Apparently it’s not enough to use the IRS and FCC to shut down the opposition.
What does an aspiring democrat Senator wannabe do when he doesn’t like an opposition TV ad?
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kpjyr1x7mC0[/youtube]
Attack the woman cancer victim in the ad, and then threaten to take the station off the air.
While Julie Boonstra of Dexter, Mich., struggles to survive leukemia, she now also has to cope with being called a liar by the Democrat who wants to be her next senator.
And the campaign of Rep. Gary Peters is also going after television stations airing ads in which her story is featured, threatening their licenses.
The ad by Americans for Prosperity features Boonstra talking about how her insurance was canceled under Obamacare and saying that Peters’ decision to vote for the law “jeopardized my health.” The ads are airing in Michigan as Peters seeks the Democratic nomination to replace Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., who is not seeking re-election.
The Obamedia sprang into action, helping to pound Boonstra:
Media organizations investigating the ad’s claims note that Boonstra was able to find comparable new insurance under the law; the Washington Post’s “Fact Checker” blog gave the ad “two Pinocchios” (as compared to four for President Obama’s claim that people could keep their insurance under the law).
Let’s lay them out: Mr. Peters goes to Washington and votes for Obamacare. Because of this, back home, Ms. Boonstra, a mother who was given a 20 percent chance of surviving her cancer, looses her health insurance. It takes her two uncertain, sleep-deprived months to replace her plan, with Obamacare delaying every step of the way through its broken website, weeks of snail-mail delays and days of backed up phone lines. Ms. Boostra finally ended up with a plan she doesn’t think is even comparable to the security of her old plan. And when she told her story, Mr. Peters, the politician who wants to be her senator — and represent her in Washington — sicced his lawyers on her, questioning her trials and, in a page right out of Richard Nixon’s playbook, threatening the license of the station that dared to air it.
In his rebuke of the ad, Glenn Kessler makes the same mistake liberals make every day of the week- they confuse coverage with care.
Boonstra was able to find a plan with a similar overall cost. That’s where the discussion normally ends for liberals, but it’s wrong. For cancer patients, successful treatment very often hinges upon drug therapy. Not only can you not keep your plan, you might not be able to keep your drugs:
In fact, state and federal regulators must have approved the health plans without reviewing final drug formularies. Many plans are also not publishing information about their networks of doctors, or when they do; the information is unreliable (listing, for example, doctors who argue that they aren’t part of the plans).
There are some things we know about these formularies.
Under the law, the Obamacare plans benchmarked their drug formularies off of one of the health plans already operating in each state.
In selecting this benchmark, they could have to select from one of four options:
They could choose from: 1) One of the three largest small group plans in the state by enrollment; 2) one of the three largest state employee health plans by enrollment; 3) one of the three largest federal employee health plan options by enrollment; or 4) the largest HMO plan offered in the state’s commercial market by enrollment.
Because there’s a wide variation in the breadth of the drug formularies maintained by these four options, there is also wide variation in the Obamcare plans.
The formulary you’ll get depends most of all on which state you live in (and which benchmark was chosen by the state regulators).
It also appears that the final regulation on all this, issued by the Department of Health and Human Services, gave states some latitude to nix drugs that might otherwise be listed on the benchmark formularies they selected. That regulatory wiggle room seems to undermine the whole idea of having a benchmark plan.
So can you find a good drug plan in Obamacare?
It’s difficult.
Secondly, Boonstra lost her plan. Obama promised that she would not lose her plan- no matter what. Piled on the stress of even dealing with cancer Boonstra was dropped into a roiling pot of uncertainty. As the relative of a cancer victim I can tell you that that is significant.
Peters needs a reminder that an Obama Super-PAC ran an ad claiming that Mitt Romney killed Joe Soptic’s wife. That was a dastardly lie, while this message remains accurate.
This is one more effort in the Obama/DNC philosophy of controlling the media and suppressing the ability of conservatives to exercise their First Amendment rights. And let’s remember that democrats have a history of attacking cancer patients. They could call it the “Gutless Doctrine”
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.
