First, apologies to my readers for the diversion from the usual fare, but I’ll point out that this entry is covered under the masthead in the category of “recent news” and there’s a relevant WUWT category.
Since like many of you, I’ve been forced to sign a document (at my radio station where I employed part-time) that confirms I’ve been given another document that advises me of my Obamacare rights, and of course being in tune to the news, I’ve been wondering if the claims about the Obamacare websites are as bad as claimed.
I read an article in the Pittsburgh Tribune “Sebelius visit fails to reassure as health care website glitches persist” that said:
Sebelius, who is making similar trips to cities across the country to spread the word about the website, told the audience of about 100 people that Healthcare.gov was “open for business.”
“Believe me, we had some early glitches,” said Sebelius, who was introduced by Rooney, a backer of the law. “But it’s getting better every day.”
So, I decided to find out myself. I went to http://healthcare.gov and chose my state, California. What follows is a record of what I actually got. I never made it past step 1:
Try it yourself: https://coveredca.com/shopandcompare/
NOTE: To be accurate, the website security certificate will work if the “www” is used as prefix, but not the link above sans www. By following the link from the Tribune article, with no other changes on my part, I ended up with the sans “www” connection, which they didn’t get a proper security certificate for. One wonders how many other “glitches” exist in basic security on these websites.
Even when you go in with the “www” there are problems. In Firefox I get this:
UPDATE: Reader Ben points out that it gets a failing grade from an SSL grading service, SSL Labs:
Source: https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html?d=coveredca.com
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“””””””…….Ed_B says:
October 13, 2013 at 6:08 am
“If you have no right to select your own health are then what individual right do you have?”
Amazing statement.. as if someone with no means, or with pre existing conditions have any right to select.. Ha!! Go die!…….””””””
Stop exaggerating. NOBODY needing medical attention can be turned away from a licensed health care facility (like the local hospital emergency room), in the USA. Millions of people in the USA (and from outside the USA), use the emergency room as their FREE walk in medical provider.
MrX says:
MrX says:
“It’s true. One third to two thirds go to insurance companies. It does not go to any medical services.”
Things are not “true” because you assert that they are true. I still question your assertion that American medical costs are ≈30X – ≈60X higher than in Canada.
You also say that “…it’s US citizens that cross over to Canada.”
That may be true, I don’t know. But I question it because as you say, all Canadians are covered by a national health plan. That would mean that everyone has a card of some sort, no? How would U.S. citizens get a Canadian medical card?
I do know that Canadians cross the border to get American medical treatment, because I have relatives living in Ohio who tell me they have met such persons. Why would they cross over, if medical care is better in Canada?
@dbstealey – Just ask him about Danny Williams.
richardscourtney says:
October 14, 2013 at 1:58 pm
Fascism, ie revolutionary national socialism, is more of a left-wing than right-wing doctrine. All totalitarian, eg communist, & statist, ie socialist, movements are left-wing. Mussolini started out as a socialist.
Right-wing means conservative,which in Europe implies support for the established order, & in the US is more Whiggish than Tory, ie support for classical liberalism, but also in its social variant values traditional religion, with toleration rather than an established, state-supported church, over worship of the state.
Even authoritarian fascism, as in Franco’s Spain & some Latin American countries, means more state control of people’s lives & the national economy than in free market societies. Those countries don’t fit neatly along the left-center-right spectrum because they were also conservative in according the Catholic Church power. Red China is now more of a fascist than communist state, but still authoritarian if no longer totalitarian.
As you may know, the terms “left” & “right” originate in the French Revolution, early in which members of the National Assembly divided into supporters of the king to the president’s right & supporters of the revolution to his left. The European conception of conservative is why Hayek wrote that he was “not a conservative”, although of course by 20th century standards he was, as a proponent of personal liberty & responsibility against the growing oppressive power of the state in both putative democracies & dictatorships.
I know you find comparisons of communism, fascism & socialism offensive, for which I apologize, but history & indeed human nature argue for the similarities.
