Fox News is telling viewers that the cheapest Obamacare plan (the Bronze plan) will cost $20,000 per year for a family of five. A complete misrepresentation of the facts. The "ugly truth" of Fox bimbo Gerri Willis's report couldn't be farther from the truth. There are so many lies in what Dr. Marc Siegel says in this interview, but this article will present you with the actual truth as opposed to the Faux News version of it.
True, the most inexpensive plan is indeed called the "Bronze" plan. It is the policy offered by the state exchange, this is also correct. People may opt to purchase this policy if they either do not have health care offered through their employer or they are unemployed. Another reason they may opt for this plan is because it might be cheaper than paying for health care through their employer(s).
So, the headline on every conservative "news" outlet and straight from Ms. Willis's mouth is that families will be "forced to shell out" $20,000 per year for health care. Their source for this "information?" The IRS. The full text of what they are referring to is on page 70, about halfway down the page of this document. It is explaining what the penalty will be for a family of five with an annual income of $120,000 per year that does not carry the minimum essential coverage (which is also explained earlier in the same document). The scenario explains what happens if no member of the family (two adults and three children) have the essential coverage for any month in 2016. Their filing threshold is $24,000 and the "annual national average bronze plan premium" is $20,000 for a family of five. The threshold amount ($24,000) is subtracted from the family income ($120,000) and multiplied by the 2.5%. The result is $2,400. The penalty for not carrying the minimum essential coverage is $200 per month for a family of five earning $120,000 per year. Re-read the bolded part of the previous sentence if you are affiliated with the Republican party and note the following: if you DO carry the minimum essential coverage, guess what? Ta-da! There is no penalty! Thus, there is no headline for conservative "news" sources either. That's no fun.
Next, something just plain ignorant said by Dr. Siegel: "Someone who's eighteen years old, do they need maternity coverage? Do they need eyeglass coverage?" Wow! So, according to Dr. Siegel, adult, 18-year-olds don't have babies and don't wear glasses. This speaks to the "reality" these people live in. He goes on to call it "entitlement" insurance. So, Dr. Siegel, if you have health insurance and you never see a doctor...you die in your sleep, not even visiting the hospital in your last hours, yet you had health insurance the entire time, what's that called? Or suppose you have auto insurance (because it's the law) since you've been old enough to drive and never had so much as a fender-bender, what's that called? Isn't it basically just paying for other, bad drivers?
Also, Obamacare was not "sold to the American people" as catastrophe insurance. It was always meant to cover pre-existing conditions and to provide people with the preventative care they need to avoid long-term serious health problems.
The figures shown from the American Action Forum? The board members of this organization include Republican Jeb Bush, Republican Norm Coleman, Republican John McKernan, and former Goldman Sachs vice-chair (also Secretary of Domestic Finance under George W. Bush) and Republican Robert Steel. Enough said about that "source."
Lastly, in a letter dated January 11, 2010, the Congressional Budget Office sent a letter to Olympia Snowe with the following figures:
- $12,000 - $12,500 is the estimated 2016 premium for a family (replacing a previous analysis stating the national average for a family would be $15,200)
- Bronze plans will be lower because the actuarial cost is only 60% rather than individually purchased plans at 72%
- Small employers may purchase insurance plans from the exchange (not simply offer limited coverage for employees and send them to the exchange for additional coverage as stated by Dr. Siegel)
These are the facts of the Patient Protection And Affordable Care Act.
Image Source: ClassWarfareExists
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 172
Does "cost" mean the cost to the citizen, cost to the citizen plus cost to the gov't?
So many meaningless estimates???
So much convoluted language and idiotic formulas...
Covrett, the lies and numbers that you spew are irrelevant. Leftists cannot even run the Airlines...it went to Hell. They could not run Amtrak...it went to Hell. They cannot run the Post Office...it's gone to Hell.
Face it; everything the Left touches goes to Hell.
As will the "Healthcare" system in this Country.
Look for it. You'll find it...in Hell.
Also, the plain statement of the IRS, according to Lora is "...and the "annual national average bronze plan premium" is $20,000 for a family of five."
How is FOX reporting that a lie???
LOS ANGELES, CA (Catholic Online) - Under Obamacare, Americans will be required to buy health insurance or pay a penalty to the IRS.
The examples point to families of four and families of five, both of which the IRS expects in its assumptions to pay a minimum of $20,000 per year for a bronze plan.
