Another Obamacare postponement
We figured something like this was coming again from President Penphone. Congress? Deadlines? Who needs ’em?
Here’s more about the latest postponement of the enforcement of Obamacare’s mandates:
Under the new Treasury rule, firms with 50 to 99 full-time workers are free from the mandate until 2016. And firms with 100 or more workers now also only need cover 70% of full-time workers in 2015 and 95% in 2016 and after, not the 100% specified in the law.
The new rule also relaxes the mandate for certain occupations and industries that were at particular risk for disruption, like volunteer firefighters, teachers, adjunct faculty members and seasonal employees. Oh, and the Treasury also notes that, “As these limited transition rules take effect, we will consider whether it is necessary to further extend any of them beyond 2015.” So the law may be suspended indefinitely if the White House feels like it.
Even some of Obamacare’s defenders are getting a bit fed up:
Advocates for a strong executive branch, including me, have given the White House a pass on its rule-making authority, because implementing such a complicated law requires flexibility. But the law may be getting stretched to the point of breaking. Think of the ACA as a game of Jenga: Adjust one piece and the rest are affected; adjust too many and it falls.
If not illegal, the changes are fueling suspicion among Obama-loathing conservatives, and confusion among the rest of us. Even the law’s most fervent supporters are frustrated.
Ron Pollack, executive director of the consumer lobby Families USA and an ally of the White House, told The Washington Post he was “very surprised” by the latest delays. For workers at large companies that don’t provide coverage, he said, “It’s very unfortunate ”¦ that they don’t have a guarantee it will be extended to them for quite some time.”
Put me in the frustrated category. I want the ACA to work because I want health insurance provided to the millions without it, for both the moral and economic benefits. I want the ACA to work because, as Charles Lane wrote for The Washington Post, the link between work and insurance needs to be broken. I want the ACA to work because the GOP has not offered a serious alternative that can pass Congress.
Unfortunately, the president and his team are making their good intentions almost indefensible.
Obviously, not quite fed up enough, and not quite indefensible enough. Fournier (the author of the piece) seems to believe that good intentions could and should have somehow made this all work. And he buys the fact that Obama’s intentions were good. He swallows the line (or perhaps he just pretends to swallow the line?) that the GOP has not offered a serious alternative. And what’s this “that can pass Congress” bit? Does the GOP have to appeal to the Democratic-run Senate—in other words, offer a bill even more liberal than Obamacare—to qualify as a serious alternative with him?
In fact, Republicans have offered many bills over the years that do the things Fournier says he wants: provide insurance to many millions who didn’t have it, and break the link between work and insurance. Intrastate portability would have been another advantage of some Republican bills, as well as equalization of tax breaks, two things he doesn’t even mention.
This sort of executive overreach—otherwise known as tyranny—will continue, and spread, until Democrats unite with Republicans to stop it. It sets a very bad precedent for either party, because their opponents might come to power one day and do the same thing. But Democrats either can’t think that far ahead, or believe that what they are doing now will keep Republicans from ever coming to power.
Every time they postpone, they have gathered money laundered to the tune of at least several hundred million in kickbacks from industries that benefit from the postponement.
Like Mafia Enforcement, they don’t need a reason to destroy the store. They need a reason (money) not to destroy the store.
That is what the power and wealth is centered around, the redistribution of wealth through force.
“This sort of executive overreach–otherwise known as tyranny–will continue, and spread, until Democrats unite with Republicans to stop it.”
I wish that were true. However, I think it is more likely that it will instead inspire state level Democrat politicians to do the same. Just as we’ve seen IRS-like harassment of conservatives in Wisconsin, I imagine we’ll see a lot more governors and mayors choosing not to enforce laws they don’t like (some have already started doing this).
And why not, after seeing Obama get away with it for years. If you don’t like it you can leave, right Gov. Como?
“Unfortunately, the president and his team are making their good intentions almost indefensible.”
Wow, it’s almost as if he might consider to start being a little bit miffed with the president if he continues to cross N more lines some time in the future. I’m sure Obama is concerned.
New York’s pols have targeted O’Keefe using law and leg charges. So the purging of Republicans are being prepared.
If people don’t have the guts to impale the Left on the cleansing purity, the Left will take the initiative and do it first to their enemies.
Our constitutional republic is dead. It didn’t die a natural death but was rather thoughtlessly murdered by greed, indifference, and leftist ill intent.
