Skip to main content

Cartoon fish wrapped in newspaper.
The big loser in Tuesday's Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report release isn't President Obama. It's not Obamacare. It's not Democrats. It's the traditional media. This was a textbook case of reading incomprehension, preconceived assumptions, susceptibility to spin and inability to admit an error, spread out over the airwaves, the Internet, and blowing up in real time. In the aftermath, it's fascinating to see how it all played out: who corrected themselves, who backpedaled without ever ackowledging their fuck up, who insisted that even if they were wrong they were right, and who ran with the lie and are sticking with it.

The latter category is entirely predictable. For example, the National Review, which stuck with the headline "The CBO Just Nuked Obamacare" even after the debunking. Forbes doubled down, from "Congressional Budget Office: Obamacare A Tax On Workers" to "CBO: Obamacare Is A Tax On Work, May Cut Full-Time Workforce By 2.5 Million." The Washington Times, likewise, stuck with "Obamacare will push 2 million workers out of labor market: CBO" even after it was made abundantly clear that it would be the workers choosing to leave.

To its credit, the Washington Post was pretty much first out of the gate with a correction and with a very timely factcheck, which pretty much triggered the rest of the respectable media to correct themselves. But what was really fun to watch was the "well, yeah, but" crowd. Case in point: NBC's Chuck Todd.

He starts out with the unequivocal statement: "CBO essentially reaffirms GOP talking points on health care. Says it will cost jobs, feel as if it raises taxes and contributes to deficit." GOP wins! Then as his story falls apart, the idea that the CBO is hedging: "The CBO report has a lot of uses of the word "may" which for a forecast is obvious but certainly is reminder nothing is definitive." He finally ends with a complete head fake, changing the subject: "Biggest story out of the CBO report is the fact that long term econ outlook is all less than robust because of the aging overall pop." Uh, huh.

Another standout:

Tho much reporting & GOP response to new CBO report on ACA is inaccurate/false, problem for Dems: If you're explainin', you're losin'
Well, yeah, maybe I got it all wrong, but it's the Democrats' fault! Interestingly enough, Calmes employer thinks it's pretty great stuff, editorializing that the report shows a huge benefit of Obamacare: it "frees" people from the "insurance trap." That's an explanation Democrats can sure live with.

While it's fun to point and laugh at stupid reporters, the whole incident is pretty disheartening and problematic. Steve Benen sums up the problem well: "we can no longer focus on what is true; we must also consider what Republicans and reporters perceive as possibly true—which in turn is what the public will believe, whether it’s accurate or not." One part of that equation should be easy to fix, reporters just have to do their jobs.

Originally posted to Joan McCarter on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 10:04 AM PST.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

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

  •  First reporters have to figure out (19+ / 0-)

    what their job is.

    Apparently for most of them these days it is to reduce every issue to a simple two-sided affair and then dutifully regurgitate what each side says about the issue.
    Provide context? Facts? You know actually inform the public?
    Not so much.

    Blue is blue and must be that. But yellow is none the worse for it - Edith Sidebottom

    by kenwards on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 10:21:11 AM PST

  •  And the truth the media is ignoring (13+ / 0-)

    is the disincentives could be erased by Congress right now if they extended the ACA subsidies so there was no sharp cutoff for middle class earners. Or better yet make essential health care free for all Americans and pay for it with a progressive income tax.

  •  I'm facing another issue here in Tennessee. (10+ / 0-)

    It's not just that the media serves as lapdogs and courtiers for the 1% and their Republican lackeys.

    It's the fact that Tennesseans are willfully ignorant and choose not to believe the "liberal media" for reporting the facts.

    You can tell the truth all day long.  But Tennesseans aren't going to hear it, mostly because there is such a strong kneejerk bias against Barack Obama that they no longer believe anything he says or support anything with his name attached to it.

    Take Net Neutrality as an example.  We had Marsha Blackburn the other day on Facebook telling her constituents that the FCC is trying to act like Russia or China because they're trying to regulate the internet.  Really, we all know the exact opposite is true: The FCC is trying to make sure that the World Wide Web is not choked or distorted by the Internet Service Providers.

