Free Markets, Free People

You Can’t Sabotage a Disaster

The Democrats’ newest line in the peeling onion of fail that is Obamacare is that its failure is all the Republicans’ fault because…they sabotaged it. This line has been taken up by Politico in an article by Todd S. Purdum.

From the moment the bill was introduced, Republican leaders in both houses of Congress announced their intention to kill it. Republican troops pressed this cause all the way to the Supreme Court — which upheld the law, but weakened a key part of it by giving states the option to reject an expansion of Medicaid. The GOP faithful then kept up their crusade past the president’s reelection, in a pattern of “massive resistance” not seen since the Southern states’ defiance of the Supreme Court’s Brown v. Board of Education decision in 1954…

Most Republican governors declined to create their own state insurance exchanges — an option inserted in the bill in the Senate to appeal to the classic conservative preference for local control — forcing the federal government to take at least partial responsibility for creating marketplaces serving 36 states — far more than ever intended.

Then congressional Republicans refused repeatedly to appropriate dedicated funds to do all that extra work, leaving the Health and Human Services Department and other agencies to cobble together by redirecting funds from existing programs. On top of that, nearly half of the states declined to expand their Medicaid programs using federal funds, as the law envisioned.

Then, in the months leading up to the program’s debut, some states refused to do anything at all to educate the public about the law. And congressional Republicans sent so many burdensome queries to local hospitals and nonprofits gearing up to help consumers navigate the new system face-to-face that at least two such groups returned their federal grants and gave up the effort.

So, political opposition to a law that Republicans always opposed is now "sabotage’. That’s simply nonsense on stilts. The law was passed without a single Republican vote. That should’ve been a big signal to Democrats that the law was going to be on shaky ground, but of course, in their arrogance, it didn’t.

Back in 1993, when Hillary Clinton was working on Health Care Reform, Daniel Patrick Moynihan gave her some sage advice. He told her that without support from a large, non-partisan majority, no large-scale reform can ever be successfully concluded. She ignored him at the time, just as Democrats ignored that advice when they passed Obamacare on a strictly party-line vote.

But no Congress can ever bind a succeeding Congress. This has been a black-letter principle of American politics for two centuries. The only way a succeeding congress can be bound is if the support for a particular law is widespread and bi-partisan. And in the case of Obamacare, not only have the Republicans been opposed since the beginning so has a majority of the American people. Obamacare has never polled with majority support among the electorate, and as its implementation date has drawn closer, the majority of the electorate that opposes it has increased.

Howard Dean, recently suggested that Republican opposition to Obamacare is a sign that Republicans have  "forgotten that they’re actually supposed to serve the American people." But since, by all the polling results I’ve ever seen, a substantial majority of the public opposes Obamacare, it would seem to me that Republican opposition is actually the precise opposite of what Howard Dean suggests.

Defining opposition to Obamacare as "sabotage" is simply sour grapes from an arrogant political party that imposed an unpopular law against the apparent wishes of the electorate.

Obamacare is a disaster. I predicted it was an unworkable disaster before it was passed, as did anyone who took the time to look at the perverse incentives it created. The amount of wishful thinking that went in to passing this stupid law is incomprehensible to me. It could not have been more clearly prone to failure if it had been intentionally designed to fail.

Make no mistake: if you support Obamacare, you are a complete dolt, or so lacking in fundamental knowledge that your opinion about it is irrelevant. It is a law that literally cannot accomplish its stated purpose, because it ignores essential and fundamental economic and political realities. Moreover, it was passed in opposition to a majority of Americans.

Opposition to this disaster is not sabotage. It is the only rational response to the utter stupidity it encapsulates.

But framing opposition as sabotage does have a darker, more nefarious purpose. The whole point of such charges is to delegitimize the opposition. Frankly, it’s part of what I see as an ongoing Democratic strategy to define opposition to any policy they support as un-American, at the very least, if not somehow criminal. The Left in this country could not be doing more to foment a civil war if they were intentionally trying to do so.

I have very little hope for the future of this country. I have very little left but anger.

Dale’s social media profiles:
Twitter | Facebook | Google+

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

60 Responses to You Can’t Sabotage a Disaster

  • How many people whose policies were cancelled or who face a skyrocketing premium/deductible will be lulled into believing that if they just voted for the Democrats one more time, they could fix the problems?  Even if a large number of previously Democrat voters aren’t fooled and choose to vote Republican or just stay home, there will be droves of people who will soon have subsidies which make their costs less.  Those people can be counted on to vote Democrat, and screw their neighbors.

