cost of care.

Continue reading.

Read More

.@MSNBC Race-Baiter Michael Eric Dyson Attacks Matt Lewis for 'White Privilege'

The funny thing is Dyson really believes he's being treated like a "boy" rather than being called out, rightly, for his idiot race-baiting. Behold the intellectual and moral bankruptcy of the radical left.

At NewsBusters, "WATCH: Conservative Writer Takes on Race-Obsessed MSNBC Contributor Michael Eric Dyson."

Read More

New Emails Show White House Knew #ObamaCare Could Crash on Launch

At Politico, "White House email chain shows launch fears":

Top White House and health officials feared that HealthCare.gov wouldn’t work correctly and would set off a wave of bad publicity, according to emails shortly before the disastrous rollout of the Obamacare enrollment website.

The emails, released Wednesday evening by House Oversight Chairman Darrell Issa, included a picture of an error message that has become emblematic of the launch debacle. They were dated Sept. 25 — less than a week before the enrollment portal opened and immediately created a crisis for the White House.

“When Todd Park and Marilyn [Tavenner] was here yesterday one of the things Todd conveyed was this fear the WH has about hc.gov being unavailable,” Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Deputy Chief Information Officer Henry Chao wrote to a few dozen staff and contractors. He was referring to White House Chief Technology Officer Todd Park and CMS Administrator Marilyn Tavenner.

“Todd does have a good point and I think we should have a more comprehensive answer as to how we will ensure high availability,” Chao continued.

Later on in the email chain, Chae wrote to two colleagues: “… can you think about a better way to convey to the public when the site is not available? I am picturing in my mind all the major print and online publications taking screenshots of what is below and just ramping up the hyperbole about hc.gov not functional.” Attached is picture of an error message which says, “The System is down at the moment.”

Also at Fox News, "Email shows White House had 'fear' ObamaCare site wouldn't work before launch."

Read More

Some Afternoon Alice Goodwin #Rule5

I might be able to get a little blogging in tonight, so might was well start it out with a bang.

At Egotastic!, "Alice Goodwin Return to Barely There Lingerie Glory."

Read More

Oh My! Obama Dive-Bombs to 37 Percent Approval in Latest CBS News Poll

Yeah, because it's just a matter of time before the ObamaCare kinks are worked out, or something.

At CBS, "Obama approval sink to new lows":

President Obama's job approval rating has plunged to the lowest of his presidency, according to a new CBS News poll released Wednesday, and Americans' approval of the Affordable Care Act has dropped it's lowest since CBS News started polling on the law.

Thirty-seven percent now approve of the job Mr. Obama is doing as president, down from 46 percent in October -- a nine point drop in just a month. Mr. Obama's disapproval rating is 57 percent -- the highest level for this president in CBS News Polls.

Obamacare issues erasing Democrats' political advantage from gov't shutdown
A rocky beginning to the opening of the new health insurance exchanges has also taken its toll on how Americans perceive the Affordable Care Act. Now, approval of the law has dropped to 31 percent - the lowest number yet recorded in CBS News Polls, and a drop of 12 points since last month. Sixty-one percent disapprove (a high for this poll), including 46 percent who say they disapprove strongly.

Republicans are nearly unanimous in their disapproval of the law, and now more than two-thirds of independents agree. Almost six in ten Democrats continue to support the law, but their support has dropped 16 points from last month - from 74 percent in October to 58 percent today. Support has dropped 11 points among independents and five points among Republicans.

Via Memeorandum.

Read More

Greta Van Susteren Exposes Murderous Black Thug 'Knockout Game'

It's long past time for black leaders to speak out and denounce this vicious "game" that's popular with America's black thug youth.

At Greta Van Susteren's blog, "VIDEO: “Knockout Game” hits another victim in D.C."

From last night's show, "What did you think of my OFF THE RECORD commentary tonight?"

Also, "WATCH THIS VIDEO: WHERE IS THE MEDIA?? THIS SHOULD BE SPARKING OUTRAGE COAST TO COAST! WHY ISN’T EVERY NEWS OUTLET COVERING THIS? (CBS LOCAL IS!) THIS IS NOT A GAME AND IT IS NOT FUNNY – THIS IS MURDER."

When someone dies from this cruel KNOCK OUT game (and it is not funny nor a game), it is MURDER. If the victim does not die, it is assault with intent to kill. It is mean. It is cruel. It also is terrible for the many good people in a community trying to live their lives and raise their families. They are scared.

Read More

Unhinged Leftists Freak Over Big-Game Hunter Melissa Bachman — Again!

The hunt was completely legal --- and ethical.

From Katie Pavlich, at Townhall, "Ignorant Anti-Hunters Freak Out Over Woman Who Legally Killed a Lion."

Just read it all at the link.



Yeah, by now this is pretty routine, the damned leftist ghouls.

Remember previously, "Big-Game Hunter Melissa Bachman Cut From National Geographic's 'Ultimate Survivor Alaska' After Environmental Fascists Mount Boycott at Change.org."

Read More

Repeal of 1988 Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act Portends Danger for #ObamaCare

Look, when front-page coverage at the New York Times raises the specter of ObamaCare repeal, you know things are hitting rock-bottom on the left.

See, "Lesson Is Seen in Failure of Law on Medicare in 1989":

WASHINGTON — Angry Americans voice outrage at being asked to pay more for health coverage. Lawmakers and the White House say the public just doesn’t appreciate the benefits of the new health law. Opponents clamor for repeal before the program fully kicks in.

The year was 1989, and the law was the Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act, which was supposed to protect older Americans from bankruptcy due to medical bills. Instead it became a catastrophe for Democratic and Republican lawmakers, who learned the hard way that many older Americans did not want to be helped in that particular way.

Seventeen months after President Ronald Reagan signed the measure with Rose Garden fanfare, a series of miscalculations and missteps in passing the law became painfully evident, and it was unceremoniously stricken from the books by lawmakers who could not see its demise come quickly enough.

