Archive for Health Care

It’s ObaMagic!

He can expand Medicaid and shrink it…at the same time!!!!

A stunning new report claims that 50 percent of the doctors who are listed as being under contract with Medicaid to treat patients are not available for appointments, according to The New York Times.

They are either not accepting new Medicaid patients or no longer lived at their last known addresses, according to the report from the inspector general of the Department of Health and Human Services.

“Half of providers could not offer appointments to enrollees,” the investigators, led by the inspector general Daniel Levinson said in the report, which was due to be released on Tuesday.

The investigators called participating doctors’ offices and found that they were often unavailable or unable to make appointments. More than one-third of providers could not be found at the location listed by a Medicaid plan, the newspaper said.

“In these cases, callers were sometimes told that the practice had never heard of the provider, or that the provider had practiced at the location in the past but had retired or left the practice,” Levinson told the Times. “Some providers had left months or even years before the time of the call.”

I can picture the doctor hiding in the supply closet hissing “Tell them I’m not here!”

“Over a quarter of providers had wait times of more than one month, and 10 percent had wait times longer than two months,” the report said, adding that the delays could cause serious complications for patients.

“For example, a number of obstetricians had wait times of more than one month, and one had wait times of more than two months for an enrollee who was eight weeks pregnant. Such lengthy wait times could result in a pregnant enrollee receiving no prenatal care in the first trimester.”

ObamaCare becomes law of the land; women, poor hardest hit!

Where’d the docs go?

Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion is facing a new threat from an unlikely source: the law itself.

An additional 9.1 million Americans have been added to the Medicaid rolls in the year since the program expanded under Obamacare. But a scheduled cut in Medicaid payments — built into the law — could steer doctors away from taking new patients covered the program.

That’s because a temporary payment bump to Medicaid primary care doctors, included in the Affordable Care Act, is likely to expire at the end of the year. That will mean an average payment cut of 42.8 percent to Medicaid primary care doctors next year, according to a new Urban Institute analysis.

The federal Medicaid reimbursement to doctors vary by state, but they’re lower than the rates paid by private insurers and the Medicare program. And that affects doctors’ willingness to take new Medicaid patients.

Who wouldn’t take on more work for half the pay?

Why are you conservatives so hung up on big government?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!! Saps. Suckers.

Comments

Where Our $2,500 ObamaCare Savings Went

Yesterday I labeled Jonathan Gruber a hero for telling the truth about ObamaCare.

But I never said he wasn’t doing well by doing good!

When asked to provide details requested by the committee about $2.5 million in Obamacare related contracts he secured with an estimated eight states, He lawyered up. “Take it up with my counsel,” he said several times.

In addition, he refused to provide any examples of work product related to his Obamacare economic modeling carried out under a $400,000 sole source contract he obtained with the Department of Health and Human Services in 2009.

At the conclusion of the hearings, Issa promised that the incoming Chairman was likely to call Gruber back to provide that information, and that if the information was not forthcoming in 30 days, the Committee would subpoena Gruber for it.

Gruber also lawyered up when Congressman Mark Meadows (R-NC) asked him to show the work product from his Obamacare model in which he estimated how many people would lose their coverage under the Affordable Care Act.

“You can talk to my counsel,” Gruber responded to each question from Chairman Issa and several other Republican members of the committee who wanted to know details about the number and size of his Obamacare related contracts with state governments.

“My counsel says we complied with the committee,” Gruber told Issa when asked about his failure to provide the detailed list of federal and state contracts prior to his testimony.

“No, you didn’t,” Issa responded.

For someone as “glib” as Gruber, lawyering-up has gotta hurt.

But when staying quiet equates to staying out of prison, that’s motivation:

One week after he first requested billing details related to Jonathan Gruber’s contract with the state of Vermont, state Auditor Douglas Hoffer has yet to receive any information about the details of Gruber’s contract from the administration of Democratic Governor Peter Shumlin.

“Nothing yet,” Hoffer told Breitbart News in an email on Monday responding to our inquiry checking up on the Shumlin administration’s response to his information request.

One day before Gruber is scheduled to testify about “health law deceptions” before the federal House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, chaired by Representative Darrell Issa (R-CA), details of Gruber’s $280,000 contract with the state of Vermont remain shrouded in mystery.

Of course, we know Gruber well around here. He’s at MIT, and he was “architect” of RomneyCare.

