Do you have adblock enabled?
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  
•       •       •

3446 clicks; posted to Politics » on 05 Dec 2013 at 2:12 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



143 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
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 43 of 143 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report