For the GOP: New Jersey vs. Virginia, Pragmatism vs. Purity

The mainstream analysis from Dan Balz, at the Washington Post, "Virginia, New Jersey results highlight Republican Party’s divisions, problems":

Tuesday’s elections, which produced a resounding Republican victory in New Jersey and a dispiriting loss for the GOP in Virginia, highlighted the challenges ahead for a badly divided party — and will probably intensify an internal debate about how to win back the White House in 2016.

At a time when the party’s image has sunk to record lows nationally, the results of the gubernatorial elections will reverberate far beyond the borders of Virginia and New Jersey. Off-year elections are hardly foolproof in predicting the future, but as GOP leaders digest what happened Tuesday, the lessons they take away from the races after their autumn of discontent will shape the coming rounds.

In New Jersey, Gov. Chris Christie (R) rolled to reelection by a margin that will make him a leading contender for his party’s presidential nomination in 2016, should he decide to run. His victory in a solidly blue state will be touted as a model for a party that needs to expand its coalition in national campaigns. But will the formula Christie employed in New Jersey work in Republican primaries and caucuses or in a national election for president?

In Virginia, Republican Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli II, a tea party favorite, came closer than many expected but fell short in his race against Democratic businessman and party fundraiser Terry McAuliffe. What Republicans will debate was whether Cuccinelli was personally too conservative — and his party too toxic after the recent government shutdown — for what is now a classic swing state.

The outcomes set up a battle for power between competing wings of the Republican Party. Call it the establishment vs. the tea party, or the gubernatorial wing against the congressional wing. This competition is less about ideology or policy — there is no disunity, for example, when it comes to the party’s dislike of President Obama’s Affordable Care Act — than about purity vs. pragmatism, tactics and strategy. Or, as Christie has put it, it is about winning an argument vs. winning elections.

I'm not reading that much into Virginia. As Instapundit says, "IF THE ELECTION HAD BEEN NEXT WEEK, I THINK MCAULIFFE WOULD HAVE LOST VIRGINIA BY 5," referencing Gallup's new polling numbers with Obama tanking at 39 percent.

And the way the media's playing it, Christie's gearing up for the McCain/Romney political death dance in 2016.

The GOP will lose again if they nominate a kiss-ass Republican like Christie. But FWIW, see NBC News, "Analysis: NJ Gov. Chris Christie's big re-election victory offers GOP a roadmap to resurgence in 2016."

Mika Brzezinski Not Pleased With Obama's 'You Can Keep Your Plan' Lies

At Twitchy, "Schadenfreudelicious! Obama’s ‘keep your plan’ lies nutshelled by Mika Brzezinski’s face [pic]":

Heh. What is an Obama cheerleader to do when exposed to a montage of all his “you can keep your plan” lies on loop? Well, on Monday Mika hit herself in the face.

No, for serious.

RT @Mediaite: Mika Brzezinski Literally Hits Herself in the Face After Watching Obamacare Promises Montage http://t.co/rVAYnrfMiW (VIDEO)
— WhiteHousePressCorps (@whpresscorps) November 5, 2013

Mika Brzezinski not a fan of the Obama "if you like your plan, you can keep your plan" video compilations pic.twitter.com/hiDsqAzHHh
— Jeff Poor (@jeff_poor) November 5, 2013

Anthem Blue Cross Sued Over Policy Cancellations

Oh, it's just "churn" in the market.

At LAT, "Anthem Blue Cross is sued over policy cancellations":

In a new line of attack on canceled health policies, two California residents are suing insurance giant Anthem Blue Cross, alleging they were misled into giving up their previous coverage.

About 900,000 Californians and many more nationwide have received cancellation notices on their individual health insurance policies, triggering a public uproar against the rollout of President Obama's healthcare law.

Some consumers have complained about hefty rate hikes from the forced upgrades because their current plans don't meet all the requirements of the Affordable Care Act.

