Friday Morning Open Thread: Chrome Ones Cost More

basic truck nutz
(Scott Meyer‘s website)

Speaking of chrome-plated fake ballz, the GOP says they’re going to sue President Obama for… not properly enforcing the ACA. Yeah, that law they fought so hard against enacting in the first place. Per NYMag:

When House Speaker John Boehner announced last month that House Republicans would attempt to sue President Obama for failing to “faithfully execute the laws of our country,” he was vague about which executive actions they found objectionable. On Thursday, a draft resolution authorizing the suit revealed that it will focus on Obama delaying the Affordable Care Act’s employer mandate twice since last summer. “The president changed the healthcare law without a vote of Congress, effectively creating his own law by literally waiving the employer mandate and the penalties for failing to comply with it,” Boehner said. “That’s not the way our system of government was designed to work. No president should have the power to make laws on his or her own.”…

Dave Weigel linked to the official document, and adds:

This is not quite the most riveting basis for a lawsuit, but it’s the one we’ve got. Next Wednesday the House Rules Committee meets to talk it over; a journey begins to the D.C. Circuit, which can toss this over the lack of standing, or the Supreme Court, which can also toss it but at least be appealed to if Republicans lose Round 1.

***********
Apart from public displays of fake MANLINESS!, what’s on the agenda as we wrap up another week?

134 replies
  1. 1
    EmDeeAhr says:

    It seems patently obvious to me that this lawsuit is about getting a court to say “You’re the Congress; if you think the President isn’t obeying the law, your remedy is impeachment.” Then they can go “Sadly, the courts said this is all we can do…” and shake their heads slowly while reviving the 1998 circus.

    This seems so obvious to me that I wonder if I’m a sooper genius or just a moran.

  2. 2
    James E. Powell says:

    @EmDeeAhr:

    I don’t think so. The lawsuit isn’t a prelude to impeachment; it’s a substitute.

    The only purpose of the lawsuit is to get negative press/media coverage for the president between now and November. It will give them the opportunity to yell “Lawless President!” “Doesn’t even follow his own law!” “And there’s more” because they always say there’s more. And whenever they get any information they say that it raises more questions than it answers – they never say which questions were raised or which were answered.

    It will be like an Issa investigation – Bold and brazen allegations turned into headlines and sound bites by a credulous press/media – Op/Eds by Republicans making ominous predictions – the use of “gate” – Senator McCain on Sunday morning – then the truth, that the allegations are false, is reported on page 7. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

    This has been going on since 1993

  3. 3
    Jewish Steel says:

    Like most of what R does anymore. Fundraising boondoggle.

  4. 4
    Cpl Cam says:

    Tabloid governing. It’s all they’ve got. And, knowing America, it just might work.

  5. 5
    Waspuppet says:

    This is all assuming they ever file the suit. Which I doubt.

  6. 6
    tybee says:

    a few weeks ago, near the local art college (SCAD), i saw a young lady with an iphone that had very small pink testicles dangling.

  7. 7

    @Jewish Steel: To paraphrase Mencken (I believe), no one ever went broke by exploitng the fear and loathing of the right-wing base.

    I have the day off — another use-it-or-lose-it — and I’m going to visit a friend whom I first met when I was four years old in 1957.

  8. 8
    BillinGlendaleCA says:

    Joe Scar and Halprin don’t like the President’s tone. He needs to work with the Republicans. I may start chugging my mouthwash.

  9. 9
    Schlemizel says:

    Hey, sorry I commented and then ran yesterday morning. Work has been a beast, in a normal month my team will process about 30 projects. Last week, in just 4 days, we were given 48 projects and as of last night we had over 60. I have not had a minute to sneak over to BJ.

    Thanks to everyone for the comments. Yes, we saw the cyclorama and to me it is more interesting as an art object of its period. Against the actual battle field it felt flat I’m sure I am jaded by media overload. There is a lot of whining on-line from the wingnut community about the movie they show & the reason is very apparent. The movie shows and states explicitly that the war was not started to end slavery but because slaves wanted total freedom to expand slavery. After the movie was when my wife noted that politics today reminds her of this situation.

    I did go back and red replys when I got home last night but now have forgotten most of what I want to say. Maybe Monday morning.

  10. 10

    @BillinGlendaleCA: How many ways can someone be expected to respond cooperatively to the line from Blazing Saddles: “Up yours, n****r!”?

  11. 11
    dmsilev says:

    @BillinGlendaleCA: It never ever occurs to those jackasses to ask the question “why won’t the Republicans work with the President?”. Always the other way around.

  12. 12
    Elizabelle says:

    Today’s cartoon is funny.

    This is less so. WaPost has been pimping this with prominent top left of the website spot, but not biting.

    Obama’s travels: Breaking free or Running Away?
    DEBRIEF | His staff — promoting the stops on Twitter with #TheBearIsLoose — says the president is trying to connect with ordinary citizens, but critics fault the strategy as ill-timed and irresponsible.

    Not linking. Is that a “ringing the chowbell for wingnuts” headline or what?

    And is that a thought that occurred to any of you? If he’s not on the road, he’s the Imperial President, cloistered (hiding!) in the White House, unaware of the lives of average Americans.

  13. 13
    Elizabelle says:

    @BillinGlendaleCA:

    Good morning. Awoke, clock said 6:01 a. I thought, I know one program I will choose not to watch today.

  14. 14
    another Holocene human says:

    @tybee: better fake appendages than intact dogs and cats and the resulting strays and diseases

  15. 15
    raven says:

    @Schlemizel: Well, as you know, there is no real battlefield since they flattened Legget’s Hill for I-20. I’m sure the right-wingers don’t like much about the Cyclorama, the young African American dude that had Abe Lincoln hat and beard must really piss em off!

  16. 16
    Baud says:

    @dmsilev:

    They’re not paid to have that occur to them.

  17. 17
    raven says:

    @Elizabelle: I have to say Caperhart and Mika are giving a decent defense (despite her “both side”)

  18. 18
    Ben Cisco says:

    This is really, painfully simple.

    THEY. HATE. THIS. PRESIDENT.

    And as pathetic THAT is, they know full well that they drive the media narrative, and between the:
    – NeoConfederates
    – FerengiMedia
    – so-called “captive” non-insane GOPers
    – “even the liberal” sacks of crap
    – the pearl-clutchers
    – and those on the left that SHOULD have figured this out by now but are either pretending to be dense or may actually be so

    you have a built-in audience for this garbage.

    I stopped watching a LONNGG time ago, and anybody else with an IQ over 20 should have by now too. Even the clips making fun of these assholes are no longer palatable to me. Just so DONE with it. These motherfuckers want to turn me back into 3/5 of a fucking human being – I am neither amused nor entertained.

    But you know what? I get where President Obama is coming from. On an extremely personal level. Anybody in our, ahem, demographic does. We’ve had to deal with the same shit, just on a smaller scale. And because of that, can readily recognize it for what it is.

    And are sick of it.

