Treasury: Employers must “self-attest” that ObamaCare not behind staffing decisions – under penalty of perjury

posted at 12:41 pm on February 11, 2014 by Ed Morrissey

Old and busted: Businesses will love ObamaCare for its cost savings in health care! New hotness: Businesses had better not make staffing decisions based on cost savings from ObamaCare-fueled price spikes! After its latest delay in implementing the employer mandate, the Obama administration rebuffed criticisms that the law incentivizes employers to shift to part-time work by announcing the Treasury Inquisition — ahem, excuse me, the Treasury Attestation Department:

The latest announcement comes after the administration heard from businesses about their concerns with the looming ObamaCare rules. However, the change is sure to raise more questions about the health and implementation of the law. Fewer workers getting insurance through their employers could mean more individuals on the ObamaCare exchanges seeking subsidized coverage, increasing the cost to taxpayers.

Some lawmakers, though, have claimed that the mere threat of the employer mandate is causing companies to shed full-time workers in the hope of keeping their staff size below 50 and avoiding the requirement.

Administration officials dispute that this is happening on any large scale. Further, Treasury officials said Monday that businesses will be told to “certify” that they are not shedding full-time workers simply to avoid the mandate. Officials said employers will be told to sign a “self-attestation” on their tax forms affirming this, under penalty of perjury.

Officials stressed that the latest reprieve applies to a relatively small percentage of employers — albeit companies that employ millions of workers.

Er … exactly what gives Treasury the authority to demand that kind of pledge, anyway? The law only mandates that employers provide coverage for full-time employees, a status defined by working 30 or more hours a week. It doesn’t contain any authority for Treasury or anyone else to force current full-time employees to stay in that status, nor for the federal government to dictate ratios of full-time/part-time staff.

Gabriel Malor wondered the same thing:

The Obama administration is big on self-attestation, huh? Just ask the Little Sisters of the Poor. They’ve certainly gotten the “bully” part of the bully pulpit in mind these days at the White House.

This seems an opportune time to revisit F. A. Hayek and The Road to Serfdom about the nature of command economies, and the nature of governments that impose them. Hayek supported social insurance programs, but warned that crafting them or anything else in the nature of a command economy would not just guarantee economic failure, but increasing lawlessness, arbitrariness, and tyranny from the government that imposes it as it gets desperate to avoid failure. That cycle appears to be fast-tracked with ObamaCare at Treasury.

My friend Scott Johnson at Power Line recalls the argument well in a rebuttal of a recent column from E. J. Dionne:

As I say, I guess it’s too difficult to actually read Hayek’s Road to Serfdom, or his more complete Constitution of Liberty, to see what his argument actually was, so easier just to go with Judt’s comic book version instead.  In both of his great books, Hayek endorses the principle of social insurance (and even a mandate for everyone to buy health insurance—egad*), but is concerned with the tendency toward making social insurance programs into redistribution programs.  Wow—crazy stuff, I know.  But you can see that Judt’s formula that Hayek opposed “welfare policies of any sort” is flat wrong.

And is Hayek’s broader point that centralized economic planning would lead to tyrannical government really so far-fetched?  The linchpin of Hayek’s argument was that the plans and desires of the statists would require the undermining of the rule of law, because steadily increasing arbitrary power is necessary for their centralized schemes to work.  I wonder whether Dionne has checked in lately with the Little Sisters of the Poor?  Or has taken notice of the IRS harassment of groups opposed to Obama?  I wonder what he makes of Obama’s unilateral executive decisions simply to suspend parts of the health care law that are politically inconvenient?

As for me, I wonder whether Scott expected his argument to be so very well validated in such a short space of time. Of course, no one expects the Treasury Inquisition …


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5 7

If Obama doesn’t feel the need to follow the rules, why should the rest of us?

I’ll say that’s a Yes-No answer to cut out the barack speak answer cycle.

DinaRehn on February 11, 2014 at 1:54 PM

The premise of your question is that this is an egalitarian society, where the law applies equally to everyone. It is therefore a flawed question and can’t be answered.

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 1:58 PM

Since libfreeordie is being obtuse let me translate for you:

The boot of the government is going to step on the necks of all those who need to be brought down in order to make things “fair” and “equal”.

gwelf on February 11, 2014 at 2:01 PM

If Obama doesn’t feel the need to follow the rules, why should the rest of us?

I’ll say that’s a Yes-No answer to cut out the barack speak answer cycle.

DinaRehn on February 11, 2014 at 1:54 PM
The premise of your question is that this is an egalitarian society, where the law applies equally to everyone. It is therefore a flawed question and can’t be answered.

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 1:58 PM

No, we should not use the excuse to not follow the law even if our President is not. Libby will not admit President Obama is not following the law so he spouts the above nonsense

Libby, we should call ours out when they are wrong. Try being honest it is so much easier than having to use double speak.

HonestLib on February 11, 2014 at 2:03 PM

The premise of your question is that this is an egalitarian society, where the law applies equally to everyone. It is therefore a flawed question and can’t be answered.

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 1:58 PM

Then why are Obama and his friends “more equal than others”?

ConstantineXI on February 11, 2014 at 2:03 PM

Bishop: We was too late.

Buttercup on February 11, 2014 at 2:05 PM

There never has been nor will be a real egalitarian society so until the impossible happens libfree is happy to support totalitarian regimes lead by enlightened rulers to “redistribute” things around.

Or course he has no answer as to why Obama’s policies redistribute money from the younger poorer to the richer older.

See, in theory, if libfree were honest he’d admit that Obama’s policies have the exact opposite effect Obama and libfree claimed they would have (inequality is worse under Obama than Boooosh!) but he likes the idea of a progressive president with imperial powers.
And ideas are so much more important than results to libfree.

gwelf on February 11, 2014 at 2:06 PM

If Obama doesn’t feel the need to follow the rules, why should the rest of us?

