ENDA Passes Senate
There was some important news on the LGBT front this past week, as the Senate easily passed the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA). Let's take the story from the Christian Post, just for fun.
A few years ago this was a controversial idea, but that era is rapidly evaporating.
By the way, this was the "inclusive ENDA," with protection for gender identity as well as sexual orientation. There was a time when Congress would have supported a gay and lesbian nondiscrimination bill, as long as it did not include transgender people. If you're not following these things, sexual orientation and gender identity are two entirely different things, and members of one community do not necessarily feel a strong sense of responsibility to the other. It might not have seemed very "progressive" of them, but a lot of gay people would have been happy to pass a bill that covered them, and come back for gender identity later. Attitudes have changed fast, though, and the current bill protects LGB and T.
A little more, given that I am quoting the Christian Post:
Some religious people read their scriptures to say that you should not be gay. Whatever, we won't talk about the inconsistencies at this point. But the fact is, I have never heard anybody explain what part of the Bible says you can't hire a gay person, or work alongside them. You know, if they made a case where they showed chapter and verse saying, "The Lord shall smite thee if thou payest a homosexual person for working," then they might be able to persuade somebody to put in a religious exclusion. But, uh, I don't think so.
The vote in the Senate was like butter. Republicans joined Democrats in supporting rights for our gay and transgender neighbors. In the House it will be more political, Boehner is afraid of the Nutty Ones and it looks like he can be intimidated into blocking a vote on this. On the other hand, the recent election might have been a wake-up call for the GOP, and this could be a good opportunity for them to show the people that they can be decent. Okay, a little joke there, sorry.
In a move hailed by LGBT rights groups, the United States Senate has passed the 2013 version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.Most people already think that it is illegal to discriminate against someone because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. It just makes sense. You can fire somebody for being gay? Why would you do that?
The Senate voted on Thursday 64 to 32 in favor of passing the legislation, which if enacted would bar workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.
Tico Almeida, founder and president of the pro-gay organization Freedom to Work, said in a statement that the vote was a "historic step."
"The Senate has taken a bi-partisan and historic step towards ensuring that gay and transgender Americans have the same workplace protections that give all Americans a fair shot to succeed on the job," said Almeida.
"Our fight now moves to the House of Representatives where Speaker Boehner and the Republican Conference will have to decide which side of history they want to stand on. We will work with our Republican allies to push Speaker Boehner to allow this vote for the good of the country and the good of his party."
Since the 1970s, lawmakers have introduced some version of ENDA on behalf of expanding anti-discrimination employment protections to include LGBT individuals.
Efforts have yet to be successful, with the proposed bills having either never been brought to a vote or, as was the case in 1996, was voted down.
For a time, ENDA also met resistance from LGBT activists who argued that the bill did little to protect all sexual minorities and gender expressions as opposed to just gays and lesbians.
Known as Senate Bill 815, ENDA was introduced by Sen. Jeff Merkley of Oregon in April and had 56 cosponsors. On Monday, the Senate voted 61 to 30 to bring ENDA to the floor for a vote. During the debate Thursday morning, Sen. Pat Toomey proposed an amendment to expand the religious exemptions offered in S. 815. However, the amendment was voted down with 43 ayes to 55 nays. Senate Passes Employment Non-Discrimination Act; Now Will Go to House
A few years ago this was a controversial idea, but that era is rapidly evaporating.
By the way, this was the "inclusive ENDA," with protection for gender identity as well as sexual orientation. There was a time when Congress would have supported a gay and lesbian nondiscrimination bill, as long as it did not include transgender people. If you're not following these things, sexual orientation and gender identity are two entirely different things, and members of one community do not necessarily feel a strong sense of responsibility to the other. It might not have seemed very "progressive" of them, but a lot of gay people would have been happy to pass a bill that covered them, and come back for gender identity later. Attitudes have changed fast, though, and the current bill protects LGB and T.
A little more, given that I am quoting the Christian Post:
Opponents of ENDA maintain that the bill does not do enough to protect religious liberty, especially for employers who may hold moral objections to homosexuality and/or transgender identity.We put up with quite a lot of irrational and bizarre stuff from religious people, and most of us try to accommodate their weird beliefs when we can. But if their religion tells them they have to be jerks, I think the rest of us deserve to be protected from that.
Emily Hardman, spokesperson for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, provided The Christian Post with a statement earlier this week regarding what the organization believed about ENDA's religious exemption.
"The Becket Fund is concerned about any law that does not provide robust religious liberty protections where they are warranted," reads the official statement. "The limited exemptions for certain religious organizations that we have seen in the ENDA draft under consideration are manifestly inadequate."
ENDA will next go to the Republican-dominated U.S. House of Representatives, where House Speaker John Boehner has expressed opposition to S.815.
"The Speaker believes this legislation will increase frivolous litigation and cost American jobs, especially small business jobs," said Boehner spokesman Michael Steel in an earlier statement to Politico.
Some religious people read their scriptures to say that you should not be gay. Whatever, we won't talk about the inconsistencies at this point. But the fact is, I have never heard anybody explain what part of the Bible says you can't hire a gay person, or work alongside them. You know, if they made a case where they showed chapter and verse saying, "The Lord shall smite thee if thou payest a homosexual person for working," then they might be able to persuade somebody to put in a religious exclusion. But, uh, I don't think so.
The vote in the Senate was like butter. Republicans joined Democrats in supporting rights for our gay and transgender neighbors. In the House it will be more political, Boehner is afraid of the Nutty Ones and it looks like he can be intimidated into blocking a vote on this. On the other hand, the recent election might have been a wake-up call for the GOP, and this could be a good opportunity for them to show the people that they can be decent. Okay, a little joke there, sorry.
posted by JimK at 5:48 PM
198 Comments:
I had heard that there are enough votes to pass it in the house, but that Boehner won't bring it up for a vote.
For me personally, ENDA is much more important than marriage.
I wonder if the House rule adopted by the GOP leadership that forced the October 2013 government shut down by only allowing GOP leadership to introduce a bill to the House for a vote is still in effect or if any member of Congress can bring the Senate approved ENDA bill to the floor.
If the ENDA bill gets to the floor of the House for a vote, will the House Republicans who voted for ENDA in 2007 vote for it again?
Locally, I'm tickled pink to see Viriginia is turning bluer than ever. It appears, that while still headed to a recount due to the closeness of the vote, Democrat Herring now leads GOP Obenshaim in the Attorney General race there.
It truly is remarkable that Virginia elected a candidate as liberal as McAuliffe.
"There was some important news on the LGBT front this past week, as the Senate easily passed the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA)."
Why in the world would anyone consider this to be "important news"?
It has no effect.
Further, even if there were some chance that it might become law, it would unnecessary. Homosexuals are doing fine in our society. Few have any trouble finding employment that are not shared by most college graduates as a result of Barry Obama's horrific management of our economy.
Discrimination laws are only justified when a society presents barriers to the pursuit of happiness that are virtually insurmountable. To say that is true for homosexuals in 21st century America is ridiculous.
As I've explained before, discrimination laws in the absence of otherwise insurmountable barriers to success are simply another form of discrimination, creating a burden of proof that gives special preference to a group without any justification.
In our society, if any homosexual suspected that any employer didn't hire him because he didn't want to be associated with homosexuals, there are plenty of other employers that not only don't feel that way but are eager to hire them. There are many businesses that actually cater to homosexuals.
Let's look at the thoughts of the TTF staff biblical scholar:
"Some religious people read their scriptures to say that you should not be gay. Whatever, we won't talk about the inconsistencies at this point."
We won't talk about ignorance either. Scripture clearly says homosexual behavior is immoral.
Even if it didn't, the point of religious freedom is that it is not the proper place of government to interpret scripture. If you know anything about the British history that influenced the founding fathers, you would recognize this.
"But the fact is, I have never heard anybody explain what part of the Bible says you can't hire a gay person, or work alongside them."
How about, in the second book of Corinthians, chapter six, verse 14:
"Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness?"
In our modern era, few people have the punch the card in the factory, watch out for the man mentality. People seek employment where they can be part of a mission. If an enterprise has a religious component to that mission, it might be inappropriate to hire people who don't support that mission.
It goes to the heart of freedom, a concept mocked by the TTFers of the world.
"You know, if they made a case where they showed chapter and verse saying, "The Lord shall smite thee if thou payest a homosexual person for working," then they might be able to persuade somebody to put in a religious exclusion."
You may not understand religious convictions are based on gratitude and love for God rather than fear but you don't need to. Religions shouldn't have to prove themselves to government.
However, you might want to note that Old Testament law was applied, specifically by scripture, to individuals but also to their families and servants. "Servants" was a more innocuous term in past societies.
Having said all this, I personally wouldn't decline to hire a homosexual unless it was for a specifically religiously missioned endeavor. For example, if I were running a restaurant, I'd be likely to hire a homosexual who applied if he otherwise fit well. Still, others may interpret scripture differently and in a society with religious freedom this should be permissible.
quote from a moderate Republican, Dwight Eisenhower:
‘Our form of government has no sense unless it is founded in a deeply felt religious faith, and I don’t care what it is.’
But, uh, Jim doesn't think so.
Only if "think" is applied liberally.
"It truly is remarkable that Virginia elected a candidate as liberal as McAuliffe."
It's actually remarkable that McAuliffe could win election anywhere. He was the biggest sleazeball connected to the Clinton administration and it is highly unlikely he will serve his term without major scandal. the Virginia legislature remains in Republican hands.
Did you know that Arlington was originally part of the District of Columbia? If we gave it back and made DC a state, Democrats would never win another election in Virginia.
I remember in 2001 when there were a number of lgbt teachers moving to this area from the deep south, looking for tolerant school districts. They reported that Alabama had had a kind of witch-hunt, searching out and firing gay teachers.
(insert insulting comment from anonymous here)
I did know Arlington was once part of the district. Itt was returned to the commonwealth in 1847, in anticipation of the banning of open slave markets in the District of Columbia (which did in fact come about as part of the Compromise of 1850). The largest slave market in Northern Virginia was in Alexandria, which was then part of the southern section of the district, and southern lawmakers lobbied to have it returned to Virginia, so they could keep buying and selling people in public. Slave-breeding and selling were the major economic business of Virginia at the time.
I'm not sure if Arlington would mind enormously being separated from Virginia.
"I remember in 2001 when there were a number of lgbt teachers moving to this area from the deep south, looking for tolerant school districts. They reported that Alabama had had a kind of witch-hunt, searching out and firing gay teachers."
Hate to shock you, but the deep South, like most of the world outside of western Europe, will never be gay-friendly territory. They don't want homosexuals teaching their children as teachers are seen as role models. The answer is not to send Federal marshals in. If you want to be openly homosexual and a teacher, move someplace where everyone thinks that's cool.
"(insert insulting comment from anonymous here)"
Robert, you're on of my favorite TTFers, making us look good on a regular basis. Why would I insult you?
"I did know Arlington was once part of the district. Itt was returned to the commonwealth in 1847, in anticipation of the banning of open slave markets in the District of Columbia (which did in fact come about as part of the Compromise of 1850). The largest slave market in Northern Virginia was in Alexandria, which was then part of the southern section of the district, and southern lawmakers lobbied to have it returned to Virginia, so they could keep buying and selling people in public. Slave-breeding and selling were the major economic business of Virginia at the time.
I'm not sure if Arlington would mind enormously being separated from Virginia."
One of the big objections to DC statehood is that it would add two Democrat Senators to represent a small group of people. A compromise might be workable if Northern Virginia would join DC, which would secure Virginia for the Republicans. Yeah, you have Alexandria too.
btw, y'all have probably heard that the mayor of Toronto, who was arrested smoking crack, has higher approval ratings than Sir Barry. You want to contemplate that as you start getting Mount Rushmore ready for a new head.
Of course, Obama does have his signature achievement, the "Affordable" Care Act to brag about. Oh, wait a minute. Oh dear..ummm...
Never mind..
You do a great job exemplifying the need for the passage of ENDA. Thank you.
No problem, Robert. btw, I looked at your Facebook page and it said you are a "former" Latin teacher in Fairfax. Did you retire?
Anyway, I know you TTFers are a little miffed that John Boehner won't allow a vote on ENDA.
Here's an idea for effective protest. You guys could do it on the sidewalk in front of the Capitol. You know what they say, smoke 'em of you got 'em. It's worth a shot!:
A Russian performance artist was hospitalized Sunday after stripping naked and nailing his testicles to a Red Square cobblestone in protest against the Kremlin's crackdown on rights.
A video of the graphic action, available on Russian websites, showed artist Pyotr Pavlensky sitting naked outside Lenin's Mausoleum being covered with a blanket by police officers while horrified passersby looked on.
The state-run RIA Novosti news agency said Pavlensky was taken to a police station after being treated in a central Moscow clinic.
The Saint Petersburg-based artist said in a statement posted on the Grani.ru website that he was trying to draw attention to Russian society's inaction in the face of the denial of rights.
Russia marked its annual Police Day holiday on Sunday.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
"One of the big objections to DC statehood is that it would add two Democrat Senators to represent a small group of people."
The 2012 estimated population of
--Washington DC was 632,323
--Vermont was 626,011
--Wyoming was 576,412
If Vermont and Wyoming have large enough populations to warrant having two Senators in Congress, then so does Washington DC.
I was just saying that's the argument. I wasn't validating it. I think all U.S. citizens should have representation in Congress. Another good compromise would be to let DC citizens vote for Maryland's Senator. That wouldn't affect the Congressional balance at all.
Here's a fun story:
A 15-year-old daughter of two lesbian parents is campaigning to have technology giant Apple change the definition of "gay" in the company's dictionary.
Becca Gorman was shocked when she looked up the definition of "gay" in the Apple dictionary while working on a school project about gay rights. The third definition provided by Apple struck Gorman as incredibly offensive:
gay: INFORMAL: stupid; foolish; EX. MAKING STUDENTS WAIT FOR THE LIGHT IS KIND OF A GAY RULE.
"At first, I was kind of in disbelief," Gorman stated.
After consulting with her parents, she decided to write a letter to Apple, whose CEO Tim Cook was recently named the most powerful gay man in the world.
"I assume that you are a pro-gay company, and would never intend for any one of your products to be as offensive as this definition was," Gorman reportedly wrote. "Even with your addition of the word 'informal,' this definition normalizes the terrible derogatory twist that many people put on the word 'gay.'"
Only an hour after receiving the letter, Apple reportedly called the Gorman household to speak with Becca. The company's representative told the teen that they were also shocked by the definition, and that Apple would look into correcting the problem.
However, as of Tuesday morning the definition still remained the same.
Hillary's husband is throwing Barry under the bus.
Little wonder. She has to run in 2016 and she needs to distance herself from the disastrous Obamacare fiasco:
Former President Bill Clinton said Tuesday that the health care law should be changed to allow people to keep their health care plans that have been canceled as a result of the implementation of Obamacare.
"I personally believe, even if it takes changing the law, the president should honor the commitment the federal government made to those people and let them keep what they got," Clinton said.
The former president recounted a story where a man he met had his individual plan canceled because of Obamacare, and his insurer offered a plan with twice the premiums.
Republicans seized on his comments as an admittance of Obama's failure to fulfill his frequently-stated promised that those who like their health care plan can keep it. The White House has not agreed to change the law to allow people to keep their individual insurance plans, even though Obama has apologized for lying to America.
"A 15-year-old daughter of two lesbian parents is campaigning to have technology giant Apple change the definition of "gay" in the company's dictionary."
It was the third informal definition she asked to have changed and on my MacBook it already has been changed as of 3 PM this afternoon.
BTW, that same HuffPo article ends with this fact:
"This wouldn't be the first time that a dictionary definition has been changed to reflect current social and political attitudes. This past summer, Oxford English Dictionary announced that it was considering changing the definition of "marriage" to include the unions of same-sex couples."
And now that change has been made.
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/marriage
A recently released NBC poll has Hillary ahead of Christie by 10 points, 34 to 44.
Hilary beats "other Democrat" 66 to 14, while Christie beats "other Republican" 32 to 31.
"This wouldn't be the first time that a dictionary definition has been changed to reflect current social and political attitudes. This past summer, Oxford English Dictionary announced that it was considering changing the definition of "marriage" to include the unions of same-sex couples."
I think most people agree changing definitions to accommodate political purposes is wrong. This is how homosexuality was removed from the list of mental diseases. Political pressures.
A society that tolerates this will find its academic standards degrade over time.
"A recently released NBC poll has Hillary ahead of Christie by 10 points, 34 to 44"
Since neither of those two are likely to be nominated by a major political party for President in 2016, this is meaningless.
I find a Scott Walker v. Jerry Brown scenario more likely. If Mike Huckabee decides to run, he'll probably clean up though.
