The GOP economic recipe used to be based on the notion that the more money the top earners and corporations have, the more money the people have through trickle-down. Well that hasn't worked out so well. Now we got possible 2016 GOP contender, Jeb Bush, saying that people should get off welfare and just get married to combat poverty. Apparenttly Jeb has a problem with reality, just like the rest of his party. I was thinking about this solution of Jeb's and realized I know more married couples on government assistance than non-married.
Sure 8 million people have signed up and leaders like Obama and Pelosi (and non-leaders, like me) are pushing Democrats to run on Obamacare, but 8 million signups doesn't mean they are happy with Obamacare. Ok, I agree with that. A lot of Democrats also aren't happy with it. But you know what Americans are even less happy with? The idea of going back to the old system, where people could get kicked off of insurance after years of payments just for getting sick. When only 20% of Americans want to go back to that, then I can say the level of happiness with Obamacare greatly surpasses that of the system people like Byron York supports - a failed system that killed people.
See this and many more outcomes of what happens to Ann Coulter when trying to troll Michelle Obama on Twitter.
After my earlier post, I realize I may have jumped the gun saying that repeal of Obamacare is dead. Now that I think about it, I can actually see it happening. But this won't be repeals of Obamacare the way you might think. The Affordable Care Act will still be around, but I give it only a few months before the GOP and right-wing Media start referring to it as that, The Affordable Care Act. As more and more people realize the changes and start liking what has happened, the last the the right will want is for Obama's name to be associated with it, so they will stop calling it "Obamacare".
A new CNN poll finds that only 20% want to repeal Obamacare. Meanwhile it looks like the House GOP has all but given up on their failed attempts at repealing, after 50+ tries. Might I suggest that the Democrats take the lead here and really run on Obamacare and the good it has done for people, and remind voters of which voters thought college kids should be kicked off of insurance, or even people that get sick or have pre-existing conditions? Or that the insurance companies should be allowed to go back to pocketing the money you pay for things not related to your healthcare. Or how about having to pay for things like preventive care again? Yes, let the Democrats put the Republicans on the defensive now. If they do that, November won't look as bad as it does now.
A couple of years ago we got to hear from the right what a brilliant business man Mitt Romney is. So doesn't that mean the GOP should listen to their own advice and now embrace a minimum wage hike, since Romney has also embraced it?
KLAS TV in Vegas is reporting that the FBI is now investigating the militia surrounding the Bundy Ranch. I had been wondering when we would hear about this. At a minimum, the supporters out there were obstructing official business, which is a federal crime. It's going to be interesting to see where this goes. I'm just hoping one of these trigger happy militia nuts doesn't decide to open fire, or even pull a gun on a FBI agent. If that happens, then we'll see another WACO.
You may remember last week, when the a House committee released a report stating that only 67% of ACA signups paid their first premium. Well that lie filed report was rebuked by the insurance industry yesterday, when addressing it on Capital Hill. Instead, the insurers are saying those payments are around 80%. This left the committee Republicans looking rather upset.
Subway is the largest fast food chain in the country, and the founder/CEO has now come out in favor of a minimum wage hike, saying it won't hurt them.
That should really serve as no shock, but there is an interesting twist here. With 93% of the precincts reporting, Boehner is struggling to break 70%. In every other primary he has had here, he has constantly been in the mid-80's. In 2012, he won by 84% and by 85% in 2010. Before that he has pretty much gone unchallenged. So Boehner has always been very safe, but this year he saw some serious challenge and that took a chunk out of him. If this trend continues, 2016 could end up being almost fatal to him.
My what a difference a President of a different color makes. During the Bush years, Republicans were all about security and how it even trumps out rights. Now that we have a black man in the White House, the terrorists might as well go ahead and attack. Take Bob Johnson as an example. Dr. Johnson is a Republican running for Georgia's 1st congressional district. When asked about the TSA screenings at airports, Dr. Johnson replied "I’d rather see another terrorist attack, truly I would, than to give up my liberty as an American citizen". That just proves that terrorism was never about security or the implications that come with it, but rather a political issue for Republicans. Sickening!
Here's a very interesting article about the homes destroyed by the deadly tornados in Arkansas last week. The destroyed homes were mounted to the foundations using a technique called split nailing, instead of bolting. Split nailing is the minimum anchoring technique under Arkansas building codes, and also provides the least secure method of anchoring. So why builders, building houses in tornado alley use the bare minimum to keep the house on the ground? Simple, it costs less. And why would a state in tornado alley not have more strict building requirements? Simple, it's red state America and they believe the free market will make the better call. For Republicans, this means they can only blame the homeowners, who should have known better. I mean, isn't every homebuyer a structural engineer?
One of the things that I really couldn't understand with the right's defense of Cliven Bundy was their defense of the grounds in which Bundy was standing on. We have a man who has refused to follow a law, enacted by Congress in 1966 and upheld by the courts numerous times, as well as court orders directing Bundy to pay. All the BLM did was enforce the law. And when you think of the arguments prior to Bundy, it was that Obama didn't enforce the law. Well not the argument has come full circle again, with the WSJ pushing for Congress to sue Obama for not enforcing the law. Of course it isn't over Bundy, but only the laws that the right want enforced.