February 05, 2014
How many enrollees were previously uninsured? WA exchange doesn't know

The most sought-after metric to gauge the Washington health exchange's success, after total number of enrollees in private plans, is how many of those enrollees were previously uncovered.

The only problem is, Washington's exchange leadership doesn't know.

That's curious considering that enrollees were asked, with a check box during the sign-up process, if they were previously uncovered. From the Puget Sound Business Journal:

"This is the number that counts," said Sen. Andy Hill, R-Redmond. "And it doesn't sound to me like one of your design requirements was to accurately capture this in a timely manner."

The Healthplanfinder has a check box that asks applicants if they previously had insurance, said Onizuka. But, he said, it's difficult "to track those kinds of numbers."

Sen. Randi Becker, R-Eatonville, also said she had "an issue with the fact that we can't get that information." The exchange has been able to provide specific numbers on metrics ranging from plan type breakdowns to who's receiving a tax credit, but, she said, the number of newly insured is the question "we need to have answered."

Also unknown at this point: How many of the 290,000 Washingtonians who lost their previous private coverage have found an affordable option.

And speaking of total number enrollees, mostly lost in yesterday's controversy of the Congressional Budget Office's report on reduced working hours due to Obamacare was the CBO's downgrade of the number of expected exchange sign-ups through March. The CBO reduced its previous estimate by 1 million nationally, now predicting 6 million sign-ups.

Posted by Adam Faber at February 05, 2014 08:52 AM | Email This
Comments
1. I know what is best for you. Period.

Posted by: B. Obama on February 5, 2014 10:39 AM
2. The most sought-after metric to gauge the Washington health exchange's success, after total number of enrollees in private plans, is how many of those enrollees were previously uncovered.

Really? Other than right-wingers, who is seeking this metric with such great interest? Why is it important?

Adam doesn't say, but he can't gripe about the website anymore so he needs something.

Here's something he hasn't thought about: If someone leaves their existing insurance for an exchange policy, it might be because their exchange option is better. Providing people with better health insurance options is a good thing, right? Unless you're a Republican...

Down the page, Adam's also discovered another of his surefire campaign issues. CBO says the exchanges are only going to help 6 million people obtain private insurance -- not 7! Take that, Democrats! You're not helping enough people!

Posted by: scottd on February 5, 2014 11:24 AM
3. If someone leaves their existing insurance for an exchange policy, it might be because their exchange option is better.

MIGHT. Yes, hang the health of your kids of your parents, on that.

Adam, we no longer need to fight Obamacare - it's dying a very public death while supporting nitwits are trying to find a doctor - anyone - to administer CPR.

1079 days to enjoy the SCHADENFREUDE and laughing every day at Incompetent in Chief and his rapidly sinking ship of fools.

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 5, 2014 12:02 PM
4. Ragnar: I know plenty of folks who have found improved insurance options working through the exchanges. So should I believe my own experience or your blinded ideology?

BTW: How long is your Obamacare deathwatch going to last? When is this very public death going to happen? You've been predicting it for a long time, but I see enrollment growing.

Posted by: scottd on February 5, 2014 02:46 PM
5. You see enrollment growing because the liar in chief is adding in the MEDICAID numbers with the number of folks who VISIT the site and sign up. Of course, Medicaid is simply a burden on the taxpayers and the liar in chief won't tell us how many people who visit and sign up have actually PAID ... you know, the only number that actually matters.

Keep twirling - you certainly are babbling the gibberish of the dizzy.

1079 days to enjoy the SCHADENFREUDE and laughing every day at Incompetent in Chief and his rapidly sinking ship of fools.

Porch.com

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 5, 2014 03:17 PM
6. Rags,
How old is your son who is on your health insurance plan?

Posted by: MikeBoyScout on February 5, 2014 03:34 PM
7. Ragnar@5: So people on medicaid aren't worthy of help and don't count? How very Christian of you!

You've been saying Obamacare's in a death spiral -- when's it all going to end? Is enrollment going to start falling before it collapses? Let us know what to look for!

Posted by: scottd on February 5, 2014 04:07 PM
8. Ragnar@5: So people on medicaid aren't worthy of help and don't count? How very Christian of you!

Nice try. And how utterly dishonest.

I said absolutely nothing like that. Had you put on your glasses and read what I wrote you would have seen I was refuting your erroneous and misleading claim that about "enrollment growing". Had you an ounce of honesty or the ability to understand what you read, you would acknowledge the distinction. Of course we all know that you are able to interpret what you read so in fact, it tells us much about your dishonesty.

"Enrollment" means nothing. Actual purchase WITH payment is the standard. Of course that's inconvenient to you and the liar in chief.

Your two straw dogs won't bark. But I wonder when you'll put down your pom-poms and address the very real problems with this debacle....

Keep twirling - you certainly are babbling the gibberish of the dizzy.

RE my son - he HAD insurance so staying on it or not is irrelevant. But what IS relevant is that we had health insurance that cost us $439 per month TOTAL. It was a great plan with a reasonable deductible and a $35 copay that paid 80% for providers in the plan.

NOW we are paying $789 per month for a plan with a $10,000 deductible. The benefits of the plan do not kick in UNTIL we've met that $10,000 deductible and then pays only 70% IF the providers are in the network. Since we have YET to receive a booklet or any information (including an insurance card for my son) we have no flipping idea if the providers with whom we've had a relationship for over 20 years are even IN the plan. If we have a medical emergency, not only do we have to deal with the real possibility we can't use our preferred providers but also the immediate and expensive COST of it - which is exactly what insurance was supposed to alleviate - and actually had before Obama and the Democrats screwed it up. This plan is purported to be a HSA - but contributions to the Health Savings Account are over and above the $9468/year for "insurance" that doesn't kick in until we've paid out an additional $10,000.

I refuse to go on the Obamacare website. I will not expose myself or my son to fraud, to egregious governmental errors, worse, to governmental intrusion, nor to felons as "navigators" like those who have been exposed in California.

Further, and more important, I do not believe it is the responsibility of my fellow citizens to subsidize me. I realize that is an anathema in your narrow ideological world view. I encourage you to widen your horizons outside of your ideology and to look to history to learn the meaning and importance of self-reliance. I am not a baby and not in need of nanny government. I am proud of my history. I am a 2nd generation American. My Italian grandmother was widowed with 4 children under the age of 10 in the late 1930's. She neither spoke nor wrote a word of English and yet was able to provide for her young family. NO ONE on either side of my family has taken nor WILL take hand-outs from the government which, although you may not recognize, actually comes from the pockets of our hard working neighbors across this vast country.

My story is being replayed in homes all across the country. You dismiss them as anecdotal and refuse to see that real people are being harmed and frightened. The solution for some is not to buy insurance. Others of us are weighing the consequences of paying nearly $20,000/year for something we may not use vs the cost of not having it should we have a catastrophic health problem.

America is fed up with Obamacare and more fed up with the half-truths and outright lies of its supporters. That would be folks like you. Shame on you. Shame on you for throwing away your integrity and honesty to promote a product and worse to use your resources to bash those who oppose it. In your over-wrought exuberance to condemn us as liars you must have missed your own reflection in the mirror. Shame on you.

I find it incredible that you who claim to be part of and defend the 'caring party of the people' absolutely have no concern for those who are harmed and suffering, Shame on you.


1079 days to enjoy the SCHADENFREUDE and laughing every day at Incompetent in Chief and his rapidly sinking ship of fools.

Porch.com

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 5, 2014 06:07 PM
9. @8 RagnarDanneskold on February 5, 2014 06:07 PM,

It's a simple question Rags.

How old is your son who is on your health insurance plan?

Posted by: MikeBoyScout on February 5, 2014 07:00 PM
10. It's a simple answer MikeyBS - it is irrelevant to the debate and further, none of your business. NONE of my private information is any of your business.

AND since you clearly can't read nor comprehend what you read: HE had insurance. The TOTAL was for 2 of us. He was not on 'my' health insurance.

How completely predictable that you would focus on the utterly irrelevant to distract, to run, from what is. Look! There's a squirrel!

Remember when Nasty Pelosi said: "We have to pass it, to find out what's in it."?
A physician called into a radio talk show and said: "That's the definition of a stool sample."

1079 days to enjoy the SCHADENFREUDE and laughing every day at Incompetent in Chief and his rapidly sinking ship of fools.

Porch.com

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 5, 2014 08:01 PM
11. @10 RagnarDanneskold on February 5, 2014 08:01 PM,

You won't answer it here, okay.
I'll provide the answer in a few minutes.

What do you think the answer will show us Rags, you Obamacare hypocrite?

Posted by: MikeBoyScout on February 5, 2014 08:05 PM
12. Dear Carnival Barker (hawking his ugly straw dog), There's nothing hypocritical at all. His age is none of your business and not germane to the failure of Obamacare. What is germane is the new CBO report that loud lefty's are both studiously ignoring AND running from.
Twirly, twirly, spin, spin. Good luck with that.

You are predictably attempting a personal attack by what you think is attacking my child. That's despicable, but evidently not for you. You evidently don't know much about Italian tiger Moms. Keep playing your little game. It reveals that you have nothing else.

Instead of dragging my child into it, address the real concerns. Or better yet, announce to the world the ages and birth dates of YOUR children. Offer up some child mocking equality. Post a few of their pics. Be sure to include where they go to school and the particular activities they participate in. Hey, and be sure name their doctors who may or may not still BE their doctors. Golly gosh gee whiz, I sure hope they don't need care at Children's Hospital..

1079 days to enjoy the SCHADENFREUDE and laughing every day at Incompetent in Chief and his rapidly sinking ship of fools.

Porch.com

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 5, 2014 08:39 PM
13. @10 RagnarDanneskold on February 5, 2014 08:01 PM
& the (un)SP peanut gallery,

Rags claims to be all anti-ObamaCare and she whines incessantly about it.

But here's the thing. I've repeatedly asked Rags how old her son is who she claims is on her health insurance policy in 2014.
@42 Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on December 12, 2013 01:54 PM

"Oh. And yes, our son is staying on our policy. NO ONE in my family will even venture to log on to the death star healthcare.gov and/or its evil twin here in WAhhhh.

Why won't Rags tell you and me the age of her son "staying on" her health insurance policy?

If you meander over to this November 17, 2008 article posted by Rags you'll find the age of her 3 sons in 2008 were 19, 26 and 28 years of age.

The age of Rag's son "staying on" her health insurance policy is not less than 24 years old.

Despite her loud uninformed hatred of ObamaCare, our lovely Rags has availed herself of one of its earliest implemented provisions of ObamaCare which allow children to be added to or kept on a parent's health insurance policy until they turn 26 years
old.

Congratulations Rags! Despite all your bullshit ObamaCare is demonstrably working for you and your family!

And you're welcome for my support of ObamaCare.

Posted by: MikeBoyScout on February 5, 2014 09:03 PM
14. MikeboyScout and Obamacare jock sniffer adds cyber stalker to his list of credentials. WTF does it matter to you MikeboyScout? How many kids do you have? what are their ages? How does that effect your opinion on Obamacare? Pathetic joke of a lying Democrat sychophant.

Posted by: Smokie on February 5, 2014 09:26 PM
15. @12 RagnarDanneskold on February 5, 2014 08:39 PM,

Rags, I certainly want to discuss the CBO report with you and how ObamaCare is germane to a family whose head of household has a preexisting cardiac condition but is not yet old enough to be eligible for Medicare.

Got any thoughts about that?
If his health should deteriorate such that he can't work and therefore would no longer be enrollable in an employer provided health plan, is it wrong that provisions of ObamaCare enable him to leave the workforce and still obtain affordable health insurance?

Posted by: MikeBoyScout on February 5, 2014 10:06 PM
16. NOW we are paying $789 per month for a plan with a $10,000 deductible.

Ragnar: There are plenty of unsubsidized plans available on the WA exchange that would cost much less than that. If you want to pay more, that's your business. We'll just call it an ideology tax.

Anyway, I wish you many years of good health. In each of those years, I'm sure you'll write about the imminent demise of the ACA and I'll have a good laugh. Thanks!

Posted by: scottd on February 6, 2014 05:04 AM
17. Despite her loud uninformed hatred of ObamaCare, our lovely Rags has availed herself of one of its earliest implemented provisions of ObamaCare which allow children to be added to or kept on a parent's health insurance policy until they turn 26 years
old.

Oh my God! LOL!! I truly feel sorry for MikeyBS - he's so sure he's won some pathetic game of 'gotcha'.

Pay very close attention you poor obtuse BS - my son WAS not on a plan where a second party contributed to the cost of health insurance. It was NOT a government plan that supplemented the cost of coverage and therefore could dictate age limits. It was NOT a union plan that supplemented the cost of coverage therefore could dictate age limits. It was NOT a employer plan that supplemented the cost of coverage therefore could dictate age limits.

It was PRIVATE plan. It's amazing what can be done when you have the freedom of independence of choice of how to spend your money.

Get it yet you poor, obtuse cipher? Or are you so used to being subsidized that you cannot fathom the thought of someone who is not.

I pity the fact you do not understand the true meaning of FREEDOM. LOL - you and you ilk celebrated state sanctioned getting stoned while ignoring that when you are subsidized, you are a slave.

Go away. You spectacularly have earned being ignored henceforth as you have (once again and finally) proved you irrelevance.


Dear Scott, I am well versed in how to research. You are simply wrong. All the unsubsidized plans offered by the companies our state graciously allows [/snort] are within a few dollars of each other at the required Obamacare levels because of the required Obamacare RULES. Your dear leader, the incompetent in chief of the liberal and ignorant half of the country has destroyed competition in the insurance industry. Actions:Consequences.

1078 days to enjoy the SCHADENFREUDE and laughing every day at Incompetent in Chief and his rapidly sinking ship of fools.

Porch.com

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 6, 2014 09:50 AM
18. Rags sez, "He was not on 'my' health insurance"

Rags sez, "our son is staying on our policy"

Rags sez, "we are paying $789 per month for a plan"

Rags sez, "HE had insurance. The TOTAL was for 2 of us."

My wingnut decoder ring is having fits!

It isn't that Rags is a pathological liar. Rather, she's just been driven insane by her rabid, foaming at the mouth hatred of our country and president. So sad.

Posted by: Dr. Zatoichi, the Blind Surgeon on February 6, 2014 10:15 AM
19. Dear Scott, I am well versed in how to research. You are simply wrong. All the unsubsidized plans offered by the companies our state graciously allows [/snort] are within a few dollars of each other at the required Obamacare levels because of the required Obamacare RULES.

I can research, too. You've been cagey about the details of your situation -- I think that's to keep people from calling out your BS.

Nevertheless, on the WA exchange a 56 yo woman with 24 yo son can get several different HSA plans for $589/mo (no subsidy). If you're older, it will cost more. If you're younger (good for you!), it will cost less. That's just the way health insurance has always worked.

Since I honestly don't care how much you choose to pay for insurance, it's fine with me if you want to hide behind obscurity and keep paying the ideology tax -- but I'm not going to care much about your whining if you can't at least be honest about it.

And you still haven't told me when I can expect the collapse of the ACA to finally occur. You've been whining about it for years. When is it going to happen?

Posted by: scottd on February 6, 2014 11:18 AM
20. Several blue state exchanges are a disaster.

No surprise here. Pro-sloth Obamabots and accountability are about as far apart as Earth and Pluto. As with the Federal site, election politics trumped truth and honest assessments from tech professionals. More of the lies we have come to expect from the Obama administration.

Posted by: Mike on February 6, 2014 11:57 AM
21. Fatal car crashes triple.

Hey thanks regressive-Obamabots. Because what we really needed was another vice for more citizens to be less responsible, and to present a greater danger to everyone. Heckuva job.

Posted by: Mike on February 6, 2014 12:10 PM
22. "Fatal car crashes triple"

"what we really needed was another vice for more citizens to be less responsible, and to present a greater danger to everyone"

Here's a clue. Marijuana isn't exactly a new vice.

You're talking about a rise in one year of the study, 2010, which gathered data from a handful of states, and marijuana use was involved in less than 12% of all fatal crashes in that peak year. Meanwhile, your same study showed that over a decade over 40% of all fatal crashes involved drunken drivers.

