Support NeoGAF

[HylianTom]

If one of Obama's aims is to bait the freepers, it's working. They're in a tizzy over this.

At this point, impeachment wouldn't shock me in the slightest.

 

[TacticalFox88]

If one of Obama's aims is to bait the freepers, it's working. They're in a tizzy over this.

At this point, impeachment wouldn't shock me in the slightest.

God I want it to happen so bad.

The backfire when it fails will be LEGENDARY

 

[PhoenixDark]

Has the exec order been scaled back or has the WH simply come up with their spin? The Reagan and HW Bush comments seem defensive but also perhaps suggest this won't be as extensive as some thought.

 

[Aaron Strife]

We should wait until we actually hear the announcement, I should think.

Someone called Obama's speech in Vegas tomorrow the start of Reid's 2016 campaign. ha

 

[Wilsongt]

America, fuck yeah!

Jennifer Huculak, who lives in the Canadian province Saskatchewan, was six months pregnant when she flew to Hawaii to go on a vacation with her husband. But two days into her 2013 trip, her water unexpectedly broke; she spent the next six weeks on bed rest, and her daughter was delivered prematurely via an emergency C-section.

A year later, the Huculaks and their daughter are healthy and back at home. But they’re now facing medical bills that total $950,000 for the hospital care they received in the United States last fall. “It makes you sick to your stomach,” Huculak told CTV News. “Who can pay a million-dollar medical bill? Who can afford that?”

Although the couple purchased travel insurance from Blue Cross before their vacation, the insurance company says that Huculak’s previous pregnancy complications — she had a bladder infection when she was four months pregnant — amounted to a pre-existing condition, so her medical expenses won’t be covered. Blue Cross also maintains that the Huculaks’ plan expired while they were still in Hawaii.

Jennifer Huculak told CBC News that she’s frustrated with Blue Cross because she thought she did everything right. She had approval from her doctor to travel, and after her water broke, she tried to figure out how to return to Canada. But she couldn’t find a medical evacuation company that was willing to transport her home in her condition.

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/11/19/3594075/canadian-childbirth-bill/

 

[speculawyer]

America, fuck yeah!



http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/11/19/3594075/canadian-childbirth-bill/

Well . . . just don't pay it. What's the hospital gonna do?

 

[HylianTom]

We should wait until we actually hear the announcement, I should think.

Someone called Obama's speech in Vegas tomorrow the start of Reid's 2016 campaign. ha

I didn't realize until today that Reid's reelection is in 2016. For some reason, my mind had it filed away as being in '18. Tempus fugit!

Reid has a pretty good GOTV machine. Makes me feel 100% better about Nevada staying blue.

 

[Aaron Strife]

America, fuck yeah!



http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/11/19/3594075/canadian-childbirth-bill/

Seems these freeloading Canadians have a thing or two to learn aboot bootstraps.

 

[speculawyer]

If one of Obama's aims is to bait the freepers, it's working. They're in a tizzy over this.

At this point, impeachment wouldn't shock me in the slightest.

Bring it on.

To convict the accused, a two-thirds majority of the senators present is required.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment#Process

 

[speculawyer]

I didn't realize until today that Reid's reelection is in 2016. For some reason, my mind had it filed away as being in '18. Tempus fugit!

Reid has a pretty good GOTV machine. Makes me feel 100% better about Nevada staying blue.

On the other hand . . . we will still be stuck with Reid, the uncharismatic. That said, he certainly has been the spine or the balls of the Dems lately it seems.

 

[HylianTom]

On the other hand . . . we will still be stuck with Reid, the uncharismatic. That said, he certainly has been the spine or the balls of the Dems lately it seems.

Yup. I have my qualms about the man, but at least he's done a good job on moving judges through the process. In this climate, my expectations for two branches of the federal government are quite low, so I'm thankful that he's helped measurably with the third branch.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Bring it on.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment#Process

They might not even get a bare majority, I imagine a few GOP senators would want to save face. Maybe not though.

 

[PhoenixDark]

They might not even get a bare majority, I imagine a few GOP senators would want to save face. Maybe not though.

