New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Wow...you guys really screwed me over......

justoffal

Senator
http://personalliberty.com/2013/11/22/will-the-obamacare-lies-ever-stop/

Geez, you’ve got to feel sorry for Jessica Sanford. Do you remember her? She was one of the glowing examples of an Obamacare success that Barack Obama bragged about at a press conference last month. Turns out this much-hyped “success” was anything but.

Sanford is the mother of a child with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, known as ADHD. The medications to treat him cost $250 a month. For the past 15 years, she had been unable to afford health insurance. But thanks to Obamacare, the President bragged, she was able to buy an affordable plan through the State of Washington’s health insurance exchange.

Except, it turns out that she wasn’t.



When she first applied, Sanford was told she qualified for a federal subsidy, so a “gold” plan would only cost her $169 a month. Then she was told, “Sorry, we made a little mistake here. Your actual cost will be $280 a month.” Then she got another notice, stating that because she earned $50,000 a year, she actually would not receive any subsidy and her actual cost would be almost twice as much again.

Sanford finally gave up and said she’ll just pay the penalty for not joining Obamacare. She posted on Facebook: “Wow, you guys really screwed me over.”

Yes, indeed. And with millions of people being dropped from their existing plans, while only a tiny fraction of that number actually purchases new insurance through Obamacare, you can expect to hear similar stories repeated over and over again.

This has led to such mind-boggling irony as having former President Bill Clinton lecturing Obama on the need to be straight with the American people. Yup, the man who was impeached for lying about having sex in the Oval Office broke ranks with the White House and said, “I personally believe, even if it takes a change to the law, the President should honor the commitment the federal government made to those people and let them keep what they got.”

To a lot of folks, that sounded like a perfect set-up for the “Keep Your Health Plan Act” introduced in the House by Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.). So Obama had to do more than merely denounce the legislation and promise to veto it if it reaches his desk.

No, the President went even further. A day before the House was to vote on the measure, he told a hastily assembled press conference that he would now allow insurance companies to continue offering those supposedly defective insurance policies for another year.

So once again, the White House is engaged in a patently unConstitutional usurpation of power. The President, who is supposed to enforce the laws that Congress passes, claims he can change the law whenever he wants. After all, he’d done it earlier this year, when he unilaterally suspended the employer mandate.

Some Republicans pointed out that the President has no legal authority to issue such an order. Insurance companies say that Obama is basically inviting them to break the law. And State insurance commissioners say that Obama’s “fix” will be impossible to implement in a timely fashion.

Consider: Insurance companies had three years to get ready for Obamacare to take effect. Now they’re being given less than three months to comply with the changes Obama cavalierly insists they make.

When the Upton bill came up for a vote last Friday, 39 Democrats joined 222 House Republicans in voting “aye.” The number of defectors surely would have been higher had it not been for the dubious “compromise” the President offered the day before.

But this wasn’t the only bombshell that exploded over Obamacare this past week. Here are three others that are giving the Democrats an Excedrin headache:

On Tuesday, one of the top tech officers responsible for building the Obamacare website told a Congressional subcommittee that almost 40 percent of the IT systems supporting Healthcare.gov website have not even been built yet. “It’s not that it’s not working,” Henry Chao told a House Energy and Commerce Oversight and Investigations subcommittee. “It’s still being developed and tested.”

On the same day, four cybersecurity experts warned the House Science Committee that the Obamacare website is in danger of being hacked. The personal financial information of people who use it is at “critical risk,” they said. ABC News reported: “Three of the four witnesses agreed that the Obama Administration should take the site offline in order to address the security flaws.”

And finally, we learned this week that McKinsey & Co., an outside consulting firm that was hired to check on the progress of the Healthcare.gov website, told Administration officialsback in March that the website would not be functioning properly by its Oct. 1 launch date.

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius allegedly was briefed on their findings on April 4. Yet just two weeks later, Sebelius said in sworn testimony before Congress, “I can tell you we are on track.” Think anyone will suggest that perjury charges be brought against her?

All of this helps explain why opinion polls have gone from dismal to disastrous for Obama and the badly misnamed Affordable Care Act, the signature legislative achievement of his Presidency. The latest Quinnipiac national poll shows that just 39 percent of the public approves of his performance. His disapproval rating has climbed to 54 percent.

A month ago, Democrats were gloating at how badly the Republicans had been hurt by the reaction to the partial shutdown of the Federal government. The latest poll numbers indicate that the Democrats are suffering much more from the cataclysmic rollout of Obamacare.

Here’s what may be the most worrisome number of all for the President’s supporters. Some 46 percent of the people surveyed said that the President knowingly deceived the public, when he repeatedly promised that they could keep their health insurance plans if they wanted to.

The numbers just keep getting worse. The latest CBS poll says that the President’s approval rating has slipped even further, and is now down to 37 percent. That’s a drop of 9 percentage points in just the past month. Obama’s disapproval rating, according to the CBS poll, has climbed to 57 percent, an all-time high.