Much of the consumer anger has been directed at Obama's repeated pledge that Americans could keep their existing health insurance if they liked it despite the massive overhaul.

In separate lawsuits filed Monday, Paul Simon, 39, of Sherman Oaks and Catherine Coker, 63, of Glendale sought to pin some of the blame on Anthem Blue Cross, a unit of WellPoint Inc.

The two plaintiffs are asking the courts to block any policy cancellations unless Anthem customers are allowed to switch back to their previous grandfathered health plans.

Just a "glitch," I'm sure.

Obama Now Lying to Cover His Lies

At AoSHQ, "Obama's Covering Up His Gigantic Lie With, Get This, a New Gigantic Lie":

The new lie is added to this supercut of the 36 times (and counting) Obama said "If you like your plan, you can keep your plan. Period."

Note that he could repeat his lie without the aid of notes -- but now when he offers his new lie -- claiming that "What we said was that... you could keep your plain if your plan didn't change [at all]" -- he needs some Lawyer's Notes to guide him.

On Megyn Kelly last night, Judge Napolitano pointed out the power of adding Period to the end of most of these vows. When one says "Period," one means there is no fine print. There are no caveats, conditions, or qualifications. "Period" means that the vow you just heard is self-contained; there is no extraenous material elsewhere you have to check to determine what the promise means.

But that's exactly what he's saying "Period" doesn't mean now. Now he's claiming "Period" meant-- actually, he's claiming "we" said this, which is a lie -- "unless there have been any changes [whatsoever] to your policy."

Such as $5 increase in your copay to keep pace with rising medical costs. Yes, a $5 change in your copay ungrandfathers your policy. The HHS deliberately wrote these rules to terminate as many policies as possible.

Actually, the lie is deeper than that. Because if you thought "If you like your plan, you could keep your plan" meant that you would be held harmless by the changes wrought by Obamacare, then you were misled -- even grandfathered policies, for example, must have their premiums jacked up in order to pay for the sick and uninsurable.

Another part of Obamacare says that insurers can't discriminate based on health status, which means the sick pay less... and the healthy, necessarily, pay more. A lot more.

And the guarantee of "If you like your policy, you can keep your policy" was never intended to mean you wouldn't be shellacked by higher rates. Or, at least, it was intended to be understood as meaning that; Obama always knew that wasn't the way he was setting it up to work.

In other words: You were never going to keep your old policy. Even as regards grandfathered policies, you were always going to have something new: Steeply increased premiums, which represent a hidden tax to redistribute wealth to Obama's constituents.

So the only people allowed to change your policy were... Obama's HHS officials, by jacking up your premiums.

He flat out lied. And lied and lied and lied. And now he's lying some more.

More at that top link.

VIDEO CREDIT: Free Beacon, "36 Times Obama Said You Can Keep Your Health Plan."

Running Scared: Mary Landrieu Introduces 'Keeping the Affordable Care Act Promise Act'

Bwahaha!

They're eating their own.

And you know, I guess even Democrats don't buy the stupid regressive spin that it's all the insurance companies' fault. You know, that they just dumped consumers off their plans, totally unrelated to ObamaCare, or something.

Landrieu's smart enough to know that voters aren't that stupid.

At the Weekly Standard, "Landrieu Introduces Bill to 'Keep Promise' of Obamacare":

Senator Mary Landrieu, the Democrat from Louisiana, has introduced a bill called the "Keeping the Affordable Care Act Promise Act." The bill recognizes that Americans are losing their individual health plans because they don't conform to the new regulations under the Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare. During the debate over health care reform in 2009 and 2010, Democrats who supported the law like Barack Obama and Landrieu herself promised that if Americans liked their health care plans they could keep it under Obamacare.

"When we passed the Affordable Care Act, we did so with the intention that if you liked your health plan, you could keep it. A promise was made and this legislation will ensure that this promise is kept. For many consumers, plans in the Marketplaces may offer superior coverage at a good value that saves them money. But people should be able to keep their plans if they want to," Landrieu said in a statement. "I have said repeatedly that the Affordable Care Act isn't perfect, and I am willing to work with anyone who wants to improve it and implement it correctly. Middle class families and businesses need and deserve access to quality, affordable health insurance, and I hope that leaders from around the country and from both parties will join me in this effort."

