President Barack Obama - Term 1 and 2 Thread

General Intelligent Discussion & One Thread About That Buttknuckle

Moderator: Andrew

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby slucero » Sun Dec 15, 2013 5:04 am

well... this is one way to drive down healthcare costs...


Image

Government Takeover: White House Forces Obamacare Insurers To Cover Unpaid Patients At A Loss

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapotheca ... r=yahootix

Of all of the last-minute delays, website bungles, and Presidential whims that have marred the roll-out of Obamacare’s subsidized insurance exchanges, what happened on Thursday, December 12 will stand as one of the most lawless acts yet committed by this administration. The White House—having canceled Americans’ old health plans, and having botched the system for enrolling people in new ones—knows that millions of Americans will enter the new year without health coverage. So instead of actually fixing the problem, the administration is retroactively attempting to force insurers to hand out free health care—at a loss—to those whom the White House has rendered uninsured. If Obamacare wasn’t a government takeover of the health insurance industry, then what is it now?

On Wednesday afternoon, health policy reporters found in their inboxes a friendly e-mail from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, announcing “steps to ensure Americans signing up through the Marketplace have coverage and access to the care they need on January 1.” Basically, the “steps” involve muscling insurers to provide free or discounted care to those who have become uninsured because of the problems with healthcare.gov.

HHS threatens to throw non-complying plans off the exchanges

HHS assured reporters that it would be “urging issuers to give consumers additional time to pay their first month’s premium and still have coverage beginning January 1, 2014.” In other words, urging them to offer free care to those who haven’t paid. This is a problem because the government has yet to build the system that allows people who’ve signed up for plans to actually pay for them. “One client reports only 15 percent [of applicants] have paid so far,” Bob Laszewski told Charles Ornstein. “So far I’m hearing from health plans that around 5 percent and 10 percent of consumers who have made it through the data transfer gauntlet have paid first month’s premium and therefore truly enrolled,” said Kip Piper.

“What’s wrong with ‘urging’ insurers to offer free care?” you might ask. “That’s not the same as forcing them to offer free care.” Except that the government is using the full force of its regulatory powers, under Obamacare, to threaten insurers if they don’t comply. All you have to do is read the menacing language in the new regulations that HHS published this week, in which HHS says it may throw otherwise qualified health plans off of the exchanges next year if they don’t comply with the government’s “requests.”

“We are considering factoring into the [qualified health plan] renewal process, as part of the determination regarding whether making a health plan available…how [insurers] ensure continuity of care during transitions,” they write. Which is kind of like the Mafia saying that it will “consider” the amount of protection money you’ve paid in its decision as to whether or not it vandalizes your storefront.

There are other services HHS is asking insurers to offer for free. The administration is “strongly encouraging insurers to treat out-of-network providers”—i.e., costly ones—“as in-network to ensure continuity of care” and to “refill prescriptions covered under previous plans during January.” But the issue of unpaid premiums looms largest.

It’s unconstitutional to force insurers to cover people for free

The administration could pay insurers to cover up for its mistakes. But that would lead to criticism—as it has in other instances—that the White House is lawlessly throwing taxpayer money at insurers to, well, cover up for its mistakes. So, instead, they’re asking insurers to pay for the mistakes.

But, of course, the cost of paying for those mistakes won’t end up being paid by insurers, but by consumers, in the form of higher premiums.

In theory, the Obama administration’s actions aren’t merely illegal—they’re unconstitutional. The Fifth Amendment of the Bill of Rights says that no one can “be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

But it will be up to insurers to sue to protect their rights. Like battered wives, they are unlikely to do so. Companies like Aetna and Humana are so terrified that the administration will run them out of business that they are more likely to do what they’re told, and quietly pass the costs on to consumers. The chaos and recriminations have made insurers like UnitedHealth, who have largely stayed out of the exchanges, look smart.

In 2010, PolitiFact said that the claim that Obamacare was a “government takeover of health care” was its “lie of the year.” The Federal Register disagrees.

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.


~Albert Einstein
User avatar
slucero
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5444
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 1:17 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby Boomchild » Sun Dec 15, 2013 9:10 am

slucero wrote:well... this is one way to drive down healthcare costs...