McConnell wouldn't even put it on the floor.

 

[speculawyer]

McConnell wouldn't even put it on the floor.

And he'll get so much shit for it.

Let the GOPers rip each other apart.

 

[HylianTom]

"GOP Leaders warn 'impeachment' is a dirty word"

Republican leaders, anticipating outrage from their base over President Barack Obama’s upcoming immigration move, have a message for their party: Don’t use the ‘I’ word.

Senior House and Senate Republicans don’t want their rank-and-file to even raise the specter of impeaching Obama, fearing it would give Democrats a message to rally around as the president’s party is split over the hugely controversial move. Ahead of the upcoming announcement, top congressional Republicans are trying to find the right balance between expressing outrage and overreaching, hoping that the battle doesn’t lead to either a government shutdown in December or calls among conservatives to impeach the president.

Texas Sen. John Cornyn, the incoming Senate majority whip, said Wednesday that the GOP response needs to be “appropriate” and measured.

“Nobody’s talking about the ‘I’ word like the White House and others,” Cornyn said. “They would love for us to take the bait. We’re not going to take the bait.”

The story: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/11/republicans-immigration-impeachment-113027.html

And the FreeRepublic reaction is great, as usual..
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3228804/posts

"It’s not a dirty word, it’s your DUTY."

 

[ivysaur12]

These next two years are going to be so fun.

 

[Joe Molotov]

Well Mary, you had a good run. Sigh

Did she?

 

[Averon]

These next two years are going to be so fun.

Yeah. The GOP actually have to govern now, and not just sit back and throw bombs.

Let's see how well they do that.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Yeah. The GOP actually have to govern now, and not just sit back and throw bombs.

Let's see how well they do that.

not really. they don't 'have to govern'

 

[Mario]

America, fuck yeah!

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/11/19/3594075/canadian-childbirth-bill/

When I was in SF with my ex girlfriend travelling from NZ a couple of months ago, she lost her asthma inhaler and started having a mild attack before dawn so we had to go to the hospital (no clinic would give her a refill without a prescription).

They charged us $350 on the spot which they said covered everything, a transaction which took about 30 minutes because they had lost their visa machine, and escorted me to a local ATM so I could get cash (in case I decided to bolt and abandon my ex there I guess). They refused to call my insurance company and wouldn't take the information.

A bill turned up at my place in NZ for US$3.2k for further unspecified charges shortly thereafter.

US$3.5k for a refill on an asthma inhaler. Yeah, we aren't paying that.

 

[B-Dubs]

When I was in SF with my ex girlfriend travelling from NZ a couple of months ago, she lost her asthma inhaler and started having a mild attack before dawn so we had to go to the hospital (no clinic would give her a refill without a prescription).

They charged us $350 on the spot which they said covered everything, a transaction which took about 30 minutes because they had lost their visa machine, and escorted me to a local ATM so I could get cash (in case I decided to bolt and abandon my ex there I guess). They refused to call my insurance company and wouldn't take the information.

A bill turned up at my place in NZ for US$3.2k for further unspecified charges shortly thereafter.

US$3.5k for a refill on an asthma inhaler. Yeah, we aren't paying that.

That is ultra fucked up.

 

[Black Mamba]

When I was in SF with my ex girlfriend travelling from NZ a couple of months ago, she lost her asthma inhaler and started having a mild attack before dawn so we had to go to the hospital (no clinic would give her a refill without a prescription).

They charged us $350 on the spot which they said covered everything, a transaction which took about 30 minutes because they had lost their visa machine, and escorted me to a local ATM so I could get cash (in case I decided to bolt and abandon my ex there I guess). They refused to call my insurance company and wouldn't take the information.

A bill turned up at my place in NZ for US$3.2k for further unspecified charges shortly thereafter.

US$3.5k for a refill on an asthma inhaler. Yeah, we aren't paying that.

Moral of the story, give a fake home address when you're coming from abroad?

 

[Wilsongt]

Lots of butthurt, godly comments on local news facebook pages in SC.