Landrieu, who is up for reelection in 2014, isn't exactly running away from the law she voted to pass in 2010. But her acknowledgement of the law's problematic implementation is significant.

#ExemptMeToo

From Americans for Prosperity, a fantastic ad:

Dependency Nation — Millions of Americans to Score Free Healthcare Under #ObamaCare

From yesterday's New York Times, "Under Health Care Act, Millions Eligible for Free Policies":

The analysis [by McKinsey and Co.] found that five million to six million people who are uninsured will qualify for subsidies that will be greater than the cost of the cheapest bronze or silver plan. A million more people with individual insurance could also be eligible, according to McKinsey, although estimates of the size of the market for private individual insurance vary widely. None of the people in the analysis qualify for Medicaid.

The availability of zero-premium plans may make the deal especially enticing to the healthy young people the marketplace needs to succeed, said Mark V. Pauly, a professor of health care management at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School. “This is such a good deal that you’d have to believe you were immortal not to really pick it up,” he said.

Yeah, so taxpayers will be picking up the health insurance tabs of people like the "Elisabeth and Mark Horst, artists in Albuquerque who earn $24,000 a year between them, qualified for a zero-premium plan." These are Ph.D. holding "artistes" living the sweet life in the American Southwest.

William Jacobson has that, "Congrats America, you are subsidizing health insurance for Ivy League Ph.D’s who choose to paint":

I have nothing against the Horsts. Living and painting in Albuquerque is a dream for many people.

But why should the taxpayers have to subsidize what clearly is a lifestyle choice? The Horsts are not exactly uneducated or without choices in their lives.

Here’s a part of Mark Horst’s bio at his art website:

Mark Horst grew up in small town Minnesota. He studied pottery and printmaking in high school and college, but his encounter with Dorothy Day and the Catholic Worker led to years of very different work. After earning a Ph.D. in theology from Yale University, he spent time teaching and working toward neighborhood renewal in south Minneapolis. He pursued the craft of painting and drawing at the Minneapolis College of Art and Design and the New York Studio School. He lives in Albuquerque.

If paint were a means of freezing time and protecting us from the dangerous life of the spirit, I would put down my brushes. But, for me, painting is a way of breaking time’s grip and setting loose something wild and strong.

Elizabeth also is highly educated and closed her psychology practice to paint:

I studied philosophy at Yale, psychology at the University of Minnesota, and in addition have trained in Reiki, yoga instruction, and shiatsu. As for art… I taught myself to knit at the age of seven, designed and made my own clothes in high school, stitched a quilt while writing my senior essay in college. Fiber art has always been what I do when I am not required to be doing something else (and sometimes when I am). I began to sell my handwoven scarves at art fairs and farmers markets in 2002, and in 2003 closed my psychology practice to make art full time.

More power to the Horsts. But don’t ask me to subsidize their lifestyle choice.

And don't forget, these provisions of the law are a huge incentive for people not to work. That way, they'll lower their annual income and qualify for subsidies.

From the San Francisco Chronicle last month, "Lower 2014 income can net huge health care subsidy."

Behold "dependency nation" expanding exponentially before your very eyes --- just what Democrats have planned all along, to create a nation of welfare queen zombies sucking the vitality from the American economy.

Yep, congratulations Americans, you're digging your own graves.

Loop of Death

Seriously. A death loop.

Damn, what a video.

A couple of these dudes were skating back in the day, Steve Caballero, Mike McGill, Tony Magnusson.

And I don't know the mofo who took a hospital-worthy slam. He hits as hard as anyone I've ever seen. Broke his shoulder for sure. Maybe his collarbone as well.

'So if you're tired of the same old story...'

From yesterday's drive-time, at The Sound L.A.

I hadn't heard REO in quite some time, especially "Roll With the Changes."

Roll With the Changes - REO Speedwagon 10:05 AM

Changes - David Bowie 10:01 AM

Strange Magic - Electric Light Orchestra 09:56 AM

White Rabbit - Jefferson Airplane 09:47 AM

Train In Vain - The Clash 09:44 AM

Jet - Paul McCartney & Wings 09:40 AM

Hells Bells - AC/DC 09:35 AM

Stumbling, Bumbling Lame-Duck Obama Seeks to Shift Momentum

And what better way for the lame-duck loser to shift the debate from ObamaCare momentum than talking about immigration reform? Doh!

At WSJ, "Obama Shifts Focus in Bid for Momentum: Organizes Flurry of Events on the Economy and Immigration":

Problems with the government's health-care website are forcing President Barack Obama to redraw his plans for the rest of the year as he looks for ways to regain political momentum.

Scrapping a planned push to drive people to the balky website, the White House is organizing a flurry of events on the economy and immigration, as well as health care, a senior administration official said.

Several executive actions are in the works related to workplace skills and other matters, this person said, as the president moves to sidestep a polarized Congress to advance his agenda.

The president will headline a health-care event Monday with Obama re-election campaign supporters and another on Wednesday in Texas with volunteers who are helping consumers learn about and enroll" in the health-care program, according to the White House. On Tuesday, he will hold an event on immigration, followed by an economic event Friday at a port in New Orleans. The schedule will make Mr. Obama more visible than in recent weeks, which he has spent largely behind the scenes.

The White House is also preparing to announce several executive actions in December, including private-sector partnerships, aimed at jobs and economic growth, a senior administration official said. The actions, which are still being crafted, will focus on infrastructure and increasing workforce skills—a priority of business leaders Mr. Obama has been meeting with in recent weeks, the official said.

A push to raise the minimum wage is also under discussion in the West Wing, people familiar with the issue said. Mr. Obama urged Congress during his State of the Union address early this year to increase the federal minimum wage to $9 an hour, from $7.25 now, and index it to inflation. The proposal didn't gain momentum.

Now, Mr. Obama plans to spend more time on a minimum-wage increase, the senior administration official said, although White House officials said they don't expect Congress to act on it by the end of the year.

No, they won't act on it --- but boy, that oughta work wonders to change the subject from the healthcare debacle. That, and homosexual rights!

At Twitchy, "Here we go: President readying for another pivot — far away from Obamacare."

Rainbows and unicorns --- and S&M bullwhips!

Bwahahaha!

RT if you believe EVERY American should be treated equally under the law: http://t.co/Ao8OouCSvK #Equality #LGBT, pic.twitter.com/ARvpwc6lke
— The White House (@WhiteHouse) November 4, 2013

Four Legal Arguments Why #ObamaCare is Bad Law and Ought to Be Overturned

From Kelly O'Connell, at Canada Free Press.

Pew Research Center: Twitter News Consumers — Young, Mobile and Educated

An interesting survey, from the Pew Research Journalism Project:

Nearly one-in-ten U.S. adults (8%) get news through Twitter, according to a new report by the Pew Research Center, in collaboration with the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation. Compared with the 30% of Americans who get news on Facebook, Twitter news consumers stand out as younger, more mobile and more educated.

In addition, a separate Pew Research analysis of conversations on Twitter around major news events reveals three common characteristics: much of what gets posted centers on passing along breaking news; sentiments shift considerably over time; and however passionate, the conversations do not necessarily track with public opinion.

This two-part report is based first on a survey of more than 5,000 U.S. adults (including 736 Twitter users and 3,268 Facebook users) and, second, on an analysis of Twitter conversations surrounding major news events which spanned nearly three years. Twitter posts were analyzed for the information shared, sentiments expressed and ebb and flow of interest.

According to the survey, 16% of U.S. adults use Twitter. Among those, roughly half (52%) “ever” get news there — with news defined as “information about events and issues that involve more than just your friends or family.”

Mobile devices are a key point of access for these Twitter news consumers. The vast majority, 85%, get news (of any kind) at least sometimes on mobile devices. That outpaces Facebook news consumers by 20 percentage points; 64% of Facebook news consumers use mobile devices for news. The same is true of 40% of all U.S. adults overall, according to the survey.

Twitter news consumers stand out for being younger and more educated than both the population overall and Facebook news consumers.

RTWT.

Beautiful Kate Hudson on the Cover of Shape

I saw the magazine at CVS yesterday while picking up my meds.

She's fabulous.

At London's Daily Mail, "It's no wonder she has abs of steel! Mother-of-two Kate Hudson displays her rock hard stomach on the cover of Shape magazine after doing Pilates for 15 YEARS."

And at Shape, "Kate Hudson on How She Stays Fit and Beautiful."

Obama’s Catastrophic Victory

From Peggy Noonan, at the Wall Street Journal:

They said if you liked your insurance you could keep your insurance—but that’s not true. It was never true! They said if you liked your doctor you could keep your doctor—but that’s not true. It was never true! They said they would cover everyone who needed it, and instead people who had coverage are losing it—millions of them! They said they would make insurance less expensive—but it’s more expensive! Premium shock, deductible shock. They said don’t worry, your health information will be secure, but instead the whole setup looks like a hacker’s holiday. Bad guys are apparently already going for your private information.

Look at the simple, factual eloquence of Edie Littlefield Sundby, from Monday’s Journal. It is a story that tells you everything you need to know about ObamaCare. It is the single most persuasive and informative piece written since the whole program began.

And now there are reports the insurance companies are taking advantage of the chaos of the program, and its many dislocations, to hike premiums. Meaning the law was written in such a way that insurance companies profit on it.

And—I am limiting things to just today’s news – the New York Times reports that while millions may qualify for enough federal subsidies to pay the entire monthly cost of some health-insurance plans, the zero premiums come with some “serious trade-offs.” What serious trade-offs? Most of these plans, called the bronze policies, “require people to pay the most in out-of-pocket costs, for doctor visit and other benefits like hospital stays.” Huh? I thought the purpose of the law was to help with the cost of doctor visits and hospital stays!

Yesterday Fox News was on ObamaCare all night. This catastrophe ain't dyin' down any time soon.

More at that top link.

Information Surge! — #MyHealthPlanDied

At Michelle Malkin's, "#MyHealthPlanDied – A national social media information surge":

Over the weekend, I asked AFP activists in Illinois to join me in a national day of mourning and protest today along with millions of other Americans whose insurance plans have been canceled thanks to Obamacare’s top-down tyranny. The do-gooders continue to lie, mock, and smear those who are being forced onto the exchanges and who face massive sticker shock despite Pinocchiobama’s promise that they could keep their plans if they liked them and keep their doctors if they liked them.

Here’s what you can do to raise your voices:

1) Tweet a phot of your cancellation to @WhiteHouse and @MyCancellation 
2) Use #MyHealthPlanDied hashtag for all related tweets; and
3) Contact local media with your story.

My story: Obama lied, my health plan died.

In the WSJ today:

Everyone now is clamoring about Affordable Care Act winners and losers. I am one of the losers. My grievance is not political; all my energies are directed to enjoying life and staying alive, and I have no time for politics. For almost seven years I have fought and survived stage-4 gallbladder cancer, with a five-year survival rate of less than 2% after diagnosis. I am a determined fighter and extremely lucky. But this luck may have just run out: My affordable, lifesaving medical insurance policy has been canceled effective Dec. 31.

My choice is to get coverage through the government health exchange and lose access to my cancer doctors, or pay much more for insurance outside the exchange (the quotes average 40% to 50% more) for the privilege of starting over with an unfamiliar insurance company and impaired benefits. Countless hours searching for non-exchange plans have uncovered nothing that compares well with my existing coverage. But the greatest source of frustration is Covered California, the state’s Affordable Care Act health-insurance exchange and, by some reports, one of the best such exchanges in the country. After four weeks of researching plans on the website, talking directly to government exchange counselors, insurance companies and medical providers, my insurance broker and I are as confused as ever. Time is running out and we still don’t have a clue how to best proceed.

After years of phony Obamacare fables, which the MSM swallowed whole, it’s time the media started reported the true horror stories of progressive wreckage.

The information surge is just beginning.

That's Hadley Heath at the photo. Here's her story, at the Washington Examiner, "For some, losing so-called bad apple health insurance plans will mean paying more for less."

Jay Carney Paper Process Enrollment Meltdown – #MyHealthPlanDied

Jonathan Karl reported today that paper and phone ObamaCare enrollment takes just as long as logging on to Healthcare.gov. "We're all stuck in the same queue." See, "Obamacare Paper, Phone, Web Apps ‘Stuck in the Same Queue,’ Memos Note."



Here's the exchange, "Carney gets animated as reporter pressures him on Obamacare (Video)."

And also from Mandy Nagy, at Legal Insurrection, "Jay Carney nears meltdown over questions about Obamacare application process."

Leftists Smear Stage-4 Cancer Survivor Whose Insurance Plan Was Curb-Stomped Under #ObamaCare

It was inevitable.

Leftists will stop and nothing to destroy grassroots resistance to the ObamaCare monstrosity. Still, even this latest smear is lower than the lowest of the leftist-regressive low.

At Twitchy, "Despicable: WH smears cancer survivor who lost her insurance plan due to Obamacare." Plus, "Dana Perino slams WH with advice to shameful cancer victim-blaming Dan Pfeiffer."

Yep, this goes right to the top. See James Taranto, at WSJ, "How Low Can They Go? The White House Attacks a Cancer Patient":

It's been just over a month since ObamaCare's disastrous launch, and it's just over three years until the scheduled election of Barack Obama's successor. It's going to be a long three years. The exposure of Obama's signature "achievement" as both incompetent and fraudulent (with its economic inviability yet to be realized) is also showing the administration's true face. It is an ugly one, and we can expect to see a lot more of it while Obama remains in office.

This morning the White House went on the attack against a cancer patient who is also a victim of ObamaCare. Edie Littlefield Sundby of San Diego explains in today's Wall Street Journal that she's been managing a case of stage 4 gallbladder cancer, an affliction whose five-year survival rate is just 2%. Having survived the diagnosis by seven years so far, she beat very long odds--and she did so with the help of an excellent insurance plan that covered care at three hospitals, two in California and one in Texas.

In touting ObamaCare, Obama asserted at least two dozen times (in slightly varying language) that if you like your health plan, you can keep it. As Sundby explains, she is a victim of Obama's fraudulent sales pitch:

Since March 2007 United Healthcare has paid $1.2 million to help keep me alive, and it has never once questioned any treatment or procedure recommended by my medical team. The company pays a fair price to the doctors and hospitals, on time, and is responsive to the emergency treatment requirements of late-stage cancer. Its caring people in the claims office have been readily available to talk to me and my providers.

But in January, United Healthcare sent me a letter announcing that they were pulling out of the individual California market. The company suggested I look to Covered California starting in October.

Covered California is the state ObamaCare exchange, one of those that, unlike the administration-built federal one, has some degree of technical functionality. Thus Sundby was able to log in and check out her options, which--contrary to Obama's "new and improved" sales pitch, that people whose policies are canceled will get better insurance--were unsatisfactory. No plan available to her would cover both her primary-care doctor at the University of California, San Diego, and her oncologist at Stanford. Sundby asks: "What happened to the president's promise, 'You can keep your health plan'? Or to the promise that 'You can keep your doctor'? Thanks to the law, I have been forced to give up a world-class health plan. The exchange would force me to give up a world-class physician." This morning Dan Pfeiffer the fast-talking flack tweeted out a piece from ThinkProgress.org, a leftist propaganda outfit. Titled "The Real Reason That the Cancer Patient Writing in Today's Wall Street Journal Lost Her Insurance," the piece, by one Igor Volsky, claims that "Sundby shouldn't blame reform." Volsky instead blames United Healthcare, which, he writes, "dropped her coverage because they've struggled to compete in California's individual health care market for years and didn't want to pay for sicker patients like Sundby":

"The company's plans reflect its concern that the first wave of newly insured customers under the law may be the costliest," UHC Chief Executive Officer Stephen Helmsley told investors last October. "UnitedHealth will watch and see how the exchanges evolve and expects the first enrollees will have 'a pent-up appetite' for medical care. We are approaching them with some degree of caution because of that."

Get that? The company packed its bags and dumped its beneficiaries because it wants its competitors to swallow the first wave of sicker enrollees only to re-enter the market later and profit from the healthy people who still haven't signed up for coverage.

Sundby is losing her coverage and her doctors because of a business decision her insurer made within the competitive dynamics of California's health care market.

All this may be true, but it begs the question. The addition of a phrase to that last sentence shows why: Sundby is losing her coverage and her doctors because of a business decision her insurer made within the competitive dynamics of California's health care market under the regulatory structure established by Obama's comprehensive "reform." Obama did not qualify his pitch by stating that if you like your health plan, you can keep it unless your insurer makes a business decision to the contrary within the competitive dynamics of your state's health care market. To the contrary, he represented ObamaCare as protecting consumers from precisely that sort of cruel business decision, and he has not backed away from that fraudulent promise: At a speech last Wednesday, he asserted that the only policies being canceled were "substandard" ones offered by former "bad-apple insurers" whose practices ObamaCare reformed.

There's more at the link.

The lame Volsky piece is pure propaganda. Despicable propaganda at that.

Noel Sheppard offers another takedown at NewsBusters, "Obama Advisor Tweets Far-Left Website's Rebuttal to Cancer Survivor Losing Doctors Due to ObamaCare":

... that a senior White House advisor would disseminate such detritus to rebut the claim of a cancer survivor is deplorable.

Sadly, there is no floor to the depths this administration will sink to defend itself or advance its agenda.

Staggering Democrat douchebaggery.

Lucy Pinder Epic Hotness for #Rule5 Monday

Hey, too good to wait for the weekend!

At Egotastic!, "Lucy Pinder in 'Time for Bed' Photoshoot."

#LAX Shooting: It's Jared Loughner and Zeitgeist All Over Again

As is to be expected, when news broke of the shooting at Los Angeles International Airport, the usual suspects were out in force attempting to smear conservatives and gun rights supporters as complicit in the mayhem.

NYT coverage of LAX shooting is typical: zero ref to the shooter's "Patriot," anti-government rants; http://t.co/SbBr9iPeFB
— Eric Boehlert (@EricBoehlert) November 3, 2013

What I noticed was the Southern Poverty Law Center pushing hard on the anti-government, right-wing militia meme.

.@RSMcCain Here we go: Mark Potok, "Hatewatch: Alleged #LAX Shooter Referenced 'Patriot' Conspiracy Theories." http://t.co/5RYIBEbSSX
— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) November 2, 2013

.@SPLCenter You people have no shame. Disgusting exploitation of the #LAX tragedy. @RSMcCain
— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) November 2, 2013

Despicable people. Especially so since there's little evidence that the suspect, Paul Ciancia, had any coherent ideological program. See Robert Stacy McCain on that, "LAX Shooter: Some Kind of Kook":

There’s this weird little game going on between the Justice Department and the media where bits and pieces of LAX gunman Paul Ciancia’s one-page manifesto keep getting leaked out, and yet it seems no one has the entire note. So the shooter supposedly ranted about the “New World Order” and “fiat currency,” which is being interpreted by some as evidence of a right-wing motive — except, no it’s not: It’s Jared Loughner and Zeitgeist all over again.

Perhaps you’ve forgotten how Loughner, the 2011 Tucson shooter, was a big fan of the pseudo-”documentary” Zeitgeist, which wraps up 9/11 Truther stuff in a lot of conspiracy theory crap about bankers, “fiat currency,” and other such paranoid kook stuff.

Clear enough. And RTWT.

Still, the leftist press is all over the Mark Potok "hate-watch" theory of the right-wing "patriot" anti-goverment types. At yesterday's Los Angeles Times, for example, "LAX shooting comes amid mounting aversion to the TSA":

WASHINGTON — The killing of a TSA screener in Los Angeles is symptomatic of a growing antipathy toward government workers and TSA personnel in particular, experts said Saturday.

Specialists on hate crimes and union officials decried what they said was a general atmosphere of mockery and derision toward TSA agents that they said is amplified by late-night talk show hosts, politicians and news media.

"When people or institutions are vilified on national television and in the public square, you often see people latch on to them as enemies to be destroyed," Mark Potok, a senior fellow at the Southern Poverty Law Center, said in an interview.

Potok has tracked radical groups for more than two decades. He said alleged shooter Paul Anthony Ciancia appeared to have subscribed to anti-government theories about a conspiracy to take away American freedoms and create a single global government.

The violent outburst Friday has put airport screeners around the country on edge, just weeks before terminals will see a rush of passengers during the stressful holiday season.

As Ciancia allegedly blasted his way through the checkpoint, the 23-year-old was looking for transportation security officers to shoot, officials said, and cursing the Transportation Security Administration.

A note found with Ciancia contained a rant against the government and the words "kill TSA," said a federal law enforcement official briefed on the investigation. "I would love to see people stop making villains out of government workers — they are good people" said J. David Cox, the president of the American Federation of Government Employees, the union that represents 45,000 TSA employees. TSA officers are verbally abused by passengers every day, Cox said.

"They may go through your luggage, they may question your name on your ticket, but all that is for your protection. It is not to harass you," he said.

Despicable smears. "Tea party" pops into people's minds when they see these "anti-government" memes. And Mark Potok is the f-king last person to trust commenting on this. You might say (cough, cough), he has an agenda.

Nearly 290,000 to Be Dropped from Insurance Plans in Washington State

And remember, this is by design.

At the Seattle Times, "Canceled health insurance plans add to angst of change" (via Weasel Zippers):

Bill Fullner has reached his breaking point.

It started with the letter from his health-insurance company informing him it was canceling his plan and offering him a new one that’s nearly twice as expensive. Then the 60-year-old retiree from Mount Vernon heard about more people like himself with canceled plans and soaring premiums. Finally, he spent hours on the phone and computer trying — and failing — to find a new option that he likes.

“This whole experience has converted a lifelong Democrat into a foot soldier for the Republican Party,” Fullner said.

He’s not alone in his frustration.

In Washington, most of the 290,000 people covered by insurance plans they purchased on the individual market received letters this fall telling them that their plans are going away.

That’s because under the Affordable Care Act, insurance plans must meet new requirements, including limits on how much money patients spend in out-of-pocket medical expenses, and they must cover 10 so-called essential benefits such as preventive care, prescription drugs and maternity care.

So all 90,181 people with insurance coverage from Regence BlueShield have learned their plans will be canceled, as did all 60,000 people covered by Group Health Cooperative. Some 77,000 people with LifeWise Health Plan, a subsidiary of Premera Blue Cross, also learned their plans were being scrapped.

An additional 24,000 people with LifeWise are covered under “grandfathered” plans that predate the act and will not be canceled, though members will be getting letters in November informing them they can move to another plan if they would like to.

Some folks will qualify for subsidies or they'll be sent to Medicaid, a failing Great Society-era program.

But you just gotta love how this dude Fulner now calls himself "a foot soldier for the Republican Party."

That reminds me of my earlier post, "Dem Party is F****d'." They may well be. They just very well may be.