Of course, we can all dream. Republicans are dreaming of Terry McAuliffe running for the Democraps. And in this fantasy, Kathy Sebelius would be the VP nominee and Barack Obama would hit the campaign trail heavily to "support" the ticket.
ha-ha!!
The Hawaii State Senate just passed marriage equality 19-4. Gov. Neil Abercrombie, who called lawmakers to a special session for the bill and has vocally supported gay marriage, has said he would sign the measure.
why does it seem that Hawaii has legalized deviant marriage every three months or so for the last five years?
changing the definition of marriage doesn't equalize anything, it just destroys it
new Quinnipiac poll out tonight
it lines up with Gallup and Pew:
only 39% of Americans approve of Barack Obama
coincidentally, the poll also shows only 39% of Americans approve of Obamacare
that's just eerie, man!!
I remember back when Obamacare passed despite the fact that Americans made it clear they disapproved of it and not one single Republican voted for it, Obama said Americans will like it when they see it
it's here
it's a deception and a disaster and Americans detest it
and, henceforth, distrust Obama
50,000 have signed up to pay for insurance on Obamacare.
5,000,000 have lost their insurance because of it.
so come January 1, this plan to help people get insurance will have caused 100x more folks to lose insurance than they have helped.
and that is now. by Jan 1 the numbers might be much worse.
won't it be ironic if, come March, more Americans are uninsured than last March
it's not unlikely
Bill Clinton now wants to let people keep their insurance but the insurance companies are saying that at this point that's impossible
it's looking more likely every day that the website won't be fixed November 30
every time they fix one of the hundreds of problems, hundreds more pop up
and there's no incentive for the young to sign up
the penalty is significantly less than even subsidized insurance and, if you do get sick, you can sign up for insurance
they can't exclude you for pre-existing conditions
and people are beginning to avoid the site now because of reports of identity
this is all just embarassing in the land of Microsoft and Apple
"A recently released NBC poll has Hillary ahead of Christie by 10 points, 34 to 44"
recent?
it was released today
of course, just yesterday, a Ramussen poll was released showing Clinton ahead by less than the margin of error
how could that be?
NBC polled all adults, Ramussen polled voters
unfortunately for Clinton, a lot of her supporters don't vote
oh well, Hillary could always start making cookies
HAHA!!
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
No, anon. Add some value.
JimK
what are you talking about?
that great screen name says it all, the rest is just support for the point, which you've deprived your readers of
I looked at my facebook page, and I don't see where it says "former." I am a former math teacher in Fairfax, but currently teach Latin there. Retirement is still a decade off.
When my seniors say "135 school days until graduation," I respond "1475 school days until retirement." It gets a chuckle.
We have good retirement plans in Fairfax, reasonably sound. One wonders whether social security will keep up, though.
Now I see. I guess facebook just assumed I'd quit, in it's wisdom. I think I've corrected it.
its
Facebook is evil, Robert
"I was just saying that's the argument. I wasn't validating it. I think all U.S. citizens should have representation in Congress. Another good compromise would be to let DC citizens vote for Maryland's Senator.
To be fair then:
Either Wyoming citizens can vote in Colorado while Vermont citizens can vote in Massachusetts -- because those two states don't have enough people living within the state borders to justify having Senators and voting Representatives in Congress.
Or if Wyoming's and Vermont's low number of residents qualify for such representation, so does the District of Columbia's higher number of residents.
The issue is a little more complicated than you make out.
I don't think anyone wants cities making all the rules for rural areas just because fewer people live there. Under your reasoning, all five boroughs of New York could secede from New York state, each get statehood and increase the Senators from New York state from two to twelve. But who wants the whole country to be under Big Apple rules?
What you say might make sense if we limited the role of the Federal government to areas where there is a common interest, like defense, and leave local issues to locals.
Otherwise, you get nuts like Robert Rigby trying to force people in rural Alabama to hire homosexual teachers.
what's new in the world of health care today?
well, anonymous sources at the contractor tasked with fixing HealthCare.gov have told reporters there is no chance the site will be fixed by December 1
the number of cancellations in California has reached a million
meanwhile, Bill Clinton has opened the floodgates
Diane Feinstein, an influential Senator from a blue state and not up for re-election, has announced she will co-sponsor a bill to amend Obamacare to allow existing policies that don't comply with Obamacare standards to stay in effect
House Democratic have informed Obama that, unless he has a better idea by Friday, they will vote for a Republican bill to do the same
of course, this guts Obamacare completely which was a backdoor tax disguised as a premium increase trying to make people think they were getting more for their higher premiums when in fact the higher premiums were mostly to support universal health insurance
premiums will now go even higher, deficits will explode, and, hopefully, Obama will resign in disgrace
if a CEO of a private corporation had lied about his product on this scale, he'd be on trial for fraud
considering that, impeachment should be considered
Are these policies that don't qualify under the ACA really insurance, or are they scams?
they are just the policies people have now, Robert
some may be bad policies but not all are and if people like what they have, they can keep it
they will still have the option to go on the exchange, assuming the website is ever functional
the name of the bill is Keeping the ACA Promise Act
Kirsten Powers, Democrat commentator, on your subject Robert, from daily caller :
"Powers had a different reaction to the White House’s explanations for the less-than-desirable rollout of Obamacare. She explained how she had been personally affected by the law and said the explanation from Obama and his press secretary Jay Carney is not based in truth. Powers said customers like her are seeing their premiums increase in order to subsidize others.
“My blood pressure goes up every time they say that they’re protecting us from substandard health insurance plans because there is nothing to support what they’re saying,” Powers said. “I have talked about how I am losing my health insurance. If I want to keep the same health insurance, it’s going to cost twice is as much. There’s nothing substandard about my plan. All of the things they say that are not in my plan are in my plan. All of the things they have listed — there’s no explanation for the doubling of my premiums other than the fact it’s subsidizing other people.
“They need to be honest about that — that that’s the reason they don’t want to change it,” she continued. “It’s because they’re basically taking the people who are responsible enough to get health insurance in the individual market and asking them to subsidize other people. So they’re taking young healthy people and asking them to subsidize other people. I don’t think that’s going to last, frankly. I think they’re trying to buy time until they think they’re going to reach this next deadline. I don’t think they’re going to reach it and when they don’t reach it … I think there is going to be an absolute — now, not just senators who are up for reelection, you know, calling for this to be fixed — so, I think they’re going to have to respond to that.”"
I will echo that in the changes to my own plan, which also covers just about everything. My copays/deductibles all went up 50% and premiums went up 1700 from 4000. doesn't appear to cover anything more than birth control went to free from a 20.00 co-pay.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/11/12/kirsten-powers-slams-white-house-obamacare-excuses-my-blood-pressure-goes-up/#ixzz2kXdMGzy7
also, having a software development background, and having worked with customers doing complicated software development projects, folks usually allocate about 40% of the software development cycle to integration and test... especially when they are bringing together software pieces from different contractors. and they typically "code freeze" ie, no major changes, before they go into integration and test. so I have been shaking my head when I hear that they just entered integration and test a couple months ago and were making major changes up until a couple weeks before... that would imply that if they started, say two years ago on the actual software work (let's say it took a year to get the contracts in place) that they have at least a year to get the bugs out for a reasonable integration and test cycle. and if they didn't properly define the interfaces between the various contractors software portions (very likely given the reporting) they may never be able to get it fixed.
they may have to throw it out and start over. that's what I would do at this point, start a skunks works parallel effort to build a replacement site. the more software you have, the more complicated it is, the harder it is to debug. and they had several contractors sounds like on cost plus projects... ie paid more based on the how much it costs ... yes this is the crazy way our govt wastes money. you get paid more if you spend more time and overrun. FCS ... a billion dollar debacle spearheaded by Boeing was such a govt program. Tens of millions SLOC and they could never get it to work. eventually scrapped it.
Why did your insurance go up and mine go down?
no idea.
but my husband's company put the blame squarely on ACA.
"For xxx, the combination of ACA mandated plan changes, current and new ACA related taxes and fees, as well as increasing cost trends and experience rates will mean 49 million in addition medical plan related costs - and that's just for 2014"
it goes on about how it is going up even more next year.
my company's insurance is going from a 2K deductible to a 4K deductible. My HR person also cited obamacare as the reason.
these are both UHC plans. which carrier is yours ?
also one of the radio shows I listen to had an insurance rep call in who says that they are now being told to offer different rates to folks based on their income and ability to pay. I would have thought that was only in the exchange but maybe it is spilling over into the private market as well. that might explain it Robert.
aside from the testing aspect, one area that you don't hear a lot about is the security
sounds like the website has a lot of holes that will allow personal information to be stolen
scrapping the whole thing is probably the best idea
as intelligent anon said above, fixing it may be more complicated and expensive than starting over
it's sometimes true for bricks and mortar, why not software?
what a mess, eh?
Mine is BC/BS. It may be that my current insurance doesn't disqualify pre-existing conditions. I suspect that's the main difference.
I don't know about what you're employer's doing, Robert, but many are renewing at Dec 1 instead of Jan 1 this year because they think Obamacare won't apply until their first renewal period after Jan 1, thus putting it all off until next year
What we're seeing this week is the final disintegration of the progressive philosophy, that government can solve all our problems if just given enough control. This notion will now be extinguished for a generation.
The liberal media is not taking it well. You keep seeing reports in the mainstream outlets about the Republican "Civil War" and the Tea Party and yadda yadda.
Don't fall for it. It's a diversion. The Democratic Party is in a crisis and that's the story that historians will discuss about our time.
On the plus side, the events of the last couple of weeks seem to be finally forging a new bipartisanship. Democrats are now distancing themselves from our divisive President and working with Republicans to solve this health care mess. Hopefully, the new relationship will translate to deals on deficit reduction, tax reform and jobs growth.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/11/ipcc_s_bogus_evidence_for_global_warming.html
It's a beautiful day. There's a joyous crisp clear snow feel in the air. The socialist menace is receding, the stock market hit an all-time high yesterday. Let's not just celebrate, let's get noisy!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBWpIlSlZpU
Flip the flapjacks!! It's morning in America. The people have woken up:
"President Obama’s signature domestic policy may have accomplished something previously unthinkable: taking an issue where one party had a dominant hold on public opinion, and reversing it in favor of the opposing party.
If the latest poll numbers and enrollment figures are to be believed, we could be witnessing a political achievement unequaled in modern political history: the complete demolition of one party’s long-term dominance on an issue area – the Democrats’ ownership of the health care issue – in the space of a few months. Quinnipiac finds that young people trust Republicans in Congress more on health policy than the president; that a plurality of Hispanics, long the most pro-Obamacare faction, are now opposed to the law; and that overwhelming majorities (70+ percent) of Democrats, Republicans, and Independents are in favor of delaying the law. And that’s not all:
Only 19 percent of American voters say the quality of care they and their families receive will improve in the next year because of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), while 43 percent say it will get worse and 33 percent say ACA won't affect their health care. Voters oppose the ACA 55 - 39 percent, with men opposed 59 - 37 percent and women opposed 51 - 41 percent. American voters are divided 46 - 47 percent on whether Obama "knowingly deceived" the public when he said people could keep their existing health insurance plans if they wished. Voters also support 73 - 20 percent extending the deadline for signing up for coverage without facing a penalty.
No wonder we’re seeing these kinds of numbers, when even die-hard supporters of the law are getting hit hard by its ramifications. And for what? The enrollment figures released today illustrate that the administration has failed thoroughly in managing Obamacare’s launch, with just 26,794 people having enrolled via Healthcare.gov (and even that definition is dubious, given that the federal site reportedly is unable to process payments at this time). Comparison to the four million or so people who have lost their existing plans is laughable.
All told, the federal exchange enrollment figures work out to just 23 people per day per state signing up via the site. The whole project now looks like the creation of a tiny high risk pool and a Medicaid expansion in half the states.
Go tell your crazy hoax theory to the people with nothing left in the Phillippines.
“It’s time to stop this madness” – Philippines plea at UN climate talks
"...It was barely 11 months ago in Doha when my delegation appealed to the world… to open our eyes to the stark reality that we face… as then we confronted a catastrophic storm that resulted in the costliest disaster in Philippine history. Less than a year hence, we cannot imagine that a disaster much bigger would come. With an apparent cruel twist of fate, my country is being tested by this hellstorm called Super Typhoon Haiyan, which has been described by experts as the strongest typhoon that has ever made landfall in the course of recorded human history. It was so strong that if there was a Category 6, it would have fallen squarely in that box...
if you abandon your ignorance and actually read the IPCC report, you'll find that even the most ardent and fanatic global warming alarmists no longer connect the current hurricane activity with climate change
nice try, though
as far as alarmist propaganda goes anyway
I went to the Daily Caller article, and from there I clicked the link where Ms. Powers explains how she was "personally affected by the law," on a Fox News Special Report a few days ago.
Powers has changed her tune a bit since her appearance on Megyn Kelliy's Fox News show back in October 2013, during which we learned:
Ms. Powers "is a columnist with the Daily Beast and a Fox News political analyst."
On that Megyn Kelly show, at approximately the 6:39 mark, Kirsten Powers said, "You know, Megyn, I've been a huge fan of Obamacare and I still support it, but I think this is really problematic. I would say I'm actually willing to pay more money if people are going to be insured. So if they say "You pay $150 a month more but 30 million people get insurance," I'm actually willing to do that, however, I don't really, not really sure if I believe anymore that 30 more million people are going to be insured. And so I'm going to be very upset if it turns out I'm paying all this extra money and people aren't actually getting insured."
She might want to give it more than 6 weeks to determine how it "turns out."
Back in 2009, this very same Kirsten Powers wrote:
Why cost shouldn’t stop health-care reform
Now that she's a Fox News Analyst, it's interesting to watch Ms. Powers' spin change in the few weeks between her October 2013 appearance on Megyn Kelly's Fox News show to her November 2013 appearance on Bret Baier's Fox News Special Report show.
Her allegation that "young healthy people" will be burdened with higher cost insurance policies doesn't hold up in the case of my healthy 22 year old daughter, who has signed up for her own Obamacare health insurance policy that covers all 10 essential elements and will cost her $19 per month.
"as far as alarmist propaganda goes anyway"
What a great name for the next Super Typhoon!
Brilliant!
assuming there is one
a decade ago, Florida had a particularly bad hurricane
and the alarmists were running telling everyone, this would continue and intensify because of GLOBAL WARMING IS NEAR TO BEING IRREVERSIBLE!!!
we all know what happened
no hurricanes have hit the Eastern seaboard since
this is why IPCC is careful to mention the lack of connection now
they don't want to get burned again
too bad you're not worried about the same
btw, have you guys discussed the health care mess here yet?
millions have had their policies cancelled as of Jan 1, 2014
the deadline to sign up and have insurance in effect by then is Dec 15
HealthCare.gov will probably not be functional enough to allow millions to sign up within two weeks
hence, Obamacare will result in millions going naked, without health insurance, for an indeterminate period of time
what if... no, what about when some of these people have a health crisis during this period?
think bankruptcy and death
in coming years, people will spit on the ground when Barack Obama gets mentioned
“This has been a complete embarrassment,” Representative Patrick Murphy, Democrat of Florida, said. “It doesn’t matter what party you are."
this morning around 11:30, Barack Obama will announce that the administration will unilaterally allow insurance that don't comply with Obamacare to continue
this is an attempt to halt what is a foregone conclusion, that Congress would do the same tomorrow
while it's nice that he now recognizes the problem, the truth is that he is again violating our Constitution by legislating from the Oval Office
although he devised the dastardly Obamacare scheme, it was passed by Congress and only Congress can change it
but then, Obama has never cared about following the law
"no hurricanes have hit the Eastern seaboard since"
Are you saying only hurricanes that hit the Eastern seaboard cause damages to the US?
Time to teach some facts.
Here are a few of the hurricanes that have caused major damage to the USA in the past 10 years:
2004 Hurricane Ivan
"...After peaking in strength, the hurricane moved north-northwest across the Gulf of Mexico to strike Gulf Shores, Alabama as a strong Category 3 storm, causing significant damage. Ivan dropped heavy rains on the Southeastern United States as it progressed northeast and east through the eastern United States, becoming an extratropical cyclone. The remnant low from the storm moved into the western subtropical Atlantic and regenerated into a tropical cyclone, which then moved across Florida and the Gulf of Mexico into Louisiana and Texas, causing minimal damage. Ivan caused an estimated US$18 billion (2004 USD, $22.2 billion 2013 USD) in damages to the United States, making it the fifth costliest hurricane ever to strike the country..."
