Patterico's Pontifications

2/11/2014

Barack “I Can Do Whatever I Want” Obama Rewrites ObamaCare Again

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:02 am

Our Great Leader has gone and rewritten the law again:

For the second time in a year, the Obama administration is giving certain employers extra time before they must offer health insurance to almost all their full-time workers.

Under new rules announced Monday by Treasury Department officials, employers with 50 to 99 workers will be given until 2016 — two years longer than originally envisioned under the Affordable Care Act — before they risk a federal penalty for not complying.

Companies with 100 workers or more are getting a different kind of one-year grace period. Instead of being required in 2015 to offer coverage to 95 percent of full-time workers, these bigger employers can avoid a fine by offering insurance to 70 percent of them next year.

How the administration would define employer requirements has been one of the biggest remaining questions about the way the 2010 health-care law will work in practice — and has sparked considerable lobbying. By providing the dual phase-ins for employers of different sizes, administration officials have sought to lighten the burden on the small share of affected employers that have not offered insurance in the past.

Some carping Republicans are saying that it is wrong for Our Great Leader to rewrite laws on his own. They say it is dangerous to give the branch of government with the guns the power to write and rewrite the laws.

But these complainers are tax cheats, comrades. Preparations are already being made to demonstrate that this is so, with righteous audits to reveal the lies of the carpers. Can you really believe a tax cheat?

Obviously, Our Great Leader’s action is benign, comrades. Our Great Leader is simply “giving” some employers “extra time” before they are penalized. The Washington Post even admits Our Great Leader has this power, and that the only question was how he would exercise it. And he has chosen to exercise it in a way that will “lighten the burden” for these few poor souls.

The tax cheats don’t want to lighten burdens, comrades. They don’t want to give people extra time before penalties. Our Great Leader is the only one with the wisdom to delay these consequences of this law that — recall well, comrades! — does not bear his name.

Here is video of Our Great Leader saying he can do whatever he wants:

We’re breaking protocol here. That’s all right, that’s the thing about being President. I can do whatever I want.

Of course, he was joking, comrades.

Kind of.

And if he wasn’t? You aren’t going to register a complaint about it. Are you?

266 Responses to “Barack “I Can Do Whatever I Want” Obama Rewrites ObamaCare Again”

  1. Ding.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  2. Impeach.

    nk (dbc370)

  3. Ditto.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  4. R.I.P. Shirley Temple

    Icy (4e4eff)

  5. Gee, do you think that Debbie Wasserman Schultz was lying when she said that Democrats are going to run on Obamacare for the 2014 midterms? Bring it on!

    Icy (4e4eff)

  6. They will run on income inequality, the minimum wage, and the Potemkin village they have constructed re Healthcare,

    narciso (3fec35)

  7. Voting and not voting have severe consequences and, alas, politics shouldn’t be about coffee klatches, sewing circles, pet peeves, single issues or sending messages. QED.

    Concerning Obama’s Caesar Augustus impersonation, that’s merely a prelude for what’s to come. Try to fathom how off the charts this White House will be during the waning months of 2016 and then leading into Jan. 2017.

    Regarding Obamacare, itself, the reality is it was designed to be such a train wreck that it would serve as the platform for the Dems’ final push for single payer. If Zombieland along with non-voting WASPs manage to elect and then especially reelect Clinton then it’s all over except for the giant smoking crater where a captitalistic republic once sat.

    Lawrence Westlake (48fb95)

  8. Voting and not voting have severe consequences and, alas, politics shouldn’t be about coffee klatches, sewing circles, pet peeves, single issues or sending messages.

    Thank you for this incredible insight.

    JD (b4e6c6)

  9. We are way past that point where ‘working within the system’ has any point at all:

    http://pjmedia.com/blog/is-it-over/?singlepage=true

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  10. The first of the biggest, most endangered–along with Deutsche and Citi–dinosaurs is crawling off to die.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-02-11/barclays-fires-12000-reports-horrible-earnings-awards-itself-bigger-bonuses

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  11. Well it does make one ponder, gary,

    narciso (3fec35)

  12. This is another excellent take on Obama’s abject disdain for the law. His law. Settled law.

    Cue the chorus of but monkeys.

    JD (b4e6c6)

  13. Any lawyerly types want to answer a question I have about this

    What happens when an employee sues their employer for not providing Obamacare-compliant insurance when the statute says they must?

    CTD (07c33c)

  14. Outside DC, of those States anywhere close to the mid-line for cause are ND, NE, TX and maybe WI, the rest are insane asyla.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/2014/02/20140210_WTF.png

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  15. 15. Yes, please do answer. Anyone?

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  16. ‘sorry vicar, you bought the never pay policy, how’s the nude lady’

    narciso (3fec35)

  17. CTD – That is an excellent question. One the MFM would never dream of asking. Probably DOJ would simply decline to defend, and the Court would dismiss.

    JD (b4e6c6)

  18. 18, 19. Not fair, you guys are too quick.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  19. That is an excellent question. One the MFM would never dream of asking. Probably DOJ would simply decline to defend, and the Court would dismiss.

    Comment by JD (b4e6c6) — 2/11/2014 @ 8:04 am

    I admittedly don’t know what I’m talking about, but… why would the DOJ be involved? I guess I meant a lawsuit between the employee and employer.

    CTD (07c33c)

  20. Does the ACA provide a private remedy? There’s lots of laws, almost all of them actually, enforceable only by the government. Are you sure ACA isn’t one of them?

    nk (dbc370)

  21. Here’s another of us slow people answering:

    http://www.redstate.com/2014/02/10/heres-why-barack-obama-is-delaying-obamacare-again/

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  22. My intuition is il Douche is just doubling down on Chaos and really isn’t ‘fixing’ anything, but nk seems to be homing in on the suck.

    We are well and truly hosed.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  23. Charles Krauthammer on Fox News via therightscoop.com/drudgereport.com: But generally speaking you get past the next election by changing your policies, by announcing new initiatives, but not by wantonly changing the law lawlessly. This is stuff you do in a banana republic.

    I’ve sometimes wondered what it must be like to be a citizen of a country like Mexico or Argentina, etc, or a resident of Europe with all its “Eurosclerosis.” As each year goes by, and the US acquires more and more of the symptoms of decadent, corrupt liberalism, I do get a better sense of what such people have to experience on a regular basis.

    Mark (1ba1b9)

  24. There’s writ of mandamus but I know it better in the state system than the federal system. Where you can sue a public official to perform a ministerial, non-discretionary act, or to appeal from his gross abuse of discretion. ???

    And there’s impeachment for nonfeasance, misfeasance, and malfeasance. Just copy the indictment of Rod Blagojevich for that one.

    nk (dbc370)

  25. I can’t get the link to work, but Ron Fournier at National Journal is tired of Obama’s nonsense as well. A few are willing to call out the lawlessness now. A few. Even supporters. He will get back in line.

    JD (b4e6c6)

  26. Breitbart is reporting the GOP’s suits for peace:

    Boehner is offering a ‘clean’ debt ceiling bill.

    Issa’s draft Immigration bill confers legal status.

    The Chamber of Commerce is dancing a jig. “Who gives a sh#t about the Nation, Q1 forward guidance is saved! Yay.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  27. Damn. Shirley Tempe died.

    In other news, Sy Perlis set a bench press record for his age.

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/06/14/elderly-man-breaks-weightlifting-record/2422467/

    The 91-year-old weightlifting champ from Surprise, Ariz., stepped up to the firetruck-red bench at the front of the room. With a light push, Perlis rolled onto his back, reached for the metal bar above his head and hoisted the 187.2-pound weight over his chest.

    It’s kind of old news. But then, so is Sy.

    Speaking of old news, Loyalist Arms will still sell you a Prussian Cavalry pistol.

    http://www.loyalistarms.freeservers.com/prussionmilitary1840-a.jpg

    I don’t know what goes better with a Hanoverian than a brace of horse pistols.

    Anyhoo, back to the subject at hand. Which is frankly boring the crap out of me. I think that’s his plan. He’ll just pout and outlast us, hold his breath, whatever. And, eventually, we’ll ignore him and let him fundamentally transform him.

    Can some state AG just take him to court? Because it seems to me his illegal rewrites of his illegal rewrites don’t actually change the laws that everyone else has to live under.

    It’s not a fully formed plan. But, somebody needs to throw a penalty flag.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  28. No controlling legal authority.

    crazy (d60cb0)

  29. The first of the biggest, most endangered–along with Deutsche and Citi–dinosaurs is crawling off to die.

    That reminds me of the situation with Obama around 4 years ago, when he was throttled by two well-known columnists — one from the left, one from the right — for, in effect, excusing or justifying the amoral, broken-down nature of the banking industry. Obama is so screwed up (or ass backwards) that even when it wouldn’t be all that bad for his inner-leftism (or “Occupy Wall Street” nonsense) to kick in, he instead comes off as the ultimate insider huckster and carny barker.

