Patterico's Pontifications

10/31/2013

Obama Lies on ObamaCare

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:26 am

The following clip is not for those with high blood pressure or heart problems. You’re about to see some world class lying:

Let me translate. The parts in parentheses are some of the parts he forgot to mention:

As I have always said, you can keep your plan under the law we passed (unless of course your company cancels the plan because of the law we passed), in which case you can just shop around in the marketplace (which nobody can access), and you’ll get a plan that has more benefits (many of which you don’t need), and which will be a better deal (with higher deductibles and premiums), and many people will get subsidies (paid for by taxpayers who already owe $17 trillion).

And if you tell only part of the story (and please ignore the fact that I didn’t mention any of the points in parentheses), you’re being GROSSLY MISLEADING!!!

So George W. Bush was a liar because he and everybody else in creation thought Saddam Hussein had WMD. But Mr. Barack “If You Like Your Plan You Can Keep It” Obama is not a liar. And he gets to call us “grossly misleading” if we point it out.

Is that about it, Big Media?

Anthony Weiner: I Wanted the NYT to Be Hard On Me, But They Weren’t

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:12 am

The silly headlines just write themselves, don’t they?

The latest installment in Anthony Weiner’s “It’s Everybody Else’s Fault” tour is a complaint that the New York Times went soft on him. Therefore, you see, the fact that he was still sexting women didn’t come out because the stupid reporter never came after him in an aggressive way.

The reporter is upset at the accusation. Why, he says, they knew they were getting a puff piece!

According to Sella, Van Meter is furious to be dismissed as “not tough enough” and that he was specifically chosen for the profile because Abedin liked Van Meter after spending time with him when he profiled Hillary and Chelsea Clinton.

“In that experience, I spent a lot of time around Huma — and she said to Anthony that if Jonathan Van Meter does it, that is the kind of writer I’m comfortable talking to,” he said. “I was chosen. They knew exactly what kind of story and what kind of writer they were going to get.”

The whole thing is at Politico (no links for bullies!), but for my money, this is the takeaway quote:

Van Meter has a warning for any reporter thinking of profiling Weiner in the future: Don’t.

“No one should interview Anthony again. He is the least reliable narrator of his own story that I have ever encountered,” Van Meter said. “And I’ve interviewed people in prison, who have chopped people up — prisoners who are charming and funny and smart. And well dressed.”

Heh. And now, in the spirit of the headline:

The Carnage In The Individual Market Is A Precursor To Employer Market

Filed under: General — JD @ 7:08 am

[guest post by JD]

And they know it.

That is why their newest attempts to spin the known effects of their regulations as just applying to a tiny fraction of the population, 5%, is not all doom and gloom. Besides, that is what the exchanges are for. And talking about losing your plan that you like is grossly misleading. Because they can buy new coverage on the exchanges, which covers things they don’t need, things they don’t want, at prices they can’t afford. Because they know better, and they are saving you from your own stupidity.

Now we find out that they KNOW, and have known, that this will have profound effects on the small business market, and the large business market. If you accept the admin’s own metrics, Avik’s rough estimate is that 93,000,000 could be effected in the first year.

They are effin’ liars. The real life disastrous consequences of this leftist utopian wet dream warrant a throw away line in a stump speech from them.

—-JD

Aaron Swartz Prosecutor and L.A. City Councilman SWATted

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 6:53 am

They’re both month-old cases, apparently, which are just coming to light now, at about the same time.

The news about the prosecutor comes in a story about the sentencing of a SWATter:

A 22-year-old Athol man was sentenced to serve 30 months in federal prison Tuesday on charges he made hoax emergency phone calls to law enforcement across the country claiming he was an armed fugitive holding hostages.

This is the second time Nathan Hanshaw has been sentenced for the practice known as “swatting.” It was revealed in court proceedings in U.S. District Court in Worcester that Mr. Hanshaw was sentenced to 11 months in prison for the same activity while he was a juvenile.

Apparently, this SWATter is helping the government find the person who SWATted the Swartz prosecutor:

Mr. Hanshaw has already helped the government by testifying in one case involving software used to conduct “swatting” calls. He is also helping officials investigating a “swatting” call received by a prosecutor in the U.S. attorney’s office in Massachusetts.

According to Mr. Bookbinder, that prosecutor was involved in the case against Aaron Swartz, who committed suicide in January while he awaited trial on charges he illegally downloaded millions of academic articles by using the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s computer network.

Mr. Hanshaw’s cooperation was one of the reasons the defense and prosecution agreed to a 30-month sentence.

Note to the geniuses in California who want this to be a misdemeanor unless someone is actually hurt: an 11-month sentence did not deter this guy from repeating his offense.

The exact identity of the prosecutor is not clear.

Meanwhile, we’re also learning that a Los Angeles City Council member was SWATted after trying to do something about SWATting:

Councilman Paul Koretz said he was targeted himself in April, after he asked the city to take action against swatting perpetrators. On April 10, he told the council, multiple police with guns drawn pounded on his front door demanding to be let in just as Koretz prepared to step into the shower.

“I held up my council badge and said, ‘Sorry, I’m not letting you in while I’m naked,’” Koretz said.

They insisted, so he got dressed and the police looked around and then left. But they returned a few minutes later, Koretz said, after receiving a second call that someone in his apartment was being held hostage in a closet.

“At that point, I called [Police Chief] Charlie Beck and said ‘Could you please ask your officers to leave?’” Koretz said.

Isn’t it nice that he has that relationship with the Chief that he can do that.

So prosecutors and city councilmen are victims, and nobody seems to be able to do anything. Lovely.

At least they didn’t get hit with a frivolous RICO suit by a violent convicted criminal for talking honestly about their experiences . . .

The roll call of the SWATted: an unnamed Aaron Swartz prosecutor; L.A. City Councilman Paul Koretz; Corey Feldman; Paris Hilton (again); Miley Cyrus (again); Khloe Kardashian and Lamar Odom; Anderson Cooper; Magic Johnson; Mike Rogers; Wolf Blitzer; Ted Lieu; Erik Rush; Ryan Seacrest; Russell Brand; Selena Gomez; Justin Timberlake; Rihanna; Sean Combs; Paris Hilton; Brian Krebs; Clint Eastwood; Chris Brown; the Jenners and Kardashians; Tom Cruise; Simon Cowell; Justin Bieber; Ashton Kutcher; Miley Cyrus; Aaron Walker; Erick Erickson; Mike Stack; and me.

ObamaCare Is Not Just A Website – Navigators (Corrected)

Filed under: General — JD @ 6:45 am

[guest post by JD]

There are also thousands and thousands of highly trained navigators to aid the citizenry in navigating this monstrosity. The list of organizations that are participating in the navigator programs reads like a Who’s Who of leftist activist organizations.

In Iowa, the Hawkeye people have countless groups willing to aid their fellow people of the corn. So many, in fact, that many navigators don’t know that they are navigators.

In New York, should you have issues, you can call your local cupcake and bakery shop, among countless others that had no idea it was their role to aid New Yorkers in navigating this failed program. The quotes from the Obama staffers are rich, apparently some people are just too stupid to know.

***Joshua correctly notes that the fatuous quotes were from a NY Dept of Health spokeshole, not an Obama staffer. Some might argue that is a distinction without a difference, but he is right in correcting this.

We are in the best of hands.

—JD

10/30/2013

Sebelius Testifies To Congress – Updated, Updated, Updated and More

Filed under: General — JD @ 9:38 am

[guest post by JD]

I don’t want to give misinformation to the American public.

The website has never crashed.

She also pushed the Admin lie that if you like your coverage, you can keep your coverage. Period. . Unless your copay increases by $5. Or your coinsurance increases by any amount. It doesn’t matter, it was an objective intentional knowing LIE from the moment it was first uttered by TOTUS.

Teh One of transitioning to single payer.

I loathe these liars. Their collectivist utopian power and control ideals are hurting real people. /spit

Update *** – Don’t do this to me.

Whatever

Sebelius the dishonest prevaricator also told us that healthcare.gov is now in beta testing, almost a full month after it went live. We are in the best of hands.

More

At this point, what difference does it make?!

GET OVER IT

Tapper – United States of uh, Whatever

Great exchange
Rep. Ellmers: You also brought up the issue, when you were in Kansas [as governor and health insurance commissioner], that you fought against discriminatory issues. Now I–you know, as far as the essential health benefits [of Obamacare], correct me if I’m wrong, do men not have to buy maternity coverage?
Sec. Sebelius: Policies will cover maternity coverage for young and healthy–
Rep. Ellmers: Including men?
Sec. Sebelius: Under 30-year-olds will have a choice also of a catastrophic plan which has no maternity coverage.
Rep. Ellmers: The men are required to purchase–
Sec. Sebelius: Well, an insurance policy has a series of benefits, whether you use them or not. And one of the benefits will be–
Rep. Ellmers: And that is why the health care premiums are increasing this high, because we’re forcing them to buy things they will never need. Thank you, madam chairman.
Sec. Sebelius: The individual policies cover families. Men often do need maternity coverage for their spouses and for their families, yes.
Rep. Ellmers: Single male, age 32, does not need maternity coverage. [Crosstalk] Rep. Ellmers: To the best of your knowledge has a man ever delivered a baby?
Sec. Sebelius: I don’t think so.
Chair: The gentlelady’s time has expired.
[Laughter]

—JD

10/29/2013

The Amazing Disappearing NBC Paragraph About Obama’s Health Care Lie — And Why Obama’s Lie Is So Infuriating

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 5:40 am

Commenters last night noticed that the blockbuster NBC story — showing Obama knew years ago that not everyone would be able to “keep” their plan as promised — had disappeared. It has now resurfaced at the same URL, but for a while, a key paragraph was missing:


That is the paragraph that showed that HHS was going out of its way to make it difficult for policies to be grandfathered. The paragraph seems to be restored now, but let’s quote that passage in normal readable font in case it mysteriously disappears again.

None of this should come as a shock to the Obama administration. The law states that policies in effect as of March 23, 2010 will be “grandfathered,” meaning consumers can keep those policies even though they don’t meet requirements of the new health care law. But the Department of Health and Human Services then wrote regulations that narrowed that provision, by saying that if any part of a policy was significantly changed since that date — the deductible, co-pay, or benefits, for example — the policy would not be grandfathered.

As Morgen Richmond points out, this is actually something the administration boasted about years ago:

Q: How will the regulation help me keep my coverage if I don’t want to choose a new private plan?

A: The regulation lets health plans that existed on March 23, 2010, when the Affordable Care Act became a law, to be “grandfathered” and thus be exempt from some of the new law’s provisions. But the rule sets firm limits on how much your current coverage can be changed before it loses its grandfathered status. Compared to their policies in effect on March 23, 2010, grandfathered plans:

*Cannot significantly cut or reduce benefits – for example, if your plan covers care for people with diseases such as diabetes, cystic fibrosis or HIV/AIDS, the plan cannot eliminate coverage for those diseases;

*Cannot raise co-insurance charges – for example, it increases your share of a hospital bill from 20% to 25%;

*Cannot significantly raise co-payment charges – for example, it raises its copayment from $30 to $50 over the next 2 years;

*Cannot significantly raise deductibles – for example, it raises a $1,000 deductible by $500 over the next 2 years;

*Cannot significantly lower employer contributions by more than 5 percent – for example, it increases its workers’ share of the premium from 15% to 25%;

*Cannot add or tighten an annual limit on what the insurer pays. Some insurers cap the amount that they will pay for covered services each year. If they want to retain their status as grandfathered plans, plans cannot tighten any annual dollar limit in place as of March 23, 2010. Moreover, plans that do not have an annual dollar limit cannot add a new one unless they are replacing a lifetime dollar limit with an annual dollar limit that is at least as high as the lifetime limit (which is more protective of high-cost enrollees).

It sounds wonderful, doesn’t it — except that refusing to grandfather anything that changes even slightly means you don’t actually get to keep your plan, as promised, because premiums go up, other things change, and any little change means you get kicked into the new whatever-Democrats-like plans where seniors are paying for childbirth coverage.

What is actually happening — and it was known this would happen — is that plans are disappearing because they do not comply with the new regulations. In some cases, they are being replaced by new and more expensive plans; we have seen numerous stories about this in recent days, and commenter Kevin M. provides the letter his wife received placing the blame for the cancellation of their less expensive policy squarely on ObamaCare:

Screen Shot 2013-10-29 at 5.25.33 AM

It’s OK, though: Kevin’s wife can purchase a new and more expensive plan.

Some others aren’t so lucky. Some other private plans are being cancelled outright. It’s OK — the people affected can simply go to the exchanges!

You know: the exchanges that don’t work.

So if you’re on a private plan and you are receiving expensive treatment for, say, cancer, or some other life-threatening condition, your insurance company may simply cancel your plan on the theory that the exchanges can pick up the slack — and then, when the government’s incompetence in building a simple ^%&&^*& website is not fixed in time, your treatment will be disrupted.

The government’s hubris in taking over health care insurance, and failing to provide an alternative, may actually put people’s health at risk if they don’t get this thing fixed.

And we are powerless to do anything about it. It’s enough to make you want to scream and storm the barricades — but that won’t do any good. So you just sit and fume. Because that’s what you do when government takes over and screws it up. You can’t go to the competition. You can’t vote them out because the system is rigged. So you sit and fume.

This is the problem with lack of competition, folks. There are no alternatives. That’s why it’s incredibly dangerous and stupid to turn over such an important part of the economy to the government. And make no mistake: that’s what we have done. (And by “we” I mean other people.)

I will now go scream into a pillow. What else can I do?

10/28/2013

Valerie Jarrett’s Blatant Lie: ObamaCare Is Not Forcing People Out of Their Health Plans

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 6:48 pm

Obama advisor Valerie Jarrett:

JD linked this earlier, but in light of Jarrett’s jaw-dropping dishonesty, I will link it again, and quote the beginning:

President Obama repeatedly assured Americans that after the Affordable Care Act became law, people who liked their health insurance would be able to keep it. But millions of Americans are getting or are about to get cancellation letters for their health insurance under Obamacare, say experts, and the Obama administration has known that for at least three years.

Four sources deeply involved in the Affordable Care Act tell NBC NEWS that 50 to 75 percent of the 14 million consumers who buy their insurance individually can expect to receive a “cancellation” letter or the equivalent over the next year because their existing policies don’t meet the standards mandated by the new health care law. One expert predicts that number could reach as high as 80 percent. And all say that many of those forced to buy pricier new policies will experience “sticker shock.”

Let’s watch this video yet again:

Nothing in our plan requires you to change what you have. Period. Yet millions are having their policies cancelled “because their existing policies don’t meet the standards mandated by the new health care law.”

And they knew this would happen. But they repeatedly said the opposite. Because they are liars.

But nothing beats the brazen brass balls of Valerie Jarrett, who continues to peddle the lie even as millions are getting those cancellation notices. With a giant “FACT” in capital letters right before the lie.

FACT: Valerie Jarrett and Barack Obama are liars. FACT: Big Media won’t tell you this. FACT: We will.

President Know Nothing

Filed under: General — JD @ 5:54 pm

[guest post by JD]

WaPo writers Dana Milbank and Jen Rubin skewer Teh One and his incompetent lying administration for the ever-growing list of things he was blissfully unaware of.

ObamaCare debacle
Benghazi security
IRS political targeting
Fast & Furious
Spying on Merkel etal
DOJ targeting journalists
Inset other topics that he only learned about by reading news accounts …

Rubin notes other things that he did know about, that just weren’t true.

Iranian fatwa
Blamed Benghazi on YouTube video
If you like your insurance, you can keep it
Nobody ever forced to negotiate budget in the face of potential shutdown
Insert other lies here …

To paraphrase from their conclusions, is it worse that he did not know about these things, or that he knew and either approved or did nothing?

—JD

If You Like Your Insurance, You Can Keep It. Period. Bald Faced Lie.

Filed under: General — JD @ 4:37 pm

[guest post by JD]

Lie. It was a calculated lie. Deliberate.

And the Obama Admin knew it. Anyone that had any sense knew it was not true. And the MFM let them get away with it.

Now, 4 years later, the MFM is acting shocked that they were lied to.

It seems the new spin/lie/meme is that they didn’t mean you could actually keep your policy/doctor/etc but you could keep their new more expensive plans with higher deductibles. Because they know better than you what kind of insurance coverage you want. Or need.

See Carney push their meme in this link, and follow up with Acosta’s question, which Carney goes to great length to avoid. And it is a great question. Acosta should expect to hear from the IRS any time now.

Sen Johnson is introducing a bill that would allow you to keep your plan if you like your plan. Period. How could Obama oppose his own words?!

Obama is a liar. He deliberately pushed this lie to paper over what they had to do to structure this train wreck. So he lied. He lied and he lied and he lied and he lied. And then he lied some more. It is really that simple.

—JD

Next Page »

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2983 secs.