ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2020 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Tuesday, October 29, 2013

Wait, politicians lie?

I fail to see how the news that millions of Americans will lose their private insurance under Obamacare is supposed to be any surprise whatsoever:
President Obama repeatedly assured Americans that after the Affordable Care Act became law, people who liked their health insurance would be able to keep it. But millions of Americans are getting or are about to get cancellation letters for their health insurance under Obamacare, say experts, and the Obama administration has known that for at least three years.

Four sources deeply involved in the Affordable Care Act tell NBC NEWS that 50 to 75 percent of the 14 million consumers who buy their insurance individually can expect to receive a “cancellation” letter or the equivalent over the next year because their existing policies don’t meet the standards mandated by the new health care law. One expert predicts that number could reach as high as 80 percent. And all say that many of those forced to buy pricier new policies will experience “sticker shock.”

None of this should come as a shock to the Obama administration. The law states that policies in effect as of March 23, 2010 will be “grandfathered,” meaning consumers can keep those policies even though they don’t meet requirements of the new health care law. But the Department of Health and Human Services then wrote regulations that narrowed that provision, by saying that if any part of a policy was significantly changed since that date -- the deductible, co-pay, or benefits, for example -- the policy would not be grandfathered.

Buried in Obamacare regulations from July 2010 is an estimate that because of normal turnover in the individual insurance market, “40 to 67 percent” of customers will not be able to keep their policy. And because many policies will have been changed since the key date, “the percentage of individual market policies losing grandfather status in a given year exceeds the 40 to 67 percent range.”

That means the administration knew that more than 40 to 67 percent of those in the individual market would not be able to keep their plans, even if they liked them.

Yet President Obama, who had promised in 2009, “if you like your health plan, you will be able to keep your health plan,” was still saying in 2012, “If [you] already have health insurance, you will keep your health insurance.”
Barack Obama is easily the least honest president since Richard Nixon. And he has no pressure on him to be honest since he not only has the press covering for him, but relies upon the support of the two most gullible portions of the population. But, let's face it, this isn't going to stir any outrage among the "Obama gwan pay mah mortgage" crowd. It may spark a momentary skepticism in a few white urban liberals, but only until someone reminds them that Republicans are evil and racist, at which point they will dutifully abandon their crimethink.

Labels: ,

106 Comments:

Blogger Nate October 29, 2013 6:17 AM  

man... lying sure used to be a big deal to the left when Dubya was doing it...

Anonymous Smokey October 29, 2013 6:26 AM  

And some idiots still say that Americans don't live under a tyranny.

Newsflash, jackasses: Just because you don't have armed state thugs in tanks patrolling your neighborhood 24/7, and the U.S Government hasn't yet redecorated the White House to look like Sauron's summer getaway, doesn't mean that American freedom isn't dead.

Anonymous GeorgeOfTheJungle October 29, 2013 6:27 AM  

Bush's crimes were undeniably greater, even the Iraq lie was greater than all of Obama's put together. So you must be saying that Dubya was by far the most ignorant.

Blogger Nate October 29, 2013 6:31 AM  

"Bush's crimes were undeniably greater, even the Iraq lie was greater than all of Obama's put together. So you must be saying that Dubya was by far the most ignorant."

/facepalm

There was no Iraq lie George. Iraq had chemical weapons and everyone knew it. Before or during the invasion those weapons were moved out to Syria.

Anonymous GeorgeOfTheJungle October 29, 2013 6:41 AM  

There was no Iraq lie George. Iraq had chemical weapons and everyone knew it. Before or during the invasion those weapons were moved out to Syria.

Convenient. Oh you must mean those rickshaws that were supposed to rain down WMDs on us. They did find some right? Or were they shipped out to Antartica? You guys really like your stories.

Anonymous Anon. October 29, 2013 6:47 AM  

Mmmmmm, yellow cake....

Anonymous Idle Spectator Jackson October 29, 2013 6:48 AM  

alight ya fukn krackers its payback time

pay whitey pay


but the ebt still be runnin so we ok right

Anonymous GeorgeOfTheJungle October 29, 2013 6:49 AM  

This fag is deleting my comments, well, g'night you lunatics, keep the conspiracies strong, the commies are out to git' ya.

Anonymous zen0 October 29, 2013 7:16 AM  

"This fag is deleting my comments,"

If they were like the ones that are still here, you must have violated the boring and stupid rule.

Anonymous VD October 29, 2013 7:22 AM  

No, George is simply too stupid to grasp the concept of a spam trap. His 6:41 masterpiece was caught in it. Imagine the loss to humanity if this had not been discovered!

Anonymous Josh October 29, 2013 7:25 AM  

Bush lied, people died! Or something like that.

Anonymous Lo Pan October 29, 2013 7:29 AM  

"you must mean those rickshaws that were supposed to rain down WMDs on us. "

Rickshars?

oh, you clazy.

Anonymous Titus Didius Tacitus October 29, 2013 7:31 AM  

The only difference between "read my lips: no new taxes" and "if you like your plan, you can keep your plan" is mass media partisanship.

Blogger Crowhill October 29, 2013 7:33 AM  

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me 42,000 times, shame on me.

It's astonishing how the cycle repeats. Politicians lie. Voters believe them. Politicians are revealed as liars. Voters get mad. Politicians lie again. Voters believe them.....

Anonymous Roundtine October 29, 2013 7:33 AM  

He is a Lightworker. He can't lie.

It may spark a momentary skepticism in a few white urban liberals

There are some sites out there where the lefties find out their premiums are doubling or tripling. Lots of f-bombs and f-this f-that if this is true then I'm not paying and I'm not paying the fine either. Obamacare will double my monthly premium (according to Kaiser)

The comments are hilarious as the hamsters spin spin spin and spin some more! I don't care if they recognize it or not, I have had a skip in my step for the past week. This is free comedy gold from Obama and it's not going to end. Most people have no idea how deep the fail goes; there are still lots of lefties who think this is just a website problem, that cancelling policies is good and that rising premiums are just the right's narrative.

