Patterico's Pontifications

8/5/2013

Utterly Corrupt Obama Rewriting ObamaCare Unilaterally (Again)

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:59 am



The Wall Street Journal has an eye-opening piece about how Obama is (again) rewriting ObamaCare to benefit Congrressmen and their staffers. The details are a bit complicated, but the essential story is simple:

  • ObamaCare ended up inadvertently screwing Congress and its staffers.
  • Obama doesn’t want a legislative (i.e. legal) fix because Republicans might demand concessions.
  • So Obama is simply planning to ignore the law, dictator-style, and rewrite it so that everybody in Congress will be happy.

Here are the ugly and enraging details:

[T]he statute means that about 11,000 Members and Congressional staff will lose the generous coverage they now have as part of the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP). Instead they will get the lower-quality, low-choice “Medicaid Plus” of the exchanges. The Members—annual salary: $174,000—and their better paid aides also wouldn’t qualify for ObamaCare subsidies. That means they could be exposed to thousands of dollars a year in out-of-pocket insurance costs.

The result was a full wig out on Capitol Hill, with Members of both parties fretting about “brain drain” as staff face higher health-care costs.

My response: oh well. Sucks to be you, Congress. That’s what you get for voting for something when you had no idea what it said. But never fear! SuperObama is here!

Democrats in particular begged the White House for help, claiming the Reid language was merely an unintentional mistake. President Obama told Democrats in a closed-door meeting last week that he would personally moonlight as HR manager and resolve the issue.

And now the White House is suspending the law to create a double standard. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) that runs federal benefits will release regulatory details this week, but leaks to the press suggest that Congress will receive extra payments based on the FEHBP defined-contribution formula, which covers about 75% of the cost of the average insurance plan. For 2013, that’s about $4,900 for individuals and $10,000 for families.

It’s unclear what mechanism the White House is going to use, but whatever mechanism it is, it will be illegal:

This latest White House night at the improv is also illegal. OPM has no authority to pay for insurance plans that lack FEHBP contracts, nor does the Affordable Care Act permit either exchange contributions or a unilateral bump in congressional pay in return for less overall compensation. Those things require appropriations bills passed by Congress and signed by the President.

But the White House rejected a legislative fix because Republicans might insist on other changes, and Mr. Obama feared that Democrats would go along because they’re looking out for number one. So the White House is once again rewriting the law unilaterally, much as it did by suspending ObamaCare’s employer mandate for a year. For this White House, the law it wrote is a mere suggestion.

Luckily we have a free press which will call Obama on this and not let him get away with that. (If you believe I meant that, put on a dunce cap and go away forever.)

This guy just keeps ignoring the law and the Constitution, and apparently nobody seems to care.

It’s getting to the point where a massive act of civil disobedience seems to be our only remedy. We can’t use the courts because we will be denied standing. We can’t petition Congress because they are the ones benefiting from this. What choice do we have, other than to say: if you won’t obey the law, why should we?

Of course, the reason is: if we don’t obey the law, they will point guns at us and make us go to jail. If they don’t obey the law, they’ll just rewrite it so the law says what they want it to say.

This country has become utterly corrupt at the hands of this President.

160 Responses to “Utterly Corrupt Obama Rewriting ObamaCare Unilaterally (Again)”

  1. Until Congress shows some backbone and resists these power plays by Obama then they will continue to be ignored.

    Or they ARE powerless and that fact is only now being revealed as a weakness in the system.

    Either way, Obama has shown future presidents how far they can go and we can expect more of this in the future.

    Welcome to the Imperial Presidency.
    Brought to you by Democrats.

    Ain’t that ironic as hell?

    Jcw46 (6106c6)

  2. They really should just pass shell bills, and let Obama do whatever the hell he wants.

    JD (b63a52)

  3. Government fraudulently spending money it doesn’t have the right to spend? Is that a qui tam action?

    luagha (745e91)

  4. Congress critters just recently woke up to the fact that the “affordable” part of ACA was only about making health insurance more affordable (allegedly) for the lower classes, and was ALWAYS going to cost everyone else more?

    Icy (5d5621)

  5. These actions should make it easier to reverse by a GOP president. Any executive action is reversible by the next president. It also reduces the legitimacy of the law and easier to repeal and replace when the next president and Congress are GOP. The Democrats are betting a lot on their ability to keep the presidency forever.

    Mike_K (dc6ffe)

  6. WHO’S going to cover 75% of my premium, huh?

    Icy (5d5621)

  7. Brain Drain – Too late for that.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  8. Barky Obama
    arrogance incompetence
    hallmarks of era

    Colonel Haiku (1011ad)

  9. Will the last straw be door to door searches for food?
    Knock Knock

    Click Click

    mg (31009b)

  10. Someone should start a petition on WhiteHouse.gov that forces Congress to abide by all laws that they pass.

    They’re citizens too, aren’t they?

    © Sponge (8110ec)

  11. Jefe 0bama
    banana not just a fruit
    es muy macho… no?

    Colonel Haiku (ec6093)

  12. More to come.

    navyvet (02dd07)

  13. Rep. Alcee Hastings – We are making up the rules as we go along.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  14. If the GOP can’t stop ObamaCare now, it will erode access to medical treatment for senior citizens to the point Medicare becomes the new Auschwitz. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) takes $700 Billion from Medicare (away from health care for seniors) and uses it to subsidize medical insurance for free loaders who can be relied upon to keep voting Democrats into office.

    Healthy young people don’t need medical insurance, older people do. So, to buy votes for his political party, Barack Obama will force the young to buy coverage they don’t need, and he’ll take away the benefits older Americans have earned, in order to pay for health insurance that isn’t anywhere near good enough for the Democrats in Congress who forced this bastard legislation down the throats of a people who’ve rejected it at every opportunity. This isn’t the work of a representative democracy, it’s evidence that an arrogant cabal has usurped the rights of the people.

    ropelight (5c94d3)

  15. Who has standing in the Federal Courts to stop it?

    airedale (9213ef)

  16. Government really is totally corrupt. When amnesty passes, we will be Venezuela.

    Politico in a prior story even blamed the dastardly Repubs for inserting this onerous language into the ACA. Isn’t that what Americans said they wanted??

    As for civil disobedience maybe the youth will finally revolt. After all, they’re not busy working. This is their issue; and they are wasting it.

    And the media are silent. The GOP is silent. Why aren’t they out there giving speeches like Teh One? Even if they can’t repeal, they can make political headway. WHY?

    Patricia (be0117)

  17. It is incredible that the provisions in ObamaCare deny citizens the right to challenge in Court, and his unilateral imperial a toons appear to be such that nobody would have standing. Incredible is not the right word. Disgusting. Predictable.

    JD (bc34bc)

  18. I’m pretty sure I get an exemption due to my union membdrship. Would I have some type of standing to sue because I don’t get to take part in Onamacare like the little people do?

    BradnSA (cf8175)

  19. lol at my spelling on my last post.

    BradnSA (cf8175)

  20. This country has become utterly corrupt at the hands of this President.

    But at least the trains are running on time.

    What? They’re not? Oh, nevermind.

    Enjoy:
    http://gawker.com/5056959/could-creepy-kids-singing-video-bring-down-obama

    in_awe (7c859a)

  21. According to the in-the-tank MFM the GOP “forced” Emperor Tiger Beat to decree this, since the GOP vowed to block any legislation to make this legal.

    So the question now is who has standing to sue? Because Obama and the Dems will get away with it until a court takes action, and I don’t see how this can be legal.

    Speaking of things that can’t be legal, anyone see this?

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/05/us-dea-sod-idUSBRE97409R20130805

    Exclusive: U.S. directs agents to cover up program used to investigate Americans

    (Reuters) – A secretive U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration unit is funneling information from intelligence intercepts, wiretaps, informants and a massive database of telephone records to authorities across the nation to help them launch criminal investigations of Americans.

    Although these cases rarely involve national security issues, documents reviewed by Reuters show that law enforcement agents have been directed to conceal how such investigations truly begin – not only from defense lawyers but also sometimes from prosecutors and judges.

    The undated documents show that federal agents are trained to “recreate” the investigative trail to effectively cover up where the information originated, a practice that some experts say violates a defendant’s Constitutional right to a fair trial. If defendants don’t know how an investigation began, they cannot know to ask to review potential sources of exculpatory evidence – information that could reveal entrapment, mistakes or biased witnesses.

    “I have never heard of anything like this at all,” said Nancy Gertner, a Harvard Law School professor who served as a federal judge from 1994 to 2011.

    …A QUESTION OF CONSTITUTIONALITY

    The age of Obama. This administration uses “recreate” as a euphemism for falsify, and claims it’s constitutional to do this.

    Can’t you wait until they get their hands on all your health information, comb through that, then conceal where they got that information to deny you everything from a medical procedure to approval to buy a gun?

    Steve57 (a65996)

  22. 10.Someone should start a petition on WhiteHouse.gov that forces Congress to abide by all laws that they pass.

    They’re citizens too, aren’t they?

    Comment by © Sponge (8110ec) — 8/5/2013 @ 8:57 am

    Emperor Obama will decree that he is abiding by his law. After all, he’s a “Constitutional Perfesser.” Are you a “Constitutional Perfesser,” Mr. Sponge?

    Well then, shut up you racist, he explained.

    Steve57 (a65996)

  23. Next thing they’ll have a brown bag at the door on the clinic.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  24. Patterico: If they don’t obey the law, they’ll just rewrite it so the law says what they want it to say.

    But that’s what they are trying to avoid (rewrting the law, that is)

    So if they were forced to rewrite the law that would be a victory already.

    A New York Times article about this said that only members of Congress and personal staff might be affected, but that was clearly not enough.
    t might be interesting to see what kind of legal reasoning they can come up – but only the White house counsel’s office and Judge Obama needs to approve, so it might be easy for this to pass muster…

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  25. BradSA – no, you wouldn’t have standing. They denied the right to challenge the “law” to most individuals.

    JD (bc34bc)

  26. JD, Instapundit keeps mentioning there might be a constitutional issue with the exemptions. Just trying to do my part.

    BradnSA (e2d745)

  27. Until Congress shows some backbone and resists these power plays by Obama then they will continue to be ignored.

    You think they’re going to resist this? This is what they want. Their staffers are the direct beneficiaries.

    My response: oh well. Sucks to be you, Congress. That’s what you get for voting for something when you had no idea what it said. But never fear! SuperObama is here!

    Funny.

    On a serious note, if Congress wants to maintain current levels of net compensation to their staffers, can’t they just pass a law granting them a pay raise equal to the difference in benefits/costs between the two plans?

    I assume they don’t want to for political reasons?

    Former Conservative (6e026c)

  28. Utterly corrupt?

    A community organizer whose resume is almost a total blank, who got his leg up shilling for the Chicago machine?

    How could THAT happen? And how come nobody saw it coming?

    mojo (8096f2)

  29. They’re citizens too, aren’t they?

    Sure, Sponge. “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”

    Patricia (be0117)

  30. Patterico was talking about ‘them’ metaphorically rewriting the law by doing end-runs around it, Sammy.

    Icy (5d5621)

  31. “When in the Course of human Events, it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another…”

    It is time for The Country Class, to dissolve its connections to The Ruling Class, and to re-establish our Federal Republic under the limited strictures of The Constitution.

    askeptic (b8ab92)

  32. Welcome to the Imperial Presidency.
    Brought to you by Democrats Progressives.

    FTFY!

    askeptic (b8ab92)

  33. Who has standing in the Federal Courts to stop it?

    A cynic would say only John C. Garand, and Eugene Stoner!

    askeptic (b8ab92)

  34. Today’s New York Times reports as its main headline another problem with the law:

    Health Care Law Raises Pressure on Public Unions / Tax on Expensive Plans / Cities Across U.S. Fear Steep Costs if Benefits Aren’t Reduced (3 tier headline in printed newspaper)

    The cities may not be hit with this right away. But New York City, for instance, might hit the cap in 2018. Bloomberg managed to get a lower bid for insurance this year, but there is still a problem.

    Under the tax, plans that cost above a certain threshold in 2018 — $10,200 annually for individual plans and $27,500 for family plans, with slightly higher cutoffs for retirees and those in high-risk professions like law enforcement — will be taxed at 40 percent of their costs in excess of the limit. (The thresholds will rise with inflation after 2018.)

    State and local governments across the country tend to offer more expensive health plans than private businesses do, and workers often accept smaller wage increases to retain their benefits. Because of this, state and local government employees are expected to be disproportionately represented among those whose plans will be subject to the tax…. The announcement last month that the Obama administration would delay by a year the mandate that larger employers offer coverage to their workers does not affect the timing of the excise tax, although it may provide encouragement to those who hope that the assessment will be delayed or scrapped altogether.

    “Some skeptics, and I’m not one of them, say that that’s why the tax was put into effect in 2018 — that it’s far enough away that people can consider whether or not they really want it to go into effect,” Mr. Piro, the health care lawyer, said.

    More likely, it would hit even after the 2016 election.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  35. Hark! Diogenes, we have a candidate at #33.

    ropelight (5c94d3)

  36. The wheels are coming off this train-wreck!

    askeptic (b8ab92)

  37. 30. Comment by Icy (5d5621) — 8/5/2013 @ 10:00 am

    Patterico was talking about ‘them’ metaphorically rewriting the law by doing end-runs around it, Sammy.

    That’s interpreting the law. You know, like what the Supreme Court does to the constitution. Nobody ever says they rewrite it.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  38. “When there’s will, there’s a legal way” – Obama’s motto maybe?

    It was said once in connection with Spiderman:

    Should Disney World’s Cirque du Soleil show be replaced by something more Marvel-ous?

    One comment goes:

    That’s so funny Jim. Last week I was reading “Cirque du Soleil: The Spark” and was thinking that very identical thing. It’s the best option I could ever imagine going in there. I just wonder if beyond the Universal legal agreements, there isn’t some legal tie to doing a “theatrical” production since Julie Taymor is doing Spiderman. And I can’t imagine a Marvel show not having Spiderman. That said, when there’s a will, there’s a legal way!

    Hat tip: Google.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  39. It is time for The Country Class, to dissolve its connections to The Ruling Class, and to re-establish our Federal Republic under the limited strictures of The Constitution.

    Idle words.

    There is no way this would work. The government hasn’t been massively militarizing, including the police forces, and building up a technological super-surveillance state for nothing.

    Former Conservative (6e026c)

  40. When the President does it, that means that it’s not illegal.

    Richard M. Nixon

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  41. Comment by Former Conservative (6e026c) — 8/5/2013 @ 10:20 am

    Word for word from Tory pubs of the 1770’s!

    askeptic (b8ab92)

  42. When in the course of human events…

    Dan S (5953bb)

  43. askeptic, I see your point and I thought about it before posting.

    However, the Tory’s didn’t have a database of all your emails and blog comments, nor anything like the US military and police forces and drones and aircraft at their disposal, now did they?

    Former Conservative (6e026c)

  44. #39, once upon a time and against all odds, way back in 1776, an overwhelming superpower was defeated by a rag-tag colonial militia bent on establishing a new form of government, one responsible to the rights of the people, not to the greed of entrenched aristocrats.

    ropelight (5c94d3)

  45. ropelight, I really do think the 2nd amendment and the ability to stand up to a tyranny is a wonderful concept.

    However, I fear technology and government hyper-militarization has vastly superseded the ability of ragtag groups of riflemen. Plus I see little evidence that a large enough percentage of the population isn’t too hooked on modern comforts to change the status quo.

    One day the system will financially collapse. Then something new may rise up, but I wouldn’t bet on better.

    Former Conservative (6e026c)

  46. Then wait behind the women and the children till men have sorted it out.

    ropelight (5c94d3)

  47. Freakin’ laws, how to they work? Sounds like Obama & Congress need to watch some more schoolhouse rock.

    Warren (c3caa8)

  48. Also, I don’t think the French are going to help out this time.

    Since I think the US navy would be like, “Er, get lost.”

    Former Conservative (6e026c)

  49. Keep on a-splittin’ those hairs, Sammy. You know what Pat meant from the moment when you first read it.

    Icy (5d5621)

  50. Sammy, when the Feds, who are charged with implementing ObamaCare, decide to simply ignore certain parts of the law, that is metaphorically referred to as ‘rewriting the law.’

    Why do you insist on playing these obtuse word games ?

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  51. Although, ropelight, I’m not saying their isn’t cause.

    That’s a stunning article at Hot Air. The DEA is mining databases of communications info to nail drug dealers, then faking how their investigations began for the courts, and often to prosecutors themselves.

    Fourth Amendment? Sixth Amendment? lulz.

    Former Conservative (6e026c)

  52. Commissioned officers in the US military are obligated to take the following oath. Contrary to the expectations of Democrats not all of them had their fingers crossed behind their backs. (emphasis added)

    I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

    ropelight (5c94d3)

  53. Re the cadillac tax, I thought the employee paid the tax…

    Patricia (be0117)

  54. ropelight, the cadet oath was actually changed at West Point a few years ago (how scary is that? that they would even think to do it).

    I’ve verified it at official government webpages, but this link shows a group of cadets stating the new oath.

    IF there was ever a successful revolution, the model would be Egypt or Pakistan, not 1776. Pretty much the military would have to make the call.

    And that itself would change America a lot, away from its founding principles. As for a civilian uprising, don’t see it.

    Former Conservative (6e026c)

  55. So to anyone who missed it, at West Point (home of inconsequential figures such as Eisenhower, Bradley, Patton, MacArthur, Petraeus, etc.) the cadets now swear allegiance to “the national government” and pledge to protect “the sovereignty” of the United States.

    Former Conservative (6e026c)

  56. Oh, but threatening to shut down government to defund, let alone repeal, Obamaneycare is “nuts”, cannot be accomplished, and is a distraction from really important things like Amensty.

    Face it GOP, you are dead old white men.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  57. Reports of our demise have been greatly exaggerated.

    ropelight (5c94d3)

  58. I guess we had to do more than just pass it, to see what was in it.

    SPQR (768505)

  59. FC, “commissioned officers of the United States military” is not the same set as “West Point cadets”.

    Rob Crawford (e6f27f)

  60. don’t bother, ropelight. i doubt FC knows anyone who knows anyone who knows someone in the military, or even a veteran.

    besides, even if someone were to give the order, and others attempt to comply, the logistical chain would be the obvious, and easy, target. no need to attack military forces when you can cut their supply lines instead. no food, no fuel, no army.

    redc1c4, oathkeeper (abd49e)

  61. @#2 “They really should just pass shell bills, and let Obama do whatever the hell he wants.
    That is exactly the problem with the so-called bills that have transformed into laws recently. The ACA’s most common phrase is “as the Secretary of HHS shall deem necessary.” What if the next secretary chooses to undeem everything that Sec. Sebelius has deemed? What a nightmare scenario that would be! The Dodd-Frank law, most of which remains to be written, is/was a farce at best from the outset. You want to fix a problem that Congress created by not parsing the bills they passed, so you have two members who could be argued were at the heart of the problem come up with a new law. The Gang of 8 Immigration bill has more holes in it than the best Swiss cheese or the finest Irish lace. Congress wants to pass this bill to fix the problem, yet under President Reagan when they passed that immigration bill, they touted that it would fix the immigration problem for ever and a day. What good is passing a law when you get a regime that feels that they are Constitutionally allowed to cherry pick which laws that will enforce?

    drbage (4de5ea)

  62. West Point?
    Wasn’t a Gen. Arnold posted there?

    askeptic (b8ab92)

  63. The cadets that Former Conservative is most familiar with are Space Cadets.

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  64. please carry me back
    to my old Prunetucky home
    makes no nevermind

    Colonel Haiku (5348bf)

  65. Hit the government where it hurts. Delay any tax payments until the deadline. Maximize deductions, and perhaps push the envelope a bit in grey areas. The IRS can only audit a small fraction of people if enough semi-passive resistance occurs. They just do not have the resources, as the system depends on overwhelming voluntary compliance.

    David (099e1f)

  66. You guys just don’t like Obama because he has a funny name. Or something.

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  67. If 200MM Americans took up the Cloward-Piven playbook?

    askeptic (b8ab92)

  68. “The Democrats are betting a lot on their ability to keep the presidency forever.

    Comment by Mike_K (dc6ffe) — 8/5/2013 @ 8:39 am ”

    Why not just declare that Obamacare gives citizenship, amnesty, and the right to vote to all illegal immigrants and other criminals and outlaws teaparty groups as hate groups? That kind of takes care of that risk, doesn’t it? How is this different in kind to the changes he has been making?

    How is one any less legal or Constitutional than the other?

    Machinist (b6f7da)

  69. This guy just keeps ignoring the law and the Constitution, and apparently nobody seems to care.

    I used to think that those people claiming that President Obama would refuse to leave office after his term expired were crazy. Given the actions of this administration the last 4 1/2 years, and the inability or unwillingness of Congress or the media to rein it in, I’m no longer so sure.

    gahrie (3fff08)

  70. #66, Elephant Stone wrote, You guys just don’t like Obama because he has a funny name. Or something.

    OK, ya got me, it’s his ears, I can’t stand crooks and liars with big ears. Referenced commenters excepted.

    ropelight (5c94d3)

  71. 45. Comment by Former Conservative (6e026c) — 8/5/2013 @ 10:39 am

    However, I fear technology and government hyper-militarization has vastly superseded the ability of ragtag groups of riflemen.

    Of course. It didn’t help the Kurds in Iraq. Only the no-fly zone kept them out of Saddam Hussein’s clutches after 1991.

    Sammy Finkelman (55138d)

  72. These actions should make it easier to reverse by a GOP president. Any executive action is reversible by the next president. It also reduces the legitimacy of the law and easier to repeal and replace when the next president and Congress are GOP. The Democrats are betting a lot on their ability to keep the presidency forever.

    It’s the theory of the street dealer and the junkie, Mike K. Get the junkie so dependent upon your product that by the time he realizes you are substituting low-grade drugs for the good stuff he once received, he will be too hooked and too broke to do a damn thing about it.

    Um, not that I have any experience with the above scenario, mind you.

    JVW (23867e)

  73. Sammy, I hope that 8/5/2013 @ 2:04 pm was supposed to be sarcastic.

    SPQR (768505)

  74. Comment by Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 8/5/2013 @ 10:55 am

    when the Feds, who are charged with implementing ObamaCare, decide to simply ignore certain parts of the law, that is metaphorically referred to as ‘rewriting the law.’

    Why do you insist on playing these obtuse word games ?

    When Patterico said they I think he was talking about Congress. Who would not be obeying the law? Congress. So I was saying if they did rewrite it, they’d be doing what we wanted. That was exactly what they were trying to avoid doing – rewriting the law.

    What they were doing instead – having the Obama Adminnistration issue some legal opinion leading to an executive order – cannot also be described as re-writing the law, when rewriting the law was precisely what was being avoided.

    Sammy Finkelman (55138d)

  75. And that made no sense, Sammy.

    SPQR (768505)

  76. SOQR 73. Sammy, I hope that 8/5/2013 @ 2:04 pm was supposed to be sarcastic.

    What do you mean? It’s the exact truth. Rifles cannot stands up against amodern army and a real dictatorship, not to mention an air force and posion gas. Even artillery is a problem as we see in Syria.

    And by the way, Alexander Hamilton, back then even, didn’t think an undiciplined (untrained and unpracticed) militia was any good either. (Federalist number 29)

    Sammy Finkelman (55138d)

  77. 76-
    I guess that Charlie Wilson’s War never happened then.

    askeptic (b8ab92)

  78. From Patterico’s post:

    So Obama is simply planning to ignore the law, dictator-style, and rewrite it so that everybody in Congress will be happy.

    Sammy,

    Patterico clearly said Obama is rewriting the law, not Congress. IMO Obama and his Administration are the “they” to which he refers.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  79. Re: 68… There’s “presidential overreach” and there’s presidential overwrought overreach…

    Colonel Haiku (aa8ee9)

  80. Jeff Bezos (Amazon) buys WaPo for $250MM.

    askeptic (b8ab92)

  81. I think one thing that most people understand and react against is the idea that people in government get things for themselves that the average person can’t.
    I bet pointing out this one example of how the federal government is protecting themselves while giving everyone else the shaft would win quite a few seats in Congress and maybe even the Senate-
    if a candidate can stay on message and make it clear.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  82. News flash: Boston Globe, Newsweek and now Washington Post sold. (WP to Jeff Bezos of Amazon.com)

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  83. SF, you’re about 8′ late.

    askeptic (b8ab92)

  84. “…(untrained and unpracticed) militia was any good either.”

    you haven’t been to your local shooting range recently, have you?

    and then there is http://appleseedinfo.org/

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  85. here’s some numbers to make any military planner blanch… how many hunters do you think there are in the US?

    how many people are there in the military? remember, most of them aren’t trigger pullers.

    which number is bigger, and by how much?

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  86. ” This guy just keeps ignoring the law and the Constitution, and apparently nobody seems to care. ”
    = = = = = =
    As someone above said, “who’s got standing?”

    Certainly the branches of government which are supposed to provide a check on the Executive Branch are derelict in doing their duty.

    Nobody in Congress is willing to face the sh!tstorm that the Democrat-Party-plus-Complicit-Media is guaranteed to unleash on them.

    And we’ve already seen that the Supreme Court is willing to label “whatever-it-is” as “whatever-it-needs-to-be” so they can deem it Constitutional.

    Nobody in Washington is interested in legality or constitutionality or morality. They’re just interested in making the next deal and increasing their share of the power-prestige-and-influence pie.

    Egypt has the right idea. When we individual citizens are so fed up that EVERYBODY DROPS EVERYTHING to go march in the streets, maybe the “duly-elected”s will listen. (But of course, the Egyptians out in the streets are the ones with no jobs and no way to buy even government-subsidized bread. They’re the ones with literally NOTHING LEFT TO LOSE. We in the US have a long way to go before people are that desperate/ angry/ frightened. It’s not “do-or-die” for us — yet.)

