Sebelius: Opposing ObamaCare is like opposing civil rights in 1964, or something

posted at 12:41 pm on July 17, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius spoke at the NAACP convention yesterday in Orlando to congratulate them on their support for ObamaCare.  Why, the same kind of people who oppose ObamaCare now are like those who opposed the Civil Rights Acts in the early 1960s, she told the audience.

Did she mean … Democrats?

“The Affordable Care Act is the most powerful law for reducing health disparities since Medicare and Medicaid were created in 1965, the same year the Voting Rights Act was also enacted,” Sebelius said. “That significance hits especially close to home. My father was a congressman from Cincinnati who voted for each of those critical civil rights laws, and who represented a district near where the late Reverend Fred Shuttlesworth lived and preached.

“The same arguments against change, the same fear and misinformation that opponents used then are the same ones opponents are spreading now. ‘This won’t work,’ ‘Slow down,’ ‘Let’s wait,’ they say.

“But history shows that upholding our founding principles demands continuous work toward a more perfect union…And it requires the kind of work that the NAACP has done for more than a century to move us forward.

“You showed it in the fight against lynching and the fight for desegregation. You showed it by ensuring inalienable rights are secured in the courtroom and at the ballot box. And you showed it by supporting a health law 100 years in the making.

“With each step forward, you said to forces of the status quo, ‘This will work,’ ‘We can’t slow down’ ‘We can’t wait,’ ‘We won’t turn back.’

Er, yeah. Because opposing a law-enforcement effort to stop lynchings is so totally like opposing another big, costly, and destructive government intervention in the health-insurance industry.

It’s just another case of demagoguery from an administration forced to admit that they can’t administer their own law after a three-year head start.  In a blatant attempt to avoid the political consequences of the bill’s destructive failure, the White House wants to ignore the law they created and which Democrats shoved down the throats of Americans to buy off employers for a year or so.  This argument tosses even more demagoguery into the mix by bizarrely implying that opposition to ObamaCare is somehow racist — which gets Sebelius off the hook from explaining why HHS has utterly failed to meet the requirements of the mandates this administration demanded and got from Congress.

House Republicans want both mandates delayed an equal amount of time, and propose to do it correctly — via statute. However, Obama issued a veto threat in the rare chance that the Senate passes the extension, too:

Obama will veto measures set for House votes Wednesday to delay key parts of the new healthcare law if they reach his desk, the White House said.

The administration “strongly opposes” a pair of Republican-led bills to delay the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act’s employer mandate and individual mandate, a White House statement said.

The employer mandate requires businesses with 50 or more full-time employees to purchase health insurance or face penalties. The individual mandate requires the same thing for most Americans.

The scheduled House votes follow an administration announcement July 2 to delay for a year, until 2015, the employer mandate, saying business owners expressed concerns about the law’s complex reporting requirements.

The back-to-back votes will seek to codify the White House’s delay and match it with a one-year delay of the individual provision, saying it’s only fair.

Yes, I’d like Obama to explain why employers got a waiver while individuals still have to deal with IRS enforcement in 2014, and why he’s suddenly a lot less interested in “fairness” for the people rather than the fat cats that employ them.  Or is that like opposing the Smoot-Hawley Act?

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Fluke you Nurse Ratchad

Schadenfreude on July 17, 2013 at 12:42 PM

The entire obama admin are nothing but poverty pimps and race hucksters.

Schadenfreude on July 17, 2013 at 12:43 PM

This all goes back to the requirement to read the syrupy “To Kill a Mockingbird”, there are too many wanna-be Atticus Finches out there, ignorantly living in a long dead past.

NoDonkey on July 17, 2013 at 12:44 PM

Note to HHS Sec – It’s better to remain silent and let others think you’re a fool, than to open your mouth and prove yourself a fool.

Athos on July 17, 2013 at 12:44 PM

Minorities, wake up.

obama and is capos keep you in modern day plantation, unenlightened, dependent, just for your votes and their own enrichment, power and glory.

YOU are being snookered.

Wake up, wake up, wake up.

Your masters hate you.

Schadenfreude on July 17, 2013 at 12:44 PM

No it isn’t, you bigoted harpy.

CurtZHP on July 17, 2013 at 12:45 PM

Not allowing Skippy St. Skittles to go out gay bashing is like opposing the civil rights too.