    That’s why it’s even more ironic and contemptible that a larger percentage of Americans continue to blame George W Bush for ongoing economic problems, probably based largely on their sense that the private sector (particularly big-business banking) — so greedy and heartless, as the stereotype they latch onto makes them think of characters like banker Henry Potter in the movie “It’s a Wonderful Life” — is kowtowed to by the right/Republicans and not someone similar to, say, the current debacle in the White House.

    We is stupid.

    Mark (1ba1b9)

  30. A related question is what would happen if ex-post-facto the government says it will prosecute for not obeying the law, especially selectively (they wouldn’t do that, would they?), and claim that since there was never a repeal, never a formal written declaration of immunity, they have every right to?
    As a lawyer, isn’t it a bit shaky to recommend an illegal course of action on the basis of “we were told it wouldn’t be enforced”?

    Imagine a doctor trying this. “You’re in good luck, Mr. Jones; I’ve decided to erase from your record that stress-test report, so you’re safe and don’t need that emergency angioplasty…”

    In one way we have already lost the Republic as a nation of laws. The question is whether the loss is solidified. If the first casualty of war is truth, that casualty happened in the 60′s if not before.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  31. Sy Perlis should have gotten more publicity.

    http://thechive.com/2013/06/20/90-year-old-man-sets-bench-press-record-video/

    If I live to 90 I just hope I still have the strength to change the channel on my remote. Seriously, My God.

    Seriously.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  32. Doc, I think the Ear Leader might be growing reckless.

    I keep getting told he’s a smart guy. But I see no sign of such smarts.

    And if people in positions of power didn’t grow reckless, I wouldn’t know about Eliot Spitzer bedding prostitutes with his socks on.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  33. Executive orders, regulations, and opinion letters are binding on the executive, if anyone. So it’ll probably be alright, MD. But you never know, especially with this bunch of community organizers.

    nk (dbc370)

  34. A related question is what would happen if ex-post-facto the government says it will prosecute for not obeying the law, especially selectively (they wouldn’t do that, would they?), and claim that since there was never a repeal, never a formal written declaration of immunity, they have every right to?

    Ok, we have a guy who has, what, three years left in office? Who promises not to enforce laws as long as he’s in office. What’s the statute of limitations for insurance fraud? Perhaps one of the legal beagles can weigh in. Because this is one of the parts I have trouble wrapping my mind around. If someone offers an insurance policy that doesn’t comply with the law because Barry Soetero says it’s cool, as long as he’s Preezy, then six months down the road he’s not Preezy.

    What happens then?

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  35. The ones that really need to worry about prosecution, all their lives, are the CIA drone operators who killed Awlaki and his son. From a future administration.

    nk (dbc370)

  36. Just get it in writing, Steve.

    nk (dbc370)

  37. Executive orders are binding on the executive. Just that.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  38. Oh, I always get it in writing. Then I make copies and store it on several different continents.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  39. What I’m driving at is getting it in writing doesn’t do you any good if the person putting it in writing doesn’t have the authority. An executive order is binding on the executive. So the AG won’t enforce the law. For now. But a lot of others responsible for enforcing the law don’t work for Obama.

    It seems to me an insurance company would have to be run by idiots to take his word. And it seems to me that state agencies that have to comply with federal law, not executive orders, might at some point be presented an opportunity to put a stop to this BS.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  40. Executive orders, regulations, and opinion letters are binding on the executive, if anyone. So it’ll probably be alright

    But these aren’t EO’s.

    JD (f49f7c)

  41. If the penalty is a fine imposed by the Treasury Department and if the Treasury grants a grace period for compliance ….

    Is anything forbidding the employers from compliance now? I’m pretty sure my family and I have always had Obamacare-compliant plans, twenty years before this abomination. Employer based.

    I don’t want to play devil’s advocate for Obama, BTW. Just doing a little legal analysis from the little information I have.

    nk (dbc370)

  42. If there is no legal justification to suspend the law, only the fact that no one will tell Obama, “No”, then no matter what is written by who and where, it would seem that it really wouldn’t have any validity when challenged…
    unless, of course, it is before a judge that is pro-Obama or even appointed by Obama, who will find an Obama-penumbra.

    I’m not trying to pick an argument, nk, which would be foolish for me to do, but it seems to me what we have now is simply rule by personality; Obama does what he wants because no one has the political will or influence to stop him. Can you have legal precedent based on something illegal?

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  43. So it’ll probably be alright

    Famous last words.

    I’m just approaching this as a businessman. The Preezy asks me to walk into a minefield, I’m not doing it. I have people I’m responsible for. I’m not putting their livelihoods at risk like that.

    How are you doing?

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  44. If Democrats are going to argue that Obama has the authority to suspend those parts of the law that he chooses, what would prevent President Cruz or President Walker from suspending those parts of the law that HE chooses in January 2017?

    aunursa (82afe2)

  45. I’m pretty sure my family and I have always had Obamacare-compliant plans

    Did your plans include coverage for your personal obstetrical care?

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  46. CTD:

    What happens when an employee sues their employer for not providing Obamacare-compliant insurance when the statute says they must?

    I assume you’re asking what happens to employers who are required by the Affordable Care Act to provide health insurance beginning in 2014, but who do not provide health insurance based on the White House’s announcement that the mandate won’t apply to “medium-sized employers” until 2016.

    I think those employers are at risk unless the HHS promulgates a specific rule, regulation, or guidance letter that delays the mandate. I suspect it is doing that in the instances when the Administration delays mandates and other provisions of the Affordable Care Act. If so, the employer could cite that rule, regulation or letter to substantiate its failure to provide insurance. However, I also think a court would analyze whether the HHS provision complied with the Administrative Procedures Act that applies to federal government rules and regulations. I have questions about that.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  47. Having said that, I doubt a court would hold an employer responsible if the government failed to comply with the Administrative Procedure Act, especially if the employer provided its employees with the required notices about health care insurance available through the ObamaCare exchanges. I think the biggest risk for employers is failure to provide required notices to employees, and I think the notice requirements apply to far more employers than simply the ones that are mandated to provide health insurance.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  48. If there is no legal justification to suspend the law, only the fact that no one will tell Obama, “No”, then no matter what is written by who and where, it would seem that it really wouldn’t have any validity when challenged…

    Which is my difficulty. And, for once, it’s a bipartisan difficulty. If I operate an insurance company, and I take advantage of the fact I don’t have to comply with the law as long as he’s Preezy, where am I in 2016?

    I don’t see how I’m safe. The feds may not come after me for not selling policies that do X, Y, and Z. Even though the law says health insurance policies must do X, Y, and Z. But teh Preezy issued an EO that says different cuz he has to get the dems thru the midterm. But then now my customers are ticked. They expected X, Y, and Z. And what are the courts going to do to me?

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  49. 47. If Democrats are going to argue that Obama has the authority to suspend those parts of the law that he chooses, what would prevent President Cruz or President Walker from suspending those parts of the law that HE chooses in January 2017?

    Comment by aunursa (82afe2) — 2/11/2014 @ 9:37 am

    Any presidential order can be rescinded at the whim of the President.

    That’s just a fact, Jack.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  50. Re: ObamaCare compliant plans, a plan will also cease to be compliant if the the health insurer changes the rates, coverage, or term. Virtually all policies will experience a change of that sort at some point, and the Democrats knew that. That was part of their plan to ultimately eliminate all existing policies.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  51. Steve57,
    I think aunursa asked about suspending laws, as in any law (not a presidential order), as Obama has suspended laws, not his own, or other, presidential orders.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  52. aunursa:

    If Democrats are going to argue that Obama has the authority to suspend those parts of the law that he chooses, what would prevent President Cruz or President Walker from suspending those parts of the law that HE chooses in January 2017?

    The problem with this is that ObamaCare will already have gone into effect, so there is a far greater probability that a specific person would be adversely affected by their 2017 acts and thus they would have standing to sue. The problem with Obama’s executive orders is that, while it adversely affects taxpayers as a whole, there aren’t any specific individuals who can show a concrete, adverse impact sufficient to enable them to have standing to sue.

    Obama and ObamaCare may be making out lives miserable but, for now, standing is the legal issue that is making liberals’ dreams come true and conservatives’ lives miserable.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  53. Did your plans include coverage for your personal obstetrical care?

    It never came up, MD. ;) I know it covers some plastic and reconstructive surgery but the plastic surgeon we like is out of network, and I would not be interested in that operation, or the accompanying treatments by an OB/GYN, anyway. Yes, I suspect that the OB/GYN provisions for men were for the benefit of transexuals.

    nk (dbc370)

  54. I doubt a court would hold an employer responsible if the government failed to comply with the Administrative Procedure Act…

    But who bears the weight if you’re wrong?

    I realize people are sick and tired of finding out from me that I was once in the Navy. But one more time.

    “We screwed up. Now you have a problem.”

    Word.

    The gub’mint advises me that this time it’ll be OK to ignore the law,

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  55. @MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/11/2014 @ 9:53 am

    I was just giving a practical demonstration why it’s silly to turn to me for legal advice.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  56. Gee, do you think that Debbie Wasserman Schultz was lying when she said that Democrats are going to run on Obamacare for the 2014 midterms?