As bad as those numbers must seem to be to the denizens of the White House, the numbers for Obamacare are even worse. The same CBS poll found that 61 percent of Americans now disapprove of the President’s healthcare plan. Only 31 percent approve of it — a drop of 12 points in just the past month.

And here’s something that must have the residents of the White House tearing their hair out. Thanks to Obamacare, the President is losing the support of younger voters. Back in 2008, Obama got 66 percent of the vote of Americans under the age of 30. That landslide majority declined a little bit in 2012, but he still received 60 percent of the youth vote then.

Now, Quinnipiac says that young Americans disapprove of Obamacare by a margin of 51 percent to 42 percent. As shocking as that must be, check this out: The same poll says that young Americans disapprove of Obama himself by an even bigger margin — 54 percent to 36 percent. Not only do they give him a negative rating on his healthcare plan, they also rate him negatively on the economy, the Federal budget, immigration and foreign policy.

Granted, poll numbers can change quickly. It’s far from certain that voters will still feel the same way a year from now, when it will be time to vote for the men and women who will represent them in Congress. But given these numbers today, it’s easy to see why so many Democrats — especially those who will be seeking re-election in areas where Republicans have traditionally done well — are bordering on all-out panic.

Let’s do everything we can to make sure their worst fears are justified.

Until next time, keep some powder dry.
 
I see Republicans continue to offer up viable solutions to improve the artocious health care fiasco that has been the US health care system in America. A system that haz been btoken for a very long time!


Not. The Republicans offer nothing, just mayhem.
 
That racist BITCH!

And CNN....whatsamatta wid dem? They used to be left wing drones now they started....gasp...

Telling the truth.

JO
 
Last edited:
I see Republicans continue to offer up viable solutions to improve the artocious health care fiasco that has been the US health care system in America. A system that haz been btoken for a very long time!


Not. The Republicans offer nothing, just mayhem.
When one person having a problem is major news on every wingnut site....well....what should we glean from that?
 
I see Republicans continue to offer up viable solutions to improve the artocious health care fiasco that has been the US health care system in America. A system that haz been btoken for a very long time!


Not. The Republicans offer nothing, just mayhem.

Starting at the cost end and working back would be a good Idea...unfortunately my friend neither party is interested in actually helping people to afford health care...that would mean less money flowing into the honey pots that they feed from.

No.....

The current so-called solution does nothiing to defray costs it just serves up the American public on a platter to the corporate predators...

I mean Obama is the best danm Republican to come along in the past 100 years.

Nomshayin?

JO
 
Starting at the cost end and working back would be a good Idea...unfortunately my friend neither party is interested in actually helping people to afford health care...that would mean less money flowing into the honey pots that they feed from.

No.....

The current so-called solution does nothiing to defray costs it just serves up the American public on a platter to the corporate predators...

I mean Obama is the best danm Republican to come along in the past 100 years.

Nomshayin?

JO

So today is "Obama is a Republican" day. Will this be an all day affair or will he be back to being a Marxist by supper time?
 
Health Insurance Companies are "the" ptoblem, not the government. Too much profit, too much incentive to make profit on unneeded testing, increasing the bills with mandatory this or that, inflating all "costs". We need single payer
 
When one person having a problem is major news on every wingnut site....well....what should we glean from that?

It's not one Person Zig...

It is the customer that is one person, the whistleblower ....the other several hundred people involved work for the agency that lies to people.

So was the principle different when Obama used the ' ONE PERSON " to prove something? Or do you just tacitly make double standards all day long?

Nice try though.....

Say Hi to Carney for me will ya....

JO
 
It's not one Person Zig...

It is the customer that is one person, the whistleblower ....the other several hundred people involved work for the agency that lies to people.

So was the principle different when Obama used the ' ONE PERSON " to prove something? Or do you just tacitly make double standards all day long?

Nice try though.....

Say Hi to Carney for me will ya....

JO
Anecdotes are anecdotes. When people have more than that, they use it. Until the site is up and running right, anecdotes will rule the RWNJ alternate reality media network. Big deal.
 
Health Insurance Companies are "the" ptoblem, not the government. Too much profit, too much incentive to make profit on unneeded testing, increasing the bills with mandatory this or that, inflating all "costs". We need single payer
Z....

I hate to break it to you but the Inusurance comapanies become the victims in this process...and I am by no means defending them either.

The real problem is the cost of healtchare.

1.) It begins with way overpriced Meidical school educatoins
2.) It continues with negotiated salaries for health care staff like $60.00/hr for RN's her in Mass.
3.) It is further exacerbated by the cost of Pharmceutical reserach ( part of that is the usury of the FDA crime syndicate )
4.) It is made even more expensive by the massive fraud and mismanagment in the system.


What does Obama care do?

If forces the end consumer to be screwed with no recourse and no choices,

So yes there was a problem before the law ..... now the problem still exists and it has been made mandatory abuse by the Government.

It fixed NOTHING AT ALL except for the wallets of the Insurance company CEO's and the Washington plutocrats.

JO
 
Anecdotes are anecdotes. When people have more than that, they use it. Until the site is up and running right, anecdotes will rule the RWNJ alternate reality media network. Big deal.