    Scott Desjarlais is busily telling his constituents on Facebook that he is going to stand up against wasteful government spending, even as he supports billions of dollars of cuts to food stamp programs and supports paying for the government deportation of 13 million undocumented immigrants.  (And he's silent about military spending.)

    Being a reality-based community means we need to face another reality, highlighted by the Bill Nye Creation Museum debate last night.  The reality is, some people are so completely fooled by propaganda and religious bigotry that they cannot see the truth when it is clearly explained to them.

    Bill Nye didn't change anyone's mind... all he did was highlight the massive gap between those who have an ability to understand science and those who are part of the "faith-based community" which willfully ignores reality.

    I like Marsha Blackburn on Facebook. Don't hate.

    by Benintn on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 10:36:50 AM PST

    •  The propaganda (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Grabber by the Heel, 1Nic Ven

      is effective and virulent.  I was at the funereal home Tues afternoon speaking to an friend who is apparently a winger.  He had all the CBO propaganda and I hadn't heard much about the report because of the death and subsequent arrangements taking up my time. I was angry that I was not up to snuff with the info and couldn't refute.  My only option was to tell him I didn't give a f--k if some were suffering with new health care rules because they certainly didn't give a f--k when my kids were uninsurable.  He had to agree to that.  

      Everyone! Arms akimbo! 68351

      by tobendaro on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 12:30:35 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  But the CBO screwed up, too (10+ / 0-)

    And the media has some excuse for confusion.

    The report addresses this on page 117:

    The estimated reduction stems almost entirely from a net decline in the amount of labor that workers choose to supply, rather than from a net drop in businesses’ demand for labor, so it will appear almost entirely as a reduction in labor force participation and in hours worked relative to what would have occurred otherwise rather than as an increase in unemployment (that is, more workers seeking but not finding jobs) or underemployment (such as part-time workers who would prefer to work more hours per week). (emphasis mine)
    Those two highlighted items are in conflict.

    If there is no drop in demand for labor, there will NOT be a drop in hours worked.  Different people will work those hours.  That's what the CBO meant to say - and it misspoke.

  •  Benen: Breaking 1981. nt (0+ / 0-)

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 10:57:49 AM PST

  •  I would've bet my last dime the WSJ front page (9+ / 0-)

    headline would trumpet the job "losses," and I would've been right: "Healthcare Law to Cut Into Labor Force." If you read the story, they do mention it's not job losses caused by ACA, but people electing not to work more because they now have coverage. Also, buried on page A4, paragraph 12, the story notes two pieces of good news that the headline overlooked:

    The CBO estimated that insurance premiums on the healthcare exchanges were 15% less than originally projected ... The CBO estimated that through 2024, the government would collect $8 billion more from the provision than it would be required to pay out.

    stay together / learn the flowers / go light - Gary Snyder

    by Mother Mags on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 11:04:08 AM PST

  •  The FOX news hit on my local fox (0+ / 0-)

    station used the 2 million jobs lost claim which I am sure went out to all of their local affiliates across the country. I'm sure talk radio will make it the CW for the simple minded.

    Most of the people taking a hard line against us are firmly convinced that they are the last defenders of civilization... The last stronghold of mother, God, home and apple pie and they're full of shit! David Crosby, Journey Thru the Past.

    by Mike S on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 11:05:42 AM PST

  •  Workers will have a little bit more power.. (4+ / 0-)

    .over their own health care. Something the republicans have been ranting about for years:

     "Obamacare denies people their own choice to keep their own doctors and choose their own plans blah blah blah..."

