Tech Giant Qualcomm Lays Off Thousands Of Americans While Simultaneously Seeking More Foreign Workers

Qualcomm Lays Off 4,500 Workers While Demanding More H-1bs – Daily Caller


Another tech giant that says it must import foreign workers because there aren’t enough skilled American workers in the industry is laying off thousands of workers.

Qualcomm – a major producer of smartphone chips – announced last week it’s eliminating 15 percent of its workforce or about 4,500 employees, just weeks after fellow tech giant Microsoft announced a massive round of layoffs.

Both companies are top beneficiaries of the H-1b visa program, which backers say allows companies to temporarily hire foreign workers for jobs they can’t find qualified Americans workers to fill. Critics contend the program is really used to cut costs.

Microsoft and Qualcomm were in the top 15 users of H-1b visas in Fiscal Year 2013, according to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services data obtained by Computer World. They’re part of a major tech lobbying effort to increase the cap on these temporary workers, on the grounds there is a shortage of Americans with science, technology, engineering and math degrees.

“Qualcomm has been engaged within the technology industry in highlighting the ‘skills deficit’ in all areas of today’s workforce, especially engineering,” a spokeswoman for Qualcomm told The Daily Caller News Foundation. “This is an industry-wide problem, and we are committed to working to build the pipeline of students studying STEM fields.”

One in five of the new Qualcomm hires in Fiscal Year 2013 were foreign workers with H-1b visas, according to an analysis of SEC filings by Ron Hira, a professor at Rochester Institute of Technology who is an expert in offshoring. Those 900 foreign workers hired in 2013 triple the total number of workers Qualcomm hired in 2014.

“Qualcomm and other tech firms have argued that they turn to H-1Bs because there is a significant shortage of American talent available,” Hira told TheDCNF. “Given the recent large layoff announcements by Qualcomm, Microsoft, Intel, and Cisco, how can the tech industry continue to argue there’s a shortage of American workers?”

Microsoft did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Hira also analyzed the skills of H-1b workers Qualcomm hired from Fiscal Year 2010 through 2012, and found most of the workers weren’t the highly skilled, U.S.-trained workers lobbyists imply make up the majority of H-1b holders.

Thirty-five percent of the 1,265 workers Qualcomm hired at that time held only a bachelors degree, and just 32 percent held advanced U.S. degrees. Only 44 of them held Ph.Ds from U.S. universities.

“This is very different than the carefully constructed, and misleading, narrative constructed by the tech industry that the H-1b program is primarily a vehicle for keeping people from abroad that the U.S. trained, and paid for,” Hira told TheDCNF.



President Asshat Released Top Iranian Scientist As Part Of Nuke Deal; Left Americans To Rot In Hell

Obama Released Top Iranian Scientist As Part Of Nuke Deal; Left Americans To Rot In Hell – Gateway Pundit

On Wednesday Barack Obama lashed out at CBS reporter Major Garrett after he asked him about the four Americans left behind to languish in Iranian prisons.


Former Marine Amir Hekmati, Saeed Abedini and Vahid Salemi are being held in Iranian prisons. (Breitbart)

Obama was defending his nuclear deal with Iran when Garrett asked him about the US hostages in Iran.

Obama: I got to give you credit Major for how you craft those questions. the notion that I’m content as I celebrate with American citizens languishing in Iranian jails… Major, that’s nonsense and you should know better.

Of course, that is exactly what he did.

The Obama administration did nothing to free American hostages during their talks with the Iranian regime.


Now we know…

Obama released a top Iranian scientist as part of the deal but left the Americans to rot in hell in Iranian prisons.

The Times of Israel reported:

Mojtaba Atarodi, arrested in California for attempting to acquire equipment for Iran’s military-nuclear programs, was released in April as part of back channel talks, Times of Israel told. The contacts, mediated in Oman for years by close colleague of the Sultan, have seen a series of US-Iran prisoner releases, and there may be more to come.

The secret back channel of negotiations between Iran and the United States, which led to this month’s interim deal in Geneva on Iran’s rogue nuclear program, has also seen a series of prisoner releases by both sides, which have played a central role in bridging the distance between the two nations, the Times of Israel has been told.

In the most dramatic of those releases, the US in April released a top Iranian scientist, Mojtaba Atarodi, who had been arrested in 2011 for attempting to acquire equipment that could be used for Iran’s military-nuclear programs.

No wonder he didn’t want reporters talking about it!



*VIDEO* The Donald Holds Press Conference With Families Of Americans Killed By Illegal Aliens



37 Consecutive Gallup Polls Show Majority Of Americans Want Abortion To Be Illegal In Most Cases

Two Decades Of Gallup Polls Show Majority Of Americans Want Abortion To Be Illegal In Most Cases – Breitbart


In 37 consecutive polls performed throughout the past 21 years on the issue of abortion, Gallup has found that a majority of Americans surveyed say abortion should be illegal in all or most cases.

“In the past 20 years, the percentage who say abortion should be illegal in all circumstances or all but a few circumstances has never dropped below 54 percent,” writes Terence P. Jeffrey at CNS

A review of the data over the last two decades may appear to be at odds with Gallup’s latest poll, conducted May 6-10, with the headline: “Americans Choose ‘Pro-Choice’ For First Time in Seven Years.”

“Half of Americans consider themselves ‘pro-choice’ on abortion, surpassing the 44% who identify as ‘pro-life,’” Gallup’s Lydia Saad wrote in her analysis of that poll. “This is the first time since 2008 that the pro-choice position has had a statistically significant lead in Americans’ abortion views.”

Saad continued:

The pro-choice view is not as prevalent among Americans as it was in the mid-1990s, but the momentum for the pro-life position that began when Barack Obama took office has yielded to a pro-choice rebound. That rebound has essentially restored views to where they were in 2008; today’s views are also similar to those found in 2001. Some of the variation in public views on abortion over time coincides with political and cultural events that may have helped shape public opinion on the issue, including instances of anti-abortion violence, legislative efforts to ban “partial-birth abortion” or limit abortion funding, and certain Supreme Court cases. While events like these may continue to cause public views on abortion to fluctuate, the broader liberal shift in Americans’ ideology of late could mean the recent pro-choice expansion has some staying power.

As Jeffrey observes, however, in that Gallup survey, a combined 55 percent of participants said abortion should be illegal in all circumstances or in all but a few circumstances.

The poll specifically found that 29 percent of respondents said abortion should be legal “under any circumstances,” and 13 percent “under most circumstances.” However, 36 percent responded that abortion should be “legal only in a few circumstances,” and 19 percent said it should be illegal “in all circumstances,” totaling 55 percent believing abortion should be illegal in all, or all but a few, circumstances.

Gallup’s data sheet for that poll shows results for this particular question of when abortion should be illegal for the 37 surveys it has performed since September of 1994.

“In every one of these surveys, the combined percentage of respondents who said abortion should be illegal ‘in all circumstances’ or in all but ‘a few circumstances’ exceeded 50 percent of those surveyed,” writes Jeffrey, adding that “the lowest these combined answers have ever been was 51 percent,” in both September of 1994 and September of 1995.

Gallup has also asked survey participants the question, “With respect to the abortion issue, would you consider yourself to be pro-choice or pro-life?”

In September of 1995, 56 percent of participants described themselves as pro-choice and 33 percent as pro-life, while in the latest survey, 50 percent say they are pro-choice and 44 percent pro-life.

The labels of “pro-life” and “pro-choice,” however, may not be aptly describing Americans’ beliefs about abortion.

In the most recent poll results, on which Gallup’s headline – “Americans Choose ‘Pro-Choice’ For First Time in Seven Years” – was based, 27 percent of “pro-choice” individuals say abortion should be mostly illegal, while only 9 percent of “pro-life” people say it should be mostly legal.

Kristan Hawkins, president of Students for Life of America, looked at the poll and tells Breitbart News: “While on the surface, it looks like more Americans are self-identifying as pro-choice than pro-life, when you look at the split in what exactly they favor, those numbers tell a different story.”

