November, 2018, I Am A Global Warming Doubter and A Believer In Science

Every month we have enough material to return to a continuing theme in this blog, namely that “I am a global warming doubter AND a believer in science.” This became of interest because of people like Al Gore who fanatically and verbosely claimed that you had to be an idiot to not believe in manmade global warming. It has been my life belief that anyone that is that loud and that obnoxious is hiding something, that rather than argue facts and reality it is better to beat down and insult anyone who disagrees.

As we have dove into the whole issue of man made global warming, or its new rebranded title of climate change, we found that Al Gore and people like him were guilty of a number of things:

• Ignoring science and realities that did not support their opinions and positions.
• Rather than have an adult conversation about climate, these types of advocates like Gore sank to the level of insulting those who dared look at ALL science by calling them a variety of names including racists, homophobes, terrorists, flat earth believers, and other slanderous names.
• Continuing to insist that politicians step up their intrusions into our lives with higher taxes, more regulations, and more control on our freedoms and standards of living based on a shaky theory at best.

To see the past posts and the multitude of evidence that we have compiled that showed it is perfectly okay to be a global warming doubter and a believer in science, enter the phrase "global warming doubter” in the search box above or go through the monthly historical post listed on the right side of this page.

Thus, let’s see the latest facts and science that prove you can be a global warming doubter and a believer in science, regardless of what Al Gore proclaim.

1) A recent research paper that was published in the scientific journal, Nature, proclaimed that the oceans were warming much faster than expected due to global warming and/or climate change. If true, this would have serious ramifications around the world, especially with countries with long coastlines along the oceans. The mainstream media went nuts with the news, proclaiming catastrophe in in its headlines covering the research, especially since the well respected magazine Nature had published the peer reviewed article.

One problem though, the research was wrong due to a math error:

• The study claimed that ocean temperatures had risen 60% faster than previously believed.
• But mathematician and well known climate change skeptic Nicholas Lewis found some math errors that proved this was not the case: “The findings of the . . . paper were peer reviewed and published in the world’s premier scientific journal and were given wide coverage in the English-speaking media. Despite this, a quick review of the first page of the paper was sufficient to raise doubts as to the accuracy of its results.”
• Research author Ralph Keeling, a climate scientist at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography who co-authored the paper, said he and his partner, Laure Resplandy of Princeton, agreed that their math error was indeed true: “When we were confronted with his insight it became immediately clear there was an issue there. We’re grateful to have it be pointed out quickly so that we could correct it quickly.”
• Keely went on say in total honesty: “We really muffed the error margins.”

Error corrected, good thing. But three troubling thoughts come to mind:

• It does not appear that the mainstream media corrected their original stories once the error was found and admitted to. Which, if given what we have discussed over the past week or so, lack of journalism honesty and ethics, means that the mainstream media has contributed to muddying the waters when it comes to the science of climate to suit their preconceived and biased intentions and aims.
• Second, we will these two scientists the benefit of doubt on the error in their calculations. However, given the proven history of global warming advocates and scientists intentionally faking data and results to align with their preconceived notions, this type of relatively simple screw up does the raise the specter of bad and corrupt science for political and personal fame and glory.
• And finally, and related to the previous point, this was a peer reviewed article. Why did none of those peers find the error? Were they just sloppy also or did they want the wrong findings to stand and fit their biased and skewed view of climate? 

Shady dealings potentially all around.

2) Although global warming basically stopped increasing two decades ago, there was global warming prior to the last two decades. And while global warming advocates always claim that ANY global warming is really bad, we have often discussed the reality that global warming may actually make it better for humanity, not worse.

