The Thursday wrap
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Wednesday, Sept. 18, 2013, 9:00 p.m.
Uh-oh, don't look now but the Oracle of Omaha, Warren Buffett, says it's time to scrap ObamaCare and start over. “Attack the costs first and then worry about expanding coverage,” he told Money Morning. Bottom line: If President Obama has lost the usually ardent support of Mr. Buffett, ObamaCare is a lost cause. ... The Treasury Department says the federal government pulled in a record of nearly $2.5 trillion in tax revenues for the first 11 months of fiscal 2013. But it still put up a $755 billion deficit for the same period, CNSNews.com reports. Why do we get the impression that no matter how much the government conscripts, it would overspend? ... Those opposing any plan to privatize liquor sales in Pennsylvania invariably claim that all manner of drunken-driving Armageddon will befall us if the state's role is diminished. But as the Commonwealth Foundation's Nathan Benefield reminds, “The truth is that Pennsylvania currently ranks higher than the national average in accidents related to DUIs according to MADD — despite 80 years of the state government's total control over alcohol sales.” Nothing quite like the sobering facts to slay the myths of the drunken apologists for statism. ... The New York Post reports that under ObamaCare, doctors will be required to ask you “Are you sexually active?” and “If so, with one partner, multiple partners or same-sex partners?” To which any true-blue American should respond, “Tell the president it's none of his (expletive deleted) business.”
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- The big sting: To what end?
- Sunday pops
- Saturday essay: Resurrection
- THE BOX
- Easter 2014: Churches’ vital role
- Liquor privatization: Now’s the time
- Keystone caper: Pipeline politics