Speaking of which:

The Massachusetts Medicaid program spent $35 million on questionable claims for health care provided to low-income immigrants, according to a critical report released Wednesday by state Auditor Suzanne Bump.

The findings reflect “serious weaknesses” in the agency’s claims processing system, Bump concluded, and illustrate the need for tighter controls.

The audit found that the state’s Medicaid agency, known as MassHealth, routinely paid for nonemergency medical care for roughly 45,000 immigrants from July 2011 through December 2012. The review identified 270,167 questionable or unallowed claims for services such as speech therapy, fluoride treatment, and physical therapy.

What, illegal alien kids are supposed to get cavities?

Yes, illegal:

Bump’s office examined Medicaid’s Limited Program and its payment of medical bills for this pool of immigrants, who are entitled to emergency medical services under the program’s rules. The auditors said they believe that roughly 89 percent of the immigrants were in the United States illegally during the time of the audit.

By my rough math, $31 million out of that $35 million went to elocution lessons for people with no business being here, let alone taking millions in taxpayer money.

But you don’t know the half of it:

But the Executive Office of Health and Human Services disputed much of the auditor’s findings regarding its coverage of medical treatments for immigrants.

“We respectfully disagree with the state auditor’s definition of emergency services, which would preclude coverage under this program for critical medical conditions including kidney failure, broken bones, ectopic pregnancy, appendicitis, aortic aneurysms, insulin for diabetics, and other life-threatening injuries and conditions,” the agency said in a statement.

“MassHealth is required under both state and federal law to cover these emergency services for families and children who would otherwise be eligible for Medicaid but for their immigration status,” the agency’s statement said.

Hey, I don’t want to deny insulin to diabetics, either. But if immigration status isn’t relevant, why should geography be? Why aren’t we Bay Staters providing insulin to diabetics in Tegucigalpa without those families and children having to schlep up here? Give us your tired, your poor, your ectopic pregnancies, and aortic aneurysms. Forget hi-tech coders, we want sick people. Expensively sick people.

In government-run health care, illegal aliens and Jonathan Gruber thrive. The rest of us have to wait for the next available doctor.

Comments

A Real American Hero

Not the guy who got Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to sing like a canary with a ewer of water—though he and his colleagues deserve Congressional Medals of Honor.

I salute that other Great American who served his country honorably by taking a disgraceful and unfair PR hit: Jonathan Gruber.

Jon Gruber told the truth. He told the truth over and over, on video and audio, to anyone who would listen. The truth was there for anyone to see (we critics saw it), but he alone among the proponents of CrapolaCare called out the shameful dishonesty of the bill and its passage. He was as brave as any dissident, honest as any whistleblower.

I’m not kidding when I say I was a little disappointed in the Republicans on the committee for their one-note response. Their outrage at Gruber’s arrogance was perhaps justifiable, but someone should have taken a breath from nonstop indignation to thank him for his candor. Next time I bump into him in Emma’s Pizza by MIT (which will be the first time), I swear to you I will thank him from an ungrateful nation.

Comments (1)

Good News On ObamaCare!!!

Half of the Senators who voted for this dog won’t be in the Senate come January.

On Dec. 24, 2009, the Democratic-controlled Senate passed President Obama’s healthcare law with a filibuster-proof 60-vote majority, triggering a massive backlash that propelled Republicans to control of the House the following year. On the Senate side, going into this year’s midterm elections, 25 senators who voted for Obamacare were already out or not going be part of the new Senate being sworn in next month. After Democratic losses on Nov. 4 and Saturday’s defeat of Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., the number has risen to 30. In other words, half of the Senators who voted for Obamacare will not be part of the new Senate.

The following is an updated breakdown of senators who voted for Obamacare and will not be part of the next Senate.

Lost and replaced by a Republican:

Sen. Mark Begich, D-Alaska

Sen. Mark Pryor, D-Ark.

Sen. Mark Udall, D-Colo.

Sen. Kay Hagan, D-N.C.

Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La.

Russ Feingold, D-Wis.

Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark.

Arlen Specter, D-Penn.

Left Senate and replaced by a Republican:

Jay Rockefeller, D-W.V.

Max Baucus, D-Mont.

Tim Johnson, D-S.D.

Tom Harkin, D-Iowa

Ben Nelson, D-Neb.

See ‘Ya, wouldn’t wanna be ‘Ya!

