Tag: Democrats

Bad Night for the GOP

I try not to read too much into off-year elections but last night’s was a debacle for the GOP. The Virginia governor’s race was a wipeout and, as of this morning, the state legislature may tip to the Democrats. At minimum, Virginia Democrats will now have veto power for the first time in over 25 years and had their biggest night in four decades. The New Jersey governorship and New York mayoral race went against the GOP. Other state legislative races and mayoral races went against the GOP. It was bad night for them, a clean sweep by the Democrats.

Trump’s popularity hasn’t changed that much since election day. He’s still got most of the GOP behind him and most of the Democrats against him. Moderates have shifted against him but he’s still polling in the high 30’s, lower than election day but not drastically so. I’ve noted before that Trump’s performance in 2016 was terrible. It was the worst performance in a post-incumbent election in American history (i.e., an election where a two-term incumbent President is retiring). Now we’re seeing what would have happened had his opponent not been almost equally despised. With a meh candidate, Virginia shifted almost five points to the Democrats, enough for the gubernatorial election to become a rout and the legislature to tip. The Democrats won young people by nearly 40 points, a huge shift from 2012 and even 2016. An advantage of even a tenth that size would have given Clinton the election.

Here’s another thing: the Democrats are not popular. Their approval rating is the lowest in their history. So this was not a stampede toward Democrats, much as they’d like it to be. This was a backlash against Trump without the tempering influence of Clinton hate.

The implications of this for the GOP have to be frightening. Without Clinton as a foil, Trump’s unpopularity could completely sink the party. Over the last few weeks, we’ve seen solid conservatives like McCain and Flake leave the party. Now we’re seeing decent Republicans run out of office because people hate Trump so much.

If this keeps up, the Republicans will be dead in the cities, dead in the suburbs and only alive because of rural support. We will see a shriveled husk of a party devoid of conservatives, devoid of moderates and comprised entirely of Trumpist populism. This would be a party unable to stop the Democrats from going Full Metal Socialist. Their only accomplishment would be ranting on raving on Sean Hannity’s show, which is apparently now the apotheosis of political achievement for Republicans these days.

Trump is not going to change course in response to this election. His response to the election was to immediately stab Gillespie in the back and I’m sure he’ll stab every Republican if he feels the need. He’s not a Republican. He only used them to vault into office. If the Democrats take Congress, he’ll claim credit then happily sign off on single payer healthcare as long as it had his name on it (as shown by his spineless deal on DACA).

Yeah, it’s just one election. We’ll see what happens next year. And, come 2020, the Democrats are going to need an actual Presidential candidate, who might be a fiasco in his or her own right. But you can’t help but be alarmed by where this is going. In 2016, Warren Meyer said the Republicans had chained themselves to a suicide bomber. It may turn out that it just took a bit longer for the bomb to go off.

History Did Not Start in 2009

Over the weekend, a number began circulating in liberal circles in an attempt to justify the Democrats’ effort to filibuster Neil Gorsuch. The number was that there have been 148 cloture votes on judicial nominees in our entire history … and 79 of them took place under Obama.

The number instantly triggered my BS alarm and rightly so. As Ed Whelan details, this number is garbage. It turns out that Harry Reid routinely filed cloture motions on bills and nominations even when there was no filibuster or no threat of one (most likely to try to evade debate on Obama’s nominations and proposals).

By my quick count, the cloture motions that Reid filed on some 39 of the 79 nominees were withdrawn or mooted, and the motions on 28 others were successful, many with strong Republican support. (Only twelve of the 28 received more than 30 negative votes, and eleven of them had fewer than twenty negative votes.) All of those nominees were confirmed.

Of the eleven cloture motions that were defeated, three of the nominations were confirmed after some delay, and four others were confirmed after Democrats abolished the filibuster.

In sum, even under a very liberal account of what “blocked by filibusters” might plausibly mean, it is difficult to see how anyone could contend that more than eleven of Obama’s nominees were “blocked by filibusters.”