Image

Government Takeover: White House Forces Obamacare Insurers To Cover Unpaid Patients At A Loss

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapotheca ... r=yahootix



Sounds like something De Fuhrer would demand.
"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington
User avatar
Boomchild
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 7129
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 6:10 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby slucero » Tue Dec 17, 2013 5:14 am

oops...


Image

Judge: NSA phone program likely unconstitutional
By: Josh Gerstein
December 16, 2013 01:36 PM EST
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/12/n ... 01203.html

A federal judge ruled Monday that the National Security Agency program which collects information on nearly all telephone calls made to, from or within the United States is likely to be unconstitutional.

U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon found that the program appears to run afoul of the Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures. He also said the Justice Department had failed to demonstrate that collecting the so-called metadata had helped to head off terrorist attacks.

Acting on a lawsuit brought by conservative legal activist Larry Klayman, Leon issued a preliminary injunction barring the NSA from collecting metadata pertaining to the Verizon accounts of Klayman and one of his clients. However, the judge stayed the order to allow for an appeal.

“Plaintiffs have a very significant expectation of privacy in an aggregated collection of their telephone metadata covering the last five years, and the NSA’s Bulk Telephony Metadata Program significantly intrudes on that expectation,” wrote Leon, an appointee of President George W. Bush. “I have significant doubts about the efficacy of the metadata collection program as a means of conducting time-sensitive investigations in cases involving imminent threats of terrorism.”

“I cannot imagine a more ‘indiscriminate’ and ‘arbitrary invasion’ than this systematic and high-tech collection and retention of personal data on virtually every single citizen for purposes of querying it and analyzing it without judicial approval,” Leon added.

Leon’s ruling is the first significant legal setback for the NSA’s surveillance program since it was disclosed in June in news stories based on leaks from former NSA contractor Edward Snowden. The metadata program has been approved repeatedly by numerous judges on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and at least one judge sitting in a criminal case.

Similar lawsuits challenging the program are pending in at least three other federal courts around the country.

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.


~Albert Einstein
User avatar
slucero
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5444
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 1:17 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby Memorex » Tue Dec 17, 2013 7:33 am

Of course it's unconstitutional. Is that even a question?
User avatar
Memorex
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3570
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2006 1:30 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby Boomchild » Tue Dec 17, 2013 8:15 pm

Memorex wrote:Of course it's unconstitutional. Is that even a question?


What does constitutional mean anyway? Never heard of it. 8)
"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington
User avatar
Boomchild
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 7129
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 6:10 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby slucero » Wed Dec 18, 2013 3:07 am

ENROLL MAVEN
Tracking Obamacare enrollment
in the 50 states (and D.C.)

http://www.enrollmaven.com/

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.


~Albert Einstein
User avatar
slucero
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5444
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 1:17 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby Boomchild » Wed Dec 18, 2013 9:13 am

From The Washington Post:

"The biggest Pinocchios of 2013"

Image

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fac ... s-of-2013/
"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington
User avatar
Boomchild
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 7129
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 6:10 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby Memorex » Wed Dec 18, 2013 9:28 am

I've come to realize that Snowden really exemplifies the reason why huge amounts of data like this should not exist in the first place. That a young man, a contractor, can walk in and steal so much information in very short order is in itself reason enough not to have these data stores.

Obviously, it was wrong of them to be collecting all this data anyway. I think we can all agree on that. The NSA, or any government, has no business tracking and collecting data on ordinary citizens, American or otherwise. But specifically in America, we are afford the rights that we have given ourselves and so hat's an even higher standard. A standard that has all but evaporated because people would rather support George Bush or Barrack Obama than call them wrong.

You can middle on about how this has been going on for 50 years, but America has never witnessed such a handover to the federal government as it has in the last 10, 15, 20 years. Our government now controls us in ways that many, including me, thought would never happen.

Add to that the fact that some contractor can walk in and steal volumes and volumes of highly classified data and you see the government has as much business tracking our whereabouts via cell phone as trying to run healthcare, or anything else for that matter.

And screw these big tech companies that feign anger over the government demanding their data. Is Google not the single biggest spy agency on the planet, followed closely by Facebook and Verizon, and the like? They only say they are "concerned" because they are afraid to lose market share. The only reason the government has access to all that information is because companies like that gather and store it.

