Return to the Hot Topics Forum | Post a Follow-Up

 o
By what authority

Posted by demifloyd 8 (My Page) on
Thu, Nov 14, 13 at 12:35

...does Barack Obama suddenly "allow" the sale of cancelled insurance plans?

Obamacare is legislation passed.

SPECIFICALLY, by what authority does one man completely change this law?


Follow-Up Postings:

 o
RE: By what authority

Someone in the other thread predicted one of you conservatives would say this. I am just surprised it happened so fast.


 o
RE: By what authority

YEAH!!!! ANOTHER ACA THREAD TO BEAT THOSE LIBERALS OVER THEIR POINTY LITTLE HEADS. I HAVE DISCOVERED THE "CAPITAL" KEY AND ITS DEFINITE VALUE IN SPEAKING OUT IN FAVOR OF MANY MORE aca THREADS AUGMENTED OF COURSE WITH THOSE EXCORIATING THE GAY MUSLIM KENYAN COMMIE FASCIST obama.


 o
RE: By what authority

Peer pressure. The party bosses pressed him to make the changes instead of enduring the continuous embarrassment at the expense of the party and the risk of losing future elections.

IOW....get out of our way!

The president needs to be reminded time and time again. Read Comprehend the law or action before you sign it, and then consider the consequences, intended or unintended.


 o
RE: By what authority

Marshall....tsk tsk


 o
RE: By what authority

I see there is no answer.

So we have a DICTATOR for a US President that just throws out laws when they are politically damaging to him--in this case, his OWN LAW HIS NAMESAKE LEGISLATION-- and commands private businesses to do his bidding to save his political fat from the fire.

It doesn't get any crazier than this.

Question is, why are we sitting down taking this?


 o
RE: By what authority

Why are we sitting down taking this?


 o
RE: By what authority

The crazy part is this post from demi, a well-educated and worldly woman going off half-cocked over an expressed policy change, not dictated program change.

Weird to see so much blind shrillness. Reminds me of how people with some kinds of mental struggles behave.

Please, demi and her colleagues on the Right, please get a grip.


 o
RE: By what authority

Yea.

But sitting is what some people do best and seem to enjoy it.

So I am not surprised that most people are not standing up and complaining about liberties being taken away and a President changing legislation all by himself.

When someone is lining the pockets of others with benefits earned by the sweat and work of others, I guess it's better to just lay back and enjoy it, as per Clayton Williams.


 o
RE: By what authority

He didn't change the legislation. There was nothing written specifically written into the law that addressed the length of the Grandfather clause.

You can say what you want about the President.....and you surely do.. ....but he isn't stupid and if he wasn't on solid ground legally he would not have gone there....

You may be sitting down and taking THIS but I am very sure that the House is watching his every move on your behalf.


 o
RE: By what authority

This administration has no respect for laws, the constitution, nor the American people. They have an agenda, that's it. They are so bankrupt it's pathetic.


 o
RE: By what authority

horsepuckies, he is a politician playing amongst politicians and pundits and panderers.


 o
RE: By what authority

demi, I think it was just Obama doing what Obama does best. Give a speech. We should be hearing from the lawyers soon. And he can say, I tried, my hands are tied.


 o
RE: By what authority

"SPECIFICALLY, by what authority does one man completely change this law?"

Same authority he used to void the employer mandate for a year.
Same authority he had to make recess appointment without a recess.
Same authority he has to keep the House and Senate from interviewing Benghazi survivors.

Attorneys will tell you that with the right judge, anything is possible. Which is kind of funny, now that I think about it. Obamacare is the law of the land because the "right judge" made it happen!


 o
RE:one view of authority

Just heard Judge Napolitano say the president can't change the law because that's a legislative function. But the judge confirms that if congress looks the other way he can get away with it. He also says the Democrats can't live with this personal "fix" but the president didn't want a legislative fix because our electeds would start taking his law, his "legacy," apart.

Sounds like as long as Americans are willing to let this mess drag out, the pain. chaos and uncertainty will continue. If and when obamacare collapses, imagine the national sigh of relief!


 o
RE: By what authority

Oh--just heard it's for "one year."

So for "one year" you're welcome to try to get your old policy back if you can (nothing about the old price, eh, especially since insurance companies have scrapped the way they do business and it's too late to go back anyway).

And again, by WHAT AUTHORITY?

Barack Obama is just getting up in front of a microphone and mumbling words. By what authority can he do this? And even if people can get back their policies, who is going to facilitate this big mess? How do insurance companies know what they are going to have to charge?

What a MESS.

This doesn't help anything.

What an arrogant and incompetent man Barack Obama is.
CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN--you betcha.

This post was edited by demifloyd on Thu, Nov 14, 13 at 15:31


 o
RE: By what authority

IOW, these delusions will continue.


 o
RE: By what authority

I keep reminding you all but you seem to forget.