By contrast, 14 of Bush’s nominees were blocked by filibusters. Only 16 times has the Senate rejected cloture on a judicial nomination. Ten of those were in the 108th Congress when the Democrats were basically filibustering every Bush nomination they could, hoping he would be unelected in 2004. The only reason no SCOTUS nominee was blocked was because Bush didn’t nominate any justices in his first term (a time when Schumer was threatening to filibuster SCOTUS nominees for all four years). The Democrats tried to filibuster Roberts but failed. In the meantime, the Republicans brought up and voted on two of Obama’s SCOTUS nominees.

(The CRS report is here and it really blows away this talking point. Gorsuch’s nomination was only the fifth time cloture was even attempted with a SCOTUS nominee. All five were Republicans nominees. Only seven cabinet nominations have needed cloture votes — five were under Bush. Reid’s office has been citing only two pages of the report, conveniently eliding the other damning parts. Politifact, in proclaiming the “79 of 148″ number true, couldn’t be bothered to look at the full report and just took Reid’s excerpt as gospel. I include that last tidbit just in case you were wondering if Politifact is still full of it.)

Any filibuster of a nominee is wrong, in my opinion. I wasn’t happy when the Republicans did it and I didn’t agree with their sitting on Garland’s nomination. But this business did not start under Obama. It’s been building for years, really all the way back to Bork.

But it goes way beyond that. For eight years, all we heard that was that Republicans were “obstructing” Obama (obstructing, in this sense, meaning a co-equal branch of government not enacting his agenda because they thought it was a bad idea). But that followed on eight years of … Democrats “obstructing” everything Bush wanted to do. If anything, it was worse under Bush. Democrats not only opposed things Bush wanted that they opposed (privatizing Social Security, cutting spending, etc.) but even things they wanted like Medicare’s drug program, Medicaid expansion and massive spending hikes.

And, of course, now that Trump is in power, the Democrats are rediscovering how much fun opposition is. The very same people who cried “obstruction!” for eight years are now crying “obstruction, yes!” as Republicans try to repeal Obamacare, put judges on the bench, enact regulatory reform and … well, anything else. Hell, if Trump proposed single payer healthcare, I am convinced that Democrats would oppose just for the bloody hell of it.

Look, I’m in favor of obstruction. I like it that our government is set up with all kinds of checks and balances that are designed to slow, if not completely stop, bad ideas. But I’ve always been in favor of it. I won’t bash Democrats an “obstructionist” for opposing laws or nominations if they think they are bad ideas. But I will bash them when they claim some kind of factually-challenged moral superiority in doing so.

Yes, the Republicans have been engaging in some shady things. But that’s politics. They only time the Democrats don’t use the same tactics is when they literally can’t. They’ll scream the heavens down about gerrymandering; then they’ll gerrymander the hell out of Maryland. They’ll shout about voter disenfranchisement; but the only reason they want to enfranchise felons is because felons vote Democrat. They scream about Republican special interests; while bankrupting their states in obedience to SEIU. They scream about Garland; and they forget about Estrada.

The Great Liberal Myth is their belief in their own reasonableness and adherence to cold fact. But, as we’ve seen many times, Democrats can be as unreasonable and full of it as anyone. Don’t buy this business that the Garland-Gorsuch thing is a new low. We got there years ago.

Turkeys And Drumsticks 2016

For nine years running, I have taken advantage of the Thanksgiving Holiday to give out my awards for Turkey of the Year and Golden Drumsticks. The latter are for those who exemplify the best traits in our public sphere. The former are for those who exemplify silliness and stupidity. I rarely give them out to someone who is evil; they are reserved for those who regularly make me shake my head and wonder what they’re thinking. It’s a sort of “thank you” for making blogging easier.

This may be the last of these. We’ll see. But this is the post I most look forward to every year.


Those Evil Vote Suppressing … Democrats?

Today is an election day in Pennsylvania. Turnout is expected to be very low, as it is in all states that time elections off of the federal cycle. There has been a movement afoot to get states to line up their elections with federal elections, something voters and citizens favor overwhelmingly.

Guess who is standing of this and why?

