If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(LA Weekly)   California GOP: How can we thwart Obamacare? "Hey, let's put up a phony website with the name similar to the legit coveredca.com, and make these stupid people more frustrated"   (blogs.laweekly.com) divider line 143
    More: Interesting, GOP, obamacare, California, California Democratic Party, stupidity, detours, California State Assembly, Courage Campaign  
•       •       •

3437 clicks; posted to Politics » on 05 Dec 2013 at 2:12 PM (42 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



143 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-12-05 01:35:04 PM
Apparently the GOP can't even hire decent web designers. Their stupid website keeps scrolling back to the top when I try to go to the bottom.
 
2013-12-05 01:44:37 PM
Isn't willfully and knowingly attempting to deceive people by undermining the laws of the United States of America some kind of treasonable offense?
 
2013-12-05 01:57:58 PM
once again i ask: if obamacare is so bad, why do you have to lie and cheat to make your point?
 
2013-12-05 01:59:07 PM

FlashHarry: once again i ask: if obamacare is so bad, why do you have to lie and cheat to make your point?


Does the GOP know any other way to do anything?
 
2013-12-05 02:03:39 PM

BunkoSquad: FlashHarry: once again i ask: if obamacare is so bad, why do you have to lie and cheat to make your point?

Does the GOP know any other way to do anything?


They seem refreshingly honest about their views on rape. But that may be the exception that proves the rule.
 
2013-12-05 02:14:37 PM
in before "if you are too stupid to figure out which website to use, then you should die in a gutter"
 
2013-12-05 02:15:52 PM

markie_farkie: Isn't willfully and knowingly attempting to deceive people by undermining the laws of the United States of America some kind of treasonable offense?


Seriously. Maybe not legally treason but how in the hell is this not being condemned by everyone across the nation.

If Obamacare is so bad why do Republicans feel they need to sabotage it?
 
2013-12-05 02:17:48 PM

FlashHarry: once again i ask: if obamacare is so bad, why do you have to lie and cheat to make your point?


Obama could stand in front of the GOP, give them boxing gloves, stand with his chin out and say "Have at it." And they would somehow punch themselves in the back of the head until they fall unconscious. They could have the advantage right in their hands and screw up immediately.
 
2013-12-05 02:17:59 PM

themindiswatching: Apparently the GOP can't even hire decent web designers. Their stupid website keeps scrolling back to the top when I try to go to the bottom.


Or maybe their web designer was a devious non-idiot who botched the thing on purpose?

/Maybe not. Would make me smile tho.
 
2013-12-05 02:18:07 PM
if you are too stupid to fig... aw, crap.
 
2013-12-05 02:18:29 PM
Obamacare greenlights for Thursday: 2

Yippee.
 
2013-12-05 02:19:25 PM

WizardofToast: FlashHarry: once again i ask: if obamacare is so bad, why do you have to lie and cheat to make your point?

Obama could stand in front of the GOP, give them boxing gloves, stand with his chin out and say "Have at it." And they would somehow punch themselves the middle class in the back of the head until they fall unconscious. They could have the advantage right in their hands and screw up immediately.


Fixt.
 
2013-12-05 02:20:02 PM

themindiswatching: Apparently the GOP can't even hire decent web designers. Their stupid website keeps scrolling back to the top when I try to go to the bottom.


I think you missed the point here, it was never supposed to work.
 
2013-12-05 02:20:05 PM
Oh what a surprise!  After trying a DoS attack against the website, they put up fake sites to screw with the public.

Do Republicans ever do anything positive for the American public or do they all hate the USA?

Is there any Republican that isn't a racist, treasonous sack of garbage?
 
2013-12-05 02:20:12 PM

Jackson Herring: in before "if you are too stupid to figure out which website to use, then you should die in a gutter"


In before Bootstraps McGillicutty
 
2013-12-05 02:24:07 PM
I like the bit at the bottom with linked text

Disclaimer - Privacy Policy - Assembly Republican Caucus

Not fake at all.....

/turn off javascript to stop the scoll glitch.
//Waiting for the police to boot down their doors in 3-2-1-potato
 
2013-12-05 02:24:18 PM

rosebud_the_sled: Oh what a surprise!  After trying a DoS attack against the website, they put up fake sites to screw with the public.

Do Republicans ever do anything positive for the American public or do they all hate the USA?

Is there any Republican that isn't a racist, treasonous sack of garbage?


They don't see it as treason if you've bootstrapped your way to the top.
 
2013-12-05 02:24:32 PM

rosebud_the_sled: Oh what a surprise!  After trying a DoS attack against the website, they put up fake sites to screw with the public.

Do Republicans ever do anything positive for the American public or do they all hate the USA?

Is there any Republican that isn't a racist, treasonous sack of garbage?


The only goal of the Republican party is to have absolute power, with which they'll funnel every last cent of America's wealth into the pockets of the 1%. Everything else is a means to that end.
 
2013-12-05 02:26:16 PM

themindiswatching: Apparently the GOP can't even hire decent web designers. Their stupid website keeps scrolling back to the top when I try to go to the bottom.


There is a piece of Javascript that is forcing the page to jump back to the top, ensuring that the main content of the page is always viewable.
 
2013-12-05 02:26:46 PM
The California GOP is like a sideshow and this will go nowhere.

Remember what Wendy Davis accomplished in Texas? Nothing.
 
2013-12-05 02:27:53 PM

themindiswatching: Apparently the GOP can't even hire decent web designers. Their stupid website keeps scrolling back to the top when I try to go to the bottom.


When I get to the bottom I go back to the top of the slide
Where I stop and I turn and I go for a ride
Till I get to the bottom and I see you again
Yeah yeah yeah hey


Web design by Helter Skelter
 
2013-12-05 02:29:11 PM

Jackson Herring: in before "if you are too stupid to figure out which website to use, then you should die in a gutter"


Gah, I have a hard enough time with maple leaves. Dead bodies would cause all sorts of flooding.
 
2013-12-05 02:29:40 PM
Quelle surprise!
 
2013-12-05 02:29:46 PM
Wow, domain squatters are really slipping if they let the GOP beat them to this.
 
2013-12-05 02:31:38 PM
What else should we expect from the regional GOP group that thought Carly Fiorina was a viable Senate candidate?

Then again, given all the nasty NSA spying, Fiorina would have been right at home in the Senate devising new methods of surveilance
 
2013-12-05 02:33:21 PM

Jackson Herring: in before "if you are too stupid to figure out which website to use, then you should die in a gutter"


..... shouldn't they?  If the GOP wants to make sure their people continue to die without coverage, WHO AM I to interfere with Darwinism?
 
2013-12-05 02:34:05 PM

markie_farkie: Isn't willfully and knowingly attempting to deceive people by undermining the laws of the United States of America some kind of treasonable offense?


It's just a website for slamming on the ACA. It doesn't look like a place you'd go to sign up and clearly doesn't pretend to be. The name isn't really all that close to the California site.

But other than that, yes throw them in Leavenworth.
 
2013-12-05 02:36:53 PM

markie_farkie: Isn't willfully and knowingly attempting to deceive people by undermining the laws of the United States of America some kind of treasonable offense?


That's what I honestly want to know.
This shiat has gone too far. The Acorn debacle, blatant corporatism, voter fraud, The Egypt Trio,etc. etc.
When will the party of responsibility finally have to pay for all of their treasonous bullshiat?

Or is America really only an idea?
We were bought and paid for from the beginning.
 
2013-12-05 02:36:54 PM

markie_farkie: Isn't willfully and knowingly attempting to deceive people by undermining the laws of the United States of America some kind of treasonable offense?


MD Dems apparently don't think so.
 
2013-12-05 02:37:10 PM
We drink to our youth, to the days come and gone.
For the age of oppression is now nearly done.
We'll drive out the Liberals from this land that we own.
With our blood and our steel we will take back our home.

All hail to Reagan! You are the High King!
In your great honor we drink and we sing.
We're the children of 'Murica, and we fight all our lives.
And when Jesus Christ beckons, every one of us dies!

