We have actually had some good insurance regulators in California. I don't know much about the current one but he seems to have achieved a pro-citizen rather than pro-company record.

I did not check with the state before I rejected the trash plan, perhaps it wasn't legal.

Valerie has insurance which covers the three of us, but it's her insurance. If she lost her job or if other things happened that I decline to contemplate, we would not have been able to obtain that sort of insurance or indeed anything that wasn't a fraud or a rip-off.

Are you able to show us the terms of your plan? The reason I ask is that I was offered what turned out to be a "trash plan", and the sort of things that aren't being grandfathered are rejected because they don't meet a minimum standard of care. In my case, a catastrophic injury such as in an auto wreck would not have been covered significantly.

The lady who famously confronted Obama on this issue had a plan that limited its payout to a few hundred dollars.

There were two sorts of plans available: There was a company that sold a "trash plan" and sent a sales person to my home. This plan was not written to provide useful medical coverage for a catastrophic condition such as an auto accident with severe injury. Basically, it was a "feel good about being insured until you try to use it" plan which had the main purpose of producing income for a fraudster. I am very glad that such things are being prohibited now because I know there are lots of people who are not as careful readers of terms as I am.

The second was priced so prohibitively high that it seemed to be intended to deter the customer from purchase.

California's exchange is well capable of providing a mere 7 Million registrations and was not ever having problems while the Federal site was the subject of so much news controversy.

I am celebrating this event because This is the first time that Bruce Perens can get insurance coverage! I operate my own company and have previously only had access to insurance through my wife's employer. All of my family, my wife, my son, and I, have each individually been rejected by private insurers for what was esentially medical trivia. In my son's case, it was because he took a test they didn't like even though he passed it.

Not everyone understands the B.S. that private insurers were permitted to put people through.

So you think slandering Americans is NOT worse than NOT slandering Americans.

Oooooooo K.

You're a liar. There is no sense in which Jimmy Carter is not an elected Democrat. You're just lying ... as usual.

You're a liar. You didn't. You said "elected Democrat." You're just lying ... as usual.

And no one did. You're lying by implying "Democrat" is the same as "official" or "President."

Um. Except that definitionally, he is. Stop lying.

You're a liar.

You're a liar. And I correctly predicted you would state this lie.

Of course, that's not much different than predicting that the Earth will spin around ... liars lie, it's not tough to call it.

No. Someone who regularly gets up in front of the American people and lies about his political opponents to advance his interests or to harm the interests of his opponents ... that makes him worse. Absolutely and significantly.

Um. Actually, yes, in fact, he was. He was a Democrat, and he was elected. He was no longer serving in office, but you didn't ask for that: you asked for someone who had been elected. President Obama is -- by the exact same standard -- not an elected Democrat. He was elected. He is not currently being elected. Same thing with Carter.

If you meant a Democrat currently serving in office, you should have said so. Instead, you're lying about what your words mean. As usual.

George Mitchell did it. Bill Frist did it. Mitch McConnell did it.

I am not saying they were never assholes behind the scenes ... I am saying, they are not nearly the assholes in public that Reid constantly is. The guy tells baldfaced, defamatory, bullshit lies to the public pretty much every time he opens his mouth in front of a microphone.

I do not believe anything you say, so the fact that you claim it is not evidence the "challenge" was ever made, or accepted.

I gave you a specific example of Jimmy Carter, though I didn't quote or cite it. But why would I? It doesn't meet your mythical "challenge," so as best I can tell, you don't care about it.

Yes. Jimmy Carter said Joe Wilson's "you lie!" was based on racism.

But I do not accept your mythical "challenge." But, you can no longer claim no evidence has been presented.

(Prediction: you will dishonestly claim that no evidence has been presented.)

You're a liar. Quote me implying that.

I was thinking of elected officials. But yes, I still would put him below Reid, but probably closer to .8 or above, both because of his policies, his lies that the policies he attacks are racist, his race-respective enforcement of policies, his refusal to accept the valid oversight of Congress, his lies about Fast and Furious, his responsibility for the death of Paul Walker ...

Ohwait.

But still, the other stuff.

Nah. Not even close. Neither Clinton is half as much of an asshole as Reid. They just seem worse because they were in the White House.

I know of no specific challenge. But yes, the left and Democrats cry racism all the time. Actual politicians.

Well, most politicians are too smart to call specific things racist, because they know they can't back it up. Instead, they say that, collectively, the opposition to Obama is based on racism, bullshit like that (which Jimmy Carter infamously has done, multiple times). And the Democrats (led by DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman-Schulz) often call specific policies racist, including, but not limited to laws against abortion, promoting election integrity, promoting reductions in the welfare state, and so on (not to mention immigration).

I don't know anything about a specific challenge given, or accepted. I do know that anyone who claims the Democrats don't lie about racism all the damned time are full of shit.