Here is a discussion of the likely disastrous results in Tea Party stupidity about finance and Obamacare bring about a US default. Do these people really think that international finance is the equivalent of household thrift, It is not and trying to equate teh two can bring about critical consequences.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/jeremy-warner/10378666/The-sun-is-setting-on-dollar-supremacy-and-with-it-American-power.html
The sun is setting on dollar supremacy, and with it, American power
======================
The consequent stronger euro and pound would have powerfully deflationary consequences for Europe. Internal demand in the US would also collapse as a result of the wrenching fiscal squeeze that would result from federal government attempts to match expenditures with tax revenues
======================
milodonharlani:
At October 14, 2013 at 2:21 pm you say to me
No, I do not “find them offensive”: they ARE offensive. Communism, fasc1sm and socialism are very different.
I was objecting to the ludicrous assertion that the extreme right-wing political philosophy of fasc1sm is a description of the UK’s NHS. It is not.
Indeed, such an assertion from an American is especially egregious because it required the UK to conduct a nice piece of espionage to ensure that Japan bombed Pearl Harbour instead of Hong Kong to force the US to join the UK in a war against fasc1sm.
But this thread is supposed to be about the US healthcare system and especially problems with its implementation. It is not about the British NHS and insults of the British by Americans.
Richard
The province of Alberta where the population has just gone pass four million.
http://globalnews.ca/news/865772/albertas-population-tops-four-million/
…and where 45% of the budget is being spent on health care.
$17.1 Billion or $47 million per day.
http://www.health.alberta.ca/about/health-funding.html
There might be specific scenarios where an American will come to Canada. Perhaps to the Cambie Clinic. http://www.csc-surgery.com/
The overwhelming trend is for Canadians to go to the US. That includes politicians. Anyone who says otherwise is, less than informed on this topic.
and from what I’m reading lately, Mexico is becoming popular, especially for dental work.
Sasja L says:
“Well, as you defend insurance companies in a way that indicates that you actually are involved…”
You can’t win your argument with logic, so you hit below the belt. Typical leftist. milodonharlani wrote a few comments up-thread: “I’m not in the insurance business. What a ludicrous suggestion.” So now you are calling him a liar, just to try and win a debate point? Despicable.
You write: “It all begins with one of the mortal sins – Greed”
Speaking of sins, there is also the sin of Envy, which clearly afflicts you. You just cannot stand the thought that someone else is earning more than you. You’re jealous. It doesn’t matter if it is an insurance company or an oil company. You don’t want them to have what they earn. That comes across loud and clear. As milodonharlani points out: Plainly you’re not in favor of political liberty & private enterprise. Political & economic freedom are flip sides of the same coin.
I’ve met a number of Scandanavian leftists over the years, and they all have the same problem: envy of someone else’s successful capitalism. They want the government to take that money away, and hand it out to more “deserving” recipients.
The problem is that government bureaucrats are not nearly as smart as a good businessman. It is even worse when they are dealing with other folks’ money. So to show you how it feels, I propose that you give a thousand dollars a month to Anthony’s site. Just pretend that I am the bureaucrat, and that I think Anthony is more deserving of your money than you are.
Really, what’s the difference between that, and what you are proposing? If you could, you would take away most of the profits of insurance companies. Wouldn’t you?
My bad … above I wrote:
“Sebelius appeared on leftwing “comedian” (is there any other type?) Bill Maher’s TV show.”
But it was actually on the Jon Stewart show …. but who can tell the difference, anyway?
Leftwing “comedians” are fungible, like dollar bills … they are pretty much interchangeable.
“””””……climatereason says:
October 13, 2013 at 9:34 am
Db Stealey said;
‘Obamacare is a disaster. Americans do not want it. Poll after poll has shown that.’
Forgive me, but you collectively voted for a President that consistently endorsed it and it has democratically passed through the Houses and been validated by the Supreme court. We here in the UK-and no doubt around the world-are baffled that the Republicans appear to be holding the President to ransom over this issue by withholding the budget and delaying the Debt ceiling discussions……..”””””
Forgive ME climatereason, but you clearly have NO idea, how OUR system of government works.
American citizens, by a very clear majority, following the passage of obummercare, and his subsequent re-election, freely voted a majority of Republican members to the House of Representatives, into office with the express charter to repeal that piece of crap, that the vast majority of US citizens are vehemently opposed to.