    Now people will have more say and the GOP turns the story upside down

    Chris Hayes talks with Josh Barro, a republican (who is very sharp and usually puts the GOP spin on things - but is more honest than most republicans most of the time)  explains that many people will now, NOT be at the mercy of their employers to keep their health care. He uses standard supply and demand calculation.
    The Buried Lede In The CBO Report: Obamacare Will Raise Wages - Josh Barro | Feb. 4, 2014, 3:49 PM

    Over the last few decades, owners of capital have captured a rising share of national income, as wage growth has lagged. By strengthening workers' hands in negotiation, Obamacare should increase the labor share of GDP and reduce income inequality. The CBO finding that the law will reduce labor supply is just one example of that. while Josh Barro is quite willing to point out that jos numbers may go down, he also points to the fact that it is because of workers gaining more control, and will help those low wage workers most in need:
    The positive wage effect should be concentrated among low-skill workers, who will face the greatest discouragement to work from Obamacare, and therefore will be able to command the greatest wage increases in order to keep working.

      (@ minute 6:30 Josh Barro gets to it - short ad sorry)
    transcript @ link:

    So it sort of sad that it takes a republicans outfit to report what too many in the MSM lost sight of chasing yet another republican scandal ratings/hunt

    So steve does nail it:

    "we can no longer focus on what is true; we must also consider what Republicans and reporters perceive as possibly true—which in turn is what the public will believe, whether it’s accurate or not."
    And so do you Joan McCarter:
    One part of that equation should be easy to fix, reporters just have to do their jobs.
    - Indeed
  •  "Reporters Have To Do Their Jobs" (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Hayate Yagami, hang319

    How the hell are we going to get any reporter to actually engage in "journalism"? It doesn't make the networks enough money when there are 1,000 Megyn Kelly's who don't have to do anything but talk pretty and sound stupid.

    Allow provisional acceptance of things that go against your deepest convictions in the face of a preponderance of evidence.

    by ConservativeBrainTrust on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 11:21:37 AM PST

  •  Allow elderly to voluntarily exit job? No-ooooooo (6+ / 0-)
    Ned Resnikoff @resnikoff
    I just read a shocking CBO report saying that our policy of allowing the elderly to voluntarily exit their jobs is killing millions of jobs
  •  You can't expect stenographers to think (3+ / 0-)

    "Side A says _, while Side B says _. Who's telling the truth? You decide!"
    No thinking, no comprehension, no understanding, very little work required from their stenographers "journalists".  If the media actually bothered to fact check before writing, the Republican party would go extinct overnight because all they have are lies.

    "He who fights monsters should see to it that he himself does not become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you."

    by Hayate Yagami on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 11:29:28 AM PST

  •  Instead of reporters "doing their jobs" how (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Hayate Yagami, cybersaur

    About these clowns go find new jobs. Because lord knows they suck at being journalists. They're just mouth pieces who peddle gossip and lies.

  •  "Obamacare Adds Liquidity to Jobs Market!" (4+ / 0-)

     I doubt those cited by the CBO are choosing to exit the ranks of the employed entirely.
      They may keep one or more jobs, but be freed from working every waking moment in order to afford junk health insurance, or worse yet: to pay for uninsured illness or injury in their families.
      Aside from having better health insurance AND a higher quality of life: an instant two rungs up on the ladder, they have more time for themselves and their families, and there are more jobs available as well. It's a win for everybody.
      I'm guessing those jobs they're vacating will need to be filled. Can't wait to see the employment numbers for this quarter.
      Time for some competition for employees to reinvigorate wages for our working class!

    •  Some will exit (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Involuntary Exile, jhop7

      Some older people will decide to retire early, now that they can have insurance. Some parents will decide that one partner will stay home with their young children instead of working. Some people will decide to stay on Medicaid and not get a job, though I imagine that choice wouldn't be a hugely popular one, because one has to have a very low income to remain on Medicaid and most people prefer to have money if possible.

      •  I know one of those who will now retire. (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        hang319, tb mare, Cassandra Waites, jhop7

        As I wrote in another thread earlier today, I have a friend who works as a nursing assistant at the biggest hospital in our area who will turn 65 this June. Her husband won't be 65 until August, 2015. She started drawing her Social Security retirement benefits at age 62 and would have stopped working then, but her husband has always been self-employed and the two of them have always relied on her health insurance because he has several pre-existing conditions. She thought she'd have to work an extra year just to keep her husband insured until his Medicare kicks in. I'm sure there are many tens of thousands of couples across the country who were in the exact same situation.