 

[Dominican Power]

The story: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/11/republicans-immigration-impeachment-113027.html

And the FreeRepublic reaction is great, as usual..
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3228804/posts

"It’s not a dirty word, it’s your DUTY."

The GOP can't help themselves.

 

[Incognito]

The story: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/11/republicans-immigration-impeachment-113027.html

And the FreeRepublic reaction is great, as usual..
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3228804/posts

"It’s not a dirty word, it’s your DUTY."

Great stuff in there, but this has to take the cake:

Which “I” word? I know a lot of “I” words - many of which could be used to describe both Obama’s “executive amnesty” AND republican congressional “leaders”:

Ignorant
Incompetent
Incorrigible
Idiotic
Insane
Inane
Ichthyocoprolitic
Inept
Irresponsible
Irrelevant
Imbecilic
Immoral
Illogical
Inferior
Improper
Infernal
Improvident
Injurious
Inexpedient
Inauspicious
Incompatible
Invalid
Infantile
Infuriating
Infrugal
Inhospitable
Inhumane
Injudicious
...
I can come up with more but I’m starting to get bored.

Impressive!

 

[TacticalFox88]

Lots of butthurt, godly comments on local news facebook pages in SC.

Link???

 

[WayneMorse]

Obama's speech wont be televised on any of the networks. So what the fuck is the point?

 

[kess]

House Passes Bill that would Allow More Industry Reps Access to EPA Board

A key provision of the bill would forbid scientists from advising the EPA on their own research and require 10 percent of members of the advisory board to be from a state or local government. A dead letter in the senate, of course.

 

[Oblivion]

So what’s changed since the 1960s and '70s? Overtime pay, in part. Your parents got a lot of it, and you don’t. And it turns out that fair overtime standards are to the middle class what the minimum wage is to low-income workers: not everything, but an indispensable labor protection that is absolutely essential to creating a broad and thriving middle class. In 1975, more than 65 percent of salaried American workers earned time-and-a-half pay for every hour worked over 40 hours a week. Not because capitalists back then were more generous, but because it was the law. It still is the law, except that the value of the threshold for overtime pay—the salary level at which employers are required to pay overtime—has been allowed to erode to less than the poverty line for a family of four today. Only workers earning an annual income of under $23,660 qualify for mandatory overtime.

...

So let me be specific. To get the country back to the same equitable standards we had in 1975, the Department of Labor would simply have to raise the overtime threshold to $69,000. In other words, if you earn $69,000 or less, the law would require that you be paid overtime when you worked more than 40 hours a week. That’s 10.4 million middle-class Americans with more money in their pockets or more time to spend with friends and family. And if corporate America didn’t want to pay you time and a half, it would need to hire hundreds of thousands of additional workers to pick up the slack—slashing the unemployment rate and forcing up wages.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/11/overtime-pay-obama-congress-112954.html#ixzz3JZW2oOhP

Holy fuck, that is some amazing power the labor department has. I'm honestly surprised at the kinds of really significant things Obama can legally do without any help from congress.

Obama needs to go big these last two years.

 

[adamsappel]

America, fuck yeah!

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/11/19/3594075/canadian-childbirth-bill/

And yet, when Americans get sick in civilized countries, doesn't that universal healthcare system, that they have never paid into, cover them completely?

 

[Grexeno]

Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/sto...#ixzz3JZW2oOhP

Holy fuck, that is some amazing power the labor department has. I'm honestly surprised at the kinds of really significant things Obama can legally do without any help from congress.

Obama needs to go big these last two years.

And the Department of Labor can just do this under its own power? Cause this would be AWESOME

 

[Teggy]

Surveillance Reform dies in the Senate, 58-42

Roll call here

I just want to make sure everyone noticed this bill spells USA FREEDOM. Amazing.

 

[Diablos]

When I was in SF with my ex girlfriend travelling from NZ a couple of months ago, she lost her asthma inhaler and started having a mild attack before dawn so we had to go to the hospital (no clinic would give her a refill without a prescription).

