Just a reminder, Consumer Reports helped shove Obamacare down your throats
Rename the website Healthcare.debacle, brought to you by ConsumerReports.Obamacare
How nice of Consumer Reports to tell people to wait a month before using the Healthcare.debacle website (h/t Instapundit):
If all this is too much for you to absorb, follow our previous advice: Stay away from Healthcare.gov for at least another month if you can. Hopefully that will be long enough for its software vendors to clean up the mess they’ve made. The coverage available through the marketplaces won’t begin until Jan. 1, 2014, at the earliest, and you have until Dec. 15 to enroll if you need insurance that starts promptly.
Before you give Consumer Reports a big Thank You Consumer Watchdog For Watching Out For Me, keep in mind that Consumer Reports and its parent, Consumers Union, were big backers of Obamacare at the earliets stages, long before it took its final shape. Consumer Reports argued for even more activist government intervention, including the so-called Public Option.
As I reported on October 1, 2009, Consumer Reports’ Massive Fail:
As reported by Politico, Consumers Union is putting its brand behind current health care reform proposals (it’s not clear which ones), including a government run plan. An advertisement being run by Consumers Union is completely vague, only calling for “health care reform.”
That concept is agreed to by almost everyone, it’s just that most Americans have a very different concept of health care reform than the monstrous proposals — laden with taxes, penalties, punishments, government bureaucracy and out-of-control spending — which actually are on the table in Washington.
On its health care website, however, it appears (although the language still is somewhat vague), that Consumers Union is backing many of the concepts in the Democratic proposals to have government run our health care system.
Consumers Union has done substantial damage to its reputation and status. It may know dishwashers, but it obviously doesn’t know much about the Democratic proposals which I have spend a considerable time studying. I have analyzed on this blog dozens of specific aspects of the Democratic proposals, and it is shocking to me that Consumers Union is so profoundly ignorant of what actually is in the proposals. The dreamy concept of providing care for everyone at low cost with higher quality, which is the thrust of the Consumers Union position, has no basis in the actual legislative proposals.
While the Consumer Reports branding of its “health care reform” push sounded benign:
For the first time ever, Consumers Union is weighing in with a TV ad that calls on lawmakers to find a solution for health reform.
You may wonder why we are injecting ourselves so publicly into a heated debate that has generated an enormous amount of concern and confusion. We believe that so much attention has been focused on the politics of health care that we’re losing sight of the core problems. Health costs are skyrocketing, which affects all of us, and if you get seriously sick, having insurance is no guarantee that you’ll get the care you need.
But it wasn’t benign, and its presentation was full of evasion and implicit political posturing, as I documented on October 5, 2009, Consumer Reports’ Specious Stand On Health Care Reform:
CR has stepped out of being a provider of unbiased information (both good and bad) to empower consumers to make their own informed decisions, and has become a political advocacy group which seeks to minimize the legitimate arguments against the current Democratic proposals. If that is what one was expecting from CR, that’s fine, but that is not how CR presents itself to the public.
Consumer Reports stood with Harry Reid in supporting the God-awful Senate bill that eventually became law:
“You’re the reason we’ve come so far,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), told advocacy groups supporting reform at a press conference in the capitol today. DeAnn Friedholm, director of Consumers Union’s healthcare reform campaign, was there representing CU, which has endorsed the House bill and supports passage of the Senate bill. “You never let us forget this fight isn’t about politics, it isn’t about partisanship, it’s about people–real people,” said Reid.
Along with others in the Alphabet Soup of “non-profit”Obamacare supporters, Consumer Reports deserves no thanks.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Like everything from AARP to the Girl Scouts, CR succumbs to O’Sullivan’s Law: “Any organization or enterprise that is not expressly right wing will become left wing over time.”
It applies to publications, as well. “Popular Science” and “National Geographic” as just house organs for Enviro-Nazies now.
I subscribed to Natural History for a decade. Gorgeous photos and intelligent articles about how animals live, escape from predators, find food, …
Replaced by “Man is in the forest” propaganda. Sigh.
