ACA: Affordable Care Act (better known as OBAMACARE) - Enrollment Starts October 1st - You In?

[yeah]

Anyways I got my bill about 3 days ago, my insurance which I have literally never used for anything is covering about 80% of the cost and somehow I still owe the hospital nearly 4 grand. Needless to say Bring on the Obamacare cuz I aint paying Cleveland clinic no where close to that.

$20,000?!

 

[andycrazn]

Anyways I got my bill about 3 days ago, my insurance which I have literally never used for anything is covering about 80% of the cost and somehow I still owe the hospital nearly 4 grand. Needless to say Bring on the Obamacare cuz I aint paying Cleveland clinic no where close to that.

$20,000?!

dude if you had cash you couldve had a HUGE discount that was nowhere near the bill.

 

[-Red-]

 

You're forced to pay taxes.

You're forced to buy insurance if you want to drive.

You're forced to have identification.

We're forced to do a lot of things.

And as far as medical insurance going away, you think the insurance companies would let that happen? Way too much money to be lost. That **** WILL NOT happen. That's why I posted the gif. It's not even worth debating.

Your not forced to do anything. You wanna work then pay taxes, if you dont want to pay taxes then dont work or move out of country

If u dont want to buy insurance then dont drive on a pulic roaD


your not forced to do anything, you made the choice

you do know we never had an income tax before 1913 right?
you also know that if the income tax was 100% it would be considered slavery. but because its only at around a quarter of the amount, we are temporary slaves to the machine. 3 months outta the year slaves. BUT THATS OK cause its only 3 months out of the year.

You also know that if police were granted 100% power, we would live in a police state.

You also know that if government was 100% abolished, we would live in anarchy.

This is the problem with you and dudes like you taking your "arguments" to their illogical extremes. But y'all only do it with regard to regulations on capitalism and the "free market."

Are you really holding up pre-1913 as some "golden era" of quality of life and prosperity for all? If so, please explain. If not, then what's the point of bringing up the greatness of having no income tax during that period?

no, but climbing up the ladder was alot easier to achieve. i dont get how its logical for anyone to LIKE to be taxed or accept it like its ok cause even when the income tax was at 1% when it was passed in 1913, no one gave a damb. it took a generation or two to actually follow the law and at the time it was just a simple tax form. now look where it is now, 70,000+ pages of tax laws we gotta follow. who does that benefit? government and the people that are in that field.

and anarchy doesnt mean everyones gonna go and do the wrong thing because there is no law. it just all the responsibilities fall onto the individual.

You can't be serious bro. "Climbing up the ladder was a lot easier to achieve" prior to 1913? Are you literally delusional? At that point in time, the average farmer was barely subsisting. Black folks who were sharecroppers were basically reenslaved. People living in cities were barely getting paid enough to feed their families. There was little to no regulation for housing so people were regularly living in subhuman conditions. Labor organizers were being murdered by capitalists. People regularly died on their jobs because there was essentially no oversight to ensure safety standards. Elderly people who worked their entire lives were literally dying of hunger because they could no longer work and had no money. But hey, there were no taxes so life was great!

As for your comments about anarchy, they're not even addressing my point. My point is that if you take essentially anything to its illogical extreme it becomes preposterous and detrimental as in your example of equating income tax to slavery. Do you understand?

 

[sneakaprince]

$20,000?!

Fam when I tell you I was beyond pissed.... I literally spent the night and they charged me 20,000...

When I tell you all I did was spend the night in the bed with an IV attached and eat 3 popsicles (cuz the nurse made me). I was just like man they must already know they aint getting this money....

Real talk I thought the bill was gonna be closer to 1000 which is still ridiculous but I'd have been more willing to pay. When I added up my bill and saw it was closer to 4K I was just like eff it. I'm young enough to not care if it hits my credit at this point.

 

[Brownstone]

it's really quite simple, you want to know if Obama care is good or not? Just ask people in the health care industry. They are seeing the effects already, good and bad. 

 

[superb]

Fam when I tell you I was beyond pissed.... I literally spent the night and they charged me 20,000...