As for the “Republicans” WITHHOLDING the budget; be advised that as we come to the close of Pres Obama’s sixth year in office, as President of the United States of America; he has for the sixth year in a row FAILED to submit ANY budget to the Congress for approval. How could the Republicans “withhold”, what has never been submitted to them for their perusal ?
As for delaying debt ceiling discussions; that subject has not yet arisen for discussion. What IS being considered is approval of a revolving credit card to allow the President’s administration to continue spending money, without ever placing ANY budget before the Congress.
There is plenty of money coming into the Federal treasury, to pay EVERY obligation of the Federal government, and the USA as it comes due for payment; That also includes “entitlements” like Social Security, and Medicare that people have already paid in for, and others are still paying into to provide those funds.
Default on the debt, or redemption of bonds that come due, is simply impossible; funds for that are already available, and committed to those obligations. The problem is US media prima donnas, are brain dead, and simply can’t explain the simple truth to the people, including folks like YOU.
And raising the debt ceiling, has nothing whatsoever to do with paying existing obligations; they are already provided for; the debt ceiling, raise is simply a brand new credit card for the Democratic administration to go on a future spending spree, like a drunken sailor; well with apologies to drunken sailors; they at least will eventually sober up. The current administration, and the Senate (both sides) never will sober up.
richardscourtney says:
October 14, 2013 at 2:45 pm
I didn’t compare the NHS with fascism, but it is an historical fact that fascism, communism & other forms of socialism all have the same roots. The British Fabian version is less revolutionary, but is for that reason more dangerous in the long run, as it has survived better than its more totalitarian sisters. The modern Labour Party has shed some of its Marxism since Blair, but as you would know better than I, often grudgingly. I will grant you that Soviet agent Wilson came to power only because Khrushchev bumped off the more moderate Gaitskell.
The US was already in the war against fascism before Pearl Harbor. FDR just wasn’t able to declare it openly until after Pearl Harbor, for which attack his actions were more responsible than the British espionage which you cite. America had good reason to be isolationist until 1941, but Britain would have been starved into submission before our entry into the war without our food, fuel, materiel, Lend Lease ships, planes, vehicles & more covert assistance.
If you want examples of aiding fascism before WWII, look no further than Britain’s acquiescence to Hitler in Czechoslovakia. That was perpetrated by a Tory PM, but the British Left were anti-war pacifists until Hitler attacked Stalin. Another Tory, Churchill, was one of the few major political figures calling for rearmament & resistance, & he was notably kept out of the government.
US sailors, merchant mariners & volunteer fliers were already fighting & dying to save Britain in 1940. Our tanks & planes saved your bacon in North Africa. We were repairing your carriers & other capital ships in our yards, leaving non-LL aircraft on the Canadian border & doing all we could without the Democrats being voted out of office. Reinstating the draft in 1939 passed by a single vote, cast by a member of Congress who was retiring.
So I wouldn’t go around castigating Americans for not immediately jumping into another European war, given this record on both sides of the Atlantic. Regret the digressions, too. Although started by others, we responded & kept them going. As you know, I greatly respect your long commitment & contributions to rescuing science & public policy from its corrupters.
Obamacare is just a prelude to what is coming next, according to Agora Financial’s research.
[Sorry that it is a commercial, but the info seems credible given current events.]
Her Health Care was… Affordable.
http://t.co/2SmcoZ9JPg
“Former NHS director dies after operation is cancelled four times at her own hospital”
george e. smith:
Thankyou for your post at October 14, 2013 at 3:14 pm.
I write because I suspect I am not the only non-American reading this who appreciates some insight – as you have provided – of the existing US government ‘freeze’ which is puzzling to those of us outside the US.
More of the same from you would be appreciated but, of course, so long as it does not stray to far from the subject of this thread. For example, you say the US President has repeatedly failed to present a budget: perhaps, this has similarities to the EU Commission repeatedly failing to present budgets? And how can ‘Obamacare’ be implemented unless it is included in a government budget?
I appreciate that these questions may seem naive to you, but please understand that the US political system is strange to many – probably most – non-Americans.
Richard
George e smith at 3.14
I am British and several days ago expressed a polite opinion related to the us debt ceiling which the president of the world bank has echoed in the last day. The situation is completely incomprehensible to many of us on this side of the pond.
