Obama Knew and Lied

President Obama knew as early as 2010 that Obamacare would force 40-67% of people from the individual health insurance market out of their plans.... but not one peep of this came out of President Obama's mouth. He repeatedly made the claim that insurance would be grandfathered in and that you could keep your same doctor that you've been going to before Obamacare existed after the health care law was implemented. This was a selling point in Obama getting support for the ACA from some of the citizens. Plus he repeatedly said this during the 2012 campaign. It's not all that surprising that the Obama administration hid the truth from the American people. Top Democrat Steny Hoyer admitted that Democrats and the President knew that people would not be able to keep their current health care plans.

“We knew that there would be some policies that would not qualify and therefore people would be required to get more extensive coverage,” Hoyer said in response to a question from National Review.

Another claim for selling the ACA is it would lessen health care costs for the consumer.  Unfortunately that also isn't true. Many citizens are being required to pay an additional 20% at the very least. Here is the Aetna CEO on CNBC explaining why health insurance costs are rising dramatically.

Flashback to Obama saying....

Megyn Kelly goes off on Democrat over citizens losing health insurance coverage since President Obama promised that every person who had health insurance were going to be able to keep their plans after Obamacare was instituted.

Obama Admin's HealthCare.gov Misleads; Gives Cost Estimates Lower than Actual Price

From CBS: 

Jonathan Wu is co-founder of Valuepenguin.com, a consumer finance website focusing on the impact of health care reform. His company has built a tool that provides quotes for plans on the federal exchange. He said it's "incredibly misleading for people that are trying to get a sense of what they're paying."
Prices for everyone in the 49-or-under group are based on what a 27-year-old would pay. In the 50-or-older group, prices are based on what a 50-year-old would pay.
CBS News ran the numbers for a 48-year-old in Charlotte, N.C., ineligible for subsidies. According to HealthCare.gov, she would pay $231 a month, but the actual plan on Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina's website costs $360, more than 50 percent higher. The difference: Blue Cross and Blue Shield requests your birthday before providing more accurate estimates.
The numbers for older Americans are even more striking. A 62-year-old in Charlotte looking for the same basic plan would get a price estimate on the government website of $394. The actual price is $634.
A U.S. Department of Health and Human Services spokeswoman said the government added the "shop and browse" feature to provide "estimates of premiums without tax credits."
Chini Krishnan is the chief executive officer of GetInsured.com. His company helped designCalifornia's new health-care-exchange website. It requires people to enter their birthdays to get a real price quote. Krishnan said, "It's important that the users have a proper, trustworthy, honest brand experience when they interact with HealthCare.gov, and I think providing accurate prices is an integral component of that."

Miscellaneous Meanderings

I haven't been feeling well and still don't feel well but I didn't want to go any longer without posting so here are a few thoughts on a couple articles as well as a video posted below.  

In What Obama and the Tea Party have in common by George F. Will, Will claims that both Obama and the tea party have "disdain for the practice of politics within the Framers’ institutional architecture."  By this George Will is mainly referring to compromise but also to the separation of powers. 

In my opinion George Will is both correct and incorrect.  Correct in the fact that neither the Tea Party or Obama likes to compromise.  But incorrect since by compromising we have strayed so far from what the Framers' built in the United States - the train has derailed off the tracks, crashed, and now needs to be rebuilt - that it is important that the Tea Party espouse and defend the constitution and not cede any more power and control to those who believe in progressivism, European socialism.  

Sarah Palin says: "Today, doesn't it seem like we have a Corrupt Bastards Club in D.C.? On steroids? It might not be as oily and obvious as its Alaska counterpart, but it’s just as compromised because its members, too, are indifferent to what their actions mean for We the People." 

What we have witnessed is the bastardization of politics by GOP establishment and Democrats over the past decade. In addition we have witnessed the bastardization of our health care system over the past 4 or 5 years thanks to progressives as well as the GOP establishment who are weak- kneed "be reasonable, don't offend the other side" defeatist cowards.  Instead of the GOP standing united the GOP was fractured because of the establishment who abandoned camp and in their cowardly fashion supported the Democrats who stood firm and made it known that they were unwilling to budge, no compromise for them.  Even when it the prerogative of the House to fund or refuse to fund whatever part of the government they decide. Please do go over to read the rest of Palin's article on the establishment and Obamacare. It is a great article.  Yep Folks what we have is the Corrupt Bastards Club in D.C. 

Cats Stealing Dog Beds

This is funny. Enjoy!

Sen. Coburn Investigates Social Security Disability

I have some pertinent thoughts on this since I have filed an appeal for social security disability benefits. On Sunday I watched 60 Minutes which had a segment on the investigation into disability benefits, into the reasons for the substantial increase in the number of people receiving disability benefits. I was really heartened when I heard Sen. Tom Coburn say that "we ought to err on the side of someone being potentially disabled" and give them benefits.

One problem which was discussed is the number of disability lawyers advertising, the amount of money they earn from the federal government representing people who have been denied benefits on the first try, whether the lawyers are gaming the system by representing and getting benefits for clients who aren't really truly considered "disabled", meaning being unable to perform some type of job.

The problem with claiming these lawyers are overpaid or that they may be gaming the system is that the government's system for deciding who is considered "disabled" is flawed to begin with. About 80% of the people who apply for Disability benefits are denied the first time they apply for benefits. The only individuals who are approved are the very obvious ones with severe physical impairments. So in fact the government has created the need for these lawyers.  If you are unable to see the person's ailment, for example if you're not in a wheel chair or didn't have a stroke or heart condition which affects your speech, walking, and use of limbs then you are not going to be approved the first time.  I am in the being disapproved after the first try category.  I was advised to hire a lawyer so I have done so. A huge problem is that whoever in the government decides whether you get approved or not assume that if you look or seem to be okay then you are okay.  That is a wrongheaded assumption.

I never thought that I would be applying for Disability but I am. I don't want to be on disability but this is the way it must be for now.  I had a hysterectomy for my endometriosis thinking that it would substantially ease my pain. The surgery helped for about 3 months then the extreme pain came back.  I suffer from depression due to having the hysterectomy at 35 and having no kids. I suffer from some anxiety and other symptoms cause of surgical menopause. My red blood cells are too big and the doctors are having trouble figuring out the reason. This causes me to be dizzy, have the shakes in my hands and arms, and fatigue. I also have bad migraines or cluster headaches where for three days I have to lay down and am unable to eat very much. Then in April I started hurting very very badly in my bones and joints all over my body. Finally my doctors have figured out that its fibromyalgia. In the video the claim is that there are subjective symptoms in  fibromayalgia and I guess that could be true for some symptoms, to some degree a few of the symptoms but at least some aren't subjective. Migraine headaches, vomiting from the migraine, and when a doctor examines your joints and/or bones and can tell that you are in extreme pain then your pain can be verifiable.

There probably is a small amount of disability applicants and lawyers gaming the system but anything can be abused and usually is by a few.  Heck things like cough medicine and white out are misused. In addition to me you can't look at a piece of paper and claim to know whether that person is disabled or not disabled. I am going to update my skills and work on me a while - work on healing, treating symptoms - then I will be able to head back to work. But at this time there is no possible way I can work. I consider myself lucky when I don't have much pain which is only maybe 2 days per month.

Video Variety

Brian Aitken possessed firearms legally did not break any laws but was sent to prison

First of all the judge is a stupid imbecile who needs to be stripped of his position as judge.  A massive injustice was committed and it wasn't about falling through the cracks but it looks like the judge did this intentionally and ignored laws. Second, let's help Brian have his case heard in front of the Supreme Court by buying his book. Third, this case should alarm any gun owner, especially those moving across state lines.  This whole situation is F*cked up (sorry about the language but this pisses me off, the fact that a moron judge abused his power). He screwed with someone's life and now Brian is unable to see his son. We need to make sure this type of malevolent injustice NEVER happens again. Thank goodness that Governor Christie commuted his sentence after Brian having served 4 months. 

From LibertyGlobe: 

Brian Aitken is a normal, law abiding citizen; at the time of his arrest he still had student loans, a wife and a young child. 

Everything changed when he was arrested and sent to serve time for something which was actually legal. 

While he was moving from Colorado to New Jersey, Brian was pulled over and had his vehicle searched despite not being suspected of a crime. In the car he had two locked, unloaded and legally purchased firearms. The law specifically outlines an exemption clause which allows the transportation of legally owned firearms while in the process of moving. During the trial, the jury even asked the judge 3 times if they could rule based on this law but the requests were denied! 

Brian was sentenced to 7 years for doing something that was legal, he was not breaking the law, he fell victim to a judge applying the rules how he saw fit. Thankfully, the governor of New Jersey released Brian early, but the NJ supreme court refuses to hear his case and his status as a convicted felon means he cannot see his son.

He is now raising money for a book through Indiegogo which he well then use the proceeds of to take his case to the US Supreme Court. No matter what side you are on in the gun control debate, this is a case of severe injustice.