Skip to main content

One must always be careful what one asks for. Many have been accusing President Obama of breaking his promise: "If you like it you can keep it." The president ill-advisedly decided to "apologize" in an interview with MSNBC’s Chuck Todd.

On Thursday the president gave an extensive news conference. Republicans may have been caught flat-footed judging from the less-than-inflammatory rhetoric that followed. Maybe they thought the president would have to resort to legislation that they would be able to politicize and block.

The fix the president has instituted is rather ingenious. More importantly it immediately ensured that Congress, the insurance companies, and the American citizens absorb responsibility for the solution.

The president said, "Insurers can extend current plans that otherwise would be canceled into 2014 and Americans whose plans have been canceled can choose to re-enroll in the same kind of plan." He then said, "This fix won't solve every problem for every person, but it's going to help a lot of people. Doing more would require work with Congress."

The president’s fix allows insurance companies to extend the cancelled policies even if they do not conform to the Affordable Care Act for one year. The insurance companies cannot enroll new customers into the substandard policies. The insurance companies are also required to inform the purchasers of these substandard policies that they may qualify for federal subsidies only through the exchanges. They must disclose that these policies do not have the consumer protections that all new insurance policies must have. They must also inform them that they may qualify for Medicaid,

President Clinton was the master of triangulation. Unfortunately while he seemed to win at triangulation, the poor and the middle class usually became its victim (e.g., Glass-Steagall, welfare reform, supply side economics). This move by President Obama if allowed to go through is how a masterful triangulation should be effected.

More on the president and the insurance companies below the fold.

President Obama tells insurance companies they have the freedom to extend the policies but cannot force them. That removes the narrative of Obama/government takeover of your health care. He forces insurance transparency by requiring insurance companies to come clean on their substandard policies relative to the Affordable Care Act. In doing this the American citizens purchasing these policies know upfront that they are purchasing junk.

The fact that many will now have the comparison and the knowledge that there may be subsidies on the exchange will limit the size of that insurance market. This means it is unlikely many insurance companies will bite. There are some people who will not get subsidies, will not have policies extended by insurance companies, and will be upset that they will pay higher rates. The president put the onus of fixing that on working with Congress. Congress can choose to engage or not. Not engaging becomes a new campaign direction for Democrats.

The insurance companies are now upset. When they cancelled policies they did so with an up-sell of more expensive policies as opposed to encouraging folks to go to the Obamacare exchanges. In doing so they created a political firestorm instigated by Republicans. Now the insurance companies are complaining about the fix disrupting the insurance markets.

Purists believe the Obamacare fix is about to create a big mess. This is partly true. This mess is politically necessary to expose insurance companies and Republicans. It will illustrate realities versus perceived hypotheticals.

The insurance companies attempted to circumvent the Obamacare exchanges and got bit. Their threats of future higher premiums should be ignored. If they do not work towards assisting in getting a sustainable pool that can be insured at affordable rates, Americans will demand a public option which will likely evolve into a single payer (Medicare for all) in the form detailed by Anthony Weiner on Real Time with Bill Maher.

The roll out of the healthcare.gov has been a mess. President Obama said that he is responsible for fumbling the rollout of Obamacare. He also said that when he became president he told Americans he would not be perfect but he would be working throughout his administration to make life better for Americans. He said the old individual insurance market was not working. Many only had insurance until they had to use it. He reiterated all the benefits of Obamacare.

The president’s news conference was contrite yet assertive. It was likely compelling to many in its detail. Near universal coverage has eluded every president in the 20th and 21st centuries thus far. Those who are betting that obstruction and sabotage would deter this president should take heed. This president has accomplished substantive changes to the direction of this country even as billions have been spent to derail him. Bet against him at your peril.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Wow (141+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LinSea, anna shane, ban48, Birdman, Sir Roderick, ArcticStones, annieli, Miniaussiefan, akmk, Onomastic, a2nite, AnnetteK, ronnied, Texknight, on the cusp, ZedMont, Floande, artr2, Proud Mom and Grandma, seefleur, Catkin, rlk, pickandshovel, RNmakingsense, jmrichardson, Aint Supposed to Die a Natural Death, rzen, SoCalSal, I love OCD, Roccekt, Chitown Charlie, Ditch Mitch KY, True North, karma5230, eeff, Sue B, SteelerGrrl, MKSinSA, fixxit, david78209, David54, loblolly, GAS, lineatus, KayCeSF, MRA NY, IndieGuy, bbctooman, Dbug, RamblinDave, Jesse Douglas, Lencialoo, DonnaSC, deeproots, MrAnon, nice marmot, PsychoSavannah, sja, paj1, gffish, BarackStarObama, FisherOfRolando, palantir, SaintC, Linda1961, mrsgoo, FindingMyVoice, astage4444, Bud Fields, janmtairy, tackbox53, librarisingnsf, rmb, sunbro, scamperdo, Fury, agent, Rosaura, terranova108, thomask, Libby Shaw, 417els, CookyMonzta, NedSparks, offgrid, pierre9045, slapshoe, confitesprit, nominalize, GeorgeXVIII, Miira, Tangerinegirl20, Dustee, Fireshadow, travelerxxx, delphine, Tortmaster, outragedinSF, kaliope, deepeco, duhban, eagleray, mksutherland, Matt Z, skepticalcitizen, EastcoastChick, MBramble, WisVoter, OrganizedCrime, Mr MadAsHell, Dodgerdog1, exNYinTX, Blue Bell Bookworm, avsp, CuriousBoston, fumie, PipeUp, orangeuglad, DarthEVaderCheney, HarryFodder, dsmithcsep, fishnleo, VPofKarma, unclebucky, eps62, John Ely, meinoregon, omgamike, Independent Progressive, atxcats, OldDragon, babyowl13, jw1, Diogenes2008, Loose Fur, remembrance, orchid1958, Cheryl915, SherrieLudwig, touch128, Kimba

    Every time I think President Obama can not surprise me more he does something like this and surprises me. What a brilliant solution. He puts the problems squarely where they belong. He also lets the common man know that he is one of us and not perfect. Good for him.

    "A dreamer is one who can only find his way by moonlight, and his punishment is that he sees the dawn before the rest of the world." Oscar Wilde

    by michelewln on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 05:08:03 PM PST

  •  I agree (33+ / 0-)

    The ball is on the other side now.
    All three of them.  LOL

    Now we need the Dems and their pundits to pound the "junk insurance" story and talk up how much better compliant insurance is. Until Obama's presser, it was tough to get the good news into the news cycle.

    Meanwhile, the Repubs have shot their wad and can't really get too much more mileage out of Obamacare or it'll backfire big time in the '14 elections.

    I think they've already outplayed their hand.

    •  I'd love if the GOPers really were overconfident (5+ / 0-)

      I think the smarter ones really aren't -- and are dreading the looming Shutdown 2: Electric Boogaloo that Cruz and the rest of the Suicide Caucus will soon force on them.

      But Cruz and Meadows and the rest of the Suicide Caucus crew are in super-safe districts, or their own elections are years away.  Plus, they are stupid enough to think that another shutdown is a winning gambit for them, and callous enough not to care about the effect it has on people, even their fellow Capitol Hill Republicans, who will be wanting to go out and campaign (and fight off the Tea Party twerps challenging them).

      Visit http://theuptake.org/ for Minnesota news as it happens.

      by Phoenix Woman on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 08:21:04 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  All the smart GOP have to do is caucus with (0+ / 0-)

        Democrats to avoid Shutdown 2.0, but that would take principle and courage, and they might lose their jobs and not be able to cash in at the corporatist trough when they leave. So, craven assholes they are, they stand behind the TPers.

    •  Outplayed their hand.... (0+ / 0-)

      This is the first time in my life that I've observed political suicide by an entire party system... you go GOTPers!

  •  This part is priceless: (71+ / 0-)
    The insurance companies are also required to inform the purchasers of these substandard policies that they may qualify for federal subsidies only through the exchanges. They must disclose that these policies do not have the consumer protections that all new insurance policies must have. They must also inform them that they may qualify for Medicaid,

    And we love to wear a badge, a uniform / And we love to fly a flag But I won't...let others live in hell / As we divide against each other And we fight amongst ourselves

    by ban48 on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 05:11:27 PM PST

  •  even Kaiser Permanente (19+ / 0-)

    the poster child of ACA is allowing members to retain their old compliant polices that cost more than the ones they offer on the exchange and do not come with any subsidizes.  

    Many will roll over, thinking how great, I can keep my plan, that is compliant, sure, but more costly and comes with no help.

    Thank you President Obama - these substandard policies at least require more than the so-called 'good guys' who like their customers and want to keep them.

  •  Calling their bluff (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dservgun, Lencialoo, Pablo Bocanegra

    Why doesn't he call the insurance companies' bluff and reneg on his promise to kill the public on by reviving it or by proposing a Medicare buy-in. Without those--or the threat of those--there is no real leverage over the insurance companies.

  •  Our Friends on the Crazy Side of the Aisle (30+ / 0-)

    must be having fits at this point. Not even Clinton in his heyday could have pulled off a better twist than this.
    In one fell swoop we've gone from "Obama Trying Desperately to Salvage Healthcare Plan" to Republicans and big pharma making weak excuses fro not wanting to comply.
    Well Played Mr. President.

  •  thank you, egberto, for stating it clearly. (11+ / 0-)

    there is much to fight for and against but it's true that progress has been made: junk policies/junk plans are now in the spotlight like never before.

    ages ago i read every word of any policy i held, but compared with information from medicare, it was still 'fine print' agony. medicare is written for almost all ages, and almost any physical condition.

    wherever those in poverty are, there is where we need to look closest to make improvements. lasting ones.

    Addington's perpwalk? TRAILHEAD of accountability for Bush-2 Crimes. @Hugh: There is no Article II power which says the Executive can violate the Constitution.

    by greenbird on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 05:15:56 PM PST

  •  The guy makes some pretty good lemonade (20+ / 0-)

    out of the lemons he is given to deal with.  Everybody knows O-care is the Rube Goldberg contraption it is because the vested interests all got protection one way or another.  And still it will be better than the death spiral of coverage that existed before.