    No, but the messages will be targeted at those who are benefiting (there are some). As in “the Republicans want to take away your medical care because they hate poor people, sick people, brown people, gay people … ”

    In short they will target Romney’s 47%.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  57. Well, OK this one time.

    I’d be in prison if I had listened to people I was told knew what they were talking about.

    Which is why, AGAIN, this Preezy is not talking me into prison.

    Yeah. I can just ignore this law.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  58. Steve57:

    But who bears the weight if you’re wrong?

    First, when I express opinions here, I am not suggesting that my opinions can’t be wrong. It’s just my opinion. Second, there are a lot of things employers need to worry about, including the ones you and CTD suggested as well as certifying to the Treasury Dept that they aren’t making staffing decisions based on ObamaCare.

    At this point, it’s probably impossible to reconcile and comply with all the ObamaCare rules and regulations since so many conflict. (This is also true of government rules in general.) There are going to be a lot of employers put at risk, and the employers will bear the burden of any non-compliance. Even if they aren’t held responsible, they will also bear the burden of defending themselves in regulatory and court proceedings. In sum, it’s a nightmare and any effort I make to try to simplify or explain what I think might happen doesn’t change that fact.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  59. Steve57:

    Yeah. I can just ignore this law.

    I know you are being sarcastic and if I were an affected employer, I might also decide to comply with the original law and ignore the Administration’s random extensions and suspensions. The problem is that those changes to the law have, in some cases, had a ripple effect. The law has changed so much that complying with it as originally written may not even be possible.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  60. DRJ, I wasn’t trying to pick a fight. I was just looking at the whole Obamacare mess and throwing up my hands.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  61. According to The Hill:

    The new delay, revealed in final regulations from the Treasury Department, gives businesses that have between 50 and 99 employees until January 2016 to either offer health insurance or pay penalties, provided they don’t cut workers just to get under the threshold.

    Now, one might ask, does a business do if it has 105 workers and needs to cut payroll 10% in these times? Does it apply to the government for permission? Does it cut everyone’s pay, citing the government’s new rule? Does it cut the workforce and risk huge fines?

    And where did the Administration get the authority to constrain employers in this way? BY issuing a conditional waiver of a law they had no authority to waive?

    It would seem that this, at least, could produce a plaintiff with standing: a company cutting workers and suing the HHS secretary if a fine is imposed.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  62. *How

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  63. I’m not fighting, Steve57. I understand this is frustrating. It’s why I supported Ted Cruz’s efforts to stop ObamaCare, no matter how futile some may have thought it was. I don’t think most people really realized how much this will impact us, even if Obama were to delay most of ObamaCare’s provisions. His delays are adding more uncertainties to the law and that doesn’t make things better for business. It makes it worse.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  64. animal crackers
    in my soup while Preezident
    goes all loopy looped

    Colonel Haiku (c196c9)

  65. Kevin M:

    It would seem that this, at least, could produce a plaintiff with standing: a company cutting workers and suing the HHS secretary if a fine is imposed.

    I think that’s true, although I also doubt that many employers will be that transparent about what’s happening. I suspect most will find other (possibly valid) reasons to document and justify what they are doing. Frankly, in this economy, it’s generally easy to find reasons to justify letting employees go.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  66. DRJ,

    Since the original law depends on Obamacare exchanges for businesses, complying with the original law in the absence of those exchanges seems awkward.

    The really ironic thing about this, though, is that for businesses with 50 or more workers there has never been the kind of systemic problems that occur in the individual marketplace (e.g. pre-exisiting condition abuse). Such policies should be cheaper, more predictable and less restrictive than what happened in the individual market with the opening of all plans to the currently sick uninsured.

    But somehow this is harder. I wish someone could explain why.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  67. I fea-ah ah must take to teh couch as theyah vapahs have ovahcome me once agin. theyah great state of Texas must lead us out of this morass, cuz this Obama fella is just makin’ it up as he stumbles along.

    Colonel Haiku (c196c9)

  68. We’re just talking here. And with that, why shouldn’t I play devil’s advocate? What difference does the inclusion of contraception and OB/GYN care for men make? Are women, now sans Obamacare, charged higher premiums for their policies than men because of those things? Or is the overall risk already spread across the entire group regardless of sex, age, race, or Sandra-Fluking*?

    *Sandra-Fluking, verb, to be so sexually active as to need $3,000.00 worth of contraceptives a year.

    nk (dbc370)

  69. Frankly, in this economy, it’s generally easy to find reasons to justify letting employees go.

    Certainly. But this administration might decide to fine first and ask questions afterwards. After all, private enterprise is evil.

    Besides, a company could sue when they got the demand to explain. ‘Eff off seems a proper response.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  70. When will the Repubs in Congress grow some backbone and hold hearings on what is going on here? It’s a constitutional crisis and a usurpation of authority.

    Colonel Haiku (c196c9)

  71. law is what he sez
    President Armslength SunKing
    one Pompous Arsehole

    Colonel Haiku (c196c9)

  72. therein, lies the rub, fluke’s ostensible reason for these particular products, was to deal with issues
    that persons in a certain status, were involved with, that happens to fall outside the university’s aegis, the real purpose was to subvert the university’s principles,

    narciso (3fec35)

  73. Dems all dance Teh Poot
    teh Prez blows hot wind in sails
    are we not Free Men?

    Colonel Haiku (c196c9)

  74. 71. We’re just talking here…

    Comment by nk (dbc370) — 2/11/2014 @ 10:21 am

    Well as long as it’s just us girls.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  75. 72. Frankly, in this economy, it’s generally easy to find reasons to justify letting employees go.

    Certainly. But this administration might decide to fine first and ask questions afterwards. After all, private enterprise is evil.

    Besides, a company could sue when they got the demand to explain. ‘Eff off seems a proper response.

    Comment by Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/11/2014 @ 10:23 am

    Uhh, no. In this economy I need everyone I’ve got.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  76. What am I? A charity? The whole reason for employing someone is to make money.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  77. I didn’t start this gig just to look for reasons to let people go.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  78. For Steve and nk…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fpW1thGues&sns=em

    Colonel Haiku (c196c9)

  79. “If I operate an insurance company, and I take advantage of the fact I don’t have to comply with the law as long as he’s Preezy, where am I in 2016?”

    Steve57 – If I operate an insurance company I’m going to pay attention to what state regulators tell me to do rather than Obama since they are still the ones with power over my licenses to do business. Obama still has to get state regulators to go along with his waivers and individual delays in states for them to be widely accepted.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  80. daley, that was kind of my point.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  81. Fournier’s just another jerk.

    Colonel Haiku (c196c9)

  82. Choice? Your choice is to flip burgers, go on disability or opt for welfare, otherwise you can go to jail, racist.

    http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2014/02/10/consumerwatch-some-doctors-surprised-to-be-on-covered-california-provider-list/

    Glass half-full.

    gary gulrud (ef5550)

  83. Steve57,

    The more I think about this, the more I realize it would be very dangerous for a business to ignore the HHS regulations and try to rely on the “original” Affordable Care Act provisions. Laws are written by Congress but implementation of the laws is delegated to the executive. That’s why we have an Administrative Procedure Act that governs how the executive implements laws and *theoretically* makes the implementation work in an orderly, fair and understandable manner.

    If a business were to look solely at the Affordable Care Act provisions and ignore the HHS regulations that implement that law, it would almost certainly expose itself to penalties, sanctions and lawsuits. You can’t ignore those rules because they are part of the law, so if Obama’s unilateral edicts become part of the HHS regulations then a business can’t ignore them.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  84. 82. I’ll buy that.

    gary gulrud (ef5550)

  85. It isn’t a digression. When Obama was running for Preezy back in 2008, I looked at his plan to help small business. And it was no plan at all. What it was was a plan to convince people who didn’t know any better and were already going to vote for Obama anyway to think he was going to do something for businesspeople.

    So they could say, “Look at everything Obama is doing to help you!”

    Which brings us back to these waivers. Thanks, Barack.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  86. DRJ, maybe Obama knows what he’s doing.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  87. Kevin M:

    Besides, a company could sue when they got the demand to explain. ‘Eff off seems a proper response.

    I disagree, and as long as good business owners/people like Catherine Englebrecht continue to be targeted by this Administration, I hope no one decides they can take on this government without a lot of thought.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  88. In the real world, businessmen are ahead of the government anyway. Once this provision gets known, businessmen who might be impacted by this will take decisions like:

    1 – Not expanding their workforces, just in care the expansion proves too optimistic, because they can’t lay off the new employees.
    2 – If layoffs have to be made, the layoffs have to take the business down to 49 or fewer employees, to escape the regulations entirely.
    3 – Since the change applies to 2015, if layoffs seem possible, layoffs must be made this year, not next.

    Great regulations, huh? They provide an incentive for small businesses not to add jobs, to lay off more rather than fewer employees if lay offs are necessary, and to lay off people sooner rather than later.

