PostScript: Krauthammer and losing health-care coverage

We're waiting. (Karen Bleier/Getty Images)

We’re waiting. (Karen Bleier/Getty Images)

Happy November, everyone! Let’s argue about Obamacare. Today we have Charles Krauthammer arguing that President Obama’s promise regarding Obamacare — that it wouldn’t mess with the insurance you already had — was a big, ol’ lie, since the Affordable Heath Care Act does make certain plans noncompliant. It’s especially galling right now, when people are getting notified their coverage will end soon and while they aren’t able to navigate Healthcare.gov to know what their new policies will be. Just bloop, no insurance for you while we fix these glitches that maybe we can fix. Wheee! Of course, bloop, no insurance for you was par for the course for some people before Obamacare, but it was different people, and Obama did say, many times, that Obamacare wouldn’t take your insurance away if you wanted to keep it. And there are factors we don’t know yet and won’t know for some time about how all this will work, which is really scary. But if there’s one thing we can count on, it’s the contours of the argument, which have solidified over threeeeee yeeeeeeeeears.

billnewcott thinks Obama probably really did misspeak:

Don’t be too tough on the Prez, Dr. K. What he meant to say was, “If I like your health insurance, you can keep it.”

All American Eric is less inclined than ever to trust Obama and his plan:

If the government can’t even get a website to function properly, 3 1/2 years and $600 Million later, how on God’s green earth are they going to competently administer healthcare to 300 Million Americans?

wmbrent says everyone in the pool is better off when everyone in the pool has the coverage he needs and isn’t sneezing/going bankrupt all over the rest of us:

Obama should certainly have made his rash promise conditional on having a qualifying policy, but there’s nothing new about a group policy covering maternity costs for men and post-menopausal women.

TheHillman says he represents the losers under the old system, with bigger problems than people who will have to switch to more comprehensive plans:

I have cancer. My insurance company has denied all types of treatments, including access to the best doctors (out of my plan simply because I’m self-insured instead of having a big company plan), denying genetic testing that would tell me the likelihood of return of cancer, etc. And it’s six months to get a colonoscopy. Nearly a year to get an appointment for followup for skin cancer treatments. Over a month to see my primary care physician. My $300 a month medications? Completely uncovered. Through their pharmacy they are $300. Through a Canadian pharmacy they are about $25. This is the system Republicans are trying to preserve?

DA_Mike says, despite how our legislators behaved, there were still more options than Obamacare or nothing:

There are plenty of problems with the existing healthcare system that could have been looked at before demanding that every American continue to prop it up through mandates. The only people that think the ACA is a good thing are those who are going to get something for free.

And edbyronadams thinks Obamacare is functioning TOO well so far, and needs a couple more fatal blows:

I hope the young follow the path of civil disobedience to this latest ream job and do not comply. That will sink it.

PostScript was wrong before about the argument never changing. Nobody’s talking about death panels anymore! Which, honestly, is about the best prognosis one could hope for, right?

Also on PostPartisan

Oh SNAP, veterans get dissed by the GOP