Drive-Bys Start Spinning for Unemployment Spike
RUSH: Here, Christopher Rugaber, who is a mouthpiece for the regime/AP reporter. "Why a Spike in October Unemployment May Not be so Bad." Okay, this tells us the unemployment numbers tomorrow are not gonna be good, and so AP is setting the table: Hey, that's actually good! The numbers going up, that's good.
He says, "The job report for October due out Friday may be bleak. It might even be scary. The unemployment rate could jump by the most in three years. Hiring may slow from an already weak pace. Don't panic. The ugly figures will reflect the government's partial shutdown, which coincided with 16 days in October. The trends for the job market will likely reverse themselves in coming months."
Nobody lost their job because of the government shutdown. What's the shutdown have to do with the unemployment rate? Zip, zero, nada. So somebody's told this schlub that we're gonna have a rotten unemployment number tomorrow and AP's out there saying: Don't sweat it, it's just the shutdown, and it'll roar back in the next few months or so. Don't sweat it.
And then also from AP, headline: "New Measure Shows Nation's Poor at 49.7 Million -- The number of poor people in America is 3 million higher than the official count, encompassing 1 in 6 residents due to out-of-pocket medical costs and work-related expenses, according to a revised census measure," but don't be fooled. This is the AP. They're not exposing Obama's disastrous economy.
What they're trying to do, if you read the whole story, is they're making sure that food stamps and other welfare benefits don't get cut. That's the only reason they run this. It is a shame. It is unacceptable, the number of Americans living in poverty, and it's going up, and we can't get one story from anybody in the media that maybe the last five years of economic policies might have something to do with this?
They even say here that "out-of-pocket medical costs and work-related expenses" are going up, but there's no connection. Why are out of pocket medical expenses going up? Ever heard of Obamacare? But, oh, no, no, no, no, no, no! It's just a piece to make sure that these Republicans don't seize on this and cut food stamps or welfare benefits. That's all this story is.
Loyal Obama Supporters Canceled by Obamacare
RUSH: I talked about this other story earlier. I mentioned it last hour. It's from ProPublica, which is a left-wing hack site. It's supposedly a journalist clearinghouse site, but it's his bunch of leftist wackos. Headline: "Loyal Obama Supporters Canceled by Obamacare." Here's what this is: "San Francisco architect Lee Hammock and he's wife, Joe Ellen Brothers, are cradle Democrats. They have donated to the liberal group Organizing for America and worked the phone banks a year ago for President Obama’s re-election."
"Cradle Democrats" means they're cradle-to-grave Democrats. They're dyed-in-the-wool Democrats. The ProPublica reporter has been hearing about all these horror stories with health care, and he wanted to find out if they're really true. So he found this San Francisco couple that is losing their health insurance, and their prices for replacement are skyrocketing, and he wanted to find out if it was really the case or if there was some other explanation for it.
"Since 1995, Hammack and Brothers have received their health coverage from Kaiser Permanente... 'We’ve both been in very good health all of our lives -- exercise, don’t smoke, drink lightly, healthy weight, no health issues, and so on,' Hammack told me. The couple -- Lee, 60, and JoEllen, 59 -- have been paying $550 a month for their health coverage -- a plan that offers solid coverage, not one of the skimpy plans Obama has criticized.
"But recently, Kaiser informed them the plan would be canceled at the end of the year because it did not meet the requirements of the [Obamacare]. The couple would need to find another one. The cost would be around double what they pay now, but the benefits would be worse." So this guy wanted to find out, this reporter, is this really true? They keep hearing that's horror stories, and wanted to get to the bottom of it.
"From all of the sob stories I've heard and read, ours is the most extreme," Lee said, and that's because it's happening to him, of course. That's why he thinks it's the most extreme. "I've been skeptical..." This is the reporter writing. "The couple’s existing Kaiser plan was a good one. Their new options were indeed more expensive, and the benefits didn’t seem any better. They do not qualify for premium subsidies because they make more than four times the federal poverty level, though Hammack says not by much.