    The realistic Dana (3e4784)

  89. In other narrative bursting news;

    However, a Memorandum for The Record prepared by the Deputy Chief of Base specifically states that the Chief “authorized the move” and the Chief told the Committee: “We launched QRT [Quick Reaction Force] as soon as possible down to the State [Department] compound.”

    narciso (3fec35)

  90. He absolutely knows what he’s doing, Steve57, especially when it comes to the Constitution. Conservatives like to joke he was a lousy constitutional lawyer, but I disagree. I think he’s a skilled constitutional lawyer who has spent a long time searching for ways to subvert the Constitution in order to implement the Cloward-Piven strategy.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  91. They’re not storming the gates but there’s some noise and commotion down in the hamlets.

    http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/opinion/57120093-82/nsa-power-facility-utah.html.csp

    gary gulrud (ef5550)

  92. I think you meant this one, Haiku. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_Ym7Lj6ko0

    nk (dbc370)

  93. DRJ, please be fair to me. I’ve often said Obama studied the Constitution for the same reason Jefferson studied the Quran.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  94. You have to know how something is put together if you’re going to take it apart.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  95. More like the way, KSM studied blueprints.

    narciso (3fec35)

  96. 94. He absolutely knows what he’s doing, Steve57, especially when it comes to the Constitution. Conservatives like to joke he was a lousy constitutional lawyer, but I disagree. I think he’s a skilled constitutional lawyer who has spent a long time searching for ways to subvert the Constitution in order to implement the Cloward-Piven strategy.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/11/2014 @ 11:14 am

    I need to be fair to you, too.

    We could all see this coming, couldn’t we?

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  97. Half the country could see it coming. The other half was divided between those who wanted to be lied to, and those who were in on it.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  98. Steve57,

    The conservatives I know saw it coming, and probably the ones you know, too. But I don’t think that’s true of moderate Republicans who wanted to believe in Obama and his promises of change.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  99. If I operate an insurance company I’m going to pay attention to what state regulators tell me to do rather than Obama since they are still the ones with power over my licenses to do business

    Yes.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  100. “Obama and ObamaCare may be making out lives miserable but, for now, standing is the legal issue that is making liberals’ dreams come true and conservatives’ lives miserable.”

    DRJ – I mentioned before that for policyholders in the individual market Obama may have created a problem for himself. If people received cancellation notices and subsequently purchased higher priced, higher deductible, higher co-pay, narrower network, Obamacare policies prior to the announcement from on high that you could keep your old policy for a year – those people may have been injured by the creation of a two tiered market by executive fiat and have standing to sue.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  101. DRJ,

    I read somewhere that one of the necessary steps on the road from Republic to Empire is a period where putative republican forms are observed while the real power coalesces in the hands of the executive.

    It seems an open secret that Barack Obama wants to be Emperor.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  102. Obama seems to limit himself to things that would pass Congress.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  103. Are you just trying to get under peeps’ skin, Sammy?

    Cuz it’s not working.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  104. 106. Obama seems to limit himself to things that would pass Congress.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 2/11/2014 @ 11:38 am

    I mean…

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  105. That don’t pass teh smell test, Sammy.

    Colonel Haiku (c196c9)

  106. You just don’t understand, Colonello.

    Nobody understands like Sammy.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  107. Steve57,

    The conservatives I know saw it coming, and probably the ones you know, too. But I don’t think that’s true of moderate Republicans who wanted to believe in Obama and his promises of change.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/11/2014 @ 11:32 am

    Rather presumptuous about so-called “moderate Republicans”, don’t you think?

    Colonel Haiku (c196c9)

  108. Presumes a certain naïveté or numbness above the shoulders…

    Colonel Haiku (c196c9)

  109. kicked out from underneath the tent

    Colonel Haiku (c196c9)

  110. Going back, I thought aunursa was asking the broader question, as Obama has ignored law other than ObamaCare, such as immigration, DOMA, and judicial rulings.
    So I thought the question was the broader one. If we now have the precedent that the president can pick and chose what he/she wants to, what will limit what future presidents can do on a whim?

    The answer is the same thing that limits what the president can do now, what they can get away with. That is a function of the audacity (and arrogance) of the president involved and the PR spin machine, which at current will always give cover for a D and attack an R even if it is necessary to lie (remember how bad the economy was under Bush, for all 8 years of his presidency).

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  111. 112. …or numbness above the shoulders…

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (c196c9) — 2/11/2014 @ 11:54 am

    Did I mention I used to play Rugby?

    Or, did I need to?

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  112. I’d go a “few moderate…” or mayber even “some moderate…” but to implicate an entire species? Why, I say, how dare you, Madame!?!?

    Colonel Haiku (c196c9)

  113. I shall take my leave, Madame, and darken these doors no moah… at least this afternoon.

    Colonel Haiku (c196c9)

  114. Anybody else keep track of how many times I got whacked in the head?

    I didn’t. I was busy.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  115. Sammy – “The Roads Scholar”

    mg (31009b)

  116. What did badgers have to do with that?

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  117. 120. Sammy – “The Roads Scholar”

    Comment by mg (31009b) — 2/11/2014 @ 12:10 pm

    http://www.rhoadslifters.com/

    Sorry for keeping it rolling.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  118. 120. Comment by mg (31009b) — 2/11/2014 @ 12:10 pm

    Sammy – “The Roads Scholar”

    Shouldn’t that be Bridge Scholar, maybe?

    Although I don’t really know everything about it.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  119. ‘the First Amendment was an interesting thing, no’

    narciso (3fec35)

  120. I’d go a “few moderate…” or mayber even “some moderate…” but to implicate an entire species? Why, I say, how dare you, Madame!?!?

    I always grimace or feel annoyed when a politician, particularly a president (regardless whether he’s a Democrat or Republican, left or right) says something like “the American people want me to…” or “the American people believe we must…” Yea, I know that’s just a short-hand way of talking, but when I hear that type of phrase, I still want to retort: “Hey, are you talking about liberal Americans, conservative Americans, ‘centrist’ Americans, big-city Americans, small-town Americans, etc, etc?!”

    But DRJ still has good reason to paint so-called moderate Republicans with a broad brush, since the mid-point of the political spectrum has meandered further and further to the left over the past several decades. That includes people like Peggy Noonan, who definitely was full of squish when it came to Obama back in 2008, or all the non-liberals who increasingly feel warm and fuzzy about issues like same-sex marriage.

    Most crucially of all, I have a hunch that not all the folks who continue to idiotically blame Bush Jr instead of Obama for today’s economic torpor are Democrats or independents.

    Mark (1ba1b9)

  121. “Obama seems to limit himself to things that would pass Congress.”

    (But he doesn’t want to admit failure, force some Democrats to cast emnbarassing votes, or risk a bill that would get away from him.)

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (c196c9) — 2/11/2014 @ 11:47 am

    That don’t pass teh smell test, Sammy.

    Consider:

    Every one of his changes to Obamacare would pass Congress – except that they’d change more.

    The marijuana non-enforcement would pass Congress.

    And his immigration non-enforcement is carefully limited to provisions of the Dream Act, which would pass Congress, except that they’re divided on what else to include in the bill.

    Obama is heading off bills.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  122. 94. “a skilled constitutional lawyer who has spent a long time searching for ways to subvert the Constitution in order to implement the Cloward-Piven strategy.”

    A cunning, practiced con-artiste who preys on the credulity of moderates and centrists who want to believe the best of themselves and consequently affect an effete, baseless confidence in like-minded others.

    “All men are grass.”

    gary gulrud (ef5550)

  123. In defense of moderates in Jan 2009:

    THe economy was a disaster and it was not clear how we were going to get out of it. Obama was the new president and he surrounded himself with all the serious economic players, from Volker to Buffet. One really had to hope that there would be something positive coming out of it.

    A year later, Obama had ignored almost everyone and committed us on a path of increasing statism. But that does not mean that it was wrong to hope things wouldn’t go that way.

    And frankly, McCain was pretty weak on economics, with questionable judgement, so the decision there was not clear cut.

    Hindsight is always so much clearer.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  124. We doan need no stinking badgers
    We doan need no thought control

    Colonel Haiku (c196c9)

  125. …or at least sponsorship by Democratric Senators and Congressmen.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  126. Obama’s constitutional law classes were all about bleeding edge Living Constitutionalism, the kind of thing that gets Justice Ginsberg all hot and bothered wound up. Things like welfare rights and class struggle guised as constitutional law.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  127. Sammy can understand six impossible things before breakfast.

    luagha (5cbe06)

  128. Hindsight is always so much clearer.

    But foresight wasn’t all that difficult in 2008, when the disreputable background of Obama was just sitting there, in broad daylight, waiting to be read and scrutinized. If anything, the unseemliness of his life history, including the extremists he hung out with — things like the controversy with Jeremiah Wright — was so glaringly obvious, that only a willfully blind person (or an ultra-liberal who’d deem such information to be delightful and positive) would not have been aware of or cared about that.

    Mark (1ba1b9)

  129. 5. Comment by Icy (4e4eff) — 2/11/2014 @ 7:18 am

    Gee, do you think that Debbie Wasserman Schultz was lying when she said that Democrats are going to run on Obamacare for the 2014 midterms? Bring it on!

