ChrisWeigant.com

Friday Talking Points [274] -- The Answer To Obamacare, The Universe, And Everything

[ Posted Friday, September 20th, 2013 – 17:17 PDT ]

It's all becoming clear now. House Republicans are just really big fans of Douglas Adams -- that's been their plan all along. Adams, in his brilliantly funny Hitchhiker's Guide series, told the story of the megacomputer "Deep Thought" who spent seven-and-a-half million years working on "the answer to the ultimate question of life, the Universe, and everything." Deep Thought famously came up with the answer to this weighty query: 42.

How else to explain the House of Representatives voting 41 times previously on killing Obamacare, other than as an homage to Adams: a precursor to today's 42nd vote (after the first 41 failed utterly)? Today's vote must be an attempt to answer the question of Obamacare, the Universe, and everything. Or something. It's hard to tell, anymore.

What's amusing in the whole sorry excuse for legislating (or, if you prefer, this endless Washington soap opera) is that, increasingly, Democrats and even (gasp!) the dreaded Barack Obama himself are becoming almost irrelevant to the Republican angerfest. They've got new targets to rail against, instead. As Pogo Possum might have sagely observed of the new Republican strategy (such as it is): "We have met the enemy and he is us."

What started as a partisan ploy to raise money from gullible donors has now grown into a full-scale Republican-on-Republican cage match. It's hard to even count the corners in this boxing ring, really. We've got the House Tea Partiers versus the Senate Tea Partiers versus the House leadership versus sane Senate Republicans versus the apoplectic rightwing media versus the sane rightwing media. It is, in fact, a full-on dogfight within the party, with Democrats doing nothing more than standing back and letting the fur fly -- because they're not even the target of most of the Republican rage right now.

That's right, folks, the Republicans have begun to eat their own. Or perhaps you prefer the "circular firing squad" metaphor? As you can already tell, the metaphors (mixed and singly) freely leap to mind, while watching this fracas from the sidelines.

In fact, for the first time ever, we're going to use nothing but Republican quotes as our talking points this week, since Republican politicians and conservative pundits are now savaging their fellow partisans better than any Democrat could even hope to do. That's right -- we don't even have to create any anti-Republican snark this week, because Republicans are already doing such a good job of it. So there's that to look forward to.

Before then we've got our usual awards, and one unrelated note that just has to be pointed out here. Want to see a pro-marijuana ad during the next Super Bowl? Well then, click on over to the contest Quicken is running, and vote for NORML to win the competition! It would certainly give the biggest spotlight in the world to the issue, so it's a worthy effort which deserves support.

 

Most Impressive Democrat of the Week

In a sort of "dog that didn't bark" or perhaps "dog that went off to bark to the wealthy to make oodles of cash" pick, our Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week award goes to Larry Summers, for gracefully withdrawing his name for consideration for Federal Reserve Chair.

Summers was facing open hostility not just among Senate Democrats as a whole, but specifically from Senate Democrats on the committee which would have initially had to vote on him. This all but doomed his chances, and so Summers did the honorable thing by "falling on his sword" so that Obama wouldn't look like he was forced into choosing someone else.

Now, we're not exactly big Larry Summers fans (for all sorts of reasons), but we have to at least give him some credit for choosing the dignified way out. Rather than being nominated and facing a defeat in the Senate confirmation vote, Summers will now be free to give speeches and sit on boards of directors across this great land.

For making this choice, Summers wins our MIDOTW award. We wish him a relaxing retirement from politics, most sincerely.

[Larry Summers is a private citizen outside of politics (thankfully), and our policy is not to provide contact information for such non-public figures.]

 

Most Disappointing Democrat of the Week

We have two Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week awards this week, for the two House members who voted with the Republicans for their "defund Obamacare" continuing resolution today.

Blue Dogs at heart, Representatives Jim Matheson from Utah and Mike McIntyre from North Carolina voted with the Tea Party in a naked attempt to keep their jobs in tough districts. Their votes were not necessary, but if they had voted "nay" or not voted at all, it would have lowered the vote count to 216 for the Republican plan -- a significant number, since it is less than half of the full House of Representatives. The whole exercise was symbolic, and over a dozen House members sat out the vote, but Matheson and McIntyre both felt the need to join with the Republicans -- the only two Democrats to break ranks on the vote.

For doing so, both Jim Matheson and Mike McIntyre deserve a Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week award.

[Contact Representative Jim Matheson on his House contact page and Representative Mike McIntyre on his House contact page, to let them know what you think of their actions.]

 

[CORRECTION: We (blush) misremembered the vote count on the bill today, thinking it was "218 for," when the actual count was "228 Republicans for, plus the two Democrats (total 230 for)." Mea culpa maxima. This means the preceding sentences about "less than half" are incorrect, which we are leaving uncorrected as a monument to never cutting corners when fact-checking and editing. Although the two votes would not have been as significant, we're still awarding both MDDOTW awards anyway.]

 

Friday Talking Points

Volume 274 (9/20/13)

This week's talking points section is without precedent for this column, because each and every one of them was uttered or written by conservatives or Republican officeholders. In fact, there was such a plethora of scathing commentary to choose from that what follows is merely a representational sample of what Republicans are currently saying about each other in the midst of the 42nd Obamacare shutdown showdown.

We didn't even have room for the snarkiest comments, which have been coming from unnamed "senior GOP congressional aides" (such as: "Cruz is the leader of a secret cabal of leftists that are seeking control of the conservative movement -- their aim is to force the party to take on suicidal missions to destroy the movement from within."). We also decided not to bother with all the rage the House Tea Party is flinging at Ted Cruz (example, from Peter King: "We can't be going off on these false missions that Ted Cruz wants us to go on. The issues are too important. They're too serious, they require real conservative solutions, not cheap headline-hunting schemes.") -- who set much of this ragefest off earlier this week by breaking a cardinal Tea Party rule, when he admitted that reality would win, and not the Tea Party defunding fantasy.

Which still leaves us a lot of scathing commentary. Here are seven responses (well, eight, really -- because there were just so many to choose from) to the House's plan to shut the federal government down in a tantrum because they didn't get their way on the Obamacare issue. All -- each and every one -- straight out of the mouths of respected conservative Republicans. Enjoy!

 

1
   Fanaticism on the Right

When even Bill O'Reilly is using such language, normally Republicans take note. This is Bill speaking to the leader of the Tea Party Express:

Fanaticism on the right is also harming the country. There is no way Obamacare is going to be defunded. It is not going to happen. What you are trying to do... is impossible. Do you not know that? I just think it's destructive to your cause.

 

2
   Showing your manhood on the way down from jumping off a cliff

Charles Krauthammer's politics could be described as "somewhat to the right of Genghis Khan's," on a normal day. But he absolutely lit in to the House Republicans (beginning by calling their shutdown idea "really dumb"), mixing metaphors with abandon:

The other issue, the one you're talking about now, I think is a ginned-up issue for this reason: It's all about tactics. It's not about what you think about Obamacare. The tactics that these brave people are telling us we have to do is to jump off a cliff so we can show our manhood. There is -- unless you believe that you are ready to shut down the government, unless you are ready to deliver on the threat, you don't go near there. And we know that every time Republicans in opposition have threatened to shut down the government, they've had to blink because it turned against them. If I thought it would work, I would support it. There is not one chance in a hundred that the threat of shutting down the government is going to succeed... you don't show that you are completely irresponsible and shut down the government, knowing that you will in the end have to cave.

 

3
   An ill-conceived tactic

Even Karl Rove couldn't make this turd blossom, it seems:

The desire to strike at ObamaCare [sic] is praiseworthy. But any strategy to repeal, delay or replace the law must have a credible chance of succeeding or affecting broad public opinion positively. The defunding strategy doesn't. Going down that road would strengthen the president while alienating independents. It is an ill-conceived tactic, and Republicans should reject it.

 

4
   A suicide note

John McCain's been telling anyone who will listen what he thinks of the shutdown plan (the following is a composite quote from two different articles, I should mention, which is why it's kind of choppy):

Republicans ought to understand if we shut down the government, Congress always gets blamed -- rightly or wrongly -- Congress gets blamed. We've seen the movie before. It's just some of them weren't around at the time; I was.... [W]e all know we're not going to cut off Social Security checks... And for us to say you've got to repeal Obamacare in order to get that done, as Charles Krauthammer [wrote?], that's a suicide note.... I hope my colleagues in the House who believe that we need to shut down the government will understand that that's not what the American [people want?] -- they hate government, but they don't want it to stop functioning.... So some would like to set up another one of these shutdown-the-government threats. And most Americans are really tired of those kinds of shenanigans here in Washington.

 

5
   Stupid... idiotic

Nichole Wallace, former communications guru for George W. Bush, after calling the shutdown strategy "idiotic," went on to offer her own charming metaphor to her fellow Republicans:

When Republicans run into the street, despite the fact that there is a flashing red light, they're going to get hit by the cars and killed. So this is stupid, politically.

 

6
   The dumbest idea ever

This one is a two-parter, because we just couldn't limit ourselves to just seven snarky quotes this week. Both of these refer to the same thing: the House bill, regardless of what the Tea Party thinks, doesn't even defund Obamacare. It doesn't even come close, since most of Obamacare is actually mandatory (as opposed to discretionary) spending. First we have Senator Richard Burr of North Carolina:

I said it was the dumbest idea I'd ever heard of. I still think it's a dumb idea, because you can't defund Obamacare.

Senator Lindsey Graham was a bit more jocular in his response, when addressing the same issue:

That's a technical thing. But yeah, like 80 percent of it [Obamacare funding] is unaffected [by the House "defunding" bill] ... That seems to not resonate with anybody.

 

7
   Shutdowns are bad... 'mmm-kay?

While the quote from Ted Cruz was what got all the attention this week, there was an even more extraordinary quote from his buddy, Senator Mike Lee. These two were crucial in ginning up all the anger and rage this summer, appearing in "let's defund Obamacare!" ads and whatnot in order to convince House members the shutdown idea was a great one. Which makes his remarks this week all the more extraordinary:

A shutdown is too much. We don't want a shutdown, we don't need a shutdown. We should avoid a shutdown, and Obamacare is a law that's going to harm people. It certainly is not a good idea to shut down the government in order to force through the implementation of Obamacare at a time when the president has said he's not going to follow the law and he's made substantial changes. Shutdowns are bad, shutdowns are not worth it, this law is not worth causing a shutdown over.

-- Chris Weigant

 

All-time award winners leaderboard, by rank
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

Cross-posted at: Democratic Underground
Cross-posted at: The Huffington Post

 

25 Comments on “Friday Talking Points [274] -- The Answer To Obamacare, The Universe, And Everything”

  1. [1] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    It's hard to even count the corners in this boxing ring, really. We've got the House Tea Partiers versus the Senate Tea Partiers versus the House leadership versus sane Senate Republicans versus the apoplectic rightwing media versus the sane rightwing media.

    I count six.

    JL

  2. [2] 
    Michale wrote:

    I will simply re-iterate the point I have been making all week. Apparently it's such a great point that no one has been able to refute it.

    It's Obama and the Democrats who have made the decision that the abomination known as Obamacare is more important to them than a running functional government.

    Why blame the GOP for tee'ing up the choice?? Shouldn't the ones who MAKE the bonehead choice be blamed??

    Will the TPGOP plan fail? Maybe.. Maybe even probably.. But you simply must acknowledge that they are being true to their principles.

    Put another way. If it were a faction of Democrats that were acting like the Tea Party and were fighting for an issue that ya'all agreed with then the MIDOTW Awards would be flying fast and furious.. If it was Democrats that were threatening a shutdown of government for an issue that they believed in, ya'all would be supporting them to the hilt...

    Am I wrong?? Of course I'm not.. :D

    So, let's kind of keep some perspective here...

    It's hard to even count the corners in this boxing ring, really. We've got the House Tea Partiers versus the Senate Tea Partiers versus the House leadership versus sane Senate Republicans versus the apoplectic rightwing media versus the sane rightwing media.

    I count six.

    "That wasn't such a chore, now was it??"
    -Bill Murray, GHOSTBUSTERS

    :D

  3. [3] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    nypoet22 -

    Ah, but I could have easily forgotten a faction or two... didn't want to offer up a solid number on that account...

    :-)

    Michale -

    I said this on another thread, but it bears repeating:

    Let's see in 6 months or a year how Obamacare is polling. When people realize that the GOP cries of Apocalypse were unjustified lies ("what death panels?!?"), when millions are afforded access to insurance at a reasonable price they never had before (people with "pre-existing conditions"), and millions more see the subsidies working for them -- then let's see what the American public thinks. But not before.

    The GOP -- I've said this before, mind you -- is downright terrified not that Obamacare is going to be a trainwreck, but that it will work fine. If they weren't, they wouldn't have put so much energy into killing it. As I said, let's meet back here in six months and compare statistics, shall we?

    I notice, also, that you're completely ignoring the breakdown of the standard theme: Republicans fall into line, while Democrats herd cats. Notice any "herding cats" aspects to the GOP/TP commentary this week... hmmm?

    :-)

    -CW

  4. [4] 
    Michale wrote:

    Wow, yer up late, CW! :D

    Lemme take care of some old business from yesterday's commentary..

    Not just Karl, but a whole passel of Republicans. It's full-on R-on-R violence. While I largely agree with you that Republicans are better at staying on message and discipline among the ranks, I'm interested in what you think of the GOP civil war going on now? Maybe I should save such questions for Friday's article, though...

    I know the standard thought around here is that I am full on pro-GOP.. I submit that it simply seems that way because I dislike and oppose Democrats so intensely..

    What do I think of the GOP civil war?? It doesn't surprise me. They are simply politicians after all.

    The simple fact that I agree with their position on a lot of issues does not make them any less a politician. And, by definition (at least, *MY* definition), a politician will look out for their own best interests first, the best interests of their Party second and the best interests of their country a very VERY distant third..

    The biggest point of contention around here between me and rank-n-file Weigantians is that I maintain that ALL politicians are like that, Dem or GOP...

    Let's see in 6 months or a year how Obamacare is polling. When people realize that the GOP cries of Apocalypse were unjustified lies ("what death panels?!?"), when millions are afforded access to insurance at a reasonable price they never had before (people with "pre-existing conditions"), and millions more see the subsidies working for them -- then let's see what the American public thinks. But not before.

    We don't KNOW that cries of the Apocalypse are "unjustified lies".. Given what we know so far (employees being screwed over, insurance rates are skyrocketing, etc etc) it would seem to me that those "lies" are quite true and quite justified..

    The simple fact that no one here will address these problems lends credence to the idea that these are real and major problems..

    Further, acceptance of Obamacare in 6 months time may not be indicative that Americans LIKE it, but rather a grudging acceptance of the reality that they are going to have to live with it regardless. Like herpes...

    "Now they have herpes. You keep that shit forever. Kinda like luggage."
    -Eddie Murphy, DELIRIOUS

    :D

    The GOP -- I've said this before, mind you -- is downright terrified not that Obamacare is going to be a trainwreck, but that it will work fine.

    Considering what we know already about ObamaCare, the chances of it working "fine" are slim and none.

    And Slim just logged off...

    But I will be happy to compare the stats in 6 months time...

    I notice, also, that you're completely ignoring the breakdown of the standard theme: Republicans fall into line, while Democrats herd cats. Notice any "herding cats" aspects to the GOP/TP commentary this week... hmmm?

    Yes, it's true. In the here and now, Republicans are acting more like Democrats...

    While that DOES say something about Republicans, it ALSO says something about Democrats..

    And, I submit, what it says ain't good... For EITHER Party..

    Wouldn't you agree?? :D

  5. [5] 
    Michale wrote:

    We don't KNOW that cries of the Apocalypse are "unjustified lies".. Given what we know so far (employees being screwed over, insurance rates are skyrocketing, etc etc) it would seem to me that those "lies" are quite true and quite justified..

    Further evidence of this is the fact that the Obama Administration has missed more than HALF the deadlines associated with his "signature" legislation..

    forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/08/18/unpublished-crs-memo-obama-administration-has-missed-half-of-obamacares-legally-imposed-implementation-deadlines/

    Further, Obama has delayed or amended his "signature legislation" almost 20 times!!

    Now, you tell me..

    Does that sound like a law that has a snowball's chance in hell of being "liked" by the American people in six months??

  6. [6] 
    Michale wrote:

    Further...

    (Sorry, these points just come to me as I am tearing into laptops...)

    I submit we don't even have to wait six months to see how good ObamaCare is going to be..

    In 10 days, the main parts of ObamaCare officially kicks in.. The individual mandates and the Health Insurance exchanges...

    Let's take stock in 30 days and see how smoothly things are running..

    I'll wager a juicy bet that Obamacare will be hell on earth...

  7. [7] 
    Michale wrote:

    I have a much better awardee for the MDDOTW...

    Democratic Official Allan Brauer Wishes Death on Ted Cruz Aide’s Children
    http://freebeacon.com/democratic-official-allan-brauer-wishes-death-on-ted-cruz-aides-children/

    It would be nice if those on the Left would rush to condemn these kinds of remarks as quickly as they condemn remarks from the Right...

    I know that's not a problem with Weigantians.. :D

  8. [8] 
    Michale wrote:

    Buffett: Scrap Obamacare and Start All Over
    http://moneymorning.com/ob-article/obamacare-buffett.php?code=t-oc-buffett

    Straight from the horse's mouth..

    Interesting to note..

    According to most Wall Street experts, Obamacare will create unheard of fortunes for investors who tap into the right companies.

    That's because the U.S. will spend billions, even trillions of dollars implementing, regulating, and enforcing Obamacare.

    Select companies and their investors are set to make a fortune in the next several months - and years - as the full Obamacare plan gets underway.

    Even main street investors will have a chance to reap big paydays - provided they know which sectors stand to benefit most.

    Those who support Obamacare are being played by the very corporate and big money interests they claim to be against...

  9. [9] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    I'll wager a juicy bet that Obamacare will be hell on earth...

    you'll lose your quatloos. not because obamacare ends up being particularly good mind you, but because the changes the ACA has made are pretty modest regardless of their ultimate impact. also because the country's health insurance situation before obamacare was so ugly that there's not much further things could fall. i mean seriously, even michael moore had most of his facts right. he had to go to cuba to make the situation seem any more dramatic than it actually was. all of which is saying, the bar for "success" has been set REALLY low.

    JL

  10. [10] 
    Michale wrote:

    you'll lose your quatloos.

    Who said anything about quatloos??

    I want a bet with some REAL bite!! :D

    ot because obamacare ends up being particularly good mind you, but because the changes the ACA has made are pretty modest regardless of their ultimate impact.

    Again, I have to ask. What makes you say that??

    Considering all that has gone bad and wrong with Obamacare to date, how can you claim that the problems are going to be "pretty modest"??

    also because the country's health insurance situation before obamacare was so ugly that there's not much further things could fall.

    And now it's worse than it was before..

    Insurance rates are sky rocketing.

    Businesses are being forced to close.

    Employees are losing hours and pay.

    These are indisputable facts...

    How is this better than it was before??

    all of which is saying, the bar for "success" has been set REALLY low.

    I would agree completely. The bar IS set pretty low.

    And, to date, Obamacare has been digging WAY under the bar..

  11. [11] 
    Michale wrote:

    More facts...

    It's Official: Obamacare Will Increase Health Spending By $7,450 For A Typical Family of Four
    forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/09/23/its-official-obamacare-will-increase-health-spending-by-7450-for-a-typical-family-of-four/

    Even if, by some miracle, Obamacare DOES lower rates (which there is absolutely NO evidence to support such a conclusion) there will still be a downside...

    Lower Health Insurance Premiums to Come at Cost of Fewer Choices
    nytimes.com/2013/09/23/health/lower-health-insurance-premiums-to-come-at-cost-of-fewer-choices.html?_r=0

    So, no matter HOW you slice it, Obamacare is going to be worse for Americans, not better.

    "These are the facts of the case. And they are undisputed."
    -Captain Jack Ross, A FEW GOOD MEN

  12. [12] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    I want a bet with some REAL bite!! :D

    what do you have in mind? it will be a least a year before the facts on this argument are in, so it would have to be quite a long-term wager.

    And now it's worse than it was before..

    ...and it was getting worse prior to obamacare. that's causation fallacy.

    Insurance rates are sky rocketing.

    they were doing so prior to obamacare. any extra uptick thus far could be attributed to panic on the insurers' part, in anticipation of their future profits taking a potential hit when the regulations kick in. of course they won't actually take a hit, due to all the extra people who will have to be insured or pay higher taxes, but if the insurers can gouge people a little more and blame the guy who fed them all those extra customers, all the better for their profit margins.

    Businesses are being forced to close.

    or they're choosing to "re-organize" in order to exploit loopholes in the law. businesses with less than 50 full-time employees are exempt, so we're not exactly talking about mom n' pop operations here.

    Employees are losing hours and pay.

    that part is true. one of the law's biggest flaws is that giant corporations can get away with switching almost exclusively to part-time help and "independent contractor" status for their employees, often breaking labor laws to do so.

    These are indisputable facts...

    as you like to say, that's just one way of spinning the facts. here's another: if a corporation can't cut into its profit margins enough to cover the health insurance of its employees, it SHOULD close its doors so a better, more efficient business can take its place. that's something we here in the US of A like to call "capitalism."

    How is this better than it was before??

    those facets of the law you mentioned may or may not ultimately improve once the insurance exchanges get going. but regardless of those particular question marks, there have been some positives. for example:

    no lifetime caps, no annual caps, no pre-existing condition exclusions, no dropped coverage for the sick, parental coverage until age 26, mandatory rebates for high overhead, small business tax credits, free preventative care, subsidies for medicare and prescriptions, and getting high risk patients out of the main insurance pools. just to name a few. it's a far cry from universal coverage, but as far as i'm concerned those count as "modest improvements."

    It's Official: Obamacare Will Increase Health Spending By $7,450 For A Typical Family of Four

    that's not official at all, it's conjecture. the change per family this year, listed in your article, is 66 dollars for the whole year, well below inflation. further, it attributes the anticipated changes specifically to the law, when prices prior to the law were spiraling out of control anyway. i'd be shocked if real average healthcare spending per family changes even a tenth of that claim next year (745 dollars), in either direction.

    Lower Health Insurance Premiums to Come at Cost of Fewer Choices

    so wait, is it less or more? make up your mind already!

    the only way those numbers might jibe would be if the prior average includes people who previously did not have health insurance at all - that group would naturally be spending more, which is why the insurance companies really have nothing to worry about. they really ought to quit complaining; obamacare is their new best friend.

    JL

  13. [13] 
    Michale wrote:

    Totally apropos of absolutely nothing.. Just watched two new Nicholas Cage movies.. THE CROODS and THE FROZEN GROUND..

    I am of the opinion that Nicholas Cage movies are either very very good (Con Air, Face Off) or very very BAD (Bad Lieutenant)...

    I am happy to report that CROODS and FROZEN GROUND are in the very very good department, for completely and totally different reasons...

    I highly recommend both to all...

    what do you have in mind? it will be a least a year before the facts on this argument are in, so it would have to be quite a long-term wager.

    Of course, we would have to set a reasonable time limit..

    I mean, if we were to wait decades, one might be able to point to a good nugget or two...

    If the makers of the Edsel had waited long enough, they could have made the design stick...

    Personally, I think all the horror of the next 30 days will set the stage for Obamacare (ObamaCare??? Still waiting for a ruling.. :D)...

    But, since CW laid down the challenge, I have something more.... er... pivotal in mind.. :D

    ...and it was getting worse prior to obamacare. that's causation fallacy.

    It MAY (emphasis on *may*) have gotten worse w/o Obamacare. That's conjecture...

    Unfortunately, we will never know for sure..

    Considering the extreme rate hikes we are seeing (300%+ in some places) it's unlikely that it would have gotten NEARLY as bad if there never was Obamacare...

    I'll get to the rest in a few.. It's my turn to cook dinner tonight.. :D

    Michale

  14. [14] 
    Michale wrote:

    Personally, I think all the horror of the next 30 days will set the stage for Obamacare (ObamaCare??? Still waiting for a ruling.. :D)...

    In other words, very high stakes.. For true Triskelion Gamesters.... :D

  15. [15] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    I mean, if we were to wait decades, one might be able to point to a good nugget or two...

    agreed, ten years is too long. full implementation is supposed to begin soon, so I think new years 2015 would be about the earliest one could definitively make a factual judgment about obamacare's impact.

    Obamacare (ObamaCare??? Still waiting for a ruling.. :D)...

    it's for conundrums such as these that it's useful to completely forego the use of capital letters. problem solved.

    Considering the extreme rate hikes we are seeing (300%+ in some places)

    in any system there are always going to be geographical and statistical anomalies. some areas will pay more, others will save more. that's why they invented averages. the average change thus far, according to the article you cited, is $66. until a legitimate preponderance of facts states otherwise, i remain underwhelmed.

    JL

  16. [16] 
    Michale wrote:

    so wait, is it less or more? make up your mind already!

    It's actually the "beauty" (IE horror) that is ObamaCare...

    If the rates ARE lowered (and that's a big IF) then Americans are left with little or no choice (IE Communism)...

    If Americans have a choice under Obamacare, then they have to pay exorbiantly high insurance premiums...

    With OBamaCAre (now I am just getting creative), it's a LOSE/LOSE for the American people...

    Yet Congress and their staffs and families ARE EXEMPT....

    And yet, ya'all still support Obamacare as better than nothing...

    Why???

  17. [17] 
    Michale wrote:

    in any system there are always going to be geographical and statistical anomalies.

    So... what??

    The ones that have to pay the high end of the average are not worthy of concern???

    They are Americans, aren't they??

    Why should they get screwed over just because Democrats and Obama need a warm and fuzzy???

  18. [18] 
    Michale wrote:

    Just answer me one simple question..

    If Obama Care is so great... Why do CongressCritters and their staff and their families have to get an exemption???

    "Anyone??? Anyone?? Buehler????"

  19. [19] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    And yet, ya'all still support Obamacare as better than nothing...Why???

    because without it, nothing is exactly what millions of people have. no health care. don't get sick, and if you do, die quickly. meanwhile, the rest of us are still footing the bill.

    The ones that have to pay the high end of the average are not worthy of concern???

    i'm not saying that the odd cases are meaningless, just that they're nothing new. there were egregious oversights before obamacare. that some still exist is not necessarily an indictment of the legislation, just SSDD.

  20. [20] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    If Obama Care is so great... Why do CongressCritters and their staff and their families have to get an exemption???

    i couldn't say for sure if that's what is actually happening, but new york magazine has a retort:

    http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/08/congress-exempt-from-obamacare-or-something.html

  21. [21] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    nypoet22 -

    Just as with the Buffet thing, this is a "pull the wool over people's eyes" attempt by the GOP.

    In proper language:

    The Obamacare bill was attacked by Republicans. One of these attacks was "let's force Congress to go on the Obamacare exchanges!" This was an amendment by a Republican, and Democrats agreed to it, so it passed.

    The problem? Forcing Congress (and all congressional staff) into the exchanges is the proverbial "square peg in a round hole." The square peg? The exchanges were never designed for people who had health insurance provided by their employers. The round hole? Because of the square peg (the ONLY folks in the exchanges with employer benefits will be Congress) they had to create an "exemption" for them -- they would still be allowed to have their employer funding in the exchanges (unlike everyone else purchasing insurance in the exchanges).

    But the "exemption" is only necessary because Congress was FORCED into Obamacare exchanges -- by a REPUBLICAN amendment. It was necessary to shoehorn them all INTO "Obamacare." So the so-called "exemption" is necessary to "exempt" them all INTO Obamacare -- the EXACT OPPOSITE of how it is now being portrayed in right-wing media.

    Clear?

    Michale -

    Care to respond?

    Also, that Warren Buffet thing is hokum as well. Read some quotes from him from the past week, to prove this.

    -CW

  22. [22] 
    Michale wrote:

    JL,

    because without it, nothing is exactly what millions of people have. no health care. don't get sick, and if you do, die quickly. meanwhile, the rest of us are still footing the bill.

    And with it, the "something" that people will have, they can't afford and they will STILL lose their houses if they have a medical emergency...

    The "something" that Doctors have will force them out of business..

    The "something" that Americans have will have employees lose hours and pay..

    So, is the "something" *really* better than the nothing??

    From where I sit, this "better than doing nothing" is not really accurate..

    http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/08/congress-exempt-from-obamacare-or-something.html

    That's just spin. A left-wing rebuttal to a talking point.

    If the special contribution for CongressCritters has always been there (the "employer" contribution for healthcare) why did Obamacare have to specifically create another one???

    While not an exemption per se, it's a special privilege not available to everyday Americans.

    Why??

    CW,

    Care to respond?

    Absolutely.. :D

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/canary-coal-mine_756591.html

    Also, that Warren Buffet thing is hokum as well. Read some quotes from him from the past week, to prove this.

    Warren DID make those quotes. Granted, not recently, but he DID say that Obamacare emphasis the wrong aspect.

    Buffett said that the first goal should NOT be to get everyone on Health Insurance, but rather to bring the costs down so that more people CAN have health insurance.

    Doesn't that make more sense???

    Things like tort reform and fraud would be two ways to bring the costs way WAY down..

    But Obamacare doesn't do ANY of that. Matter of fact, the Obama Administration is slashing the budget to the bare bone of the fraud unit that would detect and punish fraud..

    So, Warran Buffett DID say that he would scrap Obamacare and start over. This is fact.

    Warren Buffett DID say that Obamacare needs to change and emphasis the FIRST priority. Which is the skyrocketing costs... This is fact.

    Obamacare does the OPPOSITE.

    According to the Forbes article posted above, the "average" family will see a HUGE increase in their insurance rates. Note that it's the AVERAGE family, not a family on either end of the spectrum...

    Let's face the facts, people.

    Obamacare is going to be a big boon for corporate interests.. The insurance companies are going to get a HUGE windfall of new clients, while STILL raising their rates...

    But without doing ANYTHING to bring down the costs, those corporate interests are going to be the ONLY ones who will be making out..

    The middle class, the ones ya'all claim to be warriors for, will still be getting scrooed...

    We'll know in a few weeks just how bad Obamacare is...

    Fortunately for ya'all, I am not the one who revels in saying, "I told ya so!!"... Much.... :D

    Michale

  23. [23] 
    Michale wrote:

    Wanna talk about Syria?? Gun Control?? :D

    Michale

  24. [24] 
    Michale wrote:

    'Family glitch' in health law could be painful
    It could leave up to 500,000 children without coverage and cost some families thousands of dollars.

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/09/23/aca-family-glitch-issues/2804017/

    On health-care fraud, US is pennywise, poundfoolish
    http://www.cnbc.com/id/101041552

    These aren't bastions of conservative talking points.

    It's USA TODAY and NB-frakin'-C fer chreest's sake...

    How many more pieces of evidence do ya'all have to see before you think, "Hmmmm... Maybe Obamacare is not the end all get all savior of the masses it's being touted as...Hmmmmmm"

    Yea, I know, I know.. "Michale, you are pointing to an isolated possibility here and an isolated possibility there"...

    Well, guess what?? If you have an isolated possibility here, an isolated possibility there and an isolated possibility over there, pretty soon the "isolated" part becomes ALL over the place and the "possibility" part approaches certainty...

    Well, as I said.. We'll know in a couple weeks who is right and who is wrong about Obamacare...

    While I am not going to fall into the SCOTUS trap again (can't afford a new t-shirt.. :D) I have a feeling that there WILL be some gloating going on.. :D

    Michale

  25. [25] 
    Michale wrote:

    Wanna talk about Syria?? Gun Control?? :D

    Speaking of Gun Control...

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2430201/British-hero-mall-massacre-Ex-Royal-Marine-handgun-saved-100-lives-terrorists-ran-amok.html?ICO=most_read_module

    Another good guy with a gun proves that the only worthwhile "Gun Control" is the control that allows 1 to put 2 in the 10 ring.

    Michale

Comments for this article are closed.
[Powered by WordPress]