>>>With your permission, can I state for the record that you put those words (President telling whopper of lies) into the Washington Post? Their fact checkers have also given Obama the high Pinocchio label. :)
>
>If you want to keep stating for the record things that are wrong, well, you are entitled to your own opinions but not your own facts.
>
>In this case I've explained more than once why grandfathering and serial extensions mean that anybody who had a plan when Obama said his thing could keep it to this day unless one of the parties chose to exit. So there's no lie. It's an exceedingly simple argument. The Washington Post or a mid term popularity contest is not a proxy for a factual rebuttal. Votes allow the electorate to steer policy, not to declare that rain is sunshine and hey presto, it is so because the people spoke. If facts are a popularity contest then society has reached its final stage of corruption.
>
>>>Hopefully the least objectionable of the R candidates (ugh, even if there is one) will win in November. At that point, they can put an end to this sinking ship of a law.
>
>Maybe they'll repeal Medicare as well since that's the biggest sinking ship on the healthcare planet. Or maybe not.

Excuse me for interrupting but was/is it also true that the ACA was going to force many of those plans to change or drop AND the administration knew that. So the statement may have been technically true when you add in "provided the suppliers do not cancel" but they knew that was exactly what was going to happen.