Consider a February 13, 2018 article from the Constitution website that discussed this topic from both perspectives:

• Former EPA head, Scott Pruitt, earlier this year posed the hypothesis that global warming might actually be good for humanity.
• Penn State global warming advocate Michael Mann accused Pruitt of being in “stages of denial” and American Meteorology Society’s Paul Higgins also checked in to berate Pruitt. 
• But Mann and Higgins represent only one side of the argument.
• Consider Robert Murphy, an economist with the free market Institute for Energy Research who has done a lot of research regarding climate-economic models: “It’s always problematic to try to add benefits and harms together since people are different, but in terms of standard economic modeling, Administrator Pruitt’s comments are not as unreasonable as some of his critics are claiming. There are plenty of obvious benefits to certain regions from warmer temperatures, such as better harvests and fewer elderly deaths in the winter.” 
• Murphy has concluded that, “It shows that the actual economic research on the human impacts of climate change are not as catastrophic as the alarmists would have you believe.”
• Another study by environmental economist Richard Tol forecasted that impacts of global warming would be a net benefit to humanity, at least in the shorter term horizon.
• Even longer term impacts, if global warming would start rising again, would not be all that bad: “ After 1.5 degrees [increase in warming], Tol found warming has “a limited impact on the economy and human welfare in the twenty-first century,” but the costs would be “substantially greater in poorer, hotter, and lower-lying countries.””
• Specifically, Tol has stated: “There are of course positive aspects to climate change. The eastern US has just been through a brutal winter. Climate change will bring lower heating costs in winter, and cut cold-related death and disease. Plants grow faster and tolerate drought better if there is more carbon dioxide in the air.”
• Historical satellite data likely shows that the Earth has greened up over the past several decades, possibly because of higher levels of carbon dioxide in the air from fossil fuel burning.
• Since carbon dioxide is an essential plant food, more carbon dioxide may suggest more plant food which may mean more plant growth.
• In fact, scientist Craig Idso of the CO2 Coalition has documented a load of studies and research that show the improved growth rates with higher levels of CO2 in the air: “And beyond this very real benefit to human health from increasing temperatures, the extra CO2 has helped to increase crop yields so as to improve food security.”
• Of course, the United Nations’ effort on climate change, the IPCC, disagrees with all of these positive research findings on higher levels of carbon dioxide in the air.
• But the IPCC also ignores the reality that crop yields have increased so much during the global warming hysteria that, “The world produces so much food now the World Peace Foundation declared the “elimination of calamitous famines.” Population has grown, but the death toll from famines has shrunk considerably in the last 50 years.”

So who is right, the global warming skeptics or the doubters? Tough to say but in my opinion there is far more science showing that global warming, which stopped two decades ago, has been more beneficial to humanity than hurtful. And given the reality that the forecasts of doom of global warming advocates over the past forty years or so have always been wrong, I believe the reality as pointed out by Dr. Tol: “The climate change we have witnessed over the last half century has been a net positive for humans.” 

And that is why I am a global warming skeptic and a believer in science.

Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at:

www.loathemygovernment.com

It is also available online at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Please pass our message of freedom onward. Let your friends and family know about our websites and blogs, ask your library to carry the book, and respect freedom for both yourselves and others everyday.

Please visit the following sites for freedom:


http://www.reason.com
http://www.cato.org
http://www.bankruptingamerica.org
http://www.conventionofstates.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08j0sYUOb5w

June, 2018, Part 1, Political Class Insanity: Pelosi Still Out Of Touch, $130 Pens, $17 Million Fruitless INvestigations and Busting Lemonade Stands.

It is another month which means it is again time to review the latest political class insanity from Washington and around the world. Political class insanity takes many forms including the wasting of taxpayer wealth, criminal fraud within government programs, inane and stupid political quotes and actions, the inability to create and implement effective and efficient government programs, stupid and ill performing economic policies and strategies, and other forms of insanity that continue to evolve and surprise and shock us.

Let's get started:

1) Government wasteful spending continues to amaze and disgust:

• An aide to the head of the EPA, Scott Pruitt, spent $1,560 to buy 12 fountain pens.
• They must be great pens since the average cost comes out to about $130 per pen.
• Each pen bears the EPA seal and Pruitt’s signature and apparently is used as gifts to important people around the world: EPA spokesman Jahan Wilcox said the pens were similar to purchases made by Pruitt's predecessors "for the purpose of serving as gifts to the Administrator's foreign counterparts and dignitaries upon his meeting with them."
• The EPA under Obama made a similar purchase but for almost twice the amount, $2,952, from the the same vendor with the purchase to be used for "non-monetary awards for Administrator."