The man has no principles. Noam Chomsky.


 o
RE: By what authority

Im tellin ya, this clown aint runnin the show, some body else is pullin the strings. He is an empty suit. A puppet.


 o
RE: By what authority

The sudden compassion and deep interest for the approx 0.6 % of the population whose individual health care policies are effected is a sign of the warming of the hearts of Conservative America.

Yes, not so long ago, even days, it was all "personal responsibility" "Why should I pay for your pre-conditions" and so on, and now: Oh my, those poor, poor people whose policies were cancelled!!!

Well, down in Whoville they say - that the Grinch's small heart grew three sizes that day


 o
RE: By what authority

Ohhh, the vagabonds of compassionate conservatism do get lost in the deep warrens of haunted ideology.


 o
RE: By what authority

Marshall you haven't lost your touch with words!


 o
RE: By what authority

Here's more on the "authority" the president claims to have.

FTA: “It is true that the chief executive has some room to decide how strongly to enforce a law, and the timing of enforcement. But here, Obama is apparently suspending the enforcement of a law for a year" simply to head off actual legislation not to his liking,” said Eugene Kontorovich, a professor at Northwestern University School of Law, in a blog post at Volokh Conspiracy.

“The ‘fix’ amounts to new legislation " but enacted without Congress,” Mr. Kontorovich argued. “The president has no constitutional authority to rewrite statutes, especially in ways that impose new obligations on people, and that is what the fix seems to entail.”

For his part, Mr. Obama himself has acknowledged limits to prosecutorial discretion. He has rejected calls from immigrant-rights advocates to expand DACA to include all illegal immigrants, saying that would be illegal."

Stay tuned. Full article at link below.

Here is a link that might be useful: Latest authority claim


 o
RE: By what authority

Thanks, Nik, just what I thought.

Of course that was the FIRST thing that came to my mind when I heard of what Obama said at his press conference, but of course others think he hung the moon and can do what he darned well pleases, including ignoring law and changing law at a whim and issuing edicts from on high.

Apparently other more studious types have considered and expressed the same concerns.

It is particularly disconcerting to me that so many blind supporters of Barack Obama do not consider the legality--or lack thereof--of his actions.

Or, apparently care.


 o
RE: By what authority

•Posted by marshallz10 z9-10 CA (My Page) on Thu, Nov 14, 13 at 14:18

"horsepuckies, he is a politician playing amongst politicians and pundits and panderers."

Oh, good; you're back. ;-)


 o
RE: By what authority

but of course others think he hung the moon and can do what he darned well pleases, including ignoring law and changing law at a whim and issuing edicts from on high.

Haha. After what George Bush did, this doesn't even rate a 1 on the BS-o-meter.


 o
RE: By what authority

HEY MARSHALL! keep speaking truth to baloney. Thanks!


 o
RE: By what authority

The state insurance commissioners are already weighing in...no way. Obama says...I tried. Dang it, and all he wanted to do is get past the 2014 elections, poor dear.


 o
RE: By what authority

Posted by mrskjun 9 (My Page) on
Thu, Nov 14, 13 at 18:13

The state insurance commissioners are already weighing in...no way. Obama says...I tried. Dang it, and all he wanted to do is get past the 2014 elections, poor dear

*

Yes, and the most pathetic part of that is that he was so blinded by his narcissism that he was politically incompetent to even pull that off.

You'd think he could think that far ahead and at least get a website up and going to demonstrate he got something right.

Nope.

I do not think Barack Obama was counting on the fact that those not blinded by Hope and Change were going to have a dog in the race.(regional term).

Unfortunately for him, there are about half of the people that did not vote for him.

Unfortunately for him, very many of those that did vote for him no longer approve of his performance.


 o
RE: By what authority

You just might be on to something there fanci. But who?

Someone from Illinois? Chicago? Ya think?


 o
RE: By what authority

"Yes, not so long ago, even days, it was all "personal responsibility" "Why should I pay for your pre-conditions" and so on, and now: Oh my, those poor, poor people whose policies were cancelled!!!"

I keep thinking, David, that I've seen this behavior somewhere before... and then I remember my bi-polar ex-husband...


 o
RE: By what authority

•Posted by jodik 5 (My Page) on Thu, Nov 14, 13 at 20:13

***Yes, not so long ago, even days, it was all "personal responsibility" "Why should I pay for your pre-conditions" and so on, and now: Oh my, those poor, poor people whose policies were cancelled!!!***
"I keep thinking, David, that I've seen this behavior somewhere before... and then I remember my bi-polar ex-husband..."

Well, gee. The clip below was certainly a post about people losing their health care insurance, and that was 2 weeks ago, when we all first started hearing about the cancellations. You two both missed that? I'll have to go re-read the whole thread to see if you participated.