Anonymous Roundtine October 29, 2013 7:40 AM  

Politicians lie. Voters believe them.

Obama's lies are really good though. He never has a "Read My Lips!" moment, but he's on record enough time saying the exact opposite of what Obamacare does. You can keep you old plan! Nope, it's even going to get cancelled on you. You'll save money! Nope, your premiums might double, triple or worse. It'll lower healthcare costs! Nope, higher demand and more people on Medicaid means higher costs.

Under Obamacare, insurance companies pay benefits based on the group. So if you are in the bronze age plan that covers 70% of your expenses, well that just means the insurance has to cover 70% of the expenses for people in that group.

Blogger Glen Filthie October 29, 2013 7:41 AM  

It's all Bush's fault.

Anonymous Rational Rothbardian October 29, 2013 7:44 AM  

Reagan was a bigger liar than Obama -- and Nixon.

Anonymous FP October 29, 2013 7:51 AM  

I don't think I haven't had a policy change each year in the past three years to my coverage and costs since ACA passed. I've been told that they are dropping my old plan but will auto-magically switch me over to a new plan (that complies with all the obamao mandates) starting Jan 1st. Which means two checks within a month since a new quarter for my current plan starts Dec. 1st.. I'll have to pay monthly instead of quarterly too. I'll have to double check how much the rate has gone up.

Its rather fun now that all the blind idiots are complaining who told me I was idiot/moron/selfish/full of it for the past few years as I told them how bad it was going to be. That woman in CA who was quoted in the news saying "I didn't think I'd be paying for it!" is hilarious if it wasn't you know, sad. But my violent right wing rhetoric of "its slavery you idiots!" was/is just "too extreme". Got told that by some guy claiming to be a libertarian even.

Blogger Unknown October 29, 2013 7:57 AM  

Actually , the its all bush's fault idea kind of is true. If he was a better president and if the republican nominee had been stronger there is a very high probability obamacare wouldnt have existed.

Anonymous dh October 29, 2013 8:00 AM  

Which means two checks within a month since a new quarter for my current plan starts Dec. 1st.. I'll have to pay monthly instead of quarterly too. I'll have to double check how much the rate has gone up.

Same boat, my December payment is going to be pro-rated, and the plan will be about 15% more than my old one.

Anonymous dh October 29, 2013 8:20 AM  

There was no Iraq lie George. Iraq had chemical weapons and everyone knew it. Before or during the invasion those weapons were moved out to Syria.

Nate, I dare you to go through. Sec. Powell's UN address and say you think there were no lies. The State departments only analysis suggested virtually every fact that Powell used to pitch the invasion to the UN and the public was not strong enough to use as evidence. The mobile weapons labs, the tubes, yellowcake - it was all fabrications based on Curveball, a useless double or triple or whatever agent.

Barack Obama is easily the least honest president since Richard Nixon. And he has no pressure on him to be honest since he not only has the press covering for him, but relies upon the support of the two most gullible portions of the population.

I wouldn't criticize the assessment, except to say it shows some weird priorities when dragging the country into a decades long-boondoggle military adventure, which has cost literally a million lives, is somehow seen as a honest.

As far as the press goes, the press works with what it has. There is an aggressive, powerful, muscular press, it's just not US based, and hasn't been in modern times.

The difference in the last two administrations - the Clinton Administration and the Bush administration, is that you had opposition who were effective at using the the investigatory powers of the Congress to maximum extent. The Democrats in Congress put significant pressure on the Bush administration.

For political reasons, the Republicans are not able to do so. For example, in 2006, the Democrats in the House were meeting to work on impeachment grounds for Pres. Bush for domestic spying without FISA court approval. Rep. Nadler for one worked on the issue for many months and had a strong case. Of course now, the GOP and Pres. Bush made this retroactively legal, reduced the scope of what FISA could review, and gave the telecommunications companies involved immunity. And now Pres. Obama uses those same powers daily to maximum effect.

Also, with. Rep. Issa doing the investigations you come to find out he's just not that good. Remember back in May and June when everyone here was predicating a summer of scandals, televised live hearings, connections to the White House, and all that? How did that go? How is IRS Gate proceeding, ready to get Obama on his helicopter off the front lawn at any moment? Of course not, as I predicted, Issa lost the initiative and has failed to make any headway. Mostly its because the GOP is just not that good at doing what the opposition should be doing. I guess you can make this the presses fault, but its a stretch.

Anonymous Salt October 29, 2013 8:21 AM  

Was at the dentist yesterday. Got informed that they expect to see an increase in children patients due to Obamacare. What they do not know is what insurance will pay exactly. My take was they expect it to be down.

Anonymous FP October 29, 2013 8:26 AM  

Hah, Krugman weighs in and blames the GOP for Obamacare failures... and goes all in for single payer aka medicare for all.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/28/opinion/krugman-the-big-kludge.html?_r=1&

Anonymous VD October 29, 2013 8:30 AM  

I wouldn't criticize the assessment, except to say it shows some weird priorities when dragging the country into a decades long-boondoggle military adventure, which has cost literally a million lives, is somehow seen as a honest.

I'm not saying Bush was honest. By no means. I'm simply saying that as a percentage of what comes out of a man's mouth, Obama tends to lie even more egregiously than known liars such as Bush the Younger, Bush the Elder, and Bill Clinton.

Remember, his entire campaign was a lie. I openly predicted he would screw over the anti-war Democrats who got him elected as well as the Occupy Wall Streeters. Although I didn't realize he would turn out to be more in Goldman's pockets than Bush the Younger, that really did surprise me.

