I saw that. Fraud will always pop up. But for every Barrette there are hundreds of thousands (soon to be millions) of actual stories where the facts bear out that ObamaCare is doing more harm to more people than good.
Basically, ObamaCare's net effect is to restructure almost the entire insurance industry, forcing many people into coverage they don't want or need in to more expensive plans. It's a redistribution of wealth - from prior insurance "winners" who were happy with their plans to the insurance companies and to a much smaller percentage of the population who had no insurance or who were paying a lot for the coverage they could get. I've never argued that there shouldn't have been health care reform. My argument is that OBAMACARE is not the way to do it.
There are millions of people who DO NOT QUALIFY for the government subsidies and who were perfectly happy with their prior insurance. The Obama administration knew that these people would become "losers" under their legislation, and they just gave them up. They knew (see my recent blog) that more than 60% of the people would be affected, and they STILL said "you can keep your plan" and "you can keep your doctor." That - on top of everything else - is why Democrats, women, and young people are turning against the President and ObamaCare in droves.
The polls are relevant; they are not "personal attacks"; and they are not "dishonest" (or at least nobody has proven that they are). As a means of reflecting how the sample survey feels, they do not "lie." Real people are being affected adversely by this legislation, and the media is reporting it. Every now and then they will get taken in. Every time Fox News gets caught in an error the left says: "AHA - there they go again distorting and lying about the news." CBS, ABC, NBC has been in the pocket of the Democrats for as long as I can remember. (See especially their complicity in covering up the Kennedy extra-marital peccadilloes - both Jack and Bobby.) IMHO - they have still been treating the Democrats and Republicans differently.
The New York Post - no friend to Democrats - came out with this one yesterday:
It chronicles the "scandals" and makes a case for why the media has now "turned against" Mr. Obama. I don't agree with the conclusions, but I wholeheartedly agree with the assertion that the media has "shielded the President." They have had an interest in his success ever since he first started running for office. He was a great story, and it helped a whole lot that he was a politician on the LEFT. If Rubio was a Democrat, you'd better believe that they'd be tooting his horn as the "heir apparent" if HRC wasn't going to run in 2016. But because he's a Republican, they find every flaw and portray it as a potential disqualifier.
I don't believe the plans are junk Sebe. I know a single parent of one who could not afford insurance for her child prior to Obama care, now has Obama care. Without Obama care, her insurance premiums were over 600.00 per month for some jacked up insurance coverage through Blue Cross Shield. She even tired Aetna. Now because she was able afford medical for her child for under 200.00 per month. Don't allow FOX mis construe you. A lot of people in the north are very happy with the new Obama Care.
Hey Sporty! Actually, I never said anything about "junk" plans - it was the basic blog post. I also have said repeatedly that there will be some new "winners" under ObamaCare but the new "losers" and the overall effect on the economy and hospital/doctor CHOICES under this legislation make it not worth it. They could have "fixed" health care another way without giving the insurance companies a wholesale opportunity to raise rates on EVERYBODY ELSE and "transition" them to new plans with unnecessary coverage and features they don't want or need.
My daughter and I are "in the South" and (since I am helping with the bills) we are very UNHAPPY with the new ObamaCare. We feel like STUCKEES.
The junk plans I'm referring to are the old plans. The new plans under the ACA are much better plans
"The junk plans I'm referring to are the old plans. The new plans under the ACA are much better plans."
That's the propaganda the Dems want you to believe. My daughter didn't have a "junk" plan. She had an affordable plan that met her needs AND MET THE REQUIREMENTS OF OBAMACARE. BCBSGA admitted this last September; then sent a notice saying that BECAUSE of ObamaCare they were essentially restructing their plans and their pools. Simply stated - BCBSGA changed the plan DESPITE THE FACT THAT IT COMPLIED WITH OBMACARE REQUIREMENTS and jacked up the rates.
This is what the millions of "losers" are experiencing all over the country. This is what the Democrats are trying to ignore and push these stories beyond the election so WE THE PEOPLE don't rise up and give them what for.
Fox didn’t admit that Dianne Barrett’s healthcare plan is junk; Greta pointed out the fact that it isn’t the best coverage by far; however Barrett was happy with it. Greta even pointed out that it would probably be less than her initial quote when she applied for a subsidy. The main fact remains, she can’t keep the plan she likes, period.
Now what about a single male over 26 that wants to save money on costs but they are jacked up because he is forced to have paternity care, pediatric care and birth control to name a few JUNK services provided in the plan that they won’t need!