The Ridiculous Tax-Penalty Debate

This sort of pissing contest is what made the Republican Primary clown show so entertaining this year, but I don't think any general election issue has proved as ridiculously entertaining as the response in the past week to the health care ruling.

Of course, the original schadenfreude of seeing the right betrayed by a conservative Chief Justice, and the resulting justifications, provided a great opening salvo. But I think my first laugh-out-loud moment came when conservative bloggers started writing about how the courts upholding ObamaCare actually hurt the president.

Here is Erick Erickson at RedState:
---
It seems very, very clear to me in reviewing John Roberts’ decision that he is playing a much longer game than us and can afford to with a life tenure. And he probably just handed Mitt Romney the White House.
---

That's right, ObamaCare winning just handed Romney the White House. The logical twisting is astounding.

Let's start with a simple exercise and ask what would happen in the health care reform was shot down. By Erickson's logic, that would be good for Obama, right? To have centerpiece legislation, and the only legislation to be commonly referenced using Obama's name, thrown out as unconstitutional would have been just wonderful for the White House. Frankly, this suggestion is ridiculous on its face, and I think initial misreadings by CNN and Fox of the court rulings show that the media would not have gone with such a ludicrous narrative

The logic Erickson uses is that this court decision fires up the right-wing base and puts the health care issue back in the political realm. The mistake he makes, of course, is that this issue was always principally a political one. That is why so many of us on the left have been frustrated by conservatives who profess a hatred of judicial activism trying to push a legislative issue into the hands of the courts. Now sure, Republicans have used this ruling to bump fundraising, but so would Democrats, and everybody was prepared to make a push regardless of what the court ruled.

But now we have entered a new and equally ridiculous stage of the fight: the tax vs. penalty debate.

I admit out side has stumbled a little here too. Obama has said the individual mandate is protected by the taxing authority but is not technically a tax. But there has been for more of a cry on the right for this to be labeled a tax. Not a penalty. A taxing, taxy, taxerific tax tax.

Problem is Mitt Romney's campaign hasn't unified around that message in a coherent way, with Romney staffers first saying the mandate was a penalty, then Romney himself saying it's a tax.

Hilarity. But not for the reason so many Beltway pundits think. This is an insane debate to be having in the first place, and frankly, our side should just stop talking about this issue at all, kick back, and watch Romeny burn his own messaging department to the ground. But let me explain something as a public service to all involved.

NOBODY CARES!!!!!!

The Obama camp in coming months, and they will realize this, wants to brag about ObamaCare and the way it will bring healthcare to the American people. The right will argue that it is too expensive to make sick children well unless they are rich. In fact, they spent months arguing that making sick children well was a violation of the constitution!

The Supreme Court ruling did an important thing in stating the Republicans were wrong. Obama will be helped by the court ruling because he won, not because of debates about the Commerce Clause or the use of judicial restraint or whether there was a leprechaun sitting on John Robert's shoulder convincing him to rule in favor of ObamaCare by offering a big pot o' gold.

Mitt Romney was already running on the platform that Obama is a tax-and-spend liberal, despite the fact taxes have gone down for most Americans in the past four years. This court ruling doesn't change anything in that regards. The right will put out ads filled with lies regardless of what is happening in the world. They will try to create their own reality. They are counting on Americans not being able to assess what is happening around them with their own eyes. They will fail in this mission, and they know it. That's why they are so mad at Romney right now.

Grab some popcorn. This is gonna be a fun election for the blue team.

Rick Scott's History of Health Care Fraud

So Rick Scott just hates federal involvement in health care. So much so Florida apparently won't even participate in the now clearly constitutional reform.

 Fine. Most of this stuff won't kick in until 2014, at which time we are due to show Rick Scott the way out of our governor's mansion. But I would like to remind people Rick Scott knows more about taking money from the federal government than he likes us to remember.

Scott ran HCA based by fraudulently taking money from the feds, so much so he earned the company a record fine in a settlement (Indeed, something I think is often forgotten is that this settlement amount was likely much, much less than HCA stole). But that was different, because that was taking government money and putting it in his own pocket, not allowing a program that would ensure that people who don't have insurance today can get medical care.

This whole health care debate has sickened me. Republicans used to be the party that wanted people using a service to pay for the service, not the ones who would defend a system where the only way poor people could see a doctor is by visiting a government-funded emergency room and standing in an eight-hour line. That's why the GOP came up with the individual mandate in the first place.