When I tell you all I did was spend the night in the bed with an IV attached and eat 3 popsicles (cuz the nurse made me). I was just like man they must already know they aint getting this money....

Real talk I thought the bill was gonna be closer to 1000 which is still ridiculous but I'd have been more willing to pay. When I added up my bill and saw it was closer to 4K I was just like eff it. I'm young enough to not care if it hits my credit at this point.

My girl been to hospital for abdominal pain. Total time was like 4-5 hours sitting in bed waiting for doctors

Now my girl went to bathroom and past a stone so that's why she had pain

Dumb doc nurses come back and said probably upset stomach or food posining lmao

We never told them she just pasted a stone

Got the bill one week later came to 6 or 7k for 5 hours..

Sister had a c section 3 days in hospital 16k

Dang shame something have to change

 

[BALH ENH]

My sex life came to a screeching halt. No chances. Not ruining my credit over a bs hospital visit.

 

[011781]

Anyone been on their local websites checking out the rates yet?

I'll probably check them out later, just for the information. I have employer provided insurance and don't plan on switching, but I'd still like to see what's out there.

 

[andycrazn]

 

You're forced to pay taxes.

You're forced to buy insurance if you want to drive.

You're forced to have identification.

We're forced to do a lot of things.

And as far as medical insurance going away, you think the insurance companies would let that happen? Way too much money to be lost. That **** WILL NOT happen. That's why I posted the gif. It's not even worth debating.

Your not forced to do anything. You wanna work then pay taxes, if you dont want to pay taxes then dont work or move out of country

If u dont want to buy insurance then dont drive on a pulic roaD


your not forced to do anything, you made the choice

you do know we never had an income tax before 1913 right?
you also know that if the income tax was 100% it would be considered slavery. but because its only at around a quarter of the amount, we are temporary slaves to the machine. 3 months outta the year slaves. BUT THATS OK cause its only 3 months out of the year.

You also know that if police were granted 100% power, we would live in a police state.

You also know that if government was 100% abolished, we would live in anarchy.

This is the problem with you and dudes like you taking your "arguments" to their illogical extremes. But y'all only do it with regard to regulations on capitalism and the "free market."

Are you really holding up pre-1913 as some "golden era" of quality of life and prosperity for all? If so, please explain. If not, then what's the point of bringing up the greatness of having no income tax during that period?

no, but climbing up the ladder was alot easier to achieve. i dont get how its logical for anyone to LIKE to be taxed or accept it like its ok cause even when the income tax was at 1% when it was passed in 1913, no one gave a damb. it took a generation or two to actually follow the law and at the time it was just a simple tax form. now look where it is now, 70,000+ pages of tax laws we gotta follow. who does that benefit? government and the people that are in that field.

and anarchy doesnt mean everyones gonna go and do the wrong thing because there is no law. it just all the responsibilities fall onto the individual.

You can't be serious bro. "Climbing up the ladder was a lot easier to achieve" prior to 1913? Are you literally delusional? At that point in time, the average farmer was barely subsisting. Black folks who were sharecroppers were basically reenslaved. People living in cities were barely getting paid enough to feed their families. There was little to no regulation for housing so people were regularly living in subhuman conditions. Labor organizers were being murdered by capitalists. People regularly died on their jobs because there was essentially no oversight to ensure safety standards. Elderly people who worked their entire lives were literally dying of hunger because they could no longer work and had no money. But hey, there were no taxes so life was great!

As for your comments about anarchy, they're not even addressing my point. My point is that if you take essentially anything to its illogical extreme it becomes preposterous and detrimental as in your example of equating income tax to slavery. Do you understand?

damn what kind of socialist rewriting of history did you read?

READ booker t washington's up from slavery that will address that whole slavery situation you talked about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilded_Age

A dramatic expansion in farming took place.[69] The number of farms tripled from 2.0 million in 1860 to 6.0 million in 1905. The number of people living on farms grew from about 10 million in 1860 to 22 million in 1880 to 31 million in 1905. The value of farms soared from $8.0 billion in 1860 to $30 billion in 1906.[7

 

[-Red-]

 

You're forced to pay taxes.