Flange on July 17, 2013 at 12:46 PM

Opposing ObamaCare is like Standing Your Ground…

Electrongod on July 17, 2013 at 12:46 PM

Here you go, union fools who were fooled.

Schadenfreude on July 17, 2013 at 12:47 PM

You might be a racist if you oppose anything the government wants…

d1carter on July 17, 2013 at 12:48 PM

“We read it and we found out what’s in it” — US people to Pelosi

“Now, go to Hell, all who voted for it” — The US People

Schadenfreude on July 17, 2013 at 12:48 PM

Yes, I’d like Obama to explain why employers got a waiver while individuals still have to deal with IRS enforcement in 2014, and why he’s suddenly a lot less interested in “fairness” for the people rather than the fat cats that employ them.

“I decide what constitutes fairness.”
/Preezy Zero

Bitter Clinger on July 17, 2013 at 12:48 PM

So, since Obama has been inaugurated, it seems that all issues eventually boil down to race.

Wow, who could have seen that coming?

Chris of Rights on July 17, 2013 at 12:48 PM

Most blacks are in the slavery, block-the-schoolhouse-door Dem party.

What fools.

faraway on July 17, 2013 at 12:48 PM

She means that unions are racist civil rights violators, too.

Philly on July 17, 2013 at 12:49 PM

Abolish the IRS!!!

Schadenfreude on July 17, 2013 at 12:49 PM

So you are racist if you object to having to sell your house to be able to afford the Obama healthcare tax. All under threat of jail and confiscation of assets.

tommyboy on July 17, 2013 at 12:50 PM

Schadenfreude on July 17, 2013 at 12:43 PM

And why should they change? It seems to be working pretty well for them. Let it burn!!

Deano1952 on July 17, 2013 at 12:51 PM

Deano1952 on July 17, 2013 at 12:51 PM

All on purpose, according to plan. They are very successful. I hope they destroy all who brung them, from the left to the right, and all of theirs too.

I’ll just sit back and laugh. A relatively free land always deserves its ‘leaders’.

Schadenfreude on July 17, 2013 at 12:53 PM

HHS Secretary declares majority of American Citizens are closet KKK wannabees.

questionmark on July 17, 2013 at 12:53 PM

“We read it and we found out what’s in it” — US people to Pelosi

“Now, go to Hell, all who voted for it” — The US People

Schadenfreude on July 17, 2013 at 12:48 PM

This * 100;

dogsoldier on July 17, 2013 at 12:54 PM

They’re still running the Cloward, Piven, and Alinsky playbook….

Athos on July 17, 2013 at 12:57 PM

You might be a racist if you oppose anything the government wants…

d1carter on July 17, 2013 at 12:48 PM

You are most definitely a racist if you oppose anything Barry’s government wants.

hawkeye54 on July 17, 2013 at 12:57 PM

I’m sick of these people. If you disagree with them, or don’t think like them, then you’re evil.

Paul-Cincy on July 17, 2013 at 1:00 PM

They’re still running the Cloward, Piven, and Alinsky playbook….

Athos on July 17, 2013 at 12:57 PM

They will continue to do so as long as they have political life.

hawkeye54 on July 17, 2013 at 1:00 PM

RAAAACCCCIIISSSSTTTT

Good Lt on July 17, 2013 at 1:01 PM

George Tiller’s patron said what? ///

annoyinglittletwerp on July 17, 2013 at 1:01 PM

Now Ed…You gotta quit posting these logical articles about moonbat reasoning…cause You’re Old School and ya just don’t get the New School Cultcha

; )

workingclass artist on July 17, 2013 at 1:01 PM

I’m sick of these people. If you dis agree with them, or don’t think like them, then you’re evil.

Paul-Cincy on July 17, 2013 at 1:00 PM

See how easy it is to turn that around?

hawkeye54 on July 17, 2013 at 1:02 PM

A relatively free land always deserves its ‘leaders’.

Schadenfreude on July 17, 2013 at 12:53 PM

There is more than a mountain of truth in this statement, and unfortunately we are living it.

Deano1952 on July 17, 2013 at 1:04 PM

She means that unions are racist civil rights violators, too.

