Apparently, there was a meeting of the editors at The New York Times op-ed page in which someone said, “You know how every time someone does a story about one of these Obamacare ‘victims’ whose insurance companies are cancelling their plans, it turns out they could do really well on the exchange, but no one bothers to check? We should get one of them to write an op-ed, but not bother to ask what options they’ll have.” And then someone else responded, “Right, don’t bother with the fact-checking. But we need a new twist. What if we find someone who’ll complain that the problem with Obamacare is that other people care too much about poor people and the uninsured, while what they ought to be doing is spending more time liking her Facebook post about her possibly increased premiums?” The editors looked at each other and said, “That’s gold. Gold!”
And this was the result. Written by Lori Gottlieb, a Los Angeles psychotherapist and author, it relates how she got a cancellation letter from Anthem Blue Cross and was offered a plan for $5,400 more a year, then had a frustrating phone call with the company. Did she go to the California health exchange and find out what sorts of deals would be available to her? Apparently not. She took Anthem at their word—you can always trust insurance companies, after all!—then took to Facebook, where she “vented about the call and wrote that the president should be protecting the middle class, not making our lives substantially harder.”
And here’s where our story takes a shocking turn. Instead of expressing what she felt was the appropriate sympathy, those 1,037 people on Facebook she thought were her friends but turned out just to be “friends” had the nerve to point out that the Affordable Care Act will help millions of previously uninsured and uninsurable people get coverage. Gottlieb was disgusted with these people she termed the “smug insureds.” And none of them even “liked” her post!
Like Bridget Jones’s “smug marrieds,” the “smug insureds” — friends who were covered through their own or spouses’ employers or who were grandfathered into their plans — asked why I didn’t “just” switch all of our long-term doctors, suck it up and pay an extra $200 a month for a restrictive network on the exchange, or marry the guy I’m dating. How romantic: “I didn’t marry you just to save money, honey. I married you for your provider network.”
Along with the smug insureds, President Obama doesn’t care much about the relatively small percentage of us with canceled coverage and no viable replacement. He keeps apologizing while maintaining that it’s for the good of the country, a vast improvement “over all.”
It was a magazine column designed to generate a discussion of gun rights.
“Way too many gun owners still seem to believe that any regulation of the right to keep and bear arms is an infringement,” the column said. “The fact is, all constitutional rights are regulated, always have been, all need to be.”
Titled “Let’s Talk Limits,” the column was published in the December issue of Guns & Ammo, the well-known magazine based in Florida, and written by longtime contributing editor Dick Metcalf.
And it enraged readers.
Over the last few days, opposition to Metcalf’s stance reached a boiling point. On Wednesday, the magazine’s editor, Jim Bequette, posted an online letter of apology that addressed Guns & Ammo readers and announced that both he and Metcalf would no longer be working at the magazine.
Although he had been planning to step down Jan. 1, Bequette announced he would resign immediately, hastened by the outcry.
In his apology, Bequette wrote that he had thought the column would “generate a healthy exchange of ideas on gun rights.”
“I miscalculated, pure and simple. I was wrong, and ask for your forgiveness.”
A marriage made in outrage-porn heaven. Filed under “Politics” because I can’t do Wingnuts and Moonbats at the same time.
The noticeable upswing in Alex Jones style anti-government paranoia on the left of all places has reached epidemic proportions, and if you haven’t been infected yet you’re regarded as either an unthinking Obama administration automaton or you’ve fully embraced the worst Bush-era transgressions. There’s never been room for nuance with this crowd; it’s a pervasive intransigence that happens to be a feature of their paranoia. If you’re not screeching about the conspiracy, you’re clearly part of the conspiracy.
It’s not surprising, then, to discover that Alex Jones’ dual websites, Prison Planet and Info Wars, are loaded with all of the same breaking news stories and bombshells about Edward Snowden and NSA that are also found at The Guardian, Salon and elsewhere. In keeping with recent outrage-porn from writers such as Salon’s David Sirota and The Atlantic’s Conor Friedersdorf, as well as activist Cornel West, there’s even a post on Prison Planet in which the death of Trayvon Martin was compared with the killing of Adbulrahman Al-Awlaki, the son of terrorist Anwar Al-Awlaki. Naturally, there’s also plenty of stuff about how President Obama is clearly a war criminal worthy of prosecution and imprisonment, just like we’ve heard from Glenn Greenwald and the rest.
Yes, the Summer of ‘13 has witnessed the inking of the merger between the Glenn Greenwald Left and the Alex Jones Right.