The tortured history of the catastrophic-care law is a cautionary tale in the context of the struggle over the new health law, the Affordable Care Act. It illustrates the political and policy hazards of presenting sweeping health system changes to consumers who might not be prepared for them. And it provides a rare example of lawmakers who were willing to jettison a big piece of social policy legislation when the political risks became too grave.

“It has often been said that if you get an entitlement on the books, you can never get rid of it,” said Bill Archer, who pushed to repeal the 1988 law as a senior Republican, from Texas, on the House Ways and Means Committee. “That is an example of a time we did get rid of it.”

Backers of the Affordable Care Act say comparisons to the catastrophic-care debacle are flawed. They say that the new law fills a major health insurance void and that despite its current problems it will never meet the same fate as that undertaking in 1988.

“It is enormously different,” said Ron Pollack, the executive director of Families USA, a liberal consumer advocacy group, who supported both the new health law and the catastrophic-care program. “You had a benefit totally paid for by 40 percent of the Medicare beneficiaries, who overwhelmingly thought there was not a benefit there for them. It is understandable they were upset.”

Others involved with the passage and repeal of the Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act see clear parallels with the current situation, in which a very vocal segment that views itself as harmed by the new law has joined with highly organized political operations to rally opposition to it.

“When I saw this massive thing, I said, ‘Boy, if this is anything like catastrophic, they are going to be in trouble,’ ” said Brian J. Donnelly, who led the 1989 repeal effort as a Massachusetts Democrat on the Ways and Means Committee. “It is a very good analogy.”

Continue reading.

And flashback to 1989, at NYT, "Retreat in Congress; The Catastrophic-Care Debacle - A special report.; How the New Medicare Law Fell on Hard Times in a Hurry":

Rarely has a Government program that promised so much to so many fallen apart so fast.

Yeah, well.

I guess people actually got a chance to see what was in it --- and they weren't happy.

PREVIOUSLY: "#ObamaCare's on Life Support."

Read More

@MSNBC's Disgusting Martin Bashir Apologizes to Sarah Palin

At Freedom Eden, "Martin Bashir Apology to Sarah Palin (Video)."

Also at Legal Insurrection, "Martin Bashir apologizes for disgusting attack on Sarah Palin."



And ICYMI, the background's at BCF, "Martin Bashir Suggests Someone Should Defecate in Palin's Mouth and Urinate in Her Eyes."

Read More

Philippines Survivors Begin Odyssey for Families

At the Wall Street Journal, "Typhoon Haiyan Survivors Begin Odyssey to Find Their Families":

CEBU CITY, Philippines—Just after nightfall, three men jostled with hundreds of other people for spots aboard a rust-stained ferry leaving this port for an island where they hoped to find loved ones alive—or prepare to bury them.

Typhoon Haiyan ripped across the Philippines a week earlier, focusing much of its wrath on Samar Island. A few hundred of those on the Cebu dock found their way aboard the Samar-bound 34-year-old ferry, the Blessed Stars.

The Blessed Stars' passengers—and thousands of others boarding ferries on the docks during a tropical downpour—were part of a mass migration of people from the Philippines and beyond who are converging on their devastated home islands.

As the engine kicked in and fumes mixed with the salty breeze, stars began to emerge. Passengers lighted cigarettes and, as the 15-hour journey began, told of the people they were traveling to find.

One was Angel Cillo, who boarded with his wife to find out whether his family in his hometown was alive, including his 75-year-old mother. He last spoke to them by phone just before the typhoon hit, and his brother had sounded nonchalant. Calls now always produced one response: "The person you are trying to call is out of the coverage area."

Another, Rayanaldo Casas, knew his 22-year-old son, an apprentice on a cement ship, died when the storm surge hit off the Samar coast.

His body was in a mass grave, Mr. Casas said. He wanted to return the remains to his home on another island.

"I will bring him home, but I don't know how," he said.

Passenger Eduard Amanigos, a worker in Kuwait, lost touch with his wife, son and daughter when the typhoon hit their home along the eastern Samar coast. The last thing his wife said before the phone went dead: "The water has risen to the ceiling in just five minutes."

He said he later saw her alive on television, but he didn't know much about her situation.

Continue reading.

Read More

What Castro Knew About Lee Harvey Oswald

From Mary Anastasia O'Grady, at WSJ, "The official narrative skips tantalizing signs of a Cuban connection":

In November 1963, Cuban intelligence officer Florentino Aspillaga was posted in a little hut near a Cuban beach where he operated listening equipment trained on Miami and CIA headquarters in Virginia. On the morning of Nov. 22, Mr. Aspillaga—who would defect to the U.S. in 1987—said that he was ordered "to stop all your CIA work, all your CIA work." He was instructed to "put all of my equipment to listen to any small detail from Texas. They told me Texas."

Did Castro know that Lee Harvey Oswald was about to assassinate President Kennedy? Brian Latell, a veteran CIA Cuba analyst who spent 15 hours interviewing Mr. Aspillaga for his newly revised "Castro's Secrets," (Palgrave MacMillan), makes a strong case that he did.

Mr. Latell takes readers through a half-century of Cuban espionage by interviewing a dozen high-ranking Cuban defectors and numerous former CIA officers. He calls Mr. Aspillaga "the most knowledgeable Cuban defector ever to change sides." He also pored over thousands of pages of declassified CIA documents and gained access to the unpublished memoir of Thomas Mann, the U.S. ambassador to Mexico in 1963, who had reason to suspect an Oswald-Cuba connection.

Mr. Latell set out to tell the story of Cuba's "intelligence machine," which outmaneuvered the U.S. for many years. In the process he uncovers startling details that suggest that Cuba fueled Oswald's maniacal desire to prove himself worthy of Castro's revolution during the American's visit to Mexico City in the fall of 1963. Mr. Latell also presents strong evidence that the Johnson administration and higher-ups in the FBI and the CIA ensured those details were kept from the Warren Commission.