August 2005 Hurricane Katrina
"...the costliest natural disaster, as well as one of the five deadliest hurricanes, in the history of the United States. Among recorded Atlantic hurricanes, it was the sixth strongest overall. At least 1,833 people died in the hurricane and subsequent floods, making it the deadliest U.S. hurricane since the 1928 Okeechobee hurricane; total property damage was estimated at $81 billion (2005 USD),[1] nearly triple the damage brought by Hurricane Andrew in 1992.[3]
Hurricane Katrina formed over the Bahamas on August 23, 2005 and crossed southern Florida as a moderate Category 1 hurricane, causing some deaths and flooding there before strengthening rapidly in the Gulf of Mexico. The hurricane strengthened to a Category 5 hurricane over the warm Gulf water, but weakened before making its second landfall as a Category 3 hurricane on the morning of Monday, August 29 in southeast Louisiana...."
October 2005
Hurricane Wilma
"...As Wilma began accelerating to the northeast, gradual re-intensification occurred, and the hurricane became a Category 3 hurricane on October 24. Shortly thereafter, Wilma made landfall in Cape Romano, Florida with winds of 120 mph (190 km/h)....
...As a result, Wilma is ranked among the top five most costly hurricanes ever recorded in the Atlantic and the fifth costliest storm in United States history.
2008 Hurricane Ike
"...Ike made its final landfall near Galveston, Texas as a strong Category 2 hurricane, on September 13, 2008, at 2:10 am CDT...
...Due to its immense size, Ike caused devastation from the Louisiana coastline all the way to the Kenedy County region near Corpus Christi, Texas.[5] In addition, Ike caused flooding and significant damage along the Mississippi coastline and the Florida Panhandle[6] Damages from Ike in U.S. coastal and inland areas are estimated at $29.5 billion (2008 USD),[..."
2011 Hurricane Irene
"...Irene was downgraded to a Category 1 hurricane before making landfall on the Outer Banks of North Carolina on August 27, [2011]..."
... Damage estimates throughout the United States are estimated near $15.6 billion,[3] which made it the seventh costliest hurricane in United States history, only behind Hurricane Andrew of 1992, Hurricane Ivan of 2004, Hurricanes Wilma and Katrina of 2005, Hurricane Ike of 2008, and Hurricane Sandy in 2012. In addition, monetary losses in the Caribbean and Canada were $830 million and $130 million respectively for a total of nearly $16.6 billion in damage...."
2012 Hurricane Sandy
"...On October 27, Sandy briefly weakened to a tropical storm and then restrengthened to a Category 1 hurricane. Early on October 29, Sandy curved north-northwest and then[7] moved ashore near Brigantine, New Jersey, just to the northeast of Atlantic City, as a post-tropical cyclone with hurricane-force winds.[1][8...
...In the United States, Hurricane Sandy affected 24 states, including the entire eastern seaboard from Florida to Maine and west across the Appalachian Mountains to Michigan and Wisconsin, with particularly severe damage in New Jersey and New York. Its storm surge hit New York City on October 29, flooding streets, tunnels and subway lines and cutting power in and around the city.[10][11] Damage in the United States amounted to $65 billion (2013 USD)..."
Have fun spinning!
you indicated that your daughter doesn't make much money.
everyone else is paying for your daughter's plan.
what you have said just backs up what I had already heard, the insurance companies on the exchange have been told to offer plans at different prices points based on income.
that's why your daughter's plan is less.
call your "navigator" back and ask how much the plan would be if your daughter was making 120K instead of 20K.
"Are you saying only hurricanes that hit the Eastern seaboard cause damages to the US?"
I'm saying there has been no unusual hurricane activity and what there has been is not a result of climate change.
It was in 2005 when global warming alarmists were making this unjustified claim that this was the beginning of super-storms caused by global warming.
You can keep making a fool of yourself but even the IPCC, whose mission it is to prove anthropogenic global warming theory has dismissed this idea.
"Time to teach some facts."
You might want to learn some first.
Try Ritalin. Might help you concentrate when you read.
all these people calling into to WMAL.
one lady's deductible went to 12, 500. one guy's OOP (preexisting heart condition) from 6000 lifetime to 100,000 insurance up from 350 to 1600 a month.
the lady whose deductible went to 12,500 is republican.. old deductible was 2K (and she can't afford the premiums anymore), her mom is a dem. she showed her cancellation letter to her mom (who voted for Obama) and her mother started crying for the pain she has inflicted on her daughter.
well, we told you so. hopefully people are waking up.
"one lady's deductible went to 12, 500. one guy's OOP (preexisting heart condition) from 6000 lifetime to 100,000 insurance up from 350 to 1600 a month.:
Health insurance plans with lifetime limits are not ACA compliant.
These confused individuals should name their companies, their specific health care plans, theire age and income and state of residency so a competent journalist can go on the exchange for them and find how much they will save shopping there instead of taking the single option offered by their current non-ACA plan-offering insurance company.
BTW, both of your callers can keep their plan for another year and that should give them more than enough time to stop spinning, go to the exchange and find out what's out there.
WMAL is hate radio. You shouldn't listen to it.
they are all in Maryland.
the whole wide world sees the Obamacare catastrophe and recognizes it
and Aunt Bea plugs her ears closes her eyes and says over and over "spinning, spinning, spinning..."
meantime, life outside goes on around you
latest poll out today has the generic Congressional Republican ahead of the generic Dem in Congress by three points
guess that government shutdown payed off after all!!
Obama just showed up at his press conference 45 minutes late
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TI6Uyf29H34
"latest poll out today has the generic Congressional Republican ahead of the generic Dem in Congress by three points"
Oh, yes, the FOX NEWS poll indeed found that, yet the RCP average still shows Dems ahead of GOPers in a generic Congressional race.
Here's more info about the Fox News spin machine regarding Obamacare.
Inside the Fox News spin machine: I fact-checked Megyn Kelly on Obamacare
"When a guest said Obamacare made him sell his business, I called him for his full story. It was more complicated
...Bill recently sold his company Bubbles Car Wash, with 13 locations and 290 employees, to a private equity fund for what he admitted was a tremendous price. “I’ve been very successful,” he acknowledged. (He boasted in a 2011 Houston Business Journal article that he owns two Mercedes and a Bentley convertible.)
With 290 employees, his business would be subject to the Affordable Care Act’s employer mandate that kicks in in 2015 (assuming it isn’t delayed, as it has been once already), which will force companies to offer insurance to workers or else pay a penalty. Bill says it would have run him in the neighborhood of $400,000 annually.
My first question to him was: Would he show me some of his business’s financial records? Maybe an annual report, preferably something audited, so I could analyze his claim about the catastrophic effect Obamacare would have had on his business? He would not.
Did Megyn Kelly request such verification? No, he said, she did not.
...were any other reasons he was selling his business. He admitted to me that there were plenty of others (“myriad reasons,” in his words)....The headache of managing workers. Taxes, fees and permits of every shape and size and color (dumpster permits, gate permits, this permit, that permit). He complained to me that he has to pay $300 for an “auto dealer’s” permit just to sell air fresheners at the checkout counter of his car wash centers.
From the sound of it, Gov. Rick Perry is more to blame for Bill’s choice to retire than Obama...
Nonetheless, Bill insisted that the Affordable Care Act was the “primary” reason he chose to sell out and retire after 22 years. He told me he spent a year attending seminars and seeking advice from lawyers and insurance experts on the employer mandate, and it was universally made clear to him that the new federal law would make it too costly to stay in business....
..;Bill also told me that the private equity company that bought him out had approached him as early as “three or four years ago,” so he was at least speaking to the buyers before Obamacare ever existed. A spokesperson for the new owner refused to talk to me for this article. Suffice it to say, however, that a private equity firm sees enormous potential in Bubbles Car Wash with or without Obamacare....
...And as for Megyn Kelly, she asked very few probative questions before or during the interview, preferring instead to just take Bill’s claim about Obamacare at face value. But clearly there was another side of the story."
When Fox News does the reporting, there's always another side of the story.
Americans have come to trust FOX more any other cable news.
Check out the ratings.
It's a trust that hasn't been earned by the mainstream media or that branch of the Democratic National Committee called MSNBC.
btw, they don't trust Obama.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Fn36l_z3WY
looks like Obama's little "we fumbled" plea isn't going to stop the freight train rumbling through the Capitol
this was supposed to go with the last post:
President Obama's announcement that he will allow a one-year delay of cancellation notices for current health insurance policies, even if they don't comply with the Affordable Care Act, triggered relief among some congressional Democrats, but most are concerned it doesn’t go far enough.
Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu, who has proposed legislation that would extend current policies indefinitely, said she was “encouraged” by the president’s solution but will continue to push her legislation. "I remain willing to work with anyone who wants to strengthen the Affordable Care Act and keep the significant promise that it holds for our country,” she said.
Oregon Sen. Jeff Merkley, who has endorsed Landrieu’s bill, said that while the White House proposal is “a step in the right direction,” it doesn’t go far enough. “The concept was … you could chose between the individual plan you have and the plans that were on the exchange and without any limitation on the length that you could keep the plan that you had,” he explained.
Obama’s offer comes amid growing alarm among his party members about the flawed rollout of the health care law. Over the past several days, Democratic lawmakers, including those who have been steadfast in their support for the law, have demanded that the White House address constituents’ outrage over their canceled plans.
Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said House Democrats would propose their own legislative fix to accompany the president’s.
Pelosi, who pushed the Affordable Care Act through her chamber in 2010, said her caucus is united about the need to change the law so buyers in the individual market can keep their policies, a promise the president made repeatedly when explaining the legislation. “We’re all of one mind. … We must have a fix, and we will,” she told reporters.
There was some important news on the LGBT front this past week. Turns out the Republicans are poised to capitalize on the failure of Obamacare and retake the Senate and hold the House, ending ENDA's chances of becoming the law of the land.
OBAMACARE: SIGNED, SEALED and DELIVERED
OOOH BABY!
"Turns out the Republicans are poised to capitalize on the failure of Obamacare and retake the Senate and hold the House, ending ENDA's chances of becoming the law of the land."
President Huckabee must be so proud of all the work he's done to help uninsured Americans get health insurance and to prevent workplace discrimination against God's LGBT creations.
Oh, that's right.
He didn't because the fact is he couldn't even win his party's nomination, let alone a nationwide election.
"President Huckabee must be so proud of all the work he's done to help uninsured Americans get health insurance"
what a clever remark
of course, what Obama has done is increased the cost of insurance astronomically to everyone who isn't poor and used the healthcare system to push his social agenda
higher premiums, higher deductibles, less choice about what doctor to use
since it is clear that Obama lied to get ACA passed, it needs to be repealed and re-argued, honestly this time
the American never agreed to a huge transfer of wealth
"and to prevent workplace discrimination against God's LGBT creations."
it's not government's job to compensate for the consequences of people's personal decisions
homosexuality is not something you are, it's something you do
if people don't want to encourage or associate with those who do such things, that's their right
"Oh, that's right.
He didn't because the fact is he couldn't even win his party's nomination, let alone a nationwide election."
in point of fact, he came in second in delegates to a dubious chameleon in 2008 who still has no convictions and will say anything to be popular with the media
as far as the 2012 election, polls in late 2011 showed Huckabee leading for both the Republican nomination and in match-ups against Brackish Obama but he chose, for personal reasons, not to run
contrast that to the head homosexual in America at that time, Barney Frank, who declined to run to avoid the humiliation of an inevitable defeat
earlier today, I noted:
"latest poll out today has the generic Congressional Republican ahead of the generic Dem in Congress by three points"
to which, a TTFer had a non-response:
"Oh, yes, the FOX NEWS poll indeed found that, yet the RCP average still shows Dems ahead of GOPers in a generic Congressional race."
well, true, except the average includes surveys weeks old and we all know the magnitude of the Democratic "fumble", as Sir Barry put it, has become more apparent on a daily basis
here's another poll, beside the FOX one:
"Immediately after the federal government shutdown, Democrats claimed that their momentum improved their chances to recapture the House after next year's midterm elections. But a new poll released this week shows that momentum has vanished in the wake of the Obama administration's failures in implementing the health care law.
A new Quinnipiac University poll shows the parties are now tied on the generic ballot, with each party at 39 percent.
That is down from a 9-point Democratic lead in late September, immediately before Republican opposition to the health care law led to the shutdown. Independent voters, who split virtually evenly in the September survey, now back the Republican House candidate in their district by an 11-point margin, 37 percent to 26 percent. Among white voters, Republicans now have a 14-point lead, 46 percent to 32 percent. And, perhaps most strikingly, the poll shows no significant difference in vote intention by age, with the two parties virtually tied, even among voters under 30, who stuck with Democrats even in the 2010 GOP landslide.
The Quinnipiac University poll was conducted Nov. 6-11, surveying 2,545 registered voters. The poll has a margin of error of plus-or-minus 1.9 percentage points."
so Democrats were in front before the shutdown, and now they aren't
moreover, independents favor Republicans overwhelmingly and the youngsters are breaking Republican
what a nasty turn of events for Democrats!
how ominous things like for them, of a sudden
next November, the shutdown will be remembered as the Republicans' gallant effort to stop disaster
middle income Americans will be struggling to pay their bills and businesses, who got a reprieve of one year will be unveiling the same cancellations we see today with premium and deductible increases in the triple digits
and, then, we vote
this ain't a dream no more, it's the real thing
MWAHAHAHAHA!!
no wonder Dem approval polls are in free fall
people realize it wasn't just Obama that lied
every Dem knew how this was going to work and so did every Republican
not one Dem voted to avoid this disaster, that they knew would come
they gambled that a slobbering press to give them cover
turns out even the media's leftist advocacy has limits
meanwhile, Repubs, who also knew the facts, tried to warn us
people now know who to trust
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6j9EvK9_JFA
did you know that twice as many Democrats believe in astrology as Republicans?
the media, in collaboration with the Democratic National Committee have labored mightily to stereotype Republicans as superstitious and anti-science despite the fact that Democrats heavily oppose all kinds of scientific achievements like nuclear power and genetic engineering with the potential to advance society, portraying them as dangerous without empirical basis
Atlantic magazine has a great analysis of the situation in this month's issue:
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/11/the-republican-party-isnt-really-the-anti-science-party/281219/
and now you know the rest of the story
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOqDabQGfGc
meant to attach this to the last post
sorry, kids
Alzheimers is a terrible thing in a young fellow like meself
back then, Nancy Pelosi said:
"We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it."
and with that, all Dems drank the Kool-Aid she was serving
unanimously approving a 2,000 page bill without reading it
deliciously, Pelosi will be running in Nov 2014
and people in her district will have watched commercials with that quote hundreds of times by then
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUV_YbmHk6Y
Obama is just brilliant
instead of saying grandfathered plans can be kept, he said they can be kept for another year
meaning this whole mess will bubble up next year again right before the election
how many Dems will follow Obama's lead now?
Boehner should vote on repeal again
it might go through
Oh brother!
Repealing Obamacare, again, will work exactly like it has all 40 some odd times the House has voted to repeal it already.
Maybe our do nothing over and over again Speaker of the House John Boehner should try bringing a new bill to the floor for a vote, like the Senate's bipartisan approved immigration and ENDA bills, or maybe even the House leadership could come up with a jobs bill to help employ more long term unemployed workers like Yellen advocated to help us recover from the Great Recession Bush left for us to clean up after.
"Oh brother!
Repealing Obamacare, again, will work exactly like it has all 40 some odd times the House has voted to repeal it already."
little different this time
as Nancy Pelosi has confirmed, she had no idea what was in the ACA bill when she voted for it
now, she and all Americans do know "what's in the bill"
so, many Dems, scared for their political lives have already announced they will vote for the Republican bill today that will effectively end Obamacare
in the past, the repeal bills only had Repub support
if the Dem number in the House is large enough, it may force the hand of Senators- many Dems there are already supporting something similar
"Maybe our do nothing over and over again Speaker of the House John Boehner should try bringing a new bill to the floor for a vote,"
there's one coming up today
it will be voted on and passed
btw, Americans now trust Repubs in health care more than they do Dems
"like the Senate's bipartisan approved immigration and ENDA bills, or maybe even the House leadership could come up with a jobs bill to help employ more long term unemployed workers like Yellen advocated to help us recover from the Great Recession Bush left for us to clean up after."
Bush, huh?
Bush followed policies that kept America at full employment for a quarter century
during that time, cyclical recessions were matched soon by bounce backs of compensating magnitude
now, with the socialist, anti-business policies of the Obama administration, our economy lacks vitality while we await the next recession
Bush left office over five years ago
even if concede that Bush is to blame, which he isn't, Obama clearly hasn't got any viable solution
he needs to resign for the good of the country
he has apologized and admitted he failed
it's time for him to make that more than a bunch of words
the House easily passed the effective end of Obamacare this afternoon
39 Dems joined the Repubs so, unlike Obamacare, this is a bipartisan decision
over to the Senate where Mary Landrieu and Diane Feinstein are pushing a similar bill
Harry Reid will have no choice but to call a vote
the House vote was a shade under two-thirds so the question of the hour is:
will Obama dare veto the Keeping the ACA Promise act?
so do you feel sorry for dems that have had their plans cancelled or do you just think they deserve it ?