        These two people had no idea that thanks to the ACA she can retire as soon as she pleases. I had to explain multiple times that not only will they be able to buy the husband good insurance for no more than they pay now, they may be able to get it even cheaper because their income will be reduced as soon as she stops working, qualifying them for a subsidy. At my urging the two of them have an appointment with an insurance specialist at our local Council on Aging to help them select a policy for him and commence the paperwork to get her onto Medicare as soon as her birthday rolls 'round. She will soon become one of those people that the CBO reported will voluntarily leave the labor force this year thanks to the ACA, and she can hardly wait.

        "Some folks rob you with a six-gun, some rob you with a fountain pen." - Woody Guthrie

        by Involuntary Exile on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 12:01:40 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  That last option (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        makes no sense.  Getting on Medicaid in my state is near impossible.  They did have a working poor option at one point but Corbet pulled.  I have a son with epilepsy and we have been through hell trying to keep him insured since he graduated high school. In states that expanded Medicare it may be easier but like you say, you have to be poor to get it.

        Everyone! Arms akimbo! 68351

        by tobendaro on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 12:38:54 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Getting Medicaid in expansion states is easy (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          tobendaro, jhop7

          I'm sorry that your state, Pennsylvania, didn't expand Medicaid.  That causes real hardship to real people, and the governor and legislators are scum to have refused expansion. But other states have expanded, and in those states, it's pretty easy to sign up.

          The CBO projects that by 2024, 80% of people who would be eligible for Medicaid if their state expanded will be in expansion states.

  •  Chuck Todd said it all:` (4+ / 0-)

    It's not the job of the media to explain things correctly.  It's their job to report what both sides say - i.e., both sides do it.

    Chuck Todd is an asshole, but he's not unlike most other traditional media assholes ...or David Gregory, for instance.

    What we need is a Democrat in the White House. ~ expatjourno

    by ezdidit on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 11:30:45 AM PST

  •  Where is... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    joesig, Grabber by the Heel

    the Obama press conference to correct all this?

    “Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.” - John Steinbeck

    by RichM on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 11:31:54 AM PST

  •  By next fall, things will have cleared up. (3+ / 0-)

    It will be hard to spin a bad light on economic growth and lower unemployment figures. That is where I see this going.

    In addition, there will be growth in the per capita hourly wage. More folks will afford healthcare, costs will be lower.

    They can try, but this will be hard to spin.

    A true craftsman will meticulously construct the apparatus of his own demise.

    by onionjim on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 11:31:55 AM PST

  •  I rarely do this but I feel in fairness to (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CTMET, PsychoSavannah

    Jackie Calmes, it bears pointing out that she did send several tweets correcting the MSM inaccuracies, and even called out Eric Cantor for his misrepresentation of the report.


    I called her out after seeing just the one tweet about "explainin" without reading the other previous and subsequent tweets. I tweeted her an apology.

    America is a COUNTRY, not a CORPORATION. She doesn't need a CEO. Vote Obama.

    by manneckdesign on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 11:31:57 AM PST

    •  You are right about that. It was bad enough (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      that Markos didn't read all the tweets, but Joan by repeating it just makes it worse. Lets not act like the other side.

      The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy;the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness

      by CTMET on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 01:28:04 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Calmes vs the NYT editorial page (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Interesting perspective here on the war between the news and opinion pages at the NYT ... it's a long article but the gist seems to be that the villagers on the news side think the NYT editorial page is too frumpy and liberal, want it to be more outrageous and frothy like the WSJ editorial page.

    •  Thatwas a good read, but I'm not sure its (0+ / 0-)

      really a villagers versus the liberals issue.

      One of the biggest arguments made by the news side was this.

