Allah:
Via Newsbusters, after yesterday’s unpleasantness and the Halbig “speak-o” fiasco of a few months ago, I see Democrats (plus independents in name only like King) have finally reached the “Jon who?” stage of their Gruber problem.
This is the game we’re playing now, eh?
KILMEADE: They just lied about a health plan to the American people, called the stupidity of the American voter and bragged about the lack of transparency.
KING: This is one guy. I don’t know who this guy was. All I know is that it’s important for people to have health insurance. And if you guys are saying people shouldn’t have health insurance, I don’t know where you’re coming from.
GUILFOYLE: That’s not what we’re saying, sir.
KING: Are you that cruel?
“All I know is that it’s important for people to have health insurance.” That’s consistent, at least, with the ends-justifies-the-means Democratic M.O. that’s defined Obama’s presidency, particularly its second half. Want to bomb Qaddafi in Libya and ISIS in Syria but not have to wrestle with Congress over an AUMF? Just skip it and send in the jets; all I know is that intervention is important. Want to get ObamaCare started on schedule in 2013 but worried that midterm voters will react badly to the employer mandate? Just suspend implementation of the mandate, even though it’s statutorily required. All I know is that it’s important that the law succeed politically. Want to amnestize five million illegals but can’t get Congress to make a comprehensive immigration deal? Just do it by executive order, separation of powers be damned.
Let him caucus with the Dems.
He’s an ignoramus.
It’ll be a perfect fit.
(Calls the architect of ObamaCare ”just some guy.” I half expected him to call Brian, ”dude,”)
It’s a bigger issue than that. WAY bigger.
King is merely demonstrating the arrogance of the collectivists, seasoned with a little bit of desperation. What else should we expect from party apparatichiks who believe they should make all decisions for the stupid masses who are too ignorant to recognize how superior the elitists are? Their socialist takeover attempt of medicine grows more unpopular every day with the majority of Americans, so turds like King spew invectives in a pathetic act of trying to shame obamacare opponents, twisting in the wind to avoid admitting that obamacare is based on nothing but lies and deception.
Health Insurance and actual ‘care’ are two different things aren’t they?
Gold – bronze – silver…some Insurance metals are BETTER than other Insurance Metals. I would also Think the ‘CARE’ would define the Metal you could Afford/had to choose ( which at this point is NONE).
So, maybe the BRONZE metal would not have caught the CANCER King spoke of – – OR if it DID, you would not get the GOLD metal treatment for it…
Democrats I’m convinced are the scum that floats to the top…of the cesspool…
Jonathan Gruber? Oh yeah. The guy hired by Governor Mitt Romney to help design Massachusetts health care reform, aka Romneycare.
@Greg:
“A list of administration lies might be a good topic for a book. But to just hit a few of the health care related highlights, we were told that the public option was not a Trojan horse, that it was about choice and competition. This was a bald faced lie. We were told we could keep our plans and doctors period, end of sentence. That was a lie. We were told Obamacare would reduce premiums by $2,500. That was a lie. That Obamacare was not a tax. Lie. That the VA was a model of socialized medicine. True, but not in the way they meant. All of these lies built upon one another, creating a vision of health reform that was all upside and no downside. And the Democrats barely, despite the obvious displeasure of citizens, forced it through, though only just barely.
What followed was several more years of various lies being told to adjust and protect the program. We were told, still incredible, that the White House had no idea what a disaster the launch of the federal exchange was going to be. We were told it was off to a great start, when in fact it only managed to enroll 6 people on the first day. We were told the problem with the site was too many excited customers when in fact the site crashed under just over a thousand users. We were told HHS had no enrollment targets when in fact there was an enrollment target memo. We were told the figures on enrollment were not available when in fact HHS was collecting data from insurers. We were told the rollout was just like the one in Massachusetts when in fact it was not. We were told the rollout was just like Medicare part D when in fact it was not at all. We were not told about a hidden Obamacare exemption that could have applied to almost anyone (it was finally added to the website after a WSJ report about it). On and on the administration and its allies in the media just lied about what was happening.”
The American people were lied to so that the Obama administration could have its signature legislation. Truth be damned, lie, shove it down the public’s throat, and get hapless Democrats to go along with the lies and misrepresentations.
There are now TWO cases pending in the SCOTUS on the disaster that is Obamacare. And if I were the defendants, I would play Gruber’s videos, all three of them, to the Justices and say “See, this bill was passed based not on truth, but lies like it’s not a tax, you won’t lose your doctor or insurance plan that you can keep, period; that there would be savings, etc.”
The fact that you support such a lying, deceitful Administration says a lot about your own character. Gruber was just some low level hack that was pushing Obamacare, not matter how you want to project the blame for the deceit. So what if he wrote Masscare? I don’t live in Massachusetts and should not be required to pay for insurance that was union negotiated because of the damn Cadillac tax that the lying bastards in the White House used to redistribute wealth.
The ACA is no more popular now than when it was passed. And in case you didn’t notice, 28 of the Democrats who voted for that bill just got booted to the curb.
@retire05, #6:
I assume, then, that republicans will attempt to rectify this deplorable situation as soon as their newly elected majorities are seated.
Or they’ll do absolutely nothing useful for another 2 years, while continuing to attack people who actually did. That seems to be the strategy.
@Greg:
Using Colbert as your intellectual go-to guy to pump up your opinion only shows that you rely on comics, not true intellectuals, for your information.
You go ahead and use Colbert, I’ll use Madison, Adams, Jefferson and Monroe.
Maybe you should give some thought to what the conservative National Review article had to say, since that’s what Colbert thought worthy of close comedic attention. Colbert is certainly a lot smarter than the average elected politician.
@Greg:
Colbert is certainly a lot smarter than the average
electedDemocrat politician.There, fixed it for you.
I’ll bet Colbert knows the difference between an adjective and and adverb. You might fix that, while you’re fixing things.
@Greg:
I’ll bet you are not going to get any smarter with age. Stick with Colbert. He appeals to those like you whose I.Q. is no greater than your shoe size,
Colbert is smart enough to understand what it is that the National Review article is advocating. Unlike Colbert, the National Review and Rush Limbaugh aren’t trying to be funny. They really are advocating that the new republican majorities refrain from doing anything constructive so long as Obama is in the White House.
Maybe you’re somehow missing that. Colbert certainly didn’t.
Responses to this PEW Research poll question make the same point. Two-thirds of republican voters want their congressional representatives to “stand up to Obama,” even if it means nothing constructive gets done.
Compare the 2014 responses of republican and democratic voters to the same question. It’s pretty clear where the responsibility for Congressional dysfunction lies.
@Greg:
And in the same Pew survey, over half of Democrats want the President to work with the Republicans.
Correct. Nation before party. That was the point being made.
@Greg:
When did that change for the Democrats in D.C.? Oh, wait, it hasn’t.