Thread: Do you support Obama Care ?

Originally Posted by boopster

how about his scenario (fictitious) - elected official spending a working vacation on a tropical island vows that he is in direct contact with his office and also the oval office 24/7. He claims that while on this vacation he is spending all his time pleasing his constituents. He is having s3x with his wife, his girlfriend and his mistress who all live in his district. He has been working so hard that while pleasing them he has thrown out his back and will now have to claim workman's comp since this occurred while diligently at work. Since he believes in the honor system, then no proof will be necessary except perhaps the smile on the faces of his wife, his girlfriend and his mistress?

jfk ?

John Boehner FB Status :

If President Obama gets his way, big software companies, big banks, and big government contractors will be exempt from ObamaCare next year.

But young people, single parents, and families of four – they’ll be taxed.

As a matter of fairness, next week the House will vote to delay both the ObamaCare employer mandate and the ObamaCare individual mandate. If big businesses get an exemption from this train wreck of a law, the American people should too..

Originally Posted by boopster

voting on laws is not based on knowledge but on who tells you that you have to vote it in and it gets done because the person voting on it is exempt and therefore has no meaning to them because they are superior (and who wants to waste their time reading thousands of pages describing ...

Not JUST Obamacare ... did you read where the State of Florida banned all computers and and smart phones because a badly writen bill was passed by people who didn't read nor understand WHAT they passed.

http://www.bigbigforums.com/news-inf...eads-bill.html

Like the "honor system" for food stamps, welfare, etc.? Yeah, good idea. [sarc\]

Change: Grocery store chain axes health benefits for part-timers due to Obamacare
By Doug Powers • July 11, 2013 12:51 PM

The final nails are now being driven into the coffin of President Obama’s “if you like your existing plan you can keep it” promise. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBfUbLrW4RM

From the Buffalo News: http://www.buffalonews.com/apps/pbcs...130719892/1003

Et tu, Wegmans?

The Rochester-based grocer that has been continually lauded for providing health insurance to its part-time workers will no longer offer that benefit.

Until recently, the company voluntarily offered health insurance to employees who worked 20 hours per week or more. Companies are required by law to offer health insurance only to full-time employees who work 30 hours or more per week.

Several Wegmans employees confirmed part-time health benefits had been cut and said the company said the decision was related to changes brought about by the Affordable Care Act.

But wait, thousands of people losing their employer-provided coverage is good news, or something:

However, part-time employees may actually benefit from Wegmans’ decision, according to Brian Murphy, a partner at Lawley Benefits Group, an insurance brokerage firm in Buffalo.

“If you have an employee that qualifies for subsidized coverage, they might be better off going with that than a limited part-time benefit,” Murphy said.

According to the story, Wegman’s employs over 4,300 part-timers in the Buffalo-Niagra region that now might have to have taxpayers subsidize their health care, and that’s a “win-win”? Now if only Wegman’s would fire all of their part-timers so they’d be forced to run to the government for their every need would these people reap the full benefit of the Obama economy.

Obamacare may result in a shortage of medical doctors, but it is creating an abundance of spin doctors.



**Written by Doug Powers
http://michellemalkin.com/2013/07/11...-to-obamacare/

Comedy night at HHS: Obamacare will cover injuries sustained from Sharknado
By Doug Powers • July 13, 2013 12:10 PM

A side-by-side comparison of Sharknado and Obamacare finds that Sharknado was more competently written and more people actually read it before it got the green light.

Kathleen Sebelius ✔ @Sebelius

@Buzzfeed, in 2014, #Sharknado injuries will be covered as a pre-existing condition under #Obamacare
http://bit.ly/18dO6JC

2:12 PM - 12 Jul 2013

9 Harsh Political Realities Of Sharknado

By BuzzFeedBenny @bennyjohnson http://t.co/phdwIWvHL2

You have been warned.
BuzzFeed @BuzzFeed

Sebelius was referring to the low rated disaster has been widely mocked. Ditto for Sharknado.