      I love and completely agree with these:

      One current Times staffer told The Observer, “Tom Friedman is an embarrassment. I mean there are multiple blogs and Tumblrs and Twitter feeds that exist solely to make fun of his sort of blowhardy bullshit.” (Gawker has been particularly hard on Mr. Friedman, with Hamilton Nolan memorably skewering him in a column entitled “Tom Friedman Travels the World to Find Incredibly Uninteresting Platitudes,” as a “mustachioed soothsaying simpleton”; another column was titled “Tom Friedman Does Not Know What’s Happening Here,” and the @firetomfriedman Twitter account has more than 1,800 followers.)
      . But I will say, regarding Friedman, there’s the sense that he’s on cruise control now that he’s his own brand. And no one is saying, ‘Hey, did you see the latest Friedman column?’ in the way they’ll talk about ‘Hey, Gail [Collins] was really funny today.’”
      I also agree that Gail Collins is awesome.
      unprompted, returned to Mr. Friedman. “I just think it’s bad, and nobody is acknowledging that they suck, but everybody in the newsroom knows it, and we really are embarrassed by what goes on with Friedman. I mean anybody who knows anything about most of what he’s writing about understands that he’s, like, literally mailing it in from wherever he is on the globe. He’s a travel reporter. A joke. The guy gets $75,000 for speeches and probably charges the paper for his first-class airfare.”
      Another former Times writer, someone who has gone on to great success elsewhere, expressed similar contempt (and even used the word “embarrass”) and says it’s longstanding.
      Cough....Frank Rich.... Cough.
      As for the columnists, Friedman is the worst. He hasn’t had an original thought in 20 years; he’s an embarrassment. He’s perceived as an idiot who has been wrong about every major issue for 20 years, from favoring the invasion of Iraq to the notion that green energy is the most important topic in the world even as the financial markets were imploding. Then there’s Maureen Dowd, who has been writing the same column since George H. W. Bush was president.”
      agree about Dowd too. They didn't even get to Brooks.

      If I had more energy I would diary this.

      The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy;the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness

      by CTMET on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 02:10:20 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Even media in liberal S.F. get ACA facts wrong. (0+ / 0-)

    CBS station in S.F. has been attacking Covered CA lately.  Yesterday, they implied Covered CA/"Obamacare" was responsible for an error that was clearly the fault of insurer Anthem/BC.  

    My Karma just ran over your Dogma

    by FoundingFatherDAR on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 11:37:02 AM PST

    •  Local news media in liberal SF not particularly (0+ / 0-)

      liberal. Pretty much all of the coverage of the BART negotiations was openly pro-management, for example. Haven't seen the CBS5 coverage of Covered CA, but I'm not surprised.

      "Think of something to make the ridiculous look ridiculous." -- Molly Ivins

      by dumpster on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 12:08:42 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  We live in an age of spin and interpretation. (4+ / 0-)

    Truth has become a daily casualty.

    You come to an argument armed with iron-clad facts, and those who disagree with you will say, "Yes, but..." and spew whatever nonsense is clogging their minds.

    This is why I like sports. Not even the most ardent Denver Broncos fans can spin their way out of Sunday's beatdown, other than to say, " one contracted the bubonic plague during the game. So, there's that."

    I swear, it's reached the point that if I were to say, "George Washington was our first president," someone would disagree.

    How about I believe in the unlucky ones?

    by BenderRodriguez on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 11:37:09 AM PST

  •  Oh please. (3+ / 0-)

    We created this mess.  Know we're blaming the MSM just like Faux news.  

    Someone, anyone, needs to stand up and tell the public what the f' is going on.

    Please, not Jay Carney.

    Where are the "Lions"?  Pelosi, Stenyer, Reid, Schumer, Durbin?


    "When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains, And the women come out to cut up what remains, Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains An' go to your Gawd like a soldier." Rudyard Kipling

    by EdMass on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 11:38:15 AM PST

  •  Even if it's true, consider what the claim is. (0+ / 0-)

    Employers would rather fire people or impoverish them further than give them access to health care.  We live in a country where employers are just assumed to be the most awful people in the world and it's as natural as the weather--no, it's praised as the utmost rationality.  The idea that government should make policies to accommodate the awfulness of employers is really what's at issue here.  The notion that if you're a "job creator" you should be allowed to destroy jobs and lives at will is like saying doctors should be allowed to machine-gun people because they deliver babies.