I’ll say that’s a Yes-No answer to cut out the barack speak answer cycle.

DinaRehn on February 11, 2014 at 1:54 PM

The premise of your question is that this is an egalitarian society, where the law applies equally to everyone. It is therefore a flawed question and can’t be answered.

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 1:58 PM

Did you miss the part where is said it was a Yes-No answer?

Where did I say anything similar to what you put forward in your lame strawman answer?

It’s a simple question with a simple answer, surely you are intelligent enough to answer it?

Right?

DinaRehn on February 11, 2014 at 2:06 PM

The premise of your question is that this is an egalitarian society, where the law applies equally to everyone. It is therefore a flawed question and can’t be answered.

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 1:58 PM

Then why are Obama and his friends “more equal than others”?

ConstantineXI on February 11, 2014 at 2:03 PM

Excellent point.

You also wont see libfreeordie redistributing his own income or wealth to the poor.

Utter hypocrisy. Especially when you consider the fact that libfreeordie’s sinecure as a college professor is paid for by working and middle class families who aren’t as well off as he is – he’s a direct beneficiary of redistribution from people poorer than he is.

gwelf on February 11, 2014 at 2:07 PM

Ah, but the AR platform with it’s adaptability and smaller round is much more accessible to everyone no matter their sex.

DinaRehn on February 11, 2014 at 1:46 PM

The AR round may be smaller, but it’s NOT cheaper, and therefore not necessarily more accessible.
I generally pay about $9 for a box of 20 brass rounds of .223 (less in bulk), but a 20 pack of 7.62×39 in steel casing (which the AK can handle just fine) costs less than $6.

dentarthurdent on February 11, 2014 at 2:08 PM

PolAgnostic on February 11, 2014 at 1:47 PM


The ban now includes any semiautomatic firearm — that is, one that reloads a round after each pull of the trigger

So much for double-action revolvers …

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on February 11, 2014 at 2:08 PM

I despise John Roberts more and more every day….

ladyingray on February 11, 2014 at 2:08 PM

The boot of the government is going to step on the necks of all those who need to be brought down in order to make things “fair” and “equal”.

gwelf on February 11, 2014 at 2:01 PM

The leftists haven’t figured out the dirty little secret yet, people like us might be the ones selected to make the rules and enforce the edicts.

Bishop on February 11, 2014 at 2:09 PM

libfreeordie likes egalitarian societies.

Which is why he refuses to be paid more than a janitor where he teaches.

gwelf on February 11, 2014 at 2:09 PM

I think lib free is actually drunk, or been hacked. He’s flat out admitting that the law doesn’t apply equally, and that Obama can break the law and we can’t.

That’s not lib free, usually.

Vanceone on February 11, 2014 at 2:09 PM

Just a thought. All of this is but a public admission that Obamacare is failing exactly because of this, so it must continue if we are to keep our freedom from this oppressive monster that the GOP will not remove from the laws of this nation.
The Dems are doing this because they need to shift the blame, for fear they’ll all go down with the USS Obamacare.

Don L on February 11, 2014 at 2:09 PM

It is, except for the 1%rs, whom you so despise, unless they are the obamas and their cronies. Find a mirror.

Schadenfreude on February 11, 2014 at 2:00 PM

*cough* Affluenza *cough*
And that is just one striking example of the way class status produces privilege for some Americans over others. You say I am a hypocrite because I am more likely to point out class privilege operating in corporate worlds, rather than say Beyonce. But in order for me to be a hypocrite, you have to admit that class privilege exists throughout the society. I am only a hypocrite if I am ignoring that class privilege is universal and only critiquing it amongst political enemies.

The problem though for you, is that if we agree that class privilege is systemic and endemic to American society, this blog’s myopic obsession with the “privileges” of the President reveal themselves to be the *actual* hypocrisy; because they are predicated on the idea that obama’s over-privelige emerges from the much maligned “state” and that class privilege emerges from “hard work” and a “free market.” In other words, the supposedly “objective” nature of the market allows you to not give two poops about class privilege. On some fundamental level, you believe the upper middle class and upwards deserve privilege before the law because they earned it int he system you approve of.

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:10 PM

The AR round may be smaller, but it’s NOT cheaper, and therefore not necessarily more accessible.
I generally pay about $9 for a box of 20 brass rounds of .223 (less in bulk), but a 20 pack of 7.62×39 in steel casing (which the AK can handle just fine) costs less than $6.

dentarthurdent on February 11, 2014 at 2:08 PM

I prefer .30-06.

ConstantineXI on February 11, 2014 at 2:10 PM

The boot of the government is going to step on the necks of all those who need to be brought down in order to make things “fair” and “equal”.

gwelf on February 11, 2014 at 2:01 PM

The leftists haven’t figured out the dirty little secret yet, people like us might be the ones selected to make the rules and enforce the edicts.

Bishop on February 11, 2014 at 2:09 PM

They’ll use the bureaucrats as long as they can.
And when that fails we’ll see what they do next.

gwelf on February 11, 2014 at 2:11 PM

The AR round may be smaller, but it’s NOT cheaper, and therefore not necessarily more accessible.
I generally pay about $9 for a box of 20 brass rounds of .223 (less in bulk), but a 20 pack of 7.62×39 in steel casing (which the AK can handle just fine) costs less than $6.

dentarthurdent on February 11, 2014 at 2:08 PM

So get an AR which fires 7.62×39 and be happy.

Bishop on February 11, 2014 at 2:11 PM

I prefer .30-06.

ConstantineXI on February 11, 2014 at 2:10 PM

I’d like to have one, but that’s one of the gaps in my arsenal…

dentarthurdent on February 11, 2014 at 2:13 PM

ACA was a terrible law now being implemented by dolts.