We know the government believes Sharknado could never happen in real life because the EPA said the freakstorm has no connection to global warming. http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-...ange-sharknado

**Written by Doug Powers http://michellemalkin.com/2013/07/13...rom-sharknado/

comments

Well, allrighty then. So, obamacare is somehow compared to that movie? I guess I am dense today. All I know is, I am half brain-dead form Zimmerman overkill and I'm not sure I will ever recover. Every once in a while, I turn on the TV just in case there is OTHER news of interest out there. Apparently there isn't. That trial is the "look! a squirrell!" tactic of the month. What else is going on? Did they pass immigration reform on Friday at midnight? Did North Korea launch another missile? Is Egypt still standing? Did anyone even know that we can go back to using regular light bulbs again? I have had it!!! Watching TV, you would think the only thing going on in the world is a trial where some "white" guy killed an "innocent little black kid". I know this country has gone off the rails, but I refuse to go with it!!!

..

O.K. I'll bite! What is a Sharknado?

..

A supremely bad made-for-Syfy movie that aired on Thursday night. A hurricane "caused by global warming" hits L.A., the city floods 20 miles inland and sharks start munching on Angelenos, then the turbulent weather spawns tornadoes filled with angry flying hungry sharks. It was epic.

..

It was terrifyingly bad - so bad that it was addictive to watch and see how much worse it could get - it surpassed even my threshold for bad movies - now, if Nancy Pelosi and all the house and senate democrats were shown to be trapped in LA during this storm and being chowed down on by a shark frenzy - A+ and a cult classic for the ages lol

Cost Of Obamacare Reaches $2.6 Trillion,
Democrats Originally Claimed $940 Billion In 2010
10 hours ago



In 2010 then-North Dakota Senator Kent Conrad, the self-styled Democrat “budget hawk,” was busy attacking state legislators for supposedly exaggerating the cost of Obamacare.

In 2011 Conrad tried to claim that repealing Obamacare would add $1.5 trillion to the national debt because the bill, he claimed, reduced the deficit.

In 2012 candidate Heidi Heitkamp who describes Conrad has her mentor and replaced him in the US Senate told a crowd of voters in Minot that Obamacare is actually a “budget saver.”

“If you look at the entire bill, and we can pull out CBO numbers, it actually is a budget saver,” she claimed in response to a question from an audience member. “It actually reduces the deficit. Yeah, and so we’ll get you those numbers.”

Yet, with each new review of Obamacare, the price tag for taxpayers keeps going up. Democrats claimed the cost was $940 million for the first decade. That cost is now at $2.6 trillion: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/...de_648413.html

“President Obama promised a joint session of Congress in 2009 to spend $900 billion over ten years on his health care law: ‘Now, add it all up, and the plan that I’m proposing will cost around $900 billion over 10 years.’ Adding up all the different spending provisions in the health care law, however, (including closing the Medicare ‘donut hole,’ implementation costs, and other spending) total gross spending over the FY 2010–19 period is about $1.4 trillion, based on CBO estimates,” the Senate Budget Committee Republican staff explains. “And most of the major spending provisions in the law do not even take effect until 2014. Congressional Democrats delayed these provisions in order to show only six years of spending under the plan in the original 10-year budget window (from FY2010-19) used by CBO at the time the law was enacted. Therefore, the original estimate concealed the fact that most of the law’s spending only doesn’t even begin until four years into the 10-year window. A Senate Budget Committee analysis (based on CBO estimates and growth rates) finds that that total spending under the law will amount to at least $2.6 trillion over a true 10-year period (from FY2014–23)—not $900 billion, as President Obama originally promised.”

You almost get the idea that Democrats worked hard to hide the cost of Obamacare from the taxpayers.

And it’s not just the cost of Obamacare in tax dollars either. The law is driving up the cost of premiums Americans pay as well.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapoth...by-88-percent/


http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/cos...ntent=FaceBook

Dueling Headlines; ‘Are you gonna believe Jay Carney or your lying eyes’ edition
By Doug Powers • July 16, 2013 06:55 PM

Getting right to it, here’s headline #1 today from The Hill: http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch...#ixzz2ZElyb3oi




Very funny! Just another day at the White House Improv.

