whembly wrote:
Folks are impacted by this.

 Easy E wrote:
[Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Zathras wrote:

 Easy E wrote:

 Zathras wrote:
And speaking of WW2, here's something else to think about regarding Obamacare:

“Putting things in perspective:

March 21st 2010 to October 1 2013 is 3 years, 6 months, 10 days.

December 7, 1941 to May 8, 1945 is 3 years, 5 months, 1 day.

What this means is that in the time we were attacked at Pearl Harbor to the day Germany surrendered is not enough time for this progressive federal government to build a working webpage. Mobilization of millions, building tens of thousands of tanks, planes, jeeps, subs, cruisers, destroyers, torpedoes, millions upon millions of guns, bombs, ammo, etc. Turning the tide in North Africa, Invading Italy, D-Day, Battle of the Bulge, Race to Berlin – all while we were also fighting the Japanese in the Pacific!! And in that amount of time – this administration can’t build a working webpage.”

http://weaselzippers.us/2013/11/09/fun-fact-of-the-day-america-fought-wwii-quicker-than-obama-admin-could-build-healthcare-gov/

You are right. We should have mobilized our entire population and economy towards building Healthcare.Gov.

And the point flies right over your head. No we should not "mobilize our entire population and economy towards building Healthcare.Gov". Instead they should have put the best and brightest from sites like Amazon.com and Facebook working on this, instead of giving it to a Canadian based company with a track record of failures in a no-bid contract. Then again, if your plan in the first place was to have a faulty website so you can later implement what you really want, then what the Ineptocracy of Barack Obama has done with the ACA website is "working as intended".

No I got your point. I was just showing you how non-equivalent the situations were and therefore your entire point was meaningless.

I'm sure you would have been right there demanding that the Governement mobilize a "Total War" approach to implementing Healthcare.Gov.

On Tuesday, two prominent media personalities who support President Barack Obama’s overhaul of America’s health care system took to the airwaves to vent about their insurance plans which have been cancelled as a direct result of the Affordable Care Act.

In an appearance on Special Report on Tuesday, Fox News Channel contributor and Daily Beast editorial writer Kirsten Powers lashed out at the White House – and, by extension, her Democratic cohorts – for implying that her consumer choices were poorly informed and insufficiently focused on the collective good.

“My blood pressure goes up every time they say that they’re protecting us from substandard health insurance plans,” Powers told Bret Baier. “There is nothing to support what they’re saying.”

“I have talked to about how I’m losing my health insurance,” she continued. “If I want to keep the same health insurance, it’s going to cost twice as much. There’s nothing substandard about my plan.”

“All of the things they say that are not in my plan are in my plan,” Powers lamented. “All of the things they have listed — there’s no explanation for doubling my premiums other than the fact that it’s subsidizing other people. They need to be honest about that.”

Powers, a committed Democrat, once supported the aims of the ACA, if not every mean designed to achieve a noble end. Today, it would seem, she is wavering on the virtue of that end as well.

Powers is in good company. On CNN’s The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer on Tuesday, former Daily Beast columnist David Frum hijacked a conversation about President Bill Clinton’s shocking admonition of President Barack Obama to discuss his own cancelled health plan.

“I’m pulling rank,” Frum informed his fellow panel guests, “because I’m one of those who has had his plan canceled.”

“I still have, but will not very much longer have, a plan in the District of Columbia, covered my wife and my children, which is canceled,” he reported. “I can buy on the exchange a plan that will cost $200 a month more and have a higher deductible. I can’t get back my old plan unless, as Ron [Brownstein] says, the administration drops the element of the law that requires the coverage of everybody.”

“That’s why my coverage went up is because every insurer must now cover everybody,” Frum continued. “I think President Clinton should have the honesty to defend that.”

Frum has spent the better part of the last two years arguing in print for ways which would make the ACA more palatable to Republicans because, in his estimation, the law as it was written was going to be an intractable feature of modern life.

While he appears less frustrated by the philosophical notion that people like himself should subsidize the care of others in a broader, government-administered health care system, he is not above expressing his frustration over the fact that he’s being asked to pay for it.

It turns out that media personalities, like virtually anyone else, bristles at being lectured to on the shortsightedness of their consumer choices by those who perceive themselves to be their intellectual superiors.

Some on the right will succumb to the temptation to indulge in schadenfreude. They should not. Powers and Frum’s trials, like those of millions of average Americans who are also losing their health plans, are tragedies – unnecessary, manufactured, and devastating. They and their families may suffer unduly as a result of poorly envisioned and disastrously executed legislation.

Now that they recognize that their hardship is unnecessary, perhaps they will soon recognize that there is no easy fix for their predicament and the identical predicaments of millions of others like them. Maybe they will also soon realize that it is time to start fresh.

Ann Coulter wrote:TO SPEAK TO A NIGERIAN PRINCE ABOUT YOUR HEALTH CARE, PRESS '1' NOW

http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2013-11-13.html

 Zathras wrote:

Evidently you didn't get my point because you missed it completely. My point is, with the talent available to this administration, it shouldn't take them longer than it took to defeat 2/3rds of the Axis powers (and from the looks of it the last 1/3 as well) to do such a trivial task as designing and implementing a web site, making it fully functional, secure and ready for as many people to access it as possible for something as important as their healthcare needs. As I said before they should have had the best and brightest working on this. People here in America from sites like Facebook and Amazon.com with a track record of running websites that have millions of people around the world accessing their websites without crashing them, not some company based in Canada with a proven track record of failures.

 Easy E wrote:
I agree that maybe their choic eof contract wasn't great, but remember Federal law requires lowest-bidder in most cases. Did Amazon or Facebook put in a bid? I honestly don't know. However, I'm pretty sure if they did it wasn't the lowest.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
I agree that maybe their choic eof contract wasn't great, but remember Federal law requires lowest-bidder in most cases. Did Amazon or Facebook put in a bid? I honestly don't know. However, I'm pretty sure if they did it wasn't the lowest.

For the ACA website? It was a no-bid contract that went to a firm run by Michelle Obama's college room mate **awaits for the same rage as Cheney/Halliburton**

 Easy E wrote:
I agree that maybe their choice of contract wasn't great, but remember Federal law requires lowest-bidder in most cases. Did Amazon or Facebook put in a bid? I honestly don't know. However, I'm pretty sure if they did it wasn't the lowest.

 Easy E wrote:
As for the WWII analogy.... well.... it doesn't bolster your case at all. By your logic, it shouldn't have taken us 8 years to get a man on the moon since we beat the Axis in less time. Plus, it is pretty obvious that getting Healthcare.Gov up and running was not a National effort since (something like) 25 states didn't bother setting-up exchanges or expanding Medicaid like they were suppose to. Did 25 states decided not to raise troops or manufacutre war material during WWII?

 Frazzled wrote:
My barber has been trying to get on for three weeks, with no success.

 Frazzled wrote:
Seriously, how can this be your signature piece of legislation and you feth it up THIS BAD???

 whembly wrote:
Whoa...

Insurance companies are saying Obama thru them under the bus:


Nothing more then an attempt to shift the blame to the insurance company and delaying that requirement until after 2014 is a blatant tactic to blunt the storm during the '14 election season.

Relapse wrote:
Here's hoping the voters have at least half a brain and enough foresight to see how Obamacare has already hurt people, and is most likely going to roll their asses into the mud.

Facing growing opposition from his own party, President Obama today proposed a fix to a key component of his signature health care law, allowing Americans who are losing their coverage because of the Affordable Care Act to keep their plans for up to a year before being forced into coverage that meets the new standards.

"The bottom line is insurers can extend current plans, that would otherwise be canceled, into 2014," the president said in a hastily announced statement in the White House briefing room. "And Americans whose plans have been canceled can choose to re-enroll in the same kind of plan."

Six weeks into the botched rollout of the HealthCare.gov, the president admitted, "we fumbled the rollout on this health care law."

"We should have done a better job of getting that right on day one," he said.

Obama added, "I am confident that by the time we look back on this next year, that people are going to say, 'This is working well, and it's helping a lot of people.'"

Whether the president can make such an administrative fix without legislative involvement is unclear.

The president took responsibility as he sought to ease the concerns of people whose health care plans were canceled because they did not meet the new, higher standards of the law.

READ: 5 Signs Obama's Second Term Is In Serious Trouble

In selling the Affordable Care Act to the U.S. public, the president often used the same refrain: "If you like your plan, you can keep your plan."

"There is no doubt that the way I put that forward unequivocally ended up not being accurate," he said today. "It was not because of my intention not to deliver on that commitment and that promise.

"My expectation was that for 98 percent of the American people, either it genuinely wouldn't change at all, or they'd be pleasantly surprised with the options in the marketplace and that the grandfather clause would cover the rest," he said. "That proved not to be the case. And that's on me."

READ: The Strangest Ads to Promote Obamacare Sign-Ups

Today's announcement that consumers in the individual market will be able to keep their existing plans for another year comes amid growing opposition from Democrats over the canceled insurance policies, which the president had repeatedly said consumers could keep.