    According to losing New Jersey Gubernatorial candidate Barbara Buono:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/11/nyregion/amid-christie-scandal-buono-says-some-democrats-have-buyers-remorse.html?_r=0

    …When Ms. Buono asked the chairwoman to send out an email from her fund-raising list, Ms. Wasserman Schultz suggested she would and then “didn’t even do that; isn’t that sad?” (Ms. Wasserman Schultz has since gone on the Christie warpath, following the governor around the country and telling reporters: “Chris Christie has a culture of intimidation and retribution in his office. It was directed at his own constituents.”)

    Hillary Clinton sent her a letter – after the election.

    Joe Biden called her – after the election.

    Patrick Gaspard, the former White House political director and Democratic National Committee executive director, promised help – but he didn’t do it.

    Debbie Wasserman Schultz paid her a visit – right at the end of the campaign. (then hinted she’d help, as quoted above, but didn’t.)

    They all knew she would lose and didn’t want to waste any money.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  130. 129. Indeed, McVain is inadequate as a father and man, why would he make a better President.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  131. Repeal of DOMA wouldn’t pass Congress, but he didn’t suspend enforcement, just refused to defend it in court. Now he’s changing regulations rapidly.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  132. Catherine Englebrecht looks like she was the target of people who know how to work the bureacracy – maybe bribe people.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  133. #127… sez you, Sammy.

    Colonel Haiku (c196c9)

  134. Comment by gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/11/2014 @ 8:38 am

    Boehner is offering a ‘clean’ debt ceiling bill.

    No it’s not “clean.”

    It includes the repeal of the slight reduction in military retiree pensions until they recah normal retirement age.

    The catch is, that, earlier, that “paid” for some spending increases.

    Now the spending (this is all in the out years anyway) will be restored without “paying” for it.

    Harry Reid is quite happy to go along with that.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  135. #127 #139

    This is at least true with Obamacare.

    He’s either heading off bills, or Democratic sponsership of bills.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  136. But foresight wasn’t all that difficult in 2008

    McCain ran a crap campaign and when he suspended the campaign to go help smarter people get out of the meltdown he made an ass out of himself.

    At that point it was a choice between a not-very-bright squish and a bright maybe-not-socialist. VERY scary times and people were running on adrenaline.

    Sure I voted for McCain, but in some alternate universes I voted for Obama.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  137. Sammy, the House would not pass a clean delay of Obamacare mandates. No way in Hell. There would be other changes made.

    The problem with what Obama is doing is he makes legislative compromises meaningless. They turn out a bill with 10 provisions, and he treats it like a menu. How can you write legislation when the president is going to ignore stuff he doesn’t like?

    They really really need to impeach him. I don’t give a flying fig if they convict; Impeachment serves notice that this is not acceptable behavior.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  138. Better yet, and quite doable: the House needs to move to Censure Obama on his oath-breaking. Why they have not done that yet is unknown; maybe they are waiting until later in the election year.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  139. 143 Comment by Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/11/2014 @ 1:10 pm

    Sammy, the House would not pass a clean delay of Obamacare mandates. No way in Hell. There would be other changes made.

    That’s exactly why Obama is doing things this way.

    The problem with what Obama is doing is he makes legislative compromises meaningless. They turn out a bill with 10 provisions, and he treats it like a menu. How can you write legislation when the president is going to ignore stuff he doesn’t like?

    Well, you could specify that if one thing goes, another does, or try some other things, but that would be if you knew this was a power of the president. Congress does this when it comes to provisions that some think a court might remove.

    They really really need to impeach him. I don’t give a flying fig if they convict; Impeachment serves notice that this is not acceptable behavior.

    Hard to get votes for that, when he’s doing what you want. Yes, a censure would be easier and maybe more appropriate.

    Maybe the threat of it could get him to start relying on legislation. Obama also, of course, has come up with some kind of legal rationale for everything.

    But you know, even when Abraham Lincoln suspended the writ of habeus corpus, he later got Congress to pass it so as to leave no doubts.

    The marijuana bill would probably sail through Congress rather easily. so even if a decision had to be made January 1, there still would be no question by October.

    But Obama is not interested. Everything is a tough vote for somebody.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  140. did someone say “badger”?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NL6CDFn2i3I

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  141. One of the impeachment counts for Nixon was impoundment.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  142. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psUvAUw37D8

    Beaufighter – Whispering Death, The Forgotten Warhorse

    I was watching, this, JD, and I thought of you. Or rather your little bro.

    Around the 40 minute mark the Aussie says he spots a couple of Americans who were putting their gear down and were about to land at a Japanese held airfield on New Guinea.

    So he calls ‘me up and says in the clear, which he admits he shouldn’t have done. Wake up! You might not want to do that. Then he led them back home.

    I Just thought that would be something your brother would do.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  143. *So he calls ‘me them up and says in the clear*

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  144. R.I.P. former Ambassador Shirley Temple Black

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  145. What the Lightning drivers may have been about to do may sound stupid. But you flew long distances and long hours back then. There were Japanese pilots who tried to land on American aircraft carriers. Several times. Tired.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  146. Just looking to put it down ANYWHERE.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  147. I just don’t understand why some people say they don’t think they can trust Obama to enforce provisions of any immigration reform bill that is passed.

    Why would they have that impression?

    It boggles the mind. Seriously!

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  148. At that point it was a choice between a not-very-bright squish and a bright maybe-not-socialist. VERY scary times and people were running on adrenaline.

    Kevin, you gave Obama much greater benefit of the doubt than I did or ever would.

    Any person who’s considerably older than a teenager, college student or, say, a 35-year-old and who’s also of the left — and Obama is innately of the left, if not far left — to me is intrinsically lacking in “bright.”

    Yea, there are some very successful people who are liberal, and geniuses like Albert Einstein have been of the left. But when it comes to the bigger picture, when it comes to understanding human nature and the real world, I think such people are similar to what’s known as “idiot savants,” or humans who are brilliant in one area but astonishingly inept or even dumb in another one.

    As for the reason why a majority of Americans put Obama into the White House in 2008, that was bad enough. But excuses of ignorance, inattentiveness or desperation could at least be applied to that moment in time. But for them to have repeated the same mistake in 2012 can be attributed to what?

    “The danger to America is not Barack Obama, but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president.

    The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools, such as those who made him their president.”

    Mark (1ba1b9)

  149. Well, what I do understand is we just outran the chupacabras.

    Because my little girl saw the chupacabra running us down. And said, “Agggh! Drive faster, Steve57.”

    So I did.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  150. Kids. Because of them, I get to deal with chupacabras. Aren’t I the lucky one?

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  151. What happens when an employee sues their employer for not providing Obamacare-compliant insurance when the statute says they must?

    Does it actually say they must, or is it like the individual “mandate”, which merely says that if one doesn’t buy insurance one must pay a tax, and it’s perfectly lawful to choose that option.

    As I understand it, the administration is relying on the law that gives the Treasury Secretary the power to “prescribe all needful rules and regulations for the enforcement” of taxes. So long as this waiver is merely a tax regulation, i.e. it says a tax will not be collected, and so long as the Secretary says it’s “needful”, I don’t see how it’s illegal. Perhaps someone can explain it to me. Of course if that’s so, then surely the next Republican administration can use the same barn door to cut taxes unilaterally. Just make a regulation that says this or that tax will not be enforced.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  152. Best of the web: The hypothetical Marlboro mandate

    What if Congress enacted a law requiring chain drug stores with at least 20 stores to sell cigarettes?

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  153. Don’t banana republics have a ripe banana as leader? Ours is rotten.

    htom (412a17)

  154. Yes, badgers are you going to argue;

    http://minx.cc/?post=347082

    narciso (3fec35)

  155. El Presidente Muchichimos Grande de los Estadoss Unidos De Republicos Bananas?

    These considerations are beneath him.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  156. Colonel Haiku:

    Rather presumptuous about so-called “moderate Republicans”, don’t you think?

    I was thinking about David “creased pants” Brooks and other moderate Republicans like him, and I stand by my statement. I think Brooks and those like him were naive about Obama.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  157. I wonder when the Investiture will be held announcing Dear Leader’s elevation to Generalissimo?

    askeptic (2bb434)

  158. So, Colonel, please tell me what the conservatives you know thought about Obama in 2008. I think most of the conservatives who comment here have been leery of Obama and his promises from the start, because he made so many different promises to so many different people. Frankly, I assumed most of our like-minded friends and neighbors felt that way, too. But seeing how defensive you are about my comment or how you seemed to take it personally, I admit it does make me curious. Are there some David Brooks-type moderates in your friends and family?

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  159. If it helps, I know a couple of people I would describe as moderates who put on blinders about Obama in 2008-2009. They wanted to believe in him so much so they did. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that they also support an activist government, as long as it involves policies they like. I don’t think all moderates believe in big government, but I think all conservatives believe in limited government.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  160. Forget about it Haiku. I was annoyed with you for assuming I was being snide and sarcastic about commenters here, instead of asking me what I meant by my earlier comment. (It’s ironic because I almost mentioned Brooks in my comment but I decided not to. It never occurred to me that someone here would take it personally.) So think what you want. I don’t care anymore. No matter how many times I apologize for offending someone — even when it wasn’t intended and I’m given no chance to explain — it never matters.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  161. I’m thinking Mazda Miata. 302 cubes of Ford V8. Supercharged. Lift kit. Lights.