Anonymous Myrddin October 29, 2013 8:34 AM  

Actually , the its all bush's fault idea kind of is true. If he was a better president and if the republican nominee had been stronger there is a very high probability obamacare wouldnt have existed.

Or maybe pushed it back four to eight years.

Human kingdoms go bad. The only question is how fast.

Anonymous dh October 29, 2013 8:35 AM  

Hah, Krugman weighs in and blames the GOP for Obamacare failures... and goes all in for single payer aka medicare for all.

Thats why the GOP is handling this stupidly. Obamacare is the last stop before single payer. Either it works, or for profit insurance is over as a thing in the health care industry.

Blogger tz October 29, 2013 8:36 AM  

This is the bipolar media lobotomy. Faux News spews right wing talking points and MiStress NBC does the left. But no actual reasoning takes place. It is entertaining but as much a stalemate as the DMZ in Korea.

Bush lied too, and yes, on Iraq. And functionallw when Afghanistan ceased to be about Obama and became... I don't know what exactly. Why are we still there?

The bases are equally stupid - He lies but is pro [life, choice] is the motto.

Does anyone of the long timers here think Ronmeycare would have been different except on the margins? (the vids should still be on ewww tube) The Venn diagram of bipartanship shows the intersection to be getting bigger - but that with the American people smaller.

Anonymous dh October 29, 2013 8:46 AM  

. Why are we still there?

How many troops do you think we have in Afghanistan?

Anonymous DT October 29, 2013 8:47 AM  

Obama tends to lie even more egregiously than known liars such as Bush the Younger, Bush the Elder, and Bill Clinton.

It isn't really a lie if oral sex isn't really sex.

Blogger Unknown October 29, 2013 8:49 AM  

Good points. It is also worth noting that all of Bush's from Iraq to domestic spying to drone strikes were adopted in-kind or expanded upon by Obama.


Liberals will unwaveringly dismiss this all as cynicism, racism, or ideological nonsense though. And they will do it claiming their ideology makes them morally superior because they believe in "equality."

Anonymous DT October 29, 2013 8:51 AM  

How many troops do you think we have in Afghanistan?

63,000 according to Wikipedia. Assuming of course that all the troops are actually labeled "troops" and not advisers, contractors, etc, etc.

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother October 29, 2013 8:52 AM  

The money is bad enough, but worse is the information collected, and the control that can be exerted based on that information.

Blogger Unknown October 29, 2013 8:55 AM  

What amazes me is critics and administrative personnel both foreshadowed the issues Obamacare would cause. Mainly that only the sick would sign up, premiums would go up, and that the website was a disaster. Despite the signs warning of this disaster Obama and Co. pushed on, fully knowing that the media and the public would never hold them accountable for any of if. Instead, try would applaud him for some speech he made in third world paradise about how cross dressing minorities should have the right to equal treatment under God's laws.

Anonymous dh October 29, 2013 8:56 AM  

63,000 according to Wikipedia. Assuming of course that all the troops are actually labeled "troops" and not advisers, contractors, etc, etc.

It easily could be 100k all in. On the way to zero. Iraq is effectively at zero. I am surprised that anyone would claim Obama hasn't followed through on his plan for Iraq and Afghanistan.

Blogger Unknown October 29, 2013 8:57 AM  

More than 1!

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother October 29, 2013 8:58 AM  

Romney was the GOP's attempt to out Democrat the Democrats. When I was running for a national delegate spot, a judge who was also a state delegate like I was asked me and a friend if we would make sure we voted for Romney if I was assigned to do so, because the people in the district wanted a conservative in office. I had to stifle my urge to laugh in his face. Romney started gay marriage in this country, made abortions 50.00 each, signed an assault weapons ban, the list goes on. He even made a statement that homosexuals should be allowed in Boy Scouts. What a freaking joke.

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben October 29, 2013 9:33 AM  

It's over, DH. The law is a failure and single payer will take its place. Most voters want everything for free.

Free stuff vs. personal responsibility. Free stuff always wins.

Anonymous Susan October 29, 2013 9:34 AM  

@Stg58/Animal Mother

You forgot to remind about the fact that when he ran against Kennedy for the Senate in the 90's he tried to out-liberal a Kennedy. He was nothing more than a finger in the wind, run with the polls, moderate. Only thing I would ever consider giving him any props for is his business experience. At least he has some, Obama doesn't.

I just love it when you give those facts to a moderate as to why you can't vote for Romney and they turn purple and scream, "You Hate Mormons, You're a Bigot"!!!! The elite rinos have nothing else to deflect the truth with. I lost track how many times I saw that response in comment threads on other websites.

I think we still would have had some kind of national plan under Romney, but it probably would not have been the circus that this one has been.

Anonymous the bandit October 29, 2013 9:49 AM  

@Stg58

Did you reply, "I will definitely represent the people of my district and make sure that I vote to put a conservative in office"?

Blogger Booch Paradise October 29, 2013 9:55 AM  

I am surprised that anyone would claim Obama hasn't followed through on his plan for Iraq and Afghanistan.
Seriously? You think that even the GOP had wanted to just keep the war going forever? How long would Obama have to extend the war in Iraq for his promise to be broken? How much time does he still have on Afghanistan before it's broken?

Blogger swiftfoxmark2 October 29, 2013 9:57 AM  

Yep, got my cancellation notice a few weeks ago. All you moochers owe me your welfare checks now.

Anonymous Feh October 29, 2013 10:05 AM  

Barack Obama is easily the least honest president since Richard Nixon.

Not a high bar, since Nixon wasn't dishonest at all, only foolish enough to fall into his internal enemies trap (Watergate).

