So can we agree that this sums everything up?

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Nothing really to cheer about. The rollout was an epic failure. What more do you want an Obama supporter to say?
I would vote for him again over the other horrifying choices. Am I happy with everything going on? Fuck no, absolutely not. I feel mislead, manipulated, and deliberately lied to.
But I do have faith that they (the ubiquitous 'they) will get the website up and fully operational and the ACA will eventually stand out as a hallmark of his presidency. I hope I am not wrong on that.

It took 5 years for the first SS monthly benefit check to get issued. There are going to be growing pains, and it will suck. But I have to hope that eventually it will be a functional part of our society.

 

[irishScott]

Nothing really to cheer about. The rollout was an epic failure. What more do you want an Obama supporter to say?
I would vote for him again over the other horrifying choices. Am I happy with everything going on? Fuck no, absolutely not. I feel mislead, manipulated, and deliberately lied to.
But I do have faith that they (the ubiquitous 'they) will get the website up and fully operational and the ACA will eventually stand out as a hallmark of his presidency. I hope I am not wrong on that.

It took 5 years for the first SS monthly benefit check to get issued. There are going to be growing pains, and it will suck. But I have to hope that eventually it will be a functional part of our society.

And here we have the crux of the problem. One party blows chunks, but the only other option blows more. We really need electoral reform, but that requires the big two falling on their swords and letting themselves lose influence.

 

[PrinceofWands]

ACA is definitely fucked up. But I can't think of a govt program this big that started out smoothly.
It's still better than nothing. I hope they get their shit together and get it fixed asap. Too much is riding on this.

I disagree. It accomplishes nothing while destroying individual rights and expanding government scope/power. That makes it far worse than merely doing nothing.

 

[glenn1]

Of the few things that should have gone right with this implementation, the web site is one of them. The incompetence and level of idiocy is ASTOUNDING.

The whole Obamacare implementation does give a new understanding of "Hope and Change," doesn't it? From the time of his election and since, I've been moderately opposed to some of the premises of Obamacare but hopeful that my skepticism would be unfounded once implemented. I kept thinking that perhaps there was something I was overlooking, some intellectual blind spot I had; and that the whole mess would work somehow for reasons then yet unknown to me that Obama and his crew had thought of and put into the law. Now I'm realizing I wasn't nearly skeptical enough.

 

[irishScott]

The whole Obamacare implementation does give a new understanding of "Hope and Change," doesn't it? From the time of his election and since, I've been moderately opposed to some of the premises of Obamacare but hopeful that my skepticism would be unfounded once implemented. I kept thinking that perhaps there was something I was overlooking, some intellectual blind spot I had; and that the whole mess would work somehow for reasons then yet unknown to me that Obama and his crew had thought of and put into the law. Now I'm realizing I wasn't nearly skeptical enough.

No, come on didn't you see Obama's statement? All he's asking for is another year of hope before the change we can believe in...

 

[FerrelGeek]

Yup. Although I have little doubt that the mainstream media will be telling us how great are the Democrats and how crazy are the Republicans well before November 2014. And I have little doubt that the Republican will figure out a sure fire way to turn their luck into something that will make them too look like idiots.

Beat me to it. The 'stupid party' will fumble the ball even though the dems tossed the ball and hit them right on the numbers.

In spite of the above, I don't think that even if the reps played it flawlessly, they'd still get a small run-back out of this. There's already ~40% of the population that still will vote for anyone with a D after their name and there's a growing percentage of people that will panic when the Ds start their barrage of adds next year about how the Rs will take away all their freebies. The dependency class, and the apathetics, in this country are too entrenched now.

 

[rudder]

Meh. Republicans are just being set up for taking all the blame. And like the usual dumbasses that the Rep party establishment is... they'll fall for it hook, line, and sinker.

!

Republicans have already gotten the blame. They let the government get shut down and in the eyes of the public it was all their fault. Now the dems are using this as a reason for the woes of the ACA. The republicans should have funded what Obama wanted with the stipulation that if the ACA is a failure no funding is renewed.