The Kennedy administration was desperate to eliminate Castro. The 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion had failed and by August 1963, according to Edward Jay Epstein —a renowned expert on the killing of the president and author of the recently released book "The JFK Assassination Diary"— Richard Helms, though not yet CIA director, was "receiving almost daily phone calls from [Attorney General Robert Kennedy ] demanding to know what actions he was [taking] to remove Castro from power." The agency recruited Rolando Cubela, a revolutionary insider, to do the job.

But Cubela was a double agent. And on Sept. 7, just after Cubela agreed to help the Americans, Castro gave an interview to an AP reporter in which he put the U.S. on notice that "aiding terrorist plans to eliminate Cuban leaders" would mean that "they themselves will not be safe."

Castro didn't need to look far for a willing partner to back up those words. It is "known with near certainty," writes Mr. Latell, that Cuba had "opened a dossier" on Oswald in 1959, while he was stationed at the Marine Corps Air Station El Toro, in Southern California. Oswald was enamored of the Cuban Revolution, and he had made contact with the Cuban consulate in Los Angeles.

On Sept. 27, 1963, Oswald checked into the Hotel Comercio in Mexico City for a five-night stay. He tried to get a visa from the Cuban embassy to travel to Havana. He had a fling with an embassy employee and probably spent time with others who were intelligence agents. When his visa was not forthcoming, witnesses said he went on a rant at the embassy, slammed the door and stormed off.

According to Mr. Latell, during his Mexico City stay Oswald twice visited the Soviet consulate where he met with "an officer of the notorious Department 13, responsible for assassination and sabotage operations." The KGB was training Cuban intelligence at the time, and "it seems certain that [Oswald's] intelligence file in Havana was thickening."

Castro's claim about Oswald—in a speech 30 hours after Kennedy was shot—that "we never in our life heard of him" was a lie. Indeed, in a 1964 conversation with Jack Childs —an American communist who had secretly been working for the FBI—Castro let it slip that he knew of Oswald's outburst while at the embassy in Mexico City and said that the ex-Marine had threatened to kill the U.S. president.

Continue reading.

Read More

Ouch! Obama's Approval Tanks in New Poll at Washington Post!

Oh boy, Dems are going to have another rough day tomorrow.

At WaPo, "Obama’s ratings tumble after health care flaws":

The flawed rollout of the Affordable Care Act has pushed President Obama to the lowest point of his presidency, with dwindling faith in his competence and in many of the personal attributes that have buoyed him in the past, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

Opposition to the new health-care law also hit a record high in the survey, with 57 percent saying they oppose the president’s most significant domestic initiative. Forty-six percent say they are strongly against it. Just a month ago, as the enrollment period was beginning, the public was almost evenly divided in its assessments of the law.

Disapproval of Obama’s handling of the health-care law’s rollout stands at 63 percent, with a majority saying they strongly disapprove. Last month, 53 percent disapproved.

The findings are the first since Obama’s news conference last week in which he repeatedly acknowledged his and the administration’s mistakes in handling the legislation. He also sought to assuage the anger among millions of Americans whose individual policies were canceled because they did not meet the new requirements.

The provision of the legislation that requires all individuals to obtain health insurance or pay a fine long has been controversial, and the survey highlights that anew. By almost 2 to 1, Americans oppose the individual mandate, with more than half saying they strongly oppose it. In contrast, almost six in 10 support the provision that requires companies with more than 50 employees to provide health insurance or face a financial penalty.

Because of the problems with HealthCare.Gov, the federal Web site designed to allow people to sign up for insurance, seven in 10 Americans say the administration should delay the individual mandate.

The public views the uproar over canceled policies, which has roiled the administration over the past month, as more than the normal start-up problems of a large enterprise. A majority say the trouble is a sign of mismanagement by those in charge of implementing the law.

Because of the cancellations, Obama has come under sharp criticism for having said repeatedly that people who liked their policies could keep them. The Post-ABC survey asked people whether they thought that he told the public what he believed to be true or that he intentionally misled. By 52 percent to 44 percent, Americans say they think he told people what he thought was correct at the time.

With all the controversy surrounding the implementation of the law, Americans are evenly divided on whether the Affordable Care Act can be fixed.

Responses to that question differ dramatically depending on party identification, with Democrats overwhelmingly confident that the legislation can be made to work and Republicans overwhelmingly pessimistic about its viability. A majority of independents say it cannot be made to work.

The health-care law has become a political burden for elected officials who support it. Almost four in 10 Americans say they are more likely to oppose a politician who backs the legislation, while just over a fifth say they would be more likely to support such a politician. That’s the biggest gap recorded in Post-ABC polling during the entire debate over the law.

Not good at all.

Continue reading.

More people have a negative view of Obama "personally" than they do of his positively, which is unlike any time during in in the past for this presidency.

More:

For the first time in Obama’s presidency, a bare majority of Americans, 52 percent, say they have an unfavorable impression of him, with 46 percent saying they view him favorably. Those ratings have declined from a net positive of 23 points at the time of his inauguration in January.

Like I said: It's gonna be a rough day for the Dems tomorrow. And boy do they deserve it.

IMAGE CREDIT: The Looking Spoon.

Read More

Doris Lessing, 1919-2013

From LAT's obituary, "Doris Lessing dies at 94; British novelist of the 'female experience'":

Lessing resisted being called a feminist, in fact frankly condemned the man-hating excesses of the early women's movement.

"I think they missed a great many opportunities," she said in a 2007 interview with The Times. "Just to oversimplify, they went political. From the moment they went political, inevitably they were going to fragment and bitch-bite and call each other names. They did some unspeakably bad things, like rubbish women who were bringing up children," she said.

"If I say the 1960s motto was 'women good, men bad,' I think I've summed it up," she said. "But things have changed. I think I have noticed that what young women are doing is looking for a husband, just as if there hadn't been any so-called feminist revolution.... Not saying they want to get married, necessarily. I also know a lot of women who don't want children, which I think is marvelous. What a liberation that is, in that nobody even blames them for it!"