    A_Nonny_Mouse (57cacf)

  87. This is the travesty of a sham thread, right:

    http://minx.cc/?post=342270

    narciso (3fec35)

  88. For a note of levity about Obamacare, in this dark thread, read this – hilarious. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/08/05/1228977/–I-m-very-lucky-I-m-about-to-pay-8665-a-year-for-crappy-high-deductible-insurance-in-NYS#

    Walter Cronanty (d16f1a)

  89. narciso,

    For some reason, your link reminds me of this 2012 GOP gossip.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  90. I had a similar, although more understated reaction to Christie’s speech.

    narciso (3fec35)

  91. Given all this that El Presidente is decreeing, I think those of you who are worrying who the Republicans should run in 2016 are missing the plot.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  92. I think at this point, the Democrats are hoping that the Republicans block funding of Obamacare so that they can blame the failure on the GOP. And this will probably be where the House leadership finally takes its stand, it being the point of maximum stupid.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  93. Comment by Kevin M (bf8ad7) — 8/5/2013 @ 6:51 pm

    the Democrats are hoping that the Republicans block funding of Obamacare so that they can blame the failure on the GOP. And this will probably be where the House leadership finally takes its stand, it being the point of maximum stupid.

    Maxiumum stupid is not replacing it with anything or proposing any replacement. If it was blocked, true, it could never be demonstrated to be a failure. An idea that won’t pass is shutting down the government over it – the Republicans will be blamed for being too stubborn.

    Sammy Finkelman (55138d)

  94. and so, over the cliff we all go, intelligent people along with the LIV/FSA lemmings and the MFM.

    thanks for nothing, a55hats

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  95. The only thing going in our favor lately is the fat lady has forgotten the words.

    http://nicedeb.wordpress.com/2013/08/05/the-regime-has-a-stranglehold-on-the-republic-and-its-not-letting-go/

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  96. gary @95, some things never change.

    Such as the First Commandment in the book of journalistic ethics at CNN.

    1. Thou shalt carry the water of dictators to maintain access.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/11/opinion/the-news-we-kept-to-ourselves.html

    The News We Kept To Ourselves
    By Eason Jordan
    Published: April 11, 2003

    Over the last dozen years I made 13 trips to Baghdad to lobby the government to keep CNN’s Baghdad bureau open and to arrange interviews with Iraqi leaders. Each time I visited, I became more distressed by what I saw and heard — awful things that could not be reported …

    Jordan tried to make some sort of self-serving argument that they carried Hussein’s water out of concern for their safety of their local Iraqi employees.

    Here’s a thought; don’t put yourself in the position of having a Baghdad office and a) you don’t have to report only unadulterated propaganda and b) you’re not handing the dictator a bunch of hostages.

    You know, like all the other US MFM outlets that didn’t prostitute themselves and put locals in harm’s way just for the tagline “this is CNN, Baghdad.”

    Not that they wouldn’t prostitute themselves. Just not for that. I suppose it’s the difference between a call girl working a hotel bar for a $1,000/night and a streetwalker willing to give you a Lewinsky in your car for $25.

    CNN, on the relative scale, is a meth whore willing to turn tricks in a dumpster behind a liquor store for $5 and a bottle of Night Train Express.

    And if that’s the case you’re sure not going to do anything to jeopardize your membership to the WH press corps where you can score some free shrimp just for giving Jay Carney a metaphorical BJ.

    Although sometimes I wonder if it’s really metaphorical.

    Steve57 (a65996)

  97. Actually, CNN would be willing to split that bottle of Night Train Express with you for $5.

    Steve57 (a65996)

  98. “If it was blocked, true, it could never be demonstrated to be a failure. An idea that won’t pass is shutting down the government over it – the Republicans will be blamed for being too stubborn.”

    Sammy – Most rational people already consider Obamacare a failure. It has not delivered on any of its significant promises, lowering costs, allowing people to keep plans, etc. As Max Baucus said, it’s a train wreck waiting to happen.

    The Republicans are not trying to shut down the government over its funding. They want to fund everything but Obamacare. It is the Democrats who are threatening the shutdown by insisting everything must be funded, including Obamacare.

    Guess which way the media will frame it.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  99. If any good comes out of this ongoing debacle, I hope it will be an increasingly negative, cynical, contemptuous attitude expressed by more and more Americans towards entities like the IRS and the government in general.

    I recall a time when if someone I was speaking with indicated he or she was cheating on his taxes, I would feel uneasy and wary. Now? I’d just smile and shrug it off.

    I know my own reaction towards crafty tacticians like an Edward Snowden in years gone by would have elicited a bit more suspicion or indignation on my part. Now? Well, although I still try to avoid the idiocy of moral equivalency, I also, at the same time, do sense the value of this nation’s government has plummeted. So if a good portion of the American electorate — and, in turn, their government — is largely responsible for the Nidal-Hasan-izing of this country, why should I give a damn when that same populace doesn’t?

    Mark (938403)

  100. 93. An idea that won’t pass is shutting down the government over it – the Republicans will be blamed for being too stubborn.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (55138d) — 8/5/2013 @ 6:58 pm

    All the GOP has to point out is that Obama is demonstrating why you don’t put the government in charge of your health care.

    If Obama and the Democrats are willing to hold back old peoples’ SS checks and let them starve or die of heatstroke without A/C because they can’t pay their food or utility bills unless they get their entire agenda, just imagine what they’ll do when they have more hostages to bargain with?

    That’s not hard.

    Steve57 (a65996)

  101. © Sponge (8110ec) #10 … I apologise for not responding more quickly …

    Take a look back at the 1995 Congress … HR 1 … it was designed to swing things back to where the laws passed by Congress would apply to all citizens, including Congresscritters … with the GOP regaining the House after the Democrats had owned it for 40 or so years, it was the GOP’s first priority … it was pretty much the first thing they worked on …

    I have said since before Hillarycare that most US healthcare problems can be solved by making everyone at the federal level be subject to the healthcare legislation that Congress passes … it will focus the concentration of our representatives and officials most effectively on getting it right …

    Oh – and, while being even-handed about politics generally, it is still completely fair not to blame Obamacare on Congress … since it was passed into law in its final vote without a single Republican vote, give the Democrats the credit they have earned – it is the Democrat Obamacare

    Alastor (2e7f9f)

  102. Remember how everyone says Obama’s promises come with an expiration date? Well, that’s not all.

    If you stand wading through it, here’s the speech Obama gave at the National Defense University this past May. Everything in it expired at least a year before he said it.

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/05/23/remarks-president-national-defense-university

    One thing that didn’t, and probably the only thing that didn’t, is this.

    Today, the core of al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan is on the path to defeat.

    As reported by CNN this weekend:

    http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2013/08/03/analysts-terror-warning-may-be-linked-to-choice-of-al-qaeda-chief-deputy/

    There may be a link between what sources tell CNN is evidence of final-stage planning for an attack against U.S and Western interests by al Qaeda’s affiliate in Yemen and the reported recent appointment of the affiliate’s leader as the new general manager of the global al Qaeda network.

    Seth Jones, a senior analyst at the Rand Corporation, told CNN’s Barbara Starr on Friday that intelligence indicated that Nasir al Wuhayshi, the Yemeni leader of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), had recently been appointed into the role by al Qaeda leader Ayman al Zawahiri.

    Guess what? Since Wuhayshi is now the AQ GM?

    That means the core of AQ isn’t in the effin’ AFPAK region.

    Expect our Ear Leader to keep babbling as if he’s defeating the “core” of AQ in the AFPAK.

    I don’t know when they learned this bit of info as opposed to publicly revealing it. But at most in that snoozer of a speech Prom Queen managed to say one thing that didn’t go bad and decompose for 2 1/2 months.

    That must be a record for this guy.

    Steve57 (a65996)

  103. Sorry, wrong comment thread.

    Steve57 (a65996)

  104. Cadets swear an oath to defend the Constitution, et cetera, as cadets. When they are granted their officer’s commissions upon graduation, they take the standard oath for all services. Don’t get too hung up on the ‘National Government’ verbiage – cadet years only. I’ll check my Dad’s USMA commission (WWII era) and note any discrepancies.

    Fabi (931053)

  105. What I have in my office is his appointment, not an oath, sorry. It’s signed by the Secretary of War – Robert P. Patton. And, unfortunately for Rachel Jeantel, it’s in cursive….

    Fabi (931053)

  106. Robert P. Patterson, not Patton. He can’t write cursive apparently.

    Fabi (931053)

  107. General Alexander, Admiral McConnell, call the office:

    http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/08/researchers-say-tor-targeted-malware-phoned-home-to-nsa/

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  108. “Truth is what I can convince you to believe.”

    htom (ffba9d)

  109. Also via Larwyn, the patently obvious uttered.

    http://reaganiterepublicanresistance.blogspot.com/2012/11/russian-military-intelligence-report.html?m=1

    Bound to be a few good eggs among 500 stinkers.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  110. Jarrett and Brennan are running our foreign policy.

    http://conservativereport.org/benghazi-valerie-jarrett-cic/

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  111. 111. I imagine this is what she’s ululating over:

    “Erroneous information is being advanced as if these are the final rates available in the marketplace and this is what consumers will be paying,” Sebelius said Monday in a telephone briefing. “That’s just not accurate.”

    State insurance officials in Ohio originally said the average individual premium proposed for 2014 was $420, up 88 percent from the 2013 average price as reported by the Society of Actuaries. Then earlier this week, they announced that the same coverage was actually about $332 a month.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  112. Ya know, when we’ve only short-circuited 50 terrorist plots aimed at Amerikkka, half of which are total BS, and we get alarms out months late following no activity, all because of the tireless work of 60,000 Federal spooks and 500,000 contractors spying on everything that moves or has breath maybe protecting the motherland is just too expensive.

    All while the military is aiding our emerging enemies and the established ones are just flipping us off.

    That’s alright Washington, we’ve got this. Thanks but no thanks.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  113. 27th amendment to the Constitution:

    No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened

    Jeff Hall (42392c)

  114. 27th amendment. Yes, they can’t just raise the pay (of the members of Congress themselves, as opposed to their staff) to compensate for the increased health care costs to them caused by the self-described Affordable Care Act.

    Sammy Finkelman (a90e7e)

  115. Constitution, shmonstitution!

    Icy (10548a)

  116. Oh, and Thank You, Jeff & Sammy, for pointing out the same thing that Patterico noted in his original post. Clarity!

    Icy (10548a)

  117. Former FBI chief [under Clinton] Louis Freeh, the state-appointed trustee in the MF Global bankruptcy case, has asked to be paid another $1 million for winding down the failed brokerage.
    Freeh already asked for nearly $2 million in fees, but agreed to a slight reduction after the Department of Justice criticized him and his law firm for vague time records.

    Icy (10548a)

  118. I’m sure those records were “sterling” compared to the deceit of Corzine he had to wade through.

    askeptic (b8ab92)

  119. Actually, people could just refuse to pay taxes. En masse. Bleed the government dry.

    Bets (717964)

  120. 119. Heh.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  121. Somewhere Harold Stassen is smiling down on today’s GOP.

    Evidently Congressman King has a Mini Donuts concession.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  122. 123. Of course, Breitbart has the story, quote on King’s stop en route to NH:

    part of a New Hampshire visit that served as a coming-out party of sorts for King’s presidential ambitions. He says he is at least a year away from a final decision,

    Guess its too late to clone my brain, huh?

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  123. Please don’t act so surprised:

    http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2013/08/army-will-not-suspend-contracts-with-al.html

    Dissembling does not become you.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  124. They can’t just say they have a hunch that the contractors are connected to terrorism…

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  125. Conservative Report: BREAKING! Benghazi Bombshell: Valerie Jarrett, Commander in Chief

    ….After supper, Barack Obama had a telephone conference scheduled with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Senior Advisor to the President, Valerie Jarrett was present for that conference, which was held due to problems the President was having with the perception of him snubbing Netanyahu in previous, formal encounters.

    The telephone call between Obama and Netanyahu carried on for a full two-hours, creating the appearance of respect between the two world leaders.

    As that meeting drew to a close, Ms. Jarrett, who is also the Assistant to the President for Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs, went from the living quarters to the White House Situation Room, where the attack in Benghazi was being monitored by Dempsey, Panetta and other top-ranking officials.

    Whether she was instructed by the President to go there, or if she went of her own volition, is only known by the President and herself.

    A critical question that needed to be answered, and the sole military-order that could have launched offensive-actions, neutralizing the Ansar al Sharia terrorists attacks on the Mission (the purpose of which is detailed here) and its subsequent attacks on the adjacent CIA Annex, was the issuance of “Cross Border Authority”, an order that can only be issued by the Commander in Chief, himself.

    As was reported earlier by Conservative Report, Cross Border Authority was denied.

    Q. Wouldn’t it be enough for her to say the president shouldn’t be disturbed?

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  126. 126. Daley tried the competence route, hip-checking Jarrett off the puck as CoS.

    We’re on to the second successor since competence face-planted.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  127. It looks like Filner – not just from the latest report – was trying to blackmail women into going along with his propositions.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  128. And to think our ancestors rebelled and fought a war over a tax.

    ErisGuy (76f8a7)

  129. Peter Schiff, whom Rico has featured, on the curious pull back in Gold that is now over:

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-08-06/peter-schiff-asks-whats-vault

    Bold move by Chairman Ben and Jamie Dimon, sell it all and depress the price so we can buy what we owe the Germans.

    Pity it seems to have failed, rather badly, in fact.

    When they confiscate all our gold they will have to pay, say, 80% market price. Better hope to print yuan by then.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  130. 129. Yeah, he assaulted #9 in church and when #10 approached him for help with a brain injured Marine he tried naked coercion.

    I’d not stand too close, the earth will open under him any moment now.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  131. Forget treason, impeachment, 9/11 and all that American history, English grammar you name it, I’m thinking Nuclear Winter is our only hope.

    http://www.downsizedc.org/blog/new-spying-scandal-is-this-one-the-last-straw

    Wonder how MERS is doing post-Ramadan?

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  132. Some of the youngsters get it.

    http://noisyroom.net/blog/2013/08/06/shocking-obama-intends-to-collapse-us-economy-exclusive-ann-barnhardt/

    Move away from the city, my darlings, move away as fast as your feets can carry you.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  133. Not only is this Administration utterly corrupt, it thinks Americans are fools. For example, when asked the Administration’s position on the Egyptian overthrow of Morsi, State Department spokesperson Psaki answered “We have determined that we do not need to make a determination” on Egypt.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  134. I think it’s too late for that generation, gary. Maybe things will improve for their children.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  135. Maybe we should start yelling “Stupidist!”

    htom (412a17)

  136. “Fact” is posting nonsense again. Nonsense we already debunked, because repeating is “Fact” the trolls modus operandi.

    Meanwhile, Obama is the most lawless President in history.

    SPQR (768505)

  137. “Fact” is “Dad” and is still spamming the same link.

    Commenters who do not use a consistent name, and/or who use a proxy to post, are subject to banning.

    JD (1b0ee3)

  138. “Leave this economy to the mentally competent.”

    Fact = A good thought, but voters reelected Obama instead.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  139. Talk about doomed, the GOP and its mouthpieces are unaware a third of their voters in 2008 are not interested in primaries except as a means to unseat their incumbents.

    http://hotair.com/archives/2013/08/07/romney-to-nh-gop-dont-vote-in-anger-in-the-2016-primaries-and-nominate-someone-who-cant-win/

    Mr. Romany, Republican former Presidents normally have the good grace to withhold opinion let alone advice.

    No one welcomes either from two-time losers.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  140. 137. You are doubtless correct. From my vantage most everyone looks youngish.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  141. 142. The Honorable(sic) Keiff Ellison MN 5th, genetically challenged Congress life form, claims “there’s plenty of money, its just the government doesn’t have it”

    Remember the empty shelves in Soviet supermarkets in Moscow 30 years ago? What do you suppose happened to all the starving urbanites occluding photos of the heroic?

    A shortage of money is just and excess of body parts.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  142. 139. Leave this economy to the mentally competent.

    http://news.investors.com/blogs-capital-hill/112012-634082-federal-deficit-falling-fastest-since-world-war-ii.htm#ixzz2a0HboUmw

    Comment by Fact (b17026) — 8/7/2013 @ 10:57 am

    Fact, here’s a fact for you.

    I don’t take advice from someone who is too stupid to know the difference between the economy and the federal deficit.

    Steve57 (a65996)

  143. Factoid:

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-08-07/guest-post-real-personal-income-points-recession

    The private sector moved significant income forward to pay taxes in 2013 rather than 2014 dodging Obamaneycare and scores of other new fees and taxes.

    Moreover, while the Treasury has issued $60 Billion in new bills and notes the debt has remained frozen, for 75 days and counting, at $30 Million below the legislated limit.

    Crickets.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  144. I just got out of a presentation by the State of Illinois on its exchanges. As usual, the audience had lots of questions about implementation. At least 50% or more of the questions were met by the following responses: 1. I don’t know; or 2. It hasn’t been determined yet. Illinois rolls out its exchanges on October 1–God help us all.

    rochf (f3fbb0)

  145. Who “ran” that seminar, rochf? Who was the target audience?

    elissa (8d2745)

  146. rochf – I’ve been looking around for a townhall meeting for Rep. Jan Schakowsky to educate her constituents such as me on such matters. I’ve got some questions I would like to ask her. I think she’s in hiding.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  147. The wall Street Journal editorial page this morning says they now have Obama’s legal reasoning foe exempting Congress:

    Members Only How the White House is weaseling Congress out of ObamaCare.

    The eat-your-own-cooking provision begins with the phrase “Notwithstanding any other provision of law.” The feds now interpret that clause as a loophole to mean that the Affordable Care Act did not change the 1959 law that created the FEHBP.

    Since Members and staff still technically meet the definition of federal employees qualified for the FEHBP, the Administration says they’re still entitled to enroll in the FEHBP concurrently with the exchanges. The feds then “clarify”—their euphemism—that the regulatory meaning of health benefits in the FEHBP can be ObamaCare plans. Voila, taxpayers will continue to chip in $4,900 for individual and $10,000 for family coverage.

    The charitable term for such legal gymnastics is creative. When statutes conflict, the bedrock administrative law obligation is to enforce the most recent statute. “Notwithstanding” clauses are routine catchalls that are supposed to emphasize Congress’s intent that a new bill is controlling and pre-empts other laws on the books.

    The White House is claiming the clause means the opposite….

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  148. It’s getting to the point where a massive act of civil disobedience seems to be our only remedy.

    If you don’t sign up for a health insurance plan, all you can lose is a tax refund. The IRS cannot collect the money any other way.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  149. “Those things require appropriations bills passed by Congress and signed by the President.”

    The section of the ACA that states that members must get their employer coverage from the exchanges starts by saying “Notwithstanding any other provision of law…”

    Any argument that other laws prevent the employer coverage from going through the exchange is taken care of by that.

    sell (c770a7)

  150. It’s kind of amusing how DC is fixing Obamacare. But only for DC.

    Meanwhile the Democrats are thanking the unions for their support.

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/08/harry-reid-to-unions-its-time-to-give-up-cadillac-plans-and-put-some-skin-in-the-game-video/

    One question he faced was about union uproar over Obamacare. Harry Reid said it’s time for them to give up their Cadillac plans and “put some skin in the game.”

    “Let’s understand where we are with the unions. One of the things we’ve learned with all of the hearings we held, dozens and dozens of them, is that if you have insurance you have to be able to have some skin in the game as we say in Las Vegas. And that means you just can’t keep running to the doctor with no deductible whatsoever. These are referred to as the Cadillac plans. And the Cadillac plans weren’t fair to other people… You have to have I repeat skin in the game.”

    Putting aside the pleasure I get from watching the Democrats screw the unions followed by the left’s typical thank-you salute with extended middle finger, isn’t it well past time to demand Obama give Rep. Joe Walsh (R-SC) an apology? After all, when Walsh blurted out “You lie” during Obama’s SOTU speech he was responding to Obama’s oft repeated lie that if you like your plan you can keep it.

    What’s clarifying in this case is that not only won’t union members and other not keep their plans, but this is explicitly an intended consequence. Obamacare was designed to intentionally regulate “Cadillac plans” out of existence because it offends Dingy Harry’s sense of “fairness.”

    Not that a special exemption for Congress that other people don’t get doesn’t offend his sense of “fairness.”

    I was reminded of this today by this post at Powerline, in which a prominent long-time reader details his nearly miraculous recovery from two massive strokes. And how Obamacare is legislating that sort of recovery out of existence.

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2013/08/obamacare-in-the-first-person.php

    It’s been quite a while since we’ve corresponded. I was reading your post on Obamacare and I simply couldn’t hold back. Obama is so duplicitous, dishonest and shameful I just couldn’t hold it in. I take his lies personally and blame his supporters, too. I don’t think even the people who oppose Obamacare understand just how awful it is. Let me explain.

    About a year and a half ago I suffered two stokes simultaneously, one of them massive. I was unconscious for weeks and spent three months in the hospital – a good deal of that was on life support.

    …Obamacare comes into the picture on multiple levels. First, when the law began to be implemented last year everybody’s insurance changed. My insurance has been incredible. It literally saved my life, has spent well into the six figures on my care, and actually fought hospitals (and Medicare CMS guidelines) to spend more on me. Even though it’s in the universe of “Cadillac” healthcare plans it’s just a normal PPO. There’s nothing particularly special about it.

    … I have two stroke specialists and a health insurance policy expert in my family so they had seen the changes coming long before they happened. Had I been an elderly patient responsible for my own care, or not had the extraordinary family connections that I have at my disposal, I would have been in serious trouble and undoubtedly come out of this much worse. Switching neurologists when I otherwise would have had to would have been catastrophic.

    …As awful as that is, the thing that I find particularly galling is one of the stealthy ways that Obamacare is “saving money.” We’ve all heard of the death panels and such. My survival was such a low percentage chance (we’re talking something like 1 percent – to give a new meaning to the Democratic Party’s favorite saying) I would have been the perfect candidate for such healthcare rationing.

    …Rather, the way I saw the cost-cutting is much more tangible. A major factor in my recovery has been physical, occupational, and speech therapy. Without those things I wouldn’t be able to roll over, put on my socks, or eat, among other things.

    …One of the things Obamacare is doing is forcing Medicare’s CMS to cut back on quite a lot of rehabilitation services. CMS, even though it is officially for Medicare and Medicaid, is something that governs reimbursement for all insurance. It sets prices for every single medical procedure and device, etc., etc. Hospitals’ ability to seek reimbursement for something, regardless of whether the insurance is private or not, is set by CMS. It is the Big Brother of healthcare. Even though CMS has been in place for a very long time it is the whip hand for Obamacare rationing.

    One of the things that changed for “new” stroke patients was limiting reimbursable therapy visits of all kinds for stroke patients to ten total (because my stokes had happened before the change I was grandfathered in, so to speak). Ten!

    I have had well north of 200 visits. At upwards of $250/visit for most therapy not many folks could sustain that for long without insurance (and remember, jobs go away when you’re in the hospital as long as I was). Had I been restricted to ten visits my best case scenario would have involved a home nurse. I wouldn’t have been able to find work. And had I been single (as many stroke patients are because they’re elderly and their spouse has passed) I would have become destitute, thus likely landing in the Medicaid system, eventually.

    As the anonymous other notes at the beginning, Obamacare has been sold with an army of lies by an army of liars. In the main the Praetorian Guard of this army of liars, the MFM, will defend the administration by claiming these fully intended consequences (indeed the law couldn’t have resulted in any other outcome) were “unintended consequences.” No doubt they’ll claim that’s “evidence” the GOP needs to quit trying to repeal the law and help Obama fix Obamacare to get rid of these unintended consequences.

    But the one thing they can’t lie about is that you never could keep your plan. No where is it more clear that the Democrats intended to scuttle your plan than their war on “cadillac” plans. Which as the stroke victim notes really aren’t anything special.

    They are exactly the kind of plan Obama promised you could keep. The kind of plan you’d like. The plan the author obviously loves because it literally saved his life.

    That’s the kind of plan Dingy Harry, Pelosi, and Obama admit they want to tax out of existence. Their previous promises were lies.

    Steve57 (ecac13)

  151. It appears my previous comment is stuck in moderation. So here’s a shorter version.

    While we are commenting on how the utterly corrupt Obama rewriting Obamacare unilaterally, it’s also time to revisit how the utterly corrupt Obama/Pelosi/Reid deliberately lied about how Obamacare was originally written.

    You could never keep your plan if you liked it. Here’s Dingy Harry explaining to the upset unions why they can’t keep their “Cadillac” plans.

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/08/harry-reid-to-unions-its-time-to-give-up-cadillac-plans-and-put-some-skin-in-the-game-video/

    This isn’t a glitch or an unintended consequence. Reid finds “Cadillac” plans unfair to other people. Unless your “Cadillac” plan is the result of a special carve out for Congress. He’s cool with that.

    More importantly Obamacare was written to tax these plans out of existence. If you like your plan, you can’t keep it because those plans “fair to other people” who the feds are going to force into unaffordable plans that suck.

    In fact everyone’s plan already has changed. So the plan you liked, that Obama said you could keep, is already gone. Here’s a first person account of why that is and why that matters.

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2013/08/obamacare-in-the-first-person.php

    Most of that is probably too subtle for the low information Obama voter. But even they ought to grasp that they all lied when they said you could keep your plan, since they’re now waging war to take away their union supporters’ plans.

    Steve57 (ecac13)

  152. *…those plans aren’t “fair to other people”

    Steve57 (ecac13)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.5632 secs.