Anonymous Anonymous October 29, 2013 10:12 AM  

And yet Romney would have been a huge improvement over Obama -- mostly because the media would have opposed him on the very same programs they support from Obama, but still. That's not praise for Romney; just saying Obama is really, really bad.

Blogger IM2L844 October 29, 2013 10:13 AM  

Barack Obama is easily the least respectable president ever! There, that's better.

The only thing Obama knows how to do is campaign and chillax. He is wholly disengaged from day to day administrative operations. He let's his posse handle it. As long as he's campaigning, it's much easier for his supporters to accept his disingenuous and divisive remarks, but that doesn't make him any less of an unscrupulous liar.

Of course ObamaCare is just a stepping stone to a single-payer system. Keep in mind, though, all of the top insurance companies are also top investment companies who are inextricably intertwined with the top international banking and finance companies. Does anyone believe they are too stupid to see it coming? If they didn't want it to happen, it wouldn't happen! To think otherwise would be incredibly naïve.

Anonymous Anonymous October 29, 2013 10:17 AM  

When Obama doesn't lie he can always fall back on the, "I didn't know," defense. He didn't know about the IRS targeting, he didn't know about the Obamacare glitches, he didn't know about the NSA surveillance programs, he didn't know about Fast and Furious. What are we paying this "In the dark," president for?

Blogger James Dixon October 29, 2013 10:29 AM  

> Either it works, or for profit insurance is over as a thing in the health care industry.

It was designed to fail from the beginning to allow a complete government takeover.

> Romney was the GOP's attempt to out Democrat the Democrats.

And Dole, and Bush, and McCain. Is the pattern obvious yet?

Anonymous fmudd October 29, 2013 10:51 AM  

As other commenters have said; all by design. Now, with private health insurance being increasingly expensive to the point of being ludicrous; guess what will be the perfect solution?

The Public Option; championed by none other than Hillary Clinton/Elizabeth Warren.

Anonymous Will Best October 29, 2013 10:55 AM  

I was paying $90/mo for a goldish level plan last this year. Next year the most similar plan for me is $260/mo. However, my son who I pay a pre-existing condition rider on is seeing his premiums drop from $800/mo to $290. So it looks like I made $4k, but then they moved the medical deduction from 7.5 to 10% AGI so they will recapture about half that when I file in 2015.

Anonymous Red Comet October 29, 2013 10:57 AM  

It easily could be 100k all in. On the way to zero. Iraq is effectively at zero. I am surprised that anyone would claim Obama hasn't followed through on his plan for Iraq and Afghanistan.

I dunno. Was replacing ground troops with drones that specialize in blowing up weddings and first responders ever officially laid out as "the plan"?

Anonymous Lysander Spooner October 29, 2013 11:03 AM  

"Why are we still there?"


Answer: War is a Racket.

Anonymous fmudd October 29, 2013 11:03 AM  


I dunno. Was replacing ground troops with drones that specialize in blowing up weddings and first responders ever officially laid out as "the plan"?


This. President Obama didn't end the war; he automated it.

Anonymous Roundtine October 29, 2013 11:06 AM  

Now, with private health insurance being increasingly expensive to the point of being ludicrous; guess what will be the perfect solution?

I guess this argument, but the steps are:

1. Create a government run healthcare system that is so totally f-ed up that even liberals hate it
2. ???
3. Everyone will be in favor of a government run healthcare system

Blogger CarpeOro October 29, 2013 11:07 AM  

From the moment the American people reelected those who went along with Feinstein's "You have to vote for the bill to find out what is in it" the final white flag went up. The point of no return was doubtless years before, say when Reagan did his blanket amnesty of illegals, but that was an in your face declaration that the voting public was/is considered a bunch of dupes willing to put up with any thing. This kind of idiocy is never corrected, it is only cleansed by fire and blood. I weep for our children at what their elders have done to them and their future.

Anonymous Cretin October 29, 2013 11:08 AM  

My health insurance company dropped my policy from their offerings and I was forced to buy new health insurance on my state's new insurance exchange.

My new policy is with the same company as before, is less expensive and has more comprehensive coverage.

Blogger James Dixon October 29, 2013 11:08 AM  

Well, I don't think they believe 3 will actually be the case, but they think they'll be able to force it through anyway.

Anonymous fmudd October 29, 2013 11:16 AM  


I guess this argument, but the steps are:

1. Create a government run healthcare system that is so totally f-ed up that even liberals hate it
2. ???
3. Everyone will be in favor of a government run healthcare system


Not that hard to map this out:

1. Create a *incrementally more* government run healthcare system that by design has flaws.
2. Disguise the government-run system as actually being all private insurance. "Private Exchanges"
3. Prices/Costs/Problems become so ludicrous that everyone is angry.
4. Blame private insurance companies/industry.
5. Everyone will then be in favor of a *even incrementally more* government run healthcare system.

Repeat steps #1-5 until you go from completely private to completely government.

Not that hard folks. How do you think we started from being completely private not more than 60-70 years ago.

People have short memories. They take advantage of that.

Anonymous zen0 October 29, 2013 11:19 AM  

What's all the fuss about?

You live in the Greatest Democracy on Earth. If politicians lied, a dedicated and responsible Free Press would pillory them and the voters would turf the scoundrels out!

Then the newly elected would work tirelessly to fix the problems these dishonorable bums had caused.

So quit whining.

Anonymous Mitchell October 29, 2013 11:25 AM  

Vox, the comments in this post are as interesting as the post itself! The post is about how much of a lair Obama is, with Bush's name tossed in for comparison purposes. And the comments focus on how much of a liar Bush was. Even the Dread Ilk can't resist the "Bush lied, several billion people died" meme.

