by

News/Politics 11-16-13

What’s interesting in the news today?

We lost power last night and didn’t get it back until the wee hours. So only a few from me today, but it’s an open thread so I’m sure you folks can come up with more. 🙂

1. The House passed the Upton Bill, with Democrat support I might add. Why they would give Democrats an out like this is beyond me.

From Politico  “The White House reiterated its veto threat of a just-passed House bill to allow insurance companies to continue selling insurance plans that don’t meet the minimum requirements of the Affordable Care Act.

The House passed the legislation introduced by Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.) with 261 votes, including 39 Democrats who defied President Barack Obama’s veto threat issued Thursday evening.

“We absolutely do not support and oppose the Upton bill,” White House press secretary Jay Carney said minutes after Friday’s House vote.”

Obama will veto it. He kinda has to. He can’t have Republicans getting credit for fixing his mess.

_________________________________________________

2. Once again, Congress gets special perks the rest of us aren’t allowed to have.

From CNSNews   “Under Obamacare — as it is being implemented  under a regulation issued by the White House Office of Personnel  Management (OPM) — a middle-aged member of Congress who earns an annual  salary of $174,000 from the taxpayers, and who has a wife and children,  will get a $10,000 subsidy from the taxpayers (over and above his  $174,000 salary) to buy a health insurance plan that a regular citizen  making almost $80,000 less than the congressman will not get.”

“Americans in the private sector who buy health insurance through the Obamacare exchanges only get a federal subsidy (a tax credit) if their income/family situation is below 400% of poverty, the ceiling for which is $94,200 for a family of four.

If they surpass that 400% level, then no subsidy.  Theoretically, a  family bringing in $174,000, like a member of Congress, would have to  have 12 children dependents to even be eligible for a subsidy under the Obamacare rules.”

We don’t even get cake to eat.

_________________________________________________

3. The more we know, the worse it gets. Now we know why a cover-up from the White House was necessary. They had to hide details like this, which raise even more questions.

From FoxNews  “The terrorists who attacked the Benghazi consulate last year knew the location of the safe room where Ambassador Chris Stevens and his security team sought shelter, according to a congressman who spoke for 90 minutes with the diplomatic security agent severely injured in the assault.

“He confirmed this – that it was a very well orchestrated, and well organized, almost a military operation, using military weapons and using military signals,” the late Florida Rep. Bill Young said after meeting diplomatic security agent David Ubben at Walter Reed Medical Center last summer, when both were patients there.”

“”He (Ubben) emphasized the fact that it was a very, very military type of operation they had knowledge of almost everything in the compound,” Young explained. “They knew where the gasoline was, they knew where the generators were, they knew where the safe room was, they knew more than they should have about that compound.”

“An August 16 classified cable, reviewed and reported on by Fox News last fall, showed there was an emergency meeting in Benghazi less than a month before the attack due to rapidly deteriorating security.  The cable warned the office of Secretary of State  Hillary Clinton, and other State Department leaders in Washington, that the consulate could not sustain a coordinated assault.

The cable also reflected a grave concern among officials on the ground that the Libyan militia charged with protecting the consulate had been compromised, perhaps even infiltrated by extremists.”

And Obama’s White House and Hillary’s State Dept ignored these warnings. These deaths would not have happened had they listened and installed some proper security.

_________________________________________________

4. And Obama’s war on the military continues.

From Politico  “After a spate of news stories this summer citing tensions between President  Barack Obama and his top military commanders over the possibility of U.S.  intervention in Syria, White House chief of staff Denis McDonough hastened to  assure the Washington Post that everything was, in fact, copacetic: The  president “appreciates” candid military advice “above all else,” McDonough insisted, and has “close, and in some instances warm,  relationships with his military chiefs,” as the Post put it. During my  own time at the Pentagon, where I worked as an Obama appointee from the spring  of 2009 until mid-2011, few seemed to hold this view. I recall asking one  general, recently back from Afghanistan, if he’d shared his experiences and  insights with the president. Rolling his eyes, he told me grimly that the White  House preferred the military to be seen but not heard.

Curious about whether things had changed since then, I asked a dozen serving  and recently retired senior military officers with high-level White House   access, many of whom were not comfortable speaking on the record, if they knew  of any military leaders with whom the president had a close and warm personal  relationship. In every case, the initial response was a long silence. “That’s a  great question,” said one retired senior officer, after a lengthy pause. “Good  question. I don’t know,” said a second. “I don’t think he’s close to anyone,”  commented a third. He just doesn’t seem to have any interest in “getting to  know” the military, a retired general concluded.”

Why would he? They have nothing in common. Their views are quite the opposite of his.

_________________________________________________

26 thoughts on “News/Politics 11-16-13”

  1. The Republicans are not bailing Obama out. As temping as just sitting back and watching Obamacare implode would be, the republicans should be above using the pain of the American people as a tool for spite the way Obama did during the shut down.

    Like

    Reply

  2. As the cliche goes, “The genie is out of the bottle”. This will be around in some form forever. Obama has won in his attempt to destroy the health care system.

    Next year, I will remember that Kay Hagen voted for Obamacare.

    Like

    Reply

  3. 1. I don’t know if 261 votes are enough to override a veto, but I heard recently that Congress is he only branch that can change a law once it is passed, so the President, in telling insurance companies that they can continue selling these policies, is out of line.

