Although BuzzFeed editor-in-chief Ben Smith's article is a cheeky defense of ObamaCare, it is the first time since the program's passage that a member of the elite media has actually bothered to publish a high-profile look at the devilish details. When it might have actually made a difference, there was no way Smith, or anyone in media, would have dared to report the truth about just how brutally ObamaCare screws Obama's all-important youth vote: And what's Smith's rationale for the media covering up this important information until after it matters? Well, of course, it's all the fault of we eeeevil conservatives. Apparently, the Right was so opposed to ObamaCare, the media was paralyzed and couldn’t do its job:Hot Air's Ed Morrissey, whose informed fisk of Smith's piece is a must-read, reacts to Smith's ridiculous excuse with…And let us never forget that, at the same time the media was attempting to demonize everyday Americans (who had read the bill) protesting ObamaCare at town hall meetings, this very same media had obviously entered into an unspoken agreement not to report on those aspects of ObamaCare that might hurt its chance of passage or Obama's reelection bid.

Because of Obama's willingness to screw his own base, Smith attempts to paint Obama as some kind of political braveheart. But when the president knows he can always count on Ben Smith and his ilk to cover up politically damaging news like this, that's not bravery; it's entering into a conspiracy.

You'll live longer if you eat less, have a healthier family more valuable to society, and you won't have to live with the consequences of being fat.

Pro-life = smaller waistline.

While ObamaCare won't take full effect until 2014, health-insurance premiums in the individual market are already rising, and not just because of routine increases in medical costs. Insurers are adjusting premiums now in anticipation of the guaranteed-issue and community-rating mandates starting next year. There are newly imposed mandates, such as the coverage for children up to age 26, and what qualifies as coverage is much more comprehensive and expensive. Consolidation in the hospital system has been accelerated by ObamaCare and its push for Accountable Care Organizations. This means insurers must negotiate in a less competitive hospital market.

Although President Obama repeatedly claimed that health-insurance premiums for a family would be $2,500 lower by the end of his first term, they are actually about $3,000 higher—a spread of about $5,500 per family.

Health insurers have been understandably reluctant to discuss the coming price hikes that are driven by the Affordable Care Act. Mark Bertolini, CEO of Aetna, the country's third-largest health insurer, broke the silence on Dec. 12. "We're going to see some markets go up by as much as 100%," he told the company's annual investor conference in New York City.

Insurers know that the Obama administration will denounce the premium increases as the result of greedy health insurers, greedy doctors, greedy somebody. The Department of Health and Human Services will likely begin to threaten, arm-twist or investigate health insurers in an effort to force them into keeping their premiums more in line with Democratic promises—just as HHS bureaucrats have already started doing when insurers want premium increases larger than 10%.

And that may work for a while. It certainly has in Massachusetts, where politicians, including then-Gov. Mitt Romney, made all the same cost-lowering promises about the state's 2006 prequel to ObamaCare that have yet to come true.

But unlike the federal government, health insurers can't run perpetual deficits. Something will have to give, which will likely open the door to making health insurance a public utility completely regulated by the government, or the left's real goal: a single-payer system.

http://professional.wsj.com/article/...?mg=reno64-wsj

David Dillon, chief executive of the Kroger supermarket chain, told the Financial Times that some companies might opt to pay a government-mandated penalty for not providing insurance because it was cheaper than the cost of coverage.

Nigel Travis, head of Dunkin’ Brands, said his doughnut chain was lobbying to change the definition of “full-time” employees eligible for coverage from those working at least 30 hours a week to 40 hours a week.

Some restaurants, including Wendy’s and Taco Bell franchises, have explored slashing worker hours so fewer employees qualify for health insurance, arguing that they cannot afford the additional healthcare costs. Other businesses are deliberately keeping headcounts below 50.

Universal Orlando plans to stop offering medical insurance to part-time employees beginning next year, a move the resort says has been forced by the federal government's health-care overhaul.

The reason: Universal currently offers part-time workers a limited insurance plan that has low premiums but also caps the payout of benefits. For instance, Universal's plan costs about $18 a week for employee-only coverage but covers only a maximum of $5,000 a year toward hospital stays. There are similar caps for other services.

Those types of insurance plans will no longer be permitted under the federal Affordable Care Act.