The consolidation bills, which were generally sponsored by Republicans, typically failed because of Democratic opposition, according to Anzia. By her account, Democrats opposed the bills at the urging of Democratic-aligned interest groups, namely teachers unions and municipal employee organizations.

Consider a 2011 bill in Michigan to move school board elections to November of even-numbered years. The Michigan Education Association, a teachers union, testified against the bill, as did associations of school boards and administrators. The bill ended up passing on nearly a party-line vote, with almost all Democratic legislators opposed and almost all Republican legislators in favor.

Looking at the 102 bills aimed at consolidating school board elections with other elections between 2001 and 2011, Anzia found that 72 were sponsored either exclusively or predominantly by Republicans, compared with 23 that were sponsored exclusively or predominantly by Democrats. The bills sponsored by Democrats were also generally much weaker than the Republican bills. For example, the Democratic bills typically permitted municipalities to hold on-cycle elections while the Republican bills required them to do so.

Moreover, for the subset of bills that went to a vote, Republicans were far more likely to vote “yes” than Democrats. For all the bills that went to the floor, Anzia estimates that Republicans voted for consolidation 60 percent of the time and Democrats 40 percent.

The difference is even starker when you look at the “strong” consolidation bills that would require local elections to move to the federal cycle.

There’s no mystery as to why unions want turnout for local elections to be low. It’s so that they can control them. In any local election, the unions turn out like crazy because they know that school boards and local politicians exercise immense control over spending and hiring. Without a federal election to drive up turnout, there is no counterbalancing force. In fact, Anzia’s research shows that public employees in areas with off-cycle elections get higher pay and benefits than those with on-cycle elections.

It is accepted wisdom in our society that Democrats are all in favor of everyone voting while Republicans want to suppress the vote, especially the vote of black people, to serve their special interests. Why else would Republicans want to require ID to vote … for free … like many other democracies? And at the risk of being accused of “saying both sides do it” — currently the gold standard for responding to revelations about Democratic chicanery — this shows a much more focused and naked interest.

And at least the Republicans have the public on their side. Voter ID laws are supported by 70-80% of the public, including a slim majority of Democrats. By contrast, having local elections off the federal cycle is opposed by the 70-80% of the public, including 70-80% of Democrats.

(The excuse being made is that, in a consolidated election, the ballot would be too long for people to have a good feel for each election. This would apparently be worse than … not voting at all.)

So … who exactly is sabotaging the elections in favor of their special interests? Oh, right. Must be the Republicans. ‘Cuz we all know they’re evil.

(PS – And you should check out the comments on 538’s site and their Twitter feed. The idea that Democrats are noble defenders of the electorate and Republicans are evil vote suppressing maniacs is a deeply ingrained faith.)

Walker Vindicated … Again

Color me surprised:

Dealing Gov. Scott Walker a victory just as his presidential campaign gets underway, the Wisconsin Supreme Court in a sweeping decision Thursday ruled the governor’s campaign and conservative groups had not violated campaign finance laws.

The ruling means the end of the investigation, which has been stalled for 18 months after a lower court judge determined no laws were violated even if Walker’s campaign and the groups had worked together as prosecutors believe.

This is the infamous “John Doe” investigation where government agents basically had an ongoing far-reaching investigation that involved, essentially, harassing Walker’s supporters and any other conservatives within reach with midnight raids, gag orders and endless investigation:

In international law, the Western world has become familiar with a concept called “lawfare,” a process whereby rogue regimes or organizations abuse legal doctrines and processes to accomplish through sheer harassment and attrition what can’t be accomplished through legitimate diplomatic means. The Palestinian Authority and its defenders have become adept at lawfare, putting Israel under increasing pressure before the U.N. and other international bodies. The John Doe investigations are a form of domestic lawfare, and our constitutional system is ill equipped to handle it. Federal courts rarely intervene in state judicial proceedings, state officials rarely lose their array of official immunities for the consequences of their misconduct, and violations of First Amendment freedoms rarely result in meaningful monetary damages for the victims.

Investigators would conduct armed police raids on the houses of Wisconsin conservatives. They seized computers, phones and as many documents as they could get their hands on. They then issued gag orders preventing the targets their neighbors what was going on. All this because of supposed violation of campaign finance laws; laws we now know were not broken.