RE: Obamacae horror stories

•Posted by mrskjun 9 (My Page) on Fri, Nov 1, 13 at 10:39

"ninamarie, at some level you are right. But just as on another thread regarding something else that ends up hurting the middle class, that's exactly what Obamacare is doing. His lie about keeping your health insurance if you like it..affects those people who have always done the right thing, paid premiums for years for a health plan that they wanted, and that would be the middle class. Now that Obamacare is being rolled out, middle class losing their health insurance and being forced into the Obamcare approved plans, young people who aren't signing up, sick people who are, and Medicaid exploding...who do you think is going to foot the bill? And next year when people start losing their employer based insurance plans, and they will, who do you think is going to take the big hit on that? Middle class working people yet again. So, if it hasn't changed for you yet...just give it a little time."

Jodi, I hope your ex-husband is better now.


 o
RE: By what authority

.who do you think is going to foot the bill?

*

Just came in from getting the mail.
I have a letter in my hand from my insurance company.

My premiums just went up.
I have only met my deductible one time in the last seven years.
Everything I pay is out of pocket unless I have surgery.

Thanks Barry, but hey man, where's my $2500 per year savings?

Barry? Barry?


 o
RE: By what authority

Sorry elvis, but I don't see mrskjun as an authority on medical insurance, much less the new program under discussion.


 o
RE: By what authority

No, of course not.

I'm pointing out that David's statement is in error; jodi agreed with David, and she added that posters who were concerned about people losing their health insurance, after they were concerned about other issues with the AHCA, reminded jodi of her mentally ill ex.

I was simply pointing out, via the 2 weeks old mrs post, that we have been talking about the problem of lost coverage for a couple of weeks, not just a few days, contrary to what david stated.


 o
RE: By what authority

  • Posted by vgkg 7-Va Tidewater (My Page) on
    Fri, Nov 15, 13 at 9:42

As per usual, America either lacks a leader or is run by a dictator...at least the prez appears VERY flexible to his critics.


 o
RE: By what authority

"As per usual, America either lacks a leader or is run by a dictator...at least the prez appears VERY flexible to his critics."

I disagree. The president is extremely rigid at his core. He is flexible only in what tools he will use to get his way, but he will not compromise on his goal.

He hasn't changed his mind about forcing Americans to live under the unpopular ACA. Democrats alone passed this law, and joined him in making promises they had no intention of keeping. He went on TV yesterday to try limit the number of Democrats abandoning him in favor of a legislative fix, now that Americans are experiencing the ACA for themselves. And we now know that he went on TV without bothering to run his idea past those elected members of congress who know the most about the harm the law is doing. He doesn't know what he doesn't know, nor does he care. He wants what he wants, and if he can slow down the cancellation letters until after the next election, that keeps his "legacy" alive and the damage to the middle class at bay long enough to serve his goal. And his goal is to win what he wants, with whatever tools it takes, including lying and deception. As we see on these pages, he is a cult like figure to the fringe who will always offer their support, even when he becomes toxic to his own party.


 o
RE: By what authority

  • Posted by vgkg 7-Va Tidewater (My Page) on
    Fri, Nov 15, 13 at 10:54

So he's not a dictator, nor a poor leader, but he stands on principle? That's a move up.


 o
RE: By what authority

"he is a cult like figure to the fringe who will always offer their support, even when he becomes toxic to his own party.

Well, this fringe has voted him in as President twice- that's 8 years of fringe.

The real fringe, supported by a few billionaires have bought a few politicians to support 'their' fringe.
And so the news last week

"House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) affirmed on Monday morning that he would oppose a law that would prohibit discrimination against gay and lesbian employees in the workplace"

that's right, you can be fired from your job just for being gay. And the teaparty house does nothing to stop it.

And just the day before yesterday:
"On Wednesday, Boehner once again showed his failure to lead when he suddenly announced the House would not take up a vote on any immigration bills, including the Senate Gang of Eight bill passed by the Senate or anything similar, reported The Hill.

The Senate bill was passed in June by a huge bipartisan margin of 68-32."


 o
RE: By what authority

President Obama is a "cult figure"?--what a silly thing to say! I've never run into even one Democrat who entertained such notions.

Yes, Democrats, as a rule, do like him, and yes, they often agree with him. That is why they voted him. Wouldn't make much sense to vote for someone you disagree with, would it?

And the majority of the Independents who voted for Obama probably feel the same.

Democrats have not been "abandoning" him. Democrats do not want to repeal Obamacare or damage it, so you better get over the dumb idea that Democrats are joining the Republicans who do want to repeal or damage Obamacare. Yes, there are Democrats who want some changes or "fixes"--but that does not mean they have turned against Obamacare, much as you wish that were true.