But this land is ours and we'll see it wiped clean.
Of the scourge that has sullied our hopes and our dreams.
All hail to Reagan! You are the High King!
In your great honor we drink and we sing.
We're the children of 'Murica, and we fight all our lives.
And when Jesus Christ beckons, every one of us dies!

We drink to our youth, to the days come and gone.
For the age of oppression is now nearly done.
 
2013-12-05 02:37:22 PM
Vote GOP this year. The GOP, the Grand Old Party of Treason.
 
2013-12-05 02:37:38 PM

Cletus C.: markie_farkie: Isn't willfully and knowingly attempting to deceive people by undermining the laws of the United States of America some kind of treasonable offense?

It's just a website for slamming on the ACA. It doesn't look like a place you'd go to sign up and clearly doesn't pretend to be. The name isn't really all that close to the California site.

But other than that, yes throw them in Leavenworth.


Really?  Dismissive of this? I mean, they are going to actually cause people to die for confusing / lying to people about ACA so they don't get covered, but you wanted Issa to do a full body cavity search on Obama for what he said AFTER the 4 deaths in...... let's call it..... (need a safe word so you don't go postal)..... Kalamazooghazi.
 
2013-12-05 02:37:50 PM

markie_farkie: Isn't willfully and knowingly attempting to deceive people by undermining the laws of the United States of America some kind of treasonable offense?


It is a hanging offense.
I'll get the rope.
 
2013-12-05 02:39:35 PM

baltimoreron: markie_farkie: Isn't willfully and knowingly attempting to deceive people by undermining the laws of the United States of America some kind of treasonable offense?

MD Dems apparently don't think so.


That's not about the law of the United States, it's about a candidate. Still shiatty, but differently so.
 
2013-12-05 02:40:54 PM

baltimoreron: markie_farkie: Isn't willfully and knowingly attempting to deceive people by undermining the laws of the United States of America some kind of treasonable offense?

MD Dems apparently don't think so.


Um, if they did that, sure, bring them up on charges for fraud, however, that article didn't actually provide proof that it was the MD Dems.  It said it was them, but provided no evidence to back it.

If you can't trust examiner.com, who can you trust?
 
2013-12-05 02:41:45 PM

themindiswatching: Apparently the GOP can't even hire decent web designers. Their stupid website keeps scrolling back to the top when I try to go to the bottom.


ZOMG WEBSITE DOESN'T WORK HANG 'EM HANG 'EM HANG 'EM!

/Just going by the outrage set by Healthcare.gov.
 
2013-12-05 02:42:05 PM

coeyagi: Cletus C.: markie_farkie: Isn't willfully and knowingly attempting to deceive people by undermining the laws of the United States of America some kind of treasonable offense?

It's just a website for slamming on the ACA. It doesn't look like a place you'd go to sign up and clearly doesn't pretend to be. The name isn't really all that close to the California site.

But other than that, yes throw them in Leavenworth.

Really?  Dismissive of this? I mean, they are going to actually cause people to die for confusing / lying to people about ACA so they don't get covered, but you wanted Issa to do a full body cavity search on Obama for what he said AFTER the 4 deaths in...... let's call it..... (need a safe word so you don't go postal)..... Kalamazooghazi.


It's a death site? I should have clicked the "About Us" tab.
 
2013-12-05 02:42:06 PM

LordJiro: rosebud_the_sled: Oh what a surprise!  After trying a DoS attack against the website, they put up fake sites to screw with the public.

Do Republicans ever do anything positive for the American public or do they all hate the USA?

Is there any Republican that isn't a racist, treasonous sack of garbage?

The only goal of the Republican party is to have absolute power, with which they'll funnel every last cent of America's wealth into the pockets of the 1%. Everything else is a means to that end.


My question was being answered while I was asking it.
 
2013-12-05 02:42:12 PM
That's really farked up if true but it's a bit of a stretch to think the intention was to confuse.
 
2013-12-05 02:42:30 PM
They can't even f*ck up properly. Sounds about right.
 
2013-12-05 02:43:19 PM

Cletus C.: coeyagi: Cletus C.: markie_farkie: Isn't willfully and knowingly attempting to deceive people by undermining the laws of the United States of America some kind of treasonable offense?

It's just a website for slamming on the ACA. It doesn't look like a place you'd go to sign up and clearly doesn't pretend to be. The name isn't really all that close to the California site.

But other than that, yes throw them in Leavenworth.

Really?  Dismissive of this? I mean, they are going to actually cause people to die for confusing / lying to people about ACA so they don't get covered, but you wanted Issa to do a full body cavity search on Obama for what he said AFTER the 4 deaths in...... let's call it..... (need a safe word so you don't go postal)..... Kalamazooghazi.

It's a death site? I should have clicked the "About Us" tab.


If their objective is to make sure that people don't get covered - yes.  You can draw your own conclusions, and I put my full faith and trust in that - you've never backed a wrong horse before.
 
2013-12-05 02:44:51 PM
 
2013-12-05 02:47:01 PM

skullkrusher:  it's a bit of a stretch to think the intention was to confuse.


seriously? this is the GOP we're talking about here. the GOP.
 
2013-12-05 02:47:33 PM

skullkrusher: That's really farked up if true but it's a bit of a stretch to think the intention was to confuse.


Oh yeah, it's a real stretch to think that a political party who has made sabotaging the ACA their number one priority might have done this on purpose. What you think their intent was?
 
2013-12-05 02:49:13 PM

skullkrusher: That's really farked up if true but it's a bit of a stretch to think the intention was to confuse.


Then what was it?
 
2013-12-05 02:53:18 PM

baltimoreron: markie_farkie: Isn't willfully and knowingly attempting to deceive people by undermining the laws of the United States of America some kind of treasonable offense?

MD Dems apparently don't think so.


Oh how cute, you think someone's political campaign is a law.
 
2013-12-05 02:54:41 PM

Flappyhead: skullkrusher: That's really farked up if true but it's a bit of a stretch to think the intention was to confuse.

Then what was it?


To honestly and objectively inform the people of California on questions of serious concern.

Disclaimer: I may have not used any real definition of some of those words.
 
2013-12-05 02:55:04 PM
That's really farked up if true but it's a bit of a stretch to think the intention was to confuse.


ummm
 
2013-12-05 02:56:26 PM

Flappyhead: skullkrusher: That's really farked up if true but it's a bit of a stretch to think the intention was to confuse.

Then what was it?


Look, he's just a GOP shill/amateur troll (redundant?)... they're not giving him a lot to work with... there's no reasonable explanation other than they were trying to mislead/confuse people... but he's gotta put forth some effort.
 
2013-12-05 02:57:22 PM
How is this legal at all?
 
2013-12-05 03:02:16 PM

firefly212: Flappyhead: skullkrusher: That's really farked up if true but it's a bit of a stretch to think the intention was to confuse.

Then what was it?

Look, he's just a GOP shill/amateur troll (redundant?)... they're not giving him a lot to work with... there's no reasonable explanation other than they were trying to mislead/confuse people... but he's gotta put forth some effort.


There's a lot of that going around.

That accusation, I mean.

Weak.
 
2013-12-05 03:03:56 PM
Democrats made a spoof site in '12, and did it without being evil. All it did was make a rhetorical point.

And it's still up -- http://www.romneytaxplan.com/ . I think there was a Fark thread about it.
 
2013-12-05 03:05:31 PM

SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: How is this legal at all?


Free Speech?

Lying isn't against the law. Didn't Fox News win a lawsuit about a decade back on this?
 
2013-12-05 03:05:47 PM

phaseolus: Democrats made a spoof site in '12, and did it without being evil. All it did was make a rhetorical point.

And it's still up -- http://www.romneytaxplan.com/ . I think there was a Fark thread about it.


Again, there is a difference between the active law of the land and... well, NOT that.
 
2013-12-05 03:05:55 PM

Cletus C.: There's a lot of that going around.

That accusation, I mean.

Weak.


Have you thought that it could be due to you doing a lot of trolling lately? No, it must be literally everyone else and not you.
 
