Inside the Fox News lie machine: I fact-checked Sean Hannity on Obamacare

Quote from CaptainObvious:

LOL. Salon, for truly unbiased reporting. Tell me, who is face checking the fact checker?
In today's world all "reporting" is suspect regardless of origin. Political bias runs wide and deep. I go so far as to say there is no reporting at all, just political commentary.
You're saying the Salon author did not contact the persons who appeared on Hannity's show?
 
Quote from Ricter:

You're saying the Salon author did not contact the persons who appeared on Hannity's show?

I'm saying that this guy, or anyone else can slant a story whatever whey they like. Hannity, a clearly right wing nut job, slanted it his way. Salon, a bastion of left wing nut jobs slant it their way. The truth, what's left of it, will be found out as we go along. Seeing how it's the government administering the program, and the IRS as the collection agency, I suspect stormy seas and gapping assholes, freshly fucked from our friends in the IRS.
 
Quote from Tsing Tao:

Interesting how the Salon author claims to have shopped successfully not once, but twice for individuals on the ACA site to see what plans two of the Hannity guests could have gotten.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No. The Salon author is honest to say he use this calculator to find prices of the premiums. http://kff.org/interactive/subsidy-calculator/

The people on the Sean Hannity tv show do not compare or shop for prices difference of the exchanges too. So why do they complain and blame President Obama?
 
Slate Magazine headline: “Canada has death panels, and that’s a good thing”


The liberal garbage that comes out of Slate Magazine shouldn’t surprise me anymore but occasionally it does. Just look at this headline!

The article only makes the headline worse:

Last week Canada’s Supreme Court ruled that doctors could not unilaterally ignore a Toronto family’s decision to keep their near-dead husband and father on life support. In the same breath, however, the court also confirmed that, under the laws of Ontario, Canada’s most populous province, a group of government-appointed adjudicators could yet overrule the family’s choice. That tribunal, not the family or the doctors, has the ultimate power to pull the plug.

In other words: Canada has death panels.

So after admitting that Canada’s socialist healthcare system has panels of bureaucrats who have the power to kill someone, Slate goes on to tell us why this is such a great thing!

In Canada, with our single-payer health care system, Rasouli’s situation has a very public bottom line: Should taxpayers foot the bill for his family’s indefinite goodbye?

But American critics of Canadian health care will declare that merely asking this question is unacceptable, unethical, even unthinkable—and that it proves that the Canadian system gives doctors a dangerous incentive to kill off their patients as quickly as possible. They are wrong. The Hippocratic Oath’s promise to do no harm still applies. But they are also only wrong in part. When taxpayers provide only a finite number of acute care beds in public hospitals, a patient whose life has all but ended, but whose family insists on keeping her on life support, is occupying precious space that might otherwise house a patient whose best years are still ahead.

Basically, it has nothing to do with the sanctity of life and everything to do with money. So, obviously, Slate thinks money outweighs lives.

Ladies and gentlemen, this is the model that so many liberals point to as what America’s healthcare system should eventually become. It’s a place where there are so few hospital beds available that bureaucrats have the power to end your life in order to provide a room to a new patient.

The left mocked Sarah Palin for even suggesting that death panels would exist, and now that they can no longer deny them, liberal rags like Slate are trying to convince you that they’re a good thing...
 
WaPo poll: 56% believe Obamacare website glitches indicate broader problems with the law


Pre-launch tests of Obamacare website showed site would crash with only a few hundred visitors.

tumblr_inline_mv1t61xizy1qij8k6.jpg



Pitiful: Obama could only find 2 actual Obamacare enrollees to stand behind him for his speech
 
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/IVRTHmrYHlQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 
At a price tag of between $400 and $600 Billion spent already, lack of money is clearly not the problem with the Obamacare website. That won’t stop Democrat Steny Hoyer from trying to solve the problem by throwing good money after bad.

from Washington Examiner:

Rep. Steny Hoyer wants to give President Obama more money to help fix the costly federal health care exchanges that have been roiled by problems since they launched at the beginning of the month.

Asked Tuesday how Congress could help improve the system by which millions of Americans must buy insurance by the end of the year, the House minority whip and Maryland Democrat said, “We can give them a little money.”

"[Republicans have] been pretty much focused in the House of Representatives on undermining the implementation of the Affordable Care Act in every which way that we possibly could," he said.

Hoyer admitted that he does not know whether the project, which has already cost more than $400 million, has faced funding problems. “I don’t think that’s the reason,” he said. “If I know that, I’ll blame it.”...





Just as I've been saying. Our politicians measure government program success not by any common sense performance metrics. But by how big the program's budget is. This GD idiot doesn't even know if the Obamacare web site needs more money. Yet he's suggesting it merely because, as always, it's the only solution theses ignorant unimaginative buffoons can come up with.
 
Back
Top