– Aggie

Comments

Insurance = Health Care?

Not.

Longtime readers know that we made this very point, again and again. Most physicians are not willing to work for free, or for peanuts. They spent too much time in college for that. And what most democrats apparently don’t understand is that it is very expensive to buy the equipment, pay the rent, staff the practice, and keep up with all the paperwork demanded by the government. So when the government sends patients on a cut rate plan, the numbers simply don’t work.

When Olivia Papa signed up for a new health plan last year, her insurance company assigned her to a primary care doctor. The relatively healthy 61-year-old didn’t try to see the doctor until last month, when she and her husband both needed authorization to see separate specialists.

She called the doctor’s office several times without luck.

“They told me that they were not on the plan, they were never on the plan and they’d been trying to get their name off the plan all year,” said Papa, who recently bought a plan from a different insurance company.

It was no better with the next doctor she was assigned. The Naples, Florida, resident said she left a message to make an appointment, “and they never called back.”

The Papas were among the 6.7 million people who gained insurance through the Affordable Care Act last year, flooding a primary care system that is struggling to keep up with demand.

A survey this year by The Physicians Foundation found that 81 percent of doctors describe themselves as either over-extended or at full capacity, and 44 percent said they planned to cut back on the number of patients they see, retire, work part-time or close their practice to new patients.

At the same time, insurance companies have routinely limited the number of doctors and providers on their plans as a way to cut costs. The result has further restricted some patients’ ability to get appointments quickly.

One purpose of the new health law was connecting patients, many of whom never had insurance before, with primary care doctors to prevent them from landing in the emergency room when they are sicker and their care is more expensive. Yet nearly 1 in 5 Americans lives in a region designated as having a shortage of primary care physicians, and the number of doctors entering the field isn’t expected to keep pace with demand.

Reality remains reality, despite whatever fantasies the Party In Power propagates. Reality never goes away.

– Aggie

Comments

Thanks for Reminding Us!

With friends like this, does Obama need enemies?

JONATHAN CAPEHART, WASHINGTON POST: But there’s another thing that you haven’t put in this list is, health care costs. One of the reasons why Americans’ wages were shrinking or stagnant is because health care costs were going through the roof. And when the president was pushing the Affordable Care Act, one of the main pillars of his argument was, we have to do this in order to bend the cost curve, which is happening. The deficit is shrinking. Premiums, yes they are going to go up, but not nearly as much as they would have without the Affordable Care Act.

If that’s so (a whopping great if), it’s not what was promised.

Nineteen times:

He’s an incorrigible liar, but if no one calls him on it, why should he change? Lying got him to the White House, twice, and even in his much-diminished capacity lying serves him well.

We should be stopping traffic and looting stores, but we won’t. In place of “hand’s up, don’t shoot” and “we can’t breathe”, we should be chanting “where’s my $2,500 bucks”, but we don’t.

Expect more of same.

Comments

Coming Soon to a Health Care System Near You

They say smoking and obesity are bad for your health—and they aim to prove it!

Obese patients and smokers face an immediate ban on routine operations according to a major NHS clinical commissioning group.

In a statement it said: ‘The CCG decided that for those patients undergoing hip and knee operations with a body mass index of more than 35 (morbidly obese) they patient would be required to have a BMI of under 35 or to lose five per cent of their weight before planned surgery, whichever is the lesser weight loss.’

The new restrictions will be extended to all non-urgent surgical procedures, however, it will not apply to cancer treatment or urgent cases.

I would say that’s big-hearted of them, but that might lose them their coverage. I can sort of understand the joint replacement requirement to lose weight. Recovery from the operation might be nigh on to impossible if one is morbidly obese. But how does smoking matter? Of course no one should smoke. But it’s not illegal.

Dr Burke said that he was being forced to curtail some services because the CCG is currently running a deficit of £14.5 million.

He said he was now going to restrict access to second hearing aids as well as certain expensive drugs.

Put down the chip butty, Nigel, or kiss that hearing aid goodbye.

‘The CCG has a legal duty to live within its financial resources and the prioritisation of services is helping us to do that.’

My waking nightmare is that the last words I hear on this earth are are those, from Kathleen Sebelius’s mouth.

Comments (4)

Hail to the Chief

There’s a philosophy in defensive football that committing penalties on every play pays off because “they can’t call ‘em all”.

