Obamacare's Exchanges are Still Broken, and Obama's Speech Shouldn't Give Anyone Confidence They'll Work Soon



Three weeks after the deeply troubled launch of Obamacare's health insurance exchanges, President Obama gave a speech responding to some of the problems that have plagued the government-run online enrollment system. The most revealing thing about it was what he didn't say. 

Obama was somewhat more blunt than he has been about the system's failures. "There's no sugarcoating it. The website has been too slow. People have getting stuck during the application process. And I think it's fair to say that nobody's more frustrated by that than I am," he said. "There's no excuse for the problems."

No excuse—and no explanation either. Obama acknowledged some problems with the site. But he didn't say why they happened, when they would be resolved, or what the administration's specific plan was to get things working.

That's rather telling. If President Obama was confident that the online exchange system was on track to be fixed in short order, that would have been the highlight of his message. It wasn't. Indeed, much of his speech was devoted to arguing that Obamacare is more than just a website, and to explaining how people who want coverage can still enroll in coverage outside the exchanges. Phone help and paper applications, he said, provided an alternative method of enrollment.

But full processing of paper applications can't be done easily without a functioning online system. At best, it's a process that takes weeks; a document is filled out for you, then mailed to your home, then mailed back again, after which you can expect to wait another week or so to find out if you qualify for subsidies.

Just a few weeks ago, Obama was telling people that the exchanges would be as simple to use as Amazon, or an online travel reservation site like Kayak.com. Now he's telling people they must rely on a phone and paper process that is, at best, extremely slow.

Obama's speech, in other words, was designed to tell people how Obamacare could work without the online exchanges. Which strongly suggests that he and the rest of the administration believe that, at least for the time being, that's the only way it's going to. 

NEXT: Poll: More Than Half of Americans Believe GOP-Controlled House is Bad For the Country

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. But he made the oceans change directions!

    1. And stopped them from rising!

      1. It isn't really fair to the President to quote Him out of context. Here's full context of the President's prophecy:

        " I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on earth."

        President Barack Hussein Obama (PBUH)
        3 June 2008

        1. Well I can't say he lied. Even though more people are jobless on the whole, federal jobs are up (aren't they?) so they (government) are providing good jobs to the jobless. And now the government is paying doctors to provide health care to certain children so they are doing that. Possibly the rate of ocean rising (is this happening for real?) was a little slower on June 3rd, so he could be correct here. The planet healing, well that is too subjective to judge so we can give him the benefit of the doubt and assume by his definition the planet healed that day. He did end the Iraq war (on Bush's schedule) and has restored our image to what it was during Bush's years (after a brief bit of hope when Obama was elected that he would actually be a good leader).

        2. Holy shit.

          And I thought that I was a megalomaniac.

          1. He literally is hitting all the points in the DSM for Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

            The amazing thing are the huge numbers of people acting as if his delusional claims are reasonable ones.

            1. Not so amazing. History is the tale of narcissistic sociopaths seizing power based on grandiose promises that the masses willingly allowed themselves to believe in.

              1. What? Unpossible! Can name ONE narcissistic sociopath who seized power based on grandiose promises...?

        3. If it was indeed 6/3/08 then he was Senator BHO.

          1. He gave several variations of that speech during the campaign and you are correct that he was still a Senator.

            But this is a better variation that he gave on June 3rd, 2008 in St. Paul:

            "The journey will be difficult. The road will be long. I face this challenge with profound humility, and knowledge of my own limitations. But I also face it with limitless faith in the capacity of the American people. Because if we are willing to work for it, and fight for it, and believe in it, then I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on earth."

            Yep, that's our humble Prez speaking to the hoi polloi.

  2. Bend over and let's take a look Mr. President.

  3. I would go without health insurance if I could. But I'm on my employer's plan, and going without is "not permitted".
    Fucking statists.

    1. Really. I wish I could get a kids coverage only plan. I'm 40, but in great shape and have only been to the doctor when I broke my face playing hockey. I ended up paying out of pocket anyway because of the deductible.

      1. I'm 51 and don't give a shit anymore.

    2. Really? Your employer requires you to buy insurance? I've never encountered or heard of an employer that made it mandatory.

      1. Seriously? If you can't prove your spouse has a medical plan, it's required for us to sign up. You are put on a plan if you don't make an election, so you can't even ignore it.

        1. Interesting. I've really never run into that. Learn something everyday.

        2. We can opt out but you have to actively do so. Failure to sign up dumps you in the base level plan.

      2. I've worked for companies that did that. At least in my case, the insurance was 100% subsidized for single coverage.

        1. Other than the Army, I've never got 100% subsidies either. Maybe just my industry, but it's always been 65-80% employer paid.

          1. "Maybe just my industry, but it's always been 65-80% employer paid."

            This is just book keeping. Technically, economically speaking, you are paying the full cost through a lower wage. This is factored into the cost of an employee by a firm.

      3. At my employer, you can take the individual plan or not, but they aren't changing the amount of money in your check. The employee's health insurance is part of the compensation package, whether used or not.

  4. I've been saying for weeks that there's one thing that would really turn this exchange problem around: a presidential speech.

    1. Don't forget trotting out a handful of "success stories" to pose behind you in order to make your point worthlessly anecdotal!

      1. The hilarious thing is that of the 13 or so "success stories," only three of them have actually managed to create accounts yet on the website. The others just "plan to," and expect to save money.

  5. His speech was on TV in our cafeteria - people were openly laughing at him.

    1. This is the best thing I've heard in awhile.

    2. That totally just made my day.

    3. Why does your company promote this type of open racism?

    4. Note to self: Drake is the founder and CEO of Chick-Fil-A

    5. Yea our president at the time said we could watch the inauguration, to mark what a historical event it was, at the office, but had to count it as our lunch time.

      I decided to have lunch at home that day instead.

  6. "There's no sugarcoating it. The website has been too slow. People have getting stuck during the application process.

    That IS sugarcoating it. It's just when the turd is this squishy and foul, even after the sugarcoating is applied it still looks awful.

    1. Dang, you beat me. And your comment has turds in it.

    2. Calling something that doesn't function "too slow" is sugar coating it.

      There is no sugar coating it, TWA Flight 800 is not going to arrive on time.

      1. I like that one, I'll have to borrow it from you!

      2. "TWA Flight 800 is not going to arrive on time"

        I probably should not have, but I did laugh...

      3. TWA Flight 800 is not going to arrive on time.

        TOO SOON!

      4. Some of his minions on the FluffPo are still saying it's all due to overwhelming demand on the site, when that is already proven to not be true. Some people are stuck on stupid.

        Others are saying that, ok, the website in flawed, just like Apple products! (yes, they are really still saying that) But that the law itself will be a huge success.

        They are saying this and they haven't even seen what's in it yet. They just know that because it's the product of the dreamy guy in the white house that it must be great.

        When other posters point out the high deductibles and higher rates most people are seeing, they freak out and hurl childish insults.

        1. The Apple one is awesome. Imagine if IOS7 had prevented 99% of iPhones from making calls for 3 weeks running. And Tim Cook was out there saying that they were just glitches, and that people who wanted to make calls could just use their landlines.

          1. It would be a big win for Samsung.

            Unfortunately, this is going to be a big lose for all of us who have a middle class or higher income. We're going to pay for it big time, no matter whether it works or not.

            1. It's going to fuck poor people over far worse, because of Obamacare's negative effects on employment. People who were barely scraping by doing hourly work are now cut to 30 or less per week.


              1. It's also poor people who have the immediately out-of-pocket expenses because of this. I just can't wrap my head around what the Democrats were thinking when they decided to pass this massive piece of legislation reaming their own base.

                1. With the help of the MSM the blame will be deflected from them.

                  With the Dem's the buck never stops here.

                2. Destroy healthcare as it exists so they can implement single payer. The goal has always been to make all the money and decisions go through government, because that makes it easier to keep the serfs in line.