"Hammack recalled his reaction when he and his wife received a letters from Kaiser in September informing him their coverage was being canceled. 'I work downstairs and my wife had a clear look of shock on her face,' he said. 'Our first reaction was clearly there’s got to be some mistake. This was before the exchanges opened up. We quickly calmed down. We were confident that this would all be straightened out. But it wasn't.' I asked Hammack to send me details of his current plan.
"It carried a $4,000 deductible per person, a $40 copay for doctor visits, a $150 emergency room visit fee and 30% coinsurance for hospital stays after the deductible. The out-of-pocket maximum was $5,600. This plan was ending, Kaiser’s letters told them, because it did not meet the requirements of [Obamacare]. 'Everything is taken care of,' the letters said. 'There’s nothing you need to do.'
"The letters said the couple would be enrolled in new Kaiser plans that would cost nearly $1,300 a month for the two of them (more than $15,000 a year)." Remember, they were paying $5,600. "And for that higher amount, what would they get? A higher deductible ($4,500), a higher out-of-pocket maximum ($6,350), higher hospital costs (40% of the cost) and possibly higher costs for doctor visits and drugs."
The reporter asks, "What is going on here?" because they all trusted Obama. They just thought you keep your plan. If you like your plan, you keep it. Your doctor, too. Your premium goes down $2,500. These people bought it -- they're big Obama supporters -- hook, line and sinker! Now their medical costs are skyrocketing under the new plan they're gonna be forced into taking.
The way this story ends: "So what is Hammack going to do? If his income were to fall below four times the federal poverty level, or about $62,000 for a family of two, he would qualify for subsidies that could lower his premium cost to as low as zero. If he makes even one dollar more, he gets nothing." So what the Hammacks have decided they have to do is figure out a way to get subsidies, meaning get their neighbors to pay the freight.
Even though they make over the $62,000 a year cutoff, they want to find a way to get their neighbors to pay for it. Typical Democrats. "That's what he's leaning toward -- lowering his salary or shifting more money toward a retirement account and applying for a subsidy." That's what this couple is gonna do. They are going to lower their salary so they are below the limit of four times poverty level, so that they get subsidies from their neighbors. Here is a case of Obamacare harming economic production. Here's a couple giving up income in order to get a freebie, lowering their standard of living.
Dyed-in-the-wool Obama supporters. They love Obama. They think this guy's the greatest ever. In fact, the end of the story: "We’re not changing our views because of this situation, but it hurt to hear Obama saying, just the other day, that if our plan has been dropped it’s because it wasn’t any good, and our costs would go up only slightly. We’re gratified that the press is on the case, but frustrated that the stewards of the ACA don’t seem to have heard."
So it isn't Obama that did this. They have implicit trust in Obama. Limbaugh Theorem right there. Obama has destroyed their lives, but he didn't. It's the stewards of Obamacare. He probably doesn't even know, but they're happy the press is on the case now. So they're gonna lower their income so they qualify for freebies, and they're gonna remain dyed-in-the-wool, loyal San Francisco Democrats. In fact, the story says this guy called Nancy Pelosi for assistance, which might prove beneficial. Once the word gets out, she'll see the value here. So loyal Obama supporters canceled by Obamacare, remaining loyal Obama supporters lowering their standard of living to qualify for freebies, and talking about what a great guy Obama is.
Folks, these are low-information, just dyed-in-the-wool. These are nincompoops. There's no amount of reality that's gonna ever wake people like this up. Obama could carpet bomb their neighborhood and somehow it would be the fault of the Air Force. "And, gosh, I wonder if Obama knew. But we're not changing our views. We'll just go down to public housing and try to get a subsidized apartment. We love Obama."
Couple Who Married for Health Insurance Now Better Off Divorced
RUSH: Then there's a companion story to this from CBS Eyeball News New York. "From website crashes to long holds on calls, the issues involved with the unveiling of the Affordable Care Act are well documented. But now, could it be breaking couples up? CBS 2’s Don Champion spoke to one Brooklyn couple on Wednesday who said they may be forced to get a divorce to get health insurance. Nona Willis Aronowitz and Aaron Cassara’s love affair began at a party in 2008."
Oh, get me the Stradivarius.
"'We kissed on a bean bag chair,' Aronowitz said. A year later, it grew into a marriage at City Hall in Manhattan. 'It was really sudden,' Aronowitz said. 'It was basically because he needed health insurance, and I had a job that would give that to him.'" My God, these people admit they got married for health care. It's not just professional leeches, Snerdley. Look at what this kind of cradle-to-grave socialism is doing to our culture! One kiss on a bean bag chair, you head over to the Justice of the Peace in Manhattan and you get married for health care.
"But four years later, there is now irony in the fact the couple could soon divorce for the same reason. 'After Obamacare has rolled out, we realized that we would save thousands of dollars if we got divorced,' Aronowitz said." So why don't you head back to the bean bag chair, take back the kiss, head back over to the Justice of the Peace and break it up?
"The issue for Aronowitz and Cassara is that together as family of only two, they make more than the $62,000 level to qualify for --" It's the same thing. They make too much money. So not only is Obamacare rotten for the economy, it is bad, very bad for families.
"Together as family of only two, they make more than the $62,000 level to qualify for subsidies under the Affordable Care Act. But if they lived together unmarried, they would qualify for the subsidies and could literally save hundreds of dollars a month on their health care."
So that's what they're gonna do. Obamacare. Affordable Care Act. Maybe this pair in Brooklyn need to call the couple in San Francisco and say, "You don't have to get divorced. You just have to find a way to lower your income," and that can't be too hard now with this new mayor 'cause everybody's gonna have less money. Did you know this de Blasio guy, do you know he's married to a lesbian? He is. He's married to a lesbian. The new mayor of New York is married to a lesbian. Well, I don't know about health care implications. That's just something I saw today. (interruption) What? He's got two kids. I think she's a former lesbian. I don't know what happened. It's not a choice so I don't know what happened. Well, it isn't. So I don't know what happened. She was a lesbian, now she's not, they're married. What's this gonna do to gay marriage? I wonder if people are thinking about this.
NYC's New First Lady is a Former Lesbian
RUSH: Right here you go. After graduating from Wellesley, the current Ms. de Blasio -- looks like Chirlane McCray -- published an essay in Essence magazine, 1979, entitled: "I am a Lesbian." The article was described as groundbreaking for how a black woman discussed her sexuality in a black magazine. We were told the purpose of the essay was to dispel the myth that there were no gay black people. She married de Blasio and then they honeymooned in Cuba. I don't know this, but I wouldn't be surprised if some Sandinista communists didn't show up as best men for the ceremony. (interruption) If you're what? If you're a lesbian and you marry a man, have two kids, you're asking how does that make you a lesbian? I don't know, you just say so. You're asking the wrong guy, Snerdley. There's no way that I'm gonna answer this question for you. Way, way above my pay grade.
Senate Passes "Historic" Gay Rights Bill
RUSH: Okay, The Politico. They're all excited now, folks, "Senate Backs Gay Rights Bill in Historic Vote." You ever notice that when Democrats get what they want it's historic? "Historic Gay Rights Bill Passes in Senate." Somebody tell me what gay rights are denied now? Are there any gay rights that are denied? You know what this really is, this now goes to the House, and Boehner and the boys have said, "We're not gonna pass this. I mean, there's plenty of protections for everybody already in the Constitution." And that's why they did it in the Senate. They pass a new gay rights bill that's not necessary, send it to the House Republicans hoping they'll vote it down, so they can run around saying anti-gay, bigots, blah, blah, blah, Republicans.
Now, what would you do to counter this if you're Boehner? Would you go ahead and pass it to avoid the allegation? Or, would you do what they're gonna do and not pass it and then deal with the fact that you're anti-gay in the media? What would you do, seriously? We sit there and we say, "These damn Republicans." What would you do? Well, if you're gonna vote against it you're gonna have to get aggressive in explaining why. You just can't let it sit there. (interruption) I know. It is a lawsuit magnet. It's a giveaway to the trial lawyers out there.
You've gotta come out and say why you're gonna oppose this. And to say, "Well, they got enough rights as it is," that won't fly, even if it's true. They're gonna have to explain. It's just a never-ending full-court press constant Democrat offense, and it's not meant to pass anything. It's always meant to categorize Republicans and conservatives as anti-this or whatever the Democrats want.