    It's not the side effects of the cocaine/I'm thinking that it must be love

    by Rich in PA on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 11:43:13 AM PST

    •  Aw, c'mon Rich (0+ / 0-)

      If an employer generates $X revenue and payroll plus healthcare plus taxes all add up to net negative profit then   what is that business owner supposed to do?  Still pay employees? Still provide benefits?  How?  Etc, etc.  

      Employers aren't "awful", at least those I have worked for. And I have been an employer as well.  My top priority was always providing/treating those that worked for me as well as I was able.  Sometimes, it just doesn't work out for the employer or the employee.  Sh*t Happens.  The Gubmint can't and shouldn't f with this dynamic, which we are now doing bigtime, imho.

      You should blame Accountants that tally balance sheets.  Unless of course, everyone should get paid with benefits regardless...


      "When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains, And the women come out to cut up what remains, Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains An' go to your Gawd like a soldier." Rudyard Kipling

      by EdMass on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 12:07:49 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes but it doesn't add up to negative profit. (0+ / 0-)

        It's simply a bit less profit than they'd get otherwise.  What you've stated is the logic of NFL owners during the lockout, who used the few worst-run and/or least-viable franchises to justify all franchises cutting the share going to workers.  

        It's not the side effects of the cocaine/I'm thinking that it must be love

        by Rich in PA on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 12:14:59 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Huh? (0+ / 0-)

          Negative profit = no profit = no money in the coffers.  Does the phrase "Going Concern" mean anything to you?

          "When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains, And the women come out to cut up what remains, Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains An' go to your Gawd like a soldier." Rudyard Kipling

          by EdMass on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 12:23:04 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Jesus H Christ, (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gimmie truth, PsychoSavannah

    just where was this "skeptical" media when George W Bush mislead this nation into a costly still unpaid for war in Iraq?

    "Remember, Republican economic policies quadrupled the debt before I took office and doubled it after I left. We simply can't afford to double-down on trickle-down." Bill Clinton

    by irate on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 11:45:57 AM PST

  •  I confess, I missed this whole thing yesterday (2+ / 0-)

    Too busy working all day (cursed tax season).

    I enjoy seeing the Beltway media eat crow today, though. I'd like to think it's a wakeup call to them, but they have a major lack of self-awareness. If they didn't, they wouldn't be the Beltway media.

  •  Headline on website of Cincinnati's CBS affiliate (0+ / 0-)

    Via a Newsmax widget hosted on their page:

    CBO: Obamacare to Kill 2 Million Jobs
    That they link to a far-right "news" organization such as Newsmax has been an ongoing frustration of mine with WKRC-TV. So I'll take this opportunity to ask once again:

    Please contact WKRC-TV and tell them that Newsmax is not a reputable news source and should be removed from WKRC-TV's website.

  •  Yes but. (0+ / 0-)

    The LIV (white, old, rural, but committed to voting) doesn't consume media of any other kind than traditional media (read: Fox News).  This will have major play for the rest of the year, through election season...

  •  Actually, Newsweek was the first one to call BS (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Van Buren, tb mare, Russycle, madronagal

    ...and it wasn't even subtle about it. It didn't say "let's interpret the meaning of the CBO report. It said, "Everything you're reading and hearing about this report is wrong, and here's why."

    The story is here. One great quote from it:

    So, when politicians and commentators say that the new CBO report is devastating proof of the terrible impact of Obamacare, just know this: they’re lying.'
    Kinda says the point pretty strongly.
  •  CBO said the same thing years ago (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    It was either in the original markup ofv the bill in 2009 or in some later analysis a year later.  They said 2 million people would  leave their jobs, because they wouldn't have to work to remain insured.

    It's incompetant of the MSM to muff this point 4 years later & it's lame of the dems not to come out swinging at a this tired old trope.