2013-12-05 03:06:48 PM

btchin trans-am: The California GOP is like a sideshow and this will go nowhere.

Remember what Wendy Davis accomplished in Texas? Nothing.


Wait until she's Governor.

And really, activating the dispirited majority of Texans who are democrats and exposing hypocrisy and incompetence are something.
 
2013-12-05 03:06:52 PM

TheMysticS: markie_farkie: Isn't willfully and knowingly attempting to deceive people by undermining the laws of the United States of America some kind of treasonable offense?

That's what I honestly want to know.
This shiat has gone too far. The Acorn debacle, blatant corporatism, voter fraud, The Egypt Trio,etc. etc.
When will the party of responsibility finally have to pay for all of their treasonous bullshiat?

Or is America really only an idea?
We were bought and paid for from the beginning.


Ten actual coveredca.com scam sites (you know, the kind that markie_farkie and you are alluding to) have been shut down by the states attorney generals office in the past month and criminal charges filed against the operators. This is not one of those. It's an information only site that answers some questions that people may have regarding California laws and how they interrelate with the PPACA as well as what obligations a citizen and insurance companies have under that law and some possible implications for the future as it gets fully implemented.

But you guys go on with your faux outrage over something that you entirely made up in your head. I googled "california health care" (and a few different iterations of that) and the top (non-advertising) pick was always coveredca.com (which should probably be a .gov domain anyway just to help prevent any scams in the first place, but that's an entirely different topic).
 
2013-12-05 03:07:31 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Cletus C.: There's a lot of that going around.

That accusation, I mean.

Weak.

Have you thought that it could be due to you doing a lot of trolling lately? No, it must be literally everyone else and not you.


To be fair, the guy called Skullkrusher a shill-troll. I may disagree with him from time to time, but I'm pretty sure he's just a dude.
 
2013-12-05 03:07:47 PM

mgshamster: SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: How is this legal at all?

Free Speech?

Lying isn't against the law. Didn't Fox News win a lawsuit about a decade back on this?


I feel like fraud might be against the law, though.
 
2013-12-05 03:08:28 PM

LasersHurt: cameroncrazy1984: Cletus C.: There's a lot of that going around.

That accusation, I mean.

Weak.

Have you thought that it could be due to you doing a lot of trolling lately? No, it must be literally everyone else and not you.

To be fair, the guy called Skullkrusher a shill-troll. I may disagree with him from time to time, but I'm pretty sure he's just a dude.


Granted he is, but dudes troll all the time without necessarily having to be affiliated.
 
2013-12-05 03:09:44 PM

LasersHurt: phaseolus: Democrats made a spoof site in '12, and did it without being evil. All it did was make a rhetorical point.

And it's still up -- http://www.romneytaxplan.com/ . I think there was a Fark thread about it.

Again, there is a difference between the active law of the land and... well, NOT that.



Agreed. I wasn't defending Repubs, was only reliving good times...
 
2013-12-05 03:12:02 PM
Republicans could shut down the government for 17 days to get their way. It worked last time..

OH WAIT, no it didn't!

/Plan Boehner.

Seriously Cletus, we're tired of you.
 
2013-12-05 03:12:39 PM

cameroncrazy1984: mgshamster: SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: How is this legal at all?

Free Speech?

Lying isn't against the law. Didn't Fox News win a lawsuit about a decade back on this?

I feel like fraud might be against the law, though.


If the site isn't selling a fake plan, how are they performing fraud?

It's despicable, but I'm not sure its illegal.
 
2013-12-05 03:12:42 PM

mgshamster: SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: How is this legal at all?

Free Speech?

Lying isn't against the law. Didn't Fox News win a lawsuit about a decade back on this?


Deliberately lying in a way that could cause harm to others should be illegal.
 
2013-12-05 03:13:13 PM

themindiswatching: Apparently the GOP can't even hire decent web designers. Their stupid website keeps scrolling back to the top when I try to go to the bottom.


that is the circle jerk feature
 
2013-12-05 03:14:11 PM

SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: mgshamster: SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: How is this legal at all?

Free Speech?

Lying isn't against the law. Didn't Fox News win a lawsuit about a decade back on this?

Deliberately lying in a way that could cause harm to others should be illegal.


I agree with you in principle, but I am pretty sure the entire Food industry would go bye bye.

//Organic gardens for all!
 
2013-12-05 03:16:38 PM

SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: Deliberately lying in a way that could cause harm to others should be illegal.


Please find the lies on that site and link to them here. I went through the FAQ and I couldn't find any. In fact it explicitly states that you must buy healthcare that meets PPACA standards and goes over who can legally sell it to you.
 
2013-12-05 03:19:59 PM

Corvus: markie_farkie: Isn't willfully and knowingly attempting to deceive people by undermining the laws of the United States of America some kind of treasonable offense?

Seriously. Maybe not legally treason but how in the hell is this not being condemned by everyone across the nation.

If Obamacare is so bad why do Republicans feel they need to sabotage it?


Probably(And I'm just spitballing here) because the website doesn't do anything "bad". It sounds like it doesn't take you through a fake signup process or lie to you, it supposedly educates you, which is fine. The fact that they made the names so similar, it never linked to the official site until the site was exposed, and that it really didn't do anything all go by the wayside if it didn't "hurt" anyone.

Oh, and the Right will defend the absolute sleaziest actions by their politicians, so this works out to small potatoes in comparison.

And I agree with your last statement, too.
 
2013-12-05 03:20:44 PM

Cletus C.: firefly212: Flappyhead: skullkrusher: That's really farked up if true but it's a bit of a stretch to think the intention was to confuse.

Then what was it?

Look, he's just a GOP shill/amateur troll (redundant?)... they're not giving him a lot to work with... there's no reasonable explanation other than they were trying to mislead/confuse people... but he's gotta put forth some effort.

There's a lot of that going around.

That accusation, I mean.

Weak.


Look, there are plenty of people I frequently disagree with who aren't trolls, Weaver, LasersHurt, and others from both sides of the spectrum... but skullkrusher is just too farking obvious wiith his mental contortions to be taken seriously. If you're gonna say he's not trolling, then tell me, do you think it's reasonable to say "it's a  bit of a strech to think that the intention was to confuse." Because, to me, that's just some soft-trolling... it's not a stretch at all to think the intent was to confuse, to the contrary, you have to stretch pretty far to think that the intention was something else... heck, I can't even think of what possible intent naming the website so similarly could possibly be, other than to confuse.

All due respect to him, but he's done a better job of trollololing in other threads, but that's what rattles his rocks.... I'm not mad at him, and I don't hate him for it... but sometimes we should call a spade a spade.
 
2013-12-05 03:20:45 PM

SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: mgshamster: SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: How is this legal at all?

Free Speech?

Lying isn't against the law. Didn't Fox News win a lawsuit about a decade back on this?

Deliberately lying in a way that could cause harm to others should be illegal.


I wholeheartedly agree.

But there are multiple industries that would fight against that: oil companies, alternative medicine, supplements & vitamin pill companies, conservative media, certain pharmaceutical companies, certain biotech companies, pretty much any advertising company...
 
2013-12-05 03:22:39 PM

Radioactive Ass: SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: Deliberately lying in a way that could cause harm to others should be illegal.

Please find the lies on that site and link to them here. I went through the FAQ and I couldn't find any. In fact it explicitly states that you must buy healthcare that meets PPACA standards and goes over who can legally sell it to you.


Well now that I've actually gone to the website, I'm going to shut my mouth. Shouldn't have trusted the article.
 
2013-12-05 03:24:15 PM
Manufactured controversy or legitimate rage over an allegedly "fake" website? You decide.


I can't decide!

1. it's the GOP
2. it's the GOP
3. this has to do with the ACA
4. it's the GOP
5. are circus clown evil by nature?

well, i wouldn't put it past them.
 
2013-12-05 03:24:35 PM
Listen Libtardomos

Un-bunch your panties, it wasnt intended as a factual website, no harm no fowl. Libbos just cant let anything go, JEESH, it was just a joke.
 