RTWT.

And from Instapundit, "DORIS LESSING HAS DIED":

Let me again call attention to this column of hers on political correctness and communism, and this piece on why feminism should stop attacking men, which was linked back in the very earliest days of InstaPundit.

Click through and follow the links.

She was a fascinating woman. I had no idea --- and I'm supposed to be well-read, lol.

Read More

#ObamaCare's on Life Support

From Josh Kraushaar, at National Journal, "Why Obamacare Is On Life Support":

There's nothing that Democrats want more than to change the subject from Obamacare, despite DNC Chairman Debbie Wasserman Schultz's protestations otherwise. Congressional Democrats don't want to be dealing with a drip-drip of news about premiums going up, patients losing their doctors, and a broken health care website as they face angry voters in 2014. Hillary Clinton doesn't want this issue lingering past the midterms. She hitched her presidential prospects to President Obama's wagon and she's not about to let someone else's crisis damage her presidential ambitions yet again, Even Vice President Joe Biden, who called the health care law a "big f---ing deal," didn't mention it once at a fundraiser last week for North Carolina Sen. Kay Hagan.

Unless the HealthCare.gov website miraculously gets fixed by next month, there's a growing likelihood that over time, enough Democrats may join Republicans to decide to start over and scrap the whole complex health care enterprise. That became clear when even Obama, to stop the political bleeding, offered an administrative fix that threatened the viability of the entire individual exchange market to forestall a House Democratic mutiny the next day. It was as clear sign as any that the president is pessimistic about the odds that the federal exchange website will be ready by the end of the month, as promised.

More than anything, politics is about self-preservation, and the last two weeks provided numerous examples of how public opinion has turned so hard against the law that even its most ardent supporters are running for the hills. It's not just red-state Democrats, like Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu, distancing themselves from the law. It's blue-state senators like Oregon's Jeff Merkley and New Hampshire's Jeanne Shaheen -- and top blue-state recruits like Michigan's Gary Peters and Iowa's Bruce Braley, who voted for GOP legislation Friday that the White House said would "gut" the law. Nearly every House Democrat in a competitive district joined with Republicans to threaten the law. Without a quick fix, those ranks will grow.

This tsunami of blowback, which built in just the last month, is unsustainable for Democrats over the long haul. The president isn't just losing his skeptics from the chaotic Obamacare rollout but his allies who stood to gain from the law's benefits -- namely Hispanics, whose approval of the president has dropped more than any demographic subgroup since the problems began. The simplest solution -- if only to stop the bleeding -- is to get the website fixed. (When former DNC Chairman Howard Dean's proposal is to hire tens of thousands of young phone operators to sign people up for insurance -- straight out of a Jerry Lewis telethon -- as he suggested on "Morning Joe," it's clear the website problems are really bad.).

Continue reading (via Memeorandum).

An excellent analysis, Kraushaar suggests we're about this far from enough Democrat defection to favor repeal in the Congress. If not now, should Democrats lose the Senate in 2014, kiss the ACA goodbye.

Read More

Toronto Mayor Rob Ford Knocks Over Councilwoman

Via BCF, "Tim Hudak would support action to deal with Mayor Ford."



PREVIOUSLY: "Toronto Mayor Rob Ford Says He Won't Go Down Without a Fight."

Read More

From BFD to MIA: Vice President Joe Biden Missing from #ObamaCare Debacle

He's been pretty scarce lately.

Neil Munro has it, at the Daily Caller, "Joe Biden hides from Obamacare crisis."



The video's from Biden's comments two weeks ago, but it looks like he stuck his head out today, "Biden: 'God Willing' Obamacare Website Gets Fixed."

FLASHBACK: At Freedom Eden, "Biden: 'This is a Big F---ing Deal' (Video)."

Read More

Gallup: 55 Percent of Independents Say It's Not Federal Gov't's Responsibility for Health Coverage

Here's the report at Gallup, "Majority in U.S. Say Healthcare Not Gov't Responsibility."

Read it at the link (via Memeorandum).

What's particularly striking is the robust majority of independents against the federal government's role of provider of healthcare. We're hearing all this talk about the death of the "liberal" agenda (what I've called the death of radical progressivism under Obama), and this is just one more indicator of the harsh hit the left is taking amid this massive Democrat healthcare clusterf-k.

Read More

Toronto Mayor Rob Ford Says He Won't Go Down Without a Fight

At Canada's National Post, "Rob Ford vows not to go down without a fight after vote strips him of key powers."

But see Christie Blatchford, "Rob Ford’s downfall leaves sobering questions about Toronto police probe":

By this point in the shlock opera that is the Rob Ford story, it’s a given that the Toronto mayor is, to borrow from Wayne Campbell and Garth Algar on Wayne’s World, not worthy.

He is not worthy of defending. He is not worthy of the benefit of the doubt. He’s not worthy of another chance.

What Mr. Ford is is hard bloody work, and after months of duplicity, he has managed to squander the public trust. And with each new low he attains — the bar is now well below the ground — he exhausts even the residue of goodwill that remained for him even after the last of the trust had gone.

So don’t cry for him.

Continue reading.

More at BCF, "Is OCAP Trying To Setup Rob Ford?" And, "Rob Ford’s prominence in police investigation into two other men puzzling, experts say."

Read More

Philippines Typhoon Boosts Leftist 'Climate Justice' Meme

A big climate change "inequities" piece on the front-page of the New York Times yesterday. I almost started laughing.

Pirate's Cove has it, "NY Times: Say, That Climate Change Thing Sure Creates Inequities, Eh?"

Read More

Russia Plane Crash: 50 Dead as Boeing 737 Crashes on Landing in Kazan

At LAT, "Russian plane crashes in gusty weather, killing 50":

MOSCOW — A Boeing 737 being operated by a regional airline crashed in gusty weather Sunday evening while attempting to land at the airport in Kazan in central Russia, killing all 50 people on board, authorities said.

The Tatarstan Airlines flight from Moscow was carrying 44 passengers and six crew members when it crashed into the airport tarmac, caught fire and broke apart, according to Sergei Izvolsky, a spokesman for Rosaviatsia, a federal air transportation agency.

The cause was not immediately known. Vladimir Markin, spokesman for the national Investigative Committee, told the Interfax news agency that authorities would look at several possibilities, "including pilot error, technical fault and unfavorable weather conditions."

Russian television carried dramatic footage that showed flames engulfing the plane as it sat on the tarmac in the dark, firetrucks drenching it with water cannons. The crash occurred at 7:25 p.m.

Among those killed, according to the federal Emergency Situations Ministry, was Irek Minnikhanov, 24, the son of the president of Russia's Tatarstan republic, Rustam Minnikhanov. Also reported killed was Alexander Antonov, the regional head of the Federal Security Service, the main successor agency to the Soviet KGB.

Kazan is the capital of Tatarstan.

Read More

IDF Humanitarian Delegation to the Philippines

This is awesome:

Read More

Youth Pastor Daniel Diaz Shot to Death by Lone Gunman in Pomona

It's a pretty rough neighborhood out that way.

At LAT, "Pastor's slaying is latest in a year of violence for Pomona":

Eddie Reyes was just a 12-year-old in the school lunch line when Daniel Diaz shook his hand, introduced himself and asked Reyes about God.

Twenty years after the pair first met, Diaz was still reaching out to young people. His ability to connect with youths took the longtime friends to the corner of Park and Mayfair avenues in Pomona on Nov. 11, where police say Diaz was shot to death by a lone gunman on foot.

Diaz's killing — just hours after about 200 people gathered for an anti-violence rally at Ganesha High School in Pomona — was the latest in what police and community leaders are calling the worst year of violence in the city's recent history.

"I'm just kind of in disbelief," said Connie Jimenez, whose son Carlos was killed in a still-unsolved homicide in May 2011. "It's a cycle."

Diaz was shot about 12:45 a.m. Monday. He was a passenger in Reyes' car while the pair dropped off three boys who are a part of Diaz's youth ministry at New Beginnings Community Church in Baldwin Park. The group was celebrating Reyes' 32nd birthday and one of the boys' recent graduation from a youth program. Diaz had turned 33 a week earlier.

According to police, someone ran up to the passenger-side door and unloaded four shots into Diaz. No one else in the vehicle was hit, and police have no explanation for the killing. Friends and family say Diaz had no enemies.

"The individual that was out there that night was some lost young soul," Reyes said. Diaz's "entire purpose was to inspire them to not go in that direction."

Over the last two years, Pomona has seen a sharp increase in homicides, reversing years of decline in a city once known for its crime rate and gang wars. There have been at least 24 homicides in Pomona this year, according to the Times Homicide Report.

"There's no way to overlook the fact that we've had a significant increase in gun violence and homicides," said Pomona police Lt. Eddie Vazquez. "All of our other crimes, assaults, thefts, burglaries are all down … but homicides are up."

A majority of the victims of this year's violence have been documented gang members, Vazquez said.

Continue reading.

More at the Times Homicide Report.

Read More

USC Interim Coach Ed Orgeron Makes Loud Statement with Trojans' Dramatic 20-17 Win Over Stanford

It was something else.

Funny video too, of Lee Corso's prediction of a USC victory.

At LAT, "Ed Orgeron makes loud statement to stay as USC football coach":

The deep green Coliseum field turned cardinal and gold, swarmed by thousands of fans, enveloped in thousands of screams, a heart of Trojans nation beating together in dizzy disbelief.

In the middle stood one sweating man who was somehow bigger than all of it, his giant white-sleeved arms raised above his giant smile, his massive shoulders carrying this bear of a victory.

He was rocked, he was hugged, he was loved like no man has been loved here since the early days of Pete Carroll.

He is Coach Ed Orgeron, and he orchestrated and inspired USC's stunning 20-17 last-second victory over fifth-ranked Stanford on Saturday night in such a way that every question about his brief but dazzling tenure was answered but one.

Will he be allowed to keep his job?

After Andre Heidari kicked a 47-yard field goal with 19 seconds remaining to give the Trojans their biggest victory in several years, one more startling question dominated the postgame celebration.

If the Trojans win their final two games, against Colorado and UCLA, then win their bowl game, how can they let Coach O go?

As the pressure lifts from a USC team that has joyfully won five of six games since Orgeron replaced Lane Kiffin this fall, the pressure mounts on Athletic Director Pat Haden to remove Orgeron's interim tag and allow this crazy Trojans rebirth to continue.

Actually, if you listen to one of Saturday's defensive heroes, freshman Su'a Cravens, the pressure begins now.

“Coach O needs to be here next year … we want Coach O next year,” Cravens said after his fourth-quarter interception set up the game-winning drive. “Forget the hiring, forget all that. We got Coach O and that's all we need.”

Continue reading.

Also, "Andre Heidari's foot doesn't fail USC in 20-17 upset of No.5 Stanford."

Read More

Sunday #Rule5

Here's the long-awaited Rule 5 roundup I've been meaning to get posted (my last roundup is here).

I've been busy with semester grading, plus I'm going to be speaking on campus next week on the left's attacks on the Koch brothers' group, ALEC. So, I'm sadly behind on the lovely babe blogging.

Here's last week's entry at the Other McCain, to get things rolling, "Rule 5 Sunday: Double-Stuf Veterans Day Weekend Edition." (And click over there for updates.)

Now, over at Pirate's Cove, "Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup," and "If All You See……is a wonderful wooden bench made to overlook a changing climate which changes because someone cut down a tree to make the evil bench, you might just be a Warmist."

And at Camp of the Saints, "Rule 5 News: 09 November 2013 A.D."

From Wirecutter, "Your (Belated) Good Morning Girl."

Also Daley Gator, "DaleyGator DaleyBabes: Stephanie Fantauzzi."