But the Rick Scott philosophy has always been that if he cant make money off sick people, he would rather they just die. He didn't care if that money came their the poor people's pocket or strapped government coffers so long as it ended up in his hands at the end, even if it was done so through bold-faced fraud.

That sick bastard is our governor now, folks.

As this governor complains now about federal demands, don't forget his private sector experience was built on stealing from the feds. When he talks about how health care is bad for individuals living in Florida, remember that he made his fortune stealing from people. And when he complains about how this hurts business, remember that his idea of good business was centered around fraud.

It's a shame we can't enjoy the full benefits of health care reform before the end of Scott's lone term of service. Having to live with Voldemort as governor is making many of us sicker every day.

The Hilarity of the Romney-Scott Debate

There may be no better pairing of Republic icons than Mitt Romney and Rick Scott. Both are businessmen-turned-politicians. Both have an utter disdain for government regulation not so much because it hurts America but because it hurts their own bloodthirsty bottom line. And both are craven hacks who want to spin any and every bit of news to their own benefit. This is why between now and November, we can count on entertainment from the Romney-Scott feud on whether the economy is doing better or worse. In an early installment from Bloomberg News, we read this: --- Scott, a Republican, was asked to say that the state’s jobless rate could improve faster under a Romney presidency, according to the people, who asked not to be named. --- Anyone who has seen Rick Scott open his mouth in the last two years knew this was coming. Scott cannot talk without preaching how his policies are restoring jobs in Florida. He has been caught spinning numbers, in fact, to suggest job growth is better than it actually is by discounting population growth. I thought about that when an ad mentioned in this Bloomberg article first came out, an ad where a mother is just weeping that her children can't find any jobs in Florida. If you took Rick Scott at his word on what is happening in the Sunshine State, that would make absolutely no sense. In this instance, though, the greater problem isn't Rick Scott (I know, that's one for the archives). It is that a supposed business master like Romney is out poo-pooing the economic rebound in every way in which he can. It has been sickening watch him wring his hands like a mad scientist whenever a jobs report comes out indicating disappointing numbers. As anyone in the business world can tell you, consumer confidence is enormously important in accelerating an economic recovery. Truthfully, jobs have come back enough and unemployment is at rates where the greatest factor in stalling commerce is not a lack of dollars or a lack of employed people; it is the confidence of consumers who still worry about spending too much because they still do not feel secure in their own careers. What Mitt Romney is actively doing is trying to depress economic confidence so that he can damage President Obama's approval ratings. The only job prospect that unemployed Mitt cares about is his own, and he can only get the job he wants in Americans create an opening at the White House. I never never seen a candidate to lead the free world cheer so breathlessly for its economic collapse. Rick Scott understands this too. He is going around doing what he can to convince investors that this battleground state is also one of the best places in the nation to do business. While he likes to take shots at Obama whenever he can, Scott knows that an economic recovery in Florida will determine his own electoral prospects, and that good things need to happen sooner than later for voters to reward him. Heck, with his approval ratings in the toilet, he probably also wants to make sure the state in which he lives is ripe for business growth in the somewhat likely chance he leaves the public sector in 2014. In reality, our economy isn't bouncing back faster in Florida because of Obama or because of Scott. It is because Florida was harder hit than almost anywhere else by the housing collapse and the investment losses that resulted from the Wall Street fiascos. Our unemployment rate still lags the nation as a whole, even though we have the fastest job growth. The oldest saying says that the bigger you are, the harder you fall, but that also means that when you stand back up again, you climb upward with more urgency. Mitt Romney, of course, would rather we stay down for the count. He wants Florida to fail because he wants Obama to fail. If he doesn't even care about the future of voters in the nation's largest swing state, it should be no surprise he cares nothing of Scott's future either. Thus comes my favorite part of the article, because it enlightens and makes me laugh out loud. From the Bloomberg piece: --- Romney’s staff has concluded there’s no benefit in appearing with Scott, said two campaign advisers who asked for anonymity because they weren’t authorized to discuss the matter. --- Of course not. Scott is political kryptonite, the flotsam and jetsam that washed onto our shores only because of a Republican wave in 2010. But for the rest of us wondering if there is any benefit to appearing even to agree with Scott about job growth in this state, we can now feel comforted that Mitt Romney wants nothing to do with that message.