You're forced to buy insurance if you want to drive.

You're forced to have identification.

We're forced to do a lot of things.

And as far as medical insurance going away, you think the insurance companies would let that happen? Way too much money to be lost. That **** WILL NOT happen. That's why I posted the gif. It's not even worth debating.

Your not forced to do anything. You wanna work then pay taxes, if you dont want to pay taxes then dont work or move out of country

If u dont want to buy insurance then dont drive on a pulic roaD


your not forced to do anything, you made the choice

you do know we never had an income tax before 1913 right?
you also know that if the income tax was 100% it would be considered slavery. but because its only at around a quarter of the amount, we are temporary slaves to the machine. 3 months outta the year slaves. BUT THATS OK cause its only 3 months out of the year.

You also know that if police were granted 100% power, we would live in a police state.

You also know that if government was 100% abolished, we would live in anarchy.

This is the problem with you and dudes like you taking your "arguments" to their illogical extremes. But y'all only do it with regard to regulations on capitalism and the "free market."

Are you really holding up pre-1913 as some "golden era" of quality of life and prosperity for all? If so, please explain. If not, then what's the point of bringing up the greatness of having no income tax during that period?

no, but climbing up the ladder was alot easier to achieve. i dont get how its logical for anyone to LIKE to be taxed or accept it like its ok cause even when the income tax was at 1% when it was passed in 1913, no one gave a damb. it took a generation or two to actually follow the law and at the time it was just a simple tax form. now look where it is now, 70,000+ pages of tax laws we gotta follow. who does that benefit? government and the people that are in that field.

and anarchy doesnt mean everyones gonna go and do the wrong thing because there is no law. it just all the responsibilities fall onto the individual.

You can't be serious bro. "Climbing up the ladder was a lot easier to achieve" prior to 1913? Are you literally delusional? At that point in time, the average farmer was barely subsisting. Black folks who were sharecroppers were basically reenslaved. People living in cities were barely getting paid enough to feed their families. There was little to no regulation for housing so people were regularly living in subhuman conditions. Labor organizers were being murdered by capitalists. People regularly died on their jobs because there was essentially no oversight to ensure safety standards. Elderly people who worked their entire lives were literally dying of hunger because they could no longer work and had no money. But hey, there were no taxes so life was great!

As for your comments about anarchy, they're not even addressing my point. My point is that if you take essentially anything to its illogical extreme it becomes preposterous and detrimental as in your example of equating income tax to slavery. Do you understand?

damn what kind of socialist rewriting of history did you read?

READ booker t washington's up from slavery that will address that whole slavery situation you talked about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilded_Age

A dramatic expansion in farming took place.[69] The number of farms tripled from 2.0 million in 1860 to 6.0 million in 1905. The number of people living on farms grew from about 10 million in 1860 to 22 million in 1880 to 31 million in 1905. The value of farms soared from $8.0 billion in 1860 to $30 billion in 1906.[7

1. I posted more than half a dozen historically documented facts describing the harshness of life for the average person around the turn of the twentieth century. You responded to exactly one of these items and did quite a horrific job at doing so.

2. Black sharecroppers suffered under tremendous oppression and exploitation generally lived in abject poverty. These are universally-accepted historical facts. This is not up for debate. I have literally never heard anyone in this day and age attempt to dispute this. Congratulations on being the first to do so and failing miserably.

3. Your response in no way refutes my assertion and the reality of life for black sharecroppers during this period. You cite Booker T. Washington? Do you have any idea what he is generally known for historically? Apparently you don't so I will clue you in. He was known for downplaying the incredible oppression Black folks (especially those in the South) were living under during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. He even argued that slavery basically "wasn't that bad." I hate to break it to you, but Booker T. Washington's views on Black oppression are not regarded as accurate, much less authoritative.

4. Are you really arguing that Black sharecroppers somehow "had it good?" If not, then what the hell was the point of your post?

5. Did you actually read the link that you posted? Most of the information actually supports my arguments. Here is a sampling of quotes FROM YOUR OWN LINK that utterly refute your ridiculous position:

The Gilded Age was also an era of enormous poverty. The average annual income for most families was $380, well below the poverty line.