I guess I am leaning towards well they deserve it.
and a million of them are in CA, so largely democrats
I was thinking it makes me a terrible person to not feel sorry for them... but they brought it on themselves ! and I have to admit, I am laughing at these idiots that voted for Obama and got their plans cancelled as a result.... how stupid can you be ?
wow, wait until the employer mandate kicks in. oh and bea, someone else called into WMAL, healthy male at 4x the poverty level so above subsidies...28 years old, single male and insurance (on the exchange) at 450 a month or 5400 a year single person. which would say that if
he was older the number would be 16,500 single male (using the 3x number as the maximum ratio young to old)
he didn't indicate what his deductibles were.. what did you say your daughters deductibles were for her 20.00 a month plan ?
On the bright side, the failure of Obamacare means freedom will probablt survive. Republicans oppose Obama’s policies because they believe the president will so inexorably change the structure of our social and economic system by mandating and punishing human behavior that nothing less than individual freedom is at stake. Under present circumstances, this hardly seems delusional. Does anyone really believe that subsidized policyholders with preexisting conditions won’t eventually face other mandates and penalties related to their lifestyle choices?
The GOP suddenly says its so worried about people losing their insurance, but their real goal is to repeal Obamacare and leave nearly 45 million Americans without any health insurance coverage.
We should never forget the cries of "Let him die!" at a GOP Presidential debate.
more people will have lost insurance because of obamacare cancellations then will have signed up for obamacare.
the net will be obamacare will leave more uninsured than before it was implemented.
spin that one, why don't you ?
Insurance companies have been raising rates and canceling people's policies forever -- that's the main reason we needed Obamacare in the first place. Now there are some standards in place to stop companies from selling junk policies, and a few people are having to make a change because their policies don't meet the minimum standard.
Even if the rates on their existing policy are increasing, ACA gives them a place to shop to find a better policy at a better price. Since your real goal is to denigrate the President, you can focus on the fact that some people have to make changes, but in fact the changes are for the better, in terms both of price and coverage.
please explain why it is better for a 50 year old post menopausal female (like me) to pay for maternity coverage. I need maternity coverage and b/c coverage now for my family, and am happy to pay for it. when the kids are off my policy I don't need it. why would I ?
please explain why it is better for a 28 year old male to pay for maternity coverage when the coverage is for himself ONLY.
please explain why it is better for a non gender confused person to pay for gender identity surgery.
please explain why putting EVERYONE on the same policy REGARDLESS of their needs is the right approach.
I get what they are doing, I don't agree with your assessment that this is better for everyone.
It is patently ridiculous to assert that it is discrimination to charge a female more for coverage during child bearing years... It's not discrimination, it's statistics and logic folks.
we want the insurance WE WANT. not that Obama wants for us. we want to keep the plans we had.
"if you like your plan you can keep it"...
repeated 40 x times over. LIAR LIAR pants on fire.
Silly person, you don't know what insurance is, do you? Do you think you can get a policy that only covers the diseases and conditions you will have in the future, and nothing else? Insurance works by aggregating the gamble across many customers. If you don't need obstetrical services then fine, don't go to the OBGYN. Somebody else's premiums will help you when you have a problem they don't have. It all works out.
The insurance companies would like to sell you the insurance "we want," because the public are uninformed and will buy the cheapest thing, which is fine until they get sick and then guess what, the rest of us are going to pick up the bill for their treatment. They have had their way with customers long enough, taking your money and then dropping you when you need help. At least finally there is somebody speaking for the public, and not the insurance industry.
And of course the point for you is to call the President a liar. Insurance companies have always raised rates and dropped people when they became a risk. He did not think that people would complain when they were "forced" to switch to a less expensive policy that gave them better coverage, but he did not anticipate exactly how stupid the Republicans are, and how much they hate him.
and I will agree that establishing a standard of what insurance covers (bronze, silver, whatever) and mandating a set of things that must be covered and then also mandating that insurance companies cover those minimum things or at least categorize plans so that substandard plans are clear... isn't necessarily a bad idea. It helps consumers compare. BUT, they should have established a "iron" plan and a "nickel" plan... ie, high deductible, excluded items like maternity coverage, like gender identity, like birth control, are excluded.
so given that "bronze" plan is the lowest, is BC excluded on this plan, or is it free ?
why couldn't they have established a "religious compliance" plan that excluded birth control, covered maternity, and didn't cover sex changes...
if there objective was to make sure that folks didn't sign up for a plan that were "junk" plans and to control "junk" plans mandated "exclusions".
you are lying and spinning bea.
not attractive.
"Silly person, you don't know what insurance is, do you? Do you think you can get a policy that only covers the diseases and conditions you will have in the future, and nothing else? Insurance works by aggregating the gamble across many customers. If you don't need obstetrical services then fine, don't go to the OBGYN. Somebody else's premiums will help you when you have a problem they don't have. It all works out."
really. so you should pay for auto insurance when you DON"T DRIVE A CAR ? and single men should pay for maternity coverage because they are likely to GET PREGNANT ?
come on bea, you are brighter than that.
don't try to avoid the issues, I will concede that their is model for amortizing the costs among everyone, but you are impossible to have a discussion with because you avoid the facts.
Obama lied because he knew he couldn't pass Obamacare without doing so.
Arguing the merits of Obamacare is pointless. You're arguing that he had the right to lie, if necessary, because he knew what was good for us and we didn't.
Unless you're in the subsidized group, you're not paying less for better insurance. You're paying more for your own coverage plus subsidizing a very large group of others. Obama simply found a clever way to raise taxes, disguised as a higher premium, and then conflate it with a number of other features.
For the last three years, every suggested amendment by a Republican was responded to by saying this is "settled law". And yet Obama makes changed to this "settled law" at will.
Many haven't realized it yet but when Obama makes changes to law without the approval of the legislature because he knows better than his constituents, harasses opponents using the tax authority, and threatens journalists with treason charges for whistleblowing, we're close to having Hugo Chavez as President.
I am not bea and never have been. Insurance premiums go into a pool, your complaints are meaningless. If you don't want abortion coverage, then just don't go in for an abortion. Your premium will help somebody with cancer, and their premium may help you if you were to go for addiction treatment or something that does not affect them.
The bottom line is, it is clear you will be opposed to ACA because Obama proposed it, and discussion with you is futile.
Sure, of course, Obama lied and everything he did was wrong. I am so surprised you think so.
No, Barack Obama lied to achieve a wealth transfer that would never have passed if he had told the truth.
It's no more complicated than that. If Congress has any integrity, Obamacare will be repealed and we could have a truthful and honest conversation about health care in this country.
One thing is obvious though: it wasn't necessary to change insurance requirements for everyone in order to provide insurance for the uninsured. That was done to mingle the subsidies with charges for new services and disguise a defacto tax on the middle class.
If we acquiesce to the government ignoring democratic processes because they know what is best for us even if we don't, personal freedom will be gone. Eventually, if the government is subsidizing health care, it will justify forcing bureaucratic healthy habits on us.
Sure, of course, Obama is doing great. The 39% who think so are so much wiser than the 61% who don't.
That's why it's OK for him to lie to achieve his objectives. That's how socialists comrades march. He is so much wiser the rest of us.
a message for TTFers from John Kass of the Chicago Tribune:
Somewhere deep in the mind of President Barack Obama, way back where it's safe and warm, the man must be seeking refuge in memories of happier days.
Days when he could easily wield magical powers like the political messiah he once was, feeding the multitudes with his rhetoric, bringing Hopium-smoking journalists to tingles and tears.
All the man had to do was hold out his hands to stop the oceans. He said so.
"I am absolutely certain that generations from now," he said the night he won the Democratic Party's presidential nomination in 2008, "we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal."
He who could heal the planet and stop the oceans must be a man who could control one-sixth of the American economy and impose Obamacare on us whether we wanted it or not.
But it didn't turn out that way, did it?
Hubris has a way of ruining grand designs. And like reality, it bites.
So last week the Obama presidency began crumbling. Some may be disappointed, and may see him in heroic terms, withering like a character in an ancient tragedy.
A few of us saw a backbencher from the Illinois state legislature, a guy who took orders, then rode to the White House on a personality cult, finally exposed.
Obamacare, his health care plan rammed down America's throat without a bipartisan consensus, not only became a political embarrassment, it became a political disaster.
The Obamacare website continued to implode, Americans lost their health insurance even though he repeatedly promised them they wouldn't. Period.
The word "liar" was suddenly attached to his name, because of the cynical, untruthful promise he repeatedly made, and once Obamacare began collapsing, his fellow Democrats began to run in panic.
Political disasters have one father, usually, and this one sprang directly from the president's own forehead.
Disasters are contagious, and politicians are terrified of infection. So his guys began to run. And journalists asked him pointed questions at his news conference last week, and his performance was beyond awkward.
It was embarrassing.
"OK," Obama conceded. "On the website, I was not informed directly that the website would not be working as — the way it was supposed to. Had I been informed, I wouldn't be going out saying, 'Boy, this is going to be great.' You know, I'm accused of a lot of things, but I don't think I'm stupid enough to go around saying, 'This is going to be like shopping on Amazon or Travelocity' a week before the website opens, if I thought that it wasn't going to work."
Watching him blame others for the failure of his signature policy — saying, "I was not informed directly" — was depressing.
He'd promised us, repeatedly, famously, stridently, that under Obamacare, we could keep our health plans and our doctors. "Period," he said.
He guaranteed it. He gave his word. It was as if he asked us to read his lips.
What he said wasn't true. And Americans know it, and they don't like it.
It's not as if other presidents haven't lied. President George W. Bush lied when he promised the world he wouldn't be some nation builder, but then invaded Iraq to build a nation at the cost of precious American blood.
And President Bill Clinton, of course, was a profound liar. He famously lied about not having sex with that intern until the stained blue dress surfaced. Most Americans (wrongly) considered that to be a lie that was no one's business but his own and his wife's, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee for 2016.
But this lie from Obama is different. It's not about death and destruction overseas, or infidelity among the elite.
This one is close to home. If all politics is local, there's nothing more local than your own body.
What could be more personal than our own bodies, or those of our spouses and our children? And that makes it all the worse for the president.
Imagine what all those people who've lost their health insurance as a result of the Obama catastrophe are feeling right now. They're confused, and afraid, and feel betrayed.
You've seen them in news accounts. You've heard their anguish.
You've also heard the president's men shriek and holler in his defense.
But what about the father who's just had his family's health insurance canceled? To him, the political arguments must sound like the barking of dogs.
And when the president speaks, blaming others for not informing him directly? That father is done listening to Mr. Obama.
And that's no lie.
Does anybody really not realize that Bill Clinton threw Barry under the bus this week because he's dying to live at 1600 Penn again?
When you've been in the national focus as long as Hillary, however, there's so much material out there.
Prior to Obama, Hillary was the last Democrat to fall into the black hole of national health care.
How about this little ditty from back in the gay nineties? :
"We just think people will be too focused on saving money and they won't get the care for their children and themselves that they need. The money has to go to the Federal government because the Federal government will spend that money better."
Oh, yeah, she's a lock for the nomination alright.
But, it takes a village idiot to see it.
well, I think Obama is just saying:
YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!!!
"so given that "bronze" plan is the lowest, is BC excluded on this plan, or is it free ?"
BC, birth control pills are prescription medications, which are covered differently from each plan. Condoms are OTC, which are not covered.
To find out what they cost, you need to go to an exchange and find out.
Many ACA compliant plans offer different prescription coverage as determined by each health insurance company.
Three BRONZE plans offer to cover in-network generic drugs as follows:
A - No charge after deductible ($6,000 for individual, $12,000 for family) is met
B - $10
C - $20% coinsurance after deductible ($3,500 for individual, $7,000 for family) is met
For Preferred Brand Drugs in-network:
A - No charge after deductible ($6K ind, $12K fam) is met
B - 30% coinsurance after deductible ($5.5K ind, $11K fam) is met
C - 30% coinsurance after deductible ($3.5K ind, $7K fam) is met
For Speciality Brand Drugs in-network:
A - No charge after deductible ($6K ind, $12K fam) is met
B - 40% coinsurance after deductible ($5.5K ind, $11K fam) is met
C - 50% coinsurance after deductible ($3.5K ind, $7K fam) is met
Monthly premiums for these three BRONZE plans, without subsidy are:
A - $277
B - $329
C - $348
Two GOLD plans offer the following prescription coverage for Generic drugs in-network:
1 - $10
2 - 0
Two GOLD plans offer Rx coverage for Preferred Brand Drug in-network:
1 - 30% coinsurance after deductible ($1,000 for individual, $2,000 for family) is met
2 - $45 copay after deductible ($3,450 for individual, $6,900 for family) is met
Two GOLD plans offer Rx coverage for Specialty Drugs in-network:
1 - 40% coinsurance after deducible ($1K ind, $2K fam)
2 - $200 copay after deductible (($3,450 ind, $6,900 fam)
Monthly premiums for these two GOLD plans are:
1 - $495
2 - $554
I could pay zero for generic prescriptions, $545 for Preferred Brand name prescriptions, and $200 for specialty drugs without having to meet any deductible with a PLATINUM plan, but that premium would be $700 a month.
There are many options available and it's easy to find one that best meets your own needs.
It's apparent you have not been to the exchange to find out what's offered. Rather than speaking from ignorance, I suggest you go to the exchange, plug in some numbers and find out what is offered.
Typo:
That $545 for Preferred Brand name prescriptions should just be $45
I would try that but I don't want to put in all my personal information including social on a site that is not secure from identity thieves.
I am curious though if you change your income if the price of the insurance changes.
try tripling your declared income and see what that does to the prices of in the plans offered.
the details don't matter at this point, Aunt Bea
the simple, uncomplicated truth is that a used-car salesman posing as President sold Americans a massive wealth transfer from the middle class with the lie that nothing would change for them if they already insurance
here's the appropriate steps if the Democrats in Congress want to be re-elected:
1. Obamacare repealed and reconsidered, from the beginning
2. Obama impeached and removed from office
3. after he is removed from office, he needs to be tried for fraud
otherwise, it is difficult to imagine how any Democrats, who voted for Obamacare and showed such contempt for their constituents, could be re-elected in November 2014
"try tripling your declared income and see what that does to the prices of in the plans offered...
...the details don't matter at this point""
That's right Anonymous, facts do not matter to a spin artist/plagiarist like you.
However, for people who do find factual details matter, I can report after spending a month shopping on the exchange, there are plans are available to me without subsidy that offer various coverage at premiums ranging from $277/month to over $700/month.
Every plan offered to me by the exchange covers more and costs significantly less than my current plan.
You will have no factual data about these options for yourself as long as you are too frightened to check out the website. The only numbers required are your SSN and wages from your 2012 income tax form, all of which is already reported to the IRS, often electronically. In fact, my CPA has been filing my taxes online for years without a problem.
"That's right Anonymous, facts do not matter to a spin artist/plagiarist like you."
Oh, you are misquoting me. The facts do matter. What doesn't matter is the details about how you think the crime committed against America is actually good for it.
This is like someone kidnapping your kid and then arguing with you about whether they fed them better than you.
Here's the fact:
Obama lied and told Americans that if they already had insurance, the ACA wouldn't have any effect on them. They were told they could keep their insurance, keep their doctors and the cost of their insurance would go down.
bonus fact: No one disputes that Obamacare would not have passed unless this lie had been told and relied on.
"The only numbers required are your SSN and wages from your 2012 income tax form, all of which is already reported to the IRS, often electronically. In fact, my CPA has been filing my taxes online for years without a problem."
Those just happen to be the numbers that an identity thief needs to wipe you out and destroy your credit.
The IRS has a system with security. According to experts in cyber-security, HealthCare.com is not secure.
"According to experts in cyber-security, HealthCare.com is not secure."
House Republicans Asked Murder Suspect John McAfee to Testify on Obamacare Website
So tell us, Goober, how many reports have you read of actual citizens having their privacy invaded or their identities stolen?
According to Sheriff Andy, there ain't none reported yet, but that's probably all Deputy Fife's fault.
look at Aunt Bea concede that Obama lied
the identity theft isn't usually immediately apparent
there has been plenty of testimony that the security systems weren't tested
btw, you can always tell a TTFer is losing an argument when they start revving up the personal attack machine
hadn't heard that MacAffee is a murder suspect but it really doesn't invalidate his estimable expertise
Yes McAffee is a murder suspect.
