Patterico's Pontifications

12/3/2013

L.A. Times Dispenses A Giant Load of Horsey on ObamaCare

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:16 am

Real Man of Genius David Horsey at the Los Angeles Times:

Before noon Monday 375,000 Americans logged on to HealthCare.gov and discovered that, though the federal website is working far better than at its launch in October, it still runs into problems when demand gets too high. That is both the good news and the bad news for Republicans who are hoping to use Obamacare as their prime attack point in the 2014 congressional elections.

For the GOP, continuing glitches in the online delivery system for the new national healthcare market reinforce the argument that the Obama administration has tried to do too much, too fast without really understanding the enormity of the job. That is the upside for Republicans. The downside is that there is obviously a demand for the product Obamacare is trying to deliver and, by the time the election rolls around, millions of voters may have forgotten the website bugs. Instead, they may be pleased that healthcare coverage is no longer out of reach for them and they will not want to see it taken away by a Republican Congress.

Two parts bolded there, one to make a serious point, and one for grins.

WHY SO SERIOUS?: Let’s start with the serious part first: ObamaCare must be working because there is a demand for the product!! Well, Mr. Horsey, given that ObamaCare’s requirements mean that as many as 10 million Americans will receive cancellation notices by the end of the open enrollment period (never mind the looming changes in the group market when the employer mandate hits), yeah, I guess there is a demand. Caused by the law itself.

This is, in your mind, a good thing? What are you, some cartoonist who was given a column or something?

Oh. You actually are?

Awkward.

I thought it was Ronald Reagan, but the Google tells me it’s Harry Browne, who said:

The government is good at one thing: It knows how to break your legs, then hand you a crutch and say, “See, if it weren’t for the government you wouldn’t be able to walk.”

Except that here, they’ve broken your legs, and are holding your crutches just out of reach (try logging in again 30 minutes later!), while telling the world it’s a good thing they are almost providing you those crutches, because clearly, there is a demand for them.

AND NOW FOR THE GRINS: I do think, however, that Horsey is alllllllmost on to something when he says Republicans argue that Obama tried to do too much without really understanding the enormity of the job. That’s not quite what we’re arguing, though. We’re arguing that Obama tried to do too much and that Americans didn’t understand the enormity of the job.

You know what enormity means, right, Mr. Cartoonist?

Screen Shot 2013-12-03 at 7.02.02 AM

I think Americans are starting to understand the enormity of ObamaCare, Mr. Horsey.

That’s what worries you, isn’t it?

105 Comments

  1. Huh. I had no idea that “enormity” had a bad connotation.

    Learn something new every day.

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (c45233) — 12/3/2013 @ 7:35 am

  2. What are you, some cartoonist who was given a column or something?

    Worse of all, he’s not nearly as good or clever — or sophisticated too — as his predecessor, Michael Ramirez, was.

    As far as I’m concerned, the LA Times might just as well (actually: should) close up shop and stop destroying so many pine trees—reducing the use of newsprint, the size of the carbon footprint and encouraging Green Earth policies are wonderful!

    Comment by Mark (58ea35) — 12/3/2013 @ 7:36 am

  3. “there is obviously a demand for the product Obamacare is trying to deliver”

    Historical note to Obama Yout:

    Capitalism is that economic behavior known for the practice of creating demand for and delivering a product.

    The approved ideology of Marxism dispenses with the latter. Demand, or want, is an unqualified good and the end state of Marxist orthodoxy.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/3/2013 @ 7:41 am

  4. What a load of Horsey pucky.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (963e6d) — 12/3/2013 @ 7:49 am

  5. My parrot Tourette has now officially come unglued.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (963e6d) — 12/3/2013 @ 7:51 am

  6. Just think of how many Chevy Volts GM would sell if the government would just go ahead and mandate that we all go out and buy one!

    Comment by Icy (509ec8) — 12/3/2013 @ 8:23 am

  7. I had the “enormity” argument with a liberal friend last year when VP Biden used the term to describe Obama’s first term. Be prepared for them to trot out some updated dictionary listing which claims that it the word can also be used to to mean “large size.”

    And did it ever occur to the Administration and its fan club that a whole lot of the 375,000 users were people like us who wanted to see if it really worked?

    Comment by JVW (709bc7) — 12/3/2013 @ 8:30 am

  8. Except that Chevy Volts suck, and if they were a mandatory I would firebomb the factory before I’d buy one.

    Comment by papertiger (c2d6da) — 12/3/2013 @ 8:30 am

  9. And the difference between a Volt and Obamacare is WHAT?

    Comment by Icy (509ec8) — 12/3/2013 @ 8:43 am

  10. Speaking of breaking legs and crutches. If some young moron at my Thanksgiving dinner table had wanted to deliver a talk on Obamacare–well, he’d be on crutches today.

