A Bunch Of Lazy Government Moochers

Guess which states depend on federal tax dollars the most?  If you said "Republican-controlled Southern and Midwestern states" then you get the brass ring.



That's Mississippi there at the most dependent state in the nation, 42.9% of the state's revenue comes from Washington DC.  Meanwhile, large blue states like California and New York?  Near the bottom.

In fact with the exceptions of Louisiana at number 2 (who just elected a Democrat in late November) and #6 Montana (Democrat Steve Bullock) all the top ten moocher states have GOP governors. Fiscal conservative John Kasich, running for the 2016 White House on a federal balanced budget? His own state is #19 on the list, getting more than a third of all revenue from the Feds.

Funny how that works.

Dispatches From Bevinstan, Con't

Gov. Matt Bevin's plan to flip the state 100% red like neighboring Indiana, Ohio, Tennessee and Missouri is proceeding apace, with the Governor having already gotten rid of two Kentucky House Democrats with new appointments to his cabinet and knocking the Democratic lead down to 50-46, he's now calling special elections for the seats in just nine weeks.

Gov. Matt Bevin has set March 8 as the date for critical special elections to fill four vacancies in the Kentucky House of Representatives. 

Those elections could tip the balance of power in the House, which will stand at 50 Democrats and 46 Republicans when the General Assembly convenes on Tuesday. 

During an impromptu news conference Monday at the Capitol, the Republican governor also said he plans to campaign hard in those elections to elect candidates who share his views. 

"I want conservative people. I want people in those seats that will represent the people of Kentucky. And I will do everything in my power to make sure that the people who I think embody the values that I was elected to represent are elected. I do think they'll be Republicans," Bevin said. 

Two of the four vacant House seats were caused by resignations of Democrats John Tilley, of Hopkinsville, and Tanya Pullin, of South Shore, who resigned to accept appointments from Bevin. The other two seats were made vacant by the resignations of two Republicans to accept jobs to which they were elected in November: Ryan Quarles, of Georgetown, who was elected agriculture commissioner, and Mike Harmon, of Danville who was elected auditor. 

In addition, two House Democrats - Jim Gooch of Providence and Denny Butler, of Louisville - switched to the Republican Party last month. 

"I think the tide is turning; the tide has already turned in some measure," Bevin said of the growing GOP numbers in the House. "And I think that's going to become increasingly evident in the days, weeks and years ahead."

A 50-50 tie in the Kentucky House would be something of a disaster, as there's no clear law as to who would be in control of the assembly.  It's entirely possible another legislator could flip parties to break the deadlock, but Bevin's made it clear that Democrats no longer have a place in the state. He's apparently drafted the state's most powerful Republican to help, too.

U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, after privately meeting Wednesday morning with Gov. Matt Bevin, said it’s inevitable that the Kentucky House will flip to Republican control and that he is working to make sure it happens. 

McConnell, a Louisville Republican, said he is working with state Rep. Jonathan Shell, R-Lancaster, to recruit Republican candidates for the four special House elections Bevin has called for March 8 to fill vacancies and for this year’s regular House elections, in which all 100 seats will be contested. 

Democrats now control the House with a 50-46 margin. If Republicans win all four House special elections, the political party makeup in the chamber will be an even 50-50. 

That has never happened before in Kentucky history, and Republicans are trying to wrest control of the state House for the first time since 1921. Republicans now control the state Senate and governor’s office. 

Both McConnell and Bevin said it is a matter of time before Republicans control the House. Bevin said he expects it to happen this year.

Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/news/politics-government/article53290090.html#storylink=cpy

We'll see where it goes, but Bevin doesn't seem to be wasting any time in turning Kentucky into another basement dwelling Southern red state.  And in case of a 50-50 tie in the House, Bevin is already laying down markers that he's the decider.

Ironically, Alison Lundergan Grimes is still Secretary of State, and Steve Beshear's son Andy is now state AG, so we'll see how they weigh in.  I'm hoping they do, and soon.

StupidiNews!

• Chinese stocks plummeted for a second day as markets hit limit down within 30 minutes, dropping 7% before trading was suspended for the day.
• Former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson is again running for President on the Libertarian party ticket, having garnered one percent of the vote in 2012.
• Iraq is offering to help broker an agreement between Iran and Saudi Arabia after Riyadh cut diplomatic ties with Tehran over the execution of a prominent Sunni cleric.
• South Korea is resuming propaganda broadcasts into North Korea in response to Pyonyang's nuclear test earlier this week.
• German newspapers are reporting that Volkswagen may offer to purchase more than 100,000 cars sold in the US back from owners as fixing the cars' diesel emissions may prove too costly.

