Can it be revived?

Obama struggles to save his cherished health law.
Associated Press
Nov 16, 2013


President Barack Obama's health care law risks coming unglued because of his administration's bungles and his own inflated promises.

To avoid that fate, Obama needs breakthroughs on three fronts: the cancellations mess, technology troubles and a crisis in confidence among his own supporters.

Working in his favor are pent-up demands for the program's benefits and an unlikely collaborator in the insurance industry.

But even after Obama gets the enrollment website working, count on new controversies. On the horizon is the law's potential impact on job-based insurance. Its mandate that larger employers offer coverage will take effect in 2015.

For now, odds still favor the Affordable Care Act's survival. But after making it through the Supreme Court, a presidential election, numerous congressional repeal votes and a government shutdown, the law has yet to win broad acceptance.

"There's been nothing normal about this law from the start," said Larry Levitt, an insurance expert with the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation. "There's been no period of smooth sailing."

Other government mandates have taken root in American culture after initial resistance. It may be a simplistic comparison, but most people automatically fasten their seat belts nowadays when they get in the car. Few question government-required safety features such as air bags, even if those add to vehicle costs.

Levitt says the ACA may yet have that kind of influence on how health insurance is viewed. "An expectation that everybody should have health insurance is now a topic of conversation in families," he says.

That conversation was interrupted by news that the website didn't work and that people with coverage were getting cancellation notices despite Obama's promise that you can keep your insurance.

Obama maneuvered this past week to extricate Democrats from the cancellations fallout.

The president offered a one-year extension to more than 4.2 million people whose current individual policies are being canceled by insurers to make way for more comprehensive coverage under the law. This move by the White House was intended to smooth a disruption for which his administration completely failed to plan.

But it also invited unintended consequences, showing how easily the law's complicated framework can start to come loose.

State insurance commissioners warned that the president's solution would undermine a central goal of the law, the creation of one big insurance pool in each state for people who don't have access to coverage on their jobs. Fracturing that market could lead to higher future premiums for people buying coverage through the law's new insurance exchanges, which offer government-subsidized private insurance.

That Obama is willing to take such a gamble could make it harder for him to beat back demands for other changes down the line.

On the cancellations front, the president seems unlikely to break through. He may yet battle to a political draw.

Obama realizes it's on him to try to turn things around, and quickly. In the first couple of weeks after the website debacle, Obama played the sidelines role of "Reassurer-in-Chief." Now he's on the field, trying to redeem himself.

"I'm somebody who, if I fumbled the ball, I'm going to wait until I get the next play, and then I'm going to try to run as hard as I can and do right by the team," Obama said Thursday at a news conference.

Making sure the website is running a lot better by the end of the month may be his best chance for a game-changing play.

Although only 26,794 people signed up in health plans through the federal site the first month of open enrollment, 993,635 applied for coverage and were waiting to finalize decisions. For many it took hours of persistence, dealing with frozen screens and error messages. When states running their own sites are included, a total of 1.5 million individuals have applied.

The law's supporters believe that's evidence of pent-up demand, and so far the insurance industry agrees. Public criticism of the administration by industry leaders has been minimal, even though insurers also have been on the receiving end of the website problems. Compounding the lower-than-expected sign-ups, much of the customer data they got was incomplete, duplicative or garbled.

Insurers, eager for the new business expanded coverage would bring, are pressing the administration to clear a route for them to sign up customers directly. Such workarounds may put Obama back on track toward his goal of signing up 7 million people for 2014. Medicaid expansion, the other arm of the law's push to cover the uninsured, signed up 396,000 people last month, a promising start.

With the website troubles, a national effort to promote insurance enrollments has been dialed down. Groups ranging from liberal activists and civic clubs to health promoters were mobilized and waiting. But there was little they could do. Advertising campaigns have been postponed. As the year-end holidays approach, both volunteers and the people they would be trying to reach have other priorities.

Whether enthusiasm among the rank-and-file supporters of the law will come surging back is one of the big unknowns for a president who has acknowledged the need to restore his credibility on health care.

"I think people have lost confidence in the ability of this working," said Kansas Insurance Commissioner Sandy Praeger. "And we've still got the anti-Obamacare folks out there taking full advantage." Praeger is a Republican who believes her state should have helped implement the law.

Skittishness among supporters was evident in the 39 House Democrats who Friday bolted their party to vote for Republican legislation on cancellations, ignoring Obama's veto threat.

Politics is not the only consideration.

The people who are signing up now are likely to be those with unmet medical needs. Younger, healthier customers probably don't see much reason to spend their time tangling with the website. To hold down costs, the law aims for a mix that includes a hefty proportion of younger enrollees whose medical expenses are low.

"Everybody said the website would be up and running the first day," said Praeger. "The longer it takes, the more people are going to question whether this is going to work."



Dinghy Gal

Let's hope not

Darwin's choice

Hmmmm......doing what Cruz wanted all along, silly democrats.


I refuse to sign up for this communistic, socialistic extortion that our "fearless leader" (said with sarcasm)has thrust on us. FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS!! I will never back a government that forces it's legal citizens to purchase something they can't afford, don't want or don't want to change what they have. I will not be a part of Nazi type of tactics.

The Big Dog's back

Yep, let everyone else pay for your medical bills.

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

By whatever logic you are using to determine that "we" are paying for his bills, then it sounds like we actually have had before the ACA the single-payer system that I believe you prefer we have. Nobody turned away, bills paid in full even if by "others". Am I wrong? Where, why?


DailyKOS or one of the other Progressive websites must have given him the idea he somehow pays for other's medical bills.

He has been throwing that around lately quite a bit.

The Big Dog's back

Who pays then sappy? People getting Medicare paid into it.

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

I am going to presume that you believe the taxpayer "pays" for unpaid bills because the government isn't getting every penny of taxable income from a facility that it thinks it can as the losses are deducted before taxes.

In other words, if a hospital conducts $10M in business but has a 5% (industry statistic) write-off for nonpayment, the government only collects taxes on $9.5M. So, presumably according to you, the taxpayer "paid" for $500k by some stretch as it was money the government could have maybe possibly confiscated from the hospital but didn't.

Is this right?

In that case, we need to fix the broken tax system to squeeze every penny out of someone because all the perfectly-legal deductibles are actually cruel "loopholes". It is unfair that our money is considered ours first. Government should collect on the gross first then we are allowed to keep whatever is left as a gift from the government. Hmm? Our predicted maximums should always be taxed regardless of circumstances, then we get the crumbs? But oh what patriotic crumbs they are! Knowing you lived up to the supposition and expectation of someone you will never meet, was never elected, and has no care for your personal life circumstances.

We need to tax families who have a stay at home parent more. After all, if a working wife takes home $50,000 but gives half of it to the stay at home dad, clearly the TOTAL income of the household is actually $75,000 and they should be taxed accordingly. Yes?

The government is paying for that $25,000 subsidy to the husband. YOU! You are paying for a tax-dodging layabout! All because these "middle-class" people are abusing loopholes in the system that allow them a life of excess. I mean we're talking $75,000 here! Since the government should be able to tax the full $75,000 but is only getting it off the $50,000 we're on the hook for all that money. They probably waste it, too, on whatever it is rich people do. Yes?

Is this your logic? Is the government due taxes on what it perceives your gross is (or worse, "should be")? If someone steals from my store and I deduct the loss, does that mean YOU are paying to support my store? Or actually did I just eat it up front, wrote it off, and continued business of producing many, many more goods, services, and taxable events than not?


Doggie when someone receives a subsidy to help them pay their insurance then that means others are paying their bills.


"let everyone else pay for your medical bills" big dog, is EXACTLY what obamacare is ALL about. Funny that IF obamacare is Sooooo great that obama himself doesn't want it for his own daughters.


Big Dog isn't smart enough to put 2 and 2 together and realize others are footing the bill so that others can have insurance

The Big Dog's back

Write your Repub Senators and Congressmen for legislation that makes it mandatory for them too.


There's no further point that needs to be made:
Our betters are forcing we the sheeple to take something they themselves are not willing to have.
What is this equal protection you speak of?

A Young Adult's...

Only 3 more years of this clown. Seems like an eternity.


Of course it can be revived. The website will get fixed. Much as Republicans would wish that it won't succeed, it will.


How do they put the toothpaste back in the tube?... a metaphor, I know. The only way this works is if everyone not having employer backed health care plans is to put them in the exchange. If you allow some to "grandfather" they are diluting the pool and the premiums will go up. I have one of those so called inferior policies right now, I might keep it or I might not. I want to see what the exchange has to offer, but when I go to the website, all I see is $387 per month for an individual and no mention of deductible, what is covered etc. All I see is it is a Gold Plan with no mention of what it is. They need to get this fixed, so I can see what my options are once my current plan is done away with this year or next year.


From what I've been able to get from the Website, your options go from bad to worse. At the minimum, your deductible is some $6,500 per year, and your copay is 40%. Note, too, that one of the "executive order delays" under Obamacare is the maximum out-of-pocket expenses in 2014! And even with such poor coverage, the premiums are high. NOTE: On the low end of the options, there are no subsidies whether you're eligible or not. Cheer up, though: It'll include free birth control!

In truth, I wouldn't take the estimated premium amounts seriously right now. As of a couple of weeks ago, the estimated premiums were frequently off by as much as 100%.


Re: "Of course it can be revived."

The odds of it potentially "succeeding" will improve with your financial support.

You're on your spouse's OH taxpayer guaranteed STRS health plan aren't you?

Well then drop your old "substandard" employer based health ins. and buy a "new & improved" individual policy on the exchanges.

Put your $ where your mouth is.

So why isn't the "Obama" in Obam☭are signing up and setting an example????


"Obamacare: Memo reveals health care adviser warned W.H. was losing control 3 years ago":

Pres. Obama, 11/14/13:

"I was not informed directly that the website would not be working as -- the way it was supposed to,"

Has 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."

"I don't think I'm stupid enough,"?

Why, does he wish that he was more "stupid"?


Dr. Information

This thing will not survive. It will be repealed one day because the people HATE this thing. Its job killing, people killing and has a net negative effect overall.

The polls are out:

Obama is a failure across the lines. A large section of people who had his back, even when wrong, from day one are seeing the real failure he is and starting to wake up.


In the 2014 election, more Dem seats are in play in the Senate than are Repub.

21 to 14.

Three: MT, WV and SD, currently held by Dems are leaning Repub.

The Dems may run, but they can't hide. :)

The Big Dog's back

Other than right wingers committing suicide because they hate Obama so much, who has it killed?


The president lied about Obamacare so he could win the election. If he told the truth, you would not have voted for him. It takes being hit financially to wake up and smell the coffee. Did people think insurance was going to be free? The middle class is getting hit hard because we are picking up the shortfalls. the country will suffer tremendously if the program isn't stopped.

The Big Dog's back

So why aren't the rich picking up the "shortfalls"? I'm sure if the Repubs proposed that it would have overwhelming support from Dems.


Little reported:

Small co. group insurance plans are also being adversely affected.

(The majority of Americans are employed by sm. business with fewer than 50-100 employees)

"Some small-group plans are also expected to cost more under the law because starting in January insurers will be prohibited from setting premiums for such policies based on a firm's industry or the health or gender of its staff."

"Brokers say the change will drive up premiums for companies with lots of young, healthy workers, while moderating rate increases for firms with older and sicker workers."

The Big Dog's back

Other than rupert murdoch, who's your source?


The source doesn't change the FACTS you PDB.

The Big Dog's back

Yes it does. Fox and wsj are fact free zones.


Re: "Fox and wsj are fact free zones."

Only in your tiny canine brain you PDB.

"Small-business insurers warn that Obamacare requires higher premiums in 2014":


Re: "shizzle"

"It has two meanings, 'Sure' and 'Sh*t'. It all depends on the way you say it."

"Word most often abused horribly by inexperienced suburban white douche-bags who wish to give themselves some falsified counterfeit form of street-cred.

Also used by the oreo cookies who stoop low enough to keep the company of these pathetic weasels."

Darwin's choice

So, shizzle is a full of chit, douche-bag, oreo, pathetic weasel? Lol...I thought that chess-pigeon was good...!!!!
Typical team obama/fail member.

More for the team failure...


Pres. Obama:

"I’m also somebody who, if I fumbled the ball, you know, I’m going to wait until I get the next play,"

The coach oughta bench ya and try to trade you.

2cents's picture
Dr. Information

Funny thing is I never hear any white person claiming they hate Obama because he is black. Now, Im not saying that it doesn't happen with some rare breeds of people out there, but the only reason racism is thriving is because of people like Obama, like Oprah, who constantly use it as a crutch and tell everyone "racism does exist because I said it does". When something goes south, they blame racism instead of the real issue, which is Obama has been a horrible president and the polls don't lie.


Re: "blame racism,"

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."

- H.L. Mencken

Small minded thinkers tend to gravitate toward the easy-to-grasp simple answers that propagandists and demagogues readily supply.

Pterocarya frax...

Dr. Information: Is this racism?: "Here is a lesson to you young white girls. Stop mudsharking!!! Most of these black men have absolutely no control over their sex drive. Most of them haven't evolved past the ape species". That is a direct quote from one of our fellow posters (YAWWNN) just yesterday on another story. Just curious for your thoughts.


"Watch Nancy Pelosi Struggle To Defend Obama's Promise That People Could Keep Their Health Insurance":

Ms. Pelosi is the face of the double talking, lying Progressives in the Democrat Party.


Her face is just as fake as Obie's promise.

The only thing that would be better than her plastic surgery suffering a catostrophic failure would be someone posting the video of it on YouTube.

The Big Dog's back

Many in the rich or wealthy class continue to complain about being overtaxed. They do so even as they receive preferential tax treatment. They do not pay social security tax (12.4%) on any of their income above $17,000.

The rich makes most of their income from capital gains. The working middle class make most of their income from wages. Capital gains are taxed at 20%. Wages are taxed at up to 39.6%. In other words the working man’s tax rates could be near 100% higher than the rich shareholder drinking tea at his/her pool. Worse, they do not pay any Social Security tax on the gains.

thinkagain's picture

Sounds fair to me. (If you need a couple extra bucks, my pool could use a cleaning.)


Never happen. That would require he do something called "work". Parasites don't do that. They just feed off the host.

Edit: As usual with him, anything over one sentence is a Copy & Paste. No idea how to form his own ideas.

thinkagain's picture

Oh that’s right, I forgot he’s a member of the TEAt party.


Exactly. Impossible to weane too. Not a thread of Personal Responsibility in their being.


So he is a flea on a big dogs back. Now it makes sense. And this whole time I thought he was just a tard.


That he is. But while some parasites form a symbiotic relationship with their host, his type will continue to drain them until they're dead.


Re: "They do not pay social security tax (12.4%) on any of their income above $17,000."

Say wa?

"For 2013, the maximum amount of taxable earnings was $113,700."

Yep! Rep. Pelosi is the 15th richest member of Congress, worth between $24M and $39M - soak her senile *ss!

The TOPIC is the FAILURE of the Incompetent-in-Chief's "signature program" you PDB.

The Big Dog's back

Capital gains maroon.


Re: "Capital gains maroon."

Short or long term you PDB?

Again: The TOPIC is the FAILURE of the Incompetent-in-Chief's "signature program" you PDB.


Do you really expect piddle puppy to be able to wade through that fidelity report? Even though it has definitions for some of the terms in the report he is WAY beyond his depth to figure out anything it says about tax rates for various investments.and their gains.


"Many in the rich or wealthy class continue to complain about being overtaxed."

Bull$hit, the rich don't bother to complain about taxes. They buy/hire folks to figure the best way to make more money and how it needs to be reported to the gov't so they keep the most they legally can. Do you habitually overpay your taxes and not expect a refund? Neither do they.

If you wish to limit what they can do reform the tax structure and tax laws of the country. Whining about the taxes and loopholes the congress and president has passed and signed into law does nothing. If you don't start with a clean sheet the tens of thousands of pages of tax laws hide lots of loopholes they won't find till some tax lawyer does and uses them. Start with a clean sheet and write short simple laws with no exemptions or loopholes, think something opposite the 2300+ pages Obamacare, that no one read.

The "Rich or Wealthy" you claim complain about taxes are those few who wish to be on TV, not 99.9% of the rich take what is in the laws and make the most of what they can. They read the rules and find legal ways to use them. Change the rules and they will change their way to get around the new laws, same as anyone would who has the ability to do so. Start with a clean sheet and make no loopholes. Want to bet this congress and this president won't insist on loopholes for their butt buddies?

How long is the federal tax code? 74000 pages more than 30 times longer than Obamacare. It is how congress and the president hide what is really there, who the h&ll would read it all?

Correct. The answer is: 73,954 pages
The code is now nearly 74,000 pages long. That's about 185 times longer than it was in 1913, when the code was 400 pages. Source: CCH

Darwin's choice

She is not alone in lying for the liar in's a few more that need to be tried for treason....