    I have very little hope for the future of this country.

    Justifiably so.  Even if Republicans can benefit electorally from this, how many will be like McCain, Graham, King, Romney, Christie?  Such wimps and charlatans will not reverse the damage.  They’ll putter around until the next election when the short-attention-span voters will again swing the pendulum left.
    You can’t vote your way back to freedom.

    • You can’t vote your way back to freedom.

      Really?  I suppose Ted Cruz and his fellows gained office by the “immaculate election” route.
      You can’t “abstain” your way to anything but self-satisfied smugness.

      • Lets not go so hardcore into Ted Cruz just yet. Not saying he’ll turn out to be just another sellout (I mean they’re ALL sellouts but its a matter of degree) but I saw this movie before starring Marco Rubio (*spit*) so I’m taking a watch and see attitude for now.
        As for what Elliot said….he’s right. You know darn well how this clash of opposing worldviews is going to have to be settled. The only question is when.

        • Right, shark.  But history is good so far.  We here in Texas are PAST not watching who we send to office, and holding them to account.

          • That’s all well and good, but it’s the REST of them that are working to turn TX blue with “immigration reform”
            And once that happens, you can hold your pols to account all you want, and it won’t matter squat because you’ll be in the permanent minority. Just sayin’ is all.

          • I just noticed that the only thing missing from the reporting on the current debacle is the use of the word … wait for it“Unexpectedly”

          • I wish them luck, I suppose if the GOP gives amnesty to the illegals it might happen.

      • I suppose Ted Cruz and his fellows gained office by the “immaculate election” route.

        What does Cruz have to do with freedom?  Name one substantive way in which his election has reduced the government infringement of our freedoms, lightened the burden of taxes, mandates, etc..

        You can’t “abstain” your way to anything but self-satisfied smugness.

        Indeed.  Abstaining from voting, in and of itself, accomplishes nothing in the way of getting others to respect your freedom.  And, of course, that’s basically the same as what most people get from voting.
        Restoring freedom is a matter of living and doing, not sitting around and waiting for someone else to change the rules for you.  When you can get away with it, ignore those laws which are immoral.  If you have a right to do something, don’t abstain from acting until you can get enough politicians to codify official permission to do so.
        The ballot box is not the be-all-end-all of expressing your moral choices.  It isn’t even necessary to do so.  Your day-to-day choices are far more substantive.

  • But wait!  What’s Politico talking about!   It’s just a web-site!
    The smartest man in the world who didn’t know anything about it being bad said that’s the only problem!
    If you don’t like your cancelled policy provided to you by a bad-apple insurer you just have to go to the marketplace he provided and shop around, that’s what it’s for!
    I’d say ‘sadly’ it all proceeding as we have foreseen, but….I can’t honestly say there’s a single 1/10 ounce of sadness in me.

    • If you don’t like your cancelled policy provided to you by a bad-apple insurer you just have to go to the marketplace he provided and shop around, that’s what it’s for!
      >>>> Don’t forget that the cancelled policy was “substandard” anyway, so the Govt has actually done you a favor by forcing you to buy a more expensive policy that covers everything!

  • I was thinking on another of the threads…
    You know, they have succeeded to some extent in their goals.  Whatever scum sucking vote Democrat forever socialist goals they are….
    We make jokes now about NSA spying on us, reading our mail, listening on the phone.
    We joke about TSA doing anal probes.
    We joke about the numerous lies of the Administration.
    We joke about Obamacare and the web-site disaster.
    The list is probably bigger than I’m willing to recall right now.
    It strikes me that it’s gallows humor we’re feeling.   The acceptance of the tragically inevitable.

    • I vacillate between anger and apathy. The anger gets expressed in my growing unwillingness to put up with the gullible and misinformed people Dale references. I very, very rarely associate with them socially any more. Their simplistic mantras about government’s intentions and abilities make me nauseous – literally.

      They’ve been conditioned not to think. Like Professor Polywobble, they believe they arrived at their opinions through some sort of rational analysis, when they were actually indoctrinated into it by a leftist educational system and a leftist media. They equate feelings with logic (“subjective certainty”) and intentions with outcomes.

      Unlike some here, I get no pleasure seeing them go through the consequences of their politics. At most a grim satisfaction that I saw it coming. That is tempered by the sure knowledge that many (most?) of them will never figure out the connection between the big government beliefs they hold dear and the fact that reality continuously slaps them in the face.


