swampland.time.com?

notusreifserious.jpg

here we go...

So he starts biatching about exchanges. Which the states were supposed to set up. Which most of them decided not to in an attempt to deliberately screw over Obamacare.

Somehow this is Obama's fault.

Got it.

I knew this was crap the moment it was greenlighted with 0 comments.

Certainly, the Republicans who have stood in the way of these exchanges-their own idea, by the way, born in the conservative Heritage Foundation-deserve a great deal of the "credit" for the debacle.

But let's blame Obama anyway.

The Administration has had 3 years to set up these exchanges. It has failed to do so

Actually no dumbass, the states were supposed to set those up however many of them have GOP lead houses, senates, and Gov so they kicked screamed and drug their feet waiting for SCOTUS to rule on the law and even AFTER the ruling waited, hemmed hawed, then finally threw up their hands and said fark it.

So point of irony here, those states that biatched the most about government control over healthcare failed to do their job and now have to have a government control over healthcare.....cunning plan GOP..cunning plan.

Our plan to sabotage Obamacare was a success! Obama is incompetent for not nailing us to a wall!

Has Obama ever done a single thing that does not show incompetence?  Obamacare was doomed to be a failure simply because he demanded that his name be associated with it, so that future generations could be in awe of his greatness.  That type of hubris always guarantees failure.

I know of an American healthcare system that has worked for decades, receives high approval marks from its coverage, and holds costs to well below their "free market" prices. It's called Medicare. And it's a complete travesty that the young and healthy don't have access to it.

MithrandirBooga: So he starts biatching about exchanges. Which the states were supposed to set up. Which most of them decided not to in an attempt to deliberately screw over Obamacare.

Somehow this is Obama's fault.

Got it.

The article states that the government failed to plan for the inaction of the states. 

Got it?

TofuTheAlmighty: receives high approval marks from for its coverage

FTFM

MithrandirBooga: So he starts biatching about exchanges. Which the states were supposed to set up. Which most of them decided not to in an attempt to deliberately screw over Obamacare.

Somehow this is Obama's fault.

Got it.

He may have a loose point that there should have been a federal contingency waiting in the wings, except for the fact that the federal option had to be all but gutted in order for anything to pass.

Certainly, the Republicans who have stood in the way of these exchanges

and...

the Democrats may come to understand that making it run efficiently is the prerequisite for maintaining power.

You don't suppose these two statements are somehow related, do you?

MithrandirBooga: So he starts biatching about exchanges. Which the states were supposed to set up. Which most of them decided not to in an attempt to deliberately screw over Obamacare.

Somehow this is Obama's fault.

Got it.

IIRC states that don't want to set up an exchange were supposed to be able to participate in a federal exchange -- perhaps that's what he was talking about.

Alternate headline: The pustulous weeping butthurt of submodmin.

You lost, get over it.

TeaHadist: Has Obama ever done a single thing that does not show incompetence?  Obamacare was doomed to be a failure simply because he demanded that his name be associated with it, so that future generations could be in awe of his greatness.  That type of hubris always guarantees failure.

I like you.

ElMNoPee: MithrandirBooga: So he starts biatching about exchanges. Which the states were supposed to set up. Which most of them decided not to in an attempt to deliberately screw over Obamacare.

Somehow this is Obama's fault.

Got it.

The article states that the government failed to plan for the inaction of the states. 

Got it?

So, if you say constantly that you like blueberries and hate strawberries, and I go to the store and buy you some blueberries, it's my fault for your ensuing temper tantrum because now you want strawberries.

Got it.

Summercat: ElMNoPee: MithrandirBooga: So he starts biatching about exchanges. Which the states were supposed to set up. Which most of them decided not to in an attempt to deliberately screw over Obamacare.

Somehow this is Obama's fault.

Got it.

The article states that the government failed to plan for the inaction of the states. 

Got it?

So, if you say constantly that you like blueberries and hate strawberries, and I go to the store and buy you some blueberries, it's my fault for your ensuing temper tantrum because now you want strawberries.

Got it.

Y'know, I didn't even realize the *color* of said fruits until after I hit Add Comment.

I may be wittier than I think I am, which is scary since I don't like LA County.

Summercat: ElMNoPee: MithrandirBooga: So he starts biatching about exchanges. Which the states were supposed to set up. Which most of them decided not to in an attempt to deliberately screw over Obamacare.

Somehow this is Obama's fault.

Got it.

The article states that the government failed to plan for the inaction of the states. 

Got it?

So, if you say constantly that you like blueberries and hate strawberries, and I go to the store and buy you some blueberries, it's my fault for your ensuing temper tantrum because now you want strawberries.

Got it.

Man, the GOP is just like a woman!

<b>ftfa</b>: <i>This is a really bad sign. There will be those who argue that it's not the Administration's fault. It's the fault of the 33 states that have refused to set up their own exchanges. Nonsense. Where was the contingency planning? </i>

You know, that's a pretty good point. With the vitriol that's been spewed over Obamacare since before it was even signed into law, the administration should have created some kind of rule or plan for dealing with states who refuse to set up their own HC exchange. That is really, REALLY short-sighted, and I think the blame HAS to fall directly at the feet of the presiden...

Oh, wait. You mean Republican governors' refusal to set up HC exchanges is largely symbolic because, as stated in the law, the DHHS will come in and set one up for them?

Well then you should maybe shut the fark up then.

Oh farking please.

Let me get this straight.  Now the exchanges are NOT going to cause widespread destruction of small businesses and commie-nazi-socialism.......... but we're not getting them fast enough?

Am I getting that right?  Conservatives mad about the speed at which progressive policy is enacted?

I quit.

Pappas: <b>ftfa</b>: <i>This is a really bad sign. There will be those who argue that it's not the Administration's fault. It's the fault of the 33 states that have refused to set up their own exchanges. Nonsense. Where was the contingency planning? </i>

You know, that's a pretty good point. With the vitriol that's been spewed over Obamacare since before it was even signed into law, the administration should have created some kind of rule or plan for dealing with states who refuse to set up their own HC exchange. That is really, REALLY short-sighted, and I think the blame HAS to fall directly at the feet of the presiden...

Oh, wait. You mean Republican governors' refusal to set up HC exchanges is largely symbolic because, as stated in the law, the DHHS will come in and set one up for them?

Well then you should maybe shut the fark up then.

That's not a contingency plan, that's a federal takeover of 1/6th of the economy.

TeaHadist: Has Obama ever done a single thing that does not show incompetence?  Obamacare was doomed to be a failure simply because he demanded that his name be associated with it, so that future generations could be in awe of his greatness.  That type of hubris always guarantees failure.

6/10

Lacked lizard people reference.  But, points for blatant lie about the name.

Philip Francis Queeg: Certainly, the Republicans who have stood in the way of these exchanges-their own idea, by the way, born in the conservative Heritage Foundation-deserve a great deal of the "credit" for the debacle.

But let's blame Obama anyway.

The irony is that Obamacare was originally the Heritage Foundation's response to Clintoncare.

-as someone who believes in activist government

Fark you.

Anyone who has had to help their parents select Medicare drug coverage knows these exchanges are going to be a cluster-fark.

Sooo...if what I am reading is correct, it's Obama's fault for not anticipating a whole big handful of states giving him the finger and setting up a back up plan to basically shove it down their throats anyway or simply working around the state legislatures?

MithrandirBooga: So he starts biatching about exchanges. Which the states were supposed to set up. Which most of them decided not to in an attempt to deliberately screw over Obamacare.

Somehow this is Obama's fault.

Got it.

That's my take on it.

And the exchanges go online soon.  Oregon starts enrollment in October 2013, with benefits starting January 1st.

Pappas
Oh, wait. You mean Republican governors' refusal to set up HC exchanges is largely symbolic because, as stated in the law, the DHHS will come in and set one up for them?

Well then you should maybe shut the fark up then.

What are you talking about? Did you even finish the paragraph you pulled that quote from? The guy's entire point is that the federal government is having to delay the original timeline in order to setup the exchanges as intended by the law. Considering 33 states refused to do so, it seems like they should have been a bit more on the ball about getting that done; not like it was a surprise they would have to do so.

The GOP is far less fearful of Obamacare being a failure than they are of it being a success. They do not give a runny liquid shiat about expanding government or excessive spending.

Summercat: So, if you say constantly that you like blueberries and hate strawberries, and I go to the store and buy you some blueberries, it's my fault for your ensuing temper tantrum because now you want strawberries.

Got it.

Send that one in somewhere, thats worth a few hundred from the Tonight Show

chiett: It's NEVER Obama's fault.

That is all.

He certainly isn't always without blame. But with the ridiculous number of things that the right has manufactured in an attempt to falsely pin on him, I'll agree the percentage of actual fault is extremely low.

MyKingdomForYourHorse: Summercat: So, if you say constantly that you like blueberries and hate strawberries, and I go to the store and buy you some blueberries, it's my fault for your ensuing temper tantrum because now you want strawberries.

Got it.

Send that one in somewhere, thats worth a few hundred from the Tonight Show

Nah. Let someone else profit off my works n.n

I did come up with "The Plural of Hypthosis is not Data" last night, though. Sounds good for the BSABSVR.

This isn't a good thing, what we need to realize is liberals will hold their leaders accountable. It's why Christie, Romney, etc... can win in "liberal" states.

Whereas it's next to impossible to elect a Democrat to state-wide office in the "conservative" states.

chiett: It's NEVER Obama's fault.

That is all.

The new seal of the Republican Party:

GoodDoctorB: Oh farking please.

Let me get this straight.  Now the exchanges are NOT going to cause widespread destruction of small businesses and commie-nazi-socialism.......... but we're not getting them fast enough?

Am I getting that right?  Conservatives mad about the speed at which progressive policy is enacted?

I quit.

Modern "Conservativism" isn't an ideology so much as it is a team. Whichever stance the other team takes, they must oppose it or risk confusing their party members ("but they're the badguys, we can't agree with them on anything!"). This is why you hear shiat like "DEFICITS DON'T MATTER" whenever their team has the ball, and "DEFICITS ARE EVERYTHING" when they lose possession. Or "PROTESTING WAR IS TREASON" when it's their war, but "OMG HOW DARE FARTCONGO USURP FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS" when it's not. Or "Newt/Romney/Obamacare is the best thing ever, that'll show that stupid Hillarycare who's boss" vs "OMG OBAMACARE WILL LITERALLY KILL EVERYONE". This is how they can have multiple conflicting viewpoints at the same exact time, such as "GOVERNMENT IS EVIL GET IT OUT OF EVERYTHING. ALSO WE WANT TO BAN GAYS AND FORCE THE 10 COMMANDMENTS ON EVERYONE AND BAN EVOLUTION AND BAN CLIMATE SCIENCE".

So naturally whenever there is an opportunity to "score points", they will take it. Obamacare not passed yet? Well it's satancare and will kill everyone. Now that it's passed? Let's screw it up and then make fun of them for not implementing it fast enough.

It's about winning for them, it's not about governance or ideologies. Do not ever make the mistake of ascribing ideologies to a self-proclaimed "conservative". They don't exist.

YouAreIncorrect: Pappas
Oh, wait. You mean Republican governors' refusal to set up HC exchanges is largely symbolic because, as stated in the law, the DHHS will come in and set one up for them?

Well then you should maybe shut the fark up then.

What are you talking about? Did you even finish the paragraph you pulled that quote from? The guy's entire point is that the federal government is having to delay the original timeline in order to setup the exchanges as intended by the law. Considering 33 states refused to do so, it seems like they should have been a bit more on the ball about getting that done; not like it was a surprise they would have to do so.

The author explicitly implies that there was no contingency plan in place for states who refuse to set up their own HC exchanges as directed by federal law, and were caught totally off guard by it. That's a lie. There is a contengency plan... the DHHS well set the exchanges up. That's in the law.

Now, to his larger point of "they should have been on the ball"... the deadline for states to set up their exchange was this past December (which, granted, was moved back once by the administration.) Many of the states that opted out of setting up their own exchange waited until mid December or later to publicly say so. If you have a calendar handy, you might notice that that was THREE MONTHS AGO. And the administration has at least ONE plan on the table for small business, as is indicated by the author.

But, I guess since it was instantaneous, 0bummer is dropping the ball. History's greatest monster, and all. I gotcha.

contingency. And wasn't, not was. I need more donuts before I deal with this shiat, clearly.

Why not have 1 federal exchange and not 33 separate ones?  Oh yeah, because insurance companies aren't able to share plans across state lines.

It should be called Romney care.  It's based on his plan in Massachusetts.

No doubt, small business owners will be skeptical of the Obama Administration's belief in the efficacy of the market system to produce lower prices through competition.

Stupid Obama belief in the free market system... wait, what?