The South remained economically devastated

The most significant of these was sharecropping, where tenant farmers "shared" up to half of their crop with the landowners, in exchange for seed and essential supplies. About 80% of the African American farmers and 40% of its white ones lived under this system following the Civil War. Most sharecroppers were locked in a cycle of debt, from which the only hope of escape was increased planting. This led to the over-production of cotton and tobacco (and thus to declining prices and decreased income), exhaustion of the soil, and increased poverty among both the landowners and tenants

6. You still haven't touched on the ridiculousness and irrelevance of taking a phenomenon to its illogical extreme as you did in equating income tax with slavery.

Anything else?

 

[suberzat1]

 

[andycrazn]

 

You're forced to pay taxes.

You're forced to buy insurance if you want to drive.

You're forced to have identification.

We're forced to do a lot of things.

And as far as medical insurance going away, you think the insurance companies would let that happen? Way too much money to be lost. That **** WILL NOT happen. That's why I posted the gif. It's not even worth debating.

Your not forced to do anything. You wanna work then pay taxes, if you dont want to pay taxes then dont work or move out of country

If u dont want to buy insurance then dont drive on a pulic roaD


your not forced to do anything, you made the choice

you do know we never had an income tax before 1913 right?
you also know that if the income tax was 100% it would be considered slavery. but because its only at around a quarter of the amount, we are temporary slaves to the machine. 3 months outta the year slaves. BUT THATS OK cause its only 3 months out of the year.

You also know that if police were granted 100% power, we would live in a police state.

You also know that if government was 100% abolished, we would live in anarchy.

This is the problem with you and dudes like you taking your "arguments" to their illogical extremes. But y'all only do it with regard to regulations on capitalism and the "free market."

Are you really holding up pre-1913 as some "golden era" of quality of life and prosperity for all? If so, please explain. If not, then what's the point of bringing up the greatness of having no income tax during that period?

no, but climbing up the ladder was alot easier to achieve. i dont get how its logical for anyone to LIKE to be taxed or accept it like its ok cause even when the income tax was at 1% when it was passed in 1913, no one gave a damb. it took a generation or two to actually follow the law and at the time it was just a simple tax form. now look where it is now, 70,000+ pages of tax laws we gotta follow. who does that benefit? government and the people that are in that field.

and anarchy doesnt mean everyones gonna go and do the wrong thing because there is no law. it just all the responsibilities fall onto the individual.

You can't be serious bro. "Climbing up the ladder was a lot easier to achieve" prior to 1913? Are you literally delusional? At that point in time, the average farmer was barely subsisting. Black folks who were sharecroppers were basically reenslaved. People living in cities were barely getting paid enough to feed their families. There was little to no regulation for housing so people were regularly living in subhuman conditions. Labor organizers were being murdered by capitalists. People regularly died on their jobs because there was essentially no oversight to ensure safety standards. Elderly people who worked their entire lives were literally dying of hunger because they could no longer work and had no money. But hey, there were no taxes so life was great!

As for your comments about anarchy, they're not even addressing my point. My point is that if you take essentially anything to its illogical extreme it becomes preposterous and detrimental as in your example of equating income tax to slavery. Do you understand?

damn what kind of socialist rewriting of history did you read?

READ booker t washington's up from slavery that will address that whole slavery situation you talked about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilded_Age

A dramatic expansion in farming took place.[69] The number of farms tripled from 2.0 million in 1860 to 6.0 million in 1905. The number of people living on farms grew from about 10 million in 1860 to 22 million in 1880 to 31 million in 1905. The value of farms soared from $8.0 billion in 1860 to $30 billion in 1906.[7

1. I posted more than half a dozen historically documented facts describing the harshness of life for the average person around the turn of the twentieth century. You responded to exactly one of these items and did quite a horrific job at doing so.

2. Black sharecroppers suffered under tremendous oppression and exploitation generally lived in abject poverty. These are universally-accepted historical facts. This is not up for debate. I have literally never heard anyone in this day and age attempt to dispute this. Congratulations on being the first to do so and failing miserably.