It fits Obama’s MO. Break every law, flout every convention, break every tradition—they can’t call ‘em all:

On Thanksgiving eve, the Obama administration dumped reams of mind-numbing ObamaCare regulations into the Federal Register — including yet more unilateral rewrites of the Affordable Care Act.

Dropping the rules as most Americans were busy preparing for the holiday made a mockery (again) of President Obama’s promise to have “the most transparent administration in history.” The stunt has even worked to keep most of the media from reporting on the rules.

Yet the changes these regulations make in the health care law are substantial.

For one, the president is redefining what health plans are “adequate” for larger employers (100-plus workers) to offer under the Affordable Care Act. He’s also “asking” insurers to pay for new benefits — while warning that, if they don’t, they may be forced to.
Under the Constitution, Obama lacks any authority to make such changes to the health law, or any law. Only Congress has that power.

But he’s doing it, and not for the first time.

The president has made two dozen changes to his health law by executive fiat, from delaying the employer mandate to allowing people to keep health plans that don’t meet ObamaCare standards.

In fact, the House of Representatives is suing him (after Obama explicitly challenged it to do so) for making changes without Congress’ OK.

,,,

The basics:

Obama will require large employers to provide more coverage than the Affordable Care Act specifies. The move disqualifies plans now offered by 1,600 employers to 3 million workers, according to Kaiser Health News. Those employers will have to find a way to cover the higher costs — and some will surely do so by stopping coverage for spouses or part-time workers.

The new rules suddenly treat state high-risk pools as adequate coverage under the Affordable Care Act — a 180 from what the law actually says.

When the ACA became law, these plans for people with chronic illnesses were offered in 35 states. Winners will be those who live in the 10 states that haven’t yet phased out their high-risk plans. Losers: the many thousands in 25 states that already gave up their plans to comply with the ACA’s mandates.

The rules tell insurers to give new enrollees a 30-day grace period during which they can continue to use doctors not in their plan’s network. Winners: people who need time to switch to in-network doctors. Losers: taxpayers — who’ll be obliged to bail out the insurers clobbered with the extra cost.

Speaking of bailouts, Section 1342 of the law promises taxpayer-funded bailouts to insurers that lose money selling plans on ObamaCare exchanges. But the bailouts can’t happen unless Congress appropriates the money, something the GOP-controlled Congress won’t want to do. Yet the new Federal Register notices explicitly double down on the administration’s pledge to make insurers whole if losses are bigger than expected.

By repeatedly contradicting the letter of the Affordable Care Act, these new rules add to a pattern of lawlessness in implementing the health law — even as the administration’s boldest misreading of the law is before the Supreme Court.

The framers of the Constitution were terrified of creating a new king in place of the one they had just deposed. That fear ripples through every clause of the Constitution. But along with the “checks and balances” enumerated in the document, there is an implied good faith that each branch of government will abide by the rules, the President most of all. He is the individual with the most power, his removal is the most difficult.

With amnesty, ObamaCare, the IRS, and innumerable other violations, Obama dares us—the people—to try to call him on them with that ageless playground taunt, “what are you going to do about it?”

Comments (1)

Another ObamaCare Success Story [UPDATED]

Right up there with Supreme Court fights, canceled plans, un-kept doctors (period), and the fiasco that was and is Healthcare.gov:

One in three Americans say they have put off getting medical treatment that they or their family members need because of cost. Although this percentage is in line with the roughly 30% figures seen in recent years, it is among the highest readings in the 14-year history of Gallup asking the question.

Last year, many hoped that the opening of the government healthcare exchanges and the resulting increase in the number of Americans with health insurance would enable more people to seek medical treatment. But, despite a drop in the uninsured rate, a slightly higher percentage of Americans than in previous years report having put off medical treatment, suggesting that the Affordable Care Act has not immediately affected this measure.

Then there’s this nugget:

If the goal of ObamaCare was to give the poor more access to health care, Mission Accomplished: those making less than $30,000 and those on Medicaid showed improvement on these scores.

And if the goal was to give that access to the poor at the expense of the middle class, Mission Also Accomplished. Everybody else suffered. Everybody. These numbers explain not only the truth of ObamaCare, but the story of the recent elections.

Yet again, I am forced to ask: what was the point of ObamaCare? More and more I am forced to answer, to take from the barely-making-it and give to the hardly-even-trying. Even if we thought that was noble or even worthwhile, did we need to hijack one-six of the nation’s economy?