I figured that out on my own a few years ago, and am grateful to you for letting me know the name of it. EVERY organization seems to drift leftward unless it is expressly conservative, and even THEN,well,look at the Republican party. I assume that this phenomenon is because the major media, the schools and colleges and universities, Hollywood in general,the press, all are saturated in Leftist dogma. In “Witness, Whitaker Chambers pointed out that the Left was taking teaching positions on a large scale in the universities beginning in the 1920s,so the indoctrination has been going on a long time, and it’s a darn miracle that there is still a conservative movement at ALL, we sure don’t get any moral support from ANY other large organization or institution. Except for maybe the Catholic Church,and even it is under constant pressure from the Left to give up its principled opposition to abortion and homosexuality, to the extent that some of its own members have joined in the criticism.
Wow, who writes the Urban Dictionary?
This is what it says about O’Sullivan’s Law. “O’Sullivan’s Law states that any organization or enterprise that is not expressly right wing will become left wing over time. The law is named after British journalist John O’Sullivan.
Television shows are the best examples of this. 24, House. Charitable foundations are worse but harder to see.
One of the reasons for this is leftist intolerance versus right-wing tolerance. Right wingers are willing to hire openly left-wing employees in the interest of fairness. Left-wingers, utterly intolerant, will not allow a non-Liberal near them, and will harass them at every opportunity. The result over time is that conservative enterprises are infiltrated by leftists but leftist enterprises remain the same or get worse.
Also, leftism is in and of itself a form of decay. It’s what happens not just to television shows but to nations, churches and universities as the energy given off by the big bang of their inception slowly ebbs away. Rather than expend vitality in originality and creation they become obsessed with introspection, popularity and lethargy. Leftism is entropy of the spirit and intellect..”
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=O%E2%80%99Sullivan%E2%80%99s%20Law
Oops!
I’d add Popular Science to your list as well. They took a hard left turn back in the late seventies with their embrace of “global warming” and anti-nuclear hysteria.
Sorry, my coffee hasn’t kicked in yet. Replace “Popular Science” with “Scientific American”. Doh!
And the womens’ magazines are all left leaning, also.
Do these organisations still exist.? Man very retro.
If they still exist, it is time they were all shoved……where Obamacare is going soon!!!!
Same goes for the American Cancer Society.
My wife, being a cancer survivor became very active in ACS about ten years ago. Coordinating our local Relay for Life foro two years, attending ACS Lobbying days on Capitol Hill, etc.
During the run up to Obamacare she closely followed much of the details that were available, especially as they affected cancer treatments. It became undeniably apparent that Obamacare would adversely impact cancer care.
She tried repeatedly warning people in ACS about these issues, at least hoping to see them addressed, if not corrected. Stonewalling and angry denouncement were the only responses she received from anyone up the chain of authority. The message was clear, ACS was putting politics and lobbying position ahead of patients.
The next time someone hits you up for sponsorship in a Relay for Life, or other ACS activity I would suggest you consider your support carefully.
We stopped supporting Komen events after they caved in to the Planned Parenthood Blackmail scheme. Probably not so much over the money, but the policy decision that was made based on emotions rather than sound budgeting principals.
Not to mention the utter insanity of an organization that is supposedly working towards a CURE for breast cancer caving into the demands of another organization that promotes abortion, which has been determined to CAUSE breast cancer in some women. Why could not the Susan Komen people just SAY so??!! “We cannot support PP because their activities cause breast cancer in some women, and that is contrary to OUR goals”. Maybe cite some research, or call upon the researchers themselves to testify. Maybe the feminists will scream, but reality needs to come crashing into their dreamland sooner or later. Abortion is not only immoral,it represents a horrendous health hazard to women, and sometimes they even DIE from it, are much more likely to die from it than from carrying a pregnancy to term and giving birth. Planned Parenthood has LOTS of clout, especially now that the Obama administration gives them millions in TAXPAYER funds every year.
We dropped our 20+ year subscription to CR because of their rabid endorsement of Obamacare and complete disregard for the market distortions that would be created or what would happen to folks who already had very good insurance that we were happy with.
Remember “Communist Retorts” even endorsed Obama for Present of the nation in 2008 and 2012!
How “un-biased” of them!
Consumer Reports?
Is that “code” for Communist Revolutions?
Snark Snark.
By the way, does anyone know anything about this book, ”
How Harvard Rules: Reason in the Service of Empire” by John Trumpbour.
It has an interesting blurb on Amazon.