    As others have said - hopefully just a small first step to a more rational model - be it single payer or some other approach that is more straightforward and easier to navigate.

    •  Not all. Obama learned for Clintons' folly (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Denver11

      You can't fight against the combined efforts of the hospitals, doctors, big Pharma, big insurance, the libertarians and the Republicans all at the same time.

      If it's all, you get nothing. And you make so much harder for the next try.

      I'm asking you to believe. Not in my ability to bring about real change in Washington ... *I'm asking you to believe in yours.* Barack Obama

      by samddobermann on Tue Nov 19, 2013 at 12:25:43 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  query wheter courts, esp SCOTUS could spoil (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SouthernLeveller, Lencialoo

    ...the proposed fix somehow - especially if the intermediate court is a circuit dominated by a conservative majority bent on mischief.  As helpful as Roberts was in providing the critical vote to uphold the ACA, I wouldn't be surprised if he decided that an upheld but crippled-from-fixing ACA is almost as good a gift to the long-term cause of conservatism as overturning it might have been.

  •  Assuming the worst of your opposition (15+ / 0-)

    If one starts with the assumption that Obama never expected the GOP to give an inch--he saw their responses to the Clintons, so why would he expect anything else, given his priorities--then his long-game approach to institutional change looks very smart, indeed.  Let the GOP become the party of obstruction and the party demanding that the federal state do NOTHING to protect the lives of average Americans.  Meanwhile, get some incremental but substantial reforms on the books, and take pride in doing so.  Then, when they are established and perhaps expanded, take credit.  

    As we all know, the GOP cried "socialism" when the Dems created Social Security, and the program was far from inclusive for its first two decades (agricultural and domestic workers were excluded).  Only later did it became accessible to all Americans.  

  •  Conservative law in the wake of anti-conservative (4+ / 0-)

    wave election, incompetently rolled out and responsible for a loss of stature in the polls…

    What's not to adore?!

    "I am confident that we're going to be able to leave the Gulf Coast in better shape than it was before." President Obama

    by quagmiremonkey on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 05:20:31 PM PST

    •  You're right. He should have just waved his magic (6+ / 0-)

      "single payer and nationalize the oil cos while we're at it" wand from his throne atop Sugardream Mountain

      You can't make this stuff up.

      by David54 on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 06:26:38 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  That would have also stopped up the gunz at (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Phoenix Woman

        the town hall meetings while ObamACAre was working its way through the legislative process.

        No one believed what they were doing.

        Now we get to go through all the Guns are Fun and Get Used to Them Demonstrations.

        Why is it easier to buy a gun than it is to register to vote in most states?

        by 88kathy on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 06:33:08 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Huh? what about demonstrations by (0+ / 0-)

          people being treated for cancer or other serious problems who would be terrified by any big change to their source of care.

          Those demonstrations would dwarf what ever the toots could dream of.

          I'm asking you to believe. Not in my ability to bring about real change in Washington ... *I'm asking you to believe in yours.* Barack Obama

          by samddobermann on Tue Nov 19, 2013 at 12:45:10 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Staking out a liberal position requires magic? (0+ / 0-)

        If -- in the wake of an anti-conservative wave election -- he had aggressively bargained from a liberal position, threatening from the beginning to use reconciliation to maximize the power of his party in congress, and very publicly laid every necessary concession to conservative policy preferences around the necks of the GOP, perhaps it would be possible to take such apologia as yours seriously. As it is, we all know he favored a Heritage Foundation plan from the start, so everyone in the country can rightly blame President Obama and that Democratic Congress for such a labyrinthine gift to the status quo, a sorry outcome compared to that enjoyed by the rest of the developed world.

        "I am confident that we're going to be able to leave the Gulf Coast in better shape than it was before." President Obama

        by quagmiremonkey on Mon Nov 18, 2013 at 08:14:24 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I think you underestimate the role that Senate (0+ / 0-)

          Dems played in facilitating the "Senate Stall".

          I think you're underestimating the role that the Senate plays in the passing of legislation.
          However, yes, I do think he should have gone ahead and publicly pushed for a "public option".
          As it was, he was being slammed hard as a "socialist" and I think they were too focused on defeating that narrative and they were content to let the "public option" be born in the individual state exchanges.

          You can't make this stuff up.

          by David54 on Mon Nov 18, 2013 at 11:11:37 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Baucus-care? (0+ / 0-)

            The President was happy to let it appear as if the Senate were responsible for months and months of rightward trudging in search of impossible Republican votes, but the how did the outcome diverge from his advocacy?

            You put your finger on something that I do agree on: the President's preoccupation with distancing himself from liberal policy. I suppose we disagree about the source of this, as I don't see it as fear but rather a long observed desire on the part of the Democratic party elite to displace the GOP as the best friend of big business.

            "I am confident that we're going to be able to leave the Gulf Coast in better shape than it was before." President Obama

            by quagmiremonkey on Mon Nov 18, 2013 at 12:08:23 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Maybe, but I'm not sure they're just trying to (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              CuriousBoston

              finesse a long term dominance for the Dem party so they can actually move the country in a more progressive direction, as opposed to lose elections.

              I don't think he's "distanced" himself from liberal policies. He has stated that he planned to be President for all Americans, not just liberals.
              He has also stated that he thought that the no. 1 task to move the country in a more progressive direction was to convince the electorate that gov. had a role, that it could be effective and responsive and adapt to changing circumstances.
              He had a plan for "more jobs" and a response to climate change, and that was obstructed.
              He planned to close gitmo and hold civiilan trials and that was obstructed.

              Now with the recent arrest of al Libi, he's once again back to civilian trial. I think it's significant.

              I don't like everything he's done, but I didn't expect to from the get-go.

              You can't make this stuff up.

              by David54 on Mon Nov 18, 2013 at 01:47:21 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Why should we trust his intentions? (0+ / 0-)

                After voting for him in the primary and the general, I came late to the realization -- beginning with reneging on his telecomm immunity promise -- that he is exactly who he most likely could be as a serious Democratic candidate for the Presidency: a friend of the status quo.

                The Bush era torturers and warmongers have his back. The banksters weren't only let off the hook, they were catered to, their "runways foamed". He brags about austerity policy that is contributing to entrenched misery for many Americans. He has repeatedly put his reputation behind the notion that Social Security should be cut, and if he is to be believed, he will do everything he can to see it cut. Al Libi given a civilian trial is dwarfed by the extrajudicial killing of Americans and the dragnet surveillance of the world. His reaction to a catastrophic oil spill was to approve a highly toxic chemical cover up and talk about how good the shrimp taste.

                Of course the GOP has tried to stand in the way, but on those major issues where he has been able to make something happen, and that relate to interests of the rich and Presidential power, he has consistently driven towards the right.

                I truly cannot understand why so many of my liberal brothers and sisters feel that trust for Barack Obama is warranted. I've never read his books, but feel we've seen about all we need to see in order to understand what he does when he has power. Given all that we have seen, what is the coherent argument for trusting that this politician's intentions are aligned with the interests of the majority and the weak?

                "I am confident that we're going to be able to leave the Gulf Coast in better shape than it was before." President Obama

                by quagmiremonkey on Tue Nov 19, 2013 at 10:08:24 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

            •  Bull, Obama was on the phone throughout (0+ / 0-)

              One thing he even asked Grassley what he could do to make it so Grassley could vote for it. Grassly responded "nothing." There was no way he could vote for it.

              If Obama could have gotten 1-3 Repub votes we could have told Lieberman and Ben Nelson to go to hell.

              I'm asking you to believe. Not in my ability to bring about real change in Washington ... *I'm asking you to believe in yours.* Barack Obama

              by samddobermann on Tue Nov 19, 2013 at 12:59:21 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  He did push for it! Geeze. (0+ / 0-)

            It was in the House bill. It could gotten put in the joint bill in conference. But so much time was wasted by Reid trying to shoehorn it into the senate bill — and so many posturing Senators getting their position set in concrete that there was no hope. And time ran out so any conference bill couldn't pass because it would need 60 votes.

            I'm asking you to believe. Not in my ability to bring about real change in Washington ... *I'm asking you to believe in yours.* Barack Obama

            by samddobermann on Tue Nov 19, 2013 at 12:55:37 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  The PO was traded away at start of process (0+ / 0-)
              In his book, Daschle reveals that after the Senate Finance Committee and the White House convinced hospitals to accept $155 billion in payment reductions over ten years on July 8, the hospitals and Democrats operated under two “working assumptions.” “One was that the Senate would aim for health coverage of at least 94 percent of Americans,” Daschle writes. “The other was that it would contain no public health plan,” which would have reimbursed hospitals at a lower rate than private insurers.

              http://news.firedoglake.com/...

              The White House had negotiated a number of deals with the health industry, designed to win their support for reform, including agreeing to oppose a robust public option… (Richard Kirsch, Health Care for America Now)

              http://news.firedoglake.com/...

              "I am confident that we're going to be able to leave the Gulf Coast in better shape than it was before." President Obama

              by quagmiremonkey on Tue Nov 19, 2013 at 09:31:30 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  You CAN'T pass a health reform law (0+ / 0-)

          through reconciliation.

          You just can't do that. There are rules which limit what can pass that way.

          I'm asking you to believe. Not in my ability to bring about real change in Washington ... *I'm asking you to believe in yours.* Barack Obama

          by samddobermann on Tue Nov 19, 2013 at 12:49:32 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Even Obamacare used reconciliation (0+ / 0-)

            Pelosi immediately amended the law through reconciliation in a deal to secure votes for the initial law.

