take your answer off the air...

  • HorsesAss.Org: the straight poop on WA politics & the press
    progressive brilliance from the guy who pointed out Tim Eyman's nascent horse's-assedness
  • Talker's Magazine
    The quirky talk radio trade mag. Check the Talk Radio Research Project- it's not very scientific, but places on the top 15 talkers list (scroll down to Talk Radio Audiences By Size)) are as hotly contested as Emmys (and mean just about as much).
  • The Advocate
    No, not THAT Advocate... it's the Northwest Progressive Institute's Official Blog.
  • Media Matters
    Documentation of right-wing media in video, audio and text.
  • Orcinus
    home of David Neiwert, freelance investigative journalist and author who writes extensively about far-right hate groups
  • Hominid Views
    "People, politics, science, and whatnot" Darryl is a statistician who fights imperialism with empiricism, gives good links and wry commentary.
  • Jesus' General
    An 11 on the Manly Scale of Absolute Gender, a 12 on the Heavenly Scale of the 10 Commandments and a 6 on the earthly scale of the Immaculately Groomed.
  • Howie in Seattle
    Howie Martin is the Abe Linkin' of progressive Seattle.
  • Streaming Radio Guide
    Hellishly long (5795!) list of radio streaming, steaming on the Internets.
  • The Naked Loon
    News satire -- The Onion in the Seattle petunia patch.
  • Irrational Public Radio
    "informs, challenges, soothes and/or berates, and does so with a pleasing vocal cadence and unmatched enunciation. When you listen to IPR, integrity washes over you like lava, with the pleasing familiarity of a medium-roast coffee and a sensible muffin."
  • The Maddow Blog
    Here's the hyper-interactive La Raych of MSNBC. daily show-vids, freakishly geeky research, and classy graphics.
  • Northwest Broadcasters
    The AM, FM, TV and digital broadcasters of Northwest Washington, USA and Southwest British Columbia, Canada. From Kelso, WA to the northern tip of Vancouver Island, BC - call letters, formats, slogans, networks, technical data, and transmitter maps. Plus "recent" news.
  • News Corpse
    The Internet's chronicle of media decay.
  • The Moderate Voice
    The voice of reason in the age of Obama, and the politics of the far-middle.
  • News Hounds
    Dogged dogging of Fox News by a team who seems to watch every minute of the cable channel so you don't have to.
  • HistoryLink
    Fun to read and free encyclopedia of Washington State history. Founded by the late Walt Crowley, it's an indispensable tool and entertainment source for history wonks and surfers alike.

right-wing blogs we like

  • The Reagan Wing
    Hearin lies the real heart of Washington State Republicans. Doug Parris runs this red-meat social conservative group site which bars no holds when it comes to saying who they are and who they're not; what they believe and what they don't; who their friends are and where the rest of the Republicans can go. Well-written, and flaming.
  • Orbusmax
    inexhaustible Drudgery of NW conservative news
  • The Radio Equalizer
    prolific former Seattle KVI, KIRO talk host speaks authoritatively about radio.
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 02/2005


« Can't we all get along? | Main | We have some questions »

March 26, 2012



I do like broccoli, but not government-mandated broccoli.


The idea of buying individual health insurance as a mandate was the Republican idea in answer to Hillary's mandate that employers had to provide it. As soon as Obama said it was a good idea, the Republicans started opposing it.

Chris Chronic

bingo, this idea was suddenly touted as an Obama idea when in fact, it was conceived by the GOP not long after Kirby Wilbur was yelling at folks in Westlake center.

Puget Sound Blathers

the only way for Obama Care to be viable -from a fiscal point of view- is to have young people buy in. the worst would be to have Obama Care without the mandate. that would be a sure fire recipe for fiscal disaster.

anyone notice how big Pharma is kind of silent? that's cause they got a nice carve out from Pres Obama. but hey, we don't have Lobbyist in the Obama Administration ...LMAO.

can't wait to see what the Supremes will say on this. my take is that they will uphold Obama Care.

Why wait?

Listen to oral arguments - Scalia nitpicking


The best you can say about Obama/Romney care is that it is far better than what we have now. It is interesting to watch Romney distance himself from his greatest achievment as Governor of Massachusetts.


Out on a limb, I think Roberts will be the deciding vote. I predict Kennedy will vote against it. But Roberts might allow it. I don't think it very well-argued on the left. I don't get that. Also, Ginsberg was a little disappointing. As always, Breyer was excellent. If Roberts votes against it, I believe it will be more political than intellectual only because argued well or not, he knows precedent exists. Seemed to me his main point was that regulating payment lets government into the game and then there are no limit. The response is already in commerce in places that are questionable.

Kennedy sounds anti but Roberts might be a possible.