    Comment by Comanche Voter (caea51) — 12/3/2013 @ 8:58 am

  11. Ginormous… ginormity!

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (963e6d) — 12/3/2013 @ 9:05 am

  12. He bit off more than He could choke down…

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (963e6d) — 12/3/2013 @ 9:06 am

  13. Brave Sir Barry

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (963e6d) — 12/3/2013 @ 9:06 am

  14. The Plague came in November 2008 and was reinvigorated in November 2012.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (963e6d) — 12/3/2013 @ 9:08 am

  15. a ginormous load of equine effervescence…

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (963e6d) — 12/3/2013 @ 9:10 am

  16. All things being equine, the enormity of Obamacare’s evident superiority to US healthcare 5 years ago goes without saying …

    papertiger – given Chevy vehicles ability to burst into flames, no need of firebombing by humans …

    Comment by Alastor (e7cb73) — 12/3/2013 @ 9:14 am

  17. O/T….but can’t wait to see the “horsey” that the LAT unloads on this, something that just might save CA from collapse…..

    Comment by askeptic (b8ab92) — 12/3/2013 @ 9:53 am

  18. Obamacare makes
    us shake our heads at insult
    Oh when will it end

    Comment by elissa (af177f) — 12/3/2013 @ 10:02 am

  19. 3
    : the quality or state of being huge : immensity
    4
    : a quality of momentous importance or impact

    Selective screen-grab FTW!

    Comment by Leviticus (6a67b8) — 12/3/2013 @ 10:03 am

  20. Enormity, some people insist, is improperly used to denote large size. They insist on enormousness for this meaning, and would limit enormity to the meaning “great wickedness.” Those who urge such a limitation may not recognize the subtlety with which enormity is actually used. It regularly denotes a considerable departure from the expected or normal . When used to denote large size, either literal or figurative, it usually suggests something so large as to seem overwhelming and may even be used to suggest both great size and deviation from morality . It can also emphasize the momentousness of what has happened or of its consequences .

    Comment by Leviticus (6a67b8) — 12/3/2013 @ 10:04 am

  21. Stupid cartoonist is stupid.

    Comment by Leviticus (6a67b8) — 12/3/2013 @ 10:05 am

  22. The downside is that there is obviously a demand for the product Obamacare is trying to deliver and, by the time the election rolls around, millions of voters may have forgotten the website bugs. </blockquote

    By that logic, we could nationalise the cell phone system, grocery system, and gasoline systems, and then, when people have trouble logging on, declare victory based on the "demand" for our services.

    Comment by bridget (a44b32) — 12/3/2013 @ 10:06 am

  23. L.– When you practice law if you hear or use use the term “the enormity of the crime stunned veteran law enforcement officials” what will it mean to you?

    Comment by elissa (af177f) — 12/3/2013 @ 10:16 am

  24. How about “the enormity of the job”? I freely admit that I will think “big job.”

    Comment by Leviticus (6a67b8) — 12/3/2013 @ 10:20 am

  25. It is a poser;

    http://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2013/12/03/media-wonders-why-didnt-we-spot-these-huge-obamacare-screw-ups-sooner/

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 12/3/2013 @ 10:56 am

  26. Here comes the Infernal Ice Hockey team …

    The enormity of the satisfaction I achieve while pointing out the Left’s consistently-inconsistent logical fallacies is only exceeded by the enormity of pleasure I experience at a job well done.

    Both are positives since both uses of ‘enormity’ are associated with positive things …

    The “enormity of the crime” associates the negativity of “crime” with the word “enormity” – it is an association, not a connotation … unless, of course, the enormity (neutral) of one’s experiences with the word “enormity” leads one to associate (and thus experientially connote) “enormity” with only negative experiences …

    Yup … I just supported the side Leviticus took in a discussion …

    (innocent grin)

    Comment by Alastor (e7cb73) — 12/3/2013 @ 11:02 am

  27. There’s a giant list of things with absolutely huge demand, and no fulfillment.

    Faster-that-light travel.

    Point-to-point travel, like Star Trek transporters.

    Do-overs in real life.

    A Hobart 10-qt mixer for my kitchen.

    Comment by htom (412a17) — 12/3/2013 @ 11:13 am

  28. htom – do you not already have a qt in your kitchen ?