Look, $2,952 or $1,560 is not going to balance the Federal budget. But this type of behavior is more a symptom of a bigger problem, a lack of respect for taxpayer dollars, a lack of respect that extends way beyond a couple of overpriced pens.

2) Okay, let’s talk about some real wasting of big taxpayer dollars. Robert Mueller has been chasing ghosts now for well over a year in his investigation into whether the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians. Why he is not looking into the Clinton’s relationship with the Russians, a relationship that we already know resulted in hundreds of thousands of dollars flowing from Russian interests into the Clinton bank accounts, is a story for another day. 

Back to Mueller and a recent article on the Freedom Outpost website by David Greenfield:

• Mueller has already spent almost $17 million in his hunt for Russian influences in the 2016 Presidential campaign.
• He has basically come up with nothing for his efforts and the $17 million.
• According to a USDA study back a number of years ago, the full cost to produce a school lunch was on average, $2.91.
• Assuming that inflation raised that cost since the USDA study was done, you could conservatively estimate that the Mueller investigation cost, if it had been repurposed to feed some hungry kids in the country, could easily have fed about 5 million kids.

Talk about bad priorities, an expensive, useless, and hollow investigation vs. feeding millions of U.S. kids.

3) Politicians not only waste our tax dollars in Washington but they do a pretty good job of wasting our tax dollars locally also. Consider another recent article from the Freedom Outpost website by Matt Agorist:

• According to the article: Jennifer Knowles, mother of three boys, wanted to instill a bit of entrepreneurial spirit in her sons over the Memorial Day weekend. So, Knowles and her husband decided they would have her four and six-year-old sons run a lemonade stand. “We have never had a lemonade stand and the boys thought Memorial Day weekend is going to be great weather, so why not have a lemonade stand across the street in the park,” Knowles said.
• Besides giving their kids a lesson in business and being an entrepreneur, she wanted to teach them to be generous to those less fortunate than themselves and so the kids were going to donate the lemonade stand profits to a local charity.
• The charity thy chose was going to support a child in Indonesia with food and clean water.
• So they set up their stand in a Denver area park and did good business for a while and received great compliments from those passing by on their efforts and the purpose of their profits.
• Which is when the local government, via local police officers, crushed the effort: “The police officers came over and they said that because my boys and I did not have permits for a lemonade stand they shut us down and we had to stop immediately,” she said. “My boys were crushed. They were devastated. And I can’t believe that happened. I remember as a child I always had lemonade stands and never had to worry about being shut down by the police officers. I mean that’s unheard of.”
• Apparently someone complained about the kids and the police officers when then required to do their jobs, crushing the hopes and scaring two young kids doing the right thing.
• While these kids got away with just a warning, the article points out that other kids operating other lemonade stands as young as five years old have received police citations.

Obviously, this problem could have been avoided if the local politicians had done their job and not wasted time on passing such stupid ordinances. I am assuming that the local government and the politicians that operate it have better things to do, from fixing schools to fixing potholes to who knows what else, anything has to be more important than banning kids’ lemonade stands. 

4) Let’s finish off today’s political class insanity with that inane quote machine Nancy Pelosi, the biggest contributor to political class insanity this blog has ever known. Before we get to her latest idiocy, let’s review some realities:

• The nation’s unemployment rate is at 3.8%, almost record lows.
• The unemployment rate for African Americans, Hispanics, women, and people without a high school education is at or near record lows.
• Wages are trending upwards.
• Over 140 million American tax filers will see lower tax rates in 2018.
• Companies are investing in jobs, training, and machinery.
• There are now more job openings in the country than unemployed adults who are looking for a job.
• Gas prices, which recently spiked, have come down quickly in the past week or so.
• The stock market continues to hold at record high levels.
• Consumer confidence surveys show high confidence in the economy.
• Inflation continues to run at low levels.