3. Your response in no way refutes my assertion and the reality of life for black sharecroppers during this period. You cite Booker T. Washington? Do you have any idea what he is generally known for historically? Apparently you don't so I will clue you in. He was known for downplaying the incredible oppression Black folks (especially those in the South) were living under during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. He even argued that slavery basically "wasn't that bad." I hate to break it to you, but Booker T. Washington's views on Black oppression are not regarded as accurate, much less authoritative.

4. Are you really arguing that Black sharecroppers somehow "had it good?" If not, then what the hell was the point of your post?

5. Did you actually read the link that you posted? Most of the information actually supports my arguments. Here is a sampling of quotes FROM YOUR OWN LINK that utterly refute your ridiculous position:

The Gilded Age was also an era of enormous poverty. The average annual income for most families was $380, well below the poverty line.

The South remained economically devastated

The most significant of these was sharecropping, where tenant farmers "shared" up to half of their crop with the landowners, in exchange for seed and essential supplies. About 80% of the African American farmers and 40% of its white ones lived under this system following the Civil War. Most sharecroppers were locked in a cycle of debt, from which the only hope of escape was increased planting. This led to the over-production of cotton and tobacco (and thus to declining prices and decreased income), exhaustion of the soil, and increased poverty among both the landowners and tenants

6. You still haven't touched on the ridiculousness and irrelevance of taking a phenomenon to its illogical extreme as you did in equating income tax with slavery.

Anything else?

1. there was mass immigration happening that effected the "average" this also resulted in increased labor competition. theres a reason why whites wanted unions because blacks were pricing out the whites in labor.

2. 380 in todays dollars is around 24,000 which isnt bad. my mom survived off less than that for 10+ years with no government assistance.

3. anyone can pick any point of time and will always find poverty. poverty moves in waves and can never be eliminated. all those things you mentioned before is still happening now, not only that its worse because the average american is in insane amounts of debt. so slavery evolved through the use of force to indentured servitude with a pen and a credit card.

4. look at the times when we had the gold standard or pseudo gold standard operating. a person in the 50s-60s those cohorts thrived even with a minimum wage at 1 dollar. the male were the only members working and still supported what was supposed to be the "american dream". now its been destroyed through the use of fiat.

just to show you how powerful gold was over fiat. a slave costs 15-20 oz of gold with an indentured servant costing 10-15oz.

 

[fantastic4our]

Dude really in here trying to argue the positives of sharecropping amazing

 

[andycrazn]

Dude really in here trying to argue the positives of sharecropping amazing

and you dont understand supply and demand in the labor force

 

[-Red-]

Dude really in here trying to argue the positives of sharecropping amazing

"But you have to understand that there was no income tax back then so even if a sharecropper made only 1¢ he got to keep his whole salary! Not like this slave situation we have today with this income tax nonsense. Plus back then that penny was backed by the gold standard, not this fiat currency garbage, so you could actually trade it in for a particle of gold dust. You would basically be middle class by today's standards."



I'm think I'm done arguing with this guy. His thinking is entirely too dogmatic to engage in any form of meaningful critical discourse, as evidenced from his reply to my last post which essentially evaded everything I stated with the exception of arguing the fact that the poverty experienced by the average family back then really "wasn't bad." I mean...

 

[deuce king]

damn what kind of socialist rewriting of history did you read?

READ booker t washington's up from slavery that will address that whole slavery situation you talked about.

 

You shot yourself in the foot as soon as you said Booker T. Washington champ, let alone reading a book the he wrote on slavery.  Better luck next time. 

 

[wsdesigner14]

Having a hard time signing into my account (which took forever to create). Hope these technical difficulties are resolved soon. Interested in seeing what the options would be for me, if I were to buy off of the marketplace.

 

[rillo561]

Anyone been on their local websites checking out the rates yet?

I'll probably check them out later, just for the information. I have employer provided insurance and don't plan on switching, but I'd still like to see what's out there.

I won't switch either but the bronze package is 89$ a month in my area. That's a awesome deal IMO, much cheaper than my car insurance and my employer based insurance.