  19. 19
    BillinGlendaleCA says:

    @raven: I was a bit surprised by Mika, but then she went to “Both Sides”. Joe had the tired line that Clinton knew how to work with us, the near sheriff doesn’t seem to know how according to Joe Scar.

  20. 20
    JGabriel says:

    NYMag:

    On Thursday, a draft resolution authorizing the suit revealed that it will focus on Obama delaying the Affordable Care Act’s employer mandate twice since last summer. “The president changed the healthcare law without a vote of Congress, effectively creating his own law by literally waiving the employer mandate and the penalties for failing to comply with it,” Boehner said.

    I think there’s one of two things going on here:

    1) Boehner needs to give the elected teatards something to placate them in lieu of the impeachment they want. Boehner knows impeachment will be a disaster for the party, and himself – he remembers how well that didn’t work for Gingrich in ’98. So this is what he’s giving his clown show reps to distract them.

    or

    2) Some jackass in the Federalist Society (yeah, yeah, I know that’s redundant) came up with a new legal theory they want Boehner to test at SCOTUS while they still have a conservative majority.

    I really don’t see how Congress can have standing – maybe that’s what they want to test – but if SCOTUS can give Hobby Lobby a soul, then who’s to say what they’ll dream up next.

    Historically, SCOTUS tries to stay out of disputes between Congress and the executive branch, but I fear the Roberts Court may be an exception.

  21. 21
    JPL says:

    The ACA law is already being challenged in the D.C courts on the basis that the law doesn’t provide for subsidies on the federal exchange. Why do the repubs want to waste additional money on additional suits?

  22. 22
    BillinGlendaleCA says:

    @JGabriel: There’s also another problem, by the time this reaches pretty much any court, the employer mandate exemption will no longer be an issue. It was only a 1 year exemption and that ends at the end of this year.

  23. 23
    Aimai says:

    @James E. Powell: this. 100 per cent this.

  24. 24
    dmsilev says:

    @JPL: Boehner’s suit isn’t about the ACA, it’s about political posturing. Remember, he announced the lawsuit, and then it took the better part of a month before he decided what specifically he was going to sue over. Traditionally, you do those steps in the opposite order…

  25. 25
    JGabriel says:

    @BillinGlendaleCA:

    There’s also another problem, by the time this reaches pretty much any court, the employer mandate exemption will no longer be an issue. It was only a 1 year exemption …

    Yep, you’re right – there’s a definite “What’s the remedy?” issue here too.

  26. 26
    JPL says:

    Legally can the administration use the words of the Representatives who wanted the mandate delayed, as part of the defense?

  27. 27
    Betty Cracker says:

    @tybee: Haha, good old SCAD. My sister lived around the corner from there back in the day. Always some interesting characters.

  28. 28
    raven says:

    @Betty Cracker: SCAD and the movie saved that towh.

  29. 29
    WereBear says:

    @tybee: Well, art college, all bets are off. You almost scared me there.

    I loved this panel so much I visited the site and signed up for a subscription! $2.50 a month to help support this artist… I can do that.

    Strength in numbers.

    Speaking of which, I know the economy’s coming back because our cat toy business has picked up for the second week in a row. (Thus, allowing me to afford being an Art Patron.)

    We were perking along, making cat site expenses, and then the Republicans kicked the legs out from under the economy and began beating it with a stick.

    Cat toy sales vanished like a TV when you pull the plug.

    So be of good cheer, my friends! The Cat Toy Index is trending upward!

  30. 30
    gnomedad says:

    Apart from being assholes, they are convinced that the ACA sucks, and that if only everyone knew enough about it, they would reject it, and so Obama is trying to hide the suckiness. They are superficially correct in the sense that change is always painful and Obama wants to minimize the pain.

  31. 31
    raven says:

    @Betty Cracker: SCAD and the movie saved that town.

  32. 32
    Kay says:

    @James E. Powell:

    I think there’s more substance to it than that. Not the lawsuit, but the issue. They want to put Democrats in a box on the employer mandate because a lot of Democrats are backing away from it, which will be a problem for Democrats.

    But scrapping it isn’t a snap for Democrats. The employer coverage rules were part of the ACA’s core philosophy that individuals, employers and the government should all contribute to paying health care costs. Some Democratic constituencies, including labor unions and Obamacare proponents like Families USA, still see it that way.
    But the shift among liberal policy experts and advocates has been rapid. A stream of studies and statements have deemed the mandate only moderately useful for getting more people covered under Obamacare. And they too have come to see it as clumsy, a regulatory and financial burden that creates as many problems as it solves.
    The main downside to eliminating the mandate, from the Democratic perspective? Money.
    Estimates of the mandate’s worth to Obamacare financing range from $46 billion to more than $100 billion over a decade. That helps pay for coverage expansion. Getting a bipartisan deal to scrap the policy is one hurdle; an agreement on how to make up the money could be even harder.

    It’s a problem for me, actually. The employer mandate is one of the reasons I supported the law. I don’t think large low-wage employers should get a free ride on employee health care, particularly if individuals have a mandate. It’s a really important “fair share” issue for me. They lose revenue without the employer mandate, so there’s that, but the principle is also important. Without the employer mandate, that piece becomes a federal subsidy to low wage employers. I think that’s the wrong direction to go. They can’t lose the “fairness” argument for the law, and they will without the employer mandate. It will be yet another area where large companies don’t have to play by the rules but individual people do. That’s not fair.

    Of course employers don’t want it. No shit. That’s not a reason to let them off the hook.

    So, short answer, Republicans hate the employer mandate, Democrats are getting wobbly and there’s no way to replace it or fix it with Republicans in Congress. Raising it now works for the GOP politically.

  33. 33
    debbie says:

    Why do the repubs want to waste additional money on additional suits?

    @JPL:

    Someone with access to these things needs to total up the costs of these lawsuits, the faux hearings, the sham fact-finding tours, etc., to see how much the GOP has cost the taxpayers since 2008. And then ask how this supports their harpy-cries for fiscal responsibility.

  34. 34
    Baud says:

    @JPL:

    Might be useful rhetorically, but legally irrelevant. It’ll never get that far, however. The suit will be thrown out on standing.

  35. 35
    Kay says:

    @James E. Powell:

    The employer mandate to me is typical of the kinds of issues that divide the Democratic Party (or liberals and Democrats, maybe more accurately).

    Families USA and labor unions would say that scrapping the employer mandate is the result of “technocrats” in the Democratic Party, people who ignore things like “fairness” or a longer trajectory towards “fairness” and thus lose the public argument. They see it as a divide between DC and regular people. I lean their way. I think they’re right about that; there is a divide and all the studies in the world aren’t going to help anyone who is trying to sell this to regular people because regular people will see it as unfair. Hell, I think it’s unfair. I agree with them.

  36. 36
    BruinKid says:

    @Ben Cisco: For the most part, yes. But can you explain those like Clarence Thomas and Tim Scott and Ben Carson? I don’t even count Michael Steele in this category, because he’s seemed pretty exasperated/disgusted by some of the shenanigans going on, especially down in Mississippi. But those others, they seem to defend it 100%.