    Ok, maybe it’ll be more practical to do it with the Crown Vic. I plan on calling it the Hoopyty of Hell’s Canyon.

    So who’s with me?

    Says John Belushi.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  162. I want this to be clear: I was annoyed with you but I responded by trying to talk to you about what you meant and why you said what you said. I was trying to start a dialogue with you, even though I thought you were being snide and sarcastic. It’s a dialogue with you and others like you that I’m giving up on. It isn’t worth my time.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  163. Camera. Action.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  164. I had some notion, specially after I read the Cantor piece on his lectures at University of Chicago

    narciso (3fec35)

  165. DRJ, was that directed at me? Because it it was, what I have to say for myself is that I did once engage in more than just dialogue trying to keep this country free. And it wasn’t good enough. And that’s a bitter pill to swallow.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  166. Oh, our Dear Leader didn’t just rewrite the law and postpone the mandate, check out the new thought crime he’s come up with: “”It’s been a bad week for Obamacare. Incredibly, the White House has had to grant yet another delay in the employer mandate….And the fine print of the latest announcement from the Administration is worse than the terrible headlines. This rule includes a provision that says you have to have the right motives for having a certain number of employees to be in compliance with Obamacare. Bear with me, that’s right: You must certify to the IRS – under the threat of perjury – that the reasons for your employee head count have nothing to do with your opposition to or avoidance of Obamacare.”

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2014/02/11/the-insiders-obamacare-creates-new-ways-to-prosecute-american-business/?wpisrc=nl%5Fpopns

    Walter Cronanty (d16f1a)

  167. Lighten up, DRJ… I wasn’t offended and I was just teasing you. My apologies if I offended you in the process. We’re all on the same team.

    Colonel Haiku (43a85a)

  168. Those moderates in the house have just given the majority in the house to the democrats.
    The speaker deserves Tar and Feathers.

    mg (31009b)

  169. 173. Lighten up, DRJ… I wasn’t offended and I was just teasing you. My apologies if I offended you in the process. We’re all on the same team.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (43a85a) — 2/11/2014 @ 3:28 pm

    We are all on the same team. I hope, one day, to build the blown modular V8 what can prove it.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  170. I know of no one – friend (with a couple of exceptions, but they’re liberals) or family that had any misconceptions about Obama, only varied on just how bad he’d be… unmitigated disaster on one end, absolute incompetent nightmare at the other, or somewhere in between.

    Colonel Haiku (43a85a)

  171. How does this work for you?

    “I locked fingers with him, and brought his skull crashing down on my knee.”

    I’ll let you process that.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  172. I figger if the cops don’t show, it worked. I’ll be down by the crick, just in case.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  173. 176. I know of no one – friend (with a couple of exceptions, but they’re liberals) or family that had any misconceptions about Obama, only varied on just how bad he’d be… unmitigated disaster on one end, absolute incompetent nightmare at the other, or somewhere in between.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (43a85a) — 2/11/2014 @ 3:38 pm

    I was sitting horrified listening to how Obama was going to bring us together.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  174. i have to stop on the way home to get craisins for so I can make this

    http://thepioneerwoman.com/cooking/2011/12/brussels-sprouts-with-balsamic-and-cranberries/

    i’m excited cause at the end i get to drizzle

    happyfeet (c60db2)

  175. Colonel Haiku, come on, bud, it is obvious that one of Mark Levin’s spies has seen you and David Brooks bar-hopping and visiting tailors in NYC.

    The photos will eventually emerge !

    You must ask forgiveness on the Mark Levin Show. Repent before it is too late.

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  176. there is a madness to the method;

    http://theothermccain.com/2014/02/10/intellectuals-and-the-total-state-jamyersons-dilettante-marxism/

    but it’s much like Sonny Bono’s part in Airplane,

    narciso (3fec35)

  177. So, Colonel, please tell me what the conservatives you know thought about Obama in 2008.

    It depends when in 2008. At the beginning of the year I thought well of him, and seriously considered voting for him, should McCain end up with the GOP nomination. By the end of February I knew he was bad news, and it just kept getting worse.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  178. Listen to how the pilot was I starting to sober up around the 50 minute mark. “No, really, I’m Ok,
    ” not filling people with confidence when loaded with high explosives. Listen to how disgusted they were when he started strafing, just to keep up opinions. I guess he wasn’t hitting the target.

    And how completely sober the pilot was when he finally landed.

    That will sober you up.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  179. Happy 50th Birthday, Sarah Palin!

    Icy (b22f5c)

  180. Not cool. ^^^

    Icy (b22f5c)

  181. happyfeet has lived in the van nuys area for much too long. or something.

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  182. the point is about fielding the team;

    http://therightscoop.com/ted-cruz-wishes-sarah-palin-a-happy-birthday-rated-by-politifact/

    even your cupcake sharing friend bluegill would agree

    narciso (3fec35)

  183. “I was sitting horrified listening to how Obama was going to bring us together.”

    I wholeheartedly agree, Steve. I remember watching some of the pundits who I had some respect for prior to 2008 eating that bullsh*t up and thinking have these people taken full leave of their senses? Total film-flam man, no executive-level accomplishments and he’d had smoke blown up his ass his entire life.

    Colonel Haiku (43a85a)

  184. happyfeet has always loved Sarah Palin and she him. They are always exchanging affectionate insults. It’s their own little something, just between the two of them.

    nk (dbc370)

  185. Feets is more of a Poodleman-Schultz man…

    Colonel Haiku (43a85a)

  186. 133.Sammy can understand six impossible things before breakfast.

    Comment by luagha (5cbe06) — 2/11/2014 @ 12:33 pm

    Now THAT is funny!

    felipe (6100bc)

  187. i live more west of there really kind of in southeast noho

    in an area with a high walkability score and you can walk miles and miles and miles in any direction without running into a moose population of any significance

    you should still keep your camera ready just in case

    but anyway I see no reason to celebrate these tawdry celebrity birthday occasions

    I’m a go home and drizzle on my sprouts now

    happyfeet (c60db2)

  188. Let me know how substituting craisins for cranberries works out, happyfeet.

    mg (31009b)

  189. It’s my health care law, and I’ll change it if I want to. Or whatever.

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  190. mister happy, it sounds like you live near eddie brandt’s saturday matinee. keep your doors locked at nite.

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  191. 190.133.Sammy can understand six impossible things before breakfast.
    Comment by luagha (5cbe06) — 2/11/2014 @ 12:33 pm

    Now THAT is funny!
    Comment by felipe (6100bc) — 2/11/2014 @ 4:36 pm

    – WHO said that Sammy understands these things?

    Icy (b22f5c)

  192. Have you ever seen a Caracal in action.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lf1IJa5PlqU

    No, thought not.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  193. i think for reals the recipe wants you to use craisins

    yup yup I can walk over to Eddie’s

    it’s a very odd neighborhood – mostly cause of Section 8 I think Mr. Stone

    and the subway doesn’t help either

    I feel bad for a lot of the people I see around there as long as they don’t try to interact with me

    happyfeet (c60db2)

  194. Why don’t you try some cabbage-rice rolls in egg-lemon sauce. Just soak some rice, and blanch some cabbage leaves only enough that they can be rolled. Don’t wash the pot, you’ll use it again. Then chop some garlic, some salt and pepper, do you like mint? and mix it with the rice and wrap it in a cabbage leaf about egg size (grade A large) to make each roll. Put them in a pot with water to cover and boil them with the lid on for as long as it usually takes you to cook rice. Keep the lid on when they’re done to keep the heat in. Make a nice merengue by beating egg yolks and lemon juice together. If you don’t mind egg white, use whole egg. Pour it over your hot cabbage rolls like a topping in the pot. Put lid back. Wait, say fifteen minutes? to eat.

    nk (dbc370)

  195. But I find egg white ruins the merengue.

    nk (dbc370)

  196. If you’ve got some hamburger browned with chopped onion lying around, you can mix that with the rice too.

    nk (dbc370)

  197. that sounds like there’s culinary skills involved in the interstitial parts

    I never cook rice except for in a rice cooker so I have no idea how you work with it

    much less wrap it in cabbage

    I’m all up for learning though maybe I can find a youtube

    happyfeet (c60db2)

  198. Here’s a merengue you can’t ruin with teh egg whites, nk…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWga8tXwCD0&sns=em

    Colonel Haiku (43a85a)

  199. rice is, traditionally, 2 parts water, 1 part uncooked rice, splash salt.

    bring salted water to boil, add rice & cover, turn down to simmer as soon as it boils again after adding the rice.

    cook 20 minutes w/NO looking under lid. rice should be ready. stirr with fork to inspect. if still overly moist/sticky, cook a bit longer, or at least turn off the heat and let it rest.

    then eat. practice makes perfect.

    or you can cheat and buy a box of Uncle Ben’s, then follow his directions.

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  200. Bear with me, that’s right: You must certify to the IRS – under the threat of perjury – that the reasons for your employee head count have nothing to do with your opposition to or avoidance of Obamacare.”