“Americans may be misidentifying themselves when it comes to the matter of abortion since a majority clearly support significant restrictions on abortion,” Hawkins continued. “We see students misidentifying themselves all the time on campuses across the country, which is why we no longer ask them if they are pro-life or pro-choice. They don’t know what the labels mean. Instead we ask if they support legal abortion or how long into a pregnancy they tolerate abortion.”

“As this pro-life generation continues to mature and technology continues to advance, more and more Americans will come to realize the great human tragedy of abortion,” she added.

Similarly, Maureen Ferguson of the Catholic Association tells Breitbart News, “This poll shows once again that most Americans oppose most abortions. Not only do the majority of people morally oppose most abortions, they want them to be against the law.”

“Polling numbers are even higher when talking about protecting babies from late-term abortion, so we hope the U.S. Senate will listen to the will of the people and pass the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which would ban abortions past 20 weeks of pregnancy,” she added.



Apparently, 46 Percent Of Americans Still Aren’t Convinced That Hillary Clinton Is Pure Evil

Hillary Clinton Unfavorable Numbers Highest In 14 Years – Politico


Hillary Clinton is seeing her highest unfavorability ratings in 14 years, according to the latest CNN/ORC poll released Tuesday.

Just 46 percent said they view the Democratic presidential front-runner favorably, compared to 50 percent who said they have an unfavorable view. In the preceding April survey, Clinton polled with 53 percent favorable, compared to 44 percent unfavorable.

Despite holding a commanding lead among declared and potential Democratic opponents, the public has not viewed Clinton this unfavorably since March 2001, when the former first lady was in her third month as a New York senator. Just 44 percent said they had a favorable view of Clinton at that time, with 53 percent seeing her in an unfavorable light.

Clinton grabbed 60 percent of the primary field among Democrats and independent-leaning Democrats, with Vice President Joe Biden, who has not declared an intention to run, a distant second with 14 percent and independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders at 10 percent. Sanders officially launched his campaign as a Democrat late last month.

Voters are also skeptical about Clinton in other ways – they are split on whether she “inspires confidence” (49 percent say that applies to her, 50 percent do not) and on whether she “cares about people like you” (47 percent say it applies, 52 percent it does not apply).

Consistent with other polls on the issue, just 42 percent say they think the former secretary of state is “honest and trustworthy,” compared with 57 percent who say they do not.

At the same time, 61 percent responded that emails being released by the State Department from her time at Foggy Bottom will not show that she did anything wrong in that capacity.

The CNN poll was conducted May 29-31 among 1,025 Americans via land lines and cellphones, carrying an overall margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. Among Democrats and leaners, the sampling error is plus or minus 4.5 percentage points.

A separate poll released Tuesday by The Washington Post and ABC News found that Clinton’s favorability was 45 percent, the lowest in that survey since April 2008, when she was in the midst of a tough primary fight with Barack Obama.



Hallelujah! Unemployment Plunges Due To 354,000 Americans Leaving The Workforce (James Quinn)

Hallelujah! Unemployment Plunges Due To 354,000 Americans Leaving The Workforce – James Quinn


This shit is almost too funny to read. The Bureau of Lies & Scams (BLS) just issued their seasonally adjusted, excel spreadsheet enhanced, monthly propaganda data for February. They have the balls to report that an economy that is hemorrhaging energy jobs, seeing retailers close stores by the hundreds, has seen manufacturing new orders decline for six straight months, has corporate profits falling, has real median household income sitting at 1989 levels and has seen 80% of all economic reports miss to the downside is creating 295,000 new jobs in the middle of the coldest, snowiest February in years. The BLS uses classic government logic. When in doubt, lie.


Of course, the BLS is still using their excel spreadsheet Birth Death model to add 132,000 phantom jobs into the calculation for all the small business hiring going on out there. It has already been documented that there are more businesses closing than opening in the US. This adjustment is a farce. It is untrue. It is more likely to be negative 132,000, which would eliminate virtually all the new jobs just reported. As usual the household survey reports an entirely different result than the blaring positive headlines in the corporate mainstream media.

A critical thinking person might wonder how the labor participation rate could go even lower (37 year lows) if the unemployment rate just reached a seven year low of 5.5%. The BLS counts on the faux journalists at CNBC and Marketwatch to not think critically. So you need to go elsewhere for some truth. Here it is:

* Here is the blunt truth. Last month there were 148.2 million working age Americans working and 101.5 million working age Americans not working. This month there are 148.3 million working age Americans working and 101.6 million working age Americans not working. Does that sound like progress or stagnation?

* The BLS expects you to believe that in the midst of a supposed economic recovery, 354,000 working age Americans decided to leave the workforce in one month because their financial situation is so sound. How stupid do they think we are, or are they so incompetent with their models and measurements that they just make this shit up?

* We should be so proud. The 92.9 million Americans not in the labor force is an all-time record. Who needs a job when you can “earn” a $50,000 per year life on welfare or SSDI. Working is for suckers.



* What are the 1.5 million working age Americans who left the workforce in the last 12 months doing? What are the 13 million working age Americans who have left the workforce since 2008 doing?

* Since 2008 we’ve added 3 million jobs, while 13 million people have supposedly left the workforce, and the unemployment rate is supposedly lower today than it was in 2008. So the working age population is up by 16 million, we only have 3 million more jobs, but the unemployment rate has fallen from 5.8% to 5.5%. This is simply hysterical. The blatant lies, manipulation and utter bullshit is mind boggling in its outright dishonesty.

* How come the household survey says there are only 96,000 more people employed than in January, but the blaring headline only proclaims the 295,000 from the other survey? Propaganda at its finest.

But at least we’re adding those high paying service jobs for waitresses, fry cooks, social services workers and retail clerks. They accounted for 45% of the jobs added. Services accounted for 259,000 of the 295,000 supposed jobs added. At least all these workers can glory in the 1.97% wage increase they’ve earned in the last year. I’m sure that is going a long way in paying those Obamacare premium increases and 10% rise in food costs.

Government reports are like the American Dream. You have to be asleep to believe them.



*VIDEOS* Senate Leftists To Release Hotly Contested CIA Interrogation Report Despite Threat To Americans







Obamacare Architect Caught On 3 Different Videos Admitting The Regime Lied, And Calling Americans Stupid (Videos)

Megyn Kelly Shows 2nd Video Of Obamacare Architect Calling Americans “Too Stupid” – Right Scoop

Last night Megyn Kelly showed a 2nd video of Obama architect Jonathan Gruber talking about how Obamacare passed because Americans are “too stupid”:


Clearly Gruber thinks he knows what’s best for us stupid Americans, just like Obama and Democrats believe they are our betters. So much so that they’d hide important information about a bill just to shove it down our throats.

Republicans have ammunition to fight this thing in the court of public opinion but so far I don’t see them doing much about it.


Related articles:

Video: Interview Gets Tense In A Hurry When TV Hosts Confront Senator Over Obamacare Architect’s Revealing Comments – The Blaze

The hosts of “Fox & Friends” confronted Sen. Angus King (I-Maine) on Tuesday over one of the Obamacare architects’ controversial assertion that the health care law made it through Congress thanks to a “lack of transparency” and the “stupidity of the American voter.” The video of MIT professor Jonathan Gruber making the revealing comments at a University of Pennsylvania event in October of 2013 went viral this week.

King said he was unsure of what Gruber was talking about and made it clear he doesn’t “endorse those kinds of comments.” He then defended the way Obamacare was passed.

“Everybody knew that there were going to be additional taxes required to support the premiums under the Affordable Care Act. I don’t see it as any deep dark conspiracy,” he added.

“Really? Senator, he said he wasn’t transparent. He wasn’t telling the truth,” host Brian Kilmeade responded.


The senator then seemingly downplayed Gruber’s role in crafting Obamacare. King was not in the Senate when the law was voted on.

“Who was he? I don’t know where he was in the process,” King said.