He was hiding out in Belize for a while as he was proclaiming his innocence. That company is definitely the leader in anti-virus and security, not sure whom else you would get (Norton maybe ?)
don't think Norton's original founder is still working for them ....
As far as constitutional government goes, the president of the United States is doing a grand job of overthrowing it all by himself.
On Thursday, he passed a new law at a press conference. George III never did that. But, having ordered America’s insurance companies to comply with Obamacare, the president announced that he is now ordering them not to comply with Obamacare. The legislative branch (as it’s still quaintly known) passed a law purporting to grandfather your existing health plan. The regulatory bureaucracy then interpreted the law so as to un-grandfather your health plan. So His Most Excellent Majesty has commanded that your health plan be de-un-grandfathered. That seems likely to work. The insurance industry had three years to prepare for the introduction of Obamacare. Now the King has given them six weeks to de-introduce Obamacare.
“I wonder if he has the legal authority to do this,” mused former Vermont governor Howard Dean. But he’s obviously some kind of right-wing wacko. Later that day, anxious to help him out, Congress offered to “pass” a “law” allowing people to keep their health plans. The same president who had unilaterally commanded that people be allowed to keep their health plans indignantly threatened to veto any such law to that effect: It only counts if he does it — geddit? As his court eunuchs at the Associated Press obligingly put it: “Obama Will Allow Old Plans.” It’s Barry’s world; we just live in it.
The reason for the benign Sovereign’s exercise of the Royal Prerogative is that millions of his subjects — or “folks,” as he prefers to call us, no fewer than 27 times during his press conference — have had their lives upended by Obamacare. Your traditional hard-core statist, surveying the mountain of human wreckage he has wrought, usually says, “Well, you can’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs.” But Obama is the first to order that his omelet be unscrambled and the eggs put back in their original shells. Is this even doable? No. That’s the point. When it doesn’t work, he’ll be able to give another press conference blaming the insurance companies, or the state commissioners, or George W. Bush . . .
The most telling line, the one that encapsulates the gulf between the boundless fantasies of the faculty-lounge utopian and the messiness of reality, was this: “What we’re also discovering is that insurance is complicated to buy.” Gee, thanks for sharing, genius. Maybe you should have thought of that before you governmentalized one-sixth of the economy. By “we,” the president means “I.” Out here in the ruder provinces of his decrepit realm, we “folks” are well aware of how complicated insurance is. What isn’t complicated in the Sultanate of Sclerosis? But, as with so many other things, Obama always gives the vague impression that routine features of humdrum human existence are entirely alien to him. Marie Antoinette, informed that the peasantry could no longer afford bread, is alleged to have responded, “Let them eat cake.” There is no evidence these words ever passed her lips, but certainly no one ever accused her of saying, “If you like your cake, you can keep your cake,” and then having to walk it back with “What we’re also discovering is that cake is complicated to buy.” That contribution to the annals of monarchical unworldliness had to await the reign of Queen Barry Antoinette, whose powdered wig seems to have slipped over his eyes.
Still, as historian Michael Beschloss pronounced the day after his election, he’s “probably the smartest guy ever to become president.” Naturally, Obama shares this assessment. As he assured us five years ago, “I know more about policies on any particular issue than my policy directors.” Well, apart from his signature health-care policy. That’s a mystery to him. “I was not informed directly that the website would not be working,” he told us. The buck stops with something called “the executive branch,” which is apparently nothing to do with him. As evidence that he was entirely out of the loop, he offered this:
Had I been I informed, I wouldn’t be going out saying, “Boy, this is going to be great.” You know, I’m accused of a lot of things, but I don’t think I’m stupid enough to go around saying, “This is going to be like shopping on Amazon or Travelocity,” a week before the website opens, if I thought that it wasn’t going to work.
Ooooo-kay. So, if I follow correctly, the smartest president ever is not smart enough to ensure that his website works; he’s not smart enough to inquire of others as to whether his website works; he’s not smart enough to check that his website works before he goes out and tells people what a great website experience they’re in for. But he is smart enough to know that he’s not stupid enough to go around bragging about how well it works if he’d already been informed that it doesn’t work. So he’s smart enough to know that if he’d known what he didn’t know he’d know enough not to let it be known that he knew nothing. The country’s in the very best of hands.
Michael Beschloss is right: This is what it means to be smart in a neo-monarchical America. Obama spake, and it shall be so. And, if it turns out not to be so, why pick on him? He talks a good Royal Proclamation; why get hung up on details?
Until October 1, Obama had never done anything — not run a gas station, or a doughnut stand — other than let himself be wafted onward and upward to the next do-nothing gig. Even in his first term, he didn’t really do: Starting with the 2009 trillion-dollar stimulus, he ran a money-no-object government that was all money and no objects; he spent and spent, and left no trace. Some things he massively expanded (food stamps, Social Security disability) and other things he massively diminished (effective foreign policy), but all were, so to speak, preexisting conditions. Obamacare is the first thing Obama has actually done, and, if you’re the person it’s being done to, it’s not pretty.
The president promised to “fundamentally transform” America. Certainly, other men have succeeded in transforming settled, free societies: Pierre Trudeau did in Canada four decades ago, and so, in post-war Britain, did the less charismatic Clement Attlee. And, if you subscribe to their particular philosophy, their transformations were effected very efficiently. But Obama is an incompetent, so “fundamentally transformed” is a euphemism for “wrecked beyond repair.” As a socialist, he makes a good socialite.
But on he staggers, with a wave of his scepter, delaying this, staying that, exempting the other, according to his regal whim and internal polling. The omniscient beneficent Sovereign will now graciously “allow” us “folks” to keep all those junk plans from bad-apple insurers. Yet even the wisest King cannot reign forever, and what will happen decades down the road were someone less benign — perhaps even (shudder) a Republican — to ascend the throne and wield these mighty powers?
Hey, relax: If you like your constitution, you can keep your constitution. Period. And your existing amendments. Well, most of them — except for the junk ones . . .
h
Oh brother. Another cut and paste of an unattributed editorial written by a conservative Canadian published in the National Journal
Here's a Fox News story about that GOP cybersecurity expert, John McAfee, with attribution and a link,
Don't be afraid to click it if you want to read more than the excerpt below:
One year later, cybersecurity expert John McAfee still ‘a person of interest’ in Belize murder
By Perry Chiaramonte
Published November 11, 2013
FoxNews.com
Excerpt "...McAfee’s life reportedly took a dark turn in recent years from cybersecurity to drugs, guns, prostitution and violence beginning in 2008 after the death of a colleague. After selling his company, which created the first anti-virus software, for $100 million, he moved to Belize and attempted to pursue several new business ventures -- including herbal medicine -- to help save the Central American nation from poverty.
But after his venture collapsed, he got heavily into the hallucinogenic drug known as bath salts, explained Jeff Wise, a freelance reporter who visited McAfee in the Western Caribbean nation twice, once in 2010 and again in 2012. McAfee alienated a lot of people around him, according to published reports.
The Belize police grew suspicious of McAfee after the November 2012 murder of American expatriate Faull, a well-liked builder from Florida who was shot at his home near McAfee’s compound.
The incident caused McAfee to flee Belize into Guatemala and eventually back to the U.S. and Portland, Ore., where he now resides, working on various projects documenting his life story, including books and a film. He also chronicled his own exploits by blog and phone, turning the crime into farce...”
Don't be afraid to click the link to McAfee's blog since you "hadn't heard that MacAffee is a murder suspect." You can read and watch videos he has posted himself and might find his current mental state refutes your claim that "it really doesn't invalidate his estimable expertise."
Life inside the bubble leaves you uninformed. Pop out and learn some facts about your party's leadership choice of experts.
Pope Francis honors gay teen genius for cancer test
"Pope Francis has honored a gay teen science prodigy for his work developing a cost-effective method to detect pancreatic cancer.
Jack Andraka, a 16-year-old teen from Maryland, is one of the most brilliant minds of his generation.
He was awarded the Vatican’s International Giuseppe Sciacca Award for his work.
But while he was won several accolades for his ground-breaking science, this award is special.
Speaking to WBAL News, Andraka said: ‘It’s really amazing to be recognized by the Vatican, especially as a gay scientist.
‘I mean this would be unheard of just a few years ago. To be part of this bridge of progress is really amazing.’
He added: ‘It just shows how much the world has grown to accept people that are gay and are LGBT. It's really amazing.’
Andraka developed the award-winning test when he was 15, after the death of a family friend from pancreatic cancer.
It is considered one of the deadliest forms of cancer, as there is no reliable way to detect the cancer before it spreads.
The majority of patients die within five years.
Andraka, who has said he lives his life being inspired by Alan Turing, is now in talks with two biotech firms to study and manufacture the cancer test.
But due to the amount of time to ensure the tests work properly, it will likely not be on the market for another five or 10 years."
I wouldn't listen too hard to WMAL. It's hate radio.
Andraka, the gay teen from MD who is creating an early test for pancreatic cancer, was on WBAL, not on WMAL.
Andraka's work was featured last month on 60 Minutes. You can watch their report of his amazing story here.
hey look, kids!
it turns out that 56% of Americans don't think it's the government responsibility to ensure that everyone has health insurance:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/165917/majority-say-healthcare-not-gov-responsibility.aspx
I guess that settles it, this is still a democracy, right?
oh, and you'll hardly believe it
just when you thought we couldn't get down any more, Barack Obama's approval rating drops another point to 38%:
http://www.nationaljournal.com/white-house/poll-obama-down-but-congress-is-down-further-20131118
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
I was talking about the quotes about health insurance earlier in the thread, not Andraka.
Robert, let's just say you're flailing around throwing attacks and who cares who gets hurt
"Pope Francis has honored a gay teen science prodigy for his work developing a cost-effective method to detect pancreatic cancer.
Jack Andraka, a 16-year-old teen from Maryland was awarded the Vatican’s International Giuseppe Sciacca Award for his work.
But while he was won several accolades for his ground-breaking science, this award is special.
Speaking to WBAL News, Andraka said: ‘It’s really amazing to be recognized by the Vatican, especially as a gay scientist.
‘I mean this would be unheard of just a few years ago. To be part of this bridge of progress is really amazing.’
He added: ‘It just shows how much the world has grown to accept people that are gay and are LGBT. It's really amazing.’"
Unheard of? This messed-up kid has been misled. The Vatican would have probably awarded this to him the same award "a few years ago" without even inquiring about his sexual preferences. Of course he wouldn't know this, only being in his teens. His parents and teachers have obviously filled his head with a revisionist bunch of liberal propaganda.
Are we now going to be treated to moronic stories every time some homosexual wins an award about how it shows everything has changed?
If you don't like the comments in support of LGBT folks that get posted on this blog, go find a blog with comments you do like over at Fox, or Red State or Brietbart...
You are free to choose.
Nobody forces you to come here to read or post comments.
Your right wing bubble-dweller editorial cut and pastes, like the two-parter you posted yesterday that didn't draw a single response, will not be missed.
Stories about lgbt people are preferable to gratuitous insults.
well, I would still like Aunt Bea to try tripling her income and see if the health insurance price goes up.
very curious.
and no I am not going to do that myself because I wouldn't want to overload an already burdened site when I have no intention of purchasing anything.
sounds like they already have their hands full.
but that is a quick test to run, triple the income and see if the health insurance price changes.... the price before subsidies.
according to the callers on my "hate radio", it will.
If it does, well that tells us that this is just another govt based redistribution of income system....
I sincerely doubt that a customer's income makes any difference to insurance companies. If it does, its the usual "differential pricing" that businesses engage in in a capitalistic economy, because they know that people with more money are more likely to be willing to part with it. For much the same reason, gas costs more in more affluent neighborhoods.
rrjr
If you qualify for a subsidy because your income is less than 400% of the poverty level, you get a subsidy that will reduce your monthly premium.
Otherwise your income has no bearing on the price you pay for insurance.
Everybody with income above 400% of the poverty level pays the same price for the same policy, even if they make 4,000% or 40,000% the poverty level.
Age, however is another matter. A 60 year old could pay 3 times as much as a 20 year old for the same policy.
so try it. someone who has already set up an account, try tripling the income and see if the prices offered changes....
You can't fake your income in your ACA account. Each ACA account's income must be verified by the IRS before you can shop for a plan.
You're the one making the claim so it's up to you to prove what you say is true.
Show us what proof you've got that people must pay a higher price for their insurance based on earning different incomes above 400% the poverty level.
well, I can tell you that some guy who called into WMAL claimed he was from an insurance agency and indicated that the insurance agency's have been told to charge more based on income.
Okay, I am not willing to go put all my information in on this site because of the security risks and personally I feel it is an invasion of privacy.
A 28 year old called in and said that his insurance would be $470 or so a month. You said your 23 year olds (also a single policy) was $20 a month. I don't know which type of plan he was looking at, let's assume Bronze, what type was your daughters and how much was price without subsidies ?
this guy that called in said he did not qualify for subsidies and was an engineering contract, so let's assume he is probably at around 90K or so.
you said your daughter was at 20K or so.
that would be one data point.
My friend Joe is of the opinion that the government is set up as a system for poor people to fleece rich people out of their money. It doesn't surprise me that content on WMAL confirms that theory. I wouldn't listen to it, it's hate radio.
I made less than half of $90K and did not qualify for a subsidy, so neither did the 28 year old who called in.
But at my age, I would pay a much higher premium than he would for the same plan, while he makes more than twice as much income as I do.
Our incomes have nothing to do with what we'd be charged since neither one of us qualifies for a subsidy.
Your failure to comprehend this simple fact is astounding.
Prove what you say is true with facts and numbers or quit wasting our time with your bogus claim.
"If you don't like the comments in support of LGBT folks that get posted on this blog, go find a blog with comments you do like over at Fox, or Red State or Brietbart..."
I didn't object to the post itself but the fact that the general news media has a story about a teenager winning a science prize and the focus is what kind of sex the kid is looking for. It's ridiculous. Could you imagine the reverse? "Teenage boy that likes girls wins a Nobel Peace Prize"
btw, what's these "LGBT folks" stuff?
LGBTs are not folks
the term "folks" is used to connote the normal, common person, not deviants
here's Webster definition:
"the great proportion of the members of a people that determines the group character and that tends to preserve its characteristic form of civilization and its customs, arts and crafts, legends, traditions, and superstitions from generation to generation"
now, does that sound synonymous with homosexuals?
I don't thiiiink so!!
as a matter of fact, it sounds opposite of deviant
"You are free to choose."
You're really too kind. Free at last, free at last...
"Nobody forces you to come here to read or post comments."
I gotta tell you: a blog without dissent is pretty damn boring.
You should thank me.
And all of Obama's minions at TTF need to follow the example of their Dear Leader and apologize for supporting Obamacare.
"Your right wing bubble-dweller editorial cut and pastes, like the two-parter you posted yesterday that didn't draw a single response, will not be missed."
Hey, are you the one who said last week they wouldn't miss my "ha-ha" taunting?
That was cold.
I mean, of course, they didn't respond. At this point, there is no credible way to defend Obama. After that joke of a press conference last week, where Obama admitted this was all his fault, that his lying was necessary to pass ACA, that the website would not be ready for the previously promised December 1 deadline, that he needed to earn back the trust of the American people, that he thinks he has the power to unilaterally change laws, that he didn't know how hard it is to buy insurance, and on and on, there's really nothing you can say to defend Obama that can't be easily contradicted by a quote straight from his mouth.
"Stories about lgbt people are preferable to gratuitous insults."
It all depends on the context, Robo.
I mean it would be difficult, for example, to tell a story about you that isn't, in some way, an insult.
Am I right?
"Premiums will vary significantly depending on an individual’s income, where she lives and what type of coverage she buys. A 27-year-old in Fairfax County, for example, could spend between $124 and $258 on a health plan, depending on how robust she wants it to be."
this Washington post article implies the premiums are based on income, before subsidies even come into play.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/09/25/how-much-will-obamacare-premiums-cost-depends-on-where-you-live/
hey, guess what, kids
'Bama and his infamous Dem-minions told some more lies
here's the latest:
Obama, then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and top Democrats made all sorts of claims in their effort to convince a skeptical public to accept a complicated, far-reaching national health care scheme. Here are three promises that might cause serious trouble in the days to come:
1) Obamacare will save your family $2,500 a year.
During the 2008 campaign, and as president, Obama promised his health plan would "cut the average family's premium by about $2,500 per year." But Obama and fellow Democrats knew that many premiums would actually go up.
The promise of $2,500 savings has become a reality of rising premiums, with subsidies for some. It's a broken promise that could prove politically toxic for the administration.
2) Obamacare will create millions of jobs.
In 2010, as Obamacare neared final passage, Nancy Pelosi promised it would be a big boost for Americans looking for work. "This bill is not only about the health security of America," Pelosi said. "It's about jobs. In its life it will create four million jobs, 400,000 jobs almost immediately."
"The health care bill," Pelosi said at another time, "is a jobs bill."
It's not. Obamacare will likely cost a significant number of jobs, and the most optimistic assessments these days are that its effect on employment will be basically neutral.
Pelosi made the claim when Democrats were under attack for taking their attention away from the economy and focusing instead on passing health care reform. Now, her unfulfilled promise could come back to haunt Democrats.
3) Obamacare won't hurt Americans who are already insured.
Obama has repeatedly promised that his plan will make the health care system work "better for everybody." In particular, he promises that the 85 percent of Americans who already have coverage will be basically unaffected by Obamacare, beyond enjoying some of the system's new benefits.
"If you're one of the nearly 85 percent of Americans who already have insurance ... you don't have to do a thing," Obama said in June. "You've just got a wide array of new benefits, better protections and stronger cost controls that you didn't have before, and that will, over time, improve the quality of the insurance that you've got."
It's a simple promise: Most people won't notice much of any change due to Obamacare. And that could be the most potentially dangerous promise of all.
If, as many experts believe, Americans who have employer-based coverage face cutbacks in working hours, or find that their bosses cancel their coverage in favor of sending them to the exchanges, or face higher costs because of Obamacare's requirements, or lose spousal coverage, or have to deal with narrowed provider networks, or lose their jobs altogether — if those things and more happen to a significant number of Americans, the president and his party could face a truly national backlash.
Until Oct. 1, Obamacare was something in the future for most Americans. Now it's becoming a reality.
Deputy Chief Information Officer Henry Chao of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services acknowledged Tuesday that up to 40 percent of IT systems supporting the healthcare exchange still need to be built.
“It’s not that it’s not working,” Chao told lawmakers at an Energy and Commerce Oversight and Investigations subcommittee hearing. “It’s still being developed and tested.”
Financial management tools remain unfinished, he said, particularly the process that will deliver payments to insurers.
A Health and Human Services source said the health plans can receive the payments consumers make when they enroll. The system isn’t yet ready to deliver federal subsidies to insurers.
The update hits hardest at Democrats, who hoped the system would function smoothly by the end of the month.
It also concerned insurers, who expressed worries Tuesday with Chao’s disclosure. The extent of the problems with HealthCare.gov are fueling doubts that the systems will be ready when they’re needed.
The functions need to operate correctly so insurers can enroll the right people in the right plans. That process, called reconciliation, has to work so people can get the care they seek starting as early as Jan. 1.
“There’s not a lot of confidence that the reconciliation process is going to be up and running in time, and given all the challenges that we’re facing with the enrollment files, that’s a big cause of concern,” an insurance industry source said. “If people are enrolling, but the back-end systems are not working, their coverage could ultimately be disrupted. They may think they’re enrolled in a plan and they’re not. They may show up at the doctor’s office and not be covered.”
Chao said Tuesday that the “back office” functions, including accounting and payment systems, were not yet complete.
This issue could resurface Wednesday when CMS’s Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight Director Gary Cohen testifies before the Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee.
The tech leader also told lawmakers he didn’t see a spring report that warned of potential stumbles and foreshadowed many of the problems that thwarted the website’s launch.
“I was aware some document was being prepared,” he said, but had no knowledge of a report until it was leaked to The Washington Post.
Chao told the oversight subcommittee that he may have answered questions for the study but was not involved in any briefings on it.
The report, which independent consulting firm McKinsey conducted for CMS, described a process that relied too heavily on outsider contractors, didn’t provide enough time for complete testing and failed to hand authority to one decision maker. Chao’s limited knowledge of the report feeds lawmaker frustrations with the site’s fractured management and unclear controls.
The study did not include options for a delayed deadline. CMS officials say the agency took steps to address the issues.
These tidbits came out just before the oversight subcommittee’s hearing on site security. Republicans have jumped on safety concerns, partly to highlight flaws in the website’s development and demand its shutdown. Democrats have tried to play down fears, although both parties express unease about a system that did not undergo complete testing before launch.
""Premiums will vary significantly depending on an individual’s income, where she lives and what type of coverage she buys. A 27-year-old in Fairfax County, for example, could spend between $124 and $258 on a health plan, depending on how robust she wants it to be."
this Washington post article implies the premiums are based on income, before subsidies even come into play.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/09/25/how-much-will-obamacare-premiums-cost-depends-on-where-you-live/"
Thanks for supplying the URL to your source.
Read this reply with care and try to comprehend how these facts work together.
Here's the next paragraph immediately after the one you excerpted above:
"A family of four in Fairfax County that earns $50,000 could get a health insurance plan with no premium at all, because the federal tax credit would cover the bill."
Here are the 2013 Poverty Guidelines, which vary as your excerpt points out "depending on...where she lives":
2013 POVERTY GUIDELINES FOR THE 48 CONTIGUOUS STATES AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
[First column is the number of people in the household, second column is the poverty level]
1 $11,490
2 15,510
3 19,530
4 23,550
5 27,570
6 31,590
7 35,610
8 39,630
For families/households with more than 8 persons, add $4,020 for each additional person.
2013 POVERTY GUIDELINES FOR ALASKA
1 $14,350
2 19,380
3 24,410
4 29,440
5 34,470
6 39,500
7 44,530
8 49,560
For families/households with more than 8 persons, add $5,030 for each additional person.
2013 POVERTY GUIDELINES FOR HAWAII
1 $13,230
2 17,850
3 22,470
4 27,090
5 31,710
6 36,330
7 40,950
8 45,570
For families/households with more than 8 persons, add $4,620 for each additional person."
--From http://healthinsurance.about.com/hhs.gov/poverty/index.cfm
Your excerpted paragraph tells us "Premiums will vary significantly depending on an individual’s income," but we have no information about the 27 year old Fairfax resident's earnings so we do not know if she qualifies for a subsidy or not.
If she earns less than $45,960 ($11,490 x 4), she will qualify for a "federal tax credit" or subsidy.
If she earns more than $45,960, she will not qualify for a subsidy, no matter how much more than $45,960 she earns.
Available ACA plans for her range in monthly premium from $124 to $258 "depending on how robust she wants it to be."
Again, we do not know if these monthly premium rates are subsidized rates or not because we do not know her income.
In the next paragraph I quoted, the family of four in Fairfax definitely qualifies for a subsidy because their $50,000 income is well below $94,200 ($23,550 x 4).
My daughter's subsidized plans ranged from $19 for high deductibles/OOP limits to $211 per month with lower deductibles and OOP limits.
My unsubsidized plans ranged from $277 with high deductibles/OOP limits to $845 per month with lower deductibles/OOP limits.
To keep deductibles and OOP limits low, we must pay higher monthly premiums, but if we want lower monthly premiums, we will be responsible to pay higher deductibles and OOP limits.
We each get to decide what will work best for ourselves and our families.
The ACA offers subsidies to people who earn less than 400% of the poverty level.
The ACA does not impose fines or penalties on people who earn more than 400% of the poverty level.
These are FACTS. They are not spinnable.
Here are more FACTS:
You still have found no facts and figures to support your bogus claim and you won't because your claim is not based in fact.
FACT:
Obama lied to get his healthcare bill passed and America will never trust him again.
That's an opinion.
Just ask President Huckabee.
It's about as close to fact as you can get. Second term President who lose their creditability never regain it.
Ask Best President, like ever, Obama.
Why do you tolerate him, Jim?
"It's about as close to fact as you can get. "
And that's close enough for you.
Thank you for your bubblicious input this morning!
actually, it's closer than any TTF crap being posted
the fact that Obama lied to get ACA passed is not only a fact, it is documented and even Obama himself doesn't deny it
further, the lie that you won't lose you insurance, which Obama has admitted and apologized for, is not the only one
he also lied by saying premiums would go down, that the deficit would go down, and that unemployment would go down as a result of ACA
he's not the only Democrat to do so and there is ample documentation that these lies were contradicted by analyses distributed to all these parties before ACA passed
indeed, while the failure of the website is more incompetence than deceit, there has also been assurances about when it would be fixed that appear so off that Obama had to know
"Why do you tolerate him, Jim?"
sorry if you found offense by my pointing out that "folks" is not an appropriate term to apply to homosexuals, Robert
but facts are facts and the definition is in Webster and the gay agenda hasn't gotten around to changing the definition yet, as they have with so many other English terms
For Mitt Romney, the 2012 election was held about a year too early.
Romney would hold a lead on President Obama if the 2012 election were replayed today, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.
The poll of registered voters shows Romney at 49 percent and Obama at 45 percent in the rematch.
Obama’s shifting fortunes, of course, come as his signature health-care law is increasingly embattled — both thanks to a glitchy Web site and a broken promise by Obama to allow people who like their insurance to keep it.
Obama’s loss of support is spread across many demographics, but he has suffered most among the young, the less-educated, the poor and, perhaps most interestingly, among liberals.
To wit:
* Obama won women in 2012 by 11 points, according to exit polls; today he leads by one point.
* He has seen his lead among young voters (18-39 years old) drop from 18 percent to 2 percent.
* His four-point lead among those with less than a college degree has flipped to a nine-point deficit.
* Among those making less than $50,000, Obama’s 22-point lead is now three points.
* The biggest drop is among those professing to have no religion. While this group backed Obama by 44 points, it now supports him by a 22-point margin.
* Among liberals, Obama won by 75 points but now leads by 59 percent. One in five self-described liberals (20 percent) say they would vote for Romney.
This eight-point shift in the popular vote, spread across the entire country, would have netted Romney an additional 10 states and 125 electoral votes in 2012. That would mean he would have won the race 331-207.
The Post-ABC poll was conducted Nov. 14-17 among a random national sample of 1,006 adults, including interviews on landlines and with cellphone-only respondents. The overall margin of sampling error is plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.
How the Heritage Foundation, a Conservative Think Tank, Promoted the Individual Mandate
Romney on Romneycare: First Subsidize, Then Mandate
Letter to the Honorable John Boehner providing an estimate for H.R. 6079, the Repeal of Obamacare Act
Excerpt:
"...Assuming that H.R. 6079 [another House GOP repeal of Obamacare] is enacted near the beginning of fiscal year 2013, CBO and JCT estimate that, on balance, the direct spending and revenue effects of enacting that legislation would cause a net increase in federal budget deficits of $109 billion over the 2013–2022 period..."
Obama Grants One Year Reprieve For Existing Health Insurance Plans
Excerpt:
"...The ‘fix’, which is being effectuated administratively by the White House and without the approval of Congress, will go a long way to allow Obama to keep his promise guaranteeing that if you like your insurance policy, you can keep your insurance policy..."
"How Soon They Forget and Spin"
how quickly liberals change the subject
"How the Heritage Foundation, a Conservative Think Tank, Promoted the Individual Mandate"
currently, the individual mandate is the least of the troubles with Obamacare
"Romney on Romneycare: First Subsidize, Then Mandate"
even subsidizing is not as big a problem as the increase in premiums
face it, Romney made this work in Massachusetts and Obama couldn't
aside from the policy issues, the simple truth is Romney would have been a competent President
there is simply no way to make an argument that Obama is competent to do anything but run a campaign
"Letter to the Honorable John Boehner providing an estimate for H.R. 6079, the Repeal of Obamacare Act
Excerpt:
"...Assuming that H.R. 6079 [another House GOP repeal of Obamacare] is enacted near the beginning of fiscal year 2013, CBO and JCT estimate that, on balance, the direct spending and revenue effects of enacting that legislation would cause a net increase in federal budget deficits of $109 billion over the 2013–2022 period...""
actually, there's a little known clause in Obamacare that will requires taxpayers to bail out the insurance industry from the damage of these false "estimates"
"Obama Grants One Year Reprieve For Existing Health Insurance Plans
Excerpt:
"...The ‘fix’, which is being effectuated administratively by the White House and without the approval of Congress, will go a long way to allow Obama to keep his promise guaranteeing that if you like your insurance policy, you can keep your insurance policy...""
experts agree that this does little other than enable Obama to blame insurance companies for the disaster he created
who saw this coming?
Obama approval sinks to new low today
37% approve 57% DISAPPROVE
shouldn't this guy just resign?
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57613067/poll-obamacare-support-obama-approval-sink-to-new-lows/
I was talking about the gratuitous personal attacks.
Anon complained again:
“Obama approval sinks to new low today
37% approve 57% DISAPPROVE”
Wow, that seems pretty dismal… until of course you realize that 37% is still over *4 times* better than the congressional approval rating:
From http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/congressional_job_approval-903.html
RCP Average: 10/17 – 11/18: Approve 8.9% Disapprove 85.1%
Who could have thunk it could be so bad when congress has all those Republicans and Tea Partiers in it?
It seems to me congress should be resigning long before Obama does. It doesn’t bode well for their re-election campaigns. Obama of course, won’t be running again. All he has to do is build his presidential library, kick back, and maybe do some charity work. Unless of course, Michelle wants to run!
Have a nice day,
Cynthia
"it would be difficult, for example, to tell a story about you that isn't, in some way, an insult"
is this what you're talking about, Robert?
this kind of stuff is part of the blog culture
it's so over the top that it's obviously a joke
remember when I use to tell Cinco to swim in lava, bear-hug a hornet's nest and French kiss a Doberman?
I was only kidding
I thought you knew
this is an interesting topic in the mindset of homosexuals though
homosexual men have a tendency to walk around with a chip in their shoulders and then accuse everyone of bullying
most guys insult and banter with one another and then have a good laugh
chill out and learn to laugh at yourself
everyone else is
"Wow, that seems pretty dismal… until of course you realize that 37% is still over *4 times* better than the congressional approval rating"
actually, it's pretty dismal still
and it's not saying much when the Congress is so split
during the shutdown, I posted a poll showing that Harry Reid scores lower approval ratings than any other personality in Congress
"It seems to me congress should be resigning long before Obama does."
well, that's a generalization
and the House will all be up for election in about a year
and a third of the Senate
I'd be in favor of a movement to encourage every incumbent to refrain from running for re-election though
"All he has to do is build his presidential library, kick back, and maybe do some charity work."
a lot more than what he's done so far
"Unless of course, Michelle wants to run!"
that would be a dream come true
how can we make it happen?
"Have a nice day"
yeah, why don't you go snort a line of fire ants?
give Robert a straw too
Anon backpedaled:
“remember when I use to tell Cinco to swim in lava, bear-hug a hornet's nest and French kiss a Doberman?”
And
“it's so over the top that it's obviously a joke”
Or it could be a sign that you are a sociopath.
Have a nice day,
Cynthia
I'm on the right track, baby
I was born that way
now, go guzzle a bottle of absinthe
Mr. Obama says he regrets perfectly good health insurance plans were taken away from some Americans, but he doesn’t regret it enough to do the right thing about it. “I am sorry that they are finding themselves in this position, based on assurances they got from me.” Nevertheless, he said he would veto the legislation passed by the House guaranteeing that people could keep their health plans as he had promised. The White House said enabling consumers to keep their existing plans “rolls back the progress” made in enacting the health care law.
The new ABC poll shows candidates opposing Obamacare enjoy a 16 percent advantage over their opponents. Red-state Democrats are popping a sweat already and the elections are a year away. In September, Sen. Kay R. Hagan of North Carolina was ahead of Greg Brannon, a Republican physician, with a 16-point lead. Now she’s trailing by a point.
Obamacare won’t be fully implemented before next year. The American people have admitted their mistake. The Democrats — though not including the president — have time to avoid severe consequences if they admit theirs, and act accordingly.
Jumpin' gee willikers!
this is the biggest scandal since Monica Lewinsky
Yawn.
poor lazy Priya
it's so boring sitting home every day waiting for something, anything, to happen
btw, lazy priya, Obama lied about Obamacare and apologized to everyone about giving them false "assurance"
when are you planning to apologize to everyone for supporting this plan?
remember last year how y'all were saying the Republicans need to change to suck in women and young people and Hispanics?
and now they've all turned against him without Republicans changing a bit
ahead of their time, the world has caught up with them
"The poll of registered voters shows Romney at 49 percent and Obama at 45 percent in the rematch"
That's only because Romney gets no press these days so no one hears his latest put downs of the 47% or him putting his foot in his mouth, for example, when talking about his love of Detroit by saying, "Ann drives a couple Cadillacs, actually."
Romney remains clueless about the middle class.
Unfortunately for the signer of Romneycare, which also had a slow start, the only poll that counts for President is the one taken on election day.
Obama is not worried about his polling, which a year from now could improve just like Romney's numbers have.
The tea party isn't worried about their polling numbers either.
"...If we have to get hurt in the polls in order to save the country from financial ruin, so be it," said Ben Cunningham, a long-time conservative activist in Tennessee involved in efforts to find a challenger for Senator Lamar Alexander.
Tea Party-backed primary challengers are running in South Carolina against Senator Lindsey Graham, a frequent target of Tea Party ire for his ability to compromise, and Alexander in Tennessee. There are also right-wing challenges to Senator Pat Roberts in Kansas and Thad Cochran in Mississippi. The Senate seat in Georgia left open by the impending retirement of Saxby Chambliss has a field of candidates vying for the mantle of most conservative.
For many grassroots conservatives the main target is Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell in Kentucky. McConnell is well known for vowing to make Obama a one-term president, but his record of brokering deals with Obama has incensed the Tea Party.
"There are many important races in 2014 that deserve attention," said David Adams, president of Kentucky Citizens Judicial, a group suing Kentucky's Democratic Governor Steve Beshear over the implementation of Obama's health care law. "But in terms of taking off the head of the snake, Kentucky is it..."
-- Decision time for Tea Party movement in U.S. political contests.
Tea baggers, who have trouble getting themselves elected in general elections are too busy sabotaging GOPers who can get themselves elected in general elections to care about their lowly polling numbers.
Months from now, after the tea party shuts down the government in January again, Obama's polling numbers will likely rise again as the tea party's numbers continue to fall.
Right wing cyber attacks on Healthcare.gov website confirmed
"Romney remains clueless about the middle class."
You mean like Sir Barry, who didn't realize how complicated buying health insurance is?
"Unfortunately for the signer of Romneycare,"
unfortunate for the whole country, you mean
we all have to suffer through the malaise of the Obama era
"which also had a slow start,"
because a lot of people were slow to sign up?
if only that were the only problem here
"the only poll that counts for President is the one taken on election day."
keep thinking that way, buddy
these polls will have tremendous impact on Obama's ability to do anything because Dems are running scared
"Obama is not worried about his polling, which a year from now could improve just like Romney's numbers have."
this comment is ignorant of history
second term Presidents who lose trust don't come back while in office
he'll be in the media daily, irritating constituents who just want to forget they ever voted for him
"The tea party isn't worried about their polling numbers either."
they shouldn't be
all they have to do, if necessary, is change their name
because Americans agree with most Tea Party positions
"Tea baggers, who have trouble getting themselves elected in general elections are too busy sabotaging GOPers who can get themselves elected in general elections to care about their lowly polling numbers."
in 2014, Obama won't be on the ballot and his organization will not be using their organizational skills, paying people to vote for him
it will be like 2010, only much worse for Dems
"Months from now, after the tea party shuts down the government in January again, Obama's polling numbers will likely rise again as the tea party's numbers continue to fall."
not a chance
Poll: Most Americans Oppose Obamacare Repeal Despite Rollout Troubles
Obamacare Is Still Much More Popular Than The GOP
You poor, pathetic, deluded soul. According to the CBS poll out today, only 7% of Americans believe Obamacare should remain as is. While, it's true only 43% favor outright repeal, it's also clear it wouldn't break anyone's heart.
Here's the truth. Americans would like to see everyone covered by health insurance. Big revelation. What they don't want is the government dictating the terms for people who were handling their own affairs fine, especially considering the sheer incompetence, really idiocy shown by this administration.
Democrats are in a hell of a mess. As it stands right now, the employer mandate will kick in next year and right before the election, millions of American will be losing their personal doctors and facing massive increases in premiums, deductibles and co-pays. Some will be laid-off or have their hours cut back. Do you really think Democrats in Congress will continue to stand in the way of repealing the whole thing?
Barack Obama should have accepted House Republicans’ reasonable, and, seen in the light of recent developments, generous offer to raise the debt limit and fund the government in exchange for a delay in the individual mandate. The federal government would have remained open for all of October, and a big and inconvenient political problem would have been avoided.
You almost wonder if Obama and his Dem-minions aren't orchestrating this whole thing to make single-payer health insurance unavoidable. The problem is that all these countries that have that started long before medicine could do all that it can now. Truth is, the only way to make that work now is to ration healthcare and set up death panels.
The Dem-minions may think they want to go there, but they don't.
Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio thinks Democrats might be ready to repeal Obamacare in eight weeks.
"Look, this law cannot be saved. It will have to be repealed and the question is how long will it take for Democrats to realize that and cooperate in that endeavor," Rubio said.
"So far I think upper echelons of the Democratic party, they're still being very stubborn about it. My prediction is check back in eight weeks," Rubio said.
Rubio promoted a bill he introduced to prevent the federal government from subsidizing insurance companies if they don't profit from health care plans during the first three years of Obamacare.
"The idea that the federal government should be bailing out insurance companies in order to make Obamacare work, that's not something a lot of people are aware of and I haven't taken a poll on it but I guarantee you it would be hugely unpopular," Rubio said.
It’s like totally official, now, bro: Even the young Americans who were central to Barack Obama’s election in 2008 and 2012 are sick of the president, with a large and growing majority disapproving of the job he’s doing. In this, they’re just like their elders.
A new Quinnipiac Poll finds that only 36 percent of voters between the ages of 18 and 29 approve of the job the president is doing while fully 54 percent of the kids give him the thumbs down (10 percent didn’t know or care enough to respond to the topic). Back in March 2009, 62 percent of 18 to 29 years approved, compared to just 20 percent disapproving.
Millennials may be young, but they’re not stupid. As bad as Obama’s time in office has been for older Americans, nobody has taken it on the chin quite as bad as kids under 30, who are more likely to be unemployed, broke, and facing decades of sub-par wages if and when they do finally get a job.
Who can blame them for not showing up? The abysmal and pathetic launch of healthcare.gov is simply the cherry on top of a crap sundae Obama’s been whipping up for the kids. You can protest that the stimulus should have been bigger, but when you judge its success against what the Obama administration claimed it would do, it was an epic fail. While masquerading as the peace and freedom candidate – easy to do against such hawkish characters as Hillary Clinton in the primaries and John McCain in the general election – Obama prided himself on tripling troop strength in Afghanistan and tried to extend our stays there and in Iraq. But for the vocal pushback from Rand Paul, Justin Amash, and a bunch of younger, non-interventionist Republicans, there’s every reason that the U.S. would have started an unsanctioned war in Syria, just as it did in Libya (where things are working out...how, again?).
The president has been genuinely awful on pot legalization and he spent his first term deporting more immigrants than George W. Bush managed to in eight years (despite minor reprieves announced in time for the 2012 elections, the deportations keep on happening). The revelations of widespread, Obama-approved drone strikes, the compilation of a presidential kill list, and the data collection of phone logs and internet traffic don’t exactly inspire warm and fuzzy feelings from a generation that lives online. His response to the Gulf oil spill was dithering to non-existent and his alt-energy plans have come to naught even as fracking has put the country on a path to something like energy independence. And clandestine attempts to expand onerous copyright laws and outlaw cellphone unlocking via the Trans-Pacific Partnership Treaty aren’t helping either.
good news: the gay guy that runs the Kennedy Center is leaving
the most cruel and heartbreaking aspect of the disastrous Obamacare program is that kids with big health problems who had access to the best doctors and hospitals will now have to change to cheaper places to accommodate all the Obamacare requirements
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/insurers-restricting-choice-of-doctors-and-hospitals-to-keep-costs-down/2013/11/20/98c84e20-4bb4-11e3-ac54-aa84301ced81_story.html
now, people who have been paying for their own insurance for years are being forced into Medicaid because Obama doesn't like their plan
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303531204579207724152219590
"Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio thinks Democrats might be ready to repeal Obamacare in eight weeks."
Oh those tea baggers! What a laugh riot!
Will Republicans Shut Down The Government Again Over Obamacare?
they'll be no need to shut down the government
all Republicans agree, not just so-called Tea Party legislators
and, by then, the will of public will force most Democrats to try to save themselves
most Democrats aren't as foolish as your average TTFer
there's even been talk of a budget deal between Paul Ryan and Democrats, ending the sequester in exchange for other more sensible cuts
one benefit of the Obamacare disaster is that Democrats are becoming more humble and cooperative
for most, it's now there only chance to be re-elected
Republicans are in a great mood
"now, people who have been paying for their own insurance for years are being forced into Medicaid because Obama doesn't like their plan
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303531204579207724152219590"
Nicole Hopkins: ObamaCare Forced Mom Into Medicaid
My mother preferred to pay for her care rather than be on the government dole. Now she has no choice.
Obamacare will cover her for free and she's complaining!
Hey, if she really wants to continue paying her $276 a month for insurance rather than being grateful for the free coverage she qualifies for if she earns less than 133% of the poverty level, she can donate that no-longer needed premium to her state's health exchange so she doesn't feel "her dignity and independence and her sense of being a fully functioning member of society" have been affected by her choice to earn less money when she decided in 2001 to "give up her real-estate license; as a newer agent....She has since managed to eke out a living as a substitute para-educator in the Central Kitsap School District....
...Unable to secure employer-sponsored health care, she had, until this fall, chosen to pay $276 a month for bare-bones catastrophic coverage."
Where does this "substitute para-educator in the Central Kitsap School District" work?
Here's the Washington State School Salaries: 2011-2012: Detailed Table: Substitute Teacher salaries
Not a single one of these substitutes is shown to work in the Central Kitsap School District.
Here's the full list of all 1495 employees of the Central Kitsap School District.
Not a single one of these employees is shown to be a "substitute para-educator."
As usual in these bogus sob stories, something's fishy here.
she's likely not listed as an employee because she is an independent contractor
she doesn't want to be on Medicaid
she wants to pay for her insurance and was doing so until Obama thought he would play Big Brother
whenever anyone gets anything "free" from the government, there's a loss of freedom
A new and independent analysis of ObamaCare warns of a ticking time bomb, predicting a second wave of 50 million to 100 million insurance policy cancellations next fall -- right before the mid-term elections.
The next round of cancellations and premium hikes is expected to hit employees, particularly of small businesses. While the administration has tried to downplay the cancellation notices hitting policyholders on the individual market by noting they represent a relatively small fraction of the population, the swath of people who will be affected by the shakeup in employer-sponsored coverage will be much broader.
An analysis by the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank, shows the administration anticipates half to two-thirds of small businesses would have policies canceled or be compelled to send workers onto the ObamaCare exchanges. They predict up to 100 million small and large business policies could be canceled next year.
"The impact I'm mostly worried about is on small young, entrepreneurial firms that will suddenly face much higher health insurance premiums if they want to offer health insurance to their employees," said AEI resident scholar Stan Veuger. "I think for a lot of other businesses ... they can just send their employees to the exchanges or offer them a fixed subsidy every month to buy health insurance themselves."
Under the health care law, businesses with fewer than 50 workers do not have to provide health coverage. But if they do, the policies will still have to meet the benefit standards set by ObamaCare.
As reported by AEI's Scott Gottlieb, some businesses got around this by renewing their policies before the end of 2013. But the relief is temporary, and they are expected to have to offer in-compliance plans for 2015. According to Gottlieb, that means beginning in October 2014 the cancellation notices will start to go out.
Then, businesses will have to either find a new plan -- which could be considerably more expensive -- or send workers onto the ObamaCare exchanges.
For workers, their experience could mirror that of the 5 million or so on the individual market who already received cancellation notices because their plans did not meet new standards under the Affordable Care Act.
President Obama announced last week that insurance companies could offer out-of-compliance plans for another year. But that only means the cancellation notices will resume late next year.
"she wants to pay for her insurance"
So she can pay her $276 monthly premium to
Mail:
Health Care Authority (HCA)
P.O. Box 45502
Olympia, WA 98504-5502
BOOM
Nuclear option voted in by Senate, k42-48!
From now until the Senate passes a new rule, executive branch nominees and judges nominated for all courts except the Supreme Court will be able to pass off the floor and take their seats on the bench with the approval of a simple majority of senators. They will no longer have to jump the traditional hurdle of 60 votes, which has increasingly proven a barrier to confirmation during the Obama administration.
this is great news
with the Republicans poised to control both houses of Congress in November 2014, Democrats will wish they never did this
and the dismantling of whatever's left of the liberal agenda will be much easier
thanks, guys
we needed that
"Republicans poised to control both houses of Congress in November 2014"
Another prediction from he who predicted President Huckabee!
The word of the week seems to be “Schadenfreude.” We have Obamacare, or, rather, what appears to be the unravelling of Obamacare to thank for that.
“Schadenfreude”: Is there any more perfect German word? Taking malicious glee in the misfortunes of others. It is not an attractive emotion, though it is an all-too-human one. I’m not sure what aspect of the mess is producing the most glee. The display of technical incompetence on the part of those who spent some $650 million of taxpayer money creating a web site that doesn’t work. That was pretty nice. The fact that construction of the site was given to a former classmate of Michelle Obama in a no-bid contract is a nice touch.
And who hasn’t enjoyed the spectacle of the site crashing whenever Kathleen Sebelius holds a media event to demonstrate how easy healthcare.gov is to navigate. Nice! Then there is the sideshow of Democratic lawmakers having apoplexy as they begin to realize the extent of this debacle — the millions (yes, millions) of folks who have found a letter notifying them that their insurance has been cancelled because of Obamacare, the thousands of doctors who have been dropped from various insurance plans. Ouch and double ouch. Then there is the central drama revolving around President Obama. “If you like your insurance plan, you can keep your insurance plan. Period.” He said that, or variations of that, over and over again. There's video circulating that captures 36 separate occasions when the president publicly made that promise—a promise, we now know, he knew he could never keep, had not intention of keeping, didn’t want to keep anyway, since the two-fold goal of Obamacare is to destroy private insurance and bring all us plebs under the wing of an all-encompassing “single-payer,” i.e., the federal government.
The revelation of Obama’s lies, his obvious confusion and the hunted-look he has exhibited at press conferences while his approval rating is in a death spiral (it dropped to 37%, the lowest of his presidency, in a CBS poll released this week). All of this is, for the opponents of ObamaCare, ample ground for malicious glee, and I at least can deeply empathize with the blogger who wrote that “if schadenfreude had calories, I’d weigh 300 pounds.”
TO paraphrase Oscar Wilde: “You’d have to have a heart of stone not to laugh at the unraveling of Obamacare.” Except, it is no laughing matter that millions of Americans’ lives have been thrown into anxious chaos as they lose their health insurance, their doctors, their money, or all three. Nor is it particularly amusing to think of the incredible waste of time and tax dollars that has gone into Obamacare’s construction.
The unravelling, of Obamacare has provided hours of entertainment for the politically mature. If you can’t take some joy in the unprecedentedly spectacular beclowning of the president, his administration, its enablers, and, to no small degree, liberalism itself, then you need to ask yourself why you’re following politics in the first place.
The hubris of our ocean-commanding commander-in-chief surely isn’t news to readers of this website. He’s said that he’s smarter and better than everyone who works for him. His wife informed us that he has “brought us out of the dark and into the light” and that he would fix our broken souls. The man defined sin itself as “being out of alignment with my values.” We may be the ones we’ve been waiting for, but at the same time, everyone has been waiting for him. Or as he put it in 2007, “Every place is Barack Obama country once Barack Obama’s been there.”
A little Schadenfreude is certainly in order. The news today that Obama was briefed last spring about possible widespread failures when the web site went live may seem to deepen the glee even as it deepens the malice. After all, the president has all along acted surprised by the technical failures bedeviling the roll-out of healthcare.gov. But now it turns out that the surprise, like so much else about the president, was feigned.It was part of his campaign of lies.
One of the most disturbing aspects of this entire affair is the stench of lawlessness that surrounds it like a miasma. President Obama carps impatiently that he will simply direct insurance companies to reinstate the policies that they, in an effort to follow the law, have been required to cancel. He says that he will direct that application of the law be delayed a year — but he says nothing about where he is supposed to get the authority for such actions. The president’s response to the embarrassment of the eponymous legislation he shoved down the throats of the American people is one of the most disturbing occurrences of his administration. Since Magna Carta in 1215, a test of legitimacy has been the extent to which the sovereign is subject to the laws of the land. Obama is not a sovereign, exactly, but he acts as though he were above the law, that the law (like taxes) were something to be imposed on the rest of us but which he and his magic circle of apparatchiks could ignore or “delay” or partially implement at their pleasure. The law is binding upon us little people, and upon insurance companies, which would be severely penalized should they fail to abide the provisions of that intricate legislation.
I suspect that one of the reasons Obama’s approval rating is in free fall is because of his obvious surprise and petulance in his public encounters over the disaster of Obamacare. He has made some grudging half apologies, but it is clear that the only thing he is sorry about is that he cannot — not yet, anyway — simply decree what happens with health care in this country. He believes himself above the law and is impatient about finding a means of achieving that discretion. For our own good, of course. Many observers on the Right have long known this about Obama. Suddenly, though, it is out there for all to see. The American people don’t like tyrants, even smooth-talking, Harvard-educated ones. The great trek away from Obama and what he stands for — above all, government unlimited — has begun. The journey will not be pretty, but I think it is all but certain to continue.
"...what appears to be..."
ObamaCare enrollments spike in California
I guess soap bubbles is telling us that we're imagining the adverse reaction to Obamacare
thanks for the hilarity
truth is, we're entering the American Spring
all Americans, young and old, rich and poor, from every race, gender, ancestry have come together and said "enough"
they want their country and its Constitution back
btw, the California stat is pathetic
of course the numbers are soaring
Obama made sure over a million in California lost their insurance
they had nowhere else to go
few were uninsured before
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2hNLDigNVB8
"Obama made sure over a million in California lost their insurance
they had nowhere else to go
few were uninsured before"
Who needs facts when you've got spin?
In 2011, over 6.6 million or 20.2% of Californians were uninsured. Nobody I know thinks of 6.6 million as "few."
You might want to scroll down that linked to chart and see how many other states in addition to California had millions of residents, more than 20% of their own state residents who went without health insurance in 2011:
Alaska 21.7%
Arkansas 20.1%
Florida 24.8%
Georgia 21.7%
Louisiana 20.1%
Mississippi 20.6%
Montana 21.6%
Nevada 23.8%
New Mexico 23.0%
Oklahoma 21.8%
Texas 25.7%
"Obama impeached and removed from office"
About 100 protesters showed up in DC this week agree with you. Of course 100 is just a bit fewer than the million protesters they were expecting would protest with them. Read all about it and see the pictures of this pathetic protest:
Larry Klayman Rally To Overthrow Obama Draws Slightly Fewer Than The Millions Expected
"Who needs facts when you've got spin?"
you always wonder with TTFers:
are they stupid, or just liars?
I'll generously assume the former and that your reading comprehension is so poor that you didn't realize that I was talking about those who enrolled and not the total population
it is true that millions of Californians are uninsured
according to polls, Americans don't think that's the government's problem
we've moved past the liberal little ice age now
the steam from the tea kettle is warming things up
"About 100 protesters showed up in DC this week agree with you."
must have been poorly organized
polls, left and right, show most Americans don't approve of him
OBAMA IS PATHETIC
NOW, HE'S DELAYING THE BEGINNING OF EMPLOYER OBAMACARE A MONTH, TO NOV 15, 2014, TO GET IT PAST NEXT YEAR'S ELECTION
HE AND THE DEM-MINIONS FEAR ACCOUNTABILITY
IT WON'T HELP
who here is familiar with the term "petro dollar" versus "petro yuan" ?
I have been reading some things lately that makes me think we should go buy a house in Kentucky.
and explains why Obama wanted to go to war with Syria.
and justifies the statement I previously dismissed about the Iraq war being over oil.
and makes the debt even more important than I had previously imagined.
In Kentucky you will enjoy their KYNECT exchange, which has been very successful.
Bloomberg Television posted this story saying a key to KYNECT site’s success is that users can browse insurance plans or see which subsidies they are eligible for without an account.
For those of you too paranoid to input personal data into an ACA exchange, at KYNECT you can browse for plans and subsidies without inputting your name, SSN or address, but you will have to select a KY County as your place of residence to see what's offered.
Go play around on KYNECT with incomes over 400% of the poverty level and see for yourself how it works.
so....
what do you think will happen if OPEC decides not to retain the dollar as the currency they exclusively trade for oil in ?
right now, oil is traded in dollars, and has been since the 1970's when we agreed to protect Saudia Arabia in return for them exclusively trading oil for dollars.
Saudia Arabia is not on friendly terms with Syria and they wanted us to go to war with Syria. Which would explain why folks on far left (not in rich elite) and the far right (not in the rich elite) were against it... we don't get this stuff... and folks in the elitist society were for it.
Also explains why the US took out Iraq - major oil producer selling oil in something other than US dollars outside of OPEC. It all fits.
and it explains why Boehner caved, when faced with default because default with Obama would mean that he would choose not to pay US debts and the Saudis could choose to change the standard of the US dollar from oil. and if they do that, our society crashes down over night since our dollar is so deflated. AND it explains why Trump, railing against China artificially devaluing it's currency was so upset about it. because it means the USA kills its manufacturing and can no longer make steel or clothing or many other things to provide for their people.
Trump just kept railing on about we should be so upset about China devaluing their currency without explaining why it mattered.
I get it now.
tell me, someone, why I should not be panicked.
because I am kind of panicked.
and I really think that next march's debt ceiling could be it.
just it.
the us media has not been reporting about this, but it seems to me this EXPLAINS Kerry going around the US Senate to ratify the small arms treaty, was because he WAS FORCED TO, because we are now in so much debt that we are beholden to other countries and there is nothing we can do !
someone explain to me why this is crazy and there is a non panic related explanation for this, because right now I am ready to sell the house in DC and move to KY tomorrow.
anything folks ?
tell me why I am a crazy stupid person that shouldn't listen to FOX (and I am not getting this from fox).
why are these predictions not valid ?
anyone ?
because I called my mom's financial advisor (50 mil+ he manages) and HE DIDN"T THINK BUYING LAND IN KENTUCKY was a bad idea.
he said I should check into it, if I could rent it this was not a bad backup strategy.
please someone tell me I am crazy and WHY !
maybe he thought I was crazy and didn't want to offend me.
at this point I would be grateful to hear I was crazy.
with details as to why.
Jim, aunt bea, anon ?
why is the threat of OPEC determining that something other than the dollar is the financial standard not a big deal ? or if it is a big deal how will the US weather it ?
aunt bea, you do realize that if people are starving they will come after you and your husband as well as me, and that wealth, except that wealth which has been spent on prepping and security, will be irrelevant ? and the only currency will be food ?
Or, have you all been aware that Obama is after the demise of society as we know it and I am just catching on late ? that this is something he wanted ?
tell me I am crazy, folks, back it up with facts, at this point that is something I would welcome....
Explain how the decoupling of the US dollars from OPEC oil will NOT cause the demise of society as we know it, I am all ears.
You'd be a lot better off if you could gain some self control instead of freaking out and pitching SCREAMING hissy fits so often.
I strongly suggest calming therapy, maybe a nice massage or a nice long stroll in the neighborhood.
And lay off the booze!
http://www.bizpacreview.com/2013/09/23/americans-are-fleeing-saying-goodbye-to-tax-hungry-america-83900
Nope, just time to leave.
and take my three 140+ IQ kids with me.
Speaker John Boehner:
Failed to dismantle Obamacare in 46 votes.
Succeeded in signing up for Obamacare in 1 day:
John Boehner Has Officially Signed Up For Insurance Through Obamacare
"House Speaker John Boehner has officially enrolled in a D.C. insurance exchange under the Affordable Care Act, he said in a blog post on his website Thursday evening, after having some difficulty signing up earlier in the afternoon.
"Like many Americans, my experience was pretty frustrating," he wrote of his experience at first, a reference to the dysfunction that has plagued the exchange websites since their launch.
"After putting in my personal information, I received an error message. I was able to work past that, but when I went to actually sign up for coverage, I got this 'internal server error' screen."
In his original blog post, he wrote that he had put a call into the help desk. A short while later, he added an update:
"Kept at it, and called the DC Health Link help line. They called back a few hours later, and after re-starting the process on the website two more times, I just heard from DC Health Link that I have been successfully enrolled."
Brendan Buck, Boehner's press secretary, joked that "sure didn't take long after the blog post."
The federal health care law requires members to enroll in D.C. exchanges. "
Note: John Boehner was *not afraid* to enter his personal information on the DC health care exchange and within a few hours, he had signed up for his ACA compliant health care plan for 2014.
not an answer.
and what do you do if the brilliant leave ?
as I was recently offered to take my entire family overseas ?
what do you do when the brilliant are offered jobs working outside the USA with comp plans to take their entire families with them ?
what do you do ?
do you stay or do you go ?
when you are the elite (because of income/education/heritage) do you stay and try to salvage this or do you go ?
I think you go.
and you leave them to figure it out.
good luck
see ya
On your way out the door, you might want to thank Harry Reid for enacting the nuclear option to end your party's obstruction of the Presidency ("In the history of the United States, there have been 168 filibusters of presidential nominees, 82 filibusters under President Obama, 86 filibusters under all other presidents."), as that very same day "The Dow Jones Industrial Average closed above 16,000 for the first time Thursday, extending a rally that has the blue chip-index on pace for its best year in a decade.
Thursday's gains came after Janet Yellen moved a step closer to becoming the next Federal Reserve leader and a better-than-expected report on the jobs market boosted sentiment. .."
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303653004579211283929257404
ha-ha!!
a year from now, Harry Reid will be the new minority leader in the House and wishing he had never done this
there are some other problems as well but you'll find that out
wouldn't want to spoil the surprise
but, let's just say, Republicans are kinda crafty
apparently, however, there's been a big misunderstanding
Barack Obama thinks he's pretty darn close to being a deity and the American people, well, they don't exactly agree:
"Washington (CNN) - Only four out of 10 Americans believe President Barack Obama can manage the federal government effectively, according to a new national poll.
And a CNN/ORC International survey released Monday morning also indicates that 53% of Americans now believe that Obama is not honest and trustworthy, the first time that a clear majority in CNN polling has felt that way.
According to the survey, conducted last Monday through Wednesday, 40% say the President can manage the government effectively. That 40% figure is down 12 percentage points from June.
"A lot of attention has focused on the President's numbers on honesty in new polling the past three weeks, but it looks like the recent controversy over Obamacare has had a bigger impact on his status as an effective manager of the government, and that may be what is really driving the drop in Obama's approval rating this fall," CNN Polling Director Keating Holland said.
Does being an effective manager count more than honesty?
"Just ask Bill Clinton, whose overall approval ratings remained high during and after the Monica Lewinsky scandal because three-quarters of all Americans thought he could get things done, even though only about one in five said he was honest," Holland added.
Obama's woes are not limited to honesty and his managerial skills. Fifty-six percent say he is not a person they admire, and an equal number say he does not agree with them on important issues. Fifty-six percent also say he does not inspire confidence, and 53% don't view him as a strong and decisive leader. All of those figures are all-time records for Obama in CNN polling.
turns out Oprah Winfrey is as stupid as Jim Kennedy
she thinks America is racist and just criticizes Barack Obama because he's black
it must have slipped her mind that in America, a country where blacks are a minority, she had the highest rated daytime talk show for years and is still treated like an icon by its largely colorblind populace
yeah, sounds like a real racist nation
truth is, the main racists left in America are liberals who benefit from grouping people into categories based on race
"Shortly before receiving the medal of freedom from President Obama, Oprah Winfrey gave an interview to the BBC in which she seemed to chalk up much of the opposition to the president to racism: "I think there's a level of disrespect for the office that occurs ... because he's African American," she said.
Oprah's pronouncement produced a "huh?" moment for me, considering the fact that it was millions of Americans that gave their colorblind eyes to her show for a quarter-century, famous enough to be interviewed by the BBC.
As communism wound down in the Soviet Union, President Reagan was asked whether he still considered it an evil empire. "You are talking about another time, another era," he replied.
Oprah is still living in that other time and era in which people separated themselves from one another primarily on the basis of race — a real time to be sure — but one that is, for the most part, not our reality today. That's especially so at the highest levels of politics and entertainment.
Because it is more often than not Tea Party types who are accused of racial hostility toward Obama, I have a parlor game I play with my white conservative friends that tells me everything I need to know about the state of race relations in America.
"If your daughter were thinking of marrying a man like Clarence Thomas or one like Chris Matthews, which would you choose?" I ask.
The answer is quick and unanimous: They'd choose to spend their holidays with a son-in-law who looks nothing like them but shares their values rather than one who merely shares their skin color.
Oprah might want us to believe Obama faces extraordinary opposition that can largely be explained by his race, but she conveniently forgets that in the past 100 years, six presidents were shot at, one killed, another impeached and two driven from office. All were loathed by millions. Some more than others.
Our first black president is actually accorded more respect than some past presidents have received. At the height of his health care reform failure, Obama has the lowest popularity of his presidency, yet the past eight (white) presidents in a row were all less popular at their own low points.
The success of the civil rights movement and the widespread acceptance of interracial marriage has fundamentally changed America's racial equation.
Some day soon, when we all look like actor and TV host Mario Lopez, it will simply be impossible to find people of a different skin color, let alone hate on the basis of it."
there's a reason no TTFers want to talk anymore
"Washington (CNN) – What a difference a month makes.
A new CNN/ORC International poll indicates a dramatic turnaround in the battle for control of Congress in next year's midterm elections.
Democrats a month ago held a 50%-42% advantage among registered voters in a generic ballot, which asked respondents to choose between a Democrat or Republican in their congressional district without identifying the candidates.
The Democratic lead has disappeared. A new CNN/ORC poll indicates the GOP now holds a 49%-47% edge.
The new survey was conducted last week and released Tuesday.
The 10-point swing follows a political uproar over Obamacare, which included the botched rollout of HealthCare.gov and controversy over insurance policy cancelations due primarily to the new health law."
once again, history repeats itself and the world learns that socialism doesn't work
if left unchanged, Obamacare will destroy the middle class in America
next year, around this time, when employers who renewed on December 1 to avoid ACA for another 11 months have to comply, at least 80 million will have their insurance cancelled replaced with new policies with sky-high deductibles and co-pays
if you are a young couple not eligible for subsidies, for example, you'll leave the hospital with an average $10,000 bill when your first child is born
this will destroy our economy and, in the end, 30 million Americans, at a minimum, will be left uninsured
President Obama’s poll numbers are at record lows. The health care law that serves as the cornerstone of his domestic policy legacy is even more unpopular. And there are few chances to change the conversation among a skeptical public that isn’t happy with Washington.
Sound familiar? It should: The national political climate today is starting to resemble 2010, when Republicans won control of the House of Representatives by riding a wave of voter anger.
Wave elections are rare. Only a handful of times in the previous century has one party racked up big wins. Republicans won back more than 40 seats in 1938, 1942, 1946, 1966, 1994 and 2010.
But the rocky rollout of the Affordable Care Act and President Obama’s crumbling support suggests another wave is building. While voters usually punish a president’s party in at least one midterm election, they seem to be winding up to deliver another smack to President Obama’s allies on Capitol Hill.
Voter dislike of ObamaCare cost Democrats the House in 2010. It could cost them the Senate in 2014.
The poll numbers hint at the toll the Affordable Care Act has taken on the Democratic Party. A CNN/ORC International poll conducted November 18-20 shows 49 percent of registered voters favored a generic Republican candidate for Congress, compared with 47 percent who favored a Democratic candidate.
Historically, Democrats have held an advantage of at least a few points on the generic ballot, even when election results are a wash: Democrats held a six-point edge just before Election Day 2000 and picked up a grand total of one seat. Democrats led Republicans by one point on the generic ballot just before the 2010 elections, when Republicans rode to a sweeping victory.
And there’s no sign that Obama will become more popular. Presidents who see their approval ratings dip so dramatically in the second term rarely see their numbers improve. Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon’s approval ratings never recovered after the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal (Nixon, of course, didn’t stick around to see just how far his ratings could fall). George W. Bush’s approval rating sank in the spring of 2005, and continued falling through the end of his term. Obama’s numbers are starting to resemble Bush’s trend lines.
Increasingly, Obama himself is unpopular: In the latest Washington Post/ABC News survey, conducted earlier this month, Obama’s unfavorable rating, 52 percent, tops his favorable rating, 46 percent.
Democrats will say the Republican Party is in even worse shape than they are, but back in 2010, 40 percent told Post pollsters they viewed Republicans in a favorable light, 10 points lower than those who said they saw Democrats favorably. Republicans feigned a national platform, akin to the Contract With America, but their pitch to voters was more about what they were against — namely, Democrats and ObamaCare — than what they were for. Voters have backed the unpopular party with few ideas over the slightly-more-popular party with unpopular ideas before.
And there aren’t many opportunities for Democrats to change that climate.
The one opportunity that Democrats do have lies in negotiations over the federal budget. October’s government shutdown gave Democrats a temporary advantage, and if Republican hardliners pursue the same path, they could hand Democrats an opening. But it seems unlikely Republicans would repeat their political mistakes of this fall.
That leaves Democrats weighed down by an unpopular president and an unpopular (and malfunctioning) law, running in unfavorable terrain. A major political wave hasn’t developed yet, but a Republican sweep looks more likely now than it has since the waning weeks of the 2010 campaign.
Post a Comment
<< Home