    Merely one step away from what’s going on in Venezuela, where management of certain retail businesses have been arrested for selling products at prices not approved by the government. Or, similarly, in Argentina, where it’s illegal for non-government-approved sources to report the rate (or certainly the actual rate) of inflation.

    Meanwhile, in slightly less leftwing-deranged France, it has been illegal for businesses to allow employees to work more than a specified number of hours per week. Inspectors have been known to even snoop around the parking lots of various companies to ensure that cars — and presumably their owners — aren’t still in sight after allowable hours of operation.

    Mark (1ba1b9)

  201. Nobody in his right mind would sign something like that. The nonsense this SCOAMF comes up with.

    nk (dbc370)

  202. rice is, traditionally, 2 parts water, 1 part uncooked rice, splash salt

    Rice. I thought you said risk.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  203. For a second.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  204. I know a couple of people I would describe as moderates who put on blinders about Obama in 2008-2009. They wanted to believe in him so much so they did. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that they also support an activist government, as long as it involves policies they like

    Beyond those who you describe, I imagine it must be very easy for non-liberals to become lured by the siren song of “progressivism” if they’re living in very blue — true-blue — cities and states. Surrounded by people who love to promote the idea that liberalism gives one a touch of compassion, intelligence, generosity, tolerance and sophistication.

    I wonder if David Brooks would be less ultra-squishy if he were residing in, say, Oklahoma City instead of New York City?

    BTW, whenever someone tries to push the meme on me that left-leaning instincts are wonderful and beautiful — and how dare I be anything but of the left — I mention to them the example of the city of Detroit, awash with liberalism and lock-step Democrat-Party politics for over 50 years.

    Mark (1ba1b9)

  205. Maybe they’re not egg white, but they’re white enough so they and their white dog are ruining that merengue, Haiku. ;)

    nk (dbc370)

  206. 206. – Venezuela, Argentina, France. A transformative president, indeed.

    Walter Cronanty (d16f1a)

  207. 173, 175. Well, mg and I are on the same team.

    There are a few that just need to give the word and they’re in too.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  208. 215. Sort of a trial agitprop meme. I file these sort flops frequently. You try to follow an idea where it leads and pffft, faceplant.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  209. Facepalm is right. Hot Air lives up to its sobriquet more than usual. Yes, we want a Republican President not to follow the law either. Sheeeeeesh! …eesh!

    nk (dbc370)

  210. 217. Hot Air is currently traversing one of those creative walkabouts in the outback. They should just take a hiatus rather than strangle the brand.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  211. You say that about close personal friends,

    https://grabien.com/file.php?id=14028

    narciso (3fec35)

  212. Could it be their tongue was firmly in cheek?

    Dana (8a69ce)

  213. 189. I must admit the mention of Sarah Palin’s butt elicited a twinge of concupiscence here.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  214. Well just one example, Clinton dismissed every US Atty, with nary a protest, bush fired 7, you’d think lady liberty had been tpeed, or worse,

    narciso (3fec35)

  215. Hotmail seems to have some kind of an advertising video called The American parasite.

    That thing seems to be getting around. Interesting graphics but distorted facts.

    The heart attack rate wet don after the 1950s, yet it has the propaganda beginning then. As for the sugar lobby what that always argued for a protective tariff and quotas, And Coca Cola now uses high fructose corn syrup, except around Passover.

    Or is that the enemy? I didn’t keep watching the video long enough to find out.

    Sammy Finkelman (a611ed)

  216. Comment by Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/11/2014 @ 11:37 am

    I read somewhere that one of the necessary steps on the road from Republic to Empire is a period where putative republican forms are observed while the real power coalesces in the hands of the executive.

    In the Roman Empire that went on for centuries, even persisting through a change of capital and language.

    In the 600s it was still known as the Roman Republic – Republica Romana.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_Senate

    http://larsbrownworth.com/blog/2010/11/03/what-was-the-point-of-the-byzantine-senate/

    Oh – look at this:

    Of course the Senate never quite forgot its august history and there were sporadic attempts to grasp real power. In 532 they participated in the Nika Riots hoping to replace Justinian with one of their own members. (Justinian repaid them by confiscating the Senate House and turning it into a reception hall for the Great Palace.) In 608 they elected Heraclius as Consul, then elevated him to emperor against the usurper Phocas. On his deathbed in 641, Heraclius thanked them by entrusting his young son Heraklonas to their care. The Senate promptly deposed the boy and replaced him with a grandson of Heraclius named Constans II. For the next three years the empire was openly ruled by the Senate- the first time since the assassination of Julius Caesar in 44 BC.

    Then it turned into a court. Later on, membership could be purchased from the emperor.

    Their last known act was to elect a man named Nicholaus Kanabus as emperor in opposition to the pathetic Isaac II during the fourth Crusade. Nicholaus- a gentle man- immediately fled to the Hagia Sophia and refused to come out. But his resistance to the imperial summons failed to save him. Another man seized control of the government, and as a warning to any challengers had Nicholaus dragged out of the church and strangled.

    Sammy Finkelman (a611ed)

  217. Love to see President Cruz abolish voting democrat!!!

    mg (31009b)

  218. Sammy, this drill-down-into-magma response thing of yours is a bit odd. I mention empire and I get a treatise on the Eastern Empire, although it’s kind of hard to determine what the response says, let alone its relevance.

    This might be something that you might want to look into.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  219. The certification thing about staffing is fairly hard to justify. Here, Obama has waived a section of law for reasons of expedience (never mind the constitutionality of the waiver) and conditioned the waiver on a certification requirement that occurs nowhere in law.

    As I understand it, they are saying this: There is a waiver. If you want the waiver it will be automatically granted if you sign this form. But the law that is being waived ALSO requires that a small-business insurance exchange be set up, and that isn’t happening either. So, the “choice” not to sign the form isn’t all that much of a choice. Someone will sue.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  220. #73
    “When will the Repubs in Congress grow some backbone and hold hearings on what is going on here? It’s a constitutional crisis and a usurpation of authority.”
    Comment by Colonel Haiku (c196c9) 2/11/2014 10:24 am
    = = = = = = =

    Ha-ha-ha-hahahaha-ha-ha, ho-ho-ho, har-de harrghh!

    (Pardon me, I almost choked.)

    Good one. “Repubs / backbone” ====> hahahah, chortle, splortle, smpffft!

    A_Nonny_Mouse (f1e7cb)

  221. Bad news.

    http://cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-hollingsworth/ice-expert-predicts-lake-superior-will-completely-freeze-over

    Where do they find these experts?

    Anyway good news. We’ve got boat for that.

    http://www.uscg.mil/d9/cgcMackinaw/

    Even better news; I found my tanto. It was hidden in the cushions of my office chair I was on the ragged edge of throwing out.

    It gives me hope I’ll eventually find my skean dubh.

    Alba go brah!

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  222. It’ll probably be all rusty, by the time I find it.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  223. I’ma waiting for Hell to freeze over, Steve57.

    mg (31009b)

  224. While you’re waiting.

    http://www.stormomagazine.com/Articles/HistoryArticles_MacchiComparativeTest.htm

    As soon as Rommel began to retreat from Alamein, nearly every pilot in 239 Wing was determined to find a serviceable German or Italian aircraft to play with. It was not long before a Savoia-Marchetti S.M.79 – “Desert Lily” – and later a Heinkel 111, were making regular Cairo runs taking Wing personnel on leave and returning loaded with luxuries of food and drink to share around the five squadrons (Nos. 450,250,3,260 and 112). Bf.109′s, Fiat C.R.42′s and Stukas became commonplace; a Bf.108, Fiat G.50, Fieseler Storch and a Henschel 126 were amongst the rare acquisitions; but the one type which everybody wanted to fly remained elusive until the Italian capitulation in 1943 – the exceptional, but to us, accursed, Macchi C.202.

    Sleek, supremely fast – the sight of their high, white-crossed fin would have struck fear into our hearts had the Italians pressed home their attacks. The odd pilot proved that the 202 was capable of mixing it in a dogfight – out-turning our P-40s with ease; but the majority would pull away effortlessly into a climbing roll or a roll off the top when things became at all hectic. There is nothing more exasperating, when you are caning fifty-four inches of boost out of an engine, than to see your enemy indulge in carefree aerobatics; but although we did our damnedest to get near enough to shoot at them, we seldom succeeded. Their aircraft was superior to ours on all counts. No wonder we wanted to fly one.

    Throughout the advance I made a point of being the first to arrive at any captured airstrip, but the 202′s had always been systematically destroyed: axes, sledge-hammers – even acid was used. There were always plenty of other types left in serviceable condition, but the Italians seemed to know that we wanted a 202 and they destroyed the lot! As far as I know only one was found – by the SAAF’s – but they kept it to themlselves and I never had a chance to fly it. Still, I did discover the next best thing – a Macchi C.200.