 

[victor page]

 

 

[rell826]

Calling this a disaster is putting it lightly. In total, the website has cost the taxpayer anywhere from ~300 to 600 mil depending on which reports you read.

[h1]  [/h1]

[h1]White House deems health exchange glitches ‘unacceptable,’ GOP calls Obamacare DOA[/h1][h2]Republicans battered by the shutdown debacle are quickly gearing up to bash Obamacare by touting troubles with the rollout, and the President on Monday will address problems with the health exchange system.[/h2]Comments (73)[h3]By Bill Hammond In Albany AND Dan Friedman In Washington / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS[/h3][h5]Published: Monday, October 21, 2013, 12:45 AM[/h5][h5]Updated: Monday, October 21, 2013, 6:00 AM[/h5]

[table][tr][td]
[table][tr][td]
[table][tr][td]  [/td][td][/td][td]  [/td][/tr][/table]
[/td][td]
66
[/td][/tr][/table]
[/td][td]
[table][tr][td]
[table][tr][td]  [/td][td][/td][td]  [/td][/tr][/table]
[/td][td]
112
[/td][/tr][/table]
[/td][td]
[table][tr][td]
[table][tr][td]  [/td][td][/td][td]  [/td][/tr][/table]
[/td][td]
0
[/td][/tr][/table]
[/td][td][/td][td]
[table][tr][td]  [/td][td][/td][td]  [/td][/tr][/table]
[/td][td]
[table][tr][td]  [/td][td][/td][td]  [/td][/tr][/table]
[/td][td]
[table][tr][td]  [/td][td][/td][td]  [/td][/tr][/table]
[/td][td]
[table][tr][td]  [/td][td][/td][td]  [/td][/tr][/table]
[/td][/tr][/table]
Print

[h4]MANDEL NGAN/AFP/Getty Images[/h4][h4]  [/h4]
President Barack Obama on Monday 'will directly address the technical problems with HealthCare.gov — troubles that he and his team find unacceptable — and discuss the actions he has pushed for to make it easier for consumers to comparison shop and enroll for insurance while work continues around the clock to improve the website,' a Whited House official said.

President Obama will speak Monday to acknowledge a new potential political disaster — the glitch-laden federal health care exchanges.

Administration officials have no time to waste as they race to find a prescription to heal the sickly exchanges while Republicans, battered by the government shutdown debacle, quickly gear up to tout troubles with the Obamacare rollout.

“The President will directly address the technical problems with HealthCare.gov — troubles that he and his team find unacceptable,” a White House official said.

The remarks are part of an administration push to inject a new urgency into efforts to fix the site, which made its debut on Oct. 1 — the day the government was shut down as the Republicans sought to defund the 2010 law.

The Health and Human Services Department, which oversees HealthCare.gov, announced over the weekend that it has hired experts from the private sector and other federal agencies to rewrite flawed computer code that has hampered the site and left most users unable to sign up for health insurance plans available under Obamacare.

[h4]Mark Wilson/Getty Images[/h4][h4]U.S. Department of Health and Human Service Kathleen Sebelius is under fire for problems with federal health care exchanges.[/h4]

With the new steps, the administration appeared to have decided to own up to the technical woes that it had initially downplayed.

RELATED: GOP LEADERS SAY NO MORE SHUTDOWNS, CRUZ SAYS 'NO' TO THEM

“There’s no one more frustrated than the President at the difficulty in the website,” Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

In New York, one of only 16 states that has its own exchange, not one person had succeeded in using the site to enroll in a plan as of Friday.

Donna Frescatore, director of the New York State of Health marketplace, said Friday that 134,000 people had registered and shopped on the state’s online health care site since its Oct. 1 launch, and thousands signed up to enroll in a plan.

[h4]MIKE SEGAR/REUTERS[/h4][h4]The Affordable Care Act — or Obamacare — signup page on the HealthCare.gov website.[/h4]

But the state has repeatedly delayed electronically transmitting those users’ data to insurers offering health plans .

The department, which held off in order to verify the accuracy of the information users submitted, said it would transfer the first batch of enrollees’ data — which includes thousands of transactions — as early as Friday night.

Meanwhile, insurers were worried that the state website had incorrect information on details of plans that are available.

RELATED: PRESIDENT OBAMA FRUSTRATED WITH PROBLEM-PLAGUED ROLLOUT OF HEALTH CARE LAW

“We have heard from some plans that some of the information they thought was going to be there isn’t showing up,” said Leslie Moran, a spokeswoman for the New York Health Plan Association.

[h4]  [/h4][h4]In New York, one of only 16 states that has its own health care exchange, not one person had succeeded in using the website to enroll in any plan as of Friday.[/h4]

In Washington, the Department of Health and Human Services acknowledged in a blog post Sunday afternoon that the system has been beset with woes. “Unfortunately, the experience on HealthCare.gov has been frustrating for many Americans,” the department said in an understatement.

Republicans — distracted by the shutdown battle — initially missed a chance to make political hay over the technical meltdown.

That’s a political misstep the party is hustling to correct.

“While shutdown took up front pages for two weeks and Obamacare was not highlighted as much as it would have been otherwise, the flaws in this unpopular law will take center stage now,” a Senate Republican aide said Friday.

“The law is a disaster,” the aide added. “People are going to notice it.”

[h4]  [/h4][h4]The White House's website for health care coverage.[/h4]

RELATED: OBAMA SLAMS GOP FOR GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN

“Democrats will be forced to answer tough questions that they may have gotten away with not answering before,” the aide said.

Republicans demanded Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius testify on problems with HealthCare.gov before the House Energy and Commerce Committee on Thursday.

They hope to press on her on why she claimed in July that the project was on track, when agency documents show that alarm was growing among officials involved that it was far behind schedule.

The agency on Friday told the panel that the recent end of the shutdown meant Sebelius had insufficient notice to attend the hearing.

Sebelius’ department also faces fire for taking too long to issue specifications to contractors working on software for the website and for failing to hire a contractor to manage the many companies working on parts of the site.

Another top administration official, Office of Management and Budget Director Sylvia Burwell, would not guarantee on Friday that problems with the site will be fixed by Dec. 14.

That’s the deadline for buying policies that kick in next year, when Americans who lack health insurance will start to face fines under Obamacare’s individual mandate.

“The administration has put together a team and is deeply focused on the issues of how do we fix those problems,” Burwell said in an interview with Bloomberg TV.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/pol...obamacare-doa-article-1.1491281#ixzz2iN7xBCxU

 

[ninjahood]

 

You're forced to pay taxes.

You're forced to buy insurance if you want to drive.

You're forced to have identification.

We're forced to do a lot of things.

And as far as medical insurance going away, you think the insurance companies would let that happen? Way too much money to be lost. That **** WILL NOT happen. That's why I posted the gif. It's not even worth debating.

quoted for emphasis, short term pinch on the pocket but long term it will beneficial 

Driving is not a Constitutional right....its a privilege.

So far to say this launch has been fumbled is putting

It mildly.

 

[crcballer55]

 

FDR, a Progressive, had Social Security and look where its at now.
LBJ, another Progressive, had Medicare and looks where its at now.

History keeps repeating itself.

Social Security and Medicare are still here and not going anywhere.

So does that make them a success? The Shuttle program has been eliminated. Does that mean it was a failure?

Social Security literally has a worse return on investment than investing in CD's for your working life.

 

[Nike Jordan]

This is why I don't vote Republican.

 

[ninjahood]

did obama really just get on a podium and recite a 1800 number?

obamacare is a train WRECK....

GOP should've forgot about that shutdown and make fun of da bust they called a launch for 2 weeks straight..

maybe that would've made da mandate delayed a year.

 

[Nike Jordan]

 

 

FDR, a Progressive, had Social Security and look where its at now.
LBJ, another Progressive, had Medicare and looks where its at now.

History keeps repeating itself.

Social Security and Medicare are still here and not going anywhere.

So does that make them a success? The Shuttle program has been eliminated. Does that mean it was a failure?

Social Security literally has a worse return on investment than investing in CD's for your working life.

Apples and oranges, brah.