      • Nope, I have to admit, I’m enjoying their ‘whaaaaaaaaaaaat’ moments.
        I don’t think they’re getting enough reward from their politics yet.
        Stupid should hurt.   And I can’t think of any other way to get them to at least THINK once in a while instead of ‘feeling’ all the time.
        Also, after being called  and sometimes treated like…a racist, NAZI, grandma murdering sonofabitch for this long, I’m not exactly inclined to be forgiving all of a sudden.

      • I am just perplexed by this new “doctrine of fairness.”
        Besides the fact that fairness or being fair isn’t referenced once in the US Constitution or, thanks to a story in the WSJ some twenty years ago, there is no word for “fair” or “fairness” in many languages, we are now propelled into using fairness as our rudder.
        While the idyllic notion of fairness is laudable, there really is no definition of fairness that is recognizable to all.  It instead becomes, much like beauty, “in the eye of the beholder.”  I doubt there is any case law to support a definition.

      • Unlike some here, I get no pleasure seeing them go through the consequences of their politics.
        Then you are a better man than I am. As I told these people three years ago, we’ll all be carted off to the gulag together, but I’m going to be pointing and laughing at the crestfallen and shocked expression your collective faces. And I’m doing so with relish right now. Sure, that makes me a dick, but I’m long past caring.

  • Dale…
    “I predicted it was an UNworkable disaster before it was passed, as did…”
    “Moreover, it was opposed [passed] in opposition to a majority of Americans.”
    Those leapt out at me.

  • I’d submit you have a moral duty to “sabotage” a disaster.
    If I could figure a way to do it here (and I kind of have), I most certainly WOULD.
    Individual Americans have to refuse to comply.  Just don’t have any part of ObamaDoggle.

  • But framing opposition as sabotage does have a darker, more nefarious purpose. The whole point of such charges is to delegitimize the opposition.

    Ah, but, Dale, you missed a part.  Note Pur-dumb’s allusion to Brown v. Board.
    See, HERE he’s throwing the race card.  We who understand and oppose ObamaDoggle are akin to the segregationists who opposed the integration of schools.  (He limits that to the South, curiously.)  How?  Because…racist!
    So it is MUCH more nefarious than you even you gave it credit (infamy) for being, and really quite typical of how the Collective works.  When one of their crap sandwiches goes balls-up, it is NEVER the fault of a very faulty idea.  And this crap sandwich is the Dagwood of the Collective’s menu.  So, it will be defended with everything they have in the tool box, until it just can’t be any longer.  Then, they will concoct lies about what made it fail, just as Pur-dumb is doing now.
    Like Prohibition, it cannot be around for long.  And I will do all I can to “sabotage” it.

    • The best path to ‘sabotage’ is to take a page from old Comrade Alinski, by pointing out each and every failing, loudly and relentlessly.
      Punctuating each example with ‘Just like I told you it would happen’.
      That said, give the dog all the leash it needs to hang itself.

  • “The Left in this country could be doing more to foment a civil war if they were intentionally trying to do so.”
    Dale: Did you mean to write “The Left in this country could NOT be doing more …”?

  • My new mantra:

    if you support Obamacare, you are a complete dolt, or so lacking in fundamental knowledge that your opinion about it is irrelevant


    Yes.  Obama “misspoke” like the murder defendant who claims his victim accidentally ran into the knife.
    Twenty-four times.
    In the back.

  • Cruz is starting to look like a genius, as is Mike Lee.
    Notice how quiet Mccain and Obamas other GOP enablers have been these last several days?

    • Of course. Like our own Professor Polywobble, they are loathe to admit that (1) they have no principles, and (2) they made a miscalculation about Cruz. They were so sure what he did was going to result in all kinds of awful fallout, because there are a jillion GOP consultants and media types around to tell them that, and they long ago proved that they can’t think for themselves.

      Plus, I’m sure many of their esteemed colleagues from the other side of the aisle dropped by to remind them where their real loyalties are supposed to lie. So they are certainly not going to rub it in that the Democrats own one of the biggest domestic policy program disasters in American history. Might cause some of their ruling class buddies, uh, sorry, I mean esteemed colleagues to suffer at the ballot box, you know. Can’t have that.