Philly on July 17, 2013 at 12:49 PM

Sure…Cause they didn’t build that or something…

Progressive cannibalism…It’s the new Hotness

Shutup and eat your peas.

workingclass artist on July 17, 2013 at 1:04 PM

And Kathleen, did you also mention that Congress and staff are exempt from the Affordable Care Act? Do they oppose civil rights?

diogenes on July 17, 2013 at 1:04 PM

You might be a racist if you oppose anything the government wants…

d1carter on July 17, 2013 at 12:48 PM

You are most definitely a racist if you oppose anything Barry’s government wants.

hawkeye54 on July 17, 2013 at 12:57 PM

Cause we are all old school crackas or something…

workingclass artist on July 17, 2013 at 1:05 PM

Opposing abolishing the IRS is like opposing civil rights laws of 1964

Opposing universal gun carry laws is like opposing civil rights laws of 1964.

Implementing ObamaCare is like supporting slavery.

Fine… If this is what the leftist have brought our national level of discourse to then ill fight them on their own terms.

Skywise on July 17, 2013 at 1:07 PM

the employer mandate requires businesses with 50 or more full-time employees to purchase health insurance or face New TAXES penalties.

kirkill on July 17, 2013 at 1:08 PM

“Those who would trade liberty for security” …..? Is everything fine as long as you’ve got the NFL and an iphone?

michaelthomas on July 17, 2013 at 1:08 PM

Hey, Madame Secretary, what about the civil rights of the 85% of Americans satisfied with their health insurance in 2008, who don’t want to pay more for it now?

What about the civil rights of people who don’t want health insurance, and don’t want to pay a fine for something they don’t want?

What about the civil rights of doctors who want to heal people instead of going out of business?

What about the civil rights of old ladies who want a pacemaker instead of being forced to fall asleep in a casket?

What about the civil rights of Medicare patients whose funding was cut to “pay for” Obamacare?

Steve Z on July 17, 2013 at 1:10 PM

These people have no shame whatsoever. That she can stand there and claim that it’s somehow Republican obstructionism which is keeping Obamacare from being implemented, when all along it’s Barack Obama who has decided for strictly political reasons to issue waivers… is MONSTROUS. This whole debacle is a partisan affair brought to us singularly by the DEMOCRAT party… and Sebelius is a blatant LIAR to claim otherwise.

Murf76 on July 17, 2013 at 1:11 PM

“Those who would trade liberty for security” …..? Is everything fine as long as you’ve got the NFL and an iphone?

michaelthomas on July 17, 2013 at 1:08 PM

I think Ben Franklin would be a baseball fan…but that’s just me…

workingclass artist on July 17, 2013 at 1:11 PM

Sebelius – stupid, ugly, and full of hate.

Typical liberal.

jaime on July 17, 2013 at 1:12 PM

And Kathleen, did you also mention that Congress and staff are exempt from the Affordable Care Act? Do they oppose civil rights?

diogenes on July 17, 2013 at 1:04 PM

Only if that affects them personally or financially. Since when has CONGress ever made its members subject to the same laws and regulations imposed on we peons.

hawkeye54 on July 17, 2013 at 1:12 PM

Just another ugly hag baby killer…..

crosshugger on July 17, 2013 at 1:12 PM

Yes, I’d like Obama to explain why employers got a waiver while individuals still have to deal with IRS enforcement in 2014,

I’m still waiting for him to explain why a thousand waivers were issued to companies long before this, and why Congress doesn’t have to live under this great plan.

SailorMark on July 17, 2013 at 1:13 PM

So if I’m opposed to higher premiums, inferior care, fewer full-time jobs, dropped coverage, and the IRS having access to my medical records, I’m a racist? There’s some libtard logic for ya.

Doughboy on July 17, 2013 at 1:15 PM

“With each step forward, you said to forces of the status quo, ‘This will work,’ ‘We can’t slow down’ ‘We can’t wait,’ ‘We won’t turn back.’

The ultimate, sad irony is that ObamaCare freezes the “status quo” and doubles-down on everything wrong. It’s the opposite of what health insurance reform would actually look like.

Oh, and sometimes “slowing down” and actually reading a 2000+ page bill before passing it might be a good idea.

visions on July 17, 2013 at 1:15 PM

How ironic is the choice by Sebelius to compare opposition of Obamacare to opposition of the Civil Rights Act – when such liberal Democratic icons like Robert Byrd, J. William Fulbright, and Al Gore, Sr were among the leaders attempting to derail the passage of the Civil Rights Act via filibuster.