HonestLib on February 11, 2014 at 1:44 PM
But it’s not implemented. It’s post-poned for all the political reasons. If it were good it would need no propaganda, and you know this. Why you’re an honest lib, a true dichotomy.

It is known here that I don’t ever try to convert people. That is up to each their own.

However, why on Earth are you a Lib? I asked you the other day if you are Libertarian or “Liberal”. Also, we are the true liberals. The leftist thugs are fascist leftists.

Schadenfreude on February 11, 2014 at 1:49 PM

.
.
.
ACA is terrible and sorry if my post was not clear. Yes, it is being changed for plitical reasons. I will ask an internet favour. Give me a few more weeks to post and that will show what type of liberal I am. If I have not been clear, then ask again and I will provide an answer. Sadly the answer will be too long like most of my posts.

HonestLib on February 11, 2014 at 2:13 PM

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:10 PM

You’re so thoroughly unoriginal.

I’d address your points, but you have yet to make any.

Eric in Hollywood on February 11, 2014 at 2:14 PM

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:10 PM

fap fap fap and libfree takes care of another strawman.

HumpBot Salvation on February 11, 2014 at 2:14 PM

“Oh, bugger!”

mojo on February 11, 2014 at 2:15 PM

*cough* Affluenza *cough*
And that is just one striking example of the way class status produces privilege for some Americans over others. You say I am a hypocrite because I am more likely to point out class privilege operating in corporate worlds, rather than say Beyonce. But in order for me to be a hypocrite, you have to admit that class privilege exists throughout the society. I am only a hypocrite if I am ignoring that class privilege is universal and only critiquing it amongst political enemies.

The problem though for you, is that if we agree that class privilege is systemic and endemic to American society, this blog’s myopic obsession with the “privileges” of the President reveal themselves to be the *actual* hypocrisy; because they are predicated on the idea that obama’s over-privelige emerges from the much maligned “state” and that class privilege emerges from “hard work” and a “free market.” In other words, the supposedly “objective” nature of the market allows you to not give two poops about class privilege. On some fundamental level, you believe the upper middle class and upwards deserve privilege before the law because they earned it int he system you approve of.

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:10 PM

That’s a bunch of crap and you know it. It’s also a bunch of straw men.

Or is that what you tell yourself to justify the state redistributing money from the working and middle class who are poorer than you to your own bank account?

You can blather on all day about egalitarian societies and inequalities but the truth is that you don’t do jack squat personally to redistribute your wealth with those around you – and in fact make a living off of redistribution from them to you.

gwelf on February 11, 2014 at 2:16 PM

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:10 PM

Either you are very unfamiliar with conservative or libertarian thought on society and markets and government or you think we’re stupid and you’ll get away constructing your own deranged straw man versions of them.

gwelf on February 11, 2014 at 2:16 PM

So get an AR which fires 7.62×39 and be happy.

Bishop on February 11, 2014 at 2:11 PM

I “celebrate diversity” – of weapons of different calibers that is.
I’m happy – I have a Draco AK “pistol” and my son has a standard AK-47 that use that round.

dentarthurdent on February 11, 2014 at 2:16 PM

Which is why he refuses to be paid more than a janitor where he teaches.

gwelf on February 11, 2014 at 2:09 PM

He hates a class-structure society where a man without the requisite station in life must clean toilets while others are able to work in an office environment and not perform such labor.

He hates it until the faculty lounge toilet overflows and he has to call someone to fix it, but rest assured an hour later he hates it again.

Bishop on February 11, 2014 at 2:17 PM

BTW, did I mention that I despise Disqus and pray that Hot Gas never – repeat- never adopts that commenting system?

DinaRehn on February 11, 2014 at 1:40 PM

Did you know they do not do the censoring? It’s the websites that use Disqus that do the censoring.

Those websites I will not mention (cough..nro..cough) may feel freer to censor more aggressively because people think it is Disqus doing it, but it’s not.

fadetogray on February 11, 2014 at 2:18 PM

He hates a class-structure society where a man without the requisite station in life must clean toilets while others are able to work in an office environment and not perform such labor.

He hates it until the faculty lounge toilet overflows and he has to call someone to fix it, but rest assured an hour later he hates it again.

Bishop on February 11, 2014 at 2:17 PM

Libfree knows that redistributing money from people poorer than him to his own lavish salary is going to benefit them in the long run once the progressive revolution runs it’s course they become completely dependent on the state and the rich are paying for everything.
Still not sure who’s going to be fixing the toilets though.

gwelf on February 11, 2014 at 2:18 PM

You can blather on all day about egalitarian societies and inequalities but the truth is that you don’t do jack squat personally to redistribute your wealth with those around you – and in fact make a living off of redistribution from them to you.

gwelf on February 11, 2014 at 2:16 PM

That ties in very nicely with what I said yesterday…

There really isn’t any point to entering into a discussion with people who have absolutely no intention of ever holding themselves accountable to the very rules they would prescribe for you.

Ask them why they felt the need to lie in order to pass their law, and they’ll tell you they didn’t lie at all.

Show them proof of their lie, and they’ll tell you it was necessary and for the common good.

Ask them to reconcile their denial with their later admission, and they’ll call you “myopic” and “anarchistic.”

It really is like trying to have a discussion with a toddler, albeit a sociopathic one.

Eric in Hollywood on February 11, 2014 at 2:20 PM

New hotness: Businesses had better not make staffing decisions based on cost savings from ObamaCare-fueled price spikes!

Ed, this is actually more “do what you want, but you damn well better go on the record saying it wasn’t because of Obamacare, even if it was.”

Reality be damned, they just don’t want people saying it was done because of Obamacare – and if they *do* say it, the DoJ will have something to say about it, for sure.