            And something better than Obamacare could have been passed with reconciliation:

            And the administration has a tool at their disposal to create a healthcare bill that is both politically popular and good policy.  They can instruct Harry Reid to begin reconciliation on a bill that would include:

            - A public option
            - A Medicare buy-in for those 55 to 64
            - Reasonable subsidy levels to ensure affordability
            - A funding mechanism that forces the wealthy to pay their fair share
            - Changes to expand Medicaid

            There are various ways to do such a bill while leaving the regulatory structure of the Baucus Bill in limbo in the House during the interim.  Best guesses are that it could be completed in four weeks.  We need 50 Senate votes, and by our count is that we can count on 54 to 56 votes.

            http://www.dailykos.com/...

            "I am confident that we're going to be able to leave the Gulf Coast in better shape than it was before." President Obama

            by quagmiremonkey on Tue Nov 19, 2013 at 09:19:31 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  Thankfully, he had this figured out (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MKSinSA, Lencialoo

    long before it became an issue, otherwise we might've ended-up dealing with a problem resulting from Republican "obstruction and sabotage," not one caused by his administration's own missteps.

    Glad I didn't "bet against him," because sometimes winning isn't a good thing.




    Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ J. Garcia

    by DeadHead on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 05:21:04 PM PST

  •  I wish Kathleen Sebelius was there with him (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    forgore, jplanner, Lencialoo

    on the podium. I feel that people working under him trying to fix this process are leaving their boss out in winds. They need to be talking to the media more often telling them the status of the fixes, why things haven't gone so smooth, etc. Why is no administration official going on the Sunday shows, instead of Democratic politicians trying their best to defend the administration?

  •  I think he FINALLY FINALLY (5+ / 0-)

    realizes that he's been playing Charlie Brown to their Lucy (with her football).

  •  you go, Mr President (16+ / 0-)

    Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "I’m not the strapping young Muslim socialist that I used to be" - Barack Obama 04/27/2013

    by annieli on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 05:23:07 PM PST

  •  I swear he's aging fast... (22+ / 0-)

    Totally off topic, but I'm looking at that photo and it looks like he's aged 20 years since I voted for him in 2008...

    That's why you couldn't make me accept that job if you tried to tie me to the oval office chair...

    They've really been trying every trick in the book on this president, and even writing a few new books of nasty tricks just for him. So its good to see anytime he manages to ensnare them in their own traps.

    OMG, like, gag them with a multi-colored spoon. Like, ya know.

    by Jyotai on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 05:23:21 PM PST

  •  And the big story that's being missed. . . (27+ / 0-)

    Is that we now have the Republican Party on record essentially saying that no American should ever lose their health insurance.

    Thanks for coming around, fuckers. You're only a century behind the rest of us.

    They've done studies, you know. 60% of the time, it works every time. -- Brian Fantana

    by IndyScott on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 05:23:33 PM PST

    •  That must also apply to ACA-compliant policies! (4+ / 0-)

      “The meaning of life is to find it.”

      by ArcticStones on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 05:38:30 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Ha! You're right! (8+ / 0-)

      Of course, they're only concerned about it insofar as they can ram the perception of President Obama as a liar/pledge-breaker down everybody's throats, ruin his poll numbers, and make Democrats panic (as many in the House clearly did on Friday).

      But let's just see them try to keep up with the ACA repeal that would immediately take away the health coverage that half a million people have signed up for since October- despite all of the teeth gnashing and screaming about the website.  Short of supporting single payer and supporting Medicaid expansion in areas not currently benefiting from it, they have no alternative plan that they can propose that can help cover nearly the same (or better) amount of people.    

    •  Only if the gubmint makes them lose it (8+ / 0-)

      Republicans think Americans should lose their health insurance whenever their insurance company decides they're too expensive to carry, or when they make a claim.  It's having policies cancelled by government order, just because they suck and are fraudulent, that they object to.  Y'see, cancelling policies to raise profits is all freedomy and stuff, while the gubmint protecting people interferes with the market's invisible hand which has an absolute right to pick your pocket and molest you when it's done.

      •  I don't think they really believe (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        CuriousBoston

        that people have actually lost coverage due to getting sick, or for any other reason. I mean, no one they know has ever gone without coverage, and Platinum coverage at that, and from what they hear (where? echo chamber?), it's no biggie anyway because doctors and hospitals always take you for free.

        So they don't have to think through what happens when insurance companies kick you out, because in their universe that would never ever happen -- unless you deserve it, of course.

  •  In this, he's a badass. (5+ / 0-)

    If reality clashes with your belief, then the problem clearly is reality.--God

    by Flyswatterbanjo on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 05:24:16 PM PST

  •  I feel very smart. (12+ / 0-)

    When Clinton said the President should do this I couldn't see why everyone was upset.  It does put the insurance industry in a quandary of having to deal with and fix their plans without the "government" making them do stuff. You explained the nuances of the situation expertly.  I have been trying to tell people this but I have not been able to verbalize the points clearly.  I now have the verbal ammo I need.

    Everyone! Arms akimbo! 68351

    by tobendaro on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 05:26:00 PM PST

    •  I've posted this elsewhere (16+ / 0-)

      But this is how insurers are talking about it in their own private forums:

      The insurance companies are freaking:

      This was, indeed, a prudent move by Obama. The ignorant majority will think this is akin to putting Twinkies back on the shelf post-Hostess bankruptcy, then be pissed at the insurers when they attempt to point out how infeasible Obama's plan is logistically.

      It will play out one of three ways in my estimation, none good for insurance industry PR.

      1) Somehow insurers are able to do all the operational and pricing work necessary to get the plans back up and running, BUT they obviously need to raise the rates to be in line with medical inflation, utilization, fee schedules, etc. Insurers are bad because they jacked up the rates.

      2) Insurers realize that the rate increases will not be well-received and serve as ammunition for Obama's claims that we're just taking money from people wily-nily. So insurers put the plans back on the market, but at no rate increase (added benefit of bypassing the DOI review delays, possibly). Bad for industry because the Individual market takes a financial bath in 2014.

      3) Insurers realize that the operational miracles ain't happening in 6 weeks and just don't bother trying to get the plans back into their systems and priced for 1/1/14. Bad for industry because, "OMG! Obama is right! Insurers ARE taking away our plans! WTFBBQ42!"

  •  As to the reaction of insurance companies ... (11+ / 0-)

    Here is the announcement that Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina posted to their website ...

    On Thursday, President Obama announced that insurers may allow customers to keep their Individual insurance plans through 2014, regardless of whether or not they meet the Affordable Care Act minimum requirements. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina is currently exploring options that may provide relief to customers who were faced with losing a health plan they liked. We expect to file plans with the North Carolina Department of Insurance in the next few days. We expect to have more details to share next week and will continue to keep you updated through our website, bcbsnc.com and through social media. Thank you for being a valued Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North
    Carolina member

    ______________
    Love one another

    by davehouck on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 05:27:23 PM PST

  •  Thank you so much for this and (16+ / 0-)

    Thank you! Mr. President for so brilliantly hoisting the Republicans, MSM, and Insurance Companies on their own whining petards.

    There is something in us that refuses to be regarded as less than human. We are created for freedom - Archbishop Desmond Tutu

    by Onomastic on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 05:29:56 PM PST

  •  "You can keep your insurance if you want to.. (17+ / 0-)

    keep it."

    His only crime is underestimating the number of fools who would WANT to keep their crappy plan when better plans at good prices would become available.

    Mr President, never underestimate the ignorance of Americans. Did Sarah Plain teach you anything?

    As for Chuck Toad, his question had to be one of the dumbest questions, ever. But is anyone surprised?

    I'll say this, if the "lie" (Todd) is the "low point" (Brokaw) of Obama's presidency, he's doing one hell of a job. Keep looking you losers.

    What is so unnerving about the candidacy of Sarah Palin is the degree to which she represents—and her supporters celebrate—the joyful marriage of confidence and ignorance. SAM HARRIS

    by Cpqemp on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 05:30:49 PM PST

    •  Brokaw (7+ / 0-)

      The guy who supposedly chronicled the "Greatest Generation" ends up by being a clueless avatar of conventional wisdom and "both sides" crap -- he and the courtier media are the "Lamest Generation."

    •  This: (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Pluto
      His only crime is underestimating the number of fools who would WANT to keep their crappy plan when better plans at good prices would become available.
      This is what I've been saying for the past week or more. No rational person should want healthcare insurance that doesn't pay for hospitalization or prescriptions. As one wit noted: (paraphrased) "These people are paying to be uninsured."

      It is like the Government enacting a law that said you couldn't purchase any portion of the Brooklyn Bridge or invest with Bernie Madoff or Charles Ponzi. But FREEDOMS!  

      It is so obviously right wing hand-wringing-drama sabotage that the media having lapped it up is, in turn, frustrating and telling and sad and disgusting.

      Rand Paul is to civil liberties as the Disney Channel is to subtle and nuanced acting.

      by Tortmaster on Mon Nov 18, 2013 at 12:51:55 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Thanks for posting the link back to ... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    I love OCD, Lencialoo, PsychoSavannah

    ... the video of Anthony's Medicare for all explanation; I missed it the first time, and I'm glad I got to see it.

    ______________
    Love one another

    by davehouck on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 05:33:22 PM PST

  •  why are you Clinton bashing? (0+ / 0-)

    Clinton put a hell of a lot of effort getting Obama's lame-ass re-elected.  Only to find now-elected Obama making snide comments about him.
    Clinton accomplished an amazing amount during his 2 terms, and he knew how to hold up under Republican fire.

    •  Clinton held (14+ / 0-)

      under Republican fire by passing half the Republican agenda. I'm glad we've got a President now who sticks to his guns even against Republican sabotage worse than anything Clinton faced.

      •  His triangulation was harmful, not necessary (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Willinois, Judge Moonbox, brn2bwild, Miira

        Clinton lore holds that his popularity was based on his skill at triangulation, which he picked up from Dick Morris.  But that's bullshit.  Clinton was a masterful politician.  He had great personal charisma and the ability to "feel your pain" the way voters liked it.  

        Triangulation was considered politically safe because Clinton had come only four years after the reign of St. Ronald the Addled, who supposedly had turned America's youth into staunch conservatives.  So if the country was Reaganite, then triangulation would be the most liberal positions that could be accepted.  But that was bullshit too:  Reagan himself, a professional actor, was even better at selling shit than Clinton was. This was a man who had done (among other things) cigarette and detergent commercials on TV, after all.  So Clinton was afraid to hold down Democratic positions, thinking that Reagan's ideas were popular, when it was really Reagan's own personality that dominated the era.  Clinton could have been more effective had he rallied his own troops.

        •  Triangulation wasn't necessary BEFORE (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Phoenix Woman, scamperdo, brn2bwild

          1994, but it was after because Clinton no longer had Congress.

          I agree that he didn't have to give us NAFTA or GATT (which became the WTO) and all the crap that came with that.

          I think DADT was an honest mistake. He really thought it would be a workable, and short-term compromise.

          However, I don't think that, even after 1994, he had to gut welfare. He had promised to "end it as we know it," but I think he originally planned a more progressive change. Why he thought he had to go with the Gingrich plan AFTER he beat Newt on the showdown, I'll never get.

          His assault rifle ban showed that he could get progressive goals accomplished even without a Democratic Congress when he put the full weight of his office behind it.

          But I'll never forgive him for 2 things: DOMA and Gramm-Bleach-Liley.  He could've vetoed DOMA. The GOPers didn't have the votes to override and didn't want to override. They wanted to use his veto to help Dole win the '96 election. Bill Clinton threw the LGBT community under the bus purely to win reelection and never lost a moment of sleep doing it.

          Summers and Rubin talked him into signing the destruction of Glass-Steagall. Clinton's smart. He had to know the risk. If not,  I'm sure he heard an earful from his former Labor Sec., Robt. Reich, unless he was no longer taking his calls.

          Triangulation was partly necessary, but Clinton did too much of it and we all suffered for it--like we're suffering through sequestration because Obama blinked in 2011.  Sometimes Presidents don't know their own power.

          "I was not born for myself alone, but for my neighbor as well as myself."--Richard Overton, leader of the Levellers, a17th C. movement for democracy and equality during the English Civil War. http://www.kynect.ky.gov/ for healthcare coverage in Kentucky

          by SouthernLeveller on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 06:58:27 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  The difference. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            lookit

            I'll point out that Obama got a few progressive accomplishments in the sequester deal like an increase in Pell Grants.
            Republicans successfully used their leverage with the debt ceiling, and maybe Obama didn't think they'd let the sequester cuts continue. It didn't end well, but that's a little different than Clinton taking the initiative to support Republican ideas like welfare reform, telecom deregulation, and investing Social Security money in the stock market. I see people on this site saying Obama is the next Bill Clinton and I have to wonder if they have any idea what Clinton did.

      •  didn't say that when you needed Clinton (0+ / 0-)

        to help get zero elected did you?

    •  Clinton had nothing to do with (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MKSinSA, True North, Lencialoo, Tortmaster

      my decision vote for Obama. Just like Obama will have not have anything to do with whether I cast my vote for Clinton. So you are speaking for yourself just as I am.

    •  True but Clinton so adores the limelight (0+ / 0-)

      I bet he was eager to get back into the arena. Clinton has said some crappy things about Obama over the years. O has sucked it up in order to be a better Dem and a better President. Maybe some of  his irritation that leaked out.

      Clinton compared O's candidacy for President as a flash in the pan, like Jesse Jackson's. Often he has publically said O was making various errors, undermining O. Clinton likes to make himself relevent.

      I still like him though and thought he was a good President.

    •  "Snide comments" (0+ / 0-)

      So you believe Heilemann and his unnamed sources? Quite the assumption, I'd say.

    •  Obama was leading Mittens by at least 10 points (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      amsterdam

      even before he announced his run for re-election, airing his first campaign ad.

      Bill Clinton had very little to do with Obama getting re-elected. Debates 2 and 3, along with his handling of Hurricane Sandy, secured Obama's comfortable victory. Clinton's biggest contribution during the campaign, was his 'Secretary of Explaining Things' convention speech, which had no real lasting effect on the general public's understanding of the issues. They are still as ignorant as they ever were.

      Talking of lame asses, Bill Clinton botched healthcare reform, repealed Glass-Steagal, made disastrous trade deals, and ended up tainting his presidency (and his Vice President) with a sex scandal and lying under oath. Democrats also lost the House and a shit-ton of governors during his presidency. Then there's DADT, deregulating the media, and welfare reform...

      And lets not forget he appointed Rubin and Summers, and employed Dick Morris as his political adviser.

      •  i just remember my 6-digit (0+ / 0-)

        paycheck when Clinton was in office, never saw anything like that again.
        Of course, as I'm sure you'll say, Clinton had nothing to do with it.  He was just lucky.  Just like Obama is so unlucky.  It's all luck.  Intelligence and competence have nothing to do with a good presidency.  Just ask Al Gore.

        •  lol (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          madronagal

          So you literally used to be in the "Screw you, I got mine" camp. And now that you apparently ain't got yours anymore  you're all concerned about what the government is doing. How generous of you.

          Time is of no account with great thoughts, which are as fresh to-day as when they first passed through their authors' minds ages ago. - Samuel Smiles

          by moviemeister76 on Mon Nov 18, 2013 at 03:03:15 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Huh? He made one speech! a great one (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lookit

      but not a huge effort.

      Yeah, Clinton did a lot: DADT, DOMA. welfare reform which meant mothers couldn't stay home with their babies for a year and led to the existing childcare crisis, NAFTA and deregulation of the finance sector.

      Whoopie.

      Held up under Repub fire? They impeached his ass and damn near convicted.

      I'm asking you to believe. Not in my ability to bring about real change in Washington ... *I'm asking you to believe in yours.* Barack Obama

      by samddobermann on Tue Nov 19, 2013 at 01:12:44 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Thanks for a bit of sanity. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lencialoo, Tortmaster
  •  Do you mean... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Victor Ward, hmi

    ...the President's illegal fix that relies on him not enforcing the law to work?

    Health insurance companies aren't going to put themselves in an actionable position by violating the law despite promises of non-enforcement by the administration.

    (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
    Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

    by Sparhawk on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 05:36:32 PM PST

  •  Maher is right, Weiner should get back (9+ / 0-)

    in the game, in spite of all the negative stuff he's been going through lately.

    Back when few at DKos were paying attention to HCR, Weiner was doing very good work helping ACA get through committee in the House.

    He was one of the strongest, most effective Dems helping build a good House version of ACA that stood up to the beating the Senate Dems (Baucus, Conrad, Reid, Schumer and, obliquqely, Obama) gave it.

    Weiner, along with a few other House Dems, can take credit for the good parts of ACA today, e.g. medical loss ratio, Medicaid Expansion, etc.

    Their teamwork gave Obama a fairly tight bill, even after Senate tampering, that allowed him to craft a precise, limited remedy to deal with the private insurance cancellation kerfuffle. Obama handled it with surgical precision, as he should have.

    If cutting Social Security & Medicare benefits for low income seniors is what Democrats do after they win a budget standoff, I'd hate to see what they do after they lose one.

    by Betty Pinson on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 05:36:49 PM PST

  •  I don't understand...doesn't it only "force" (0+ / 0-)

    insurance co's who decide to re-offer the cancelled plans to inform subscribers of the ACA options ? Or do all companies who cancelled plans have to do this regardless ? How will the public at large "know" of these options and subsidies as a result of the fix ?

  •  I don't see how this is triangulation. (9+ / 0-)

    Triangulation was Clinton pulling Democrats in Congress to the right to help corporations. This is Obama sticking it to the insurance companies and staying to the left of Congressional Democrats who voted for the GOP non-fix. So, kind of the opposite of Clintonian triangulation.

    I keep seeing people around here saying Obama is just like Bill Clinton but I think they have a case of amnesia.

  •  He's still my guy (11+ / 0-)

    I get depressed over the unprecedented hatred and treasonous obstruction that's marred his Presidency, but that's the insanity of the Republicans, not his fault. History will judge them very harshly, and they'll be remembered as villains who worked to bring down the government and damage the country, for their own cheap political gains.

    Obamabobble1

    (a photo I shot of my bobble head after I bought it a couple of weeks ago)

    "Here comes the night; dark as my soul. No end in sight, no shining light, no love to hold." - The Mavericks

    by Fordmandalay on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 05:46:41 PM PST

    •  and President Obama STILL got impt stuff done (4+ / 0-)

      in spite of all of them.  I still don't see how Republicans profit off all of their obstructionism in the long run.  They can obstruct all day long and some progressivism gets slowed down or halted but what policies are going to draw people to them during their next shot at the WH?  They hate the (working) poor, they hate the unemployed, they hate immigrants, they hate gays, they hate teachers, they hate unions, they want to repeal the ACA, etc.  Their base has basically been reduced to mega corps whom profit from their low-tax and union busting, ultra-religious fundamentalists, loony Birchers.  On a national level, there's no candidate, no policy they have that most people would ever want to vote for in their current form IMHO

  •  This diary is a fairy tale (5+ / 0-)

    Please, spare me.

    Here is the truth: Obama Has Lost His Credibility

    John Dickerson is spot on here. The failure of the ACA rollout has not only damaged Obama's credibility, it is the poster child for the Republican's mantra that government is the problem, not the solution.  I don't care how many people finally get to sign up and get covered, it is now and forever a failure.

    He has lost the public's trust, and for some inexplicable reason, spent the entirety of last week confirming to America that they are right not to trust him, rather than fighting for the fact that he is right.  Immigration reform? Minimum wage? Obama is a lame duck for the next 3 years, we'll see none of it.

    I have an individual policy through Optima here in Virginia. Yes, I got the letter, which I fully expected! And why did I expect it? Because the fact is, insurance plans change all the time, every year, even group insurance plans, ACA or not.  But in the end - I still have an Optima policy, with the same deductible, the same co-insurance, I can go to the same doctors, etc.