The only remaining question is what will it become. History would indicate that it won’t be pretty and in fact could be very,very ugly.
Have you noticed lefties always want to be to be graded on their good intentions, not on the results? LBJ had good intentions with his war on poverty, but look at the results. A permanent black economic underclass.
Neo, I hope you think about posting this up front. I was forwarded this link by a friend of my dad’s.
http://preview.tinyurl.com/mt5slq9
Dr. Ben Carson has now revealed that not only was HE targeted with an extensive IRS audit after criticizing Comrade Zero at the National Prayer Breakfast — but the IRS was also sicced on his family, friends, associates, and charitable organizations he’s involved with.
He’s calling on all of us to stand up and protest this outrageous abuse of power.
“How will the feds know what employers were thinking when hiring and firing? Simple. Firms will be required to certify to the IRS — under penalty of perjury — that ObamaCare was not a motivating factor in their staffing decisions. To avoid ObamaCare costs you must swear that you are not trying to avoid ObamaCare costs. You can duck the law, but only if you promise not to say so.” (source: FOX)
Sounds like freedom from job-lock has been thrown under the bus.
Here’s a bit of that Dr. Carson interview:
And there’s more:
Neo writes, “Democrats either can’t think that far ahead, or believe that what they are doing now will keep Republicans from ever coming to power.”
Simple; what they are doing now will keep Republicans from ever coming to power. That, plus rampant voter fraud that the Republicans are powerless to stop, plus hoardes of new Democrat voters (sometimes known quaintly as immigrants) flooding in, plus airtight air cover by the enemedia, plus . . .
Sir Thomas More: What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
William Roper: Yes, I’d cut down every law in England to do that!
Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned ’round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man’s laws, not God’s! And if you cut them down, and you’re just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake!
Does Satan cast out Satan?
I believe he will. He always has. My fervent prayer is that they have happen to them what they are doing to us.
When Nixon stepped over the line, it was senior Republicans who told him he needed to resign. Are there any Democrats with enough integrity to tell Obama he is out of line?
“…because their opponents might come to power one day and do the same thing.”
I dont know why that would be a concern for dems. The press will make sure that doesnt happen.
[This mandated comment is being postponed until after the November elections.}
Mr. Frank, 3:51 pm — “Are there any Democrats with enough integrity to tell Obama he is out of line?”
Polite answer: No.
Gut answer: Bwaahahahahahahahahahahahahaha . . .
I’ll go with the polite answer.
But what I say is the Congress has to, at some point, step up to the plate.
Carson hasn’t had his intel update on the war, isee. There is no Congress, just a bunch of zombies being bribed or blackmailed, controlled by the puppet masters. Bush was a puppet controlled by Rove? You haven’t seen puppetmastery yet until you see the Left’s mastery of it; it will blow people’s minds: if the zombies don’t eat it first.
Simple; what they are doing now will keep Republicans from ever coming to power.
It will also keep relationships and love from interfering with the Regime’s loyalty tests. It will keep economic relationships under the thumb of the Regime, forever.
It will get to the point where the Deus Ex Machina godhead will command that you slay your lover and family and boss, and people will Obey. Gladly, because their only lover, their only family, their only boss is the Leftist alliance.
No competition is allowed in a theocracy.
When Nixon stepped over the line, it was senior Republicans who told him he needed to resign. Are there any Democrats with enough integrity to tell Obama he is out of line?
If Nixon was really as out of control as Leftist propaganda made people believe, no Repub would have DARED criticism him. The reality test is superior than people’s propaganda beliefs.
Before the end of this century, the world wide opinion will be that the American Slave Empire is a greater threat to international peace and trade than Islamic Jihad. Whether that’s because Islamic Jihad conquered the US, the Left conquered the US and made it into an Empire, remains to be seen.
If the war the Left declared on us decades ago goes their way, that projection will become certain.
With the NSA in his hip pocket, Barry is in a position to impeach the Senate.
Hence, there can be no hope on that front.
Wonder if it means anything at all that Attorney General Holder told the New Yorker’s Jeffrey Toobin that he’ll be leaving his post sometime this year? Like maybe he foresees Republicans getting the Senate in November and figures now’s the time to make his exit before it hits the fan.
I’ve got this idea for a cartoon stuck in my head: Obama sitting down ripping pages out of the Obamacare law and saying something like, How many days do I have left in my term? I have to get rid of this stuff so we can blame the Republicans for destroying my healthcare law.
I wonder if Barry Obama got extensions on his term papers at Columbia.
But Democrats either can’t think that far ahead, or believe that what they are doing now will keep Republicans from ever coming to power.
I’ve been pondering this awhile. I do believe they finally have demographics on their side and will never have to pay the piper. And even if they are proven wrong on that, they also believe the GOP will lack the stones to be so ruthless in return.
And of course,on the second point, I agree with them.
But Democrats either can’t think that far ahead, or believe that what they are doing now will keep Republicans from ever coming to power.
It looks like Obama has every intention of there being a permanent Dem majority – just a few examples:
* Holder fighting Voter ID laws
* Holder now pushing to have felons retain the right to vote
* Amnesty/immigration “reform”
* FCC now to investigate “bias” in media
* IRS harassment of conservative organizations
* Steadily increasing dependency on government – food stamps, WIC, unemployment, health care subsidies, etc.
Neo: “He swallows the line (or perhaps he just pretends to swallow the line?) that the GOP has not offered a serious alternative.”
This is typical SOP.
When I discuss the War on Terror and Iraq mission under Bush, the usual default start position is a deliberate blanket ignorance of Bush’s stated case and policies and Clinton’s case and policies that Bush inherited and directly built on.
Then on that blank page, they proceed from either the presumption that Bush made no coherent case, and fill in their pet conspiracy theory, or they assert a false case.
This was true even in the early 2000s, when I would quote from recent broadcast statements by Bush and they would claim they had never heard it.
But here’s the kicker. In the early 2000s and today, when the same topic comes around again, they proceed the same as before, with the same deliberate blanket ignorance, as though I had never shown them anything.
In The Narrative contest, truth is elective and as elastic as necessary.
In the early 2000s and today, when the same topic comes around again, they proceed the same as before, with the same deliberate blanket ignorance, as though I had never shown them anything.
This.
My sister used to pull this crap with me all the time. It was worse than trying to nail jello to the wall, arguing with one of the Leftoid zombies. Just when you think you’ve nailed enough boards over the doors, they thrust their arms through the windows.
Eric and Beverly,
Maybe the response should be something like, I’m surprised that you have such strong opinions now since you obviously didn’t follow events as they were happening.
As someone who followed events very closely after 9/11 and who read all sorts of things from a wide range of sources, I get really annoyed at these idiots who presume to tell me what happened. I even had a huge stack of newspaper clippings from papers ranging from the Herald Tribune to the Frankfurter Allgemeine to various English papers. I finally ditched them when they started competing with my sofa for a place in my living room. No, I get more than annoyed at these superficial idiots; I get angry as hell when they act like anyone who disagrees with them is an ignorant idiot.
Arguing with zombies doesn’t accomplish anything. Has anyone succeeded in a zombie apoc by successfully debating the zombies into not eating human brains?
Is there such a thing? If there was, the zombies would become human, wouldn’t they.
I get angry as hell when they act like anyone who disagrees with them is an ignorant idiot.
By recognizing them as your peers, equals, and as people with the right to make judgments, you cannot then afterwards fight with good odds against it. Because they in fact discarded their free will, so have the benefits of those that lack free will, but if you give them the recognition that they are your peers, they retain the benefits of free will as well.
So long as they are viewed as puppets, they have no authority and their opinions matter less than a human’s. It would be as if a dog came up and started yellow dog debating the Iraq war. It can’t be taken seriously.
I sympathize with those who during FDR’s 16 years of term, tried to call out to American individualism to overcome the federal hive mind and dependence game. They had no proof, though, other than reason or emotion. They could not let the Left prove things, since it would take decades.
Fast forward to now, the proof is being presented by the Left. But that is a better situation then back in the day when people were howling out in the wilderness that FDR betrayed the country. The country was doing relatively well, after all.
(Minor) point of information:
Ymarsakar (9:50 am) mentions “FDR’s 16 years of term.”
FDR was duly elected to four full terms as President, and indeed, 4 * 4 = 16, but FDR served only the first couple of months of his fourth term before passing away. FDR’s service as President was only 12 years and a couple of months.
I know that of course, but 4 terms is 4 terms. That is what he was entitled to, by right of power if not American health or wisdom.
“And what’s this “that can pass Congress” bit?”
I have a feeling come Jan, 2015 it will be much easier to propose conservative bills “that can pass Congress.”
We’ll see what Fournier’s take is then. I expect goalpost moving.