Midas on February 11, 2014 at 2:21 PM

Firms aren’t supposed to consider the cost of employees before hiring them? This is anti-science as it contradicts the known facts of the science of economics.

thuja on February 11, 2014 at 2:22 PM

Still not sure who’s going to be fixing the toilets though.

gwelf on February 11, 2014 at 2:18 PM

We can be sure he believes it won’t be him.

dentarthurdent on February 11, 2014 at 2:22 PM

Ah, but the AR platform with it’s adaptability and smaller round is much more accessible to everyone no matter their sex.

DinaRehn on February 11, 2014 at 1:46 PM

The AR round may be smaller, but it’s NOT cheaper, and therefore not necessarily more accessible.
I generally pay about $9 for a box of 20 brass rounds of .223 (less in bulk), but a 20 pack of 7.62×39 in steel casing (which the AK can handle just fine) costs less than $6.

dentarthurdent on February 11, 2014 at 2:08 PM

I meant in terms of the physical stature of the of that weapon system, not necessarily cost-wise.

You are correct on the costs for ammo, but I’m not thrilled with the idea of steel cased ammo..

DinaRehn on February 11, 2014 at 2:22 PM

We can be sure he believes it won’t be him.

dentarthurdent on February 11, 2014 at 2:22 PM

He’d need to go to school for that…

oldroy on February 11, 2014 at 2:23 PM

That ties in very nicely with what I said yesterday…

There really isn’t any point to entering into a discussion with people who have absolutely no intention of ever holding themselves accountable to the very rules they would prescribe for you.

Ask them why they felt the need to lie in order to pass their law, and they’ll tell you they didn’t lie at all.

Show them proof of their lie, and they’ll tell you it was necessary and for the common good.

Ask them to reconcile their denial with their later admission, and they’ll call you “myopic” and “anarchistic.”

It really is like trying to have a discussion with a toddler, albeit a sociopathic one.

Eric in Hollywood on February 11, 2014 at 2:20 PM

Yeah.

Libfree does love to trot out his parade of Kulaks every day.

gwelf on February 11, 2014 at 2:23 PM

He hates it until the faculty lounge toilet overflows and he has to call someone to fix it, but rest assured an hour later he hates it again.

Bishop on February 11, 2014 at 2:17 PM

Mainly because Libfree, like most members of faculties is incapable of unstopping a toilet, or anything else that isn’t “government work”

ConstantineXI on February 11, 2014 at 2:24 PM

Somewhere, in a parallel universe…

Democrats, Media Slam President Romney Over Health Care Law Changes

Chris of Rights on February 11, 2014 at 2:25 PM

Yeah.

Libfree does love to trot out his parade of Kulaks every day.

gwelf on February 11, 2014 at 2:23 PM

Those are just long shorts with a wrap…

oldroy on February 11, 2014 at 2:25 PM

It really is like trying to have a discussion with a toddler, albeit a sociopathic one.

Eric in Hollywood on February 11, 2014 at 2:20 PM

Excerpt the big difference is that most toddlers don’t know how to lie.

Those on the national socialist left have no moral compunctions about doing so to further their agenda.

DinaRehn on February 11, 2014 at 2:25 PM

HonestLib on February 11, 2014 at 2:03 PM

Who are you really?

I suspect a counter-troll. You are far too rational to truly be a liberal.

:)

Midas on February 11, 2014 at 2:25 PM

The problem though for you, is that if we agree that class privilege is systemic and endemic to American society, this blog’s myopic obsession with the “privileges” of the President reveal themselves to be the *actual* hypocrisy; because they are predicated on the idea that obama’s over-privelige emerges from the much maligned “state” and that class privilege emerges from “hard work” and a “free market.” In other words, the supposedly “objective” nature of the market allows you to not give two poops about class privilege. On some fundamental level, you believe the upper middle class and upwards deserve privilege before the law because they earned it int he system you approve of.

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:10 PM

Yep.

That’s what you don’t get, child.

You and your Barack Obama want the government to dole out income and privileges based on skin color and adherence to political ideology.

You and your Barack Obama loathe the free market because it doles out income and privileges based on character, intelligence, and hard work.

According to you and your Barack Obama, Trayvon Martin, a proven drug user, statutory rapist, high school dropout, and juvenile delinquent is entitled to exactly the same living circumstances as a white person who goes to school, becomes a doctor, sets up a thriving practice, avoids drugs, and follows the law.

Since you and your Barack Obama are never going to work or develop the kind of character that is required to succeed in private industry, you set out to trash it. And that is why you come here spouting about “class privilege”. You are a lazy worthless child, and instead of bettering yourself, you set out to make people who do feel bad about it. This is typical of the childish and primitive mindset of the black community, in which education is blasted as “acting white” and in which math and science programs wither on the vine in favor of giving money to racists like yourself and Melissa Harris-Perry whose classes are a matter of blaming white people for everything.

northdallasthirty on February 11, 2014 at 2:25 PM

Libfree does love to trot out his parade of Kulaks every day.

gwelf on February 11, 2014 at 2:23 PM

I prefer crocs.

And guns.

LOTS and LOTS of guns.

Eric in Hollywood on February 11, 2014 at 2:26 PM

Still not sure who’s going to be fixing the toilets though.

gwelf on February 11, 2014 at 2:18 PM

The same creatures which magically fill the store shelves when inventory gets low.

Libfree makes a call about a broken toilet, goes to lunch, and presto magico when he returns the toilet works again; in Utopia this is how it works.

Bishop on February 11, 2014 at 2:26 PM

So, looks like being on defense was not such a good thing to fight this commie crap. So, go on offense.

Get Landmark Legal Foundation (Mark Levin etal) to sue the Obama adm, Sec. of Health Sillybus etal and demand they fully implement all of the Affordable Health Care Act NOW next week, as orginaly written, every bit of it total asap. Force Holder’s Justic Dept. to show up in a Federal Court House and “show cause” why Obama Care should not be implemented total and now.