  •  Maybe, just maybe, it IS the Democrats' fault, ... (0+ / 0-)

    ... because the Right is very quick and responsive to news. Out of the gate fast, pressing their spin. And let's face it, any kind of jobs news is so timely and can be so readily understood, while everything else seems, er, mired in ... great   d e  t   a     i       l.

    Where are our think tanks and "customarily reliable sources"? Without knowing for sure, I'll wager the GOP steals the march on us by being closer to the top of the reporter's rolodex AND vice versa.

    We gotta be better: faster, more responsive, more targeted, more understandable. And much better framers of the question(s).

    So Yes, "it" - the "Breaking News" media coverage, that is - might well be our fault. And the corrections, statement reversals, longer explanations, later followups are so ... so... very later.

    2014 is HERE. Build up the Senate. Win back the House : 17 seats. Plus!

    by TRPChicago on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 12:19:17 PM PST

  •  The Emancipation Proclamation killed jobs too (4+ / 0-)

    So it is now a bad thing to give people more choice in whether they want to work and who they want to work for?

  •  The new hit on ACA here is... (0+ / 0-)

    ...that ObamaCare will not allow retired teachers to supplement their retirement income by being substitute-teachers in same school district they retired from.  Must add this is from two retired teachers I know that spoke with last night.  I'm trying to get details /facts how sub-teaching is tied to ACA.  The general assumption is sort of true. The school district letter to retired teachers in part stated..."in September 2013, the Internal Revenue Service and the Dept of Labor issued regulations concerning the ACA... In short these requirements have significant implications for our retired employees receiving benefits (e.g. Health Reimbursement Arrangements (HRA) or Tax Sheltered Annuity (TSA 403b) and returning to work in any paid capacity for their same employer (e.g. sub-teachr, rehired teacher, event worker, etc.)" The school district further states "By definition, a retiree-only plan must only benefit retirees. Retirees rehired to work for their former employer are not retirees. They are considred employees once again. As a result, if a retired employy is currently receiving a district retirement benefit and he/she wishes to return to work for his/her former district, restrictions apply... explain the whys and wherefores. So is this a direct result of ACA or lazy attempt to create a blame Obama it's his fault?

    Our nations quality of life is based on the rightousness of its people.

    by kalihikane on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 12:25:07 PM PST

  •  "reporters just have to do their jobs" (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Snarky McAngus, PsychoSavannah

    We already know that finding the truth is not part of Chucky Todd's job; said so himself. But it raises a question: What, exactly, is Chucky's job?

  •  Disinformation has been the rule for a while now (0+ / 0-)
    "we can no longer focus on what is true; we must also consider what Republicans and reporters perceive as possibly true—which in turn is what the public will believe, whether it’s accurate or not."
    Steve Benen writes the above as if this were a new thing.  Seems as if it's been this way at least since Clinton was president.

    "Woe to those who make unjust laws,
    to those who issue oppressive decrees, to deprive the poor of their rights
    and withhold justice from the oppressed of my people, 
making widows their prey
    and robbing the fatherless."

    by Snarky McAngus on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 04:35:51 PM PST

  •  I think you miss a big point (0+ / 0-)

    Why would 2.5 million choose to leave the labor market? The CBO says it is because they will have incentives to. leaving the labor pool due to the healthcare subsidies and the equivalent taxes they would face otherwise which makes work less appealing. Thus we have 2.5 million who are no longer producing taxes (to fund the government) but consuming subsidies. This is not an ideal situation considering the original estimate was only 650K. A serious dilemma in terms of funding and projections if you ask me.

    •  If this projection even comes to pass (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      It is clear that there will be more than enough people to fill jobs, as there are still many looking for work; some who have left the labor market in discouragement will renter it.
      Job lock is a terrible drag on the economy and personal dignity. Thank goodness we are getting past it.

      •  I dunno' (0+ / 0-)

        I agree that job lock is not a good thing. But 2,5 million more on subsidies than anticipated could be a financial disaster.