And then there are pure idiots like me. I have a Verizon phone and I have a Facebook account and I use Chrome and Google as my search engine. I do those things because I feel like no matter which way I turn, someone is going to track me and target me for advertising.

I see someone from the NSA said our first amendment rights should be changed (read lessened). How sick is that? If anything, our rights should expand in an ever changing world. And the people should give themselves whatever rights they want. At no time has anything happened in our country that was so bad that we had to start tracking everyone's cell phone data, email data, and social networking data. Not 9/11, not World Wars, nothing. People have become too scared to let their kids play outside. Everyone is suspicious of everyone else. Yea - there are some harmful elements out there and it's good to be prudent, but people have decided that it's better to live a sheltered life that's tracked at every turn than take a small risk that they will be harmed.
User avatar
Memorex
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3570
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2006 1:30 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby Boomchild » Wed Dec 18, 2013 9:59 am

Memorex wrote:I
I see someone from the NSA said our first amendment rights should be changed (read lessened). How sick is that? If anything, our rights should expand in an ever changing world. And the people should give themselves whatever rights they want. At no time has anything happened in our country that was so bad that we had to start tracking everyone's cell phone data, email data, and social networking data. Not 9/11, not World Wars, nothing. People have become too scared to let their kids play outside. Everyone is suspicious of everyone else. Yea - there are some harmful elements out there and it's good to be prudent, but people have decided that it's better to live a sheltered life that's tracked at every turn than take a small risk that they will be harmed.


The comment made by the NSA representative confirms for me that this administration has a much different view of what personal privacy should be. In addition they have much different view of citizen's rights, their personal property and money. All of which they want to seem to change and not for the better. We are being told that these things need to change to protect us and make things more equal for all. I don't buy it for one single minute. It's all about the government getting more control over you and everything else. Since it appears that there has been very little effective resistance to these things, it can only get worse. The question is what will be "the straw that break the camel back"?
"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington
User avatar
Boomchild
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 7129
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 6:10 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby slucero » Wed Dec 18, 2013 11:18 am

Used to be the old Ben Franklin saying was...

"Our new Constitution is now established, and has an appearance that promises permanency; but in this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes"


Looks like, thanks to the ACA, ya can add "ordinary health-care expenses" to that now too...

Expanded Medicaid’s fine print holds surprise: ‘payback’ from estate after death
http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/ ... ryxml.html

As thousands of state residents enroll in Washington’s expanded Medicaid program, many will be surprised at fine print: After you’re dead, your estate can be billed for ordinary health-care expenses. State officials are scrambling to change the rule.



Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.


~Albert Einstein
User avatar
slucero
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5444
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 1:17 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby tater1977 » Wed Dec 18, 2013 11:46 am

https://twitter.com/BarackObama/status/ ... 00/photo/1

This has got to be one of their most ignorant ads ever... :|

but the replies are great... :lol:
Perry's good natured bonhomie & the world’s most charmin smile,knocked fans off their feet. Sportin a black tux,gigs came alive as he swished around the stage thrillin audiences w/ charisma that instantly burnt the oxygen right out of the venue.TR.com
tater1977
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5248
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 1:05 am
Location: USA

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby Boomchild » Wed Dec 18, 2013 6:49 pm

Looks like the bubble has burst on this one....

Barbara Walters on Obama: ‘We Thought He Was Going To Be The Next Messiah’

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-shepp ... z2noYgpxFH
Last edited by Boomchild on Wed Dec 18, 2013 6:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington
User avatar
Boomchild
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 7129
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 6:10 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby Boomchild » Wed Dec 18, 2013 6:57 pm

slucero wrote:Looks like, thanks to the ACA, ya can add "ordinary health-care expenses" to that now too...

Expanded Medicaid’s fine print holds surprise: ‘payback’ from estate after death
http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/ ... ryxml.html

As thousands of state residents enroll in Washington’s expanded Medicaid program, many will be surprised at fine print: After you’re dead, your estate can be billed for ordinary health-care expenses. State officials are scrambling to change the rule.


Actually, I am not so sure it isn't a bad idea to have someone be charged for entitlements received after they are gone. My question is, if you die with substantial assets left over, why are you on a entitlement program in the first place? After all, these programs are supposed to be for the poor.
"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington
User avatar
Boomchild
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 7129
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 6:10 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby Memorex » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:08 am

Boomchild wrote:
slucero wrote:Looks like, thanks to the ACA, ya can add "ordinary health-care expenses" to that now too...