"The annual national average bronze plan premium for a family of 5 (2 adults, 3 children) is $20,000," the regulation says.
Among all of the available plans, Bronze will be the lowest tier health-insurance plan available under Obamacare -- after Silver, Gold, and Platinum. Under the law, the penalty for not buying health insurance is supposed to be capped at either the annual average Bronze premium, 2.5 percent of taxable income, or $2,085.00 per family in 2016.
As published this week, the IRS has set in law the rules for implementing the penalty Americans must pay if they fail to obey Obamacare's mandate to buy insurance.
The IRS presented examples of different situations families might find themselves in.
The IRS assumes that families of five who are uninsured would need to pay an average of $20,000 per year to purchase a Bronze plan in 2016.
Using the conditions laid out in the regulations, the IRS calculates that a family earning $120,000 per year that did not buy insurance would need to pay a "penalty." which is a word the IRS still uses despite the Supreme Court ruling that it is in fact a "tax" of $2,400 in 2016.
Basically, Fox news is reporting what the IRS published.
How is this a lie?
Lora screwed the pooch on this one...
Her story about a "Fox Lie" is a lie...
Lies. Those Countries that you speak of are a Dream in your head. They are all on the verge of destruction, non-existent Birth Rates...DEATH.
Nope...America remains first. Unless Leftists have their way. All else FOLLOW..or FAIL. I know People who won't let that happen.
Canada has government health insurance covered free abortion on demand and our IMR is 4.85 compared to the American rate of 6.00 (source:. CIA World Factbook).
According to Wiki, the US is ranked at 34th and Canada comes in at 24th in infant mortality rates.
Due to our better care, the U.S. delivers far more premature infants; more U.S. Women carry their Babies to term that have Defects; Countries have different definitions of live birth, and therefore infant mortality statistics are not comparable. the U.S. is much farther ahead in terms of various fertility enhancing techniques, resulting in far more preemie births, driving up the number of premature multiple births which, due to their risk, have a much higher death rate. The stats don't take into account miscarriages, which is how many of these other countries count the deaths that we would call infant deaths because we get more of them out of the womb alive, but more of them die.
Nice LIE (try).
I notice you cited no source or stats to back up your premise. Why? Because you can't.
I am a native South Carolinian and Love my country. I would not trade my American citizenship for any other, bar none. However, I have always admired the Canadian government for way back in 1966 insituting a National healthcare system to cover all their citizens. Ever since learning about the Canadian National H/C system, I have admittingly been somewhat embarrassingly envious of my Canadian friends and colleagues. I have also been perturbed at my own government. Inasmuch, as it appeared that the Canadian government seemed to care more about the health of their citizens than my government did for our country's citizens.
However and thinking optimistically, I believe that our new ACAPP (healthcare system) will turnout to be just as good (hopefully, even better) for my fellow Americans when it becomes fully operational in 2014.
Why anyone would disapprove of a universal health care system, is beyond my comprehension. But, in reading the posted comments, it appears that there are those who will.
America has always had a universal health care system. Anyone, anywhere could get all the health care they had earned including their family.
But that is not what you mean by Universal Healthcare ... what you mean is full, unlimited healthcare paid for by other people with no restrictions and no costs to to those that decided not to earn it honestly.
What always amazes me is how many of the rightwingnuts talking endlessly about personal responsibility claim to be Christians. Read any passage from the New Testament and you immediately see that Jesus Christ never asked if the poor, blind, crippled, leperous, downtrodden, or sinful had "earned" his help, he simply helped everyone and advised that they "sin no more".
But even if one could find the elusive moral justification for selfishness that their true prophet (the psychopath loving Ayn Rand) tried to codify in her trashy novels, this would still have little to do with publicly funded universal health care. Because it is not about "healthcare paid for by other people". Rather it is about healthcare we all pay for collectively and, through the miracle of bulk purchasing, we pay less for it.
As per the 2012 data compiled by the OECD Canadians pay about $4,445/person/year for healthcare, Americans pay $8,233/person/year. Your cost is almost double ours, and more than double the average of all OECD countries. What's the difference? Corporate profits!
The only freedom you gain by this is the freedom to pay more.
There is no such thing as a free lunch.
If you feel so strongly about it, Rory...send us some of your money to give away...
We know that you wouln't want to be selfish...