You can read more from the WSJ:

For the past few days, I’ve been talking to the targets of the task force of Milwaukee Democratic prosecutors, the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board and Special Prosecutor Francis Schmitz. Their experiences, on the record here for the first time, reveal the nasty political sweep of an investigation that invaded privacy with surveillance of email accounts, raided homes with armed law enforcement, and swarmed individuals with subpoenas demanding tens of thousands of documents while insisting on secrecy.

Gabriel Malor shows just how empty this investigation was:

The theory of the prosecutor’s case was that conservative groups had illegally coordinated with candidates for office by means of issue advocacy. Applying well-settled principles of election law, the Wisconsin high court holds that this goes too far because “[d]iscussion of issues cannot be suppressed simply because the issues may also be pertinent in an election.” The courts have long treated express advocacy—that is, speech directly supporting a candidate for election—as wholly separate from issue advocacy—that is, speech about political issues. The court explains that, insofar as the Wisconsin statute purports to regulate issue advocacy the way that it does express advocacy, it is overbroad and vague under both the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Wisconsin’s own Article 1, Section 3.

Read the whole thing. The judges were brutal on the prosecutors saying their investigation was “unsupported by reason” and “employed theories of law that do not exist in order to investigate citizens who were wholly innocent of any wrongdoing”. This isn’t just saying there’s no evidence; this is saying the investigation was a complete travesty designed entirely to harass Wisconsin conservatives.

The Democrats had a lot riding on this. Just a few months ago, they were writing smug posts on how the John Doe investigation was going to crush Walker’s Presidential campaign. Now the investigation is in ruins, their slimy tactics open for the world to see.

I am honestly amazed by what we’ve seen in Wisconsin. Vicious election fights. Recall elections. The legislature fleeing the state. An aggressive intrusive useless investigation from the people who’ve spent the last decade vilifying Ken Starr for his “politicized investigations” that … um … produced thirty felony convictions.

And all of this just to get one governor. What the heck?

The Party of “It Wasn’t Us!”

In the wake of the Baltimore riots and unrest, the Democrats are trying desperately to shift the conversation away from what happened and more toward … anything. One issue that they seem to have locked into is that the events in Baltimore aren’t a response to militarized policing or the War on Drugs or a poisonous relationship between the police and the community. No, it’s about … inequality. And they are proposing to address this with a raft of proposals that are basically Democratic Liberalism 101: more taxes on “the rich”, higher minimum wage, more spending on “infrastructure” and schools, etc. Barack Obama, in particular, has called on Republicans to embrace more spending and job training.


The GOP Aren’t the Only Fools

That was the gist of another great Conor Friersdorf Tweetdown last night:

As I said the other day, the GOP seems to be floundering around finding something to make this shutdown about. Democrats, of course, interpret this to mean that they are political geniuses. They might want to hold back on that, given what’s going on with Obamacare:

It’s a batting average that won’t land the federal marketplace for Obamacare into the Healthcare Hall of Fame.

As few as 1 in 100 applications on the federal exchange contains enough information to enroll the applicant in a plan, several insurance industry sources told CNBC on Friday. Some of the problems involve how the exchange’s software collects and verifies an applicant’s data.

“It is extraordinary that these systems weren’t ready,” said Sumit Nijhawan, CEO of Infogix, which handles data integrity issues for major insurers including WellPoint and Cigna, as well as multiple Blue Cross Blue Shield affiliates.

Experts said that if Healthcare.gov’s success rate doesn’t improve within the next month or so, federal officials could face a situation in January in which relatively large numbers of people believe they have coverage starting that month, but whose enrollment applications are have not been processed.

“It could be public relations nightmare,” said Nijhawan. Insurers have told his company that just “1 in 100″ enrollment applicants being sent from the federal marketplace have provided sufficient, verified information.