Expanded Medicaid’s fine print holds surprise: ‘payback’ from estate after death
http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/ ... ryxml.html

As thousands of state residents enroll in Washington’s expanded Medicaid program, many will be surprised at fine print: After you’re dead, your estate can be billed for ordinary health-care expenses. State officials are scrambling to change the rule.


Actually, I am not so sure it isn't a bad idea to have someone be charged for entitlements received after they are gone. My question is, if you die with substantial assets left over, why are you on a entitlement program in the first place? After all, these programs are supposed to be for the poor.


Could be a situation where they made very little money but then they had a decent life insurance policy.
User avatar
Memorex
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3570
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2006 1:30 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby Memorex » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:20 am

Fact Finder wrote:
The newspaper also reported that Merkel was particularly angry that, based on the disclosures, "the NSA clearly couldn't be trusted with private information, because they let Snowden clean them out."


My point exactly in my comments earlier. They have proven that they can't handle the data, despite the fact that they should not be collecting it in the first place.

Not just Snowden, but all the wrong doing of other agencies and employees looking at the data of love interests. The government is not good at this stuff at all.
User avatar
Memorex
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3570
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2006 1:30 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby slucero » Thu Dec 19, 2013 7:31 am

Memorex wrote:
Boomchild wrote:
Actually, I am not so sure it isn't a bad idea to have someone be charged for entitlements received after they are gone. My question is, if you die with substantial assets left over, why are you on a entitlement program in the first place? After all, these programs are supposed to be for the poor.


Could be a situation where they made very little money but then they had a decent life insurance policy.



Means testing would be a way to do this, and eliminate the possibility of those who have the means to pay for their own HC to not take advantage.. but that would require Congress actually do something that is fair.

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.


~Albert Einstein
User avatar
slucero
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5444
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 1:17 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby Boomchild » Thu Dec 19, 2013 11:06 am

Fact Finder wrote:
Boomchild wrote:Looks like the bubble has burst on this one....

Barbara Walters on Obama: ‘We Thought He Was Going To Be The Next Messiah’

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-shepp ... z2noYgpxFH



Further proof that Liberalism is a mental disorder.


That's right and having Obamacare is not going to cure them either.
"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington
User avatar
Boomchild
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 7129
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 6:10 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby Boomchild » Thu Dec 19, 2013 11:14 am

Memorex wrote:
Boomchild wrote:
slucero wrote:Looks like, thanks to the ACA, ya can add "ordinary health-care expenses" to that now too...


Expanded Medicaid’s fine print holds surprise: ‘payback’ from estate after death
http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/ ... ryxml.html

As thousands of state residents enroll in Washington’s expanded Medicaid program, many will be surprised at fine print: After you’re dead, your estate can be billed for ordinary health-care expenses. State officials are scrambling to change the rule.


Actually, I am not so sure it isn't a bad idea to have someone be charged for entitlements received after they are gone. My question is, if you die with substantial assets left over, why are you on a entitlement program in the first place? After all, these programs are supposed to be for the poor.


Could be a situation where they made very little money but then they had a decent life insurance policy.


This could be a possibility. However, it is still a person's responsibility to pay for their healthcare. We do not have laws in place that state this service is a right and free of charge. Therefore, if the persons estate or life insurance policy would provide recovery for portion of costs associated with their care then so be it.
"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington
User avatar
Boomchild
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 7129
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 6:10 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby Boomchild » Thu Dec 19, 2013 11:18 am

Memorex wrote:My point exactly in my comments earlier. They have proven that they can't handle the data, despite the fact that they should not be collecting it in the first place.

Not just Snowden, but all the wrong doing of other agencies and employees looking at the data of love interests. The government is not good at this stuff at all.


I think you could take as an example how they have not properly handled securing personal data on the ACA website. They just do not seem to know how to properly protect this information.
"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington
User avatar
Boomchild
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 7129
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 6:10 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby Boomchild » Thu Dec 19, 2013 11:48 am

I think it's disgusting how our legislators keep shitting on people who have served in the military. Where is the Messiah on this? After all, he keeps droning on and on about fairness and taking care of everyone.

"Budget deal cuts benefits to some vets: Heartless or painless?

