This article captures the sentiments expressed in the e-mail remitted 12 hours ago, attacking Mike because of his

having overtly chosen Wall St./K St. over Main St. [The Tea Party Battles to Come - Three unrepentant veterans of the shutdown brawl say they're eager for primary election fights with a goal of remaking the GOP]. The last graph, of course, reflects the reflex-posture of the WSJ but, otherwise, these viewpoints are c/w the duty to recruit a credible [true-conservative] primary-opponent for Mike; actually, the implied-threat around which the coda has been wrapped may well have been debunked within a fortnight for, as per leaks, the Benghazi-Gate scandal may detonate [and sideline Hillary, too]. Absent, of course, from this selective-interview of TEA Party Movement [TPM] leaders is a firm cite of constitutional underpinnings of what initially/subsequently have animated this effort; even if some facet thereof was initiated by the Koch Brothers [imperceptible to the minions], its maturation is undoubtedly mutually exclusive of whatever funding [seed-money?] may have been provided for like-minded people. For example, the monthly meeting of Philadelphia Tea Party Patriots-Eastern MontCo [one of 8 groups blanketing SE-PA] will feature a guest-speaker [Jamie Cox, Field Director, American Majority PA]; indeed, accompanying this announcement was an e-mail that provided unique-info from a public-minded man [with whom I was confirmed in 1967] who has been an independent analyst of insurance programs: On 10/10/2013, Madeleine Dean's town hall meeting in Upper Dublin included [after a Harrisburg-summary] a presentation on ObamaCare by Bill England, the State Director of Enroll America. Know, however, that Enroll America is closely connected with the Administration and Secretary Sebelius [http://dailycaller.com/2013/11/01/sebeliussupported-by-figure-tied-to-fundraising-scandal/]. Ross Schriftman provided this prcis: The representative clearly supports government expansion and honestly promoted her ideas. It seems though that Medicaid expansion using Federal dollars does not make these folks realize that those dollars are tax dollars paid by Pennsylvania tax dollars. 30% of the state budget is for Medicaid and 40% for education. If Medicaid is expanding there is less money for education, which she said is under funded. She claimed insuring 500,000 more people under Medicaid would reduce costs. This is a fantasy. Bill England, the State Director of Enroll America, gave a good presentation of his talking points for his cause. However, he was weak on the details of how ObamaCare will work in the real world and inaccurate on the details of the law. For example, individuals do not get a tax credit towards their premium. They receive an income related adjustment to their premium based on what they tell the government they expect their income to be this year. It has nothing to do with how much taxes that enrollee pays. He also seemed to be unaware that people could contact the insurance companies directly to compare plans and that the companies have their own way to calculate the individual's costs on the exchange. Going to Kaiser's website kff.org only gives someone a general idea of costs in their state; not specific plan amounts.

803

He also blamed the shutdown and the volume for the healthcare.gov website failure. It is now widely reported that the problems were related to poor software design, a system that makes no sense (having to log on just to investigate premium rates and benefits), a lack of coordination between the groups working on the software and rolling it out after tests determined that there were problems. Finally, the Affordable Care Act was sold on the idea that people's premiums would be reduced. When I spoke about the 29%, 32%, 64% and 82% rate increase his response was that this was morally good because my clients are paying more so that sick people can get insurance and not face pre-existing clauses. It is morally wrong and dishonest to ask people to support legislation by saying it will lower their costs and, then when costs are higher, tell the same people that it is their moral obligation to pay more. No rational voter would be able to conclude that the myriad manifestations of the TPM could have been initiated [let alone controlled] at the top of any fiscal pyramid; this is why populism must be nurtured. One must then compare/contrast such straight-talk with the double-speak emanating from the Lefties; consider, just for example, todays NY-Times editorial which claims BHO misspoke rather than lied; also, the crucial pre-meditated facet of this known-to-be-false claim has been thoroughly-documented [which will intuitively extend to employer-based programs affecting ~100-million people, next year]. Easily-pegged as BHO-apologists are those on the talk-shows who fail to acknowledge the ramifications of such deceit when they claim existing policies are lousy [generically, quoting Frank Pallone] and then blame the insurers for complying with black-letter HHS-mandates [specifically, quoting Ezekiel Emanuel]. In contrast, note again why Ted Cruz could ride Tea Party support to White House, inasmuch as his defining-effort against all-things-ObamaCare will increasingly resonate: BY PAUL BEDARD | NOVEMBER 1, 2013 AT 11:21 AM The friendly fire directed at Sen. Ted Cruz from establishment Republicans is giving the Texan first-in-line status among Tea Party supporters and building a base for him to run for president, according to a new analysis from the University of Virginias Center for Politics. To the establishment, Cruz is the embodiment of all the forces conspiring to threaten the GOP's long-term viability. And, on a personal level, they also just can't stand Cruz: He drives them crazy, wrote Kyle Kondik in Center Director Larry Sabato's popular Crystal Ball. But, added Kondik, the venom directed at Cruz, whose effort to defund Obamacare led to a 16-day government shutdown, makes him an oversized hero to Tea Party supporters. Not pleasing the establishment is music to the ears of Tea Party activists, and if anything the shutdown has endeared Cruz even more to them. Assuming Cruz mounts a presidential bid in 2016 hes headed to South Carolina next week after his Iowa appearance last Friday (hint, hint) the Tea Party could be a potent base, he said. 804