Now, to be fair, a large part of this problem is the applicants themselves. Unsurprisingly — to anyone who isn’t Obama — the uninsured contain a high percentage of people who provide inaccurate or incomplete information on applications. But part of it is also Obamacare itself, which is shuddering along and which hasn’t definitively insured anyone yet. The website has been swamped — about 8 million hits since opening (although probably half of those are journalist checking to see if it works). But the problems are deeper than just a lot of web traffic. The system is having problems.

One of the thing I expect to emerge in the next few weeks is a push to delay some Obamacare requirements … from the Democrats. They are facing a very real possibility that the federal government will impose fines on people for not getting insurance because the exchanges weren’t ready for the load.

Was this an attempt to scare Issa whom has put this administrations crimes front & center?

That’s what I thought when I saw this report at the Daily Caller. From the post:

A leaked State Department email indicates that officials were worried about the safety of House Oversight Committee chairman Rep. Darrell Issa after Democrats revealed his plans for a secret trip to Libya this week.

Issa, a Republican from California, has safely returned from his fact-finding trip to the country as his committee continues to investigate the terrorist attacks that killed America’s ambassador and three others in Benghazi on Sept. 11, 2012.

CBS News reported Thursday on an email that quoted a Libyan national sharing “his concern and his opinion that Representative Issa should not come to Libya for his own safety.”

The email reports that the Libyan thinks, “the people who would harm Rep. Issa are the same people who conducted the Benghazi attacks.”

Before Issa’s trip, Rep. Elijah Cummings, the ranking member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, issued a press release asking Issa to postpone his trip until he allows Democrats to join him.

The word out doing the circuit is that the scumbag Cummings only did this to prevent Issa from going without him and his buddies. Maybe I just expect the worst from the left, because my take was that this administration would love for someone to take out Issa, whom has been a thorn in the side of the criminals that make up practically the entire Obama administration.

The angle that Cummings did it for petty reasons makes for a fine cover, IMO, and while these people are just that petty, I worry that people that think they not only can use government agencies to target their political opposition, but also have the right to drone strike citizens without due process, wouldn’t have to go that far off the reservation to justify killing their political enemies. After all, these are the same people that would love to do things the way they are done in China, where enemies are treated harshly by the almighty state.

I really hope that this is just me being paranoid, but the Obama crime syndicate has been well protected by the LSM for a long time, and they could by now think they can get away with anything and everything, and believe me this gang thinks they are morally justified to do anything to keep power and win.

Weapon of last resort being deployed

Well, after some 3 1/2 disastrous years, riddled with bad and destructive policy that put the protection and expansion of the nanny-state over the welfare of the citizenry, I am not surprised to find out that with the race card losing its power because they over played it so heavily for the past 4 ½ years, that democrats now need training on how to effectively play that race card for better effect:

House Democrats received training this week on how to raise the issue of race to defend government programs, according to training materials obtained by The Washington Examiner.

The prepared content of a Tuesday presentation to the House Democratic Caucus and staff indicates that Democrats will seek to portray apparently neutral free-market rhetoric as being charged with racial bias, conscious or unconscious.

In her distributed remarks, Maya Wiley of the Center for Social Inclusion criticized “conservative messages [that are] racially ‘coded’ and had images of people of color that we commonly see used” and proposed tactics for countering the Republicans’ (presumably) racially-coded rhetoric.

Collectivism 101: since you know you can not use logic, facts, or the truth to win, make up ridiculous shit that makes the other side evil and uncaring. This is just like CM’s constant attempts to get us to engage him in discussing income disparity. The argument gets framed and conducted in such a way that it allows him to then say we are uncaring, because we do not want to allow the left to do even more social engineer – to address an injustice that really is more about envy and jealousy than anything else, because their solution isn’t to free people so they can make more, but to punish those that do and do not pay homage to the left’s crusade – and completely misses the point that this social engineering always fails and causes misery, as over 100 years of collectivist history, and more importantly, the world wide economic depression we find ourselves in as the home ownership lending social engineering experiment brought us all low 4 1/2 years ago. I need to mention that the problems behind the latest crisis still remain. The social engineers simply piled on even more social engineering, and pretended this time people would suddenly start behaving like angels.

