If You Missed Last Night's Virginia Gubernatorial Debate . . . Good for You!

Morning Jolt
. . . with Jim Geraghty

September 26, 2013

If You Missed Last Night's Virginia Gubernatorial Debate . . . Good for You!

So why did Terry McAuliffe run for governor?

His main job since the mid-1990s has been to be Bill Clinton's buddy. There's nothing inherently wrong with that -- you get to play a lot of golf, meet a lot of wealthy, interesting people, and people are eager to do business with you, because they figure someday you'll invite them to hang around with the president and Hillary, too. (Yes, McAuliffe was DNC Chair for his party's sterling period from 2001 to 2005.) Consciously or not, he's like Doug Band -- selling, or at least trading access to the former president and the likely 2012 Democratic presidential candidate.

Terry McAuliffe has never been a policy wonk. He's a passionate partisan -- again, nothing inherently wrong with that; functioning political parties need passionate partisans to work in their ranks, fire up the crowd, and raise the money. But his political philosophy is simply, "my guys are right, and the other guys are wrong." It's hard to find a time he strongly disagreed with his own party; he apparently disagreed with his party on gun control back when he was DNC Chair, but his opposition didn't seem to have much influence or effect. And now he's running on gun control this year, calculating that stance will help him more in the D.C. suburbs than it will hurt him downstate.

Every time McAuliffe whiffs a candidate event because he didn't do the homework, it confirms the suspicion that McAuliffe wants the job of governor . . . just because he wants to be taken seriously, and not just seen as "the money guy." But apparently he doesn't want the job badly enough to actually study the issues.

Wednesday night's debate offered lines and arguments that are extremely familiar -- hell, let's just say, exhaustingly tired and worn out -- to anyone who's been paying attention to this race.

McAuliffe, who has spent his life's work as a Democratic party fundraiser and operative, pitched himself as the voice of bipartisanship in Virginia. He, who has done more to connect wealthy donors and lawmakers than perhaps any other man in American history, lambasted his rival for taking $18,000 in gifts from a wealthy owner of a medical supplement company. He, who has dumped a large fortune on negative ads, decried the negative tone of the campaign. McAuliffe, who spent much of 2012 insisting Mitt Romney had to release his tax returns, said he had done enough by releasing summaries of his finances for the past few years.

But McAuliffe was able to hide his not-gonna-worry-about-the-details approach to policy for most of the night. Debates only require candidates to remember a couple of talking points on each issue, and Terry McAuliffe can do that quite well. You can almost see him checking the boxes in his mind: Nanotechnology, community colleges, invest in education… mention the family… "His tax cuts will mean financial ruin for the state." We need to invest. Invest. Invest, invest, invest.

Credit where it's due, McAuliffe avoided lapsing into old habits and telling voters they could qualify for an HB-5 visa if they invested $500,000 in GreenTech Automotive.

But I can see why Ken Cuccinelli is trailing this race. His persona on the stump is even-keeled to the point of boredom. I suspect that if any undecided voters were tuned in to NBC at 7 p.m. last night, they found Cuccinelli robot-like, reminiscent of the early Mitt Romney models.

I wasn't thrilled with Cuccinelli's answer on why he accepted $18,000 in gifts from Johnny Williams. Cuccinelli emphasized that he realized he had failed to report the gifts and alerted state authorities, and asked whether anyone believed McAuliffe would do the same in those circumstances.

But most of us will never get a gift, or a group of gifts, worth $18,000 from someone we don't know that well, or even from our closest of friends. McAuliffe's gift attack suggests to low-information voters that Cuccinelli works in a world where fabulously wealthy well-connected businessmen and grifters throw around money to ensure government policies protect their interests -- which is pretty much the world of McAuliffe's entire adult life.

Three More Obamacare Train Wrecks Come Careening off the Tracks

Because Monday's edition went so well, here are a few more train wrecks from the Obamacare implementation, in progress…

Reuters informs us the online health insurance exchanges aren't working.

The District of Columbia's online health insurance exchange -- one of 51 set up under President Barack Obama's healthcare reform law -- will be unable to perform two key functions when it opens on Oct. 1, exchange officials announced on Wednesday.

The District joins Colorado and Oregon on the list of "Obamacare" exchanges hobbled by problems with information technology (IT), contributing to expectations that Obama's signature domestic achievement will get off to a slow start when the exchanges go live next Tuesday.

The "DC Health Link" web-based marketplace, where residents of the nation's capital who do not have other coverage will be able to purchase policies, will lack the ability to calculate whether someone is eligible for Medicaid. It will also be unable to calculate the size of federal subsidies, if any, that a customer qualifies for.

Kaiser Health News informs us that the Obama administration's definition of "affordable" is probably going to be significantly more expensive than the general public's sense of what's "affordable."

Michelle La Voie wants health insurance, but as a single mom making $38,000 a year and supporting two teenagers, she's not sure she can afford it -- even with a subsidy through the federal health law known as Obamacare.

Experts say that moderate-income Americans like La Voie, who will be eligible for subsidized coverage but who must still pay between 6 percent to 9.5 percent of their income toward monthly premiums, are likely to have the hardest time affording the policies.

That's because the share someone must contribute toward coverage rises with their income, starting at 2 percent for those earning the least and rising to a maximum of 9.5 percent for those earning as much as 400 percent of the poverty level, or up to $78,000 for a family of three.

And of course, despite the promises of Obama and every lawmaker that passed it, the law is turning into a mass-murderer of full-time jobs:

According to an April survey conducted by the Society for Human Resource Management, 41% of 603 small business owners said they have delayed hiring because of the federal healthcare law. One in five already cut hours, while 20% have reduced payroll.

Mercer, a human resources consulting company, said its own survey found that 12% of all U.S. employers reported plans to reduce workers' hours as a direct result of the Affordable Care Act. The impact was more pronounced in the retail and hospitality industries, with 20% of employers saying they will cut part-time hours.

Most recently, theme-park operator SeaWorld Entertainment revealed that it reduced its cap on weekly hours for part-timers to 28 from 32.

Obamacare: Come for the promises, stay for the shrapnel! Actually, you're going to come because you're legally required to have insurance now, or pay an additional tax that everyone involved insisted wasn't a tax when the law passed.

The Course of True Love, and Sandwiches, Never Did Run Smooth

When I listen to my younger, unmarried friends discuss the ups and downs of dating, I realize that my relationship advice is not merely dated, but carbon-dated.

Here's the latest cute-feature-story-turned-national-controversy:

My boyfriend, Eric, is the gourmet cook in our relationship, but he'd always want me to make him a sandwich.

Each morning, he would ask, "Honey, how long you have been awake?"

"About 15 minutes," I'd reply.

"You've been up for 15 minutes and you haven't made me a sandwich?"

To him, sandwiches are like kisses or hugs. Or sex. "Sandwiches are love," he says. "Especially when you make them. You can't get a sandwich with love from the deli."

One lazy summer afternoon just over a year ago, I finally gave in. I assembled turkey and Swiss on toasted wheat bread. I spread Dijon mustard generously on both bread slices, and I made sure the lettuce was perfectly in line with the neatly stacked turkey slices.

As he finished that last bite, he made an unexpected declaration of how much he loved me and that sandwich: "Honey, you're 300 sandwiches away from an engagement ring!"

Ace:

Apparently she's 176 sandwiches in, with 124 left to go.

Sounds like a movie. No, seriously. That Julia/Julia movie (or whatever) was based on a blog.

If you want to be a screenwriter, your best Breakthrough move is to do a silly, fun stunt that would make for a good script. Then they'll pay for your life rights and you can bargain to get paid as the first screenwriter, too.

I look forward to seeing the 300 Sandwiches movie. Well not really. But I wouldn't object to it.

Naturally, some folks like Chris Hayes and Amanda Marcotte are furious. How they find room for more fury in between their already-scheduled expressions of fury about Ted Cruz, Fox News, oil companies, and Larry the Cable Guy is beyond me. But it does raise a question about their -- and everyone else's -- capacity for tolerance.

Chances are, you've spent time with other seemingly happy couples whose relationship dynamics are completely at odds with your sense of ideal. Maybe they tease or nag each other more than you could stand. Maybe they express their disagreements loudly and angrily, or maybe they stifle it and speak quietly with gritted teeth. Maybe one spouse seems to makes all the decisions. The point is that they've found a way to live together that works for them, and that would never work for you. Perhaps the secret of a happy marriage is to find someone who drives you crazy in a much more tolerable way than everyone else.

If the sandwich-maker and the eater are both happy… why should it matter to anyone else?

The only aspect of the arrangement described in the New York Post that really bugs me is the guy's implied ultimatum. Look, pal, either you want to marry her or you don't. The article mentions she's in her mid-30s, they've been involved for two years, and she wants to raise a family.

TICK TICK TICK TICK TICK

I'm going to have to speak a little louder to be heard over that deafening biological clock. Hey, you. Yes, you, with the sandwich crumbs on your shirt. Stephanie Smith seems like a nice, attractive woman who cares about you and wants you to be happy, and she's made 176 sandwiches so far. Either pop the question or let her know you're not willing to get married.

ADDENDA: NR's Amy Mitchell wonders why the Morning Jolt hasn't discussed the season premiere of ABC's Castle -- apparently a Republican favorite. I was a bit disappointed by the kickoff of this season. The good news is the show's creative team quickly resolved last season's proposal cliffhanger (she said yes). I was trying to remember which old sitcom had a storyline of a would-be-bride giving a complicated and conflicting answer to a marriage proposal… and then remembered it was Two Guys, a Girl, and a Pizza Place. The man proposing in that long-ago sitcom was played by… Nathan Fillion of Castle.

But the rest of the episode featured the all-too-convenient trope of Beckett bringing home classified information, dropping it on the floor, and Castle finding it later… and then we're to believe some top government contractor A) keeps unbelievably dangerous nerve gas in an office building in the D.C. suburbs and B) doesn't notice it's been stolen.

Next week, we're supposed to be on the edge of our seats to see if the title character dies from exposure to that nerve gas. I'm betting "no."

NRO Digest — September 26, 2013

Today on National Review Online . . .

ALEC TORRES: Bill de Blasio was a major ally of the community-organizing group. The Mayor from ACORN.

CHARLES C. W. COOKE: Children in Virginia Beach are suspended from school for playing with an airsoft gun at home. Schools Are Not Parents.

JEFFREY H. ANDERSON: O'care will cost more than W.'s prescription drugs. Obama's Wrong Numbers.

CONRAD BLACK: The sensible Germans, the post-PC Dutch, and the genuinely conservative Australians are cause for encouragement. Signs of Political Sanity Abroad.

THE EDITORS: To replace Obamacare, we need a better plan. Replace the Law, Replace the Strategy.

SLIDESHOW: Monopoly Street View.

To read more, visit www.nationalreview.com

Why not forward this to a friend? Encourage them to sign up for NR's great free newsletters here.

Save 75%... Subscribe to National Review magazine today and get 75% off the newsstand price. Click here for the print edition or here for the digital.

National Review also makes a great gift! Click here to send a full-year of NR Digital or here to send the print edition to family, friends, and fellow conservatives.