  37. 37
    Baud says:

    @Kay:

    I don’t know enough about the employer mandate to have a view, but I’m in complete agreement with you about the tension between the “wonks” and the general public. I’m liberal so I tend to support governmental action to address issues, but I think this disconnect is one of the side effects of having a large and siloed regulatory system.

  38. 38
    Betty Cracker says:

    @raven: The crime was terrible when my sis lived there 20+ years back. Other than getting burglarized every six months, she liked living there. Don’t know if it’s improved since then or not, but I’ve always had a soft spot for Savannah. One of my grandmas is from there, though she left it long ago.

  39. 39
    Suffern ACE says:

    @Elizabelle: or it’s summer? Everyone else leaves DC in the summer. Christ. Some Senators break free and run away ever week from Tuesday on.

  40. 40
    Patrick says:

    @BillinGlendaleCA:

    Joe Scar and Halprin don’t like the President’s tone. He needs to work with the Republicans. I may start chugging my mouthwash.

    Joe Scar and Halperin are both Republicans. Of course, they will claim the Prez needs to work with the Republicans…

  41. 41
    rikyrah says:

    Good Morning, Everyone :)

  42. 42
    Baud says:

    Probably short-lived, but nice:

    TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) — The Florida Legislature illegally drew the state’s congressional districts to primarily benefit the Republican Party, a judge has ruled, and has ordered them redrawn.

    Circuit Judge Terry Lewis said in a 41-page ruling Thursday that legislators relied on GOP political operatives who worked in secret to craft the final political maps adopted in 2012. In doing so Lewis rejected arguments from top legislative leaders that they had done nothing wrong during the process.

    The ruling is not expected to disrupt this year’s elections because the Legislature is expected to appeal the decision to the state Supreme Court. But ultimately the changes could affect the political careers of Florida’s congressional delegation, which is currently dominated by Republicans.

  43. 43
    raven says:

    @Betty Cracker: Oh yea, the murder rate was through the roof back then.

  44. 44
    rikyrah says:

    Not only a law they’ve voted to repeal over 50 times..

    but they voted to delay the mandate THEMSELVES.

    are they going to sue themselves?

  45. 45
    Kay says:

    @Baud:

    Well, there’s two parts, IMO. There’s genuine “wonks” – I like having them, it’s one of the good differences between the Democrats and the Republicans, we have earnest and well-intentioned wonks and Republicans really don’t, they have lobbyists disguised as wonks. I’m not against “smart”. I don’t think populism has to be stupid. It’s not either/or. I wouldn’t lump everyone who is a wonk under “technocrat”, because that’s dumb populism.

    BUT we also have hacks and they seize on things like this. I now put Robert Gibbs in that second “hack” category because he has a PR/marketing firm and I don’t know who he actually works for. I think he should have to reveal who he works for now that he is a fake-policy-pundit. I don’t think these people should be able to appear on tv with no disclaimers. Gibbs raised getting rid of the employer mandate publicly. I don’t think that’s an accident on his part. I think he’s doing his job, working for the people who pay him.

    We have both wonks and hacks. They just have lobbyists disguised as wonks. I think we can keep the good wonks and limit the influence of the hacks.

    Technocrats need populists. They shouldn’t ignore them, and they do. Fairness is really important. It’s not an “extra” that can be jettisoned in pursuit of “what works”.

  46. 46
    rikyrah says:

    @Kay:

    BUT we also have hacks and they seize on things like this. I now put Robert Gibbs in that second “hack” category because he has a PR/marketing firm and I don’t know who he actually works for. I think he should have to reveal who he works for now that he is a fake-policy-pundit. I don’t think these people should be able to appear on tv with no disclaimers.

    Amen, Kay.

    ICAM.

  47. 47
    Baud says:

    @Kay:

    Agreed. I didn’t mean to suggest wonks were evil. ;-) But even good wonks, I think, often get lost in their work and forget that policy is ultimately supposed to govern a real world full of non-wonky people.

  48. 48
    rikyrah says:

    WASHINGTON —President Barack Obama has booked a two-week summer getaway for his family on the picturesque Massachusetts island of Martha’s Vineyard. The White House says Obama will head north on Aug. 9 and stay until Aug. 24, when he returns to Washington. It will be the longest summer vacation of his presidency.

    Obama and his family have sought rest and relaxation on the well-to-do island all but one summer since he became president. The exception was 2012, the year of his re-election campaign. Obama spends most of his time on Martha’s Vineyard playing golf, taking his family to the beach and on bike rides, dining out with friends and treating first lady Michelle Obama to date nights.

    http://www.wcvb.com/news/obama.....z3781dFkCk

  49. 49
    magurakurin says:

    @BruinKid:

    ut can you explain those like Clarence Thomas

    see Samuel L. Jackson’s character, Stephen, in Django

  50. 50
    Betty Cracker says:

    @rikyrah: I haven’t been to Martha’s Vineyard for years, but man, what a beautiful place it is! Wish I could spend a few weeks hanging out there this summer!

    I can also see where it would make sense as a presidential vacation spot from a security standpoint as it’s a small island with a fairly small population. I’m sure the Secret Service is relieved as hell the Obamas aren’t planning to vacation in Miami.

  51. 51
    Kay says:

    @Baud:

    Oh, it’s not you. That’s a criticism of populists. Kevin Drum (or Richard Mayhew!) is an example of a well-intentioned wonk, IMO. I don’t want a Lefty version of the Tea Party. There’s no reason to be dumb about this. One doesn’t have to shun anyone who has specific expertise or actually looks at the text of laws and reads studies. There’s well-intentioned liberal arguments against the employer mandate but it can’t be a free ride, or even perceived as a free ride for employers. That’s a disaster for Democrats, IMO, both substantively and rhetorically. Just at the most basic advocate level, what is the advocate supposed to say? “There’s a mandate for you, person who makes 32k a year, but it was too burdensome for the Walton family”? Policy people have to listen to that. It’s real. It’s not just “politics”.

  52. 52
    Ben Cisco says:

    @BruinKid:

    But can you explain those like Clarence Thomas and Tim Scott and Ben Carson?

    Yes.

    Every plantation had at least one.

    ETA: @magurakurin: Beat me to it.

  53. 53
    Penus says:

    The notable thing to me about the Boehner “lawsuit” is that he’s staying far, far away from immigration.

    Well, that and the fact that his party hates the ACA and the mandate, but he’s suing because it was delayed. And that the mandate will almost certainly be in effect by the time the suit (if it’s ever filed) makes its way through the appellate courts, making it a moot point. Hell, Obama will probably be out of office then.

    Boehner is punting. He gets a couple of points for staring down the Muslim Negro but doesn’t actually have to do anything of any import. Typical for the worst Speaker in the history of the country.

  54. 54
    rikyrah says:

    Will The Media Carry Water For Darrell Issa — Again?
    July 10, 2014 11:01 AM EDT ››› JEREMY HOLDEN

    Here we go again.

