People Waking Up

Saturday, November 15, AD 2014

 

 

I recall that when all the rapturous adjectives were applied to Obama in 2008 by the mainstream media and other supporters of the South Side Messiah, I thought that it was going to be fun when he fell flat on his face and some of his supporters began to wake up.  Burke Beu is among those now awake:

ObamaCare is a failure. For anyone who thinks this is a misprint because no Democratic activist would make such a comment, let me add that it is too big, too complicated and too expensive. Without a public option within its network of exchanges, ObamaCare is a giant blank check to the insurance companies that pushed it through Congress. It punishes responsible consumers like me and treats younger individuals as fools who are expected to pay the bills while not paying attention.

Now we learn in videos that came to light this week that Jonathan Gruber, MIT economist and a key architect of the Affordable Care Act, proudly relied on his perceived “stupidity of the American voter” as the basis for designing ObamaCare. Such comments, along with the program’s notoriously dysfunctional website and false assurances that people can keep their previous health plans, are insults to every citizen regardless of party.

Contrary to Medicare, which was quickly accepted at a time of economic vitality as a meaningful complement to Social Security, ObamaCare was the sequel to an overpriced economic stimulus package that didn’t stimulate very much. Those least affected by the recession benefited the most from the stimulus. I think that’s called “trickle-down economics” when Republicans do it, and the economy continues to struggle for good jobs and a real recovery. ObamaCare is part of the problem, not a solution.

For most Democrats in Congress, Medicare was originally a model for health-care reform. Single-payer, universal coverage was the favored approach. Then Republicans let loose the “socialized medicine” boogeyman and Democrats panicked.

Fearful that doing nothing was worse than doing the wrong thing, Democrats gave up on Medicare for the masses and opted for a drastic alternative. ObamaCare is an outrageous combination of private-market inflation, government bureaucracy, excessive mandates and a ridiculously delayed implementation schedule. When the thing finally kicked in, it hit hard—and there is plenty more pain on the way.

Worst of all, ObamaCare looks and feels exactly like what it is: a health-care plan devised by lawyers and corporate executives rather than true health-care providers. Democrats are top-heavy with attorneys, and this hurts the party on many issues.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

6 Responses to People Waking Up

  • The insurance companies did not push ObumblerCare through Congress. The DonkeyCrats did that all by themselves. They got insurance company executives to buy into it (suckers!) but it is entirely a DonkeyCrat creation.

    I work for an insurance company. Believe me, ObumblerCare has made our lives a lot harder. It isn’t as bad as the lower middle class who have found out that they have to pay for health insurance with a $10,000 deductible, guaranteeing that they are paying for something they can never use.

    The stupid Federal Government never ran Medicare by themselves. They have always needed private insurance companies to process Medicare claims. the Federal Government never had the ability to handle all of Medicare and they still don’t. In the early and mid 1990s, Medicare Advantage plans became available to replace the traditional Medicare Part A, Part B and the Medigap insurance all seniors had to buy to pay for what medicare does not, and it was very successful. Needless to say, pinheads like the current President, Dingy Harry, Bela Pelosi and Paul Krugman (uglier than Jack Krugman, but not as talented) HATE Medicare Advantage, where a senior signs up for insurance coverage and almost all of the premium is paid to the insurance company by CMS.

    It would take a crybaby Democrat to blame the foibles of ObumblerCare on insurance companies. I know why people hate insurance companies, but we ain’t the Federal Government.

  • I agree PF. The critique of ObamaCare is flawed, but the interesting thing is that this Democrat activist is critiquing it at all and recognizes that it is a disaster of epic proportions.

  • Obumercare is not Socialized medicine, it is complete and total Socialist medicine. When the government can levy fines and/or jail time for those who choose not to participate in one form or another of this boondoggle, that is Socialist. And since the Democrat party has become the Socialist party and is quickly on its way to becoming the Communist party, the Democrat party will fight repeal of this horrible law tooth and nail. The only Democrats who might not be on board will be those whose job is on the line in the next election. When a Democrat starts talking and/or voting like a Republican, you know he is up for election! But after he is re-elected, he talks and votes like a Socialist.

  • I would not say all insurance companies disliked the Obamacare. The lure of new money from Sugar Daddy and increased bureaucracy was music to some larger insurers. What better way to crush your competition than to have Uncle Sam legislate them away. More so than insurers, I noticed a lot of large hospitals and health provider networks supporting Obamacare. Reason #1: Society better insured and ultimately receiving better healthcare. LOL! I kid! Reason #1 was a promise of more government $$$. So many of them survive on it.

  • BTW, I happen to agree with Gruber. Those that did not swallow the Obamacare lie are intelligent.

  • “Obumercare is not Socialized medicine, it is complete and total Socialist medicine. When the government can levy fines and/or jail time for those who choose not to participate in one form or another of this boondoggle, that is Socialist.”
    .
    Thank you James for clarity.

When Congress Makes a Joke, It’s A Law

Wednesday, July 23, AD 2014

So when all the yielding and objections is over, the other Senator said, “I object to the remarks of a professional joker being put into the Congressional Record.” Taking a dig at me, see? They didn’t want any outside fellow contributing. Well, he had me wrong. Compared to them I’m an amateur, and the thing about my jokes is that they don’t hurt anybody. You can say they’re not funny or they’re terrible or they’re good or whatever it is, but they don’t do no harm. But with Congress — every time they make a joke it’s a law. And every time they make a law it’s a joke.

Will Rogers

After 32 years at the bar I have reached some conclusions about legislation and the law.  First, legislation tends to be a sloppy process.  In the hurly-burly of the legislative process, and the hacking and re-writing of proposed legislation, not infrequently the finished product contains parts that do not mesh well with pre-existing laws, portions that make no sense at all or sections that simply are logically inconsistent with other sections.  As these laws go into force, most of the time they eventually are challenged by attorneys in law suits and the attorneys wrapped in black, i.e. judges, have to figure out what to do next.  Second, a big problem that exists in this area is the doctrine of separation of powers.  The courts are not supposed to rewrite legislation passed by a legislature.  A whole body of law exists to aid a judge in this thicket called statutory construction.  In a few states there are actual statutes governing how a court is to interpret a statute, and some laws actually have sections telling a court, for example, that if it finds that one section of a statute is unconstitutional, then the remainder of the statute will still be in full force and effect.  However, most of the time, in both the states and federal judicial systems, the courts rely on prior cases ruling on how courts are to interpret statutes.

One of these rules of construction is that courts will usually not rewrite a statute which is clear in order to produce a new statute that matches legislative intent rather than what is actually written in a statute.  Here is a hypothetical example:  A state passes legislation that states that all lawyers will appear in court dressed in clown garb.  Now in every section of the statute the term “clown garb” is used, except in one section where the term used is “garb”.  A court might view this as a simple mistake and say that reading the statute all together, it is clear that attorneys are required to wear clown garb.  However, let us say that a preamble to the legislation states that this is being done in order to underline the fact that most attorneys are bozos and therefore should be dressed as Bozo the Clown when they appear in court, but in the body of the statute only the term “clown garb” is used.  In that case a court would likely rule that although the legislative intent is clear the court cannot rewrite the legislation and attorneys, as long as they are dressed like any sort of clown and not just as Bozo, may appear in court.

Well, something similar just occurred in regard to that Frankenstein of the legislative process, the Affordable Care Act, i.e. ObamaCare.

When ObamaCare was passed it had 381,517 words in it.  It was a poorly crafted piece of legislation with many parts that mesh poorly with other parts, and with existing statutes, and many parts that do not make sense.  However, where it has come a cropper is in a section that is clearly written.  In Halbig v. Burwell the question was litigated about whether taxpayer subsidies for health insurance were available in the 36 states where the Federal government set up the healthcare exchanges and not the individual State governments.  A three judge panel of the Federal DC Circuit Court of Appeals voted three to one that such subsidies were not available because the act as passed by Congress restricted those subsidies to health care insurance purchased through health care exchanges established by the States:

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

18 Responses to When Congress Makes a Joke, It’s A Law

  • The wise legislator will always bear in mind the words of the great Jean-Étienne-Marie Portalis, one of the men who composed the Code Napoléon and often referred to as the philosopher of the commission: “”A host of things are necessarily left to usage, to the discussion of men learned in the law, to the decision of judges….The function of statutory law is to fix, in broad lines, the general maxims of the law, to establish principles that will be fecund in consequences, and not to descend to the details of questions that may arise in each subject. It is for the judge and the jurist, imbued with the general spirit of the laws, to direct their applications.”

    Portalis, a Catholic, who had suffered for his faith under the Revolution, made another mordant observation: “We have too much indulged, in recent times, in changes and reforms; if in matters of institutions and laws the periods of ignorance witness abuses, the periods of philosophy and enlightenment too often witness excesses.”

  • When ObamaCare was passed it had 381,517 words in it.

    That would be over 600 single-spaced typed pages, letter-head dimensions, pica type. I think the original Social Security Act was about 35 pages long. The banking legislation passed in 1933 did not make it into a 3 digit page count. I am not sure the act authorizing Medicare and Medicaid in 1965 did either.

    This was adjacent in time to the Dodd-Frank financial ‘reform’, another door stop. They’re not getting better at this sort of thing. I think its a mix of incompetence and what is done to please the Democratic Party’s many rent-seeking camp followers.

  • This reminds me of the developments and accretions to the Law received by Moses.

  • The history of the 20th ecntury is replete with tragic examples of how state power, central planning, command economies lead to economic ruin.

    Mark Twain on Congressmen:

    “Fleas can be taught nearly anything that a Congressman can.”
    – What Is Man?

    “…the smallest minds and the selfishest souls and the cowardliest hearts that God makes.”
    – Letter fragment, 1891

    “Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself.”
    – Mark Twain, a Biography

    “Congressman is the trivialist distinction for a full grown man.”
    – Notebook #14, 11/1877 – 7/1878

    “All Congresses and Parliaments have a kindly feeling for idiots, and a compassion for them, on account of personal experience and heredity.”
    – Mark Twain’s Autobiography; also in Mark Twain in Eruption

    “It could probably be shown by facts and figures that there is no distinctly native American criminal class except Congress.”
    – Pudd’nhead Wilson’s New Calendar

    “…I never can think of Judas Iscariot without losing my temper. To my mind Judas Iscariot was nothing but a low, mean, premature, Congressman.”
    – “Foster’s Case”, New York Tribune, 3/10/1873

  • As Senator Beaugard Claghorn of Allen’s Alley used to say, “That’s a joke, son!”

  • Thanks for the Bozo the Clown garb example! Memorable.

  • And then there is the due process angle. People have a right to rely on the words of written law. If Congress passes a law that says X, it is critical that people can rely on X even if Courts or various elite specialists are confident that Congress must have instead meant Y. As Don points out, this due process concern does not apply when a law says something that can fairly be interpreted as either X or Y, but that simply was not the situation presented to the DC Circuit.

  • Stephen E. here’s a clip of Claghorn that seems appropriate for today

  • Seen on FACEBOOK: “What did liberals use before candles? Electricity.”

  • Trivia note: Foghorn Leghorn from the Looney Tunes cartoons was originally created as a spoof of Senator Beauregard Claghorn.

  • “upper south carolina!” 😀

  • The Affordable Care Act lacks a severability clause…possibly the result of rushing through legislation.
    .
    That omission may constitute the loose thread that unravels it all.

  • That omission may constitute the loose thread that unravels it all.

    The schaldenfreude is limited by the anxiety that the President and Congress have managed to take down the market for household medical insurance and bollix the employer-paid market as well.

    Otherwise, I’d chuckle. He went after a policy monument to himself (but did none of the detail work) in lieu of addressing the structural defects of the financial sector (in regard to which we got a piece of spaghetti logic written in the course of bull sessions by lobbyists parked in Barney Frank’s office). The whole two-step was so vain and irresponsible he deserves to have it blow up in his face. Now if the public could just breeze through like the Road Runner while Pres. Sooper Genius gets taken out….

  • Ad writes, “…The schaldenfreude is limited by the anxiety that the President and Congress have managed to take down the market for household medical insurance and bollix the employer-paid market as well…”
    .
    Rahm Emanuel might characterize your concerns as an opportunity…
    .
    or in his own words…””You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it’s an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.”