Some Republicans criticized the budget deal passed by the Senate Wednesday because it cuts retirement benefits to some veterans. Military cuts are often tough for Congress to stomach."


http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder ... r-painless
"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington
User avatar
Boomchild
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 7129
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 6:10 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby slucero » Fri Dec 20, 2013 9:53 am

wow....


Obama Administration Knew of Healthcare.gov Security Risks Before Launch
http://freebeacon.com/obama-admin-knew- ... h/?print=1


Documents show 19 vulnerabilities left unaddressed before Oct. 1


BY: Elizabeth Harrington Follow @LizWFB
December 19, 2013 2:07 pm

Documents provided to the House Committee on Government Oversight and Reform reveal that the Obama administration knew of security vulnerabilities within Healthcare.gov prior to Oct. 1, but launched the website anyway.

Chairman Darrell Issa (R., Calif.) said Health and Human Services (HHS) officials showed a “disturbing lack of judgment” by going ahead with the site’s launch and putting Americans’ personal information at risk.

Results of a security assessment conducted by a contractor on the site, MITRE Corporation, found that 19 security vulnerabilities remained unaddressed on Oct. 1.

Eleven of the 19 vulnerabilities “significantly impact the confidentiality, integrity and/or availability of the system data,” MITRE said.

“The American people have a right to know the risks they face on Healthcare.gov when they submit personal information such as their Social Security number and income,” Issa wrote in a letter to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius on Wednesday. “The full context of MITRE’s assessment, which the department had in its possession prior to the Oct. 1 launch date, shows that [the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services] and HHS knew that Healthcare.gov was vulnerable, yet your statements have not given the American people a fair and accurate assessment of known risks.”

Issa said he is withholding details of the documents that could be used by hackers to gain insight into compromising Healthcare.gov.

He did disclose details from the assessment that revealed one security finding summary that said, “any malicious user having knowledge of this can perform unauthorized functions.”

“The attacker is able to see and edit [personally identifiable information] PII of the victim,” the assessment also said.

Furthermore, the full extent of security weaknesses is unknown because the website was not completely built when it launched. MITRE was “forced to omit significant portions” of the security assessment of Healthcare.gov “due to software still being developed.” HHS said 30 to 40 percent of the website had yet to be built in November.

“MITRE was unable to adequately test the confidentiality and integrity of the [health insurance exchange] HIX system in full,” a summary of the assessment said. “The majority of the MITRE’s testing efforts were focused on testing the expected functionality of the application.

“Complete end to end testing of the HIX application never occurred,” it said.

“These documents show a disturbing lack of judgment by HHS officials, who decided to go forward with the launch of Healthcare.gov despite warnings of security vulnerabilities that placed sensitive information of website users at risk,” Issa said.

HHS has also backed away from a meeting proposed by the White House between Chairman Issa and Secretary Sebelius.

The White House said Sebelius requested a meeting between herself and the chairman after his committee obtained the sensitive documents detailing the security assessment on Dec. 13.

The committee was not made aware of the proposed meeting until a letter from the White House dated Dec. 15. However, Counsel to the President Kathryn Ruemmler said in the letter, “I understand that the secretary’s invitation was refused.”

“Contrary to the assertion made by the White House, neither I nor anyone on my staff has expressed an unwillingness to meet with you for a discussion about both the ongoing security vulnerabilities noted in the MITRE documents as well as the rationale for proceeding on Oct. 1,” Issa said in his letter to Sebelius on Dec. 17. “Indeed, my staff repeatedly has told your staff that it would welcome a page by page discussion of the MITRE documents and any concerns about the public release of any information once the documents were properly and fully produced to the committee.”

Issa changed his schedule to arrange a meeting this week.

“While I was scheduled to be in my congressional district office this week I am willing and prepared to meet with you in my Washington office either today, or tomorrow, Wednesday, Dec. 18, to discuss both of our concerns,” Issa said,

In response to Issa on Wednesday, HHS did not mention meeting with Sebelius, only that the agency was “prepared to make cyber security experts available to brief the committee on the security risks and mitigation steps discussed in the MITRE documents at [Issa’s] convenience.”