    Comment by Alastor (e7cb73) — 12/3/2013 @ 11:16 am

  29. as hog eats cabbage
    Statists will devour nation
    one bite at a time

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (963e6d) — 12/3/2013 @ 11:24 am

  30. call 1-900-obamacare right now to talk to horny singles in your area

    Comment by happyfeet (c60db2) — 12/3/2013 @ 11:29 am

  31. Like a 6 year old boy on his birthday, David just knows there’s a pony somewhere in that pile!

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (963e6d) — 12/3/2013 @ 11:33 am

  32. ‘friends don’t let friends read Horsey, and Hilzik, can only be taken in small doses, like the poison in ‘Princess Bride.

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 12/3/2013 @ 11:35 am

  33. It seems that the good people at the Los Angeles Times have conflated how many people have attempted to log on to horsefeces.gov into the demand for the product. How many people who really don’t need to buy insurance through the exchanges have checked in, because they don’t know whether they have to buy through hogflatulence.gov, or want to see if they can somehow get something cheaper than through their employer, or whatever? Heck, of the 375,000 (maybe) Americans who logged on, thousands upon thousands of them were journalists trying to figure out the site! I guess that they’ll finally see once howfuckedyouare.gov gets up and running.

    Comment by The Dana who noticed (3e4784) — 12/3/2013 @ 11:46 am

  34. The older of my two sisters is a manager on a thoroughbred farm in Kentucky, and we visited her for Thanksgiving weekend. She gave us a tour of the farm, including the breeding barn, and, from the brilliance of Mr Horsey’s writing, I’m not sure he could even make a good teaser.

    Comment by The Dana from Kentucky (3e4784) — 12/3/2013 @ 11:53 am

  35. Ahhh, it looks like the spam queue et one of my brilliant comments!

    Comment by The Dana in the spam queue (3e4784) — 12/3/2013 @ 11:54 am

  36. Between amateurish/clueless foreign policy and mindless fundamental transformation action on the domestic front, we are well and truly obamacared.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (963e6d) — 12/3/2013 @ 12:09 pm

  37. obamacare me running.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (963e6d) — 12/3/2013 @ 12:10 pm

  38. Name ONE Government program that has been dismantled.

    One benefit that has been removed.

    One “right” bestowed by Gov’t fiat that’s been taken back.

    You can’t because there aren’t any.

    In any government. Anywhere.

    Except by the dismantling of the government itself.

    Comment by jakee308 (e940d5) — 12/3/2013 @ 12:10 pm

  39. obamacare me to tears.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (963e6d) — 12/3/2013 @ 12:10 pm

  40. Horsey’s argument is as absurd as looking at the lines around post offices on April 15th and declaring that this means there is a great demand to have one’s income taxed.

    Comment by Kevin M (536c5d) — 12/3/2013 @ 12:11 pm

  41. Alistor — I struggle with two KA-5′s and some antique MixMasters. I’ve looked at the newer KitchenAids and am unimpressed. I see their newest ProLine is back on top of Cook’s Illustrated ratings, I’m going to ask Santa.

    The thing really desired, of course, by everyone, is more, better, and safe sex. Hence the supply of porn.

    Comment by htom (412a17) — 12/3/2013 @ 12:21 pm

  42. htom–You and Obama both will be asking Santa for something. I suspect you’re more likely to get the mixer you want than Obama is to get Healthcare.Gov up and working.

    Comment by Comanche Voter (caea51) — 12/3/2013 @ 12:33 pm

  43. Name ONE Government program that has been dismantled. – The draft

    One benefit that has been removed. – Not allowing women to vote

    One “right” bestowed by Gov’t fiat that’s been taken back. – Voting right of felons

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/3/2013 @ 1:07 pm

  44. I want a gubmint Fiat for Christmas, Santa!

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (963e6d) — 12/3/2013 @ 1:29 pm

  45. The Draft has not been dismantled, only put on hiatus – males still have to register.

    Comment by askeptic (b8ab92) — 12/3/2013 @ 1:31 pm

  46. OT MN will see snow and sub-zero lows this week.

    Detroit is now cleared to return the favor to public unions–reaming with blunt object.

    IL is comically trying to wave hankies at the man-eater.

    Dr. Doom Roubini(to distinguish from Dr. Doom Faber) notes 18 countries are about to see Housing busts.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/3/2013 @ 1:46 pm

  47. “The Draft has not been dismantled, only put on hiatus – males still have to register.”

    askeptic – It is inactive. Unused. Numbers are not issued or exemptions granted.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/3/2013 @ 1:49 pm

  48. I often wonder, Gary, when I see Americans buying properties in other countries if we weren’t just moving the bubble around.

    Comment by Patricia (be0117) — 12/3/2013 @ 1:50 pm

  49. 39. Horsey’s argument is as absurd as looking at the lines around post offices on April 15th and declaring that this means there is a great demand to have one’s income taxed.

