This is the equivalent of Hillary’s mythomania moment about her “corkscrew landing” in Bosnia: a lie that everyone knows is a lie, there are witnesses to the lie, facts known by everyone confirm it’s a lie, but the poor soul says it anyway. In the olden days, this would be called “psychopathology.” These days it’s called “Democrat.”
Watch this video, the man lies as easily (and as often) as he says “Fore!”
President Obama, in a heavily partisan speech defending his signature health care law, claimed Thursday “there’s no widespread evidence” it is hurting jobs — despite widespread reports that businesses are cutting back worker hours in order to avoid extra costs tied to the law.
The charge that ObamaCare is driving Americans into part-time work is one of the central claims that opponents make in arguing for the law to be defunded or delayed. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, reiterated the claim during his 21-hour floor speech against ObamaCare this week.
But the president, while promoting the law to a friendly audience in suburban Washington, brushed off the argument.
“Most of the stories you’ll hear about how ObamaCare just can’t work, they’re just not based on fact,” Obama said.
He continued: “They said this would be a disaster in terms of jobs. There’s no widespread evidence that the Affordable Care Act is hurting jobs. … Reforming health care’s going to help the economy over the long-term.”
The claim flies in the face of what union leaders have been telling the White House and Democratic lawmakers for months.
In a widely noted letter to Democratic leaders over the summer, the heads of the Teamsters and other unions argued that “perverse incentives” were hurting jobs…
In the meantime, just today, they’re “delaying” another aspect of ObamaCare. Because it’s not working. After 3 years, thousands of federal workers, and hundreds of millions of dollars, they can’t get it right. It’s still a TRAINWRECK because our big, bloated government is TRAINWRECK.
The Obama administration is delaying another piece of Obamacare — this time postponing enrollment in most of the small-business exchanges scheduled to open Oct. 1.
Small businesses looking to enroll in coverage on so-called SHOP exchanges run by the federal government can start their applications on Oct. 1 — they just won’t be able to enroll online until November.
The one-month delay is not a major blow to the health care law — the exchanges for individuals are still expected to open on time. But it’s yet another PR headache for the White House as it ramps up a major Obamacare sales pitch just five days before open enrollment is scheduled to begin.
And surprise! Prices Set for New Health-Care Exchanges: Younger Buyers May Face Higher Insurance Premiums
Isn’t delusional thinking a mental disorder? Everyone who has a job whether small or large companies…manager or frontline worker knows the jobs are shaky at best and nearly all businesses are cutting hours. Of course, those still enamored by the ‘One’ will refuse to see it or blame something else..but anyone who has a lick of sense knows the truth.
By the time even the most delusional in America come to realize that their guy has been lying to THEM about EVERYTHING, it may be too late for us to prevent the havoc the ACA is destined to wreak upon the US economy. And once we’re able to turn it around, the Obamas will have completed their 6th or 7th Hajj.
Wow, quoting John McCain’s economic advisor. Strange bedfellows (well maybe not).
“Any product that launches has problems” he says. This is not a product. There is nothing being produced by the government in ACA.
“The prices came out lower than we predicted.” What prices? He’s all over the page, but then again, he appears to be talking to a bunch of unemployed (forever?) and possibly uneducated 20 and early 30 somethings.
What does he consider “widespread evidence”? Clearly, no one tells him anything in the land of unicorns. Valerie doesn’t allow him to read anything that doesn’t tell him how wonderful he is. Everything is rainbow colored and sugar sweet. No one he knows and is hurting. No cutbacks where he is. What’s the problem with you people?
Oh, and will someone please pin those ears down, or back, or something?
You can prove anything with anecdotes. So it’s fair to question the extent to which Obamacare damages job creation, if at all. But the near-doubling of my personal premium, which I understand to be typical, indicates a damaging trend. The news indicates the hardest-hit demographic will be the young, so I’m supposedly getting the better deal. Is there anyone out there with a pre-existing policy who hasn’t had a similar rate hike? Is there any business that has actually seen improved, or even level, healthcare rates? Yes, the news I’m hearing is largely anecdotal, but it does at least seem to be overwhelmingly negative. Do the Obama supporters care to explain why the appearance of economic damage is false? If hiring people costs more, both monetarily and bureaucratically, the reaction will be to hire fewer people. If I have to pay more to Anthem, I’ve got less money for the rest of my life. That’s common sense. So it’s hard to imagine Obamacare doesn’t hurt job creation.
Gaming the system would be buying insurance after after the need arises which is what the law enables.
Taranto’s analysis, “The Young and the Clueless”, runs the numbers. He notes that “the success of ObamaCare depends on enrolling large numbers of young people while making insurance both more costly and less necessary for them.” The conclusion is that gaming the system becomes both legal and wise. So the “success” of Obamacare requires, among other factors, the participation of this block of people who have every motive and opportunity to do otherwise. Another hint of the unworkability of the system.
Young people could all contribute a small amount to a catastrophic situation or high deductible pool for themselves and handle the usual in and out Dr. visits out of pocket. Obamacare might give them a lifetime of debt up front.
My company’s sponsored plans run from July to June, so I’ve already experienced the increase others will see starting January. Last year (i.e. 2012/2013 plan year), my portion of my company’s subsidized plan for myself and my wife cost me $9,700. This year (i.e. 2013/2014 plan year), my portion for the exact same coverage rose to $14,500. My wife and I had to change to an inferior plan in order to reduce costs to us below $10 grand a year.
Yes, we had what some call a “Cadillac” plan, but at $9,700 a year, we were paying through the nose for the peace of mind as it was. Why should we have had to give that up?