And In a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World has the "Friday Pinups."

EBL has, "Retro Halloween Advertisement Rule 5."

Now from Wine, Women, and Politics as well, "The Weekend Sweetie Pics."

From Blackmailers Don't Shoot, "Pretty Girls on a Thursday, Rima Fakih Edition."

And from the Regular Right Guy, "Shocker! Miley Cyrus Smokes Dope!!!"

Plus, from Drunken Stepfather, "Steplinks of the Day."

And at a View From the Beach, "Shockingly, Brazilian Model Admits to Horrible Taste in Men, Music."

At 90 Miles From Tyranny, "Morning Mistress," and "Girls With Guns."

And at Randy’s Roundtable, "Thursday Nite Tart - Nell McAndrew."

Postal Dogs, "Rule 5 Sunday: Ella, pt. 2."

Subject to Change, "Melons."

At Proof Positive, "SF 49er's Vs. New Orleans Saints," and "Best of the Web* Linkaround."

More at Reaganite Republican, "B-League Beauty Pageants: 'Miss Bikini Universe 2013'!"

Also at Odie's, "Shampoo ~OR~ Rule 5 Woodsterman Style."

First Street Journal has, "Rule 5 Blogging: Basic Combat Training at Fort Jackson."

At COED, "Happy Birthday to Gemma Atkinson! [PHOTOS]" (via Linkiest).

Good Stuff's has "Elly Tran Ha."

See also, the Hostages, "Big Boob Friday," and "Big Boob Eva Wants to Know if You’re In."

Plus, special guest star, Blazing Cat Fur, "Attention Agriculturists : German Farm Girls Calendar 2014 Is Here."

Drop your links in the comments of I've missed your Rule 5.

Until then...

Read More

Diamond-Studded Nancy Pelosi Lies Her Way Through 'Meet the Press' Interview on #ObamaCare

A bloody, bald-face liar who spews incoherent untruths without a hint of self-awareness or remorse.

She's absolutely infuriating, but the complete and utter meltdown of the Democrat Party is the gift that keeps on giving.

At Twitchy, "Bless her lying heart! Nancy Pelosi ‘stands tall’ for Obamacare lies; Throws Dems under the bus?"

@NancyPelosi on @MeetthePress in her huge diamond earrings talking about "affordable' health care.

— Dana French (@DanaBordeaux) November 17, 2013

More here, "Side-splitting ‘hoop-dee-do!’ Nancy Pelosi’s most idiotic Obamacare defense yet?"

And at Free Beacon, "Pelosi Gets Grilled Over False Obamacare Promises on ‘Meet the Press’."



More from Doug Powers, at Michelle's, "Nancy Pelosi tries to insist ‘if you like your plan you can keep it’ wasn’t untrue, fails miserably." And at Conservative Intelligence Briefing, "Pelosi’s painful, embarrassing re-write of her own promise on health care."

Yes, painful.

But the congressional painkiller elections are less than one year away. It's going to be a Democrat bloodbath.

Read More

#ObamaCare's Launch Debacle Could Haunt for Years to Come

From John Judis, at the New Republic, "If You Believe in Government, You Should Be Furious About Obamacare's Incompetent Rollout":

Since the country’s founding, Americans have always had an abiding distrust of the federal government. In the country’s first fifty years, that probably had a progressive effect by accelerating Westward economic expansion, but after the Civil War, business and banking leaders exploited this sentiment to block attempts to protect workers and consumers; later, the appeal to state’s rights was used to oppose civil rights laws.

It has taken panics, depressions, wars and social upheaval to get Congress to adopt social and economic reforms. At all other times, the publics’ distrust of government, as reinforced by business, has carried the day. Bill Clinton discovered that out in his first term when he tried to pass a national healthcare program. Obama succeeded in passing a health care bill in 2010 in the wake of the Great Recession. But if Obamacare doesn’t work as promised, then its failure will have reinforced for a generation the argument against any government initiatives. Reform will be dead – whether it’s to fix immigration, healthcare, or the growing gap between rich and poor.

There are already clear warning signs. In the Gallup surveys of public trust in government, Americans’ confidence in the federal government already hit an all-time low in September. Indications are that it has continued to fall.  This lack of confidence initially reflected disillusionment with Congress over the Republican shutdown, but the Obamacare’s current problems will deepen the public’s distrust of government. In 1828, perhaps, such distrust a rising farm economy that needed the kind of easy credit that a national bank was unwilling to provide. But in 2013, it will doom the country to inaction.

The Obama administration still has a chance to turn this situation around, but it doesn’t have long. George W. Bush eventually got the Federal Emergency Management Agency on the ground in the New Orleans after Katrina, but the damage to Bush’s political reputation lingered on. If there are still stories of snafus with the Affordable Care Act six months from now, the Democrats are going to suffer the consequences in November 2014. And the country could suffer for years to come.

I don't read Judis very often, but what's interesting about this is that he's sympathetic to big government while simultaneously sounding its obituary. It's a theme across the spectrum at this point, and after reading a number of pessimistic analyses, I don't hold out much hope that the fixes are going to work. Republicans can and should help reduce the pain of ObamaCare, but in the end, it's going to take GOP congressional majorities with the Republican in the White House to fix this mess once and for all.

Hat Tip: Instapundit.

Read More

Bwahaha!! White House Optimistic it Will Bounce Back From Healthcare 'Glitches'

This is hilarious!

At the Los Angeles Times, "Despite President Obama's sharp drop in the polls, staffers believe a fix to the failed online insurance marketplace will bring healing":

WASHINGTON — He's vented, attacked, apologized and adjusted. Now, President Obama has one move left in his attempt to salvage the rollout of his healthcare law: hope the website works soon.

The White House, knowing a functional website is needed to calm its panicky allies, has now entered the wait-and-see period of its triage after the turmoil that has followed the Oct. 1 rollout. With the latest fix to the law unveiled, a bruising House vote behind them and experts working feverishly on the broken website, administration officials believe they may have weathered the worst.

