OBAMACARE-VICTIMS PRESS-CONFERENCE DOYLESTOWN, PA.

(October 8, 2013) -- Many people in the 8th Congressional District, along with all Americans, have already been adversely affected by ObamaCare; they feel frustrated by continued resistance in Washington, D.C. to changing this law. A group of these local victims will be at the Bucks County Courthouse on Thursday October 10th at Noon to tell their stories; they will urge area Congressmen to stand strong against implementing ObamaCare's harmful mandates. Respected area physician Dr. Marion Mass will moderate this event. Hear from a local businessman, commiserate with an employee whose hours have been cut, take notice of a union-member who feels betrayed, listen to a student who worries about Big Government violating his privacy. Hear from regular folks. Where: When: Date: Contact: Email: Cell: Bucks County Court House Court and main Noon until 12:30 p.m. e.d.t. October 10th Marion Elizabeth Mass, M.D. mrnmass@netscape.net (215) 290-2824

BIOs: Marion Elizabeth Mass, M.D. attended Penn State University and Duke University Medical School; she trained in Pediatrics at Northwestern University. After working as a Hospitalist for 15 years at the Childrens Hospital of Philadelphia, she is now in private practice in Buckingham. She has three children; she enjoys organic vegetable gardening and running. William Marsh is owner and operator of American Bar Products, a manufacturing company located in Warminster PA. Previously, he worked as an investment banker in London, an oilfield engineer in Texas, and a commercial fisherman in Alaska. Owning a business, and having lived and worked in London, Mr. Marsh understands the financial and social consequences of nationalized healthcare. Jennifer Conkright [pending] Nathan Faucette is recent graduate of Pennridge High School; he is currently employed part-time by Landis Supermarkets. His hours have been cut. Michael David Sklaroff is a student at Brandeis University who lives outside Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. His major academic interests are Economics, Business, Mathematics, Computers and Political Science. He wrote an essay regarding Enhanced Interrogation that was published in the Philadelphia Bulletin.

Yesterday, this physician spoke @ a meeting of the TEA Party Patriots in Lower Bucks County, and the assessment provided thereat [pre-heard by Larry Mendte, a few hours earlier] recapitulated what had been said earlier by Rob Boysen; there is no plan to primary Mike, but gross deviation from basic conservative values would probably enervate traditionally energetic support he has received, for years. He knows this, and the fact that a third Press Release was issued four days ago illustrates the fact that this amalgamated group has developed a sustained level of interaction that [as they say] has legs. Therefore, he should feel relieved [on one hand] but on-edge [on the other hand], reverberating as is determined by events and his reaction thereto; we would prioritize the defunding of ObamaCare over either the desire to end the shut-down/slow-down or the intent to mitigate upcoming political threats. It is curious that the fact that OBAMA APPROVAL DROPPED TO 37% was buried in an article on NPR that again blamed the shut-down on the Rs. To appreciate how much effort is being expended by the media to defend BHO, listen to how rep-duffy-toldandrea-mitchell [i-think-the-media-should-start-doing-its-job.] over her protestations. Explaining why Rush routinely bans paying attention to MSNBC are these quotations [MATTHEWS: BOEHNER LIKE 'REASONABLE' GUY DEALING WITH 'TERRORISTS' BEHIND HIM and MSNBC HOST: BOEHNER ASKING OBAMA TO HAVE 'CONVERSATION ABOUT HOW YOU BEAT YOUR WIFE', and Chris Hayes Blames Constitution for the Shutdown]. Although CNN's Cooper Gets Defensive After Rep. Labrador Challenges Objectivity, even CNN'S BLITZER noted OBAMACARE SIGN-UP GLITCHES are 'PRETTY EMBARRASSING.' These events corroborate an essay that details How the Left Will 'Defend' the ObamaCare Train Wreck, even as its possible some of the Media are Turning on Obama's Shutdown Strategy; there is a long way to go, noting that Carl Bernstein claimed [also on MSNBC] the Media Must Stop 'McCarthy Wing' of the Republican Party and that a Slate Columnist claimed Republicans are Like Ayatollahs. Counterpointing these data is the claim by Reid that the Media are 'Unfair' to Dems on Government Shutdown, even as BHO has defunded cancer therapy but funded Big Bird [$445 Million]. In a Shutdown Lie of Omission, the WaPo Exploited Cancer Victim [Nowhere does the Post tell its readers the truth: that House Republicans have offered a compromise spending bill that will fund the NIH and get Ms. Langbehn the treatment she needs. The problem is that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid won't allow the compromise legislation a vote in the Senate, and President Obama has promised to veto it.]. LIMBAUGH feels OBAMA HELD PANIC PRESS CONFERENCE, noting what he said [Obama Laments Republicans in 'Gerrymandered' Districts; Obama: 'We Can't Make Extortion' Part of 'Our Democracy'; Obama: House GOP Scared of Tea Party; Obama: GOP Making U.S. 'Deadbeat']; in the process, he provided his allies the Media Mantra of the Day ['Just Put It Up For a Vote'] and was contradicted by MOODY'S about default threat. Along with Duffy [vide supra], Toomey destroyed Mika on MSNBC, although he seemed to discount the ability to defund ObamaCare despite the fact that its intrusions on privacy are enhanced by such info as this IRS-related revelation [WHITE HOUSE and IRS EXCHANGED CONFIDENTIAL TAXPAYER INFO]. Also, BHOs push-back entails helping conservatives attack true-conservatives [e.g., Daily Caller Declares one-day-old Truth Revolt Responsible for 2012 Republican Presidential Defeat] as Establishment Conservative Journalists Met Off-the-Record with Obama at White House [In a clear attempt to woo largely establishment conservative commentators who have loudly opposed the GOPs current government shutdown strategy, BHO held an off-the-record meeting with the Washington Posts Charles Krauthammer, the Wall Street Journal editorial page editor Paul Gigot, National Reviews Washington editor Robert Costa, syndicated columnist and former CNN co-host Kathleen Parker, and Byron York of