    • Some people still argue that waiting until after the website rolled out was the time to do a campaign on delay, but that would merely have delayed Obamacare and allowed the Democrats to agree…much better for them to scream arsonist and hostage taker which now FORCES them to implement the law.
      Oh, and most people do not follow the news that closely, which is why you cannot always do nuanced political tactics…tons of voters need to be sledgehammered. Those people are now aware that one party said to stop Obamacare, while another refused to negotiate. Now imagine what they do when they see their rates go up. In 2015, unless Obama fully chickens out people with employer based insurance will be screwed.
      The only worry in my mind is the GOP not having a plan to replace Obamacare…I realize you don’t actually need a plan to put out your house on fire, but some people will get all freaky.
      I’d suggest simply providing tax deduction for all people purchasing healthcare insurance, and sliding scale voucher trial plans to start to replace Medicaid with catastrophic plans from the market. The one thing I do not know how to handle would be pre-exisiting conditions. It might be useful to see how many people really are affected…and we will soon now because they will have signed up for Obamacare. It may be cheaper to simply buy off those people in some way with vouchers that cover part of their insurance costs.

      • Since high blood pressure and cholesterol are “pre existing conditions” that drive your rates up.  And let´s not forget Obamacrash changed the way BMI is calculated there are now many more “obese” people out there.

        • Good point. Obviously pre-existing conditions is one of those problems that would have been solved long ago if it were possible.
          Its also infuriating when some of the people pleading pre-existing condition actually could have gotten insurance before they got sick but spent their money elsewhere.

          • FYI last night at the Great Falls Grange debate, Democrat delegate candidate Kathleen Murphy said that since many doctors are not accepting medicaid and medicare patients, she advocates making it a legal requirement for those people to be accepted. 

          • Now let me see we find didn´ see that coming did we.
            Only discussions of slave class Medico ´s as people are forced by coercive government to provide a service e, and people like Rep duggesting they should just find other jobs if they don´t like the New World Order.

          • Ah man….I need thinner fingers or a pad that understands my twisted mind.
            “Rep Duggesting”?   Is “Erp suggesting”
            The first sentence was “Now let me see, we didn’t see that coming did we”.
            Ya know, it would help if I turned off the typing ‘help’ feature, at least while sitting in the dark drinking coffee on the porch, and enjoying the sunrise….

      • If this had been done ten or fifteen years ago, with perhaps the first ten years of Medicare thrown into the mix, it might have gotten us past the baby boomer bulge, and given an amended blue social model a somewhat longer lease on life.


        Now, though, with all the extra debt piled on and the expectation being that government covers everything under the sun…. I don’t know. I don’t think it would put off the debt reckoning that long, and it would be a very hard sell even with the disaster of Obamacare. We still have way too many people who are convinced that socialism, under whatever trendy term the left thinks up each year or two, can work if the right people are running it. After all, they learned nothing from the financial meltdown and crises of 2008. No one even talks about it any more.

        • Market is still going up…go figure that.   That balloon has to eventually come down, and the Hindenburg could be the model for the next decline.
          They’re going to get a chance to learn it again, BECAUSE nothing seems to have been learned in 2008.

        • Yeah, I sort of hate having to come up with tepid re-heated blue model ideas.  The Left is often very ungrateful that most of us on the right are trying to save the safety net from them.
          But as I learned recently, the Dems says “A program for the poor is a poor program.”

      • The one thing I do not know how to handle would be pre-exisiting conditions.

        Some months ago, I Googled “pre-existing condition insurance” and was somewhat surprised to find scores…maybe more than scores…of private insurance providers catering to that market.
        Many offered plans that seem quite reasonable.  See if you still find them.

        • The pre-existing issue could still be addressed separate from Obamacare.
          The foremost concern was job lock.  Having to stay with your old job if you are found to have a pre-existing condition that would prevent you from getting new coverage if you want to change employers or go self-employed.  You end up with an employee who is in a job he doesn’t want and employer with a demoralized employee and the insurance company is still paying.
          The solution is some reciprocity agreement.  If you currently have coverage you can switch to another carrier to their most similar policy they offer and pay premiums as if you had been with that carrier prior to being diagnosed.  The insurance companies aren’t paying anymore out and employees can change jobs freely.
          Even as its been implemented it is not integral to Obamacare and was only added to give Obamacare popular support.

          • The real point of a pre-existing condition policy is to prevent someone who is not paying insurance from deciding to start paying when he needs it.  If you could switch carriers, those people have been paying into insurance company A and switches to B.  insurance payer from B can switch to A and the history of payments even out.

          • @jpmI00 reply to jpmI00 That does not work unless carriers A transfers the premiums and any earnings on those premiums to carrier B. Carrier B has not had any time to build up a reserve for your condition.
            Why don’t I see a Reply button under jpmI00’s reply to his original posting, only under his original posting?

