Ted Cruz Has Skeptics at Liberty, and They Use Yik Yak
Looks like they were forced to be there. And they like Rand Paul much more.
Check out some of the posts...hee hee...will conservatives ever appeal to young people again?
Tuesday, March 24, 2015
Monday, March 23, 2015
GOP Adds First Victim To Clown Car
Senator Ted Cruz announced his candidacy for president today and became he first official conservative to throw his hat into the ring.
“Imagine a president who stands unapologetically with the nation of Israel,” he said. “Imagine in 2017, a president signing legislation repealing every word of Obamacare.” Story Continued Below Referring to the educational standards backed by Bush, the Texas senator said: “Imagine repealing every word of Common Core.” In another swipe at the governor, who has supported comprehensive immigration reform, Cruz promised to oppose “unconstitutional executive amnesty.”
It's going to be fun watching him get his ass kicked. Even more amusing will be the mental calisthenics that the right wing blogger crowd (Cruz's gristle) will perform in an attempt to be all factsy and truthy about how there are literally millions (see: maybe a few thousand in the comment section of this one awesome blog read in parent's basements across the country) upon millions of Americans that have embrace this ideology to run the United States.
Of course, there is also that issue of where Ted Cruz was born...cue the crickets:)
“Imagine a president who stands unapologetically with the nation of Israel,” he said. “Imagine in 2017, a president signing legislation repealing every word of Obamacare.” Story Continued Below Referring to the educational standards backed by Bush, the Texas senator said: “Imagine repealing every word of Common Core.” In another swipe at the governor, who has supported comprehensive immigration reform, Cruz promised to oppose “unconstitutional executive amnesty.”
It's going to be fun watching him get his ass kicked. Even more amusing will be the mental calisthenics that the right wing blogger crowd (Cruz's gristle) will perform in an attempt to be all factsy and truthy about how there are literally millions (see: maybe a few thousand in the comment section of this one awesome blog read in parent's basements across the country) upon millions of Americans that have embrace this ideology to run the United States.
Of course, there is also that issue of where Ted Cruz was born...cue the crickets:)
Labels:
2016 Election,
conservatives,
GOP. Republicans,
Ted Cruz
Here Come The Thought Police!
Conservatives like to caterwaul about authoritarian government and how liberals are bringing all of us closer and closer to totalitarianism. I submit that the reason why they say this is because THEY are the ones who can't resist the elixir of power and would do all of things they say liberals would do. Likely worse. Remember this? Well, it's gotten worse.
SCOTT’S CLIMATE CHANGE GAG ORDER CLAIMS A VICTIM
Washington, DC — A Florida state employee is in hot water for speaking about climate change at an official meeting and keeping notes of that discussion in official minutes, according to a complaint filed today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). In response, his superiors at the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) issued him a letter of reprimand, ordered him to take two days leave and then told him not to return until he had medical clearance of his fitness for duty.
Medical clearance? WTF?
Well, apparently, Mr. Bibler has to see a psychiatrist in order to return to work. Perhaps he will need psychic probe to remove all of those evil climate change thoughts from his noggin. Here is a copy of the official reprimand.
The next time you hear a conservative bitching about "liberal fascism," show them this story.
SCOTT’S CLIMATE CHANGE GAG ORDER CLAIMS A VICTIM
Washington, DC — A Florida state employee is in hot water for speaking about climate change at an official meeting and keeping notes of that discussion in official minutes, according to a complaint filed today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). In response, his superiors at the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) issued him a letter of reprimand, ordered him to take two days leave and then told him not to return until he had medical clearance of his fitness for duty.
Medical clearance? WTF?
Well, apparently, Mr. Bibler has to see a psychiatrist in order to return to work. Perhaps he will need psychic probe to remove all of those evil climate change thoughts from his noggin. Here is a copy of the official reprimand.
The next time you hear a conservative bitching about "liberal fascism," show them this story.
A Clinical Psychologist On Ayn Rand
Here's an interesting piece on Ayn Rand which posits the following.
A century later, Ayn Rand (1905-1982) helped make the United States into one of the most uncaring nations in the industrialized world, a neo-Dickensian society where healthcare is only for those who can afford it, and where young people are coerced into huge student-loan debt that cannot be discharged in bankruptcy.
Sadly, somewhat true. The entire piece is fantastic. Check it out!