    I found it at Sorman, an attractive palm-surrounded aerodrome on a hard-surfaced salt lake, halfway along the coast between Tripoli and Zuara. There were some 30/40 C.R.42′s and Macchi 200′s parked around the two white stucco hangars, every one badly damaged; but a 200 stood in solitary splendour, apparently newly delivered, and the only damage was a smashed windscreen, as though the pilot had childishly heaved a spanner at it before fleeing with the rest of the ground staff. Happily I chalked the squadron markings – LD – on its shiny fuselage, organised a fitter and rigger to give it a thorough check, and three days later I ferried it to our temporary airstrip at El Assa: Macchi C.200 MM 5285 was mine!

    And what a beauty she was! ….

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  225. The Italians did actually press home their attacks, sometimes.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvhXKcGRwZE

    Folgore!

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  226. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luigi_Durand_de_la_Penne#Sinking_of_the_Valiant

    As part of a team of divers he took part in the human torpedo attacks on British vessels in the Mediterranean. In December 1941, he was one of a team of six (Emilio Bianchi, his second; Antonio Marceglia with Spartaco Schergat; Vincenzo Martellotta with Mario Marino) that attacked Alexandria harbour. They used an Italian manned torpedo known as S.L.C. (Siluro Lenta Corsa, also known as “maiale”), actually a small underwater assault vehicle with a crew of two. As a result, four ships were disabled: the British battleships HMS Queen Elizabeth (by Marceglia and Schergat) and HMS Valiant (by Martellotta and Marino), and the oil tanker Sagona and the destroyer HMS Jervis. De la Penne personally placed the limpet mine under the hull of the Valiant.

    If my Italian doesn’t fail me, “maiale” means pig.

    Of the three teams of frogmen, only de la Penne and Bianchi were captured before the devices exploded.[1] As de la Penne refused to inform the ship’s captain (Charles Morgan) of specifics of his missiom, mines, he and his mate were confined in a cell under-deck, actually in a place just above where the mine had been placed.

    Few minutes before the detonation, De la Penne informed Captain Morgan of the imminent explosion, in order to allow the British to evacuate the ship, but continued to refuse to disclose where the mine had been placed. The two frogmen were immediately sent back to their confinement place. Few minutes later, the mine exploded. Although hurt by the explosion, the frogmen reached the deck of the Valiant just in time to see the other mines explode under the Queen Elizabeth, Sagona and Jervis.

    …For this action, de la Penne was awarded the Gold Medal of Military Valour, the Italian highest military decoration awarded for valour “in the face of the enemy” (equivalent to the Victoria Cross). In May 1945, at the end of the war, the then Admiral Charles Morgan – who was the Valiant’s Captain at the time of the attack in Alexandria – wanted to confer himself the medal to de la Penne in a ceremony in Taranto.

    If my history doesn’t fail me, and it rarely does, Morgan actually recommended De La Penne for a gallantry award. Which was turned down, because the Brits thought it would look bad if they started giving their enemies awards for, let’s face it, doing cool s*** they wished they had thought up first.

    La Decima Flotiglia Mas!

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  227. This contains language I can’t repeat.

    Yeah, actually I could.

    http://www.badassoftheweek.com/index.cgi?id=63610142386

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  228. I think maybe because I knew this was Pavarotti’s final performance, that colored my view of it.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0Sx5lbVlQA

    Pavarotti Last Performance “Nessun Dorma” @ Torino 2006

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  229. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOfC9LfR3PI

    Pavarotti, Nessun Dorma, 1980. If there’s a difference, I can’t tell. Or it’s not important.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  230. http://www.valdezalaska.org/events/valdez-fly-in-and-air-show

    Valdez May Day Fly In and Air Show

    Be there or be square.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  231. Hmmm, House passed the ‘Clean Debt Ceiling’ bill with 199 Republicans voting agin’ it.

    Obviously most of those Republicans were just giddy with orgasmic ecstasy to cast their show vote courtesy of the Speaker.

    It’ll serve them right if Reid erases their work below the header, tacks on Unemployment Extensions and hands the dead raccoon back.

    174. I’m Ok with tarring and feathering so long as its in the presence of an open flame.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  232. I’d say its about time for S&P, Moody, and Fitch to downgrade. Japan’s durable orders just fell 16% month-over-month which means global commerce is finished.

    So much for Federal tax revenues.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  233. Team turncoat has got to go away. Not voting will actually quicken the death of the traitorous right.

    mg (31009b)

  234. I can do whatever I want.

    He won. Twice. And in his doing enacts the will of the people. If this is unacceptable, find another people.

    ErisGuy (76f8a7)

  235. No, wait. I voted for Ted Cruz.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  236. How come the half of the people who didn’t vote for f***tard don’t count?

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  237. So, come again? Those who voted GOP and took the House don’t count why?

    I can do whatever I want.

    I want to hear your theory of dictatorship.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  238. So I can use it against you.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  239. 243-blow me

    mg (31009b)

  240. That wire hair that won the dog show, looks a lot better than that hound in a dress at the whitehouse.

    mg (31009b)

  241. He won. Twice. And in his doing enacts the will of the people. If this is unacceptable, find another people.

    Is that really how our 3 beach constitutional republic works? I won, so I get to do what I want ?! Explain to us how ObamaCare represents the will of the people.

    JD (f49f7c)

  242. 249. 243-blow me

    Comment by mg (31009b) — 2/12/2014 @ 3:48 am

    I think you wrote 243.

    243. Team turncoat has got to go away. Not voting will actually quicken the death of the traitorous right.

    Comment by mg (31009b) — 2/12/2014 @ 2:13 am

    Stop me if I’m wrong.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  243. No lie, for once.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  244. I hope you don’t mind, JD. I put up that comment about the Saetta because of your brother. I always heard that ever pilot if they wanted to live once should fly a Spitfire. But then the guys who flew them said, no, fly a Saetta.

    If there is a heaven, my dad is wrenching on your brother’s plane. And getting a hundred or so ponies extra out of it.

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  245. Thanks, Steve

    JD (f49f7c)

  246. …I had some practice dogfights with Hurricane IIs, Kittyhawk III’s and Spitfire V’s and found I could turn inside all of them. Although they were faster – the Hurricane only just – the Spitfire was the only one which could outclimb the Macchi 200.

    The only bad habit I found in her was the way she dropped her starboard wing – suddenly, without warning – just before touch-down. It was odd, because she did not do it when test-stalled in the air. But it was her only vice, and the wide undercarriage prevented damage providing the hold-off was not too high. Otherwise it was best to make a wheel landing – a performance I have never liked.

    Summing up, if the 202 bore any resemblance to my 200, then the Italians should have been knocking down our Kittyhawks like ninepins; and, earlier on in the war, the 200′s should have done much better than they did. I lost my Macchi on March 5th, 1943.

    I taxied out for an exhibition dogfight, turned into wind, pulled the throttle open and eased the stick forward. The tail bumped once, twice, but instead of lifting as it should have done, it suddenly dropped and the nose cocked high into the air. I slammed the throttle forward and switched off, thinking I had hit a soft patch of sand. But when I scrambled out of the cockpit and saw that the whole tail assembly had broken away from the canted fuselage I knew that I had been very, very lucky. The Italians HAD used acid after all!

    Souls of men dreaming of skies to conquer
    Gave us wings, ever to soar!

    Steve57 (71fc09)

  247. So at the White House reception, Obama asks Hollande, “Francis (sic), would you say that France has achieved perfect socialism?” And Hollande says, “Of course not, Barack, we still have a lot of work ahead of us to make things worse”.

    nk (dbc370)

  248. 248. “Those who voted GOP and took the House don’t count why?”

    Pardon, but I think you answered your question.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  249. Wouldn’t it be nice if the Department of Justice was under the Judicial Branch and not the Executive Branch of Government? Maybe we would have avoided things like an Attorney General being a lapdog of Obama, enforcer of vendettas against “enemies” of the White House and justifier of selective enforcement of laws.

    Imagine a country where the laws were enforced and justice was served in the name of the people and not the President. Instead we get investigations of the Executive Branch conducted by political sycophants and partisan “independent investigators”.

    Sadly, the idea of a legitimate Special Counsel being appointed is a pipe dream.

    in_awe (7c859a)

  250. 264. Comment by in_awe (7c859a) — 2/12/2014 @ 10:40 am

    Wouldn’t it be nice if the Department of Justice was under the Judicial Branch and not the Executive Branch of Government?

    That’s completely consistent with the United States Constitution.

    Prosecutors can be appointed by the courts.

    Article II

    Section 2

    Clause 2:

    ….but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

    The Attorney General, in fact, was originally something like what the White House counsel is now.

    Maybe we would have avoided things like an Attorney General being a lapdog of Obama, enforcer of vendettas against “enemies” of the White House and justifier of selective enforcement of laws.

    Imagine a country where the laws were enforced and justice was served in the name of the people and not the President. Instead we get investigations of the Executive Branch conducted by political sycophants and partisan “independent investigators”.

    Sadly, the idea of a legitimate Special Counsel being appointed is a pipe dream.

    Sammy Finkelman (c08134)

  251. The last three paragraphs here are not mine, but were copied from the previous comment by in_awe and not removed from my comment.

    Sammy Finkelman (8eda0c)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.6269 secs.