                3. Square, it's even worse than that, Obamacare outlawed catastrophic care policies so part timers are losing what little insurance they had, but this is the clincher. To get a subsidy, you have to pay more than 9.5% of your pay for your PERSONAL coverage. If your employer insurance costs less than that, you get no subsidy FOR YOUR FAMILY. So you go to the exchange to buy a family plan, and your insurance, while better, now costs double what you paid last year, and your family deductible is $8,000. (bronze plan out of pocket) Your kid has a nasty cold and is getting an ear infection, so you pop down to the closest pediatrician (40 minutes away, since half the doctors and hospitals aren't on your plan), and the receptionist tells you that you must pay the entire bill cash up front. Why? Because they know your deductible, and since your insurance will pay zero, they need to collect. NOW. And keep in mind, these are people Obamacare was supposedly designed to help. One publication said they expect more than 500,000 children to LOSE their health coverage this year. I'm not making this stuff up, it's already happening. Darden restaurants just dumped all their part timers into the exchanges because they are no longer allowed to buy major medical for their employees.

            2. It would be a big win for Samsung.

              Until Apple sues them for stealing the idea of functioning products.

      5. We're just having a little communication glitch with the flight deck. I'm sure it'll fly into French airspace any minute.

      6. There is no sugar coating it, the trade tower elevators will be out of service for the next few years.

    3. Dude, thumbs up.

      I LOL'd. Actually, in the meat space.

  7. I made this comment last week. If there was anything at all that could be spun as showing this was going to work soon, they would be all over the media with it. The fact that they are not saying anything, says that it is really bad and that they literally have nothing positive to say.

    1. They have already spent $625 million. Watch it now cost several billion to make this idiotic system marginally better. And when you tell these fucking marxists these will be the same people in charge of providing them with healthcare, and then with a monopoly on it that they can in fact use against you if you complain, they just give you this dumb look.

  8. "There's no sugarcoating it. The website has been too slow. "

    The website does't work. Period.

    It's almost like he is sugarcoating it.

  9. "And I think it's fair to say that nobody's more frustrated by that than I am," he said. "There's no excuse for the problems."

    There's literally no one more frustrated by this than Chocolate Nixon.

    1. That is the other problem with the "this is going to fail so everyone will demand single payer" conspiracy. For that to work the Chocolate Nixon will have to admit his signature achievement failed. That totally strikes me as something he would do. Obama seems to not exactly be real big on admitting fault and taking responsibility.

      1. he won't have to admit failure. He and his minions will blame someone else. It's what they do. Nothing that sane people would view as negative on his watch if his fault.

        1. Doesn't matter if they blame it on someone else. They will still be admitting their plan failed. No way Obama would do that. Never. I don't care if Obamacare results in the public execution of kitten, neither he nor anyone associated with him will ever admit it failed.

          1. come on. This will be spun as anything but an administration failure. And there are enough sheep who will believe what they are told. It will never be a case of "this didn't work because the plan was bad." Something else will be the excuse.

            1. Rethuglican Obstrukkkkshunizm.

              1. One too many K's.

                1. And they should have been capitalized.

          2. I'm not saying that Obamacare necessarily will lead to single payer, but if it does, I don't expect it to happen in the next three years, nor do I think most people expecting that to happen are either. So what Obama thinks about it means jackshit once he's out of office.

            1. He will always be the first black President. He will also always be the first President that the media elite views as one of them. They will never turn on him or admit t his was a failure. Too many people have too much emotionally invested in him for that. Maybe in like 30 years when this generation of media are dead or retired. But not now or anytime in the immediate future.

              1. The tell-all books will be out soon enough -- especially considering how much worse this is all going to get.

              2. Just image Obama as an ex-President. Every future President will come to dislike him. Future Democratic Presidents will come to hate him. He'll be in front of the camera for decades, second guessing their every decision.

                1. I've often tried to picture ex-prez Obama. I think he'll be a big hit overseas, telling European and Chinese audiences, "I tried to change America to make it more like you, but there's only so much one man can do in a democracy, especially when so many folks hate change."

        2. It will be the fault of the insurance companies who raised premiums, and of the employers who cut hours and dropped coverages, and of the Republicans for talking down the system.

      2. Obamacare II: The Obamaning

      3. "For that to work the Chocolate Nixon will have to admit his signature achievement failed."

        Why? Have you ever seen democrats suffer from doign the wrong things? I certainly have seen exactly the opposite: the bigger the failure the more clout and respect they get from the masses.

        1. Sure. But they never admit it. No way is that ego maniac ever going to admit this is anything but wonderful and the glitches are just that and being over played by the evil Republicans. A normal politician would easily and shamelessly forget he had anything to do with it and start campaigning against it. But Obama is not a normal politician. His ego will prevent him from doing that.

      4. For that to work the Chocolate Nixon will have to admit his signature achievement failed.

        No, the government contractors failed. We can't trust the free market to get anything right.

        1. Probably that the Americans failed. He can blame us for losing patience and destroying Obamacare just because it wasn't perfect when we got it -- like little kids stomping on a toy because the battery wasn't charged when we took it out of the box. It could be his "malaise" speech.

    2. He says he's mad. Ooh, scary! I'll bet those donors who he awarded the contracts to despite a history of failure are shaking in their boots! Same for the army of bureaucrats who will inevitably be rewarded with more money and power as a result of their failures.

      Did they cross a redline, Mr. Narcissist-in-Chief?

      1. If they don't shape up he's going to write a strongly worded memo stating how vewy, vewy, mad he is.

        1. I dunno, since he can (in his mind anyway), legally drone strike any US citizen who poses a threat, I would be worried if I were a failing contractor.

          1. "You have failed me for the last time"

            *Force choke*

    3. "And I think it's fair to say that nobody's more frustrated by that than I am," he said. "There's no excuse for the problems."

      No one could be more frustrated than a rich president planning their presidential library, with secret service protection for life, running a nonprofit foundation into senile retirement. How could anyone else be more frustrated?

      I don't know... maybe.. someone with real problems?

      1. Exactly - I think the people who don't currently have health insurance because they don't need it and can't afford it are probably slightly more frustrated.

    4. What an insult to Nixon....

  10. And the phone number he told people to call now has a busy signal. Thank goodness for incompetnce.

    1. Well, if 'everyone', I mean literally EVERY FUCKING PERSON in America, were not jamming the phone lines trying to get their shiny new healthcare, then this wouldn't be happening! It's the fault of the phone companies!

      1. Phone companies that were at one time probably used by BOOOOOOOSH in the past I am sure!

  11. My wife, who grew up in Kenya: "It sounds so Third World."

    1. That is an insult to the third world. In the third world you could at least bribe someone to get on the website.

      1. I believe with the current law, you'd have to bribe someone to get off the website.

        1. They are called "exemptions" and "campaign contributions".

          See the difference?

      2. In the third world you could simply pay someone to give you medical care without either person having to ask permission from the government.

        1. This.

        2. When Hilary get into office and saves us all with her brand of healthcare the only way to pay a doctor will be through the government, by bribing a g-man to get approval, or to illegal pay the doctor under the table.

    2. He really did sound ridiculous.

      The Apple analogy is misplaced. One is a COMPANY with real market realities and consequences for its products the other is not. The government can literally sit on a mess and throw money at it with little or no consequences.

      1. Well, not to mention that Apple's products are very successful and Apple is the epitome of a well polished organization. The Obamacare Exchange is most definitely not well polished.

      2. And it only took Apple a week to fix their problems.

  12. No excuse?and no explanation either. Obama acknowledged some problems with the site. But he didn't say why they happened, when they would be resolved, or what the administration's specific plan was to get things working.

    In fairness to Obama, why would he? He's not an IT director or the CIO-in-Chief, he's the president.

    In fact, I'm a little surprised he didn't promise when those things would be fixed, or try to go all internet-savvy on us, because that's exactly the kind of insane, hands-on president he is. He comes from the political stock that believes you can guide and control the world's second? largest economy by pulling Oval office all-nighters with a group of bright-eyed, sharp interns fresh from the twitter generation.

    1. In fairness to Obama, why would he? He's not an IT director or the CIO-in-Chief, he's the president.

      So what? You think that excuse would fly with any halfway decent manager in the real world?

      Taxpayers: "When will the website be back up?"

      C. Nixon: "I dunno"

      T: "Why did it go down?"

      C: "Hey man, I just work here. I was just as angry as you when I heard about this on the news."

      T: "What is your plan to fix it?"

      C: "BOOOOSH!"