Sorry. The response is that government is already into commerce is question areas.


The only prediction I have is it will be a 5-4 vote. Those who favor it here are in the minority, as shown below.

Most Oppose at Least Part of Overhaul, Poll Finds
Published: March 26, 2012

"Two-thirds of Americans want the Supreme Court to overturn some or all of the health care law, even though large majorities support a few of its major aspects, according to a poll by The New York Times and CBS News…

In fact, a grand total 67% of those polled either want to ‘overturn the mandate’ (29%) or ‘overturn the entire law’ (38%). A figure that appears no where in this article. (Apparently, it would be to much of a shock for the sensitive readers of The Times.)

By the way, notice the headline for this article. It is is positively opaque. The casual reader would have no idea what is being opposed.

In the latest poll, 47 percent said they oppose the law while 36 percent approve, with the rest having no opinion. The results are similar to previous surveys that have consistently found the law’s detractors outnumbering its supporters.

Keeping the law intact is preferred by a mere quarter of those surveyed, largely Democrats, reflecting the deep partisan divide within the overall findings that has persisted since President Obama signed the Affordable Care Act just two years ago. And a bare majority of independents, an important swing group in this presidential election cycle, have remained fairly steadfast in siding with Republicans…

Yes, the polls have said the same thing since even before Obama-Care was rammed through Congress.

We the people have always hated it. And no matter how much we are told by the media and the rest of the Democrat Party that we will love it, we don’t love it.

But as has been the case since nearly the inception of the law, much confusion lingers over certain portions of it, underscoring Mr. Obama’s struggles to win public support for his benchmark legislation. In the Times/CBS News poll, less than half say they have a good understanding of the law, probably stemming in part from the fact that the provisions attracting the most opposition — like the mandate — have yet to be put into effect so therefore cannot be evaluated in tangible ways.

How many times have we been told that we don’t like Obama-Care because we are too stupid to understand it?

Yet other aspects of the law attract widespread support. Asked about a provision requiring insurance companies to cover people with a pre-existing medical condition, 85 percent said they approved of that element.

Similarly, 68 percent approved of the provision allowing children to remain on their parents’ policies until the age of 26, and 77 percent approved of a provision reducing the cost of prescription drugs for Medicare recipients…

Even if these two points are true (and they probably aren’t), are these meager benefits worth the $1.76 trillion dollars that the CBO now estimates it will cost over the next ten years?

Most Americans say they worry that the law will raise their health expenses, and a steady majority say they are somewhat or very concerned that it will limit access to care. In addition, most agree with the Republicans’ contention that many businesses won’t be able to afford to provide coverage to employees and will be forced to cut jobs.

Republicans have painted the legislation as a government takeover, and the poll found that a majority consider the law as injecting too much government into the health care system…

It doesn’t take too much Republican painting, since that is exactly what it is."


Even if these two points are true (and they probably aren’t),

Why do you post stuff that you don't believe? If part of it is untrue, why can't it all be untrue?

It doesn’t take too much Republican painting, since that is exactly what it is."

It was good enough for Romney in Massachusetts. The only picture Republicans are painting is the Portrait of Dorian Gray.

Krugman paints the truthful picture of Republicans


Great Maddow on the possible trilogy from the conservative court: Bush v. Gore ("a consideration limited to this case only"); citizens united; and now Obamacare. Politicians in robes. I wonder if Roberts will allow himself to go down in history as an obstructionist and political justice? It will be his legacy.


What part do you claim is untrue ? Do you have any credible evidence ? they are results from polls - jeez... Facts are stubborn things - most Americans do not want Obamacare. Not sure if that will make matter much to the SCOTUS.

You post a biased article by Krugman, the hack. He is full of dog squeeze. A truthful picture of Republicans by a less than credible source - like trying to put lipstick on a pig. LOL


Malloy has been in DC the last 2 days doing interviews.


"First, the lie: No, President Obama did not say, as many Republicans now claim, that he wanted higher gasoline prices. He did once say that a cap-and-trade system for carbon emissions would cause electricity prices to “skyrocket” — an unfortunate word choice."

Yes he said that. What Republicans besides the candidates for president said that he wanted higher gasoline prices ? Do you believe everything candidates say in campaigns, esp. the Obama propaganda machine ? His attitude seems to indicate that he is OK with his energy/gasoline prices - he also said he just hoped they didn't rise so fast, in 2009. Just because he didn't say that in public doesn't mean he doesn't really feel that way - his actions and attitude seems to indicate that he doesn't mind his gas prices and Sec. of Energy Chu has said that he wouldn't mind gas prices ($9/gal.) like Europe has. One thing anyone with half a brain should know about Obama - don't be distracted by what he says, pay attention to what he does.