The Rubio Obsession

It amazes me just how much attention this Jonathan Karl report today is getting. It isn't so much a confirmation that Marco Rubio is off Mitt Romney's short list in the Veepstakes as it is a piecing together of info and a supposition this must be the case. From ABC News, Karl posits: --- The fact that Rubio has not been asked to turn over any documents by now is a strong indication that he is not on Romney’s short list of potential running mates. --- Fine. But other reasons to suppose that have been out there before. I've laid out some reasons Romney likely wouldn't want to make that appointment and why Rubio really shouldn't take the gig. But that deserves no special attention. It is all just supposition. I guess it's fair to also dismiss my thoughts as concern-trolling, seeing as I could care less about Romney or Rubio's political futures and would rather see their dreams crushed than realized. But why this fascination with the Karl report? Maybe he has some source that is giving him the real scoop that Rubio is completely out of the running and we should all trust that, but come on. That would call into question the two-year obsession with a VP Rubio story in the national media. The truth is, Rubio could get vetted any second and still be the VP. Romney at this point may look like he's caving to pressure from the Rubio-happy base, but then that has always been why I didn't think Rubio would be the choice in the first place. Honestly, the widespread push of Rubio in the first place is something that should make any nominee for president reluctant. In the first chance to make an authoritative decision, why leave it up to an online campaign? But I guess I have never quite understood the love affair with Rubio in the first place. He is a career politician who became the face of the tea party movement. No explanation for that seeming contradiction has ever been provided to me. Sigh. With any luck, the Karl report might at least cool down the Rubio-mania, though I doubt it. We'll know when the media starts breathlessly hypothesizing on whether Obama will drop Biden as a running mate, or something other nonsense story with little likelihood of actually happening. Ah, national media. You wonder why everybody hates you.

Forgiving Crist? That Will Take Work

I have made no secret in the last election cycle about my feelings on Charlie Crist, and believe far too many Democrats were placing disproportionately little blame on his spoiler candidacy putting a Senate seat out of reach for the blue team. Certainly, though, there are more devious figures in Florida politics. The most high-profile is Gov. Rick 'Voldemort' Scott, a man whose private sector experience should have earned him a term in prison, not the governor's mansion. Now, a new poll on the governor's race is making a lot of us do a gut check. The short of it: Crist beats Scott 48-34, if Crist runs as a Democrat. I begin to ask myself, can Florida suffer through another four years with Rick Scott as governor? Scott is extraordinarily unpopular today, but we would all be fools to presume that will be the case in November 2014. Just as I believe Mitt Romney is a fool banking on the economy to crash in order to make Barack Obama vulnerable, I think Democrats have to avoid embracing a similar narrative with Scott. Jobs will certainly come to Florida in coming years, and if anything, Scott's give corporations whatever deregulation they ask for will lead to short-term bumps in the economy, albeit at the expense of our collective fractured soul. But what of Crist? A man famous for his political instincts did serious damage in 2010, not just to his own reputation but in allowing the creation of a narrative that favored a tea party takeover of government in Washington and in Tallahassee. Crist said the Republican Party left him, but his ego made him believe he could stand alone against a two-party system, and he refused the embrace of Democrats, who would have accepted him with welcome arms and shown that the party was a bastion for disenchanted moderates being forcefully kicked out of the GOP's big tent. Will the party do so today? Probably, but no doubt they will feel like the pathetic second choice of a governor jilted by his former base. The poll actually shows Crist does better among Florida Democrats than he fares with independents, much less Republicans. And unlike the Senate race two years ago, and despite sucking the life out of Kendrick Meek's Senate ambitions, Crist wins support from 88 percent of black voters. For now, I will reserve judgment. That is hard for me to do, but I will do my hardy best. The Democratic bench is weak in Florida, but everyone on it deserves consideration. In my opinion, Alex Sink, despite wide derision, ran a pretty solid campaign for a Florida Democrat and barely got swallowed by a Republican wave. Pam Iorio made a string name for herself as a successful mayor of Tampa. Former lawmakers like Rod Smith, Karen Thurman and Jeremy Ring all have sound party credentials and histories of public service. We would do our own ranks a severe disservice by dismissing their candidacies based solely on Crist's celebrity status. But if Crist made the switch to Democrat now, if he spent the next two years fighting for Barack Obama to win Florida, for Democrats to take more seats in the state Legislature, to rebuild a party which has been in tatters for a decade and a half, then Democrats should consider forgiving Crist of his past sins. But he shouldn't get a pass to the big race. He needs to prove he cares more about a set of public principles than his own ambitions. The good news is there is still time to do it, and this poll is probably the first of several offering some incentive. Charlie Crist can be the Democratic nominee, but first he needs to become and publicly commit to being a Democrat.