Last Call For Alabama Shakes(peare)

Happy New Year, as the Cotton State takes an early January lead in the Worst State in America 2016 race, thanks to our old friend Alabama State Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore.

Chief Justice Roy Moore issued an order today saying that a ruling issued last March by the Alabama Supreme Court remains in effect and that probate judges "have a ministerial duty not to issue any marriage license contrary" to Alabama's law and constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. 

In a four-page administrative order, Moore said the conflict between the state court ruling and the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in June has caused "confusion and uncertainty" among probate judges. 

Moore said he issued the order today in his role as administrative head of the state court system. He quoted a state law that says the chief justice is empowered to "take affirmative and appropriate action to correct or alleviate any condition or situation adversely affecting the administration of justice within the state." 

Moore wrote that since the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that many Alabama probate judges are issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, while others are issuing licenses only to opposite-sex couples or not issuing licenses at all. 

"This disparity affects the administration of justice in this state," he wrote.

So apparently Alabama's just not going to participate in the United States anymore and isn't actually bound by the SCOTUS rulings.  Interesting.

Then again, this type of obnoxious legal foot-dragging is nothing new in American history, not by a long shot. Particularly in states like, well, Alabama.

Still, same-sex marriage just landed on top of the 2016 presidential race social issue heap, and in a big way. Ted Cruz has gone on record numerous times saying that the Supreme Court has no actual authority to enforce anything, and as President, he implied heavily that he would allow states to simply refuse to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.  Santorum, Huckabee, and Rubio too have expressed similar opinions.

Trump on the other hand, well this is going to get pretty interesting, isn't it?

Such drama from the kids who have lost.

In Which Zandar Answers Your Burning Questions

Kevin Drum asks:

Are Liberals Responsible for the Rise of Donald Trump?

And in classic K-Drum style, answers his own question with "well, let me build a terrible case why that could be right but isn't."

This is hardly a new critique. Conservatives have been complaining about "being silenced" forever. The only difference between Trump and the rest of the GOP field is that Trump's complaints are a little earthier than Rubio's or Bush's. 

Still, even if I think Nichols is overstating things, it's not as if he doesn't have a point. Even those of us on the left feel the wrath of the leftier-than-thou brigade from time to time. I don't generally have a hard time avoiding objectionable language myself because (a) I'm liberal, (b) I'm good with words, and (c) I write rather than talk, which gives me time to get my act together. But even at that, sometimes I cross an invisible line and get trounced for it. 

But for someone without my advantages, I can easily see how it might feel almost impossible to express an unpopular opinion without tying yourself in knots. And let's be honest: we liberals do tend to yell racism a little more often than we should. And we do tend to suggest that anyone who like guns or Jesus is a rube. And the whole "privilege" thing sure does get tiresome sometimes. And we do get a little pedantic in our insistence that no conversation about anything is complete unless it specifically acknowledges the special problems of marginalized groups. It can be pretty suffocating at times. 

For the most part, I don't mind this stuff—and conservatives do themselves no favors by harping on supposed PC idiocy like the "war on Christmas." But that's largely because I can navigate it reasonably well and I mostly agree with the aims of the PC police anyway. People who can't obviously feel a lot more constrained. So while I don't really buy Nichols' argument—conservatives built the monster named Trump, not liberals—I do think he has a germ of a point. Donald Trump is basically telling ordinary people that ordinary language is OK, and since that's the only language they know, it means they feel like they can finally talk again.

In the classic words of Tonto, "What do you mean 'we', white man?"

Seriously, it's like terrible liberals exist solely to give cover to right-wing jagoffs like, well, Tom Nichols, and while I agreed with Nichols earlier today, he's wrong here, and this would be the point where Drum should say "Nichols is wrong and the baggage he's trying to project on liberals is complete straw man nonsense, since nobody is actually trying to silence white men."

But Drum is pretty bad at this, so he knowingly picks up Nichols's point and kicks the straw football through a new set of goalposts which he just moved.

Amazing stuff here when you argument is "Trump is awful and terrible, but he has a point about you people."