    Within hours of House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) selectively leaking emails from one of his investigations, the right-wing media is dutifully claiming that he had offered evidence of a cover-up in the controversy over IRS scrutiny of nonprofit groups.

    The question now is whether legitimate media outlets will again let Issa and Fox manipulate them with selective leaks.

    Fox News host Bill O’Reilly claimed on July 9 that the emails that Issa released were “hard evidence” that embattled former IRS official Lois Lerner was engaged in a cover up.

    In reality, the email shows nothing more than a manager issuing guidance that email communication could be subpoenaed by Congress, underscoring the “need to be cautious about what we say in emails,” and confirming that instant messages were not archived but should be treated with the same caution as email.

    http://mediamatters.org/blog/2.....aga/200052

  55. 55
    rikyrah says:

    @Ben Cisco:

    But can you explain those like Clarence Thomas and Tim Scott and Ben Carson?

    Slave catchers have been amongst us from the beginning.

  56. 56
    Tone In DC says:

    @Ben Cisco:

    These motherfuckers want to turn me back into 3/5 of a fucking human being – I am neither amused nor entertained.

    But you know what? I get where President Obama is coming from. On an extremely personal level. Anybody in our, ahem, demographic does. We’ve had to deal with the same shit, just on a smaller scale. And because of that, can readily recognize it for what it is.

    And are sick of it.

    THANK YOU.

    When these fuckers announced this lawsuit, I almost threw my TV out of the window. I’m so damn glad that BHO said what he said. He’s played nice with these nihilistic, ignorant ADD toddlers masquerading as adults for six years. Their tantrums have only gotten progressively worse.

    And if/when the judge throws this shit out, there will be nowhere to stand around here that won’t be covered with the results of winger heads exploding.

  57. 57
    Suffern ACE says:

    @rikyrah: yep. I have a cover up policy for my work e-mails. Don’t joke about doing unethical things in writing. There are lots of people who don’t get jokes. A surprising number, really.

  58. 58

    That cartoon is funny! The lawsuit seems to be more to appease the crazy base more than anything else.

  59. 59
    Central Srutiniz3r says:

    You go to court with the lawsuit you have. Not with the lawsuit you might want or wish to have at a later time

  60. 60
    Kay says:

    @rikyrah:

    I follow the mayor of Chicago, as you know, because my son lives there. So my son is a liberal Democrat, makes really good money, and even he calls Emanuel “Mayor 1%” now. Who is left in his corner? What was the point of going shock and awe on public schools and making Karen Lewis into a high-profile enemy? Wouldn’t that energy have been better spent making the streets safe in the same neighborhoods where he was closing public schools?

    Who won that fight, “Rahm versus Public Schools”? Anyone? It got him kudos on CNN and in Politico but who gives a shit? He’s supposed to be the Chicago Mayor, not the mayor of cable tv.

    He’s willing to jettison young people and AA’s in Chicago? Who does that leave in the Democratic coalition?

  61. 61

    Friday open thread needs a fashionista kitteh. BTW I found this fashion blogger who probably has never been to India, dishing out wardrobe advice about what to wear when you are there. My reaction was a facepaw, like the fashionista kitteh.

  62. 62
    Suffern ACE says:

    @JPL: they want to prevent him from delaying the individual mandate for individuals on the federal exchanges. Which he probably would have to do if the courts decide there can’t be a subsidy offered through the exchanges.

  63. 63
    Cervantes says:

    @Betty Cracker: Did you ever get a sense that there’s something fishy about SCAD? Its finances, I mean.

  64. 64

    @Kay: I hate the Clinton-Blair middle way BS. Its what got us the financial crisis too.

  65. 65
    Betty Cracker says:

    @Cervantes: I don’t know anything about it. I was acquainted with a few students a long time ago, but that’s really my only experience with the joint.

  66. 66
    Matt McIrvin says:

    So they’re suing him for not doing something they hate so they couldn’t then attack him for it?

    Might be hard to sell this one.

  67. 67
    Suffern ACE says:

    @Kay: reading the politico summary, Robert Gibbs can stuff it. Yeah “it’s a political irritant”. Sure. If the only complaints you hear are from employers.

  68. 68
    Cervantes says:

    @Kay:

    Fairness is really important. It’s not an “extra” that can be jettisoned in pursuit of “what works”.

    Agree. Do you apply this notion to foreign policy, too?

  69. 69
    Betty Cracker says:

    Steve M over at NMMNB has a good summary of what Boehner is up to with the stupid lawsuit. An excerpt:

    I assume Boehner’s trying to dole out the smallest quantity of red meat he can to keep the crazies from being ravenous. I assume he’s trying to find some sweet spot where this effort is crazy enough for the crazies but not too crazy for the Beltway establishment; a suit over this provision is so dull that it seems to pass the latter test, yet the suit is about the hated Obamacare, so maybe it’s enough to pass the former. And I think he’s dodging immigration because he agrees with the establishment that the GOP has to seem more welcoming to Hispanics.

    Sounds about right. Meanwhile, wingnut militia freaks, probably emboldened by the fact that Cliven Bundy and his band of militia crackpots have so far paid no penalty for their armed insurrection, are gearing up to head to the border.

    ETA: Update — Looks like the border militia commander wannabe is a dishonorably discharged liar who is pissing his fellow conspiracy nuts off, so their grand border protection plan might go tits-up. Good!

  70. 70
    Cervantes says:

    @Matt McIrvin:

    Might be hard to sell this one.

    Definitely a good test of their acumen — and ours.

  71. 71
    Kay says:

    @schrodinger’s cat:

    I was reading the list of the Clinton Global Initiative speakers (which I saw on Twitter, where I lurk) and I’m just thinking “okay, this is a problem” :)

    I guess they can sideline labor, there aren’t that many labor union members left, but they might not want to continue this culling process where whole sections of the Democratic Party are now “fringe” :)

  72. 72
    Suffern ACE says:

    @Betty Cracker: oh good lord. “The border isn’t secure if people can cross it. Fortress USA is being invaded! To arms! To arms!”

  73. 73
    Cervantes says:

    @schrodinger’s cat: Maybe, but consider that it was Clinton who managed to take the White House after twelve years of Republican misrule; and Blair who figured out how to take Number Ten after the Tories had held it for eighteen.

  74. 74
    Kay says:

    @Cervantes:

    To a certain extent. but not as much, because foreign policy is “long arc”; people understand that it takes a long time to turn this giant fractious global ship around. Foreign policy has all those issues of sovereignty too, where a really heavy hand (even clothed in humanitarian principles) won’t work and also clashes with democratic ideals. Telling Texas what to do is much different than telling Iraq what to do. I think people recognize the President can’t bark out orders to nations, nor should he or she.

  75. 75
    Kay says:

    @Suffern ACE:

    Robert Gibbs can work for whomever he wants, but I want a crawl under these people when they appear listing their employers.

    That goes for Howard Dean, too.

    I know Dean isn’t a lobbyist, the legal definition, but no one gives a shit about this statutory distinction. Also, everyone who does this work says they’re different because they really believe what they’re saying. He’s demanding that we rely on his high ethical standards and personal cred. How about “no” to that? How about he reveals who pays him every time he appears?