          • Insurance companies do not ‘build up reserves’ to cover anyone.  There is no pot of money called ‘reserves’.  Insurance ‘Reserves’ are strictly an accounting designation for certain liabilties known (known claims) and claims that have been incurred but not yet reported (IBNR) based upon actuarial statistical models. Therefore, every dollar of received premiums has a portion of that dollar allocated to pay claims (not just claims on that premium payer but any claim).  The assets insurance companies buy (ie their investments) are what actually pays the claims.

          • @Old Man, the thinking is that in a given year, company A might pick up 3 of company B’s customers while company B would pick up 3 of company A’s people.  It wouldn’t be exact every year.  But close.  Unless one of the two companies sucked in which case they would lose my than they typically pick up.  So competitive pressure is made a little less harsh.  You could require a company to keep a small percentage of premiums collected in cash and do a cash transfer of premiums so you don’t have hope for an even exchange of customers.
            When the alternative is to do away with all prohibition requirements and force them to take on people who decided to get insurance after they became sick, its more fair to the company and the other insured by far.

        • Exactly. Also, I bet there is an 80/20 aspect to the problem, where a simple list of diseases would account for most of the high cost policies. You could probably go down that list and provide vouchers, etc. and resolve many people’s problems without having to hand everyone a goodie bag.
          This is how we deal with dialysis – which is so expensive that it would bankrupt people/hospitals, etc.
          Note also, paying for a list of diseases would lower the cost of insurance for everyone else.
          I also think we could set up a national charity where you could donate to offset costs would actually work better. Let the progressives spend time fund-raising for actually helping people. “Come on everyone and give more to help and 100,000 people get healthcare.”
          But they despise such things for some reason. “That’s not an answer!”
          I wonder if the lefties that are now discovering Voluntaryism will change any minds.

          • “Let the progressives spend time fund-raising for actually helping people”
            That’s not going to happen.  Their time is too important and precious to, uh, spend on that sort of thing.   It’s nicer to know that they’ve forced you to be a good person.  It will probably prevent you from spending your money on something stupid that you wanted to have anyway, something that would pollute or make noise or violate Gaia in some way.

  • Good morning boys and girls, welcome to my neighborhood!
    Our phrase for the day is, “Schizo shill”! Can you all say, “Schizo shill”? Sure you can!

  • Its not about sour-grapes, its about propaganda.  And 62,000 repetitions equals a truth.   The message that somehow the Republican’s wrecked it was going to be the message from day one for all failures connected to Obamacare.  And its something the faithful in the media and schools will repeat ad infinitum.

  • It was always a sly joke to rib lefties in blog comments about wreckers and kulaks…and yet here they are, talking about sabotage!
    I guess they are very sure that most people have no historical knowledge of communism.  And why not, they control the education system.

  • Well some good news anyway, the Jooooooooooooooooooos are probably off limits for blaming this time around.

  • Oregon Health Exchange Website Only Works With Internet Explorer.

    California’s website (the home of Google) doesn’t work with Chrome.

  • Great news! Dem Rep Steve Cohen tells us to just “get over it”
    I’m ashamed this clown is Jewish.

    • That was predicted a couple weeks ago.   Not from him specifically, but as a Democrat talking point that would be used when it was discovered this thing wouldn’t be coming off life support.
      Here’s one you can be proud of then –  from Jackie Mason on Obamacare – “Since when do you destroy people and it doesn’t count because it’s too small a percentage?”

  • Obamacare is a disaster. I predicted it was an unworkable disaster before it was passed, as did anyone who took the time to look at the perverse incentives it created. The amount of wishful thinking that went in to passing this stupid law is incomprehensible to me. It could not have been more clearly prone to failure if it had been intentionally designed to fail.

    The fact you think their internal measure of success is a functioning healthcare system tells me that most elements of the Un-Left are over their heads.  There’s master chess game going on and the broader ‘right’ is playing checkers.  They’ve introduced a system where the American people will become acustom to large scale government intrusion and dependance.  And this is the gateway program.  They have their success in that the system is in place.  Any shaudenfrade over the implimentation bothers them slightly in only that it will make it slightly harder to do the same intrusion on the next thing which will either be but not limited to food, energy, or education.  They’ve moved on already, they’ve been laying the propaganda groundwork on food for over a year to justify intrusion.  They just need a disaster. 

  • Yep this is the R’s fault.  If your team hadn’t gone loopy, Murricans wouldn’t have reelected my team of incompetents 🙂

  • Sabotage is the last claim of a failing socialist regime.