When co-host Kimberly Guilfoyle argued Gruber’s comments confirm the American people were purposefully not informed that Obamacare would “tax and penalize” people, King went slightly off topic and stressed the importance of having insurance.

Wait a minute, wait a minute. Tax and penalize? Hold it, hold it, hold it,” King interjected. “We’ve got eight million people that have insurance now that didn’t before and don’t lecture me about this because 40 years ago, I had insurance. If I hadn’t had it, it caught a cancer that saved my life. If I hadn’t had insurance I’d be dead.”

“What does that have to do with it?” Kilmeade asked.

“It has to do with having insurance, man. If you don’t have insurance, it’s a high risk,” King shot back.

Confronted again with claims that Gruber’s remarks show “they lied about a health plan to the American people,” King asserted he was only “one guy” involved in the creation and passage of Obamacare. He then suggested the TV hosts believe “people shouldn’t have health insurance.”

“Are you that cruel? That is what you’re saying,” the senator added.

“Oh, my goodness,” a frustrated Kilmeade reacted.

Watch the video via Fox News below:



In Third Video, Obamacare Architect Talks About ‘Basic Exploitation’ Of American Voters – Daily Caller

A third video has surfaced of Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber bragging about pulling the wool over the eyes of the American public in order to help implement Obamacare.

“It’s a very clever, you know, basic exploitation of the lack of economic understanding of the American voter,” Gruber, an economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said during a speech at the University of Rhode Island in November 2012.

He was discussing what is known as the Cadillac tax and how it came into being.

In an effort to add a cost-control measure to Obamacare, former Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, who Gruber called a “hero,” successfully pushed through a 40 percent excise tax on insurance companies for plans that cost more than $10,200 for individuals and $27,000 for families.

This was an alternative to putting a cap on tax breaks employers provide employees for health insurance plans, which, according to Gruber, the public mistook for a tax increase rather than the removal of a tax break.

“You just can’t get through, it’s just politically impossible,” Gruber said during his talk.

The purpose of the Cadillac tax is to force the “overinsured” – people with expensive health insurance plans – to cut back on “excess benefits.” Many economists believe that such plans cause inefficiencies in the health-care system. The Cadillac tax, which will be implemented in 2018, is projected to save $250 billion.

Gruber has made remarks before in which he espouses a dim view of the American public while discussing the deception behind passing both the Cadillac tax and Obamacare in general.

The first instance came to light on Sunday when a video was published showing Gruber telling a University of Pennsylvania health-care panel that Obamacare was “written in a tortured way” and that it passed, in part, because it was difficult to understand.

“Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical to get the thing to pass,” Gruber said at the November 2013 event.

The discoverer of the video was not a journalist or a political operative, but, rather, a financial planner who was one of the millions of Americans who lost his insurance plan last year despite President Obama’s pledge that “if you like your plan, you can keep it, period.”

Gruber, who was paid $400,000 to consult on Obamacare, backtracked from those remarks on MSNBC on Tuesday, saying that they were “off the cuff.”

But the randomness of Gruber’s remarks was cast into doubt Tuesday night when Fox News’ Megyn Kelly revealed a second video that also shows the professor discussing the Cadillac tax in a speech at Washington University in St. Louis in October 2013.

Gruber said that the kludge worked because “the American people are too stupid to understand the difference” between capping subsidies and taxing insurance companies.




Meet The Guy Who Found All Those Jonathan Gruber Obamacare Clips – American Thinker

The story about Rich Weinstein, an unknown investment advisor who poured through hours and hours of YouTube videos, radio interviews, and other media featuring Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber is both incredible and inspiring.

It is Weinstein who is responsible for ferreting out Gruber’s toxic comments about the “stupidity of the American people” and, more importantly, Gruber’s insistence that Obamacare subsidies were limited to state exchanges and should not be made available at the federal level.


A few days ago, Weinstein pulled a short clip from Gruber’s year-old appearance at a University of Pennsylvania health care conference. As a crowd murmured with laughter, Gruber explained that the process that created the ACA was, by necessity, obfuscated to pull one over on voters.

“This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure the CBO did not score the mandate as taxes,” said Gruber. “Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. Call it the stupidity of the America voter, or whatever.”

Weinstein’s scoop went around the world in a hurry. American Commitment, a conservative 501(c)(4) founded by Americans for Prosperity veteran Phil Kerpen, published the clip on its YouTube channel. Kerpen promoted it through tweets, which quickly became live coverage of the media outlets discovering Gruber.

The University of Pennsylvania actually pulled the clip for a few hours before a Tsunami of outrage forced them to put it back up.

Weinstein’s activism is the result of him losing his insurance in 2013:

Weinstein dates his accidental citizen journalism back to the end of 2013 and the first run of insurance cancellations or policy changes. He was among the people who got a letter informing him that his old policy did not meet ACA standards.

“When Obama said ‘If you like your plan, you can keep your plan, period’—frankly, I believed him,” says Weinstein. “He very often speaks with qualifiers. When he said ‘period,’ there were no qualifiers. You can understand that when I lost my own plan, and the replacement cost twice as much, I wasn’t happy. So I’m watching the news, and at that time I was thinking: Hey, the administration was not telling people the truth, and the media was doing nothing!”

So Weinstein, new plan in hand, started watching the news. “These people were showing up on the shows, calling themselves architects of the law,” he recalls. “I saw David Cutler, Zeke Emanuel, Jonathan Gruber, people like that. I wondered if these guys had some type of paper trail. So I looked into what Dr. Cutler had said and written, and it was generally all about cost control. After I finished with Cutler, I went to Dr. Gruber. I assume I went through every video, every radio interview, every podcast. Every everything.”

His second shot across the bow of Obamacare was an even bigger coup:

Weinstein dug and dug and eventually discovered the first Gruber quote, known in conservative circles as the “speak-o.” Gruber had been on TV arguing that the case against subsidies in non-exchange states was ludicrous. Yet at a January 2012 symposium, Gruber seemed to be making the conservatives’ argument. “What’s important to remember politically about this is if you’re a state and you don’t set up an exchange, that means your citizens don’t get their tax credits – but your citizens still pay the taxes that support this bill,” said Gruber. “So you’re essentially saying [to] your citizens you’re going to pay all the taxes to help all the other states in the country.”

The investment advisor e-mailed this around. Nobody cared. Nobody noticed the clip until after the D.C. circuit ruled 2-1 in favor of plaintiffs who were suing to stop the subsidies. Weinstein clicked around for articles about the decision, and left a comment on The Washington Post’s Volokh Conspiracy blog, pointing to the clip. In short order, Ryan Radia of the conservative Competitive Enterprise Institute noticed the clip and promoted it. Within hours, Gruber’s “speak-o” had greatly muddied the liberal argument.

SCOTUS now has not only evidence of congressional intent to limit the subsidies, but also evidence that the people who wrote the law had the same intent. It’s going to be very hard for John Roberts to finesse this one, which probably means SCOTUS will uphold King and the subsidies gotten through the federal website will end.

That doesn’t mean the end of Obamacare. It is pssible that many states without exchanges will set them up to prevent the disruption in coverage for those in their states who got insurance through But Weinstein’s efforts have thrown a monkey wrench into Obamacare’s inner workings and whether the program can survive is open to question.


Related videos:






Thanks Barack… Record 92.6 Million Americans No Longer In Labor Force

Labor Participation Rate Drops To 36 Year Low; Record 92.6 Million Americans Not In Labor Force – Zero Hedge

While by now everyone should know the answer, for those curious why the US unemployment rate just slid once more to a meager 5.9%, the lowest print since the summer of 2008, the answer is the same one we have shown every month since 2010: the collapse in the labor force participation rate, which in September slid from an already three decade low 62.8% to 62.7% – the lowest in over 36 years, matching the February 1978 lows. And while according to the Household Survey, 232,000 people found jobs, what is more disturbing is that the people not in the labor force, rose to a new record high, increasing by 315,000 to 92.6 million!

