Archive for November, 2013

Monday Open Thread [11.4.13]

Rand Paul has a Joe Biden problem. Last week, he was busted by Rachel Maddow for plagiarizing a Wikipedia entry for the movie Gattaca, then busted by BuzzFeed’s Andrew Kaczynski both for plagiarizing a Wikipedia entry for the movie Stand and Deliver and for plagiarizing a Heritage Foundation study in his book Government Bullies. The man is a serial plagiarizer.

Instead of being concrite and apologetic, Paul on Sunday threatened to murder any one who dared question or criticize him.

Seriously.

“I take it as an insult, and I will not lie down and say people can call me dishonest, misleading or misrepresenting,” he said, dismissing his critics as “hacks and haters.” Presumably in jest, Mr. Paul added: “If dueling were legal in Kentucky, if they keep it up, it’d be a duel challenge.”

I do not give Mr. Paul the benefit of the doubt, so I am not going to presume he was kidding. I am going to presume that Mr. Paul would challenge Mr. Kaczynski and Ms. Maddow to a duel, if such were legal, where he would attempt to shoot both of them before they shot him.

That is his response to being caught in the act.

He wants to murder them.

Continue Reading »

Sunday Open Thread [11.3.13]

Jonathan Cohn finds the Republian criticism this week about the 3% of health insurance policies being cancelled (so that the insured could be enrolled in better policies that comply with the law) very disingenuous, and hypocritical.

With Obamacare, a small number of people lose their current insurance but they end up with alternative, typically stronger coverage. Under the plans Republicans have endorsed, a larger number of people would lose their current insurance, as people migrated to a more volatile and less secure marketplace. Under Obamacare, the number of Americans without health insurance at all will come down, eventually by 30 or 40 million. Under most of the Republican plans, the number of Americans without insurance would rise.

Honest Republicans would justify their policies by arguing that Medicaid is a wasteful, inefficient program not worth keeping—and their changes, overall, would reduce health care spending while maximizing liberty. In other words, forcing people to give up their coverage is worth it. I don’t agree with those arguments, but they are honest. But they should stop pretending that it’s possible to address the problems of American health care without disrupting at least some people’s insurance arrangements—because, after all, they want to do the very same thing.

Jonathan Chait agrees, and thinks this is why there never was any “Replace” bill in the Republicans’ “Repeal and Replace” strategy over the last three years.

Continue Reading »