    When I worked for a corporation, I was involved with the benefit plan renewals.  Our plan changed every year, and many of those changes were not our choice - the insurer changed the terms, not the company. The ACA actually changed important policy terms to eliminate the shit coverage that many plans had out there, why not fight for this?

    We have lost decades of progress in this past month.  Instead of being a starting point, the ACA will now be the high water mark of health care reform.  The public option? Medicare for All? We won't even be able to have a debate about them for a generation.

    So please, spare me the fairy tales that somehow this will be okay, that he's now made it the insurance company's fault.  He hasn't - he's given them an excuse to blame higher costs and all their shitty claims service on the ACA, and sadly, in part, they are right.

    Liberalism is trust of the people tempered by prudence. Conservatism is distrust of the people tempered by fear. ~William E. Gladstone, 1866

    by absdoggy on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 05:47:26 PM PST

    •  They said the same things about Clinton (7+ / 0-)

      ...almost fifteen years ago. Clinton also spent weeks, if not months, apologizing for the Lewinsky scandal, and everyone thought he was a goner. But...

      Reagan probably had it worse with Iran-Contras. By all accounts, nothing makes you less credible than "admitting" that your administration sold weapons to the enemy. Yet, his political career survived and he is still adored.

      And you're wrong about one thing: it is NOT a failure if a lot of people finally get to sign up and get covered. The Republican's mantra that government is the problem and not the solution has been applied to Medicaid, SS, SNAP, etc... However, no majority of the American population would call SS a government problem that has to be eliminated now, right?

      Bottom line: The media is lazy; it reuses narratives over and over again. This "president is losing his credibility" is just one of them. President Obama will get his credibility back, just like most presidents did (Nixon was the exception because he resigned). He may very well be a lame duck president in the next three years (like every president before him), but the legacy of the ACA will continue after 2017 and it will be judged by the future. Thus, it is wrong to call it a failure now.

      "My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we’ll change the world." -Jack Layton (1950-2011)

      by Coco Usagi on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 06:06:11 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Conservative of little faith (6+ / 0-)

      The only reason that ACA is having a problem is because of a media that's owned by corporations and deals in fiction more than fact and an intransigent Republican party. This roadblocks will be overcome and the negativism rolled over. Conservatives will be standing on the corning with the  tin cup.

    •  You are the messenger (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      coffeetalk

      prepare to be shot.

    •  Well See Here's The Thing (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      scamperdo, nominalize, Tortmaster
      Immigration reform? Minimum wage?Obama is a lame duck for the next 3 years, we'll see none of it.
      .....immigration reform was killed deader than a doornail before (back when he supposedly had credibility) this happened and any minimum wage increase is DOA in the House until at least Jan 2015.    

      In fact, in case you hadn't noticed nothing of any import has been passed since 2010 - it is quite literally impossible for any perceived loss in credibility to have even a smidgen of an impact on the agenda. None. Nada. Zip.  

      We have lost decades of progress in this past month.
      Oh bull fucking shit.  Every single bit of this is a distant memory in a month if the website is functional.  
    •  Nobody think differently of Obama now (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Tortmaster

      than they did before this.  Jesus Christ.  Come back to the real world.  

    •  Here's a 'fairy tale' from the actuaries... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      nominalize, Tortmaster, Pluto

      In case you missed it when Pluto posted it, here is what one of the (conservative) actuaries is telling his fellows on an actuary message board:

      This was, indeed, a prudent move by Obama. The ignorant majority will think this is akin to putting Twinkies back on the shelf post-Hostess bankruptcy, then be pissed at the insurers when they attempt to point out how infeasible Obama's plan is logistically.

      It will play out one of three ways in my estimation, none good for insurance industry PR.

      1) Somehow insurers are able to do all the operational and pricing work necessary to get the plans back up and running, BUT they obviously need to raise the rates to be in line with medical inflation, utilization, fee schedules, etc. Insurers are bad because they jacked up the rates.

      2) Insurers realize that the rate increases will not be well-received and serve as ammunition for Obama's claims that we're just taking money from people wily-nily. So insurers put the plans back on the market, but at no rate increase (added benefit of bypassing the DOI review delays, possibly). Bad for industry because the Individual market takes a financial bath in 2014.

      3) Insurers realize that the operational miracles ain't happening in 6 weeks and just don't bother trying to get the plans back into their systems and priced for 1/1/14. Bad for industry because, "OMG! Obama is right! Insurers ARE taking away our plans! WTFBBQ42!"

      The insurers are howling because they had hoped for Obama to take the heat for the companies' own actions.  Now they're stuck, because now they're going to have to explain to their customers a) why the policies were cancelled and b) let them know that cheaper options exist.

      Now they have to give back half a drop of gravy from the gallon of gravy and five gallons of garlic mashed potatoes they gave themselves when they had Fowler and Baucus write the ACA.  Je suis désolé.

      They'll grit their teeth and do it, because the reward is still worth it for them -- they want the kids, the young healthy kids, as customers, and if they jack up the rates as threatened the kids will just say "screw it, I'll take my chances with the IRS" -- knowing that even if the IRS could enforce the penalties, they're a pittance compared to the costs of the jacked-up insurance.

      Visit http://theuptake.org/ for Minnesota news as it happens.

      by Phoenix Woman on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 09:36:55 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  absdoggy, want to make a bet on that? (0+ / 0-)

      Not that he will do all of what you want but some of it.

      Medicare for all is not only a non-starter; it is a bad idea.

      I'm asking you to believe. Not in my ability to bring about real change in Washington ... *I'm asking you to believe in yours.* Barack Obama

      by samddobermann on Tue Nov 19, 2013 at 01:28:02 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  dear Martha Raddatz….. (6+ / 0-)

    at some point, the media will get that the industry intended to blame what they did on ACA. they will get there was something else the companies were supposed to do (get rid of the junk policies because they are too risky for consumers) but chose to make Obama the scapegoat.

    as he hammers the point that he is the one who actually chose to take this issue on when others did not, and that pretty toy the media is so fixated on (yes, the website) his reputation will recover.

    it won't be overnight. the media won't help.

    but that trust issue will recover.

    and we'll be left with how many people want to see him fail. or help orchestrate it. or keep score (file under Chuck Todd and CBS.) the public will see this revealed, and they will walk away from the media. because so many reporters are fixated on a website. on a website. on a website.

    rather than the benefits of a goal. the workings of a concept.

    Martha, I still adore you. please stop imitating Jon Karl.

    cheerleaders need not apply.

    by kravitz on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 05:51:40 PM PST

    •  Speaking of hammers, (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Tortmaster

      I think part of the problem is that it's the political press. That is, they're a political hammer, so whenever anything goes wrong or right, they see a political nail.

      Add to that the pundit's obsession with making outlandish predictions, 99% of which will be false, in the hopes of making that one big right one they can build a career out of.  

      Republicans have tried to repeal the ACA 42 times now, knowing it would fail. That means we have a party full of people who don't learn from repeating the same mistake 42 times.

      by nominalize on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 10:39:40 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Yeah, we know, he's an eleventy dimensional (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Willinois

    genius.  Again.

    Good for him.

    Be of good comfort, Master Ridley, and play the man; we shall this day light such a candle by God's grace in England as shall never be put out.

    by Bollox Ref on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 05:52:01 PM PST

  •  Todd is a right wing hack (5+ / 0-)

    The Presidents interview with Todd aggravated me to no end. He allowed Todd to practically call him a liar. Often times I want Obama to come out swinging, but this clearly shows he's the smartest guy in the room. I'm also delighted that this article called out Clinton as nothing but a Blue Dog.

  •  Kreidler, WA State, rejected the change (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MKSinSA, Phoenix Woman

    Nick Budnick, The Oregonian, Nov 15: "Oregon announcement could mean good news for people with expiring health coverage"

    Critics, including insurers and insurance commissioners in other states, have blasted Obama's move saying it will disrupt the market, further confuse consumers and lead to higher premiums in the future. Washington State Health Insurance Commissioner Mike Kreidler on Thursday rejected Obama's change of policy, saying he had "serious concerns" about market stability.
    Oregon's Insurance Commissioner has decided to allow extending the non-complying plans.  Regence BCBS:
    According to a statement released by Regence, "Based on the Oregon Insurance Commissioner's decision, Regence BlueCross BlueShield of Oregon plans to extend current coverage options to our members.  We are working closely with state regulators to understand and assess today's announcement and its implications for our members. ... We will be communicating directly to all of our customers in the coming weeks so that they clearly understand their options."

    I can't help it. I love the state of Texas. It's a harmless perversion. - Molly Ivins

    by rsmpdx on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 05:59:40 PM PST

  •  aca startup (13+ / 0-)

    I put in dozens of systems when I was working, both computer and accounting.  They all had three characteristics:  1]   none were perfect when they were first installed. 2) the users hated them in the beginning (people are adverse to change), and 3) everybody liked them once the startup bugs were ironed out. I firmly believe this will happen with ACA and democrats will be running very strong on this next November.

  •  Not sure Obama's "that's on me" was a mistake (15+ / 0-)

    but I'll bet the insurance companies will think twice before they mess with him again. He just magicked away some of their 2014 profits -- which is the only way to get their attention.

  •  Will my provider extend policy? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MKSinSA, Pluto

    We were informed early Oct. that the plan my wife and son are on would be discontinued. Just a vague explanation.  The plan is not "junk", but it's pretty expensive.

    I'm interested to know if they'll extend it, and what makes it non-compliant. This is in Oregon, which is allowing companies to extent coverage if they choose.

    I can't help it. I love the state of Texas. It's a harmless perversion. - Molly Ivins

    by rsmpdx on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 06:09:27 PM PST

  •  The insurance co. ommission was playing dirty (6+ / 0-)

    Those savvy with insurance terms and policies knew that when the ACA law said they would "grandfather," any policy written before March 23, 2010, they knew what it meant.

    Any change to that policy, any change at all, from the crossing of a T to the dotting of an i, would no longer fit the "grandfather" status.

    How devious, unprofessional, and downright sneaky, not to inform their policyholders of this at the time those changes were made.  The companies knew these policies had a short period of viability, but never told the public.

    At the time the President made these claims of "if you like it, you can keep it," they were valid as far as they went.  I suppose he could have said, "except where your insurance company fails the test of the criteria of a "grandfather policy."   However, did anyone  think the insurance companies would neglect their duty and professional integrity and fail to inform the public?  This would be too blatant, but wonders never cease.

    So, now, not only will they be required to come clean, but they will be required to steer their policyholders to the best possible outcome for them.

    Bear in mind, it is unfortunate that that age group about ten years before qualifying for Medicare, the price for insurance is the highest.  These individuals will be hit a little harder.

    The vision and bigger picture will be worth all this.  We will finally enter the 21st century, albeit a little late, and join the other Western Industrialized countries and other countries throughout the world who have health insurance coverage in place for most all their citizens.

  •  Is there any guarantee that insurance companies (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pluto, mrsgoo

    will re-offer all of the cancelled policies? I am one of the people who had a good plan cancelled to be offered a higher-priced, lower-benefit plan that is ACA compliant. If the insurance companies are allowed to offer their junk plans but not required to offer the better plans they cancelled, this will be a political disaster.

    My current insurance company has an open meeting Tuesday night so I guess I will find out then.

    I won't believe corporations are people until Texas executes one. Leo Gerard.

    by tgrshark13 on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 06:28:20 PM PST

    •  Let us know what you find out. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      scamperdo, Phoenix Woman, Tortmaster

      It is my understanding that non-ACA-compliant plans cannot be sold to individuals in the United States of America in the future.

      Your insurance company, however, can continue to sell your plan -- if they wish to do so -- for one more year.

      Most insurers want out because the risk pool is aging (most on these plans are over 50) -- and that's why they cancelled and tried to upsell you to a more expensive plan.

    •  I doubt it. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Tortmaster, bryduck

      If the plan was ACA-compliant, that is legal, the only reason the insurer would have to cancel it is profit.

      Republicans have tried to repeal the ACA 42 times now, knowing it would fail. That means we have a party full of people who don't learn from repeating the same mistake 42 times.

      by nominalize on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 10:43:41 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  You were offered a bait and switch. (0+ / 0-)

      You were offered a plan — you don't have to take.

      check the plans on the exchange. They hope you won't do that.

      Go look at the exchange before you go to the meeting.

      I'm asking you to believe. Not in my ability to bring about real change in Washington ... *I'm asking you to believe in yours.* Barack Obama

      by samddobermann on Tue Nov 19, 2013 at 01:40:40 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  What I'd like to know. (4+ / 0-)

    Many commentators, notably WaPo's Dana Milbank, are saying that Democrats are panicking because of Obama's missteps.

    I would like Milbank to put the comparative idiocy of the two parties' actions side by side and ask, If Obama's actions caused Democratic panic, why weren't Republicans suicidal last month?

    Obama did not grasp that many people who held junk insurance policies wanted to keep them, as though they had a car with bad brakes but weren't willing to change because they've heretofore been able to coast to a stop when they got to a red light. They didn't want to take them in to the dealerships as part of a mandatory recall to get them fixed, but weren't prepared for the chance they'd need good brakes if someday a child darted in front of the car.

    Obama also didn't anticipate how much trouble a webpage can have getting started, and so failed to insist on adequate testing.

    By contrast, Boehner shut down the government because he was a sore loser. It's like the old joke about the body parts debating which one should be boss, and the asshole goes on strike.

    Freedom's just another word for not enough to eat. --Paul Krugman's characterization of conservative attitudes.

    by Judge Moonbox on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 06:31:53 PM PST

    •  My normally progressive guy, Garamendi voted for (4+ / 0-)

      the Upton bill. I was shocked. I emailed him and gave him hell. I am having a hard time with the D's that are panicking. As far as the "old joke goes" just ask my husband about that one. They didn't make sure his #2 was working before discharge at the hospital. And he wanted out really bad. So two days after discharge, he went through living hell. And frankly, so did I.

      if a habitat is flooded, the improvement for target fishes increases by an infinite percentage...because a habitat suitability index that is even a tiny fraction of 1 is still infinitely higher than zero, which is the suitability of dry land to fishes.

      by mrsgoo on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 07:38:41 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Conservatives in the media try to game reality (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Tortmaster

      They make assertions like "Democrats are in a panic!" over and over again, in the hopes that it'll stick.  

      It doesn't, but that doesn't keep them from trying over and over again.  If voting for 47 useless repeals of the Affordable Care Act, going after immigrants again, and shutting down women some more haven't taught Republicans to learn not to repeat mistakes, I don't know what will.

      Republicans have tried to repeal the ACA 42 times now, knowing it would fail. That means we have a party full of people who don't learn from repeating the same mistake 42 times.

      by nominalize on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 10:46:10 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Judge, love it; just too late to rec! (0+ / 0-)

      I'm asking you to believe. Not in my ability to bring about real change in Washington ... *I'm asking you to believe in yours.* Barack Obama

      by samddobermann on Tue Nov 19, 2013 at 01:42:28 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I honestly hope you are right. (0+ / 0-)

    I WANT this to succeed, both as policy and politics. But I can't help thinking that if he'd just pushed the senate harder to include a public option in the reconciliation bill that became the ACA, much of the last 4 years would've been better. The ACA would've been more popular from the start. And harder to undermine.

    I worry--(I know, fear is the mindkiller, etc.) that between the GOP and the likes of Baucus and Ben Nelson, the ACA has been loaded with lots of self-destruct buttons and we haven't seen the last of them.

    "I was not born for myself alone, but for my neighbor as well as myself."--Richard Overton, leader of the Levellers, a17th C. movement for democracy and equality during the English Civil War. http://www.kynect.ky.gov/ for healthcare coverage in Kentucky

    by SouthernLeveller on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 06:33:39 PM PST

    •  SL. he did push. The senate bill DID include (0+ / 0-)

      the PO. That's what killed it, trying to shoehorn it into the senate bill.

      I'm asking you to believe. Not in my ability to bring about real change in Washington ... *I'm asking you to believe in yours.* Barack Obama

      by samddobermann on Tue Nov 19, 2013 at 01:44:48 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I do nit think it is fair (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TJ

    to make "... the insurance companies, and the American citizens absorb responsibility for the solution." since they did not create the problem. Seems he is passing the buck.

    •  The InsCos created the problem in the 1st place (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Tortmaster, Pluto

      They had Liz Fowler and Max Baucus craft the bill to their exact specifications.

      They wanted to be able to cut the cheap plans and trick the policyholders into buying more expensive offerings without letting them know that better and cheaper ones might be available through other sources (such as Medicare).  Now they can't do that anymore.

      Pooooor babeeeez.  NOT.

      Visit http://theuptake.org/ for Minnesota news as it happens.

      by Phoenix Woman on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 09:42:47 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Nah (0+ / 0-)

        The problem was the congress and WH that crafted the law- you can blame insurance companies for lobbying to represent their best interests but they didn't write the legislation, nor over promise to sell it. Now the people who wrote the law and hyped it are going to make people pay for their mistakes.

    •  Bull. (0+ / 0-)

      In the time it took Adam Lanza to reload, eleven children escaped. What if...

      by Sixty Something on Mon Nov 18, 2013 at 05:04:02 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Well that was a clever response n/t (0+ / 0-)
        •  Swettie, the insurers could have kept (0+ / 0-)

          most of these policies in effect by CHOOSING to  grandfather them in. They decided to be tricky — and blame it on the ACA.

          I'm asking you to believe. Not in my ability to bring about real change in Washington ... *I'm asking you to believe in yours.* Barack Obama

          by samddobermann on Tue Nov 19, 2013 at 01:47:03 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Not so sure about that swettie (0+ / 0-)

            They would have had to done that prior to 2010. And in the aftermath of 2010 who knew what was going to be the result? And Obama said after 2010 you could keep your plan. Which of course he knew was false. Then the co's had to change (or drop)  those plans not grandfathered. Now he says they can? But only for a year.

            •  but people have been saying they (0+ / 0-)

              had their policy, which they are bitching about losing, for years. Thus those could have been grandfathered.

              I'm asking you to believe. Not in my ability to bring about real change in Washington ... *I'm asking you to believe in yours.* Barack Obama

              by samddobermann on Mon Nov 25, 2013 at 04:09:27 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

  •  asdf (0+ / 0-)
    the insurance companies, and the American citizens absorb responsibility for the solution
    Yes, it's always a masterstroke to blame your potential customers. Not.
  •  And when some states say no to the fix, that will (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Tortmaster, jayden, FindingMyVoice

    "throw the market into even more confusion",

    Meaning that the insurance companies will have to offer good plans for cheap, which costs them money

    or publicly say that they're jacking up their rates only because of spite.

    "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." --M. L. King "You can't fix stupid" --Ron White -6.00, -5.18

    by zenbassoon on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 07:16:06 PM PST

  •  Damn spellcheck. LOST WEEKEND (0+ / 0-)
  •  You're right, the InsCos are pissed (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Tortmaster

    They drafted the ACA to their specs and they wanted Obama to take the heat for any bad effects.  Well guess what, that ain't happening.

    Fellow Kossack Pluto has been observing the action at a message board frequented by actuaries.  Many of them are Cons of the knuckledragging sort, but there are a few Libs there and at least one Con who does recognize political reality:

    This was, indeed, a prudent move by Obama. The ignorant majority will think this is akin to putting Twinkies back on the shelf post-Hostess bankruptcy, then be pissed at the insurers when they attempt to point out how infeasible Obama's plan is logistically.

    It will play out one of three ways in my estimation, none good for insurance industry PR.

    1) Somehow insurers are able to do all the operational and pricing work necessary to get the plans back up and running, BUT they obviously need to raise the rates to be in line with medical inflation, utilization, fee schedules, etc. Insurers are bad because they jacked up the rates.

    2) Insurers realize that the rate increases will not be well-received and serve as ammunition for Obama's claims that we're just taking money from people wily-nily. So insurers put the plans back on the market, but at no rate increase (added benefit of bypassing the DOI review delays, possibly). Bad for industry because the Individual market takes a financial bath in 2014.

    3) Insurers realize that the operational miracles ain't happening in 6 weeks and just don't bother trying to get the plans back into their systems and priced for 1/1/14. Bad for industry because, "OMG! Obama is right! Insurers ARE taking away our plans! WTFBBQ42!"

    Visit http://theuptake.org/ for Minnesota news as it happens.

    by Phoenix Woman on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 08:28:42 PM PST

  •  Just Two Thoughts Reading Through Comments (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Tortmaster, FindingMyVoice

    1. I think it not only fair, but important to remain aware of the fact the President Obama has, where it has mattered most, remained out in front on this plan--alone. What does that say about this President's character?

    2. While letters notifying insureds of cancellation contained upsells, it is well worth checking the marketplace. Many have discovered same company has OTHER plans compliant with significantly lower premiums available. Because that's what they want you to buy doesn't mean that's all you are able to buy, even from the same company.

    Nurse Kelley says my writing is brilliant and my soul is shiny - who am I to argue?
    Economic
    Left/Right: -7.75
    Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.51

    by Bud Fields on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 09:01:01 PM PST

  •  To clarify about LAWS and REGULATIONS (9+ / 0-)

    There have been many comments questioning the President's authority to "change the law"  Let me explain.  

    There is difference between regulations which are rules and laws.  Let me use WA as an example.  The legislature passed the enabling legislation that allowed the state through the Insurance Commission to create a WA State Exchange to implement the ACA in our state.  As passed, laws always have certain flex-abilities written into them empowering somebody in the executive branch to iron out the details.  That is to create a set for rules and regulations within the parameters of the enabling legislation (The law in question law).  In WA the power regulate  insurance is invested by the state constitution in in the Insurance Commission an elected state officer.  

    As passed by congress the ACA gave the power to each state to implement their own individual exchanges.  In fact that was the expected outcome.  Remember, states rights.  The GOP loves states rights, right?  Not so much I guess because 34 states decided to let Obama do it for them.

    WA said yes we'll create our own exchange and the job went to Mike Kriedler our Insurance Commissioner who spent 3 years pretty much getting it right.  We have the 3rd highest enrollment in the country.  

    During the last week he used the provision of the ACA law that grant states the right to create their own regulations to rule that we would not accept the aforementioned fix.  Mike used his regulatory authority to control insurance companies and said no.  It is not a change in the law but the regulations; the rules that insurance companies have to comply with in order to do business here.

    The U.S. Executive Branch (Obama or Sebelius) has the same kind of authority.  Laws are not passed with  a complete set of regulations but rather as a basic outline of what congress intends.  Does that make sense?  
    When Obama put the fix in, so to speak, it was through a regulatory change.  It doesn't not change the law.  

    That is also why Obama can't just dictate a change to single payer.  The enabling legislation does not give him that much authority.  He can change the rules within the framework of the law and the ACA as passed does not authorize the Executive Branch to create a single payer system.

    I hope this helps.  

    A bad idea isn't responsible for those who believe it. ---Stephen Cannell

    by YellerDog on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 09:15:49 PM PST

  •  Bill Clinton remains the world's most admired (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nominalize, Pluto, Jeremimi

    of any politician, and nobody else more than President Barack Obama knows that both Clinton's masterpiece of a DNC re-nomination speech and his many campaign stops across the county last year were absolutely integral to his reelection.

    I cannot fathom in my sixty years any other politician anywhere in this world having done so much as Bill Clinton has with his CGI Conferences and Foundation, having transferred billions of dollars into safe drinking water, fighting disease, particularly the blight of AIDS, the fight on behalf of women's rights and universal education.  He is a brilliant light of hope and progress for much of the wider world, and President Obama himself has called Bill Clinton's CGI and Foundation the very model for future generations.

    It was Bill Clinton's budget--for which he was every bit as much excoriated for his efforts in 1994 as Barack Obama was in 2010--that led to the unprecedented peacetime growth of all the remaining 1990s--not just the "tech boom"--and it was his brilliance at foreign diplomacy that kept the peace in those years, with the Kosovo War superbly effected, briefly and without any American casualty.  He alone among any past President was able to pass meaningful gun legislation, and his administration's battle with Big Tobacco assured a long-lasting liberation from its lethal influences.

    Bill Clinton stood up against the most egregious excesses of the Reagan administration, securing both Social Security and Medicare, while retaining a fully balanced budget in the greatest of all peacetime economic expansions--then and still unprecedented. Many a Clinton supporter had every right to ask detractors afterwards: "What didn't you like, the peace or the prosperity?"

    On the President's behalf, then First Lady Hillary Clinton fought the first great battles for universal health care, after the great enactment of Medicare by President Lyndon Johnson.  The insurance industry was every bit as intransigent then, and the Clintons had no precedent nor mandate on which to build the necessary momentum to fight that industry--unlike President Obama who in 2008 very much had that mandate.

    Up to the time of President Bill Clinton, no other administration was ever more inviting of gay men and women--and DADT was the very best that could be done against a most recalcitrant military establishment, and most gay men and women knew very well what the circumstances were of the period.

    Recently, the Virginia state elections resulted in the state's highest offices in an off-year stunningly changing into Democratic hands.  That Governor-elect remains a long-time Clinton friend, and Bill Clinton is owed just as much a role in that victory, with his relentless and inspired campaigning, as should be rendered to President Obama whose coalition held fast to give Terry McAuliffe his margin of triumph.

    I can think of no other politician in my sixty year lifetime who has had a longer reign of direct influence, or who is a more masterful tactician across the political divide than Bill Clinton.  The Democratic Party has been blessed to have him; GOP consultants know that to be a fact, even if the more ideological voices from the Left remain determined to deny him his due.

    This week President Barack and First Lady Michelle Obama will trek to Arlington National Cemetery, with former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton to commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.  I can think of no animosity or rancor between those couples--only an understanding of their individual and shared talents.

    For them, and for the greater American people, the bashing by the Left of the mediation successes of Bill Clinton--for whom "triangulation" is anything but a sinister word--particularly from shrill elements within DailyKos, is every bit as revolting as the extreme voices against reason and compromise from the Right.

    Bill Clinton is now the most popular of all American Presidents of the past fifty years, swiftly surpassing Ronald Reagan, who, unlike Bill Clinton, had an entire network developed to perpetuating his artificially constructed image, by way of Hollywood and General Electric, through the filter of Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch's Fox "News" Network.  Bill Clinton never needed a media to buttress his image; he was every bit as accomplished on any stage as any talk show host or hostess.  Indeed, Bill Clinton has ever been the star of his own media, which in a real sense is why the MSM never truly accepted him.

    I believe that should Hillary Rodham Clinton become our first woman Chief Executive, she will be every bit as accomplished as were her husband and Barack Obama in their own administrations.  

    But not just as the most potent of all possible campaign surrogates should Hillary decide to run again for the presidency, but as a matchless campaigner and tactician on behalf of any number of office seekers in the near and distant future, and most importantly in his ongoing role as world goodwill ambassador, Bill Clinton has left his indelible mark as a force for positive change for all the foreseeable future.

    And that, notwithstanding the shrill voices of the hard Right and Left, not any of whom have the courage, much less the ability, to debate him on any issue on an open stage.  That he is the best politician of the Modern Era is becoming increasingly clear, filtering through the white noise of even the most passionate and strident of his detractors, in this space or elsewhere.

  •  The President is Playing 'Them' Again (4+ / 0-)

    The Rcons have wasted two months talking about a website and defending junk insurance policies. Wow.
        Next thing you know it will be gov't shutdown time again.
    Happy Holidays.
       Think good thoughts.

  •  Not sure I agree with this... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pluto

    Look, I want the ACA to succeed. I want Obama and the Democrats to do well, and for the Democrats to win back the House next year. I want Medicare for All, just like Weiner talked about on Bill Maher... But, I'm sorry, this diary just assumes way too much, especially regarding the actual political consequences of what's happening right now. (And seriously, Anthony Weiner? Even if he's right he is completely toxic right now.. we should not be basically using him to tout anything that we might want right now... His negatives are MASSIVE even with JUST Democratic voters).

    The truth of the matter is, even with Obama's plan , this doesn't really change anything. You think just because Obama says, to a more or less extent, "Don't blame me, blame the insurance companies!" that that somehow inoculates him from criticism? That somehow the insurance companies won't just keep doing what they're doing and blame the law for it anyway, saying "Well, the way the law actually WORKS is that we actually can't really offer these plans any more, even if we're allowed to." They won't even need to put it in so many words... This is going to be on Obama and the Democrats.

    The way this gets better is when the website is working at basically 100% and people start actually getting signed up for insurance, and we start hearing more GOOD stories about people being able to get cheaper insurance, than BAD stories about people's policies being cancelled. Basically, the overall story on Obamacare needs a major shift from all the problems it's having to all the good it's doing. If we never get that, then the law, and Democrats, are going to have some major problems ahead.

    Obama doesn't get to wave a magic wand and make this suddenly go away, as this diary seems to believe.

    •  Talk to the media about this. (0+ / 0-)

      There are more and more people signing up each day and more people using the site. — which is mostly working right now.

      I'm asking you to believe. Not in my ability to bring about real change in Washington ... *I'm asking you to believe in yours.* Barack Obama

      by samddobermann on Tue Nov 19, 2013 at 01:54:17 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Teflon President (0+ / 0-)

    His approval ratings have tanked and are the lowest since he became President. The Democrats can't take back the House and will lilkely lose the Senate. A Democrat can't win the next Presidential election. The Beltway pundits have read the Tea leaves leaves and  pontificated......... In 2011.

    In Oct 2011 Quinnipiac produced the worse poll ratings of his Presidency a month after Benghazi after a feeding frenzy by Fox News and the maintream media blaming President Obama Susan Rice or Hillary Clinton  or all of them take your pick. Approval rating of 41%. Mark Halperin, the sage of MSNBC who was once suspended for calling the President a 'dick' headlined the results of the Quinnipiac Oct 2011 poll 'Down in the Dumps'

    http://thepage.time.com/...

  •  Accomplished absolutly nothing (0+ / 1-)
    Recommended by:
    Hidden by:
    nomandates

    Insurance that was illegal is still illegal.  We only have the word of a proven liar that he wont prosecute anyone over these plans for a year.  No insurance company is going to allow illegal plans so there is effectively no change in policy.  When the Republicans get their bill passed, then the plans will be legal but I wouldn't expect that to change anything either.  The companies have been forced to charge more money for less services.  Why should they change?

    •  False. He just said follow the law that said (0+ / 0-)

      old policies could be grandfathered in even if non compliant. They choose not to. Obama said think again, fools.

      It is not illegal.

      I'm asking you to believe. Not in my ability to bring about real change in Washington ... *I'm asking you to believe in yours.* Barack Obama

      by samddobermann on Tue Nov 19, 2013 at 01:57:18 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  ingenious (0+ / 0-)

    This is why we elected a brilliant man for POTUS...

  •  Black people are inferior to white people. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    samddobermann

    Remember black people can not be allowed to compete on a fair playing field because it will make racist republicans look stupid.   As a white man the racist republican tea party libertarians make all of us look like a subspecies that is unable to govern America.  The history books will enshrine their demonic hared for generations to see.  The message of the racist republicans will not match up with the historical record of President Obama's accomplishments.  But they want to make sure that no black man will ever get elected again, by painting a false picture of reality.  That makes them feel safe and superior.   They don't know that eternal damnation is waiting for them

  •  They already regret canceling vs. amending (0+ / 0-)

    Because more people will understand that they've been cheated by the private insurance industry, which will increase support for Single Payer.

  •  Cyber attacks on Health Care . gov (0+ / 0-)

    Cyber attacks on HealthCare.gov.  Republicans wouldn't cheat, now would they?

  •  Oh no, the President is still black!!!!!!!!! (0+ / 0-)

    It is a lie because the corporation canceled policies?  The corporation is your unelected government right?  Your use of capital letters, DON'T MAKE YOU RIGHT.  YOU WANT CORPORATE REPUBLICAN DEATH PANELS, because it is more profitable for the corporate loyalists?  Is your mind filled with lies?  Like Yellow Cake.  WMD?   Fixed elections.
    Death Panels?   Kenya?  Communist anti Christ, Global warming is not real?  A black theology christian that is really a Muslim wants to kill Grandma and George Bush won the election of 2000 fair and square?  You are mentally ill and you need Obama care to treat you.

  •  ObamaCare aka The PPACA (0+ / 0-)

    YESSSSSSS!!!  The Prez has done it again!  I thought these bastard insurance companies were smarter than that, but they compare favorably with the utter stupidity of the GOTP!  And these ankle biters want to run the country?!  Yeah, riiiiiiiight!!

  •  The ACA was not just flawed... (0+ / 0-)

    There was a fundamental problem. The GOP's allies in the insurance and health care industry were made part of this. They have had years to finagle ways to sabotage the process and any electronic solution. Even if that's not the case, they have not struggled to make the process more uniform. Hah. Naw, I believe a few bad crumbs did not make it easier.

    Prior to 2001, the application process was still very paper and very face to face, or at least voice to voice COMPANY BY COMPANY. Proprietary software or processes did not cross over.

    I MEAN, let's face it, even though every car has an engine, transmission, etc., you can't put a chevy transmission into a ford. Maybe that should be possible, I dunno.

    But in the ACA, or in Health Care in general, these processes should have been aligning over the years. But they haven't. And then there's the security issues over the various other agencies that have to be referenced in the process.

    We are only 13 years from Y2K, remember? I don't think that we have really learned that much since then to help this system.

    Gee, I hope that they have a four digit year code that's the same across systems.... Eh?

    Ugh. --UB.

    "Daddy, every time a bell rings, a Randian Libertaria­n picks up his Pan Am tickets for the Libertaria­n Paradise of West Dakota!"

    by unclebucky on Mon Nov 18, 2013 at 03:55:40 PM PST

  •  pay no attention to the man behind the curtain... (0+ / 0-)

    ...has been the mantra of the GOP and their corporate handlers for decades.
    Thanks to this fix, many people are now about to confront the man behind the curtain, his handlers and their agenda for the first time. Prediction: Minds will be blown.

    If you're going to reason with me, please use actual reason.

    by jeannesgirl on Mon Nov 18, 2013 at 04:50:04 PM PST

  •  I agree (0+ / 0-)

    with your assessment of this little insurance mess. Because It's an insurance mess not a healthcare mess. The President has pointed this out with more finesse than my blunt expression. It is past time to deal openly with insurance company market-speak and all that it hides.

  •  "Their threats of future higher premiums..." (0+ / 0-)

    "be ignored" - oh, really?

    So why are premiums still going up?

    Oh, wait a minute - Daily Kos says health care is free now.

    Yes, I believe that.

    •  who the hell said anything like that? (0+ / 0-)

      Health care costs will tend to keep rising but there are things in place to reduce costs — like eliminating fraud by providers. They are catching quite a few scammers now and even making some cough up their ill gotten gains.

      I'm asking you to believe. Not in my ability to bring about real change in Washington ... *I'm asking you to believe in yours.* Barack Obama

      by samddobermann on Tue Nov 19, 2013 at 04:33:36 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  BUT!!! (0+ / 0-)

    But Obama can change his mind in May, 2014 and rescind his previous royal order, thus screwing the insurance companies. Not only that, but individuals can sue insurance companies because the insurance companies are breaking the law and individuals will win and insurance companies will loose in courts. (Diabolical plan to destroy the health insurance industry leaving only the federal government to help me.) Does anyone seriously think Obama can define the law in real time based on his political whims? Get serious!!! The only reason he isn't impeached and thrown out of office is because he is of-color. Everyone knows that.

    I am  @egbegb on Twitter

  •  President (0+ / 0-)

    Yes he did and even if it is not a bluff, I am glad he did it. I hope he keeps it up right in the media were he has the big advantage. Just like Reagan  did.

  •  I am very disappointed by this law (0+ / 0-)

    I am glad that we get to have coverage even though we have pre-existing conditions.  I am not happy about how expensive that is, how large the deductibles are, how our monthly health care costs are going up by at least one thousand dollars.  Anyone know why Medigap is doubling their premiums now?  Is it everywhere or just a Wisconsin thing.  I know Walker has done a lot to throw a monkey wrench in there, but I have heard rumors that the powers that be believe that making it extremely expensive to go to doctors will make those people who go to doctors unnecessarily (what, sit in a crowded office just for fun?) will stay home and that will supposedly reduce health care costs.   Most likely they will stay home until its become fatal like most people without real insurance and doctors if they lose business will just raise prices on existing customers to make up for the loss

Thumb, RF, Phoenix Woman, mwm341, artr2, greenbird, eeff, etatauri, figdish, LeftHandedMan, Doctor Who, scribe, EricS, kalihikane, lippythelion69, sja, samddobermann, jalbert, Chitown Charlie, nio, Texknight, Copp, Eyesbright, delphine, Steven Payne, outragedinSF, WisVoter, KayCeSF, marina, JohnB47, paj1, fixxit, Fury, sunbro, kaliope, Aint Supposed to Die a Natural Death, Pluto, vigilant meerkat, 417els, tobendaro, rl en france, Rosaura, Libby Shaw, gimmie truth, onionjim, BentLiberal, krwheaton, Cronesense, byDesign, offgrid, CenterLeft, Mary Mike, deepeco, jayden, jedennis, Fireshadow, on the cusp, JaxDem, GAS, OleHippieChick, Sixty Something, NewDealer, rssrai, tofumagoo, pickandshovel, Gemina13, Notreadytobenice, Miz Trom, LinSea, ewmorr, bobatkinson, ronnied, Ohiodem1, CamillesDad1, kravitz, mksutherland, Denise Oliver Velez, Tortmaster, Livvy5, orangeuglad, joe from Lowell, Railfan, smileycreek, confitesprit, FogCityJohn, piers, michelewln, DrWhk, ban48, cocinero, Dems in 08, slice, Onomastic, annieli, I love OCD, ban nock, afisher, Mr MadAsHell, FarWestGirl, deeproots, mrsgoo, PorridgeGun, Kokomo for Obama, thomask, akmk, BarackStarObama, MRA NY, loblolly, FisherOfRolando, rlk, Dbug, jolux, SoCalSal, SteelerGrrl, leftykook, Davui, AnnetteK, KansasNancy, tweeternik, OldDragon, CuriousBoston, sow hat, We Won, IndieGuy, ahumbleopinion, orpurple, a2nite, FreeSpeaker, This old man, hardart, flume, Rixar13, avsp, Denver11, Glen The Plumber, T C Gibian, Stills, Blue Bell Bookworm, Linda1961, remembrance, Thornrose, Says Who, emorej a Hong Kong, aresea, KatieAnnieOakley, nice marmot, Pritty Brains, jplanner, MrAnon, Jason Hackman, OceanDiver, ArcticStones, skepticalcitizen, Kimba, Rich Lyles, karma5230, H E Pennypacker, eagleray, pierre9045, Sir Roderick, socialistfolkstick, Joe Calarco, deereigna, DarthEVaderCheney, Here since 02, Independent Progressive, astage4444, SouthernLeveller, pydoll, Artemrss, Anna Wise, Roccekt

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site