Although Obama's standing in polls and support within his party have dropped sharply, much like the downward trajectory of George W. Bush's second term, White House officials believe he can still recover.

That optimistic assessment depends almost entirely on the administration's ability to reboot healthcare.gov, the once-hyped online insurance marketplace now undergoing extensive repair. At stake are the future of the president's signature domestic achievement, his political standing and reelection prospects for vulnerable Democrats in Congress.

If the administration meets its goal of a mostly glitch-free site by the end of November, the last two months may be remembered as just another near-death experience for a healthcare overhaul that has had many. Even though many insurance executives and congressional Democrats are angry at Obama for his handling of the healthcare law, both groups have strong incentives to help the Affordable Care Act succeed.

But if the White House fails, the recent setbacks could become the beginning of years of trouble for Democrats in office, as well as those seeking to get there, officials concede.

Administration officials privately acknowledge that no argument defending Obamacare will connect with Americans until they begin to see the effects of the law at work. No work-around or temporary fix will reach enough people to build a critical mass of support. The website has to function, admit edgy aides who sometimes spit the word "website" with the contempt familiar to anyone who has ever called a tech help desk.

Obama revealed his own frustrations Thursday, saying at a White House news conference that he has an obligation to show Americans that the law has made health insurance more affordable and accessible — "if we can just get the darn website working and smooth this thing out."

Officials said Friday they were making progress on the site's many glitches and bugs. It now takes less than one second, on average, to load a page, down from eight seconds in the weeks after the launch, said Jeffrey Zients, a former top administration official who was brought back to oversee the repairs. The site can "comfortably" handle 20,000 to 25,000 consumers at the same time and more capacity is being added, he said.

Still, problems persist in the system that sends consumer information to insurers, and as experts have ticked off 200 software problems, more continue to pop up. Zients said the officials expect to make the Nov. 30 goal, but added: "Not all consumers going on the website will have a seamless experience."

While the tech team works, the president must convince his allies as well as his potential adversaries that, as he said Thursday, he's a clutch player who knows how to recover from a fumble.

That group includes insurance executives who were called to the White House on Friday to discuss Obama's answer to the millions of policy cancellation notices sent to surprised consumers. After announcing Thursday that he would allow insurers to rescind those cancellations and extend the policies for another year, the president sought to persuade the executives to take him up on the offer.

The group also includes Democrats on Capitol Hill, many of whom have gone from disgruntled to distrustful of the White House. On Friday, 39 House Democrats voted for the GOP alternative to Obama's extension fix.

That sizable number of largely swing-district lawmakers was only the most visible sign of broader dissatisfaction that makes Obama's current holding pattern a challenge. Even those who stuck with the White House on Friday's vote have expressed frustration. In the wake of Obama's announcement, lawmakers were left to figure out whether their state officials and insurers would go along with the plan. Skepticism was high.

"The message from the White House is, 'OK, you can be mad, it's frustrating. But be on the program,'" said one advisor to a House Democrat, who asked for anonymity while characterizing internal discussions. "But what program is that? The program where every five minutes there's a different plan?"

IMAGE CREDIT: The People's Cube.

Read More

Another One! Las-Vegas Review Journal Calls for Full-Blown #ObamaCare Repeal!

Here's the earlier editorial, "Whoa! Chicago Tribune Calls for Full-Blown #ObamaCare Repeal!"

And now from the LVRJ, "Obamacare Woes Beg for Repeal":

Congressional Democrats can’t run away from this mess fast enough, as evidenced by the number of partisans proposing or supporting legislation to let individuals keep their current plans — which led to the president’s Hail Mary on Thursday. At this point, however, it’s impossible to fix that broken promise. The insurance industry, which has spent all year entirely remodeling plans to become Obamacare compliant, can’t turn it all back around in just 45 days and is furious with being scapegoated into trying to do so. An industry insider told BuzzFeed.com, “This doesn’t change anything other than force insurers to be the political flak jackets for the administration.”

Said Karen Ignagni, president of America’s Health Insurance Plans: “Changing the rules after health plans have already met the requirements of the law could destabilize the market and result in higher premiums for consumers.”

As the guys in those Guinness commercials would say, “Brilliant!” Obamacare policy premiums in many cases were already going to cost significantly more money; this “fix” could cause even bigger increases. The law is so deeply flawed, with so many components in direct conflict with one another, that tweaking just one part will accelerate its collapse.

The Obamacare debacle is just getting started — and it only gets worse from here. Repeal and replace.

Read More

Billionaire Socialist George Soros to Spend Millions on 2014 Democrat 'Big Data' Effort

Obviously, panic on the left is reaching defcon levels.

At the New York Times, "Groups Mobilize to Aid Democrats in ’14 Data Arms Race":

Liberal and Democratic-leaning groups, facing difficult midterm elections next year without the technological muscle of the Obama campaign behind them, are preparing a major effort to improve their data infrastructure.

George Soros, the retired hedge fund billionaire and longtime patron of liberal causes, will invest $2.5 million in the effort, officials involved with the plan said. His participation is a signal that some of the wealthy donors who arrived late to the Democrats’ “super PAC” efforts in 2012 are committing early for the next round.

The initiative opens a new front in the “big data” arms race between the left and the right, as the Republican Party and conservative outside groups pour money into political technology after a presidential campaign in which they were badly outmatched.

President Obama’s campaign spent tens of millions of dollars building a program to identify likely supporters and to motivate them with ads, social media efforts and get-out-the-vote messages. But the data experts and engineers who built Mr. Obama’s tech programs have largely moved into the private sector. And the president’s political organization faces an uncertain future: Reborn after Election Day as a tax-exempt advocacy group, it has struggled to translate Mr. Obama’s millions of supporters into an effective tool for advancing his agenda on issues like guns and immigration.