SEN. HARRY REID (D-Nev.): “In fact, one of our core principles is that if you like the health care you have, you can keep it.” (Sen. Reid, Congressional Record, S.8642, 8/3/09)

SEN. RICHARD DURBIN: “We believe — and we stand by this — if you like your current health insurance plan, you will be able to keep it, plain and simple, straightforward.” (Sen. Durbin, Congressional Record, S.6401, 6/10/09)

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY): “If you like your insurance, you keep it.” (U.S. Senate, Finance Committee, Bill Mark-Up, 9/29/09)

SEN. PATTY MURRAY (D-Wash.): “Again, if you like what you have, you will be able to keep it. Let me say this again: If you like what you have, when our legislation is passed and signed by the President, you will be able to keep it.” (Sen. Murray, Congressional Record, S.6400, 6/10/09)

SEN. MAX BAUCUS (D-Mont.): “That is why one of the central promises of health care reform has been and is: If you like what you have, you can keep it. That is critically important. If a person has a plan, and he or she likes it, he or she can keep it.” (Sen. Baucus, Congressional Record, S.7676, 9/29/10)

SEN. TOM HARKIN (D-Iowa): “One of the things we put in the health care bill when we designed it was the protection for consumers to keep the plan they have if they like it; thus, the term ‘grandfathered plans.’ If you have a plan you like — existing policies — you can keep them. … we said, if you like a plan, you get to keep it, and you can grandfather it in.” (Sen. Harkin, Congressional Record, S.7675-6, 9/29/10)

THEN-REP. TAMMY BALDWIN (D-Wis.): “Under the bill, if you like the insurance you have now, you may keep it and it will improve.” (Rep. Baldwin, Press Release, 3/18/10)

SEN. MARK BEGICH (D-Alaska): “If you got a doctor now, you got a medical professional you want, you get to keep that. If you have an insurance program or a health care policy you want of ideas, make sure you keep it. That you can keep who you want.” (Sen. Begich, Townhall Event, 7/27/09)

SEN. MICHAEL BENNET (D-Colo.): “We should begin with a basic principle: if you have coverage and you like it, you can keep it. If you have your doctor, and you like him or her, you should be able to keep them as well. We will not take that choice away from you.” (Sen. Bennet, Press Release, 6/11/09)

SEN. BARBARA BOXER (D-Calif.): “So we want people to be able to keep the health care they have. And the answer to that is choice of plans. And in the exchange, we're going to have lots of different plans, and people will be able to keep the health care coverage they need and they want.” (Sen. Boxer, Press Release, 2/8/11)

SEN. SHERROD BROWN (D-Ohio): “Our bill says if you have health insurance and you like it, you can keep it…”(Sen. Brown, Congressional Record, S.12612, 12/7/09)

SEN. BEN CARDIN (D-Md.): “For the people of Maryland, this bill will provide a rational way in which they can maintain their existing coverage…” (Sen. Cardin, Congressional Record, S.13798, 12/23/09)

SEN. BOB CASEY (D-Pa.): “I also believe this legislation and the bill we are going to send to President Obama this fall will also have secure choices. If you like what you have, you like the plan you have, you can keep it. It is not going to change.” (Sen. Casey, Congressional Record, S.8070, 7/24/09)

SEN. KAY HAGAN (D-N.C.): ‘People who have insurance they're happy with can keep it’ “We need to support the private insurance industry so that people who have insurance they're happy with can keep it while also providing a backstop option for people without access to affordable coverage.” (“Republicans Vent As Other Compromise Plans Get Aired,” National Journal’s Congress Daily, 6/18/09)

SEN. MARY LANDRIEU (D-La.): “If you like the insurance that you have, you'll be able to keep it.” (MSNBC’s Hardball, 12/16/09)

SEN. PAT LEAHY (D-Vt.): “[I]f you like the insurance you now have, keep the insurance you have.” (CNN’s “Newsroom,” 10/22/09)

SEN. BOB MENENDEZ (D-N.J.): “If you like what you have, you get to keep it” “Menendez is a member of the Senate Finance Committee, which is expected to release a bill later this week. He stressed that consumers who are satisfied with their plans won't have to change. ‘If you like what you have, you get to keep it,’ he said.” (“Health Care Plan Would Help N.J., Menendez Says,” The Record, 6/19/09)

SEN. JEFF MERKLEY (D-Oreg.): “[E]nsuring that those who like their insurance get to keep it” “The HELP Committee bill sets forward a historic plan that will, for the first time in American history, give every American access to affordable health coverage, reduce costs, and increase choice, while ensuring that those who like their insurance get to keep it.” (Sen. Merkley, Press Release, 7/15/09)

SEN. BARBARA MIKULSKI (D-Md.): “It means that if you like the insurance you have now, you can keep it.” (Sen. Mikulski, Press Release, 12/24/09)

SEN. JAY ROCKEFELLER (D-W.Va.): “I want people to know, the President's promise that if you like the coverage you have today you can keep it is a pledge we intend to keep.” (U.S. Senate, Finance Committee, Hearing, 9/23/09)

SEN. JACK REED (D-R.I.): “If you like the insurance you have, you can choose to keep it.” (Sen. Reed, Town Hall Event, 6/25/09)

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (I-Vt.): “‘If you have coverage you like, you can keep it,’ says Sen. Sanders.” (“Sick And Wrong,” Rolling Stone, 4/5/10)

SEN. JEANNE SHAHEEN (D-N.H.): ‘if you have health coverage that you like, you get to keep it’ “My understanding … is that … if you have health coverage that you like you can keep it. As I said, you may have missed my remarks at the beginning of the call, but one of the things I that I said as a requirement that I have for supporting a bill is that if you have health coverage that you like you should be able to keep that. …under every scenario that I’ve seen, if you have health coverage that you like, you get to keep it.” (Sen. Shaheen, “Health Care Questions From Across New Hampshire,” Accessed 11/13/13)

SEN. DEBBIE STABENOW (D-Mich.): “As someone who has a large number of large employers in my state, one of the things I appreciate about the chairman's mark is — is the grandfathering provisions, the fact that the people in my state, 60 percent of whom have insurance, are going to be able to keep it. And Mr. Chairman, I appreciate that. That's a strong commitment. It's clear in the bill … I appreciate the strong commitment on your part and the president to make sure that if you have your insurance you can keep it. That's the bottom line for me.” (U.S. Senate, Finance Committee, Bill Mark-Up, 9/24/09)

SEN. JON TESTER (D-Mont.): “‘If you like your coverage, you'll be able to keep it,’ Tester said, adding that if Medicare changes, it will only become stronger”. (“Tester In Baker To Discuss Health Care,” The Fallon County Times, 11/20/09)

SEN. TOM UDALL (D-N.Mex.): “Some worried reform would alter their current coverage. It won't. If you like your current plan, you can keep it.” (“What I Learned: About Health Care Reform This Summer, By Your Lawmakers In Congress,” Albuquerque Journal, 9/8/09)

SEN. SHELDON WHITEHOUSE (D-R.I.): “…it honors President Obama’s programs and the promise of all of the Presidential candidates that if you like the plan you have, you get to keep it. You are not forced out of anything.”(Sen. Whitehouse, Congressional Record, S.8668, 8/3/09)



The double-talking, two faced Liar-in-Chief said that it ain't their fault, he misled them.

"I think it's very important for me to note that, you know, there are a whole bunch of folks up in Congress and others who made this statement, and they were entirely sincere about it.

And the fact that you've got this percentage of people who've had this, you know, impact -- I want them to know that, you know, their senator or congressman, they were making representations based on what I told them and what this White House and our administrative staff told them, and so it's not on them, it's on us."

- Pres. Obama, 11/14/13

Obviously according to the POTUS, those Dem members of Congress are like most Obamabots and are programmed without the ability to think independently.

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

Or actually read the laws they vote to pass.


Pres. Obama, 11/14/13:

"With respect to the pledge I made that if you like your plan you can keep it, I think -- you know, and I've said in interviews -- that there is no doubt that the way I put that forward unequivocally ended up not being accurate.

It was not because of my intention not to deliver on that commitment and that promise. We put a grandfather clause into the law but it was insufficient."

" intention not to deliver on that commitment and that promise."?

How is that NOT confirmation that he knew that he was LYING?


One of my "favorite" parts of Pres. Obama's long-winded, rambling and incoherent press conference:

"And it's not a perfect analogy, but you know, we made a decision as a society that every car has to have a seat belt or air bags.

And so you pass a regulation. And there's some additional cost, particularly at the start, of increasing the safety and protections, but we make a decision as a society that the costs are outweighed by the benefits of all the lives that are saved.

So what we're saying now is if you're buying new -- a new car, you got to have a seat belt."

People don't repeatedly purchase their "seat belt" bi-weekly or monthly like health ins. do they?

This "analogy" isn't only imperfect - it's IDIOTIC.


"Obamacare – Just Brain-dead":

"Looking at the fine print, maternity insurance had to be provided for everyone.

The problem, it is not quite understood how a single man can get pregnant at least without directly engaging in intercourse with the government."

Remember: Insurers MUST use a community rating system and cannot discriminate based on sex.


"White House working with insurers to bypass WSJ"

This is what a major public sector bureaucratic cluster (bleep) looks like.

In the private sector, the co. stock woulda taken a dive, Pres. Obama woulda been fired and escorted off the premises.