    Comment by Kevin M (536c5d) — 12/3/2013 @ 12:11 pm

    To the liberal mind, this makes sense. That’s why you have to understand that there are no unintended consequences. Well, actually achieving the stated goal of fixing the problem an agency was nominally intended to address would be an unintended consequence.

    After the BP oil spill the Obama administration imposed an off shore drilling moratorium in the Gulf. On one of his visits to LA, Bobby Jindal tried to get him to lift it, arguing that he was putting tens of thousands of oil workers out of jobs. Jindal was surprised that Obama just didn’t get it. Obama kept saying things like, “But I gave them food stamps. I gave them extended unemployment.” He couldn’t understand why they’d rather be working than on the dole.

    See, he created demand for government services. To him that means government was popular. Really what it means is that by eliminating all other possibilities for feeding and clothing ones self and ones family he has created a desperate client class that can’t afford to vote Republican no matter how badly they might otherwise want to. So he’s eliminated his opposition’s base and added to his own. Not just the unemployed, but the additional public employee union members that need to be hired at the federal, state, and county level to deal with the increased “demand” for the newly “popular” liferings now that he’s holed everyone’s boat.

    Just remember that to people like Horsey, Obama, and the PEUs the point of government is to create an asylum run entirely for the benefit of the benefit of the keepers. And yes, they think that’s a good thing and they’re angry at the inmates if they aren’t grateful for their lord’s munificence.

    The government is good at one thing: It knows how to break your legs, then hand you a crutch and say, “See, if it weren’t for the government you wouldn’t be able to walk.”

    Pretty much what I thought when I looked at Obama’s platform to “help” small business. Except I’d add that I thought the only reason a small business owner (anyone who isn’t a rent-seeking parasitic government contractor) would vote for this crap is that Obama promises to fix your headache. By breaking your legs. Then after handing you the crutch the gub’mint would add, “See, I bet you forgot about that headache.”

    Comment by Steve57 (4f25e8) — 12/3/2013 @ 2:08 pm

  50. But the Draft Department, program, agency or whatever still exists.

    And it’s still law.

    The kind of “right” I was talking about are those that are dreamed up by judges that are penumbras and emanations and promoted and proclaimed as trumping real ones.

    Your other responses are just claptrap and you know it. Pretty thin response I might add which makes my point.

    The ICC still exists. The Civil War survivors something or other still exists.

    There’s tons of defunct and useless agencies, funds, departments, taxes, bureaus, etc. etc. that still are on the budget, still collecting money and some of them still pay out whatever to whoever.

    My point being is that ObamaCare is here to stay and no amount of finger pointing and fun making will change that. Especially with swishes like Boehner (look out amnesty here we come) and McConnell (I’ll vote with Democrats before I’ll vote with the TEA Party).

    All they have to do is keep pushing. Who’s going to stop them? If someone does, will they be able to undo the damage?

    We’re sunk and you can thank your fellow citizens for where we are but don’t try to think that Obamacare is finished.

    Comment by jakee308 (e940d5) — 12/3/2013 @ 2:14 pm

  51. It is inactive. Unused. Numbers are not issued or exemptions granted.
    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/3/2013 @ 1:49 pm

    And what part of that is in conflict with what I describe as “on hiatus”?

    Merriam-Webster:
    hi·a·tus noun \hī-ˈā-təs\
    : a period of time when something (such as an activity or program) is stopped

    Comment by askeptic (b8ab92) — 12/3/2013 @ 2:18 pm

  52. I recall that there was a program dating back to the Civil War era to prevent a hemp shortage; I think it was either stockpiling the stuff or growing it on government farms, but it was finally ended in the Reagan era.

    Comment by Milhouse (b95258) — 12/3/2013 @ 2:57 pm

  53. Hemp:
    And, NORML fought the discontinuance IIR.

    Comment by askeptic (b8ab92) — 12/3/2013 @ 3:06 pm

  54. You guys are so dark. Where’s happyfeet? Even though he hasn’t been exactly a ray of sunshine lately, either.

    Comment by nk (dbc370) — 12/3/2013 @ 3:12 pm

  55. since they’ve been found out, killing the birds and disposing of the evidence, Obama has given wind turbine companies licence to kill eagles.
    You can kill as many eagles as you like, as long as you use a penwheel. Fly swatters are still forbidden.

    Not sure how I can wedge it in asa gubmint fiat, but kicking windmill merchants is always the right thing to do.

    Comment by papertiger (c2d6da) — 12/3/2013 @ 3:25 pm

  56. “And what part of that is in conflict with what I describe as “on hiatus”?”

    askeptic – What part of it is in conflict with dismantled since it would require an act of Congress to gear it up again and establish rules?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/3/2013 @ 4:07 pm

  57. Rest assure, re can rebuild it, no you can’t.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/03/obamacare-urban-areas_n_4378531.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 12/3/2013 @ 4:09 pm

  58. It is not dismantled, and hasn’t been since registration was re-imposed back in the Carter years.

    Comment by askeptic (b8ab92) — 12/3/2013 @ 4:13 pm

  59. “You have some good ideas? Bring ‘em to me… Lets go!”