And this mantra that the President is inflexible and won't compromise. Boy oh boy, do you have a bad memory for history. If Obama and the Democrats had just gone for what they wanted, we would have a single-payer system today, but since the Republicans were so upset, the Democrats held meeting after meeting after meeting with Republicans and threw out this because Republicans couldn't stand it and threw out that because Republicans hated it and on and on like that. That's how we ended up with RomneyCare elevated to the national level. Democrats were trying to find something the Republicans could go along with, so why not use the healthcare version invented by the Republican Heritage Center and vigorously pushed by Republican Romney!

But we all know what happened then. The Republicans said NO (as usual) to their own healthcare plan as adopted by the Democrats--at which point Obama and the Democrats just had to accept that NOTHING was going to please the Republicans--as long as it was proposed by a Democrat and the Democrats would get credit for it. So the Democrats gave up and passed the RomneyCare plan at the national level.

That is how we got where we are today! And even on the day the President signed that bill, he said that some changes and fixes and modifications would be needed in the future to keep on improving the bill. But of course Republicans don't remember that. They'd rather rewrite history and claim Obama promised it was a perfect plan that would never need any tinkering with, so now that some tinkering is needed, Obama lied.

Yes, Obama was overly optimistic, but since he claimed from the beginning that tinkering and fixes and modifications would be needed over time, you can hardly claim he is "toxic" and his supporters are all leaving him. That just is not true!

Besides, you know that you don't want Obamacare to be actually fixed. You want it to fail and hope that the present problems are signs that the Republicans can get it repealed.

Hate to tell you, but yes, Obama and the Democrats are "committed" to healthcare reform. Most people think that being committed to one's beliefs is a good thing. And committed certainly is very different than "inflexible" (which, in this case, is nothing but "spin").

Kate


 o
RE: By what authority

Demi, how come you don't qualify for Medicare? Did you not work enough years over your lifetime?


 o
RE: By what authority

You guys need to be out drumming up support for Obama. According to AP, he has a 25% approval rating on the economy, and now 38% of the country is in favor of Obamacare. He needs your support for sure. No need to keep telling the conservatives what a wonderful president he is...you need to get out and tell the liberals.


 o
RE: By what authority

Posted by circuspeanut coastal 5 (My Page) on
Fri, Nov 15, 13 at 11:39

Demi, how come you don't qualify for Medicare? Did you not work enough years over your lifetime?

*

I will; yes I worked enough years outside the federal system for social security, too.

I am not old enough to qualify for Medicare.


 o
RE: By what authority

Ah my apologies, Demi, I thought you were over 65.


 o
RE: By what authority

I could be wrong, but I don't think demi is old enough for Medicare.

Kate - thank you for your post on Fri, Nov 15, 13 at 11:31. You are spot on, 100% correct.

It is too bad that once Obama realized the regressives would not agree to anything he proposed, he didn't go back to single payer and shove that down their throats :-)


 o
RE: By what authority

Demi isn't old enough for medicare.

The thing I keep finding most frustrating, or some word indicating disgust that isn't going to get me in trouble is this total lack of concern on the part of the right wing to do something to FIX health insurance and the delivery of health care in our country. I am thoroughly tired of all this squawking about what is wrong with the present attempt to fix our absolutely horrible, ghastly, gut gouging system. Like Doublinbay I still have most of my wits and a reasonably good memory so I am not suffering some sort of disconnect on why the present ACA is the crappy thing that it is. Every time some conservative here starts in on it again someone reminds them of why, but apparently they cant remember and will not remember the process that lead to the present ACA. It is pointless apparently to do so. Because the old system left tens of thousands of people without any insurance and therefor defacto no appropriate health care(you just try to walk into a doctor's office with a serious medical condition and no insurance) something needs to change. We spend enough money on health care that we ought to be able to cover all Americans and adopt some more. Heck, we could throw in all the illegals for free-for real health care mind you, not some back door into the ER. But no, the party of NO says no. We are not going to have health insurance for all because some of those people aren't worthy of health care and for the ones that are, well it is a sad thing and besides it is Obama's fault. Intransigence(now that's a nice word) is useless here. I want to hear some solutions. So that is what I am going to start doing-post on ACA and that is what you are going to hear from me-solutions people. Solutions.


 o
RE: By what authority

"No need to keep telling the conservatives what a wonderful president he is...you need to get out and tell the liberals."

LOL!

Yeah, like the Democrats are going to do when they go home and face their constituents!

How do you think telling blindsided liberals who lost their insurance that "Obama didn't lie" will go over with them?

How do you think telling people who can't afford new policies that obamacare is good for them is going to go over with the formerly faithful?

It's not just parts of the Democrat party peeling away from the president. Now parts of the MSM have figured out he hasn't been truthful with them. If they want to protect their own credibility, they can't defend him. The cat is out of the bag.