Cancer patients are easy target, without care they all die. So what is so hard about targeting cancer patients, they all die and idiot-care continue. Game ends and the media looses the tape or the media pulls the tape.
Can any one imagine how the story would be spun if ried’s girlfriend or wife got cancer, or biden’s girlfreid got an intractable, non curable cancer?
Insurance formulary look and buy the cheapest and least expensive drugs. Most of them are produced off shore to cut expenses and cut the chemical formulas. Like a box of chocolates, never know what you are getting.
@MOS-8541: It would all be covered by the cushy med care they already have — the propaganda tho would be that they were miraculously and thoroughly served by the same obie-care that everyone else has down to the local street creatures
The only criticism I have is that she said that she “feels” lied to — lady – by now there should be a lot more certainty in your knowledge of whether (and WHO — all of them now) LIED to you —- and essentially gave you a death sentence — you did not even get a panel! — They passed the legislation — now you are seeing what the commies have in store for us.
Democrat is a noun. Democratic is an adjective. English is the language that right-wingers were apparently never taught to speak properly.
Maybe they’re all home schooled to talk American, as opposed to Mexican or some other imaginary foreign language.
Pardon me. I think I need to refrain from comments for a day or two. I just sampled the Sunday current events talk shows on a number of cable news stations. I found intelligent discussions of the situation in Ukraine—until I reached FOX News. Events in Ukraine, as a manifestation of the Obama Administration’s incompetence, as perceived by Oliver North, convicted felon. I don’t know what else I should have expected.
@Greg:
democratic fascism is an oxymoron, as is “fair democrat.” The democrat party is an insult to democracy. It is anything but democratic. It consists of fascists.
@Greg:
Democrat – noun
fascism – adjective
takes – verb
Greg – lemming
Uncertainty is the death knell of capitalism.
The communists know this.
@Greg:
Wow…such hatred for North, yet such devotion to the man who was convicted of lying under oath, impeached by the House of Representatives, and disbarred from the practice of law for lying under oath. But I would expect nothing better from a leftist, seeing as your entire movement is based on devotion to democratic (adjective) liars. Kind of like these lies:
“If you like your doctor, you can keep him, PERIOD!”
“If you like your insurance plan, you can keep it.”
“If you make less than $250,000 a year, you won’t see your taxes go up one single dime!”
“Under my plan, a family of four will see their insurance costs go down an average of $2500 a year.”
You would have a shred of credibility expressing your high dudgeon disdain for retired Colonel North if you weren’t a typical hypocritical democrat (noun) syncophant always defending the anti-American, democratic (adjective) lies told by one democrat (noun) after another.
@Greg:
Typical. Insult with no substance. Okay, Fox News sucks. What’s your take on the deficit?
Nice try. The ad is a lie sponsored by the Koch Brothers (and you either know this and are being obtuse or you really should do a little bit of fact checking before you froth up in your furor):
Koch Brothers Latest Obamacare Ad Is Their Most Dishonest And Deceptive One Yet:
“….Of course, pesky facts always get in the way of a good narrative. The truth is that Julie Boonstra did have her existing insurance policy cancelled because it didn’t meet the minimum standards of the ACA. Instead, she had to get a better policy at half the price. She was paying $1,100 a month in premiums under her old policy. She now pays $571 a month.
If she is paying less a month, how can she justify that Obamacare is bankrupting her? Well, she says it is because she now faces out of pocket expenses more often. She states that for a lot of her treatments, she is forced to do a 20% co-pay. However, under the law, there is a cap on how much she can be charged out of pocket. The cap is $6,350 a year. By her own admission, she is saving nearly that exact amount in premiums due to the ACA. So, even if she has to pay the maximum amount in out of pocket expenses a year under the new plan (doubtful), she isn’t paying anymore than she did under her old plan….
https://www.politicususa.com/2014/02/21/koch-brothers-running-extremely-dishonest-obamacare-ad.html
A hard-hitting anti-Obamacare ad makes a claim that doesn’t add up:
“…It is one thing to say there are higher out-of-pocket costs, as she did at the RNC news conference, but another to assume that those higher costs are not offset in some way by the significantly lower premium. (The $350,000 bone marrow transplant, for instance, would be capped at the out of pocket minimum.) The reality is that eventually Boonstra will hit the maximum and no longer pay anything. So over the course of the year, the difference in the costs could well even out….”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2014/02/20/a-hard-hitting-anti-obamacare-ad-makes-a-claim-that-doesnt-add-up/
@jimmyjack, #10:
Whereas a photoshopped image of Democratic Representative Gary Peters wearing a Nazi uniform is not at all insulting, and highly substantive?
Fascism, as defined by the Oxford dictionaries, Oxford University Press:
By the way…
Facts presented by Dexter cancer patient in anti-Obamacare ad inconsistent
The impression that the $750,000 anti-Obamacare ad is deliberately creating is inconsistent with reality. It’s the ad that’s lying. So, how big is the lie?
Pretty damn big, I guess. There’s some substance for you.
@Greg: Nicely done!
Julie Boonstra says her former medical insurance plan which she LIKED allowed her to BUDGET her medical expenses in order to PAY FOR THEM….
…Under the ACA she has to put MONEY UP FRONT to the tune of $6000.00 (deductible) which, like many- MANY of Americans, and those just like her, just don’t have readily available….especially….
…. in this “Great Era of Prosperity” for Americans (sarc off)
But, BUT I will BET the Washington, DC elitists (the DC Rich), and the Hollywood elitists (the HW Rich) and Obama’s Corporate Cronies will have no problem coming up that kind of ($$$ CASH $$$)…. huh.
….. while those in the MIDDLE CLASS SUFFER
Greg is an arse.
The amazing trick the GOP has performed repeatedly is to convince average Americans that their best interests are served by republican policies, while facilitating the picking of their pockets and simultaneously attributing what’s gone missing to democrats.
Say what? With the new plan, she knows that her premiums are $529 per month less. She also should know that she can’t be dropped or have payments cut off when some arbitrary coverage maximum is met—thanks to Obamacare. And we’re supposed to believe her prior plan had no annual deductible? Hey, how much was that?
What does he mean, by definition they were almost nonexistent in the old policy? By what definition? The man is babbling. He’s talking nonsense.
@FAITH7: Julie Boonstra is paying approximately one-half of the $1000 per month Blue Cross premium she used to pay for her coverage. She is still receiving care from the same physician and doesn’t have to worry about reaching a lifetime cap on her insurance benefits or being victimized by the process of policy rescission, which would have been likely outcomes for her before ACA.
http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20140221/POLITICS03/302210135/Facts-presented-by-Dexter-cancer-patient-anti-Obamacare-ad-inconsistent
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2014/02/20/a-hard-hitting-anti-obamacare
If Boonstra’s experience reflects the worst thing that is happening to people under the ACA, then you folks really don’t have much to work with or complain about.
@Greg:
Peters wants to shut down the media that displeases him. Who does that besides fascists?
MSNBC is an arm of the DNC but have you heard a Republican ask that it be shut down?
We don’t know that she’s able to enjoy the same chemotherapy regime.
She lost her plan. Obama cut her off. Indisputable.
@SkippingDog:
When was the last time that happened to anyone? Name it.
She’s not saving a penny. Go back and read.
@Greg:
fas·cism
[fash-iz-uhm] Show IPA
noun
1.
( sometimes initial capital letter ) a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Fascism
@Greg:
$85 billion each month to the fat cat bankers on Wall St.
Income inequality worse
Black median income down under Obama
http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/082213-668484-household-incomes-still-way-down-under-obama-recovery.htm#ixzz2uCFGOwEm
Please
@DrJohn: I did read it all. She’s saving about $550 per month in premium cost and griping because her out-of-pocket for an office visit went from $20 to $50. She never had to change her doctor and has received unbroken care, even while she is shilling for AFP.
@SkippingDog:
She saves nothing. It took two months to get the plan. Do you understand what a deductible is?