Get in their face demand it be in operation before the Nov. elections and or at least force them to act the legal fools and try to keep Obama Care off the books until after selected elections like they are doing now.

What we are doing is not working.

Throw some “crap” at the fan, see if it gets on Obama’s face and makes them all look like the tools they in fact are.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on February 11, 2014 at 2:27 PM

Libfreeordie is 110% dead on. Our President does not need to follow the law provided it is for the greater good.

The Affordable Care Act is just such a situation. Obama is not acting above the law in the least. Obama is the law

I Have No Political Leanings Whatsoever on February 11, 2014 at 2:27 PM

northdallasthirty on February 11, 2014 at 2:25 PM

ND30!!!!!

Fancy meeting you here, sir! :-)

Eric in Hollywood on February 11, 2014 at 2:28 PM

You’re so thoroughly unoriginal.

I’d address your points, but you have yet to make any.

Eric in Hollywood on February 11, 2014 at 2:14 PM

fap fap fap and libfree takes care of another strawman.

HumpBot Salvation on February 11, 2014 at 2:14 PM

Either you are very unfamiliar with conservative or libertarian thought on society and markets and government or you think we’re stupid and you’ll get away constructing your own deranged straw man versions of them.

gwelf on February 11, 2014 at 2:16 PM

You know, after a certain point, people should have to actually prove their accusations of “straw man.” None of you are willing to engage the ideas in my post at 2:10. So you throw out “straw man” or “hypocrite because you get paid a nice salary” when that post at 2:10 addresses the question of hypocrisy. You haven’t come up with a response to my argument there. No doubt, by the time I post this “strawman” will appear 10 more times.

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:28 PM

That’s a pure Communism/Socialism type rule.

TerryW on February 11, 2014 at 2:28 PM

Libfree makes a call about a broken toilet, goes to lunch, and presto magico when he returns the toilet works again; in Utopia this is how it works.

Bishop on February 11, 2014 at 2:26 PM

Just please, don’t flush the toilet paper. Please place it in the receptacle.

Eric in Hollywood on February 11, 2014 at 2:29 PM

Libfree makes a call about a broken toilet, goes to lunch, and presto magico when he returns the toilet works again; in Utopia this is how it works.

Bishop on February 11, 2014 at 2:26 PM

Disneyland works like that too.

oldroy on February 11, 2014 at 2:29 PM

The ban now includes any semiautomatic firearm — that is, one that reloads a round after each pull of the trigger

So much for double-action revolvers …

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on February 11, 2014 at 2:08 PM

TIn a double-action revolver the expended cartiridge remains ‘in battery’ after the pull of the trigger. To advance the cylinder and put the next sequential live round into firing position the trigger must again be pulled.
Further, all mechanical actions of a double-action revolver are executed by user energy, therefore the double-action revolver is not semi-, or in any other sense, automatic.

M240H on February 11, 2014 at 2:29 PM

The ban now includes any semiautomatic firearm — that is, one that reloads a round after each pull of the trigger

So much for double-action revolvers …

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on February 11, 2014 at 2:08 PM

Very good point.

Just to state my point more clearly for the terminally obtuse (i.e. trolls):

Every time they make a law that people will CHOOSE not to obey:

Every time the SCOAMF breaks the law without consequence:

Every time the delusional MSM LIES to advance the SCOAMF’s agenda:

They recruit another thousand people WHO WILL NOT COMPLY.

Side note to the trolls: I know you are mind bogglingly stupid enough to believe the Cloward-Piven nonsense. Please keep believing and, whatever you do, pay no attention to reality of what REALLY happens when oppressed people have risen up in the last 25 years.

PolAgnostic on February 11, 2014 at 2:30 PM

I meant in terms of the physical stature of the of that weapon system, not necessarily cost-wise.
You are correct on the costs for ammo, but I’m not thrilled with the idea of steel cased ammo..

DinaRehn on February 11, 2014 at 2:22 PM

The AR-15 platform is definitely more easily customizable, with far more custom parts/options available. Don’t get me wrong – I love my AR (Windham Weaponry SRC with many add-ons) – it’s far more accurate at a distance. And I wouldn’t put steel casings in it either.
But the AK is overall a “tougher” weapon, due to less precise machining/tolerances, that can handle more abuse, so it’s built to handle steel casings – or anything else you throw at it. The gun itself is cheaper and so is the ammo for it – but I sure as heck couldn’t hit a target 100 yards out with my Draco.

dentarthurdent on February 11, 2014 at 2:30 PM

On some fundamental level, you believe the upper middle class and upwards deserve privilege before the law because they earned it int he system you approve of.

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:10 PM

Yep.

northdallasthirty on February 11, 2014 at 2:25 PM

Thank you.

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:30 PM

livefreeonObamainflatedmoney,

Have you noticed that what Obama does in a bit of a pain to some of U.S. but others who are just getting by,,, well to them it is the end game and they get shoved to the botton of the Obama shit hole.

That and your one of his helpers to pull off the crime.

Make you feel good?

APACHEWHOKNOWS on February 11, 2014 at 2:31 PM

I wonder if Libfree is “out” while on campus.

oldroy on February 11, 2014 at 2:31 PM

*cough* Affluenza *cough*

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:10 PM

HILARIOUS.

Notice how the black child libfreeordie considers being successful a DISEASE, something to be avoided.

But of course, this is the mentality of the liberal. Earning a living is punishment. Being faithful to one person is harmful. Taking responsibility for your own actions is “acting white”. Anyone who criticizes your behavior is a racist.

Once you understand how the worthless libfreeordie and so-called black “academics” like himself glorify being a playa and living on welfare while demonizing those who do otherwise as race traitors, it becomes very obvious very quickly why the black community is in such deplorable shape.

northdallasthirty on February 11, 2014 at 2:31 PM

The premise of your question is that this is an egalitarian society, where the law applies equally to everyone. It is therefore a flawed question and can’t be answered.

