Get PJ Media on your Apple

The PJ Tatler

by
Bryan Preston

Bio

October 7, 2013 - 7:06 am

Last week, the Obama administration said it would be “a few weeks” before they could tell us how many Americans signed up for their fancy health care takeover plan, Obamacare. Over the weekend, the government took the Obamacare exchanges offline. Then Sunday, Treasury Secretary Jack Lew refused again to answer a simple question: How many Americans have signed up for Obamacare?

“I’m going to ask you one last time,” said Wallace, “because, forgive me sir, you haven’t answered it: do you not know how many people signed up, which would seem to indicate another major software glitch, or is it that the numbers are embarrassingly small?”

“Chris, our metric for this week was, could people get online, get the information they need to make an informed,” said Lew, sidestepping the straightforward question. “They have been getting that information. We are confident that they are going to make the decision — they have 6 months to make the decision.”

Even by that metric, the Obamacare administration had a bad week. People couldn’t get to the sites. Some states just ended up taking their exchange sites down.

I’ve run websites that include mechanisms for accounts, sign-ins, donations, and so forth. While they were nowhere near as big (or screwed up) as the Obamacare exchanges, they worked, and if anyone asked me how many of what we had going on, it would generally take me just a few minutes to hand over that data. Again, I’m not making a direct apples-to-apples comparison here, because the Obamacare sites are quite complex, just noting that web sites produce digital data — database files — that should be accessible fairly quickly. It shouldn’t take weeks to get it. In fact, quick access would benefit the administration — if the sign-ups are strong, they could proudly pound their chest about their law’s popularity. If the numbers are weak, they could blame the opening glitches, or blame the Republicans as is their wont on every other issue, and encourage more sign-ups. The fact that they can’t do either one is odd.

My point is, if these exchange sites were built competently at all, it shouldn’t take weeks to determine how many Americans have signed up through them. Why, then, are they telling us that it will take weeks to figure this out? The sign-up numbers are the most obvious question anyone will ask, right after “Why are these web sites so crappy, unfinished and unstable?”

Let’s flash back to 2008, and Lord Barack Obama’s first glorious run to serve the people.

Turns out that “Doodad Pro” and “Good Will” are not the only phony contributors to Barack Obama’s presidential campaign. The New York Times finally bestirred itself to apply some basic investigative journalism attention to the Democratic presidential nominee’s donor list. The Times found nearly 3,000 other questionable donors like “Jgtj Jfggjjfgj” and “Dirty West” after what the paper admitted was just a cursory look at the Illinois senator’s September financial filings. But then Times reporters Michael Luc and Griff Palmer revealed an incredible level of naivety by stating “it is unclear why someone making a political donation would want to enter a false name.”

Unclear? What other motive could there be for using a phony name and a nonexistent address to make multiple small donations using a single credit card than to evade U.S. election laws? Such journalistic gullibility may explain why bloggers have been on this story for months and the Times is only now noticing. . . . The FEC’s primary job is to protect the integrity of our federal election process. With this many red flags flying and barely three week left before election day, there’s no time to lose if voters are to have all the information at hand before casting their ballots.

Those questions about the first Obama campaign’s illegal donations were never really pursued. The questions about his second glorious campaign were never answered, either. The hole through which illegal donations were allowed to pass wasn’t quite attended to. Our man in the UK proved it.

The administration’s delay on Obamacare numbers makes me wonder — are the numbers weaker than they expected, or  is fraud being built into the numbers? Not foreign fraud, necessarily, just fraud of the type that Obama’s glorious regime encourages on its donations, on welfare, the Obamaphones, and so forth.

Did Doodad Pro sign up for the bronze, silver, or gold plan?

Bryan Preston has been a leading conservative blogger and opinionator since founding his first blog in 2001. Bryan is a military veteran, worked for NASA, was a founding blogger and producer at Hot Air, was producer of the Laura Ingraham Show and, most recently before joining PJM, was Communications Director of the Republican Party of Texas.

Comments are closed.

All Comments   (3)
All Comments   (3)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
I think this administration wants to keep hiding behind the "weeks until we know" charade to cover up for the problem that as soon as the numbers are released, someone will want to get a list and try to talk to the people who signed up. Chad Henderson ring a bell?
In any business I've been in, the adage: "Nothing happens until somebody sells something." should hold true here.
Success of this law cannot be measured by visitors or pages viewed or eyeballs or whatever. How many people have actually bought the product? If my boss asked how many widgets did we sell yesterday, and I said I wouldn't have numbers for a couple weeks, he'd say no problem, you're fired, don't let the door hit you on the way out.
47 weeks ago
47 weeks ago Link To Comment
If you think the "number who have signed up" is a hard number to get, just wait. The number that they'll NEVER release is the "number who have signed up and are current in premium payment."
The fraud will come with the black, brown and union members who signed up, stopped paying their premiums, were never dropped and retain coverage.
47 weeks ago
47 weeks ago Link To Comment
Most websites would be able to tell you how many people visited your website. Google even has an app for it (Analytics). You can tell how many are unique visitors, how many are return visitors, and where exactly their visit originates (something about IP addresses or something). If you're selling a product, it's even easier to tell since each item sold represents a both a visitor and a buyer. That the Obama Administration doesn't want to tell how many people signed up for healthcare is testament not only to their incompetence, but to the healthcare's website inability to be able to accurately determine visitors or number of buyers.

More and more people are being given examples of why you don't want the government running your healthcare. If they can't even tell you how many people are buying insurance how can they accurately diagnose whatever problem you have?
47 weeks ago
47 weeks ago Link To Comment
View All