“Chairman Issa is disappointed that HHS has apparently reneged on the White House’s offer to make Secretary Sebelius available to discuss concerns about HealthCare.gov security,” a committee spokesperson said. “It’s difficult to have a serious dialogue when the other party walks back an offer after we’ve said yes.”

Experts have warned Americans to stay away from Healthcare.gov because it lacks fundamental security safeguards. According to “white hat hacker” David Kennedy, the website is constantly under attack. In fact, the most popular searches on Healthcare.gov were hack attempts in the beginning days of the launch.

HHS said thus far there have been no “successful” security attacks on the website, in its response on Wednesday.

©2013 All Rights Reserved
Google Analytics




Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.


~Albert Einstein
User avatar
slucero
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5444
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 1:17 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby Memorex » Fri Dec 20, 2013 12:13 pm

What is America's obsession with anything a celebrity says? And a reality star at that. Don't people have better things to do with their day?

So the same people that feel homosexuality is a sin will feel the same and those that don't still don't. Either way, seems like people should be busy working, putting dinner on the table, hanging out with their family and friends, etc. Who has time for all this TV?

Of course, I guess one could say I spend as much time here, but.... :)
User avatar
Memorex
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3570
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2006 1:30 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby Boomchild » Fri Dec 20, 2013 8:03 pm

Isn't it great that some of the illegal immigrants that are here already feel like legal citizens. So much so that they have started voting in Presidential Elections!

"Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted announced Wednesday that his office found 17 non-citizens illegally cast ballots in the 2012 presidential election -- and has referred the case for possible prosecution. "

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/12 ... ing-state/
"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington
User avatar
Boomchild
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 7129
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 6:10 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby Boomchild » Sat Dec 21, 2013 2:32 am

Fact Finder wrote:I'm not buying. My plan is cancelled effective Dec 31 this month, I was thinking of applying by the Monday deadline, but now I will wait. I mean, this is the law TODAY, which is different from what the law was yesterday and God only knows what the law may be tomorrow or next week. Apparently I can apply for coverage when I get sick or hurt and damnit, that's what I will do.

These fuckheads have destroyed the greatest healthcare system in the world, but that's ok, at least they didn't call homosexuality a sin. :twisted:


So I guess this means you not going to gather the family around the Christmas Tree and discuss getting healthcare for everyone in your family as Mrs. B.O. has suggested everyone to do?
"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington
User avatar
Boomchild
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 7129
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 6:10 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby Memorex » Sat Dec 21, 2013 3:25 am

I probably shouldn't write this, but since I am not going to cheat the system, I guess it's ok.

About 16 months ago my wife and I took in my two Nieces - now age 12 and 13. They were in a bad situation with my sister in California. They were on Medical. So I bring them here and I have Power of Attorney and that turns out not to be good enough to get them healthcare. And my sister can't get them healthcare because she doesn't live in MN and has Medical. I cannot afford the Attorney's fees for custody. So we have been paying cash for their health care needs, which has been far from cheap.

So now the deadline is coming up and I'm going to be fined if they are not covered. I called the exchange to see what I could do. In MN, they do not have a non-needy relative plan like they do in other states. I make too much to qualify for anything for them and I explain this to the rep. She flat out tells me to lie and say I make very little and get them covered and that I have the authority to cover them. Now, how in the world is that going to look on my tax return, now that I have to provide the IRS with not only my income information, but all my health insurance information? Something wouldn't jive anyway.

This was one call, one person, and 100% fraud. Now multiply that across all the people calling.

As much as I dislike how Obamacare is set up, I can also say it should not be this hard to provide health insurance for two little girls that we are just trying to provide for. And it should not be so difficult to gain custody when all parties agree.

You should have seen what it took to get them enrolled in school. It was INSANE. So grateful to the ONE school employee that knocked down doors for us.
User avatar
Memorex
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3570
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2006 1:30 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby Boomchild » Sat Dec 21, 2013 3:44 am

Fact Finder wrote:Oh I can assure that in OUR Family Christmas Obamacare will come up for discussion, but it will not be on the terms the Wookie suggested. :lol: We shall roast the Ocare chestnuts over an open fire repeatedly.


At least you can discuss political topics at a family get together. In my case, I have too many libs in my immediate family and they can't handle constructive discussions without their panties getting in a bunch.
"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington
User avatar
Boomchild
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 7129
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 6:10 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby slucero » Sat Dec 21, 2013 6:49 am

Turns out the Chief Information Security Officer for healthcare.gov recommended the site not be open because it was unsecured..