  • Laws can often have applications undreamt of by those who enacted them.
    A famous instance of this is Art 1384 of the Code Napoléon that makes one responsible for damage caused by “those things one has in one’s custody.” [des chose qu’il on a sous sa garde]
    The only application that occurred to the early commentators was to injuries caused by animals and falling flower-pots. However, when, about a hundred years ago, the courts first started dealing with motor accidents, they used Art 1384 to impose strict liability on drivers, thereby eliminating the question of fault. If two cars collide, each pays for the damage caused to the other. Compulsory insurance policies are written on that basis and the result is a great saving of judicial time and legal expenses.
    Similarly, the courts found Art 1184 (« Il n’y a que les choses qui sont dans le commerce qui puissent être l’objet des conventions. » – “Only things in trade can be the subject of an agreement”] ready to hand to enable them to invalidate the sale of human gametes and agreements for surrogate gestation.

  • Who could resist this little ditty – It’s worthy of Gilbert and Sullivan

    I’m the parliamentary draftsman
    I compose the country’s laws,
    And of half the litigation
    I’m undoubtedly the cause.
    I employ a kind of English
    Which is hard to understand.
    Though the purists do not like it,
    All the lawyers think it’s grand

    I’m the parliamentary draftsman,
    And my sentences are long.
    They are full of inconsistencies
    Grammatically wrong.
    I put parliamentary wishes
    Into language of my own,
    And though no one understands them
    They’re expected to be known.

    I compose in a tradition
    Which was founded in the past,
    And I’m frankly rather puzzled
    As to how it came to last.
    But the civil service use it,
    And they like it at the Bar,
    For it helps to show the laity
    What clever chaps they are.

    I’m the parliamentary draftsman
    And my meanings are not clear,
    And though words are merely language
    I have made them my career.
    I admit my kind of English
    Is inclined to be involved.
    But I think it’s even more so
    When judicially solved.

    I’m the parliamentary draftsman,
    And they tell me it’s a fact
    That I often make a muddle
    Of a simple little Act.
    I’m a target for the critics,
    And they take me in their stride.
    Oh, how nice to be a critic
    Of a job you’ve never tried.
    J.P.C., “The Parliamentary Draftsman”, Poetic Justice (London: Stevens & Sons Ltd., 1947),

  • Comment of the week MPS! Take ‘er away Sam!:

  • I’m sure John Roberts will save the ACA and let us know what the law meant and not what it says.

Sebelius Flees Sinking ObamaCare Ship

Thursday, April 10, AD 2014

HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius announced her resignation today.  Her signature achievement is the disastrous rollout of ObamaCare.  She is fleeing a sinking ship as the elections in the fall are shaping up to be a disaster for the Democrats, much of it based on reaction to ObamaCare.  That Sebelius has helped destroy the Obama administration, or at least neuter it, I find to be richly ironic.

Sebelius throughout her political career has been a strident, one might say fanatical, supporter of abortion.  In 1992 as a member of the Kansas House of Representatives, her support for pro-abortion legislation brought this rebuke from Archbishop Ignatius Strecker.  After she was elected as governor, she constantly clashed with Archbishop James Keleher over abortion.  On May 9, 2008, Archbishop Naumann announced that Sebelius should refrain from taking communion until she repented of her position in favor of abortion and went to confession.

Sebelius is no ordinary supporter of abortion.  She was a close ally of the late Tiller the Killer, otherwise known as Dr. George Tiller, the foremost practitioner until his murder of late term abortions in this country.  The ties between Sebelius and Tiller are outlined here.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

33 Responses to Sebelius Flees Sinking ObamaCare Ship

  • Amen!

    . . .and there was rejoicing in the village. . .

  • It will be interesting to see what cushy sinecure has been arranged for her.
    Who wants to bet it will be something in the abortion industry/

  • If the bishop has the authority to forbid pols who are pro-abortion or who manifest any other grave sin to receive communion, they need to use it. This saying they “should” refrain from communion is meaningless, especially when you consider the fact that everyone knows such suggestions are routinely ignored.

  • When one diabolical person leaves the Obama Administration, Obama appoints a replacement twice as diabolical.

  • The term diabolical is misused here Paul. I assure you that if Satan were involved with staffing in this administration the competence factor would rise dramatically!

  • Ms. Sebelius in her testimony before Congressional committees on the health care rollout debacle was both defiant and scornful She deliberately stonewalled and refused to provide necessary factual information to enable Congress in its duties to oversee her work and to remedy the scandalous mess created by professional bureaucrats and Congress. May I add that she appears to suffer from overweening pride [hubris] and that upon her designation as HHS administrator she was socially promoted under the Peter Principle and rose to her level of incompetence.

    Evidently Ms. Sebelius has now been thrown under the bus at this precise time in contemplation of upcoming mid-term elections, and to preserve Obama’s grandiose vision of his place in American history?

    This entire presidency seems to be predicated on the assumption that We the People will forget about her resignation and her absurd behavior, and that a month or two from now few will remember any of this scandal, including the obvious fact that the President is not a leader at all but an adept fund raiser and reader of a teleprompter.

  • Perhaps you are correct, Donald, However, if I were going to emasculate a country’s national power, the three things I would neuter would be not its military, but its health care system, its energy supply system and its educational system. The Democrats – and particularly Barack Hussein Obama – have been singularly successful at this.

    Now I do not know much about health care or education, but I do know what has happened in nuclear energy where Obama has appointed anti-nuclear activist after anti-nuclear activist into the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. There was under George Bush much planning that went into the Global Nuclear Energy Program (GNEP), and third generation passively safe Pressurized and Boiling Water Reactors were going to be built all across the nation. We were even going to have advanced molten salt thorium breeders and high temperature helium gas reactors having greater than 50% efficiency and able to burn up the long lived actinides in used nuclear fuel from today’s light water reactors. Now we have the two PWRs at SONGS (San Onofre Nuclear Generation Station) (the NRC deliberately stalled restart efforts after S/G tube leaks for which SoCal Edison had developed resolution), the PWR at Crystal River in Florida, the PWR at Kewanee out west in Wisconsin and the BWR at Vermont Yankee in Brattleboro, Vermont all being shutdown during the Obama Administration – that’s about 5000 megawatts of safe, clean, low cost electricity permanently removed from the grid. And Obama appointed anti-nuke Gregory Jackzo as NRC Chairman, but when his woman-abusing antics became an embarrassment to the Administration (his fellow 4 Commissioners protested his actions to the White House) he was forced to resign and Obama replaced him with Allison MacFarlane whose husband works in anti-nuclear organizations.

    Just think – Obama is using the EPA to stop coal fired power plants that supply 50% of US electricity, and he is neutering nuclear that supplies 20%. So natural gas has to step in. Then the Russians invade Ukraine, make a deal to sell natural gas real cheap to communist China, and jack up the prices everywhere else in the world so that the now gas-dependent Europe, Canada and the US are hung on ropes. Is Obama capable of planning sabotage like that world-wide? No. But the devil sure is, and really competent Putin is no fool – he knows Germany has de-nuked itself out of hysterical fears of Fukushima which killed only 6 people outright (compared to 33 thousand deaths annually from coal in the US). So Putin takes advantage of Obama’s incompetency.

    But I digress from the topic of this blog post. I really do not know a darn thing about health care or education (can you spell Common Core?), but I do know that that son of a snake in Washington, DC is emasculating our energy system as well as heath care and education, and without access to low cost energy, we cannot afford our technical civilization. So maybe Obama is incompetent, but the Devil who inspires him is entirely too competent.

    The stories I could tell about stupid, useless regulation that contributes not one iota to either safety or quality but ensures the continued prosperity of the federal bureaucrat. You are a lawyer, Donald. You have even more stories than I to tell because you (I suspect) see this up front close and personal every day.

  • Paul: Thanks for your fascinating post. We observe this strange man and his Administration and speculate on motivation and mission. What is the endgame? The means to whatever end are there for all to see. They are abortion -which kills about 15% of the next generation every year, the health care takeover -which will surely reduce survival at the other end of life, the indoctrination of such children as are permitted to live -who will easily swallow fabrications of science and history and growing up docile subjects of a new order. Perhaps, we kooks who during the 50s and 60s feared the UN become a global tyranny were right after all. It all makes sense to atheists who see people as no more than highly evolved and troublesome hairless apes but people of faith can discern the devil in the details. We cannot read minds or peer into the windows of souls and many misdeeds are the product of ignorance. “Father forgive them for they know not what they do”. So perhaps the strange man is no more than a clueless socialist seeking an imaginary justice but the modern movement in its totality reeks of sulfur.

  • Let her get herself to a cloistered convent, confessing and doing penance, until her remaining years are numbered.

  • As the root word of diabolical can be traced to the Castillan word for the devil – diablo – it’s a fitting term for Sebelius’ political actions.

    An alleged Catholic, she has been an open and notorious abortion supporter.

    I am tired of alleged Catholics who enter politics on the Democrat side and climb the ladder supporting abortion all the way up. Sebelius was an arrogant and nasty human being, assigned to preside over a monstrosity of a law. I question how much she damaged obumbler. i submit, as before, that Obumbler cares not a bit. He has his nearly three years in the White House left, for his wife and him to vacation, play golf, fill out brackets for the NCAA basketball tournament and provide no leadership for the problems the nation faces.

  • It makes no matter.

    Another Obama leftist puppet will take her place.

  • Who will fail just as spectacularly because ObamaCare is an unworkable fiasco. That is the lesson to take away from this.

  • No one elected Sebelius. No one voted for Sebelius. Sebelius was appointed.
    Congress did not vote for the HHS Mandate. No one voted for the HHS Mandate. The HHS Mandate was drawn up by an unelected official and imposed by a department of government against the will of the people.

  • Kathleen Sebelius’ roll under the bus will surely give pause to the lady (Lois Lerner) from the IRS.
    If this were “Dragnet” it would be time for Joe Friday to step up the intensity of his questioning.

  • My post above contains an error. I estimated the ratio of abortions to live births at 15%. According to the Center for Disease Control, the abortion ratio was 227 abortions per 1,000 live births. Ergo, 22.7%. Terrible!

  • In keeping with the particular subtext of this post, let me just say that, when Lois Lerner finds herself in front of the bus, she’ll be the one yelling “it’s all for you Damien!”

  • Everything about the Obama Administration is an unworkable fiasco: energy policy, education, health care, environmental, etch. But the peepul wanted a king like that of other nations. 1st Samuel chapter 8.

    Vox populi non est vox Dei.

  • “when Lois Lerner finds herself in front of the bus”

    I wouldn’t be surprised to see a lot MORE Administration officials going under the bus… if the Obamacare fiasco wasn’t enough, now come revelations that the U.S. Treasury has confiscated hundreds of thousands of income tax refunds to repay decades-old debts from alleged overpayments of Social Security and other benefits. Many cases involve taxpayers whose refunds were seized to pay debts allegedly incurred by their PARENTS 30 or 40 years ago:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/social-security-treasury-target-hundreds-of-thousands-of-taxpayers-for-parents-old-debts/2014/04/10/74ac8eae-bf4d-11e3-bcec-b71ee10e9bc3_story.html

    These tax refund interceptions apparently stem from an amendment to the 2008 Farm Bill (vetoed by Pres. Bush but overriden by the Democrat-controlled Congress) that removed a former 10-year statute of limitations on collecting debts to the US Treasury, enabling the feds to pursue any alleged debt no matter how old it was. It isn’t, technically, the IRS doing this, but the Bureau of Fiscal Services, a separate division of the Treasury, though in the public mind that distinction probably won’t mean much.

  • William P Walsh asks, “We observe this strange man and his Administration and speculate on motivation and mission. What is the endgame?”

    Surrealism transferred from art to life. Etienne Gilson described it: “To abolish existing creation in order to create another: that is also the ambition of authentic surrealism, by which I mean the one which Andre Breton defined a short while ago as: “something dictated by thought, released from all control of reason, divorced from all aesthetic or moral preoccupation”. We will then be able to say everything as well as to do everything. If we start by annihilating everything, what limits can stop us? None whatever. Everything is possible, provided only that this creative spark which surrealism seeks to disclose deep in our being be preceded by a devastating flame. “The most simple surrealist act consists in this: to go down into the streets, pistol in hand, and shoot at random, for all you are worth, into the crowd.” Why not? This massacre of values is necessary to create values that are really new. “Everything is still to be done,” affirms Andre Breton, “every means becomes good when employed to destroy the ideas of family, native land, religion.” Now that is not only necessary: since God is dead, it has become possible. The eternal obstructor who has encumbered the heavens ever since the beginning of the world has suddenly disappeared. The terrible interlocutor to whom, during ages without number, man gave only trembling reply — behold he has suddenly vanished, leaving for the first time man, face to face with himself, alone in a world empty of God, and at last master of his destiny.”

  • MPS-
    “Surrealism transferred from art to life.”
    The painting Gilson skillfully creates is disturbing and painfully realistic. The random acts of violence that plague schools homes and public gatherings give life to the gory painting. Life without Jesus Christ is death.

  • Reading TAC is always educational I just read your Tiller link ( article by the now deceased Catholic convert Robert Novak) , Lamentabili, Pascendi and my reading list just keeps growing!

  • Planned Destroyerhood and its blood money supporting politician’s. 🙁
    What a sorry lot.

    The new HHS Czar is another pro-death dolly…but you already guessed that.

    Lord. When you ask for an accounting of ours, have mercy on the blood spilling “do-gooders.”

  • Marco: The innocence of the created soul, infused into the human being, making of him an immortal human being, at conception of the infused soul at the beginning of the existence of a new human being, is denied by Roe v. Wade under oath and is the denying of human rights and is perjury. Aborting the innocent for the sins of his parents is unconstitutional and un-American.
    .
    Too many persons have abandoned their right to vote as they recognize that the process has become corrupt. Freedom from murder, perjury, cheating, lying, stealing and coveting has been vanquished. All that is left to constituents is to offer sacrifice to the powers that be or refuse to affirm their constituency in the office of president to such a regime.
    .
    We have inscribed in our founding principles the saving grace for freedom and for re-establishing law and order in our nation. To those who refuse law and order, let them find three-quarters of the states to ratify any change in our Constitution. Let me assure you, marco, that the passive-aggressive constituents will not ratify any change to our founding principles to subvert freedom under God. To those who have subverted our freedom and truth, there is nothing that will save them from the laws that they inflicted on our true citizens.
    .
    I can hear Sebelius now before the throne of God, pleading: “I was just following orders.”
    Elaine Krewer: “Many cases involve taxpayers whose refunds were seized to pay debts allegedly incurred by their PARENTS 30 or 40 years ago: ”
    .
    Article 1, Section 9 and 10 of the Constitution for the United States of America states that no Bill Attainder and no ex post facto law be made, that no members of a family or friends be held liable for the crimes and actions of another person. Only for his own sins must a man be punished.
    .
    No law may be made after the fact to govern the actions of a person. Indebtedness incurred 30 and 40 years ago must be judged according to the law at that time, 30 or 40 years ago.
    .
    The government is acting as though it owns the citizens and their tax refunds when the government does not even own the taxes and refunds. Taxes are owned by the taxpayers. Communism treats the people as a group, but not as individuals. This move to treat people to “guilt by association” and extraction of payment from relatives harkens back to when a whole family was put into debtors’ prison or sold into slavery. Welcome to the gulag. Prison for us who hold that all men are created equal and answer only to God is in the wings.
    .
    Paul: The military is the only branch of government that can successfully hold a coup and take back America, making the military the most dangerous to Obama.

  • The killers have ratified their freedom to kill.

  • Mary De Voe, you have put into words thoughts I almost dare not think. This country is in great peril but a majority are blithely unaware.

  • Pingback: Philosophy & Morality in Public Discourse - God & Caesar
  • “That Sebelius through ineptitude…”

    Sin makes you stupid-

  • David: “That Sebelius through ineptitude…”
    Sin makes you stupid”
    .
    AMEN

  • The point isn’t the failure to properly implement the thing. The point is the thing (Obamacare) is a gigantic stinker from A to Z.

    To wit, abortion and artificial contraception are now “health care.” Cancer screenings are not. Bring on the death panels.

  • Sebelius throughout her political career has been a strident, one might say fanatical, supporter of abortion.
    –Donald R. McClarey
     
    Where was her bishop throughout her political career?

  • The name of the bishop escapes me but he did have public battles with Sebelius. She didn’t care. She supported Tiller the Killer.

    There are days in which I wonder if it were better for all of us if we had a Pinochet type pull off a coup and lock up the leftists in prison camps in the Alaskan wilderness. FDR did it to American citizens of Japanese heritage.

    One needs to go to blogs such as this one to get good Catholic news. Recently, the Archbishop of Boston celebrated Mass in the Arizona desert not far from the American border. He yammered on about the “broken” immigration system.

    O’Malley is a fool. Boston is an epicenter of Catholic dissent with regards to abortion and homosexuality and has been for decades. Obumblercare seeks to institutionalize abortion and birth control. Yet, we get whining about immigration.
    Never do the US or Mexican bishops bring up the policies of the Mexican government – to push off their poor people onto the US and to round up and deport any illegal immigrants entering Mexico from its southern border.

  • Michael Paterson-Seymour: What did Andre Breton do with the devil? And what did Andre Breton do with his Guardian Angel? especially now that he is free of God? And why did Andre Breton do it? Andre Breton described hell.

ObamaCare: Do It to Shut the Nagging Moms Up

Friday, March 21, AD 2014

A tribute to just how delusional contemporary liberalism is.  Young people do not want to sign up for ObamaCare policies which they view as too expensive, and almost certainly unnecessary for them while they are young and healthy.  Solution:  have celebrity moms nag them to purchase the insurance and they will sign on in droves!  These people truly do believe in unicorns and pixie dust as the solution to real world problems, and that self interest will bow to the lure of second hand celebrity.  (At least unicorns and pixies would be entertaining as compared to the wretched video above.)  Liberalism since the time of McGovern has been a long revolt against reality, but reality always wins in the end.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

29 Responses to ObamaCare: Do It to Shut the Nagging Moms Up

  • If these moms are so concerned, then, why don’t they provide health insurance for their children?

  • Too funny.
    For the record, young people do need health insurance, but only a catastrophic plan that should take into account the reduced risks associated with their youth. Forcing them to subsidize the middle-aged and elderly is grounded in politics, not fairness.

  • The best and simplest health care reform we could have Mike is legislation requiring all health insurance companies to offer a la carte health insurance where the consumer gets to pick his plans without either the States or the Feds mandating required coverages. That and abolishing the absurd restriction that health care insurance cannot be sold across state lines, along with mandating that all care givers disclose their prices electronically on public accessible web sites would drive costs down dramatically. In short, turn the medical marketplace into a real market.

  • These liberal feminists would have aborted the very children whom they urge to get on board with Obamacare had they the chance

  • Thought this was going to be on the endless “Moms against an amorphous threat with all debate answered by YOU HATE CHILDREN!!!” groups.

  • Donald, the key is to eliminate the tax break for employer-provided health insurance. It is that special treatment that results in insurance being offered through employers rather than directly though insurers, which I agree is much preferable. I doubt that law you suggest would be needed if we eliminated the tax preference. After all, insurers do not need a law requiring them to offer property, casualty, and life insurance to individuals and families. Yes, health insurance should be offered across state lines, but that does implicate some regulatory challenges since states do regulate insurance and their public policy choices will never be identical. Federal law could change to substitute federal regulation for state, but on balance I’m doubtful that that would be an improvement. Finally, none of these changes addresses the social risks resulting from a significant portion of the population choosing to go without insurance for catastrophic or emergency care. When those folks encounter catastrophies or emergencies, taxpayers inevitably end up paying the bill. This is why the unfairly maligned “mandate” makes policy sense, though it should only require catasrophic/emergency insurance — i.e., only services which the taxpayer would otherwise have to provide. Also, such mandates should only be at the state level. Leaving aside the rather famous constitutional issues, a federal mandate leaves no room for experimentation based on demographic diversity and social change. Political forces being what they are a federal mandate would eventually become richer and richer in terms of the breadth of the coverage mandated.

    Finally, I would note that insurance is by nature a bad bet. Insurance companies are designed to make a profit. That does not mean that risk sharing and transfer is not a good idea. It is prudent and necessary for catastrophic events. But any time that the user of a service is separated from the payer, abuse will happen. People use services differently if it is other people’s money. This is inevitable with insurance, but manageable if the coverage is limited to large exposures. The separation between an the payor (i.e. insurer) and user (patient) is exacerbated when a fourth party employer (the health care provider is the 3rd party) is introduced into the mix. ObamaCare doubles down on this inefficiency instead of retreating from it as you suggest.

  • “Donald, the key is to eliminate the tax break for employer-provided health insurance.”

    All health insurance should simply be deductible.

    “After all, insurers do not need a law requiring them to offer property, casualty, and life insurance to individuals and families.”

    One can go through life without any of those insurance policies, while health insurance is a necessity as people grow older and sicker. A la carte policies, free of state or federal mandated coverage, would allow low cost alternatives for people who wish to avail themselves of such policies.

    “Yes, health insurance should be offered across state lines, but that does implicate some regulatory challenges since states do regulate insurance and their public policy choices will never be identical. Federal law could change to substitute federal regulation for state, but on balance I’m doubtful that that would be an improvement.”

    State regulation of health insurance has always been a political football. A national market for health insurance can never be established as long as the states and the feds attempt to write the policies to protect their pet special interests. Federal pre-emption is necessary to establish a free market in such policies. The risk of Federal regulation would be high, but after the ObamaCare fiasco I think most people are ready for some free market common sense.

    “This is why the unfairly maligned “mandate” makes policy sense, though it should only require catasrophic/emergency insurance”

    I disagree. People should simply be on the hook for reimbursing the government by seizure of tax refunds, including earned income tax credit, social security benefits, pensions, stoppage of welfare benefits, etc. That should be incentive enough for people to get health insurance. Those who have nothing to take would be unable to pay for health insurance premiums in any case. The truly indigent could go on Medicaid, but a vastly reduced Medicaid, better able to serve the truly needy rather than the swollen monster now that has too many people on the rolls who could pay a large portion of their health care costs. Illegal aliens who owe any medical bills that are paid for by the government should be promptly expelled from the country and their goods confiscated to defray the cost of their care.

    People who go naked without any health insurance will always be a minority. We should attempt to make that option as painful as possible if the dice come up snake eyes on their gamble.

  • Mike Petrik wrote, “Insurance companies are designed to make a profit.”

    In Europe, quite a number of insurers are mutuals.

  • I have worked in health insurance – financial and regulatory reporting – for over 25 years. State regulations are a nightmare to deal with. Insurance companies can offer health insurance across state lines, but getting licensed in multiple states is costly and time consuming. it’s bad enough when a company wants to offer vision or dental insurance in multiple states, but comprehensive health insurance….ugh.

    Processing and filing regulatory paperwork to keep these licenses is a huge part of my job – and I hate it. ObumblerCare has made it worse and the worst of it is yet to come.

    I will not allow my sons to go into this line of work.

  • Some guy who claims to be pope says this about those pesky, indigent illegal aliens:
    .
    “’Where is your brother?’ the voice of his blood cries even to me, God says. This is not a question addressed to others: it is a question addressed to me, to you, to each one of us. These our brothers and sisters seek to leave difficult situations in order to find a little serenity and peace, they seek a better place for themselves and for their families – but they found death. How many times to those who seek this not find understanding, do not find welcome, do not find solidarity! And their voices rise up even to God! And once more to you, the residents of Lampedusa, thank you for your solidarity! I recently heard one of these brothers. Before arriving here, he had passed through the hands of traffickers, those who exploit the poverty of others; these people for whom the poverty of others is a source of income. What they have suffered! And some have been unable to arrive!
    .
    “’Where is your brother?’ Who is responsible for this blood?” Etc., etc., etc. ad nauseum. Thankfully, that guy was talking about some far off country. No applicability here.

  • The context of his homily is important:
    http://www.news.va/en/news/pope-on-lampedusa-the-globalization-of-indifferenc/?frommarfeel=yes

    Both because you are shifting his meaning away from indifference to folks’ deaths, and because even if he had said what you desire to claim, a Pope’s words don’t outweigh the Church’s teaching about the right of a country to set the rules so long as they are moral ones. (And no, “I would be better off materially” is not a good enough reason.)

  • “’Where is your brother?’
    Hopefully in his own nation hard at work to support his family, just as I am in my own nation hard at work to support mine. Americans are a generous people, but some six million illegal aliens from Mexico alone is not a call for neighborly assistance, but another form of invasion. I am perfectly happy to assist people in need due to some catastrophe in their own nation. I am not willing to see them come here, take jobs away from native Americans, and strain public resources. There is a difference between being a good Christian and being a total chump. This of course leaves aside the machinations of some big businesses that thrive on cheap illegal alien labor, counting on local social welfare programs to supplement the meager wages paid out. Open borders immigration is bad social policy all around and all the pretty words in the world, no matter who says them, can’t make this pig of a policy any prettier.

  • Killing the goose that lays golden eggs, even though you get a free egg every couple of months from the goose’s owners.

  • These people remind me of the photos from the Soviet Union in the 1930’s showing peasants happily signing up to join a collective farm.

  • A coherent case can be made for protectionism. It is more difficult, however, to support the free movement of capital, the free movement of goods, but not the free movement of labour.

    Because we have freedom of movement within the EU, the French people, like the Scots, enjoy the inestimable benefits of my ill-requited legal services, the only sufferers being the former cartel of avocats. By the same token, I can have my antiquated geyser maintained by a rapacious, but efficient Polish plumber.

  • “Some guy who claims to be pope says this about those pesky, indigent illegal aliens…”

    There was also this other guy who claimed to be pope and will soon be canonized who said this about illegal immigration:

    “Illegal immigration should be prevented, but it is also essential to combat vigorously the criminal activities which exploit illegal immigrants.”

    Wow, it should be prevented. What a wack job that alleged pope was.

    Then that alleged pope also said this:

    “When no solution is foreseen, these same institutions should direct those they are helping, perhaps also providing them with material assistance, either to seek acceptance in other countries, or to return to their own country.”

    Are you kidding? You mean you can kick them out. Did that poor excuse for a pope ever hear about Catholic Social Justice? Why are they making him a saint?

  • The whole concept of insurance is based on spreading out the financial risk of a rare or statistically unlikely event over a long period of time and among lots of people. Events such as houses burning down or people getting in serious car accidents do happen regularly, but, the odds of them happening to any specific individual are fairly low.

    Trying to insure for events that affect just about everyone, such as ordinary illnesses and routine checkups, inevitably places too much strain on the system and leads to companies going under or having to charge sky-high premiums. Imagine how costly your car insurance would be, for example, if it had to cover routine maintenance such as oil changes and tire rotations (not to mention that car repair places would probably jack up the price of these services simply because they could).

    For that reason I think health insurance policies should be designed primarily for rare, high-cost or catastrophic events. For the more frequent or routine events such as checkups, immunizations, well-baby care, etc., a medical savings account, a concierge plan (you pay an annual or monthly fee to your doctor to cover all your services for the period) or a medical expense sharing plan (a type of coverage sponsored by various Christian organizations and specifically authorized under Obamacare) would probably be more appropriate ways to manage costs for people who have difficulty paying for them on the spot.

  • Trying to insure for events that affect just about everyone, such as ordinary illnesses and routine checkups, inevitably places too much strain on the system and leads to companies going under or having to charge sky-high premiums. Imagine how costly your car insurance would be, for example, if it had to cover routine maintenance such as oil changes and tire rotations (not to mention that car repair places would probably jack up the price of these services simply because they could).

    If the insurance including that was grouped by probability of use– say, miles driven and age of car?– then there’s no inherent problem with “insuring” to include regularly scheduled maintenance; it’s when you group unlike things and remove visibility of the costs that it causes problems. Our minivan is scheduled for an oil change ever 4,500 miles, according to the book, but we also use synthetic; Laurence’s 1970’s jeep runs as much on oil as it does on gas, but uses normal oil.

    I wouldn’t mind buying “insurance” that paid for regularly scheduled maintenance up to XYZ amount per thing, with some service groups agreeing to charge exactly that amount. I can even see a big demand for it for those who know that they have “sucker” written across their forehead when it comes to vehicles, and aren’t sure of themselves.
    (Let me tell you about when Jiffy Lube tried to sell me a window repair on a chip that had been patched the last three times I came through, and wanted to sell me a replacement lightbulb for an area that doesn’t have a light…..)

    The problem comes when you can’t shop around and when you have groups with wildly different demands shoved together, and those who get insurance subsidize those who defraud the system, which is legally prevented from stopping the defrauding.

  • Philip, that excerpt was from an excellent message by John Paul II that everyone should read, beginning to end. Here is the link for convenience:
    http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/messages/migration/documents/hf_jp-ii_mes_25071995_undocumented_migrants_en.html

  • Yes, an excellent message that includes the fullness of Catholic teaching including respect for persons, helping immigrants, decrying illegal immigration, respecting the rights of states to set limits to immigration and, where necessary, to deport illegal immigrants.

    Quite different than the simplistic message that you first conveyed.

  • Quite different than the simplistic message that you first conveyed.
    lol. So, Philip, to what extent does Donald’s message — the one that prompted my comment — include the fullness of Catholic teaching on respect for persons, helping immigrants, decrying illegal immigration, respecting the rights of states to set limits to immigration and, where necessary, to deport illegal immigrants?
    .
    “Illegal aliens who owe any medical bills that are paid for by the government should be promptly expelled from the country and their goods confiscated to defray the cost of their care.”

  • Such a comment by Don is in fact consistent with the rights of the state protecting the common good. First, illegal immigration per Catholic Social teaching is immoral as it violates the right of the state to set limits on immigration and the duty of persons to respect those laws. Second, as illegal immigrants, there is no right per se to free medical care provided by the state. (In fact, there is no right per se for citizens to be provided free medical care by the state.) Certainly in a time of massive deficit spending and an ill-conceived state run medical system, the state can decide that, for the common good, illegal immigrants can be denied certain services and can, as JP II has clearly stated, be deported.

    Now, per Catholic Social teaching, one may disagree with this assessment, taking into account other factors, as CST allows for a diversity of opinions in solving social ills. But Don’s position does take into account the fullness of Catholic teaching as noted and not a simple “take care of everyone of not be Christian” approach.

  • That should read “Take care of everyone or not be a Christian.”

  • Such a comment by Don is in fact consistent with the rights of the state protecting the common good.
    Nobody ever said it wasn’t. But as soon as anyone here quotes the Bible, or quotes the Catholic Catechism, or quotes a pope (past or present) in an attempt to provide the fullness of Catholic teaching, that is when commenters around here get really agitated. And that’s weird because they are not getting upset at the person who made the original comment, they’re getting upset at the person who steers the conversation toward Catholic teaching.
    .
    Okay we are serious off-topic. Philip and Don and Foxfier can vent at me one more time, but any further comments by me here will be on-topic of the original post. I’m not ignoring you, I’m not going away mad, I am just not going to continue off-topic.

  • “Hopefully in his own nation hard at work to support his family, just as I am in my own nation hard at work to support mine.”
    .
    Many of the pubic schools and churches were built by the workmen’s own hands from the brick made his own hands in the evenings after their jobs.

  • Nobody ever said it wasn’t.

    You tried to imply it with your selective and misleading partial quotes.

    I’m not ignoring you, I’m not going away mad, I am just not going to continue off-topic.

    I guess that’s as close as we’re going to get to an admission that you’re wrong. Being off topic was not a problem to you initiated the attempt use the Pope as a club and claim that a country’s government not paying for medical care for those who illegally entered the area was somehow anti-Catholic.

  • Being honest folk & sincerely wanting to do what is best for others–we are trying to think of how to actually provide quality care for people at the lowest cost in the most efficient manner. That was never the goal of those who passed Obamacare–if it had been their true goal, they would have read the bill they voted on–and it would not have been thousands of pages long–and the thousand exemptions granted for political favor would not have been granted–nor the requirement that Christians violate their conscience. The overarching purpose of that piece of legislation was government control of the private sector and redistribution of wealth–as is shown for all to see by the refusal of those who voted for Obamacare to participate in it as well as the dictatorial actions of our current president in altering the law by issuing decrees with any legitamate authority to do so. Even to say that Obama care was ” passed” is not the full truth. As the current speaker of the house had to say at that time–she [Nancy Pelosi] “reckoned” it passed because it could not be passed any other way.

  • In short, turn the medical marketplace into a real market.

    Most reasons why political bodies resist plain common-sense solutions such as that one is because, as the Instapundit frequently observes, they have “insufficient opportunities for graft”.

Do Not Laugh!

Saturday, December 14, AD 2013

9 Responses to Do Not Laugh!

  • All these liberal progressives deserve exactly what they are getting. I personally am glad they will suffer the consequences of their support for Obamacare.

  • Redistributive plan turns out to be redistributive

    guess people feel nicer supporting that in the abstract

  • There is some justice left in this world. HAHAHA. Stay healthy, everyone!

  • MWAHAHAHAHA!!
    Poor liberals, they never realised that their dear leader was a Manchurian candidate sponsored by the insurance industry to force people into high-premium, high-deductible plans.

    Now that the ACA is gouging the “cultural elites” we may see some action. After all, it was the Stamp Act, levied on lawyers and printers that really got the Revolutionary sentiment rolling.

  • “Poor liberals, they never realised that their dear leader was a Manchurian candidate sponsored by the insurance industry to force people into high-premium, high-deductible plans.”

    Interesting conspiracy theory but no

  • I generally put little stock in conspiracy theories, just because I have a hard
    time believing that large numbers of people could be so organized for so long
    as to pull something like placing a manchurian candidate in office. So yeah, I
    don’t think that it was some vast, deep-cover conspiracy behind the empty suit
    we currently have in the white house.

    It is interesting, however, to note that the day Obamacare was passed by
    congress, the insurance giants like Aetna and Humana saw a considerable surge
    in their stock prices…

    Oh, and the tears of these liberal elites are a sweet, sweet nectar– a balm to my soul.

  • Obama will work with insurance companies wherever he can, but I don’t get the sense that if they objected to something he really wanted to do he’d care all that much.

    Democrats have wanted some kind of national health insurance program since FDR/Truman, it’s not new.

  • Clinton: The Bolshevic Revolt that brought communism to the world for over a century was fomented by 79 people who were promised Religious Freedom by Lenin. After Czar Nicholas and his family were executed, the Bolshevics asked for Religious Freedom and it is said that Lenin laughed them out of his office. Constant vigilance is the price of freedom. These people have no idea, none at all, that the law is being used against them instead of for them.

  • As the cliché goes, they are in denial. Eyes shut tight, ears stopped up, they repeat the mantra over and over. How can such well educated, affluent people seem so incapable of logic?

Yep, the Website Malfunctioning Was the Good News for ObamaCare

Monday, December 9, AD 2013

 

 

Hattip to Erika Johnsen at Hot Air.  Even the New York Times is beginning to notice the skyhigh deductibles and co-pays of ObamaCare:

 

In El Paso, Tex., for example, for a husband and wife both age 35, one of the cheapest plans on the federal exchange, offered by Blue Cross and Blue Shield, has a premium less than $300 a month, but the annual deductible is more than $12,000. For a 45-year-old couple seeking insurance on the federal exchange in Saginaw, Mich., a policy with a premium of $515 a month has a deductible of $10,000.       

In Santa Cruz, Calif., where the exchange is run by the state, Robert Aaron, a self-employed 56-year-old engineer, said he was looking for a low-cost plan. The best one he could find had a premium of $488 a month. But the annual deductible was $5,000, and that, he said, “sounds really high.”       

By contrast, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation, the average deductible in employer-sponsored health plans is $1,135.       

“Deductibles for many plans in the insurance exchanges are pretty high,” said Stan Dorn, a health policy expert at the Urban Institute. “These plans are more generous than what’s prevalent in the current individual insurance market, but significantly less generous than most employer-sponsored insurance.”       

Caroline F. Pearson, a vice president of Avalere Health, a consulting company that has analyzed hundreds of plans, said: “The premiums are lower than expected, but consumers on the exchange will often face high deductibles and high co-payments for medical services and prescription drugs before they reach the cap on out-of-pocket costs,” $6,350 for an individual and $12,700 for a family.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

One Response to Yep, the Website Malfunctioning Was the Good News for ObamaCare

Quotes Suitable For Framing: Miracle on 34th Street

Saturday, December 7, AD 2013

 

 

But… but maybe he’s only a little crazy like painters or composers or… or some of those men in Washington.

Mr. Shellhammer, Miracle on 34th Street, (1947)

Something to brighten the Christmas Season courtesy of Mary Katharine Ham at Hot Air:

Merry Christmas and happy holidays, Hill staffers!

Capitol Hill staffers are hitting multiple obstacles in trying to enroll in the Obamacare exchange just days before the federal government’s deadline for getting coverage.

They and lawmakers have until Monday to sign up on DC Health Link, the District’s insurance exchange, if they want to maintain the government’s generous employer contribution to their health insurance.

But as crunch time approaches, Democratic and Republican staffers are getting error messages, denials, notices that they’re enrolled in multiple plans and incomplete confirmation — as well as a website that went down briefly Thursday.

Officials at DC Health Link say that they are working quickly to fix each problem. But the snags are causing a lot of frustration and grief.

I feel for anyone who has to go through this process who didn’t have a direct hand in passing this thing. As for the true believers, it is quite useful to have them experience exactly what the rest of America is going through. And, this is what that looks like:

wpid-Screen-Shot-2013-12-06-at-9.16.25-AM

We are in the best of hands.

Rep. John Boehner’s journey through the system has been well documented. It took him 3-4 hours to find out his premiums will double and his co-pays and deductible tripled.

“I’m thrilled to death, as you can tell.”

An amendment to the Affordable Care Act required federal lawmakers and their personal staff to forfeit their government-sponsored health care plans and enroll in state-based insurance exchanges. The goal was to make lawmakers experience what many Americans face in the individual marketplace.

But with the enrollment deadline looming, the complaints are growing louder — and are aimed particularly at the D.C. small-business exchange that members of Congress are supposed to enroll in.

The D.C. exchange’s log-in tool experienced technical difficulties Thursday morning.

“Sigh. I was just in the middle of signing up,” the chief of staff for Sen. Marco Rubio, Florida Republican, tweeted in response to an internal Senate email about the hiccup.

Sen. Ted Cruz’s speechwriter and communications adviser Amanda Carpenter has also been tweeting her experiences. She went to a physical DC Health Link help line offered for staffers after her first online attempt failed.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

5 Responses to Quotes Suitable For Framing: Miracle on 34th Street

Of Course The Website Isn’t Fixed

Monday, December 2, AD 2013

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air reveals what will come as little surprise to those who have been following this story:  the administration did not meet its November 30 deadline to fix the ObamaCare website:

Sloane’s description of the improvement boils down to this — you can go farther into the system before it fails.  That’s well before anyone can actually enroll.  Yesterday, the White House tried to spin the results by claiming that success was sustaining 50,000 concurrent connections in the database, but that’s only success if that’s all the government mandates Americans to do.  And this was on a Sunday, the slowest traffic day of the week.

Of course, the mandate is to actually purchase insurance, and the site’s front end isn’t ready to do that on the heavy scale needed to enroll millions of people in the next 22 days in order to meet the requirement. And that’s just the front end, as the New York Times reminds usThe back end is still mostly missing (via Jeff Dunetz):

Weeks of frantic technical work appear to have made the government’s health care website easier for consumers to use. But that does not mean everyone who signs up for insurance can enroll in a health plan.

The problem is that so-called back end systems, which are supposed to deliver consumer information to insurers, still have not been fixed. And with coverage for many people scheduled to begin in just 30 days, insurers are worried the repairs may not be completed in time.

“Until the enrollment process is working from end to end, many consumers will not be able to enroll in coverage,” said Karen M. Ignagni, president of America’s Health Insurance Plans, a trade group.

The issues are vexing and complex. Some insurers say they have been deluged with phone calls from people who believe they have signed up for a particular health plan, only to find that the company has no record of the enrollment. Others say information they received about new enrollees was inaccurate or incomplete, so they had to track down additional data — a laborious task that would not be feasible if data is missing for tens of thousands of consumers.

In still other cases, insurers said, they have not been told how much of a customer’s premium will be subsidized by the government, so they do not know how much to charge the policyholder.

Jeff wonders where the “Mission Accomplished” banner came from:

So where does the “mission accomplished” come from?

This is the administration where the DOJ investigates itself, where the State Department runs an investigation on Benghazi without interviewing the Secretary of State, and the head of the NSA appoints the people on a commission to investigate the NSA, of course they would have the people charged with fixing a failed website grading their own performance.

Healthcare.gov is not fixed from the standpoint of the insurance companies, nor has the security infrastructure been fixed, but that doesn’t stop the Administration from praising itself.

It took 42 months to roll out this turkey, and we’re going to be eating leftovers from the failure for months to come … and that doesn’t even include the damage done to coverage for millions of Americans who liked their plans.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

7 Responses to Of Course The Website Isn’t Fixed

  • Some one, think it may have been my father, but I am sure others have noticed it and commented on it as well, that much “spending on the poor” and “welfare for the poor” really goes to the middle class and the rich–in the form of bureaucracy jobs and what not.

    Especially now in this day and age with “online banking,” the government could just swipe 10% of our income, sweep it into a government bank, and then redistribute it to “the poor” who would have an account at that bank. Basically, a lot of middle men could be cut out, our taxes would not need to be so high, and the poor would get more assistance. (I am not saying that I necessarily approve of this, but it would be a lot more efficient than the welfare mess we have now.)

    By the way, why does this silly exchange need to be set up anyway? I can go to Blue Cross, or Health Plus, or Aetna, or Health Priority and get my own plan, without having to go through the State to do it.

  • Pingback: MONDAY AFTERNOON EDITION | God & Caesar
  • It is my opinion that Obama needs this boondoggle to cover his lies.

  • American liberalism is like a snake that has attempted to gobble up an animal too big to swallow.

  • My prediction. Obama continues to appear concerned about the web site and makes it his highest priority. (Remember, everything is his first priority.) The site makes progress slowly. Deadline approaches, and the Chairman pushes deadline out further. (Why not abuse power? He’ll meet no resistance.) Obama appears to be working so hard to make Obamacare work, the American people take pity on him.

    “He’s trying his best.”
    “He is just trying to make things better.”
    “If only those rascally Republicans would help, …”

    The 2014 election is not the homerun the GOP and thinking people expect. The GOP makes some gains, but nothing spectacular because
    a) the GOP do not know how to run an offensive play,
    b) Voters sympathizing with Obama’s well intentioned struggles choose to continue giving his lapdog Democrats another chance.

  • “a) the GOP do not know how to run an offensive play,
    b) Voters sympathizing with Obama’s well intentioned struggles choose to continue giving his lapdog Democrats another chance.”

    2010 would indicate otherwise, and sympathy for any politician tends to evaporate quickly when voters see greenbacks flying out of their wallets because of the actions of the party the politician belongs to. We shall see how it all plays out, but I do not think the truly bad news for the Democrats on ObamaCare has yet begun.

  • Indeed, the truly bad news for the Democrats on ObamaCare has yet to begin. Perhaps the troubles with he website serve to mask the full scope of the ObamaCare debacle. Five million cancelled policies are but a drop in the bucket compared with the deluge to come.

Thanksgiving: Time to Discuss ObamaCare?

Tuesday, November 26, AD 2013

 

 

ObamaCare Propaganda Sheet

And you all think that Thanksgiving is about thanking Almighty God and having a great meal!  Allahpundit at Hot Air sets us straight:

Believe it or not, these soulless robots have prepared an actual talking-points memo for the occasion replete with tips on how to plan your “talk.” My favorite: “Integrate the talk into family time.” Good advice — and for my money, the more dramatic the integration, the better. When your cousin pulls out baby pictures of her newborn and tries to pass them around, grab her arm gently but firmly and say, “Hey — isn’t there something more important we should be discussing?”

Don’t be fazed by the stunned silence that follows. That’s your opening to grab your iPad and start the Powerpoint on enrollment that you’ve prepared.

I like the idea that you, by dint of having donated to Obama and happily swallowed endless lies about keeping your plan and your provider network, are necessarily the “voice of reason” at the dinner table this year. In the unlikely event that you find yourself seated across from one of these benighted schmucks, you can play it three ways: One: Deflect. Change the subject. Bring up “The Walking Dead” or how boring the NFL is this year or whether maybe Orwell had a point about statism’s insidious power to dehumanize people by reducing them to cogs in a government propaganda machine. Two: Engage. Ace has prepared a helpful talking-points memo of his own in case you find yourself at a loss upon being pitched on O-Care by the same arrogant little sh*t who called you ignorant for doubting that the program would work at Thanksgiving dinners past. (If Ezra Klein has any conservative relatives, he or she is about to have the best Thanksgiving ever.) Three: If there are people at the table considering buying a plan on the exchange, wait patiently until they’re done cursing Obama for having forced their insurer to cancel their old coverage and then prepare them for how to shop on the exchange.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

14 Responses to Thanksgiving: Time to Discuss ObamaCare?

  • This has got to be the best idea since the suggestion of some self-appointed health experts a couple of years back, that the holidays were a great time to remind your overweight relatives about the dangers of obesity…

    If you read the letter carefully, though, it does NOT say that the reader should initiate dinner table discussions of Obamacare, it simply offers talking points for responding if one is asked about it (“when people turn to you”), or for joining in a discussion that has already begun (“Sometimes it’s easier to just let all those rants go without getting involved”).

    The best line in this letter has to be “Chances are, folks at the dinner table probably look to you mostly as a voice of reason on the subject.” Really? They’re going to look to a hardcore Obama supporter who signed up to be on the Organizing for Action mail/e-mail list as a “voice of reason?”

  • Ha! I beat them too it, and with a stranger (two actually). Insurance and what not came up naturally in conversation. . .on the tennis court of all places. We all agree ObamaCare is a disaster, and I’m likely to lose my insurance next year during the second round of health insurance cancellations.

  • “I beat them TO it . . .” I know where the boys get their dyslexia.

  • I don’t engage in conversation with people for whose opinions I have no respect. So, I can’t ask, “For what are you thankful this year?”

    It’s all lies. Lies. All lies.

    Here’s my coined response to my relative Obama-worshiping idiots: “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame in me. Fool me for five years, I’m an obama voter.”

  • Should I keep the talking points folded in my pocket for easy reference to spring my enlighten superior intellect on my unwitting, ignorant, hate filled, racist, parochial, gun clinging family members? Oh what burden we, the best and brightest, have to bear being saddled with uncles (and other family members) such as we have. I like the idea of the PowerPoint – can someone feed me that too so I do not have to think too hard or do any work. With a PowerPoint , I can do a much better job of talking down to my family. Do not think I am not thankful for anything . . . I thank god or gods or goddess or spirits or force or whatever. . . that I only have to sit with the unintellectual masses once a year! Now, where is my tobacco pipe and tweed jacket with patches on the elbows, I want to sit down and read the new issue of the Occupy America magazine.

    I enjoy how patronizing they are about those silly old uncles spouting off at the dinner table. It is making assumptions about the “family” that does not exist in the modern liberal idea of family. (A family is any group that decides it is a family.)

    It just oozes with condescension, clichés, paternalism, and oversimplification.

    And with that I wish Happy Thanksgiving to all and to all a good night . . . or something like that.

  • Yup. I guarantee you, more people are going to be sharing their health insurance stories this year than any Thanksgiving before. At some tables, that’s all they’re going to talk about.

  • “uncles everywhere feel the need to spout off about Obamacare.”

    I read that first sentence and thought the rest of the letter was going to be a parody about uncles who want to tell you how wonderful America will be when everyone “gets covered.”

  • What I have to say to Obama about his Obamacare and all of his legions of doom is quite unprintable. Godless, iniquitous, diabolical man of sin and depravity.

  • It is reasonable, from the standpoint of a secularist mindset, that Thanksgiving dinner would be an opportune and effective setting for healthcare discussion. To someone who reads the holiday in a religious light, it is irreverent. It comes down to how we value our priorities. Christians will probably feel Thanksgiving is a time to focus upon God and the debt of gratitude we owe him. To discuss health insurance matters during that time would be inappropriate.

  • It is reasonable from the stand point of a political opportunist to view every disaster as an opportunity to advance their cause – it does not in actuality make is so . . . our society may be so harden as not to view it as such but bad manners are still bad manners. (See “You don’t ever want a crisis to go to waste; it’s an opportunity to do important things that you would otherwise avoid.” – Rahm Emanuel). Thanksgiving is a time to be thankful for what we have and reestablish family connections. It is not a time to advance your political position. I am not saying it does not happen but I tend to agree with Miss Manners on this topic:
    But to be polite — and for that matter, to be effective — those with opposing views must be respectful and fair. That requires listening to the other’s argument and conceding when convinced. And it means confining the discussion to the subject matter, eschewing personal criticism.
    Miss Manners’ Guide to the Turn-of-the-Millennium” that discussing financial matters is generally considered in poor taste, whether the financial matters are yours or someone else’s. Other taboo topics are religion, sex and politics, according to Martin. Although these topics are fascinating to many, they can cause emotions to run high, resulting in major disagreements among guests and a ruined dinner party.

  • Crises are indeed moments of opoportunity. Revolutionaries have sometimes hoped to create them in order to usher in change. Thanks for your comments.
    While Miss Manners may have an issue with discussing religion during a holiday dinner, I certainly don’t. As a Christian, I have to disagree with her on that. In the case of Thanksgiving, it’s hard to imagine giving thanks if no Creator exists, and the Christian God is the inspiration for this yearly thanksgiving.
    It is unfortunate that people attribute their success to themselves oftentimes. If one reflects properly, they’ll see they are part of a vast, intricate web of interdependency with the Almighty God orchestrating all things. It is also a terrible thing when Thanksgiving is equated wtih eating a well-cooked turkey with sides. Happy Turkey-Day simply isn’t adequate–it indicates profound ignorance and reduces the day to one of gluttony. That simply won’t do.

  • Honestly, I hate Thanksgiving for personal, childhood-wound reasons, but I guess I should be thanking God Almighty that my parents & sister are conservative, and cannot stand anything having to do with Obama. While I think the phrase, “It could be worse,” is extremely mean to say to people who are suffering, I do think can fit in well this Thanksgiving, in light of the propaganda going around.

  • Ace of Spades’ Turkey Day tip: “Hey remember when you said that ObamaCare was going to work great, and then, when people asked you how it actually worked, you sort of implied they were stupid for not knowing, and yet you never provided any evidence that you had any idea of how it was supposed to work yourself? Yeah, you were wrong then, too.”

    People want to discuss ObamaCare on Thanksgiving Day because it’s the largest turkey in America.

    Missy: Das dicke ende kommt noch. Which is very bad for the worldies, not so much for people of Faith: God fits the back for the burden: offer it up.

  • Jon, I agree with you in that my family thanks God for his blessings on Thanksgiving . . . if I have guests over I do not brow beat them with the Bible instead I try evangelize by example. It is a slower process but one I am more comfortable with. As an aside, I have found over time that confrontation is not the most effective form of changing someone’s opinion or views. Telling someone they are wrong or an idiot is not an effective method to win someone over. Pointing out flaws in their logic and then letting them come to their own conclusion is more effective. As for crisis, you seem to be agreeing with liberals that you can do anything you want as long as it advances your cause. I am sorry but I do not believe that the end justifies the means. It may be effective in the short run to get where you are going but how many wrong acts end in a just society? Is it better to lose your soul in your rush to an ends or is it better to lose the fight but keep your soul? I know my choice but God gives us free will so you can make yours. Please understand that I am a highly flawed man but with God grace I shall be healed.

Maybe We Should Take Up a Collection?

Friday, November 22, AD 2013

2 Responses to Maybe We Should Take Up a Collection?

  • How about we raise congressional pay to $3-4 million/yr with the proviso that they pay all their expenses (including staff salary & benefits) out of that. It would be interesting to see how generous congressfolk would be with aides ho were personal rather than gov’t employees.

  • We must be neighbors. I am a Monmouth County shore resident.

ObamaCare Crashes, And So Does Obama

Thursday, November 21, AD 2013

One could not ask for a better symbol of ObamaCare than yesterday when HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, the woman purportedly in charge of this mess, was meeting with ObamaCare “navigators”, and I love the Orwellian implications of that title, and the ObamaCare website crashed.

The remarkable thing about this fiasco on stilts is that the Obama administration knew, or should have known, that the website was not going to work.  Obama could have simply announced that he was going to delay the individual mandate for a time period which would have given time to at least make the website operational.  Why didn’t they?

Overwhelming hubris I think.  Shielded by a sycophantic press from every other disaster that has hit the country under his misrule, I think Obama assumed that this would be the same.  Every problem encountered with the website or implementation of  ObamaCare could be blamed on those obstructionist Republicans.  Indeed, Obama is still trying to do this now, when it is obvious that such an absurd strategy is not working and cannot work.

Obama forgot the first rule of politics:  reality always wins in the end.  A website that does not work, mass cancellations of insurance policies, sky-rocketing premiums and deductibles, less choice regarding doctors and hospitals, these are the reality of the hilariously named Affordable Care Act.  No amount of speeches, no biased news coverage, no liberal true believers on blogs can alter it.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

21 Responses to ObamaCare Crashes, And So Does Obama

  • I entirely agree: it is pride that kept him from seizing the branch with a deal to avoid the shut down by delaying the role out. The President just cannot imagine admitting he is wrong. This is curious to me since the mark of maturity is the acknowledgment that one is all too human and, therefore, flawed. It is interesting that you mention FDR in your piece. I read three biographies and was left with the same impression I have of President Obama now. “Hubris,” a pretty sounding little word for a self-defeating human trait.

  • It is not fair to compare FDR to Obama. The former confronted a far more severe set of challenges than the latter and managed to meet them (with some bad decisions along the way and some other decisions that had unfortunate downstream consequences).

    Megan McArdle, who has never been a political partisan, is someone to read on this question among those who write for general audiences. Her tentative conclusion surveying the landscape is that it looks as if BO & co have managed to ruin the market for household medical insurance policies. Megan McArdle has in the past worked for several start-up firms in the IT sector. She has been shaking her head in dismay at what she hears coming out of the Administration’s flacks and also at the original decision to have the Center for Medicaid and Medicare Services manage the project.

    It implicates the President quite directly. He fancied that the person to put in charge of policy in the realm of financing medical care was a woman named Nancy-Ann deParle. She is, of course, an attorney (and a graduate of Harvard Law School).

  • As an agenda, liberalism is a fiasco. However, the oversupply of resentful, dull and illogical people keeps expanding. Ergo the push for “Common Core” brainwashing.

    And, the failures that caused the US to not recover from the Great Depression until 1946 can be traced to FDR and his gang of statist quacks.

    In addition to IRS apparatchniks quashing independent political speech in 2012, the regime lied about unemployment statistics.

  • D.S.,

    The zero’s problems are a hustler’s hubris and the abject absence of arete.

    Only in America: Aeschylus, Homer, Sophocles, et al would not include in their classics such a dud as Ofama.

  • This is great:

    http://rsc.scalise.house.gov/solutions/rsc-betterway.htm

    I just hope the backlash is strong enough to get a sufficient number of GOP Ken dolls off their polystyrene backsides and act, that there’s a big enouigh Republican capture in both House and Senate to either snowball the bill or, ideally, override any veto from Poobah Barry.

  • No, wait!

    Homer included at least one obama-like character in The Iliad. See Book I, Thersites.

  • the failures that caused the US to not recover from the Great Depression until 1946 can be traced to FDR and his gang of statist quacks.

    Once more around the block. Real gross domestic product per capita had returned to its 1929 level by 1939. By 1941, this metric was 20% higher than it had been in 1929, which is what you would expect from long-term trends in the growth of real gdp. The labor market remained in troubled condition.

  • The Prince. Written by Machivelli. Our current president is the closest I have seen to the spirit of that book. Just to appear to be like he cares is enough. And the sheeple buy it hook line and sinker. He can do what he wants and gets a free pass. How does this dibacle actually affect him? In all seriousness – it will not. Polls say one thing and if he ran for office tomorrow he would win again because of the blind sheeple out there that will vote themselves to the slaughter. My hope lies in Christ not in politics – thank you Lord.

  • Robert,

    That’s largely a result of the five-year “tongue bath” (see Iowahawk) he’s gotten from the so-called media. He enjoys a 97% approval rate from his cheerleaders. The people have him at 37%.

    Art:

    I love you, man!

    What was the unemployment rate in 1941?

    Answer: 9.66%. The year prior – 1940 – it was 14.45%.

    Beginning in 1933 when FDR took conrol the u/e rates were: 24.75%; 21.6%; 19.97%; 16.8%; 14.81%; 18.91%; and 17.05%. Plus, the people working often had lower wages, fewer hours.

    Here’s the point. President Thersites and his band of central planners are putting the US through an unnecesary weaker “recovery.”

    Average FDR real GDP growth (1934 to 1940) was 7.33%. Under Thersites it’s been, what (?): 2.1% – not adjusted for regime lies. Reagan’s recovery from a deeper recession averaged 5+% annual real GDP growth.

    Some recovery!

    Remember Einstein’s defintion of insanity.

  • A month before the site went online, the Republican Congress had shut down government in an effort to delay the rollout. If the White House had known what to expect from the website, they should have jumped at the chance. Not looking like they were jumping for it, of course. Let the government shut down for a few days then put out word that they’d be willing to delay Obamacare for six months in exchange for a budget including, say, a 20% increase in Head Start and the removal of the Social Security cap. The President would be called a statesman and a hero and the rollout could have been saved.

    So no, there’s no way they could have known that the system would fail so badly, or they would have acted differently.

  • I like T. Shaw’s reference to Thersites – how apt! We, however, need a modern-day Odysseus to give our Thersites a beating about the back and shoulders, and preferably in just as public a way as was done in those days of yore:

    He is said to be bow-legged and lame and to have shoulders that cave inward. His head is covered in tufts of hair and comes to a point. Vulgar, obscene, somewhat dull-witted, he “got up in the assembly and attacked Agamemnon in the words of Achilles [calling him greedy and a coward] . . . Odysseus then stood up, delivered a sharp rebuke to Thersites, which he coupled with a threat to strip him naked, and then beat him on the back and shoulders with Agamemnon’s sceptre; Thersites doubled over, a warm tear fell from his eye, and a bloody welt formed on his back; he sat down in fear, and in pain gazed helplessly as he wiped away his tear; but the rest of the assembly was distressed and laughed . . . There must be a figuration of wickedness as self-evident as Thersites– the ugliest man who came to Troy– who says what everyone else is thinking”.

    http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Thersites.html

  • “So no, there’s no way they could have known that the system would fail so badly, or they would have acted differently.”

    Disagree Pinky. They had every reason to expect that the website was going to fail.

  • Progressivism arrived in the U. S. very early in the 20th century and has colored our politics ever since. I can imagine it will continue to do so for quite some time irrespective of any repercussions.

  • T. Shaw, the salient metrics are production metrics. By those metrics, the economy had recovered and recovered prior to the war. Also, the unemployment statistics of the time do not include those working for the Works Progress Administration and like agencies.

    Roosevelt’s policies exacerbated trouble in the labor market extant when he took office, but even without that, it is a reasonable counter-factual that the labor market was going to take time to recover. Again, recall that Britain had a liberalizing ministry under Margaret Thatcher and yet elevated unemployment rates for nearly 20 years.

  • Pinky, I suspect that the hands-on technicians knew quite well the system was a mess, but the institutional culture of the Valerie Jarrett Administration is such that information does not travel up the hierarchy very readily, because bearers of bad news are ignored if not punished.

  • From the post:
    Obama forgot the first rule of politics: reality always wins in the end.

    Ah, but sometimes you get to die in harness first and have the entire nation participate (by command, with bullets for the disobedient) in a gigantesque travesty of a hero’s funeral. So it was for Stalin; so it was for Mao. Is Obama less worthy than they?

    From the combox:
    “So no, there’s no way they could have known that the system would fail so badly, or they would have acted differently.”
    Disagree Pinky. They had every reason to expect that the website was going to fail.

    Actually, you’re both right. They had every reason to see the failure coming; but because reason is not a tool used by the modern Left, they had no way of knowing. That would have required them to be sane and sapient, two qualities in which they are eminently lacking.

  • Mr. Simon. Thanks for passing the First Rule of Politics on to a grunt in the trenches. It fits BO.

    Damage control to our beloved Free United States is going to take time, however we are one nation indivisible and Under Our Gracious God.

    We will have leadership that is truly worthy of the blood poured out by our patriots of long ago. We will because the tide will turn. So help us God.

  • As I reread Dante’s Inferno I think BO. BO, BO and all the rest of the ilk that wants us dead and limited in numbers and under the rule of socialism/fascism(fine lines there) I never slept a wink the night of the first election of this scoundrel, nor the second, and with the same fervor hounded heaven for guidance. Ah yes, Dante.

  • For decades, the Democrats craved control of the health care system – all of it. A perfect disaster, brought about by mortgages handed out to people who could never afford to pay them – instigated by Democrats – caused the perfect disaster. then they took full advantage of it.

    The Democrat Party is the single worst organization of people ever to take root in the Western Hemisphere – organized crime and political suppression rolled up in one – and yet there are mindless lemmings who still vote for them.

    FDR was a crook. He used the IRS to attack his political adversaries. He left the Army decimated before WWII. He ordered the concentration camps of American citizens. He blatantly lied about Katyn and bent over backwards to help Stalin – a useful idiot if Lenin ever described one.

    The day he died he was in the company of his mistress.

    Obumbler is nothing but an empty chair as Clint Eastwood so aptly portrayed him. He is a puppet for people like Soros and Jarrett and Reid and Pelosi and he doesn’t even know it. His wife is the ultimate mooch.

    If Texas ever became independent I would be there the next day.

  • Evidently, Obama believes his own lies, but does he have Obamacare health insurance?
    About Katyn: Stalin blamed the Katyn massacre on Hitler and it was believed that Hitler was responsible (and Hitler was capable). About internment camps of the Japanese. They were more protective custody under martial law than anything else in times of war. I was born in 1940 and the animosity was ferocious. There was a picture in the newspaper with a Chinese man wearing a sign that read: “CHINESE”. In addition, there was the possibility of spying, after all, Pearl Harbor was a sneak attack. Nobody, but nobody smart a$$ wisecracked in those days. The churches were full morning, day and evenings.

  • Charlie has it…”Complete Denial..”
    Referring to this sloppy mess obamacare.

    The dem’s built it sold it and now cower under a “seat” that supports the largest buttocks that is ready to evacuate the vilest waist material known to man…obamafece’s.

    As they wallow in their new form of mud bath’s, claiming that the scent is Wicca friendly, we believer’s of free enterprise and smaller govt. can only pray that the rainwater will sweep the stench away….far far away…..say Kenya.

Oops! You Are Peter!

Tuesday, November 19, AD 2013

In the Carboniferous Epoch we were promised abundance for all,
By robbing selected Peter to pay for collective Paul;
But, though we had plenty of money, there was nothing our money could buy,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: “If you don’t work you die.”

Kipling, The Gods of the Copybook Headings

 

 

The ongoing debacle that is ObamaCare just keeps rolling on:

 

 

OLYMPIA, Nov. 17.—Jessica Sanford, the Federal Way woman who got a shout-out from President Obama last month with her fan letter for the Affordable Care Act, got a rather rude awakening last week. Turns out she doesn’t qualify for a tax credit after all.

At least that’s what the letter said that she got from the state. Now she says her dream of affordable health insurance has gone poof. She can’t afford it. She’ll have to go without. “I’m really terribly embarrassed,” she says. “It has completely turned around on me. I mean, completely.”

Chalk it up to a bollixed-up state website that apparently still has major problems. Originally it said Sanford and her child would get a whopping tax credit that would reduce their total premium to $169 a month. Now the state is telling her it goofed – twice – and she has to pay full ticket. There may even be a third goof involved: At least one health-insurance broker says she may qualify for a tax credit after all, albeit a small one. Officials at the state Healthplanfinder website could not be contacted Sunday night. But it just goes to show that even in the state of Washington, which has earned national kudos for a health-insurance exchange that seems to function better than the dysfunctional federal website, there are big, big problems.

“They have to own up to what is going on,” Sanford says. “They have to fix it. They can’t just go around and say this is working great. In my opinion they ought to shut it down and just get all of it straightened out.”

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

5 Responses to Oops! You Are Peter!

Hometown Paper

Sunday, November 17, AD 2013

 

 

 

For decades I was a subscriber to the Chicago Tribune.  The traditionally Republican paper in Chicago, for many decades it was the voice of Republicanism, and sometimes conservatism, throughout the Midwest.  In the nineties I noticed that The Trib was changing.  It was hiring more liberal columnists and the editorials took on an increasingly liberal flavor.  The paper would still usually endorse Republicans at election time, but the endorsements were pro forma.  Additionally, The Trib rarely had anything to say about the corruption that infested both parties and was busily producing the bankrupt Illinois that exists today.  One columnist who was, and is, a bright light at The Trib, John Kass, constantly attacked “the Combine”, as he called it, that ruled both parties and  made sure that insiders profited at the expense of the tax payers.

After my family became hooked up to the internet at the end of the nineties, living in a rural area did have its disadvantages back then in reference to obtaining a reliable internet service, I no longer needed The Trib for news, but I kept it out of inertia, although I was extremely unhappy with its increasingly leftist editorial views.  The inertia came to an end when The Trib endorsed Obama in 2008.  That ended my subscription, along with the subscriptions of quite a few other downstaters.  I noticed after the fact that I didn’t miss the paper.  It had become an anachronism in the age of the internet.  My wife still buys a copy at Thanksgiving for the black Friday ads, but that is the only time a copy of The Trib enters McClarey Manor.  The Trib endorsed Obama again in 2012 and its transformation into just another big city liberal rag seemed complete.

I was therefore surprised, and no doubt Obama was also, by The Trib’s editorial last Friday calling for the repeal of ObamaCare:

 

As Friday dawns, here’s what a health insurance crisis looks like to many millions of Americans: Barely six weeks shy of 2014, they do not know whether they will have medical coverage Jan. 1. Or which hospitals and doctors they might patronize. Or what they may pay to protect themselves and their families against the chance of medical and financial catastrophe. How much, that is, they may pay in order to satisfy the Democratic politicians and federal bureaucrats who are worsening a metastasizing health coverage fiasco.

For perhaps 5 million of those Americans thus far — estimates vary — the Washington-ordered cancellation of their policies is especially maddening. In the past these people took responsibility for their coverage and bought policies that balanced their needs, finances and personal choices. Congress and President Barack Obama, by enacting the Affordable Care Act, in effect ordered insurers to dismantle many of those individual plans — and cancel those policies.

The Americans manhandled by this exercise in government arrogance now find themselves divided into warring tribes: Those with chronic ailments who have found new plans on Obamacare exchanges and are pleased. Those who don’t want or can’t afford the replacement policies Obamacare offers them. Those whose new policies block them from using the health providers who have treated them for many years. The estimated 23 million to 41 million people whose employer-sponsored plans are the next to be imperiled. And on and on.

Most of these tribespeople only wish their big problem was a slipshod Obamacare website. On Thursday, their plight grew more frightful. With even Democratic members of Congress storming the White House over the cancellations, Obama declared — by what legal authority is unclear — that he would overrule the law he signed in 2010 and allow insurers to extend those canceled policies for a year.

If, that is, insurance regulators of the 50 states permit this potential distortion to risk pools inside and outside of Obamacare. The regulators, including those in Illinois, had better put protection ahead of politics: Within two hours of Obama’s announcement, Mike Kreidler, insurance commissioner of Washington, a Democrat-leaning state, rejected the president’s notion, citing “its potential impact on the overall stability of our health insurance market. … We will not be allowing insurance companies to extend their policies.”

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

4 Responses to Hometown Paper

  • I too cancelled the Trib in 2008 for the same reason as you. I’m ashamed it took me that long to do the deed. I love getting the letters in the mail pleading with me to come back. I love sending these letters back telling them how much I do not miss them and I throw in some stats about the decline of their industry.

  • “I love getting the letters in the mail pleading with me to come back.”

    Me too, although I just toss the letters out with the rest of the trash.

  • “I suspect that the powers that be at The Trib latched on to Obama because he seemed to be the wave of the future. It is interesting in studying history to observe just how many times waves of the future come asunder on the rocks of reality.”

    Daniel chapter 4: http://www.usccb.org/bible/daniel/4

  • Would that such divine retribution could befall an entire political party . . . perhaps actually becoming jackasses might teach them something.

The “Fix” That Fixed Nothing

Friday, November 15, AD 2013

 

Since Nixon’s “I am not a crook ” speech during a news conference, the fortieth anniversary of which will be this Sunday, I have never seen a more bizarre Presidential performance than that given by Obama yesterday.  In response to overwhelming alarm by Democrats in Congress to the fact that millions of Americans are seeing their insurance policies being cancelled due to ObamaCare, Obama at a news conference on November 14 announced the following:

Already people who have plans that pre-date the Affordable Care Act can keep those plans if they haven’t changed. That was already in the law. That’s what’s called a grandfather clause that was included in the law. Today we’re going to extend that principle both to people whose plans have changed since the law too effect and to people who bought plans since the law took effect.       

So state insurance commissioners still have the power to decide what plans can and can’t be sold in their states, but the bottom line is insurers can extend current plans that would otherwise be cancelled into 2014. And Americans whose plans have been cancelled can choose to re-enroll in the same kind of plan.       

We’re also requiring insurers to extend current plans to inform their customers about two things: One, that protections — what protections these renewed plans don’t include. Number two, that the marketplace offers new options with better coverage and tax credits that might help you bring down the cost.       

So if your received one of these letters I’d encourage you to take a look at the marketplace. Even if the website isn’t working as smoothly as it should be for everybody yet, the plan comparison tool that lets you browse cost for new plans near you is working just fine.

Well, what is wrong with this?  The glib answer is everything:

First, it is by no means clear that he has the power to do any of this.  The requirements of the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) allow for none of this and Obama’s job title is President not Emperor.

Second, some state insurance commissioners will not allow this to be done.  The state insurance commissioner in Washington has already spoken up and said Obama’s policy would lead to great instability in the insurance markets of Washington and Obama’s suggestion is a dead letter in Washington.

Third, the insurance companies have responded and stated that it is impossible for them to comply with the time lines of the Affordable Care Act and do what Obama has said.

Fourth, it is only for one year, so people facing cancellation of insurance policies they like, even if their insurance company offers the same policy, would be facing the same dilemma in a year.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

4 Responses to The “Fix” That Fixed Nothing

  • Fool me once. Shame on you.

    Fool me twice. Shame in me.

    Fool me for five years. I’m an Obama voter.

  • 1. This whole cock-up implicates the whole top echelon of the Democratic Party. That’s not only the President, that’s the discretionary appointees of his administration, that’s about 90% of the Democratic congressional caucus, that’s the salient figures on the staffs of individual members and the staffs of the various committees. That’s the General Accounting Office and the Congressional Budget Office. That’s the state insurance commissioners. That’s the economist/pundits appended to the Democratic Party who did not clear their throats and educate their public on the problematic nature of this. (Yes, Mark Thoma, I am talking about people in your stable). That’s Warren Buffett.

    2. Sad to say, quite a large fraction of the public will never hold them responsible. One key to not being held responsible is to admit nothing a la Benghazi, so I cannot see the President acceding to outright repeal. He is too vain and too politically calculating to boot. (And you do encounter partisan Democrats in fora like this whose mind works in such ways that they will defend the IRS for conduct even the IRS admits was dodgy).

  • Net ACA health care enrolment: minus/negative 3.9 million people dropped from their “substandard” health care plans.

    In January 2014, tens of thousands will be unable to pay for vital chemotherapy. Of course, that will go unreported except at racist, teabagger FOXNEWS.

    Jonah Goldberg: “You can’t let Congress off the hook for the underlying driver of this calamity: the lie that ‘if you like your health plan, you can keep it. Period.’ This is now beyond dispute, though there’s still some squabbling about the ‘L’ word itself. It wasn’t a lie, Obama and his defenders insist, it was simply an “incorrect promise,” in the words of the New York Times. I somehow doubt that locution would provide much cover for an adulterer who tells his wife, ‘Honey, I didn’t break my wedding vows. That was just an incorrect promise.’

    “But whatever label you want to put on that untruth, Obama wasn’t alone in offering it. Moreover, even though the legislation may go by the moniker ‘Obamacare,’ the fact is the president didn’t write the law. Congress did, specifically congressional Democrats, with virtually no Republican input.”

  • In 2006 surveys, 80% of Americans were happy with their health plans.

    In 2014, it will be 20%.

    Another progressive victory! Every citizen is reduced to the same abject level of squallor and despair.

Schadenfreude: Yeah, Me Too

Thursday, November 14, AD 2013

 

obamacare-advances-in-obamacare-political-poster-1298675815

 

Ditto to Jonah Goldberg at National Review Online:

 

To paraphrase Oscar Wilde, you’d have to have a heart of stone not to laugh at the unraveling of Obamacare.

First, the obligatory caveats. It is no laughing matter that millions of Americans’ lives have been thrown into anxious chaos as they lose their health insurance, their doctors, their money, or all three. Nor is it particularly amusing to think of the incredible waste of time and tax dollars that has gone into Obamacare’s construction. And the still-unfolding violence that this misbegotten legislation will visit on the economy and our liberties is not funny either. This very magazine has been downright funereal about the brazen and unconstitutional seizure of one-sixth of the economy, and rightly so.

But come on, people.

If you can’t take some joy, some modicum of relief and mirth, in the unprecedentedly spectacular beclowning of the president, his administration, its enablers, and, to no small degree, liberalism itself, then you need to ask yourself why you’re following politics in the first place. Because, frankly, this has been one of the most enjoyable political moments of my lifetime. I wake up in the morning and rush to find my just-delivered newspaper with a joyful expectation of worsening news so intense, I feel like Morgan Freeman should be narrating my trek to the front lawn. Indeed, not since Dan Rather handcuffed himself to a fraudulent typewriter, hurled it into the abyss, and saw his career plummet like Ted Kennedy was behind the wheel have I enjoyed a story more.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

14 Responses to Schadenfreude: Yeah, Me Too

  • Ann Althouse quoted some poll results which indicate that 45% of the public fancies the President’s mendacious babble about people being able to keep health plans with which they were satisfied (which the reportage of the Wall Street Journal indicates was a calculated lie in which dozens of officials are implicated) was an honest mistake. The 45% in question includes most people under 40.

    You read stuff like that and you figure Idiocracy has arrived. I am not sure this is going to play out as you expect. We have reason to believe that for a large fraction of the young, their adherence to the Democratic Party is a sort of brand loyalty that will not be shaken by performance deficits of any kind.

    The difference in the balance of attitudes you see in the 1975 cohort as compared to the 1985 cohort appears quite stark and one doubts that life-cycle factors can explain it.

  • Those people are not merely, utterly evil, they are completely incompetent.

    How can 45% of we the people be so stupid? If so, yiou need to prepare for the zombie apocalypse.

    Anyhow, 70% of us independent voters are 100% opposed to the massive feces sandwich they call ObamaCare.

  • I too wonder about this. Yes, Obamacare may be repealed, but the damage is done. People want free birthcontrol, to keep their children on their insurance until age 26, pre-existing conditions coverage. Not sure the implosion of Obamacare is going to lead to the freeing of the medical markets. I think this may very well end up as “You know, the market really doesn’t work, and we need Single Payer.”

  • I hope this is the beginning of the end of that godless, arrogant man of sin and depravity, and of his whole liberal progressive monstrosity along with him.

    “Et apprehensa est bestia et cum illa pseudopropheta, qui fecit signa coram ipsa, quibus seduxit eos, qui acceperunt characterem bestiae et qui adorant imaginem eius; vivi missi sunt hi duo in stagnum ignis ardentis sulphure.” Apocalypsis Ioannis 19:20

  • Paul, putting aside your joke, I’m also thinking the unrest will lead to a republican resurgency. I think it will be easier, at least, for the republican party at the election. But as a student of history, I don’t expect anything to last. Trends always cycle.

  • Oh, but Jon, I wasn’t joking. I have nothing but disgust, disdain and contempt for that man who uses sex to market Obamacare to the young, legitimatizes the infanticide of the unborn, and sanctifies homosexual activity as “marriage”. I know that I am wrong for giving vent to such feelings, but I cannot stand how low this putrid, filthy refuse and his Democrat gangsters have brought this country. Nevertheless, you are correct. If what is happening now fails to give us a Republican victory, nothing will.

  • That’s probably true. If the health-care reaction doesn’t do it nothing will. But like I said, republican victory won’t last. People will grow tired of that and find their way back to the democratic party. We have a short-term memory and seek novelty all the time. As for Obama, I don’t think he fits the bill when it comes to that, thankfully. I have always seen things I like and hate in both parties. Yes, the democrats have collectively stood for some very impious things. Abortion and homosexuality, for instance, have become equated with that party in the minds of most people. It may come as a surprise to some, but many republicans out there are irreligious and have no qualms with these social positions either. There are different kinds of republicans and I like to think there are different kinds of democrats.

  • I can’t get on board with the Schadenfreude. I’m extremely disappointed in pundits like Jonah who encourage it.

    We can’t give progressives an inch. Not one inch of “happiness” about anybody’s misfortune. Just confirms their narrative. A disastrous president is a disaster for all.

    It’s one thing to stand back, reminding them you were told to sit in the back seat, and point out that progressives are hurting Americans. It’s a whole other thing to do that with a smile on your face.

    No smiles. Not one.

    In 2014, who will the low-information voter vote for? The president who tried to give her free contraceptives? Or the opposition party that laughed at him for trying?

    We’re fighting for the title of Daddy, of “the adult in the room.”

  • Jon, you are only too correct.

    Respondit Iesus: “ Regnum meum non est de mundo hoc; si ex hoc mundo esset regnum meum, ministri mei decertarent, ut non traderer Iudaeis; nunc autem meum regnum non est hinc ”.
    Evangelium secundum Ioannem 18:36

  • Is it okay if we smile on the inside? I plan on enjoying every minute of the progressive meltdown over Obamacare.

  • Thanks, Paul. That has always been my point. God’s kingdom transcends our politics. It transcends human institutions and values. Thanks for the pertinent quote.

  • As far as some turncoat Republicans you bet they’re out there. I worked my you know what off for a Lutheran Republican pastor candidate as well as did every pro life volunteer in the 30th district. Stuffed thousands of envelopes, walked hundreds of miles door to door. He was “so pro life” that within weeks of getting to Madison he turned out to be the most pro abortion member of the assembly we ever had. I tend to agree with all of the above comments. I don’t think I have ever felt such disdain in all my life for what we have allowed as a nation to happen. We have done it. Low information my patootsky, downright selfishness, greed, apathy, and laziness has led us to this downfall of the greatest country ever! It is positively terrifying.

  • No I don’t think lolling in schadenfreude is a good idea. We American Catholics should be on our toes.

    I am afraid of the hope so many of us “used-to-be-democrats” are putting into republicans. Seems not likely to pan out, esp when they can’t decide to form up behind leaders like Santorum or Cruz because they are AFRAID (that they need to pander to liberals to increase voting base. It seems like the republicans might be just what many of us grew up thinking they were: all about the money. Don’t talk to them about social issues! )

    The real growth in voting base would come with strength and leadership.
    There is a lot of talk about low information voters, but the electorate is capable of more intelligent choosing than they are given credit for IF the leadership is there.
    It is true in the Church and in politics: we need real leaders truly oriented to the Good.

    It is our blessing, and perhaps the intervention of prayers, that the HHS mandate is not rolling out so well, and we need to understand our opportunities here and now.
    If the current administration was not amateurish ideologues we could have easily been pinned by now. If the administration had the perspicacity and effectiveness of Stalin we would be. Fortunately the left that is taking a stab at it now is more inept and their titular head is imprudent.
    Prudence is a virtue only when it is oriented to the Good. Stalin, it has been said, was a prudent man.
    But the rank and file of the left are not imprudent and they will continue their efforts if we don;’t capitalize on their current temporary disarray.

  • I don’t think I have ever felt such disdain in all my life for what we have allowed as a nation to happen.

    Is he still in the legislature? The man sounds like a sociopath a la Sens. Rubio an Ayotte. If your constituency tolerates fraud like that, I can see your frustration.

5 Responses to Internet Hitler’s Health Insurance is Cancelled

Not a Parody

Tuesday, November 12, AD 2013

girlsurance

 

Hattip to Instapundit and commenter Nate.  The above is an ad put out by “Thanks ObamaCare”, a group supporting ObamaCare.  I wonder if the young lady will still be smiling when she calculates how much her “free” birth control is costing her.

I actually like the ad.  It conveys the complete and utter contempt that the Obama administration consistently displays for their key voting blocs.  I can imagine the bull session that went into the ad.  “Yeah we have to convince young people to buy insurance that most of them do not need at an inflated price with high deductibles.  How to do this?  I know, we will put out an ad showing a hot guy and a hot gal and link having insurance to “free”  birth control and having sex.  Hey, stop laughing!  I know it’s stupid, but so are our voters!”

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

11 Responses to Not a Parody

  • Got to love that the ad is so over-the-top idiotic that Planned Parenthood originally thought it was an anti-Obamacare parody and blasted it as such:

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/11/12/new-pro-obamacare-ads-are-so-ridiculous-youll-wonder-if-theyre-real/

  • I’d just like to say that I did NOT tip off Don because I’m the Nate in the photo.

    I did a series of a tasteful nudes for Obamacare.

  • Well, it’s bread and circuses, and Caesars, and everything else that happens when a people decline.

  • I assumed it was real. Because during the 2012 campaign season, I thought characters like Sandra, Julia, Lena, Alicia, Cecile, and all of the costumed Code Pinksters would cause young women to draw back from Democrats in horror and in shame and in fury. They did not. It’s not clear we’ve hit bottom yet.

  • In America it has come down to those who believe in a truth/reality rooted in the transcendant and those who do not. And they do not line up politically. We can no longer expect to read meaning in politics. Politics has become a purely pragmatic enterprise. It is about how to accomplish things efficiently — and democrats and republicans happen to have different understandings about that. But we no longer find a fundamental clash of worldviews there. It is no longer a matter of atheists verses people of faith in the political arena. I’ve seen too many crass republicans and felt their greed, their ignorance, and their selfish pride. No, the political arena is no place to discern the war of good and evil. That goes on in the lives of every one of us, and it is a spiritual and hence, invisible battle.

  • tamsin: Hell is a bottomless pit. There is no bottom nor top in the metaphysical world. While we are preoccupied with fornication, our enemies will be preoccupied with subduing us. Nakedness is designed to humiliate the enslaved.

  • I guess Sandra Fluke was unavailable for the photo shoot. Or maybe her fee was too high.

  • Darwin, that’s both hilarious and sad.

    And then, when it became apparent that it was actually supporters of Obamacare who had produced the ad “slutshaming women”, Planned Parenthood suddenly changed their tune – without an apology, mind you, to the people they had falsely accused – and found the ad to be “good”:

    “2 B clear, ads encouraging women 2 B healthy are good! So is dialogue about birth control”

    About as clear an indication you’ll ever see that politics in this country has become nothing more than a team sport where “our side” = good and “their side” = bad.

  • Is Nate Winchester’s comment for real, or satire? if for real, then why would someone be proud of being a hedonistic promiscuous sexual pervert and purveyor of pornography?

    Maybe I am just too thick headed to understand the humor. I much prefer nuclear engineering – very straightforward.

  • Oh Paul I was joking. It was intended to be over the top and silly.

    Though these days… gets hard to tell I’ll admit.

  • Pingback: Is ObamaCare Repeal Coming? - God & Caesar