I love it!
— Josh Romney (@joshromney) April 15, 2014
Now THAT is how it’s done, y’all.
The post Tweet of the Day: @JoshRomney zings @SenatorReid on #TaxDay appeared first on Sister Toldjah.
The Hill’s Gossip Blog reports that Chelsea Clinton is no longer ruling out a potential run for political office:
Chelsea Clinton says when people ask her these days whether she wants to go into politics, her answer isn’t an automatic “no.”
The 34-year-old former first daughter told Fast Company in an interview published Monday, “for so long the answer was just a visceral no. Not because I had made any conscientious, deliberate decision, but since people had been asking for as long as literally I could remember, it was no.”
Now, the only child of former President Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton explains, “I live in a city and a state and a country where I support my elected representatives. If at some point that weren’t the case, and I didn’t support my mayor or my city councilwoman or my congresswoman or either of my senators — and I’m lucky to live in a state where I have lots of women representing me, you know — maybe then I’d have to ask and answer the question for myself, and come to a different answer.”
I have nothing against Chelsea Clinton personally, and from what I’ve seen she’s conducted herself over the last several years with class, dignity and grace, but if her politics are anything like her parents’, and I strongly suspect they are, then she’ll just be another Clinton for conservatives to oppose on down the road. Question is – will the American people experience Clinton fatigue in the future much as they seem to have Bush fatigue? As they say, stay tuned.
The post Chelsea Clinton doesn’t rule out the possibility of running for political office appeared first on Sister Toldjah.
The “War On Women” theme was a key component of Barack Obama’s 2012 campaign. And since politicians tend to repeat what works, the Democrats are pushing the same theme again for 2014 — and, no doubt, as preparation for a Hillary Clinton campaign in 2016 where all opposition will be treated as evidence of sexism. But have they taken it too far? Just maybe.
“The level of hyperbole — actually, of demagoguery — that Democrats have engaged in here is revolting. It’s entirely understandable, of course: The Senate is up for grabs. Women account for a majority of voters. They tend to favor Democrats. To the extent that women — and in particular, single women — can be motivated to turn out in a midterm election, waving the bloody shirt of unequal pay is smart politics. Fairness is another matter. Since President John F. Kennedy signed the Equal Pay Act in 1963, it has been illegal for employers to pay women less than men for the same work.”
The problem is that comparing what all men and all women earn is deceptive. Men tend to choose more jobs that require long hours, or that are dangerous — hence the much higher rate of vocational death among men than women — but that also pay more. Women tend to prefer jobs that offer flexible or shorter hours, and clean indoor conditions.
Then it turned out that the Obama White House itself pays women workers less than men. White House Press Secretary Carney didn’t mention his wife’s choices, but did argue that the number was misleading because women held different jobs. Well, yes. Federal law says you have to pay people the same for the same work; it doesn’t say you have to pay secretaries the same as press secretaries. This is true both in the White House, and in the private businesses that the White House was attacking.
Make sure to read the whole thing, especially if you want to learn more about other Democrats who don’t practice what they preach when it comes to their standard and definition of “equal pay” … including NC’s own Senator Kay Hagan.
Reviving the “war on women” meme is just another desperate election year tactic (like playing the race card) for Democrats who want to maintain control of the Senate and win more seats in the US House, as Reynolds notes above. But at least in the case of the phony equal pay argument, even many of the left’s reliable media outlets aren’t on board with it, so it looks like – at least in this case – the Democrats have engaged in a spectacular fail.
**Posted by Phineas
The Democrats would really rather you talk about anything other than Obamacare, which has become a huge millstone around the neck of their political fortunes (1). To distract you from this anti-constitutional monstrosity and rally their base voters, they’re desperately deploying the weapons that have served them so well in the past, such as the Race Card.
Another weapon is the “War on Women,” the accusation that, in short, Republicans and conservatives want women barefoot, pregnant, and underpaid, shouting that women only earn 77 cents for every dollar a man earns. (2) There’s no denying that the “Sexism Card” was effective in the 2012 election, but how is it working for them, now?
If a Pittsburgh waitress is any indicator, not so good:
She gave a dramatic eye-roll in reaction to all of the fuss that Democrats and the president attempted to create over equal pay for women last week.
A Democrat herself, she said she has carved out a decent, comfortable life for her family over the years as a waitress at a local restaurant.
“I am in many ways my own boss,” she explained. “It is up to me to get the order right, treat people well, and use my personal skills to increase my wages.”
And she is “sick and tired of my party treating me like a victim. This is not 1970, and it’s insulting.”
Her last remark is telling. Progressives have long dreamed of instituting nationalized health care in the US, but the ACA’s passage was controversial (to say the least), the bill has never been popular, and it’s rollout to date has been a train wreck. Now faced with an electoral shellacking potentially worse than 2010′s, they’ve gone back to their happy place in the 1960s and whipped out the magic fetishes that have always saved them before: cries of racism, sexism, and class warfare.
Only, as the astute waitress observed, what worked 40-50 years ago doesn’t necessarily work now. American society has made enormous progress on issues of unfair treatment based on gender or race, and only an ideologue or a charlatan –or a desperate pol (or, in this case, all three)– would claim otherwise.
Remember what Lincoln said?
“You may fool all the people some of the time, you can even fool some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all the time.”
The Democrats have been able to fool enough of the people, but, at some point, people get tired of being taken for fools. They notice how dog-eared those cards in the Democrats’ deck have become from being played so often and they’re not impressed anymore. In fact, as our waitress noted, they’re insulted. And insulted people take their business (and votes) elsewhere.
More from the article:
Barack Obama has divided this country since the beginning of his presidency. He has not been transformative; instead, he has indulged one special-interest group after another — women in this case, but also blacks, young people, the lesbian-gay-transgender community and Hispanics in earlier instances.
He has governed by sliced-and-diced division, fear, secrecy and resentment, all accented with toothless executive orders used as political weapons.
This is definitely not the transparent and compassionate administration that he promised.
Maybe this is what happens when you over-promise, or maybe this is who Barack Obama is.
Or the answer is “C,” both. Obama and the Democrats clearly over-promised to win over a public tired by war and frightened by an economic crisis, but it is also who Obama is: a political “slice-and-dicer.” Remember that Obama got his start and his education in retail politics as a community organizer, a profession invented by Saul Alinsky. The whole point of community organizing is not to unite or build bridges, but to divide communities into “us and them” and then organize your faction to achieve your goal by setting them against the other guys. Thus no one should be surprised that Obama has operated this way over the course of his presidency.
It’s who he is and all he knows.
PS: The article’s author, Salena Zito, is a great reporter who looks at politics from a “Main St.” perspective, the point of view of the people the Beltway often forgets exist. You should add her to your reading list.
RELATED: John Fund on the race card as a losing game.
(1) And deservedly so.
(2) And even though even the White House admitted that was wrong.
(Crossposted at Public Secrets)
The post Democrats’ “Look it’s Elvis!” strategy not playing on Main Street? appeared first on Sister Toldjah.
It’s amazing what people will admit once they’re off the hook politically:
Outgoing Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius says the timeline for the ObamaCare rollout was “flat-out wrong” and that the federal exchange could have used “more time and testing” before going online.
Sebelius, who led the agency through the problem-plagued rollout, made her comments in an interview that aired Sunday on “NBC’s “Meet the Press,” the first interview since she announced her resignation Thursday.
“Clearly, the estimate that it was ready to go Oct. 1 was just flat-out wrong,” she said Sunday.
Sebelius also said the roughly first eight weeks of the glitch-filled rollout was the low point of her five years as secretary.
“I think there’s no question — and I’ve said this many times — that the launch of the website was terribly flawed and terribly difficult,” Sebelius said.
She also said the president setting a Dec. 1 deadline to have the website repaired was a nerve-racking experience.
“Having failed once at the front of October, the first of December became a critical juncture,” Sebelius said. “That was a pretty scary date.”
Much more than just that December date was scary. The Obamacare law itself is scary, the President’s penchant for making unilateral executive decisions on delays and extensions without going through Congress is extremely disturbing, as is the left’s tendency to just go along with whatever he says without question, etc…
Maybe in time she’ll admit all of that, too, right? Nah.
The post Now she admits it: @Sebelius admits #Obamacare rollout timeline “flat out wrong” appeared first on Sister Toldjah.
Well, it’s a crucial election year and the last one of Obama’s final term in office where he and his party still feel they have a significant amount ‘left to accomplish.’ So what better way (for them) to try to play on the emotions of voters than to do what the left does best? Trot out the tired, stale race card:
Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) Chairman Steve Israel (N.Y.) said on Sunday that “to a significant extent” there are parts of the Republican base that are motivated by racism.
In response to a question on CNN’s “State of the Union,” Israel declared that “not all” Republican lawmakers are racist.
“To a significant extent the Republican base does have elements that are animated by racism, and that’s unfortunate,” he added.
Israel’s charge followed comments from Attorney General Eric Holder last week that he believes he wasn’t treated respectfully by lawmakers at a House Judiciary Committee hearing, in part, because of racism.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) last week also said she believes “race has something to do” with Republicans’ reluctance to address immigration reform.