  76. 76
    GregB says:

    @Patrick:

    And by tone you mean hue.

  77. 77

    @Cervantes: Their strategy was politically expedient in the nineties but it has come at a great cost to the 99%.

  78. 78
    Cervantes says:

    @rikyrah:

    Slave catchers have been amongst us from the beginning.

    Succinct.

  79. 79
    Cervantes says:

    @Penus:

    he’s suing because it was delayed

    He’s not that stupid. He says he’s suing because the President decided things unilaterally instead of working with legislators.

    That’s not a good-faith complaint, either, of course, but it’s different.

  80. 80
    rikyrah says:

    @Kay:

    I follow the mayor of Chicago, as you know, because my son lives there. So my son is a liberal Democrat, makes really good money, and even he calls Emanuel “Mayor 1%” now. Who is left in his corner? What was the point of going shock and awe on public schools and making Karen Lewis into a high-profile enemy? Wouldn’t that energy have been better spent making the streets safe in the same neighborhoods where he was closing public schools?

    Who won that fight, “Rahm versus Public Schools”? Anyone? It got him kudos on CNN and in Politico but who gives a shit? He’s supposed to be the Chicago Mayor, not the mayor of cable tv.

    He’s willing to jettison young people and AA’s in Chicago? Who does that leave in the Democratic coalition?

    I have lived in Chicago my entire life, outside of college and graduate school.

    I have not been this upset about Chicago in a long time.

    He closed FIFTY-FIVE SCHOOLS

    FIFTY-FIVE

    and then turned around and gave that money to CHARTER SCAM OUTFITS.

    He announces the Barack Obama Selective Enrollment High School.- making a point of saying that 30% of the kids will come from the NEIGHBORHOOD.

    AND PUTS IT ON THE MUTHAFUCKIN’ NORTH SIDE.

    THE NORTH SIDE.

    ARE.YOU.KIDDING.ME.

    He closes 55 SCHOOLS

    and can’t find any money for projects on South and West sides..

    but, can find TIFF money for a STADIUM FOR DEPAUL UNIVERSITY to the tune of 125 MILLION DOLLARS?

    When has DePAUL done ANYTHING in the past 20 years.

    125 MILLION DOLLARS!

    do you know, that 90% of WHITE STUDENTS in CPS get into SELECTIVE SCHOOLS.

    90%?

    REALLY?

    REALLY?

    He closed FIFTY-FIVE SCHOOLS

    while giving TWENTY-MILLION DOLLARS for an expansion of a school in the RICHEST NEIGHBORHOOD IN CHICAGO, where they HAD SPACES in schools surrounding that one.

    and don’t me started on the red light cameras and the speed cameras.

    HOW COME….the red light and speed cameras on the NORTH SIDE, have countdown clocks with them.

    and I go for miles and miles on the South and West sides before I find a countdown clock.

    IF it’s about safety…

    HOW COME…none of the red light or speed cameras are DOWNTOWN?

    his popularity is down to 8% in the Black Community..

    and in the teens with the Latino Community.

    I will vote for ANYONE I consider plausible against him.

    ANYONE.

    And I’m still waiting for an apology from those who voted for him last time.

  81. 81
    danielx says:

    Note: kittehs wearing fentanyl patches are not interested in or up to much, and that includes eating, drinking and going to the litter box. Antibiotics and water through an eyedropper…

  82. 82

    @danielx: Oh poor kitteh, what are those patches for?

  83. 83

    @Kay: I wonder what Hilllary’s views about economic policy are.

  84. 84
  85. 85
    danielx says:

    @schrodinger’s cat:

    Patch, singular, in this case. They sent him home from the animal hospital wearing one along with various dressings like that kitteh sweater after his encounter with a pit bull. Which pit bull had a totally scratched nose when it was sent off to doggy heaven, I’m happy to say.

  86. 86
    Tone In DC says:

    He closes 55 SCHOOLS

    and can’t find any money for projects on South and West sides..

    but, can find TIFF money for a STADIUM FOR DEPAUL UNIVERSITY to the tune of 125 MILLION DOLLARS?

    The unlamented Adrian Fenty found $$$ to build the Expos/Nationals a very expensive new stadium. While closing many schools (and a couple of hospitals) around here. And, yeah, both hospitals were in the melanin-enhanced side of town. As well, affordable housing has all but disappeared from the city.

    Hopefully, Chicago isn’t following the same route that the District started down with the Control Board (thanks, g00per Congress of 1994!) and this industrial strength austerity.

  87. 87

    @danielx: Wow he survived a fight with a pit bull, that is one bad ass kitteh.

  88. 88
    Kay says:

    @rikyrah:

    The thing about a “technocratic” view is, it has to work. Everything has to work, because if that’s your one and only justification, “we don’t do ideology, we do what works!” then you better be really competent.

    My son would be sympathetic to a technocratic view. That’s the way he is, generally. More head than heart. But he turned on them when the public transpo payment system didn’t work because he relies on it and it was a pain in the ass and he felt as if they did what was testing on millions of commuters. He doesn’t want to test the system. He thinks the contractor has to test the system.

    They have nothing to fall back on when it’s not “better” or it doesn’t “work”, no “heart” argument because they jettisoned all that along the way.

  89. 89
    ruemara says:

    The USSC would toss it? Has Dave Weigel met the Roberts’ court?

  90. 90
    danielx says:

    @schrodinger’s cat:

    Actually the kid who was trying to round up the dog finally pulled it off, with a lot of screams and shouts and total chaos..good brave kid, even if he did let the dog slide by him out the door. Far as I’m concerned the general philosophy with a pit bull in the house ought to be the same as keeping firearms in the house – they should be secured by whatever means necessary.

  91. 91

    @danielx: I hope he makes a full recovery soon!

  92. 92
    Another Holocene Human says:

    @rikyrah: mayor of cable tv is right, doesn’t he have a hagiographic reality show on now?

    Everything u said is correct but u forgot the cta payment system scandal and the parking meter giveaway.

    Rahm was going to be shit from the start but I guess the incompetence is unforgivable. Obama doesn’t need friends like Rahmbo. Altho don’t let it be said that the rest of the country doesn’t appreciate y’all falling on your sword to remove him from DC.

  93. 93
    Seanly says:

    I am f’ing sick of this. Every Democratic president is worthy of impeachment? In an ever increasingly diverse America, people are going to remember that Republican hypocrites tried to impeach Clinton and then tried to impeach Obama, the first African American president. After the Democrats had the overly polite stance of not holding GWB accountable. Republicans should go for the hat trick and immediately hold impeachment hearings in January 2017 against the next Democratic president (mayhap the first woman president). Then they can double dog confirm that they are a bunch of backwards, sexist, racist, USA-hating troglodytes.

    Yeah, I’ll say it – Republican politicians hate the USA. They want no health care; they want no infrastructure; they don’t want an educated populace; they don’t want to adequately fund the government; they hate most of the population for one reason or another; and they send our young soldiers off to die for no good reason. The America they want is nothing like the place I grew up and nothing like what I want it to be.

  94. 94
    RaflW says:

    I would probably make a bad president. Because if I were in the WH, I would today, this morning, issue a new executive order reinstating the employer mandate effective exactly 30 days from today.

    When the instantaneous and insane chorus of anger spouted forth, I’d walk up to the WH press room mic, grab it in hand and say “Representative Boehner is suing to rescind my previous order. I’m complying. You gotta problem with that, call him. I’ll text you his phone number.” Then I’d drop the mic, stride out to Marine One, and fly off to some important meeting that I’d just made up.

  95. 95
    rikyrah says:

    @Kay:

    My son would be sympathetic to a technocratic view. That’s the way he is, generally. More head than heart. But he turned on them when the public transpo payment system didn’t work because he relies on it and it was a pain in the ass and he felt as if they did what was testing on millions of commuters. He doesn’t want to test the system. He thinks the contractor has to test the system.

    I didn’t even include that in my other reasons for being against Rahm, because I didn’t know if you knew about it.

    There was ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WRONG with the public transportation payment system.

    EXCEPT…

    NOBODY WAS MAKING MONEY OFF OF IT.

    There were 3 different ways to pay for public transportation before. You had a CHOICE.

    NOW?

    NOBODY has a choice.

    It’s an ineffective system.

    Buses are taking longer because it takes longer for people to get confirmation that they are allowed to go. So, while you would have a bus sitting at one light for a pickup, because of the incompetence of the system they chose to FORCE ON EVERYONE – because, we no longer have 3 different ways of paying – everyone is forced into this SCAM – you might sit through 2 or 3 lights while the bus loads…..at every stop..this adds REAL TIME to your bus ride.

    then there’s the issue of snow etiquette.

    remember, Chicago is the town that threw a Mayor out because of snow removal. It’s the one city service that everyone expects to be good and uniform.

    this past winter, I have never seen Chicago like this. And, I don’t just mean on the South and West Sides. I mean DOWNTOWN CHICAGO. Never, in my recent history, has the snow been this hideous DOWNTOWN.

    DOWNTOWN?

    I only drive major streets in the Winter…and they were pitiful.You don’t expect for the side streets to be terrific, but everyone expects the Main Streets to be clean enough to walk on, even on the South and West Sides.

    like I said…time for him to go.

  96. 96
    rikyrah says:

    @Another Holocene Human:

    Everything u said is correct but u forgot the cta payment system scandal and the parking meter giveaway.

    The parking meter was begun under King Richard II, but Rahm did nothing to correct it.

    I…just…can’t even begin to express the anger about this either except…

    WE ARE PAYING TO PARK AT THE LAKEFRONT?

    THE LAKEFRONT?

    THE LAKEFRONT?

    Daniel Burnham is spinning in his grave.

    People not from Chicago don’t understand how offensive this is to us as Chicagoans.

  97. 97
    Suffern ACE says:

    @Another Holocene Human: Yep. And with him goes the Democratic party. I mean, seriously. The Democrats do not have these huge pockets of goodwill that they think they have such that Demographic Change means they will never ever loose again (until they do!). I could see most Democratic “stronghold”area flipping red for a cycle long before Texas goes mildly purple. And that’s the issue. The Democrats need to win every election, or bad stuff will happen that will be difficult to undo. But they act like there is no urgency.

  98. 98
    rikyrah says:

    @Seanly:

    Yeah, I’ll say it – Republican politicians hate the USA. They want no health care; they want no infrastructure; they don’t want an educated populace; they don’t want to adequately fund the government; they hate most of the population for one reason or another; and they send our young soldiers off to die for no good reason. The America they want is nothing like the place I grew up and nothing like what I want it to be.

    Amen
    Amen
    Amen

  99. 99
    Another Holocene Human says:

    @Baud: The sad part is that D5 Dem Corrine Brown actually backed the republicans on her gator-mander district even though with fairer lines she would still easily win re-election.

    She may fear possible liberal dem challengers but her baggage is not Charlie Rangel size baggage, she does good constituent service and she has seniority. There are other black dems at state level who could run if competitive districts opened up and the dixiecrat factor is shrinking fast, not really a factor in her area the whites are hard red or they’re Obama voters in Alachua Cty. Those whites will vote for a Black candidate who seems to be on their side and not nepotism (somebody’s son) or one of these reactionary sounding business ‘leaders’. 80/20 districts just breed weak politicians. Gop plans it that way to deny AA voters a statewide “bench” and thus any shot at real non token power. (Rick Scott had a token LtGov. You never heard of her. But she was lesbophobic and resigned in disgrace over a fake charity scandal. Not reported I also discovered that prior to office when she was in pr she would troll Jax Times Union online and post semi anonymously to defend her political friends. )

  100. 100
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @ruemara: I always took Weigel on his own terms as a Ron Paul supporting, pro-life glibertarian, I thought his was a useful perspective, but his coverage/commentary on Benghazi has changed the way I view him, i.e., he’s an asshole. The other night I saw him on MSNBC saying with a snide and smarmy attitude that “progressives may not want to hear it”, but the American people have questions about Benghazi. A good number of Americans also have questions about whether or not Adam and Eve spoke English and rode saddled dinosaurs. And he seems to believe there’s some kind of scandal or cover-up around the “Talking Points!”, but he won’t come out and say what that might be, or register that that particular bit of blatherskite has only gotten sillier as time goes on.

  101. 101
    Davis X. Machina says:

    @Kay:

    , Democrats are getting wobbly and there’s no way to replace it or fix it with Republicans in Congress. Raising it now works for the GOP politically.

    More ‘small’ business worship. If I can find some muffler shop franchisee getting screwed over here, and get noisy enough about it really quite large firms over there can bump their earnings.

    And in this case, both parties really do do it.

  102. 102
    Jasmine Bleach says:

    @Ben Cisco:

    Uggh. Again with the left bashing. And now on top of it, equating the left with the right and heavily implying the left is full of racists.

    Yeah. I’m sure everyone on the left really wants a suit brought against the President. Please, show me a single example of this for this situation. Anywhere.

    So here’s where you’re fundamentally mis-understanding “the left,” whether you call them “sacks of crap” or “dense.” (You’re winning friends, lemme tell ya!) The left is mostly concerned with actual policies–not personalities.

    I voted for Obama in 2008 and supported him strongly–he was stating he stood for things I supported, and seemed miles ahead of Hillary (to me, at least) at the time. While it was very cool that someone of “his demographic” won, I (a sack of crap liberal, evidently) don’t vote based on gender or demographic.

    In his first 4 years, Obama did not deliver (or even attempt to support, which is perhaps the bigger issue) many of the things he said he would do during his campaign. You, of course, know the details of what we liberals complain about, so I won’t hurt your feefees here by repeating them. In 2012, therefore, I did not support him (went Green, instead).

    Sure, he’s done some decent stuff. But then you’ve got him fully supporting things like TPP (and the European equivalents) which will only accelerate the shift of income and money to the top 1% and give corporations even more power over government. Ironically, this will end up hurting “your demographic” even more than most. I’m very much against this. You see, us lefties (at least the one’s I know) try to support people as a whole–not individual personalities.

    I’m absolutely sure you are correct that the right is doing this out of racism. I don’t think that’s ever been a question. And I sure as hell don’t think the President should be sued. But I don’t appreciate being associated with these clowns on the right.

  103. 103
    Davis X. Machina says:

    @Seanly:

    I am f’ing sick of this. Every Democratic president is worthy of impeachment?

    Drones, anyone? Targeted extra-judicial killings of citizens? Mass warrntless electronic surveillance?

    Unless we want to embrace ‘executive over-reach for me, but not for thee’ as a party platform plank.
    Unless those aren’t actually as important as people keep saying they are.

    Yeah, right now that’s probably the case.

  104. 104

    Greenhouse. Makes this and any other political site a lot more interesting.

  105. 105
    Shakezula says:

    @Betty Cracker: That’s a very good guess on Benen’s part. It has the stoat stink of the Weeping Orange and it won’t work. It is almost as if encouraging voters to view Obama as a cross between Hitler and bin Laden had a downside or three.

  106. 106

    @Jasmine Bleach: How is throwing away your vote by voting third party going to achieve the goals you hold dear?

  107. 107
    amk says:

    @Jasmine Bleach:

    In 2012, therefore, I did not support him (went Green, instead).

    Too bad, you didn’t get your pony this time too. #twoterms

  108. 108

    @Ben Cisco:
    They hate, period. It’s a culture and philosophy and political policy of hate. But more than anything, they hate the black man who beat them, who beat them when they tried their hardest and threw everything they had at him, who beat them publicly and resoundingly, over and over, and is now their boss. They are frothing with that hate, unable to see straight.

    @magurakurin: and @Ben Cisco:
    People are surprisingly willing to repress themselves. You usually have to couch it in some moral terms. GOP racism is so blatant that only the serious assholes among the blacks are willing to spit on themselves. Alas, Carson’s ‘but I wasn’t lazy like blacks today’ shows that you can always find an asshole.

    @Seanly:
    They hate, period. They used to draw lines, but they were always pretty hateful. Now they feel so much hate because a black man is better than them that they lash out in every direction.

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    Ron Paul supporting, pro-life glibertarian

    Sounds like an asshole to me.

  109. 109
    Suffern ACE says:

    @Kay: Well, they can also appeal to the “I’m a tough maverick what makes tough decisions against my own party.” If they were entertaining. Or wore cowboy boots. But they can’t pull that off. Since the tough decisions never impact them and they don’t seem fraught with anguish over making them, at the very least they could be Rob Ford level entertaining. In many ways, Rob Ford is probably a better Mayor than Rahm is on his best day.

  110. 110
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    somebody upthread (can’t find it now) mentioned the virtual front page of the Washington Post , here’s an update:

    ‘The Bear’ goes out for a beer, and critics growl
    Juliet Eilperin
    DEBRIEF | His staff says the president is trying to connect with ordinary citizens, but critics fault his trips as irresponsible.

    Obama cuts the line for barbecue

    Remember last week when Obama was aloof and cerebral and stand-offish and that’s why Congress wouldn’t vote on anything? NOw it’s because he’s good-time charlie! and rude!

  111. 111
    Another Holocene Human says:

    @Ben Cisco:

    and those on the left that SHOULD have figured this out by now but are either pretending to be dense or may actually be so

    You are too kind. White lefties who refuse to confront their own privilege bc they think being a lefty means their farts smell like Fantasy by Britney Spears and never having to say you’re sorry.

  112. 112
    Kay says:

    @rikyrah:

    The public ed fight might be getting interesting. Donna Brazile and Ted Strickland are starting a 527 “Democrats for Public Ed”, according to my Twitter lurking.

    If it’s legit (not just political cover to keep the the public ed people onboard for midterms) I’l try to write about it. I can’t talk about public ed rationally anymore. I go immediately into oppositional/adversarial mode :)

  113. 113
    RaflW says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: I can imagine MoDo having an endless print orgasm if Obama had patiently waited in line for BBQ like any workaday schlub.
    We would hear endlessly about how this signifies that Obama will wait in line to kiss Putin’s KGB ring, or be the last to get a glass of champagne offered at a G-7 meeting, etc.

  114. 114
    WereBear says:

    @danielx: It’s so wonderful that they do kitty pain relief. I remember when I used to ARGUE with vets to get it.

    Cats don’t show their pain, but that doesn’t mean they don’t have it. DUH.

  115. 115
    another Holocene human says:

    @Kay: Forgive me, when i hear those names i think astroturf for kinder, gentler charter reform tfa nonsense. Ms Brazile has always struck me as die hard DNC and the only thing she fights to defend on her million lackluster cable appearances is Clinton admin record. Def not a dyed in the wool old school liberal or a new school progressive, unless I’m missing something.

  116. 116
    another Holocene human says:

    @Another Holocene Human: hahahaha, I didn’t even see the true lefties Cisco smoked out with his comment before I made mine. If the shoe fits–!

  117. 117
    Kay says:

    @another Holocene human:

    But Strickland was actually substantively good for public schools in his one term as governor, so that goes the other way. We’ll have to stay tuned!

    The truth is we need some help. They have a huge campaign machine on the privatizer side. I’m sometimes amazed at how powerful they are. It can’t be like 150 teacher bloggers and teachers unions versus that giant machine. They’ll get killed.

    I read the transcript of an Ohio legislative hearing on public ed, about 3 months ago. There were 15 witnesses. 14 of them came from Michelle Rhee’s lobbying group. It is so lopsided it is ridiculous.

    Even if it’s fake, it’s at least a recognition that Democrats are feeling some heat on this. That is itself a win. They see some risk in continuing to pursue this. Good.

    I feel strongly about this. Abandoning public ed is a deal-breaker for me. I don’t want to privatize another public sector. I’ll leave over this.

  118. 118
    another Holocene human says:

    !@Jasmine Bleach:

    In his first 4 years, Obama did not deliver (or even attempt to support, which is perhaps the bigger issue) many of the things he said he would do during his campaign.

    He didn’t. Even. Try.

    I call Poe. The user name, also. Whitey McPalealot. I get it.

  119. 119
    Cervantes says:

    @Kay:

    The public ed fight might be getting interesting. Donna Brazile and Ted Strickland are starting a 527 “Democrats for Public Ed”, according to my Twitter lurking. If it’s legit (not just political cover to keep the the public ed people onboard for midterms)

    Politico has a mission statement up.

    Brazille and Strickland signed up to co-chair. We shall see who else is on board.

  120. 120
    another Holocene human says:

    @rikyrah: It makes me furious all the public money blown on fare collection. Y’all, buses are like the roads, they are paid for with tax dollars. Fares no more cover service costs than highway tolls cover neighborhood street cleaning and site removal.

    These pig transit execs who do not ride the services they raid talk about how much revenue they collect but NEVER talk about how much the system clears. These systems cost the feds more than the revenue they collect in one year or in many cases even in several years. It would be more rational to have counties pre-pay fares but it’s more important to feed the grift, “create jobs” and show those ungrateful dusky hued fellers who’s boss at the fare box because nothin in life is free.

    I guess a crappy slow underfunded route does not humiliate the poors adequately. Must spend big bucks to be able to tell them they can’t ride. It’s cruel and crazy.

  121. 121
    Kay says:

    @another Holocene human:

    They should understand, too, I’m not a teacher or a union member. If they continue to set this up as “teachers unions versus reform” that means they are not listening to people who want public schools to remain publicly-owned and run. I get why it works for them politically and I get why media portrays it that way, but it isn’t true. I read this Jonathon Chait piece where sets it up that way. You know, it may be true that in northeastern states with Democratic governors ed reform is not “anti-union” but in a state like mine with my governor is IS anti-union. They have to look at the reality of how this playing out, NOT just in DC or NYC or CA, but everywhere. Democrats will win in DC and NYC and CA. What about what’s happening in MI and OH and PA and NC? Not going so great here! We could really use a Democratic advocate!

  122. 122
    Tone In DC says:

    They hate, period. It’s a culture and philosophy and political policy of hate. But more than anything, they hate the black man who beat them, who beat them when they tried their hardest and threw everything they had at him, who beat them publicly and resoundingly, over and over, and is now their boss. They are frothing with that hate, unable to see straight.

    They hate, period. They used to draw lines, but they were always pretty hateful. Now they feel so much hate because a black man is better than them that they lash out in every direction.

    Well said.

  123. 123
    Kay says:

    @Cervantes:

    We shall see. Public schools can’t be political orphans. They won’t survive. It is criminal what is happening in Philadelphia right now, yet the entire public discussion is over teacher tenure. That’s ridiculous. It is so 30,000 feet up I don’t even know how they could not see it. Why are public school teachers and parents the only people fighting to fund those schools? Is there some reason they have been abandoned by the people they hired to work for them? Helen Gym in Philadelphia is a volunteer. She’s a parent. She’s haggling over operating expenses. I mean, she wins, occasionally, but should she be doing this with a ragged band of volunteers? :)

  124. 124
    Mnemosyne says:

    @danielx:

    Aww, poor guy. Kitties are pretty tough, though, so don’t give up hope — Charles Bukowski wrote a great poem about his tough cat (with a NSFW title).

  125. 125
    Patrick says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    The other night I saw him on MSNBC saying with a snide and smarmy attitude that “progressives may not want to hear it”, but the American people have questions about Benghazi.

    Perhaps he can show us a poll backing up his highly dubious claim. I don’t know anybody whatsoever outside the FoxNews bubble that cares one bit about Benghazi. People outside that bubble know it is a dangerous world and that these things happen every so often. Hell, they happened many many more times under Bush and with deadlier consequences.

    Frankly, people are more concerned about the economy and their job security.

  126. 126
    EmDeeAhr says:

    Thanks for the replies, all. They make sense, but I just can’t (yet) shake the feeling it’s an attempt to legitimize impeachment over any disagreement, at least for GOP Congresses and any non-GOP President. Though getting the Roberts Court to say Congress can sue instead also fits with my general feeling of doom on the subject.

    (Not that I think the GOP would benefit from this, but that’s never stopped them before.)

  127. 127
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Patrick:

    I do care what happened in Benghazi, but mostly because I’m still curious to find out how that video played into it. From the reports on the ground at the time from outlets like Juan Cole and Al-Jazeera, it seemed as though the militia group used the protests against the video as a cover for the attack, but it’s not quite clear how spontaneous it was. Plus there are all of the questions about who produced the video and why and who funded it.

    I don’t give a shit about any of the “issues” the right wing is trying to manufacture about it, though. That’s what’s so fucking frustrating about dealing with them — I think that, say, Fast & Furious should be looked at to see how it went wrong, but all they want to do is make it into a club against the president, which doesn’t actually fix anything. Same with the NSA and surveillance — I want Congress to rein the NSA in, but they’re not interested in doing it unless they can somehow blame it all on Obama.

  128. 128
    Patrick says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    I do care what happened in Benghazi, but mostly because I’m still curious to find out how that video played into it.

    Sure. But do you care more about Benghazi than all the different embassy attacks that took place under Bush? And our idiot Congress has already had tons of more hearings for Benghazi than they did for all the different embassy attacks under Bush. Why is Benghazi and those killed there more important than the ones that took place under Bush?

    That’s where I don’t know a single American (except for the FoxNews crowd), who at this point cares one bit about Benghazi. They had their hearings and then some. People know it is simply political at this point and out to get Obama.

  129. 129
    cckids says:

    @WereBear:

    Cats don’t show their pain, but that doesn’t mean they don’t have it. DUH.

    Humans too. I’ve had to argue with surgeons to give my (disabled) son pain relief beyond Tylenol after major orthopedic surgery because “he won’t remember pain the way you or I will”.

    Evil bastard.

  130. 130
    JGabriel says:

    @Kay:

    Of course employers don’t want it. No shit. That’s not a reason to let them off the hook.

    Right, but there’s also a reason the President delayed its implementation for a year. It incentivizes employers around the 50 person minimum to cut hours for employees so they’re not full-time, and/or make the full-time employees work harder while the employer tells them it’s Obama’s fault.

    There must be multiple ways it could be fixed, but the only one that comes to my mind is to subsidize the first 50 employees for all employers. In theory, we’re already doing it for small employers anyway via the exchanges and Medicaid expansion – so it wouldn’t cost much in real terms. Though I suspect it might cause the cost for CBO scoring to increase, since the CBO would have to change its projected costs for the ACA to include the continued subsidies. But we can probably fix that with a minor pay-for somewhere else.

  131. 131
    David Koch says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: but, but, so does history’s greatest journalist! it’s the biggest cover-up EVAH!!

  132. 132
    Kay says:

    @JGabriel:

    That would be a fine fix for me, subsidize all employers. One of the original goals of the thing was to make small business competitive with large business by giving small business a way to offer/afford health insurance.

    I’ll just give you an example of when I would vehemently and loudly object. We have two supermarkets here. One is a regional chain and one is a Wal Mart. The regional chain has a unionized workforce and they offer health insurance. I know they get a tax break for that, so I grant that part. The Wal Mart, on the other hand, has decided to just not cover their employee health care costs and believe they have some divine right to pass that cost onto the public.

    I want them to pay their fair share. If that means fining them, well, individuals who don’t purchase health insurance will be fined, so them’s the breaks.

    It is unconscionable to me to give bad corporate actors yet another break. If pizza has to cost more than 5 dollars, well, I’m paying more anyway, because I’m covering their employee health care costs. They can’t do this. They can’t adopt the welfare state as the secret key to their business model and not pay us back for that.

  133. 133
    tybee says:

    @raven:

    which movie?

  134. 134
    tybee says:

    @Cervantes:

    yes. definitely.

Comments are closed.