“A scathing indictment of Harvard that goes well beyond the fact that it is generally perceived as elitist. The contributors to this book, all Harvard graduates or faculty, assert that Harvard is, at least partially, racist, ethnocentric, sexist, and hostile to progressive intellectuals, and that it has compromised its independence.” – Library Journal
Remember Present Barry Obama passed through there – Harvard that is.
Thanks for the down vote Bamie!
I don’t care if the site is up or not. I won’t be signing up for any reason.
Ah, and don’t forget to ignore AARP.
AARP is compensating for parents divorced from their children, for men and women who condemn breeding, and for others who are incapable of having children for “lifestyle” reasons.
So, what came first, social programs or social dysfunction? Somewhere, as men and women dreamed of material, physical, and ego gratification, they lost contact with reality.
AARP has a wholly-owned subsidiary that sells AARP endorsements to various insurance products. AARP gets 5% of the purchase price every time some sucker buys an AARP-endorsed policy.
AARP got behind Obamacare because they knew Obamacare would cut sharply into Medicare, causing Medicare beneficiaries (seniors) to need to purchase more private “Medicare-gap” policies (the policies that cover medical expenses Medicare won’t pay for). AARP makes many millions on endorsements every year on “gap” policies, and they stood to make even more (estimates are $1 – $2 Billion a year) if Obamacare passed.
That is why AARP supported Obamacare. AARP didn’t give a damn about the interests of seniors, who would be hurt by Obamacare. All AARP cared about was the money it would make.
I just passed a milestone birthday, so suddenly I am getting a lot of mail from the AARP. It will be a cold day in Hell before I join that organization or have anything to do with them. They could be giving away free money, and I would still tell them to get bent.
The problem is not the technology, but the policies and regulations. I guess Consumer Reports forgot to report that Obamacare would not work in Detroit, which is why they passed it quickly before people could judge its content.
Dismember it. Vacuum it. Flush it. Support planned government!
As I advocate to abort Obamacare, and invite all pro-choice men and women to join me, I wonder about cause and effect. No, not sex and conception, which is apparently no longer taught in biology class, but market distortions and compensatory policies.
Anyway, Obamacare is merely a clump of policies. Why do pro-aborts oppose its abortion; pro-choice oppose its choice; and Democrats oppose citizens’ rights? Why are sacrificial rites an integral part of their religion (i.e. moral philosophy)?
Thirty days? CR thinks it might be fixed in 30 days? HAHAHAHA! Thirty MONTHS maybe – if they tear it down and start all over again from the beginning.
There’s a not-too-old Russian joke:
It is the time of Stalin, he is traveling in a train and it becomes stuck in the snow. Stalin says, “fire all the engineers and replace them with the proletariat.” The trains gets moving again.
Time passes.
It is the time of Khrushchev, he is traveling in a train and it becomes stuck in the snow. Khrushchev says, “bring back the engineers. .. they knew what they were doing.” The trains gets moving again.
Time passes.
It is the time of Brezhnev, he is traveling in a train and it becomes stuck in the snow. Brezhnev says, “pull down the shades and pretend we are moving.”
… next, Obama will be saying we should pull down the shades and pretend …
The Ocare website is teetering on the brink.
My question is, where are the right wing hacking syndicates who could impregnate it with virus and finish it off altogether?
And for that matter, all the other techno portals upon which the left has become most utterly dependent.
Not only would doing it be incredibly stupid even suggesting it is.
Now leftwinger can post your suggestion and claim that the reason the site is having problems is Republican hackers.
How you know the poster isn’t a leftist troll?
They stole Hillary sites and posted as her fans demanding she cede to Bama.
Is that you, Senator McCain?
Is that you, Senator Graham?
Shhhhhhh!
[…] As the Professor so diligently reminds, Consumer Reports “helped shove ObamaCare down your throats”. […]
I am glad to have read this article. I didn’t know what CR was up to, was considering re-subscribing, but no, never again.Will tell all seven of my grown kids about this, too.
Same here, just got my second re-up notice. Always knew they were lefties but appreciated the product reviews. I’ll read my library’s copy.
The stealthy and steep drift left is lamentable. I suppose it is the revenge of the 60’s activists who saw all status quo as hard right. I will forgive Consumer Reports its transgression and continue my subscription — the information they provide on consumer products is very useful.