Lawmakers from both parties are gathering support for legislation that would make good on the president's promise that people who wanted to keep their plans could do so.

With millions of consumers receiving cancellation notices, however, the president has come under fire for his misleading comments.

Americans who purchase insurance on their own, a small portion of the population, might be forced to switch plans because their providers have made changes that don't meet the stiffer standards established under the Affordable Care Act.

Obama first apologized last week to Americans who are losing the health care coverage he said they could keep.

It also comes a day after the White House announced that only 26,794 people, a far smaller number than expected, successfully chose a health insurance plan using the glitch-plagued Healthcare.gov website in its first month.

In total, 106,185 people signed up for health insurance in October, and most of those individuals -- 79,391 -- used the 15 state-run websites, not the troubled federal site, the White House said Wednesday.

Joe Schoffstall wrote:Second O’Keefe video exposes more Obamacare Navigator’s telling people to commit fraud

http://capitolcityproject.com/second-okeefe-video-exposes-more-obamacare-navigators-telling-people-to-commit-fraud-and-deceit

 Alfndrate wrote:
Okay, so I just saw this today:
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/obama-announces-insured-health-plans-year/story?id=20888098

Spoiler:

Facing growing opposition from his own party, President Obama today proposed a fix to a key component of his signature health care law, allowing Americans who are losing their coverage because of the Affordable Care Act to keep their plans for up to a year before being forced into coverage that meets the new standards.

"The bottom line is insurers can extend current plans, that would otherwise be canceled, into 2014," the president said in a hastily announced statement in the White House briefing room. "And Americans whose plans have been canceled can choose to re-enroll in the same kind of plan."

Six weeks into the botched rollout of the HealthCare.gov, the president admitted, "we fumbled the rollout on this health care law."

"We should have done a better job of getting that right on day one," he said.

Obama added, "I am confident that by the time we look back on this next year, that people are going to say, 'This is working well, and it's helping a lot of people.'"

Whether the president can make such an administrative fix without legislative involvement is unclear.

The president took responsibility as he sought to ease the concerns of people whose health care plans were canceled because they did not meet the new, higher standards of the law.

READ: 5 Signs Obama's Second Term Is In Serious Trouble

In selling the Affordable Care Act to the U.S. public, the president often used the same refrain: "If you like your plan, you can keep your plan."

"There is no doubt that the way I put that forward unequivocally ended up not being accurate," he said today. "It was not because of my intention not to deliver on that commitment and that promise.

"My expectation was that for 98 percent of the American people, either it genuinely wouldn't change at all, or they'd be pleasantly surprised with the options in the marketplace and that the grandfather clause would cover the rest," he said. "That proved not to be the case. And that's on me."

READ: The Strangest Ads to Promote Obamacare Sign-Ups

Today's announcement that consumers in the individual market will be able to keep their existing plans for another year comes amid growing opposition from Democrats over the canceled insurance policies, which the president had repeatedly said consumers could keep.

Lawmakers from both parties are gathering support for legislation that would make good on the president's promise that people who wanted to keep their plans could do so.

With millions of consumers receiving cancellation notices, however, the president has come under fire for his misleading comments.

Americans who purchase insurance on their own, a small portion of the population, might be forced to switch plans because their providers have made changes that don't meet the stiffer standards established under the Affordable Care Act.

Obama first apologized last week to Americans who are losing the health care coverage he said they could keep.

It also comes a day after the White House announced that only 26,794 people, a far smaller number than expected, successfully chose a health insurance plan using the glitch-plagued Healthcare.gov website in its first month.

In total, 106,185 people signed up for health insurance in October, and most of those individuals -- 79,391 -- used the 15 state-run websites, not the troubled federal site, the White House said Wednesday.

Is the bolded part not part of the reason why Obama called the Republicans terrorists?

Wtf, did I miss something?

 Breotan wrote:
And the hits just keep on coming...

Joe Schoffstall wrote:Second O’Keefe video exposes more Obamacare Navigator’s telling people to commit fraud

http://capitolcityproject.com/second-okeefe-video-exposes-more-obamacare-navigators-telling-people-to-commit-fraud-and-deceit

 whembly wrote:
Was the video edited to the point that makes the navigators look bad?

 whembly wrote:
Was the video edited to the point that makes the navigators look bad?

 sebster wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Was the video edited to the point that makes the navigators look bad?

No, I'm sure O'Keefe's learnt his lesson, that lying only gets you fame, money and an insider position within a major political party... he'd never dare do anything like deceitfully edit a video ever again.