A century later, Ayn Rand (1905-1982) helped make the United States into one of the most uncaring nations in the industrialized world, a neo-Dickensian society where healthcare is only for those who can afford it, and where young people are coerced into huge student-loan debt that cannot be discharged in bankruptcy.
Sadly, somewhat true. The entire piece is fantastic. Check it out!
Sunday, March 22, 2015
Good Words
From a recent piece in Politico from Representative Mike Thompson
To that end, the priority of Congress should be straightforward: Keep guns away from criminals, domestic abusers and the dangerously mentally ill while protecting the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens. The best way to do this is by expanding criminal background checks.
Yep.
The reaction on one side of the debate is to argue that guns have no place in our society. Significant constraints on gun ownership are proposed as legislative remedies. On the other side of the debate, we’re told the answer is to put more guns in schools and make it easier for people to carry weapons in public places such as malls and movie theaters. Both responses are extreme. Neither side gets anywhere. Gun violence continues unabated, and we fail to pass meaningful legislation that could save lives
Yep.
If you’re a Second Amendment supporter like me, this is problematic. Persistent gun violence will eventually lead to laws that place substantial and overly burdensome restrictions on our right to own guns. You don’t have to look any further than California’s attempt to require that all ammunition purchases be made through face-to-face interactions, or New York’s attempt to limit magazine capacity to seven rounds despite the fact that almost no handguns have seven-round magazines available to see the truth of this.
Yep.
We need to stop criminals, domestic abusers and those with a history of dangerous mental illness from getting guns. The only way to know if someone falls into one of these categories is to conduct a background check. This is a rationale that an overwhelming majority of gun owners support. It’s one that even the National Rifle Association used to support before it changed its stance. Ironically, by flip-flopping on expanded background checks, the gun lobby has undermined a legitimate effort to reduce gun violence and, in doing so, has left the door open for more stringent restrictions on Second Amendment rights in the future.
In short, the Gun Cult should give a little now and save themselves a whole worse later...
To that end, the priority of Congress should be straightforward: Keep guns away from criminals, domestic abusers and the dangerously mentally ill while protecting the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens. The best way to do this is by expanding criminal background checks.
Yep.
The reaction on one side of the debate is to argue that guns have no place in our society. Significant constraints on gun ownership are proposed as legislative remedies. On the other side of the debate, we’re told the answer is to put more guns in schools and make it easier for people to carry weapons in public places such as malls and movie theaters. Both responses are extreme. Neither side gets anywhere. Gun violence continues unabated, and we fail to pass meaningful legislation that could save lives
Yep.
If you’re a Second Amendment supporter like me, this is problematic. Persistent gun violence will eventually lead to laws that place substantial and overly burdensome restrictions on our right to own guns. You don’t have to look any further than California’s attempt to require that all ammunition purchases be made through face-to-face interactions, or New York’s attempt to limit magazine capacity to seven rounds despite the fact that almost no handguns have seven-round magazines available to see the truth of this.
Yep.
We need to stop criminals, domestic abusers and those with a history of dangerous mental illness from getting guns. The only way to know if someone falls into one of these categories is to conduct a background check. This is a rationale that an overwhelming majority of gun owners support. It’s one that even the National Rifle Association used to support before it changed its stance. Ironically, by flip-flopping on expanded background checks, the gun lobby has undermined a legitimate effort to reduce gun violence and, in doing so, has left the door open for more stringent restrictions on Second Amendment rights in the future.
In short, the Gun Cult should give a little now and save themselves a whole worse later...
Saturday, March 21, 2015
ISIS, Death and Taxes
An article in the New York Times raises the specter of Americans haring off to the Middle East to join ISIS and wreck havoc. It's supposed to be particularly shocking because several of these would-be terrorists are coming from white-bread Minnesota, where Somali immigrants have been settling for decades with very few problems.
The total number of ISIS sympathizers who have left the US is unknown, but is probably small. The FBI and concerned Somali Americans have been working together to keep these kids from going to certain misery and death in Iraq and Syria. They have been monitoring social media and have stopped many would-be terrorists from leaving the country. For example,
Mohammed Hamzah Khan, 19, took his younger brother and sister with him to O’Hare airport in Chicago, where agents intercepted them. He left his parents a long letter saying he could not stay in the United States because his taxes might be used to kill Muslims overseas.It's interesting how the right-wing American objection to their taxes being spent on things they don't like -- such as abortion -- has now been wedded with Islamic fervor. Right-wing crazies are the same no matter what their religion.