        •  It is POssible (0+ / 0-)

          that of those choosing to leave 9or who may choose to) are working for wages that ALREADY give them a subsidy. And that they can now buy food, insurance, home care or rental etc... without the full or partime job OR second job.

          Raise the minimum wage and that will solve more of the subsidy complaint and food stamp complaint.

          More able to move around to another job is the key here. To move to own business perhaps, retire or lord forbid go back to school?

          AND give someone really needed to have a job right now a chance at a spot..

          So, I see it as a very positive affect ACA may have for many

          •  Look I see those as possible scenarios (0+ / 0-)

            as good news as well. However that is not what the report predicts. It does not predict they will move to another job, or start businesses (or else they would NOT be out of the labor market), or retire. They will work less due to the consequences of the ACA.

            They may be or not already be working for a low enough wage for a subsidy but again, the report says the ACA will offer enough by the way of incentives of the ACA subsidies and disincentives via taxes for 2.5 million full time equivalents not to work. That will be a substantial increase in ACA subsidies and a strain on the system. My fear is that those who really need a job will not find those low wage pistons any more appealing or rationale a move than ones who will leave them?

            Not sure what the food stamp complaint is?

            •  Okay Then (0+ / 0-)

              So I guess I missed your point..  If they are going to raise the subsidy amount, I think that's the concern, right? And the jobs will just go away somewhere

              What would be your solution then? To the harm that is predicted to come?

              Look, I am a single payer person so.. I just think it a right to actual healthcare a human right, and to whatever modality you choose, integrative, alternative, Western, Eastern...  I cannot participate in the ACA, but if I could I would have to grind my teeth, being forced to support the greed of and Insurance Corp. But I would.

              The food stamp complaint? Well, that point, was if I have NO job and one opens up, I Might be able to buy my own food.

              To my mind, it is an outrageous idea  that any country could EVER argue we don't have enough money to make damn sure our people can get healthcare. Nor can we lawmakers make sure to make laws that have the affect of making that affordable along with the drugs when needed.

              But I do appreciate your concern for the potential cost.

              •  You have some good points (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                My concern is multi faceted. To quote Elmendorf :

                “After we get out of this current downturn, but later in this decade and beyond, the principal reason why we think the economic growth will be less than it was for most of my lifetime will be a slower rate of growth by the labor force.”
                among other things.

                Look I am all for more access for all to the conventional healthcare. But his has been an ill planned, unread, insurance bought, loophole ridden, technically botched, hot mess. And I really got irritated at the ridiculous spin that this sudden tripping of the labor force exit is a "positive". It may be a worthwhile trade off but in and of itself it portends serious complications in funding the program. The spin is really disingenuous and makes me suspicious of any proclamations.

                I've always said that incremental improvements would have been better such as an phased in expansion of medicare, automatic  coverage for kids, some compromise on pre existing, etc.  I think even GOP could have been brought along on some of this.

                There are a lot of thorny issues never accounted for. Not the least of which is this sudden tripling of those who would leave the workforce and consume benefits rather than fund them.  Or Religious exemptions, or the dilemma of the responsible healthy paying for the irresponsible un healthy (that obese sloth who smokes 5 packs a day)? It's much more complicated than the slogans. I am happy that 15 million more will get insurance, and pre existing are a no brainer and there is no lifetime cap. But I think it could have been accomplished more cheaply and less controversially.  But hey, I don't get paid the big bucks!

                Peace be with you.

                •  I understand (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Mister T

                  your position Mister T. Thank You. It makes sense.

                  I think even GOP could have been brought along on some of this.
                  If it is true, it was their plan from years ago, so my guess is they got someone else (Dems) to bring forward and place into law a flawed system, of their own design, thereby getting what they wanted anyway.

                  I agree we went from one sucky insurance system to a less sucky insurance system. It's not what I would have wanted but, it is what we work with and I am thankful for it's establishment and those who can have some peace of mind.

                  It will be our shame if it turns out to be deemed unaffordable as is feared. This country has so much money flowing, it would be our disgrace, as a system.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site