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 1:58 PM

I told you NO computer until you finish cleaning your room!

libfreesMom on February 11, 2014 at 2:31 PM

I have been out of the closet since the age of 15, every employer I’ve worked for has known about my sexual orientation. Though that is a very creepy thing to ask oldroy.

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:31 PM

Still not sure who’s going to be fixing the toilets though.

gwelf on February 11, 2014 at 2:18 PM

The same creatures which magically fill the store shelves when inventory gets low.

Libfree makes a call about a broken toilet, goes to lunch, and presto magico when he returns the toilet works again; in Utopia this is how it works.

Bishop on February 11, 2014 at 2:26 PM

To be fair, libfree things the guy restocking the shelf should make a “living wage” of say $25/hour.
Not sure if he’ll like the quadrupling of his grocery bill to actually pay for it though. Or maybe grocery stores are part of the parade of Kulaks who horde vast amounts of wealth and keep it away from the workers.

gwelf on February 11, 2014 at 2:31 PM

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:10 PM

Are you ever going to answer my question:

Should the rest of us follow the rules, if our Dear leader doesn’t follow them?

[Rephrased it to make it more amenable to it being a yes-no response]

You can also just say Y for Yes and N for No.

One letter is all you need.

You should be able to handle that.

DinaRehn on February 11, 2014 at 2:32 PM

No doubt, by the time I post this “strawman” will appear 10 more times.

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:28 PM

If he’d only stop using them, perhaps we’d be induced to refrain from calling him out on them.

See how that works?

Eric in Hollywood on February 11, 2014 at 2:32 PM

I wonder if Libfree is “out” while on campus.

oldroy on February 11, 2014 at 2:31 PM

As long as you’re a black Democrat, you can be a rapist and a pedophile and no one cares.

northdallasthirty on February 11, 2014 at 2:32 PM

I told you NO computer until you finish cleaning your room!

libfreesMom on February 11, 2014 at 2:31 PM

But Mom! I have to help that poor slow Reagan boy down the street with his homework. You know he ain’t right in the head! And you always told me to be good to my lessors. Please, can’t I for just a bit longer?

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:33 PM

Obama is the law

I Have No Political Leanings Whatsoever on February 11, 2014 at 2:27 PM

He’s Judge Dredd???

Chris of Rights on February 11, 2014 at 2:33 PM

I have been out of the closet since the age of 15, every employer I’ve worked for has known about my sexual orientation. Though that is a very creepy thing to ask oldroy.

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:31 PM

Reason I ask is that you spend so much time here spouting your views. With people whose mind you won’t change. During the middle of your busy work day.

oldroy on February 11, 2014 at 2:33 PM

Treasury: Employers must “self-attest” that ObamaCare not behind staffing decisions – under penalty of perjury

Bill and Hillary could be heard laughing hysterically.

airupthere on February 11, 2014 at 2:34 PM

The Affordable Care Act is just such a situation the law. Obama is not acting above the law in at the least. Obama is the law just the president.

I Have No Political Leanings Whatsoever on February 11, 2014 at 2:27 PM

Dressed that up a lil’ for ya’.

antipc on February 11, 2014 at 2:34 PM

By the way. This is implementing directive 10-289.

TerryW on February 11, 2014 at 2:35 PM

Should the rest of us follow the rules, if our Dear leader doesn’t follow them?

[Rephrased it to make it more amenable to it being a yes-no response]

I’ve responded to your question by revealing its flawed premise. Now go back to basic logic class and learn the difference between “strawman” and “premise.” Run along little buddy!

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:35 PM

Are you ever going to answer my question:

Should the rest of us follow the rules, if our Dear leader doesn’t follow them?

[Rephrased it to make it more amenable to it being a yes-no response]

You can also just say Y for Yes and N for No.

One letter is all you need.

You should be able to handle that.

DinaRehn on February 11, 2014 at 2:32 PM

Oh, he answered it, and clearly stated that no, we should indeed NOT flaunt the law, even as Teh Lightbringer continues to do so. I’d go back and look for it, but I’m a lazy f*ck that way.

The more pertinent question would be to ask him, “Why not?”

Eric in Hollywood on February 11, 2014 at 2:35 PM

But Mom! I have to help that poor slow Reagan boy down the street with his homework. You know he ain’t right in the head! And you always told me to be good to my lessors. Please, can’t I for just a bit longer?

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:33 PM

Not until you clean up all the Clam dip you threw at the wall last night because you accused the White Chess pieces of being racist.

Your room smells like a the Clam docks at low tide.

libfreesMom on February 11, 2014 at 2:36 PM

You know, after a certain point, people should have to actually prove their accusations of “straw man.” None of you are willing to engage the ideas in my post at 2:10. So you throw out “straw man” or “hypocrite because you get paid a nice salary” when that post at 2:10 addresses the question of hypocrisy. You haven’t come up with a response to my argument there. No doubt, by the time I post this “strawman” will appear 10 more times.

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:28 PM

It’s because we’ve done so multiple times.

And you seem unable to answer how redistribution from the working and middle class to your bank account works with your preferred egalitarian society.

And nd30 did a great job deconstructing your argument but the fact you think he actually agreed with your ridiculous straw man framing of the argument shows that you either can’t read or are disingenuous.

Conservatives/libertarians don’t argue that there aren’t inequalities in society or even that wealth provides some people with greater opportunity and “privileges” but it’s only the insane left like you that think that this can actually be removed from society. You will never get rid of this and any government or institution you imbue with the power to try to cannot help but be corrupt and impose it’s own WORSE inequality and hierarchy of privilege. The truth is that a free market allows for the most opportunity for the most people and that for the most part it’s merit based. You won’t be able to come up with a better system.

nd30 totally nailed you.

gwelf on February 11, 2014 at 2:36 PM

livefreesoothersgetscrewed,

Being selfdestructive seems to be your number one problem.