You have just made a very rude reply To me when a reasoned response outlining your position would have been much more useful in helping to explain the situation from your particular american perspective and perhaps shed some much needed light on the subject
I am not ‘brain dead’ and I am sorry that your evident anger at obamacare has caused you to be so impolite and seemingly unable to conduct a proper rational discussion on matters that affect us all
Tonyb
Let’s go back to doctors making house calls. Anyone remember that? It was before government got involved in healthcare.
“The USA spends twice what any other modern country does on healthcare per capita and gets lousy or no service for 1/3 its citizens.”
I see the numbers are growing like Pinocchio’s nose. 1/3?
The number being bandied about for the last couple of decades is that approximately 44 million non-elderly do not have employer provided health insurance at some point during a given year. Of those 44 million, are those who are self-employed and thus have no employer, those who are wealthy and self-insure, those who can afford it and don’t believe they need it (20+ million earning above median income in this category alone), those who are short-term employer uninsured between jobs, the Amish and Muslims who don’t participate in insurance for religious reasons, and those who buy insurance for themselves.
After these groups are subtracted, there is a group of around 2-3% of the population who earn too much for free Medicaid, and not enough to be considered able to afford insurance but still want health insurance. A substantial portion of that 2-3% are people who are in fact actually eligible for Medicaid, but haven’t signed up.
Now there IS a big issue for those in-betweeners who earn too much to be considered indigent (and thus get bill forgiveness): They have access to health-care, but because of the way the various government entities pay their bills, they – and some of the insured – can get caught up in the faux-pricing: The states pay only a portion of the billing rate, typically about 35-40%, with a low of 29% in New York…so to be paid fairly for both their services and the extra paperwork, practitioners which accept Medicare and Medicaid triple or quadruple their official rates. If one doesn’t use insurance and pays in cash, the rates are much, much lower.
“The fact is that USA has the most costly Health System of the world and ranks only 38Th for the WHO.”
Primarily because it is neither socialist enough, nor uniformly mediocre enough. Using their data without these criteria it moves into the top 10. Controlled for an excess of auto accidents it moves into #2. When also controlled for the particular demographics that make up the diverse population of the US, it moves to #1 by a significant margin.
Cuba is often used as an example of comparison, and truthfully Cuba does get a lot of bang for its buck in medical spending…but many practices that keep costs down are practices that are functionally outlawed here in the US…not by greedy insurance companies, but by government decree and lawsuits. Former Presidential Candidate John Edwards chicanery in court has caused obstetricians to conduct around 20 million unnecessary C-sections to avoid lawsuits (that number is probably outdated).
1980s medicine is perfectly fine for the vast majority of cases, and is cheap…but service that meager is not considered acceptable in the US even for the destitute.
Just as simple examples of the differences in attitudes, in Cuba typically families are expected to bring the clean linens and meals for those staying in their (non-tourist) hospitals. I’m not aware of any US hospital that has done that in the last half century.
Periodically we have coops of doctors, or “health clubs” that attempt to do away with dealing with Medicare, Medicaid, and insurance, accepting cash and donations to give basic healthcare and triage. The costs end up being almost trivial, but they generally end up being shut down by the government. My own practice that I receive service from has two doctors, a PA, a nurse, an assistant nurse who guides patients to an open room and collects height, weight, and blood pressure, and SIX people in the front office to do the paperwork.
Goldie: “From the above you can see how this Brit/Australian cannot understand why you don’t have a proper healthcare system that provides free healthcare to those who really need it.”
We do, as least as we define “need it”. The longstanding argument is about Health Insurance, and a deliberate attempt to conflate it with “Health Care” is made. It’s in part like claiming that no one without supplemental insurance in your system can see a doctor or get picked up by an ambulance. It’s a level of dis-ingenuousness that we’ve become so used to that we use the same language ourselves when we argue about it. We also have charity ingrained into our ‘system’…which the other side doesn’t count if government doesn’t provide it.
“So rather than whingeing about the website, why don’t you post something that tells the rest of us why you don’t think this system will work?”
In part, because it has already failed the standards it set multiple times…badly. See my post at October 13, 2013 at 7:17 am.
My insurance payments didn’t go up much for next year, but the deductible went up by $2500, so I get much less for the already-inflated price which includes a great number of things I don’t want (if I go bald, I’d rather live with it, for example). But that lack of a rise in direct payment now hides that when the law was passed, my insurance went up by $500 a month, and about 10% each of the next two years.
The promise when passed was that on average health insurance would instead have gone down by about $200 per month by the end of last year, plus have a side effect of allowing free health insurance for the uninsured without any tax increases or rate increases. Many of us recognized it as a ridiculous lie, but were demonized for not believing it. The website issues are simply the latest of a series of failures to meet the standards set by the advocates – even marginally. Particularly bad efforts tend to have 20% failure rates…and this one sits at greater than 99% for step one, and for those that make it through step one, at least 99% more for step two.
“Yes we do pay for THE PILL, so Sandra Fluke would not like our Australian system.
Her complaint wasn’t simply about the $300 annual cost for the pill, but for the apparent $700+ additional annual cost in condoms.
milodonharlani says:
October 14, 2013 at 3:19 pm
richardscourtney says:
October 14, 2013 at 2:45 pm
I might add that had the Western European powers stood up to fascism in the 1930s, there would have been no need for the US to yet again pull their chestnuts out of the fire. They could have kept Hitler out of the Rhineland with ease. The Czechs could have stopped Hitler with French & British backing. Instead, he used their captured tanks to augment his forces to invade Poland, France, Russia, et al.
As noted, the leading pacifists between the wars were socialists, as in the notorious “King & Country” debate in the Oxford Union.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_King_and_Country_debate
So while America was isolationist, Britain was pacifist, understandably so in both cases after the apparently pointless mass slaughter of the “War to End All Wars”.
Under these circumstances, I find European attempts to fault America for not entering the war for two years to ring hollow, without even allowing for all the help we provided in 1939-41 to keep Britain fighting & from being starved into surrender by losing the Battle of the Atlantic.
Again apologies for going off topic, but my kinsmen & parents’ friends died to liberate Europe, when it would never had been needed had the Western powers not been so weak & gun-shy.
richardscourtney says:
October 14, 2013 at 3:35 pm
george e. smith:I write because I suspect I am not the only non-American reading this who appreciates some insight – as you have provided – of the existing US government ‘freeze’ which is puzzling to those of us outside the US.
If I may: The “freeze” is for 20% of the government. The remainder of the government is still functioning. The President chose what part of the government to sit idle, and he chose parts that interface with the public and businesses. The House passed resolutions to continue the funding (CR – Continuing Resolutions) of the full budget, but with a retracting of the funding of parts of Obamacare.
He also furloughed defense contractors and inspectors for military equipment (thus shutting down production lines), but as that was fully funded and explicitly so in a bill he signed a couple of months ago, he relented after the end of the first week.
He had organizations like the National Park Service send armed agents to close down national/veterans memorials (Think open spaces like Trafalgar Square, patrolled intermittently by local police) and barricade the public from places like the WWII Veterans Memorial and the Vietnam Memorial, which are open-air and normally unmanned.
Via the NPS the President also shut down hundreds of state-run and vendor-run campgrounds, taverns, Inns, and hotels, which normally have no federal manning or support but are on leased/permitted Federal land – having the NPS rangers blockading entrances and patrolling the perimeter where they tried to reopen. They sent armed NPS agents to force people whose owned homes were on federal lands from those homes. They sent patrols to block people from using or passing through several ocean and shoreline reserves; put barricades up at boat launches; rousted state employees running historical sites out of parks; closed sightseeing pulloffs along highways where Mt Rushmore could be seen from; and after barricading the whole museum, relented and only barricaded the jointly owned parking lot for a privately run museum (George Washington’s home). None of this was required, nor have anything but the memorial shutdowns been done by any previous President during the 17 other “shutdowns” (and the memorials only be shut down by Presidents Nixon and Clinton ).
More of the same from you would be appreciated but, of course, so long as it does not stray to far from the subject of this thread. For example, you say the US President has repeatedly failed to present a budget: perhaps, this has similarities to the EU Commission repeatedly failing to present budgets? And how can ‘Obamacare’ be implemented unless it is included in a government budget?
Obamacare was funded as part of the original passage of the bill in 2010 by a Congress after they’d been defeated in an election but before their replacements were seated. The President has not submitted further budget requests, and the Senate has not passed a budget since Bush was President. There are some specific supplemental funding bills that have been passed, but for the most part, the government has been operating on Continuing Resolutions to just repeat the previous years’ budget which grossly overspent income every year so no particular programs can be cut. The President with the Senate (controlled by his party) has declined to accept the funding for the rest of the government without the Obamacare funding.
The Debt limit authorization is an authorization to borrow more money. The government does not need this to service existing debt – with an income of $225billion/month and a debt service amount of $18 billion – but the Secretary of the Treasury (an Obama appointee, who reports to the President) has coyly publicly stated that he “can’t guarantee” he would actually make the payments if the debt limit isn’t raised. If he doesn’t the nation would be in default, but he has the means and the authorizations to do so.
Gdn says:
October 14, 2013 at 6:28 pm
Also, if I may, although not addressed by Mr. R. Courtney:
The US system differs from a parliamentary system without a written constitution, in which the legislature can do whatever it wants, lacking a separate executive branch & a supreme court (in Britain the House of Lords used to function as such, but since 1999, IIRC, no longer). Under the US Constitution, the President, Congress & the Court are co-equal branches of the federal government, whose powers were carefully balanced by its Framers, although the relationships have gotten out of whack over the past 224 years.
The President is constitutionally obligated to send a budget to Congress (first to the House of Representatives, which has the power of the purse). Obama has not done this at all, thus shirking his duty, or has sent absurd budgets, simply continuing prior year spending, plus 8-10%. He doesn’t feel the need to make any choices, since he no longer needs congressional approval for spending. The Federal Reserve System just invents money for him & his Democrat allies in Congress, so that instead of having to make hard decisions, he just welcomes spending over four trillion dollars a year with less than three trillion in tax receipts. And wants more.
All prior presidents ran up ten trillion dollars in debt from 1789 to 2009 (four trillion of which accrued under Bush the Younger’s eight years, thanks to fighting two wars & bailing out Too Big to Fail Banks, occasioned by Clinton & Rubin’s creation of the subprime slime in 1998, with congressional support from both parties). In five years (we’re working on Fiscal 2014), Obama & congressional Democrats have added another seven trillion, so that under Obama our debt will have more than doubled. Plus being in violation of the fundamental law of the land.
Every year under Reagan, the then Democrat-controlled House declared his balanced budgets dead on arrival, so almost every year there were government shutdowns. But Reagan & Speaker O’Neil engaged in good faith negotiations, instead of refusing to do so. We ended up with unbalanced budgets, but Reagan achieved his other goal of ending the Cold War, which yielded a great peace dividend (which was squandered by his successors). In those days, no surprise, the media blamed the White House for the shutdowns, not the House of Representatives.
When shutdowns happened under Clinton & Obama, however, naturally the blame shifted to the Republican controlled House. Hope this helps.
No problem Ed, but first I have to say that I’m positively amazed at this question. Is it possible that you only look at the (D) and (R) labels to size up the political landscape and evaluate elections? Anyway, first a recap of the dynamics at play …
2006 … (D)ummycrats win Congress
2008 … (D)ummycrats win Presidency, begin push for Socialist Health Care
2010 … (R)epublicans win House ( massively )
In January 2007 the (D) Congress was sworn in. Although they immediately set about ballooning spending ( Deficits vs. Congressional Control ), they did not attempt anything as audacious as Communist Health Care until two years later in 2009, immediately after DingleBarry was elected ( having an entire Congress as a rubber stamp for Socialism was not seen since LBJ and the disastrously expensive Great Society, it didn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out what would happen next ). Note that this move to Socialized Medicine in early 2009 was doubly crazy since only months earlier in the fall of 2008 saw the economic meltdown and despite all those trillions of stimulus they still felt inclined to blow up the system further.
In December 2009 after a year of the most incredible shenanigans ( a bill that didn’t originate in the House as required ) and arm-twisting ( many (D) members were NOT inclined to support Socialized Medicine because of their constituents ) they got that ( Senate originating ) Bill passed by the House by a mere handful of votes, and finally signed by the idiot-in-chief. Then the wrath of the people began and 2010 saw immense TEA party growth and rallies and the (D)ummycrats in the House were wiped out in the 2010 mid-terms ( and are still out ).
You ask why this didn’t translate in 2012? First of all that was two more years later and this is short attention-span theater. Secondly, as someone already mentioned, the (R)epublicrats nominated the ONLY person on Earth who could not run using this issue – Romney, the name-sake of a similar plan at the state-level. That was beyond dumb, it was suicide. Also, being a Mormon he had no chance, rightly or wrongly, because evangelicals despise them, and non-religious people aren’t attracted either. He had no real chance and never should have been nominated in the first place. Even a smoky backroom full of conspiring (D)ummycrats couldn’t select a better opponent to run against. That said, President DingleBarry still only eeked out 51% of the voters in 2012. That election showed many of us that the fix was in. The (R)epublicrats would rather have the “opposing party” in power than any normal, traditional, pro-American citizen from the peasantry. Though I personally didn’t, many people stayed home. Romney got like 47% of the vote anyway, a feat in itself really, which matches the current President’s approval rating.
The point is this, the dynamics of the 2012 election was anything but a referendum on Socialized Medicine. How could it be? You had a choice of the only two people on Earth with actual Socialized Medicine plans on their résumés. The choice was a kick-in-the-teeh to the citizenry who had just made clear their anger over this un-Constitutional over-step, yet were completely ignored. Now everyone wonders why politicians are at their lowest approval? And it’s not just the GOP. The Communist-in-chief has almost never been at even 50% approval and spends most time around 47%. They don’t realize it yet in DC, but 2009 was the year that people found out that they are ruled, not served, by a one party bureaucracy. Like it or not, things will be drastically changing, it’s only a matter of time.
NOTE: I’m not him but I need to comment about that World Bank and other stuff. And Tony, this is NOT aimed at you ( I know the great work you do in climate )! It is the generic “you” I am using here to address generic foreigners commenting on our internal politics. Clear?
Do people on the other side of the pond really expect us to bend over because world bureaucrats say something? Then they definitely don’t understand us at all. The last thing you would ever want to do is accidentally unite us here against outsiders. If you cite the World Bank or the United Nations or EU or some stupid treaty gathering I guarantee we will rise to fight it just on principle. The World Bank and UN can crash and burn for all I care. We see it as yet another vehicle to pilfer the American taxpayer and somehow impose foreign will upon us.
If Europeans actually believe there will be some blowback on them because of how we handle our internal budgeting then I suggest they start lobbying their governments to disentangle and disconnect themselves from us however it is they may have become “attached” to us in the first place ( I don’t really know how, nor do I care to read anything from the World Bank or other Internationalists ). If you’re worried about stocks crashing, sell them. That’s how you prepare. If you’re in some fund and expect some perfect security and no risk, well, you’ve been had. While you’re at it, take the damn United Nations over to London or Brussels or wherever your Kings and Princes reside.
Now about this debt thing, let me get this straight … The outside world wants us to ENLARGE the current credit card that the government keeps in its wallet?!? It’s already racked up an ‘effin’ huge debt of $17.655 Trillion presently. And our foreign friends would like us to approve of it increasing some more? If so, just say that. Spell it out in plain english: “Please tell your Congress to authorize a higher debt limit on the Federal credit card, and don’t you dare restrain their spending”.
Let’s say your wife or kid crashes their own credit card, multiple times, every damn year, and now the red ink is more than you make in a year or two or five ( which is our case ). And now, your next-door neighbor says please raise his credit card limit, again! Jeez Louise. These are our kids’ grandkids that are gonna pay for this disaster someday. This is like giving the car keys back to a drunk after their 20th DUI offense.
Now let me get very specific here. To all our foreign friends demanding that we bend over, again … What is the limit you would put on the National Debt? Give me a number. … What is the highest tax rate we taxpayers should be willing to pay? Give me that number.
Gdn says:
October 14, 2013 at 6:28 pm [ … ]
Agree completely, as I do with Blade, milodonharlani, georgesmith, richardscourtney, and others.
They are expressing common sense, which is all too scarce in the current Obamacare debates.