Anyway, back to the race baiters getting training so they can more effectively lie about their opposition and make the LSM’s job of propagating those lies easier. If you doubt that the envy driven collectivist social engineers aren’t planning a campaign of lies, just read this:

According to Wiley’s group’s website, “right-wing rhetoric has dominated debates of racial justice – undermining efforts to create a more equal society, and tearing apart the social safety net in the process” for over 25 years. Wiley had been invited to run the Democrats “through their strategy and how they message and talk about stuff” pertaining to race and fiscal policy, a staffer for Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., explained.

Check that web site out. Holy freaking insane bullshit! These class warriors have no shame at all. In fact, they feel superior and more moral by pushing this garbage. It’s as if the USSR never happened, and North Korea is a paradise. But it gets better.

As samples of race-coded rhetoric, Wiley reminded the Democrats of statements by Republican presidential candidates Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich. Of Gingrich’s famous comment about President Obama, her distributed remarks note, “Calling a Black man ‘the food stamp president’ is not a race-neutral statement, even if Newt Gingrich did not intend racism.”

This is akin to making the ludicrous and deceptive argument that pointing out that a male pedophile that preys on little boys is and evil being that destroyed the lives of those poor kids, is an attack on all gay people. It’s nonsense. Nobody in their right mind should take it seriously. In fact, gay people should be offended by anyone that makes this sort of overreach, because basically it is the people making the argument that the pedophile should not be called out that are making the connection.

Basically what we have here is the democrats trying to shut down any and all criticism of Obama because nobody can have any legitimate reason to criticize him unless they are racists. Fuck them and the horse they rode in on. If Obama was green I would still point out how stupid he, the democrats, the vile nonsense they believe in, and the destructive policies they have put in place and continue to pile on, are.

The last 3 ½ years have been disastrous for us. The people that decried Bush for a $250 billion annual budget deficit in 2006 took power and then proceeded to jack that number up to $1.25 trillion per annum. Even worse, Bush was, correctly I add, excoriated for allowing nearly $5 trillion in new debt to be tacked on in 8 years. Obama has tacked more than that in 3 ½ measly fucking years, with thrice that number projected a decade after Team Blue took over the budget responsibility. Speaking of budgets, I should point out that Reid’s Team Blue controlled senate has now avoided passing a spending bill for almost than 3 years now.

We also have the EPA making its own laws and enforcing them with disastrous economic consequences after the cowards that held majority positions and all power in both houses failed to pass the “Cap & Tax” bill. Barney and Chris wrote some 2000+ pages of new regulations. To prevent another mortgage lending meltdown, like the last one that was indubitably of their making, they told us. But all those dead trees covered with more bullshit left the fundamental and underlying problem – the left’s need to social engineer home ownership – intact. Who wants to bet this works out well?

And then there is Obamacare. They told us we needed to wait until it was passed to find out what would be in it. Rigged the CBO scoring so they could lie to us and pretend that it would have a both a positive economic and medical impact. They had to bribe their own tribe members, be it in politics or in the field, with hundreds of billions in favors, exceptions, and exclusions. And most importantly, they exempted themselves and their biggest donors from it all. Now we are discovering this thing is going to control 1/6 of our economy and only get bigger, will cost us probably at least twice what they projected, and if we go by other liberal dream programs like Social Security, will cost multiple times more than the worst case projections, and that the medical care quality will suffer and suffer drastically. Let’s not forget the plethora of job killing efforts by these bastards either. From the XL Pipeline, which seems more about protecting Warren Buffet’s profits and hence his donations to Team Blue than anything else, to the war against coal, which resulted in a convicted WW inmate scoring 40% of the democrat vote in a runoff against Obama, they tell us they want their vision of renewable and clean energy. That vision is companies like Solyndra, of course. Inflate your tires, or better yet, buy an expensive hybrid, and stop complaining about high gas prices you stupid serfs!

The list of other failure is long: unemployment numbers that are staggering, ridiculous gas prices, inflation gone wild, recovery always being just around the corner for over three years now, and a slew of other depressingly bad things. Not to mention the criminal stuff the DOJ pulls regularly. Yeah, we got bin Laden, but that was the military, and while Obama whom deserved props for the decision, the fool decided to milk it for political purposes, and thus made it all a joke. Seriously, it has been solid campaign mode since 2007, very little of substance or value, unless that is, you are part of the circle that made itself stinking rich at the tax payers expense by fooling everyone into letting them blow close to a trillion dollars and call it a stimulus.