Your point is what, that you hate booze four times more than you do pot?

Posted by: Dr. Zatoichi, the Blind Surgeon on February 6, 2014 01:24 PM
23. It's the personal choices we make in our lives which have the biggest impact on our health. Apparently, Rags has decided that stomping about angrily, hunched over in fear and rage, forever roiling about things she cannot change -- all these constitute a set of healthy lifestyle choices. (Also, calling the president names, cursing his supporters, and counting down the many long days until his term expires all confer the additional benefit of totally not making her look like a whiny sore loser.)

(How about we take scottd's suggestion one further, and ask Rags for a daily countdown until the ACA fails?)

Posted by: tensor on February 6, 2014 02:00 PM
24. It's the personal choices we make in our lives which have the biggest impact on our health.

And as an Obamabot, you are going to make us all pay for someone else's personal choices having great impact on their lives.

Posted by: Mike on February 6, 2014 02:46 PM
25. How about we take scottd's suggestion one further, and ask Rags for a daily countdown until the ACA fails?

Don't hold your breath, tensor.

These are the same folks who breathlessly counted down the days until the Romney presidency. And before that, they counted down the days until the second coming of Dino Rossi when righteous voters would finally restore him to the office he had been earlier denied. Or the days until voters would extract their revenge on Ron Simms.

"Frequently wrong, but never in doubt..." should be the motto around here -- and God bless 'em for it. It's one of the things that still makes this site worth visiting.

Posted by: scottd on February 6, 2014 03:34 PM
26. "1078 days to enjoy the SCHADENFREUDE"

"counting down the many long days until his term expires"

1078 days. With the likes of Pudge and Jim Miller pounding nails into the (un)SP coffin, this blog should only hope to live so long. Even if it does, Rags would only have to start all over again with Hillary.

"stomping about angrily, hunched over in fear and rage, forever roiling about things she cannot change"

As Rags is only happy when angry, Dr. Zatoichi, the Blind Surgeon prescribes 2920 days of Hillary.

Posted by: Dr. Zatoichi, the Blind Surgeon on February 6, 2014 04:28 PM
27. As Rags is only happy when angry, Dr. Zatoichi, the Blind Surgeon prescribes 2920 days of Hillary.

Sure, doc -- but first she'll have to count down the 1078 days until the Huckabee presidency.

Posted by: scottd on February 6, 2014 04:57 PM
28. You've been cagey about the details of your situation
Or, perhaps unlike you, the social media generation, I value my privacy ... which is well advised with the specter of a stalker who has evidently chronicled and cherished every word I've written since 2008.

RE 18- 27 Continue using me to deflect from the utter failure that is Obamacare. It speaks volumes to what you're avoiding.

The authenticity of poverty

The Left teaches people to think of jobs as an entitlement, more akin to a social program than a capitalist transaction. They've spent the last two days telling people that unemployment is a form of liberation, while work is inherently oppressive. The people who least need to hear a message like that are most likely to internalize it.

The authenticity of poverty is also a big part of the Left's phony "income inequality" crusade, which you'll notice has nothing to do with increasing employment - quite the contrary, to listen to their desperate efforts to defend ObamaCare as a merry circus of funemployment. The income inequality crusade is about making the middle class poor, not raising poor people into the middle class through the promise, and challenge, of work. And ObamaCare will go a long way toward realizing those goals. Here's a fun little chart to consider:

Which right-wing think tank produced this devastating chart? The liberal Brookings Institution. They concluded ObamaCare "may do more to change the income distribution than any other recently enacted law." Yippee. Does anyone remember Barack Obama promising his health-care boondoggle would make just about everyone with a job poorer?

A growing number of able-bodied people in the prime of their lives who need the government to feed them? That's what I call "transformation," just like Obama promised, before he started getting nervous about saying such things in public. Work is increasingly presented as either oppression, or a luxury reserved for a dwindling class of employables. Poverty is treated as the authentic and inescapable state of affairs for a growing number of people, whose only hope is to vote for politicians who will spend other peoples' money to make their lives more tolerable... after skimming off the customary 90 cents on the dollar for Big Government overhead, of course.

Those on the lowest rungs of the income ladder will be taught to feel mounting hatred and envy for the people they don't want to work for. The reasons why certain areas are mired in decay and despair for generations will be treated as inscrutable mysteries, when its really as simple as the tale of Trader Joe's in Portland.

Congratulations! You built that!

107 days to enjoy the SCHADENFREUDE and laughing every day at Incompetent in Chief and his rapidly sinking ship of fools.

Porch.com

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 6, 2014 07:33 PM
29. *1078 days to enjoy the SCHADENFREUDE and laughing every day at Incompetent in Chief and his rapidly sinking ship of fools. \

Porch.com

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 6, 2014 07:35 PM
30. You cannot Just say No to the Obamacare race questionnaire
State your race and ethnicity, or no doctor for you.
"Section 4302 is explained by HHS as follows:"

Congratulations! You built that!

1078 days to enjoy the SCHADENFREUDE and laughing every day at Incompetent in Chief and his rapidly sinking ship of fools.

Porch.com

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 6, 2014 07:46 PM
31. @28 Rags - ObamaCare beneficiary since at least 2013,

"I value my privacy ... which is well advised with the specter of a stalker who has evidently chronicled and cherished every word I've written since 2008"

Don't flatter yourself. The way you blather on about so much about your 'private' life here requires neither chronicling nor stalking.

A simple Google search


http://www.google.com/#nirf=RagnarDanneskold+AND+son+@sound+politics.com&q=RagnarDanneskold+AND+son+%40soundpolitics.com


produces pages of results where you blather on about your 'private' life.

Here's a tip for you Rags. If you want to keep a secret don't post it on the internet.

Posted by: MikeBoyScout on February 6, 2014 09:07 PM
32. .
Rags - ObamaCare beneficiary since at least 2013,

I thought you wanted to discuss the CBO report?
Do have any thoughts about what the CBO reported and how ObamaCare is germane to a family whose head of household has a preexisting cardiac condition but is not yet old enough to be eligible for Medicare?

Got any thoughts about that?

If his health should deteriorate such that he can't work and therefore would no longer be enrollable in an employer provided health plan, is it wrong that provisions of ObamaCare enable him to leave the workforce and still obtain affordable health insurance?

Posted by: MikeBoyScout on February 6, 2014 09:30 PM
33. But you took the time to do a search on Rags, so yep you're a stalker.

Posted by: Anon on February 6, 2014 09:47 PM
34. @34 Anon on February 6, 2014 09:47 PM,

But you took the time to read my comments,so yep you're a stalker.

Real man of genius!

Posted by: MikeBoyScout on February 7, 2014 03:14 AM
35. I am regular reader, how are you everybody?

This article posted at this web site is in fact
fastidious.

Posted by: gamestop hours black friday on February 7, 2014 04:53 AM
36. I am regular reader, how are you everybody?

This article posted at this web site is in fact
fastidious.

Posted by: gamestop hours black friday on February 7, 2014 04:54 AM
37. $200/mo -- that's a steep price to pay for ideology, Ragnar. But it's your money...

When are you going to start posting the ACA countdown?

Posted by: scottd on February 7, 2014 07:13 AM
38. MikeBoyScout -- you actually did some research before posting here. For a member of the (u)SP peanut gallery, that's bizarrely deviant, utterly incomprehensible behavior. Little wonder you got accused of stalking! :-D

Posted by: tensor on February 7, 2014 07:44 AM
39. tensor - you're being unfair. Ragnar does plenty of research at breitbart, humanevents, worldnetdaily -- all of the best the wingnutosphere has to offer!

Posted by: scottd on February 7, 2014 07:54 AM
40. tensor & scottd,
Well, we learned a few things on that tangent.
1) Somebody really needs to find out who has been "chronicling" Rag's opinions here at (un)SP.
2) "Research" is considered a bad thing.
3) Search = REsearch.

Posted by: MikeBoyScout on February 7, 2014 10:09 AM
41. MikeBS, tensor, scott, and other progs:

When are you heading over to Potemkin Sochi to help your comrades and Bob Costas glorify the collective and the success of the Motherland?

You know they could use your help collecting toilet paper that cannot be flushed down the toilets.

Posted by: Anon on February 7, 2014 11:03 AM
42. Anon: You're funny. Thanks!

I'll bet you make Adam proud knowing that you're one of his peeps!

Posted by: scottd on February 7, 2014 11:05 AM
43. And I bet you make Marx proud you are one of his peeps!

Posted by: Anon on February 7, 2014 11:38 AM
44. @43: Anon on February 7, 2014 11:38 AM,

Karl Marx has been dead for 130 years ace. He hasn't had the ability to be proud for quite some time now.
And you really need to get up to speed with the right wing noise machine. Your hero, Ronald Reagan, "defeated" communist Russia more than 20 years ago and the last Republican president saw the goodness of Putin's soul in 2000.

Posted by: MikeBoyScout on February 7, 2014 12:28 PM
45. Thanks for clarifying that Mike. Can you enlighten us with more of your brilliance? Maybe by explaining 1+1=2. Then again, another one of your Proud Puppeteers, President Obama, did say that each family would see an average of $2500 savings on our healthcare premiums. And that math was incorrect. So maybe for you it is 1+1=3?

But the spirit of Marx, that is your bag baby! Own it.

Posted by: Anon on February 7, 2014 12:54 PM
46. You seem like a smart guy, Anon. Maybe you can tell us when the ACA is finally going to collapse or be repealed.

Posted by: scottd on February 7, 2014 01:37 PM
47. Fun to watch the left squeal and squawk in defense of the indefensible.

Their nastiness and incongruity is only exceeded by the blind arrogance of their loyalty to the single most incompetent and arrogant boob in Chief and his rapidly sinking ship of fools.
Next bongo will announce (like pelosi) that the ACA isn't his responsibility and caused by Bush.
Then he'll move on to importing Al Quaida in the spirit of "immigration reform," and blame the result of that on Fox News and Bill O'Reilly.

Very amusing indeed.

Posted by: Amused by Liberals on February 7, 2014 02:19 PM
48. Washington 53,445


Thanks to the loudest lefty's for proving liberals are/liberalism is vile.

Thanks for proving the real bullies are the stalker trolls.

This is a repeat of why I left the asses at HA to themselves: despicable threats and stalking. War on women, indeed, hypocrites.

No shame, no filter, no action low enough to defend/protect your ideology.

Don't cry when it happens to you. Oh wait.

1077 days to enjoy the SCHADENFREUDE and laughing every day at Incompetent in Chief and his rapidly sinking ship of fools.

Porch.com

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 7, 2014 03:17 PM
49. RE:30
There are no WASPs, Micks, Wops, Hillbillies, Pennsylvania Dutch, or Pollacks, but there are sure a helluva lot of varieties of Hispanic "ethnicity," including such well know ethnic categories as "Balearic Islander," "Canal Zone" (!), and "Criollo."

Every archipelago and lagoon in the South Pacific, including Iwo Jima which lacks native inhabitants, has been awarded individual racial status, while so few categories of Asian "races" are deemed to exist. The Nepalese are there, but not the Kazakhs, Uzbeks, Kirghiz, Mongols, and so on.

What, the inquiring mind wants to know, did we ever do to people from Yap?
...
Well, this certainly shows how far Blacks have fallen in the Progressive pecking order. The whole continent of Africa has been colorized as they are either Black/African American or nothing. At least Caucasian doesn't require you have ancestors from America.

And what of St. Nicolas or Jesus, there was a whole lot of argument that they weren't "white" just a little over a month ago.

And what ethnicity is "American". There was a map of predominate US ancestry going around not long ago that show a good portion of the mid-South as being "American".

We should take heart, as it is almost certain the producers of this questionnaire are graduates of our most famous universities. No doubt highly trained in ethnic studies.

~!~

Celebrate loud lefty HERO!

1077 days to enjoy the SCHADENFREUDE and laughing every day at Incompetent in Chief and his rapidly sinking ship of fools.

Porch.com

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 7, 2014 03:25 PM
50. LOOMING DISASTER... 44% Of Employers Likely to Cut Heath Insurance - 43 Million Americans to Lose Coverage
According to a recent survey, 44% of top companies are considering reducing health benefits due to Obamacare. This follows a previous study that found 43 million Americans will lose their coverage due to Obama care.

Adding to a devastating CBO report of how Obamacare could damage the economy, a Duke University survey of top companies found that 44 percent are considering reducing health benefits to current employees due to Obamacare, confirming the fears of millions of American workers.

In its December survey of chief financial officers around the country, Duke also found that nearly half are "reluctant to hire full-time employers because of the Affordable Care Act."

And 40 percent are considering shifting to part-time workers and others will hire fewer workers of fire some to avoid the costs of the program.

What's more, they said in the study, "One in five firms indicates they are likely to hire fewer employees, and another one in 10 may lay off current employees in response to the law."

Without the law, the CFOs told Duke that they would hire more full-time workers.

You built that!

1077 days to enjoy the SCHADENFREUDE and laughing every day at Incompetent in Chief and his rapidly sinking ship of fools.

Porch.com

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 7, 2014 03:35 PM
51. Sink or Swim? The Future of Obamacare
Young people are supposed to be in Obama's back pocket and among his most enthusiastic supporters, but now the jury is out and the numbers show that many think Obamacare is one of his worst accomplishments as President or are indifferent to his signature legislation.
The unpopularity of Obamacare isn't shocking though given the fact that only 24 percent of young people have actually enrolled since the opening of the exchange. This goes to show that young people are not eager to enroll in Obamacare nor do they find it in their best interest to do so. The truth of the matter is young people are expected to subsidize healthcare for the older and sicker generation and the cost of implementing Obamacare falls on the backs of the young and healthy.

In conclusion, these numbers don't bode well for the future of Obamacare or for the administration. The White House continues to pitch to millennials the idea of talking to one another about enrolling, but young people are not willing to sign up or recommend signing up to one another. Obamacare is under water right now and young people are the ones who are necessary to keep it afloat, but what happens when they cause it to sink? The future of Obamacare is about as bright as that of the Titanic, the American people better hope that there are enough lifeboats to bail them out of this disaster.

Number of Pro-Obamacare Ads Running On TV Right Now: Zero
The only pro-Obamacare message on TV right now is a three-second blurb in a tiny ad buy in Texas.
Via National Journal:

The most robust defense of Obamacare on television right now lasts about three seconds and comes from a little-known Texas Democrat named Barbara Mallory Caraway, a former state lawmaker running for Congress.

Her $20,000 spot says last year's government shutdown led by her home-state senator, Republican Ted Cruz, hurt "those people looking for health care insurance."

And that's it for political ads that tout the Affordable Care Act, even as anti-Obamacare ads flood the airwaves.

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 7, 2014 03:42 PM
52. Ha! ha! Ha!! Because it's all working so darn well!
Only 20 percent of enrollees are below the age of 30, while 42 percent are aged 50-64.
... Obamacare's actuaries were hoping that nearly 40 percent of the risk pools would be comprised of young people.

Rah! Rah! Rah! loud lefty's!

1077 days to enjoy the SCHADENFREUDE and laughing every day at Incompetent in Chief and his rapidly sinking ship of fools.

Porch.com

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 7, 2014 03:59 PM
53. .
I'm going to post this here entirely because it tracks so closely to the months long blathering of the person who is 'chronicling' the opinions and private info of RagnarDanneskold (ObamaCare beneficiary since at least 2013), here at (un)SP and ethically challenged Cathy McMorris Rodgers has posted at this infrequently read backwater of political thought.

McMorris Rodgers glosses over pesky facts

The story of "Bette in Spokane," as told by McMorris Rodgers, is this: Obamacare drove up her premiums by nearly $700 a month. Period.
The actual story of Bette from Spokane, as substantiated by the S-R's David Wasson, is that she saw one of her pricier options go up by around $650, when her insurer canceled her current plan because it did not qualify under the new law. A less-expensive option offered by her insurer was around $450 more. She believes she could have brought that down more had she explored the Washington Health Plan Finder website, but as she said, "I wouldn't go on that Obama website at all."

Ideology tax indeed.

Posted by: MikeBoyScout on February 7, 2014 05:32 PM
54. Scott D wrote "I know plenty of folks who have found improved insurance options working through the exchanges."