 

[Agent11]

Nothing really to cheer about. The rollout was an epic failure. What more do you want an Obama supporter to say?
I would vote for him again over the other horrifying choices. Am I happy with everything going on? Fuck no, absolutely not. I feel mislead, manipulated, and deliberately lied to.
But I do have faith that they (the ubiquitous 'they) will get the website up and fully operational and the ACA will eventually stand out as a hallmark of his presidency. I hope I am not wrong on that.

It took 5 years for the first SS monthly benefit check to get issued. There are going to be growing pains, and it will suck. But I have to hope that eventually it will be a functional part of our society.

I think that is overly optimistic. 5 million people lost insurance because of Obamacare, and millions of people will see rate increases. This is not what was promised at all, and is a separate issue from the failure of a website.

I do find myself wondering if Romney would have been better. Considering the various areas that the Obama administration has fallen short of expectations I would say that there is a good chance he would have been. It's a shame he was not electable.

Republicans have already gotten the blame. They let the government get shut down and in the eyes of the public it was all their fault. Now the dems are using this as a reason for the woes of the ACA. The republicans should have funded what Obama wanted with the stipulation that if the ACA is a failure no funding is renewed.

This is a problem of communication, the Republicans have been pandering to their base for so long that I think they lost the ability to speak to the middle. I have seen some evidence to warrant hope of this reversing though. . . And now the Democrats seem to be falling into the same predicament.

 

[Texashiker]

Republicans have got lucky a LOT this year. even though they mishandled a lot of situations Dems did worse.

Did the republicans get lucky, or are the democrats incompetent?

The democrats can not even write a law without the insurance industry writing it for them.

 

[werepossum]

Nothing really to cheer about. The rollout was an epic failure. What more do you want an Obama supporter to say?
I would vote for him again over the other horrifying choices. Am I happy with everything going on? Fuck no, absolutely not. I feel mislead, manipulated, and deliberately lied to.
But I do have faith that they (the ubiquitous 'they) will get the website up and fully operational and the ACA will eventually stand out as a hallmark of his presidency. I hope I am not wrong on that.

It took 5 years for the first SS monthly benefit check to get issued. There are going to be growing pains, and it will suck. But I have to hope that eventually it will be a functional part of our society.

One teeny weeny, itty bitty, tiny little difference, almost not even worth mentioning: Social Security did not destroy the retirement savings of five million Americans and counting to get that first check out. Another teeny weeny, itty bitty, tiny little difference, almost not even worth mentioning: Social Security's delay was by design, forcing people to pay into the system for some period of time before collecting benefits. Some of us differentiate between that and sheer gross incompetence.

But hey, as long as you'd vote for him again, it's all good, right?

No, come on didn't you see Obama's statement? All he's asking for is another year of hope before the change we can believe in...

LOL

New slogan: Change that I hope will kick your non-government-employee, evil private sector ass.

Beat me to it. The 'stupid party' will fumble the ball even though the dems tossed the ball and hit them right on the numbers.

In spite of the above, I don't think that even if the reps played it flawlessly, they'd still get a small run-back out of this. There's already ~40% of the population that still will vote for anyone with a D after their name and there's a growing percentage of people that will panic when the Ds start their barrage of adds next year about how the Rs will take away all their freebies. The dependency class, and the apathetics, in this country are too entrenched now.

Yeah, almost half of all households now collect a government check, and once Obamacare actually works that number will significantly increase. At that point there aren't enough people off the dole to vote against the party offering freebies and government can really begin to grow in scope, power and influence, unstoppable until we can no longer sell bonds or print money that isn't a net loss.

 

[Agent11]

To be fair relying on special interests to write legislation is not a phenomena isolated to either party.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Did the republicans get lucky, or are the democrats incompetent?

The democrats can not even write a law without the insurance industry writing it for them.

Lucky.
They keep alienating women voters, LEGAL immigrant voters, minorities, etc.

 

[Agent11]

...

Yeah, almost half of all households now collect a government check, and once Obamacare actually works that number will significantly increase. At that point there aren't enough people off the dole to vote against the party offering freebies and government can really begin to grow in scope, power and influence, unstoppable until we can no longer sell bonds or print money that isn't a net loss.