@DrJohn: Calling out blatantly false claims about a government program is hardly fascism. If folks like yourself and AFP made factual and unbiased claims about whatever problems the ACA might have, it would be far easier to take your complaints seriously. When AFP and the Koch Brothers are involved in the claim, and their spokeshole won’t discuss the specifics of the old and new insurance policies they’re complaining about because of “privacy concerns,” you know it’s all just BS.
@DrJohn: I understand quite well what a deductible is. Nowhere does it say she previously had a non-deductible policy, nor is there any claim she went bare for two months.
@SkippingDog:
You really might want to read the post.
@DrJohn: I’ve known two people in the last decade who have had policy rescission imposed on them by Blue Shield and Aetna. Claiming it didn’t happen doesn’t change reality for the people who lived through it.
@SkippingDog:
Who said it was?
@DrJohn: Read it, as well as your excerpt. It says it took her two months to get all the details of a new plan worked out. It says nothing about her going bare for two months.
@SkippingDog:
Do you know what rescission is?
@DrJohn: “Peters wants to shut down the media that displeases him. Who does that besides fascists?”
You.
@SkippingDog:
Prove it.
@DrJohn: The breaking of a contract. In these cases, the breaking of the policy contract to avoid the previously agreed upon performance requirements of the parties. For health insurance, it means that the insurers choose to vacate their contract obligations to provide coverage, usually, in practice, because the claimant is creating what the insurer believes are “excessive costs” due to the nature of or extent of the necessary care.
Want to play 20 questions about the law?
@DrJohn: I already did. Now you’re just being cranky and obtuse because I called you on it.
@SkippingDog: @Greg:
The deductible amount means that Boonstra has to budget the additional $550 every month because as a cancer victim in treatment she is going to burn through that deductible every year she’s treated. Easily.
I doubt either of you has any firsthand experience with cancer.
@SkippingDog:
And what media outlet is Dr. John trying to shut down?
@SkippingDog:
As the father of two lawyers, no problem.
@SkippingDog:
You said it. You proved nothing. This is the thing with liberals. They think saying something makes it true.
@SkippingDog:
And also FYI
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/obama-health-insurance-whopper-misleading-country-key-reform-proposal-article-1.386152#ixzz2uCKMl4FN
Your assertion is nonsense.
@DrJohn: Depends on how her policy is written and whether it treats her cancer as an ongoing medical event or has requirements that the deductible be met for each new policy year. My own insurance is very good and still requires me to meet my out-of-pocket deductible each year.
She was always going to pay her insurance premiums to maintain her insurance, regardless of whether she’s being treating for cancer or for a fracture of her little toe.
@DrJohn: Not at all. Do you really think any insurance company is going to say “we’re canceling your coverage because of your illness”? Of course not.
You also conveniently left out her exposure to lifetime coverage caps under her old policy. Why is that?
Skipping dog
Who handles your health insurance? Did you get it under Obamacare?
@DrJohn: That’s the problem with fringe wingnuts like you: you’ll never allow facts, regardless of how compelling they are, to alter your bizarre worldview.
@inMAGICn: No. I’ve had a very good Blue Shield policy for over 20 years now.
@SkippingDog:
What were they?
@Greg:
and Dimocrat is a dim democrat. But that’s redundant, so I only use Dimocrat.
Democratic? and you were just trying to make a point?
I didn’t think you had a problems with crooks, Clinton, impeached president, suspended law license for lying under oath, real upstanding rapist. On the other hand North did his crimes while fighting communism.
You sure have strange standards.
@retire05: That makes no sense. You should probably read the story, the comments, and then try one more time.
@DrJohn: Neither you nor I know, because her AFP spokeshole turned coy when people started asking for details about her current and previous policies. That’s also how you can tell the whole thing is a fabrication.
@SkippingDog:
So you know squat and are simply being capricious.
@SkippingDog:
At last count you’ve made at least two assertions you are wholly unable to support with facts, yet you’re hot and bothered by this ad and not the attack on a woman cancer victim.
@SkippingDog:
You’re an expert on fringe wingnuts, are you? You must be related to Greg, Tom, RJW and a couple others. Which organization you work for? OFA?