We could go on but you get the idea: Trump has the country in an economic sweet spot with low unemployment, low inflation, and rising wages.

But the end of the world is near according to Nancy Pelosi: “May’s jobs report shows that strong employment numbers mean little to the families hit with soaring new costs under the Republicans’ watch.” Again, what color is the sky your world, Ms. Pelosi? What soaring new costs? She goes on to discuss how drug company executives are making millions of dollars and somehow that is more important than jobs, wages increases, lower gas prices, low inflation, etc, Insane.

That will get us started with this month’s insanity: Pelosi still so out of touch, and politicians wasting money from local lemonade stands to Washington. More insanity to follow.

Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at:

www.loathemygovernment.com

It is also available online at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Please pass our message of freedom onward. Let your friends and family know about our websites and blogs, ask your library to carry the book, and respect freedom for both yourselves and others everyday.

Please visit the following sites for freedom:


http://www.reason.com
http://www.cato.org
http://www.bankruptingamerica.org
http://www.conventionofstates.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08j0sYUOb5w

November, 2017, Part 7, Political Class INsanity: California Imploding, Murder on the EPA Express, and More Obama Chicago Political Tactics.

It is the beginning of another month which means it is again time to review the latest political class insanity from Washington and around the world. Political class insanity takes many forms including the wasting of taxpayer wealth, criminal fraud within government programs, inane and stupid political quotes and actions, the inability to create and implement effective and efficient government programs, stupid and ill performing economic policies and strategies, and other forms of insanity that continue to evolve and surprise and shock us.

1) Regardless of whether or not your preferred candidates won an election, the truth is that elections determine who gets to run the country. It has been like that since the beginning. If your candidate lost, well, too bad. Maybe for the next election you should take a more active role in helping the candidate you support get elected to further the positions you hold.

But apparently that is not the case in today’s society where losing an election prompts people to threaten murder to stop the people who elected their candidates from exercising their rights and positions via the ballot box. According to a recent Washington Free Beacon report, EPA head Scott Pruitt is receiving an unheard amount of death threats since taking over his current position within the Trump administration. 

These threats, from Americans who are obviously unhappy about the 2016 Presidential election, have resulted in the Pruitt having to have a 24 hour security detail assigned to protect him. The Wall Street Journal has reported that there have been more than “70 credible threats against EPA staffers, with a disproportionate number menacing Administrator Scott Pruitt and his family,” since Trump took office. Reform in Washington is always difficult, but at the Environmental Protection Agency it’s also dangerous. The EPA responded by beefing up his security detail, but Mr. Pruitt’s political opponents are now trying to hold these warranted precautions against him.” These threats have been verified by the EPA inspector general and has resulted in the American taxpayer forking over $2 million a year for the security protection Pruitt needs. 

Great, childish people are disappointed by the election results and it results in the American taxpayer being hit with a multi million bill. Credible threats from liberal opponents have resulted in the EPA’s inspector general’s office recommending 24/7 security detail for Pruitt, which is costing taxpayers $2 million per year.

A seriously insane and sad commentary on the manners, maturity, and thought processes in this country today. Do not get what you want, threaten murder. Crazy.

2) We have often talked about how lowly voters and citizens rank the favorability of our current set of politicians. We generally view them as inept, out of touch, greedy, and intrusive into our lives and our freedoms. Unfortunately, they have generally rigged the election processes and manage to usually keep themselves in office despite the fact that we despise their performances while in office.

Some people in California having gotten so fed up with the current set of politicians running the state government in California, a position that we have proven to be very valid over the years based on the out of touch incompetence of those same politicians, that a group of citizens is working on freeing themselves from those politicians:

• An effort is underway to break California up into three different states.
• One of the new states woulds comprise most of northern California including Sacramento and San Francisco, a second state would be along the central coast and include Los Angeles, and a third state would have the southern coast along with San Diego and the eastern part of the state.
• This effort recently passed a court test that resulted in a ruling that would allow them to begin gathering signatures that they hope will get the proposed three state plan on the ballot in the state.
• The plan organizers need to get over 300,000 valid signatures by April 23, 2018 in order to get the proposal on the ballot in the fall of 2018.
• If that ballot measure passes, the proposal would be brought before Congress.
• The reason given is that the state has become so large and so diverse that it is currently unmanageable and that going to a three state solution would provide more local say and control to for citizens.
• Not surprising, some oppose such a division, including political analyst Steven Maviglio: “Creating three new governments, three new legislatures, three new governors and then having to disrupt what we have as a state all our prison systems, our higher education systems, I think diversity is what makes California great and this would actually ruin it.” 

What Mr. Maviglio does not realize is that many people might actually be willing to go through the trouble that he lays out, that life under a faraway state government is not working for them. The high state tax burden has not enabled the central state government to provide good schools, safe infrastructure, etc. and that maybe there is a better way to gain control of their lives, their fates and their freedom. Time will tell but given the state of the country and our disdain for incumbent political class, I would not bet against the three state solution being proposed. Take a look at Spain and the Catalonia situation, people just want to be free, be it a small California town or Barcelona.

3) It has always been our opinion that the Obama administration was one of the most inept, corrupt, and lawless administration of all time. Obama took the traditional low life, dirty set of Chicago political game plans and brought it to Washington. We have already documented the many instances of unlawful and unConstitutional actions that were taken while he was President:

https://loathemygovernment.blogspot.com/2016/10/part-2-obama-presidency-end-of-error.html

And recently, Bryan Saavedra, writing for the Daily Wire website, documented another low life Chicago-type political action that his administration undertook:

• An FBI confidential informant’s lawyer claims her client had information on how “Russian nuclear officials engaged in bribery, kickbacks, money laundering, and extortion in their attempts to corner the U.S. uranium market” and how “under the Obama administration revealed the threats her client received from the Obama administration if he didn’t keep quiet during the 2016 presidential election."
• The client had started a lawsuit to get the information on Russia activities made public but was forced to drop the suit when lawyers form Loretta Lynch’s Justice Department pressured him.
• Specifically, the client was told “that if he didn’t dismiss the case his reputation and liberty were in jeopardy.”
• The HIll has reported that the lawyer for the whistleblower has documentation which prove that the Obama administration desperately wanted to shut up her client since the civil suit would have likely taken place during the 2016 election cycle and would likely have a large impact on the election: “Toensing [their lawyer] said she also possesses memos that recount how the Justice Department last year threatened her client when he attempted to file a lawsuit that could have drawn attention to the Russian corruption during the 2016 presidential race as well as helped him recover some of the money Russians stole from him through kickbacks during the FBI probe.”
• The pressure from the Obama camp forced her client to eventually sign a nondisclosure document to shut him up, a document that has snow been voided by the Trump Department of Justice to enable the informant to testify before Congress.
• He had to remain silent since the Obama people threatened his freedom and the threat of bringing a criminal lawsuit against him.

So sad when the government threatens citizens with jail and safety for trying to tell the truth and expose corruption at the highest levels of government.But in Obama’s case, it is the Chicago way, integrity and the Constitution be damned.

That will do it for today’s insanity: murder threats now okay if your candidate loses an election, possible secession in California and more Obama Chicago thug politics. More insanity to follow.

Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at:

www.loathemygovernment.com

It is also available online at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Please pass our message of freedom onward. Let your friends and family know about our websites and blogs, ask your library to carry the book, and respect freedom for both yourselves and others everyday.