They charged us $350 on the spot which they said covered everything, a transaction which took about 30 minutes because they had lost their visa machine, and escorted me to a local ATM so I could get cash (in case I decided to bolt and abandon my ex there I guess). They refused to call my insurance company and wouldn't take the information.

A bill turned up at my place in NZ for US$3.2k for further unspecified charges shortly thereafter.

US$3.5k for a refill on an asthma inhaler. Yeah, we aren't paying that.

Compared to NZ we must look like a third world country. Just don't come back here (and why would you after such an awful experience). They aren't going to sue you internationally for not paying. I would tell them to fuck right off.

I don't see the point of having the 'greatest healthcare system in the world' if it sets patients up to fail. The ACA does indeed stop some of the worst abuses of the industry (if you are American) but compared to other nations we're still eons behind. I think it's totally legitimate to say the USA in many regards looks like a third world country in how they extort patients.

Things are never going to get better in this country... universal, nationalized healthcare, workers' rights, economic reform that ensures the wealthy make a respectable contribution to the nation that made them so great, and sensible gun policy... this is not asking for a lot, it's what any other modern western nation does.

You read stories about $900k hospital bills and the like and it really does just make you come to the realization that we are living through an extremely gloomy period of America's history. I don't know if it will ever improve. Furthermore, what kind of society would stand for these kinds of things and not have the common sense to lash out against it? An ignorant and self-absorbed one... it's a two-sided problem really; you have the capitalist thugs at the top rigging the entire system (no hyperbole) to go against the everyday man or woman -- and you have the average citizen who doesn't give two fucks about how they could change that overnight if they wanted to because they're so ignorant and/or ill-informed. It's a toxic mix... how can this country continue to prosper?

I would be amazed if America is still held in such high regard in another 25 years. Someday we will lose our superpower status if we do not put a STOP to this lunacy.

It's just a horrible time to be an American, despite having an incredible President and an emerging demographics/ideology shift it's increasingly clear that this nation remains underwater because of a ridiculously powerful group of individuals (politicians, lawyers, capitalist thugs)...

 

[ICKE]

not really. they don't 'have to govern'

It remains to be seen.

They will definitely use Keystone XL and and immigration as political footballs to smear their opposition.

I doubt we will see any meaningful action against ACA before SCOTUS makes its decision.

The best outcome would be a favorable decision from the Court after a grand bargain is reached. Republicans would frame it as bringing back some sense to Washington after the previous administration failed in governing the country. Then it would be open season on ACA as the premiums would skyrocket in all the red states. Riders in every single bill and when the President uses his veto option blame him for everything.

Hillary Clinton would find it difficult to gain any traction in such an environment. Her best hope is that some loon wins the Republican primary but even then it would be just about two sides attacking one another and conservatives have that game in the bag.

 

[Diablos]

If the SCOTUS kills the federal subsidies, I'm telling you, it is going to doom Democrats in 2016... not enough people will understand what it really means and why it really happened. It's going to make people go bankrupt or drop their policy, it's going to hurt people working in the health care industry since there won't be as many patients... it's going to be awful.

Not to mention people would basically die as a result of a decision in favor of King.

This country is a capitalist theocratic shithole. The election results are sobering in a way. It makes you realize how abhorrent this place really is. We aren't North Korea or Iran, I know -- but we are a complete embarrassment to any other free nation on Earth, and there is a lot to be said for that.

 

[Avon Barksdale]

Only a Democrat can beat Hillary.

 

[ICKE]

If the SCOTUS kills the federal subsidies, I'm telling you, it is going to doom Democrats in 2016... not enough people will understand what it really means and why it really happened. It's going to make people go bankrupt or drop their policy, it's going to hurt people working in the health care industry since there won't be as many patients... it's going to be awful.

Not to mention people would basically die as a result of a decision in favor of King.

This is how I see it as well.

Republicans would do well to present an alternative wishy washy plan immediately and demand that order is restored via removal of ACA. What can Obama realistically do in such a situation? There are no votes to pass a new version either.