And that’s how you get a fresh cycle low in the unemployment rate.


So the next time Obama asks you if you are “better off now than 6 years ago” show him this chart of employment to the overall population: it speaks louder than the president ever could.




Thanks Barack… 1.9 Million Americans Won’t Get Health Insurance Due To ‘Family Glitch’

Report: ‘Family Glitch’ In Obamacare To Impact 1.9 Million Americans – Washington Free Beacon

Vague language within Obamacare will result in nearly 2 million Americans being unable to afford health insurance, according to a new report by the American Action Forum (AAF).


The so-called “family glitch” occurs when an individual is offered health insurance through their employer but the plan is not extended to the rest of their family. Due to the Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) interpretation of the law, other immediate family members are not eligible to receive subsidies for insurance, even if their income is below the federal poverty level.

The AAF has estimated that 1.93 million Americans will be affected by the glitch, making it “practically impossible” for them to obtain affordable health care coverage.

“The ‘Family Glitch,’ as it has become known, is an odd and particularly problematic side-effect of the Affordable Care Act (ACA),” the report said. “Since several provisions of the law are rather ambiguous, they unfortunately combine to create a perfect storm where obtaining affordable health insurance is practically impossible.”

Under Obamacare, Americans below 138 percent of the poverty line are eligible for Medicaid coverage, and anyone up to 400 percent of the poverty level can also receive subsidies to help pay for insurance purchased through the health exchange.

However, this provision does not apply to families who have been offered employer-sponsored insurance (ESI), even if it is only offered to the individual employee.

“This provision of the law lacks clarity on the point of whether or not the coverage offered must be family coverage, or whether individual coverage is sufficient,” the AAF said. “The Internal Revenue Service (IRS), through rule making, has interpreted the statute as only requiring an employer to offer individual coverage, and pegged affordability at 9.5 percent of the employee’s household income. The glitch occurs when one (or both) spouses are offered affordable individual ESI under the IRS definition, but family coverage is either not offered or is unaffordable.”

“Spouses and children of an employee offered ESI could be unable to afford the employer plan, but because it is offered to one family member, the rest are made ineligible for subsidies in the Exchanges,” the report added.

Using census data from April 2013, AAF estimated 947,000 spouses and 984,000 children could fall into this category, and left uninsured. The glitch will affect up to 428,000 women and 519,000 adult men.

If Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) funding expires, 2.28 million children would also be affected, according to AAF.

The provision could have unintended consequences for employees in the middle class, forcing them to not accept higher paying jobs out of fear of losing subsidy eligibility to pay for their family’s health insurance.

The AAF also said the glitch could result in families choosing to separate or divorce, in order to keep subsidies.

“The family glitch is just one of many problems that will inevitably arise from the ACA’s complete restructuring of the health care system,” the report concluded. “It is an unintended consequence that creates hardship and perverse incentives for American families struggling to obtain affordable health insurance. This year alone 1.93 million Americans will be impacted by this glitch and that number will likely increase as the employer mandate goes into effect.”



Related article:

Lowest-Cost Insurer Drops From Minnesota Exchange – Yahoo News

The insurance company that grabbed the most customers on Minnesota’s health care exchange by offering the lowest rates told state officials Tuesday that it’s pulling out of MNsure, a major blow to the exchange as the next open enrollment period approaches.

The decision by Golden Valley-based PreferredOne may mean higher rates and again puts the troubled exchange front-and-center in Minnesota’s governor and House elections.

MNsure officials said the company’s exit won’t affect health coverage through the state-run exchange. The state will send out notices early next month to the nearly 30,000 people who enrolled in PreferredOne through MNsure to outline the next steps – customers can transition to another MNsure health plan or renew with PreferredOne, in which case they’ll no longer be eligible for government subsidies.

PreferredOne had a cumulative total of 59 percent of the private-plan market for MNsure enrollees through early August. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota had 23 percent, HealthPartners 12, Medica 5 percent and UCare 1.

MNsure CEO Scott Leitz said he’s had no word any of the four remaining companies are mulling an exit. Open enrollment begins Nov. 15.

Despite a launch last year marred by technical problems and long call center waits, Democratic Gov. Mark Dayton’s administration has called MNsure a success because it helped reduce the ranks of uninsured Minnesotans by nearly 41 percent to a record low while offering some of the lowest premium rates in the country. More than 327,000 Minnesotans have enrolled through MNsure since it went live Oct. 1, including nearly 55,000 in private plans. Most enrollees are in the publicly run Medicaid and MinnesotaCare programs for lower-income people.

In a statement, Dayton cast the company’s exit as a result of its own low rates.

PreferredOne didn’t return calls from The Associated Press.

Company spokesman Steve Peterson told KSTP-TV, which first reported the decision, that staying on MNsure wasn’t financially or administratively sustainable. The membership they gained through MNsure was small, but was taking “a significant amount of our resources” to administer, Peterson said.

Republicans called it the latest sign of systemic problems in MNsure, an issue they plan to use to bolster their election-year pitch to take back control of the House and the defeat Dayton. Rep. Joe Hoppe, R-Chaska, said Tuesday’s news makes it clear Democrats have mismanaged the state’s health care overhaul.

“If you tell your average Minnesotan that we spent $160 million to develop a website and it doesn’t work, I think it makes a pretty strong argument for new management, not only in the state House, but in the governor’s office as well,” Hoppe said.

But Leitz and MNsure board chair Brian Beutner said it was proof the exchange is working as a competitive marketplace. Both officials acknowledged the exchange’s rocky rollout, but Beutner suggested PreferredOne’s low rates led to its exit.

“They offered the lowest rates and the broadest networks offered last year. I can understand how that might impact them,” Beutner said.

It’s unclear whether PreferredOne’s exit will affect premium rates for 2015, which were already expected to increase because health care costs have been rising. The state’s Department of Commerce is expected to release an early snapshot of rates in early October, with full details to follow when open enrollment begins. The department is still reviewing rates from the four remaining providers.

Rep. Joe Atkins, an Inver Grove Heights DFLer and the lead House sponsor of the legislation that created MNsure, said he expects premiums to stay low compared with the rest of the country. He laughed off the Republican criticism as election-season politics.

Atkins said he wasn’t surprised by the announcement because he expected some losses and some additions to the online marketplace for 2015. He pointed out that despite its large market share on MNsure, PreferredOne is one of the smaller carriers in the Minnesota health insurance market.

The Dayton administration opted to set up the state-run exchange rather than have Minnesota participate under the federal exchange created by the Obama administration’s Affordable Care Act.

Dayton’s GOP opponent, Jeff Johnson, blasted the governor and MNsure officials for PreferredOne’s withdrawal. If elected, Johnson said he’d sweep out the MNsure board and replace its top management.

Johnson said Dayton himself used PreferredOne’s “artificially low” rates to tout MNsure as having the lowest rates in the country.

“It was all a house of cards,” Johnson said. “Now 60 percent of policyholders are going to have to go through this whole nightmare again.”



Operation Choke Point: Obama Illegally Seizing Americans’ Bank Accounts

Obama Illegally Seizing Americans’ Bank Accounts – Tell Me Now

Since Obama has been having an issue with actually banning Americans from owning guns he has turned to a sneakier, and more sinister, method of stopping the flow of weapons, through Operation Choke Point. However now it’s being reported that this same scheme is being used to seize the bank accounts of those who are targeted in some cases.


The Department of Justice launched Operation Choke point to literally “choke” off gun retailers by restricting their ability to do business with banks. Obama and Holder don’t even seem to care that these businesses abide by all the laws and are properly licensed.

According to a report from the House of Representatives issued by Darrel Issa, Choke Point is without question illegal. Unfortunately this isn’t stopping Obama and his cronies within his administration.

Now that thousands of dealer across the nation have been left without a means in which to do banking they’re facing bankruptcy. What are they to do if they can’t make cash deposits or accept checks?

This is entirely wrong and unconstitutional. Unfortunately it’s yet another example of a rogue regime stomping on the rights of law-abiding Americans, which seems to be commonplace with him.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story


20 Million MORE Americans Could Lose Insurance Thanks To Obamacare

20 Million More Americans Could Lose Insurance -WorldNetDaily


The same failed Obamacare promise that plunged the individual health-care market into chaos last year is now hitting small group plans and could result in lost coverage for 20 million Americans.

Obamacare’s employer mandate does not apply to businesses with fewer than 50 employees, but many of those those companies are still receiving notices from their insurance providers informing them their previous plans are being canceled because they don’t contain all the provisions required under the new law.

Much like individual policyholders last year, small group plan holders are discovering their plans don’t qualify for being grandfathered, despite the famed assurance that if they liked their plans they could keep them.

“If you had your plan prior to March 2010 when Obamacare became law, it was supposed to be grandfathered in. You were supposed to keep it, but the Department of Labor came out with these grandfather regulations. It’s almost like telling a guy you can keep walking on the beach as long as you don’t get any sand on your feet. It’s almost impossible not to violate,” said National Center for Public Policy Research health-care analyst Dr. David Hogberg.

“If one of your co-pays goes up $10 over one year, your plan is no longer grandfathered. If the co-insurance you pay for a procedure was at 15 percent and they moved it up to 16 percent, it is no longer grandfathered,” he said.

Hogberg points to Labor Department statistics that admit 66 percent of small group plans will fail to be grandfathered because of those types of technicalities. With 31 million people employed by firms with less than 50 employees, some 20 million Americans are facing cancellation of their policies.

“It was obvious from the start that these regulations were going to result in loads of people losing their health insurance, but the president kept making that promise that if you like your insurance you can keep it, when he should have known better and I kind of suspect that he did know better,” Hogberg said.

The issue is not just theoretical for Hogberg, whose employer has fewer than 50 workers. In January, the National Center for Public Policy Research was informed by Kaiser Permanente that the policy the organization used since 1996 no longer met federal standards and had to be canceled. Hogberg said the plan Kaiser now recommends requires a six percent hike in premiums, which is a much better deal than other small firms are seeing.

Hogberg said his boss noted the cancellation would provide most small employers plenty of incentive to scrap insurance altogether and force employees onto health-care exchanges. He said it’s hard to estimate how many businesses would actually do that.

Another concern for Hogberg is how the story seems to be slipping below the radar for a mainstream media that were all over the headaches caused by individual policies getting canceled. He said it’s probably because of how enrollment periods are defined for different groups.

“Individual policies are mostly renewed in January of each year, and so these cancellation letters had to all be sent out over a period of a few months. Small group plans are renewed practically every month,” Hogberg said. “I think that’s one reason why the media might not be giving small group cancellations quite the same coverage because it’s happening over a more protracted period of time. The number of cancellations doesn’t escalate very quickly, so at this point it’s not making a huge media story.”

However, the number of Americans set to lose their small group plan coverage is much greater than those affected by the individual market, whether their employers end up finding another plan or dropping coverage and forcing employees to find insurance on the exchanges. As a result, Hogberg predicts this will be another black eye for Obamacare.

“I think this is another reason why Obamacare is in such trouble. First of all, the law shouldn’t be forcing people to lose their insurance to begin with. But if that’s going to happen, if many people are going to lose the plans that they like, I suspect most people would at least prefer to get a new plan that’s better than the old one,” Hogberg said.

“So far, I really don’t see much evidence that that’s happening and quite a bit of evidence that it’s not. People are paying higher premiums and higher out-of-pocket costs. Networks of doctors and hospitals are more restrictive,” he said. “I suspect the Obama administration and other Obamacare supporters are kind of in denial about that. Maybe that denial will end come November, but who knows?”

Click HERE For Rest Of Story


Dick Durbin’s Fantasy World: Where Obamacare Helped 10 Million Uninsured Americans Get Insurance (Video)

Sen. Durbin’s Fantasy World: Where Obamacare Helped 10 Million Uninsured Americans Get Insurance – Independent Journal Review


Senator Richard Durbin revealed his wild imagination on Face the Nation this week, where he proclaimed that Obamacare has insured an additional 10 million Americans who wouldn’t have otherwise had insurance:

“Bob, let’s look at the bottom line. The bottom line is this. Ten million Americans have health insurance today who would not have had it without the Affordable Care Act – 10 million. And we can also say this. It is going to reduce the deficit more than we thought it would.”

However, there are some major problems with Durbin’s statement, which he seems to have taken by combining two numbers:

* The more than 3 million who signed up for Obamacare through the exchanges: The federal exchange counts people as enrolled as long as they have selected a plan, even if they haven’t paid for it. Also, a McKinsey & Co. survey estimates that only 11 percent of those who bought insurance under Obamacare didn’t have insurance previously.

* The 6.3 million people who were deemed eligible for Medicaid this year: In addition to some who were added to Medicaid as a result of Obamacare, this group also includes those who had Medicaid prior to Obamacare and those who are joining Medicaid in states that did not accept the Obamacare Medicaid expansion.

The Washington Post Fact Checker estimated that, at the very most, the number of newly insured under Obamacare is 4 million but that even that number is generous. Durbin’s estimate of 10 million is ridiculous and not at all backed by fact though, sadly, many who hear his statement will believe it.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story


Record 91.8 Million Americans No Longer In Labor Force… Fake Unemployment Rate Falls To 6.7 Percent

People Not In Labor Force Soar To Record 91.8 Million; Participation Rate Plunges To 1978 Levels – Zero Hedge

Curious why despite the huge miss in payrolls the unemployment rate tumbled from 7.0% to 6.7%? The reason is because in December the civilian labor force did what it usually does in the New Normal: it dropped from 155.3 million to 154.9 million, which means the labor participation rate just dropped to a fresh 35 year low, hitting levels not seen since 1978, at 62.8% down from 63.0%.


And the piece de resistance: Americans not in the labor force exploded higher by 535,000 to a new all time high 91.8 million.


The jobless, laborless recovery continues to steam on.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story


Over 6 Million Americans Have Lost Their Health Coverage So Far Thanks To Obamacare

6,171,890 Americans Have Lost Health Care Because Of Obamacare – Fire Andrea Mitchell

Over six million Americans have now lost their health care coverage thanks to Obamacare. In fact, 6,171,890 Americans have already lost their health care coverage. This is just the foreshock as 80-100 million are expected to lose their employer based health care come next fall.


These numbers don’t even include the state of Texas which likely has several hundred thousand to millions who will end up losing their health care coverage thanks to Obamacare.

Let’s see if Americans wake up and wipe out the Democrats in the House and Senate who voted for and support Obamacare in 2014.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story


Poll: 73 Percent Of Americans Say 113th Congress Is Worst Ever… Because It Is

Poll: Americans Say 113th Congress Is Worst Ever – News Max

An overwhelming majority of Americans say the 113th Congress is the worst in their lifetime, according to a new CNN/ORC International poll released Thursday.


While nearly three quarters of the respondents said this has been a “do-nothing” Congress, two thirds of those surveyed said the current Congress is the worst in their lifetime, with 28 percent disagreeing.

“That sentiment exists among all demographic and political subgroups. Men, women, rich, poor, young old – all think this year’s Congress has been the worst they can remember,” Keating Holland, CNN polling director, said.

“Older Americans – who have lived through more congresses – hold more negative views of the 113th Congress than younger Americans. Republicans, Democrats and independents also agree that this has been the worst session of Congress in their lifetimes.”

The telephone poll of 1,035 adults nationwide showed that 73 percent say Congress has done nothing to solve the country’s problems, with roughly 25 percent disagreeing.

Indeed, less than 60 bills have been passed and signed into law during the past year, according to CNN, and there is not much optimism that next year will be much better.

Fifty-two percent believe the policies of Democratic leaders in Congress would move the country in the wrong direction, and 54 percent think the policies of the Republican leaders would do the same, the survey found. The poll, conducted Dec. 16-19, had a sampling error of plus or minus three percent.

One of the first tests of where Congress is headed in 2014 will be the fight over the debt ceiling, and analysts are somewhat divided about the prospects, reports The Washington Times.

“I don’t think there’s any political reason why they’ll fight over this, at least not to the degree that they have in the past,” Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, said Wednesday on CNN.

But others maintain that could still be gridlock, despite the bipartisan budget deal reached earlier this month.

“I believe we very quickly began to move away from ‘Kumbaya’ a couple weeks ago,” Jared Bernstein, a senior fellow at the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, said Tuesday on MSNBC.

“I’m afraid we’re not going to see a lot [of cooperation], but we’ll see some,” he added.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story


The latest imagined threat to mankind? Gift cards!

Basically Envirocrats are just whining Chicken Littles who are probably a complete pain in the ass to be around. At least that is what Donald Douglas says

The left’s environmental fascists go after another hugely popular capitalist standby, the plastic gift card. Nothing is off limits to these assholes. Any product or capitalist innovation that proves popular or highly successful is targeted for destruction. And this time? The stinking retail gift card? How low can retarded leftists go? And we’re supposed to go back to gift certificates? That might be hard on trees, you know? And plastic gift cards are recyclable, doh! Maybe a recycling campaign would have been better than assassinating this simple retail purchasing device.

Leftists are vile people out to destroy virtually everything of convenience and utility in the modern capitalist economy.

At LAT, “Retailers seek ‘green’ alternative to plastic gift cards“:

It does seem anything innovative bothers Envirowhiners doesn’t it? They like to pretend they are “above us all” they are hip, they get it man! Actually, I think they just enjoy being a pain in everyone else’s behind, Take Jessica Hamilton for instance

Like millions of Americans, Jessica Hamilton of Pasadena will buy her friends and family a handful of gift cards this holiday season, drawn by their convenience.

Yet Hamilton, who carries reusable bags when she goes shopping, is bothered by the thought of all of that plastic ending up in landfills along with worn-out hotel key cards, credit cards and the like.

Ah yes, the landfill, the source of worry and butt hurt for Enviroweenies. Go read the rest if you like, or if you can stand the angst these poor Envirodouches have to endure for poor, poor Mother Earth.

Oh, and congratulate Donald on his 5,000,000 hits! Which reminds me, we are nearing 4,000,000 hits here at The DaleyGator.

Top Obama Afghan Officials Can’t Say How Many Americans Have Been Killed In Afghanistan This Year

Top Obama Afghan Officials Asked How Many Americans Have Been Killed This Year In Afghanistan… Not A Single One Can Answer The Question – Weasel Zippers

Nor could they say how much the U.S. is spending in Afghanistan, even far-left Congressman Gerry Connolly called their inability to answer these questions “stunning.”


Via WSJ:

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R., Calif.) had a simple question Wednesday for three of the Obama administration’s top Afghanistan specialists: How many American troops have been killed in Afghanistan this year?

None of the witnesses at the House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on Afghanistan had an answer.

How much is the U.S. spending in Afghanistan? Mr. Rohrabacher asked.

No one could say.

“We’re supposed to believe that you fellas have a plan that’s going to end up in a positive way in Afghanistan?” Mr. Rohrabacher asked. “Holy cow!”

Mr. Rohrabacher’s incredulous questioning came during a two-hour hearing on U.S. policy in Afghanistan that revealed increasing congressional frustration with U.S. policy as the administration tries to rescue its plan to keep thousands of troops in Afghanistan through the end of this decade, if not beyond.

Rep. Gerry Connolly (D., Va.) called the witnesses’ inability to rattle off the facts “a stunning development.”

“How can you come to a congressional oversight hearing on this subject and not know” the answers? He asked. “Like that wouldn’t be a question the tip of one’s tongue.”

Keep reading

Click HERE For Rest Of Story


Obamacare Disaster Update: More Than 160 Million Americans Could Lose Their Health Insurance In 2014

More Than 160M Could Lose Insurance In 2014 – Sweetness & Light


From Fox News:

Almost 80 million with employer health care plans could have coverage canceled, experts predict

By Jim Angle | November 25, 2013

Almost 80 million people with employer health plans could find their coverage canceled because they are not compliant with ObamaCare, several experts predicted. Their losses would be in addition to the millions who found their individual coverage cancelled for the same reason.

Stan Veuger of the American Enterprise Institute said that in addition to the individual cancellations, “at least half the people on employer plans would by 2014 start losing plans as well.” There are approximately 157 million employer health care policy holders.

Avik Roy of the Manhattan Institute added, “the administration estimated that approximately 78 million Americans with employer sponsored insurance would lose their existing coverage due to the Affordable Care Act.”

Once again, it has to be pointed out that most insurance policies cover more than one person. So these 80 million cancelled policies could mean that more than 160 million people will lose their insurance coverage. And 160 million people is a lot of votes. (Obama beat Romney by less than 5 million votes.)

Last week, an analysis by the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank, showed the administration anticipates half to two-thirds of small businesses would have policies canceled or be compelled to send workers onto the ObamaCare exchanges. They predicted up to 100 million small and large business policies could be canceled next year.

According to projections the administration itself issued back in July 2010, it was clear officials knew the impact of ObamaCare three years ago. In fact, according to the Federal Register, its mid-range estimate was that by the end of 2014, 76 percent of small group plans would be cancelled, along with 55 percent of large employer plans.

The reason behind the losses is that current plans don’t meet the requirements of ObamaCare, which dictate that each plan must cover a list of essential benefits, whether people want them or not…

And it’s better that people have no insurance at all, than plans that don’t provide ‘free’ breast pumps.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story


Related article:


Top US Hospital Laying Off Staff Due To Obamacare – Daily Caller

The Cleveland Clinic, which is ranked among the top four U.S. hospitals, is making layoffs and cutting its budget more than $100 million as a direct result of the Affordable Care Act, the Daily Caller has learned.

“The cuts for 2014, about half of those are related to the Affordable Care Act… We anticipate a reduction in workforce,” Cleveland Clinic executive director of communications Eileen Sheil said in an interview with TheDC.

The Cleveland Clinic is reducing its 2014 budget by $330 million.

“We offered early retirement to 3,000 employees,” Sheil said, but noted that the early retirement option recently offered to staff was “voluntary” for eligible employees.

“The $330 million cut is not all layoffs,” Sheil said, noting that the Clinic is also cutting operating-room expenses and paying less to vendors.

“We’re taking money out of vendors, renegotiating contracts, looking at where we can reduce duplications, improve supply chain efficiencies… how we can scale back and use less. How we can take costs out of our operating rooms,” Sheil said.

“We were able to take 23 percent out of common operations procedure by doing things more efficiently,” Shiel said.

The Cleveland Clinic is a Top 4 U.S. hospital for 2013-2014, according to U.S. News and World Report rankings. In 2008, Clinic surgeons performed the nation’s first near-total face transplant.