More important, some Democrats said, is that they are unsure how big a role Mr. Obama’s organization can — or will — play in 2014. Those involved with the new effort say they are not waiting to find out. The initiative, as yet unnamed, will be based at Catalist, a for-profit cooperative founded in 2006 by Harold Ickes, a former aide to Hillary Rodham Clinton, and others.

Details of the effort were presented this week at a Washington conference of the Democracy Alliance, a coalition of some of the country’s biggest liberal givers, which works to steer money and to coordinate political work among advocacy groups. Mr. Soros and other alliance donors were early investors in Catalist, and many of the groups funded by the alliance now buy data from it.

On Thursday, boldfaced names of the Democratic donor world mingled at the Mandarin Oriental Hotel with rising Democratic stars like Wendy Davis, a contender for the Texas governor’s race, and Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, who has been urged by some supporters to consider a presidential bid. Ms. Warren gave a speech touching on Republican efforts to filibuster Mr. Obama’s judicial nominees and the drive to bring intellectual diversity to the federal bench, attendees said, and was warmly received.

“She’s been a darling here since the first time she came,” said Rob McKay, the alliance’s chairman.

The conference will also feature the installation of Gara LaMarche, a veteran of liberal philanthropy, as the alliance’s new president. In an interview, Mr. LaMarche said the alliance hoped to expand its donor base and double its giving over the next several years, in part for a major new effort to expand the liberal political infrastructure at the state level, where conservatives and Republicans have won a series of political and policy victories.

“There is a lot of feeling in this room that the states are where the focus should be,” Mr. LaMarche said.

Improving Catalist was part of that drive, alliance officials said. The group serves as a kind of data hub for dozens of labor unions, liberal advocacy groups and super PACs, maintaining a shared national voter file that is continually updated with commercial and consumer data. Catalist was also involved in the governor’s election this month in Virginia and in the victorious mayoral campaign of Bill de Blasio in New York City.

But the company is also jockeying with other Democratic-oriented data ventures, including some with roots in the Obama campaign, in a rapidly expanding sector that consumes an ever-larger chunk of campaign spending.

Here's the piece on the Democracy Alliance at Discover the Networks, "A New Alliance of Democrats Spreads Funding: But Some in Party Bristle at Secrecy and Liberal Tilt."

Democracy Alliance is a front-group for the most radical organizations in the United States, groups that have been working for decades to destroy the basic fabric of American freedom, to leverage in the far-left socialist state. More on where that funding goes, "The Democracy Alliance's Grant Recipients."

And more on Catalyst at CNN, "George Soros reinvests in progressive-cause data company."

Read More

Whoa! Chicago Tribune Calls for Full-Blown #ObamaCare Repeal!

Points and Figures has it, "Hey, it looks like Senator Ted Cruz was right! Even the venerable Chicago Tribune is calling for outright repeal of Obamacare. It’s what happens when one party rams objectives down the throat of constituents."

And at the Tribune, "Stop digging. Start over":

As Friday dawns, here's what a health insurance crisis looks like to many millions of Americans: Barely six weeks shy of 2014, they do not know whether they will have medical coverage Jan. 1. Or which hospitals and doctors they might patronize. Or what they may pay to protect themselves and their families against the chance of medical and financial catastrophe. How much, that is, they may pay in order to satisfy the Democratic politicians and federal bureaucrats who are worsening a metastasizing health coverage fiasco.

For perhaps 5 million of those Americans thus far — estimates vary — the Washington-ordered cancellation of their policies is especially maddening. In the past these people took responsibility for their coverage and bought policies that balanced their needs, finances and personal choices. Congress and President Barack Obama, by enacting the Affordable Care Act, in effect ordered insurers to dismantle many of those individual plans — and cancel those policies.

The Americans manhandled by this exercise in government arrogance now find themselves divided into warring tribes: Those with chronic ailments who have found new plans on Obamacare exchanges and are pleased. Those who don't want or can't afford the replacement policies Obamacare offers them. Those whose new policies block them from using the health providers who have treated them for many years. The estimated 23 million to 41 million people whose employer-sponsored plans are the next to be imperiled. And on and on.

Most of these tribespeople only wish their big problem was a slipshod Obamacare website. On Thursday, their plight grew more frightful. With even Democratic members of Congress storming the White House over the cancellations, Obama declared — by what legal authority is unclear — that he would overrule the law he signed in 2010 and allow insurers to extend those canceled policies for a year.

If, that is, insurance regulators of the 50 states permit this potential distortion to risk pools inside and outside of Obamacare. The regulators, including those in Illinois, had better put protection ahead of politics: Within two hours of Obama's announcement, Mike Kreidler, insurance commissioner of Washington, a Democrat-leaning state, rejected the president's notion, citing "its potential impact on the overall stability of our health insurance market. ... We will not be allowing insurance companies to extend their policies."

Note that these are the same insurance companies that have done what Obamacare demanded of them, while they often were being vilified by politicians and bureaucrats who haven't done what Obamacare demanded of them: Create workable, economically sustainable, insurance markets. A spokesman for America's Health Insurance Plans, an industry group, said Thursday that Obama's decree could further drive up prices: "Premiums were set based on assumptions about people transitioning to the (Obamacare) marketplaces," Robert Zirkelbach told The Washington Post. "Changing the rules in the middle of the game could dramatically change who actually signs up. If the exchanges become nothing more than a high-risk pool, that's going to result in massive premium increases for consumers"....

We understand why the president and leaders of his party want to rescue whatever they can of Obamacare. On their watch, official Washington has blown the launch of a new entitlement program ... under the schedule they alone set in early 2010.

What we don't understand is their reluctance to give that failure more than lip service. Many of the Americans who heard their president say Thursday that "we fumbled the rollout of this health care law" would have been pleased to hear him add: So we're admitting it. This law is a bust. We're starting over.

Remember, this is the president's hometown newspaper. Lots of hardcore Obama-cultists will be canceling their subscriptions at the audacity of dissing the dope!

Hat Tip: Instapundit.

Read More