Please visit the following sites for freedom:


http://www.reason.com
http://www.cato.org
http://www.bankruptingamerica.org
http://www.conventionofstates.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08j0sYUOb5w

October, 2014 Part 3, The Unfolding Disaster That is Obama Care: Less Competition, More Insurance Company Sleaze, and Heading For A Massive Court Defeat

Over the past few years, but especially over the past fourteen months, we have had to devote more and more posts each month to the unfolding disaster that is Obama Care. This legislation, without a doubt, is the worst piece of legislation ever passed, likely passed by the most inept and useless set of Washington politicians that this country has ever had to endure. The disasters from this law include at least the following downsides:

• It has and will continue to increase the national debt.
• It will leave tens of millions of Americans still uninsured ten years from now.
• It has restricted overall economic growth.
• It raised taxes on all Americans in dozens of ways.
• It has reduced the job growth rate in this country.
• It has turned many full time workers into part time workers or into unemployed workers.
• It has generally increased the cost of health insurance, both premiums and deductibles, over what was available in the insurance market before it was passed.
• The Constitution was violated any number of times when the Obama administration unilaterally and illegally changed components of the law without the permission of Congress or the American people.
• The American people were lied to over and over, directly by the President and Democrats in Congress, on the negative ramifications of the law.
• It has caused millions of American to lose access to the current insurance policies they had.
• It has caused millions of Americans to lose access to their preferred doctors, preferred hospitals, and in many cases, current medicine treatments.
• It has likely increased the volume of people visiting hospital emergency rooms.
• It has caused thousands of doctors to retire early or change professions in order to not deal with the bureaucracy and idiocy of the law.
• It has exposed the inability of the Federal government and various state governments to develop, launch, and operate any kind of successful program.
• It has exposed millions of Americans’ personal financial information to identity thieves.
• It never addressed, and thus, never resolved, the root causes of our escalating health care costs in this country.

I am sure that I omitted some of the negative ramifications of the legislation but you get the idea. To review past discussions of past disasters from Obama Care, enter ”the unfolding disaster that is Obama Care” in the search box above. To see what disasters have popped up over just the past month or so, read on:

1) Richard Pollock wrote a recent article for the Washington Examiner where he showed that the smaller health insurance companies, those that have a relative small potion of the health insurance market, look to be getting out of or being driven out of the Obama Care exchanges.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) recently published some of its research which showed that in 40 states, the largest insurers either maintained or boosted their market share through the health exchanges established by the Affordable Care Act. The GAO analysis is the first government analysis study which examined how competition within the health insurance market has been affected by Obama Care.

The study found that in 2012, consumers in the individual health insurance market on average could choose among 36 small-market company carriers in their state, each holding a market share of five percent of or less. However, by 2014 those same consumers could on average choose from only three insurers in their state exchanges, a decline of more than 90%.

Similarly, in the small-group/small business insurance market, at least 15 small-market carriers were available, on average, to consumers before Obama Care. But within the Obama Care exchanges, now only three insurance companies still competing on average.

Thus, let’s use some logic here. Before Obama Care stormed the market for health insurance across the country, premium and deductible costs were less and the number of competing insurers was more, probably a cause and effect relationship: more competition usually means lower consumer costs. 

Obama Care comes along, and the number of competitors dwindles while the cost of deductibles and premiums generally go up substantially across the country. Less competition usually means higher consumer costs, basic economics, something that is constantly lost on the American political class. And as always, when the political class acts out of ignorance, the American consumer pays more.

2) Charles Ornstein, writing for the ProPublica website on September 17, 2014, analyzed the many ways that insurance companies within the Obama Care tent are finding new and interesting ways to reduce their costs but endangering the financial and medical well being of Obama Care policy holders. My source of the story noted that his story was co-published with The New York Times’ column,  The Upshot.

A little background. Under the Obama Care legislation, health insurance companies are no longer allowed to deny coverage to any consumer with a pre-existing medical condition. Since these customers are likely to have more of a negative cost impact on the company, they are also likely to depress earnings of those insurance companies. Of course, Obama Care also required ALL Americans to have health insurance so those same insurance companies were willing to trade off some high cost customers, i.e. those with pre-existing conditions, to get millions and millions of new customers.

According to the article, in order to protect profitability, some health policy experts say health insurers may be pulling some subtle shenanigans to protect their profits by forcing customers with certain illnesses such as Parkinson’s disease, diabetes and epilepsy to pay more for their drugs. If potential customers with pre-existing conditions find out that a certain health insurance provider makes them pay a lot for their medicines, they might be more inclined to look elsewhere for their insurance coverage.