2013-12-05 03:28:10 PM

Triple Oak: Obamacare greenlights for Thursday: 2

Yippee.


So submit something else already...
 
2013-12-05 03:31:02 PM
Isn't this type of thing kind of illegal?
 
2013-12-05 03:43:07 PM

Mikey1969: Triple Oak: Obamacare greenlights for Thursday: 2

Yippee.

So submit something else already...


Not my personal greenlights, the amount total today. I wouldn't waste my time on submitting every article, we have many of them daily.
 
2013-12-05 03:47:37 PM

Black_Lazerus: themindiswatching: Apparently the GOP can't even hire decent web designers. Their stupid website keeps scrolling back to the top when I try to go to the bottom.

that is the circle jerk feature


Lulz.
 
2013-12-05 03:48:17 PM

SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: Well now that I've actually gone to the website, I'm going to shut my mouth. Shouldn't have trusted the article.


No worries. I took note that TFA intentionally didn't link to the site in question, I can only assume that was to try and get people to take their word for it instead of judging for themselves. I suspect that most of the people calling this illegal took the article at face value as well.

Like I said earlier in the thread, the CA state AG's office has taken down 10 actual scam sites and are prosecuting the operators for fraud. This isn't even close to being one of them.
 
2013-12-05 03:49:49 PM

Radioactive Ass: SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: Well now that I've actually gone to the website, I'm going to shut my mouth. Shouldn't have trusted the article.

No worries. I took note that TFA intentionally didn't link to the site in question, I can only assume that was to try and get people to take their word for it instead of judging for themselves. I suspect that most of the people calling this illegal took the article at face value as well.

Like I said earlier in the thread, the CA state AG's office has taken down 10 actual scam sites and are prosecuting the operators for fraud. This isn't even close to being one of them.


Is it a scam or fraud? No. Is it deliberate misinformation? You bet.
 
2013-12-05 03:53:54 PM

qorkfiend: Radioactive Ass: SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: Well now that I've actually gone to the website, I'm going to shut my mouth. Shouldn't have trusted the article.

No worries. I took note that TFA intentionally didn't link to the site in question, I can only assume that was to try and get people to take their word for it instead of judging for themselves. I suspect that most of the people calling this illegal took the article at face value as well.

Like I said earlier in the thread, the CA state AG's office has taken down 10 actual scam sites and are prosecuting the operators for fraud. This isn't even close to being one of them.

Is it a scam or fraud? No. Is it deliberate misinformation? You bet.


It's not even deliberate misinformation... From what I read, much if it is simple answers to FAQs. I got all caught up in the outrage, because given the GOP track record, I assumed they'd done something awful as usual. It doesn't seem like the case.
 
2013-12-05 03:54:01 PM

qorkfiend: Is it a scam or fraud? No. Is it deliberate misinformation? You bet.


Well then surely you can link to some specifics here right?
 
2013-12-05 03:54:16 PM

Radioactive Ass: TheMysticS: markie_farkie: Isn't willfully and knowingly attempting to deceive people by undermining the laws of the United States of America some kind of treasonable offense?

That's what I honestly want to know.
This shiat has gone too far. The Acorn debacle, blatant corporatism, voter fraud, The Egypt Trio,etc. etc.
When will the party of responsibility finally have to pay for all of their treasonous bullshiat?

Or is America really only an idea?
We were bought and paid for from the beginning.

Ten actual coveredca.com scam sites (you know, the kind that markie_farkie and you are alluding to) have been shut down by the states attorney generals office in the past month and criminal charges filed against the operators. This is not one of those. It's an information only site that answers some questions that people may have regarding California laws and how they interrelate with the PPACA as well as what obligations a citizen and insurance companies have under that law and some possible implications for the future as it gets fully implemented.

But you guys go on with your faux outrage over something that you entirely made up in your head. I googled "california health care" (and a few different iterations of that) and the top (non-advertising) pick was always coveredca.com (which should probably be a .gov domain anyway just to help prevent any scams in the first place, but that's an entirely different topic).


Lulz.
Hey, nerd, back off!
No, really. Honestly. This ain't the straw what broke the camel's back. That camel is now in traction.

I have a new camel now. His name is Bob.
 
2013-12-05 03:55:14 PM

FlashHarry: once again i ask: if obamacare is so bad, why do you have to lie and cheat to make your point?


The only reason the GOP is against it is because they think it'll garner them votes.
 
2013-12-05 03:59:30 PM

Radioactive Ass: No worries. I took note that TFA intentionally didn't link to the site in question


So what would THIS be?

Hiltzik says the site,  http://coveringhealthcareca.com , changed its tune just a few hours after he published his piece by including links to the official Covered California site.

All that's changed from TFA is my attempt to get the link to populate correctly, but you are MORE than welcome to go right back to TFA and click yourself.

So yeah, they linked to it. That's what the blue words meant.
 
2013-12-05 03:59:54 PM

qorkfiend: skullkrusher: That's really farked up if true but it's a bit of a stretch to think the intention was to confuse.

Oh yeah, it's a real stretch to think that a political party who has made sabotaging the ACA their number one priority might have done this on purpose. What you think their intent was?


I think they're at least competent enough to make the name something that is easily confused with the real one. Coveredcali or something like that. Coveringhealthcareca is not even close to coveredca
 
2013-12-05 04:01:10 PM

Corvus: markie_farkie: Isn't willfully and knowingly attempting to deceive people by undermining the laws of the United States of America some kind of treasonable offense?

Seriously. Maybe not legally treason but how in the hell is this not being condemned by everyone across the nation.

If Obamacare is so bad why do Republicans feel they need to sabotage it?


Because people are too stupid to know what's good for them! You know! The same argument they make against liberal policies!

[projector.jpeg]
 
2013-12-05 04:07:13 PM

cameroncrazy1984: mgshamster: SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: How is this legal at all?

Free Speech?

Lying isn't against the law. Didn't Fox News win a lawsuit about a decade back on this?

I feel like fraud might be against the law, though.


If they're not taking money, I'm not sure it can be fraud.

/but hey, I don't have no fancy GED in Law, so don't take my word for it
 
2013-12-05 04:07:39 PM
Meh - the page is mostly true information about the ACA, informative and there's a link to the actual covered california in the master page links.  I've got other things to be more outraged about.
 
2013-12-05 04:11:11 PM

firefly212: Flappyhead: skullkrusher: That's really farked up if true but it's a bit of a stretch to think the intention was to confuse.

Then what was it?

Look, he's just a GOP shill/amateur troll (redundant?)... they're not giving him a lot to work with... there's no reasonable explanation other than they were trying to mislead/confuse people... but he's gotta put forth some effort.


Seriously? If I wanted to confuse people about a site called coveredca.com I'd call it coveringca.com and make it look like the real thing and I sure as shiat wouldn't have big clickable icons walking me directly to the real site as a place to purchase insurance in addition to another link at the bottom to the actual website. Maybe you think everyone is as dim as you but there is no way in fark someone with the brains of a carrot would think they are... I don't even know. What do you think their hope was?
 
2013-12-05 04:13:44 PM

Empty Matchbook: cameroncrazy1984: mgshamster: SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: How is this legal at all?

Free Speech?

Lying isn't against the law. Didn't Fox News win a lawsuit about a decade back on this?

I feel like fraud might be against the law, though.

If they're not taking money, I'm not sure it can be fraud.

/but hey, I don't have no fancy GED in Law, so don't take my word for it


I always thought there was a component to fraud that included misrepresenting oneself or one's organization.
 
2013-12-05 04:15:32 PM

skullkrusher: If I wanted to confuse people about a site called coveredca.com I'd call it coveringca.com and make it look like the real thing and I sure as shiat wouldn't have big clickable icons walking me directly to the real site as a place to purchase insurance in addition to another link at the bottom to the actual website. Maybe you think everyone is as dim as you but there is no way in fark someone with the brains of a carrot would think they are... I don't even know. What do you think their hope was?


I don't agree with your politics but you're right.