Seek help.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on February 11, 2014 at 2:36 PM

Reason I ask is that you spend so much time here spouting your views. With people whose mind you won’t change. During the middle of your busy work day.

oldroy on February 11, 2014 at 2:33 PM

How about this. We keep this entertaining space for political debate the fun place it is, and not a place where people get creepy. If you’re *really* that mad at my goofing around on here, that says much more about you than it does about me. Absolutely no one on this board is obligated to respond to anything that I type. They do so, on their own free will. That is because, on some level, they enjoy it. And so do you, or you wouldn’t be getting all histrionic. Just, chill. Its a politics board that means nothing.

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:37 PM

The livefree toy would not bring much at the Pawn Shop in Las Vegas seems to me.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on February 11, 2014 at 2:38 PM

gwelf on February 11, 2014 at 2:36 PM

You actually haven’t defended the morality of class privilege before the law. You have not made a defense of the fact that having money makes it less likely you will be punished for a crime. And if you have, I am sure that you can copy and paste it here.

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:38 PM

livefreeonothersmoney,

Your wnat meaning nothing is.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on February 11, 2014 at 2:39 PM

They do so, on their own free will. That is because, on some level, they enjoy it. And so do you, or you wouldn’t be getting all histrionic. Just, chill. Its a politics board that means nothing.

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:37 PM

OK. I’ll chill. You? When asked questions, will you answer? Or do you want this to be your soap box? Is that what you do in your class? Your view only is represented? Your questions must be answered? Seems so unchilled…

oldroy on February 11, 2014 at 2:39 PM

You know, after a certain point, people should have to actually prove their accusations of “straw man.” None of you are willing to engage the ideas in my post at 2:10. So you throw out “straw man” or “hypocrite because you get paid a nice salary” when that post at 2:10 addresses the question of hypocrisy. You haven’t come up with a response to my argument there. No doubt, by the time I post this “strawman” will appear 10 more times.

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:28 PM

Another thing you’ve never bothered to answer is where “white privilege” and “hierarchy of privilege” ranks in holding back poor blacks compared to the disintegration of the black family, abandonment of bourgeois values, liberal policies driving away business, and teachers unions foisting bad education on children (another aspect of the redistribution you won’t criticize).

And how is it exactly that poor asians have escaped all these things for generations (to the point that race hucksters like yourself need to exclude Asians from affirmative action).

gwelf on February 11, 2014 at 2:40 PM

ve responded to your question by revealing its flawed premise. Now go back to basic logic class and learn the difference between “strawman” and “premise.” Run along little buddy!

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:35 PM

Ah yes, the libtard fallback: “YOUR PREMISE IS FLAWED, THEREFORE I AM ABSOLVED FROM HAVING TO ANSWER IT!”

Again, when you lack the courage of your convictions, you get what we have here…

A bonafide, run-of-the-mill, seen-one-seen-em-all sociopathic parasite.

He looks in the mirror, and sees inherent goodness.

He looks at you, and sees a criminal.

But when the world looks at him, they see the untold millions of innocent people murdered in furtherance of an ideology that steadfastly refuses to acknowledge it’s abhorrent history, primarily because it can’t understand the difference between envy and altruism.

Eric in Hollywood on February 11, 2014 at 2:40 PM

The problrm is that that not only is not much is likely to be done about this…gut yhat the GOPe areblikely gonna go along because they are licking their chops at the thought of having that pen and that phone..

redyoshii on February 11, 2014 at 2:40 PM

But Mom! I have to help that poor slow Reagan boy down the street with his homework. You know he ain’t right in the head! And you always told me to be good to my lessors. Please, can’t I for just a bit longer?

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:33 PM

That slow kid leases property to you?

Maybe you meant “lesser”?

You’re a college perfesser, right? O_o

Bishop on February 11, 2014 at 2:40 PM

You know, after a certain point, people should have to actually prove their accusations of “straw man.”
libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:28 PM

Ah, good question!

What is a Straw Man Argument?
The straw man argument is regarded as a logical fallacy, because at its core, the person using the device misrepresents the other person’s argument. The person does this because it then becomes easier to knock down the weaker version of the opposing argument.
The straw man argument deliberately misrepresents and weakens the argument of the opposing side.
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-straw-man-argument.htm

In my case you deliberately misrepresented my question:

If Obama doesn’t feel the need to follow the rules, why should the rest of us?

DinaRehn on February 11, 2014 at 1:54 PM

The premise of your question is that this is an egalitarian society, where the law applies equally to everyone. It is therefore a flawed question and can’t be answered.

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 1:58 PM

By misrepresenting it, to which you then went on to say that ‘It is therefore a flawed question and can’t be answered’

Where did I say anything about ‘an egalitarian society’ in that question?

It was merely a question on following the rules – to which you have yet to answer.

DinaRehn on February 11, 2014 at 2:41 PM

Please, stop feeding the f*cking trolls. Holy shit, people.

Midas on February 11, 2014 at 2:41 PM

When asked questions, will you answer?

I do answer. You just don’t *like* the answers. I am not obligated to respond to the question in the exact way you pose it. Nor am I obliged to respond to everyone. I respond when and where I want, *just like every other poster here.* You seem to want to have a different set of rules for men than for anyone else. And when you don’t get your way, you get weird and try and make it personal and about my work. How I run my classes, for example, is a work matter and not any of your business unless you sign up or are a colleague. Guess what? I’m also not interested in your work life. It’s actually irrelevant to your ability to debate these ideological issues.