At Least Obama Won The Popular Vote

I can't decide if I should be angry or start laughing hysterically about Marco Rubio's suggestion that Barack Obama is the most "Divisive Figure In Modern American History." Here is the full quote via MSNBC: --- "The man who today occupies the White House and is running for president is a very different person," Rubio said at a high-profile GOP fundraiser, where he claimed Obama has abandoned the ideals he ran on in 2008. "We have not seen such a divisive figure in modern American history than we have over the last three and one-half years." --- Rubio, of course, is referring to the only president to come into office with a majority of the popular vote. Of course, to be fair, his remarks does not want to measure Obama's "divisive" quotient based on anything that has happened since the last time all of America weighed in on his job performance. He just wants to say this about a president who, at the moment, seems to be coasting to re-election. Why would I boldly state that? Not so much because of Obama, but because of how much Mitt Romney has completely divided the Republican Party. But never mind that irony. Let's instead look at whether any more figures in modern history have divided America so much as Obama. Let's start with the last president, George W. Bush. That was easy. Oh, do I need to justify that? I would note, then, that the very first vote Marco Rubio ever cast as a member of the Florida Legislature was to cast aside the popular vote in Florida because of the recounts and instead have the Legislature simply award those votes to George W. Bush. The Supreme Court eventually took matters into their own hands in what may call a divisive decision. Then, Bush led a country frightened by 9/11 into an unwarranted war with Iraq. When George W. Bush was heading into re-election, the nation was so divided and the election so close that we didn't have the election settled until the morning after the vote (granted by Bush standards that was pretty rapid). I hope it is some time before the nation becomes as divided as it was during the reign of W. It certainly isn't so divided today, and doubt it will become so any time soon. Then, Obama is also much less divisive than the last Democrat we had in office, Bill Clinton. Now ridiculous justifications aside, Clinton was impeached. He led a nation that couldn't bear the thought of the White House and Congress being run by the same party. And the last president before that? The nation turned on George H.W. Bush to the point they voted him out of office. But if we start modern history two years ago, when Marco Rubio became the poster child for a political party eating itself, and when Marco Rubio won a Senate seat without winning the popular vote in Florida... Oh wait. There were decisive political figures that year too.

Something the SYG apologists should consider

Predictably, a bunch of people who reflexively want to take the side of the shooter in a Stand Your Ground case are these days saying "George Zimmerman's side" of the Trayvon Martin's shooting is revealing more information.

I have said before, and reiterate again, Zimmerman's side of the story is essentially the same as it ever was and the fundamental facts of the case have not moved an inch. The story boils down to this: Zimmerman thought Trayvon looked suspicious and called police. He then tracked Martin down. Zimmerman claims the two got into an altercation and he felt he needed to use deadly force and kill Martin.

That was the Zimmerman side on day 1. Now, Daily Caller is looking at video which most people see as evidence there wasn't much of a scuffle and sees evidence that there was a fight. A growing number of people seem to think hearing Zimmerman claimed his nose was broken adds some new information to the basic facts.

But as people jump on this wagon, they need to consider something very clearly. SYG works both ways. If people say Martin needed to die for this, realize he had every right to kill George Zimmerman based on the very same law which Zimmerman is shielding himself with now.

Zimmerman stalked Martin in the streets and was brandishing a deadly weapon when he did it. Martin, by Zimmerman's own account, confronted Zimmerman from there. Was it not reasonable with a man stalking you in the streets with a handgun for you to feel threatened for your life? Indeed, even assuming everything Zimmerman is saying is the absolute truth, all Martin did was to stand his ground.

Now ask yourself, would police have responded do defensively to the defendant if that was the case? If a 17-year-old black kid in a hoodie had wrestled a gun away from the neighborhood watch guy and shot him in the streets near his home? According to SYG, that is exactly what should have happened.

Zimmerman created the confrontation. Zimmerman introduced the threat of deadly force. Zimmerman employed deadly force and killed a child, hoodie or no hoodie. And Zimmerman still has not been charged with a crime.

None of that changes with a broken nose or a laceration on the head. Zimmerman has yet to show he felt in danger of his life when he had a handgun and Martin had some iced tea. Martin, on the other hand, would be able to make a pretty good cade he had reason to fear for his life. We know that because he is dead.