/Manufactured outrage is irritating regardless of left/right agenda
 
2013-12-05 04:18:06 PM

firefly212: Cletus C.: firefly212: Flappyhead: skullkrusher: That's really farked up if true but it's a bit of a stretch to think the intention was to confuse.

Then what was it?

Look, he's just a GOP shill/amateur troll (redundant?)... they're not giving him a lot to work with... there's no reasonable explanation other than they were trying to mislead/confuse people... but he's gotta put forth some effort.

There's a lot of that going around.

That accusation, I mean.

Weak.

Look, there are plenty of people I frequently disagree with who aren't trolls, Weaver, LasersHurt, and others from both sides of the spectrum... but skullkrusher is just too farking obvious wiith his mental contortions to be taken seriously. If you're gonna say he's not trolling, then tell me, do you think it's reasonable to say "it's a  bit of a strech to think that the intention was to confuse." Because, to me, that's just some soft-trolling... it's not a stretch at all to think the intent was to confuse, to the contrary, you have to stretch pretty far to think that the intention was something else... heck, I can't even think of what possible intent naming the website so similarly could possibly be, other than to confuse.

All due respect to him, but he's done a better job of trollololing in other threads, but that's what rattles his rocks.... I'm not mad at him, and I don't hate him for it... but sometimes we should call a spade a spade.


Think about this shiat logically. Name isn't even close. Site looks nothing like the real one. It isn't advertised as the place to buy insurance. It provides links to the exchange and walks you right the fark to it. Nowhere there can you possibly think you are buying insurance. It's purpose is to undermine Obamacare. It has links to critical articles. There is no reason to believe that it is there to trick people... Trick them into what? Thinking going to that website magically signs them up for insurance? I assure you, there are no Republicans under your bed. This doesn't make me a troll
 
2013-12-05 04:19:33 PM

skullkrusher: firefly212: Flappyhead: skullkrusher: That's really farked up if true but it's a bit of a stretch to think the intention was to confuse.

Then what was it?

Look, he's just a GOP shill/amateur troll (redundant?)... they're not giving him a lot to work with... there's no reasonable explanation other than they were trying to mislead/confuse people... but he's gotta put forth some effort.

Seriously? If I wanted to confuse people about a site called coveredca.com I'd call it coveringca.com and make it look like the real thing and I sure as shiat wouldn't have big clickable icons walking me directly to the real site as a place to purchase insurance in addition to another link at the bottom to the actual website.



Darn, somebody parked coveringca.com at GoDaddy, presumably for big bucks. My nefarious plan to put a porn site there has been foiled!
 
2013-12-05 04:20:54 PM

skullkrusher: That's really farked up if true but it's a bit of a stretch to think the intention was to confuse.


We've seen websites like this before - enjoying the veneer of legitimacy where only a second look reveals the intention. Under "What's New," both visible articles are about losing coverage. Click on "I don't have health insurance" and you get a tiny link to the real website and a calculator revealing how much your tax penalty will be in 2014. The overall message is "If you have health insurance, you're going to lose it; if you don't have health insurance, you're going to starve; if you're an employer, you might as well shoot yourself."

The fact that these plans are subsidized is, of course, glossed over; the fact that most insurance plans are already ACA-compliant is ignored. Sort of reminds me of those news articles that trail themselves: "Is your ice cream trying to kill you?" followed up by a story on lactose intolerance.

The intention was absolutely to confuse. The site doesn't even look all that different from Healthcare.gov. This doesn't come as a huge surprise from the party that put up flyers in African-American neighborhoods with the wrong date for election day, or voted to defund ACORN years after it had been dismantled. This is how you play when you can't play fair.
 
2013-12-05 04:23:08 PM

Mikey1969: Radioactive Ass: No worries. I took note that TFA intentionally didn't link to the site in question

So what would THIS be?

Hiltzik says the site,  http://coveringhealthcareca.com , changed its tune just a few hours after he published his piece by including links to the official Covered California site.

All that's changed from TFA is my attempt to get the link to populate correctly, but you are MORE than welcome to go right back to TFA and click yourself.

So yeah, they linked to it. That's what the blue words meant.


Cached from 29 Nov:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:MW7l9Uyjux4J:co ve ringhealthcareca.com/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a

They added a prominent link to the state exchange site. That's it as far as I can see. Oh noes, they are trying to confuse people into something something. Take this fauxrage quote by the California Democratic Party:

It would appear Republicans in California have no qualms about following their national Party's lead when it comes to spreading misinformation about the Affordable Care Act. Developing and promoting a bogus website to lure consumers away from the real www.CoveredCA.com amounts to denying Californians affordable health coverage - which appears to be the GOP's central organizing principle these days.

is full of lies and half-truths at best ("It would appear"? Really? Nice weasel wording there).

The site does none of the above. A Google search for several iterations of California and healthcare, health insurance, health insurance premiums and so on all have the legit state site as the top link (aside from ads by Kaiser, the states largest HMO and BCBS California along with a smattering of local insurance brokers in some cases, but that may be me seeing as I'm actually in California so the Google logarithm may take that into account). The FAQ explicitly states that you must buy PPACA compliant health insurance from legitimate sources and tells you who those sources are. It also covers how California laws interact with the PPACA and what they mean for the consumer. Nowhere does it imply, much less state, that it is related to the state exchange nor is their url name even close to the states url unless you're a blithering idiot or a member off the California Democratic Party (but I repeat myself).

Those are the lies that I saw, the web site that they are talking about does none of those things.
 
2013-12-05 04:26:09 PM

peasandcarrots: skullkrusher: That's really farked up if true but it's a bit of a stretch to think the intention was to confuse.

We've seen websites like this before - enjoying the veneer of legitimacy where only a second look reveals the intention. Under "What's New," both visible articles are about losing coverage. Click on "I don't have health insurance" and you get a tiny link to the real website and a calculator revealing how much your tax penalty will be in 2014. The overall message is "If you have health insurance, you're going to lose it; if you don't have health insurance, you're going to starve; if you're an employer, you might as well shoot yourself."

The fact that these plans are subsidized is, of course, glossed over; the fact that most insurance plans are already ACA-compliant is ignored. Sort of reminds me of those news articles that trail themselves: "Is your ice cream trying to kill you?" followed up by a story on lactose intolerance.

The intention was absolutely to confuse. The site doesn't even look all that different from Healthcare.gov. This doesn't come as a huge surprise from the party that put up flyers in African-American neighborhoods with the wrong date for election day, or voted to defund ACORN years after it had been dismantled. This is how you play when you can't play fair.


No doubt the intent is to undermine. I don't see how it is in any way possible someone is being tricked here, however.
 
2013-12-05 04:28:11 PM

Radioactive Ass: Mikey1969: Radioactive Ass: No worries. I took note that TFA intentionally didn't link to the site in question

So what would THIS be?

Hiltzik says the site,  http://coveringhealthcareca.com , changed its tune just a few hours after he published his piece by including links to the official Covered California site.

All that's changed from TFA is my attempt to get the link to populate correctly, but you are MORE than welcome to go right back to TFA and click yourself.

So yeah, they linked to it. That's what the blue words meant.

Cached from 29 Nov:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:MW7l9Uyjux4J:co ve ringhealthcareca.com/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a

They added a prominent link to the state exchange site. That's it as far as I can see. Oh noes, they are trying to confuse people into something something. Take this fauxrage quote by the California Democratic Party:

It would appear Republicans in California have no qualms about following their national Party's lead when it comes to spreading misinformation about the Affordable Care Act. Developing and promoting a bogus website to lure consumers away from the real www.CoveredCA.com amounts to denying Californians affordable health coverage - which appears to be the GOP's central organizing principle these days.

is full of lies and half-truths at best ("It would appear"? Really? Nice weasel wording there).

The site does none of the above. A Google search for several iterations of California and healthcare, health insurance, health insurance premiums and so on all have the legit state site as the top link (aside from ads by Kaiser, the states largest HMO and BCBS California along with a smattering of local insurance brokers in some cases, but that may be me seeing as I'm actually in California so the Google logarithm may take that into account). The FAQ explicitly states that you must buy PPACA compliant health insurance from legitimate sources and tells you who those sources are. It also covers how California laws interact with the PPACA and what they mean for the consumer. Nowhere does it imply, much less state, that it is related to the state exchange nor is their url name even close to the states url unless you're a blithering idiot or a member off the California Democratic Party (but I repeat myself).