the Washington Examiner.]. {Follow-up: Hypocritical HuffPo Blasts Truth Revolts Sharpton Petition} Manifesting this effort to tarnish Cruz are quotes from A.B. Stoddard [detailed in prior blasts] which disingenuously suggest Boehner is trying to move GOP away from health care. This enlightens:

Morning Jolt
. . . with Jim Geraghty
October 9, 2013 Apparently No One's Really Persuaded by PPP's Latest Survey So, how worried should Republicans be about losing the House? A PPP poll suggested they should, surveying GOP districts, asking a series of questions prefaced with the claim that the incumbent House Republican is responsible for the shutdown, and finding (surprise!) those incumbents in bad shape against generic Democrats. The Huffington Post's Mark Blumenthal and Ariel Edwards-Levy: The drop in congressional approval measured by Gallup will likely lead to drops in the "reelect" numbers for incumbent Republicans. However, skepticism is in order for the MoveOn/PPP results mostly because they were conducted by a Democratic pollster and sponsored by a liberal advocacy group. Our analyses have shown that polls with partisan sponsorship typically exhibit a bias of 3 to 4 percentage points in favor of their sponsor on vote preference questions. Frequent PPP critic Nate Cohn noted on Monday that the "generic" question (which pits incumbents against an unnamed challenger) overlooks the importance of viable challengers: "Democrats aren't yet poised to mount serious challenges to a clear majority of the Republicans running on competitive turf, let alone actually win. So you should probably take this morning's PPP poll with an additional grain of salt: it's about how House Republicans would fare against a 'generic' Democrat, not the mediocre one they'll face in 2014." Stuart Rothenberg just rips PPP to shreds: PPP isn't your typical polling firm. Its surveys often are intended to boost Democratic recruiting, fundraising or prospects. In this case, the "polls" were almost certainly commissioned to create a narrative about the political repercussions of the shutdown and the nature of the midterms. It's no coincidence, then, that the PPP memo accompanying the results, written by Jim Williams, observes, "The surveys challenge the conventional wisdom that gerrymandering has put the House out of reach for Democrats."