Everybody who scoffs at the MSM and is too intelligent to fall for their propaganda, raise your hand!

Anonymous Sigyn October 29, 2013 11:35 AM  

And the comments focus on how much of a liar Bush was.

A wild RATIONALIZATION HAMSTER appears!

No, not yours. Theirs. They think that if they can just prove that someone else is worse, that means they're good people.

This isn't propaganda, this is normal human behavior.

Anonymous Will Best October 29, 2013 11:47 AM  

My new policy is with the same company as before, is less expensive and has more comprehensive coverage.

Obamacare is a "good deal" if you are a man 50-65, woman 40-65, have a pre-existing condition, or make between 1.5 and 2.5 the poverty level.

It amazes me that Obama swept the 18-30 crowd in 2012. I guess they think it will still be working in 20-30 years when they are on the positive side of the premium gap

Blogger John Williams October 29, 2013 11:54 AM  

Ya think Obama lied about the death panels too?

Blogger James Dixon October 29, 2013 12:01 PM  

> Ya think Obama lied about the death panels too?

Gee, you think? Of course he was lying.

Anonymous dh October 29, 2013 12:10 PM  

I dunno. Was replacing ground troops with drones that specialize in blowing up weddings and first responders ever officially laid out as "the plan"?

Yes. Obama's 1st term review of policy indicated a shift to special operations, CIA operations, and other non-Army, non-NATO forces to carry out the war.

Anonymous dh October 29, 2013 12:12 PM  

Obamacare is a "good deal" if you are a man 50-65, woman 40-65, have a pre-existing condition, or make between 1.5 and 2.5 the poverty level.

The other big winner is women with maternity needs on the horizon.

It amazes me that Obama swept the 18-30 crowd in 2012. I guess they think it will still be working in 20-30 years when they are on the positive side of the premium gap

Amazing that they didn't vote for Mitt Romney? Really? This is delusional thinking at it's best.

No, not yours. Theirs. They think that if they can just prove that someone else is worse, that means they're good people.

I don't think there is any of this here. The Richard Nixon comparison was interesting to me, personally, because it skipped over Clinton, who has some well known truth issues, and Bush, who had some serious problems as well.

Nixon, for all flaws, is probably less dishonest than the three of them, but that doesn't make him an angel.

Anonymous dh October 29, 2013 12:15 PM  

Not that hard folks. How do you think we started from being completely private not more than 60-70 years ago.

You are working way to hard. Private insurance today is a mix of a payment plan for routine care, a hedge against catastrophic risks, and a buying club to get better bulk rates. It is not recognizable as insurance. There is very little underwriting of risk going on.

Before ACA the insurance companies were in a 10+ subscriber death spiral. Shed expensive customers, cut margins for good customers. The ACA is the last hope for health insurance.

Anonymous Noah B. October 29, 2013 12:16 PM  

Obama lied, people died.

Blogger John Williams October 29, 2013 12:29 PM  

What are we paying this "In the dark," president for?
Looks like we're paying him to play golf.

Anonymous DonReynolds October 29, 2013 12:32 PM  

This sudden attention focused on the individual policy holders being recently cancelled is a mere distraction from the real debacle.
.
I have seen reports of 300,000 policies being cancelled in Florida and another 500,000 being trashed in California. People in the know expect 16 million policy holders will be dropped nationwide. (These are sometimes individuals, but often an individual policy is affordable only because it covers a family. So to find the number of people impacted, probably need to multiply the number of policies times 2.5 or 3.0.)
.
The big disaster is tens of millions of people being cut from full-time to part-time, along with their paychecks. This often caused people to lose their employer-based health insurance completely. Now the cattle are being herded into Obamacare to be insured by the same companies for premiums that are 2 to 3 times (or more) higher, with no part of it employer paid or matched, with less coverage and deductibles that will render the insurance worthless except in cases of a major event. So now, with part-time paychecks and the same bills as before, tens of millions of people are expected to shell out even more for health insurance that does not provide the coverage they actually need but is required to cover drug and alcohol detox, abortion, and mental health services. (But it will not cover braces for the kid's teeth or a tooth filling.)
.
The Obama administration is reassuring everyone that this is OK and was expected and is good news......because these individual policies were crummy anyway and the ones required under Obamacare are much better. Now these 16 million policy holders will have coverage for crap they do not need, instead of the individually tailored policies that just got cancelled. And YOU should be happy, cause now all those people are helping to pay for the health services that YOU receive......in the event YOU should ever exceed the deductible of $13,000 in any calendar year. In short, until you payout over a thousand a month in health care expenses every month for a year, plus the multiples of the old premiums, your insurance is worthless and nonexistent.

Anonymous Josh October 29, 2013 12:41 PM  

Looks like we're paying him to play golf.

This is easily the best use of his time.

Anonymous DonReynolds October 29, 2013 12:45 PM  

dh....."The ACA is the last hope for health insurance"

As you mentioned, this is not actually insurance, so your comment is a bit odd. Once they decided to cover pre-existing conditions, once they insisted that the uninsurable must be provided a policy, and once they demanded that the premiums not be based on the actual risk.......it was no longer insurance. We need to drop use of the word "insurance" until moral hazard returns as a consideration and premiums are based on calculated risk, other than just sex and age groups.
.
The ACA is the biggest intrusion into the private lives of Americans in my lifetime. Not only does it demand that every living person have health insurance (which I find repugnant) it also prevents me from buying the insurance that I believe I need in order to force me to pay for coverage I will never ever possibly need. It will not turn out well.

Anonymous Tallen October 29, 2013 12:45 PM  

What happens if the drones blow up a gay wedding?

Anonymous David October 29, 2013 12:46 PM  

I think we need to give Obama a little more credit for being more clueless than dishonest.

