TRICK, NOT TREAT: Obama Said "You Can Keep Your Plan. PERIOD."

Even liberal-leaning SLATE writes that "The president's original promise was so ironclad and repeated so often that any explanation now sounds like dissembling...the president's claim about keeping coverage was always about more than a sliver of people signing up for Obamacare which is why it has the ability to resonate beyond the audience directly affected by it" and ObamaCare was "launched with the fanfare and success of a North Korean missile." In that article, "Why Obamacare Is Making Republicans Look Wise Beyond Their Years", SLATE writer John Dickerson goes on to fact-check the White House, proving them wrong on two recent alleged "facts" they tweeted about ObamaCare:

"White House senior adviser Valerie Jarrett tweeted Monday night: "FACT: Nothing in #Obamacare forces people out of their health plans. No change is required unless insurance companies change existing plans." Of course the insurance companies wouldn't have had to change plans if it hadn’t been for Obamacare. This is spinning—which is to be expected from a president's defender—but its legalistic dissembling seems particularly weak in light of the president's initial promises. (It isn’t the only time the administration has claimed a FACT recently about health care that isn't one)." [my bold emphasis]

To anyone who supported ObamaCare because it "will help all the uninsured get insurance coverage", consider how hypocritical it is to now believe that the 3 to 15 million being forced off their existing plans for an unaffordably higher-cost, Obama-approved plan are not as important or significant.

And as we reported on Oct.26 (scroll down to "But Wait! There's More!") and Oct. 27, apparently it was already official last month: even the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration issued a September report that "the Internal Revenue Service—which will be responsible for implementing 46 new tax penalties and verifying millions of dollars in subsidies-- cannot ensure the security of more than 306,000 IT assets worth up to $720 million." [quote from The Fiscal Times]

The report itself says,

"The risk of loss, theft, or the inadvertent release of sensitive information can decrease the public’s confidence in the IRS’s ability to monitor and use its resources effectively."

Meanwhile, HHS Secretary Sebelius Says "Whatever" About Who's Responsible for ObamaCare's Problems

...
...while Democrat TIME Magazine columnist and avid Obama-fan Joe Klein disagrees with Sebelius, writing: "The President is responsible for the quality of his Administration" in his scathing article, now entitled "BUCKPASSER", formerly entitled "With President Obama, the Buck Stops Nowhere".

Speaking of "passes," if this were a Republican President, he'd be getting none, while Obama's still being granted some. The mainstream media and elected liberal/progressive Democrats would be H.O.W.L.I.N.G. nonstop for law repeal and Presidential impeachment if this were a Republican in the White House, and they certainly would have done so long before Halloween.

Instead we have the Obama White House and Cabinet (HHS in this case) "cracking the whip" to silence critics for YEARS:

The speech-stifling gag order declared war on every opponent of Obamacare who dared to question the administration's phony claims of cost-savings or expanded access. When McDonald's notified the feds that it might have to cancel health insurance plans for 30,000 workers because of Obamacare's effective prohibition on low-cost plans, Sebelius slammed The Wall Street Journal for reporting the story. She then rushed to issue McDonald's an Obamacare waiver, the first of thousands to quell criticism and bleeding.

Health care policy analyst Merrill Matthews points out that Sebelius cracked her whip against health insurer Humana even before the law had passed. When the insurer warned seniors that an Obamacare proposal to cut reimbursements could harm their Medicare Advantage benefits and coverage, Sebelius demanded that the company "suspend potentially misleading mailings to beneficiaries about health care and insurance reform."

The warning, of course, proved true. In September 2010, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care canceled MA policies covering 22,000 seniors precisely because of Obamacare rules on reimbursements and MA-style plans.

Sebelius' power-mad partner on Capitol Hill, Henry Waxman, targeted companies including Deere, Caterpillar, Verizon and ATT in a brass-knuckled effort to silence companies speaking out about the cost implications and financial burdens of Obamacare. After the firms reported write-downs related to the Obamacare mandate (disclosures that are required by law), Waxman scheduled an inquisition hearing to berate them publicly. After the Democrats' own congressional staff pointed out that the companies "acted properly and in accordance with accounting standards" in submitting filings that were required by law, Waxman called off the hounds.

It was a temporary reprieve. Caught with their pants down on the Obamacare website abomination and unable to stifle the cries of millions of Americans who are unable to keep the plans and doctors they like, Sebelius and her corrupt company are now blaming insurers, contractors and customers for the Obama administration's ideological mess. In short: They lied, but for your own good. Culture of Corruption 101.

"CoveredCA Insurance Company Chief: Up to 900,000 will lose health plans on 12/31"

So make that about 3 million who will have lost their health plans. Contrary to the diehard Dems saying "it's good to get rid of bad plans", 1) not all the states' individual plans were bad (just mostly the ones already exorbitantly priced because they're in welfare states like Connecticut), and 2) the White House's idea of "better plans" doesn't work if it costs people too much to afford at all. Those states who declined the extra Medicaid did so to keep government a little more solvent a little longer, instead of putting more people in the cart than there are pulling the cart. After a little while, the cart doesn't go ANYWHERE, folks. It's common sense and if you can't see that, you're refusing to see it.

Help the poor with standing on their own two feet, learning how to sustain themselves, not mouth-feeding them like a mother bird regurgitating what she eats to feed her young. "Her young" aren't all the young and they aren't all the truly needy. For example, Medicaid would save millions, possibly billions, if it didn't insist on only brand name prescription drugs, like it insists on doing in this state, unless it's medically necessary as indicated in writing by a licensed MD who has seen the patient and given the prescription. The cost of brand (when generics are available) is extraordinary, yet that's what Medicaid gets because the GOVERNMENT insists on it. They can get generics like the rest of us have been forced to. But the waste goes on and on.