People are dying by the side of the road, fer Christ's sake...
What an arrogant...GGGGGGAAAAAACCCCCCKKKK!!!!!!
The figures quoted above are what the Canadian government pays (single-payer) and we citizens pay for this through our taxes. The overall cost of health care, paid for by citizens through our government by taxation, is the $4,445/person/year. There is no other cost.
Whereas Americans who insist on keeping the government out of it and letting the private sector profit off their health care needs are paying the much higher cost of $8,233/person/year.
Because despite your religious conviction that the private sector does everything better, the evidence from all over the world is that this is simply not true when it comes to health care.
Actually, I am very bright...just taking my cue from what you said...Canadians pay about $4,445/person/year
Perhaps you should learn to write more clearly...
You probably should have said "The Canadian government pays $4,445 per person per year..." If that is what you meant...
And...I would like to know the source of your information...
Source, please...
Be understanding, Jo Jo at present only barks in discontent at that which he knows little of. He hasn't been properly taught to google yet. It takes time and patients to teach such sophisticated tricks to dog faced boys.
Please just go away.
"patients"...p-a-t-i-e-n-c-e.
GOT it?
GOOD.
Clark, do yourself and the rest of us a favor by playing marbles in traffic on the closet "I" to where you live.
"Leftists cannot even run the Airlines...it went to Hell."
That would be "they went to Hell."
Mark-John K. Feb 5, 2013, 1:44pm EST
"They are all on the verge of destruction, non-existent Birth Rates...DEATH."
Grammatically incorrect and rendered meaningless.
Mark-John K. Feb 7, 2013, 8:18am EST
"Due to our better care, the U.S. delivers far more premature infants; more U.S. Women carry their Babies to term that have Defects;"
Should read: "...more U.S. women carry their babies that have defects to term;"
Mark-John K. Feb 11, 2013, 8:13am EST
"Any independent body that is willing to keep an eye on those fools that waste our Money rates right up there with me, as I'm sure it does with the American People...whose Money it is THAT THEY ARE WASTING..."
Awkward, confusing and misleading. Should read: "...whose money it is that is being wasted."
Now clean up all this broken glass and watch your tongue in future, bucko.
President Obama's health care law will push 7 million people out of their job-based insurance coverage — nearly twice the previous estimate, according to the latest estimates from the Congressional Budget Office released Tuesday.
CBO said that this year's tax cuts have changed the incentives for businesses and made it less attractive to pay for insurance, meaning fewer will decide to do so. Instead, they'll choose to pay a penalty to the government, totaling $13 billion in higher fees over the next decade.
But the non-partisan agency also expects fewer people to have to pay individual penalties to the IRS than it earlier projects, because of a better method for calculating incomes that found more people will be exempt.
Overall, the new health provisions are expected to cost the government $1.165 trillion over the next decade — the same as last year's projection.
With other spending cuts and tax increases called for in the health law, though, CBO still says Mr. Obama's signature achievement will reduce budget deficits in the short term.
During the health care debate Mr. Obama had said individuals would be able to keep their plans.
Apparently Oblama "lied" before FOX News "lied"!
...bucko.
{i.e.} It's a dark smelly hole in which asinine people stick their head in. But why the hell am I telling you this, its all too obvious that you are very familiar with that place, seeing as how that is were your head resides.
Stop worring about the cost of the Bronze Plan, they have not said anything about forcing dog faced boys buy into the ACA system. (at least not yet) You are safe for now, but for your own peace of mind, keep your AR-15 handy and continue watching out your bedroom window for those Black Op Helicopters. Remember, they always come for you on a dark spooky moonless night.
I realize that barking is repetitive by nature for dog faced boys. But, using the same excuse (i.e. ad hominem) over and over again when you don't have a counter debate is really getting old. You now have your yapping puppy, Clark V, using the same tactic. Which one of your less than knowledgeable student Libertarians will be next ??? (Eric, Opti, Mark)
It is not our fault that he has no other pitches...
Canadians offered free care in the US paid by the Canadian government have sometimes declined it.
In 1990 the BC Medical Association drummed up controversy about waiting times for heart by-pass operations, despite the medically questionable nature of heart bypass for milder cases of chest pain and studies showing by-pass recipients were only 25 - 40% more likely to be relieved of chest pain than people who just stay on heart medicine. The BC health ministry struck a deal with University of Washington at Seattle to take 50 by-pass cases at $18,000 per person, $3,000 above the cost in Canada (still paid for by the government), with further plans to buy three or four more blocks of 50 operations, but only 9 Canadians signed up for it.
Some residents of Canada travel to the United States for care. A study by Barer, et al., indicates that the majority of Canadians who seek health care in the U.S. are already there for other reasons, including business travel or vacations. A smaller proportion seek care in the U.S. for reasons of confidentiality, including abortions, mental illness, substance abuse, and other problems that they may not wish to divulge to their local physician, family, or employer.
A 2002 study by Katz, Cardiff, et al., reported the number of Canadians using U.S. services to be "barely detectible relative to the use of care by Canadians at home" and that the results "do not support the widespread perception that Canadian residents seek care extensively in the United States."
In 2005 Shona Holmes of Waterdown, Ontario, traveled to the Mayo Clinic after deciding she couldn't afford to wait for appointments with specialists through the Ontario health care system. She has characterized her condition as an emergency, said she was losing her sight, and portrayed her condition as life-threatening brain cancer. OHIP did not reimburse her for her medical expenses. In 2007 she joined a lawsuit to force the Ontario government to reimburse patients who feel they had to travel outside of Canada for timely, life-saving medical treatment. In July 2009 Holmes agreed to appear in television ads broadcast in the United States warning Americans of the dangers of adopting a Canadian style health care system. After her ad appeared critics pointed out discrepancies in her story, including that Rathke's cleft cyst, the condition she was treated for, was not a form of cancer, and was not life-threatening. In fact, the mortality rate for patients with a Rathke's cleft cyst is zero percent.
So at least try to get some facts before you make blanket statements. You just shine a very bright spotlight on your own ignorance as well as your willingness to speak out boldly from that basis.
To a man their assessment is that visitors to America who use American healthcare are usually not in an emergency situation. They're impatient for an elective procedure, and willing to pay for the quicker response. Claims that people facing life threatening situations are delayed for months for treatment are simply fables created by the American medical industry's spinmeisters. i.e., lies.
{cant wait to tell me where I am wrong. Feel free}
I would not attempt to speak for R. F. personally Knowing that he is exceptionally capable of speaking for himself. However, since you seem so determined to have someone prove to you that your suggestion is wrong, I offer the following.
The Congressional Budget Office is not a part of Congress nor is it comprised of any members of Congress. The CBO is a separate entity of paid professional government employees. The only difference between the CBO and other government offices, agencies and departments, is that the CBO is designated to serve Congress exclusively. Whereas, other government offices serve the people of the United States.
The CBO only exist for one reason, that reason being, to determine the cause and effect of proposed Congressional bugets and expenditures. It is an office with the sole responsibility to present to Congress an independent analysis concerning any/all Congressional econmonic issues.
The CBO, as you wrongly suggest, has absolutely no Congressional authority to make any policy nor to institute any laws. Neither does the CBO have the authority to keep any financial records nor bugetary books belonging to the Congress nor those of any other government agency or department.
{i.e.} As R. F. attempted to point out to you, you are suggesting that an independent office (CBO) should seize/sequester control of the U.S. Congress, which would be an Un-Constitutional act.
{Sure it is simple to poke at a flaw in what I said, but my main point remains. The way our government does its accounting is illegal in the real world.}
First of all, I neither poked at a flaw in your comment nor at you personally. Had I done so, I would pointed out that the whole of your principled position was wrong, not there being just a minor flaw in your comment.
I would suggest that your counter POV is quite disassociated from what is lawful under the Articles of the Constitution. It would also be my position that you entirely missed the point of my posted comment. Thereby, you are still incorrectly accusing Congress of committing unlawful acts, while at the same time, advocating illegal actions to be taken by a non elected government office. An office (CBO) which has no legally authorized nor Constitutionally mandated powers to do that which you suggest.
Inasmuch, it would appear that you are somewhat confused and/or unaware of how the three branches of our government work, the mandated duties, the legal positions and the Constitutionally authorized power of each branch of office.
Scott, based on what you are saying and what the constitution says, we should get rid of the CBO all together.
I am good with that.
As I have pointed out to you several times before, reading comprehension is obviously not a part of your learned educational skills. Although I have tried to make you aware of that fact, you keep embarrassing yourself with inaccurate comments which denote your inability to understand that which you read.
Now as the late great W.C. Fields would say, "Go away Boy, You bother Me"
Your words:"An office (CBO) which has no legally authorized nor Constitutionally mandated powers to do that which you suggest."
What am I not comprehending of what you wrote?
Furthermore, where in the constitution is it mandated that we have a CBO? Post office sure, CBO, NO!
BFD. Any independent body that is willing to keep an eye on those fools that waste our Money rates right up there with me, as I'm sure it does with the American People...whose Money it is THAT THEY ARE WASTING...
The whole point in this story, is that the cost of the penalty is much less than the cost of the premium, for a bronze care package.
Thank you for proving that - if the family is healthy - pay the 2400 a year! Then AFTER they get sick, they get the insurance (it can not be turned down) - if the person is 'cured' drop the insurtance until next time..........
This is the main reason why all insurance companies will go bankrupt - they will ONLY insure sick people! It is the smart move financially for the people who are not sick.
Then we WILL have only the Government option to go too - they will of ourse ":bail-out' the INsurance companies - thereby owning them, in order to avoid the guaranteed crisis in that industry (that the Government caused).
They learned the lesson quite well in the housing crisis. Laws passed can cause a collapse - then the ones that caused it, can bail them out, control them, and further centralize things.
It reminds me slightly of the whole screaming about how Death Panels are not in the law!
Of course not - they are Independant (Advisory Payment Boards" (IAPB).
Which is TOTALLY different, because of the spelling!
My son in law, has a policy for 4 people - his employer pays 10% of the total cost -= he pays 1400 a month from his paycheck. It is FAR from a great p[olicy.
But 1400 a month is 16.8 per year, and his employer pays 10% of the gross cost, so the total cost is 18.6K.
And it will NOT qualify under ACA as an acceptable plan.
My plan, where the employer pays 90% of the cost, leaves me with 250 a month to pay - so the total is 2500 a month. that is 30,000 a year!
I think Fox is wrong on the 20K - because they are way too low.
Every penny an employer pays in benefits, come out of peoples pockets (collectively). There is no such thing as the 'company' paying for a cost - it is passed on in lower salaries and higher prices to consumers.
All of this adds up to government centralized control of about 1/5 of our economy with the politicians promise of security. We do not want the freedom to choose, we do not want the right to pursue happiness. We want the government to make all of the hard decisions for us because we are unable or unwilling. We want to be dominated. We want to be ruled. We want a king. Some one save us from our selves!
Politicians are elected, though certainly family connections and wealth seem to be helpful there as well.
Corporations such as the big pharma and big insurance companies that run the American private health business are unelected, very wealthy and likely practice nepotism at the highest levels.
In only one of these three does the common man have any say at all.
Face it; everything the Left touches goes to Hell.
As will the "Healthcare" system in this Country.
Look for it. You'll find it...in Hell.
Funny how out of all that Jesse and I said, you find it necessary to pick apart my definition of a king. Does that mean that you agree with everything else we said? I bet you like that better.
Ok, so as you point out, King does not fit the best for what we want. I need a word like king, that eliminates the whole family thing. How about "Dictator" Ya, dictator and chief. That fits better. It has a ring to it. "We want to be dominated. We want to be ruled. We want a " dictator ". Some one save us from our selves!"
Do I detect a smidgen of jealousy in the tones of your comment. (i.e. The Master of ad hominem)
Jo Jo uses facts and logic...
Jo Jo uses facts and logic...
Well, he uses the words.
There is nothing stopping you from changinfg Insurance companies, or telling your doctos and pharmacy to get drugs from different companies.
But once elected, it is a bit tougher to decide today you want someone else.
Now we will no longer have the choice of Insurance companies in a few years - all bankrupt, government only. And you will no longer be able to say you wany a diferent Manufacturer for the drugs you take.
People that live where those freedoms have been gone, do not even realise we still have them - for now.
The 7% has dictated to the 93%, that the entire country must conform to them - NOT just the Government - but little mom and pop stores too!
Letsz see - thaty must be in say communist China, or maybe Cuba, or SOME communist country, state or maybe Province?
The IRS (which is charged with enforcing the onerous penalties and fines of the President’s healthcare “reform” law) has finally released a cost analysis based on ObamaCare regulations showing that the cheapest healthcare plan in 2016 will cost average American families of four or five members $20,000 per year for the so-called “bronze plan.”
CNSNews.com is reporting…
“The annual national average bronze plan premium for a family of 5 (2 adults, 3 children) is $20,000,” the IRS statement says.
“Under Obamacare, Americans will be required to buy health insurance or pay a penalty to the IRS.”
So, your choice is to buy the bronze plan (or another more expensive plan) – or pay the IRS a penalty for being uninsured.
But wait, there’s more…
Under the IRS enforcement of the ObamaCare regulations, an uninsured child or dependent spouse will also trigger an IRS fine.
CNSNews.com: “A parent will be held liable for ObamaCare’s individual mandate penalty if they don’t have insurance coverage for their children.”
ObamaCare’s official name, the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,” is quickly becoming the punch line of a pathetic federal joke at the expense of the American people!
Sadly, this is just the beginning of the ObamaCare plague.
http://www.lifenews.com/2013/02/03/irs-admits-obamacares-cost-is-20000-per-family/
Here is his exact statement: Obama (Bristol, Va., June 5, 2008): " In an Obama administration, we’ll lower premiums by up to $2,500 for a typical family per year. And we’ll do it by investing in disease prevention, not just disease management; by investing in a paperless health care system to reduce administrative costs; and by covering every single American and making sure that they can take their health care with them if they lose their job. … And we won’t do all this twenty years from now, or ten years from now. We’ll do it by the end of my first term as president of the United States." Just the same old liar that he has always been.
The real, actual name should be "Other Payer" because as Rory describes it he pays very little for either insurance or healthcare... but the money for these services has to come from somewhere, i.e. other people. As long as he personally does not have to be financially responsible for the bill out of his own pocket Rory thinks the service is reasonably priced.
Politically wonderful and economically unsustainable ... what a concept.
Since Jo Jo works and makes money, he can afford some of these things but he has to budget, plan and ration...if he were poor, sez liberals, he would get it all for free...At the expense of those who can afford only some of it...
I hope that clears it up for you...
See you in line with the dung machines at the free clinic...
How about it, MJK and Clark, were you boys a couple of the free loaders, can that be the reason the two of you are so upset over the new ACA system. I can not think of any other reason for the two of you to be so loudmouthed in opposition. Those of us who have always supplied our own insurance via paid for insurance plans are happy to know that everyone will now be doing the same.
I think it will be interesting the first year this mandate actually kicks in... and the tax filing afterwards. I have a feeling that is when reality will hit the fan with many...
The Obama Administration and the "Liberal" press put out a lie (eg...the Libyan embassy attack was the result of a spontanious demonstration against an anti-muslim film) and then FOX puts out the actual truth...
This post illustrates that point...
Thank you, Lora...
Thank you
You VILL haf insurance, UNT you VILL enjoy it, or ELSE!!!
Yes Comrades, we are in a Police State.
I am now waiting for the Brown Shirts to come for me.
But I know this is all over your head, so don't worry about it.
Baseball is too lame a sport for metaphorical application.
You do have an almost unhittable pitch...it is called the "from an alternate reality" ball...
Rational and logical people can't see it...
Unfortunately, neither can the umpire or the fans...because it happens only in your mind...
The sole issue in this post is...
Did Fox News lie when they said that the IRS said that the Bronze Plan will cost $20,000...
EVERYTHING ELSE is so much "Liberal" blather...
NOW... how much will the Bronze Plan cost???
Spare me 3 year-old estimates in letters to Olympia Snowe...
That's a shop doctored picture, Spanky was a serious conservative, not a happy go lucky liberal, and all Our Gang cadre know it. Now stop with the ad hominem or I will report you to the Alfalfa Fan Club.
And...alfalfa was a homo...
Don't try to make sense of what Clark writes in a comment, inasmuch, as what Clark writes, only makes sense to Clark.
Reading his comment, you will note that Clark does not even know that this article was written by Lora Covrett who is a woman. Neither, does he know that the author has not {locked ???} the membership out nor in any other way prevented the memberhip from continuing to post comments. Apparently, he does not even realize that he posted one himself at 9:13 pm and that by doing so, he started this thread to which you and I have responded with comments.
Like I said, don't even waste your time, he resides in a world of his own.
So, what looked like a petty move on my part was actually a hamfisted one. Probably good that I stopped that string from dominating Lora's entire article.
You may be right, but then again, we are speaking of Clark V. So I will stand by my comment.