In this way the insurance company wins from a profitability perspective: they avoid high cost patients with high cost medical needs while still fulfilling their legal requirement to accept any and all potential consumers as customers. Very subtle, very profitable, very sleazy.

Wayne Turner, a staff lawyer for the National Health Law Program described the process: “It seems that the plans are trying to find this wiggle room to design their benefits to prevent people who have high health needs from enrolling.” In the article, Turner stated he feared a “race to the bottom,” in which plans don’t want to be seen as the most attractive for sick patients. “Plans do not want that reputation.”

The article also points to research showing that as medicine gets more expensive, customers are more likely not to take the medicine or to take the prescribed amount do to the high costs. Thus, the consumer gets screwed again by this legislation. Sick Americans who thought their prayers would be answered by the legislation are finding that the legislation gives them little protection from health insurance companies who still do not want them as customers. 

And as a result, this discourages these people from even applying for insurance, placing them right back where they were prior to the legislation being approved. Much ado about nothing.

3) In the midst of all these disasters, there is a much bigger issue that is working its way through the courts and whose fate could crash the entire Obama Care legislation. Some background:

• The legislation was written so that individual states could set up their own online Obama Care health insurance exchanges where each state’s citizens could obtain Obama Care insurance policies.
• But the states did not have to set up their own exchange process, they had the option of defaulting to the Federal government’s exchange.
• However, in order to entice the states to operate their own state level Obama Care exchange, the law made it crystal clear that only insurance policies obtained from a state exchange would come with the possibility of receiving Federal subsidies to pay for the premiums.
• Customers who got their Obama Care policy from the Federal exchange website would NOT be eligible for subsidies.

But Obama and his supporters outsmarted themselves since about three dozen states did not take the bait and allowed their citizens to go through the subsidy free Federal website. Without subsidies, Obama Care insurance policy costs become even less financially attractive.

The Obama administration decided just ignore that part of the law, basically breaking the law, and allow everyone who got an Obama Care policy, regardless of where they got it, to be eligible for subsidies. They realized that if two thirds or so of the Obama Care customers did not receive a subsidy, the entire operation crashes from high costs.

But this is breaking the law, as decided by a Federal judge’s recent ruling. Despite an IRS ruling that approved them, subsidies to residents in states without a state insurance exchange violate the language of Obama Care, according to a Federal judge in Oklahoma: “The court holds that the IRS rule is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion or otherwise not in accordance with law,” wrote Judge Ronald A. White in his decision, according to Politico.

White’s ruling accords with a similar decision by the D.C. Court of Appeals that was later vacated when the entire court decided to hear the case, as opposed to the three-judge panel that issued the ruling. The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, however, sided with the Obama administration, meaning that the issue is likely to go to the Supreme Court eventually.

“Today’s ruling is a consequential victory for the rule of law,” said Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt, who filed the lawsuit. “The administration and its bureaucrats in the IRS handed out billions in illegal tax credits and subsidies and vastly expanded the reach of the health care law because they didn’t like the way Congress wrote the Affordable Care Act.”

Most legal experts expect the issue to eventually get decided by the Supreme Court. But given that the law’s language explicitly excludes customers coming through the Federal exchange from receiving a subsidy, odds are good that the entire house of cards will coming crashing down all because the writers and supporters of the law got too cute with the language. 

More disasters due in tomorrow on top of the three we discussed today: less competition, sleazy accounting, and trying to deny they wrote what they wrote. Every day a new disaster in a different form, the legislation that keep on giving.

Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at:

www.loathemygovernment.com

It is also available online at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Please pass our message of freedom onward. Let your friends and family know about our websites and blogs, ask your library to carry the book, and respect freedom for both yourselves and others everyday.

Please visit the following sites for freedom:

Term Limits Now: http://www.howmuchworsecoulditget.com
http://www.reason.com
http://www.cato.org
http://www.robertringer.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08j0sYUOb5w