    2. It’s time to throw all 535 members out and give the legislative branch back to the people. i am sick and tired of their attitude of nobility.

    3. I hope this scandal brings down the Obama presidency quicker than Watergate brought down Nixon. Obama has to go. The nation cannot wait until 2017. I think we could put up with a Biden administration for two years. He isn’t a strong enough person to win in 2016, unless the media does for him what it has done for every Democratic candidate since JFK.

    4. During the 1992 campaign, Rush Limbaugh made a lot of use of Bill Clinton saying, “I loathe the military.” But when he was president, Mr Clinton didn’t show his loathing. On the other hand, Barack Obama was never quoted as saying he loathes the military, yet he has done nothing but show it.

    Like

    Reply

  4. It won’t do any good to throw 536 members out. It’s mostly not the people, but the Washington culture. The reason they brought Microsoft and (some other company, I can’t remember) before their Congressional panels is because they didn’t have lobbyists in Washington. Lobbyists have moneyl. That’s what it’s about.
    Barry Goldwater once said (approximately, I can’t quote exactly): It isn’t the President who runs the government. It isn’t Congress who runs things. It’s the agencies.
    But it appears that Obama has the agencies under control Especially IRS.
    Most of the agencies are liberal oriented in that they want to expand their mission. That’s in line with Obama’s objective.
    The primary purpose of an agency is to grow.

    Like

    Reply

  6. Saw a post on fb from a liberal friend linking to something that implies conservative ‘hackers’ may be to blame for the health care website breakdown.

    So see? It’s always Bush’s fault. 😉

    Like

    Reply

  8. The ACA needs people to purchase a certain amount of coverage to be viable. Thus, the elimination of bare-bones policies and the mandated comprehensive coverage plans. By allowing minimal plans to be sold, the ACA is not financial viable as the healthy and richer need to purchase plans which will in turn support those with pre-existing conditions or need subsidies. Its a plan that requires people to share with the less fortunate. Thus, Obama needs to veto this bill or the ACA will die a slow death starved of funds.

    Like

    Reply

  10. HRW, When was the last time that any government program died (slowly or rapidly) from a lack of funds?

    However, if we are going to be consistent, the government should also ban the purchase of inexpensive cars, clothes, food, etc. and require all Americans to purchase only expensive items. This post was brought to you by Lexus and Gucci.

    Like

    Reply

  13. ricky, I know you’re being slightly sarcastic but think about it. The US could set huge tariffs on cheap Asian products making them as costly as an equivalent American product. This would force everyone to purchase more expensive clothes and electronic goods but with increased tariff revenue, income tax could be reduced. Plus more well paid manufacturing jobs would be created increasing gov’t revenue. The lower taxes and better paying jobs would allow people to afford the more expensive goods. (see Alexander Hamilton for a previous incarnation of this economic plan)

    Like

    Reply

  15. HRW, While we are making everyone’s clothes and electronic equipment more expensive, let’s pass a law that requires them to buy Obama-approved products (whether they want them or not) or pay a fine. Hawaiians, Buy an Obama-approved fur coat or pay a fine! Blind people, Buy a big screen TV or pay a fine!

    Alexander Hamilton was never a favorite of mine or most Southerners. The tariff protecting Yankee manufactured goods was one of the causes for the unpleasantness in the 1860s.

    Friedman’s Free to Choose has an excellent chapter on how protectionism kept India poor.

    Like

    Reply

  16. While we are at it, let’s have another law that says all companies with 50 or more employees must provide all their employees with an Obama-approved fur coat and a big screen TV or pay a fine. I can see the future. In 2030, the US will have a million businesses, each with 49 employees.

    Like

    Reply

  17. i wonder if Friedman wrote a chapter on how protectionism made China rich. Hamilton’s tariff system accomplished what it set out to do …. create a nation of manufacturers. I wonder how Friedman treated that success.

    Mandating health insurance so that everyone is covered including the poor and sick is different than mandating fur coats unless you think health care and a fur coat have the same level of necessity.

    Like

    Reply

  19. Our poor have received free healthcare since 1965. Our elderly and disabled have received nearly free healthcare since 1965. The question is: Will the non-poor, non-elderly (who are also paying for the poor and elderly) be allowed to choose their own health insurance or will they be forced to buy one designed by a government nitwit?

    Like

    Reply

  21. SolarPancake, The Democrats don’t think people are smart enough to pick their health insurance, so let’s have some bureaucrat also pick out their food, clothes, home and hairstyle. Who knows? People are probably too dumb to pick spouses. I’m sure Obama and Sebelius could do a better job for them.

    Like

    Reply

  22. Comparatively speaking, China’s economy and wealth is substantially higher now than before — due to high tariffs. In fact the Asian tiger phenomenon is due to tariffs to protect infant industries. they’ve only now embraced free trade since their manufactures are able to compete. African countries which followed the IMF’s direction which included free trade did miserable.

    To be accurate,, the ACA allows a consumer a variety of choices just not the basic plans.

    If medicare provides good care for the poor and elderly why not allow it to expand to cover everyone, ie single payer

    Like

    Reply

Leave a reply to Peter L Cancel reply