Not surprisingly, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee sent out multiple fundraising emails in the hours after reports of the PPP polls surfaced, and dozens of Democratic candidates and liberal groups did the same. That's the standard modus operandi these days on both the right and the left: have a sympathetic media organization or polling firm assert some alleged finding, and then have fellow travelers cite the initial report to try to raise cash or create momentum. It is becoming (yawn excuse me) a little trite. Rothenberg continues: Of course, the "polls" did not include head-to-head ballot tests of likely nominees (even though the surveys could have included candidate names in many contests), but instead relied on a messy question that was part "re-elect" and part "generic ballot." The results are of little or no use because that is not the choice voters will face on Election Day. Moreover, at least five of the 17 Republicans who are "losing" either have no serious opposition or have less-than-top-tier opponents at this point: Steve King (Iowa's 4th District), Andy Barr (Kentucky's 6th), Kerry Bentivolio (Michigan's 11th), Patrick Meehan (Pennsylvania's 7th) and Sean P. Duffy (Wisconsin's 7th). Bentivolio may not survive a GOP primary. Each PPP survey asked seven substantive questions and four demographic ones. Some of the questions were loaded, and as I have noted previously in dissecting PPP polls, the "more likely/less likely" question is a horrible one to use in surveys because it tends to measure the underlying attitude rather than gather useful information about an issue's eventual importance as a vote cue. Even a writer at Daily Kos had to note: Informed ballots such as these, though, must always be viewed with caution. They represent an ideal environment where one side is able to widely disseminate its preferred message, without pushback or interference from the other side. In other words, a scenario nothing like what you encounter in the real world. That said, though, these polls show that hammering Republicans over the shutdown has the potential to be effective across a very diverse array of districts. And while 3 points might not sound like a lot, seven Republicans and nine Democrats won House races by less than that amount in 2012. It's also worth noting that, like informed ballots, polling against generic candidates represents a sort of idealized situation as well. In some races, Democrats may not land serious challengers; in others,

Democratic candidates may stumble or fail to gain traction. On the flipside, sometimes an actual candidate will perform better than a generic unnamed option because of their strong personal attributes. Early on, when you're more than a year out from Election Day, generic ballots can serve as a helpful metric, but reality will ultimately diverge in most cases. Keep in mind, a majority party in the House is going to face some dangers when the country is angry at Washington and there is a slow economy. An Entitlement Reform Path Out of the Current Mess? Paul Ryan floats a bargain to get out of the current stalemate in the Wall Street Journal: If Mr. Obama decides to talk, he'll find that we actually agree on some things. For example, most of us agree that gradual, structural reforms are better than sudden, arbitrary cuts. For my Democratic colleagues, the discretionary spending levels in the Budget Control Act are a major concern. And the truth is, there's a better way to cut spending. We could provide relief from the discretionary spending levels in the Budget Control Act in exchange for structural reforms to entitlement programs. One big hitch: Obama thinks he's winning the shutdown now, and figures at some point, House Republicans will fold and pass both a clean CR to fund the government and a hike in the debt ceiling. Is he really going to end the current state of play by signing on to potentially painful, potentially controversial entitlement reform? Is the American Public Too 'Tuned Out' for Our Current Arguments? Conservatives believe, with some evidence, that the reason people disagree with them is because those people are uniformed or misinformed. Katherine Rodriguez: [Obama speechwriter Jon Favreau] said the reason most people oppose the Affordable Care Act is because people are "susceptible to billions of dollars of advertising telling them Obama's going to take away their health care and a weird Uncle Sam with tweezers is going to inspect you." . . . Fifty-five percent of Americans who say they are most likely to disapprove of the law are also the ones who know the most about it, according to Gallup. The poll also said that one-in-three young Americans from age 18-34 are least familiar with but most optimistic about the law. Derek Dye, the executive director for the Doctor Patient Medical Association, argued that Favreau's sentiment is backward because the