High security risk found after HealthCare.gov launch

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/high-securi ... ov-launch/

By: Sharyl Attkisson CBS News December 20, 2013, 8: 30 AM

A top HealthCare.gov security officer told Congress there have been two, serious high-risk findings since the website’s launch, including one on Monday of this week, CBS News has learned.

Teresa Fryer, the chief information security officer for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), revealed the findings when she was interviewed Tuesday behind closed doors by House Oversight Committee officials. The security risks were not previously disclosed to members of Congress or the public. Obama administration officials have firmly insisted there’s no reason for any concern regarding the website’s security.

According to federal standards set by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the potential impact of a high finding is “the loss of confidentiality, integrity, or availability could be expected to have a severe or catastrophic adverse effect on organizational operations, organizational assets, or individuals.”

Details are not being made public for security reasons but Fryer testified that one vulnerability in the system was discovered during testing last week related to an incident reported in November. She says that as a result, the government has shut down functionality in the vulnerable part of the system. Fryer said the other high-risk finding was discovered Monday.

In another security bombshell, Fryer told congressional interviewers that she explicitly recommended denial of the website’s Authority to Operate (ATO), but was overruled by her superiors. The website was rolled out amid warnings Fryer said she gave both verbally and in a briefing that disclosed “high risks” and possible exposure to “attacks”.

Fryer also said that she refused to put her name on a letter recommending a temporary ATO be granted for six months while the issues were sorted out.

"My recommendation was a denial of ATO," Fryer told Democrats and Republicans who sat in on the day-long interview. According to Fryer, she first recommended denying the ATO to CMS chief information officer Tony Trenkle based on the many outstanding security concerns after pre-launch testing.

"I had discussions with him on this and told him that my evaluation of this was a high risk," Fryer told the committee. Trenkle retired from his CMS job on Nov. 13. He has not responded to CBS News interview requests.

This is the first time a government insider has gone on record challenging the administration's insistence that there were no worrisome security concerns. On Oct. 30, Rep. Gus Bilirakis, R-Fla., asked Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius in testimony to Congress whether "any senior department officials" advised delaying the rollout of HealthCare.gov.

"I can tell you that no senior official reporting to me ever advised me that we should delay," Sebelius answered. "We have testing that did not advise a delay. So not -- not to my knowledge."

But Fryer says she briefed Sebelius' top information officers at HHS in a teleconference on Sept. 20, recommending the website's launch be delayed for security reasons. Fryer testified that the call included HealthCare.gov's chief project manager Henry Chao, HHS chief information security officer Kevin Charest and HHS Deputy Assistant Secretary for Information Technology Officer Frank Baitman. Fryer says she learned three days later that her advice was not going to be followed.

In a statement, CMS spokeswoman Patti Unruh told CBS News the website is compliant with all federal security standards and "to date, there have been no successful security attacks on HealthCare.gov and no person or group has maliciously accessed personally identifiable information from the site."

House Oversight Committee chairman Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., who personally interviewed Fryer, told CBS News that there are potential risks to every facet of the system tied into HealthCare.gov and the public information stored within.

"This is not about your application being compromised. This is about an exchange portal that lets me go into the Department of Homeland Security, that lets me go into the IRS, lets me go into an array, Social Security...that's the vulnerability," Issa said.

Fryer also testified that she took part in preparing a Sept. 23 briefing for CMS Chief Operating Officer Michelle Snyder. Fryer's contribution to the briefing, a slideshow presentation, outlined multiple "high risks," "risk of unknown" and "risk of attacks." She told the House Oversight Committee that her concerns arose after security testing discovered "uncertainties" and "unknown risks."

CMS' Unruh told CBS News that HealthCare.gov's authority to operate is conditioned on a number of strategies to mitigate risk including regular testing that exceeds best practices.

"It is important to note that deliberations...involve varying opinions from professional, career, subject matter experts within the agency," Unruh's statement said. "The risk mitigation strategies and compensating controls that were prescribed are being implemented and executed as planned."

However, Fryer testified that "unknown risks" can't be remediated or mitigated.

Fryer told congressional officials that besides the new high risks exposed, there have also been new “moderate” security risk findings as well as a couple of new “low” findings.

