{"id":22998,"date":"2013-10-16T22:03:30","date_gmt":"2013-10-17T02:03:30","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.thedailygouge.com\/?p=22998"},"modified":"2013-10-16T22:03:43","modified_gmt":"2013-10-17T02:03:43","slug":"the-daily-gouge-thursday-october-17th-2013","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.thedailygouge.com\/?p=22998","title":{"rendered":"The Daily Gouge, Thursday, October 17th, 2013"},"content":{"rendered":"

It’s Thursday, October 17th, 2013…and here’s The Gouge!<\/strong><\/p>\n

First up, as you’ve undoubtedly heard:<\/strong><\/p>\n

Senate approves budget deal, bill heads to House<\/span><\/h1>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"ha-ha-america-obama-pelosi-congress-obamacare-socialism-political-poster-1269314933\"<\/a><\/p>\n

House Speaker John Boehner said earlier that the House “absolutely” will take up the Senate bill, even if he has to rely on mostly Democrats to pass it, and that he expects the partial government shutdown to end by Thursday. “We fought the good fight<\/span>. We just didn’t win<\/em><\/span>,”… <\/span>(No, John.\u00a0 The Spartans fought a good fight at Thermopylae; you fought about as well as the French in WWII.)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Now, as the late, great Paul Harvey loved to say, the rest<\/em><\/span> of the story:<\/strong><\/p>\n

McConnell-Reid Deal Includes $2 Billion Earmark for Kentucky Project<\/span><\/h1>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"mcconnell618\"<\/a><\/p>\n

A proposal to end the government shutdown and avoid default orchestrated by Republican Leader Mitch McConnell and Democratic Leader Harry Reid includes a $2 billion earmark for a Kentucky project. Language in a draft of the McConnell-Reid deal (see page 13, section 123) provided to WFPL News shows a provision that increases funding for the massive Olmsted Dam Lock in Louisville from $775 million to nearly $2. 9 billion.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\"cimg0453\"<\/a><\/p>\n

The dam is considered an important project for the state and region in regards to water traffic along the Ohio River. As The Courier-Journal<\/em>‘s James Bruggers reported in 2011, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers said they needed about $2.1 billion for the locks due to “stop and go funding.”<\/p>\n

Asked about the additional funding in the proposal, McConnell spokesman Robert Steurer directed all questions to lawmakers who worked on the bill directly.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Nothing to see here, folks; move along.\u00a0 And to add insult to injury, as the WSJ <\/em>notes, the man who helped launched this latest GOP fiasco has suddenly grasped reality:<\/strong><\/p>\n

“…Does Ted Cruz support ObamaCare? You might laugh at that question, but on Wednesday the freshman Texas Republican refused to delay the Senate deal to reopen the government and raise the debt limit even though it contained barely a token concession on the Affordable Care Act.<\/p>\n

“Delaying this vote would not accomplish anything,” Mr. Cruz explained.<\/strong><\/span> “The focus is and should be on the substance of providing real relief for the American people.<\/strong><\/span> This deal doesn’t do that and that’s why I intend to vote no, but there is nothing to be benefited by delaying this vote a couple of days, versus having it today.””<\/p>\n

Really, Ted?!?\u00a0 Or perhaps, having tucked millions of additional campaign dollars safely away in his war chest, Cruz no longer sees a need to further damage the Republican brand through further futile filibusters.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The way we see it,\u00a0the GOP picked the wrong fight at the wrong time; but as the AEI<\/em>‘s Edward Conard details, the battle they’re ignoring is inevitable<\/em><\/span>:<\/strong><\/p>\n

The case for hostage-taking<\/span><\/a><\/h1>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"091101-ship-of-state\"<\/a><\/p>\n

As the budget and debt ceiling-standoff continues in Washington, many are asking the wrong question: Which party will pay a political price for the government shutdown? Democrats are comparing Republicans to \u201chostage-takers\u201d; Republicans complain that Democrats refuse to negotiate.<\/p>\n

Here\u2019s the right<\/em><\/span> question: Can we afford not<\/span> to have this fight<\/em>?<\/strong><\/span> With federal expenditures running 30 percent higher than revenues, debt at nearly twice the historical average, and no significant improvement in sight, is it any wonder that a contingent of conservative legislators is willing to ignore political expediency and stand on principle instead?…<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

http:\/\/www.aei.org\/article\/politics-and-public-opinion\/the-case-for-hostage-taking\/?utm_source=today&utm_medium=paramount&utm_campaign=101613<\/strong><\/span><\/em><\/a><\/p>\n

It’s either them or us…and if we go, the country goes with us.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Next up, Conn Carroll relates…<\/strong><\/p>\n

Something very strange going on behind Healthcare.gov<\/span><\/h1>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"obamacare_dmv_irs\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Healthcare.gov, the web site for Obamacare, is the crown jewel of the American welfare state and President Obama’s signature domestic policy achievement. Hundreds of millions of Americans will use Healthcare.gov every day for decades to come if the site ever functions properly and Obamacare becomes as permanent a feature of American life as Social Security.<\/p>\n

So, if you<\/em><\/span> were picking the IT firm to design Healthcare.gov, you would spare no<\/em><\/span> effort to make sure every potential bidder knew about the opportunity, that the integrity of the bid selection process was beyond question, and that the company most likely to create the best possible site got the award, right<\/em><\/span>?<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

But that’s not what happened with Healthcare.gov<\/em><\/span>.<\/strong><\/span> Officials with both the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and CGI Federal, the U.S. subsidiary of the Canadian IT firm that won the $93 million contract, are instead acting like they’ve got something to hide.<\/p>\n

Several weeks ago, Washington Examiner<\/em> senior investigative reporter Richard Pollock found that two federal contract databases listed CGI as the lone bidder for the Healthcare.gov.<\/strong><\/span> So, Pollock started asking questions at CGI and HHS. Nobody would talk on the record, but insisted “on background” that as many as four bidders sought the contract before it was awarded to the Canadian firm’s U.S. subsidiary.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\"obamacare-cartoon-july-15-4\"<\/a><\/p>\n

When Pollock pressed for documentation of the multiple bidders, including names of the companies involved, neither CGI nor HHS produced it<\/em><\/span>.<\/span> Tasha Bradley, an HHS spokesman, even claimed that “off the record, Richard, you will need to FOIA us for that information<\/em><\/span>.”<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Then things really got strange yesterday when Bradley said this:<\/p>\n

“Off the record, we have gotten a number of questions about your report. We are currently giving those reporters the same information that I provided to you and saying, on the record, that your reporting was incorrect.”<\/em><\/p>\n

Did you catch<\/em><\/span> that? HHS refuses to document “on background” its claim there were four bidders, but goes “on the record” with other news organizations to trash the Examiner<\/em> for reporting that the only available official documents found to date say there was only one bidder.<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Just another day in “the most transparent administration in history,” right<\/em><\/span>?<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Yeah…<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"yeahright\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Fortunately, America gets yet another chance…<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"toles05082013\"<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

…for a second opinion.<\/strong>\u00a0 After all, when even Wolf Blitzer senses a problem…<\/strong><\/p>\n