The dueling headline comes from the Wall Street Journal two days ago:




We’ll give the above WSJ headline a backup in this duel, which comes from Investors Business Daily yesterday: http://news.investors.com/071513-663...e-for-many.htm




As usual, the only thing “belied by the facts” at a Jay Carney presser is… Jay Carney.

Click the link to roll tape on the Dodge-O-Tron at CNS News: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/whit...ime-employment



Did he say "belie" or "we lie"?




**Written by Doug Powers http://michellemalkin.com/2013/07/16...-eyes-edition/

House votes to delay ObamaCare mandates
Published July 17, 2013

The House voted Wednesday to delay key components of ObamaCare, in a bid by emboldened Republicans to chip away at the law after the administration acknowledged new problems with its implementation.

Republican leaders swiftly organized the votes after the administration, in early July, said it would delay until 2015 a requirement that businesses with 50 or more workers provide insurance coverage or pay a penalty.

The House voted 264-161 for a measure that would do exactly that. But they also voted 251-174 for a measure that would delay the individual mandate -- the requirement on individuals to buy health insurance -- for a year as well.

Republicans argue that both delays are necessary. While they endorsed the delay for businesses, House Speaker John Boehner and other GOP lawmakers say it's unfair to deny everyone else a similar reprieve.

"It is not fair that the president is choosing to protect big business from ObamaCare, but not hardworking American taxpayers," Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., said on the House floor ahead of the vote.

She also said the delay was an admission that "this is a trainwreck, and it is not ready for prime-time."

But Democrats sharply disagreed, and accused Republicans of wasting time with yet another set of votes against the health care law. Rep. Joseph Crowley, D-N.Y., said Republicans weren't simply trying to delay the requirements. "It is their intention to destroy the Affordable Care Act ... to do away with it, to annihilate it entirely," Crowley said.

President Obama has already threatened to veto the bills.

The votes marked the 38th time the GOP majority has tried to eliminate, defund or scale back the program since Republicans took control of the House in January 2011.

It is unlikely the Democrat-controlled Senate will advance the latest bills. However, Republicans sense an opening to potentially erode the law, and the administration was planning to step up its public defense of the law in response.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said Obama on Thursday will draw attention to the 8.5 million consumers who have received an average consumer rebate of about $100. Carney also highlighted reports that some states are already anticipating lower premiums under the Affordable Care Act.

"Competition and transparency in the marketplaces, plus the hard effort by those committed to making the law work, are leading to affordable, new and better choices for families," Carney said.

The goal of the health care law was to provide coverage to nearly 50 million Americans without health insurance in a massive overhaul of the current system. Just months before enforcement, the Obama administration announced a one-year delay in the employer mandate, citing businesses' concerns about the reporting requirements.

"We have heard concerns about the complexity of the requirements and the need for more time to implement them effectively," Treasury Assistant Secretary Mark Mazur said in a blog post. "We have listened to your feedback, and we are taking action."

Republicans said that was fresh evidence that the law is unworkable and should be repealed. The GOP also accused the president of favoring businesses over average Americans, who will still be required to carry health insurance starting next Jan. 1 or risk fines.

In an example of strange political bedfellows, Republicans highlighted a letter from three unions to congressional Democratic leaders criticizing the health care law and demanding that the administration address problems stemming from the law.

Specifically, the unions -- International Brotherhood of Teamsters, the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union and UNITE-HERE -- complained that the law's requirements have created an incentive for employers to cut workers' hours to avoid providing health care coverage.

The law created a new definition of full-time workers, those putting in 30 hours or more.

"Time is running out: Congress wrote this law; we voted for you. We have a problem; you need to fix it. The unintended consequences of the ACA (Affordable Care Act) are severe. Perverse incentives are already creating nightmare scenarios," the union leaders wrote.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...#ixzz2ZMVwbzpg