TheDC has extensively reported on Obamacare’s effect on hospitals, including hefty fines and other penalties facing nonprofit hospitals like the one that treated the final Boston Marathon bombing victim.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story


Republicans Got It Right About Obamacare: 5 Predictions That Turned Out To Be True – John Hawkins

Republicans Got It Right About Obamacare: 5 Predictions That Turned Out To Be True

Republicans were right about Obamacare and Democrats were wrong. Before Obamacare was passed, when Democrats were telling the public that it would make health care cheaper, better, and would cure cancer right after it makes your bed in the morning and cuts your grass, Republicans were pointing out the very flaws that the American people are bitterly complaining about today. This is why we’re not going to help the Democrats “fix” Obamacare. The fact of the matter is that we’ve been right every step of the way so far and what we’re telling people is that the worst is yet to come. The only real way to “fix” this law is to repeal it. The people telling you that are the ones who pointed out all of these problems that the Democrats lied about and missed like…

1) The cost of insurance will go up: “There is nothing in the House or Senate bills that will enable Americans to have the kind of cost control that the President is promising. No matter how you look at this, health care costs both for individuals and for the country as a whole are going to increase.” – Senior Fellow for Health Policy Studies at Heritage, Robert Moffit in 2009

2) People will lose their jobs or be cut back to part-time because of Obamacare: “Additional taxes on employers and new government mandates that dictate acceptable insurance will place new and crushing burdens on employers. These are burdens that will ultimately fall squarely on the backs of workers in the form of reduced wages, fewer hours or lost employment. CBO agrees that ‘[e]mployees largely bear the cost of… play-or-pay fees in the form of lower wages.’ According to the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), the nation’s largest small business association, an employer mandate of this magnitude will disproportionately impact small businesses, triggering up to 1.6 million lost jobs. Two-thirds of those jobs would be shed by small businesses.” – House Majority Leader John Boehner in 2009

3) More Americans will lose their health insurance because of Obamacare than will be covered by the law: “This new regulation appears to ignore the impact it will have in the real world. It’ll drive up costs and reduce the number of people who will have insurance.” – Republican Senator Mike Enzi, 2010

4) “If you like your doctor, you keep your doctor” was a lie: “Remember when the president said, ‘If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor’? Not true. In Texas alone a record number of doctors are leaving the Medicare system because of the cuts in reimbursements forced on them by Obamacare.” – Former governor and vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin in 2010

5)”If you like your plan, you can keep it” was a lie: “The District of Columbia is an island surrounded by reality. Only in the District of Columbia could you get away with telling the people if you like what you have you can keep it, and then pass regulations six months later that do just the opposite and figure that people are going to ignore it. But common sense is eventually going to prevail in this town and common sense is going to have to prevail on this piece of legislation as well.” – Republican Senator Chuck Grassley in 2010

These are just five examples of what most conservatives thought would happen with Obamacare and we were spot on. In fact, conservatives predicted every problem with Obamacare other than the utter and complete failure of the website, which if anything shows that we may have given Obama too much credit. What should really scare you is that the same people who got so much right about the bill so far are predicting tens of millions of Americans will lose their plans when the employer mandate comes online and there will be death panels, doctor shortages, a dramatic decline in the quality of care, and massive cost increases that will dwarf anything we’ve seen so far, even though tens of millions of Americans still will remain uninsured under the law.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story


Over 600 Hardware And Software Defects In ObamaCare Exchange; ‘The Longest List Anybody Had Ever Seen’ – Fox Nation

On a sultry day in late August, a dozen staff members of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services gathered at the agency’s Baltimore headquarters with managers from the major contractors building to review numerous problems with President’s Obama’s online health insurance initiative. The mood was grim.

The prime contractor, CGI Federal, had long before concluded that the administration was blindly enamored of an unrealistic goal: creating a cutting-edge website that would use the latest technologies to dazzle consumers with its many features. Knowing how long it would take to complete and test the software, the company’s officials and other vendors believed that it was impossible to open a fully functioning exchange on Oct. 1…

An initial assessment identified more than 600 hardware and software defects – “the longest list anybody had ever seen,” one person involved with the project said.


Click HERE For Rest Of Story


Related article:

27 Democratic Senators Who Promised You Could Keep Your Health Coverage – Byron York

President Obama has taken a lot of heat for promising that if Americans liked the health coverage that they had before Obamacare, they would be able to keep it under the new law. But the president wasn’t the only Democrat in Washington who made that false promise. Many, many other Democratic officeholders said the same thing.

In fact, the keep-your-coverage pledge was key to some Democrats’ decision to support the Affordable Care Act. For example, when the bill was being debated, New Hampshire Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen said, “[A] requirement that I have for supporting a bill is that if you have health coverage that you like you should be able to keep that.” For many Democrats, the keep-your-coverage pledge was not a throwaway line; it was a fundamental part of their case for Obamacare.

How many Democrats made the promise? There’s no comprehensive list of all of them, but Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s office has compiled a list of 27 Democratic senators who pledged that Americans could keep their coverage under Obamacare. The list includes the entire Democratic leadership in the Senate as well as Democrats facing tough re-election races in 2014, like Mary Landrieu, Mark Begich, and Kay Hagan. Here is that list, compiled by McConnell’s office:

SEN. HARRY REID (D-Nev.): “In fact, one of our core principles is that if you like the health care you have, you can keep it.” (Sen. Reid, Congressional Record, S.8642, 8/3/09)

SEN. RICHARD DURBIN: “We believe – and we stand by this – if you like your current health insurance plan, you will be able to keep it, plain and simple, straightforward.” (Sen. Durbin, Congressional Record, S.6401, 6/10/09)

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY): “If you like your insurance, you keep it.” (U.S. Senate, Finance Committee, Bill Mark-Up, 9/29/09)

SEN. PATTY MURRAY (D-Wash.): “Again, if you like what you have, you will be able to keep it. Let me say this again: If you like what you have, when our legislation is passed and signed by the President, you will be able to keep it.” (Sen. Murray, Congressional Record, S.6400, 6/10/09)

SEN. MAX BAUCUS (D-Mont.): “That is why one of the central promises of health care reform has been and is: If you like what you have, you can keep it. That is critically important. If a person has a plan, and he or she likes it, he or she can keep it.” (Sen. Baucus, Congressional Record, S.7676, 9/29/10)

SEN. TOM HARKIN (D-Iowa): “One of the things we put in the health care bill when we designed it was the protection for consumers to keep the plan they have if they like it; thus, the term ‘grandfathered plans.’ If you have a plan you like – existing policies – you can keep them. …we said, if you like a plan, you get to keep it, and you can grandfather it in.” (Sen. Harkin, Congressional Record, S.7675-6, 9/29/10)

THEN-REP. TAMMY BALDWIN (D-Wis.): “Under the bill, if you like the insurance you have now, you may keep it and it will improve.” (Rep. Baldwin, Press Release, 3/18/10)

SEN. MARK BEGICH (D-Alaska): “If you got a doctor now, you got a medical professional you want, you get to keep that. If you have an insurance program or a health care policy you want of ideas, make sure you keep it. That you can keep who you want.” (Sen. Begich, Townhall Event, 7/27/09)

SEN. MICHAEL BENNET (D-Colo.): “We should begin with a basic principle: if you have coverage and you like it, you can keep it. If you have your doctor, and you like him or her, you should be able to keep them as well. We will not take that choice away from you.” (Sen. Bennet, Press Release, 6/11/09)

SEN. BARBARA BOXER (D-Calif.): “So we want people to be able to keep the health care they have. And the answer to that is choice of plans. And in the exchange, we’re going to have lots of different plans, and people will be able to keep the health care coverage they need and they want.” (Sen. Boxer, Press Release, 2/8/11)

SEN. SHERROD BROWN (D-Ohio): “Our bill says if you have health insurance and you like it, you can keep it…”(Sen. Brown, Congressional Record, S.12612, 12/7/09)

SEN. BEN CARDIN (D-Md.): “For the people of Maryland, this bill will provide a rational way in which they can maintain their existing coverage…” (Sen. Cardin, Congressional Record, S.13798, 12/23/09)

SEN. BOB CASEY (D-Pa.): “I also believe this legislation and the bill we are going to send to President Obama this fall will also have secure choices. If you like what you have, you like the plan you have, you can keep it. It is not going to change.” (Sen. Casey, Congressional Record, S.8070, 7/24/09)

SEN. KAY HAGAN (D-N.C.): ‘People who have insurance they’re happy with can keep it’ “We need to support the private insurance industry so that people who have insurance they’re happy with can keep it while also providing a backstop option for people without access to affordable coverage.” (“Republicans Vent As Other Compromise Plans Get Aired,” National Journal’s Congress Daily, 6/18/09)

SEN. MARY LANDRIEU (D-La.): “If you like the insurance that you have, you’ll be able to keep it.” (MSNBC’s Hardball, 12/16/09)

SEN. PAT LEAHY (D-Vt.): “[I]f you like the insurance you now have, keep the insurance you have.” (CNN’s “Newsroom,” 10/22/09)

SEN. BOB MENENDEZ (D-N.J.): “If you like what you have, you get to keep it” “Menendez is a member of the Senate Finance Committee, which is expected to release a bill later this week. He stressed that consumers who are satisfied with their plans won’t have to change. ‘If you like what you have, you get to keep it,’ he said.” (“Health Care Plan Would Help N.J., Menendez Says,” The Record, 6/19/09)

SEN. JEFF MERKLEY (D-Oreg.): “[E]nsuring that those who like their insurance get to keep it” “The HELP Committee bill sets forward a historic plan that will, for the first time in American history, give every American access to affordable health coverage, reduce costs, and increase choice, while ensuring that those who like their insurance get to keep it.” (Sen. Merkley, Press Release, 7/15/09)

SEN. BARBARA MIKULSKI (D-Md.): “It means that if you like the insurance you have now, you can keep it.” (Sen. Mikulski, Press Release, 12/24/09)

SEN. JAY ROCKEFELLER (D-W.Va.): “I want people to know, the President’s promise that if you like the coverage you have today you can keep it is a pledge we intend to keep.” (U.S. Senate, Finance Committee, Hearing, 9/23/09)

SEN. JACK REED (D-R.I.): “If you like the insurance you have, you can choose to keep it.” (Sen. Reed, Town Hall Event, 6/25/09)

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (I-Vt.): “‘If you have coverage you like, you can keep it,’ says Sen. Sanders.” (“Sick And Wrong,” Rolling Stone, 4/5/10)

SEN. JEANNE SHAHEEN (D-N.H.): ‘if you have health coverage that you like, you get to keep it’ “My understanding… is that… if you have health coverage that you like you can keep it. As I said, you may have missed my remarks at the beginning of the call, but one of the things I that I said as a requirement that I have for supporting a bill is that if you have health coverage that you like you should be able to keep that. …under every scenario that I’ve seen, if you have health coverage that you like, you get to keep it.” (Sen. Shaheen, “Health Care Questions From Across New Hampshire,” Accessed 11/13/13)

SEN. DEBBIE STABENOW (D-Mich.): “As someone who has a large number of large employers in my state, one of the things I appreciate about the chairman’s mark is – is the grandfathering provisions, the fact that the people in my state, 60 percent of whom have insurance, are going to be able to keep it. And Mr. Chairman, I appreciate that. That’s a strong commitment. It’s clear in the bill… I appreciate the strong commitment on your part and the president to make sure that if you have your insurance you can keep it. That’s the bottom line for me.” (U.S. Senate, Finance Committee, Bill Mark-Up, 9/24/09)

SEN. JON TESTER (D-Mont.): “‘If you like your coverage, you’ll be able to keep it,’ Tester said, adding that if Medicare changes, it will only become stronger”. (“Tester In Baker To Discuss Health Care,” The Fallon County Times, 11/20/09)

SEN. TOM UDALL (D-N.Mex.): “Some worried reform would alter their current coverage. It won’t. If you like your current plan, you can keep it.” (“What I Learned: About Health Care Reform This Summer, By Your Lawmakers In Congress,” Albuquerque Journal, 9/8/09)

SEN. SHELDON WHITEHOUSE (D-R.I.): “…it honors President Obama’s programs and the promise of all of the Presidential candidates that if you like the plan you have, you get to keep it. You are not forced out of anything.”(Sen. Whitehouse, Congressional Record, S.8668, 8/3/09)

Click HERE For Rest Of Story


Yes, Mr. Liberal Whiny Pants, you DO have every right to be butt hurt over my guns

Over at Bearing Arms, Bob Owens cites a piece written, likely in Crayola, at The Huffington Post. The author of the drivel, Tom Harvey, proudly announces his right to be offended because I, and others own guns

I Have a Right to Hate Guns

Well, that is true Mr. Harvey, you DO have the right to hate guns, thank you for discovering what should have been obvious to anyone

I’m not sure that I do; it’s not that simple; but I certainly have the right and plenty of reason. I shouldn’t have to hide my position. I should be free to state it clearly, directly and simply and say:

No one is asking you to “hide” your positions. the fact that you must face, sir, is that most Americans disagree with you. See, your right to bless us with your infinite wisdom, is no different than our right to tell you to get stuffed. Liberals like you never seem to grasp that the whole freedom of speech thing cuts both ways.

• It’s much too easy for people of bad will or unstable emotions to become armed and dangerous and we should take the strong action needed to stop it.

Well, Mr. Harvey, it IS easy for people who will steal or buy guns on the black market, no law will stop them. Perhaps you should write your Congressman, and Senator and ask them why the vast majority of people who tried to buy a  gun and were denied by the background check are never questioned by authorities. Again, you call for laws, but say nothing of laws NOT enforced. Do you think more laws that will likely be unenforced will do one damn thing to make anyone safer?

• It is the responsibility of gun owners to prove that their activities do not create a danger to the public and submit to whatever regulation is needed to enforce that.

So, what government agency would you place in charge of choosing which American set to exercise their constitutional rights? How would we prove our “activities” do not pose a danger exactly? And what activities would be approved? I question if you actually thought at all before writing such an absurd idea down. I also would question if you can prove that your writing does not pose some threat? Surely you must think, and I use that word think reluctantly, that all of our liberties should be deemed “safe” by Big Brother.

• Unless one has an exceptional need, the risks of having guns far outweigh the benefits, making gun possession unwise for nearly everyone.

Mr. Harvey, have you one shred of credible evidence that supports this asinine claim? The fact is there are tens upon tens of millions of gun owners in America. The vast majority never harm anyone with them. It is also true that tens of thousands of Americans USE our guns in self-defense annually. Millions of Americans have concealed carry licenses, and despite the fantasies of people like you, those gun carriers cause ZERO harm to anyone, except of course, the many times they have stopped bad guys, and hurt the feelings of overly emotional people like you.

• Notwithstanding Antonin Scalia’s bogus logic, the Second Amendment only establishes a collective right.

Ah, here we are, back to the root of your problem sir. You are a Collectivist. Those individual rights are troublesome to you, as they always are to those who frown upon the very idea that there is an inherent human right to keep and bear arms. Where you get the notion that the second amendment applies only to a collective right I cannot say, but I will allow George Mason, known as the Father of said amendment answer. I also include some quotes from other Founders

“…to disarm the people – that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them.” George Mason

“The supposed quietude of a good mans allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms like laws discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside…Horrid mischief would ensue were one half the world deprived of the use of them…” (Thomas Paine, I Writings of Thomas Paine at 56 [1894]) 

“Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence … From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to insure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable . . . the very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference – they deserve a place of honor with all that is good” (George Washington) 

“That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of The United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms…” (Samuel Adams, Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, at 86-87 (Peirce & Hale, eds., Boston, 1850)) 

“To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms, and be taught alike especially when young, how to use them.” (Richard Henry Lee, 1788, Initiator of the Declaration of Independence, and member of the first Senate, which passed the Bill of Rights

“The prohibition is general. No clause in the Constitution could by any rule of construction be conceived to give to Congress a power to disarm the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some general pretense by a state legislature. But if in any blind pursuit of inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both.” [William Rawle, A View of the Constitution 125-6 (2nd ed. 1829) 

“Americans have the right and advantage of being armed – unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.” (James Madison, The Federalist Papers #46 at 243-244) 

“No Free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.” (Thomas Jefferson, Proposal Virginia Constitution, 1 T. Jefferson Papers, 334,[C.J.Boyd, Ed., 1950])

“The whole of the Bill (of Rights) is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals…. It establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of.” (Albert Gallatin of the New York Historical Society, October 7, 1789) 

I left the last one last so that it be made VERY clear that the Constitution protects INDIVIDUAL rights Mr. Harvey, not Collective rights. That document protects the individual from tyrants, and the tyranny of the majority, and from people like you who hold their feelings in higher esteem than they do God-given liberties!