Oh, and should you think Drum is somehow alone in this, Washington Post writers Karen Tumulty and Jenna Johnson cover the same ground this week.

In the 2016 Republican presidential primary, “political correctness” has become the all-purpose enemy. The candidates have suggested it is the explanation for seemingly every threat that confronts the country — terrorism, immigration, an economic recovery that is leaving many behind, to name just a few. 

Others argue that growing antipathy to the notion of political correctness has become an all-purpose excuse for the inexcusable. They say it has emboldened too many to express racism, sexism and intolerance, which endure even as the country grows more diverse. 

“Driving powerful sentiments underground is not the same as expunging them,” said William A. Galston, a Brookings Institution scholar who was an adviser to former president Bill Clinton. “What we’re learning from Trump is that a lot of people have been biting their lips, but not changing their minds.”

The point of this is to again turn Trump into something of a mainstream figure, just in case he wins the nomination.

Let's keep that in mind.

A Bang-Up Job

President Obama's executive actions on gun control focus mainly on tightening gun seller loopholes, and while that's something, it's not much.

The gun industry has enjoyed a significant upper hand for decades, while mass shooting after mass shooting has failed to yield any meaningful gun control. A Bush-era law rendered the gun industry largely immune to legal challenges, which makes it hard to hold shady dealers accountable for illegal sales. Online sales, now a fixture of the firearms marketplace, are exempt from most laws governing dealers. And enforcement of current laws governing gun dealers is weak. 

The meat of the executive action will try to address these problems, notably by requiring all gun sellers to get a license and conduct background checks no matter where they’re selling them. That means online dealers and gun show vendors, many of whom are unlicensed go-tos for people looking to avoid background checks, will have to get approval from federal law enforcement. But the order doesn’t specify how many guns someone will need to sell in order to be considered a dealer. 

The orders will also clarify rules about who in a gun business is responsible for reporting stolen or lost guns. In addition, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) will get new funding to hire more people for background checks and to centralize illegal gun tracking. 

The action will also require background checks for people who buy weapons through trusts or corporations, an increasingly common way to avoid detection when buying serious firearms like machine guns. For instance, former Los Angeles police officer Chris Dorner said he used one such trust to buy silencers and a short-barreled rifle without a background check before going on a multi-day shooting rampage. The White House notes that gun purchases through trust and corporations has risen from fewer than 900 applications to 90,000 applications in 14 years.

It's tinkering around the edges, but necessary tinkering.  If the goal is to reduce the number of firearms in the country, well...that's not going to happen.  Ever.

StupidiNews!

• Several countries remain skeptical over North Korea's claim that it successfully tested a hydrogen bomb last night, the UN Security Council is meeting to discuss sanctions.
• A new Pew report finds that despite what Republican presidential candidates are saying about America's southern border, more Mexican immigrants are leaving the US than entering.
• ISIS is threatening to destroy Saudi Arabian prisons and free hundreds of prisoners in response to Riyadh's execution of 43 convicted Al Qaeda militants.
• Wal-Mart stores in Texas are asking those taking advantage of the state's new open carry handgun law to see their carry licenses before entering the store.
• Online "brain-training" site Lumosity will pay $2 million to settle FTC claims of deceptive advertising over its games staving off everything from dementia to Alzheimer's.

Last Call For Petulant Children

One Texas House Republican is so mad at President Obama that he's promising to defund the entire Department of Justice if the White House moves ahead with any executive measures on gun control.

No, really, not an Onion article.

In a letter to Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Rep. John Culberson (R-Texas), chairman of the Appropriations subcommittee that oversees the Justice Department, warned against enforcing the new gun restrictions.

"The next twelve months will be an especially dangerous time for Americans who treasure our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms,” Culberson said."I have formally notified Attorney General Lynch that I will aggressively protect our Second Amendment rights using Congress' power of the purse,” he added. "I notified the attorney general that if the Department of Justice attempted to create new restrictions on our Constitutional rights that I would use every tool at my disposal to immediately restrict their access to federal funding.”

Culberson appears to be the first Republican to call to block the DOJ's funding over the executive action on guns.

In future budget agreements, House appropriators could specifically prohibit the Justice Department from enforcing the gun restrictions without defunding the entire agency.

Culberson warned Lynch not to “create new law” in his letter.

“The House Appropriations Committee will not provide resources to your department for the development or implementation of unlawful limitations on the unambiguous Second Amendment rights of Americans,” Culberson wrote.

This might actually carry the impact of threat if Republicans hadn't spent the last several years vowing to defund everything from Obamacare to the Department of Education to the White House itself and not following through on anything.

Petulant little kids that they are.

Here We Go Again, Day 3

As I pointed out in this morning's StupidiNews, suddenly Team Bundy seems to be reconsidering this whole "armed takeover of federal land" considering they can't seem to find anyone else who actually thinks this is a good idea.

A county sheriff and judge on Monday demanded that self-styled militiamen occupying a remote U.S. wildlife center in Oregon peacefully end their 3-day-old anti-government siege, telling the protesters: "It's time for you to leave our community." 

And in fact a lot of people seem to think this is a terrible idea, including other militia seditionist types.

Self-styled militia members who seized federal property in rural Oregon in an effort to galvanize opposition to the U.S. government appear to have made a tactical error - potential allies say they picked the wrong battle. 

As armed anti-government activists occupied a snowy wildlife refuge for a third day to call attention to a land-use dispute, militia leaders from similar groups across the country criticized the seizure of federal land and a building. 

The protesters have said they aim "to restore and defend the Constitution" to protect the rights of ranchers and ignite a national debate about states' rights and federal land-use policy they hope could ultimately force the federal government to release tracts of Western land. 

Their occupation of the headquarters of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge comes as the number of paramilitary groups is on the rise in the United States, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, a legal advocacy group that tracks their numbers. 

But the latest call to arms appears to have failed to resonate with like-minded groups whose support would be crucial for creating a coalition of armed militia members substantial enough to thwart a law enforcement operation.

"There's a better way to go about things," said Brandon Curtiss, president of Three Percent of Idaho, a militia group that has been involved in the dispute. "If you want to make a change like that, you need to get the county citizens behind you to go through the proper channels."

When you're getting "Well, actually'd..." by armed militia groups that want to overthrow the federal government, you've lost on all possible fronts. In fact, the Bundys may be considering cutting their losses and taking the out provided to them.

Late Monday, the apparent leader of the armed occupiers, Ryan Bundy, told OPB reporters that the group — which has branded itself Citizens for Constitutional Freedom — would respect the wishes of the local community.

"This is their county – we can't be here and force this on them," Bundy told OPB Monday. "If they don't want to retrieve their rights, and if the county people tell us to leave, we'll leave." 

Bundy tells OPB that he hopes to have a community meeting organized within the next day.

So amazingly enough, what I though was going to be a protracted standoff that was sure to end in Ruby Ridge-style bloodshed may in fact turn into a bunch of losers giving up and slinking home. Sensing an opportunity here to put a peaceful end to this, the Feds are going to cut off power to the refuge.

Federal authorities are planning to cut off the power of the wildlife refuge in Oregon that has been taken over by militia, exposing the armed occupiers to sub-zero temperatures in an effort to flush them out. 

Armed militants will begin their third day at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, a remote federal outpost in eastern Oregon, on Tuesday, and have vowed to remain for months in protest over the treatment of two local cattle ranchers.

A federal government official told the Guardian that authorities were planning on Monday to cut the power at the refuge. 

“It’s in the middle of nowhere,” said the official, who is based in Washington, DC, and has knowledge of the planned response to the militia. “And it’s flat-ass cold up there.” 

The official, who asked not to be named, said they were not privy to the FBI’s plan of action. However, they said the US Park Service, which is leading the crisis management reaction to the occupation in liaison with the FBI, planned to cut the power to the building where the militiamen are spending their nights.

We'll see where this goes.  Hopefully this will all be over soon.

Stopped Clock Is Right Alert

Every now and again conservatives remind me that they are capable of putting together logical arguments and do so, and believe me, nobody's more shocked than I am to find such an argument involving our little seditious Bundy Ranch friends in Oregon between Tom Nichols and Kurt Schlicter in of all places, The Federalist..

Tom Nichols: Kurt, most of the time, you and I are on the same side of a lot of issues important to conservatives. We tend to disagree on strategy, but conservatives (no matter what leftists think) are not monolithic. As you often say, we just take different roads to the same bar.

I’m kind of shocked, however, that we seem to have a real disagreement of principle on the Bundy takeover of a public building in Oregon. I despise these guys, not only because I think they’re dangerous, but because I think they’re hypocrites. These are people whose beefs with the government seem pretty much to be a matter of whether they get their way in disputes over money, not freedom.

But here’s my bigger issue: I don’t care if they have a legitimate grievance over Dwight and Steven Hammond going to jail. While there might be a legal issue here (although the Supreme Court didn’t think so), when you pick up a weapon and occupy a building, your grievances go out the window.

My question is: why aren’t you, as a good conservative, as outraged as I am about this kind of lawless thuggery? I agree that the cops should just wait these guys out and then charge them with criminal trespass or disorderly conduct or, for all I care, Aggravated Mopery With Intent To Gawk. But you and I both know that what they’re really doing is nothing less than armed sedition, encouraging others to take up arms against law enforcement and the U.S. government itself.

When did conservatives stop being the law and order party? One of the great virtues of conservatism is consistency—even if we don’t like the results—and if this were a group of Black Lives Matter activists in there with guns and waving around little pocket Constitutions, we’d both be calling for throwing them all in the pokey. I would, anyway. Why aren’t you joining me in that same call now?

I mean, I disagree with Tom Nichols on a great number of things (and certainly with 99% of the things advocated in Sean Davis's Glibertarian Online Horsecrap Extravaganza) but this is exactly the argument conservatives should be making about Ammon Bundy's takeover of a federal building in Oregon here.

It's armed sedition, period.  If you believe in rule of law, even if you don't like the people charged with executing that rule of law, you should be against this nonsense.

Kurt Schlichter's response on the other hand is where I think most conservatives are right now.

Kurt Schlichter: I need to be clear that I am not happy about this or supportive of this particular action. But I am disgusted with the way our government has disregarded law, norms, and processes to impose its will on people the elitists at the helm in on the coasts think unworthy of consideration. When did conservatives get less fussy about observing the social contract? When liberals breached it.

But this is a terrible situation. I served in Kosovo and saw up close the chaos and destruction that comes when the rule of law goes. Some on social media accused me of “rationalizing” what’s happening in Oregon; no, I am trying to explain it, because until we understand why it is happening we can’t do what we need to do to stop it.

You are correct that my response to this situation is different from other, superficially analogous movements in recent years. We need to distinguish these Oregon people from the left-wing groups, like Occupy and Black Lives Matter. These guys are marching with American flags, not burning them. Many are apparently vets. The leftist groups are seeking to take more money from people who actually worked for it, and to stop the police from effectively controlling crime.

They are not looting. They are not rioting. They are trespassing, albeit armed. To lump them together with the leftists is a false analogy and not helpful to addressing the problem.

You don’t care about their grievances, so that doesn’t leave you with many options. You either treat their concerns seriously and make it so they don’t feel this is their only outlet, or you use force to suppress them.

We are both coastal, but we know flyover Americans well enough to know they won’t just shrug and submit. The answer, I think we both know, is not force—in fact, insurgents (and make no mistake, this is a pre-insurgency with terrifying potential to expand) need the government to overreact in order to win support.

Right now, most citizens would probably prefer that these guys just go away. But if the feds kill some of them, then many people will see them as the victims, and it will further prove many of what today seem wild claims of oppression.

The wisest thing the Obama administration ever did was walk away from the Bundy ranch. That’s step one here. The next step is to address some of their grievances. We need to show that our political and legal processes can work fairly. If not, this will only continue—and get worse.

Schlichter's ridiculous projection aside, he's right that these seditionists want to martyr themselves and ignite a much larger, most more dangerous, and much bloodier revolution against the federal government.

They want to die so that the country rises up against Obama.  Giving them what they want is stupid and accomplishes nothing.

I hate to say it, loathe it in fact.  But both Nichols and Schlichter are correct on that front.

StupidiNews!

• President Obama will announce a number of executive actions on gun control today, including subjecting online sales to background checks, and calling for more mental health care funds.
• The world's governing body on chemistry has approved the addition of four new elements to the periodic table, bringing the total to 118.
• The county sheriff in Oregon where several armed seditionists have taken of a federal wildlife refuge is asking the armed men to leave peacefully.
• China is once again intervening in its stock markets in response to a 7% drop in values Monday, banning major stockholders from selling off in order to prevent another massive rout.
• The Justice Department is formally suing Volkswagen over cheating to bypass EPA clean emissions rules, and is asking for a halt to all sales of cars with the cheating devices installed.

Last Call For Trump's 50-State Southern Strategy

Greg Sargent finally comes out and says it: Donald Trump's new ads in Iowa and New Hampshire are absolutely about driving the white backlash vote into Trump's fold.

As the final, frenzied push towards the first presidential voting begins, Donald Trump has unveiled a riveting new television ad that perfectly sums up Trumpism in all its xenophobic glory — and also perfectly captures the problem Trumpism has created for the Republican Party. 

The ad, which is set to run extensively in Iowa and New Hampshire, has it all. It reiterates his call for a temporary ban on Muslims entering the United States, and links this directly to the need to combat “radical Islamic terrorism.” It also again vows to “stop illegal immigration by building a wall on our southern border that Mexico will pay for.” All of this leads up to the grand conclusion, in which Trump himself vows to “make America great again.” 

But here’s something notable: Trump’s spot looks very much like the heavily-immigration-themed ads run by California Governor Pete Wilson in the 1990s. Wilson helped secure passage of the infamous “Proposition 187,” which sought to bar illegal immigrants from a range of state services and is widely believed to have driven Latinos away from the California GOP and set it on a path into the demographic wilderness.

There's a reason for that, and of course we know that Pete Wilson's anti-Latino ads were the beginning of the end of the California GOP.

So where is Trump and the national GOP, 20 years later?

Now, it remains unlikely that Trump will actually win the nomination. But even if he doesn’t, the question then becomes: Whither the forces Trump has unleashed inside the GOP? Trump’s candidacy — and to a somewhat lesser extent, that of Ted Cruz — is framed around the idea that the way to win the White House is by unleashing the power of white backlash. This is plainly obvious in Trump’s case, but Cruz, too, has repeatedly suggested a GOP victory must be powered by evangelicals and “Reagan Democrats,” i.e., culturally conservative blue collar whites. Cruz has engaged in more sophisticated demagoguery about Muslims and has flatly ruled out any form of legalization for undocumented immigrants.

By contrast, Marco Rubio’s long-term strategy seems to be framed broadly (though he has diverted from it at times) around the idea that the way to win is to make peace with diversifying, culturally evolving America, in hopes of cutting into Dem voter groups. (Demographics expert Ruy Teixeira’s hard look at the numbers suggests this may be the better course.) Which will GOP voters choose? We’ll soon find out. And if it’s the latter, and Rubio wins the nomination, how far he has to go in pandering to the forces Trump and Cruz are unleashing in order to get there will also bear watching.

With four weeks until the Iowa caucuses and five until the New Hampshire primaries, it's looking more and more like a two-man race between Trump and Cruz.  The March 1 "Super South" primary could give either one of these goofballs a commanding lead as well.  The smart money still seems to be on Rubio as the great Latino moderate savior of the GOP, but there's no way Rubio can win the nomination without playing to the same bigots that are powering Trump and Cruz, and currently the folks backing those two represent the majority of GOP primary voters, not just "some fringe elements".

Still, history reminds us that a large national lead in January means absolutely nothing.

At this point in -- 2004: Dean +15 2008 (D): H. Clinton +21.2 (R): Giuliani +2.8 2012: Gingrich +2.4 https://t.co/8pTnsrf0Ds

— Past Frontrunners (@pastfrontrunner) January 3, 2016

So we'll see where all this goes.

Everything Old Is New Again

Good thing the Republicans in Congress are working to pass real legislation in 2016 and not waste taxpayer time on meaningless gestures that have no chance of...oh who am I kidding.

Another year, another effort to repeal Obamacare.

House Republicans are starting off 2016 with a renewed legislative push to roll back the president's landmark health care legislation, with proposals to defund Planned Parenthood tacked onto the bill.

"As Congress returns next week, in one of our first acts of the new year, the House will vote on a bill that would eliminate key parts of Obamacare and stop taxpayer funding for abortion providers such as Planned Parenthood," Rep. Vicky Hartzler, R-Missouri, said in a video released Saturday. "If this bill becomes law, patients will be able to choose a health insurance plan that works for them -- without Washington getting in the way."

The Missouri Republican, who sits on the House Budget Committee, points to rising health insurance costs as a reason to target the individual mandate of the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

Obamacare "forces people to buy insurance that's much more expensive than what they need," Hartzler said. "And when you force millions of people to buy expensive and unaffordable insurance, it's not that surprising to see premiums going up. Deductibles are going up too -- all while people's choices are disappearing."

Hartzler promised that the bill, which would eliminate the individual mandate as well as the employer mandate to offer insurance, would be sent directly to the president's desk via the reconciliation process, avoiding the chance of congressional Democrats filibustering the legislation.

The bill also takes aim at federal funding for Planned Parenthood -- a fight Republicans have renewed with vigor since last summer, when an anti-abortion group released undercover videos of Planned Parenthood employees discussing controversial procedures like fetal tissue transfers.

According to Hartzler, the legislation places a "moratorium on taxpayer funding to abortion providers" for one year and uses some of that money to fund other community health centers.

"We have taken many votes to preserve health care choices and protect precious tax dollars in the House," she said. "If the president didn't hear the people's voices earlier, hopefully, he will through this bill."

And yet 95 percent plus of these idiots will be re-elected in November.  Awesome.

Can't wait for the veto.

Here We Go Again: Day 2

America's right-wing domestic terrorism problem continues as Oregonian reporter Les Zaitz is covering the standoff in Harney County, Oregon. Armed militia seditionists continue their standoff with the FBI after seizing the Malheur Lake federal bird sanctuary over the weekend, and plan to stay "years" if need be.

Here's a summary of key elements of this unfolding story:

The backdrop: Militiamen from several states came to Burns to protest the impending imprisonment of two Harney County ranchers. They participated in several community meetings and organized a rally and protest march that occurred without controversy on Saturday. The march lasted about an hour and involved about 300 people – a mix of militia and local residents. At the county sheriff's office, marchers threw pennies -- meant to symbolize citizens buying back their government.

The occupation: Some time after the rally, key militia leaders broke off and drove across the high desert basin south of Burns to the wildlife refuge. They said they took over the refuge headquarters, which was unoccupied for the holiday weekend. They also have blocked the access road. Indications are that this has been planned for some time. Accounts of how many militia are at the refuge range from their own claims of up to 150 to accounts from reporters at the scene that there may be no more than 15.

The refuge: Established in 1908, the refuge is one of the premier migratory bird habitats in the U.S., featuring Malheur Lake. Operated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the refuge headquarters includes the main office, a museum, and homes. No workers were on duty when the occupiers arrived.

Who's involved: Ammon Bundy, son of Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, is acting as the leader, conducting a steady stream of media interviews. Other key militia leaders have joined him, including Ryan Payne, an Army veteran from Montana involved in last year's armed standoff in Nevada with federal agents; Blaine Cooper, an Arizona militiaman who also participated in the Nevada standoff, and Jon Ritzheimer, who made headlines last year for anti-Muslim rhetoric. Days before the refuge takeover, Ritzheimer posted what struck some as a farewell video to his family.

What they want: Ammon Bundy has said in several interviews that the occupiers want federal land returned to Harney County ranchers and loggers. They say the federal government has oppressed local people with its ownership and control of land. Payne and others have insisted that under the Constitution, the federal government has no legal right to Harney County land.

Law enforcement response: During Saturday's rally, not a police officer was visible. And so far law enforcement agencies have not approached the refuge or blocked access to the territory. The FBI is in charge because the refuge is federal property. The Harney County Sheriff's Office and the Oregon State Police are engaged as well.

So yes, this is a direct follow-up to April 2014's Bundy ranch standoff, where armed seditionists faced off against law enforcement agents over Cliven Bundy refusing to pay the feds for grazing his cattle on federal land for 20 years, are now at it again.

They've planned this for a long time, I suspect.  The BLM backed off and the Bundys remained free.  They've struck again.

The question is: now what?

StupidiNews!

• Heavy flooding in the Midwest continues along the Mississippi River from Illinois into Louisiana as flood crests may not be reached in Southern states for another two weeks.
• Two are dead in a 6.7 magnitude earthquake in India's Manipur state along the country's border with Bangladesh with dozens injured.
• Saudi Arabia has cut all diplomatic ties with Iran after the Saudi embassy in Tehran was stormed over the weekend in response to the Saudi execution of a leading Shi'ite cleric.
• President Obama may journey to Cuba in an historic trip to mark normalization of relations between Washington and Havana, but further diplomatic steps need to be taken first.
• Apple will pay as much as $350 million to Italy in back taxes after a 2013 investigation found the tech giant moving revenue through its Irish affiliate to avoid payments.