    Effin’ moron.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (963e6d) — 12/3/2013 @ 4:16 pm

  60. Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 12/3/2013 @ 4:09 pm

    Workers of the World, Unite!

    The Left is nothing if not persistent in its delusions.

    Comment by askeptic (b8ab92) — 12/3/2013 @ 4:16 pm

  61. 47. That is certainly our present. Money printing by all the major currencies keeps the foreign exchange rates in some sort of balance.

    While assets were appreciating we felt richer even while food, energy and rents were growing as a portion of our income.

    We are now at an end with the marginal returns of printing money. It cannot keep our Hindenberg aloft and we should expect another round of deflating asset values, led by global home price busts.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/3/2013 @ 4:24 pm

  62. Well that’s reassuring;

    http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/12/the-guardian-has-published-just-one-percent-of-snowden-leak/

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 12/3/2013 @ 4:27 pm

  63. Everything you need to know about Obamacare explained in one picture.

    Comment by ratbeach (477e41) — 12/3/2013 @ 4:32 pm

  64. Happy Horsey StufF

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (42f4f7) — 12/3/2013 @ 5:01 pm

  65. Unaffordable PotemkinCare Act is a massive redistribution of wealth in Obumbler’s Theoretical/RhetoricalWorld

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (42f4f7) — 12/3/2013 @ 5:06 pm

  66. David Horsey’s Orwellian logic about proof that there’s this great “demand” for health insurance reminds me of the old joke anecdote that comedian Jackie Mason used to tell.
    He would start out by saying, “Frank Sinatra once saved my life.”

    Then he would reveal how a few of Sinatra’s friends were roughing him (Mason) up in a back alley after a Vegas show where Mason had poked fun at Sinatra’s toupee.
    Sinatra would come to the rescue by jumping out of the car to say, “Ok, I think Jackie’s learned his lesson—he’s had enough, fellas.”

    Comment by Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 12/3/2013 @ 5:10 pm

  67. Ace over at AOS has correctly characterized Obama’s comments made earlier today: “Hey, America. Suck my dick,”

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (42f4f7) — 12/3/2013 @ 5:16 pm

  68. http://ace.mu.nu/archives/345428.php#345428

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (42f4f7) — 12/3/2013 @ 5:17 pm

  69. I’m not a big Peggy Noonan fan, but in this, she is spot on…

    http://blogs.wsj.com/peggynoonan/2013/12/03/low-information-leadership/

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (42f4f7) — 12/3/2013 @ 5:22 pm

  70. Yeah, low information voters re-elected a low information President.

    Comment by Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 12/3/2013 @ 5:28 pm

  71. Dear Lost Angeles Times,

    If you like your Horseysh*t column, you can keep it.

    Signed,

    America

    Comment by Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 12/3/2013 @ 5:39 pm

  72. Leviticus sez:

    3
    : the quality or state of being huge : immensity
    4
    : a quality of momentous importance or impact

    Selective screen-grab FTW!

    Not at all. Here is where the screen grab comes from.

    Screen Shot 2013-12-03 at 5.31.18 PM

    (Click to embiggen if your eyes are bad like mine.)

    That’s why there’s a border around my image in the post. That was the whole image.

    Of course, if your contention is that I was being dishonest by quoting the top two definitions and omitting the all-important tertiary and quatemary (thank you, thank you very much) definitions, then I assume you have no bone to pick with this statement:

    “Leviticus is sinister.”

    Stares with wide-open, absolutely innocent eyes.

    Why, you are a man of the left, are you not?

    The real joke, which it pains me to have to explain (because explaining any joke ruins it) is not that it is impossible to use the word the way Horsehead apparently intended it to be used — but that he was seemingly oblivious to the obvious connotation of the word.

    Something that ought to occur to someone who uses words for a living.

    But that might not occur to someone who draws silly pictures for a living, and uses words only incidentally.

    Summary:

    Stupid cartoonist is, indeed, stupid.

    Nice to see you here!

    Comment by Patterico (9c670f) — 12/3/2013 @ 5:41 pm

  73. Could be Horsey, Hilzik, Rutten, the meme carries through;

    http://washingtonexaminer.com/who-was-standing-behind-obama-today-white-house-wont-say/article/2540122

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 12/3/2013 @ 5:54 pm

  74. As the Sun broke over teh San Gabriel Mountains in the east, he awoke to a wet, sticky sensation on his feet. He pulled the silk sheets and blanket back and screamed and screamed some more. His piercing screams rolled down the hills into the flatlands below. At that moment he understood that perhaps he should have accepted the offer proffered by Tom Hagen the night before. An offer he should not have refused. Instead, he had awakened to a steaming load of Horsey where his bunny slippers normally tread.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (42f4f7) — 12/3/2013 @ 6:33 pm

  75. “Not at all. Here is where the screen grab comes from.”

    - Patterico

    I followed your link, dude. To Merriam-Webster.

    “Enormity, some people insist, is improperly used to denote large size. They insist on enormousness for this meaning, and would limit enormity to the meaning “great wickedness.” Those who urge such a limitation may not recognize the subtlety with which enormity is actually used.”

    Also from your link.

    My broader point (which I don’t mind having to explain): your had the guy on the first point. The second point is silly.

    Comment by Leviticus (6a67b8) — 12/3/2013 @ 7:37 pm

  76. The Colonel researches
    links rare and assertive.
    Even Noonan is found
    with words profound.
    Can the RNC be far behind?

    Comment by bobathome (7786e2) — 12/3/2013 @ 7:51 pm

  77. Leviticus, I think that asserting that “enormity” can be used to denote large size is a good example of begging the question. I can’t find the citation right now (and apologize that I don’t have more time to look), but I believe that when I was debating this issue with my friend (which I alluded to in my comment of 8:30 am) I came across a citation which mentioned that “enormity” only came to have the tertiary meaning of “large size” because so many people were misusing the word, and this meaning has only been accepted in modern times. In other words, the alternate meaning has only come about because so many people are ignorant of the word’s actual meaning. Sorry to be pedantic about it, but it is what it is.

    Comment by JVW (709bc7) — 12/3/2013 @ 7:54 pm

  78. I know you followed my link. I thought the screengrab was from that link, as there was an arrow pointing to that link (look at the screengrab in the comment above) but it wasn’t. I did follow the link, see the first two definitions, and assumed that they were the same as the screengrab, because I did not carefully compare them and because the general meaning was the same — but the screengrab was actually from the Google search.

    I’m just saying: it actually was not a selective screengrab.

    It was arguably a selective reference to the primary and secondary definitions of the word. Kinda like calling you “sinister.” Did you ignore that part of my comment because the argument was so telling? Do I have to call you sinister in the next few comments to get you to acknowledge it?

    Sure, the point was “silly” in the sense defined here — in the sense that I was having some fun. You know: “AND NOW FOR THE GRINS” — right? But I do think it is also a little “silly” in the more common sense of the word (lacking in good judgment) for Horseface to ignore the connotation of the word.

    Then again, I doubt he was aware of it.

    Comment by Patterico (9c670f) — 12/3/2013 @ 7:58 pm

  79. Leviticus, I think that asserting that “enormity” can be used to denote large size is a good example of begging the question. I can’t find the citation right now (and apologize that I don’t have more time to look), but I believe that when I was debating this issue with my friend (which I alluded to in my comment of 8:30 am) I came across a citation which mentioned that “enormity” only came to have the tertiary meaning of “large size” because so many people were misusing the word, and this meaning has only been accepted in modern times. In other words, the alternate meaning has only come about because so many people are ignorant of the word’s actual meaning. Sorry to be pedantic about it, but it is what it is.

    And whether that’s true or not, it has an unavoidable negative connotation, even when used to describe size. Which is why I I joyfully mocked the humorless sinister cartoonist over it.

    Comment by Patterico (9c670f) — 12/3/2013 @ 8:00 pm

  80. “It was arguably a selective reference to the primary and secondary definitions of the word. Kinda like calling you “sinister.” Did you ignore that part of my comment because the argument was so telling?”

    - Patterico

    Would you agree that most people use “enormity” the way this guy used it?

    Do most people use “sinister” the way you are using it?

    To JVW’s point, it doesn’t matter (to me, anyway) if “enormity” used to mean “extreme evil” to most people. What it means to most people today is “extreme size.” That’s one of the nice things about language – it evolves.

    I find myself drawn to the old intentionalism threads.

    Comment by Leviticus (6a67b8) — 12/3/2013 @ 8:06 pm

  81. Maybe I just share the man’s ignorance. I’ve never used “enormity” to mean “extreme evil,” or known it to be used that way. Just to indicate size or weightiness.

    Comment by Leviticus (6a67b8) — 12/3/2013 @ 8:08 pm

  82. What it means to most people today is “extreme size.”

    That’s how I use it. As in, “Check out my enormity!”

    Kidding.