The intellectual dishonesty of this Administration is unprecedented.

Athos on July 17, 2013 at 1:15 PM

They are really sounding desperate. We know what they are doing. Its 2013 and the elections loom large. Paint the Repubs as racists. Oppose this reckless immigration you are “anti immigrant”. Stand up for the rule of law in the Zimmerman case and you are a “racist”. Against the gun control grab and you are for murder. The Repubs need to start counter punching but wont because they are cowards. Heres hoping we get se real conservatives in office next year. Imagine several Ted Cruz’s.

neyney on July 17, 2013 at 1:15 PM

And Kathleen, did you also mention that Congress and staff are exempt from the Affordable Care Act? Do they oppose civil rights?

diogenes on July 17, 2013 at 1:04 PM

I read they are affected by it and they are losing staff…

dogsoldier on July 17, 2013 at 1:16 PM

I’m sick of these people. If you disagree with them, or don’t think like them, then you’re evil.

Paul-Cincy on July 17, 2013 at 1:00 PM

Obama’s Alinsky playbook requires it

Alinsky advised the radical activist to avoid the temptation to concede that his opponent was not “100 per cent devil,” or that he possessed certain admirable qualities such as being “a good churchgoing man, generous to charity, and a good husband.” Such qualifying remarks, Alinsky said, “dilut[e] the impact of the attack” and amount to sheer “political idiocy.”

faraway on July 17, 2013 at 1:17 PM

So, since Obama has been inaugurated, it seems that all issues eventually boil down to race.

Wow, who could have seen that coming?

Chris of Rights on July 17, 2013 at 12:48 PM

It’s only because he doesn’t measure up. If he were mildly competent, this wouldn’t be the case. There is a segment of society so invested in his legacy as the first black president, that he can’t do any wrong…no matter WTF he does.

If we had a strong, America-loving, patriotic black first president, this would not be true.

freedomfirst on July 17, 2013 at 1:20 PM

Opposing ObamaCare is like opposing civil rights in 1964, or something

I don’t think so. Opposing ObamaDEMcare is more like opposing the unfair taxation of the colonies by the British. She has her analogies mixed up.

iamsaved on July 17, 2013 at 1:21 PM

*shaking the head*

are there any journalists who are actually going to call out dear leader on this?

c’mon….

cmsinaz on July 17, 2013 at 1:21 PM

I am absolutely sober/serious when I say that Dr Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated by the “political left” for the expressed purpose of hijacking the Civil Rights Movement, so that Liberals could say things like this, ever since.

Opposition to Socialized Government has since always been stigmatized as being the same thing as opposition to Civil Rights, and wanting to return to return the country to the days of ‘Jim Crow’.

It’s the only political weapon they have that up till now has worked.

It’s past time to strip them of it.

listens2glenn on July 17, 2013 at 1:22 PM

Oh, and as an addendum, it was the Democrats that had to be brought to the table in the early 1960s to support civil rights and the law that LBJ passed.

iamsaved on July 17, 2013 at 1:22 PM

iamsaved on July 17, 2013 at 1:21 PM

Nice observation. I agree.

freedomfirst on July 17, 2013 at 1:22 PM

Anyone trying to preserve the American economy is therefore a racist.

How can any responsible person talk like this? It’s just foul.

MTF on July 17, 2013 at 1:24 PM

Opposing Sebelius is like opposing…Satan.

Hail Sebelius!

spiritof61 on July 17, 2013 at 1:25 PM

So what does that make Obama when he unilaterally delays portions of the bill?

oldroy on July 17, 2013 at 1:25 PM

I don’t think so. Opposing ObamaDEMcare is more like opposing the unfair taxation of the colonies by the British. She has her analogies mixed up.

iamsaved on July 17, 2013 at 1:21 PM

She’s not mixed up – just pandering to her audience confident in the fact that they don’t know history.

Athos on July 17, 2013 at 1:25 PM

What about the civil rights of people who don’t want health insurance, and don’t want to pay a fine for something they don’t want?

You mean like the auto insurance you’re forced by the state to buy even though you don’t “need” it, until something bad happens?

How about the rights of anyone with a chronic medical condition over 30 years old who needs insurance but is locked out by a pricing mechanism that places it out of their reach?

Er, yeah. Because opposing a law-enforcement effort to stop lynchings is so totally like opposing another big, costly, and destructive government intervention in the health-insurance industry.

Today’s healthcare system is the most bloated, costly, and inefficient in the world. Adopting a model closer to that of Germany or Japan would represent an improvement- if conservatives can ever envision a brighter future that isn’t based on the past.

bayam on July 17, 2013 at 1:27 PM

Wow, nice appearance on this site….the first two images
are of Nurse Ratchet, and a matching image of Prosecutor
Corey……who looks like…..hmmmm, o.k., I don’t even
want to go there…..

ToddPA on July 17, 2013 at 1:28 PM

Why isn’t she in jail already for spending money collected from donors on government projects (which is a crime – only tax revenue can be used for govt spending/programs)…and why isn’t she charged with extorting those ‘donations’ from the organizations overwhich she resides?

easyt65 on July 17, 2013 at 1:29 PM

I’d like Obama to explain why employers got a waiver while individuals still have to deal with IRS enforcement in 2014, and why he’s suddenly a lot less interested in “fairness” for the people rather than the fat cats that employ them.

The goal now is to push as many people on the Obamacare rolls of parasites as possible so that a year from now, any changes to the plan put forth by the rat-eared mullato would involve “taking stuff” away from people. Think of this as the administration emulating the Oklahoma Land Rush where the idea is to stake out territorial claims as quickly as possible without any regard for long-term problems.

Happy Nomad on July 17, 2013 at 1:29 PM

This all goes back to the requirement to read the syrupy “To Kill a Mockingbird”, there are too many wanna-be Atticus Finches out there, ignorantly living in a long dead past.

Community leaders that are responsible gunowners who are asked to shoot dangerous animals because of their known competence?

normalphil on July 17, 2013 at 1:29 PM

Sebelius: Opposing ObamaCare is like opposing civil rights in 1964, or something

Yep, good times in modern “progressive” American society.

It’s totally awesome to see thousands of black folk in Georgia in the August heat struggling to get a Section 8 housing application for housing that may or not be available years down the road, or thousands of ‘em standing in line for hours in Detroit in winter to maybe get a few bucks from the stimulus pot to pay their water bills and the like.

So awesome that “civil rights” means stealing from American taxpayers while at the same time forcing black Americans to be herded like animals and competing for a place in line for a few scraps. The Libtards like to make ‘em jump and twirl around for a Milk Bone biscuit every now and then…to show them that they really, truly care…tee-hee…suckers ;-)

Keep bowing and scraping there Mr. and Mrs. Poor American…get it while you can. Just don’t be shocked when they turn the water cannons and tear gas on you when those welfare checks quit coming because Uncle Ben says we can’t print more $.

Dr. ZhivBlago on July 17, 2013 at 1:30 PM

Schadenfreude on July 17, 2013 at 12:44 PM

They will never wake up… Financial servitude is powerful and addictive… money from the producers, stay at a home paid for by the producers, and never lift a finger to work… They will be servants to the Devil as long he provides them with this…

mnjg on July 17, 2013 at 1:33 PM

Look into this, witch.

Schadenfreude on July 17, 2013 at 1:35 PM

This woman is just another radical socialist idiot pressing for more “free stuff” for her parasitic constituents.

rplat on July 17, 2013 at 1:35 PM

Medicare Act of 1965:

“The House adopted the conference report on July 27, 1965, 307-116, with 70 Republicans supporting it. And on July 28, the Senate adopted the final version of the bill by a vote of 70-24, with 13 Republicans in favor of the bill. President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Medicare bill into law on July 30, 1965.”

There were 68 Democrats in the Senate. 11 Senate Democrats voted AGAINST Medicare (16.2%).

There were 32 Republicans in the Senate. 13 Senate Republicans voted FOR Medicare (41%).

There were 255 Democrats in the House. 18 House Democrats voted AGAINST it (7.1%).

There were 140 Republicans in the House. 70 House Republicans voted FOR it (50%).

Unlike Obamacare, Medicare was bipartisan.

Before you make the same mistake relative to Social Security…
.
.
Social Security Act of 1935:

“[O]n Aug. 8, 1935, the conference report — the final version of the bill that melds together changes made in the House and in the Senate — passed in the House 372-33, with 81 Republicans voting in support. The next day, the bill was passed in the Senate 77-6, with 16 Republicans supporting the legislation. So Social Security did pass with Republican support.”

There were 73 Democrats in the Senate. 12 Senate Democrats voted AGAINST Social Security (16.4%).

There were 21 Republicans in the Senate. 16 Senate Republicans voted FOR Social Security (77.2%).

There were 322 Democrats in the House. 31 House Democrats voted AGAINST Social Security (9.6%).

There were 103 Republicans in the House. 81 House Republicans voted FOR it (78.7%).

Unlike Obamacare, Social Security was bipartisan. It shouldn’t have been passed, but it was bipartisan.

Resist We Much on July 17, 2013 at 1:35 PM

They will be servants to the Devil as long he provides them with this…

mnjg on July 17, 2013 at 1:33 PM

He won’t be rich for too long.

Schadenfreude on July 17, 2013 at 1:35 PM

Keep bowing and scraping there Mr. and Mrs. Poor American…get it while you can. Just don’t be shocked when they turn the water cannons and tear gas on you when those welfare checks quit coming because Uncle Ben says we can’t print more $.

Dr. ZhivBlago on July 17, 2013 at 1:30 PM

They won’t be rushing any government buildings…..and they won’t be deterred by water canons either.

michaelthomas on July 17, 2013 at 1:38 PM

You mean like the auto insurance you’re forced by the state to buy even though you don’t “need” it, until something bad happens?
bayam on July 17, 2013 at 1:27 PM

You’re not forced to purchase auto insurance. Individual states, not the feds, require insurance (or some fee) if you intend to operate a vehicle on public roads. Registration and insurance are not required for people who don’t own cars or those who don’t operate cars on public roads.

Poor analogy.

Japan and Germany are not likely the models to copy. I don’t believe they are based on health savings accounts coupled with catastrophic insurance.

freedomfirst on July 17, 2013 at 1:39 PM

You mean like the auto insurance you’re forced by the state to buy even though you don’t “need” it, until something bad happens?

bayam on July 17, 2013 at 1:27 PM

Driving is a privilege not a right and the ability of states to regulate it is very broad. (For those that want to claim that driving is a right, the Court has been very clear that states can regulate driving and, as long as the state presents a compelling interest in encumbering driving, whether right or privilege, it is acting within its constitutional powers. See: Bell v Burson, 182 F.2d 46 (1971), Hendrick v Maryland, 235 U.S. 610, 622; Kane v New Jersey, 242 U.S. 160, 167, Packard v Banton, 264 U.S. 140 (1924)). States impose the insurance requirement, not the Federal government because states licence drivers and vehicles. If you are blind or a user of public transportation or just refuse to drive, a state is not going to force you to purchase auto insurance.

Drivers carry required insurance to cover *damage done to others,* not themselves. Driving is, after all, a voluntary activity conducted on public property (roads); there is no requirement for licencing or insurance for those who drive only on their private property. People who don’t drive on public roads aren’t required to buy a licence or the insurance.

There are additional problems with this analogy as well. Those who *do* have auto insurance only file claims when significant damage occurs. Auto insurance doesn’t pay for routine maintenance, like oil changes, lube jobs, and tire rotation. That’s why auto insurance is relatively affordable.

Unlike Obamacare, auto insurance is priced to risk. If a driver lives in a high-crime area, then the premiums will rise to cover the risks associated with theft. If a driver has moving violations and accident, his premiums will go up, or in some cases, the insurer will cancel the policy. Other risk factors are factored into price, as well. Due to their propensity for causing losses, the youngest and oldest drivers pay more. Those who drive well and present a lower risk get rewarded with lower premiums.

Right now, the federal government is preventing insurers in some instances from risk-pricing health insurance to impose government-approved *fairness.* Or, since the Obama administration loves the auto insurance analogy, your premiums will rise to compensate for the 18 year-old kid with 6 moving vehicle violations and 2 totaled automobiles. We will all pay more because the incentives for good behaviour, defencive driving, and reasonable maintenance have been removed.

Resist We Much on July 17, 2013 at 1:39 PM

You mean like the auto insurance you’re forced by the state to buy even though you don’t “need” it, until something bad happens?
bayam on July 17, 2013 at 1:27 PM

Think how expensive auto insurance would be if it paid for oil changes and let you buy it after a car wreck.

Hey, that’s how ObamaCare works!

Chuck Schick on July 17, 2013 at 1:43 PM

Her Highness of Health Care panders so well!

GarandFan on July 17, 2013 at 1:43 PM

Today’s healthcare system is the most bloated, costly, and inefficient in the world. Adopting a model closer to that of Germany or Japan would represent an improvement- if conservatives can ever envision a brighter future that isn’t based on the past.

bayam on July 17, 2013 at 1:27 PM

Sorry – ObamaCare was the product of you idiots holding all the cards. Can’t blame conservatives for this mess.

Chuck Schick on July 17, 2013 at 1:45 PM

Today’s healthcare system is the most bloated, costly, and inefficient in the world. Adopting a model closer to that of Germany or Japan would represent an improvement- if conservatives can ever envision a brighter future that isn’t based on the past.

bayam on July 17, 2013 at 1:27 PM

Japan? You mean the system where you have to bribe everyone in up and down the line to get care?

“VIP” Treatment Under Nationalized Health Care

And, the system that wants the old people to just FOAD, already?

Japanese minister: Let the elderly hurry up and die already

I guess so considering the fact that more adult diapers were sold last year than baby diapers.

Mrs Thatcher was only half-right about socialism. Yes, you do eventually run out of OPM, but you also eventually run out of OP.

Resist We Much on July 17, 2013 at 1:46 PM

Paying attention to Sebelius is like letting the worm call in and lay eggs of brainrot.

Axeman on July 17, 2013 at 1:56 PM

She would know. She’s a demoncrap – and they DID oppose Civil Rights in 1964

PJ Emeritus on July 17, 2013 at 1:56 PM

Why does Democrat white trash think NAACP is a group that’s easily manipulated, and lied to?

MNHawk on July 17, 2013 at 1:57 PM

Resist We Much on July 17, 2013 at 1:39 PM

A most excellent summary. The only thing I would add that affects risk pricing is a customer’s (insured) self-reporting. Self-reporting, meaning that a customer will assess his tolerance for risk and request a certain level of coverage and deductible. If I’m a bad driver, I might choose a low deductible and a high level of coverage…but I’ll pay dearly for that combination. My choice. My insurance. Adjusted to my needs.

freedomfirst on July 17, 2013 at 2:01 PM

Today’s healthcare system is the most bloated, costly, and inefficient in the world. Adopting a model closer to that of Germany or Japan would represent an improvement- if conservatives can ever envision a brighter future that isn’t based on the past.

bayam on July 17, 2013 at 1:27 PM

.
Today’s system of insurance for healthcare coverage is “bloated” by government regulatory mandates, and NOT ‘capitalism’.

Capitalism works/accomplishes/produces/achieves for everyone, and not just the wealthy.

Socialized government does NOT.

listens2glenn on July 17, 2013 at 2:02 PM

Today’s healthcare system is the most bloated, costly, and inefficient in the world. Adopting a model closer to that of Germany or Japan would represent an improvement- if conservatives can ever envision a brighter future that isn’t based on the past.

bayam on July 17, 2013 at 1:27 PM

Your problem is that both of those countries are many, many times smaller in population than the US (especially Germany, which has less than 1/3 the population of the US.)

Speaking of frauds, did you hear today’s story about one of your fellow Low-IQ Democrats from Ohio getting sent up the river for 5 years for vote fraud? She apparently voted 5 or 6 times for Dear Leader last year:

Poll worker gets 5-year sentence for voter fraud

Judge says woman violated position of trust

Melowese Richardson was sentenced to five years in prison for voting fraud on Wednesday. She worked as a poll worker for 14 years.

Richardson said she voted for her sister several times. Her sister has been in a coma since 2003, Richardson said.

Judge Robert Ruehlman said Richardson violated a position of trust and is a criminal, noting she is supposed to be a guardian of free elections.

Ruehlman told Richardson that President Barack Obama would be appalled by her conduct if he knew what she did.

http://www.wlwt.com/news/local-news/cincinnati/poll-worker-gets-5year-sentence-for-illegal-voting/-/13549970/21014378/-/mwbbrsz/-/index.html#ixzz2ZKNETs4g

Actually, I think O’bama would invite her to the White House and give her a medal, don’t you?

Del Dolemonte on July 17, 2013 at 2:03 PM

Anyone ever noticed/remarked upon the striking resemblance of Kathryn Sebelius to Dana Carvey’s SNL character, the Church Lady?

You oppose Obamacare, hmmmmm? Could the cause be …SATAN?”

davisbr on July 17, 2013 at 2:19 PM

Today’s healthcare system is the most bloated, costly, and inefficient in the world. Adopting a model closer to that of Germany or Japan would represent an improvement- if conservatives can ever envision a brighter future that isn’t based on the past.

bayam on July 17, 2013 at 1:27 PM

Your problem is that both of those countries are many, many times smaller in population than the US (especially Germany, which has less than 1/3 the population of the US.)

Speaking of frauds, did you hear today’s story about one of your fellow Low-IQ Democrats from Ohio getting sent up the river for 5 years for vote fraud? She apparently voted 5 or 6 times for Dear Leader last year:

Actually, I think O’bama would invite her to the White House and give her a medal, don’t you?

Del Dolemonte on July 17, 2013 at 2:03 PM

Brayam is a f’n Canadian, like many of our trolls. He IS low-IQ however.

slickwillie2001 on July 17, 2013 at 2:25 PM

Does she know that the majority of Democrats opposed the civil rights act of 1964?

That Lyndon Johnson begged Republicans to help him pass it?

portlandon on July 17, 2013 at 2:31 PM

The cost of medical care in this country is massively overinflated because of Tort Law – and the insurance industry revolving around it – period.

Ironically, “trial” lawyers came out in force pro-Obimbocare.

They are cutting off their own wallets to spite their faces. Maybe they should look into what it takes to sue the Federal government – because THAT is who will soon be the defendants they have to aim at – morons

PJ Emeritus on July 17, 2013 at 2:41 PM

Will the parade of administration clowns never end? What freak show circus did Obama tap?

nico on July 17, 2013 at 3:13 PM

“The same arguments against change, the same fear and misinformation that opponents used then are the same ones opponents are spreading now. ‘This won’t work,’ ‘Slow down,’ ‘Let’s wait,’ they say.

Right, don’t slow down, don’t wait.. .this will work.

We’ll. do the employer mandate day 1 and have the fraud prevention checks in place as the law requires…

Oh crap, wait, slow down this won’t work… say both you and Obama.

Why are you against Civil Rights Ms. Sebelius? Or is that somehow magically different while l0ooking exactly the same?

Stupid… I’m sure Kansas is still thanking their lucky stars Obama got her out of their state, but sorry she’s now being stupid for everyone.

gekkobear on July 17, 2013 at 3:40 PM

Umm, my comment Sebelius about looking like Dana Carvey’s Church Lady (with a link to a Youtube skit with Carvey’s signature line “satan”) was deleted??? Why, Ed (or ed., as the case may be)? it was pretty mild.

davisbr on July 17, 2013 at 4:27 PM

Civil rights should have been opposed and defeated as history has indicated.
Blacks are worse off today because of it.
It is extending the strife between races beyond the date it would naturally have expired.
Despite it being the Republicans that got it passed and have ever since been named the racists and get a tiny sliver of the black vote, it is doubly disgusting in nature.

astonerii on July 17, 2013 at 4:28 PM

never mind. damn search function screwed up. IE10 sucks.

davisbr on July 17, 2013 at 4:28 PM

Civil rights should have been opposed and defeated as history has indicated.
Blacks are worse off today because of it.
It is extending the strife between races beyond the date it would naturally have expired.
Despite it being the Republicans that got it passed and have ever since been named the racists and get a tiny sliver of the black vote, it is doubly disgusting in nature.

astonerii on July 17, 2013 at 4:28 PM

.
? ! ? ! ? ! ? ! ? ! ? ! ? ! ? ! ? ! ? ! ? ! ? ! ? ! ? ! ? !

The “Civil Rights Bill” was, and is fine ……. the hijacking of the Civil Rights Movement was, and is NOT.

listens2glenn on July 17, 2013 at 7:03 PM

Why does Democrat white trash think NAACP is a group that’s easily manipulated, and lied to?

MNHawk on July 17, 2013 at 1:57 PM

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do know nothing.
.. by allowing themselves to be lied to and manipulated, when exerting a little effort would reveal the truth (witness Thomas Sowell, Allen West, Clarence Thomas, Mia Love, et al.).

AesopFan on July 18, 2013 at 1:09 PM