It would also be interesting to see how Hillary would deal with the situation. She would have to distance herself entirely from the previous administration and find new issues to run on. How could she possibly energize the progressive base or would she run basically as a conservative? The upcoming years are going to be extremely entertaining, lunacy will prevail and Obama's legacy is in serious danger. His foreign policy achievements from the first term are crumbling right now (who knows how many troops will be sent back to the battlefield if extremist groups continue to take over large areas in Libya, Iraq and cross into new countries), his health care reform is in jeopardy, immigration reform is a no-go and so on.

 

[Diablos]

Only a Democrat can beat Hillary.

Or Obamacare becoming what the GOP and their ilk always wanted because of a 5-4 conservative loon SCOTUS majority that in fact will prove itself to 'legislate from the bench', even though Dubya assured us time and time again it never would.

If the court blows a hole in the ACA, 2016 is up for grabs. Disabling the Medicaid expansion unless states agree to accept it was bad enough; the law can't take much more gutting. Not even the Clintons are immune from the fallout that would come from people losing their subsidies. That will doom the Democrats for like 10 years.

 

[Wilsongt]

Warren spitting truths that the Democrats will sadly not repeat.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) went straight after Republicans, blasting the GOP on deregulation and trickle down economics during a Center for American Progress event on Wednesday.

"The Republicans have a pretty simple philosophy: they say if those at the top have more — more power for Wall Street players to do whatever they want and more money for tax cuts than somehow they can be counted on to build the economy for everyone else," Warren said. "Well, we tried it for 30 years and it didn’t work. In fact the consequences were nearly catastrophic."

Warren did allude to the 2014 elections where Republicans replaced Democrats not only in key Senate races but governors mansions and statehouses, but she stressed that didn't mean Republican calls for deregulation should be taken seriously now.

Warren also reused her regularly repeated line that the American economy is "rigged" in favor of the wealthy.

"We tested the Republican ideas and they failed, they failed spectacularly. There’s no denying that fact," Warren said. "We know the importance of accountability on Wall Street —the benefits of having a better educated work force. The advantages that come from investments of high speed rail and medical research."

Also, there is justice in the world.

The National Organization for Marriage, a group vehemently opposed to same-sex marriage, has fallen into incredible debt.

The group ended 2013 with $2.5 million in debt, according to an analysis of its 2013 tax return by the Human Rights Campaign.

 

[ICKE]

Or Obamacare becoming what the GOP and their ilk always wanted because of a 5-4 conservative loon SCOTUS majority that in fact will prove itself to 'legislate from the bench', even though Dubya assured us time and time again it never would.

If the court blows a hole in the ACA, 2016 is up for grabs. Disabling the Medicaid expansion unless states agree to accept it was bad enough; the law can't take much more gutting. Not even the Clintons are immune from the fallout that would come from people losing their subsidies. That will doom the Democrats for like 10 years.

One more thing. Right now insurers are prohibited from discriminating against people with pre-existing health conditions and have to offer coverage at an average community rate. But if the Court strikes down subsidies, and the pool of beneficiaries shrinks as coverage becomes too expensive for healthy individuals, we might see a significant push towards repealing any protections given to citizens. And we know who has the votes in Congress at the moment.

I do wonder about the Court though. It will definitely be a 5-4 ruling, could go either way.

The next two years are going to be one giant roller coaster, government shutdown is definitely on the cards and we might hear more Star Wars references from Cruz. He is advocating horrible policies but is definitely one of the most entertaining trolls in world politics at the moment. Internet at the speed of government, imagine him winning the Republican primary.

 

[Avon Barksdale]

Jim Webb has launched an exploratory committee.

The production values on his video are straight outta 1994.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oV3RnBaXIlk

 

[Mario]

Compared to NZ we must look like a third world country. Just don't come back here (and why would you after such an awful experience).

Heh, a little hard as I have to travel to the US regularly for work.

But yeah, I'm astounded not only by the broken process* but the attitude of a lot of Americans is just so selfish.

Here in NZ if a tourist (or anyone) has an emergency and goes to hospital, the treatment won't cost you anything. And as an NZ taxpayer, I am okay with that.