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:43 PM

There is class privilege benefiting “corporate” world. They meet behind closed doors with corrupt pols who are running an overstuffed federal government. They write laws and regs that keep smaller businesses out of the game. They lie and cheat and are not prosecuted with the full force of the law. Some get massive bailouts. It’s like that all around the world.
BTW – if the fed was smaller then the “class privilege” of the CEO would be smaller as well.

BUT THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS HEADLINE!!!!

No CEO on the planet has the power to fine you, make you employ 50 or 100 people, make you pay them more of your paycheck … It’s not the same. Not even close. A president not beholden/limited by law is faaaaar more of a potential threat to our freedoms then some corporate CEO. Comparing the 2 IS THE STRAW MAN!

BoxHead1 on February 11, 2014 at 2:44 PM

But then again…

Midas on February 11, 2014 at 2:44 PM

Please, stop feeding the f*cking trolls. Holy shit, people.

Midas on February 11, 2014 at 2:41 PM

If we did that, HA’s post numbers would drop by about 95%……

dentarthurdent on February 11, 2014 at 2:45 PM

You’re a college perfesser, right? O_o

Bishop on February 11, 2014 at 2:40 PM

Probably at one of those on-line “universities.” One that rakes in money by the ton for the CEO and gives out useless degrees. It was the only gig he could get.

CurtZHP on February 11, 2014 at 2:45 PM

Where did I say anything about ‘an egalitarian society’ in that question?

*sigh*

If Obama doesn’t feel the need to follow the rules, why should the rest of us?

DinaRehn on February 11, 2014 at 1:54 PM

“The rest of us” in that sentence clearly refers to the citizenry as a whole, i.e. society. And it demands that the President be subject to the same application of the law as the entire society, i.e. egalitarian.

So your question is based upon the idea that this is an egalitarian society. It is not. Therefore my argument is not a “straw man” rather I am identifying why the assumptions upon which your question is asked are flawed.

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:45 PM

Please, stop feeding the f*cking trolls. Holy shit, people.

Midas on February 11, 2014 at 2:41 PM

If we did that, HA’s post numbers would drop by about 95%……

dentarthurdent on February 11, 2014 at 2:45 PM

Exactly.

Midas on February 11, 2014 at 2:46 PM

I do answer. You just don’t *like* the answers. I am not obligated to respond to the question in the exact way you pose it. Nor am I obliged to respond to everyone. I respond when and where I want, *just like every other poster here.* You seem to want to have a different set of rules for men than for anyone else. And when you don’t get your way, you get weird and try and make it personal and about my work. How I run my classes, for example, is a work matter and not any of your business unless you sign up or are a colleague. Guess what? I’m also not interested in your work life. It’s actually irrelevant to your ability to debate these ideological issues.

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:43 PM

Chuckle…you poor thing. Can’t spout this out on Campus in front of the kids so you have to find a soapbox somewhere. It must really pain you that you can’t be who you want to be in front of your students.

oldroy on February 11, 2014 at 2:46 PM

I do answer. You just don’t *like* the answers. I am not obligated to respond to the question in the exact way you pose it.

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:43 PM

You sure you’re qualified to teach?

Because I’m pretty sure that you’ve just contradicted yourself in one breath.

Oh. I get it.

Common Core, right?

Alrighty then.

Eric in Hollywood on February 11, 2014 at 2:46 PM

gwelf on February 11, 2014 at 2:36 PM

You actually haven’t defended the morality of class privilege before the law. You have not made a defense of the fact that having money makes it less likely you will be punished for a crime. And if you have, I am sure that you can copy and paste it here.

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:38 PM

Yeah, this is all for yuks. Which is why you lie repeatedly.

No one here has ever said that people should be unequal before the law.

nd30 didn’t even address that particular issue yet you claimed he was agreeing with you.

You’re always shifting the argument.

A fascist regime telling businesses what to do and you’re asked if there are limits to what Obama can do and you’re response is to bring up non-sequitors like “Affluenza” and the criminal justice system being corrupt.

I’ve specifically told you I think there are lots of problems with our criminal justice system. This isn’t really a controversial point. But you get your head knocked around on the actual topic at hand and so you retreat to attacking something that no one is defending.

gwelf on February 11, 2014 at 2:46 PM

The problem though for you, is that if we agree that class privilege is systemic and endemic to American society

It isn’t you fool. It is to free people the world over, it’s a natural law, idiot.

you believe the upper middle class and upwards deserve privilege before the law because they earned it int he system you approve of.

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:10 PM

They could have also inherited it. I envy NO one.

Your comment was idiotic, you unerudite gnatbrain.

Schadenfreude on February 11, 2014 at 2:46 PM

It does occur, however, that there could be some merit to this.

Midas on February 11, 2014 at 2:47 PM

BUT THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS HEADLINE!!!!

No CEO on the planet has the power to fine you, make you employ 50 or 100 people, make you pay them more of your paycheck … It’s not the same. Not even close. A president not beholden/limited by law is faaaaar more of a potential threat to our freedoms then some corporate CEO. Comparing the 2 IS THE STRAW MAN!

BoxHead1 on February 11, 2014 at 2:44 PM

Yes it does. The issue at hand is equality before the law. Yes conservatives are critiquing Obama’s policies, but most often under the idea that those policies are “illegal.” They argue that this violation of the law requires prosecution and impeachment. Their argument is that Obama is free from prosecution because of the privilege he has as the nation’s chief executive. And you know what, they are right.

But conservatives do not care about the fact that class privilege distorts the prosecution of illegal behavior every single day, and many more times a day than anything Obama does. If the problem is that it is wrong to escape prosecution because of state privilege why is it OK to escape prosecution because of class privilege.

libfreeordie on February 11, 2014 at 2:48 PM

What’s all this fuss about ‘strawmen‘?

Midas on February 11, 2014 at 2:48 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5 7