Kondik took note of the Twitter sneers GOP old bulls fired off as Cruz spoke to Iowa Republicans a week ago. [Mike] Murphy (@murphymike), an alum from John McCains rogue 2000 presidential campaign and a "Meet the Press" regular, was one of the establishment Republicans tweeting snark about Cruz during his speech, he noted. Murphy tweeted: Sounds like we got trouble in River City Good citizens, make your check payable to Cruz Against Soviet Healthcare. Or just CASH And thats nothing new, said Kondik: Ever since hes been elected, we here at the Crystal Ball have heard groaning from Democrats and Republicans alike about how much they dislike Cruz. But could Cruz win the nomination in whats expected to be a crowded field? A big hurdle might be GOP endorsements, typically from the establishment and to establishment candidates like Mitt Romney. At this point, its hard to imagine Cruz winning much support from party elites, so hed have to depend on the Tea Party grassroots, said Kondik, who noted that both parties have detoured with non-establishment candidates in the past and lost the Republicans in 1964 with Barry Goldwater and Democrats in 1972 with George McGovern. His bottom line: Ted Cruz is riding high in some Republican/Tea Party circles precisely because he aggravates many high-ranking members of his own party. But his icy relationship with those party leaders might cause him problems if and when he decides to run for president. More in-depth analyses of the flaws of ObamaCare have emerged [Forget the website crashes: The real $1 trillion problem with ObamaCare has yet to emerge], and under-reported after the latest drone-kill [Leader of Pakistani Taliban Killed in Drone Strike] is the official reaction thereto [Government says death of Hakimullah Mehsud has destroyed attempts to hold peace talks with Islamist militants.] Also, the Blue Angels have re-taken flight and note also the precision of the marine-corps-silent-drill-platoon. Finally, sadly emblematic of the ripple-effect of BHOs misconduct [with potential to become a tsunami] is recognition that The millions of Americans who have lost their health insurance can testify to the mendacity of this president's pledges. Israel must not rely on Barack Obama for its life insurance. Again, recalling yesterdays chat with a liberal-rabbi, it seemed the end of the conversation was most effective when BHOs deceit regarding Iran [and he didnt yet know of how an exasperated Saudi Arabia had even refused a Security Council seat due to US-Policy on Egypt/Syria/Iran] was linked to his overall mendacity; thus was closed the feedback loop yielding recognition of how very much ObamaCare mutilates liberty. And all of this inevitably harkens back to the grinding-theme of what can be done about what occurred, thereby buttressing the case for IDing a primary challenger to all congress-people who forsook both constitutional principles and personal pledgessuch as Mikewhen they voted for ObamaCare; again, If you fund it, you own it emerges as the battle-cry, and there appears to be nothing Mike can now do [short of announcing he wont stand for re-election, satisfying a (split-)six year term-limit promise] other than to invoke personal friendships to [1]forestall an opponent, and [2]shore-up his supporters.

805

806