Those are the lies that I saw, the web site that they are talking about does none of those things.


Hehe "lure" people away like the Internet is the Sahara and once going to the GOP site people will die of exposure before finding the actual exchange site
 
2013-12-05 04:33:05 PM

markie_farkie: Isn't willfully and knowingly attempting to deceive people by undermining the laws of the United States of America some kind of treasonable offense?


Sedition.  That's what the Tea Party is already guilty of.

a person may be punished for sedition only when he or she makes statements that create a Clear and Present Danger to rights that the government may lawfully protect

Treason:  Any person who levies war against the United States or adheres to its enemies by giving them Aid and Comfort has committed treason within the meaning of the Constitution. The term aid and comfort refers to any act that manifests a betrayal of allegiance to the United States, such as furnishing enemies with arms, troops, transportation, shelter, or classified information


Based on that, I'd say the Tea Party as a group is already guilty of Sedition.  But Treason seems to require some sort of interaction with a foreign entity.
 
2013-12-05 04:37:48 PM

Radioactive Ass: Mikey1969: Radioactive Ass: No worries. I took note that TFA intentionally didn't link to the site in question

So what would THIS be?

Hiltzik says the site,  http://coveringhealthcareca.com , changed its tune just a few hours after he published his piece by including links to the official Covered California site.

All that's changed from TFA is my attempt to get the link to populate correctly, but you are MORE than welcome to go right back to TFA and click yourself.

So yeah, they linked to it. That's what the blue words meant.

Cached from 29 Nov:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:MW7l9Uyjux4J:co ve ringhealthcareca.com/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a

They added a prominent link to the state exchange site. That's it as far as I can see. Oh noes, they are trying to confuse people into something something. Take this fauxrage quote by the California Democratic Party:

It would appear Republicans in California have no qualms about following their national Party's lead when it comes to spreading misinformation about the Affordable Care Act. Developing and promoting a bogus website to lure consumers away from the real www.CoveredCA.com amounts to denying Californians affordable health coverage - which appears to be the GOP's central organizing principle these days.

is full of lies and half-truths at best ("It would appear"? Really? Nice weasel wording there).

The site does none of the above. A Google search for several iterations of California and healthcare, health insurance, health insurance premiums and so on all have the legit state site as the top link (aside from ads by Kaiser, the states largest HMO and BCBS California along with a smattering of local insurance brokers in some cases, but that may be me seeing as I'm actually in California so the Google logarithm may take that into account). The FAQ explicitly states that you must buy PPACA compliant health insurance from legitimate sources and tells you who those sources are. I ...


I don't see your point. Here is your statement:

No worries. I took note that TFA intentionally didn't link to the site in question

I pointed out how full of shiat you were by showing the EXACT link from TFA that linked to "the site in question". So not sure what you're doing replying back with this word salad. You claimed that there was no link, I showed how you were false, you respond with something completely off from what I said.

Is this usually a "winning" tactic for you?
 
2013-12-05 04:44:29 PM
Shift change, Cheetus out, Skulldugger in. Would you mind handing it over to Tbaggy? He hasn't had a chance today.
 
2013-12-05 04:48:45 PM

Wake Up Sheeple: Shift change, Cheetus out, Skulldugger in. Would you mind handing it over to Tbaggy? He hasn't had a chance today.


Hey look! It's someone else who think everyone in the country can't find his ass with a compass and an Assfinder5000. Luckily for America most of us aren't so challenged.
 
2013-12-05 04:50:21 PM

skullkrusher: Wake Up Sheeple: Shift change, Cheetus out, Skulldugger in. Would you mind handing it over to Tbaggy? He hasn't had a chance today.

Hey look! It's someone else who think everyone in the country can't find his ass with a compass and an Assfinder5000. Luckily for America most of us aren't so challenged.


Wait, the Assfinder5000 doesn't find female asses?

That's it, it's headed back to Amazon.
 
2013-12-05 04:50:35 PM

Mikey1969: No worries. I took note that TFA intentionally didn't link to the site in question


I must have missed it. That's all my bad. I clicked the first link (that went to the legit state site, and a couple of other ones but I must have missed that one buried in the middle. Personally I would have made the link to the "Offending" site much sooner in the article seeing as it's the main topic being discussed by that article.
 
2013-12-05 04:51:11 PM

skullkrusher: Wake Up Sheeple: Shift change, Cheetus out, Skulldugger in. Would you mind handing it over to Tbaggy? He hasn't had a chance today.

Hey look! It's someone else who think everyone in the country can't find his ass with a compass and an Assfinder5000. Luckily for America most of us aren't so challenged.


So, your response is NO U ?

/ahahahahahahahahahah
 
2013-12-05 04:52:07 PM

Wake Up Sheeple: Shift change, Cheetus out, Skulldugger in. Would you mind handing it over to Tbaggy? He hasn't had a chance today.


What is this? Why, I don't even.

Having a few people around who don't necessarily agree with you should be welcomed, if only for uniting in common outrage purposes.
 
2013-12-05 04:58:11 PM

skullkrusher: firefly212: Flappyhead: skullkrusher: That's really farked up if true but it's a bit of a stretch to think the intention was to confuse.

Then what was it?

Look, he's just a GOP shill/amateur troll (redundant?)... they're not giving him a lot to work with... there's no reasonable explanation other than they were trying to mislead/confuse people... but he's gotta put forth some effort.

Seriously? If I wanted to confuse people about a site called coveredca.com I'd call it coveringca.com and make it look like the real thing and I sure as shiat wouldn't have big clickable icons walking me directly to the real site as a place to purchase insurance in addition to another link at the bottom to the actual website. Maybe you think everyone is as dim as you but there is no way in fark someone with the brains of a carrot would think they are... I don't even know. What do you think their hope was?


With respect to the name, they chose a similar name, not as similar as you suggest, probably because the state already had registered several similar names to try to thwart exactly this kind of behavior. With respect to the links, they added the links recently, after they got criticized for naming the site so similarly to the actual site to get coverage. Maybe you think everyone is as derpy as you, but the facts, in context, speak for themselves.

Their hope, after all the clamoring about how sites don't work and are difficult to navigate, would probably be that someone would go to their site looking for health insurance, not find it, and give up... I mean, they've been encouraging people to give up on getting insurance since before the ACA even started. Beyond that, why start their website with cover if not to deceive... I mean they didn't take acaisbadforca or anything, so whats the compelling reason to start off the same as the official website, if not deception?
 
2013-12-05 04:59:16 PM
I like that taxpayers are paying for the site.
 
2013-12-05 05:00:54 PM

Cletus C.: Wake Up Sheeple: Shift change, Cheetus out, Skulldugger in. Would you mind handing it over to Tbaggy? He hasn't had a chance today.

What is this? Why, I don't even.

Having a few people around who don't necessarily agree with you should be welcomed, if only for uniting in common outrage purposes.


No, we should have people who have factual disagreements. Not those who complain about death panels and socializms.
 
2013-12-05 05:03:34 PM

Radioactive Ass: Mikey1969: No worries. I took note that TFA intentionally didn't link to the site in question

I must have missed it. That's all my bad. I clicked the first link (that went to the legit state site, and a couple of other ones but I must have missed that one buried in the middle. Personally I would have made the link to the "Offending" site much sooner in the article seeing as it's the main topic being discussed by that article.


This I agree with, I found it like 4 links down... Could have easily been in the opening sentence of an article like this.
 
2013-12-05 05:08:42 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Cletus C.: Wake Up Sheeple: Shift change, Cheetus out, Skulldugger in. Would you mind handing it over to Tbaggy? He hasn't had a chance today.

What is this? Why, I don't even.

Having a few people around who don't necessarily agree with you should be welcomed, if only for uniting in common outrage purposes.

No, we should have people who have factual disagreements. Not those who complain about death panels and socializms.


I have never called the president a socialist. I have never said anything about death panels unless mockingly, if I've said anything at all. Interestingly, those words are most used by the president's, ahem, loyal supporters as a deflective device.
 
2013-12-05 05:11:48 PM

firefly212: skullkrusher: firefly212: Flappyhead: skullkrusher: That's really farked up if true but it's a bit of a stretch to think the intention was to confuse.

Then what was it?

Look, he's just a GOP shill/amateur troll (redundant?)... they're not giving him a lot to work with... there's no reasonable explanation other than they were trying to mislead/confuse people... but he's gotta put forth some effort.

Seriously? If I wanted to confuse people about a site called coveredca.com I'd call it coveringca.com and make it look like the real thing and I sure as shiat wouldn't have big clickable icons walking me directly to the real site as a place to purchase insurance in addition to another link at the bottom to the actual website. Maybe you think everyone is as dim as you but there is no way in fark someone with the brains of a carrot would think they are... I don't even know. What do you think their hope was?

With respect to the name, they chose a similar name, not as similar as you suggest, probably because the state already had registered several similar names to try to thwart exactly this kind of behavior. With respect to the links, they added the links recently, after they got criticized for naming the site so similarly to the actual site to get coverage. Maybe you think everyone is as derpy as you, but the facts, in context, speak for themselves.

Their hope, after all the clamoring about how sites don't work and are difficult to navigate, would probably be that someone would go to their site looking for health insurance, not find it, and give up... I mean, they've been encouraging people to give up on getting insurance since before the ACA even started. Beyond that, why start their website with cover if not to deceive... I mean they didn't take acaisbadforca or anything, so whats the compelling reason to start off the same as the official website, if not deception?


Seems like a lot of effort to trick the 2 people it might work on. Perhaps they wanted a name that didn't scream partisanship to avoid turning people off?
How and where was this site advertised? The nav bar on the left's link to the exchange site looks slapped on. The one in the walk through does not
 
2013-12-05 05:13:16 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Cletus C.: Wake Up Sheeple: Shift change, Cheetus out, Skulldugger in. Would you mind handing it over to Tbaggy? He hasn't had a chance today.

What is this? Why, I don't even.

Having a few people around who don't necessarily agree with you should be welcomed, if only for uniting in common outrage purposes.

No, we should have people who have factual disagreements. Not those who complain about death panels and socializms.


Never done either of those things. You're safe though. People will assume I have. You guys are easily duped like that
 
2013-12-05 05:15:25 PM

themindiswatching: Apparently the GOP can't even hire decent web designers. Their stupid website keeps scrolling back to the top when I try to go to the bottom.


Just like their social policy . When we try to move forward they just drag us as far back as they can.
 
2013-12-05 05:16:28 PM
In the old days, California Republicans had the sense to arm Iranians to do their dirty work. Now that Reagan's dead long after his marbles went missing, this is the best they can do?  Has the exhilaration of committing treason not mean anything anymore?
 
2013-12-05 05:20:03 PM
So it's the Internet version of those Pro-Life "crisis care" centers offering "medical information". Gotcha.
 
2013-12-05 05:25:09 PM

skullkrusher: cameroncrazy1984: Cletus C.: Wake Up Sheeple: Shift change, Cheetus out, Skulldugger in. Would you mind handing it over to Tbaggy? He hasn't had a chance today.

What is this? Why, I don't even.

Having a few people around who don't necessarily agree with you should be welcomed, if only for uniting in common outrage purposes.

No, we should have people who have factual disagreements. Not those who complain about death panels and socializms.

Never done either of those things. You're safe though. People will assume I have. You guys are easily duped like that


No, all you do is nitpick about spelling and humor. That's an entirely different form of trolling altogether.
 
2013-12-05 05:25:52 PM
Interestingly enough, I didn't name anyone in my post and yet two people immediately defended themselves.
 
2013-12-05 05:27:07 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Interestingly enough, I didn't name anyone in my post and yet two people immediately defended themselves.


No I didn't!

Wait --

*delete delete delete*
 
2013-12-05 05:29:14 PM

firefly212: skullkrusher: firefly212: Flappyhead: skullkrusher: That's really farked up if true but it's a bit of a stretch to think the intention was to confuse.

Then what was it?

Look, he's just a GOP shill/amateur troll (redundant?)... they're not giving him a lot to work with... there's no reasonable explanation other than they were trying to mislead/confuse people... but he's gotta put forth some effort.

Seriously? If I wanted to confuse people about a site called coveredca.com I'd call it coveringca.com and make it look like the real thing and I sure as shiat wouldn't have big clickable icons walking me directly to the real site as a place to purchase insurance in addition to another link at the bottom to the actual website. Maybe you think everyone is as dim as you but there is no way in fark someone with the brains of a carrot would think they are... I don't even know. What do you think their hope was?

With respect to the name, they chose a similar name, not as similar as you suggest, probably because the state already had registered several similar names to try to thwart exactly this kind of behavior. With respect to the links, they added the links recently, after they got criticized for naming the site so similarly to the actual site to get coverage. Maybe you think everyone is as derpy as you, but the facts, in context, speak for themselves.

Their hope, after all the clamoring about how sites don't work and are difficult to navigate, would probably be that someone would go to their site looking for health insurance, not find it, and give up... I mean, they've been encouraging people to give up on getting insurance since before the ACA even started. Beyond that, why start their website with cover if not to deceive... I mean they didn't take acaisbadforca or anything, so whats the compelling reason to start off the same as the official website, if not deception?


I default to shenanigans because I can't come up with any reason, besides deception, that the GOP in any state would voluntarily create anything that conferred any information about the ACA.
 
2013-12-05 05:34:03 PM
There you have it folks - the GOP's political platform.  Not only do you have no ideas of your own (except for tax cuts for job creators), you actively try to shiat in America's coffee.

You assholes need to go away.  Find something useful to do with your lives instead of trying to ruin the country.
 
2013-12-05 05:36:20 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Interestingly enough, I didn't name anyone in my post and yet two people immediately defended themselves.


Dude, you're pretty much my personal stalker. Almost everywhere I go and almost everything I say gets a quick and angry response from you. Even if I say something you obviously agree with or something that's not even political. (You and a couple others, I am sorry to inform you.)

It's odd but it's my odd.
 
2013-12-05 05:37:03 PM

FlashHarry: once again i ask: if obamacare is so bad, why do you have to lie and cheat to make your point?


The official Fark Independent answer is "We don't want the American people to suffer from this abomination".
 
2013-12-05 05:48:28 PM

Cletus C.: Dude, you're pretty much my personal stalker. Almost everywhere I go and almost everything I say gets a quick and angry response from you.


You're not that important, but nice narcissistic complex you have going on!
 
2013-12-05 05:49:27 PM
Narcissim complex? Something like that. Anyway, if that were true I'd have responded to stuff prior to the last page in this thread, but like I said, you're not important enough to worry about responding to all the derp you post.
 
2013-12-05 05:55:53 PM

fusillade762: FlashHarry: once again i ask: if obamacare is so bad, why do you have to lie and cheat to make your point?

The official Fark Independent answer is "We don't want the American people to suffer from this abomination".



Basically, 95% of the "outrage" over the ACA since it was enacted is just a coordinated, massive concern trolling effort by the GOP.

It's pretty obvious, because for all of the years they have been whining about the ACA, they have proposed basically jack shiat as far as plans to address our broken-ass healthcare system.

It's like the GOP is a party whose entire platform is based on ideas have been consistently proven 100% wrong.  For example, "trickle down economics" - the idea that keeping taxes low for the rich is better for the middle and poorer classes because if you just let them make shiatloads of money, it must eventually find its way to a poor person - right?

Or the idea that single payer health care is a bad idea, even though (1) pretty much every comparable developed country has a single payer system that is far cheaper than the U.S. system, with better health outcomes, and (2) millions of Americans have single payer health care in the form of medicare, and freaking love it.  There's a reason why medicare is a "sacred cow."
 
2013-12-05 05:56:03 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Cletus C.: Dude, you're pretty much my personal stalker. Almost everywhere I go and almost everything I say gets a quick and angry response from you.

You're not that important, but nice narcissistic complex you have going on!


Besides you stalk me
 
2013-12-05 06:04:00 PM

skullkrusher: firefly212: skullkrusher: firefly212: Flappyhead: skullkrusher: That's really farked up if true but it's a bit of a stretch to think the intention was to confuse.

Then what was it?

Look, he's just a GOP shill/amateur troll (redundant?)... they're not giving him a lot to work with... there's no reasonable explanation other than they were trying to mislead/confuse people... but he's gotta put forth some effort.

Seriously? If I wanted to confuse people about a site called coveredca.com I'd call it coveringca.com and make it look like the real thing and I sure as shiat wouldn't have big clickable icons walking me directly to the real site as a place to purchase insurance in addition to another link at the bottom to the actual website. Maybe you think everyone is as dim as you but there is no way in fark someone with the brains of a carrot would think they are... I don't even know. What do you think their hope was?

With respect to the name, they chose a similar name, not as similar as you suggest, probably because the state already had registered several similar names to try to thwart exactly this kind of behavior. With respect to the links, they added the links recently, after they got criticized for naming the site so similarly to the actual site to get coverage. Maybe you think everyone is as derpy as you, but the facts, in context, speak for themselves.

Their hope, after all the clamoring about how sites don't work and are difficult to navigate, would probably be that someone would go to their site looking for health insurance, not find it, and give up... I mean, they've been encouraging people to give up on getting insurance since before the ACA even started. Beyond that, why start their website with cover if not to deceive... I mean they didn't take acaisbadforca or anything, so whats the compelling reason to start off the same as the official website, if not deception?

Seems like a lot of effort to trick the 2 people it might work on. Perhaps they wanted a n ...


It does seem like a lot of work... I mean not as much work as passing hopeless repeals 42 times, or whatever they are up to at present... but the GOP is not notorious for either efficiency or wit.
 
2013-12-05 06:04:02 PM

cameroncrazy1984: That's an entirely different form of trolling altogether.


That's an entirely different form of trolling.
 
2013-12-05 06:20:26 PM

fusillade762: cameroncrazy1984: That's an entirely different form of trolling altogether.

That's an entirely different form of trolling.


That's an entirely different form of trolling.
 
2013-12-05 06:55:48 PM
I'm hoping Stewart and Colbert have a field day with this one.
 
2013-12-05 06:58:22 PM

SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: qorkfiend: Radioactive Ass: SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: Well now that I've actually gone to the website, I'm going to shut my mouth. Shouldn't have trusted the article.

No worries. I took note that TFA intentionally didn't link to the site in question, I can only assume that was to try and get people to take their word for it instead of judging for themselves. I suspect that most of the people calling this illegal took the article at face value as well.

Like I said earlier in the thread, the CA state AG's office has taken down 10 actual scam sites and are prosecuting the operators for fraud. This isn't even close to being one of them.

Is it a scam or fraud? No. Is it deliberate misinformation? You bet.

It's not even deliberate misinformation... From what I read, much if it is simple answers to FAQs. I got all caught up in the outrage, because given the GOP track record, I assumed they'd done something awful as usual. It doesn't seem like the case.


Do you believe that it is possible to tell a lie without ever making a factually incorrect statement?
 
2013-12-05 07:01:57 PM

skullkrusher: cameroncrazy1984: Cletus C.: Dude, you're pretty much my personal stalker. Almost everywhere I go and almost everything I say gets a quick and angry response from you.

You're not that important, but nice narcissistic complex you have going on!

Besides you stalk me


Yep, that's it. I stalk everybody. It's not that I respond to a lot of different posts, it's that I'm stalking all of you guys at once.
 
2013-12-05 07:11:56 PM

mgshamster: SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: qorkfiend: Radioactive Ass: SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: Well now that I've actually gone to the website, I'm going to shut my mouth. Shouldn't have trusted the article.

No worries. I took note that TFA intentionally didn't link to the site in question, I can only assume that was to try and get people to take their word for it instead of judging for themselves. I suspect that most of the people calling this illegal took the article at face value as well.

Like I said earlier in the thread, the CA state AG's office has taken down 10 actual scam sites and are prosecuting the operators for fraud. This isn't even close to being one of them.

Is it a scam or fraud? No. Is it deliberate misinformation? You bet.

It's not even deliberate misinformation... From what I read, much if it is simple answers to FAQs. I got all caught up in the outrage, because given the GOP track record, I assumed they'd done something awful as usual. It doesn't seem like the case.

Do you believe that it is possible to tell a lie without ever making a factually incorrect statement?


Certainly. The website is obviously biased, but not nearly as bad as people are making it out to be.
 
2013-12-05 08:03:09 PM
Is it just me or are way too many threads becoming chick slap fights? I hope all three of you are hot, in bra and panties, and armed with pillows. If its just a few thin skinned dudes who need a hobby then I am visualizing the wrong thread. Cam- you look like Wendy David? Krusher- you look like Pailin (circa 2008)? Cletus- you look like gov walker's aid?
 
2013-12-05 08:06:53 PM

smellysocksnshoes: Is it just me or are way too many threads becoming chick slap fights? I hope all three of you are hot, in bra and panties, and armed with pillows. If its just a few thin skinned dudes who need a hobby then I am visualizing the wrong thread. Cam- you look like Wendy David? Krusher- you look like Pailin (circa 2008)? Cletus- you look like gov walker's aid?


You betcha!

*wink*

Ding!
 
2013-12-05 08:12:19 PM
Thank you! Glad someone doesn't take themselves too seriously.
 
2013-12-05 08:50:02 PM

BunkoSquad: FlashHarry: once again i ask: if obamacare is so bad, why do you have to lie and cheat to make your point?

Does the GOP know any other way to do anything?


When all you have are dicks, every problem looks like a chicken.
 
2013-12-05 09:39:22 PM

rosebud_the_sled: Oh what a surprise!  After trying a DoS attack against the website, they put up fake sites to screw with the public.

Do Republicans ever do anything positive for the American public or do they all hate the USA?

Is there any Republican that isn't a racist, treasonous sack of garbage?


THIS!
 
2013-12-05 10:18:00 PM
FTFA:Manufactured controversy or legitimate rage over an allegedly "fake" website? You decide.

No, you find out and tell me, since that's your farking job! Don't tell readers to "decide" what's true or not if you don't know either.
 
2013-12-06 04:46:09 AM

smellysocksnshoes: Is it just me or are way too many threads becoming chick slap fights? I hope all three of you are hot, in bra and panties, and armed with pillows. If its just a few thin skinned dudes who need a hobby then I am visualizing the wrong thread. Cam- you look like Wendy David? Krusher- you look like Pailin (circa 2008)? Cletus- you look like gov walker's aid?


What do you mean, "too many chick fights". I am trying to wrap my mind around that concept, but it isn't processing.
You need to explain yourself - I am not familiar with this concept of "too many chick fights".
 
2013-12-06 09:41:55 AM

Aaron Haynes: FTFA:Manufactured controversy or legitimate rage over an allegedly "fake" website? You decide.

No, you find out and tell me, since that's your farking job! Don't tell readers to "decide" what's true or not if you don't know either.


What's worse:

Asking a question and letting the reader decide, or summing it all up with a "Is it good or bad?" and never going into more detail than that?

The former is the classic "tell both sides" style, the latter is CNN's shtick.
 
2013-12-06 11:00:06 AM
I like how the WOT extension immediately sounded the alarm on the website with a yellow rating, misleading claims or unethical, phishing, and scam descriptors as soon as it loaded.
 
2013-12-06 11:43:23 AM

rosebud_the_sled: After trying a DoS attack against the website


Are you saying that you think "DoS attack" means they infiltrated all of the companies working on the site and made them design it horribly, or that the Obama administration and those companies are actively covering up the fact that the site was fine and it was just a GOP-led attack that broke everything?
 
Displayed 143 of 143 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report