The thing is, ISIS terrorists spend almost every waking moment in the Middle East killing other Muslims. This kid doesn't want his taxes to be spent killing Muslims, but he wanted to go to the Middle East where ISIS would make him kill Muslims. Huh?
Sure, ISIS terrorists have lopped off the heads of a few American, Japanese and British aid workers and reporters. But the vast majority of their victims have been tens of thousands of Iraqi, Syrian, Egyptian, Yemeni, Tunisian Muslims.
By now it's clear that ISIS doesn't give a damn about Muslims or Islam. They're just a bunch of hoodlums and thieves who want to steal oil and land from real Muslims in the Middle East.
It's also clear that we can't defeat ISIS by declaring a war against all Islam. We must defeat them by exposing them as the hypocrites they are: a bunch of greedy scum bags flying a fake Islamic flag using Muslim kids to murder other Muslims to set themselves up as petty dictators, pedophiles and slave traders.
By characterizing ISIS as an Islamic entity and declaring war on all Islam, Republicans are blundering into the trap that ISIS has set. The more Republicans scream about the fight against ISIS being a war against Islam, the more American kids will want to join ISIS.
Because, you know, kids are contrary like that.
Declining Gun Ownership
I'll always be amused by the calisthenics on display by the Gun Cult when the facts of declining gun ownership are presented.
They can try to pull whatever they want out of their collective asses but the simple fact is that younger people generally aren't interested in guns. Once the boomers are gone, the debate over guns will effectively be over because there won't be anybody on one of the sides. The NRA knows this and their masters in the gun industry (side note: also eternally amused by the men who run the NRA who claim to be all about individualism and freedom. How does it feel to someone's bitch every single fucking day?)see the writing on the wall via their market projections, hence the fear/shit your pants push to buy more guns.
They are cashing in now while they have the chance.
They can try to pull whatever they want out of their collective asses but the simple fact is that younger people generally aren't interested in guns. Once the boomers are gone, the debate over guns will effectively be over because there won't be anybody on one of the sides. The NRA knows this and their masters in the gun industry (side note: also eternally amused by the men who run the NRA who claim to be all about individualism and freedom. How does it feel to someone's bitch every single fucking day?)see the writing on the wall via their market projections, hence the fear/shit your pants push to buy more guns.
They are cashing in now while they have the chance.
Friday, March 20, 2015
Stepping Up On Carbon Emissions
The president announced yesterday that he would be directing federal agencies to cut carbon emissions by 40 percent by the year 2025. While it's more symbolic than anything else (federal agencies only account for 0.7 of our country's carbon emissions), I still think it's significant. It sets a precedent for the private sector and other countries to follow.
The United States has always been a leader in the world. In fact, we are THE leader. Despite the denying of science by the adolescents on the Right, the US will be the go to country for renewable energy and solving the problem of increased carbon emissions that is leading to climate change. It will be our technology, our innovation, and our ingenuity that will eventually save the day...again!
The United States has always been a leader in the world. In fact, we are THE leader. Despite the denying of science by the adolescents on the Right, the US will be the go to country for renewable energy and solving the problem of increased carbon emissions that is leading to climate change. It will be our technology, our innovation, and our ingenuity that will eventually save the day...again!
Thursday, March 19, 2015
When It Becomes A Meme, You Know Your Ideology is Fucked
I think it's fucking hilarious that Obama bashing has become so played that it's now a meme.
Has any Republican every made fun of himself like this?
Wednesday, March 18, 2015
The Gun Cult's History of Flip Flopping
At a recent gun show in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, a vendor had these targets for sale.
As the article notes, the vendor was quickly removed from the show and banned. I applaud the show runners for their quick action and this incident is most illustrative of how this sort of thing simply isn't tolerated anymore. Of course, the cynic in me questions the motivations of the show runners. Do they really feel that this was racist or are they worried about the stereotype of old, angry white men? I suppose it doesn't really matter either way.
However, this incident reminds me of a time when the NRA once supported gun control. Yep, that's right, folks, they surely did. Take note of the several points in history when the NRA lobbied hard for laws they say are freedom killing today. This point in time was particularly interesting, hence the connection to the target above.
The nation’s white political elite feared that violence was too prevalent and there were too many people—especially urban Black nationalists—with access to guns. In May 1967, two dozen Black Panther Party members walked into the California Statehouse carrying rifles to protest a gun-control bill, prompting then-Gov. Ronald Reagan to comment, “There’s no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons.”
This led to the 1968 Gun Control Act. There is some fascinating background in the piece on how this law got passed and the fissure that developed within the NRA.
I'm going to amend my original prediction regarding how gun laws will be changed in this country. It may be due to some horrible shooting at a gun rights event or it may when white American feels more threatened by non white America. This doesn't just include African Americans. If a substantial number of Islamic people start shooting up parts of our country, watch how the NRA and other gun rights people start a flippin' and a floppin'!
As the article notes, the vendor was quickly removed from the show and banned. I applaud the show runners for their quick action and this incident is most illustrative of how this sort of thing simply isn't tolerated anymore. Of course, the cynic in me questions the motivations of the show runners. Do they really feel that this was racist or are they worried about the stereotype of old, angry white men? I suppose it doesn't really matter either way.
However, this incident reminds me of a time when the NRA once supported gun control. Yep, that's right, folks, they surely did. Take note of the several points in history when the NRA lobbied hard for laws they say are freedom killing today. This point in time was particularly interesting, hence the connection to the target above.
The nation’s white political elite feared that violence was too prevalent and there were too many people—especially urban Black nationalists—with access to guns. In May 1967, two dozen Black Panther Party members walked into the California Statehouse carrying rifles to protest a gun-control bill, prompting then-Gov. Ronald Reagan to comment, “There’s no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons.”
This led to the 1968 Gun Control Act. There is some fascinating background in the piece on how this law got passed and the fissure that developed within the NRA.
I'm going to amend my original prediction regarding how gun laws will be changed in this country. It may be due to some horrible shooting at a gun rights event or it may when white American feels more threatened by non white America. This doesn't just include African Americans. If a substantial number of Islamic people start shooting up parts of our country, watch how the NRA and other gun rights people start a flippin' and a floppin'!
Tuesday, March 17, 2015
Broken Tail Light Policing
We live in a fairly well-off suburb of Minneapolis. The crime rate is pretty low, though our house was broken into fourteen years ago and a worthless twenty-year-old stereo was stolen. Fixing the front door cost us 20 or 30 times more than value of the stolen property.
My wife recently went on a ride-along with a city police officer. The cop spent most of the time running license plates. He also spent a long time watching a gas station near the high school that's the hub for drug deals.
Unlike Ferguson, MO, our city doesn't depend on traffic citations to balance the budget. We've got one of the biggest shopping malls in the area, lots of nice houses on lakes and in wooded areas, and plenty of businesses, all of which provide a decent property tax base. That also means we have almost no poverty, which means we have a pretty small minority community: the city is 95% white, and blacks make up about 1.5%.
Yet on my wife's ride along three of the five drivers stopped were black.
There are no laws on the books specifically intended to target minorities. It was a winter night in Minnesota and there was no way to tell the race of drivers. Objectively, there was no attempt to target African Americans, but somehow blacks were stopped far more frequently relative to their population in the city and the state.
Cops here only stop cars for real violations. That includes moving violations, speeding, expired or missing plates, faulty equipment (missing mufflers, broken tail lights), erratic driving, and violations of driving restrictions (convicted drunk drivers have special plates so curfew violations can be identified).
But since African Americans are much more likely to be poor, they're much more likely to be stopped. Even if they're committing crimes at the same rate as whites, they'll get caught more often because they're stopped more often.
For example, one of the cars stopped was in violation of a law that prohibits tinted windows (it was dawdling at the drug-dealer gas station). The driver was black, and was cited for driving without a license. It turns out that the car was a former police cruiser (I'm guessing it was bought cheaply at auction in another state -- the driver was from Ohio).
A rich white person with a brand-new SUV driving with an expired driver's license will just never get caught.
It was a very quiet Friday night on my wife's ride-along, and there weren't any drunk or high drivers. But the cop said they get a lot of arrests for drug possession and drunk driving because they are stopped for some other minor equipment violation, like burned-out tail or brake lights.
There are plenty of rich whites who drive drunk, or high, or are holding. But unless there's some cause for them to be stopped, they'll never get caught. Traffic laws discriminate between rich and poor. And since income is closely linked to race, they discriminate between black and white.
There's nothing inherently wrong with the laws on our books. People with unsafe cars should be made to fix them. People should have current licenses and plates.
Second, these laws start the poor on a downward spiral. If you get stopped for a cracked wind shield and your license is expired -- because finances are tight or you just don't have time to get it renewed because you're working three minimum wage jobs 80 hours a week and can't afford to take time off to go to the DMV during the typical 7:30-4:30 M-F schedule they're open -- you can't drive anymore and they might even impound your car. And you get a $200-plus in fines, plus towing and storage fees at the impound lot. And you still don't have the time or money to renew your license.
Since ours is such a car-centric culture, now you can't get to work. You wind up coming late a lot because you have to bum a ride or have a bus ride that takes two hours one way, or pay a cab, stretching your finances even further. That means you can't pay the fine for driving without a license, so the city garnishes your pay check. You're not looking like a very reliable employee any more. When a layoff comes, you're the first to go.
This isn't just a problem for blacks, it's a problem for whites too. A lot of formerly middle-class white Americans got sucked down the poverty drain in Great Recession.
But the real difference between Ferguson and our city is the attitude of the cops. In Ferguson, the cops piled on one bogus citation after another. They had contests to see who could get the most violations in a single stop (I think 14 was the highest).
On my wife's ride-along the officer was a stickler for the law. He stopped one car without plates that had a yellow piece of paper taped to the inside of the back window, which at first glance looked like a temporary permit for a new car. But it wasn't a permit, it was just a piece of paper with lines drawn on it. The driver was black, and had just picked up her kids at a school event. It was her brother's car. The cop told her she couldn't drive it home, so she called the brother to figure out what to do. Only then did she find out that the plates were actually in the car.
Clearly, the brother was violating some law. But since he wasn't driving, and the plates were in the car, the cop felt he had nothing to charge her with. And he just let her go.
The cop could have been a hard-ass and issued a citation immediately, called a tow truck and cost this woman hundreds of dollars in fines and towing fees. He would have been justified, and no one would have been the wiser, because technically, that woman was in violation of the law. But he didn't.
Did he let her go because my wife was there? Because there were kids in the car? Because he was so meticulous about the law? Because he was a nice guy? Because his conscience had been raised by Ferguson? Because cops in suburban Minnesota are soft touches? I don't know.
But I do know that every citizen in Ferguson, and every other town that has been leeching off poor and black Americans, deserves that same kind of consideration.
My wife recently went on a ride-along with a city police officer. The cop spent most of the time running license plates. He also spent a long time watching a gas station near the high school that's the hub for drug deals.
Unlike Ferguson, MO, our city doesn't depend on traffic citations to balance the budget. We've got one of the biggest shopping malls in the area, lots of nice houses on lakes and in wooded areas, and plenty of businesses, all of which provide a decent property tax base. That also means we have almost no poverty, which means we have a pretty small minority community: the city is 95% white, and blacks make up about 1.5%.
Yet on my wife's ride along three of the five drivers stopped were black.
There are no laws on the books specifically intended to target minorities. It was a winter night in Minnesota and there was no way to tell the race of drivers. Objectively, there was no attempt to target African Americans, but somehow blacks were stopped far more frequently relative to their population in the city and the state.
Cops here only stop cars for real violations. That includes moving violations, speeding, expired or missing plates, faulty equipment (missing mufflers, broken tail lights), erratic driving, and violations of driving restrictions (convicted drunk drivers have special plates so curfew violations can be identified).
Traffic stops don't target by race, they target by income.
The effect of this is that traffic stops here don't target by race, they target by income. Poor people are more likely to own older or cheaper cars, which means they're much more likely to have something go wrong with them and get stopped by the cops. Poor people are more likely to be strapped for license and plate renewal fees, and will be more tempted to risk stretching out the grace period.But since African Americans are much more likely to be poor, they're much more likely to be stopped. Even if they're committing crimes at the same rate as whites, they'll get caught more often because they're stopped more often.
For example, one of the cars stopped was in violation of a law that prohibits tinted windows (it was dawdling at the drug-dealer gas station). The driver was black, and was cited for driving without a license. It turns out that the car was a former police cruiser (I'm guessing it was bought cheaply at auction in another state -- the driver was from Ohio).
A rich white person with a brand-new SUV driving with an expired driver's license will just never get caught.
It was a very quiet Friday night on my wife's ride-along, and there weren't any drunk or high drivers. But the cop said they get a lot of arrests for drug possession and drunk driving because they are stopped for some other minor equipment violation, like burned-out tail or brake lights.
There are plenty of rich whites who drive drunk, or high, or are holding. But unless there's some cause for them to be stopped, they'll never get caught. Traffic laws discriminate between rich and poor. And since income is closely linked to race, they discriminate between black and white.
There's nothing inherently wrong with the laws on our books. People with unsafe cars should be made to fix them. People should have current licenses and plates.
Laws that discriminate by income cause blacks to be stopped more frequently because they're poorer.
But the laws do two things that perpetuate the idea that African Americans are criminals. First, they preselect poorer minorities for closer scrutiny by police, which means that even if richer whites commit crimes at a higher rate, they're able to slip by unnoticed because of their wealth. This creates a perception that minorities are more criminal.Second, these laws start the poor on a downward spiral. If you get stopped for a cracked wind shield and your license is expired -- because finances are tight or you just don't have time to get it renewed because you're working three minimum wage jobs 80 hours a week and can't afford to take time off to go to the DMV during the typical 7:30-4:30 M-F schedule they're open -- you can't drive anymore and they might even impound your car. And you get a $200-plus in fines, plus towing and storage fees at the impound lot. And you still don't have the time or money to renew your license.
Since ours is such a car-centric culture, now you can't get to work. You wind up coming late a lot because you have to bum a ride or have a bus ride that takes two hours one way, or pay a cab, stretching your finances even further. That means you can't pay the fine for driving without a license, so the city garnishes your pay check. You're not looking like a very reliable employee any more. When a layoff comes, you're the first to go.
This isn't just a problem for blacks, it's a problem for whites too. A lot of formerly middle-class white Americans got sucked down the poverty drain in Great Recession.
But the real difference between Ferguson and our city is the attitude of the cops. In Ferguson, the cops piled on one bogus citation after another. They had contests to see who could get the most violations in a single stop (I think 14 was the highest).
On my wife's ride-along the officer was a stickler for the law. He stopped one car without plates that had a yellow piece of paper taped to the inside of the back window, which at first glance looked like a temporary permit for a new car. But it wasn't a permit, it was just a piece of paper with lines drawn on it. The driver was black, and had just picked up her kids at a school event. It was her brother's car. The cop told her she couldn't drive it home, so she called the brother to figure out what to do. Only then did she find out that the plates were actually in the car.
Clearly, the brother was violating some law. But since he wasn't driving, and the plates were in the car, the cop felt he had nothing to charge her with. And he just let her go.
The cop could have been a hard-ass and issued a citation immediately, called a tow truck and cost this woman hundreds of dollars in fines and towing fees. He would have been justified, and no one would have been the wiser, because technically, that woman was in violation of the law. But he didn't.
Did he let her go because my wife was there? Because there were kids in the car? Because he was so meticulous about the law? Because he was a nice guy? Because his conscience had been raised by Ferguson? Because cops in suburban Minnesota are soft touches? I don't know.
But I do know that every citizen in Ferguson, and every other town that has been leeching off poor and black Americans, deserves that same kind of consideration.
The Still Lower Costs of the Affordable Care Act
I know that conservatives like to live in the own little bubble where they feel entitled to their own facts but I have to wonder what goes through their head when they see stories like this.
Obamacare’s projected cost falls due to lower premiums under health care law, CBO says
The Congressional Budget Office announced on Monday that the Affordable Care Act will cost $142 billion, or 11 percent, less over the next 10 years, compared to what the agency had projected in January. The nonpartisan agency said the Affordable Care Act will cost less for two essential reasons. The first, and most significant, is that health insurance premiums are rising more slowly, and thus requires less of a government subsidy.
In addition, slightly fewer people are now expected to sign up for Medicaid and for subsidized insurance under the law's marketplaces. That's because the agency now says that more people than anticipated already had health insurance before the law took effect, and fewer companies than anticipated are canceling coverage. All in all, three million fewer people are expected to sign up for Affordable Care Act provisions by 2025. Still, by 2025, the CBO estimates "the total number of people who will be uninsured ... is now expected to be smaller than previously projected," because more will have had health insurance to begin with.
Will they capitulate or continue to believe?