The fringe is funny, like that Black Knight in Monty Python. Despite the uncontrollable hemorrhaging which they have NO hope of stopping, they keep posting away, bleeding all over their keyboards. and proclaiming "It is but a scratch!"

Funny people.


 o
RE: By what authority

patricae, I heard someone refer to Harry Reid today as Obama's private pocket veto. There have been republican health care bills...they have been voted on and passed by congress, only to go to the hands of Harry Reid, never to be voted on in the senate. So to say they haven't offered plans is to be disingenuous. To say none of their plans were ever brought to a vote in the senate is true.


 o
RE: By what authority

Mrs could you please provide details of any health care bill that passed the House and was sent to the Senate in the last 4 years?


 o
RE: By what authority

oh...and I don't mean repeal of the ACA bills, there are certainly loads of those.... but maybe that is what you mean.


 o
RE: By what authority

You could look up a list of proposals put forth, and even passed by the House which re, you could know.


 o
RE: By what authority

I have tried but I can't seem to find a healthcare bill paased in the House.........probably my search skills.

FF do you know the details of one?


 o
RE: By what authority

Gee, I can't find any either.

Unless they're talking about the Ryan Budget, which was going to slash Medicaid and turn it into a block grant and then "save" Medicare by giving a $10,000 voucher to seniors and let them find their own insurance.

The proposal by Ryan to help those with pre-conditions was refused by the tpers and not brought to a vote.

Here is a link that might be useful: resume of the Ryan Budget


 o
RE: By what authority

Mrs must have examples or why would she say there were bills?


 o
RE: By what authority

  • Posted by vgkg 7-Va Tidewater (My Page) on
    Fri, Nov 15, 13 at 17:58

The repub plan/myth is spread by repub politicians hinting at something and their right wing noise machine keeps it alive. Tort reform is all they got.


 o
RE: By what authority

Mike Enzi warned Democrats back in 2010 not to go forward with this turkey, and not to impose obamacare on the American people. But Democrats responded with the same vitriol we're seeing here on this forum. Here's how it went down.


"His Democratic colleagues ignored him. Others even mocked him. But, now, congressmen who accused him of fearmongering are holding their tongues, for everything Senator Mike Enzi (R-Wy.) predicted about Obamacare has turned out to be true. Megyn Kelly brought Sen. Enzi on her show Tuesday to list for viewers his completely accurate warnings back in September 2010.

1. “Americans will eventually be forced to buy the kind of health insurance the federal government thinks you should have.”

Check.

2. “Employers will be less likely to hire new workers and probably even lay off workers.”

Check.

3. “Most businesses the administration estimates between 39 and 69 percent will not be able to keep the coverage that they have.”

Check.

4. “This new regulation appears to ignore the impact it will have in the real world. it’ll drive up costs and reduce the number of people who will have insurance.”

Check."

I think somebody here called me a "fear monger" about that same time.

Here is a link that might be useful: Mike Enzi warned this would happen


 o
RE: By what authority

Good God Nik.

IT ALL CAME TRUE.


 o
RE: By what authority

Grain of salt alert.

Just more of the same from the same biased sources.For those who don't want to waste their time opening the link this is who is giving their opinion and where it is being reported.

Mike Enzi
Enzi was ranked by National Journal as the sixth-most conservative U.S. Senator in its March 2007 conservative/liberal rankings

He supports partial privatization of Social Security and has consistently voted against measures to expand Medicare or to enroll more children or lower-class individuals in public health care.

A strong supporter of the coal industry, Enzi also rejects alternative energy proposals and advocates Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) and offshore drilling. Enzi's committee led the first revisions to mine safety laws in 28 years by promoting the use of new technologies to improve mine safety and save lives. He has a somewhat mixed record on trade issues: he has voted to approve most free trade bills but has rejected the Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), one of the largest pieces of such legislation, and is opposed to presidential fast-tracking of trade relation normalization.

Enzi takes a hard-line view on illegal immigration and has been rated highly by groups that support tighter border controls. He has voted in favor of the construction of a fence along the U.S.-Mexican border and against the implementation of guest worker programs. Enzi has voted to uphold the PATRIOT Act and is opposed to calls to cut down on wiretapping and to extend rights to Guantanamo Bay detainees. Enzi also rejected calls for a timetable for military withdrawal from Iraq.

Enzi opposed President Barack Obama's health reform legislation; he voted against the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in December 2009,and he voted against the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010.

On social issues, Enzi is strongly conservative. He opposes all types of abortion and has voted in favor of proposals that would provide restrictions on the procedure for minors, those stationed on military bases, and other groups. He has voted in favor of failed constitutional amendments that suggested banning gay marriage and flag desecration. However, in August of 2013, Enzi was the only Republican to sign a letter in support of ending the national ban on donated blood from men who have sex with men. Enzi also is a strong supporter of gun rights and is ranked very favorably by the National Rifle Association (NRA).

In April 2013, Senator Enzi was one of forty-six senators to vote against the passing of a bill which would have expanded background checks for all gun buyers. Enzi voted with 40 Republicans and 5 Democrats to stop the passage of the bill. NY Times predicted a 0% chance of Senator Enzi voting Yay on the bill.

Townhall.com
Townhall.com is a web-based publication and a print magazine with a conservative viewpoint, primarily dedicated to conservative United States politics. It was previously operated by the Heritage Foundation, but is now owned and operated by Salem Communications. Townhall.com, which publishes daily, features more than 80 columns (both syndicated and exclusive) by writers such as Jack Bouroudjian, Dennis Prager, Neal Boortz, Ann Coulter, Dinesh D'Souza, Larry Elder, Jonah Goldberg, Rebecca Hagelin, Paul Jacob, Paul Kengor, David Limbaugh, Michael Savage, Michelle Malkin, the late Robert Novak, Thomas Sowell, Jacob Sullum, Mike Adams, Matt Lewis, Amanda Carpenter, Fred Thompson, Jeb Bush, Lisa De Pasquale, Bruce Bialosky, Cal Thomas and John Hawkins.

Both are from Wikipedia if you want to read about both in its entirety.

I just started a new job and I have been given some excellent, affordable choices in healthcare plans.

This has grown old and boring.


 o
RE: By what authority

chase I already posted one. Actually there were 31, I believe. You'll have to check Harry Reid's pocket. They are probably in there where the Upton bill will surely end up.


 o
RE: By what authority

Dinesh D'Souza, . . . Jonah Goldberg

Oh boy!

The adulterer who predicted that President Obama would be installing sharia law in his second term, if reelected, and the guy who writes the op-ed columns for the L.A. Times which generate a great response in the letters to the editor section (generally complaining about what a putz Goldberg is).


 o
RE: By what authority

Exactly what I thought...no Bills just empty air and unfounded claims.....but if it keeps you happy then good for you. Reality is tough.


 o
RE: By what authority

Posted by epiphyticlvr 10 (My Page) on Fri, Nov 15, 13 at 18:48

"Grain of salt alert.
Just more of the same from the same biased sources.For those who don't want to waste their time opening the link this is who is giving their opinion and where it is being reported."

Poor messenger; just got shot at by epi.


 o
Insurance Companies' Actions Not Business as Usual

I agree this was an unskillful step on Obama's part.

Instead of enabling non-compliant policies, he should have stipulated, in the original legislation, that insureds with non-compliant policies be offered similar compliant ones at no or little additional cost.

As it appears that many medical insurance companies have not been attempting to retain these customers, but simply cutting them off, the normal business practice of trying to retain as many customers as possible has not been operative.

I don't know what better argument could be made for a single payer plan.


 o
RE: By what authority

So your answer is for the federal coffers to make up the difference between crap policies offered and sold by insurance companies paying their CEO's millions,and that is as they say the TIP of the iceberg since all upper management in the insurance scam business get paid big bucks, and the policies that people actually need in order to actually access HEALTH CARE?


 o
RE: By what authority

"Poor messenger; just got shot at by epi."

What else do they have? They own obamacare, it's playing out exactly as Enzi warned, they foolishly believed the president and the Democrat electeds we've seen lying on tape, and their world is falling apart. But it's OK. It's good for them to experience a loss they never saw coming. It's good to know that while Americans who have had their lives turned upside down by obamacare are suffering, the Administration and its supporters are suffering right along with them! They brought this on themselves.


 o
RE: By what authority

Nika, I have treated all your recent posts SOB; very hard to read such strident panic in a world of mostly sane people and many having had their lives turned upside down by the recent crop of health insurance carriers and medical industry. You, of course, have nothing to contribute to those existing crises.


 o
RE: By what authority

Months ago, I predicted that ACA was more or less designed to throw our existing health care insurance industry into such a state of chaos that the only viable alternative was to move to single payer. I believe that even more after the last few weeks.


 o
RE: By what authority

Posted by jlhug 6 (My Page) on
Sat, Nov 16, 13 at 10:21

Months ago, I predicted that ACA was more or less designed to throw our existing health care insurance industry into such a state of chaos that the only viable alternative was to move to single payer. I believe that even more after the last few weeks.

*

Exactly.
People will be begging for single payer; this was designed to make untenable situations for the working middle class.


 o
RE: By what authority

I disagree the ACA was "designed to throw our existing health care insurance industry into such a state of chaos". I believe it was designed as a first step towards single payer. However, if that move happens sooner rather than later, all the better.


 o
RE: By what authority

  • Posted by vgkg 7-Va Tidewater (My Page) on
    Sat, Nov 16, 13 at 17:25

So Obama created this HC crisis knowing that the end result would be Single Payer?
This guy is Brilliant!


 o
RE: By what authority

Marshall,
This is a shared forum with all kinds of people. Nobody should waste their time reading posts from people they don't enjoy. I don't. I have my own SOB list, and generally limit my time to posters likely to say something I find thought provoking, relevant, or amusing.

That is why I can disagree with Chase all day long and never get tired of what ELSE she has to say! She is fun.

Perhaps when Obamacare is replaced or revised into something people want and can afford, you can take me off your SOB list. I think watching the disaster play out, and the reactions of people who never saw it coming are fascinating. I'm going to keep right on watching and commenting on what I see from where I sit. Just as everyone else is doing. I think it would be a shame to settle for this mess. I think we can do better.


 o
RE: By what authority

"Months ago, I predicted that ACA was more or less designed to throw our existing health care insurance industry into such a state of chaos that the only viable alternative was to move to single payer. I believe that even more after the last few weeks."

I don't know if the chaos was the intent, but, indeed, it was pretty clearly stated that this Obamacare campaign was intended to be a significant step in the direction of more government control over our health care. That was and is the game plan. That wasn't really hidden at all.

It didn't really matter what was in the law as passed. The attitude really was, "Quick, while we have the votes, let's just pass ANYTHING. We'll patch it up when we finally see it."

I don't have much doubt that we'll continue on the path toward more government control over our lives. Every "fix", by necessity, will take away more and more of our freedom.

Historically, freedom is not a lasting phenomenon.

Hay


 o
RE: By what authority

I agree with Hay. And I agree with Nika that we can do better -- but not in the potboiler environment she promotes. We will get to a single-payer system whether we want that or not. Of course it will be described as choice and will involve government assuming the socialized costs while supporting free-enterprise health care profits.

An imperial government cannot become a mouse on home ground. The forces of imperialism work in both directions. We just think we are free and believe we have a chance to become freer.

We are visiting and acting in one of the freest part of our lives, here on the internet, supporting our illusions about being free peoples. The reality is represented by FB, Google, and other mega-corporations like Garden Web's parent whose service agreements with users are written as if setting out rules for slaves. We do not "own" the content of our postings and our rights to post or use any part of these domains can be remove immediately and permanently, short of playing games as avatars on alternating platforms.

Sorry to have gotten sidetracked with larger issues.


 o
RE: By what authority

No doubt there is a chaotic environment, Marshall. But the promoters are liberals and the rebellion is in the middle class, which it is not nearly as easy to demonize as the usual targets.

Do you not understand that the middle class expected to keep plans and save money? Do you understand why it is angry? It has been robbed.

Robbed of affordable policies, and robbed of the trust they had for politicians they now know played them for fools.

This is going to be a hot topic until obamacare is fixed or scrapped. It is on Democrats to clean up after themselves and stop turning more of the middle class into people who can no longer afford health insurance policies. Own what you supported. Blaming conservatives who warned it could not work as passed does nothing to solve the problem your politicians created all by themselves.


 o
RE: By what authority

Chaos is being fueled with political motivations; another unconscionable behavior. It is one thing to lambast the other party but refusing to participate in what has to be programs for all Americans is an insult to all Americans


 o
RE: By what authority

I believe that republicans were told that their participation was neither wanted or needed. Now it's the republicans fault that the Titanic has hit the iceberg? Ask Obama or Nancy Pelosi if they want any help from the republicans now.


 o
RE: By what authority

btw, it was Enzi who put forth a bill that would have assured that Americans could keep their policy if they liked it, back in 2010. Every democrat voted against it.


 o
RE: By what authority

I believe that republicans were told that their participation was neither wanted or needed.

By who?


 o
RE: By what authority

Probably by a junior staffer caught gossiping at the copy machine.

I suspect though that it was one of the frustrated senior Senate Dems when faced with continued stalling and delaying tactic of a recalcitrant Rep minority in the Senate and take-no-prisoners in the lower(est) chamber.


 o
RE: By what authority

I've withheld comment on the ACA's implementation, because I thought that fair and frankly, for now I maintain heathcare coverage through my employer and don't have firsthand knowledge of the ins and outs.

But.

This seeming debacle somewhat reminds me of what Comcast did to tens of thousands of 'grandfathered' customers a number of years ago. If one made any change to their service (like requesting a new cable box), they were kicked out of grandfathered status (*supposedly* forewarned, but we know how that goes).

When one made a fuss, they were advised they could have their old plan back...at a price increase of around 33%.


 o
RE: By what authority

King Barack is not demanding the insurance companies reinstate the cancelled policies, he's just saying that if they want to, they can. But nobody is going to uncancel any policies. This way he can blame those evil insurance companies for their failure to "do the right thing".

He always has a straw man in his back pocket.

But now he has other problems. NY Senator Kirsten Gillibrand said this weekend that everybody knew The King was LYING when he was saying we could keep our insurance. She said they knew that was false back in 2009 when the bill was passed.

Her problem is, he lied and she swore to it.

And because of those lies, King Barack's "trustworthiness" numbers are right there with Nixon's. The American people don't trust him to tell the truth anymore.


 o
RE: By what authority

Only Carter had worse poll numbers at this stage of his presidency, and the republicans in congress are edging ahead of the dems by a point. Doesn't bode well for the next three years.


 o
RE: By what authority

The country deserves another government dominated by the New Republican Party. I would be curious to see if the "revolving door" process that has worked to "corporatize" the executive branch accelerates. We should, in principle, expect a much smaller government (except DoD and DoHS), thus reducing the number of active agencies and need for government employees. Fortress America


 o
RE: By what authority

We definitely need a smaller less intrusive government. But I don't think we will get that from either the democrats or republicans. Democrats want to intrude on every aspect of our lives, Republicans want to intrude on social issues.


 o
RE: By what authority

Republicans want to intrude on social issues every aspect of our lives.


 o
RE: By what authority

I agree more with Nancy than Mrskjun. The DoD and DoHS will continue to dominate and so draw the US government into more intervention at home and abroad. Do you think the New Republicans are going to dismantle the Police State?


 o
RE: By what authority

Somewhere I thought you had posted that you were a libertarian marshall. Does that mean liberal spelled differently? LOL Or was I mistaken?

No marshall I could hope for it, but now that more and more powers are being gathered to the central government, I can't see either party giving it up.


 o
RE: By what authority

"Ezra Klein writes today that reporters should stop asking if Obamacare is "Obama's Katrina." After all, Katrina killed 1,833 people. The Obamacare rollout has killed zero people. So knock it off.

Now, I'm on record as not really minding these kinds of comparisons. Usually, when you see a comparison to Hitler or slavery or Katrina or something like that, it's obviously not meant to be taken literally. It's just that these are the historical events big enough that everyone knows about them, and that makes them handy reference points. I'm in a distinct minority on this, but aside from some of the most egregious abuses, I don't really object to this kind of stuff. (1)

However, Klein raises another point that's interesting for a different reason: nobody really needs to compare Obamacare to Katrina because there's a much more apt comparison at hand: the rollout of Medicare Part D in 2006. It was a disaster! And it was a health care plan! What better comparison do you need?

And yet, no one uses it. No one. Why is that? It's not because it was too long ago. Washington reporters all remember 2006. It's not because it wasn't a fiasco. It was. It's not because it didn't affect lots of people. It did. It's not because seniors didn't complain loudly. They did. And yet, despite all that, no one uses it. Why?

Here's my guess: It's because in 2006 there was no liberal equivalent of Drudge and Limbaugh and Fox News on the left. That's changed a bit since, but MSNBC is still a shadow of the Drudge/Fox/Limbaugh axis. These guys are simply way better at milking a narrative and getting the traditional media to play along. And the Obamacare narrative is tailor-made for them. Bureaucratic failure. Broken promises. Rising costs. Their outrage is taken as entirely sincere, and for that reason it gets amplified into a feeding frenzy in the media that makes the Obamacare rollout seem not just modestly worse than the Medicare Part D rollout, but an epic disaster unparalleled in the history of social welfare.

In fairness, there's a second reason: The Medicare Part D rollout might have been a debacle, but it didn't cost anyone anything. It was literally something for nothing, so nobody ended up with higher monthly bills to complain about. That's the miracle of being a fiscally irresponsible party that funds new programs without bothering to pay for them. Democrats could have done the same thing with Obamacare and avoided a lot of its rollout problems, but they mostly decided to be responsible and pay for things honestly. As usual, it turns out that Americans don't appreciate that much.

(1) This is not a license to be an idiot. If you start calling Obamacare "Obama's Holocaust," then you're an idiot."

Here is a link that might be useful: Obama's Katrina?


 o Post a Follow-Up

Please Note: Only registered members are able to post messages to this forum.

    If you are a member, please log in.

    If you aren't yet a member, join now!


Return to the Hot Topics Forum

Information about Posting

  • You must be logged in to post a message. Once you are logged in, a posting window will appear at the bottom of the messages. If you are not a member, please register for an account.
  • Please review our Rules of Play before posting.
  • Posting is a two-step process. Once you have composed your message, you will be taken to the preview page. You will then have a chance to review your post, make changes and upload photos.
  • After posting your message, you may need to refresh the forum page in order to see it.
  • Before posting copyrighted material, please read about Copyright and Fair Use.
  • We have a strict no-advertising policy!
  • If you would like to practice posting or uploading photos, please visit our Test forum.
  • If you need assistance, please Contact Us and we will be happy to help.


Learn more about in-text links on this page here