    Comment by Former Conservative (6e026c) — 12/3/2013 @ 8:09 pm

  83. I know that enormity can mean something like gravity and have negative connotations, but I agree with Leviticus that it’s usually simply used to indicate size or mass.

    Enormous good, for example, or enormous harm. Usually these days enormous is tied with something else.

    Comment by Former Conservative (6e026c) — 12/3/2013 @ 8:13 pm

  84. Would you agree that most people use “enormity” the way this guy used it?

    I don’t know. When I see the word I think evil first.

    I find myself drawn to the old intentionalism threads.

    Oddly enough, I don’t. Again: it’s a connotation thing. (But I think it’s neat that you do. Honestly.)

    Comment by Patterico (9c670f) — 12/3/2013 @ 8:17 pm

  85. Patterico’s post and the ensuing comments are interesting as well as an indictment.

    The press should publish wide-ranging ideas on its editorial and op-ed pages.

    However, it has abused that right on news pages to the point that it has lost credibility with a large segment of the population and is suffering the consequences.

    People now have an alternative that allows more conversations, more information and more disinformation. How people use the information or disinformation is the question.

    In regards to the first amendment, that is a feature, not a bug.

    Comment by Ag80 (eb6ffa) — 12/3/2013 @ 8:17 pm

  86. I think it’s hard to ignore that the top two definitions reference evil. I wonder if this is a generational thing. Or a regional thing. Or what.

    Comment by Patterico (9c670f) — 12/3/2013 @ 8:18 pm

  87. I find myself drawn to the old intentionalism threads.

    Me, I find myself caring less about trying to persuade people of things on the Internet — and perplexed, when I go back and read some of my old posts, that I tried so hard to do so in the past.

    Comment by Patterico (9c670f) — 12/3/2013 @ 8:19 pm

  88. To JVW’s point, it doesn’t matter (to me, anyway) if “enormity” used to mean “extreme evil” to most people. What it means to most people today is “extreme size.” That’s one of the nice things about language – it evolves.

    I can’t agree with you. One of the most wonderful things about the English language is that we have such a rich variety of words that we can use to nail down the precise meaning of the idea we are trying to convey. When we take a word that has a definitive meaning and arbitrarily append a new meaning to it — especially for something as trivial as the idea that it shares a root with with a similar-sounding adjective — I think we start to dilute our language. But again, that’s the pedant in me talking.

    Comment by JVW (709bc7) — 12/3/2013 @ 8:20 pm

  89. Anyways, I was just tweaking a twit with my post. No need to take any of it too seriously.

    Comment by Patterico (9c670f) — 12/3/2013 @ 8:20 pm

  90. I think it’s hard to ignore that the top two definitions reference evil. I wonder if this is a generational thing. Or a regional thing. Or what.

    Probably. Could also depend on which literature one is most versed in.

    Comment by Former Conservative (6e026c) — 12/3/2013 @ 8:20 pm

  91. I can’t agree with you. One of the most wonderful things about the English language is that we have such a rich variety of words that we can use to nail down the precise meaning of the idea we are trying to convey. When we take a word that has a definitive meaning and arbitrarily append a new meaning to it — especially for something as trivial as the idea that it shares a root with with a similar-sounding adjective — I think we start to dilute our language. But again, that’s the pedant in me talking.

    I agree. I think this word conveys a certain meaning in a way that no purported synonym can quite manage. If the connotation is lost because people treat it as a simple synonym for huge, it deprives the word (and the language, in some small but appreciable way) of a subtlety that I prefer to see it retain.

    I personally don’t think that’s pedantic — but maybe that’s because I am being pedantic and can’t see it.

    Comment by Patterico (9c670f) — 12/3/2013 @ 8:23 pm

  92. Would you agree that most people use “enormity” the way this guy used it?

    I wouldn’t. American lexicographers use surveys and the first-ranked meaning in the dictionary is the meaning most commonly understood by the population, and so on down.

    Comment by nk (dbc370) — 12/3/2013 @ 8:26 pm

  93. I think this word conveys a certain meaning in a way that no purported synonym can quite manage.

    “One big motherf*****” might come close.

    Comment by nk (dbc370) — 12/3/2013 @ 8:29 pm

  94. In reference to Obamacare.

    Comment by nk (dbc370) — 12/3/2013 @ 8:30 pm

  95. Or as the Solon of Scranton ‘we dodged a bullet, twice’ might put it, BFD.

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 12/3/2013 @ 8:35 pm

  96. Gargantuan is the word he was searching for. How sad when one so rarely has an opportunity to use it in a sentence.
    Visual reference

    Comment by papertiger (c2d6da) — 12/3/2013 @ 8:38 pm

  97. A medical doctor or a civil engineer, for examples, have to use the language in precise terms that are understandable to their peers.