      1. Got him elected twice. And Biden's sliding into home right now.

      2. C: "Hey man, I just work here. I was just as angry as you when I heard about this on the news."

        Although, I'm trying to remember how many CEOs I've heard say this, and I want to say the number is somewhere between a lot and a fuckload.

        1. Got him elected twice. And Biden's sliding into home right now.

          I didn't say that it wasn't wise politically. I'm just saying that "I dunno, my team handles all the details" is not a reasonable answer.

          Although, I'm trying to remember how many CEOs I've heard say this, and I want to say the number is somewhere between a lot and a fuckload.

          Well, the key phrase was "halfway decent manager".

    2. For a failure this colossal, the CEO doesn't get to shrug and say "not my job." He better be prepared to go in depth when the board starts grilling him on it.

      1. Ladies and Gentlemen, Mr. Jay Carney!

        *press applauds and pulls out notebooks and recorders*

      2. Yep - He's the guy the CIO would report to (if they were that organized).

    3. He's not an IT director or the CIO-in-Chief, he's the president.

      Obama is not the CIO, he just appointed the CIO. There's a difference!

      Obama created several new czar positions, including the Chief Information Officer of the United States. Then he filled the position with Aneesh Chopra, a guy with a public policy education and a career in politics.

      Obviously Obama doesn't have the time, training, or intellect required to manage a complex IT system. His job, however, was to appoint the executives who could. He failed miserably.

      1. It's just like any idiot boss I've had in the IT field. They make a sale, promise a deadline, then go to the developers and ask how long it will take. Then you tell them it's not possible, they say do it anyway and are shocked when it's not finished in time.

        Then they just blame those dammed lazy developers who complain about their 14 hour days, assuming they would just spend them playing video games and have no families of their own, since all they know about IT workers is geek sterotypes from TV

  13. Oh, and the company that has the contract to do the identity verification for Obamacare was just caught selling SSNs to identity theives:


  14. "There's no sugarcoating it. The website has been too slow. People have getting stuck during the application process. And I think it's fair to say that nobody's more frustrated by that than I am," he said. "There's no excuse for the problems."

    "And therefore, I will now tender my resignation."


    1. And have President Biden? Are you mad?

  15. "Obama acknowledged some problems with the site. But he didn't say why they happened, when they would be resolved, or what the administration's specific plan was to get things working."

    How about an explanation or apology for lying about the problems for the last three weeks?

  16. Third, we are doing everything we can possibly do to get the websites working better, faster, sooner. We got people working overtime, 24/7, to boost capacity and address the problems. Experts from some of America's top private-sector tech companies, who've, by the way, have seen things like this happen before, they want it to work.

    They're reaching out. They're offering to send help. We've had some of the best IT talent in the entire country join the team. And we're well into a tech surge to fix the problem. And we are confident that we will get all the problems fixed.

    Would someone please buy Obama a copy of The Mythical Man-Month ASAP?

    1. Hope that "tech surge" works out better than that Afghan surge...

      1. It won't. The main thesis of the mentioned book is about how management's inclination to respond to a failing software project by throwing more people as it only make the problem worse.

        1. That would seem to be a solid thesis. I don't care how brilliant of a software developer you are, you can't fix something until you understand it. So bringing new people into a project, especially a big, complex project that will take them weeks or months to understand, is just going to slow down the process as the people who do understand what is going on stop work to explain what they know to the new people.

          1. Hence the "mythical man-month" of the title: the idea that programmers and interchangable software development time is fungible. It's an error a lot of managers make because it allows them to manage software development operationally (if it will take 2 software developers six months to develop something, than four can do it in three), the way you would an assembly line, despite the fact it pretty much never works out well.

          2. as the people who do understand what is going on stop work to explain what they know to the new people.

            This is exactly correct. If you bring on a lot of people to help, you can expect the whole process to grind to a stop, while you bring a large group of new people up to speed.

          3. The fun part is that the people working on the problem already knew it was going to be a problem and tried to warn their dumbassed bosses it was going to happen before a line of code was written.

        2. You mean like Duke Nukem Forever?

      2. I suspect that it will work like the Iraq surge.

        A trillion dollars squandered and nothing worthwhile to show for it other than a premature declaration of "Mission Accomplished".

    2. No. Absolutely not. Nothing would be better than seeing them screw it up even worse after promising to fix it.

    3. when you start losing the sycophants...

    4. Um, so where are they getting the money for all this outside help? Cronies gotta get paid.

  17. "Famous Moments in Not Sugarcoating It"

    There is no sugarcoating it. Due to a political dispute with Japan, the USS Arizona has suffered some cosmetic damage.

    There is no sugarcoating it. The election of Abraham Lincoln has caused some political unrest in the South.

    There is no sugarcoating it. This morning, two Boeing 767 arrived in New York in unorthodox landing patterns and at higher-than-optimal speeds.

    There is no sugarcoating it. The battle of Cannae has developed in a way that is not entirely favorable to Roman interests.

    There is no sugarcoating it. The internet bubble has deflated slightly.

    1. There is no sugarcoating it. Prince Fielder was tagged out in a bang-bang play at 3rd base in the ALCS.

    2. There is no sugarcoating it. After the patient's heart stopped beating his chance for recovery became less than optimal.

    3. There is no sugarcoating it, the American colonies gave the British some trouble.

    4. There is no sugarcoating it. Neil Armstrong took a step.

  18. I can't wait til the website is fixed and people still don't sign up because price objection.

    1. The big problem is going to be if (when) everyone subsidized (sick or poor or whatever) signs up under the law, and everybody expected to foot the bill doesn't sign up.

      The former group is going to live with a crappy system. But the people who could buy a cheaper plan from ehealthinsurance.com before and haven't? Will they sit for this?

    2. I can't wait to read about the shock some older folks get when they learn that their effective marginal income tax is 740,000%.

      Married couples in late 50s earn $1 over the 400% poverty line hurdle, and, voila!, their taxes go up by $7400. Going to be some surprised taxpayers in 1Q2015.

  19. Just a few weeks ago, Obama was telling people that the exchanges would be as simple to use as Amazon, or an online travel reservation site like Kayak.com. Now he's telling people they must rely on a phone and paper process that is, at best, extremely slow.

    In other words, it runs in the same way as practically all the government I encounter. If anyone is shocked by this, they must be very young or naive.

    1. By which you mean, Obama voters. All problems with government were because GWB and Republicans didn't believe in government and wanted it to fail.

  20. And I think it's fair to say that nobody's more frustrated by that than I am," he said.

    Well, I'm glad to hear Obama is actually trying to sign up exactly the way he expects everyone else to.

    Hahahahaha! Just kidding. I know the world for the governed is completely different than it is for those who rule over them. It's that difference that motivates all us little people to improve ourselves so that we too can be hired into government jobs.

  21. "" The product is good. The health insurance that's being provided is good. It's high quality, and it's affordable.""

    And, oh, by the way? If its not? Well tough titties, America, because you have to buy it anyway = its the law!

  22. Just posted this in earlier, now dead ACA thread.

    My former business partner has pointed out that fixing things in short order to going to run into the Mythical Man Month problem.

    You cant fix it by throwing tons of IT professionals at the problem.

    Just like you cant get a baby in one month by getting 9 women pregnant.

    1. From wikipedia:

      Brooks's law is a principle in software development which says that "adding manpower to a late software project makes it later". It was coined by Fred Brooks in his 1975 book The Mythical Man-Month. The corollary of Brooks's Law is that there is an incremental person who, when added to a project, makes it take more, not less time. Brooks adds that "Nine women can't make a baby in one month".

      1. According to Brooks himself, the law is an "outrageous oversimplification", but it captures the general rule. Brooks points to two main factors that explain why it works this way:

        1. It takes some time for the people added to a project to become productive. Brooks calls this the "ramp up" time. Software projects are complex engineering endeavors, and new workers on the project must first become educated about the work that has preceded them; this education requires diverting resources already working on the project, temporarily diminishing their productivity while the new workers are not yet contributing meaningfully. Each new worker also needs to integrate with a team composed of multiple engineers who must educate the new worker in their area of expertise in the code base, day by day. In addition to reducing the contribution of experienced workers (because of the need to train), new workers may even have negative contributions ? for example, if they introduce bugs that move the project further from completion.

        2. Communication overheads increase as the number of people increases. The number of different communication channels increases rapidly with the number of people. Everyone working on the same task needs to keep in sync, so as more people are added they spend more time trying to find out what everyone else is doing.

    2. And here's the problem with having a President with no real world experience. Even a low level bank employee like me who did QA testing in my last job knows more about the process than Obama or any of his handlers.

      The idea that throwing more people at this will speed things up is hilarious. All that will happen is a bunch of pissing contests between managers. This thing will never be fully operational. Thankfully.

      1. More people bumping into another.

        Obama makes the Peter Principle look good every single day.

        1. 'into one another.'

      2. Not only does the President have no real world experience, the guy he appointed to be the technology czar, the Chief Information Officer of the United States, had a public policy degree and a career in politics.

    3. http://www.slate.com/blogs/fut.....ay_to.html

      That sounds bad already. But then there was this head-turner: "One specialist said that as many as five million lines of software code may need to be rewritten before the Web site runs properly."

      Five million lines of code? Well, if that seems like a lot, consider that the site as a whole apparently contains 500 million lines of code. "By comparison," the Times notes, "a large bank's computer system is typically about one fifth that size."

      Nuke it from space. It's the only way to be sure.

      1. I am not a coder so correct me if I am wrong here. But it is not like that five million lines of code, if it is that many and not more, are segregated into a special file called "defective code". They are I assume interspersed throughout the other 500 million lines of code. So it is not just rewriting five million lines. It is analyzing five hundred million or more lines to find and properly fix the five million defective lines. Right?

        1. More or less, yes, you are right.

          The analysis might reveal that various modules are rotten to the core, and need to be rewritten, and so are kind of segregated, but on the whole you are right.

          1. yeah, there are some things they know work. So it wouldn't be all 500 million lines. But it will be a lot more than just five million.

        2. Yep.

          While loc is a horrible measure, the mythical standard is about 100 lines of code per day per developer.

          So a rewrite of 5 million lines is 50k developer days.

          And debugging is much slower than initial writing.

        3. Just to give a little bit of a picture of how massive this is.

          Assuming their 5M and 500M numbers are correct, it's like trying to find a pile of needles (the size of 1/3 of the codebase of Windows 95) in a gargantuan haystack (the size of 15 Windows XP codebases). IMO, it would be better to scrap it and design something that weighs in at 5M lines of code, rather than 5M lines of bugs.

          1. What he said.

            There is no way this project should have that many lines of code in it.

            500 million lines is an insane size for a project.

            1. It would seem to me that the huge size of the code indicates a program that was never really thought out and tries to do all of totally unrealistic functions because the nontechnical people decided that it doing so was a good idea and thus essential. Right?

              That of course lead you to think that the only way to fix this thing is to throw it out and start over, something they will never do. So, it won't ever get fixed or run properly.

            2. Wondering why this had to written at all? Couldn't they simply have purchased the code for ehealthinsurance.com which already works? And then graft the subsidies on to it?

              The only thing stupider than reinventing the wheel is reinventing a wheel that doesn't roll.

              1. Simply put, the problem is that they don't want you to walk away once you see the prices.

                So they want you to sign up:

                1) meaning they have to verify your income to see if you qualify for subsidies.
                2) they need to be in a position to chase you, hector you and finally force you to buy once you do see the price.

                Thus, they force people to set up an account first.

                Which is why if you set up an account on that identity theft factory, you are a fool.

                Just walk away.

        4. Just for a fun exercise my team went through as much of the site we could get to and specked out the work using or normal web dev process. Breaking up UI, backend and integrations in to separate teams with one BA, 2 dev, 1 QA, and one sysadmin for each component we could have done the whole thing and had it tested for scale in 4 months.

  23. Three weeks after the deeply troubled launch

    I think you mis-spelled "failed".

  24. What would make this perfect? A series of weekly-ish (increasing in frequency as it goes on) speeches talking about what is being done to fix it, and how things are going way better than expected, and it's only a matter of time until it is all fixed.

    Over time, the president getting more and more deranged. Maybe get a nice "It's failing because YOU DIDN'T CLAP HARD ENOUGH! YOU DIDN'T BELIEVE! TINKERBELL NEEDS YOU!"

    1. As it begins to look like they can't get the site up before the signup deadline hits, I'm imagining a sequence of increasingly awkward speeches.

      1. February, 2014, on a Friday night:

        "Look, I know that some are saying that we have to have full enrollment immediately. And that many are calling for folks to fend for themselves when it comes to their healthcare.
        But make no mistake, it would be irresponsible to fully implement the ACA until after the mid terms, uh I mean, until after we can be sure that a common sense, balanced plan is in place to make sure the exchanges are operational so that folks can have access to the health care they deserve."

        1. The Friday before the Super Bowl. Count on it.

        2. Needz moar "umm"s, "folks", "amirite"s, and "let me be clear"s.

  25. After telling them relentlessly that this would be a financial disaster, the thing that gets the point across is a crappy website???????!!!!!! These little ADHD bastards haven't even gotten to the good part, and they're already screaming.

    So does the MSM have the stones to bury or spin the I-told-you-so stories. Despite recording literally hours of them hauranging Team Red Talking Heads, can they still pull it off? Granted they have no choice, it's do or do not there is no try bitches.

    1. Look, some guy named John in PA saved some money on his insurance, and that's what matters. The rest is just Rethuglican obstructionism.

      1. Generally speaking, people who are age 50-65 and buy in the individual market now will likely see their premiums fall due to younger people now subsidizing them.

        So the media will focus on these people and ignore the vast majority that see premiums get much higher.

        1. Well thats generally how the game has always been played by the statist cheerleaders in the media.

          The benefit those on the receiving end of governmnet forced transfer payments are celebrated and the detriment to those stuck with the bill for it are ignored.

        2. ^This. Plenty of people will enroll when they can, but they will 35+ and have a chronic medical condition or a family member with a chronic condition. They'll also see their premiums reduced. But there will never be enough voluntary enrollment from the young and the healthy to offset the adverse selection. Never.

          Two years from now, we'll see exploding costs for OC and for Medicaid because of the expansion - but, hey, who cares? The young are currently getting royally screwed by Social Security and Medicare, so why not ad another liability that we need to borrow to fund? It's only fair!

        3. Don't count on it. I'm 53, and I have employer provided coverage, but the rates went up this year and will go up again next year, as a direct result of the new requirements in the ACA. Also, and not an insignificant also, the deductibles went up a lot.

          This makes it very hard for me to believe that anyone in my age bracket is not going to see both increased premiums and higher deductibles. I think the only way out of that is if you are low income and get a large subsidy. But if that's the case, you were probably already on Medicaid.

          1. Yes, but group insurance is group rated, meaning the premium for a 25 year old and a 53 year old are the same as long a they use the same plan purchased by the same employer.

            So, your whole group is experiencing the same rate increase - young and old.

            The individual market is rated by individual risk based on age, sex, health condition, but OC limited individual rating factors to 3x. No older, sicker individual can be charged more than 3 times the amount a younger, healthier individual's rate.

            So, older people in the individual market will see their premiums reduced. It is what it is.

          2. But if that's the case, you were probably already on Medicaid.

            Not really ... the subsidies apply all the way up to 400% of poverty line. For a married couple of geezers under 65 (ie not on Medicare), the subsidy is $7400 with income of $62000.

        4. Maybe. The problem is that their rates will only fall if young people enroll. That seems unlikely to happen for two reasons. First, Obamacare lets many of them stay on their parents health insurance until they are 26. So there goes a huge chunk of them off the top. And second and worse, the fine for not buying insurance is much lower than the cost of the insurance. I don't see anyway that enough young people are going to buy insurance to offset for the cost of all of the mandated coverage and ending the pre-existing condition exclusion. We will see, but I don't see how those old people's insurance rates go anything but up as the whole system implodes into a rate hike death spiral.

          1. John, I was spekaing more about the short term and the media stories right now.

            If an adverse selection problem does become severe enough, then yes their rates will rise too, but thats in the upcoming next few years.

            1. True. But even now, many of those people are seeing their policies re-written and made much worse to comply with the law. So even now I think they are mostly going up. Most people didn't have coverage for birth control or mental health or other such. Well now they do and they are having to pay for it.

              Here is the thing, I have yet to see the media play up a single example of someone whose health insurance rates have gone down because of this. If they have, I haven't seen it. I don't think their rates are going down. If they were, they would be media stars right now.

          2. They don't have to pay the penalty anyway if they adjust their taxwitholding so that they never get a tax refund.

            Witholding the penalty amount from tax refund checks is the only means the IRS has to enforce it.

            1. Civil disobedience. I am seriously considering leaving the health insurance section of my tax return blank and not paying the Obamatax. I really think even people who have insurance should leave the section blank and refuse to pay the tax. If even a few million people did that, the IRS would have no way to ever enforce the tax if they wanted to.

            2. Witholding the penalty amount from tax refund checks is the only means the IRS has to enforce it.

              You really think the government will just leave it at that? No way, someone (us taxpayers) have to pay for this massive piece of crap, and they will amend the law to allow taking the penalty directly out of your paycheck or your bank account. Count on it.

              1. Unless the Dems retake the House, they are not amending shit. And if the country is dumb enough to put Pelosi Reid and Obama in charge again without any adult supervision, they will deserve whatever they get.

                They are going to play hell ever collecting the penaltax. People are going to ignore it in such large numbers they will be fucked. And if they are not lucky, people will lose enough faith in the tax enforcement system to no longer be deterred from cheating about a lot of other things and the country will quickly become Greece.

                1. John, I think you are underestimating the will of the Obama administration to do something like that through executive orders, saying that it is necessary for the public good because they don't have the ability to foot the bill for this because people are not playing fair and paying their penaltax. And because of that, women and children will be hit hardest. Since when does Obama have to go through proper legal channels to change or ignore things in this law?

                  1. Short of going into the accounts of millions of people and just taking money, they won't be able to do anything by executive order or anything else. And the problem is that they don't own the courts. It would quickly turn into a legal quagmire and a disaster for them. Worse still, the most dangerous thing in such a situation is publicity. You don't want people realizing that anyone is cheating and getting away with it. Once they realize that, then everyone starts cheating and you are totally fucked.

                    I you are underestimating what morons these people are. Sure they have will and they are at heart really nasty fucks. But they are also utterly and completely incompetent. These people could fuck up a cup of coffee. Doing anything that involves anything but the most base forms of thuggery is completely beyond them.

                    Full on police states like China often can't enforce their will on the population. These clowns don't stand a chance.

                    1. "And the problem is that they don't own the courts."

                      No but they've got a long term lease with and bargain purchase option.

          3. I've only spoken with 2 individuals so far, that do not have employer based coverage, and that I suppose fall into the 'young' category, in their 30s.

            Neither one of them were even thinking about it, didn't even know there is a health care exchange and that they are required to buy insurance now or pay a penal tax. After I explained, both said they will pay the fine.

            1. In the land of liberaldom I live in, I do know 2 guys who own a bar who said they would go to jail before they took part in this.
              The gov't will find some way to collect the penaltaxfee other than by reducing refunds.
              That's a nice liquor licence you got there........

          4. The penaltaxfee goes up significantly every year according to a post made by someone the other day - the person who posted a chat with a help desk guy named Raymond.

            1. Yes, the penaltax is actually pretty high. It's
              2014: 1% of your gross income (minimum of $95 per adult)
              2015: 2% (minimum of $325 per adult)
              2016: 2.5% (minimum of $695 per adult)

          5. Young self-employed men are suckers if they buy Obamacare.

            Not only are they subsidizing geezers, they also have to subsidize contraceptives, abortions, pregnancies, Pap smears, mammograms, breastfeeding counseling and equipment for nursing moms, and according to the Center for American Progress, "numerous other preventive services ... available to women at no additional cost".

            According to the same left-wing outfit, just the contraceptives and associated physician visits can cost $1200/year. Add in all the other "free" shit, and young men's premiums are going to bear a pretty hefty burden for the women as well.

          6. It's going to be interesting when it goes from just a fine to jail time. Remember that it's a tax, which means you get the full power of the IRS to enforce the law.

  26. There is no sugarcoating it. Operations in the Ardennes have not gone to the French General Staff's liking.

    1. Nice.

    2. There is no sugarcoating it. Due to an unforeseen event, the Pentagon has some unexpected remodeling costs.

    3. There is no sugarcoating it. The Death Star has suffered a minor ventilation glitch.

      1. I logged in just to say:


    4. There is no sugarcoating it: the American people have twice elected a president who is . . . not optimal.

    5. There is no sugarcoating it. The invasion of Midway Island has been postponed.

  27. This is not a website issue, it is flat out an data integration issue. The web site account creation was no doubt "fixed" by turning off the the data interface that wasn't functioning. So now all the downstream processes that depend on the data won't work. On any project like this interfaces are the most difficult part, especially when pulling data from many different sources (all 50 different states, fed gov DBs, insurance, finance, etc.). Interfaces are incredibly complex - you need X - state A calls it X (no problem), states B, C, D call it Y (now you need a translation table), states E, F, G collect slightly different but similar data (now what do you do?), states H, I, J don't collect it at all. But then what happens when you encounter an incomplete record and you have downstream processes dependent on the data? How about a duplicate record? And the absolute key thing to remember are all the interfaces share data and are dependent on one and other - so fixing one will almost definitely have cascading negative affects. Obama is absolutely right this is not a website, and anyone with half a brain should not have trusted a senator to spec out a complex interdependent database system.

    1. oh, and when the interfaces flat out fail, those are the easiest bugs to fix. Wait till they start discovering the data "issues" - or I should say wait till data issues become apparent, because unless you test extensively finding incorrect data errors is damn near impossible

      1. Wait, the IRS claims that I owe them the penalty, but I already have insurance! Also, their penalty letter describes me as being named "Muffler Hirohito49587", and they've assessed a 2.5% penalty on an alleged income of 5 quintillion dollars.

    2. These are not difficult problems to solve for most experienced software engineers with a background in b2b or data handling. Setting up interfaces and libraries is the whole point of the design to make such problems less severe. I agree it's likely not the client (website), but the server's architecture should be designed to lessen the impact of such issues. For example, with an interface/library to the various insurance companies, if there is a bug in the handling of one insurance companies queries it should be limited to just that one company. If there is a general bug in the library then all interaction with all insurance companies would be down, but the amount of time and effort to fix should be minimal and at that point all companies would become available again. I've seen what poor software programmers can do (and there are a lot more since the internet boom of the early 2000s where anyone with a little bit of knowledge could get a high paying job - with added job security because their code was spaghetti) - it would not surprise me if this system isn't using interfaces and libraries and that each path from user to insurance company X is using copy/pasted code.

  28. He's the Insurance Salesman in Chief.


    This is so glorious on a Monday morning that it all but wipes away the horrific memory of seeing the Nick Foles experience live yesterday.

    1. The real fun is when the POTUS starts to introduce the people who will be subsidizing the systemn through huge rate increases. "This is Tim. Tim voted for me in 2008 and 2012. Thanks to my reforms, Tim will be paying an extra $900 a month in premiums! Isn't this great, Tim?"

      1. That is my favorite part, for sure.

        Only Tim should be wearing a collar and some chaps.

    2. I'm not sure what's sadder, that he thinks people are this stupid, or that he may be right in thinking that.


      "He also described a letter from a Pennsylvania man that "pretty much sums my message today: Yes, the website really stank for the first week. But instead of paying $1,600 per month for a group insurance plan, we have a plan that will only cost us $692 a month, savings of $900 per month."

      The man was "frustrated by the website. But he's feeling a little less frustrated once he found out that he was saving 900 bucks a month on his health insurance," the president said."

      1. Which is weird, since Pa is a state run exchange.

      2. The guy is probably getting something like a $10000 subsidy on a family plan with pre-existing conditions.

        It should come as no surprise that the newcomers to the free shit brigade like their subsidies.

  29. The look on that womans face right before she is apparently about to faint, is fucking priceless. I think it should be called the look of progressotopia peak derp.

    Oh well, at least she has Obamacare, so I am sure she will be fine. If not for that, she's be a goner for sure.

    1. Huh? What. Where? Needs to see peakderp. Links or it isn't real.

      1. Watch the video of Obamas speech. She's standing directly behind him, in red.

        Woman apparently overwhelmed by the wonders of Obamacare

        1. I thought that was... Debbie wasserman Shwartzenheimer or something. With hair dye. Bored to death.

          The look on her face...

          "...the.... inanity... must... resist... listening.... can't....really need to shit... why did I take this horrible acting gig??....

          Someone hipped me to the PLAYBILL for these human stage-props for the ACA


          The star, woozy preggers jappy-ish girl? =

          Karmel Allison, Prospective ACA Beneficiary

          Karmel...was diagnosed with Type 1 Diabetes when she was nine years old.

          cue sad music

          ..She has stayed on the same insurance ever since, despite constantly rising costs, for fear she would not be able to find a plan that would cover her due to her pre-existing condition. Allison recently began researching her options on CoveredCA and has publicly described her experience as finally feeling equal to others, including her young and healthy husband, when it comes to access to coverage.

          "EQUAL-ITY...such a lonely word" (subtext = FUCKING MEN!!!)

          Well, three weeks in, and she still hasn't actually found coverage! Fucking A right! THATS SOME SUCCESS STORY.

          Is Obama the first Pres to regularly use a variety of Human Puppets for every policy speech he gives? Do they keep them in cages when not in use? What sorts of drugs do they used to keep them in that glazed, rigid posture all through the mind-numbing Blame Avoidance?

          1. What I love about her story is the idea that she thinks she's equal to her husband (no not in a sexist way). You have Type I Diabetus lady, you are never going to be the same as your husband to insure. Hell, you're not even going to be equal to most women your age.

        2. In that video Obama mentions that a group plan that cost $1,600 would go down to to $695 a month under ACA, which saves someone almost $900 a month.

          If you could afford to pay $1,600 a month for insurance, then you ain't like 99% of America. And you probably make enough that you don't qualify for subsidies.

          That's what ACA supporters don't get. The "savings" are a moot point if you couldn't afford to pay for insurance in the first place. I might qualify for would cost me $300 a month instead of $700 (deductibles would be high, I imagine) before ACA, but if I can't even afford 300 dollars a month for healthcare, I'm sill screwed. Screwed less, but still.

          1. no, you're screwed more because now you not only don't have insurance, but you also have to pay a penaltax for not having it.

    2. I know that look. Her blood sugar is crashing.




  30. This was said not by one of us being sarcastic about the man's reality defying vanity but by his closest adviser:


    As Valerie Jarrett told David Remnick in "The Bridge," Obama's "uncanny" abilities need to be properly engaged, or he disengages. "He's been bored to death his whole life," she said. "He's just too talented to do what ordinary people do."

    Holy shit, does he believe in his own PR.

    1. He's just too talented to do what ordinary people do.

      Yeah, conmen and thieves do have a hard time going legit.

      1. He's just too talented to do the menial labor of lesser mortals, like, say, Michelangelo swiping a brush all day on the Sistine Chapel. Commoners like that are a dime a dozen. Obama is a big picture guy, and they are priceless rarity in this world.

        1. Obama is a big picture guy

          and that describes the majority of shitty managers I've met.

          1. Me too. To me, 'big picture guy' means 'clueless motherfucker.'

          2. Also, this is the subthread I intended for Killazontherun|10.21.13 @ 2:26PM|#, but I suck.

        2. The American people are imperfect and just don't deserve a great leader like Obama.

          You know who else was disappointed by his people at the end?

          1. Jesus Christ?

            1. From an alternative reality (first comment on Dowd's piece. Just, wow):

              Fremont, CA

              NYT Pick

              While the tone of the President's address may have disappointed, it matters less than his dismissal of concerns which motivated a seditious strategy of radical Congressional opposition.

              The speech was inadequate and strategically inept in describing the concern of the Senate and House Budget Committee Conferences:

              "The challenge that we have right now are not short-term deficits;
              it's the long-term obligations that we have around things like
              Medicare and Social Security."

              This statement simply assisted an intransigent opposition in framing negotiations before the conferences begin, thus almost assuring a disappointing outcome.

              While discredited and ineffectual "austerian" policies are indeed what radical opponents of federal governance would have the Committee focus upon, these approaches fail to address the real fiscal concerns of our nation at this time.


              1. Inequality of income, disparity and lack of opportunity and credit, infrastructure decay, ascendance of speculative over productive investment, and theft by "privatization" of common economic and natural resources have accelerated with diminishing federal and state regulation in recent decades.

                The President's unfortunate framing of budget negotiations about Social Security and Medicare funding will simply enable the leaders of opposition to the AFA to persist in gaining objectives which they had not yet achieved: elimination of corporate regulation and FICA contributions, and shredding the social safety net.

                1. ""The President's unfortunate framing of budget negotiations about Social Security and Medicare funding...""

                  "Framing" (in the Lakoff sense) = TOTAL BULLSHIT REINTERPRETATION

                  i.e. 'by acknowledging reality, he has made a grievous error'

                  No shit.

            2. They know not what they do... ooooAAAAAWWw!!!!! Cut that shit out!!! HELLFIRE THESE ASSHOLES STAT, PADRE!!

    2. The only way to make things clearer would be if he bore a sandwich board inscribed "I have Narcissistic Personality Disorder"

      1. I was going to ask if you meant "wear" a sandwich board, but I kind of like "bore".

        1. I started with 'wear' then decided that 'bore' would be a better verb. 🙂

    3. This is a lesson on how to get ahead in the obama campaign and administration...

      1. To get in good with Obama you need to talk about how great he is.

        To get in good with Dubya you had to keep up with him on a bike and like bologna sandwiches. And war.

    4. No. He is just a smart person who never grew up. If you have above average intelligence and the right kind of personality, it is very easy when you are young and haven't had the experience to know any better to think that since you easily grasp the big picture the rest is fluff and beneath you. This sort of person tells themselves that the details don't matter because you get the big picture.

      Only later does experience teach you that everyone gets or thinks they get the big picture and the really important thing is the details because that tells you if you are in fact getting the big picture and without a command and attention to them you can never really put out a first rate product or project.

      The fact that Obama is bored by details just says he has never learned that fact. And when you look at it, his failure to grasp that explains pretty much the failure of his entire presidency. His whole Presidency is nothing but big ideas that were either totally impractical or even when they were not completely botched in the execution.

      1. It also means he's lazy. Learning and working the details takes effort.

        He is lazy and always has been. Everything he's gotten in life was handed to him.

      2. You see this in any new idea he has. When opposition asks questions about specific details, he answers by trying to better explain the big picture as if you don't get what he is trying to do.

        Every time someone points out a flaw or tries to fix one of them, he just throws out that "30 million Americans don't' have health insurance" When in reality it's that 20 million can't afford and don't want it, and 10 can't afford and need it, so he forces the 20 to buy at a higher price so the other 10 can buy it.

  31. "At best, it's a process that takes weeks; a document is filled out for you, then mailed to your home, then mailed back again, after which you can expect to wait another week or so to find out if you qualify for subsidies."

    Don't forget that Obama's IRS is breaking the law by allowing people who sign up through the federal exchanges to qualify for subsidies.

    The text of the ACA law only allows federal subsidies for those who sign up through state created and run exchanges.

    As I understand it, there is a lawsuit pending over this.

    If the administration loses this lawsuit (as it should) imagine what the reaction will be from all those folks who thought they were going to get subsidies to offset the large monthly premiums and then find out they're not after they've signed up.

    1. How much did the Kochtopus pay you to write that?

    2. imagine what the reaction will be from all those folks

      Duh, the stupid seditious Republicans strike again.

    3. That would be . . delicious.

  32. My take away from his speech is he's staying the course. No delay. So, not just a train wreck but a slow motion train wreck.

    1. The unstoppable force of narcissism meets the immovable object of coding realities.

      1. +1 angel dancing on the head of a pin

      2. Nicely put.

  33. ...a document is filled out for you, then mailed to your home, then mailed back again, after which you can expect to wait another week or so

    Ugh, it's, like, soooo 1970's.

    1. This, incidentally, is basically how the immigration system works now.

      1. You can submit some things online, but yeah, most of the documents have to be mailed.

  34. I like how he made them wear lab coats. As if they just ducked out from performing some surgery to appear at the White House.

    1. Reminds me a late-night infomercial where some "doctor" in a lab coat is hawking some product.

  35. Obama acknowledged some problems with the site. But he didn't say why they happened, when they would be resolved, or what the administration's specific plan was to get things working.

    That's because he doesn't know why they happened, or when they'll be resolve, and doesn't have a plan other than SPEND MOAR MONEY AND HIRE MOAR TOP. MEN.

    On a related note, I didn't watch his bullshit session (I'm at work and didn't want to end up destroying company property), is that top picture from today? Are they really still doing the whole trot out some paid stooges to stand behind the God-King in lab coats pretending to be doctors bullshit ?

    1. Software coders and tester always wear white labcoats, don't they? After all, they are "Smart People".

      1. I'm currently wearing a grey hoodie.

        1. Half my devs were working from home today, most likely in their underwear.

        2. Jeans and a t-shirt here.

  36. So the petulant little children of Alinsky are now discovering that it's a lot easier to destroy a country than it is to build a new one from scratch.

    It would be hilarious, except for all the suffering people will have to go through.

    1. Oh, it will still be hilarious, even through the suffering.

      Big gubmint fall down, go boom!

  37. My Christmas list for BHO this year is a copy of "I Pencil."

  38. Can we have a Greatest Hits of

    "Standard Progtarded Rationalizations for Obamacare being The Suck"

    From WaPo, I found some current-most-popular ones... =

    Has anyone thought to check for Stuxnet-like Tea Party sabotage?

    10/20/2013 11:17 PM EDT
    Is it true that the web site's programming is being done by a private hold-over contractor from the Bush Administration ?


    1:57 PM EDT
    WWII was an abject failure for the USA in the first half of 1942. I guess we should have surrendered.

    this I like for, "finding a pony in there somewhere" =

    1:52 PM EDT
    The American people have finally realized the GOP's got NO IDEAS for solving anything. They've relegated themselves to the position of "Failure Cheerleaders". Not attractive at all to voters


    1:50 PM EDT
    The benefits of Obamacare will far outweigh the costs of fixing this website fiasco. Indeed the benefits are already far greater

    1:45 PM EDT
    "I don't have any solutions but I told you that Obama Care would not work! THere is no way glitches can be fixed!" - Lazy teapublican

    1. I am suspicious that 100% of comments on major newspaper sites are in fact the same 5 liberal partisan rat-fucking hacks, flooding message boards with a few dozen crafted talking points and quips, alternating between the noble Pro TEAM BLUE, and then recasting themselves as their straw man nemesis, evil TEAM RED GUY! to knock down with pre-set repartee...

      In fact, if it were anything else, and these were in fact "real people"...? Oh, that is a vastly, vastly more depressing reality.

      1. While the pantrollium theory is tempting, I don't think you are taking into account just how few people are able to generate anything resembling an original thought or phrase.

        1. Yeah, like, whatever.

        2. As a case in point? = today there's some snarking going on @ the WaPo about how retarded the whole stage-managed characters were (since few had actually gotten covered by ACA yet) ... when 2 posters, "LegalAmerican" and "AmericanBelle1", lay into the comments thusly =

          "And Why aren't any of them American Looking? they all have foreign names"

          "ALSO did you hear OBama gave all Muslims an exemptions! Lookin out for his own!"

          "this is just another plan to open the country to immigrant hordes to take all the benefits and bring on One World Government!!"

          Etc. That sort of thing.

          Now, I'm not suggesting that there ARENT real people out there for whom the story is always "immigration" (See: Lonewacko, American) and the browns people etc. But the injection of a bunch of ShariaLAWS!! and Birther nonsense into a commentary about ACA seemed to me to be just WAYYYY too completely stupid and out of ....well, 'left field'. i.e. I'm pretty sure, as john noted, that these are Lefty trolls just littering any critical response to The Anointed One with a bunch of xenophobic/racist nativist claptrap simply to tar the opposition. Call me crazy, but it seems bloody obvious to me, particularly in context. Its so mind-numbingly stupid, and consistent with the Progressive NEED to have a mythical 'moral high ground' in order for their arguments to have any merit at all ...well, it just SCREAMS 'dumb leftist internet tactic'.

      2. I am as well. The Moby phenomenon is real. We have them on here. I guarantee you every single concern troll comment claiming to be a "a gun owner who is fed up with the NRA" or "a life time Reagan Republican who is just so embarrassed by the Tea Party" or some such is always a liberal troll. They are very organized and talk orders well. Some of them like shreek are too retarded to get the talking points right. But most of them do and they represent a good portion of the comments on news sites.

        1. Notice the absence of shrike and Bo this morning?

          I think they're waiting for their orders.

          1. Shreek is on the Ekins House unpopular thread. But is not seen on any of the four different Obamacare threads. Neither is Tony nor Bo. They haven't sorted out the talking points yet.

        2. They .... talk orders well.

          Half the fun of Hit and Run is a strangely apropos John malapropism.

          1. They do that too. And they also TAKE orders and follow orders well.

            1. Just to be clear, I was totally sincere and mean that with all due respect. You know your typos are legend.

              1. I know. I have a sense of humor about it.

                1. There's no sugarcoating it, John's posts are sometimes glitchy.

                  1. My handlers have been working to find the bad lines of code in my brain for years now.

                2. Hell, RC'z Law was practically invented for John.


            2. There is no sugarcoating it. John likes women with greater than optimal BMI.

  39. That's some good stuff.

    The benefits of Obamacare will far outweigh the costs of fixing this website fiasco. Indeed the benefits are already far greater

    Yeah, the benefits are great, even though no one has them, or even knows what they are.

    The best one I've seen today, and I don't have time to find the post again, but was from HuffPo and the gist of it was:

    This has failed because they used a Canadian company to develop the site, and Canada has a conservative government.

    1. If you can't get through the website, just call a 1-800 number which will refer you back to the website. No kidding.

      You have to laugh at this shit. You just have to laugh. These people are morons and are finally in a position where not even the media can hide that fact any longer.

      1. And this is nothing compared to what is to come. The software is a very minor disaster compared to what we're in for, with the implementation and management of the actual law.

        And no matter what some are saying, there is no way that an already outraged public is going to buy into 'Well, this was a major catastrophe, but just trust us to implement something even bigger, we just need single payer!'.

        That ship ain't gonna sail.

        1. No it isn't. Someone pointed out today how vicious the comments to an Ezra Klein WAPO piece admitting that this thing is a disaster were. I don't think many liberals are too ready to face the fact that this is a disaster. How do you admit it is a disaster when you have been telling yourself for five or more years that any criticism of Obama is just racism?

          I don't think it is going to be so easy for them to just blame the insurance companies or the Republicans. To blame them necessarily means you have something to blame on them. I just can't see that many of them doing that. They will just live in denial and turn on each other as various members of the hive admit the truth.

        2. Never underestimate the malleability of the American voter.

          American voters clamored for more government involvement in medical goods and services markets even though it was clear that market distortions were due to the fact that the government had already corrupted about half of it.

          It's really just a small step from Obamacare to single payer.

      2. The helpline, 800-318-2596, is available 24/7 and can provide assistance in 150 languages. There is also a new live-chat feature on HealthCare.gov.

        Just to be clear the Obamacare Help number is: 1-800-318-2596

        That's 1-800-F1UCKYO if that will help you remember.

    2. If you were a 25-year-old, overweight type-2 diabetes patient in the making, 7th-year part-time sociology major making Kos comments in your mom's basement, ObamaCare may have actually had some benefit already. You'll be able to transition to Medicaid after your parents have to drop you from their plan when you turn 27.

  40. It takes time to build something new and get it right. It's difficult to get it right the first time. The Wright Brothers, Henry Ford, Nikola Tesla, Alexander Graham Bell--not to mention Boeing, Ford Motor Company and Verizon--all have had rollout issues even with products and services that they tested as much as possible. Glitches happen.

    1. Neither web sites or health insurance are "new products". This here is some super special trolling.

      1. This is just a poor effort at a rehash of last weeks talking point, the Apple bug.

        No originality at all here.

        I give this troll effort a D-.

        1. C'mon man, I was just copying my favorite comment from yesterday's NYT opinion piece. You grade on a curve anyway.

    2. Glitches happen

      And major catastrophes also happen.

      This law has the latter written all over it.

    3. waffles|10.21.13 @ 2:23PM|#

      It takes time to build something new and get it right.


      However, taking something OLD, like health insurance? Then fucking it up extremely? that takes a billion bucks, the best minds in politics, and 3 or so years. VOILA!

    4. Seriously? Glitches?

  41. "Group behind Obama at Rose Garden speech includes only 3 Obamacare registrants"


    1. Note the commenters pointing out the obvious, that the Republicans need to fill a stadium or two with people who have suffered negative impacts of Obamacare, like losing their job, getting their hours cut, losing their doctor, or getting stuck in a crappy plan that they have no choice about, with increased premiums and deductible.

      But like one poster states, they will do nothing. They aren't known as the stupid party without reason. The only way we will ever get real pushback against the progs, is to rid the party of Boehners and McCains and fill it with more Rand Pauls.

      1. The only way we will ever get real pushback against the progs, is to rid the party of Boehners and McCains and fill it with more Rand Pauls.

        However even if they did then the Dems will still be meanz and Obama will veto everything and they will have to do unpopular things which Reason thinks is bad.

        1. Not all of us are assuming that Obama will be emperor for life.

          1. Well he will veto everything in 2015-2016.

            And what about future Dem Presidents?

            And even if there was a GOP Prez they will still have to worry about re-election.

      2. Sean Hannity put some people in his show that were "negatively affected" by Obamacare and it turns out none of them were actually affected by it (yet) one way or the other.

        This is why you can't trust the Republicans to do this correctly or honestly.

        1. Because Sean Hannity is "The Republicans"? Really? Come on troll better than that. Who the fuck besides lefty morons looking to troll about it even watches that show?

  42. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. AT LEAST Obamacare is deficit neutral, allowing everybody to keep their old health plans if they like them, and bending the cost curve of health insurance and healthcare costs down.

    If Obamacare turned out not to deliver on those three fronts, we would truly be screwed. I mean, people losing their jobs, having their hours cut, and not being able to navigate the exchanges is bad enough, but man oh man are we saved by the three above promises President Obama made while pushing the law down everyone's throats. Whew.

    1. *chuckle*

      Yeah, I'm feeling really confident about the fiscal soundness of this whole thing. That cost curve is going to be bent down like a giant waterslide at Six Flags.

  43. Here is something else to think about. When this thing was passed all we heard about was how fabulous it would be for those with pre-existing conditions. Well, now that it is in effect, where are these people? Surely the pro Obama media is just dying to run a few human interest stories about people who couldn't get coverage for their terrible illnesses before but can now thanks to Big Daddy in the White House. But I haven't seen any such stories. Has anyone else?

    It makes me wonder if there are very few people who actually meet this description and that many of the few who do can't afford health insurance or their conditions do not require expensive enough treatment to justify buying insurance even if they could afford it. Where are all the people with pre-existing conditions?

    1. I know of one personally.

      But thats not even final yet, and thats here in KY, where we have a working exchange.

      1. I am sure they are there. But it is odd that they are not being touted by the media. The only good news about that is that maybe at least for now insuring pre-existing conditions won't be that expensive since the pool is pretty small. Of course the moral hazard of doing so will gradually make that pool larger and larger.

        1. Well, if there's even one out there, then isn't it worth destroying the health care system and economy of the richest country on earth, to save them?

    2. Just look at the enrollment figures in the high risk pools over the last couple years. Extremely low, way below projections. If there were lots of these people out there, no doubt they would have been hoarding those high risk pools.

      1. That is a good point. The whole thing was an urban myth invented by the media.

  44. A couple of rather disingenuous comments from Obamamulus. Okay, okay Obamula. Never mind, Obama:

    "We've essentially created competition." Since when has the government ever 'created competition?' Competition infers there are to willing parties participating in action (or transactions) free of coercion. The government doesn't compete, it dictates. Nor can it "create" something it's not a participant in.

    "Prices have come down as a result of the competition." Really? So why have premiums gone up for people? Why the loopholes and exemptions? Why are tax credits needed? What we have here folks is market distortions created by the government. Something it's very good at.

    "People can save money." Which people exactly? Low-income people? Who exactly is going to benefit?

    "It's a great product and prices are good. It's a good deal." Well, Americans will never know now will they? In order to know if a product is 'great' consumers react to it. This happens in the free market system. There is no such mechanism in government run operations. As to price, again, how does he arrive at this assertion? Because he says so?

    Classic case of a bureaucrat using "capitalist" lingo to sell a state-run initiative. Obama was playing the part of CEO and this is what was most outrageous today.

    1. "Prices have come down as a result of the competition."

      That's probably the part people were laughing at.

  45. My wife IMed me and said that they just got a briefing on how Obamacare was going to affect their clinic (physical/occupational/speech therapy). She said that she'd show me the notes tonight.

    I'm actually a little bit nervous to see how Obama is managing to screw the little children who come in to learn how to walk, eat, and work through their disabilities.

    1. Now look here, don't come around here spreading your teathuglican hate and lies, we know that Obamacare will work. He just said that it will! Stop wishing for it to fail, bagger!

      /The Fluffpostians

      1. I'm using my thought rays to make Obamacare fail! I'm flipping the bits and changing the code with MY MIND!!!1!

        Either that or I'm one of those l33t h4xx0rz using my wizard skills to hack the exchanges for shits and giggles, I guess?

  46. So I'm going to start some fodder for conspiracy theorists - this can also be a poll for those with a sense of humor.

    Obamacare's websites are not working because...

    1) Poorly designed software by government contractors that get paid to build a service and then get paid more for each bug they fix.

    2) Signup is so low that they simply shut it down so that they would have a scapegoat for why people haven't purchased.

    3) The servers have been hacked and it's all they can do to keep a lid on that - no one would signup if they knew hackers could easily access all their info.

    4) This is just an excuse to remove the private insurance companies from the whole process - because, you know, developing b2b websites are too hard and complicated.

    5) To many college students are taking Computer Science so that when they graduate that can get high paying jobs. The embarrassment to the software industry will drive these students towards more productive lines of work like social worker and community planner.

    1. 6) The coders who designed the system were secretly infiltrated by libertarians who purposely implanted bugs they knew would prevent it from working. (How else can you explain the requirement that you create an account before you can see the prices?)

      7) Groups of Tea Party hackers are waging DDOS attacks against the website.

      8) Faith-based software development. If you believe in it hard enough and have a good cause it will work.

      1. #6 +1 free radical computer geek. Can be picked up at your local BestBuy(pocket protector and nerdy glasses included).

      2. 9) The government really had no clue what it wanted, making it impossible to actually design the system, and then kept sending new conflicting orders every couple of days during development.

        e.g. what ends up happening on pretty much every government IT project.

    2. 11) Lizard people, who control everything from inside the hollow moon, sabotaged the system with laser guided lizard thought beams. They wanted it to fail so they could watch children and women dying in the street for lack of health insurance(their favorite activity).

    3. "Obamacare's websites are not working because..."


  47. 3) The servers have been hacked and it's all they can do to keep a lid on that - no one would signup if they knew hackers could easily access all their info.

    There's no sugarcoating it. If a tree falls in the woods, and nobody is there to hear it, what difference, at this point, does it make?

  48. The speech failed to give me confidence that the alt-text will work.

    1. There is no sugarcoating it. The picture lacks a descriptor.

  49. There's no sugarcoating it. You didn't build that.

  50. The administration is just going to have to deem Obamacare a success and MoveOn !

  51. my classmate's half-sister makes $73 every hour on the computer. She has been without a job for six months but last month her pay check was $20027 just working on the computer for a few hours. Check This Out

    ?????????? http://www.works23.com

    1. That's nine hours a day every day in September. How is that "without a job"? Also, if you' classmate knows about this, why the hell is still taking classes instead of working nine hours every day and making $250K per year? Is he dumb?

  52. Even if they abandon the website, ACA will stumble onwards. Call 1-800-freebies for details. It might take longer and cost more, but it's your time and not their money, so what's the downside?

    1. The only possible upside is that people begin to realize that free shit is VERY expensive.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.