I was listening to an interview with Charles Krauthammer the other day where he said that ' No one is questioning the successes of classical liberalism.' to paraphrase. I think this is the stance the Republicans need to take; They need to express how successful social security and medicaid have been to allay the fears of the electorate. Republicans have been painted as wanting to reverse the new deal and force grandmothers to eat catfood for decades now. They need to do damage control.

 

[werepossum]

I was listening to an interview with Charles Krauthammer the other day where he said that ' No one is questioning the successes of classical liberalism.' to paraphrase. I think this is the stance the Republicans need to take; They need to express how successful social security and medicaid have been to allay the fears of the electorate. Republicans have been painted as wanting to reverse the new deal and force grandmothers to eat catfood for decades now. They need to do damage control.

Agreed, but Republicans have so demonized liberals as to make that difficult without looking as foolish or as dishonest (or both) as Obama himself. And it isn't just political clumsiness - it's very difficult to extol the virtues of classical liberalism as opposed to the progressive movement and maintain opposition to gay marriage, environmental protection and such. I'd love to see the GOP more fully embrace classical liberalism and more fully oppose the progressive movement, but they've used these social issues to differentiate themselves from the Democrats as the two parties grow ever closer on other issues, and on these social issues they are largely in opposition to classical liberalism.

If Obamacare could make the Republicans turn small L libertarian (socially liberal, fiscally conservative) then I'd gladly accept Obamacare as worth the pain and disruption.

 

[Tom]

care to explain?

Because this is happening as we speak

What is happening ? You mean the way people who don't have insurance are getting it ?

That's failure ?

None of the supposed problems are unresolvable. What I'm saying is a year from now it'll be a non issue.

 

[irishScott]

What is happening ? You mean the way people who don't have insurance are getting it ?

That's failure ?

None of the supposed problems are unresolvable. What I'm saying is a year from now it'll be a non issue.

Actually a year from now we'll be dealing with it all over again, what with the elections and the fact that Obama just kicked what's left of the can down the road. The Democrats themselves turned on Obama over this, I doubt that's because they share your "everything is fine" outlook.

The problems with Obamacare stopped being "supposed" a while ago.

 

[Tom]

Actually a year from now we'll be dealing with it all over again, what with the elections and the fact that Obama just kicked what's left of the can down the road. The Democrats themselves turned on Obama over this, I doubt that's because they share your "everything is fine" outlook.

The problems with Obamacare stopped being "supposed" a while ago.

It doesn't really begin until next year. Both parties will work to fix the problems, the Sensible Republicans will want to distance themselves from the slash and burn government shut down.

People are underestimating the positive impacts, because problems make better press.

But it won't last. There's no real substance to the problems, just details to fix.

 

[irishScott]

It doesn't really begin until next year. Both parties will work to fix the problems, the Sensible Republicans will want to distance themselves from the slash and burn government shut down.

People are underestimating the positive impacts, because problems make better press.

But it won't last. There's no real substance to the problems, just details to fix.

I think making a repeated, bald-faced lie promise and then claiming you didn't make it is a little more than a fine detail. I know people who had no intention of changing their health insurance who have gotten their policies canceled and are now being forced to buy more expensive ones for coverage they don't need. Suffice it to say they're a little ticked, some of them even voted for Obama (and they're by far the most ticked).

In any case, as the great Democrat heroine Pelosi once said: "you have to pass the bill to see what's in it." With that kind of legislative mentality and this kind of start, I'm sure you're right and everything will just be damned rosy next year. Just some minor details, no need for millions to be pissed off or anything.

Unless you're claiming to have actually read and understood the law in its entirety. In which case (if true) you're the first and I will vote for you if and when you decide to run for office.

 

[palehorse]

What is happening ? You mean the way people who don't have insurance are getting it ?

You're absolutely correct. 106k people now have private insurance.

Out of 40 million.

awesome.

Meanwhile, over 4.9 million lost their insurance since October 1st as a direct result of the ACA.

More awesome? Is math a new concept for you?

Stay in school, kids...

 

[Tom]

You're absolutely correct. 106k people now have private insurance.

Out of 40 million.

awesome.

Meanwhile, over 4.9 million lost their insurance since October 1st as a direct result of the ACA.