The article mentions that HHS decided to rewrite the law at their convenience. This bullshit happens all the time with bureaucracies. The government passes a stupid law, and then the bureaucracy writes the regulations in 5X the legalese to change it as much as it suits them.

Could anyone be bothered to actually tell Obama what was going on? I doubt it. Kathleen couldn't be bothered to try out the website herself as it went online and give her boss a warning that it was dead in the water.

It must be embarrassing to constantly say stuff in public that your handlers say is correct only to have the press contradict you days or weeks later.

Anonymous DonReynolds October 29, 2013 12:54 PM  

Looks like we're paying him to play golf.

Josh......"This is easily the best use of his time."

I know what you mean Josh, but it is a bit more serious than that. While Obama is busy NOT being president and the job is simply not being done, he keeps someone else from doing the job by taking the keys to the Magic Kingdom with him on the golf course.

If he just wants the pay without having to do the work, I think we can work this out. He is not likely to resign and it is even less likely that Congress will wake up one morning with working gonads and impeach him. So maybe we can work out a deal. Maybe Congress can work it out where whineass Johnny Boehner gets to be president (and make whatever changes he needs to make in the administration) anytime Obamba is not actually in the Oval Office doing the job. See? That was easy.

Anonymous 11B October 29, 2013 12:55 PM  

There was no Iraq lie George. Iraq had chemical weapons and everyone knew it. Before or during the invasion those weapons were moved out to Syria.

Who cares about chemical weapons? Iraq was no threat to the United States. We were attacked on 9-11 by an overwhelming number of Saudi nationals, who trained in Afghanistan, Germany and the USA. The weak link in the whole scenario was our porous and insane immigration system. Those Saudis should never have been allowed into this country in the first place. The fact many overstayed their visas, were stopped and released by various law enforcement agencies only adds to the comedy.

Yet Bush decided to waste the lion's share of our retaliation on Iraq. On Iraq! Yes, the Iraq that was standing against Iran, the same Iran that Bush supporters are now lamenting.

He did nothing on our immigration system. We still continued to take in the masses of the third world, including increasing our muslim population. Say what you will about FDR, but at least after Pearl Harbor the US did not take in Japanese immigrants.

Bush could have retaliated after 9-11 by striking camps and leaders in Afghanistan, targeting for assassination known AQ leaders like the Israelis would do, and tightening our border and immigration controls. Instead he squandered our treasure on futile nation building exercises in Afghanistan and Iraq.

As Pat Buchanan once wrote, while Bush was busy saving Al-Anbar province, he was losing Arizona to the Mexicans.

Anonymous Will Best October 29, 2013 12:55 PM  

Amazing that they didn't vote for Mitt Romney? Really? This is delusional thinking at it's best.

I am amazed when anybody doesn't vote their self-interest. Romney was clearly the pragmatic choice for the under 30 set, but that doesn't mean they couldn't have gone say Gary Johnson or not voted rather than continue on in a clearly abusive relationship.

Anonymous Tallen October 29, 2013 1:01 PM  

We were attacked on 9-11 by an overwhelming number of Saudi nationals

It's as if thousands of voices cried out in terror, and were suddenly silenced

Anonymous DonReynolds October 29, 2013 1:04 PM  

Obamacare is a "good deal" if you are a man 50-65, woman 40-65, have a pre-existing condition, or make between 1.5 and 2.5 the poverty level.

dh......."The other big winner is women with maternity needs on the horizon."

Not sure where you might live, dh, and there may be some maternity needs that rise above the annual deductible of $13,000, but not many. Women already had the best deal of all when they quit their job to get instant Medicaid as "medically needy"......no deductible, no copay, no premium at all. How can you possibly say that Obamacare is a good deal for women of child-bearing age? (Except, of course for those who want FREE birth control pills or an abortion.)

Anonymous Anonymous October 29, 2013 1:08 PM  

Anyone know if the Amish are being forced into this? They went to the Supreme Court to get exempted from Social Security, on the grounds that their religion doesn't allow them to be involved in group insurance outside their community. This clearly violates the same principle, but I wonder if they were quietly exempted from the start or will have to fight over it.

Anonymous cheddarman October 29, 2013 1:11 PM  

There was no Iraq lie George. Iraq had chemical weapons and everyone knew it. Before or during the invasion those weapons were moved out to Syria. - Nate

Nate, If it is true that Sadam had the weapons and moved them to Syria, why did the Bush administration never present credible evidence of this? It would have been a slam dunk move to help restore the credibility of Bush.

Sincerely

cheddarman

Anonymous DonReynolds October 29, 2013 1:24 PM  

It is worth noting that Nixon was forced to resign for lying (cover up of Watergate), Clinton was impeached for lying (about sex with a young intern). When will Obama be held responsible for the raft of lies he has been telling? Lemmie guess.....when he dragged from the White House kicking and screaming to the nearest lamp post by a mob of patriots.

I suspect everyone knows by now that Bush Jr. lied about the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Many of us knew for sure on Day Two of the Iraq Invasion. Why? BECAUSE SADAM DID NOT USE THEM AGAINST THE INVADER. That would be the perfect time to launch every damn thing he had.....and he did.....it just did not include weapons of mass destruction. Hey, if they are going to destroy your country and hang you with a rope, why would someone like Sadam be shy about using any and every weapon he had available? He was not shy at all or worried about what the world press might think or concerned that the Americans might get pissed off. Be real.

Anonymous allyn71 October 29, 2013 1:28 PM  

"Anyone know if the Amish are being forced into this?" - cailcorishev October 29, 2013 1:08 PM

I wouldn't swear to it but I seem to recall reading recently that they were exempt. The reason I am pretty sure they were given an exemption was because I had a passing thought of what it would take to be considered Amish. There was another small minority report in the article if I recall correctly. Don't recall who the other group was but know they were less attractive than becoming Amish.