Silly BTL, hijacking one-sixth of the nation’s economy was the goal. Any benefit to the poor—which could have been accomplished by any number of easier fixes—was merely the means to an end.

PS: It ain’t just hangnails we’re postponing:

If these stats make you sick to your stomach, I wouldn’t put off seeing your doc.

UPDATE
How could I forget this success?

Health insurance giants are eating up a bigger slice of the marketplace in most states, despite intense efforts under ObamaCare to increase competition.

The three largest insurance companies held an average of 86 percent of customers in the individual market last year, up from 83 percent in 2010, when the healthcare reform act was passed, according to a Monday report from the Government Accountability Office.

The report found that the marketplace remained highly concentrated from 2010-2013, the latest year data was available, which shows the nation’s slow progress to dislodge long-standing insurance monopolies under the Affordable Care Act.

The findings are a blow to the Obama administration, which has touted lower costs and more options for millions across the country under the healthcare law.

Bull[bleep]. “A blow to the Obama administration”? They wrote the damn bill, and interpret it any damn way they choose. This is by intent, by design. How dare you insult this wise and marvelous man by declaring his signature achievement an abject failure. That’s my job.

Obama couldn’t have passed the law without the consent of the insurance companies. They had to know that their profits were assured—and what fat-cat would oppose the mandated addition of more clients to their roster? If it weren’t for crony capitalism, Obama wouldn’t believe in capitalism at all.

They’ll rue the day, however, they ever got into bed with him. Whatever the capitalist equivalent to herpes, crabs, HPV, HIV, and chlamydia, they’ll get them all. Those valued profits will be their undoing, and socialized medicine will be all that’s left.

Comments

BTL: Right Again As Ever

Rush likes to boast that he’s 98.7% accurate (or whatever), but it’s not that hard when you learn how to read the stitches on the curveball (as he also says).

We said this but five days ago:

[White House spokesman Shawn] Turner noted, however, that the estimated 5 million immigrants granted protection from deportation will not be eligible for other federal benefits such as student financial aid, food stamps or housing subsidies. Nor are they eligible to purchase health insurance through the federal health-care exchange under the Affordable Care Act.

To which we responded:

Yet.

Yesterday…

President Barack Obama’s executive order to spare some immigrants from deportation has galvanized Democrats, immigration groups and health care advocates in California to push for expanding health coverage to a segment of the population that remains uninsured.

The president’s action excludes immigrants who came to the country illegally from qualifying for federal health benefits. But California has its own policy of providing health coverage with state money to low-income immigrants with so-called “deferred action” that allow them to avoid deportation. Immigrant and health care advocates say that means Obama’s executive order will enable hundreds of thousands of low-income immigrants in California to apply for Medi-Cal, California’s version of Medicaid.

Great. Another million mouths to feed.

Hang on, BTL, you say? It’s not ObamaCare they’re getting, but Medi-Cal.

You interrupted me:

Medi-Cal is a health program for the poor paid for by the federal government and the state. It has grown by about 3 million people in California under federal health care reform and now covers more than 11 million Californians, about 30 percent of the state’s population. The federal government is paying for the expansion, but the state will eventually pay 10 percent of additional costs to cover low-income adults, many of whom are childless.

You want to explain to me how “hundreds of thousands” (estimates of California’s illegals range to nearly three million) of illegal aliens getting health insurance paid in part by the federal government (you and me) is not “health insurance through the federal health-care exchange”?

We need to find that Frenchman who invented a pill that makes flatulence smell like roses. Obama is farting in our face with impunity. If we can’t stick a plug in him, we shouldn’t have to suffer from his stench.

PS: Conservatives believe in the 10th Amendment to the Constitution, which assigns rights and powers to the states not otherwise assigned to the federal government. That belief stops when a given state behaves irresponsibly and irrationally—Illinois with pensions, California with illegals—leaving the federal government (you and me) to pick up the pieces. And the bill.

Comments

Couple More Problems for ObamaCare

To get the moral of the story out of the way first, don’t lie and don’t bully. It’ll catch up with you eventually.

The lies:

The Department of Health and Human Services projected that between 9 and 9.9 million people would enroll in Obamacare plans next year, well short of the 13 million predicted by the independent Congressional Budget Office. Just a few days later, administration officials admitted they inflated sign-up figures for Obamacare in 2014, including dental plans, to pad the numbers by 400,000 — allowing the administration to meet its original goal of enrolling 7 million consumers.