BERLIN (AP) — Germany’s top security official says Internet users worried about their data being intercepted by U.S. intelligence agencies should stop using American websites such as Google and Facebook.
Leaked revelations about the U.S. National Security Agency’s wholesale information on foreign web users has prompted outrage in Europe and calls for tighter international rules on data protection.
Interior Minister Hans-Peter Friedrich told reporters in Berlin on Wednesday that “whoever fears their communication is being intercepted in any way should use services that don’t go through American servers.”
Friedrich says German officials are in touch with their U.S. counterparts “on all levels” and a delegation is scheduled to fly to Washington next week to discuss the claims that ordinary citizens and even European diplomats were being spied upon.
For all the controversy about the potential misuse or abuse of surveillance drones, it’s pretty dumb to go all apoplectic over flight testing in the premier chunk or test friendly airspace. California airspace has hosted just about every high performance military aircraft or missile there is or ever was.
SoCal needs the jobs, the dollars the brainpower brought to the task. Proper regulation can not happen until we have testing that tells us what is really workable. Then we will regulate in the context of reality. The nation needs the drones and generous protections for our traditional civil liberties/protections from undue or unwarranted search and surveillance.
Despite Americans’ concerns about the domestic use of drones, California local agencies are reportedly moving forward with an application to declare a broad swath of Southern California a “drone zone” - an area to be used to test pilotless aircraft. The purpose: government stimulus. In California, the San Diego Military Advisory Council (SDMAC) and the San Diego Regional Economic Development Corporation (EDC) have filed an application with the Federal Aviation Administration to create a drone zone. These groups want to stimulate state drone business, even as the state raises its taxes repeatedly, driving out other business. Northrup Grumman, a major drone producer, has relocated branches of its unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) program to Southern California. General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, which produces Predator drones, is located in Poway. The UAV industry in San Diego County clocks in at approximately $1.3 billion, and that number is growing fast.According to reports, 63 drone sites have already been authorized across the country.
More at Brietbart Link: Defense Industry Pushes for ‘Drone Zone’ Over Southern California
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s office sent a photo of female lawmakers to press Thursday to commemorate a huge moment for the Democratic Party: The first time its House of Representatives caucus didn’t have a majority of white men.
Unfortunately, four members were late to the photo shoot.
‘Please note this version has the four Members who were late photo-shopped in,’ Pelosi spokesperson Drew Hammill wrote in an email to news outlets Thursday evening. In a subsequent email to Poynter, Hammill confirmed that the four latecomers were placed in the rear of the group.
Here’s the Associated Press version of the photo:
And here’s the photo Pelosi’s office released:
Read more: nation.foxnews.com
ZOMG ITZ A FAUXTOGRAPHY FAUXTRAGE!1!1TY
The woman who used a racial slur to describe President Obama on Facebook said she was surprised that she was fired from her job at Cold Stone Creamery and said she doesn’t understand all the attention the post received.
The Turlock woman also wrote in her Facebook post that “maybe he will get assassinated.”
The Facebook status by Denise Helms, 22, posted immediately after Obama’s reelection Tuesday, went viral and prompted an investigation by the Secret Service about whether it was a true threat.
“I didn’t think it would be that big of a deal,” Helms told FOX40 Sacramento in an interview outside her workplace at the Turlock Cold Stone Creamery. “The assassination part is kind of harsh. I’m not saying I’d go do that or anything like that, by any means, but if it was to happen I don’t think I’d care one bit.”
As Helms’ post continued to go viral on Facebook and Twitter, the national ice cream chain began to respond to people who expressed outrage over Helms’ post.
“The employee is no longer w/the company. We were as shocked as you were by her outrageous & completely unacceptable comments,” the official Coldstone Twitter account responded to one user Thursday night.
Prosecutors provisionally dropped murder charges against the 270 jailed miners who had been accused under an obscure legal doctrine of killing 34 of their own colleagues when the police opened fire on them while engaged in a wildcat strike.
The police fired live ammunition into a crowd of about 3,000 platinum miners armed with clubs and machetes while trying to disperse the illegal strike on Aug. 16. When the firing stopped, 34 miners were dead and South Africa was outraged by the bloodiest confrontation between the police and civilians since the end of apartheid. The police have claimed they acted in self-defense.
The outrage grew when prosecutors announced last week that under a legal doctrine known as “common purpose,” the miners would be charged with murdering their colleagues. Under the doctrine, which was frequently used in the waning days of apartheid to charge members of protesting crowds with serious crimes committed by a few individuals, people in a mob can be charged as accomplices.