So answer the question Zig...

Was it alright for Obama to use ONE PERSON as an example?

How's Carney doing? Deflector?
 
He'll somehow be both!

Seeing what he has just done for big business at the expense of the middle class...you sure as hell would think so Z.

I mean what's better than legal robbery eh? They get to hold a gun to your head and Obama gives them the license to do it.

Yep....Best Damn republican to come along in the past 100 years.

JO
 
So answer the question Zig...

Was it alright for Obama to use ONE PERSON as an example?

How's Carney doing? Deflector?
Congress already had anecdote day. I'm equally impressed by anecdotes from both sides.
 
That story was already debunked: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/11/24/obamacare-horror-story-debunked-by-seattle-times-columnist/

as have most of the stories. Misinformation can only exist until the website is fully functional.

Hmmm..

Can't get it to load totally.... it must be overtaxed right now by desperate lefties.

1.) ADHD not covered before ACA?

That's a lie right off the bat.... ACA does nothing whatsoever to change the qualification standards of Medicare/Meidcaid...... What kind of Bullshit story is that?
Maybe she looked at it for the first time and just didn't realize that it was already available...other than that the article does nothing whatsoever to debunk the fact that the woman was lied to,.

Looks like the debunker needs some debunking too....

$49,000/year..... meaning her net would be about 36k ....and her coverage price under the ACA is no diffrent than it wasy prior to the ACA.. I see that the columnist mentioned nothing about coverage for her only a son diagnosed with a problem. And how much you wanna bet that the kid is over 18 and is on public assistance already?

I mean what are you guys talking about?

Turns out that Sanford wasn't the only one misled.

JO
 
Hmmm..

Can't get it to load totally.... it must be overtaxed right now by desperate lefties.

1.) ADHD not covered before ACA?

That's a lie right off the bat.... ACA does nothing whatsoever to change the qualification standards of Medicare/Meidcaid...... What kind of Bullshit story is that?
Maybe she looked at it for the first time and just didn't realize that it was already available...other than that the article does nothing whatsoever to debunk the fact that the woman was lied to,.

Looks like the debunker needs some debunking too....

$49,000/year..... meaning her net would be about 36k ....and her coverage price under the ACA is no diffrent than it wasy prior to the ACA.. I see that the columnist mentioned nothing about coverage for her only a son diagnosed with a problem. And how much you wanna bet that the kid is over 18 and is on public assistance already?

I mean what are you guys talking about?

Turns out that Sanford wasn't the only one misled.

JO

ACA is not an insurance policy first of all. The misinformation is related to insurance companies. Here is the original article for added info about her coverage: http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2022321213_westneat24xml.html#.UpJfbkgW-RU.twitter

The story is debunked.
 
Yes I understand all of that MIN...it is a law not a policy...but it becomes a policy vicarisously by eliminating the current policies that do not adher to that law...so in effect it is not only A policy it is THE policy...but I digress.

Jessica Sanford expected something that is not available to her at her income level...a susidy. If her son is on DA ...which I think you will find that he is...and he was paying 250 a month for scrips,....then they were just being foolish.

If he qualifies for cheap coverage now he probably qualified for totaly FREE coverage before and just didn't know it....in fact I will almost guarantee that those are the deatails and that he is no longer a minor.

The problem as I see it here is that O-care is coming up against the definition of the poverty line.

She would almost be better off to be totally on public asisstance..why work for a living when you can get it given to you? Why insist on the values of self reliance when there is so much pressure to become a part of the collective?

At 48k she is not considered to be at the FPL.......but anyone who knows today's economices knows that 48k... is really no more that 36k net.....about three thousand dollars a month to live on.

Now that IS poverty frankly and should be treated that way.

JO
 
Yes I understand all of that MIN...it is a law not a policy...but it becomes a policy vicarisously by eliminating the current policies that do not adher to that law...so in effect it is not only A policy it is THE policy...but I digress.

Jessica Sanford expected something that is not available to her at her income level...a susidy. If her son is on DA ...which I think you will find that he is...and he was paying 250 a month for scrips,....then they were just being foolish.

If he qualifies for cheap coverage now he probably qualified for totaly FREE coverage before and just didn't know it....in fact I will almost guarantee that those are the deatails and that he is no longer a minor.

The problem as I see it here is that O-care is coming up against the definition of the poverty line.

She would almost be better off to be totally on public asisstance..why work for a living when you can get it given to you? Why insist on the values of self reliance when there is so much pressure to become a part of the collective?

At 48k she is not considered to be at the FPL.......but anyone who knows today's economices knows that 48k... is really no more that 36k net.....about three thousand dollars a month to live on.

Now that IS poverty frankly and should be treated that way.

JO

We all have the choice to be poor. Nobody chooses to be poor. She appears to be no exception to that. At $48,000 she qualifies for a tax subsidy and I suspect a fair one. She seems to be one of those who will be helped by the new policy and law.

In any case I am heading out soon so you have yourself a wonderful Thanksgiving Jo. I'll catch up after the holiday. ;)
 
Back
Top