According to NIST, the potential impact from moderate findings is “the loss of confidentiality, integrity, or availability could be expected to have a serious adverse effect on organizational operations, organizational assets, or individuals” and the potential impact is low if “[t]he loss of confidentiality, integrity, or availability could be expected to have a limited adverse effect on organizational operations, organizational assets, or individuals.

Fryer didn’t respond to our interview request.




Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.


~Albert Einstein
User avatar
slucero
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5444
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 1:17 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby Memorex » Mon Dec 23, 2013 11:44 pm

Re Obamacare:

More people will have lost coverage on Jan. 1 than gained it.

The Health and Human Services Department had estimated that 3.3 million people would sign up for private insurance by the end of the year. It was 3 million people short of that mark at the end of November.


But it's cool. My workplace insurance premiums went up to pay the tax and I was advised by the Exchange Adviser to commit fraud. No problem here.
User avatar
Memorex
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3570
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2006 1:30 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby slucero » Sat Dec 28, 2013 4:50 pm

Metadata Not Anonymous at All, Stanford Researchers Show
http://news.yahoo.com/metadata-not-anon ... 37555.html


If you're not concerned about government surveillance of your phone because the National Security Agency (NSA) only collects metadata, think again. A study from Stanford University shows that connecting "anonymous" metadata to compromising personal information is trivially easy.

Documents leaked in June by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden revealed that the organization was collecting metadata about calls placed to and from Verizon telephone lines. Although this revelation was potentially troubling, metadata collection is, in theory, not cause for concern.

The metadata about your phone calls does not reveal your name or identity, or the content of your conversations, but it does track the numbers you call, how long the calls last, and which other companies have your phone number in their directories.

Although the specific documents leaked in June concerned Verizon landlines, the NSA has since admitted that it collects metadata about mobile telephone calls and text messages as well.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who heads the Senate Intelligence Committee, has said that collecting metadata is "not surveillance." Because the information, by itself, cannot identify individuals, Feinstein and the NSA hold that it is practically harmless for the government to collect it.

A research team operating out of Stanford University disagrees, and hopes to prove its point with a new Android app called MetaPhone. By accessing your phone number and your Facebook page, this app does what any NSA program could do: It acquires your metadata, then correlates it with your social-media information to see how much it can learn about you.

"Phone metadata is inherently revealing," wrote Jonathan Mayer and Patrick Mutchler, the app's designers, on a Stanford Law School blog. By using MetaPhone, you can submit your information to a Stanford research project so that Mayer and Mutchler can determine how easy it is for organizations to glean personal information from your supposedly non-revealing metadata.

When Tom's Guide tried the app, we found that the results supported Stanford's assertion: Dozens of different organizations had the phone number we tried on file. The NSA — or worse, a cybercriminal — would be able to find our name, our geographic location, our bank, our medical facilities and even our eating habits with just a simple cross-check online.

Whether the NSA is actually cross-referencing individual metadata is another question. The process is simple, but by no means efficient. Uploading and cross-checking data takes time, and to find more complex information, like a home address, would likely take some human oversight.

Like most NSA surveillance programs, you probably have nothing to worry about unless you're conspiring with terrorists or planning some kind of criminal activity. The question of whether the NSA should have access to such revealing data from everyday citizens, though, is a legitimate privacy concern.

Aside from participating in the MetaPhone study, there are a few things the average user can do to protect him or herself. Not listing your phone number on your Facebook or Twitter profile makes you harder to track down.

If you're really paranoid, ditch your smartphone and use a new disposable phone every month. Forget about landlines; they're even easier to track than cellphones.

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.


~Albert Einstein
User avatar
slucero
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5444
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 1:17 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - Term 2 Thread

Postby Boomchild » Sun Dec 29, 2013 5:22 pm

Here's the latest propaganda about Benghazi attack. This comes from the NY TImes.

"According to the in-depth report, the Times found no proof that al Qaeda or any international terrorist groups played any role in the assault, which killed four Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens.

The six-part report goes on to say that an American-made video mocking Islam largely triggered the attack, which was not well-planned."

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/12 ... &gt1=43001
"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington
User avatar
Boomchild
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 7129
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 6:10 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

PreviousNext

Return to Snowmobiles For The Sahara

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

cron