Care to read that again? Last year, they cooked the books; now they admit it. And that fraud (a 5.7% shortfall) is nothing compared to the fraud already admitted for next year (a 25-30% shortfall). Did you know that? I didn’t.

No wonder, then:

The fallout from the November blunders was hard to ignore. When the administration trumpeted that roughly 460,000 people had signed up for 2015 Obamacare coverage in the first week of open enrollment, the announcement was immediately met with suspicion.

AFter the lies wear thin comes the bullying:

Leading U.S. CEOs, angered by the Obama administration’s challenge to certain “workplace wellness” programs, are threatening to side with anti-Obamacare forces unless the government backs off, according to people familiar with the matter.

Major U.S. corporations have broadly supported President Barack Obama’s healthcare reform despite concerns over several of its elements, largely because it included provisions encouraging the wellness programs.

The programs aim to control healthcare costs by reducing smoking, obesity, hypertension and other risk factors that can lead to expensive illnesses. A bipartisan provision in the 2010 healthcare reform law allows employers to reward workers who participate and penalize those who don’t.

Got that? “Penalize.” Harm someone for not marching in step like a good little foot soldier. Kind of like the individual mandate—an unconstitutional affront until it was transvestized into a tax.

But like it or not, it’s part of the law (of the land).

But recent lawsuits filed by the administration’s Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), challenging the programs at Honeywell International and two smaller companies, have thrown the future of that part of Obamacare into doubt.

The lawsuits infuriated some large employers so much that they are considering aligning themselves with Obama’s opponents, according to people familiar with the executives’ thinking.

“The fact that the EEOC sued is shocking to our members,” said Maria Ghazal, vice-president and counsel at the Business Roundtable, a group of chief executives of more than 200 large U.S. corporations. “They don’t understand why a plan in compliance with the ACA (Affordable Care Act) is the target of a lawsuit,” she said. “This is a major issue to our members.”

Have your members never seen Goodfellas or The Sopranos? You don’t want these people as your partners. They’ll bleed you dry.

Obamacare allows financial incentives for workers taking part in workplace wellness programs of up to 50 percent of their monthly premiums, deductibles, and other costs. That translates into hundreds and sometimes thousands of dollars in extra annual costs for those who do not participate.

Typically, participation means filling out detailed health questionnaires, undergoing medical screenings, and in some cases attending weight-loss or smoking-cessation programs.

One of the arguments presented in the lawsuit against three employers is that requiring medical testing violates the Americans with Disabilities Act.

That 1990 law, according to employment-law attorney Joseph Lazzarotti of Jackson Lewis P.C. in Morristown, N.J., largely prohibits requiring medical tests as part of employment.

“You can’t make medical inquiries unless it’s consistent with job-necessity, or part of a voluntary wellness program,” he said.

The lawsuits are based on the view that it is no longer voluntary if employees face up to $4,000 in penalties for non-participation, loss of insurance or even their jobs.

Employers, however, see the lawsuits as reneging on the administration’s commitment to an important part of the healthcare reform.

If it violates ADA, what was it doing in the [bleeping] law? Did no one think to ask? Of course they did, but Nancy “The Bull” Pelosi gave away the game: we had to pass the “law” to find out what was in it.

The law itself is godawful enough. The process by which it passed was truly the work of Satan. No good could ever come of it. Just strife, chaos, mayhem, hellfire, brimstone, and Supreme Court appeals. All according to schedule.

Comments (1)

Your Tax Dollars at Work

Seriously? This is why we nationalized one-sixth of the nation’s economy?

The “Take Care, People” campaign uses pets as the unlikely spokespeople to raise awareness, educate, and motivate uninsured Americans to explore their options and enroll in health insurance for themselves and their families under the historic ACA. The non-partisan effort provides important information and tools year round and during open enrollment.

It does? I find it an embarrassment and an utter turnoff. The last time someone acted on the advice of a family pet, David Berkowitz, aka Son of Sam, shot 13 people, killing six. Perhaps the new Mrs. Charles Manson can be the next spokesperson?

If Sharon Tate had been covered…she’d still be dead…but don’t let that stop you!

Obama was supposed to be cool, but this takes doofusness to galactic levels.

Comments

« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »