The President said: "You can keep your current insurance policy."

[ChisolmTrailDem]

Why aren't we talking about this?

If we don't, the narrative will be controlled by ACA's opponents.

[JoePhilly]

1. Your employer and your insurance company have always been able to take away

the policy you have now.

They do so every enrollment period.

The only difference is that now they can blame the ACA when they do so.

[BlueStreak]

2. Exactly. For the next 2 years, EVERY HC related issue will be blamed on "Obamacare"

[JoePhilly]

5. The good news will be that the ACA has basically broken up much of the State level monopolies

that the insurance companies had created over the years.

The insurance companies will be trying to grab us as many customers as possible. Which should mean more competition and lower premiums.

[BlueStreak]

45. Not all of them, but progress nonetheless

In my county, there is only one well-known insurer (Anthem). There is another local outfit (MDWise) that actually has better coverage, but they both have agreed to keep the prices sky-high -- basically $1500/mo for 2 people about 59 years old.

But I expect this will change in 2015 because there will be insurance companies currently in other states looking at that juicy $1500 premium and deciding they want some of that.

You are right, these state-level Insurance Commissioner offices have often been used as fiefdoms, to the great detriment of the peasants living in those states. There will still be Insurance commissioners to regulate fraud and corrupt practices, but at least the standards for policies are now national.

[lostincalifornia]

7. problem is the speeches the President was making didn't detail it. What he said was you can keep

your same insurance, and that leaves out a lot, if the current policy does not meet the minimum ACA requirements. In that case your current policy will be cancelled, and a replacement policy provided, which could be at a significantly increased cost for some. In addition, those affected do not see a value added benefit verses the increased cost.

That does not mean I am against the ACA in general, or the many people it is helping, however, if one is an older American, greater than 55, slightly over the income level for a subsidy, they are going to have sticker shock, and are not going to be happy.

For example:

Two people, 55 years old, whose income is 63K a year will not be entitled to a subsidy, and pay 900/month for the bronze plan, which for some, depending where they live is unaffordable. The ACA indicates if the premium of the bronze plan exceeds 8% of their income they can be granted an exception from the mandate. That would mean no insurance, which defeats the original purpose of the ACA for that demographic.

[cilla4progress]

12. So true.

Plus - if one spouse has employer-paid coverage and that spouse's portion is less than 9.5% of his/her income, no matter how expensive it is to cover dependents, there are no subsidies (as long as the employee's coverage itSELF is less than 9.5%)!

[lostincalifornia]

15. They really have to fix these oversights ASAP

[PasadenaTrudy]

6. my replacement policy

is offered at a dollar less than an equivalent ACA policy. Whoopee. At least it's not higher, lol

[Mass]

9. No, some just discovered they had no insurance. They had been sold a bill of goods.

[CTyankee]

19. Or, they had a "catastrophic" insurance policy which really isn't "health insurance."

[haele]

69. Or, they find it quite adequate until something actually happens.

Well, perhaps only .005% of the population with cheap catastrophic insurance will suddenly developed a medical situation that the insurance doesn't cover. And will develop something avoidably chronic, go bankrupt, or die because they were suddenly faced with paying monstrous sums of money out of pocket on medical bills.

Problem with cut-rate medical insurance is that everyone will need medical care at some time in their life. And no one gets to pick the time they'll need it.
Everyone I know - including myself - has faced an extreme medical issue or developed a chronic condition that needed to be monitored or maintained, and none of us had a choice as to when it happened to us. The people I know who had no insurance or a cheap catastrophic plan always ended up owing a significant amount up front - thousands to tens of thousands of dollars - to deal with the medical issue.

While I might have been paying an equivalent amount over the years on a good plan, I've been able to keep my family and my health conditions to the level that we are able to maintain significant functionality. If my employer had decided to go with a cheap insurance that was basically a coupon book for doctors and services "in network" instead of going with a real insurance plan, we'd have been putting off treatment and probably ending up in bankruptcy and with a totally disabled, almost vegetative family member because we couldn't afford $400 a visit to a specialist every month, the $3800 a month in bio-medicine treatment and $800 - $1200 every three months in lab tests that wouldn't be covered by that "perfectly adequate" insurance.

No, that family member didn't plan to become disabled, and was living a very active, reasonably healthy life until he was in his early 40's. Never "needed to go" to the doctor for anything other than a cold or check-up before his body decided to quit. Yeah, we were complaining about the cost of my employer provided full-coverage insurance - until we needed it back in 2003. And if we had dropped that and gone with an alternative cheaper market-purchased catastrophic plan and waited "until we needed it" to get the better insurance we would have been SOL for getting any insurance at all.

Yes, there's a lot that needs to be fixed with the ACA. A whole lot of cracks that need patching, if people in the States or in Congress were willing to work on fixing the problems instead of pitching a political bitch.

But those "adequate, affordable" plans that were around prior to this year were really nothing more than a medical coupon club, and pretty close to worthless as health care coverage to most Americans who were got them. They're really set up for people who already had enough money to cover most medical bills but wanted the equivalent of "un-insured motorist" coverage for any big unplanned medical situations.

Haele

[solarhydrocan]

18. many people see the following as a bit more than "implied"

Calling that "Implied" is like saying Max Baucus didn't schedule the Single Payer Advocates (that he had arrested at a hearing).

[cthulu2016]

26. "Implied" is not a synonym for "stated"

[Pretzel_Warrior]

36. Oh, you again

[JoePhilly]

44. That is still nothing different from what the insurers were already doing.

The only difference is that they have a new excuse for doing it.

My company has changed my insurance company, and the associated plans, every year for the last 10 at least.

The ACA did nothing to cause that.

[CTyankee]

4. That's a good question. Joe Scar had a field day with it on MJ today...

he was laughing like a hyena. Really disgusting.

My (uneducated) guess is that Obama felt that since the insurance folks had would be so improved that they would be happy it was the "same" as before...

I guess he shudda said "You will have your health insurance, only better!" But maybe his adivsers warned that that could raise a bunch of red flags in folks' minds and it would hurt the bill's chances of passing.

[cilla4progress]

13. Ya think? eom

[Laura PourMeADrink]

46. Isn't part of it too that the better substitute can be a lot more expensive? I can't imagine

Obama purposely trying to trick people - but this doesn't not make him look good at all , IMHO. sometimes I think he picked people to run things that he liked more than people who were expert at what they do.

[CTyankee]

66. that seems to be the problem, altho some people would say they don't want the enhancements.

A young single woman may not want maternity benefits at the outset of her career, for example, tho she may want to obtain them later on. But I must say that as an employed woman post menopause my employee plan did have maternity benefits...it was just really one plan everybody had, but since I paid only a portion of the premium I wasn't too concerned. I retired at the end of 2004 so I don't know how employee health insurance plans might have changed...

[Mass]

10. This implies you had insurance. Some of these contracts were insurance in name only.

Those are the ones that are currently repealed. May be they should sue the insurance companies for ripping off their customers, but calling what these people had an insurance would be a lie.

[Mass]

17. Suing for the old contracts not being what they thought they were buying.

Most of the people we are talking of were abused because older and unable to buy insurance and they were sold products that were useless. I was joking when talking about suing, but I think if we were in a decent country, insurance companies who sold these junk insurance contracts should be sued.

This said, these people most likely are better off with these new contracts and will end up spending less in healthcare (and will definitively when they get really sick). So, rather than repeating RW memes, we should be busy explaining that (and complaining to the media for not doing their research).

[cilla4progress]

16. I don't know..mine was through the state, and it worked well for me.

One huge plus of ACA is mine had an annual $100K out of pocket cap (which I never reached) and I believe under ACA law requires $6.3K cap per individual.

This is a really good thing.

Most things about ACA are really good, except for the huge increase in premiums and deductibles for a certain segment of the population, which would be me.

[Mass]

20. You were lucky not to have been seriously ill. I had breast cancer a few years ago and I was happy

to live in a state like MA. In your state and with your insurance, I would be broke or dead. Altogether, you are probably a lot better off with your new contract, increase in premium aside.

[cilla4progress]

22. I suppose one of the challenges

is the great diversity in health profiles. Because we had no major illnesses, my perception is my lower cost (and ACA cancelled) policy worked great for me. For you, it would not have, and the increase in premiums and deductible would be worth it.

[Adrahil]

21. Welp, TBH, he shouldn't have said that.

He should have added the caveat "qualified plans."

[CTyankee]

23. But his advisers could very well have said that saying" qualified plans" would look like a

bit of a dodge. The next question, logically, would be "what do you mean by qualified plans?" I really think they played that scenario out and decided that everything would be fine once people saw they were getting more than they had in health coverage. That may still be the ultimate fallout of this whole thing, but right now it is pretty cold comfort...

[ecstatic]

24. Maybe he could have been clearer, but

despite all the current hyperbole, everyone will get to experience how the ACA affects their lives over the next 2.5 years.

The wildcard is young adults who feel invincible and aren't covered by their parents. Those of us who have pre-existing conditions, or have had to purchase individual policies that were not comprehensive, or had Cobra insurance, know how important this law is. Many others have never had to look into the nuts and bolts of their policies and they think that the $50/month they've been paying covers everything.

At the end of the day, if the misinformation persists and young people don't enroll (causing the prices to go up), both the democratic and republican presidential nominee will likely run on either changing or repealing it. Then we can go back to the days of pre-existing condition exclusion and gender discrimination. It actually might take that for Americans to finally understand that it is, in fact, needed. Of course, by then it will be too late.

[CTyankee]

25. Then my dream would be that Prez Obama would say, "OK, folks. Let's try another approach...

we have an existing framework that works pretty well and one that most Americans are familiar with. It's called Medicare. Let's just have Medicare for everybody."

Which is what should have been done in the first place. Americans know and trust Medicare. I don't know why this wasn't even tried...

[ecstatic]

27. As a public option? Yes, that would have been great

Looking back, I'm sure Pres. Obama regrets trying to compromise with people who never intended to vote for it anyway. But wasn't the issue that some democrats weren't on board?

ETA: But even with Medicare, there would still be a cost associated with buying into it.

[CTyankee]

30. well, I'll bet that you are right that PBO regrets trying to compromise as it was a doomed

effort from the beginning. Some Dems weren't on board with a public option but of all the so-called public options, it was the most attractive. It was probably Joe Lieberman, who by that time had been thrown out of our state Dem party. He ran (and, sadly, won) on his Independent party of one ticket (!) and Ned Lamont, who I supported and worked hard for, was the official Democratic Party candidate. Lots of people in the state didn't know that. I remember in call after call that I made to registered Dems for Lamont I heard people say "Huh?" when I told them that Joe was no longer the Dem candidate...

Joe was so embittered by his being dumped by the Dem Party. When he was elected Senator on his own little party label, he turned vicious and stabbed us all in the back by siding with the pukes over health care...

[blm]

28. Employers changed policies or dropped coverage altogether by decreasing

employee hours or status.

[littlewolf]

29. we just got our new insurance at work.

premiums dropped 10 percent
deducible doubled.

I am fortunate in that I do not
have to buy insurance through
work. I only take the dental
and vision coverage.
retired military.

[bluestate10]

31. HHS seems to be stepping into pile of shit. That agency wrote the REG on

minimum standards and made it much narrower than Congress intended. The President should have spent more time examining what he was speaking on. I agree that the right will take advantage of this gift to them.

[cilla4progress]

53. This is very interesting.

Interested to see how it shakes out..

[matt819]

32. As in all things, people hear what they want to hear

Okay, he said you can keep your current insurance policy.

He didn't say that life will remain unchanged.

Employers always have had the right to change the insurance plans (and anything else, for that matter) that they offer to their employees, based on any number of reasons. Sure, employers may be saying that they are changing their plans based on the ACA, but that's just a smokescreen.

Insurance companies have always had the right to change the policies they offer to individuals or groups. This happens every year based on numerous factors. Again, they may be claiming that it's the ACA that causing them to make these changes, but, again, that's a smokescreen. And the insurance business is so damned complex that trying to nail down the real reasons for changes is a challenge.

Remember, it's private insurance companies providing coverage under the ACA. That might not have been the best solution, but it's the one we are confronting. So if insurance company A has chosen not to participate in the ACA and they see customers flock to insurance companies B, C, D, etc., sure it's going to impact A and changes in premiums and coverage will have to be made.

You see, the problem is that not everything boils down to a nice, concise, talking point soundbite. And those on the right don't have the capacity to think through issues beyond this.

[cthulu2016]

33. No, people heard what they actually heard

The attempt to finesse this is embarrassing.

the problem is that not everything boils down to a nice, concise, talking point soundbite

Gee, you think? That would seem to argue against boiling it down to a soundbite, but instead you shift blame to people HEARING the facile, boiled-down soundbite for not recognizing it was false.

[matt819]

47. Disagree

Thanks to leftstreet for the quotes, from which many conclude that the president mislead the people. I disagree.

People can keep their own insurance. If it's better, or cheaper, or they don't like to change, they can keep what they have.

It doesn't mean that it absolves them of the responsibility to make reasoned decisions. Are they comparing comparing like plans? For how many family members? Same deductibles? Pre-existing condition coverage?

Nor does it mean that the world around them won't change. Sure, they can keep their plans, but that doesn't mean employers can't change their plans, raise rates, or even eliminate insurance coverage.

Just because people can keep their plans doesn't mean that insurance companies will change their coverages, providers, etc. Happens all the time, and it happened before ACA. Is it right? Fair? That's arguable. But these things do happen, and when they do people have to evaluate the impact on them and make decisions accordingly. We have an insurance plan that considered part of the state's largest health care system to be out of network, so we ended up paying a few thousand dollars more just so we could see a doctor we preferred over the one in the plan. This wasn't an ACA issue. It's an issue adults have to deal with all the time, whether they like to or not.

So, no, I don't think the administration needs to finesse this.

[leftstreet]

34. "If you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep...

your health care plan. Period. No one will take it away. No matter what." June 2009

“If somebody has insurance they like, they should be able to keep that insurance. If they have a doctor that they like, they should be able to keep their doctor.” Barack Obama, YouTube, March 6, 2009

“The plans you are discussing embody my core belief that Americans should have better choices for health insurance, building on the principle that if they like the coverage they have now, they can keep it, …” Barack Obama, Letter to Senate Democrat Leaders, June 2, 2009

“Americans must have the freedom to keep whatever doctor and health care plan they have…” Barack Obama, Remarks on Health Care, Washington, D.C., June 11, 2009

“No matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. Period. If you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan. Period. No one will take it away. No matter what. My view is that health care reform should be guided by a simple principle: fix what’s broken and build on what works.” Barack Obama, Address to the AMA, June 15, 2009

“There’s no doubt that we have to preserve what’s best in the health care system, and that means allowing Americans who like their doctor and like their health care plan to keep their plan. And that’s going to be a priority for us.” Barack Obama, Remarks at Northern Virginia Community College, Annandale, VA, July 1, 2009

“I know a lot of Americans who are satisfied with their health care right now are wondering what reform would mean for them, so let me be clear: If you like your doctor or health care provider, you can keep them. If you like your health care plan, you can keep that too.” Barack Obama, Remarks on Health Care, Washington, D.C., July 15, 2009

“And that means that no matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. Period. If you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan. Period. No one will take it away. No matter what. My view is that health care reform should be guided by a simple principle: fix what’s broken and build on what works.” Barack Obama, Holmdel, NJ, July 16, 2009

“Those who oppose reform will also tell you that under our plan, you won’t get to choose your doctor, that some bureaucrat will choose for you. That’s also not true. Michelle and I don’t want anyone telling us who our family’s doctor should be, and no one should decide that for you either. Under our proposals, if you like your doctor, you keep your doctor. If you like your current insurance, you keep that insurance. Period. End of story.” Barack Obama, Weekly Address, July 18, 2009

“If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.” Barack Obama, Town Hall Meeting, August 11, 2009

“No matter what you’ve heard, if you like your doctor or health care plan, you can keep it.” Barack Obama, Weekly Radio Address, August 15, 2009

“If you like your doctor, you’re going to be able to keep your doctor. If you like your plan, keep your plan. I don’t believe we should give government or the insurance companies more control over health care in America. I think it’s time to give you, the American people, more control over your health.” Barack Obama, Speech George Mason University, March 19, 2009

“If you already have health insurance through your job — and because many of you are members of unions, you do — nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change your coverage or your doctor. Let me repeat: Nothing in this plan will require you to change your coverage or your doctor.” Barack Obama, Address to the AFL-CIO Convention, September 15, 2009

http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2013/08/05/airbrushing-away-the-numerous-false-promises-of-obama-care/

[SoCalDem]

38. Um... we HAVE

because the media has a new chew toy, & we always discuss their playthings

[cynannmarie]

39. there are definitely certain issues that need to be addressed

I am a huge supporter of the ideals behind the ACA (or any program that gives coverage to more people). I am a cancer survivor and have seen first hand many other cancer patients struggle terribly with medical costs/insurance issues while enduring the hardships of treatment. The combination can be devastating and overwhelming.
However, there is no denying that there are issues with the "you can keep your plan" statement. Not ALL plans that are being cancelled and replaced by higher cost ones were "junk" plans. Mine (Kaiser) was quite comprehensive and has gotten me through the past 3 years of considerable medical care very well. But it is being cancelled, and its quoted replacement, a Bronze plan, is $200./month more expensive and the deduction is double, OOPM is $1350. more, copays much more, etc. To approach comparabiity, (not fully) I would have to go to the Silver plan which would be $315./month more expensive ($630. for my husband and myself).
Thankfully, we will likely qualify for a subsidy (just barely) which will bring the cost down somewhat, to a little less than our previous premium and I am super grateful for this. But what concerns me is that our income is close to the cut off and if we were to go over by even slightly, the premiums would jump to $1630. /mo for the Silver plan (for 2) when our previous, quite good plan was $1000. a month.
$1630. /mo plus deductibles and copays is unaffordable for us, considering that we have a mortgage, high property taxes and help our son with grad school tuition (none deductible from AGI/MAGI). Going without insurance is NOT an option, considering our 60+ ages and my health history.
The huge increase in premium costs between a couple making $62,000 (with subsidy) and $63,000 /yr (without subsidy) is a unfair feature of the ACA and should be altered. I realize that there has to be a limit somewhere for the subsidy, but it seems that it should be phased out gradually on a sliding scale, not the huge jump in premium costs after the cutoff that is currently built into the ACA. This is situation in which one would definitely be better off keeping one's previous plan if it were a good one.

[cilla4progress]

57. Folks like you

(and my family) need to get to Pres. Obama and make sure he hears this. I'm sure he didn't intend this.

What happened? Too much detail even for him? HHS ranging off and issuing regs that were inconsistent with the legislation?

If we'd had a public option this would all be moot.

[randome]

41. This is taking 'parsing' to an entirely new level.

If I tell you "You can work at XYZ for as long as you like", does anyone with a mind really think that precludes XYZ shutting down or filing for bankruptcy or being blasted out of existence by a meteor storm?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Treat your body like a machine. Your mind like a castle.[/center][/font][hr]

[Pretzel_Warrior]

42. ^^^^^THIS IS....^^^^^^

False. At the time Obama was touting ACA in 2009, they were writing the law with exceptions to grandfather in the individual plans already in effect in 2010 even if they didn't meet ACA standards for minimum coverage levels. Since then, HHS has rewritten rules to restrict it to ONLY policies that haven't had changes since 2010 (copay changes, coverage changes,etc.)

People who were paying monthly premiums would be better off saving that money to the side every month to self fund health care.

[cthulu2016]

43. Exactly. It depends on what the meaning of 'is' is

It was true of the ACA in 2009.

There was no obligation that it remain true when the ACA began operating.

[cilla4progress]

60. As far as I know mine hasn't EVEN

changed and it is being cancelled, presumably because it is no longer profitable under ACA or doesn't meet the law's standard of a "qualified plan."

I find this all needlessly confusing!

Question: if it's true that a big plus of ACA is the annual out of pocket cap of $6300 / yr., eliminating the huge problem of "medical bankruptcies" (filed due to unpayable medical bills), why isn't this singular issue being hyped more?

I don't know if the administration just did a poor PR job with this whole thing, or it is the convolution of integrating private profit into the system - but I, for one, am disappointed.

[NCTraveler]

48. Every person in this country knew he was full of shit when he said that.

Past that point, he made other contradicting statements to the effect that some will have to give up their coverage for a better plan. He often says what he feels he needs to when in front of certain groups. I have seen a dozen or so threads over the last week or so complaining about this one statement. Why is that? everyone knew he wasn't being honest at the time. Why are some of you now acting like you are surprised?

Obama said what he needed to in order to build momentum needed to get it passed. He showed many democrats he was willing to stick his neck out for the ACA. He was letting them know he was front and center in the fight and was willing to do anything just to get it passed. This is political hardball. Politicians aren't always honest when promoting their positions to certain groups. Obama was successful where others have failed. So fucking what if he lied a little along the way.

Concern noted.

[cthulu2016]

49. Wha?

So in order to build momentum for something a politician said something that every person in this country knew was full of shit?

How does that build momentum?

Surely somebody must have believed it.

[NCTraveler]

54. Yes, everyone paying attention knew it was a lie.

Those who only watch one news segment a week or so would get that sound bite. Hearing that makes the masses, who normally don't care about these thing, feel more comfortable. It also gave democrats something to rally behind. That builds momentum.

So, here is a list of the people who believed it.
Those who don't pay attention and just heard the soundbite, and the op.

It did give the democrats the ammo needed to shoot down the repubs who consistently said that the people would not be able to keep their health insurance.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

50. Don't pull the concern troll attitude with me. I support ACA and I don't

currently have insurance and am thankful I have options now.

So get off your high horse.

[NCTraveler]

51. No high horse here.

I stand by my comments.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

52. And I by mine. n/t

[NCTraveler]

55. Just to clarify. You paid attention to the ACA debate and thought it was an honest comment? nt

[ChisolmTrailDem]

58. No, I was pointing out that we weren't talking about it, thereby

allowing the RWNJs to control the narrative. And I think considering what I just saw during the Taverner hearing that I was right.

I don't believe I have commented on my opinion of what the president said, but if you're interested, I don't believe he should have said that and I thought so the very moment I watched him say it on live TV.

[cilla4progress]

61. YES!

So much so I initially volunteered to be an In Person Assister to help launch the program.

I guess I'm just a dummy in your world!

[NCTraveler]

65. You believed that, but didn't believe other staments by him that contradicted it? nt.

[cilla4progress]

67. Such as? eom

[CTyankee]

68. I for one heard PBO make that statement about keeping your insurance several times and I did not

think he was full of shit when he said it. I thought he meant what he said. To me "if you like your insurance plan you can keep it" did not imply "...until you don't." Sure, nothing is forever, but this is right out of the gate a plain contradiction.

Maybe he got the heads up that what he said would not be the truth late in the game, too late to go back and say "I gotta make a correction here to what I said before about keeping your insurance plan...let me explain..."

So I figure they knew they would take a hit on this but had to go forward nonetheless...and that was that...

[NCTraveler]

70. Fair enough.

I didn't believe him in any way. I didn't make fundamental sense in the way things in the act were being structured.

[CTyankee]

71. I must confess that I was not a prescient as you were about this. However, I do wonder if my guess

that he learned about this fundamental change (contradiction) to what he said earlier LATER (after HHS was busy writing the regs) is correct. That's the only explanation that makes sense to me.

It does NOT make sense to me that he would directly LIE over and over again. For one thing, he and his staff know the videos of him saying it exist and would be played ad nauseum. They must have known they were going to take a hit and a bad one right at the start of the rollout, but felt there was nothing they could do. At that point, it was what it was.

[ProSense]

56. Think Progress debunked NBC's report on insurance cancellations, and there is more

Think Progress debunked NBC's report on insurance cancellations, and there is more
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023942430

[Rex]

59. He was wrong? Is it possible for the POTUS to be incorrect?

Which is fine by me since all humans make mistakes. I have no doubt when he was briefed on this issue, he was told people will not be forced to change their policy. I cannot see him going out on stage and making a public announcement THAT factually incorrect (especially if he knew beforehand).

The opponents of ACA are welcome to say whatever they want to, I've noticed most people don't care and are still signing up or looking over the exchanges. A lot of them former Republicans.

Let them cry over a great public works project that separates work from health...it will be their parties death cry.

[1StrongBlackMan]

72. Unfortunately …

This "You can keep your current insurance policy" narrative is perfectly suited for the anti-ACA crowd … it is simplistic and requires no thought.

If you care to get a good look at what this argument looks like, try and find Billy Kristol’s act while on the panel during This Week With Georgie S (or was it that fox Wallace show?)

He might every explanation … every response … with “But he saaiiidddd!”, with a self-satisfied 4 year old’s smile.