More awesome? Is math a new concept for you?

Stay in school, kids...

Both of your numbers are wrong. Many more people will sign up in the coming months and chances are no one will lose their insurance because of the ACA.

You're analyzing a process that will take years after a few weeks.

 

[Atreus21]

Agreed, but Republicans have so demonized liberals as to make that difficult without looking as foolish or as dishonest (or both) as Obama himself. And it isn't just political clumsiness - it's very difficult to extol the virtues of classical liberalism as opposed to the progressive movement and maintain opposition to gay marriage, environmental protection and such. I'd love to see the GOP more fully embrace classical liberalism and more fully oppose the progressive movement, but they've used these social issues to differentiate themselves from the Democrats as the two parties grow ever closer on other issues, and on these social issues they are largely in opposition to classical liberalism.

If Obamacare could make the Republicans turn small L libertarian (socially liberal, fiscally conservative) then I'd gladly accept Obamacare as worth the pain and disruption.

I'd be inclined to agree, if it weren't for abortion. I can let gay marriage go. I can let every facet of the social conservative platform go. But not abortion.

 

[Tom]

I think making a repeated, bald-faced lie promise and then claiming you didn't make it is a little more than a fine detail. I know people who had no intention of changing their health insurance who have gotten their policies canceled and are now being forced to buy more expensive ones for coverage they don't need. Suffice it to say they're a little ticked, some of them even voted for Obama (and they're by far the most ticked).

In any case, as the great Democrat heroine Pelosi once said: "you have to pass the bill to see what's in it." With that kind of legislative mentality and this kind of start, I'm sure you're right and everything will just be damned rosy next year. Just some minor details, no need for millions to be pissed off or anything.

Unless you're claiming to have actually read and understood the law in its entirety. In which case (if true) you're the first and I will vote for you if and when you decide to run for office.

You're making a political argument, not analyzing the ACA.

It's true that real health insurance costs more than the pretend health insurance lots of people have been bamboozled into buying over the years.

But guess what ? It's a much better value because it actually is real health insurance.

Another thing. Health care costs, and insurance costs, have been going up for decades. And they go up as people get older. Now, EVERY increase is because of the ACA ?

It's a massive fiction being used as a political tool. It works to reenforce the Obama haters, it isn't going to work on the general public.

The website. The website is going to be fixed. Then what ?

Anything that is actually bad about the ACA can be fixed. I'm saying it will be fixed because that suits both party's interests in the upcoming midterm election.

By the time there's a national election in 2016, an election where what's happening right now might matter, the ACA issue will be long over.

Here is reality. The Republicans are not going to have veto proof majorities in the House and Senate after the 2014 election. President Obama will still be President.

So ACA isn't going away. What will happen are fixes to make it better. Congress people from both parties can run on that.

 

[nehalem256]

You're making a political argument, not analyzing the ACA.

It's true that real health insurance costs more than the pretend health insurance lots of people have been bamboozled into buying over the years.

But guess what ? It's a much better value because it actually is real health insurance.

Another thing. Health care costs, and insurance costs, have been going up for decades. And they go up as people get older. Now, EVERY increase is because of the ACA ?

It's a massive fiction being used as a political tool. It works to reenforce the Obama haters, it isn't going to work on the general public.

The website. The website is going to be fixed. Then what ?

Anything that is actually bad about the ACA can be fixed. I'm saying it will be fixed because that suits both party's interests in the upcoming midterm election.

By the time there's a national election in 2016, an election where what's happening right now might matter, the ACA issue will be long over.

How is making men pay for things they cannot possibly use such as birth control pills, pap smears, and maternity care possibly a better deal?

 

[Tom]

How is making men pay for things they cannot possibly use such as birth control pills, pap smears, and maternity care possibly a better deal?

Do men benefit from having healthy offspring ?

Do men benefit if their Mom, sister, girlfriend, doesn't die from cancer ?

Does society benefit from people having kids when they want to and can take care of them ?

I dearly hope the Republicans try to remove these benefits from the ACA. Please, please, please try to do so.

 

[AViking]

Both parties are terrible. That sums it up.

I still don't understand why the website was so expensive and doesn't work correctly. Who did they hire?