He also knows plenty of people who live in a spaceship on the other side of the moon.
And Scott's proof they exist is that no one (especially hater republicans) have proven they don't.

Then there is tensor with his usual genius who writes "how about we take scottd's suggestion one [step?] further, and ask Rags for a daily countdown until the ACA fails?

When and where did it succeed?

Oh I forgot, that would be in Scott D's imaginary world where stealing from one person to give to another is a sustainable program for anything that has EVER succeeded at any time anywhere on earth.

Leftists are as dumb as their demi-god bongo.

Posted by: Amused by Liberals on February 7, 2014 05:40 PM
55. Amused, you're a brilliant political commentator -- just ask you! Now, how long do you think it will be before the ACA is repealed, or the program collapses? If anything Rags has quoted, above, is true, the ACA must be in pretty desperate shape, correct? Please, give us the benefit of your immense wisdom.

Posted by: tensor on February 7, 2014 06:07 PM
56. At # 53,

Mike BS if you are so certain we are wrong about things why not make a legitimate argument about it?
Maybe one . . . just for fun?

Your proposition earlier was an interesting emotional straw - man but not a real argument.

You wrote,"Rags, I certainly want to discuss the CBO report with you and how ObamaCare is germane to a family whose head of household has a preexisting cardiac condition but is not yet old enough to be eligible for Medicare.
Got any thoughts about that?
If his health should deteriorate such that he can't work and therefore would no longer be enrollable [sic] in an employer provided health plan, is it wrong that provisions of ObamaCare enable him to leave the workforce and still obtain affordable health insurance?"

Yes, it is COMPLETELY wrong for many reasons.
You prove that you HAVE NO IDEA how basic economics and distribution systems work.

First, you presume that simply because liberal people say so, your cardiac patient will be treated because of the ACA. The liberals you believe are shameless serial liars that have no credibility and the ACA is based upon proven lies. You know that. It is undeniable except by complete idiots.

There is NO basis for your presumption; to the contrary. Heath care insurance and health care are two different things. The ACA is rapidly destroying the basis upon which "insurance" itself might ever be useful. Cardiac Doctors will not work for free, and people will not sign up to be hurt by a government system that cannot provide people with the services they need. Businesses (like hospitals) will not continue to function on the basis of social justice alone and unless bongo is successful at totally transforming America, there is no way to force them to. If they are successful, there will be nothing left to enforce.

Your hypothetical head of household with the cardiac condition has less potential to be adequately treated today than last year and his/her potential is diminishing more every day.

Is this really too difficult for you to understand?

Posted by: Amused by Liberals on February 7, 2014 06:28 PM
57. At #55,

Thanks and you are correct, I am brilliant.

"If anything Rags has quoted, above, is true, the ACA must be in pretty desperate shape, correct?"

Correct, everything Rags has quoted above, is true and the ACA is in mortally desperate shape.

Also in more desperate shape than ever before are those who believe in the phony ACA (especially the poor) who might need health care in the future, cannot afford it, and that have been given false hope that it will solve their problems.

It won't.

Posted by: Amused by Liberals on February 7, 2014 07:54 PM
58. @57 Amused by Liberals on February 7, 2014 07:54 PM,

"Mortally desperate shape"?
Sure it is.
"One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. It's very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project, most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly can't afford it."

Republicans, adamently wrong for 50 years and counting.

Posted by: MikeBoyScout on February 7, 2014 08:08 PM
59. Mike @57: I dunno. He doesn't sound amused, but I sure am. I think he's losing it.

I wonder how Amused By Liberals is going to feel a year from now when he realizes the ACA is still in force and we're still laughing at him.

Posted by: scottd on February 7, 2014 08:33 PM
60. What happens when the White House ends up having to bail out insurance companies affiliated with the ACA ? Do you leftists support that notion ? If you do, you are hypocritical, if you did not support previous Government bailouts !

Sure, you can say we are full of it, silly right wingers or doom seekers for the ACA, but let's see where things are one year from now. It may be law, but it is collapsing the economy before your very eyes.

The more I hear leftists like MBS, tensor, et. al. bloviate the more I realize how little you know about how the economy works and how the ACA works. It was designed to fail and bring on single payer. Karl Marx may have been dead for 130 years, but he lives today in your heart and souls. Marxism can only make this country weaker and less of beacon of hope, while you shills advocate centralized policies like the ACA as it currently exists..

Posted by: KDS on February 8, 2014 09:34 AM
61. The ACA may still be in force a year from now but that hardly means it will be a success.
From the view of any average low income person needing something and not being able to obtain it, the ACA is and will be in ever declining -- mortally desperate shape.

Mike BS ScottD's glee at the perpetration of the ACA comes from their spite and not reason or concern for our health care system. While there will never be any reasoning with the, they are smart enough to know that the ACA was never created to succeed but to collapse our health care system so it could be replaced with a single payer totally government controlled system. They want it to collapse as much as they believe I want do but for entirely different and humorously idiotic reasons.

The difference here is that these people (like their leader bongo) will utterly destroy things that work if will obtain power over others. They will look right at the obvious destruction and deny it exists. What they fail to understand is that once the power is consolidated by the government, that same government will have no regard for them or their families either. They fantasize that they will be excepted from the pogroms.

In fact, the real people behind Mike BS, ScottD and other liberals will suffer more than the rest of us who manage to find our way around obstacles created by fascist-statist leftists.

So, yuk it up boys and keep on cheering the ACA and watch as your family members suffer and die because our health care system turns a blind eye to YOUR care.

Than go ahead and blame GW Bush, or the tooth fairy or whomever. As amusingly dim-witted people with no regard for your own families' survival, you make preposterous figures of yourselves.

If the goal is to help real American people, the ACA has already failed.

Posted by: Amused by Liberals on February 8, 2014 09:36 AM
62. @ 61 - Are you saying that the leftist cheering squad for the ACA are horse's asses ?

Most of these trolls are from the blog of that name - more than a coincidence ? Hell, yes !

Posted by: KDS on February 8, 2014 09:44 AM
63. So, yuk it up boys and keep on cheering the ACA and watch as your family members suffer and die because our health care system turns a blind eye to YOUR care.

I see -- so now the ACA is going to kill my family. That sounds serious. How is this going to happen, and when?

Honestly, this just sounds like more of the same baseless hysteria that right-wingers have been dishing up since before I was born. It never comes to pass, but there's always a new generation to spew out more.

Posted by: scottd on February 8, 2014 10:26 AM
64. @63 - I don't think the ACA will necessarily kill your family, but iit will likely damage your family's economy.

The handwriting is on the wall - but let's wait another year and see which of your baseless so-called truths about the ACA come to fruition and let's also see which of the conservative memes play out.

Posted by: KDS on February 8, 2014 10:49 AM
65. "Thanks and you are correct, I am brilliant."

You might not have to tell us that if you'd just demonstrate it. For example, you could answer the question I put to you:

"Now, how long do you think it will be before the ACA is repealed, or the program collapses?"

You might also not want to waste your time on any question when the premise is clearly and obviously invalid:

"If anything Rags has quoted, above, is true, the ACA must be in pretty desperate shape, correct?"


Posted by: tensor on February 8, 2014 11:34 AM
66. Dear MB Stalker - that's based on a hit piece by the LA Times and widely refuted. Try honesty. And, btw I wrote the LA Times author who claims to be a "journalist" a letter about his lack of journalistic curiosity and the ideological agenda behind it.

~!~

Congress's official fiscal scorekeeper, widely revered by Democrats and Republicans alike as the gold standard of economic analysis--reported that by 2024 the equivalent of 2.5 million Americans who were otherwise willing and able to work before ObamaCare will work less or not at all as a result of ObamaCare.

As the CBO admits, that's a "substantially larger" and "considerably higher" subtraction to the labor force than the mere 800,000 the budget office estimated in 2010. The overall level of labor will fall by 1.5% to 2% over the decade, the CBO figures.

"I don't know what their intentions are," he says, choosing his words carefully, "but it looks like they're trying to leverage the lack of economic education in their audience by making these sorts of points." ... The larger betrayal, is that the same economists now praising the great shrinking workforce used to claim that ObamaCare would expand the labor market.

... Judging by their reaction to the CBO report, the less charitable explanation is that liberals would have preferred that the public never found out.

I know, I know 1700 words, 5 pages ... reading is hard, they whine.

I know, I know, he's a hack they scream with spittle drooling down their chin. A Iniversity of Chicago hack, but none the less ... more spittle...

Yawn.

President Obama's magic words and numbers

Barack Obama, the first president shaped by the celebratory culture in which every child who plays soccer gets a trophy and the first whose campaign speeches were his qualification for the office, perhaps should not be blamed for thinking that saying things is tantamount to accomplishing things, and that good intentions are good deeds. So, his presidency is useful after all, because it illustrates the perils of government run by believers in magic words and numbers.

The workforce participation rate is at a 36-year low; in the second half of the fifth year of the recovery, a smaller fraction of the population is employed or looking for work than was when the recovery began. Nevertheless, the administration is cheerful about the Congressional Budget Office's conclusion that the Affordable Care Act (ACA) will substantially slow the growth of employment and compensation over the next decade.

The decrease is projected to be nearly three times larger than the CBO had previously predicted. The ACA's insurance subsidies, which decline with rising income and increase with falling income, will cause many people to choose to stop working, or to work less, or to stop looking for work, thereby reducing the number of hours worked by the equivalent of 2.3 million full-time jobs by 2021.

An administration spokesman did not dispute the CBO's key finding but hailed it as evidence that the ACA is increasing Americans' choices. Really.

Many of the words and numbers bandied by Obama and his administration may reflect an honest belief that the world is whatever well-intentioned people like them say about it. So, Obama's critics should reconsider their assumption that he is cynical. It is his sincerity that is scary.

~!~

MUST SEE>>> Manuel Martinez, Fled Castro's Cuba, DESTROYS Oregon Lawmakers Gun Control Attempt (Video)

WOW! This was the best defense of the Second Amendment EVER!
Manuel Martinez, who narrowly escaped Cuba in 1962 after being imprisoned for opposing Fidel Castro, passionately defended the Second Amendment in front of Oregon's Senate Judiciary Committee.

Martinez passionately compared the state lawmakers' attempts to pass gun control to his past in Marxist Cuba.

"You say you want to protect the people. You're not going to protect nobody... A very powerful man tried to sell me this 50 years ago. I didn't buy it... This is Marxism, plain and clear. Come on, tell me I'm wrong, I've been there when you were learning how to walk... A very powerful man put me in chains... You sell THIS to the people who do not have self respect, self-determination. And they are weak. And they love to be subjugated. And be dependent on the government. You don't sell that to me sir. This is TREASON. This is an ASSAULT on the dream of the founding fathers. They didn't die for THIS. I come here, for years, talking about what happened, while you people, sink to this."

Enslavement Of America - Best Speech Ever By Communism Escapee (Video)
"They come here in those dog and pony show and cry that their going to protect people. You're going to protect nobody! I want to know what is behind it? Do you know what is behind the problem we have in this country with it's Marxism," Martinez said.

He continues, saying "Marxism is not coming, Marxism is here! Marxism has been in this country for quite a while now. And the politicians allow that because they are ignorant or they're part of the plot!"

"Don't sell me this. A very powerful man tried to sell me this 50-something years ago, I didn't buy it, do you think I am going to buy it now after pushing 80 years?" Martinez said. "This is Marxism, plain and clear."


"They put this dog and pony show saying hey, we are going to protect you. No, what they did was enslave a country," Martinez said. "They destroyed a country the same way that this country is going to be destroyed if we continue in this fashion. This is what you're selling here!" Martinez said, holding up old communist magazines from Cuba and stating "This is what you selling here!! You are not selling protection! Y/ou don't care about if we die or live! THIS IS WHAT YOU'RE SELLING!!!

That is just a a portion of this man's statement, watch the entire video as Manuel Martinez speaks up and fights for your rights guaranteed to you under the US constitution.
The fact that an immigrant, a man who fled to the US to escape tyranny and a dictator like Fidel Castro, is willing to stand up, speak out and fight harder for OUR constitutional rights than half the people who were born free in America, says so much about how clueless some Americans truly are to how close to being totally enslaved we are at this moment in time.

There is not a loud lefty coward here with the balls to wath and comment on this gentleman ... nor do they care.

~!~

Because what woman wouldn't want an aborted fetus for Valentine's Day?

The past is predictive of the future - and giving pirates a bad name

1076 days enjoy the SCHADENFREUDE and laughing every day at Incompetent in Chief and his rapidly sinking ship of fools.

Porch.com

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 8, 2014 11:48 AM
67. @63 - I don't think the ACA will necessarily kill your family, but iit will likely damage your family's economy.

Amused thinks it will. I guess he was just being hysterical. Do you agree?

How will the ACA damage my family's economy? So far, it's been a marginal benefit for my close family and it's been a larger, more direct benefit for at least one family member. I guess I've just not noticed the damage. Tell me how it's going to damage me, and when.

The handwriting is on the wall - but let's wait another year and see which of your baseless so-called truths about the ACA come to fruition and let's also see which of the conservative memes play out.

Sounds fair to me. Just to be clear, could you tell me specifically what my "baseless so-called truths" are?

Posted by: scottd on February 8, 2014 12:09 PM
68. "... let's wait another year and [...] see which of the conservative memes play out."

Yes, if there's one activity at which the (u)SP posters and peanut gallery excel, it's at sober, retrospective analysis of how their past predictions fared.

In fairness, Republicans of the rightward stripe have predicted the collapse of Social Security since the 1930's, the failure of Medicare since the 1960's, and warning about the freedom-killing nature of socialized medicine for decades as well. I boldly predict their predictions concerning the ACA will be at least as accurate. I further predict that Rags, KDS, Amused, Roots, Dan, and the rest will hold the Republicans exactly as accountable for such failed predictions as they always have.

Posted by: tensor on February 8, 2014 12:44 PM
69. "I guess he was just being hysterical. Do you agree?"

It's more like all of these people ran out of medication at the same time or something. So, yeah, I'd say at the very least that right-wing hysteria has been pretty much unleashed in this thread.

Posted by: Dr. Zatoichi, the Blind Surgeon on February 8, 2014 12:53 PM
70. At # 63,

Scott D writes, "I see -- so now the ACA is going to kill my family. That sounds serious. How is this going to happen, and when?

How? As hospital emergency rooms continue to be understaffed to a point where there are too few doctors to treat patients, and as your family member arrives and is placed on a gurney and shoved in a corner left to die. That is one very common way it will happen.
Or will bongo ride down there on his tiger striped golf cart and order them fellers to take care of your family just because you were fu*king dumb enough to vote for him?

So you ask, when?
That (your saint) bongo tells you there is a plan that will provide health care means nothing in terms of heath care. The test is whether or not you can obtain care. This will gradually but inevitably increase as the ACA does its damage until you have no certainty that anyone will treat you.

Medicaid already provides care to those too poor to get it, and they have been doing so for a very long time. Where would those newly "insured" Medicaid patients go for care with fewer doctors willing to accept new patients? Currently not one ACA card has authorized provision of health care to a single American. Since a Medicaid card clearly will not guarantee access to a physician, how will the ACA card be different? It won't.

Most office-based physicians from across the country are refusing to expand their client base. For you liberals -- that means that you can take your ACA card to physicians and they will refuse to honor it. Moreover (for you liberals), that means you will not receive the care you need. Also (for the benefit of you liberals), that means you could die.

California for example, reimburses doctors 38 cents for every dollar private insurance pays. When everyone is required to carry the cost of many who pay nothing into the system, that reimbursement offset will increase and doctors and health care providers will opt out. This means that insurance company rates will skyrocket and Doctors will no longer be able to offer their services.

Untreated illness will place many more people in real jeopardy very few experience today. Major hospitals are experiencing extreme difficulties providing care to people in need as it is. As more and more people burden an underfinanced system where Doctors refuse to practice, people like your family will certainly die. And it will not take long. Maybe two years at the outside.

Who will you complain to when your son or daughter dies because no one would look at them or provide care? Bongo?

Sorry . . . I forgot.
You can still blame GW.

Posted by: Amused by Liberals on February 8, 2014 01:34 PM
71. I don't know guys.
The front pagers and the (un)SP peanut gallery have been consistently keen with their predictions.

Who can forget the predictions that Rossi could win a statewide election? Or that Adam Faber (HACK!) would be working in the McKenna administration? Or that Obama would be a one term president?

I could go on, but if the ObamaCare Death Panels don't get them we'll be having the same argument in a year and another year and another year. ....

Posted by: MikeBoyScout on February 8, 2014 01:41 PM
72. .
@66 the person 'chronicling' the opinions at (un)SP of RagnarDanneskold - ObamaCare beneficiary since at least 2013 - on February 8, 2014 11:48,

I can't make heads nor tails of your tirade. I never quoted the LA Times. But I'm glad you read the LA Times and are so invested in their product that you write them.

Tell me, do you subscribe and pay money for the LA Times, or are you just a mooching taker?
Or just why should the LA Times read what you write to them?

Posted by: MikeBoyScout on February 8, 2014 01:51 PM
73. At # 71,

A political prediction like that Rossi could win a statewide election is hardly comparable to the inevitable collapse of health care under obamaCare.

Many of us believed that bongo would lose a second term because we also believed that even democrats were smart enough avoid the problems he is causing us all (including the ACA).

I knew better, but thanks for proving otherwise.

Posted by: Amused by Liberals on February 8, 2014 02:29 PM
74. "the inevitable collapse of health care under obamaCare"

"an underfinanced system where Doctors refuse to practice, people like your family will certainly die"

"you can take your ACA card to physicians and they will refuse to honor it"

ACA card? Families dying? Collapse of health care? Doctors refuse to work. Meds or no meds, Amused is one stupid, paranoia-ravaged SOB.

Amused should tell the esteemed capitalists on Wall Street about the imminent collapse of our health care system because with ACA as law, stocks associated with the health care industry and health care insurance have been soaring for well over a year.

Gawd, government-haters and shortages of physicians. Residency programs are mostily paid for by the government Amused hates, largely through a program he hates, Medicare. There was bi-partisan legislation a year ago that would have added 3,000 residencies a year through 2017 but it was shot down by (guess who?) the teabaggers in Congress who Amused supports. Sequestration also hit funding. If anybody owns a doctor shortage, it is Amused and the teabaggers.

Choices. We could listen to a deranged freak like Amused or we could listen to the AMA, who happens to know a thing or two about physician supply and demand.

Dr. Ardis Hoven, AMA president, in regards to ACA and physician shortages,

"As far as shortages, there are shortages of physicians now, there were shortages of physicians before the Affordable Care Act, there are shortages of nurses, there are shortages of other allied health professions."

"Again, I think there will be enough doctors."

"I'm confident we'll be able to manage the new folks who will have health insurance."

Posted by: Dr. Zatoichi, the Blind Surgeon on February 8, 2014 03:07 PM
75. At # 74,

The attitude expressed by our resident genius rootie gazootie the Nose pickin's eating wonder will change in a hurry about the time he is laying on a gurney in some hallway dying and unable to plumb nostrils for his fave nuggets, flip his mommy the Michael Jackson salute on utube or pretend that whanging and flailing away with a scowl on his mug is the same as playing a guitar. But it will be too late.
Who cares? No one.

And for merely stating opinions I am supposedly a degenerate?

Amusing indeed.

Posted by: Amused by Liberals on February 8, 2014 04:46 PM
76. .
The "inevitable collapse" of ObamaCare and his "rapidly sinking ship of fools" is mysteriously granted another day:
"FEBRUARY 8, 2014, 6:19 PM EST
PHOENIX (AP) -- A lawsuit challenging Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer's Medicaid expansion plan that was filed by fellow Republicans in the state Legislature was dismissed in a ruling released Saturday, handing Brewer a major victory in her battle against conservative members of her own party."

But you of the (in)SP peanut gallery should not lose hope or faith in your delusions because reality has a well known liberal bias.

Posted by: MikeBoyScout on February 8, 2014 04:49 PM
77. "And for merely stating opinions I am supposedly a degenerate?"

Degenerate? I never used that one but I suppose that's a good enough word for it. You've certainly got some strange things going on upstairs.

Posted by: Dr. Zatoichi, the Blind Surgeon on February 8, 2014 05:21 PM
78. How? As hospital emergency rooms continue to be understaffed to a point where there are too few doctors to treat patients, and as your family member arrives and is placed on a gurney and shoved in a corner left to die. That is one very common way it will happen.

So, you're saying the medical care system is going to collapse because the ACA extended insurance coverage to less than 5% of the total population of the US?

You're not as brilliant as you think...

The attitude expressed by our resident genius rootie gazootie the Nose pickin's eating wonder will change in a hurry about the time he is laying on a gurney in some hallway dying and unable to plumb nostrils for his fave nuggets, flip his mommy the Michael Jackson salute on utube or pretend that whanging and flailing away with a scowl on his mug is the same as playing a guitar. But it will be too late.

... and now you're just incoherent.

Posted by: scottd on February 8, 2014 05:56 PM
79. The ACA is a manifest disaster for all Americans and surprise, surprise!!
Liberals here don't get that and respond to the facts with nothing more than bullshit tactics as if from thier view this is merely a grade school neener-neener contest where they double-dog dare you to tell them WHEN will the ACA collapse.

This even though their own leaders [sic] know the ACA was designed fail deliberately in order to facilitate another goal - single payer Nationalized Government health care.

All to prove once again the luxury of the being a leftist is that you can believe anything so long as there are no facts or truth involved.

That sort of unbridled dim-witlessness is truly amusing.

Posted by: Amused by Liberals on February 9, 2014 09:02 AM
80. Health insurance everywhere, but not a doctor to see
More evidence that the Obamacare health insurance offerings are a cruel joke on the public.

We already have covered how there will be few doctors willing to see the millions more Medicaid patients -- in many cases people who previously had private insurance.

We've also covered how insurance companies have no choice but to hike deductibles and narrow in-network provider networks in order to keep premiums artificially low. It's all caused by Obamacare's one-size fits all philosophy, loading up so-called acceptable plans with so many things most people don't want or need that it raises the cost of insurance to unsustainable levels.

The reimbursement rates are so low for hospitals that even major research hospitals like Stonybrook Medical Center on Long Island are refusing to participate in any of the state health exchange plans unless reimbursement rates are renegotiated.

There is a cruel and heartless bureaucratic pox on the healthcare system, and we're just in the infancy of seeing the symptoms.

The latest, from CBS News, in how in Washington State the major children's hospital in Seattle is excluded from all but two of the Obamacare plans

Why Economics 101 will tell you that Obamacare is long-term economic suicide

Economics 101 will tell you that Obamacare insurance is long-term economic suicide. And that does not even consider the more important reality that access to medical care is going down, not up. Thus, PPAHCA is a long-term public health as well as fiscal time bomb.

Gallup Poll Finds Obama's Approval Rating Falling Back Into The 30s

Leftist Center For American Progress President Who Helped Write Obamacare Thinks Its A Loser For Dems in 2014

Center for American Progress president Neera Tanden, who has boasted about her role in crafting the legislative language of Obamacare, thinks the issue is a loser for Democrats in 2014.

"You don't want the election to be about Obamacare," Tanden told National Journal on Thursday.

Tanden was formerly a senior adviser to Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, advising her specifically on health care reform issues and working with Congress to draft legislation.

"I helped write the bill," Tanden boasted last year.

1075 days enjoy the SCHADENFREUDE and laughing every day at Incompetent in Chief and his rapidly sinking ship of fools.

Porch.com

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 9, 2014 11:35 AM
81. Because employers are finding the costs associated with the ACA too high, it has created a movement by millions away from full time employment to part time employment. This is gradually further destabilizing the economic basis upon which the ACA can function and it will only get much much worse.

The left's argument (Juan Williams and White House representatives) is that because the ACA requires greater penalties to employers in the from of significantly higher insurance costs and thus more people are now forced to work part time jobs, this is good because it lets people work less in order to get health care insurance coverage paid for by others who work more.

This argument is the economic equivalent of the famished lizard to survive consuming its own tail. Such idiotic arguments are fine for people who don't care about the truth, but eventually WHEN those same liberal people are directly affected, they will be screaming for a solution.

While amused with the charm of such simplistic stupidity enforced by rank ignorance and arrogance I don't care to have a "last word" as much as protecting me and mine from the ultimate consequences of the left's moronically insane programs with clear sanity.

Because they emote to exist in a make-believe bubble, leftists pretend they can consume themselves and like imaginary snakes come out unscathed.

Posted by: Amused by Liberals on February 9, 2014 11:42 AM
82. So, you're saying the medical care system is going to collapse because the ACA extended insurance coverage to less than 5% of the total population of the US?

So you think it's appropriate and right to harm 95% of the "total population" to serve 5% - MOST of which do not want to be helped.

~!~

Seventy-seven percent of the uninsured told The Times that they disagree with the requirement to buy insurance, in the poll taken Dec. 5-8 of 1,000 adults and Dec. 4-15 of 702 of uninsured adults.

~!~

Uninsured Skeptical of Health Care Law in Poll - NY Times

Of the uninsured who said they were not likely to sign up by the deadline, fully half said it was because of the high cost. Twenty-nine percent said they planned to go without coverage because they object to the government's requiring it, and 11 percent said they did not need health insurance.

The poll was conducted among 1,000 adults nationwide by telephone from Dec. 5 to Dec. 8 and among 702 uninsured adults from Dec. 4 to Dec. 15.

The uninsured respondents were generally younger, poorer and less educated than the respondents in the general population. Three-quarters of the uninsured were between 18 and 44, and about one in eight had college degrees. Slightly more than half said they earned less than $30,000 a year.

The requirement to get coverage or pay a penalty remains unpopular among the general public, the poll found, with uninsured Americans voicing disapproval at a higher rate than the insured population. Seventy-seven percent of the uninsured said they disapproved of the mandate, compared with 65 percent of those who already have health insurance.

Loud lefty logic. You're not as brilliant as you think...

1075 days enjoy the SCHADENFREUDE and laughing every day at Incompetent in Chief and his rapidly sinking ship of fools.

Porch.com

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 9, 2014 11:57 AM
83. it has created a movement by millions away from full time employment to part time employment

Right -- quantify that movement for us. How much has the percentage of part-time employment changed over the last year? How much will it change in the coming year?

So you think it's appropriate and right to harm 95% of the "total population" to serve 5%

No, I'm saying that extra 5% or less of newly insured people isn't going to cause a collapse of the medical care system.

As a member of the 95% -- I haven't seen any harm. You're paying an ideology tax, but that's your choice.

MOST of which do not want to be helped.

That 5% are the people who signed up for medicaid or exchange policies. Clearly, they wanted to be helped, but you don't consider them worthy. More of that Christian concern for your fellow humans you're so famous for...

Posted by: scottd on February 9, 2014 12:27 PM
84. At # 83,

No, thanks; proof of anything never matters to you or anyone like you.
Prove me wrong.

Better yet, why not go pound sand up your phony arrogant disgusting absurdly lying liberal democrat ass and pretend it's your saint boss bongo feeding you some more of his destructive liberal democrat garbage.

Either way no one cares what you believe.

Posted by: Amused by Liberals on February 9, 2014 02:54 PM
85. Thanks for the laughs, amused.

You don't sound amused to me. You sound like an angry loser beating a hasty retreat. Adios.

Posted by: scottd on February 9, 2014 03:32 PM
86. At # 85,

I assure you that your inanity amuses me immensely.
I would actually enjoy limited association with you in person so I could laugh in your face, but I don't often roll down the window on freeway off-ramps. Too stinky for me.
How's that scam working for you anyway??

Your perceptions of me explain why you would be a follower of leftist nonsense.
Leftists like you always project their own distorted feeeelings and emotions on everyone else as if others are as vicious and dereanged as you are.

And BTW . . . you are MOST welcome for the laughs especially since they are entirely at your expense.

Posted by: Amused by Liberals on February 9, 2014 03:43 PM
87. Awww, did big ol' mean bullies MikeBoyScout and scottd hit poor little Amused with one too many facts? He certainly sounds cranky enough.

Dino Rossi will win the hand recount;
Judge Bridges will invalidate the election;
Mike!@$$@&!! McGavick has even the slightest chance to beat Senator Cantwell;
Sarah Palin will make a fine VP;
Dino Rossi will win his rematch against Gov. Gregoire;
John Koster will beat a long-term Democrat to win a seat in Congress;
Dino Rossi will beat that stupid Patty Murray;
War hero John McCain will beat the Kenyan Usurper;
John Koster will beat a long-term Democrat to win a seat in Comgress;
Obama will be a one-term president;
Gay marriage is an abomination the voters will reject;
If we legalize marijuana, it will be legal to smoke in enclosed public spaces;
John Koster, ruling savant, will certainly beat some newbie woman whose name we cannot even spell;
The ACA will not pass;
The Teabaggers will repeal the ACA;
The Supreme Court will invalidate the ACA;
The ACA will collapse and fail miserably.

Yeah, I'm sure one of those things is not like the others...

Posted by: tensor on February 9, 2014 04:00 PM
88. tensor: I would think that anyone who wrote that the ACA was driving millions from full-time to part-time work would at least have some data to back that up.

Do you think amused is just making stuff up?

Posted by: scottd on February 9, 2014 04:35 PM
89. scottd -- awhile back, Angered claimed the pre-ACA American health care system was "the best in the world, by any measure." I then suggested comparison of per-capita health-care expentitures against infant mortality and life expectancy in America, Canada, Britain, France, and Germany would make for a fine measure indeed, but apparently math is hard.

Posted by: tensor on February 9, 2014 06:01 PM
90. Keep looking backwards loud lefty's - it where your ASS is - as you simply can point to nothing your boy king has accomplished.

I can't wait for Hillary! But, but, but... but she traveled the most of any Secretary of State, she's the architect of HillaryCare that bastard cousin of the oh so hated by the country of Obamacare. "AT THIS POINT, WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?!"

Do you think they have any idea how totally and deliciously amusing they are or are they THAT completely lacking in self awareness?

psst: 75 percent of North Carolinians support the voter ID law


~!~

How soon before the first lawsuit?

~!~

GLAAD isn't

~!~

YOU BUILT THAT!

Loud lefty logic. "You're not as brilliant as you think"...

1075 days enjoy the SCHADENFREUDE and laughing every day at Incompetent in Chief and his rapidly sinking ship of fools.

Porch.com

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 9, 2014 06:14 PM
91. Posted by tensor at February 9, 2014 06:01 PM

Dear Stalking accomplice - what country has contributed the most to medical innovation in technique, devices, pharmaceuticals, research and HEALTH CARE freedom?

What a perfect and very little example you are of your party's icon.

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 9, 2014 06:22 PM
92. Stalker accomplice whines: infant mortality

Screw you, hypocrite.

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 9, 2014 06:36 PM
93. Just to be clear, could you tell me specifically what my "baseless so-called truths" are?

Posted by scottd at February 8, 2014 12:09 PM

Your views, along with those of MBS, and the other left-wingers are in direct conflict with the CBO report on Obamacare that came out this week. Rather, the underlying tone suggests that you have bought into the pap from Jay Carney-barker who besides being partisan is myopic and not grounded in reality. Calling work - being trapped in a job ? Don't be ridiculous...

To be clear, I have provided background - from Rich Lowry, a credible conservative reporter;

"White House press secretary Jay Carney declared the CBO report a validation of the law: "We noted that as part of this new day in healthcare, Americans would no longer be trapped in a job just to provide coverage for their families and would have the opportunity to pursue their dreams. This CBO report bears that out."

If only the number of people effectively dissuaded from working were 5 million, or 7.5 million, the healthcare law would be an even more stunning triumph of sound public policy and true American values.

A few caveats are in order: We aren't talking about jobs that are eliminated in the usual sense of discouraging employers from hiring, as some Republican talking points suggested. And the 2.5 million number isn't for jobs per se, but for "full-time equivalent" positions, i.e., the cumulative lost hours of millions of people deciding to work less.

Nonetheless, the number is devastating. Democrats like Jay Carney want to pass it all off as ending the "job lock" that keeps people in a job only to preserve their health insurance. There is a little something to this, but it isn't the main problem. Obamacare has created a vast apparatus of subsidies, penalties and taxes that is effectively anti-work.

The CBO explains that Obamacare's subsidies, by giving people more resources, allow "some people to maintain the same standard of living while working less." And the way they phase out creates another disincentive, as "subsidies decline with rising income (and increase as income falls), thus making work less attractive." The penalties and taxes, meanwhile, "will ultimately induce some workers to supply less labor."

Democrats consider all this and pronounce themselves well-pleased. Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Wis., sees only upside in people working less: "What that means is instead they might be able to tuck their child in bed at night and read a bedtime story, or go to an activity, which means they're better off."

Harry Reid found his inner libertarian: "We live in a country where we should be free agents. People can do what they want." Obviously, if you are afraid to earn more because government will take away a subsidy, you aren't a free agent.

White House economic adviser Jason Furman made an inapt comparison. "Getting rid of Social Security and Medicare would cause more 95-year-olds to work," he said. "You wouldn't judge whether Social Security or Medicare are good or bad based on what they do to labor supply."

No, you wouldn't -- because they are programs for the elderly. Discouraging work among 95-year-olds is different than discouraging work among people in the prime of their lives. No one told us when the bill was being considered that Obamacare would have some of the same effects as a retirement program.

The latest CBO numbers are part of the growing list of facts about Obamacare that, if they had been widely acknowledged before its passage, would have doomed it in Congress. But that debate seems so long ago. It was back when both political parties professed to be pro-work."

Whether you have the insight to acknowledge the truth above matters not here, but if you don't I am observing you aimlessly swimming in the river Denial.

Posted by: KDS on February 9, 2014 08:11 PM
94. "... what country has contributed the most to medical innovation in technique, devices, pharmaceuticals, research and HEALTH CARE freedom?"

I don't know, Rags. When I was on the engineering team developing a new medical device, we worked in a laboratory in the United States. Our employer was based in Germany, but that company was, in turn, owned by an American conglomerate. Which country or countries should have gotten credit for our work?

"... infant mortality..."

Yeah, who cares if the child died of an easily-preventable disease? The important thing is the government forced his mother to bear him, and then he died, because HEALTH CARE FREEDOM!

Ever wonder why the anti-choice side has lost every election here for forty-plus years? Nope, didn't think so.

Posted by: tensor on February 9, 2014 08:41 PM
95. @94 - you can say you were involved in engineering a new medical device, but that doesn't make it so. Whatever the truth is between you and your diety. Ignoring that claim, maybe you had better rethink your remark - The left is anti-choice now when it comes to Health Care, gun rights and in some cases - free speech. Besides, what does your assertion have to do with Obamacare and so what if you were as you claimed ?

Yes, the Democrat/Progressives could very well lose considerably in the next election...

Posted by: KDS on February 9, 2014 09:40 PM
96. easily-preventable disease

Like Malaria?

Oh wait. Rachel Carson ...

March 2013

About 3.3 billion people - half of the world's population - are at risk of malaria. In 2010, there were about 219 million malaria cases (with an uncertainty range of 154 million to 289 million) and an estimated 660 000 malaria deaths (with an uncertainty range of 490 000 to 836 000).


Loud lefty logic. "You're not as brilliant as you think"...

1075 days enjoy the SCHADENFREUDE and laughing every day at Incompetent in Chief and his rapidly sinking ship of fools.

Porch.com

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 9, 2014 11:23 PM
97. Ever wonder why the anti-choice side has lost every election here for forty-plus years? Nope, didn't think so.
Posted by tensor at February 9, 2014 08:41 PM
Drugs will hurt your brain, but yours is too addled to know. Your "hyperbole" is a LIE. Again.

Ford - 4
Reagan - 8
Bush - 4
Bush - 8

Oh gee 24 years White House


97th through 99th Congress, GOP Senate
104th through 109th Congress, GOP Senate

Oh gee 18 years Senate

104th through 113th Congress, GOP House

Oh gee 20 years House of Representatives

Shall we count governors and state houses?

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 9, 2014 11:37 PM
98. Sigh. I messed up my counts.

Senate is x6

House is x2

It's late, do your own math - I'm not your information welfare provider.

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 9, 2014 11:42 PM
99. Rags -- I was referring to the following:

-- 1970: Washington state's voters approve Referendum 20, de-criminalizing abortion;

-- 1976: Washington state's voters reject an initiative which would have prevented state welfare from finding abortions;

-- 1991: Washibgton state's voters approve Initiative 120, codifying Roe vs. Wade;

-- 1998: Washington state's voters reject Initiative 596, which would have criminalized late-term abortions.

Meanwhile, as a lefty, I must thank you for rectifying my ignorance:

"Ford - 4"

I was previously unaware that Gerald Ford had been elected to the Presidency, or that he had served in it for a full term. Thank you for yet again demonstrating your iron grip on historical facts. Please do remind me -- how many of Washington state's electoral votes did he receive in his presidential election?

Posted by: tensor on February 10, 2014 12:56 AM
100. @99 tensor,

Reality has a well known liberal bias.

Posted by: MikeBoyScout on February 10, 2014 04:55 AM
101. Since the delBene thread is closed for comment, who do the Kirkland/Medina Republicans have to put up against her. Last election, it was the northern Republicans who put up Koster, who didn't get much, if any, support from the Kirkland types. Who are you folks putting up this year?

Posted by: swatter on February 10, 2014 08:45 AM
102. Per my comment @87, whomever the Republicans nominate to run against Rep. Suzan DelBene, we'll read much here about how liberal, inexperienced, and therefore vulnerable she is. Strident predictions of her overwhelming defeat will continue here right up until Election Day itself. (Throughout the campaign, pudge will ferociously ban anyone who dares recall what happened to John Koster.)

Barring any real scandal or screwup on her part, I give it a base 63% chance all such blather will promptly go into the Memory Hole upon closure of voting, and the predictions of liberal/Democrat doom in 2016 will begin.

Posted by: tensor on February 10, 2014 08:57 AM
103. Apropos to the discussion here, time to get out the pom-poms and dance around this one. If you can.

http://news.yahoo.com/exclusive-aids-patients-obamacare-limbo-insurers-reject-checks-152316632--sector.html

Posted by: dan on February 10, 2014 10:29 AM
104. Dear Tensor the STALKER accomplice - I'm glad you recognize abortion should be a STATES RIGHTS issue. But,
This past Monday, January 27, an issue was reported by Guttmacher Institute located in New York which found the 2011 rates to be on a decline of 16.9 abortions for every 1,000 women in between the ages of 15 and 44. This decline comes in second to the 1973 abortion rates which were at a 16.3 for every 1,000 women. The report shows the declines to be present in all states except for the following six: Alaska, Wyoming, Maryland, New Hampshire, West Virginia and Wyoming.

~!~

THE BRIGHT SIDE OF OBAMACARE?

ObamaCare was always intended as a vehicle to make middle-class Americans dependent on federal subsidies. So it should come as no surprise that such beneficiaries often make out better under the program than patients with more modest incomes. But ever since the Supreme Court ruled in 2011 that the federal government can't force states to expand their Medicaid programs for the poor, the issue has come into sharp relief. In the 24 states that have chosen not to expand Medicaid, there's now a coverage gap for roughly five million people who make too much to qualify for Medicaid but too little to qualify for ObamaCare. If there's a silver lining here it is that there is now a strong incentive for these workers to raise their incomes enough to qualify for federal health subsidies. Of course once they qualify, there will then be a strong incentive not to raise their incomes so much that they lose these benefits again, as economist Casey Mulligan has demonstrated. This latter distortion is why the CBO has forecast the economy will lose the equivalent of 2.5 million jobs due to the President's signature program.

LIARS lie:
Four Pinocchios to Durbin for claiming 10 million additional insured under ObamaCare

First, the CBO report did not say that deficits would be lower than claimed because of ObamaCare. In fact, they warned of rapidly increasing deficits by the end of the current ten-year projection, after a small decline at present to, er, a half-trillion dollars -- larger than any fiscal year in a George W. Bush-signed budget.

But more astonishing is the claim that 10 million people have insurance now that would not have had it without ObamaCare. In fact, the opposite is true -- there have been fewer confirmed enrollments through ObamaCare than the number of people who have lost their existing insurance plans because of the changes. The absurd nature of this flat-out lie prompted the Washington Post's Glenn Kessler to award Durbin four Pinocchios for the claim (via JWF):

~!~

Scott of the STALKER cabal repeatedly asks WHEN?

~!~

Obamacare is failing. Faced with this unpleasant reality, President Obama offered up during his State of the Union address his only remaining defense of his eponymous program: There is no alternative. "[M]y Republican friends...if you have specific plans...tell America what you'd do differently....We all owe it to the American people to say what we're for, not just what we're against."
We accept the challenge.

~!~

PREDICTION: loud lefty cowards won't touch this question with a 10' pole:
If it's so great, if it's succeeding, why does it need "bailing out"?

~!~

I have another question for President Obama: Why is expanding Medicaid to cover millions of working-age Americans a bigger priority than giving access to hundreds of thousands of people with disabilities waiting for care?

~!~

Ha! MAY?? - Investors Business Daily

~!~

And indeed, it's already started, according to the Wall Street Journal:

~!~

Its defenders have been reduced, over the past couple of days, to a series of risible partisan "gotcha" responses that indicate just how desperate things are getting for those who support ObamaCare.


Off to the Orthopedic surgeon, where instead of paying a $35 co-pay and 20% for covered services, we will now pay $165.60 for the office visit, $46 for the x-ray and $682.16 for an MRI ... on TOP of the $789/mo for insurance. Yep, insurance will cost us $1682.76 this month - Hope and change!! Thank you so much Incompetent in chief - read, LYING bastard, YOU built that.

Loud lefty logic. "You're not as brilliant as you think"...

1074 days enjoy the SCHADENFREUDE and laughing/crying every day at Incompetent in Chief and his rapidly sinking ship of fools.

Porch.com

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 10, 2014 10:31 AM
105. "... Tensor the STALKER accomplice ..."

Not very catchy. You might want to come up with something a little more jingle-friendly. Just sayin'.

(And really -- reading what someone freely chooses to post here hardly qualifies as "stalking." It can make the original poster annoyed at the differences between postings, though...)

"I'm glad you recognize abortion should be a STATES RIGHTS issue."

Oh, I fully support the Roe decision; it's just that the Civil Rights movement exposed the inadequacy of states in protecting the rights of citizens, and so vigorous federal enforcement if a woman's right to choose, augmented by repeated votes at the state level, combines for adequate protection. Thanks for noticing how little we Washingtonians care for your opinions on abortion, though.

If the ACA is such a huge burden on the rights of medical consumers, why should the government have the power to declare the only course of action to each and every pregnant woman within its borders?

Posted by: tensor on February 10, 2014 11:27 AM
106. "... Tensor the STALKER accomplice ..."

I'm not sure whether it'd be called stalking or not, but I'm pretty sure that neither Tensor nor MBS is the person sending me the 50 page-long emails full of right-wing links and snorts which look remarkably similar to the link and snort-filled screeds posted by Rags here at (un)SP.

Posted by: Dr. Zatoichi, the Blind Surgeon on February 10, 2014 11:40 AM
107. Not very catchy. You might want to come up with something a little more jingle-friendly. Just sayin'.

tensor: You're an accomplice -- I'm just a member of the "cabal" :-)

Apparently, there's a complex hierarchy to Ragnar's paranoia.

And all this comes from just searching Ragnar's earlier comments on this very blog. That's not stalking, but I can see why it would bother her to have folks comparing her previous statements with today's rant.

Earlier she stated that her health insurance from that Golden Age pre-ACA had a high deductible ($5000) -- now she's griping that her current policy also has a high deductible!

And of course, we all know how she could save ~$2400/yr, but she's not interested in that.

What a confused, angry, and incoherent person...

Posted by: scottd on February 10, 2014 11:44 AM
108. I used to visit SP regularly because it was a vibrant conservative site with diverse commenters and numerous articles posted daily. However, in the last few months, it has become dominated by looney leftist commenters trying to take over the conversation, with a few exceptions, and certainly not enough articles posted. It has currently been five days since the last article was posted. I call that boring!

Posted by: katomar on February 10, 2014 12:09 PM
109. @108.

Ditto. It is now mostly a lot of blogsturbating by MBS, tensor, scottd, Rags, and others. They seem to be quite impressed by themselves. And for MBS and team their idea of a discussion is to request copious documentation for any assertion on the right side, but never provide anything other than their own certainty for the left.

Posted by: Leftover on February 10, 2014 12:27 PM
110. "it was a vibrant conservative site"

I'm absolutely certain that Jim (everybody is banned from commenting) Miller, Ron (this thread closed, blame fear of spam again) Hebron and Pudge (my mother knows who I am, so you're a damed liar!) the Anonymous Coward have done nothing at all, nothing whatsoever to rob this site of the vibrancy of it's glory days.

Posted by: Dr. Zatoichi, the Blind Surgeon on February 10, 2014 12:28 PM
111. it has become dominated by looney leftist commenters trying to take over the conversation

Half the comments on this thread are from the right -- count 'em up. Of course, if the metric is word count, then Ragnar wins every time!

Posted by: scottd on February 10, 2014 12:49 PM
112. But you gotta admire the absurdly arrogant MikeBS and his crew of Obamabots. They are always right! If Mike were to conduct a class for his bots, I think it would go something like this.

Posted by: Mike on February 10, 2014 12:52 PM
113. But back to topic, here are more of the unintended consequences of Obamacare.

Whodathunk that the Federal Government completely upending healthcare could go wrong, right?

Posted by: Leftover on February 10, 2014 01:12 PM
114. Denounciation of a liberal policy at Townhall is not an "unintended consequence" of said policy, but rather an expected value.

"And for MBS and team their idea of a discussion is to request copious documentation for any assertion on the right side,"

See my comment @87 for a hint as to why. Every one of those failed predictions was the result, in part, of the crowd here deciding that Townhall (and other sites to which Rags tiresomely links) was a valid source of information, far better than the dreaded "liberal media."

Posted by: tensor on February 10, 2014 01:45 PM
115. Drill down. The story is linked from CBS. Maybe try watching it and focusing on the content instead of the source. Consider making connections about why hospitals might be dropping health networks. But this is a good example of your left-side blind spot. You see something like Townhall, or Fox, or anything besides what you deem "tensor accepted" sources and you cover your eyes and ears.

Posted by: Leftover on February 10, 2014 02:23 PM
116. Leftover: This is nothing new.

Insurers have always attempted to control costs by discriminating between in-network and out-of-network providers. The in-network providers are the ones who were willing to negotiate competitive rates with insurers.

This has always been true, particularly for the individual market. It's the free market at work -- and if there's one thing I've learned from my conservative friends, it's that the free market is the solution to all problems.

The CBS story was incredibly one-sided. Had they bothered to present the other side of the story, they might have reported something like this:

"The cost of Children's non-unique inpatient services is 100 percent higher than such services at other hospitals in our statewide network," he said.

A pediatric appendectomy, which cost $23,300 at Seattle Children's, is priced at $14,100 at Premera's other in-network hospitals, [he] said, adding: "The issue, at the end of the day, is access at a more affordable price. That's why their non-unique services are not covered."

(http://www.thereporteronline.com/health/20140206/specialty-hospital-not-in-your-network-heres-why)

BTW: Who was this fellow offering that perfectly reasonable explanation? Why, it was none other than former SP front-pager, Eric Earling!

The fact is, Lifewise covered the required care, they just weren't willing to be overcharged for it. Children's Hospital doesn't like that. They think they should be able to charge whatever they want and not have to deal with competition.

(PS: In cases where Children's really does offer a necessary service not available elsewhere, insurers will approve in-network coverage. They just don't want to overpay for routine services.)

Posted by: scottd on February 10, 2014 02:47 PM
117. "Why, it was none other than former SP front-pager, Eric Earling!"

Yup, wingnuts, we've been stalking Earling too!

About that article, I liked how the CEO of HCA talked about how he expects their hospitals to "get a lift" out of the ACA having more people covered. Heh. Get a lift? Perhaps if he read the comments in this thread he wouldn't be so clueless about the coming collapse of his own health care industry.

Posted by: Dr. Zatoichi, the Blind Surgeon on February 10, 2014 04:07 PM
118. Right:

Hospitals dropping networks
Networks dropping individuals
Businesses dropping hours and employees
$2500 savings per family not quite materializing
More joining Medicaid than Exchanges
Lower numbers of young signing up for plans than needed to fund
Website not being anywhere near ready
Website being dangerously insecure
Replacement website contractor still not good enough
Doctors getting skeptical
Number of paid enrollees only at about 2/3s of already low enrollment numbers

All of that was always going to happen. Right. It is all by good solid design.

The whole ACA, why it is pretty much a smashing success! What will your humble hero give himself for a grade this time? A-?


Psssst scottd - you've got your head up your ass.

Posted by: Mike on February 10, 2014 06:01 PM
119. Re 106 - Nice straw dog. I do not send any emails to loud lefty's. Being called a liar in 3, 2, ...

Re 107 - Math is hard - figure out the DIFFERENCE between a $5000 deductible and a $10,000 deductible. We'll wait.

Re 108 - "I call that boring!" I heartily AGREE. A snooze fest.

Seattle Children's Hospital Sues State Over 'False Promise' in Obamacare

Hospital Forced to Deny Treatment for Kids With Severe Medical Conditions Sues Obamacare

Administrators at Seattle Children's Hospital said in January they predicted this would happen, and it's even worse than they expected


ObamaCare doc shock: Children lose their doctors
Medicaid expansion heralds the end of medicine as many middle-class Americans have known it. ... Besides, one doctor's as good as another to the eye of a distant bureaucrat.

Yet another Obamacare disaster


Dear Tensor the STALKER accomplce, Do Liberals Care if Third World Illnesses Infect Americans?

I know, I know, 1000 words, 3 whole pages ... reading is hard.

Snort! Abortion Barbie is now a pistol packing gun nut!!

Good grief, we can't make this stuff up!

On the heels of Mark Kelly Testifies in Favor of Gun Control, Then Goes Shooting

Good grief, we can't make this stuff up!

A box of chocolates? No. A nice date to a fancy restaurant? No. Flowers? No. How about a massage, doing the dishes or taking the kids for the day? Nope, not that either.

Come to the anti-voter-ID march, and be sure to bring your photo ID
The anti-voter-ID movement is absurd, but politically useful.

The only reason voter ID laws are "controversial" is that certain groups profit politically from attacking them. Claims that our Information Age society is incapable of properly identifying individuals grow more absurd with each passing day; the anti-voter-ID crowd is making a lot of noise en route to getting laughed off the national stage by the Internet generation. But the Left's brand of life-consuming identity politics measures its success by its ability to persuade sensible people to take leave of their senses. "Progressives" invest much energy in telling the people of 2014 to ignore their calendars and believe it's still 1965 out there.

It's not just a question of keeping vote fraud alive, although that's a benefit the Left is well aware of. It's the rallying effect of portraying common-sense voter identification as a horrible racist conspiracy, harvesting support from people who have absolutely no problems with showing their drivers licenses or state-issued photo identifications when they board an airplane, buy liquor, or conduct countless other everyday transactions requiring such identification. (This demonstrably includes the Raleigh marchers - a sizable group of people, bused in from "up to 30 states" according to friendly media reports, who had few qualms about showing their ID cards to attend the event.)

At this point, the ability of "community organizers" to rally marchers by railing against voter ID far outweighs the benefit of fraudulent votes. They'd hate to lose it as an issue. This barely even qualifies as "hypocrisy," really; everyone involved knows perfectly well that protecting the vote with simple identification requirements is fair and logical. They only pretend otherwise because they derive political benefit and self-righteous pleasure from doing so, or because they hate their political adversaries so much that they're willing to believe any and all accusations of villainy.

Good grief, we can't make this stuff up!

Erasing your identity

Ignore the rhetoric and focus on the reality: our identity as citizens is being erased. Entire sectors of the population have been classified as fundamentally helpless, adult children from whom little can be expected, outside of voting for the most benevolent rulers available. A lot of the people in these groups resent the hell out of this patronizing, suffocating liberalism; they yearn to be treated with more respect, which means they long to be challenged, and given a fair chance to answer the challenge. They want to assume the duties of citizenship liberals have pronounced them unfit for.

... And once individuality is no longer respected, it's easy to erase identity altogether. The Ruling Class sees a faceless mass of voting muscle when it looks upon the bulk of its crude subjects. Faceless masses don't need valid identification paperwork.

Al Gore Wrong Again... Arctic Ice Cover 50% Thicker This Year Than in 2012
Al Gore was wrong.
Arctic ice cover was 50 percent thicker in Autumn 2013 than it was in Autumn 2012.
Via Reporting Climate Science:


Compassionate liberalism, writ large

Loud lefty logic. "You're not as brilliant as you think"...

1074 days enjoy the SCHADENFREUDE and laughing every day at Incompetent in Chief and his rapidly sinking ship of fools.

Porch.com

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 10, 2014 06:49 PM
120. Rags -- since you've repeatedly accused several of us of "stalking" you, apparently because we took seriously some of what you freely chose to post at this site, I think it would be best for us just to leave you to your bitter ranting. Have a good night!

Posted by: tensor on February 10, 2014 08:44 PM
121. News flash:

Banana Republic Leader Obama directly violated the text of the ACA law and delayed the employer mandate yet again.

But this was always going to happen.
Just good solid design right scottd?

Posted by: Mike on February 10, 2014 09:30 PM
122. Sorry Tensor the Stalker II, but you loud lefty's have repeatedly made much of "ignoring" me. To claim to ignore then to purposely search me in a perverted game of 'gotcha' is stalking. It's despicable but absolutely no less than I've come to expect from the cheerleaders of a lawless president and senate leaders with absolutely no scruples. You've learned from the well - do anything to protect your ideology. The saddest part? You no longer even recognize the shamefulness of your actions and of those you vociferously defend.

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 10, 2014 09:40 PM
123. Let's not even mention the FACT that as a woman even the perception of stalking would raise great progressive hue and cry of sexism, WAR ON WOMEN and every other vile term you can conjure to tar a conservative male for the same behavior. Of course, only liberal women dare to complain about such things.

Enjoy swallowing the bitterness of your hypocrisy writ large by YOU.

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 10, 2014 09:47 PM
124. It's "stalking" to point out inconsistencies between posts by the same person on the same blog? That's one creative definition of "stalking". And I thought only pudge got to redefine the English language!

Posted by: Bruce on February 11, 2014 08:32 AM
125. Ragnar: I had no idea you were so fragile. Can you give us some guidelines for permissible use of your older posts?

Is it OK to look up older comments as long as I don't use a search engine? Is ctrl-F OK? How far back can I go? For example, is it OK to scroll to the top of a five-day-old thread? Can I look at older comment threads as long as the original post is still on the front page?

Posted by: scottd on February 11, 2014 08:40 AM
126. A note in my inbox this morning:

A__ and J__'s infant son, L__, born January 23rd has been at Children's Hospital since Friday night in the intensive care unit. He was diagnosed with RSV...same as Simon was last year at this same time. He was holding his own but tonight the virus must be peaking as they were told on the 5th day everything seems to get worse, he is back on oxygen, having more blood draws, catheter and such. They have also mentioned testing for meningitis. Please keep L__, A__ and J__ in your prayers.
They also found out today that Children's Hospital is not on their or any "OBAMA CARE" insurance. You can imagine the extra burden of worrying about finances while you are doing everything possible to save your child's life. Remember to VOTE come November, for your own families health is at risk!
Thanks so much.
M___

You built that. But babies suffering and dying from your beliefs is nothing new, is it?


Dear Loud lefty STALKERS, your ideology daily claims that offense is in the eye of the offended. It's OK to call a conservative woman a cunt but not OK to call a vociferous empty headed advocate "Abortion Barbie". It's OK to call a black conservative an Uncle Tom or a house slave or a " a ventriloquist's dummy", but racist to merely disagree with a half black incompetent.

Feel free to stumble over an explanation of your morals and manners of convenience. We'll wait

Further, swallow the fact that you don't even realize you've been mocked for the ignorant hypocrisy you don't even recognize in yourself.

You loud lefty's are good little lemmings and would fit perfectly into The Movimento Sociale, inheritors of Italy's fascist tradition: Credere, Obbedire, Combattere!

Believe, Obey, Fight!!

Who are the real slaves?

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 11, 2014 09:33 AM
127. Missed the end blockquote ... deal with it.

But for the obtuse loud lefty's who puff themselves up by mocking every little thing, I'll sort it into the original paragraphs for you:

A__ and J__'s infant son, L__, born January 23rd has been at Children's Hospital since Friday night in the intensive care unit. He was diagnosed with RSV...same as Simon was last year at this same time. He was holding his own but tonight the virus must be peaking as they were told on the 5th day everything seems to get worse, he is back on oxygen, having more blood draws, catheter and such. They have also mentioned testing for meningitis. Please keep L__, A__ and J__ in your prayers.
They also found out today that Children's Hospital is not on their or any "OBAMA CARE" insurance. You can imagine the extra burden of worrying about finances while you are doing everything possible to save your child's life. Remember to VOTE come November, for your own families health is at risk!
Thanks so much.
M___


You built that. But babies suffering and dying from your beliefs is nothing new, is it?


Dear Loud lefty STALKERS, your ideology daily claims that offense is in the eye of the offended. It's OK to call a conservative woman a cunt but not OK to call a vociferous empty headed advocate "Abortion Barbie". It's OK to call a black conservative an Uncle Tom or a house slave or a " a ventriloquist's dummy", but racist to merely disagree with a half black incompetent.

Feel free to stumble over an explanation of your morals and manners of convenience. We'll wait

Further, swallow the fact that you don't even realize you've been mocked for the ignorant hypocrisy you don't even recognize in yourself.

You loud lefty's are good little lemmings and would fit perfectly into The Movimento Sociale, inheritors of Italy's fascist tradition: Credere, Obbedire, Combattere!

Believe, Obey, Fight!!

Who are the real slaves?

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 11, 2014 09:38 AM
128.
L__had a spinal tap procedure that went well early this am. Is on antibiotics for bacterial infection as they await the two days for test results. His lungs look clear at this time so no sign of pneumonia. A__and J__ cannot say enough about the wonderful care he is having, they have both been on a roller coaster of ups and downs during this time. Keep them all in your prayers.
Blessings,
M.


Obamacare Is Just Another Word For Laws We Ignore Together

Here's the Washington Post:

By offering an unexpected grace period to businesses with between 50 and 99 employees, administration officials are hoping to defuse another potential controversy involving the 2010 health-care law, which has become central to Republicans' campaign to make political gains in this year's midterm election.

Here's the Associated Press:

Trying to limit election-year damage on health care, the Obama administration Monday granted business groups another delay in a much-criticized requirement that larger firms cover their workers or face fines.

Notice that even these outlets must admit that the impetus for delay is a political consideration -- "limit election-year damage" and "defuse another potential controversy" -- not an effort to craft a more useful law.

More Obamacare Unravelling


Companies Must Justify Their Workforce Decisions to IRS Under Obama's Latest Rewrite

Once again acting without Congress, President Obama has unilaterally changed his signature health insurance law, delaying its employer mandate - the second time he's done this -- to 2016, after the mid-term elections.

BUT: To be eligible for the additional delay, the Obama administration says an employer "may not reduce the size of its workforce or the overall hours of service of its employees" unless it can justify those reductions to the Internal Revenue Service.

"American businesses have to justify their hiring decisions and firing decisions to the IRS. So, if you have 101 employees and you lay off two people (to get into the 50- to 99-employee category), you have to tell Big Brother why you did it. And you have to justify it. I mean, that is Orwellian."

The regulations say employers that reduce workforce size or overall hours "for bona fide business reasons" are still eligible for the relief, but the changes must be certified with the IRS.

... the latest Obamacare delay "an act of desperation."

"First of all, they've been telling us for years now that all the Obamacare critics who said the employer mandate will lead to lay-offs, some cuts in hours -- that was just a right-wing myth. But now all of a sudden, it looks like they're kind of worried about it. They're kind of worried that millions of people are going to lose their jobs and have their hours cut. And so they're taking these desperation tactics."
-

Obamacare - "The Employer May Not Reduce The size Of Its Workforce Or Overall Hours Of Service Of Its Employees"

The Employer May Not Reduce The size Of Its Workforce Or Overall Hours Of Service Of Its Employees"
"Bona Fide Business Reasons"
Under Pains Of Perjury
Final IRS Regs For US Code 4980H
"Shared Responsibility For Employers Regarding Health Coverage"

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 11, 2014 10:26 AM
129. Rags@126-127, you make a powerful case for either regulating the private insurance market more tightly or replacing it with a single-payer system. Which would you prefer?

Posted by: Bruce on February 11, 2014 10:49 AM
130. Dear Bruce, as usual, you present a FALSE choice as if those are the only options when you know they are not. As I have REPEATEDLY stated in the past (again, supposedly ignored by those who stalk) I and most thinking, liberty loving Americans, prefer a free market system, where free people can buy exactly the coverage they want from whatever company they choose to patronize in whatever state that company exists. It's called FREEDOM.

Why do you hate it? What does it say about you and those you support that yo have no faith in personal responsibility. I know.

Further, we all what it says when you loud lefty's run from things you cannot refute.

RE Dear Loud lefty STALKERS, your ideology daily claims that offense is in the eye of the offended. It's OK to call a conservative woman a cunt but not OK to call a vociferous empty headed advocate "Abortion Barbie". It's OK to call a black conservative an Uncle Tom or a house slave or a " a ventriloquist's dummy", but racist to merely disagree with a half black incompetent. @ 107: NAACP's War on Women: Regional Prez Defends Mass. Rep Convicted of Sex-Related Assault, Equates to 'Jaywalking'

Obama Rewrites ObamaCare
Another day, another lawless exemption, once again for business.

Well, which is it? Either ObamaCare is ushering in a worker's paradise, in which case by the White House's own logic exempting businesses from its ministrations is harming employees. Or else the mandate really is leading business to cut back on hiring, hours and shifting workers to part-time as the evidence in the real economy suggests.

Liberals say the law isn't harming jobs or economic growth, but everything this White House does screams the opposite.

ObamaCare employer mandate once again altered by Royal Decree
The rule of law is incompatible with Democrat political needs.

Hear ye, hear ye, humble subjects of His Most Benevolent Majesty, King Barack I, Destroyer of Insurance and Slayer of Jobs! By royal decree, it has been proclaimed that the employer mandates of His Majesty's most glorious achievement - which some of you filthy peasants have been heard sniggering is "the settled law of the land," in the same tone of voice you might use to describe the S.S. Titanic as "unsinkable" - shall once again be delayed. Let all in the land accept the new dates as chiseled in the hard granite of absolute law... until such time as His Majesty deems it necessary to change them again, of course. His Majesty's subjects are ordered to rejoice and give copious thanks for their beloved Sun King's transcendent wisdom and heartfelt compassion! Huzzah!

Barack Obama's lawlessness, thus far unchecked by anything in the hollowed-out ruins of the other branches of government, is setting a precedent that his successors are sure to follow. Of course, if those successors are Republicans, the media will suddenly wake up and begin howling about abuses of executive power... which is such a good reason for voting Republican that no one who cares about the rule of law should be able to vote Democrat in good conscience for at least a generation to come. If the only functional restraint on dictatorial power is the adversarial media, those who would defend the Republic have no choice but to elect Presidents the media will regard as an adversary.

I'm old enough to remember when the King and his courtiers claimed that a single day of delay in any part of his magnificent, brilliantly engineered, perfectly planned and executed health care takeover would kill people. Now he just waves off whichever parts of this disastrous law are likely to inflict the most damage on his Party during the next election, confident that no one will ask any tough questions about whether he has the power to do so... and even more confident his Republican opponents are unlikely to insist on fidelity to these job-smashing, possibly recession-inducing mandates, because (a) they have been absolutely correct in predicting the deleterious effect on the U.S. economy, which unlike Obama they really do care about, and (b) they don't want to be seen as responsible for inflicting that pain, while the author of the destructive mandates skips away scot-free.

It's hard to overstate the political damage that would accrue to Democrats if these mandates were not waived by royal decree. You know how their ludicrous "unemployment is good" spin of the latest Congressional Budget Office projection includes a load of sniveling about how the 2.5 million jobs to be lost will be due to people not seeking work, rather than current employees being summarily dismissed? That's because the CBO said it didn't have enough data to model outright job kills, because the employer mandate was delayed. King Barack's new rewrite of the employer mandates is herding off an atomic-bomb CBO projection that would have rocked the 2016 election, delaying wholesale job slaughter until the projection that will be printed after the votes have been cast. His previous delay kept this year's report, which gave the Democrat Party a heart attack, from including the kind of economic devastation that would have reduced imperiled Democrats to tears on the 2014 campaign trail.

So the executive branch now has the power to unilaterally suspend taxes for people and companies it favors? Awesome. Won't it be fun watching Democrats and the media scramble to take that power back after the next Republican president is sworn in? They'll be reduced to claiming it was a power the Constitution only granted to one person, Barack Hussein Obama, whose coming the Founders somehow foretold. Or maybe they'll claim it's a power that could only be exercised on behalf of one specific law, the Affordable Care Act, whose passage the Founders anticipated as the end of a Constitution they only meant to last for maybe 200 years, tops.

Update: I see I'm not the only one who finds these new lawless decrees to be the stuff of which banana republics are made. I like Dr. Krauthammer's description of the Affordable Care Act as a blackboard upon which Obama writes whatever he pleases on any given day.

More ObamaCare Delays Won't Save Dems

The motivation for this latest delay is transparently political. By delaying yet one more element of the law until after the midterm elections, the administration hopes to save some faltering Democratic red-state incumbents who, unlike the president, are faced with the difficult task of running for reelection in the wake of the ObamaCare rollout. Though the pain of the health-care law is already being felt by millions of Americans who have lost their coverage and are facing higher costs for insurance that fails to meet their needs, Democrats are trying to do anything they can to put off the devastating impact the law will have on employers and, by extension, the economy.

But the problem here is not only the flagrantly political nature of this decision. Rather, it is the spectacle of a law being stretched to the breaking point by an administration that thinks it can selectively cherry-pick what parts of the law it will enforce. With ObamaCare enrollment numbers already falling millions short of what they would have to be for the law to be cost-effective, no amount of playing fast and loose with enforcement can disguise the fact that the scheme appears to be headed for collapse.

Seen in totality, it appears that ObamaCare is unraveling like a cheap sweater. But though the administration is trying to limit the number of those who are inconvenienced or hurt by the law, this latest decision is one more shred of evidence that proves the assumptions about the law's popularity were completely unfounded. Democrats assumed that once the law began to be implemented the benefits it distributed would quickly make it as beloved as Social Security or Medicare. But it is now abundantly clear that the numbers of ObamaCare losers may well equal or exceed the total of those who will benefit from it. No amount of lawlessness on the part of a president who lacks the constitutional power to enforce only the laws or the parts of laws that he likes can conceal the enormity of the ObamaCare fiasco.

Workers of Obamcare World

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 11, 2014 11:32 AM
131. Rags@130 blathers, "I and most thinking, liberty loving Americans, prefer a free market system, where free people can buy exactly the coverage they want from whatever company they choose to patronize in whatever state that company exists. It's called FREEDOM.

If I take you at your word, you believe there should be no business regulation whatsoever by the US government or any state government. I will not bother trying to talk you out of this simplistic libertarian worldview; you've surely heard the arguments and are not impressed with them. And while the vast majority of Americans support some regulation, your comment that "most thinking, liberty loving Americans" agree with you is irrefutable, because you can simply claim that anyone who disagrees with you is obviously unthinking and liberty-hating.

But... it is ironic that your complaint about Obamacare is that some private insurers are refusing to offer insurance products that include certain private healthcare providers. Maybe you are right that eliminating all regulations will cause these private companies to offer products more to your liking. But do you have any evidence of that, or are you just assuming that less regulation is always the answer?

Posted by: Bruce on February 11, 2014 11:58 AM
132. Why I'm Getting Sick of Defending Obamacare - By Ron Fournier - National Journal

FLASHBACK: 'I'm Exhausted Of Defending You ...

Halperin: Wow, this ObamaCare change just "screams of politics," huh?

Is there anyone that still defends this incompentent, beside loud lefty's with more idilogy than brains, nanny state tit suckers and this paragon of a hard working, self-reliant society?

Treasury: Employers must "self-attest" that ObamaCare not behind staffing decisions - under penalty of perjury

Old and busted: Businesses will love ObamaCare for its cost savings in health care! New hotness: Businesses had better not make staffing decisions based on cost savings from ObamaCare-fueled price spikes! After its latest delay in implementing the employer mandate, the Obama administration rebuffed criticisms that the law incentivizes employers to shift to part-time work by announcing the Treasury Inquisition -- ahem, excuse me, the Treasury Attestation Department:

... Er ... exactly what gives Treasury the authority to demand that kind of pledge, anyway? The law only mandates that employers provide coverage for full-time employees, a status defined by working 30 or more hours a week. It doesn't contain any authority for Treasury or anyone else to force current full-time employees to stay in that status, nor for the federal government to dictate ratios of full-time/part-time staff.

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 11, 2014 11:59 AM
133. f I take you at your word, you believe there should be no business regulation whatsoever by the US government or any state government.

Dear Bruce, try reading exactly what I say without inputting your preconceived biases.

But... it is ironic that your complaint about Obamacare is that some private insurers are refusing to offer insurance products that include certain private healthcare providers.

Dear Bruce, try a 'smidgen' of honesty. The insurers are acting under the dictates of King Incompetent with his promise of bailouts.

But do you have any evidence of that, or are you just assuming that less regulation is always the answer?

Dear Bruce, auto insurance, life insurance, earthquake insurance, homeowners insurance, renters insurance, individual IRA's, banking choice,, investment freedom...

Nice try. Epic fail, again

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 11, 2014 12:16 PM
134. RE Dear Loud lefty STALKERS, your ideology daily claims that offense is in the eye of the offended. It's OK to call a conservative woman a cunt but not OK to call a vociferous empty headed advocate "Abortion Barbie". It's OK to call a black conservative an Uncle Tom or a house slave or a " a ventriloquist's dummy", but racist to merely disagree with a half black incompetent. @ 107:

David Webb Confronts NAACP Leader Over Racist Attacks on Tim Scott

In January North Carolina's NAACP President Rev. William Barber II attacked black Republican Tim Scott on MLK Day calling him a "ventriloquist's dummy."

This past weekend conservative radio host David Webb confronted Rev. William Barber II over his racist attacks on Senator Scott.

The NAACP leader laughed at him.

RE Dear Loud lefty STALKERS, your ideology daily claims that offense is in the eye of the offended. It's OK to call a conservative woman a cunt but not OK to call a vociferous empty headed advocate "Abortion Barbie". It's OK to call a black conservative an Uncle Tom or a house slave or a " a ventriloquist's dummy", but racist to merely disagree with a half black incompetent. @ 107:


The Ku Klux Klan's first incarnation was in 1866. On September 28, 1868, . The Klan was involved in a wave of 1,300 murders of Republican voters in 1868. The group was an offshoot of the Democrat Party. Klan members often threatened opponents at night with torches and hoods outside their homes. ... Fast forward 146 years ... And they even bragged about their thuggery and threats.

~!~

Lawless: Obamacare and the Imperial Government

But even Ron Fournier of National Journal has now said he is "getting sick of defending Obamacare," and added that it is "getting difficult and slinking toward impossible to defend the Affordable Care Act." The fact that Obama's quasi-dictatorial actions only put his allies in the "slinking toward impossible" camp rather than the outright opposition only speaks to the depth of Obama worship that still predominates on the intellectually dishonest left.

~!~

CNN: Latest ObamaCare Delay Driven By Politics And Another Admission Of Problems With The Law
No kidding.

~!~

What joy. Thanks to Obamacare women can now slop the hogs.

~!~

President Barack Obama and his wife First Lady Michelle Obama rubbed their royal attitudes in the noses of long-suffering Americans today.

~!~

Politico: Dems Voted to Restore Vets' Pensions to Save 'Vulnerable' Senators

~!~

"My son wasn't a loss of a pregnancy--he was a person."

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 11, 2014 12:53 PM
135. RE Dear Loud lefty STALKERS, your ideology daily claims that offense is in the eye of the offended. It's OK to call a conservative woman a cunt but not OK to call a vociferous empty headed advocate "Abortion Barbie". It's OK to call a black conservative an Uncle Tom or a house slave or a " a ventriloquist's dummy", but racist to merely disagree with a half black incompetent. @ 107:

New York Anti-Gun Zealot Arrested for Taking Gun to School, Wants Absolution
Naturally, Ferguson's anti-gun pals are crying to have him released from his crime. Why, he should be let go because, heck, he means well, dang it!

Of course, the whole thing of the matter is that anti-gun extremists don't care about the individual and his well-meaning ideas. Guns are evil and anyone that has one is instantly assumed to be a murderous criminal. Ah, but when it's one of their own, why the rules should be set aside because, gosh darn it, they are the good guys.

The full weight of the law should come down on this creep's head. If he is cut a break even in the smallest of ways, it will prove that the "law" is not the rule. It will show that anti-gun nuts will be given breaks while Second Amendment supporters will be unfairly prosecuted.

Dwayne Ferguson must be sentenced to the maximum jail time... or the law should be vacated for everyone.

The HYPOCRITE silence is deafening, eh?

Credere, Obbedire, Combattere!


Loud lefty logic. "You're not as brilliant as you think"...

1073 days
enjoy the SCHADENFREUDE and laughing every day at Incompetent (be glad I have the discretion to not say DumbAss) in Chief and his rapidly sinking ship of fools.

Porch.com

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 11, 2014 01:26 PM
136. RE Dear Loud lefty STALKERS, your ideology daily claims that offense is in the eye of the offended. It's OK to call a conservative woman a cunt but not OK to call a vociferous empty headed advocate "Abortion Barbie". It's OK to call a black conservative an Uncle Tom or a house slave or a " a ventriloquist's dummy", but racist to merely disagree with a half black incompetent. @ 107:

The closest they get to a reason is, "it's their reaction to us having a black President." Apparently nobody told them we also oppose his white half..

RE Dear Loud lefty STALKERS, your ideology daily claims that offense is in the eye of the offended. It's OK to call a conservative woman a cunt but not OK to call a vociferous empty headed advocate "Abortion Barbie". It's OK to call a black conservative an Uncle Tom or a house slave or a " a ventriloquist's dummy", but racist to merely disagree with a half black incompetent. @ 107:


What are the odds MSNBC would call a Republican "racist" if he or she said they don't want to be seen with Obama?

~!~

Here's your "free" healthcare, now vote Democrat.

BLAME THE VICTIM IN 3, 2, ...
Brother: "Obamacare Killed My Sister"

This Wednesday, my little sister, Julie, will be buried. She died because she delayed seeking health care for what turned out to be a catastrophic condition after her private health insurance policy was cancelled because of Obamacare.

Julie, her husband, and four children were covered by a medical plan they liked, and had been promised they could keep by President Obama. But like so many others in this country, her family's private health care policy was cancelled because of the Affordable Care Act.

So my sister and her family struggled through the expensive and incompetently designed Obamacare website to find a new policy. Unfortunately, while they waited for their new Obama-approved healthcare plan to finally kick in, my little sister fell ill. She couldn't keep down solid food. She should have gone to a doctor.

But she toughed it out, as many people do, until her new coverage would kick in on February 2. She and her husband didn't have a lot of money, so she didn't want to incur what she thought were avoidable medical expenses.

... After I left, hoping for the best, I learned the next day that her gentle heart stopped beating around 4:00 a.m.

So, while the White House sends out talking points to the talking heads who proclaim Americans will be better off because Obamacare forced them off of inadequate health care plans, my family knows better.

... It is highly ironic that this Administration that talks so much about protecting "choice" in so many areas of American life, yet is harshly shutting down individual choice and initiative in such a personal matter of personal healthcare.

The public debate about Obamacare will continue for a long time. But for my family, the debate ended with the death of my sister. For us, it's not about "policy," anymore.

It's about the tragic consequences that can happen when the government decides to cancel the private economic decisions of individuals in favor of a huge policy experiment created in the back rooms of Washington by out-of-touch bureaucrats, statisticians and lobbyists.

As far as we are concerned, Obamacare killed my little sister and left a good man a widower, and four children without their mother.

- Doug Graham, lives in Maryland and works in equipment development for the U.S. Military

Latest Obamacare delay to deny millions of women their free contraceptives

The Hobby Lobby case establishes the principle that free contraceptives are a basic human right, as the Democratic Party sees it. The Obama administration and its liberal supporters argue that Hoppy Lobby must comply with the portions of the Obamacare requirements that clearly violate deeply held religious beliefs, and supply contraceptives to its female employees at company expense.

Yet these same groups think it is perfectly OK for the Obama administration to delay implementation of part of the employer mandate, thereby trapping employees in "substandard" health plans, most of which do not include cost-free supplies of contraceptives. By this standard, isn't Obama denying women their rights?

Sandra Fluke was not available for comment.

Math is hard, (especially for Scott).
The Missing 43 Million

Almost 39 percent of the uninsured are in five states -- Florida, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California, all of which are entry points for immigrants. About 21 percent -- 9.7 million -- of the uninsured are not citizens. Up to 14 million are eligible for existing government programs -- Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP, veterans' benefits, etc. -- but have not enrolled. And 9.1 million have household incomes of at least $75,000 and could purchase insurance. Those last two cohorts are more than half of the 45.7 million.

'Food desert' fallacy shocks liberals
Patti Neighmond writes for NPR:

"The presumption is, if you build a store, people are going to come," says Stephen Matthews, professor in the departments of sociology, anthropology and demography at Penn State University. To check that notion, he and colleagues from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine recently surveyed residents of one low-income community in Philadelphia before and after the opening of a glistening new supermarket brimming with fresh produce.

What they're finding, Matthews says, is a bit surprising: "We don't find any difference at all. ... We see no effect of the store on fruit and vegetable consumption."


The deranged premise behind the entire "food desert" theory was that crass corporations were bypassing the opportunity to sell healthy foods to poor people out of malice, or at best ignorance. The idea that local people weren't interested in buying healthy food, and that led to low demand, and hence low supply, was unworthy of consideration. These people did not understand that demand creates supply in a free economy because they don't understand a free economy from the standpoint of a business operator.


Washington Redskins Rip Dem Sen. Maria Cantwell Over Her Letter Demanding Team Change Name: "You Must Have More Important Things To Do"

"As the former Chair of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, Senator Cantwell should be aware that there are many challenges facing Native Americans, including an extremely cold winter with high energy bills, high unemployment, life threatening health problems, inadequate education and many other issues more pressing than the name of a football team which has received strong support from Native Americans.

If the Senator wants us to change our team name, has she already told that to the team named 'Redskins' in Wellpinit, Wash., where the school's population is more than 90 percent Native American? We hope Senator Cantwell has visited with those students in order to hear their thoughts. We hope Senator Cantwell is aware how upset the students in Port Townsend were when they were forced to change their name.

Finally, why did Senator Cantwell send her letter to the New York Times before she had the courtesy of sending it to the NFL? No one other than a politician does that.

Surely, with all the issues Congress is supposed to work on such as the economy, jobs, war and health care, the Senator must have more important things to do."

This Day In History: A Progressive President Puts Japanese Americans In Internment Camps

Delusional Steny Hoyer Claims Democrats Are In Good Position To Win Back The House - Update: WaPo Gives Dems A One Percent Chance of Taking The House


Viral Video of Baby in Amniotic Sac Questions Abortion, Shows Humanity of Unborn Babies

Abortion Barbie unavailble for comment.

Abortion Worker: It Would "Torment My Soul" to See Babies' "Tiny Crushed Bodies"

My final duties were to clean up after the surgery. It would pain my heart and torment my soul when I would have to clean up after an abortion. There, at the end of the stirrup table, was a bin where the doctor would toss the small, crushed body parts of the fetus after he dislodged it from the mother's womb. I could see the bloody, tiny crushed bodies with their small arms, tiny fingers, and legs that sometimes got torn away from their bodies.
I had to watch the doctor as he would insert the forceps into the cervix to puncture the uterus and then crush the fetus in his efforts to dislodge it from the womb.

Abortion Barbie unavailble for comment.

Credere, Obbedire, Combattere!


Loud lefty logic. "You're not as brilliant as you think"...

1073 days enjoy the SCHADENFREUDE and laughing every day at Incompetent (be glad I have the discretion to not say DumbAss) in Chief and his rapidly sinking ship of fools.

Porch.com

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 11, 2014 02:26 PM
137. .
@131 Bruce on February 11, 2014 11:58 AM,

Amazingly given the assertion of the person "chronicling" RagnarDanneskold's (ObamaCare beneficiary since at least 2013!) opinions and private information here @(un)SP.com that "most thinking, liberty loving Americans, prefer a free market system" for health care,
not a single Republican congresscritter has offered that as a replacement to ObamaCare.

I can accept that Democrats don't have that point of view, but it is quite amazing that not a single solitary Republican in Congress is willing to propose Rag's solution despite the 40+ Republican House votes to repeal ObamaCare.

Wonder why that is true?

Wonder why he person "chronicling" RagnarDanneskold's (ObamaCare beneficiary since at least 2013!) opinions and private information here @(un)SP.com chooses to support Republicans?
It can't be that Republicans are less "liberty loving Americans" and more anti "free market system" hypocrites than Democrats, could it?


Posted by: MikeBoyScout on February 11, 2014 05:52 PM
138. I wonder why MB Stalker, who has repeatedly and loudly claimed to ignore my posts, remembers them enough to stalk and search years worth of posts for a pathetic game of gotcha.

I wonder why loud lefty's and stalkers refuse to understand that although they OBEY and parrot, we conservatives think for ourselves.

I don't want the GOP to propose anything (although they did), I want them to allow Obamacare to crash and burn regularly and more spectacularly than it has been. I want the incompetent in chief to continue to sidestep the law, to twerk his signature legislation while explaining how he can illegally postpone what he claimed was supposed to prevent large scale death. I want the GOP to continue to make it the focus of America's ills and force the only people that voted for to defend it to the American people who hate it and are harmed by it.... every single day.

I wonder why the loud lefty's and stalkers are so studiously ignoring all the (more) bad Obamacare news this only second day of yet another very bad week for the incompetent in chief.

Fail: Latest Obamacare Delay Slammed By Pretty Much Everyone

Liberal constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley has upbraided the Obama administration in the strongest of terms for its arrogation of power. "President Obama meets every definition of an imperial presidency," Turley told the Christian Science Monitor in January. "He is the president that Richard Nixon always wanted to be."


This president doesn't just selectively enforce the law as he sees fit; now he is actually inventing new crimes.


Credere, Obbedire, Combattere! little loud lefty lemmings.


Loud lefty logic. "You're not as brilliant as you think"...

1073 days1073 days

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 11, 2014 09:13 PM
139. I simply want to say I am new to blogging and site-building and truly savored this website. Probably I'm planning to bookmark your blog . You amazingly come with wonderful posts. Appreciate it for revealing your web-site.

Posted by: Carroll B. Merriman on February 12, 2014 05:35 AM
140. Yoo hoo LOUD LEFTY'S:

Kirsten Powers: I'm tired of "having to defend this president" and ObamaCare
POWERS: The headline is why I'm getting tired of defending Obamacare. And I'm going to say amen, brother, because it's exactly how I feel. People who have supported the law, who support universal health care, are constantly put in the position of having to defend this president, who has really incompetently put this together, rolled it out, and that's why he has to do this. It's why he has to keep doing this, because it's not working.

Democrats Running Ads Criticizing Obamacare

But it is fascinating to watch a Political Action Committee associated with Nancy "we're going to run on Obamacare" Pelosi slamming the White House for "the disastrous healthcare website" and boasting -- without any time qualification, it should be said -- that its man "voted to let you keep your existing health plan."


Neener neener neener.
Nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah.

Face it, all of you who celebrated and wept and danced when it passed back in March 2010, all of you who viewed it as the historic moment of transformation for the United States: This law is a lemon.

As Bart Simpson once said, "I didn't think it was physically possible, but this both sucks and blows."

It is a painful moment for all those who believed, and still seem to believe, in the world-changing and epoch-making properties of the Affordable Care Act. To them I extend the world-weary sympathies of a man in middle age who knows the meaning of disappointment and loss . . .

Naaaaah.

Nanny nanny boo boo.

Obama's Arbitrary Health Care Flexibility - National Journal
In the Affordable Care Act's never-ending revisions, the only pattern is chaos.


Also take note of the paltry payment rate of "enrollees" in Washington State so far, illustrated in the graph on the right:

Washington has a payment rate of just 50 percent, with Nevada sitting at 66 percent. Both states are far off pace to hit their 2014 targets, even counting unpaid "enrollments."


It may have been a lame attempt at despot humor. But it fell terribly flat and reveals a shocking unawareness of himself and what so many American people think of him.

~!~

If the church's tone under Pope Francis has changed at all, it has actually become harder, more lashing, and even snarky.

But where is the "strident and repetitious" church that O'Malley mentioned? Certainly it doesn't seem to be the one most Catholics attend week to week. Here's Cardinal O'Malley speaking only a month ago:

The normal Catholic in the parish might hear a sermon on abortion once a year. They'll never hear a sermon on homosexuality or gay marriage. They'll never hear a sermon about contraception. But if you look at The New York Times, in the course of a week, there will be 20 articles on those topics. So who is obsessed?

Indeed, if one encounters the church only through the hegemonic frame of the culture war and political battles, it does seem like the church is little more than a series of "Thou shall nots" closely linked to human sexuality. The liturgy, the ministries to the poor, the wide variety of life in the church seem to fade into the background. Including the volcanic eruptions of its supposedly placid pope.


Gun toting political whore ABORTION BARBIE, acts for political expediency... er, changes her mind

~!~

Tolerance", "Dissent is Patriotic", Free Speech

Credere, Obbedire, Combattere!


Loud lefty logic. "You're not as brilliant as you think"...

1072 days enjoy the SCHADENFREUDE and laughing every day at Incompetent (be glad I have the discretion to not say DumbAss) in Chief and his rapidly sinking ship of fools.

Porch.com

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 12, 2014 09:50 AM
141. Ray Nagin found guilty on 20 of 21 counts
"Somewhere, George W. Bush is laughing."

~!~

Hey, loud lefty's ... let's play domino's!
Republican Kevin Faulconer wins big in San Diego mayoral race
A catastrophic failure of the Obama election model, in a city he carried by 25 points last year.

If the party polarities on this story were reversed, those San Diego ballots would be portrayed as tea leaves brimming with ominous portents for the near future of the defeated Republicans. But the Republican won in a landslide, despite a tidal wave of union money, a late endorsement of his opponent by President Obama, polls that forecast a close race only a few days ago... and the fact that he was running in San Diego, a city supposedly slipping into Democrat demographic lock, a city whose presidential vote Barack Obama captured by over 25 points just last year.

Why the San Diego Mayor's Race Should Worry Democrats - National Journal
Liberal groups out-organized and outspent Republicans in a city that's trending Democratic. Their candidate still lost badly.

~!~

Obama: "WE CAN'T WAIT, WE CAN'T WAIT!"


~!~

Obama: "WE CAN'T WAIT, WE CAN'T WAIT!" V.2

~!~

Due to the Affordable Care Act

~!~

Due to the Affordable Care Act V.2

~!~

Due to the Affordable Care Act V.3

~!~

'The State, It Is I'
Obama's answer to the political fallout from Obamacare is to try to make the law disappear.

~!~

Attest that you didn't do something you have a right to do -- and if you're lying you go to jail. How about that?
Or if the PERCEIVE you're lying
Or when a disgruntled employee turns you in
Or when a competitor needing an advantage turns you in
Or because it's a politically advantageous weapon

~!~

Senator Patty Murray, the Washington senator who chairs the budget committee, was in the same boat. "Uh, I have not had a chance to look at that yet," she said.

~!~

Thought Police: Employers Will Be Forced to Inform Obama Why They're Firing Someone

Now businesses will have to go hat in hand to Obama to explain themselves about why they are firing any particular employee. This is just another of Obama's steps toward the fascist-styled control by Washington bureaucrats over the entirety of the business sector.

Had enough yet? First Obamacare orders you to pay for benefits you may or may not be able to afford. If you can't afford to, and must release employees, then you must report to the enforcers at the IRS and pay the piper.

Welcome to the new America.

~!~

Each passing day is more incriminating for President Obama's Obamacare, as the news is like a relentless prosecutor amassing evidence against a serial killer.
Yet the more evidence that rolls in condemning the president's "signature achievement" -- wouldn't you love to have that albatross hung around your epitaph? -- the more entrenched Obama becomes, making clear that his heart is not with the American people or their needs but stubbornly fixated on self. His singular goal is not to provide "affordable health care" but to slay those who are trying to take his "baby" away from him, with the deranged obsession of Captain Ahab.
... he knows that Obamacare is the best vehicle to drive this nation toward socialized medicine, which is the first destination on the trip to socialism writ large.
If it were otherwise, there is no way Obama would stick by his destructive baby monster as the daily evidence mounts to incriminate every single aspect of it in devastating detail. He would mercifully destroy it in the crib. Speaking of which -- it's time for another Obamacare disaster update.
This is a representative sampling, in summary form, of the Obamacare news from the past few days:
The Wall Street Journal reports ...
The blog "Legal Insurrection" notes...
Bloomberg reports...
The Hill reports...
Columnist John Podhoretz detail...
Stateline, the daily news service of The Pew Charitable Trusts, alarmingly reports...
The Washington Examiner reports...
The Los Angeles Times reveals...
I found those items in five minutes without looking very hard. Is there any doubt in your mind that Obama is really after something other than his stated goals for Obamacare? If so, I respectfully suggest that you consider wiping the scales from your eyes.

~!~

Another health care rationing story coming out of England is prompting fears of the kind of rationing Americans could see under Obamacare.

According to the Nottingham Post, funding for such a surgery was discontinued last year. NHS England told the newspaper it is looking at options to fund the surgery, which could include the family paying for it themselves. The family estimated that it could cost more than $11,500.

~!~

Obama's Workforce: Discouraged, Disincentivized, Downsized

~!~

Survey: U.S. Press Freedom Plunges Under Obama To 46th In The World, Now Behind Romania

The U.S. under President Obama, who once promised to run the "most transparent" administration in the country's history, fell from 32nd to 46th in the 2014 World Press Freedom Index, a drop of 13 slots. The index, compiled by the press advocacy group Reporters Without Borders, analyzes 180 countries on criteria such as official abuse, media independence and infrastructure to determine how free journalists are to report.

~!~

Liberals Redefine Abortion as End-of-Life Care
A story on Slate.com has redefined abortion as "end-of-life care." The author is a medical student and mother who, with her husband, chose to have an abortion saying it was a "parenting decision" -- not one of when life begins, but a decision of "how and when life should end:"

~!~

RE Dear Loud lefty STALKERS, your ideology daily claims that offense is in the eye of the offended. It's OK to call a conservative woman a cunt but not OK to call a vociferous empty headed advocate "Abortion Barbie". It's OK to call a black conservative an Uncle Tom or a house slave or a " a ventriloquist's dummy", but racist to merely disagree with a half black incompetent. @ 107:

Chris Matthews, Who Compared Republicans to Nazis, Is Outraged When Ben Carson Compares Liberals to Nazis (Video)

Chris Matthews, who compared conservatives to Nazis, railed against Dr. Ben Carson today for comparing the progressive movement to Nazis. While discussing the progressive movement, Carson said, "There comes a time when people with values simply have to stand up. Think about Nazi Germany."

Tingles didn't appreciate that. Matthews sneered, "Haven't we all learned by now not to go there? No Nazi references."

It's only funny when Chris does it.

~!~

RE Dear Loud lefty STALKERS, your ideology daily claims that offense is in the eye of the offended. It's OK to call a conservative woman a cunt but not OK to call a vociferous empty headed advocate "Abortion Barbie". It's OK to call a black conservative an Uncle Tom or a house slave or a " a ventriloquist's dummy", but racist to merely disagree with a half black incompetent. @ 107:

"The worst I have been treated was by northern liberal elites. The absolute worst I have ever been treated," Thomas said at Palm Beach Atlantic University in Florida. "The worst things that have been done to me, the worst things that have been said about me, by northern liberal elites, not by the people of Savannah, Georgia."

~!~

Shirley Temple gave us a heartfelt appreciation of innocence

In the midst of the Great Depression, struggling Americans could still afford an afternoon at the movies and Shirley provided the ultimate escape: a reminder of the humanity, love and innocence that seemed so out of reach in a world growing mean and bitter with despair.

~!~

RE Dear Loud lefty STALKERS, your ideology daily claims that offense is in the eye of the offended. It's OK to call a conservative woman a cunt but not OK to call a vociferous empty headed advocate "Abortion Barbie". It's OK to call a black conservative an Uncle Tom or a house slave or a " a ventriloquist's dummy", but racist to merely disagree with a half black incompetent. @ 107:

Leftists Celebrate Death of "Racist Little C*ntburger" Shirley Temple

~!~

RE Dear Loud lefty STALKERS, your ideology daily claims that offense is in the eye of the offended. It's OK to call a conservative woman a cunt but not OK to call a vociferous empty headed advocate "Abortion Barbie". It's OK to call a black conservative an Uncle Tom or a house slave or a " a ventriloquist's dummy", but racist to merely disagree with a half black incompetent. @ 107:

Leftist Scum Bag On Shirley Temple Black

~!~

I can't wait to see Abortion Barbie's lib supporters twisting themselves into pretzels trying to defend this.

~!~

Wendy Davis Now Backs Late-Term Abortion Ban, But Only if Disabled Babies Can be Killed *PSST: See article above about rationing in UK

~!~

Democrat Legislator: A Colic, Crying Baby is a Good Reason for an Abortion

~!~

How J-Lo taught us that colic isn't a good reason to have an abortion

...He sits down on a park bench next to a stranger who is watching his own children at play. After explaining his situation and expressing his apprehension, he asks,

"What's it like, the whole kid thing?"

The stranger responds (and here's the gold):

"The best way I can describe it is, it's awful, awful, awful, awful...and then, something incredible happens. And then awful, awful, awful, awful ... awful. And then something incredible happens again. It's like this all day every day, I feel like I'm drowning, gasping to get my old life back. And then a small moment happens that's so magical, so life affirming that it makes it all worthwhile. This will be the best thing you ever do."

That is the point. Right there. Parenthood is really, really difficult. It's not endless cooing, nestling a soft warm head, snuggling before bedtime or hearing your child laugh. It's a lot of crying too, and sleep deprivation and heartache when your child is sick or suffering.

But from what I hear about parenthood, those tiny, magical moments make all the rest of it worth it.

Sadly some would rather snuff out the potential for the miraculous to avoid the tiresome, the mundane, the inconvenient.

!~

Report: 95 Percent of Global Warming Models Are Wrong

~!~

The Party Of Science Has Absolutely No Clue What It's Talking About

~!~

Video: Beckel goes after White House silence on Christian persecution

This also led to the exchange on The Five, in which Beckel slams the White House for being "silent." When one panelist notes that not many people know about the issue, Beckel says, "That includes the White House," and follows up with this shot: "Why the White House and State Department stay silent on this, I do not know."

Another panelist suggests that Christians have to speak out more about persecution of gays before people will speak out on persecution of Christians:

~!~

U.S. "Chose to Stay Silent" on Muslim Persecution of Christians: November 2013

~!~

I'm pretty sure Pope Francis is going to pass on this one.


Credere, Obbedire, Combattere!


Loud lefty logic. "You're not as brilliant as you think"...

1072 days enjoy the SCHADENFREUDE and laughing every day at Incompetent (be glad I have the discretion to not say DumbAss) in Chief and his rapidly sinking ship of fools.

Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on February 12, 2014 01:10 PM