public mostly identified ObamaCare as the talking points that helped create support for the law. "ObamaCare is much more complex than those talking points make it sound, and as people learn more about the law public opinion has only gone down," said Dye, 25. I was reminded of Favreau's recent comment after reading Jack Shafer's book review of Ilya Somin's Democracy and Political Ignorance: "The sheer depth of most individual voters' ignorance may be shocking to readers not familiar with the research," Somin writes on his first page. Many Americans don't know how the government works, they don't know much about who runs the government, and they're clueless about how government programs work. For instance, a 2006 Zogby poll reported that only 42 percent of respondees could name the three branches of government. In another survey from that year, only 28 percent could name two or more of the five rights in the First Amendment, and a 2002 study indicated that 35 percent believed that the words "From each according to his ability to each according to his need" could be found in the Constitution. CNN found in its 2011 poll that Americans estimated on average that foreign aid consumes 10 percent of the federal budget when it actually takes up less than 1 percent. None of the alternatives impress Somin, who brings his book to a close by suggesting that if the American people don't know anything about their government and they don't want to know anything about it that if they're not interested in monitoring and tending the colossus they've built then maybe it shouldn't exist on the scale that it does. He doesn't put it in exactly those terms, but he does hold that downsizing and decentralizing the federal government would reduce the labor required to keep informed and thereby reducing voter ignorance. Elsewhere in the review, it's clear the public isn't growing more informed over time: When the Pew Research Center study compared the political knowledge of 1989 respondents with those from 2007 it found the advent of multiple 24-hour news channels, the C-SPAN channels, and hundreds of news sites on the Web had not moved the political ignorance dial in any appreciable way. Nor have massive rises in education over the past halfcentury put a dent in political ignorance, Somin finds. "On an educationadjusted basis, political knowledge may actually have declined, with 1990s college graduates having knowledge levels comparable to those of high school graduates in the 1940s," he writes, even though IQ scores have been rising.

I'll bet a lot of the politically "tuned in" Americans think the "tuned out" Americans' overall judgment -- well beyond the political sphere -- is eroding, as well. We've seen our fellow countrymen buying houses they can't afford. We've seen them go deeply into debt to get a college education, and then major in a field with extremely limited earning and career prospects. We've seen young men (and not just young men) create a child and then refuse to take care of those children. We don't take care of our health. We don't save for the future. We drink, gamble, take drugs, sleep around. Yes, we've always had folks with bad judgment. But societies are built by groups who make good decisions, bad decisions, and a mix of both. If we have too many folks making bad decisions, our problems worsen. You'll forgive me for linking to Matt Yglesias, as he describes a bit of social science research suggesting that poverty and bad judgment feed upon each other in a cycle: A study published last week in the journal Science shows that the stress of worrying about finances can impair cognitive functions in a meaningful way. The authors gathered evidence from both low-income Americans (at a New Jersey shopping mall) and the global poor (looking at farmers in Tamil Nadu, India) and found that just contemplating a projected financial decision impacted performance on spatial and reasoning tests. Among Americans, they found that low-income people asked to ponder an expensive car repair did worse on cognitive-function tests than lowincome people asked to consider cheaper repairs or than higher-income people faced with either scenario. To study the global poor, the researchers looked at performance on cognitive tests before and after the harvest among sugarcane farmers. Since it's a cash crop rather than a food one, the harvest signals a change in financial security but not a nutritional one. They found that the more secure postharvest farmers performed better than the more anxious preharvest ones. Final note is made [h/t Guzzardi] that gov-actuaries-say-ObamaCare-will-increase-health-care-spending by $621-billion and that ObamaCare-supporter said i-didnt-realize-i-would-pay-for-it-personally and that Issa Joined DC Leaders Calling on Senate, President to Let D.C. Access Local Funds and that jonstewart-accused-kathleen-sebelius-of-lying-to-him-about-ObamaCare and that Reid again Objected to Funding the VA and that as-shutdown-lingers, dem-senators-shut-out-constituents-voices and that James Madison, Founder, illustrated well the budgetary powers of the House in Federalist 58 and that Americans [including BHO-supporters] are upset that they have discovered ObamaCare costs money and that TRUCKERS TAKE TO THE STREET on 10/11 TO PROTEST OUT-OF-CONTROL OBAMA GOVERNMENT and that lawmakers say military pay bill should have covered kia payments frozen by hagel and that senate-democrats-strategy is dont-enforce-debt-limit-and dont-cut-spending; meanwhile, FNCs brilliance emerged [megyn-kellys-fox-show-ratings-surge-on day-2], noting that it pitted Megyn against Rachel and has shifted the key-demographicwithin one day!