The fact is that the left simply has absolutely nothing to sell themselves on. Even their political attacks backfire. They tried to make headway with dog lovers by making Romney a monster, only they forgot Barak ate dog. They tried, real hard, to convince people republicans hate women, because they don’t want to give them “free contraceptives”, that’s in quotes because what it really means is contraceptives paid by other people, of all things, and that blew up in their faces when we found out how well Team Blue and Obama’s own WH treat women all the time. Zimmerman was made out as a racist honkey that killed the poor and innocent Trayvon, out for a night stroll, because he was black. Only when we got the facts Zimmerman was neither white, nor the story as black and white – pardon the pun – and indicative of racism, as the LSM tried to make it out to be. Those evil rich people Obama always talks about? They are his biggest donors. Buffet’s secretary, paid more taxes than him too! Only the left forgot to mention, conveniently, that she likely makes more money than most small business owners do, and that’s why she manages to pay more taxes than Warren.

So when you have nothing to sell you are reduced to demonizing your opponent. Hence the need for race-baiter training, at the tax payer’s expense no less, for Team Blue. But hey, the problem is with people like me. If you do not like collectivism and tyrannical government you are a racist!


That big healthcare reform, a.k.a government takeover of healthcare so they can control another 1/6th of the economy thing, Nancy Pelosi told us we absolutely had to get passed, to figure out what would be in it, and would singlehandedly save our economy, by saving us tons of money, all based on what is absolutely the worst scoring requirements put together to make the ugliest pig look like the tastiest slab of bacon, isn’t going to save that measly $125 million or so they promised, even in that rigged scorning, but going to cost us twice as much, now!

President Obama’s national health care law will cost $1.76 trillion over a decade, according to a new projection released today by the Congressional Budget Office, rather than the $940 billion forecast when it was signed into law.

Democrats employed many accounting tricks when they were pushing through the national health care legislation, the most egregious of which was to delay full implementation of the law until 2014, so it would appear cheaper under the CBO’s standard ten-year budget window and, at least on paper, meet Obama’s pledge that the legislation would cost “around $900 billion over 10 years.” When the final CBO score came out before passage, critics noted that the true 10 year cost would be far higher than advertised once projections accounted for full implementation.

Today, the CBO released new projections from 2013 extending through 2022, and the results are as critics expected: the ten-year cost of the law’s core provisions to expand health insurance coverage has now ballooned to $1.76 trillion. That’s because we now have estimates for Obamacare’s first nine years of full implementation, rather than the mere six when it was signed into law. Only next year will we get a true ten-year cost estimate, if the law isn’t overturned by the Supreme Court or repealed by then. Given that in 2022, the last year available, the gross cost of the coverage expansions are $265 billion, we’re likely looking at about $2 trillion over the first decade, or more than double what Obama advertised.

No fucking way! What the hell changed, huh? The assholes at the CBO finally decided that they HAD to come clean on the fact that they produced obviously bullshit numbers the first time around and now are trying to cover their ass? Look on the bright side: at least we didn’t have to wait until this thing was up & running for the cost to double! Maybe they too had to wait until Pelosi got her wish to find out what was in that boondoggle so they could do some real and honest calculations. Maybe the democrats need to let them know they plan to really control costs by controlling access and making people wait for ever, like all other such government owned systems do? Heh!

So, the CBO decided to come clean and point out they had under estimated the cost of this unconstitutional pile of shit by 100%. Want to bet that the new projected cost for the first decade, that $1.76 trillion dollars, ends up being a fraction of the real cost as well? Don’t worry, they will blame the insurance companies, the private sector, and GWB for the fact that they want to thwart reality, but it refuses to budge. Let’s be honest and point out that Obama’s healthcare takeover plan is that last nail in the coffin and meant to break our economy in a decade, and get rid of it please!