* bonus story: when I was in Hawaii about 15 years ago playing in an Arena football tournament I cut open and fractured my right thumb. At the hospital, they wouldn't let the professional trainer in with me, and then they got me to fill out the admission and insurance form by myself before I was admitted which was somewhat difficult given I was both bleeding badly and could no longer use the thumb on my writing hand. 4 hours, 3 stitches and 1 xray later, I clocked up around a $2k bill which thankfully my insurance covered. And Hawaii was the most "socialized" healthcare in the Union at the time.

They aren't going to sue you internationally for not paying. I would tell them to fuck right off.

The girl and I broke up and she moved out anyway, so they'll just be getting "Not this address, return to sender" from here on in, and they don't have my name.

 

[Metaphoreus]

Everyone's favorite explainers interview everyone's favorite Obamacare analyst:

Sarah Kliff: You and Adler initially thought that this was a glitch or a typo, that it was a drafting error where legislators were sloppy and forgot a word. But you’ve since become convinced that it was the intention of Congress to withhold subsidies from states that don’t build exchanges. How did your viewpoint change on that?

Michael Cannon: We first thought that it was a mistake, that it was a drafting error. And it is still a glitch in the sense that it’s a snag or something that complicates implementation. The reason I didn’t initially think they wrote it this way was it would give states a lot of power to block the law.

But we started doing a lot of research into this, the most research that I think anyone has done. And if you look at the tax-credit eligibility rules, they are very tightly worded. It’s not in one place, but in two places, it says that the credits are only available "through an Exchange established by the State." Then there are seven different cross-references to that language. They never mentioned any other type of exchange. They never mentioned exchanges generally. It's all very tightly worded to refer only to exchanges "established by the State."

Then if you look at the legislative history, you'll find that that was the language in the Finance Committee's bill and when it passed the Finance Committee. But that bill only had one of those explicit "Exchanges established by the State" phrases. They added the other one in Harry Reid's office while it was being merged with the HELP bill under the direction of the Senate leadership and White House staff — Peter Orszag and Valerie Jarrett and Nancy-Ann DeParle, and everyone else who was going in and out of that room. So this restriction was added to the statute in multiple places at multiple points in the drafting process.

Sarah Kliff: This is where I have trouble sticking with your telling of things. Because my experience covering health care, covering the drafting process you talk about, is that Congress meant for every state to have subsidies. That it’s a key leg of the three-legged stool you mention. This is something other people who covered the law, people like Julie Rovner at at Kaiser Health News, agree with me on.

I also spoke to Congressional staffers who worked on the bill. I understand this is not legally binding in any way, but still, they say, "Of course we meant for all states to have subsidies, regardless of who was providing the exchange." Your telling of it, to me, is inaccurate.

Michael Cannon: A couple of things. First, there are a lot of legislators who didn’t read or understand this law, but voted for it anyway. The provisions they did not read and did not understand are still law. "If you like your health plan, you can keep it," for example. The Members of Congress who said that either didn't understand what was in this bill or were lying. But either way, it’s the law.

What was happening here was, the senators and staff who wrote this language were just trying to put something together that would get 60 votes, so that they could go to conference with the House. To get 60 votes, they needed to create the expectation that states would be running the exchanges. That was crucial to get to 60 votes.

It seems perfectly reasonable to me that some senators or staffers would then say, "Well, we'll offer the subsidies only in exchanges established by the state. That will create the necessary incentive for states to do it." And there are lots of reasons why they wouldn’t even discuss it. They may have believed it’s not worth mentioning because all states would establish exchanges even without the incentive. Or it’s not worth mentioning because they figured this provision isn’t going survive conference.

. . .

It may have been the case that, if this legislation had gone to conference, someone would have objected to the conditional nature of the Senate bill’s Exchange subsidies. That someone would have said, "This would knock out one leg of the three-legged stool! Did you pay attention to those town hall meetings in August? We can't let the Tea Party grab onto this because they'll blow up the whole thing! We have to change that!"

But that didn't happen. When Scott Brown won, Democrats only had one bill they could get through Congress. That’s how this provision became law.

You didn't ask about it. Julie [Rovner, a health policy reporter formerly with NPR and currently with Kaiser Health News] didn't ask about it. That doesn't mean that Congress wasn't meaning to do it. That doesn't mean it's not the law. It just means that there was so much else going on that no one examined this. No one questioned them on it.

 

[thepotatoman]

If the SCOTUS kills the federal subsidies, I'm telling you, it is going to doom Democrats in 2016... not enough people will understand what it really means and why it really happened. It's going to make people go bankrupt or drop their policy, it's going to hurt people working in the health care industry since there won't be as many patients... it's going to be awful.

Not to mention people would basically die as a result of a decision in favor of King.

This country is a capitalist theocratic shithole. The election results are sobering in a way. It makes you realize how abhorrent this place really is. We aren't North Korea or Iran, I know -- but we are a complete embarrassment to any other free nation on Earth, and there is a lot to be said for that.

I really shutter to think of a GOP 2016. Bush already represented a very real continual slide right of the party, and the party has only moved farther right since then. SCOTUS has already become far more aggressive and would only be more so with 6 conservative justices instead of 5. And the Senate is ripe for an end to the filibuster. There'd be nothing to stop them but worries about the next election.

Can't say it will happen, but it sure is a scary thought. Really praying that republicans blow these next two years, Hillary runs a good campaign, Democrats turnout like they should, and there's no surprise recession or other national tragedy waiting us.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Everyone's favorite explainers interview everyone's favorite Obamacare analyst:

Holy shit at that revisionist history. He can't actually believe what he's saying in the final question

 

[Chichikov]

In today's National Review is totally not racist news - rioting is black entitlement ya'll.

 

[PhoenixDark]

In today's National Review is totally not racist news - rioting is black entitlement ya'll.

Just read the underline...how is Sharpton inciting violence? I can't stand the man but can't think of anything he has said to stir riots.

 

[B-Dubs]

Just read the underline...how is Sharpton inciting violence? I can't stand the man but can't think of anything he has said to stir riots.

He's the guy the right likes to blame for shit, anytime there's anything racial they'll look to blame him even if he's not involved.

 

[Diablos]

Everyone's favorite explainers interview everyone's favorite Obamacare analyst:

Thanks, Martha Coakley. Her complete lack of campaign prowess and charisma that goes over like a wet fart is the gift that just keeps on giving.

 

[jamesinclair]

Good news, everyone

For the second time in the past three elections, Fresno Democrat Jim Costa has rallied from an election night vote deficit to win re-election to Congress.

Fresno, Madera and Merced counties on Wednesday finished their vote counting in the 16th Congressional District, and the final tally has Costa ahead by 1,319 votes. The victory margin over unheralded Republican Johnny Tacherra won’t change by more than a vote here or there as officials in the three counties clean up a few remaining ballots before they certify their results.

“It is an honor to be re-elected to represent California’s 16th Congressional District,” Costa said in a statement. “As a lifelong Valley resident, I am humbled that the people who live here have entrusted me to continue being their voice in Congress.

...

Overall, Costa won 50.7% and Tacherra 49.2%.

...

Tacherra got no such help from the National Republican Congressional Committee or any independent groups. None of the polling showed Tacherra had a chance, but most of the polling assumed a much higher voter turnout.

A few days after the election, a Madera County update pushed Tacherra’s lead to 1,775, and some Republicans started celebrating what they thought was a huge upset win for Tacherra, who headed off to Washington for freshman lawmaker orientation. Some conservative commentators hailed Tacherra. Firebrand Republican Assembly Member Tim Donnelly gave Tacherra a win in public comments.

But as each new vote count showed Tacherra’s lead fading, Republican optimism gave way to a bit of post-election remorse: if only they’d put a little money into the Costa-Tacherra campaign.

Read more here: http://www.fresnobee.com/2014/11/19...dates.html?sp=/99/406/263/&rh=1#storylink=cpy