    That is why reading a medical abstract or an engineer’s report is almost incomprehensible to non-practitioners. The consequences of specific language misuse are the differences between life or death. There can not be shadings of meaning. They essentially speak a professional language.

    In the political and pundit world, language takes many shades so that any person can take a twitter posting to be racist without intent or saying “period” after a statement does not really mean without exception.

    We will never agree on the shadings of meaning because we are too invested in intentions rather than the truth.

    Language is a tool in art, in science and in politics. Language is a wonderful thing.

    Comment by Ag80 (eb6ffa) — 12/3/2013 @ 8:44 pm

  98. They insist on enormousness for this meaning, and would limit enormity to the meaning “great wickedness.”

    Although I’m not immediately familiar with or automatically uncomfortable using “enormity” to connote large size, something about that word would make me wince without first checking the dictionary. That’s due in part to “enormousness” sounding like the logical way that the adjective “enormous” should be converted to a noun.

    Beyond that, there’s something cheesy about a political cartoonist who, at the same time, also is a columnist, with his drawings straddling his column. Makes me think of the setup of a high-school newspaper or something in general that’s struggling to be more than second rate.

    Horsey and the LA Times in the 21st century are ideal for each other. Combined with America’s banana-republic president.

    Comment by Mark (58ea35) — 12/3/2013 @ 8:46 pm

  99. ‘why billions when you can have millions;

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/12/03/analysis-finds-cost-of-obamacare-website-is-way-more-than-anyone-predicted/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=story&utm_campaign=ShareButtons

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 12/3/2013 @ 8:46 pm

  100. “I find myself drawn to the old intentionalism threads.”

    I find myself reflecting on the decline in our education system.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/3/2013 @ 9:51 pm

  101. Horsey, alas, is the prototypical end product of the Seattle educational establishment, including public high school, a Bachelor’s degree in “communications” from the UW, and an honorary PhD from Seattle University. He helped preside over the collapse of the so-called Seattle Post-Intelligencer, which at the time was a newspaper. One might hope, nay predict, that he will culminate his career with the destruction of the Lost Angeles Times. His hatred of non-communists is so transparent that only fellow comrades can stomache his venom.

    Comment by bobathome (7786e2) — 12/4/2013 @ 12:15 am

  102. Crossover awareness of ‘enormity’:

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2013/12/03/Daily-Show-Features-Breitbart-News-Editor-In-Obamacare-Critique

    The Post-Literate Generation and Pre-Boomer TEA movement are coming to the same conclusion–the Pro-Government Coalition is a distillation of EVIL.

    Just wait codgers, when Death to the SATAN(i.e., Liberty and Citizen Government or facsimile thereof) becomes the Sprout’s idea, modify your jargon accordingly.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/4/2013 @ 7:32 am

  103. Smarter than your average dinosaur:

    http://blogs.wsj.com/peggynoonan/2013/12/03/low-information-leadership/

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/4/2013 @ 7:50 am

  104. There’s a giant list of things with absolutely huge demand, and no fulfillment

    perfect spam filters would be another such item… 8-)

    Comment by redc1c4 (abd49e) — 12/5/2013 @ 11:25 pm

  105. Best of the web December 6:

    http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303497804579242171412038130

    This column has made the point before that there are three phases of the ObamaCare catastrophe. Phase 1, the technical failure, might have been avoided had the administration had some basic standards of competence. But Phases 2 and 3 are inherent in the law.

    Phase 2 was the revelation that the ObamaCare enterprise is the most massive consumer fraud in American history–that the “if you like your plan, you can keep it” sales pitch was not only false but deliberately deceptive, and also that ObamaCare forces insurance companies to engage in dishonest practices such as selling maternity coverage to men and postmenopausal women….

    …..Assuming that the politics of ObamaCare remain static–that is, assuming Senate Democrats continue to fear the president more than they fear their constituents–Phase 3 will develop over the coming months. Phase 3 is the demonstration that even if the system is technically functional and the fraud impervious to redress, ObamaCare is economically unviable because of adverse selection: Americans who stand benefit from the law’s price controls, the old and the sick, will buy insurance in large numbers, while those who get hit by them, the young and the healthy, will not.

    I actually think Obama is quite terrified of that.

    That accounts for hiding the truth from people about the website not actually enrolling anyone or preventing people from logging on if the site is slow (the fear being that the more steps people have to take the more they will drop out)

    And the sales campaign going on for three weeks till December 23 even though the site isn’t
    ready.

    And the slogan to ignore price.

    And why are state insurance commissioners in many cases refusing to allow old policies to be sold after January 1?

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (3bb3ae) — 12/6/2013 @ 12:20 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3349 secs.