Anonymous bluto October 29, 2013 1:35 PM  

I'm convinced that Bush bought the story of Matt Simmons and believed the Saudis would immenently be out of oil and wanted troops on the ground to forcibly sieze Iraq's cheap oil fields in that situation.

It explains why Cheney was so secretive about meetings with oil execs to hear the story and opine on it, why they drummed up a reason to invade Iraq, and why they were loath to withdraw troops.

Anonymous JCB October 29, 2013 2:03 PM  

Nixon was just unlucky when Watergate broke - the Dems had the numbers in both houses of Congress and enough R senators indicated they would vote to impeach (thus giving the required 2/3rds). I think Obama could literally get away with barbecuing children on the White House lawn today.

Anonymous Porky, Truffles of Wisdom October 29, 2013 2:23 PM  

Deep down you know that anarchy is the ONLY way.

Admit it.


Anonymous Giraffe October 29, 2013 2:38 PM  

I think Obama could literally get away with barbecuing children on the White House lawn today.

Certainly most of the Dems would support him.

Anonymous Noah B. October 29, 2013 3:26 PM  

"I think Obama could literally get away with barbecuing children on the White House lawn today."

Clinton got away with it, just not on the White House lawn.

Anonymous Anonymous October 29, 2013 4:16 PM  

Bush's Iraq war evidence was based on secret information that average citizens had no way to independently verify.

Obama's "you can keep it" lies were patently untrue and anyone who has ever participated in the free market to buy anything other than a lottery ticket should have known that the President cannot control costs, supply or demand of anything. He never had that power and EVERYONE should have known that. It's not as if there weren't plenty of people saying it couldn't work ahead of time. Ahead of the Iraq war, all Bush's opponents were voting in favor of war.

--Hale

Anonymous DT October 29, 2013 4:31 PM  

When Obama doesn't lie he can always fall back on the, "I didn't know," defense. He didn't know about the IRS targeting, he didn't know about the Obamacare glitches, he didn't know about the NSA surveillance programs, he didn't know about Fast and Furious.

HE DIN NO NUFFIN'!

Anonymous dh October 29, 2013 6:12 PM  

DR--

Not sure where you might live, dh, and there may be some maternity needs that rise above the annual deductible of $13,000, but not many.

The 13k deductible is the max, not what most people will pay. My plan under the ACA has $0 deductible, $0 co-pay, and 0% co-insurance. It's 100% coverage (platnium plan). Before the ACA, women and men could be priced differently, and for women in their fertile years almost no individual plans had maternity coverage.

Anonymous dh October 29, 2013 6:15 PM  

Ahead of the Iraq war, all Bush's opponents were voting in favor of war.

This is a lie that the GOP has promoted. A majority of Democrats voted *against* the Iraq war. Virtually 100% of the GOP voted for it.

The lie that Bush had basically unanimous support in Congress is dangerous. Back then, smart people, like VD, where not completely against the war. Normally smart people signed up for support it in droves.

Anonymous fmudd October 29, 2013 8:00 PM  


This is a lie that the GOP has promoted. A majority of Democrats voted *against* the Iraq war. Virtually 100% of the GOP voted for it.


Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution

58% of Democratic senators (29 of 50) voted for the resolution. Those voting against the Democratic majority include: Sens. Akaka (D-HI), Bingaman (D-NM), Boxer (D-CA), Byrd (D-WV), Conrad (D-ND), Corzine (D-NJ), Dayton (D-MN), Durbin (D-IL), Feingold (D-WI), Graham (D-FL), Inouye (D-HI), Kennedy (D-MA), Leahy (D-VT), Levin (D-MI), Mikulski (D-MD), Murray (D-WA), Reed (D-RI), Sarbanes (D-MD), Stabenow (D-MI), Wellstone (D-MN), and Wyden (D-OR).
1 (2%) of 49 Republican senators voted against the resolution: Sen. Chafee (R-RI).
The only Independent senator voted against the resolution: Sen. Jeffords (I-VT)

Anonymous 11B October 29, 2013 8:16 PM  

This is a lie that the GOP has promoted. A majority of Democrats voted *against* the Iraq war. Virtually 100% of the GOP voted for it.

The lie that Bush had basically unanimous support in Congress is dangerous. Back then, smart people, like VD, where not completely against the war. Normally smart people signed up for support it in droves.


DH, What is worse is some democrats who voted for the war did so for political reasons knowing full well it was a mistake. Take Senator Max Cleland (D) of Georgia.

Cleland was one of the 29 Senate Democrats who backed the authorization to go to war in Iraq. He later stated he had misgivings about the Bush administration's stance, but said he felt pressure in his tight Senate race to go along with it. In 2005, he said "it was obvious that if I voted against the resolution that I would be dead meat in the race, just handing them in a victory." He characterized his vote for war as "the worst vote I cast."

To put one's political career above the national interests is worse than those idiots who drank the cool-aid.

Anonymous dh October 29, 2013 8:27 PM  

fmudd--

You forget we have two houses of Congress.

There were 209 Democratic reps, on top of 50 Democrats in the Senate. Thats a total of 259 Democratic Congresspeople, of whom, 147 voted against the bill.

As far as Cleland goes, I count his repetance as a positive sign, not a negative one. The same GOP people who voted about 97% in favor of Iraq are now against Syria adverturism? Really? It makes no sense.

The Democrats showed that a majority had the spine to say "no" to immoral and unjustified adventurism. The GOP voted lock step down the path that would lead directly to hundreds of thousands of deaths. For absolutely not good reason.

I condemn them all for their Yes votes.

Anonymous 11B October 29, 2013 8:40 PM  

The same GOP people who voted about 97% in favor of Iraq are now against Syria adverturism? Really? It makes no sense.

