Showing posts with label Obama's agenda. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Obama's agenda. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 8, 2014

Vermont plots course for single-payer health care system

Here we go… down the road to single-payer… socialized medicine… the plan all along~

doc_office_112613.jpg

Nov. 26, 2013: A doctor speaks to patients at his office in Peoria, Ill.Reuters

Fox: WASHINGTON –  While all eyes are on the ObamaCare rollout, an ambitious health care experiment is going forward in Vermont that would create a government-run alternative know as a "single-payer" system -- and it's starting to attract more attention from liberals frustrated with the Affordable Care Act's implementation.

Democrats' faith in ObamaCare has been shaken by the technical failures of the federal and state insurance exchanges as well as, in some cases, premium increases. In Vermont, however, they see a potential first step toward the kind of national government-run health care system some have advocated for years. Filmmaker Michael Moore, in a column last week blasting ObamaCare, said Vermont's plan could "change everything."

But critics say the proposal goes too far and would kill thousands of jobs. "It’s not practical,” Vermont state Rep. Patti Komline, who voted against the plan, told FoxNews.com. “There are too many complications involved.” 

A single-payer plan would largely sideline the insurance industry, and instead set up a government-managed insurance system to collect all health care fees and pay out all health care costs.

Full implementation of Vermont’s single-payer plan could be held up for another three years, at least. In order for Green Mountain Care to fully launch in 2017, the health care exchange would have to get approval from the federal government to use federal money to fund the state program.

State law would also require Vermont to define the benefits of the single-payer program and provide a three-year budget that clocks in less than current health care costs.

University of Virginia public policy professor Raymond Scheppach said it will take another half decade to determine whether Vermont’s controversial plan even works and if there are any real benefits associated with it. He also says that regardless of outcome, Vermont’s political makeup differs from other states and therefore would not provide an accurate view of what’s to come.

The single-payer debate recently resurfaced in national headlines following the Dec. 31 op-ed piece in the New York Times by Moore. In it, Moore called ObamaCare “awful” and said liberals have avoided speaking in public about the problems with it because they didn’t want to provide the president’s critics with additional ammunition.

Moore went on to sing the merits of a single-payer system and said that the real problem with ObamaCare is that it is a “pro-insurance-industry plan implemented by a president who knew in his heart that a single-payer, Medicare-for-all model was the true way to go.”

Supporters say the single-payer system would cut down on the administrative waste and complications associated with having multiple billers and billing systems. Opponents say such a widespread overhaul would be bad for business.

Vermont became the first state in the country to lay the groundwork for single-payer health care. Gov. Peter Shumlin, a Democrat, signed the plan into law in May 2011.

The initiative, which was approved by the Democratic-controlled House and Senate, promises to extend coverage to all of Vermont’s 620,000 residents, of which around 47,000 residents are uninsured and 150,000 are underinsured.

"This law recognizes an economic and fiscal imperative," Shumlin said during a press conference when he signed the bill. "We must control the growth in health care costs that are putting families at economic risk and making it harder for small employers to do business.”

The exchange, Green Mountain Care, will set reimbursement rates for health care providers and streamline administration into a single, unified system.

Some experts say a revised system would save an estimated $580 million annually, and $1.9 billion by 2019. But the single-payer system’s creator, Harvard economist William Hsiao, says it could generate even greater profits for Vermont.

Hsiao predicts his plan would save the state 25.3 percent a year in total health care spending, lower household and employer health care spending, boost job growth and create a higher economic output for the state.

The savings, he said in a 2011 Health Affairs article, would come from tort reform for malpractice suits, better governance and lower administrative expenses. Vermont would rack up $4.6 billion in savings during the first five years of the program which he says would be used in part to cover the state’s uninsured as well as to expand benefits and services.

Vermont’s health care spending runs about $5 billion annually, with costs rising between 6.5 percent and 8.5 percent in recent years.

But not everyone is on board with the plan. It is still unknown how Vermont will pay for the plan and whether that money will come from additional taxes on its residents.

Komline says despite the plan's passage, she doesn’t see Vermont residents warming up to the idea of a single-payer system any time soon. She also said that Vermont, because of its small size and political makeup, is open to influence from special interest groups.

“It doesn’t take much money for special interest groups to come in and influence votes,” she said. “That’s why Vermont was among the first to legalize pot and same-sex marriages.”

Calls to the governor's office for comment were not returned. 

Here comes Obama’s solution to the disastrous Affordable Care Act: National Health Care a.k.a. the Single Payer System

Friday, January 3, 2014

Here comes Obama’s solution to the disastrous Affordable Care Act: National Health Care a.k.a. the Single Payer System

By: Nelson Abdullah -  Conscience of a Conservative  -  h/t to the NoisyRoom

Cancelled health insurance plans by the millions. Premiums rise 300%. Two million people enrolled in ObamaCare but most are low-income families covered under Medicaid, not the healthy, young, affulent Middle-Class families with incomes that were supposed to support the program. The so-called Affordable Care Act is already proving to be unaffordable with family deductibles averaging $10,000 or more. That means that even with the health insurance a family must pay out the first $10,000 in medical bills before the coverage starts. This plan is a disaster but it is so bad that it could not possibly be that way by accident. Even stupid people manage to do something right once in awhile. The Unaffordable Care Act was designed to fail from top to bottom.

Since the Democrats were the only ones who voted for ObamaCare they will be the only target of the expected backlash by millions of angry voters. The Democrat leaders who conceived and wrote the plan in secret, who told members of Congress they had to pass it before they could read it, are now facing the most frightening threat they have ever faced. But while conservatives are enjoying the prospect of voter revenge in the 2014 elections, only 11 months away, and the expected retaking of the Senate giving Republicans control of both houses of Congress, this may all be just a planned scenario scripted by the Marxist/Socialist leadership of the National Democratic Party. A perfect example of snatching victory from the jaws of defeat. While we watch images of a squirming and obviously uncomfortable Obama admitting that he screwed up, we may well be the ones in for the big surprise. This is because the Affordable Care Act is not the health plan that the Democrats had in mind, it was only a stepping stone to launch their valiant and heroic rescue effort to save America. And the solution to everyone’s problem will be a “new” compromise health care plan, the Single Payer System. The Single Payer System, otherwise known as National Healthcare is pure, outright socialized medicine. The following is a glossy explanation from Wikipedia that does little to explain the pitfalls of National Healthcare. It fails to warn of the long waiting lists for medical treatment or the low wages paid to Doctors or the full implementation of the Death Panels that consist of panels of bureaucrats who will be granting approval for medical procedures or denying them to the elderly who make no contribution to society.

From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_National_Health_Care_Act

The United States National Health Care Act, or the Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act (H.R. 676), is a bill introduced in the United States House of Representatives by Representative John Conyers (D-MI). The bill had 88 cosponsors in 2009. The act would establish a universal single-payer health care system in the United States, the rough equivalent of Canada’s Medicare, the United Kingdom’s National Health Service…

Under a single-payer system, all medical care would be paid for by the Government of the United States, ending the need for private health insurance and premiums, and probably recasting private insurance companies as providing purely supplemental coverage, to be used when non-essential care is sought.

The national system would be paid for in part through taxes replacing insurance premiums, but also by savings realized through the provision of preventative universal healthcare and the elimination of insurance company overhead and hospital billing costs.

The leftist news media that has been covering up the problems with ObamaCare in order to protect the Democrats in the previous two national elections while the bill was being created and the 20,000 pages of new regulations were being written are now playing their part by reporting the disastrous effects to drum up support for some sort of needed relief. Even liberal web sites like Politico called Barack Hussein Obama’s promise that we could keep our insurance coverage, The Lie of the Year. They are all setting the stage for the White House to announce a viable solution to the millions of citizens suddenly finding themselves with no health care coverage and the millions more who have found they cannot afford the coverage they signed up for. Look for Barack Hussein Obama calling on Congress to voluntarily repeal ObamaCare and replacing it with a National Health Care Single Payer System. The law they wanted all along.

And there goes one third of the U.S. economy right down the tubes.

My name is Nelson Abdullah and I am Oldironsides

Friday, December 27, 2013

A Failing Grade for Obamacare

By: Zack Slingsby  -  The Forge

GK Chesterton once said, when asked to describe what it was about the world that made him believe in a divine creator, that he regrettably found himself dumbstruck, ill-prepared, at a loss for words. When he surveyed his surroundings, he explained, it was not that one thing pointed toward a celestial hand; it was that everything did.

Politicians and pundits of verifiable eloquence have similarly found themselves humbled before the mountain of evidence towering in tribute to President Obama’s calamitous Affordable Care Act. The heap has grown at such a rate that it is getting difficult to stand back far enough to see it all at once. How can anyone squeeze the multitude of weekly revelations into a digestible sound bite?

It is not merely the premise of redistribution at issue, not merely the suffering the law has inflicted on the populace directly (via policy cancellation and the structured marginalizing of small business interests), not merely the constitutional flippancy with which the Executive has unilaterally amended and implemented the bad law at will, but rather the coalescence of all these factors, and their myriad implications, that confounds opponents when asked, Well, what is so wrong with Obamacare?

The case for repeal is made plain by the simple fact that the law sold to us as a magical fix-all has thus far rendered every step of the healthcare insurance process completely broken.

The immense failure of the Obamacare rollout has evidently emboldened the media to use a painless litmus test for its success. If the administration’s tech savvies can catch up to the flaws of the website, if they can sign people up and stifle the groans of cancellation, and really make a go of the exchanges, then all is well and all is bright. This is the wrong test.

From the moment of the bill’s inception, the President has claimed his signature overhaul will improve the essence of healthcare for the people of America. Not simply make it as good. The numbers he has to compete with have been plainly recorded. In 2009, the Washington Post conducted a survey revealing that approximately 81% of US citizens were satisfied with their health insurance coverage and 88% were satisfied with the quality of the healthcare they received.

If the President wants to remake the economy under the guise of providing coverage to 15 million uninsured Americans—a goal that could have been reached through the tested-means of capitalism—his program will have to produce satisfaction returns that not only meet but exceed the statistical enthusiasm of 2009 (and do so, as he promised, without contributing to the reckless tax-and-spend trend of new progressivism). As it stands today, on the precipice of full-scale implementation and with the administration’s arbitrary revision tactics quickly become a new fact of governing, the President must contend with seven in ten Americans who, at minimum, would like to see the law’s one-year delay.

He will have to ignore them all to stay the course. And that he will. So when the White House wishes you a Merry Christmas via press conference, pundit promise or passing pop-up ad, remember to thank them for Obamacare: the gift that keeps on giving, whether you want to return it or not.

Obamacare and Review of 2013 Should Remind Us We Are Not 'Subjects'; We Are People

By Laura Hollis, CP Op-Ed Contributor to the Christian Post writes:

The unveiling of the dictatorial debacle that is Obamacare absolutely flabbergasts me. It is stunning on so many levels, but the most shocking aspect of it for me is watching millions of free Americans stand idly by while this man, his minions in Congress and his cheerleaders in the press systematically dismantle our Constitution, steal our money, and crush our freedoms.

The President, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid (with no small help from Justice John Roberts) take away our health care, and we allow it. They take away our insurance, and we allow it. They take away our doctors, and we allow it.They charge us thousands of dollars more a year, and we allow it. They make legal products illegal, and we allow it. They cripple our businesses, and we allow it.They announce by fiat that we must ignore our most deeply held beliefs – and we allow it.

Where is your spine, America?

Yes, I know people are complaining. I read the news on the internet. I read blogs. I have a Twitter feed. So what? People in the Soviet Union complained. People in Cuba complain. People in China complain (quietly). Complaining isn't the same thing as doing anything about it. In fact, much of the complaining that we hear sounds like resignation: Wow. This sucks. Oh well, this is the way things are. Too bad.

Perhaps you need reminding of a few important facts. Here goes:

1. The President is not a king. Barack Obama does not behave like a President, an elected official, someone who realizes that he works for us. He behaves like a king, a dictator – someone who believes that his own pronouncements have the force of law, and who thinks he can dispense with the law's enforcement when he deigns to do so. And those of us who object? How dare we? Racists!

And while he moves steadily "forward" with his plans to "fundamentally transform" the greatest country in human history, he distracts people with cheap, meaningless trivialities, like "free birth control pills"! (In fact, let's face it: this administration's odd obsession with sex in general - Birth control! Abortion! Sterilization! Gay guys who play basketball! -- is just plain weird. Since when did the leader of the free world care so much about how people have sex, who they have it with, and what meds they use when they have it? Does he have nothing more important to concern himself with?)

2. It isn't just a failed software program; it is a failed philosophy. People are marveling that Healthcare.gov was such a spectacular failure. Well, if one is only interested in it as a product launch, I've explained some of the reasons for that here. But the larger point is that it isn't a software failure, or even a product failure; it is a philosophy failure.

I have said this before: Obama is not a centrist; he is a central planner. And this – all of it: the disastrous computer program, the hundreds of millions of dollars wasted, the lies, the manipulation of public opinion, the theft of the public's money and property, and freedom (read insurance, and premiums, and doctors) -- IS what central planning looks like.

The central premise of central planning is that a handful of wunderkinds with your best interests at heart (yeah, right) know better than you what's good for you. The failure of such a premise and the misery it causes have been clear from the dawn of humanity. Kings and congressmen, dictators and Dear Leaders, potentates, princes and presidents can all fall prey to the same imperial impulses: "we know what is good the 'the people.'

And they are always wrong.

There is a reason that the only times communism has really been tried have been after wars, revolutions, or coups d'état. You have to have complete chaos for people to be willing to accept the garbage that centralized planning produces. Take the Soviet Union, for example. After two wars, famine, and the collapse of the Romanov dynasty, why wouldn't people wait in line for hours to buy size 10 shoes? Or settle for the gray matter that passed for meat in the grocery stores?

But communism's watered-down cousin, socialism, isn't much better. Ask the Venezuelans who cannot get toilet paper. Toilet paper. ¡Viva la Revolución!

Contrary to what so many who believe in a "living Constitution" say, the Founding Fathers absolutely understood this. That is why the Constitution was set up to limit government power. (Memo to the President: the drafters of the Constitution deliberately didn't say "what government had to do on your behalf.") They understood that that was the path to folly, fear, and famine.)

3. Obama is deceitful. Just as the collapse of the computer program should not surprise anyone, neither should we be shocked that the President lied about his healthcare plan. Have any of you been paying attention over the past few years? Obama has made no secret of his motivations or his methods. The philosophies which inspire him espouse deceit and other vicious tactics. (Don't take my word for it: read Saul Alinsky.) Obama infamously told reporter Richard Wolffe, "You know, I actually believe my own bullshit." He has refused to be forthcoming about his past (where are his academic records?). His own pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, told author Ed Klein, that Obama said to him, "You know what your problem is? You have to tell the truth."

Did Obama lie when he said dozens of times, "If you like you plan, you can keep it"? Of course he did. That's what he does.

4. The media is responsible. And had the media been doing their jobs, we would have known a lot of this much, much earlier.

The press is charged with the sacred responsibility of protecting the people from the excesses of government. Our press has been complicit, incompetent, or corrupt. Had they vetted this man in 2008, as they would have a Republican candidate, we would have known far more about him than we do, even now. Had they pressed for more details about Obamacare, Congress' feet would have been held to the fire. Had they done their jobs about Eric Holder, Fast and Furious, Benghazi, the IRS scandal, NSA spying - or any of the other myriad betrayals of the public trust that this administration has committed, Obama would likely have lost his 2012 reelection campaign. (A fact that even The Washington Post has tacitly acknowledged. Well done, fellas! Happy now?)

Instead, they turned a blind eye, even when they knew he was lying, abusing power, disregarding the limits of the Constitution. It was only when he began to spy on them, and when the lies were so blatant that the lowest of low-information voters could figure it out that they realized they had to report on it. (Even in the face of blatant, deliberate and repeated lies, The New York Times has the audacity to tell us that the President "misspoke.") They have betrayed us, abandoned us, and deceived us.

5. Ted Cruz was right. So was Sarah Palin. The computer program is a disaster. The insurance exchanges are a disaster. What's left? The healthcare system itself. And this, of necessity, will be a disaster, too.

Millions of people have lost their individual insurance plans. In 2015, millions more will lose their employer-provided coverage (a fact which the Obama administration also knew, and admitted elsewhere).

The exorbitant additional costs that Obamacare has foisted on unsuspecting Americans are all part of a plan of wealth confiscation and redistribution. That is bad enough. But it will not end there.

When the numbers of people into the system and the corresponding demand for care vastly exceed the cost projections (and they will, make no mistake), then the rationing will start. Not only choice at that point, but quality and care itself will go down the tubes. And then will come the decisions made by the Independent Payment Advisory Board about what care will be covered (read "paid for") and what will not.

That's just a death panel, put politely. In fact, progressives are already greasing the wheels for acceptance of that miserable reality as well. They're spreading the lie that it will be about the ability of the dying to refuse unwanted or unhelpful care. Don't fall for that one, either. It will be about the deaths that inevitably result from decisions made by people other than the patients, their families, and their physicians. (Perhaps it's helpful to think of their assurances this way: "If you like your end-of-life care, you can keep your end-of-life-care.")

6. We are not SUBJECTS. (or, Nice Try, the Tea Party Isn't Going Away). We have tolerated these incursions into our lives and livelihoods too long already. There is no end to the insatiable demand "progressives" have to remake us in their image. Today it is our insurance, our businesses, our doctors, our health care. Tomorrow some new crusade will be announced that enables them to take over other aspects of our formerly free lives.

I will say it again: WE ARE NOT SUBJECTS. Not only is the Tea Party right on the fiscal issues, but it appears that they are more relevant than ever. We fought a war once to prove we did not want to be the subjects of a king, and the Boston Tea Party was just a taste of the larger conflict to come. If some people missed that lesson in history class, we can give them a refresher.

The 2014 elections are a good place to start. Call your representative, your senator, your candidate and tell them: "We are not subjects. You work for us. And if the word "REPEAL" isn't front and center in your campaign, we won't vote for you. Period."

Marion Algier at Ask Marion Added:

Along with the ever worsening travesty and lies of ObamaCare, Americans are awakening to the nightmare of the Federal government’s ever-growing stranglehold that is destroying wealth-creation and promoting skyrocketing debt. The Fed’s central bank—no longer tied to a gold standard—channels low interest rates and trillions of dollars to Goldman Sachs et al., while the rest of America is jobless, under-employed, owing staggering college loans with more people than ever without healthcare is given a bag of broken glass.

Peggy Noonan recently summarized much of what is wrong this holiday season…. beginning with:  What's the political word of the year? For months journalists couldn't settle on how to describe the rollout of ObamaCare. "Failed," disastrous," "unsuccessful." In the past few weeks they've settled on "botched." References to the botched rollout have appeared in this paper, The Hill, NBC, Fox, NPR, the New Republic, the Washington Post and other media outlets. A botch, according to the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, Sixth Edition, is a "bungled piece of work"—to botch is... Or, as JT McFarland recently mentioned on Redeye, is it really just going as they planned… creating total chaos and destroying what was the best healthcare system in the world so they can then install a single-payer socialized medicine system to pretty much cement their (Progressive) control of every every aspect of our lives?!?  I vote it is the latter.

The Christmas Classic, ‘Twas the Night Before Christmas’ was completely reworked for our current national predicament by our friend Rock Peters Western Journalism. It is guaranteed to make you laugh and cry.

Video:  Twas the Night Before Christmas - 2013 Version

Lies of the Year… ‘If you like your insurance, you can keep your insurance’ and ‘If your doctor, you can keep your doctor’ 

Whistle BLOWER- President Obama’s HALF sister comes FORTH!

Obamacare Should Remind Us We Are Not 'Subjects,' We Are People

Wednesday, December 4, 2013

New Obamacare Bombshell - Rpt: No System Yet For Exchange Payment - The Kelly File

Video: New Obamacare Bombshell - Rpt: No System Yet For Exchange Payment - The Kelly File

My fellow citizens… Nobody is this incompetent of stupid!! This is all part of the plan.  The plan has always been to make this roll out and the actual process so horrendous that they can jump in at the last minute and fix it… creating a single-payer plan, which is socialized medicine, which they wanted in the first place so they can control every aspect of your life, including who lives and dies and when.

Don’t fall for this.  Clean house in the 2014 and 2016 Elections.  Do your homework.  Elect people who are not part of the Washington DC system and are willing to fight for you.  And replace everyone who voted for ObamaCare or was associated with the Obama Administration!!

The Dirty Secret Behind ObamaCare No One’s Talking About

Attention Main Stream Media. Regarding Obamacare… I Told You So!

Wake-Up… ObamaCare Eliminates Your Plan by Design

Monday, November 18, 2013

Obamacare: The Final Nail In The Coffin For The Middle Class

Coffin-300x208 Tom Halloran: If there were any shreds of hope left that the stunning decline of the middle class could be turned around, Obamacare has absolutely destroyed them.  Over the past decade or so, the middle class in the United States has been absolutely eviscerated.  The number of working age Americans without a job has increased by 27 million since the year 2000, median household income in the U.S. has fallen for five years in a row, and the poverty numbers in this country are spiraling out of control.  And now here comes Obamacare.  As you will see below, Obamacare is causing millions of Americans to lose their current health insurance policies, it is causing health insurance premiums to explode to absolutely ridiculous levels, and it is systematically killing jobs even though the employer mandate has been delayed for a while.  All of this is creating a tremendous amount of stress for millions of middle class families that are already stretched extremely thin financially.  According to CNN, a survey that was conducted earlier this year found that 76 percent of all Americans are living paycheck to paycheck.  Most of those families simply cannot afford to pay much higher health insurance premiums for new policies that also come with much larger deductibles and significantly increased out-of-pocket costs.  Millions of those families will ultimately end up choosing to do without health insurance altogether, and that will create a whole host of new problems.  This is a disaster that is so enormous that it is really hard to put into words.  If the U.S. health care system was a separate country, it would be the 6th largest economy on the entire globe all by itself.  And now Obamacare is going to bring the entire U.S. health care system to its knees.

Obamacare: Since October 1st, The Number Of Americans With Health Insurance Has Fallen By Nearly 4 Million

Last week, Barack Obama decided to allow Americans to keep their current health insurance plans for one more year.

Isn’t that generous of him?  Especially considering the fact that he promised us over and over that if we liked our current health insurance policies that we would be able to keep them permanently.

The funny thing is that Obama is not actually changing the law.  So if your health insurance company allows you to stay on your current health insurance plan that does not meet the requirements of Obamacare, it is technically breaking the law.

And if you continue to stay on that current health insurance plan that does not meet the requirements of Obamacare, you are technically breaking the law.

It is just that Obama has promised not to enforce what the law says for one year.

For a president to just blatantly disregard the rule of law is a very dangerous precedent.  Do we really want the president to have the power to decide what laws are going to be enforced and what laws are not going to be enforced?

That sounds dangerously close to a dictatorship to me.

And in any event, there are many Americans that are not going to be able to keep their current policies no matter what Obama says.  For example, just two hours after Obama announced his plan last week, the state of Washington announced that they would not be allowing insurance companies to extend their old health insurance plans if they don’t comply with Obamacare under any circumstances…

State Insurance Commissioner Mike Kreidler has rejected President Obama’s proposal to allow insurance companies to extend health insurance policies for people who have received notices that their policies will be cancelled at the end of the year.

Within two hours of President Obama’s news conference announcing the proposed administrative fix for Americans upset by their policy cancellations, Kreidler issued a statement rejecting the proposal.

“I understand that many people are upset by the notices they have recently received from their health plans and they may not need the new benefits [in the Affordable Care Act] today,” he said. “But I have serious concerns about how President Obama’s proposal would be implemented and more significantly, its potential impact on the overall stability of our health insurance market.”

“I do not believe his proposal is a good deal for the state of Washington,” Kreidler’s statement continued. “We will not be allowing insurance companies to extend their policies.”

How do you think the people of the state of Washington will respond to that?

Things are getting crazy out there, and the number of people that are losing their health insurance policies is absolutely stunning.

According to the Wall Street Journal, so far 106,185 Americans have enrolled in Obamacare since October 1st.  Most of those that have successfully enrolled have done so through the state insurance exchanges.  So far, only 26,794 Americans have signed up for health insurance using the federally run exchanges on HealthCare.gov.

Meanwhile, during that same time frame, 4.02 million Americans have had their health insurance policies cancelled.

So that means that the number of Americans with health insurance has actually decreased by 3,918,205 since October 1st.

Wasn’t Obamacare supposed to result in more Americans being covered?

And according to U.S. Senator Rand Paul, Obama not only knew that this would happen, he actually wrote the regulation that caused this to happen…

“I’m still learning about it. It’s 20,000 pages of regulations. The Bill was 2,000 pages and I didn’t realize this until this week, the whole idea of you losing or getting your insurance cancelled wasn’t in the original Obamacare. It was a regulation WRITTEN BY PRESIDENT OBAMA, three months later. So we had a vote, this is before I got up there. The Republicans had a vote to try to cancel that regulation so you COULDN’T BE CANCELLED, to grandfather everybody in. You know what the vote was? Straight party line. EVERY DEMOCRAT VOTED TO KEEP THE RULE THAT CANCELS YOUR INSURANCE.”

So now millions of Americans, including women battling cancer, are losing health insurance plans that they were depending upon.

Thanks Obama?

Obamacare: Skyrocketing Health Insurance Premiums

How much more are you willing to pay for health insurance than you are paying right now?

10 percent?

20 percent?

30 percent?

Well, according to one study health insurance premiums for men are going to go up by an average of 99 percent under Obamacare and health insurance premiums for women are going to go up by an average of 62 percent under Obamacare.

And of course some groups are going to see increases that are much larger than that.  For example, it is being projected that health insurance premiums for healthy 30-year-old men will rise by an average of 260 percent.

Ouch.

And there are some families out there that have already been hit with health insurance premium increases that are absolutely jaw-dropping.  In a previous article, I included the example of one family down in Texas that has been hit with a 539% rate increase…

Obamacare is named the “Affordable Care Act,” after all, and the President promised the rates would be “as low as a phone bill.” But I just received a confirmed letter from a friend in Texas showing a 539% rate increase on an existing policy that’s been in good standing for years.

As the letter reveals (see below), the cost for this couple’s policy under Humana is increasing from $212.10 per month to $1,356.60 per month. This is for a couple in good health whose combined income is less than $70K — a middle-class family, in other words.

Obamacare: Enormous Deductibles And Huge Out-Of-Pocket Expenses For All

It isn’t just health insurance premiums that are going up either.  Deductibles are going up too.  In fact, just check out what one survey of Americans living in seven different states recently discovered

Expenses for some policies can reach $6,350 for a single person and $12,700 per family, the most allowed by the health-care law, according to a survey by HealthPocket Inc. of seven states, including California and Ohio. That’s 26 percent higher than the average deductible in the seven states, and a scenario likely repeated across the country, said Kev Coleman, head of research and data at Sunnyvale, California-based HealthPocket.

That same article has a great quote from an elderly New Jersey resident.  82-year-old Larry Saphire thinks that if you have to pay a $5,000 deductible up front, “you might as well not have any insurance at all”…

“If you have to pay $5,000 upfront” when illness hits, “you might as well not have any insurance at all,” said Larry Saphire, 82, of West Orange, New Jersey, who shopped for coverage for his wife and two children, ages 16 and 21. “That’s not insurance.”

On California’s state-run exchange site, the standard low-premium “bronze” plan carries a $5,000 deductible per person, a $60 co-pay to see a doctor and a 30 percent fee, known as coinsurance, on hospital care. In Rhode Island, Blue Cross Blue Shield’s bronze plan has a $5,800 deductible while Missouri’s U.S.-run exchange offers plans by Anthem Blue Cross with the maximum-allowable $6,350 in out-of-pocket costs.

Obamacare: The Quality Of Care Is Going To Go Into The Toilet

A lot of Americans that are signing up for Obamacare are going to be in for a huge shock.  Many of the best hospitals and many of the best doctors are not covered by their plans

Meanwhile, sometime between March and June, the other shoe drops: People who bought exchange policies realize that the restricted networks insurers created to keep the premium costs low cut out the best hospitals and doctors. A newly insured child with cancer cannot get into a top pediatric hospital because her insurance has zero coverage for out-of-network emergency care. Tearful Mom goes on the evening news and says that she thought when they went on Obamacare, that meant they were safe, and why can’t I take my baby to Philadelphia Children’s Hospital, Mr. President?

Can you imagine being a parent in that situation?

In response, some hospitals are already filing suit over this.  For instance, check out what is happening over in Seattle

Seattle Children’s Hospital filed suit against Washington State’s Office of the Insurance Commissioner this week, after Obamacare implementation caused the hospital to be cut from four of the six insurance plans offered by the new Washington Health Benefit Exchange.

And even if you are on Medicare that does not mean that the quality of your care is going to stay the same either.  As Reuters just reported, UnitedHealth is dumping “thousands of doctors” from their Medicare Advantage plans for the elderly because of Obamacare…

UnitedHealth Group dropped thousands of doctors from its networks in recent weeks, leaving many elderly patients unsure whether they need to switch plans to continue seeing their doctors, the Wall Street Journal reported on Friday.

The insurer said in October that underfunding of Medicare Advantage plans for the elderly could not be fully offset by the company’s other healthcare business. The company also reported spending more healthcare premiums on medical claims in the third quarter, due mainly to government cuts to payments for Medicare Advantage services.

In the United States, we already pay much more for health care than everyone else in the world, and we typically have to wait longer to see a doctor than most of the rest of the industrialized world does.

Now Obamacare is going to make all of this even worse, and the quality of the care that we receive is going to go downhill fast.

Obamacare: The Jobs Killer

A while back, Obama unilaterally made the decision to delay the implementation of the employer mandate until 2015.

That was probably a good political decision, because it would have been a huge political issue in the 2014 elections.

But the truth is that we won’t have to wait until 2015 for Obamacare to start killing jobs.  In fact, according to CNBC it is already happening…

Approximately one-third of business decision-makers at companies with between 40 and 500 employees, say the health-care law has already increased their costs due to hikes in both the cost of insurance and compliance, according to a recent report from political-research firm Public Opinion Strategies. As a result, many business leaders say they are already making personnel decisions based on the Affordable Care Act.

Among franchised businesses, 27 percent report their company has replaced full-time workers with part-time workers and 31 percent have reduced worker hours. Among non-franchised businesses, 12 percent are replacing full-time workers with part-time workers or reducing hours. This is happening now, with more than a year before the mandate goes into effect; and undoubtedly, these numbers will rise as we approach next July’s “look back” period for tabulating workers’ hours.

It is kind of startling that we are already seeing employers make such big changes even though the employer mandate does not come into effect until 2015.  You can find a very long list of some of the employers that have already either eliminated jobs or cut hours because of Obamacare right here.

Remember, this is just the tip of the iceberg.  Once we get closer to the deadline things are going to get much, much worse.

At a time when the middle class desperately needs jobs, Obamacare is going to slaughter them.

And even if you are able to keep your current job, that does not mean that your health plan will remain the same.  In fact, Forbes is projecting that a staggering 51 percent of all employment-based health insurance plans will be canceled and replaced with new ones.

Overall, Forbes is projecting that an astounding 93 million Americans will eventually lose their current health insurance policies due to Obamacare.

Obamacare: Providing Huge Incentives For Many Americans To Work Less And Make Less Money

Did you know that Obamacare is going to cause millions of Americans to want to keep their incomes under certain levels?

If you make too much money under Obamacare, you will miss out on some absolutely massive health care subsidies.  The following is an excerpt from one of my previous articles

—–

The figures that you are about to see were calculated using the Kaiser Family Foundation subsidy calculator.  These numbers apply to a husband and a wife that are both 62 years old.

A non-smoking, married couple living in San Francisco, California earning $63,000 a year will have to pay $20,318 a year for a silver plan under Obamacare and $12,647 a year for a bronze plan.

At $63,000, that couple would be making too much money to be eligible for a subsidy, so that couple will have to pay the total cost of whatever plan they choose by themselves.

But if that couple only made $62,000 a year, things would dramatically change.

The plans would still cost the same, but the couple would now be eligible for an Obamacare subsidy of $14,428.

So a silver plan would end up costing them only $5,890, and they would ultimately pay nothing for a bronze plan.

In other words, by reducing their income by $1,000, that couple would save $14,428 if they got a silver plan or they would save $12,647 if they got a bronze plan.

Isn’t that bizarre?

—–

In the end, millions upon millions of middle class families will decide to go without health insurance entirely for one reason or another.

This will work great until they get into an accident or become seriously ill.

As I have discussed previously, approximately 60 percent of all personal bankruptcies in the United States are related to medical bills.  And most of those bankruptcies actually happen to people that are supposedly “covered” by health insurance.

Obamacare is going to make all of this so much worse.  Millions of middle class families will end up with no health insurance at all, and because so many of them are living paycheck to paycheck a single health emergency will be enough to send them hurtling down the path to financial oblivion.

If you get into an accident, a visit to the emergency room and a single night in the hospital can easily cost tens of thousands of dollars in many areas of the country.

If you get a serious illness such as cancer, the medical bills can be absolutely astronomical.  For instance, there are many cancer patients that rack up medical bills well in excess of a million dollars by the time that they die.

Something desperately needs to be done about our horrible health care system.  Unfortunately, Obamacare is going to make just about everything that is bad about our current system much, much worse.

And the American people are becoming increasingly disgusted and frustrated with Obamacare.  According to Real Clear Politics, an average of recent opinion polls shows that the American people are opposed to Obamacare by an average margin of 14.2 percentage points.

Article submitted by:  Veronica Coffin

Saturday, November 16, 2013

Louie Gohmert warns about Obamacare ‘Secret Security Force’

Louie Gohmert has revealed yet another section of ObamaCARE that no one seems to have read. Believe it or not, there is a provision within Obamacare that creates an armed “secret security force”. Gohmert thus far as failed to get an answer from DHS as to why this secret security force provision is in ObamaCARE. This sounds like Obama’s brown-shirts. How long before Americans start having to wear patches on their sleves saying ‘healthy’ or ‘sick.’ This is absolutely outrageous.

Video: Congressman Exposes DHS Buildup for CIVIL UNREST & Secret Police Force- "NOT A CONSPIRACY"

Louie Gohmert warns about Obamacare ‘Secret Security Force’

FireAndreaMitchell: Referring to a section of the gargantuan Obamacare law which discusses “the president’s own commissioned and non-commissioned officer corps,” Gohmert drew attention to the notion that under the pretext of a “national emergency,” such individuals could be used to impose some form of medical martial law.
Under the Affordable Care Act, the Ready Reserve Corps is directed to “assist full-time Commissioned Corps personnel to meet both routine public health and emergency response missions.”

“It says it is for international health crises, but then it doesn’t include the word ‘health’ when it talks about national emergencies,” said Gohmert.
“I’ve asked, what kind of training are they getting….I want to know are they are they using weapons to train, or are they being taught to use syringes and health care items?” asked the Congressman, adding that “no clear answers” had been forthcoming on the issue.”

Wednesday, November 13, 2013

Wake-Up… ObamaCare Eliminates Your Plan by Design

RUSH: The scope of this fraud is incalculable and almost unimaginable.  That's how big it is.

The failure that is going on right now is all part of the plan to force everyone into a single-payer system… that is socialized medicine completely run by the government… Wake-up and stop being played.  The only option is to clean house in the 2014 Election so that we can repeal and replace this socialistic monstrosity with a plan to really help all Americans and retain our freedoms and choices.

Video: RUSH: Americans Had To Lose Their Health Care Plans In Order For ObamaCare To Work

EIB – Cross-Posted at AskMarion: BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Steve in South Bend, Indiana.  Welcome, sir.  It's great to have you here.  Hi.

CALLER:  Yes, good afternoon, Rush.  Thank you for taking my phone call.  Long-time listener, first-time caller.  In fact you mentioned Hillarycare earlier, and it's around 1993 that I think I first started tuning in, when Hillarycare debacle was going down. One thing I might add is, if you recall, C. Everett Koop supported Hillarycare.  In fact, if you remember the red carpet ceremony with Hillary walking into the joint session of Congress, I think she was joined by C. Everett Koop, who lent his weight behind her plan. 

That's not why I called.  Okay, 2010 when Obamacare was passed, they went to the states and wanted the states to offer extended Medicaid.  The promise was that the federal government would pay for it for two years -- and the bait, of course, was that the states did not have to pay for it. It was free Medicaid for two years. But then, of course, once they get everybody hooked into their entitlement then the federal government pulls the rug out from under it.

But everybody's hooked so, you know, the states have to continue it.  What I can foresee, what I predict with Obamacare rollout 2.0 is they're just gonna jack up the subsidies. They're gonna get everybody hooked in who lost their health care by overly subsidizing them, get 'em hooked and -- you know, for a protracted, limited time, a year or two or whatever -- and once theory hooked, they're hooked.  And you just mentioned the taxpayer subsidy would probably be a possibility.  That's what I see happening.

RUSH:  Yeah, well, I think that's what Jay Carney means when he quotes the president as saying he doesn't like people put in a position where they can't afford a better plan.  So here comes subsidies.  That's the Democrat solution to everything, is buy them.  The fact that we don't have the money is irrelevant.  The fact that they're still being lied to is irrelevant.  We'll just buy them.  We'll just buy their love.  We'll just buy their support.  And we'll use the federal Treasury to do it. 

There's a guy who writes a piece in The Politico today named Jonathan Gruber, and he practically admits -- let me read a little excerpt here.  "The White House is 'just reacting to one broken promise by imposing a much larger and harmful one: our promise to insurers that if they priced fairly, we would deliver a broad pool of insured.  If you allow the healthy enrollees to stay out in their old policy, the insurers lose money and the program falls apart.'"

So, in other words, if insurers are allowed to keep their plan, Obamacare will fail.  If you get to keep your plan, if we try to dial back the clock and everybody gets to keep their plan, it won't work, because the insurers will lose money and the program falls apart because they won't stay in business that way, whereas the federal government can.  Jonathan Gruber was quoted.  He didn't write the piece, but he was one of the architects of Obamacare.  He practically admitted that if insurers are allowed to keep their plans, that Obamacare will fail.  Meaning, if you're allowed to keep your plan, Obamacare fails.  This has been my point all week.  You cannot keep your plan and have Obamacare at the same time.  Obamacare, by definition, gets rid of your plan and replaces it with health care run by the federal government. 

Now, the caller is right about Medicaid.  Remember, they tried to off that to the states, and a lot of states said, "Wait a minute, we don't have the money to pay for this."  But Obamacare wanted to off that expense to the states to reduce the overall cost as reported to the CBO. Keep it under a trillion dollars and get it approved and everybody thinks, "Oh, wow, it's a net wash, we're replacing the Iraq war with health care, no loss, no gain."  The whole thing was a lie.  The states said, "We can't afford Medicaid. We can't print money. We can't accept it." 

So now it's coming back, and Obama, the theory is, "Well, we'll just subsidize people," and like the caller said, "We'll get 'em hooked," and once people are hooked with the government paying for things for them, that's it.  But they're subsidizing it with money they don't have.  But that's the story of this whole administration.  There was a stimulus that we didn't have.  A green energy program for money that we didn't have.  We're subsidizing everything Obama is doing with money that we don't have.  But the beneficiaries don't care.  The people getting the money don't care that we don't have the money.  In fact, you tell 'em we don't have the money and they say, "Yes, we do, I just got it." 

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH:  The Gruber quote, just to be clear, he's one of the architects of Obamacare, it's in a Politico piece.  Gruber is reminding people that we cannot go back and give people their old plans.  We will not have Obamacare if we do that.  We can't turn back the hands of time.  We cannot turn back the clock as a fix for all the people that are losing their policy, losing their doctor, we can't just now say, "Oh, okay.  Well, here it is back."  The reason is, the White House is just reacting to one broken promise by imposing a much larger and harmful one.  And the original promise to the insurers, not the insured, the original promise to the insurers, the insurance companies, was that if they priced their policies fairly, that the regime would deliver a broad pool of uninsured that were mandated to buy. 

This is how they hooked the insurance companies in.  These idiots thought that they were guaranteed 30 million new customers. (interruption) Well, they are.  What else explains this?  So they sit there, and of course it's the president, I guess you meet with the president and he tells you something, you automatically believe it.  That's what I don't get.  But anyway, they did, they bought it.  And they were salivating, 30 million new customers and all we've gotta do is price our policies fairly.  Well, now they can't offer what they were offering at the same price because of the new mandates and all that in Obamacare.

The bottom line is, it isn't easy to repair this broken promise, that millions of consumers would be able to keep their insurance coverage.  And, by the way, the Politico, in random act of journalism here, they've gone out and they found a bunch of industry experts to say so.  You can't repair this broken promise.  The reason I'm making a big deal out of this is Jay Carney was asked by AP today if Obama agrees with Clinton.  You know, Clinton said (Clinton impression), "I think he ought to honor his promise. He said that people can keep their plan, I think he should do that."  You can't!  It doesn't work.  The only way you could do that would be a total repeal of Obamacare.  There are just too many mandates and requirements on everybody.  That is why people got canceled in the first place. 

Your insurance company didn't cancel you 'cause they hate you.  They didn't cancel you 'cause they want you to get sick and die.  They didn't cancel you because they're Republicans, they don't care about people.  They canceled you because they couldn't offer what you had at the price you were paying and stay in business, which was the design.  Obamacare, to get where Obama and the Democrats want it to ultimately end, requires that the private sector health insurance industry cease to exist.  This is the first step, is practically requiring them to be unable to provide you with the policy you've always had, because there are other mandates and requirements they have to conform to that makes it impossible to over to you the coverage you had at the price you were paying. 

So the only way to get your plan back is not to fix a broken promise. Now, they may try a subsidy, but the only way is to repeal Obamacare, folks. This is what this architect is basically saying, as is The Politico. 

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH:  Okay, here's the money quote from Jonathan Gruber: "If you allow the healthy enrollees to stay out in their old policy, the insurers lose money and the program falls apart."  The program is Obamacare.  You cannot have people stay in their old plans and have Obamacare.  It's exactly as I've been saying.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH:  I don't know, folks.  I still can't get over Clinton telling Obama to honor his commitments and not break his promise.  You know, I famously said, "I hope he fails."  Clinton is admitting Obama failed and demanding that he fix it.  The guy who lied to a grand jury telling the sitting president to be honest. 

Folks, this Politico piece that I just stumbled across here during the program, if I don't mind saying so, is a huge See, I Told You So.  I have been -- and I hate that phrase, by the way, "I've been saying."  You hate it, but I hate it when other people use it because it implies that nobody's listening, and I know you've heard me say this.  It's almost an habitual thing to remind people that they've been told of something. 

I've been trying to make the point now -- I really hammered it yesterday with a caller -- ever since people started bellyaching about losing their policies. I mean, I've practically been pounding my fist on the table here telling people that you have to lose your policy if there is going to be Obamacare.  I don't want to have to go through this again.  By the way, I need to really apologize to you all for being all over the ballpark today.  I'm just really fatigued.  I'm just worn out, tired -- and it's not assisted by being rudely awakened by my kitten

Well, you know, what I mean by that is I'm saying silly things, like, "Why do people not remember?" I know the answer to these questions I'm asking.  I just let my guard down.  I'm asking stupid questions to which I already know the answers.  I'm just basically saying, "Gee, why can't it be some way else?" and I know that that's silly.  You know, wishing for it to be otherwise is silly, 'cause it is what it is.  But this is big.  I'm telling you that's why this lie that he told is so fraudulent. 

You mean, it's impeachable what he's done here, because there's no way anybody was ever going to be able to keep their plan, and yet he made that the number one selling point.  Without that lie he might nota been reelected, and without that lie we might not be saddled with this albatross.  The American people have been deceived and defrauded.  You let Richard Nixon try this and see what happens.

Bernie Madoff is a piker compared to the fraud, including the money, compared to what Obama has done with that one lie, because it was never true.  There was never going to be a way that you or anybody could keep your plan -- and the simplest way to understand that is he's out there telling the entire nation, "If you like your plan, you can keep it," and for the most part, the vast majority of people liked that characteristic of Obamacare. 

That's why they supported it.

Do you think he would have been reelected if he would have told people that this is what was gonna happen?  If he were to campaign now, "You're gonna lose your plan, and the replacement's gonna cost you three times as much, but we have to do it to insure the uninsured," do you think he would have been reelected? Do you think we would have to deal with this?  As Joe Biden once said, "This is a big F---ing deal." 

You were never gonna be able to keep your plan, and the fact that he made it the number one selling point, and that they knew! The Federal Register admited that 93 million people were not gonna keep their plans.  They knew that, and they've known it since 2010, when this all started.  The fact that he made that the number one selling point for this, stop and think for a second. 

If everybody keeps their plan, then what the hell are we talking about? Why do we need Obamacare?  If you like your plan and get to keep it, what's wrong?  The only thing that anybody could say is wrong, well, the insured.  Now, I realize that especially may have not liked their plans because they believed there was something better, and that was the second lie that was told.  "Do you like your plan? You can keep it, but the alternative is gonna be even better for you." 

The scope of this fraud is incalculable and almost unimaginable.  That's how big it is.  So for this Obamacare architect -- a man by the name of Jonathan Gruber, in The Politico today -- to be admitting this is a huge See, I Told You So.  The See, I Told You So is specifically what I drilled home to a caller yesterday, that these canceled policies will never be brought back.  Now, you're gonna hear Democrats talk about reinstating your lost policy.

And you might hear some idiot Republicans talking about wanting to support that, and you might hear the media talk about it. But it's not possible.  Your policy cannot be restated, or restored unless Obamacare is repealed, and that isn't going to happen.  Obama will not do it. Saul Alinsky, that might put the fire out in Hell.  That would never happen. Repealing this thing, that'd be one of the biggest embarrassment ever.  I know that they might delay the individual mandate.

They might try to do a bunch of things here to limit the pain, or to move the pain to after the 2014 elections, but these plans cannot be brought back.  They were canceled precisely because Obamacare doesn't permit them, financially and with regulation.  That's why you've been canceled.  It's not because the insurance companies hate you.  It's not because they want you to get sick and die.  It's not 'cause they're a bunch of Republicans and they're trying to save money.  It's none of that. 

They can't stay in business with your old plan.  They're not gonna be in business anyway by the time this is all said and done.  Now, The Politico piece also has this.  "The Huffington Post reported that the [regime] is considering providing subsidies to those who lost coverage but wouldn't qualify for subsidies otherwise under the law."  So they're gonna buy you off.  You've lost your plan and you can't get it back.

So they're gonna cover the difference with a subsidy.  Now, if you're the Republicans, I don't know how you deal with that. If you oppose that, what can they say about you?  "Well, you want people to starve! Oh, you don't want people to have health care? Oh, you want people in pain?"  Once you get to the point where the federal Treasury becomes the number one weapon before for a political party to stay in power, I don't know how you battle that. I really don't. 

I don't know how you battle that, given how many low-information voters we have, given how many people are already on food stamps and dependent, how many people are already in poverty. I don't know how you re-instill a sense of self-reliance.  And particularly when it comes to health care, I just don't know how you do that.  And that is why I am sounding wistful here in wishing for fantasy, 'cause it is fantasy that people understand and remember how devastating liberalism is.  They just don't. 

They fall for it every time it's pitched to 'em. 

Well, maybe not.  They had to be lied to big time to fall for this. 

END TRANSCRIPT 

Video: Rush Limbaugh to GOP: Don't Let Obama 'Eliminate Pain' by Delaying Individual Mandate

RUSH: Obama Doesn’t Care. He Lied For Power. 

Video: RUSH: Obama Is Sorry You Believed Him

The Dirty Secret Behind ObamaCare No One’s Talking About

Sunday, November 3, 2013

Memo: Administration bungled Obamacare long before GOP had power to obstruct

Washington Examiner: An emerging theme from Democrats struggling to explain the Obamacare fiasco is that stubborn Republican opposition has hobbled the administration's efforts to implement President Obama's complex national health care scheme. If you want the particulars, just glance at "The Obamacare sabotage campaign" by Politico's Todd Purdum.

But a memo revealed in a new Washington Post examination of the rollout shows the administration was already on a disastrous path in May 2010, just two months after Obamacare was signed into law -- and six months before Republicans won control of the House and more Senate seats in the November 2010 elections. At the time the memo was written, Democrats still had the huge majorities in the House and Senate with which they had passed Obamacare on party-line votes.

In the memo, dated May 11, 2010 and sent to top administration economic official Larry Summers, Harvard professor and health care expert David Cutler, a supporter of the administration's efforts, wrote that "the early implementation efforts are far short of what it will take to implement reform successfully." Cutler continued: "For health reform to be successful, the relevant people need a vision about health system transformation and the managerial ability to carry out that vision. The President has sketched out such a vision. However, I do not believe the relevant members of the Administration understand the President's vision or have the capability to carry it out."

Cutler laid out a set of problems: 1) poor leadership at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, a key organization in creating Obamacare; 2) clueless management at the Department of Health and Human Services on the subject of setting up exchanges; 3) an ineffective effort to work with insurers in implementing reform; and 4) general incompetence. "The overall head of implementation inside HHS, Jeanne Lambrew, is known for her knowledge of Congress, her commitment to the poor, and her mistrust of insurance companies," Cutler wrote. "She is not known for operational ability, knowledge of delivery systems, or facilitating widespread change."

All that was at a time when the administration had control of Congress. Although the election of Scott Brown had ended the Democrats' filibuster-proof control of the Senate, the fact is, Republicans had no control of anything. Later, after their landslide victory in the 2010 midterms, House Republicans could block funding increases the administration needed to pay for Obamacare's inevitable cost overruns. And Republican governors could make use of a feature Democrats wrote into the law that allowed states to decline to create their own exchanges, leaving the job to the federal government. But Cutler's memo shows the administration was well on the road to a disastrous debut of Obamacare long before Republicans could do anything to make the job harder.

See: Original MEMO Document (PDF) » 

What this memo does is again bring us back to the question:  Are they (Obama and cronies) really that inept?  Or was the plan really always that ObamaCare in its present state was meant to fail, leaving it to the government to swoop in and create a new single-payer (socialized medicine) planObama and Harry Reid have both said it was the second. 

So beware and watch the other hand.  The only real answer, either way, is to clean house in Washington D.C. in both Congress and the White House in the next two elections (2014 and 2016) and in the process repeal and replace this disaster  known as ObamaCare with a free market solution that really will help the average American and those without affordable healthcare insurance. ObamaCare does neither!!

**And if you understand that, it means no Hillary Clinton and no Chris Christie, who might as well be a Democat half the time, but rather real change… AM~ 

Yes, the Democrats' Plan Was to Create a Transition to Single Payer 

First Battle of 2014 and 2016 Elections: Next Tuesday and the Fate of ObamaCare

Obamacare Hype - ' The Land Of Oz ' Lies! - Judge Jeanine Pirro Opening Statement 

Wake-Up… 1,492,000 HC Plan Cancellations and Counting… All Part of the Plan to Force All But the Elite Into a Single Payer Socialized Medicine…  It has always been: 

The Dirty Secret Behind ObamaCare No One’s Talking About

Saturday, October 26, 2013

An ObamaCare Update from a Comrade

Video: An ObamaCare Update from a Comrade

SD tea party ad likens ‘Obamacare’ to communism 

Bill O’Reilly on Socialism and a Shocking New Book

$634 Million ObamaCare Website Company was Fired by Canada

500xNxObamacare.jpg.pagespeed.ic.d1b4NYtYqW

FrontpageMagazine: So Obama took a Canadian company that Canadian officials fired for screwing up their health care website and gave it a much bigger job.

Canadian provincial health officials last year fired the parent company of CGI Federal, the prime contractor for the problem-plagued Obamacare health exchange websites, the Washington Examiner has learned.

CGI Federal’s parent company, Montreal-based CGI Group, was officially terminated in September 2012 by an Ontario government health agency after the firm missed three years of deadlines and failed to deliver the province’s flagship online medical registry.

The online registry was supposed to be up and running by June 2011.

The CMS officials refused to say if federal officials knew of its parent company’s IT failure in Canada when awarding the six contracts.

It wasn’t just those contracts. As mentioned earlier, Obama dumped huge amounts of money on CGI.

CGI Federal is a subsidiary of Montreal-based CGI Group. With offices in Fairfax, Va., the subsidiary has been a darling of the Obama administration, which since 2009 has bestowed it with $1.4 billion in federal contracts, according to USAspending.gov.

HHS is by far the single largest federal contractor of CGI, showering it with $645 million in contracts. The Defense Department pays the Canadian company $254 million, the EPA $58 million and the Justice Department $36 million.

In comparison, in 2008, under President George W. Bush, CGI contracts totaled only $16.5 million for all federal departments and agencies.

The interesting question is why Obama dumped 1.4 billion in taxpayer money on a company this incompetent and ignored all the warnings.

It’s one more thing that ought to be investigated.

The Dirty Secret Behind ObamaCare No One's Talking About

Sunday, March 25, 2012

The Fluke Thickens… Are Sanger and Fluke Related and Was Rush Right Afterall?

If you are not up on the Sandra Fluke story, check out: Fluke Spin

UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER ECONOMIST: Rush Limbaugh Is Right, Sandra Fluke Is A 'Prostitute'

sandra fluke

Courtesy of CSPAN

It has been over a month since Rush Limbaugh first called Georgetown University law student Sandra Fluke a "slut" and a "prostitute," but the controversy shows no sign of dying down.

Now University of Rochester economist and former Slate blogger Steven Landsburg has jumped to Limbaugh's defense.

In a blog post, Landsburg argued that while the talk radio host's language may have been off-color, Limbaugh's logic was analytically shrewd. Fluke, Landsburg writes, "deserves only to be ridiculed, mocked, and jeered" for saying that women should have access to contraception."

He adds that Limbaugh's demand that Fluke and other Georgetown students post online sex tapes in exchange for contraception was actually a "spot-on analogy":

"If I can reasonably be required to pay for someone else’s sex life (absent any argument about externalities or other market failures), then I can reasonably demand to share in the benefits. His dense and humorless critics notwithstanding, I am 99% sure that Rush doesn’t actually advocate mandatory on-line sex videos. What he advocates is logical consistency and an appreciation for ethical symmetry. So do I. Color me jealous for not having thought of this analogy myself."

Unsurprisingly, Landsburg's arguments sparked a mini-firestorm at the University of Rochester, prompting the school's president to issue a public dissent. Landsburg has resoundingly dismissed his critics as "contraceptive sponges," and devoted another blog posts to rebutting their arguments in favor of contraception access.

But Landsburg's focus on the economic benefits and drawbacks of contraception have little to do with Fluke and her congressional testimony. Fluke was not, as Limbaugh and Landsburg have suggested, "demanding" that taxpayers pay for her to have sex; her testimony was originally part of a debate about whether religious institutions should be required to provide access to contraception. Her argument focused primarily on the medical (and non-contraceptive) uses of birth control.

Fluke and Rush

By Grace WylerBusiness Insider

Sandra Fluke’s appearances on-camera thus far, as well as Rush Limbaugh’s well publicized reaction to her Congressional testimony, turned her into a martyr for the Left. But now there are not only holes in her story but she has been connected to White House advisor and former Commincations Director Anita Dunn as well as to leftist Soros sponsored media group, Media Matters.

Bill O'Reilly investigates to find out who is really behind the Sandra Fluke controversy. 'The Factor' discovers the Georgetown law student is being represented by an organization where Anita Dunn, the former Obama communications director, is the managing editor. He Bill O’Reilly told viewers in a segment with Laura Ingraham that he strongly believes that the White House is “running” Sandra Fluke and has been behind her from the beginning.

And then over the weekend, O’Reilly’s team uncovers that Sandra Fluke’s boyfriend is son of ‘Democratic stalwart William Mutterperl’… My, my, my!

It has become more and more evident that the appearance of Sandra Fluke is no fluke but rather has turned out to be a straw woman for Team Obama and the Progressive left…  She is  connected to Media Matters and the White House and is a professional activist for contraception, abortion and even taxpayer funds for sex change operations. While she is described as a “third year law student” they always conveniently fail to mention that she is also the past president of Law Students for Reproductive Justice.

Fluke is really 30-years-old (not the 23 that has been reported), and specifically went to Georgetown to fight their contraception policy – far from the innocent, wide-eyed victim she’s tried to portray herself to be. And Fluke’s testimony for Congress, included precisely zero references to recreational sex or to abortion. Instead, Fluke would have her audience believe she’s only interested in non-sexual reasons for needing contraceptive pills – such as treating ovarian cancer. According to one study, the number of people to whom this applies is about 14 percent of all contraceptive users.

But is this really all Fluke’s agenda is? Based on the affiliations she herself has cited, that question may be more complicated. Near the beginning of her testimony, Fluke said the following (emphasis added):

My name is Sandra Fluke, and I’m a third year student at Georgetown Law, a Jesuit school. I’m also a past president of Georgetown Law Students for Reproductive Justice or LSRJ. I’d like to acknowledge my fellow LSRJ members and allies and all of the student activists with us and thank them for being here today.

So if Fluke has these sorts of ties to an organization and mentions them by name for the purposes of appreciation, readers will probably assume she supports their agenda.

Now there seems to be increasing speculation that Sandra Fluke might be a great grandchild of Fabian/Progressive Founder of Planned Parenthood and the Negro Project whose beliefs are rooted in eugenics.  The speculation began when someone noticed how much Sanger and Fluke look alike.

Margaret Sanger

Sandra Fluke

Fluke_150x150 B&Wsandra-fluke

Margaret Sanger had 2 sons--Stuart and Grant--still looking into Stuart, but found this death notice for Grant (he was a Dr. and it says that he was survived by his wife, the former Edwina Campbell; three sons, Michael, of Baltimore, Alexander, of Manhattan, and Morgan, of Tortola, British Virgin Islands; a daughter, Anne Sanger of Bozrah, Conn., and 11 grandchildren.

While talking to a friend about the photo likeness and they sent the following info:

KATHRYN ISABELL FLUKE SANGER
| Visit Guest Book

SANGER, KATHRYN ISABELL FLUKE May 13, 1910 to Sept. 12, 2010 Kathryn died restfully in her sleep in the early morning hours of September 12, 2010. She was one of six children born to Carrie and Loren Fluke on the Kansas Prairie. She moved to San Diego in 1940, where she worked during the War at Convair. She retired from civil service after 20 years. Moved to Valley Center after the passing of her husband, Clarence (Bud) Sanger in 1975. She is preceded in death by son, Jimmy McClish. She is survived by son Gary McClish and daughter Barbara Blind, her brother Loren Fluke, and devoted niece Betty Jacobs; there are eight grandchildren, 10 great-grandchildren and eight great-great-grandchildren, and too many nephews, nieces and stepchildren to count. She was the most caring and loving person and always put the needs of others over her own. She will truly be missed by not only her family, but all those who knew her. Her passion was gardening; her love was deep for her roses, humming birds, and Padres baseball. A Viewing will be on Friday, September 17, 2010, from 5 to 9 p.m., with a Service on Saturday, September 18th, at 11 a.m. at Greenwood Memorial Park. Following the services on Saturday, a celebration of her life will be held at Bayview Molibe Home Park Clubhouse at 2003 Bayview Heights Drive.

Obituary Published in San Diego Union-Tribune on September 16, 2010

Thoughts:  Are "Sanger" and "Fluke" considered typical names? And the fact that they were together is quite a coincidence?  Also, the current Ms. Fluke, her middle name is "Kay", which can be a nickname for "Kathryn". 

Family Genealogy Page: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~fryeandmecca/Randy%27s%20web%20tree/pafg463.htm#13307

Comment:  And here's where the "out on a limb" kicks in: Margaret Sanger/Margot Sanger--related/coincidence who knows but it sure does peak ones curiosity doesn't it??? TMH from the NoisyRoom

Related: 

Sandra Fluke May Not be a SL*T – But Is She a Liar?

Rush Limbaugh Isn’t the Only Media Misogynist

Is This Why Sandra Fluke Went Public?

She-PAC Calls on Bill Burton and the Obama Super Pac to Denounce Misogynist Bill Maher

Sandra Fluke Back In the News

Think for a moment that this White House is not manipulating the discussion or the news?  Check out: E-mails show White House input on Sherrod ouster

You be the judge…

Ask Marion