image courtesy of grumpyelder.com
It’s HUGE. John Rosenthal at PJ Media:
And thanks to the recent reporting of CNN (where were they and the other media three years ago, when we needed them?), more people will realize that shortly after the passage of Obamacare the Obama administration implemented rules specifically designed to ensure that millions of people — those who provided for themselves on the individual market, i.e., who did not receive coverage through their employer or union — would not be allowed to keep their current insurance. Thus not only were Obama’s assurances untrue; they were purposeful deceit in which a supine press was complicit.
Jay Carney, the Official Propagandist of the Obama regime said:
One of the things health reform was designed to do was to help not only the uninsured but also the underinsured. And there are a number of Americans, fewer than 5 percent of Americans, who’ve got cut-rate plans that don’t offer real financial protection in the event of a serious illness or an accident.
Now if you had one of these substandard plans before the Affordable Care Act became law and you really liked that plan, you were able to keep it. That’s what I said when I was running for office.
That was part of the promise we made.
No, not 5%. Try 69%.
John Hinderaker at Powerline Blog:
The Obama administration projected low-end, mid-range and high-end estimates for how many plans would be terminated, in total and broken down between large and smaller employers. The bottom line is that the administration expected 51% of all employer plans to be terminated as a result of Obamacare. That is the mid-range estimate; the high-end estimate was 69%. So as of 2010, the Obama administration planned that most Americans with employer-sponsored health care plans would lose them, whether they liked those plans or not.
As for individual, as opposed to group plans, the Obama administration said that data were insufficient to predict how many would lose grandfather status, but in any given year the percentage of such policies losing such status would “exceed[] the 40 percent to 67 percent range.”
Those numbers starkly contradict Obama’s “if you like your insurance, you can keep it” assurances. But it is worth noting that the percentage of pre-Obamacare plans that would terminate within the first few years after the law was enacted isn’t the main point. The administration never intended to allow any American to keep a non-Obamacare insurance policy for any length of time.
And for small business, it’s more like 80%.
Sen. Mike Enzi:
Unfortunately, the regulation writers at the Departments of Treasury, Labor, and Health and Human Services broke all those promises. The regulation is crystal clear. Most businesses–the administration estimates between 39 and 69 percent–will not be able to keep the coverage they have.
Under the new regulation, once a business loses grandfathered status, they will have to comply with all of the new mandates in the law. This means these businesses will have to change their current plans and purchase more expensive ones that meet all of the new Federal minimum requirements. For the 80 percent of small businesses that will lose their grandfathered status because of this regulation, the net result is clear: They will pay more for their health insurance.
Obama said in video that you could keep your plan at least 36 times:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpa-5JdCnmo[/youtube]
This is not simply a lie. It is a lie of galactic proportions. All hell is going break loose next year when nearly everyone loses their plans, and that is why the employer mandate was delayed. So Obama could lie through another election cycle.
Democrats see the handwriting on wall and are getting skittish:
More than a dozen anxious Senate Democrats facing reelection next year met with President Obama at the White House Wednesday to review the administration’s progress in fixing technical problems hobbling the rollout of the Affordable Care Act.
The website is the least of their problems.
Megyn Kelly asks the obvious:
Megyn Kelly interview Fox editor Chris Stirewalt on a White House press conference with Jay Carney, and the political possibility arose that Obama may have won the 2012 election by lying about ObamaCare.
As if there was any doubt. The real question is- does he ever tell the truth about anything? And when will the press stop treating Obama as a novelty and hold him to account for these lies?
DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education.
DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed.
Except for liberals being foolish.
@Tom:
Sounds like a little ‘blow’ went down prior to this statement.
@Tom:
Lots of people who drink, with regularity, and with moderation, like people who drink a glass of wine with dinner or have a beer in the evening, every day, do not become alcoholics. The risk of becoming an addict by snorting coke every day is a much higher percentage.
And I’ve never seen anyone who thinks that others are interested in their opinion, which we’re not.
@retire05:
Of course that’s not what you wrote. You wrote “most who use cocaine with any regularity become addicts.” So I’ll ask you again, can you prove that statement?
@Tom:
This is really strange. I have said repeatedly that I believe Obama was born where he thinks he was born and as a result of that statement both Rich and Tom jump to the conclusion that Obama thinks he was born as a foreigner. There’s no other way for them to explain their insistence. Wouldn’t it be a little foolish for me to think Obama was born somewhere that he himself doesn’t think he was born? Now, explain why he thought in 2004, in his campaign literature, he said he was born in Kenya. Do you think he didn’t think that at that time? Do you think he was just lying or being political?
@Redteam:
And who said that? You’ve already proven to a laughable extent that you haven’t taken the time to educate yourself on the subject. Just because Rich or I have, doesn’t mean we are have personal experience, as you keep insinuating. It all comes down to a simple truth: you don’t know what you’re talking about. So why keep advertising that fact?
@Tom:
One real problem with studying coke addicts is that so many of them are dead. Do you have some real experience with coke usage that you are willing to share?
@Redteam:
so you believe he was born in Hawaii? Good for you.
http://www.examiner.com/article/full-transcript-video-obama-s-birth-certificate-release-press-address
@Tom:
So you’re saying your personal experience’s of educating yourself on coke usage is something that you value? It took me about 5 minutes of reading about what coke does to people to know all I need or care to know about it. I have known very few cokeheads, all are now deceased. I’m sorry that it takes you so much time and effort to get that kind of education. Did you happen to go to the same school as RW?
@Redteam:
why would I need experience with cocaine to read the voluminous studies undertaken on its effects?
@Redteam:
So you’re proud of your ignorance? I’m glad to know you think you’re an expert after five minutes and you’re qualified to opine specifically on the moral and physical toll drug use has taken upon our current POTUS.
@Tom:
Ok, so you are going along with what he thought at the time the fake birth certificate was released. That’s one version. He thought in 1997 that he was born in Kenya, and then in 2004, he thought he was born in Kenya, and of course Michelle thought that also, but then he changed his mind on what he thinks. So all of those are fine. Hawaii is ok, but he got the hospital wrong. He thinks. Tom you have got to be one of the most gullible people I read.
@Tom:
Where did I say I was ignorant? Where did I say I was an expert? What do you know about coke usage that you didn’t know after the first 5 minutes of reading about it? Are you saying only ‘experts’ are qualified to opine on our POTUS? Then we’ll not be hearing from you again. Are you seriously going to tell me that if I read for more than 5 minutes I’m going to find out that coke usage was not a bad thing for our current potus? Tom, I’m going to just speculate that if anyone on this blog has to be an ‘expert’ before they comment on a subject, there are a hell of a lot of liberals that won’t be around. And some conservatives.
@Tom:
So you’ve read voluminous studies of effects of coke on POTUS’s? Amazing, was Obama the subject they were reporting on? He’s the only one that has admitted it’s use. These studies have been done ‘since’ he became POTUS? otherwise they couldn’t study the effects on POTUS.. Tom have you ever heard of a site called: whentostopdiggin.com?
@Tom: RT is an expert on cocaine based on 5 minutes of research.
Probably needs no more than 5 minutes to reach a level of expertise on the myriad of other subjects discussed here at FA. Certainly would explain his comments.
we’ll call him “just 5 minutes RT”
Mrs. RT wanna check in?
@Redteam: Tom, just curious: this quote:
Why would they put that ‘uh,’ on the teleprompter? uh, just noticed, they put in three in just that little bit they wrote for him. But they did forget the ‘ya know’s
@Richard Wheeler:
RW, you’ve run another wheel off. where did I mention ‘research’?
Are you claiming to be an expert on everything you comment on? If being an expert were criteria for what is said on this blog, there would be no liberals here and a few less conservatives. Just what subjects do you claim to be an expert on? As you pointed out, AA and NA are anonymous organizations, but you ‘claim’ to be an expert on them? Are you a member of both? Did you pick up those habits at your school or learn it later?
@Redteam: I’m a member of neither AA or NA but have attended open meetings with those in recovery. I came away with a profound respect for the help these two organizations provide those in need.
Men and women,blacks and whites rich(generally previously) and poor, Dems and Repubs. sharing their experience,strengths and hopes. Very powerful experience.
@Redteam:
I thought you weren’t a Birther? Do you think you’re making a clever or profound point with all your coy protestations to the contrary? Even the unintended comedic value has a half life.
@Richard Wheeler:
And remember, he has to sound each word out.
@Richard Wheeler:
Rich, I’m curious. Considering their track records, how surprised are you that RT and R5 have such uninformed, judgmental contempt for those in alcohol and drug recovery? Shocked, I’m sure.
@Richard Wheeler:
whew, thank goodness.
. Believe it or not, I have a profound respect for what AA does, but I didn’t have to go to a meeting to understand the good they do. I have not had to die to understand the profound change that it causes to families. I have not had to be confined to a wheelchair to understand the profound impact it has on a person’s life. I have not had to die from coke addition to understand that it is not something I want to do.
I do not subscribe to the school of ‘you have to do it yourself’ to understand it. If that is the only way a person can ‘understand’, then they may as well stop writing books and having classes.
@Tom:
And I said I have contempt for those in alcohol and drug recovery where?
Just the same old Tom; if you don’t have anything to add, you just make crap up.
@Tom:
by definition, I can’t be a birther. Birther was a word created by secular progressives to describe persons of the same party that they did not want to be eligible to be president. Since I’m not a secular progressive, I can’t be a birther. Despite your protestations.
Do you understand what you wrote?
Okay, move your speech back to your mouth, this talking out of your ass is not as humorous as you think. Name one single person that I know that is in alcohol or drug recovery. Since I don’t know any, how can I have contempt for them? Though you’ve said that they’ve written voluminous studies on the effects of coke on the current POTUS, I don’t have first hand knowledge of his use or if he is a member of any recovery organization. If you would, link me to one of the studies that has been published about the effects of coke on the current POTUS. That was: whentostopdiggin.com
@retire05:
Yes, did you see just above where he said he has studied voluminous studies on the effects of coke on the current POTUS? And I didn’t even know they’d done any.
@Tom: Tom, it’s RW that thinks you have to have personal experience to understand a subject.
@Tom:
Tom, a major problem with studies of persons that were coke users that became addicts is that most of them are dead. That’s not true of alcoholics. Most of the dead addicts did not volunteer for studies.
@retire05:
Oh you’re back. I trust you now have proof for your statement “most who use cocaine with any regularity become addicts.”
@Redteam:
Learn to read (it will save you much future embarrassment) and then go back and read what I actually wrote.
@Tom:
Still waiting on your answer, Tom. Cat got your tongue?
@Tom:
So you admit your previous statement was only meant to toot your horn but was fiction? So did you, or did you not read ‘voluminous studies’? What did the dead coke addicts say they had learned in those studies?
@retire05:
You don’t need to say it. You demonstrate it constantly. You are clearly uninformed on this topic, as pointed out above, and to which you cannot muster even a token defense. And most of what you write reeks of judgmental contempt, so why bother starting a list. This thread alone, from Obama, whom you erroneously labeled a crackhead, to those who struggle with dependency, to victims of Katrina who came to your state and whom you label “trash”, you’ve got something nasty to say about a wide range of people, and it always has a holier than though undercurrent
@Redteam:
No, you idiot. I said there are “voluminous studies undertaken on its (cocaine’s) effects”. Where in that statement did you come up with anything referencing studies written about the President? I’ve got to assume you’re trolling me at this point, because I can’t imagine you’re this thick.
@Tom:
she didn’t ‘label’ them, she just said what they were. Obviously you didn’t study voluminous studies on immigrants from Louisiana to Texas after Katrina or you wouldn’t be so uninformed.
It was ‘cokehead’, Tom, but she didn’t say she had studied volumes on the differences between cokeheads and crackheads, so she may have erred in terminology.
You need to stay away from that POTUS teleprompter and you would have known that was “than thou”.
we were discussing the habits of the Prez and you are the one that said you had read voluminous studies about those habits. Now you’re trying to backtrack? Remember, it was: whentostopdiggin.com
@Redteam:A birther certainly does not have to be a secular progressive. Your belief that B.C. is fake gets you in the club. Like I said ,why not embrace it like Smorg and Bees have done?
I don’t believe you have to have personal experience to understand a subject. But it certainly doesn’t hurt.
I gotta agree with Tom that the distain you and 05 showed towards the displaced citizens of N.O was pretty callous.
Did you know La. has the fourth highest obesity rate in the U.S.? Go easy on that BBQ.
@Tom:
No way Tom. I really think you believe the crap you write. And I’ve made voluminous studies on what libs write on blogs, haven’t you?
@Richard Wheeler:
Did you know that Ca has the highest rate of city bankruptcies in the US? Go easy on spending other people’s dollars.
Really? well I consulted one of the many voluminous studies on birthers and it seems that if it was a bunch of secular progressives that invented the term for those that were supporting Obama. Remember that?
Have you visited an eye doctor lately? If you can’t look at that document and know unequivocally that it is fake in less than 5 minutes, then you better get an appointment. Let me state though, that it is not a belief, it is a knowledge.
Whoa, you’re joining Tom’s ‘backtracking club’ now? You sure were espousing that up above. Have you checked out: whentostopdiggin.com?
@Redteam: B.C– 5 minutes RT on the case.” I know it’s fake.” Well birther you’re in a very small minority that believe it’s fake. .Are birthers BEES and Smorg sec. progs.?
Where did you get the idea that birthers supported Obama? Birthers are those who do not believe BHO is Constitutionally qualified—like you.
@Richard Wheeler: Geez RW, that secular progressive univ. you attended sure let you down. You’re a little old to be starting your re-education. The first use of the word birther, in modern times, was by the Clinton people(secular progressives) referring to the supporters of Obama (other secular progressives(communist branch). Don’t tell me you don’t know that. If you need more education, you might contact DeVry U, it would be a big step up for you, I understand that. I understand that Obama’s degree from Columbia turns out to be the Columbia on-line Univ. Have you heard that? I guess even that one is secular progressive also. So, you’re saying you haven’t had an eye checkup in a while..? Maybe you could start by opening your eye lids.
I still haven’t seen a republican alternative to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Matter of fact, I haven’t seen a detailed republican proposal in connection with any serious national problem. The only thing they can agree on is their opposition to Barack Obama.
You can’t govern a country based on blocking whatever efforts your opponents make. You actually have to have constructive ideas of your own.
Some excellent comments by Jackie Mason. Seems as if he knows Obama very well.
Read more at
He was almost that kind to Hillary.
@Greg:Third stooge showed up, we’ve had the other two here all day.
So your definition of improving your bed is to crap in it? What was wrong with what we had?
I haven’t heard any constructive ideas from Jackie Mason, either. Nor anything I’ve ever thought was particularly funny, for that matter.
@Redteam:You love to ramble and get things backwards. Clinton SUPPORTERS who questioned Obama’s legitimacy to be POTUS were the original birthers.You question his legitimacy to be POYUS–you’re a birther–embrace it.KISS
You say you have two degrees.LOL
@Redteam, #290:
I don’t know. What did you have? Is it gone now? Somehow mysteriously vanished, along with anything you were presumably taught at some point about common courtesy?
I have what I had before, and approve of the idea that millions of other people will have access to health insurance that they previously couldn’t get.
If republicans have a better way of solving the problems Obamacare addresses, they should divulge this great secret.
@Greg: Somehow I didn’t think his humor and yours were synched.
@Richard Wheeler: KISS, you need a link to the DeVry site? Everyone is not entitled to their own definition of birther, you’re gonna have to stick with the original. DeVry has an on-line dictionary for their students, so the sooner you get signed up, you’re on your way….But, I do notice that you concede it is a secular progressive invented term. …
@Greg:
Medicare. it hasn’t changed. If O care was gonna be so great, why didn’t they do away with medicare and sub that?
I acknowledged when you got here, what did you expect? Just for the record, you wouldn’t know common courtesy if it were your first name.
Obama care IS the problem, it’s not the solution to anything except confiscation of money to give to the illegals and welfare recipients. But that was the plan all the time.
@Richard Wheeler:
Yes, but not from a secular progressive university. One in Science and Technology and one in Chem Eng.
For those that think messing with Alcohol and Drugs are the same thing:
That’s for distributing drugs, had he been distributing alcohol, he wouldn’t have been sentenced. One must be worse than the other.
@Redteam: My 292 is correct.It makes sense. You are making things up, As usual.
Devry? That where you got your degrees?
@Greg:
Well, Greggie, seems that the signature legislation of the Chicago WONder is off to a rocky start. Only 27,000 enrolled on the federal site, while 79,000 enrolled (not paid for, mind you) on state sponsored sites. So as 106,000 enrolled (not paid for) health insurance in the first month of this fiasco, how many LOST their insurance? Obviously, you don’t seem to care that millions of Americans have lost the insurance they were happy with. No, no, no. Greggie wants Socialist Medicine because it has worked so very, very well in other places, like Stalinist Russia and Nazi Germany.
Now, you say “I have what I had before” indicating that you have maintained the same insurance you had, at the same cost. So what insurer in what state would that be, Greggie? How did you luck out when so many have lost their insurance, or are you a Medicaid recipient?