It does make sense. The GOP who voted for the Iraq war were led to believe Saddam was involved in 9-11 with the claims that Mohammed Atta had met with Iraqi intel people. They were also led to believe Saddam was a direct threat to the USA by means of his WMD. Additionally they were caught up in in hysteria following 9-11, with people wanting some sort of retaliation.

Syria is completely different. We've had ten years to see what a huge mistake we made in our nation building exercises in Afghanistan and Iraq. We are under no illusions that Syria is a threat to the USA. And the sane people left in this country are tired of these worthless, mideast adventures.

Having said that, I will never forgive the GOP for having followed the neocons post 9-11.

Anonymous 11B October 29, 2013 8:50 PM  

There were 209 Democratic reps, on top of 50 Democrats in the Senate. Thats a total of 259 Democratic Congresspeople, of whom, 147 voted against the bill.

You should not focus on the House. Everyone knows the overwhelming majority of House districts are safe havens for either the democrat or republican. So in the heavily democrat districts, it was much easier to vote "no", being confident that there would be no repercussions. Nancy Pelosi could run against George Washington in her San Fran disctirct and win every time. The same could be said of republican districts too.

The Senate is what you should look. More of the Senate seats are contested because Senate races are state-wide. So scumbags like Cleland made political calculations and voted for a war they knew was wrong just so they'd keep their elected office. Given that a majority of Senate dems did this, you can't give that party too much credit. We are supposed to have an adversarial system in our politics. When we needed it most in the Senate, the dems failed. Just like the GOP caved in on the budget and obamacare recently.

No, the democrats should not come out of this with skirts still clean. They are just as dirty, if not more, for the political game they played over such a serious issue.

Blogger Unknown October 29, 2013 9:20 PM  

This post is titled politicians lie. It is pathetic that this conversation has turned into which political party lies less. THEY BOTH LIE. And pathologically.

Anonymous Titus Didius Tacitus October 29, 2013 10:02 PM  

This video mashup, Video: President Obama Promising That You Can Keep Your Health-Care Plan, Again and Again, is the best. For years Obama lied, repeatedly, explicitly, unequivocally, emphatically and as publicly as possible.

Roundtine: "Obama's lies are really good though. He never has a "Read My Lips!" moment, but he's on record enough time saying the exact opposite of what Obamacare does."

This was a years-long "read my lips!" with the same clear lie repeated over and over and over and over: pledging, promising, guaranteeing, with no grey area.

It's not a matter of lying well but of mass media bias. As far as the mass media are concerned, Barack Hussein Obama is a valued member of the in-group; George Herbert Walker Bush was not.

Anonymous DonReynolds October 29, 2013 10:44 PM  

dh....."Before the ACA, women and men could be priced differently, and for women in their fertile years almost no individual plans had maternity coverage."

I know of no reason why I would need maternity coverage and by the same token, you have no reason to fear prostate cancer. Women still live longer than men and very much consume more health care services. Where we differ, obviously, is that I believe this SHOULD be factored into health insurance rates and underwritten as such. Insurance is for insurable risk. Same goes for risky behaviors and bad health habits. If you smoke cigarettes, you SHOULD have that fact reflected in your health insurance rates. (The premiums should be LOWER actually...... because you are expected to die faster and cost less than a non-smoker.) This is not about who we like or who we want to protect. It is about the likelihood of a health event and how much it will cost the insurance company and that expectation should be reflected in the health premiums and the coverage.

Anonymous fritz October 30, 2013 2:17 AM  

William Odom actually called for the impeachment of GWB. So, Barry S. is worse than GWB? You fill in the rest of the blanks.

Anonymous Anti-Democracy Activist October 30, 2013 4:18 AM  

Okay, enough about Bush. Every accusation leveled against him might even be 100% true, but it's still irrelevant, because:

1) Bush has been out of power for half a decade now. It's time to stop talking about him. He's history - literally.

2) "But everybody else was doing it too" isn't an excuse for bad behavior that I'd accept out of a 12-year-old child, much less the President of the United States.

So, nice try at distraction and deflection, but no.

Anonymous Vandermerwe October 30, 2013 5:39 AM  

We have this one dude from the US who always does a "US report" on one of the radio stations here. He's been commenting on how the "website is broken" and that's basically all that's wrong with your new national health insurance scheme.

Anonymous Vandermerwe October 30, 2013 5:44 AM  

Czeslaw Milosz, philosophers and scholars lie too. Even would-be sacred cows who joked about how they needed to carry loaded guns to class because their enemies had not be eliminated yet.

Anonymous dh October 30, 2013 7:47 AM  

DonReynolds--

I am not arguing for or against the ACA. I am making a statement of fact about reality, which you disputed. Instead of admitting you were wrong about a statement of fact, you have now reverted to arguing about the policy.

Anonymous dh October 30, 2013 7:50 AM  

ADA--

I think you are complaining to the wrong people. Our host stated he thinks Obama is more dishonest than any President since Nixon. That would imply a conversation about all the intervening President's, one of whom was... Bush.

I am not thrilled with the statement but it has a certain logic to it. Especially if count you volume over magnitude.

Anonymous UK Political News October 31, 2013 6:43 AM  

iParrot Post is a global read and reporting news platform that enable users to post their account of events witnessed, worthy local and International news. iParrot Post is a breaking news portal.iParrot Post exists to provide independent news and information to the masses, comprised of news feeds from around the world. We enable our users and subscribers to submit local News that they see as important. It is also a portal to allow users and subscribers to comment and contribute to the News events of the day.
Worldwide News UK
English UK News
Local UK News
UK Political News
English British Sports News
Business UK News
Breaking UK News
Technology UK News

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts