Boring:  Bulldogs, Tigers, Leopards, Panthers.

Interesting: Kingsmen, Stags

Winners:  Poets, Sage Hens

 Ladies and Gentlement, your Southern California Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

The left is running away from the ACA as fast as it can, even to the extent of running anti-ACA ads!  But it gets better.

Obama now watns businesses to "swear" that they aren't laying off people due to Obamacare. 

Legal or regulatory changes that affect the cost of labor would fall into the category of “changes in the economic marketplace in which the employer operates.” So it would be more precise to say that employers may cut back employment for any bona fide business reason except to take advantage of the ObamaCare mandate delay.

The administration thus acknowledges that its policy creates a perverse incentive and orders employers not to act upon it. But that can’t be enforced. A business will take into account all relevant factors, including the additional costs imposed by ObamaCare, in making decisions about hiring and firing, including whether to terminate employees for poor performance, sell a division, etc. In practice, the new rule is a ban–under threat of criminal liability–on acknowledging the perverse incentive. Call it OmertàCare, a government-imposed conspiracy of silence.

I’m reminded of Argentina’s policy of punishing people who dispute the official inflation rate.

And then there's this: 

Which Product was More Dishonestly Marketed: Amazing Live Sea Monkeys, or Barack Obama?

One more?  Getting harder and harder to tell the MSM from the Onion.

The Nation: Why the Curious Right-Wing Silence on Michael Sam?

The Onion: Conservative Acquaintance Annoyingly Not Racist.

Obama's "War on Work" continued apace last week.  Sorry so late to the party.  In response to the Politico article claiming that Republicans want people to work all the time I would echo others in saying we don’t want you to work all the time, we don’t give a flying crap what you do.. We just don’t want to have to pay for your life of leisure. Do what you want, leave me alone.

Related: Michael Goodwin: Obama Democrats’ troubling view on work.

Elphs hold 30 seats not up for re-election.  They need to get to 51 since Uncle Joe has the tie-breaker, so they need to win 21 of 36.  There are 17 races which the Elph is favored by more than 70% (Maine, Idaho, Wyoming, Nebraska, Kentucky, Kansas, Tennessee, S Carolina (x2), Oklahoma (x2), Mississippi, Alabama, Texas, South Dakota, West Virginia and Georgia.)

That leaves Iowa, Montana, Louisiana and Alaska as the best chances.   All four seats are currently held by Democrats, with two (Begich in Alaska and Landrieu in Louisiana) having incumbents seeking reelection.  Of course the Republicans could lose all four of these elections and still gain control of the Senate by winning a different set of four.  My point is that any other four pose more difficult challenges than these four.   (The next three in line are Michigan, Arkansas, and North Carolina).  Pryor in Arkansas ran unopposed last time out so it's hard to guage his re-electability. 

So keep your eyes on Begich and Landrieu (both are already running anti-Obamacare ads!), Montana and Iowa.

Two simple steps.

1.  Repeal the 17th Amendment.

2.  Repeal the Reapportionment Act of 1929.

Problem solved. From the comments:

The larger house would be more representative, and it would be easier to defeat incumbents because House districts would be small enough an unfunded challenger could still go and meet everyone in the district to ask for their vote.

The threat of new blood might even make it more deliberative, since leadership threats (and now PAC threats) not to fund candidates would be less effective at forcing everyone to toe the party line.

And bribing 4751 people to get legislation passed would be an insurmountable object.