Obamacare’s projected cost falls due to lower premiums under health care law, CBO says
The Congressional Budget Office announced on Monday that the Affordable Care Act will cost $142 billion, or 11 percent, less over the next 10 years, compared to what the agency had projected in January. The nonpartisan agency said the Affordable Care Act will cost less for two essential reasons. The first, and most significant, is that health insurance premiums are rising more slowly, and thus requires less of a government subsidy.
In addition, slightly fewer people are now expected to sign up for Medicaid and for subsidized insurance under the law's marketplaces. That's because the agency now says that more people than anticipated already had health insurance before the law took effect, and fewer companies than anticipated are canceling coverage. All in all, three million fewer people are expected to sign up for Affordable Care Act provisions by 2025. Still, by 2025, the CBO estimates "the total number of people who will be uninsured ... is now expected to be smaller than previously projected," because more will have had health insurance to begin with.
Will they capitulate or continue to believe?
Changing Our Gun Culture
From a recent question on Quora...
When Americans find a stoic heart and stop their national anxiety attacks over every little problem in the world guns will seem unnecessary to those who don't actually need them. I bet obesity rates would go down too as people find it unnecessarily to eat their anxiety. The recent mass panic and persecution related to the Ebola problem is illustrative.
Anxiety is killing Americans and gun ownership and violence is a relatively small aspect of the problem. All gun deaths are regrettable, but as pointed out in other answers the numbers are decreasing. Stop listening to media hyperbole and have a chat with your friends. Fear and anxiety are the problem and unnecessary gun ownership is one of the minor consequences.
Exactly what I have been saying for years!
When Americans find a stoic heart and stop their national anxiety attacks over every little problem in the world guns will seem unnecessary to those who don't actually need them. I bet obesity rates would go down too as people find it unnecessarily to eat their anxiety. The recent mass panic and persecution related to the Ebola problem is illustrative.
Anxiety is killing Americans and gun ownership and violence is a relatively small aspect of the problem. All gun deaths are regrettable, but as pointed out in other answers the numbers are decreasing. Stop listening to media hyperbole and have a chat with your friends. Fear and anxiety are the problem and unnecessary gun ownership is one of the minor consequences.
Exactly what I have been saying for years!
Monday, March 16, 2015
Poopy Pants People Who Are Fat and Stupid!
Here is a photo of Richard Nixon talking to Mao Zedong...
Mao was incredibly evil man responsible for the deaths of millions of people.
Here is a photo of Ronald Reagan signing a deal with the Soviets
The Soviets were the "evil empire," right?
So, two Republican leaders, the second of which is highly revered among conservatives today, talking and making deals with mortal enemies far greater than the likes of Iran or Syria.
Yet, if you listen to Republicans today, even sitting down and talking with countries like Iran signifies capitulation. Why? The only explanation I see is that they don't want to talk with their fat headed fat faces ever again because they are poopy pants people who are fat and stupid!! Plus, if that fat headed Obama gets another victory then it will be a never ending shame spiral of seeing him win...again!!
Mao was incredibly evil man responsible for the deaths of millions of people.
Here is a photo of Ronald Reagan signing a deal with the Soviets
The Soviets were the "evil empire," right?
So, two Republican leaders, the second of which is highly revered among conservatives today, talking and making deals with mortal enemies far greater than the likes of Iran or Syria.
Yet, if you listen to Republicans today, even sitting down and talking with countries like Iran signifies capitulation. Why? The only explanation I see is that they don't want to talk with their fat headed fat faces ever again because they are poopy pants people who are fat and stupid!! Plus, if that fat headed Obama gets another victory then it will be a never ending shame spiral of seeing him win...again!!
When The Whole Fear and Shit Your Pants Thing Kinda Fails...
Ted Cruz terrifies a little girl in New Hampshire
“The world is on fire?” piped up 3-year-old Julie Trant, sitting with her mother. The senator answered in the affirmative: “The world is on fire. Yes! Your world is on fire. But you know what? Your mommy’s here and everyone’s here to make sure that the world you grow up in is better.”
When the only tool in your tool kit is the Apocalypse...
“The world is on fire?” piped up 3-year-old Julie Trant, sitting with her mother. The senator answered in the affirmative: “The world is on fire. Yes! Your world is on fire. But you know what? Your mommy’s here and everyone’s here to make sure that the world you grow up in is better.”
When the only tool in your tool kit is the Apocalypse...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)