Other Democrats will seize on the “elements” part of Israel’s remarks to try and note that he didn’t mean “everyone” in the Republican party here, but don’t fall for it. This is a classic modern-day Democrat tactic when they’re boxed into a corner (metaphorically speaking) and desperate to win: Throw the race card on the table, make it look like they’re not smearing an entire party, but leave it up in the air to revisit the issue by declaring at a later time the hidden “racist intent” behind any and all opposition to whatever proposal the President (and/or his party) puts on the table. And in effect pretty much leaving them in the driver’s seat to determine who and what qualifies as a “racist” under their “race-meter.” This from a party that believes there are only a few reasons why anyone would dare oppose them: racism/sexism/bigotry/classism.
It’s sad, sick, pathetic – shutuppery at its worst. Let’s hope voters see right through it in November.
The post DCCC Chair: GOP base motivated by racism “to a significant extent” appeared first on Sister Toldjah.
**Posted by Phineas
With the recent announcement of more than seven million sign-ups for Obamacare, the administration and its supporters have been running around shouting “Success! SUCCESS!!”, as if an enrollment figure means that the implementation of the law itself, with its myriad problems (for example) (1), will be just a matter of working “the bugs” out.
Nevertheless, seven million was the administration’s goal, and they met it. So, how does one explain this victory? How did they do it?
Senator Ted Cruz is ready with the answer:
(1) For lots more, check out my Obamacare archives.
via Dan Mitchell
(Crossposted at Public Secrets)
The post Ted Cruz explains #Obamacare’s success in one graphic appeared first on Sister Toldjah.
Got a lot on my plate this weekend but wanted to send a quick note to let you know there will likely be some changes soon which may allow me more time to blog than I’ve had in the last couple of years. I’ve really struggled over that time to balance personal responsibilities with my number one passions – political/pop culture writing both here and on social media, and found that with my schedule the way it is that social media sites like Twitter and Facebook allowed for more “real time” information sharing than the blog.
In the coming weeks and months I am going to make a concerted effort to push more content on the blog, because as much as I love social media, oftentimes 140 characters to use to write with just isn’t enough space.
Because eventually I’d like to turn writing into my livelihood, I need the funds to write, to keep the blog going, to pay for hosting, design and re-design efforts, and everyday expenses. Plus, I’d like to also start paying my awesome co-blogger! I’ve had a PayPal account for years that I’ve rarely made appeals to contribute to, but now I am.
In addition to the PayPal account, I’ve also generated a “Go Fund Me” account (both links are now posted in the upper right side column on this page), and have set a goal there of $5,000. This will be an ongoing effort, but my goal is to have this money raised in a month’s time. If you support this blog and know others who do, please contribute via the PayPal or Go Fund Me links and make sure to share them on your Twitter and Facebook pages. I really appreciate the support already given but more is always encouraged and very much appreciated. Thank you!
A Democratic Alabama state representative is under fire for a racially charged challenge he made last month that has backfired big time. TheBlaze reported that during a legislative session discussion on abortion rights, Rep. Alvin Holmes speculated his Republican counterparts would be in favor of abortion if black men impregnated their daughters. Rep. [Holmes] then offered to pay $100,000 cash to anyone who could show him a “bunch of whites” who have adopted black children in Alabama.
Well, the representative is now being asked to put his money where his mouth is after a Facebook group entitled Faces of Families in Alabama began posting photos of multi-racial families in the state. The Facebook page has already garnered more than 7,000 ‘likes,’ and on Wednesday, the group gathered on the steps of the State House to demonstrate just how many multi-racial, adoptive families reside in Alabama.
The Daily Mail has pictures of some of the beautiful families that were in attendance at the Wednesday rally. Time to put up or shut up on your offer, Rep. Holmes. But he won’t, and here’s his “official” reason why. In shorter terms, he’s a shameless race-baiting welcher.
Holmes, you may recall, also sneered on the floor of the Alabama state House a couple of months ago that he didn’t like Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas because Thomas is “married to a white woman.” Guy sounds like a real winner, eh? Now just imagine for five seconds Holmes was a Republican …
The post Time for race hustler & Alabama state Rep. Holmes to pay up on $100k offer appeared first on Sister Toldjah.
**Posted by Phineas
There’s an interesting and frightening interview posted to Business Insider today with Yeonmi Park, a woman who escaped from North Korea with her family as a teenager, but needed years to get over the brainwashing she endured there. An indoctrination so intense, she believed the late Kim Jong Il could read her mind:
Yeonmi Park grew up in North Korea, under the watchful eye of then-leader Kim Jong-il.
Though she escaped with her family when she was 15, it took her years to get over the intense brainwashing she experienced. In a recent interview with Australian public broadcasting channel SBS, Park went into unbelievable detail about growing up in the totalitarian state.
Growing up in North Korea, according to Park, was like “living in hell.” She describes constant power outages, no transportation, and watching classmates and friends disappear without a trace. While that may be unsurprising, the most interesting part of Park’s experience is her admission that she believed Kim Jong-il to be “a god” who could literally read her mind.
“I had to be careful of my thoughts because I believed Kim Jong-il could read my mind. Every couple of days someone would disappear,” Park said.
Ms. Park’s story is part of a larger program on mind-control shown by SBS, the Australian public broadcaster. The whole show is worth watching.
In an article at SBS, she tells more of her own story:
I lived in North Korea for the first 15 years of my life, believing Kim Jong-il was a God. I never doubted it because I didn’t know anything else. I could not even imagine life outside of the regime.
It was like living in hell. There were constant power outages, so everything was dark. There was no transportation – everyone had to walk everywhere. It was very dirty and no one could eat anything.
It was not the right conditions for human life, but you couldn’t think about it, let alone complain about it. Even though you were suffering, you had to worship the regime every day.
I had to be careful of my thoughts because I believed Kim Jong-il could read my mind. Every couple of days someone would disappear. A classmate’s mother was punished in a public execution that I was made to attend. I had no choice – there were spies in the neighbourhood.
George Orwell’s 1984 depicts the UK after an atomic war and a Socialist revolution. Big Brother is a de facto god to the people: his every word the undeniable truth, no matter how it contradicted what he might have said just the day before. Your innermost thoughts known to him, and he held the power to make you willing to accept your own death and the deaths of those close to you as just. His Animal Farm is a parable of a just revolution hijacked by an anti-democratic cadre, who maintain power by turning the other animals against each other and all into slaves. Both are taught as works of fiction, but Yeonmi Park’s story reminds us that they were more like docu-dramas and that the story hasn’t come to an end.
It reminds me of a saying of John Adams:
“It is weakness rather than wickedness which renders men unfit to be trusted with unlimited power”
Our second president was right, but left something out: it’s not just that Mankind is too morally weak for any one person to hold absolute power, but there is also the weakness that makes us willing to surrender our responsibilities as citizens and entrust a small group of people or a single person with unlimited power. It is dangerous because, eventually and inevitably, that power will fall into the hands of evil men.
And then what is to stop them from proclaiming themselves gods?
(Crossposted at Public Secrets)
The Hill reports this morning that former Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown has officially declared he’s running in the New Hampshire Senate race to try and defeat incumbent Democrat Senator Jeanne Shaheen, and that he will crank up his campaign up by stirring up memories of his miracle winning campaign in Massachusetts from 2010:
New Hampshire Senate candidate Scott Brown is launching his first ad in the race on Monday, a positive spot that touts his listening tour across the state in his iconic truck.
“Scott Brown has almost 300,000 miles on this truck,” a narrator says in the ad, over a shot of Brown driving his truck on a snowy road.
Over clips of Brown interacting with New Hampshirites during his listening tour, the narrator continues: “People want an America that leads again. A health care system that works for New Hampshire. And more good jobs. Isn’t it time someone took their side?”
“Go get em, Scott,” an unknown man adds, to close the spot. It will start running Monday on WMUR, according to the Boston Globe, which first reported news of the ad.
On Thursday, the former Massachusetts senator officially launched his bid in New Hampshire against incumbent Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D).
Though he’s facing three other Republicans in the primary, he’s heavily favored to win the nomination. Republicans see him as their best shot to take down Shaheen, whom they believe to be vulnerable because of ObamaCare’s unpopularity in the state.
Beyond the “listening tour”, I admit I haven’t been paying much attention to what Scott Brown has been up to in the months leading up to him announcing his candidacy , so I’m curious to find out what people in both MA and NH in particular think about what Brown is doing. Will the “carpetbagger” accusations stick? Polls show he’s got some ground to make up in New Hampshire amongst its residents, assuming he makes it beyond the primary. He has a few months to do so, as the primary there is September 9th.
It should be noted – again – for the record, that Brown is not a rock-ribbed conservative and never campaigned as such, not during the Massachusetts primary campaign and not now. So in the event that he wins, people shouldn’t mistakenly expect to get the type of Republican they would in, say, South Carolina or Texas. All the same, I’d still prefer to see him in the US Senate than Shaheen – who is still completely unapologetic over her vote for Obamacare.
For now, put this race on your political radar … and stay tuned.
The post Scott Brown begins #NHSEN campaign w/ ad in his iconic GMC truck appeared first on Sister Toldjah.
CBS News’ Major Garrett reports tonight that the embattled Health and Human Services Secretary will announce her resignation Friday:
HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius will announce her resignation tomorrow, senior administration officials confirm.
— Major Garrett (@MajorCBS) April 10, 2014
Not seeing any write-ups on any of the news sites as to specifics other than this AP blip, but let me be the first to say “don’t let the door hit ya on the way out, Madame Secretary.” Another Obama administration corruptocrat exits stage left. Let’s hope Holder is next (although I’m not holding my breath).
Update – 7:05 PM: Best response so far to the news, via Ben Shapiro:
Sebelius resigns. Which means that as a future lobbyist, she'll meet much more often with the President.
— Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) April 10, 2014
The post Senior admin officials: @Sebelius will soon no longer be job-locked by HHS appeared first on Sister Toldjah.
**Posted by Phineas
And even freedom of thought.
Writing at National Review Online, Dr. Hanson reviews recent incidents of people being hounded for their political opinions or scientific skepticism –among others, Brendan Eich at Mozilla; Dr. Richard Tol for not towing the party line on global warming; antisemitism at a major university that only draws a slap on the wrist; and let’s add Brandeis University’s disgusting insult to Ayaan Hirsi Ali– and then argues that the president has enabled or encouraged this behavior both actively and passively. (And I do believe Hanson is right.)
After all that, VDH offers this about how civil liberties will die in America:
All of that them/us rhetoric has given a top-down green light to radical thought police to harass anyone who is open-minded about man-caused global warming, or believes that gay marriage needs more debate, or that supporting Israel is a legitimate cause, or that breaking federal immigration law is still a crime and therefore “illegal.”
Our civil liberties will not be lost to crude fascists in jackboots. More likely, the death of free speech will be the work of the new medieval Torquemadas who claim they destroyed freedom of expression for the sake of “equality” and “fairness” and “saving the planet.”
And either the irony is lost on them, or they don’t give a damn.
UPDATE: And just like that, another example — the progessive, tolerant, open-minded mob has gone after Dropbox for adding Condoleezza Rice to their board of directors. Can we call them “racists,” yet? (h/t Stephen Kruiser)
(Crossposted at Public Secrets)
The post Victor Davis Hanson on the new Inquisition and freedom of speech appeared first on Sister Toldjah.
**Posted by Phineas
Sometimes I wonder if Kim Jong Un, a reputed heavy drinker, doesn’t sit around late at night nursing a bottle of scotch and fantasizing about the various outré ways he can whack people who have ticked him off:
A senior North Korean official has been executed with a flamethrower after Kim Jong-un branded him an ‘enemy of the state’, it has been claimed.
O Sang-hon is said to have been brutally killed for his close ties to the communist leader’s uncle Jang Song-taek, who was himself publicly tried and executed in December after being found guilty of corruption and ‘counter revolutionary’ activities.
Mr O is thought to be the latest of 11 senior Workers Party figures to have been executed this year over their links to Mr Jang, with South Korean media reporting that Kim Jong-un has plans to execute or imprison hundreds more of his supporters and extended family members.
Mr O had been Mr Jang’s deputy at North Korea’s ministry of public security, and his execution by flamethrower took place after being found guilty of helping his boss turn the state department into a personal security division and hide corruption, South Korea’s Chosun Ilbo newspaper reported.
The ministry of public security has since been closed, with all 11 of the most senior officials said to have been either executed or sent to one of Kim Jong-un’s concentration camps in a second wave of vengeance following conviction of Mr Jang.
I’m not so sure a life sentence in in the North Korean gulag is much better than death, in fact I’m certain it’s in many ways worse, but execution by flamethrower? Mind you, that’s after we’ve had reports of execution by mortar and by being thrown to the dogs.
Use of a flamethrower brings a whole new meaning to “firing squad.”
Take this news with the usual caveats about “if it’s true,” but, regardless of its verity and in spite of its egregiousness, Kim’s savage, quixotic tyranny is a “teachable moment” for advocates for advocates of limited government, because it shows quite clearly the dangers posed when government is not restrained and its powers are not carefully limited. And when the Rule of Man replaces the Rule of Law, no one’s life, rights, or property is safe.
No need for flamethrowers to prove it: just ask the Sacketts of Idaho.
PS: I fully expect Kim to up his game — the next execution just has to be by tac-nuke.
(Crossposted at Public Secrets)
The post North Korea: Kim III orders execution by flamethrower appeared first on Sister Toldjah.
The Hill reports that another one of Obama’s budgets has gone down in flames in the US House:
The House on Wednesday handily rejected a GOP budget alternative based on President Obama’s 2015 spending blueprint.
It was defeated 2-413, following a pattern seen in recent years in House votes to overwhelmingly reject Obama’s budget proposals. Today’s vote is just slightly better than the unanimous vote against Obama’s budget in 2012.
The two “yes” votes came from Reps. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio) and Jim Moran (D-Va.), who is retiring.
Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.) offered a budget alternative based on Obama’s budget plan as a substitute amendment to the House GOP budget. Mulvaney made this move as a way to force Democrats to go on the record about the president’s spending plans.
But Democrats have refused to play along, and have derided these GOP-sponsored options as a political tactic. Earlier in the day, House Budget Committee ranking member Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) urged fellow Democrats in a “Dear Colleague” letter to vote against the Mulvaney amendment, calling it a “political stunt.”
Van Hollen also argued that Mulvaney’s amendment did not truly represent the president’s budget, and complained that the GOP had only allotted 20 minutes of debate, split evenly between each side.
“I thought we didn’t even want to take up thousand-plus page bills. And yet now, supposedly, we’re going to debate and vote on something that is over 2,000 pages,” Van Hollen said.
An Obama administration official agreed with House Democrats that the GOP substitute was not an accurate reflection of Obama’s budget plan.
“The Administration would welcome votes on the actual provisions of President’s Budget,” said Office of Management and Budget spokesman Steve Posner. “That is not what this amendment represents, and a vote for or against this amendment is not a vote for or against the President’s policies.”
But Republicans rejected these complaints, and defended the idea of consider Obama’s latest proposal as a way to let the House consider all budget options.
“Any time the president of the United States takes the time to produce a budget, it merits a debate,” Mulvaney said. “I think it’s a valid discussion we should have every year.”
It should be noted that while Obama’s budget only got two votes, Rep. Paul Ryan’s budget will be up for a vote today and is likely to get many more votes – including a few from vulnerable House Democrats – proving that, when all is said and done, the real “stinkburger” budget will be … Obama’s.
The post #Stinkburger: House rejects Obama’s budget by a vote of 2-413 appeared first on Sister Toldjah.
**Posted by Phineas
One of the oft-stated goals of the Affordable Care Act was insuring the uninsured. For those who couldn’t afford insurance even with the new subsidies, states could expand their Medicaid offerings with (temporary) help from the federal government (i.e., taxation and borrowing). Great, right? Even if you don’t make enough to afford private insurance, you still get medical care, right?
Not if the doctor refuses to take Medicare:
“I’m sorry, we are no longer accepting that kind of insurance. I apologize for the confusion; Dr. [insert name] is only willing to see existing patients at this time.”
As a proud new beneficiary of the Affordable Health Care Act, I’d like to report that I am doctorless. Ninety-six. Ninety-six is the number of soul crushing rejections that greeted me as I attempted to find one. It’s the number of physicians whose secretaries feigned empathy while rehearsing the “I’m so sorry” line before curtly hanging up. You see, when the rush of the formerly uninsured came knocking, doctors in my New Jersey town began closing their doors and promptly telling insurance companies that they had no room for new patients.
My shiny, never used Horizon health card is as effective as a dollar bill during the Great Depression. In fact, an expert tells CNN, “I think of (Obamacare) as giving everyone an ATM card in a town where there are no ATM machines.” According to a study 33% of doctors are NOT accepting Medicaid. Here in Jersey, one has a dismal 40 percent chance of finding a doctor who accepts Medicaid – the lowest in the country.
That insurance or Medicaid card does one a whole lot of good when no one will accept it, doesn’t it?
This is one aspect of a broader access problem that’s going to get more and more attention as we get deeper into the Obamacare morass. In addition to a growing doctor shortage (something that Obamacare may make worse), and shrinking provider networks, the limited number of doctors who accept Medicaid will only get smaller, because the system underpays for their services, and yet under Obamacare is greatly increasing the number of patients. Noble sentiments aside, a medical practice is a business, and a physician or hospital can only afford to see so many money-losing patients before it’s no longer worth staying in business.
Call it another of Obamacare’s broken promises: the government promises you medical care, but what if the care-provider refuses to play?
Of course, one would-be Democratic lawmaker in Virginia has a solution for that: serfdom.
Via Jim Geraghty, who notes it’s even harder to find specialists who take Obamacare.
RELATED: Bobby Jindal has a better idea.
(Crossposted at Public Secrets)
The post #Obamacare success! New Medicaid enrollee turned down by 96 doctors appeared first on Sister Toldjah.
If you check out Senator Kay Hagan’s campaign Twitter feed today, you’ll see she’s joining other Democrats nationwide in pretending there’s a gender wage gap that favors men over women. Here’s one of her tweets on the topic:
— Kay Hagan (@kayhagan) April 8, 2014
This manufactured issue is, of course, being brought up now by President Obama and other elected Democrats at this time because it’s an election year, and vulnerable Democrats up for reelection like Senator Hagan – whose approval numbers have been dropping rapidly here for the last several months – are increasingly desperate to take the focus off of the disastrous Obamacare bill itself and its glitch-filled roll-out. Hagan, you may recall, helped craft the so-called “Affordable Care Act”, which lead to nearly 500,000 North Carolinians losing health insurance plans they liked – plans they were routinely told by the Senator that they could keep. So understandably, she wants your eye off the ball – hence, jumping on the “Fair Pay Act” bandwagon.
Putting to the side the fact that the Equal Pay Act was already signed into law in 1963, and the fact that the “gender wage gap” is, in reality, a huge myth created by Democrats in order “win” the women’s vote by playing the victimhood card, if we go by the Senator’s own metrics concerning this supposed “issue” – it turns out she’s a big hypocrite on the issue of “equal pay”:
As President Barack Obama and the Democrats prepare to honor “Equal Pay Day,” Senate Democrats continue to pay female employees significantly less than their male counterparts, according to an analysis of Senate salary data in Democratic offices.
Senate Democrats plan to vote on the Paycheck Fairness Act on Tuesday, though the vote is largely symbolic given the unlikelihood that the bill will be brought to the floor of the Republican-controlled House.
The analysis shows female staffers in Democratic Senate offices were paid just 91 cents for each dollar paid to male staffers. The average salary for a woman was more than $5,500 below the average salary for a man.
Men received higher average salaries in more than two-thirds of the 43 Senate offices analyzed.
Many of the senators with the largest pay disparity between men and women are facing reelection battles in 2014.
Numerous senators up for reelection have an especially large gap between male and female salaries:
- Sen. Kay Hagan (D., N.C.): $15,343 higher average male salary;
- Sen. Mark Udall (D., Colo.): $9,783 higher average male salary;
- Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D., N.H.): $6,267 higher average male salary;
- Sen. Mark Pryor (D., Ark.): $5,799 higher average male salary;
- Sen. Jeff Merkley (D., Ore.): $3,189 higher average male salary.
This is not a new problem for Democrats. A previous Washington Free Beacon analysis of the fiscal year 2011 found that Democratic Senate offices were paying female staffers far less than their male coworkers during that year as well.
And not only are Hagan and many of her fellow Democrats – including our celebrity President himself – failing big by their own standards on the “equal pay” issue, but even the major media outlets that are normally reliably in Democrat corners on this topic have caught on to their duplicity:
— Stacey-SisterToldjah (@sistertoldjah) April 8, 2014
We’ll just call this “War On Women” – Democrat style. Nice to see the mainstream media finally catching on. Much easier to destroy phony liberal narratives like the ones Senator Hagan and her party try to foist onto the American people when the journalists actually do their jobs in investigating White House claims for a change.
The post On “#EqualPay” issue, #NCSEN’s @KayHagan is quite the hypocrite appeared first on Sister Toldjah.
**Posted by Phineas
Somebody on Twitter posted an upbeat message saying the US delegation to the latest round of talks with Iranian officials was quite optimistic. Don’t get me wrong, I’m a born optimist and I love optimism, but I’d rather revel in victory than hope for good news, and the Iranians have every reason to revel. The Obama crowd has just ok’d something the Tehran tyrants have desperately wanted since the eighties: spare parts for their long-grounded American passenger aircraft. Boeing and General Electric were given export licenses by the Treasury Department and everyone involved has been chanting “we take aircraft security very seriously,” in order to cloak this latest gift to the Khamenei-Rouhani regime in humanitarian hues.
Frankly I’d rather they took national security very seriously. Iran uses its commercial aircraft for military purposes (one of the reasons that eery flight between Tehran and Caracas is so worrisome), and the mullahs have been limited by the degradation of the national fleet. The Boeing planes and GE engines date to the 1970s, and very few of them are in service. Back in the mid-eighties, when I spent quite a bit of time with Iranian officials, they repeatedly asked for spare parts, both for the passenger planes and for the aging military craft, the F4s and F5s. Secretary of Defense Weinberger of course vetoed any such discussions, and the embargo has held until just now.
Now we’re arming Iran.
The idea that a state-sponsor of global terrorism like Iran would adhere to understandings to keep the civilian and military functions of their aircraft separate is self-delusional nonsense. They’ll no more do that than they have to keep their civilian and military nuclear programs apart. (Really, I have a bridge for anyone who believes they’re honoring the recent nuclear agreement.)
What these fatuous dunderheads at State and in the White House refuse to see is that Iran has regarded itself as being at war with the United States since 1979. A deal like this, when Iran could easily ferry troops or equipment on “civilian” flights is tantamount to selling them the rope they’ll use to hang us.
This is part of a larger, global war of tyrannies against democracies. George W. Bush was mocked for his “Axis of Evil” comment, but he was right. The players have changed a bit since then, but still include Pyongyang, Moscow, Beijing, Havana, Caracas — and Tehran. And they’re taking advantage of the openings we’re giving them. More Michael:
And so it is, indeed the war has been on for some time, and it’s a bit hotter than Cold War 1.0 was for most of the twentieth century. Kiev burned, and may burn again soon. Caracas is burning, as are many of Venezuela’s cities and towns. Crimea has been annexed, and Syria is still aflame, as is Iraq, and also Yemen. Estonia and Finland are seriously frightened, as well they should be. If we pull back from the crisis du jour, we can see it’s a global conflict. Iran and Russia are fighting in Syria, sometimes with and sometimes against the jihadi marauders. Cuba is fighting in Venezuela, a country the Castros largely command, and Hezbollah is in there, too. And for those of you who follow Africa, know that the Iranians are up to their necks in Nigeria, buying influence and supporting the mass murderers in Boko Haram.
The West needs to wake up and smell the smoke from the fires starting to burn all around it, before it turns into a real conflagration. Our foes are vulnerable, and the West can win, but only if with American leadership. The US government is the only one that can convince the other nations to take the steps necessary to push back against Putin, Khamenei, and the others. As John Schindler recently wrote:
We will have many allies in resisting Russian aggression if we focus on issues of freedom and sovereignty, standing up for the rights of smaller countries to choose their own destiny.
It would help if we had leaders who saw themselves as the heirs to Churchill, rather than Chamberlain.
(Crossposted at Public Secrets)
The post Why on Earth are we selling spare aircraft parts to Iran? appeared first on Sister Toldjah.
**Posted by Phineas
Continuing their quest to find something, anything at all, to distract people from the failures of Obamacare and to rally their increasingly dispirited base, Democrats and the MSM have turned to harping on “pay equality,” the idea that women are paid less than men for comparable work. A recent
news article propaganda piece in The Huffington Post reported that a study showed women earning 77 cents for every dollar a man earned. Even though this study has been shown to be shoddy and tendentious, and even though the White House admitted the 77-cent figure is wrong, loyal troops such as Dick Durbin have gone onto the Senate floor to loudly proclaim the need for a “Paycheck Fairness Act” to address this horrific discrimination.
Maybe Senator Durbin should start with his own staff:
Durbin took to the Senate floor on Tuesday to preach on the importance of passing legislation aimed at solving the gender pay gap.
“How serious is equal pay for equal work to working people across America?” said Durbin, “I think it’s critical.”
The average female salary is $11,505 lower than the average male salary in Durbin’s office, according to an analysis of Senate salary data from fiscal year 2013 that showed that more than two-thirds of Democratic Senate offices pay men more than women.
Four of the five highest paid staffers on Durbin’s staff are men, according to the analysis.
Of course, it’s hard to gain access to that pay, when women don’t have access to the higher-paying jobs, themselves. As the Free Beacon points out, none of the Senate Democratic leadership has a female chief of staff.
Why do Dick Durbin and Harry Reid hate women?
PS: To be clear, Durbin and his colleagues couldn’t give a rat’s rear end about “paycheck equality” or any of the other “Look! It’s Elvis!!” issues they’ve been throwing against the wall. But they’ve seen the electoral train wreck headed their way, thanks to Obamacare, and they’re looking for anything that might soften the blow. Hence, too, Harry Reid’s “Koch conspiracy” insanity. It’s pathetic, really.
(Crossposted at Public Secrets)
The post Today’s progressive hypocrisy: Dick Durbin’s (D-IL) war on women appeared first on Sister Toldjah.
What.a.surprise. Not. Via The Hill:
The Obama administration announced Monday that planned cuts to Medicare Advantage would not go through as anticipated amid election-year opposition from congressional Democrats.
The cuts would have reduced benefits that seniors receive from health plans in the program, which is intended as an alternative to Medicare.
Under cuts planned by the administration, insurers offering the plans were to see their federal payments reduced by 1.9 percent, which likely would have necessitated cuts for customers.
Instead, the administration said the federal payments to insurers will increase next year by .40 percent.
The healthcare law included $200 billion in cuts to Medicare Advantage over 10 years, in part to pay for ObamaCare.
The Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services (CMS) on Monday said changes in the healthcare market meant it did not need to make those cuts to Medicare Advantage this year.
It cited an increase in healthy beneficiaries under Medicare, which it said has lowered projected costs for that program.
CMS separately is delaying a risk assessment proposal that was set to take affect under ObamaCare.
Now, keep in mind that there were Republicans who complained about these cuts as well, but because vulnerable Democrats who have been steadily losing support in their home states over Obamacare sounded the alarm bell, the administration decided to hold off on the cuts to Medicare Advantage… at least for this critical election year.
Anyone wanna predict the next delay or postponement King Obama will grant on behalf of his party in the next few months in order to try and help maintain their Senate majority and contain the damage in the US House?
(Hat tip: Memeorandum)
The post Panicked Dems convince Obama admin to cancel Medicare Advantage cuts appeared first on Sister Toldjah.