Krugman is only out to indict Republicans and what he said above is just another straw man argument. Yawn.


KS, you are the one who said it probably isn't true. Get with the program.

Thanks, Coiler. I'll check in with Malloy.


A joker quoted at the end of the article: How are we going to pay for this thing,...

The CBO says it will save money. Oh, I know, you and Rush are smarter than the CBO.


TS - you are conflating the argument. I said; "most Americans do not want Obamacare. Not sure if that will make matter much to the SCOTUS." In other words, the Supreme Court does not necessarily rule based on public opinion polls.


I took you at your words.

Most Americans don't want some parts of Obamacare and mostly because they don't understand it. Take you, for instance. You don't understand it. Tell me what you don't like about it.

Let's put some life back into this blog. Even if it is primitive.

The part of the argument with which I disagreed most was the comment in response to a question that police and fire are "public" and healthcare is "market driven." Virelli did not respond to that.

Police and fire are public because Americans decided they would be. We can do the same with healthcare. If I recall correctly, some firemen watched a house burn down rather than save it because payment was not made.

And backyard marijuana sets precedent (and probably lots of others) simply because it can move across state lines. Government stretches every boundary when it wants to control something. I wonder what Robert's children will think of him in fifty years if he prevents healthcare which every other progressive country currently respects.

It would be interesting to hear other opinions on this.


Thom Hartmann was reading from the Constitution on his show and he claims the Supremes dont have the Constitutional authority to get rid of a law. He said that Andrew Jackson, Lincoln and FDR all argued that point but it didnt do any good.
He said the only one with the power to strike down a law is the Presient with his veto. I will have to go look it up.


Goldman agrees. He says the Supreme Court has become unequal and mightier than the others when it should be equal - not legislate which it does. And this Court the most activist of all.


Sparky, I listened to Hartmann's rebroadcast last night and heard him rail against the Court. We seem to be in the worst of times. Even the Christian Science Monitor Based on justices' questions in the two-hour Supreme Court health-care hearing, the fate of 'Obamacare' is in peril. Justice Kennedy expressed strong concerns about the individual mandate.

Kennedy is just old. And not in a good way. I still think Roberts is the key.


Heard a repeat of Hartmann's Monday morning show late lastnight and his guest said that Roberts decision on Citizens United was hurting him socially. Also, that the last thing he wants is for his court to be known as a "political Court." So the guest gave him a shot at supporting Obamacare. If he doesn't want to leave the legacy of running a "political Court" then, again, he may be the swing vote.

After hearing the Court's questions, the guest may have changed his mind. I still think the determinator/decider will be Roberts.

The comments to this entry are closed.

April 2013

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30        

Tip Jar

Change is good

Tip Jar

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    pacific nw talk stations

    • KIRO 710ESPN Seattle 710 KHz
      Games and sports-blabber
    • KIROFM 97.3
      Multi-format: news and nearly all local talk. This is where classic KIRO AM news talk radio went... hopefully, not to die. The home of Dave Ross & Luke Burbank, Dori Monson, Ron & Don, Frank Shiers, Bill Radke, Linda Thomas, Tony Miner and George Noory.
    • KUOW FM 94.9
      Seattle's foremost public radio news and talk.
    • KVI am 570 KHz
      Visit the burnt-out husk of one of the seminal right-wing talkers in all the land. Here's where once trilled the reactionary tones of Rush Limbaugh, John Carlson, Kirby Wilbur, Mike Siegel, Peter Weissbach, Floyd Brown, Dinky Donkey, and Bryan Suits. Now it's Top 40 hits from the '60's & '70's aimed at that diminishing crowd who still remembers them and can still hear.
    • KTTH am 770 KHz
      Right wing home of local, and a whole bunch of syndicated righties such as Glennn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Medved, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Lars Larsony, and for an hour a day: live & local David Boze.
    • KPTK am 1090 KHz
      Syndicated liberal talk. Stephanie Miller, Thom Hartmann, Ed Schultz, Randi Rhodes, Norman Goldman fill in the large hole to the left on Northwest radio dial.
    • KLFE AM 1590 kHz
      Syndicated right-wing 2nd stringers like Mark Levin, Bill Bennett, Mike Gallagher, Dennis Prager, Dennis Miller and Hugh Hewitt inhabit this timid-voiced neighbor honker for your radio enjoyment (unless you're behind something large like Costco).
    • KOMOAM
      News, traffic, Ken Schram and John Carlson.
    • Washington State Radio Stations
      Comprehensive list of every danged AM & FM station on the dial.
    • KKOL am 1300 KHz
      Once a rabid right-wing talker, except for Lou Dobbs, it's all business....