Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
The Great Prevaricator
In David Maraniss’ largely hagiographical account of Barack Obama’s family and his upbringing, there is a chapter entitled “The Moviegoer,” which deserves careful attention. In it, Maraniss limns one crucial aspect of the man’s character—his propensity to stand back, aloof, and observe his own conduct and that of those about him as if he was the director of a film. He is, in fact, our first postmodern President, and he is always looking in the mirror. He believes that thinking makes things so. He believes that the most important part of the universe within which we live is the imagination. And when things go amiss, he is apt to tell his aides not that he or they have blundered in their deeds, but that they have “lost the narrative.” Everything is always about the man his aides call “Obam-me.” He is the Prophet of “Change We Can Believe In.” Belief is the operative word.
There is something to be said for this species of Idealism. Our imaginations are exceedingly powerful, and we can easily enough be bamboozled by those with an expertise in the deployment of words. Barack Obama has demonstrated this time and again, and he understands, better than any American politician in my memory, that what he resolutely refuses to mention or mentions only once in passing and never touches on again may simply disappear down the memory hole. What ever happened to Fast and Furious? to the IRS scandals? to the Benghazi blunder? to the Associated Press wiretaps? You and I are aware of what is going on, but the general public has only a vague and hazy memory of these scandals.
It helps, to be sure, that the press is servile—eager to provide cover for the Administration at almost every moment. But that is not the whole story. Barack Obama’s “no drama” pose works. It works very, very well.
Sooner or later, however, reality bites. Sooner or later, something happens that touches the material interests of individuals in a way they cannot willfully ignore. Sooner or later, something happens that causes all but the most blind partisans to step back, pay attention, and rethink. It is like that moment in The Wizard of Oz when Dorothy sees behind the curtain. You and I have long been aware that the country is being conned. We knew that the President was lying when he told Americans on 24 occasions, in no uncertain terms, that they could keep the health insurance that they had. We knew as well that he was perfectly aware that he was peddling a whopper, and everyone in our larger political class knew so as well. The mainstream media knew, and they helped him sell his lies.
The Republicans in Congress knew, which is why, two years ago, they proposed a bill guaranteeing that one could keep one’s insurance and, at a brief moment of strength, forced every single Democrat in both the House and the Senate to go on record voting against it. You may want to think that John Boehner and Mitch McConnell are fools, and they are certainly not above criticism. But they do not lack cunning.
The only ones who did not know were the ordinary folks out there. Most of them are relatively apolitical, and they took a certain pride in electing our first black President and were willing to cut him a great deal of slack.
Unfortunately for Barack Obama and the Democrats, reality has begun to bite, and the lies they told are coming back to haunt them. It is fascinating to watch the Great Prevaricator—which is what Barack Obama is—attempt to weasel out of this one. First, he and his minions lie outright, denying in the manner of a Bill Clinton befuddled by the meaning of the verb “to be,” that they have said and done precisely what they said and did. When that did not work, the President began making apologies that were not really apologies, and the shameless hacks at The New York Times began telling us that the President “misspoke.”
Consider what the President put it in yesterday’s press conference,
With respect to the pledge I made that if you like your plan you can keep it, I think — you know, and I’ve said in interviews — that there is no doubt that the way I put that forward unequivocally ended up not being accurate. It was not because of my intention not to deliver on that commitment and that promise. We put a grandfather clause into the law but it was insufficient.
This is to compound one lie with another. It was the President’s intention to fool people. Had the public known that millions of Americans would lose their insurance—that the bill made it illegal to offer major medical and nothing else, for example—they would have erupted in such a fashion as to make the Tea Party Movement look like, well, a tea party. Moreover, had there been a grandfather clause in the law, it would have made it, in an obvious and undeniable way, economically untenable. The entire point of Obamacare is to dump the medical bills of the negligent and shiftless on those who are careful and hard-working. That cannot be done if they are allowed to retain their old health insurance plans.
The President’s latest gambit is also dishonest. He proposes by executive fiat to delay past the mid-term elections the implementation of the rules forcing insurers to cancel the plans previously in place. That this is unlawful is clear. The President is not Elizabeth I of England. He is not even James II. He does not possess and cannot even claim to possess what was once called “the suspending power.” That power, which the English monarch once did wield, was outlawed by the Bill of Rights in England in 1689, and no American President to date has ever possessed or claimed such a right. It is the constitutional duty of the President to enforce the law. He cannot pick and choose.
That is one problem. There is another. It takes insurance companies time to sort out what sort of plans they can afford to offer and at what prices. The President is now playing bait and switch with these companies. They were told—indeed, it is the law—that they must drop certain plans and offer others. They complied. They cannot simply gin up the old plans on the spur of the moment. The President and his minions no doubt know this. Their game will be to unload the public fury on the insurance companies—which, in supinely supporting Obamacare and in allowing the President to get away with his many lies—they in consideral measure deserve.
In the meantime, the congressional leadership of the Democratic Party has distanced itself from the President. Yesterday, when asked by a reporter whether they would echo the President’s non-apologetic pseudo-apology, they demurred:
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who shepherded Obamacare through the House as speaker, said Obama was “very gracious” in making that apology but that the president’s words – in the context of the law – were “absolutely” precise.
“There’s nothing in the Affordable Care Act that says that your insurance company should cancel you,” she told reporters. “That’s not what the Affordable Care Act is about. It simply didn’t happen.”
She continued that she did not make a similar statement to her constituents, noting that she “would have if I ever met anybody that liked his or her plan, but that was not my experience.”
House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said at the time the statement was made, it was accurate. The problems with the messaging came when people interpreted Obama’s comments “expansively.”
“You understand that if you had a policy on the day that this bill was adopted, you got to keep it,” Hoyer said. “Now, you didn’t get to keep it if the insurance companies didn’t want to offer it to you.”
“When [consumers] become aware of what they did not have, I don’t think there’s anything to apologize for,” added South Carolina Rep. James Clyburn, the third-ranking House Democrat.
It is their hope apparently that the whole mess can be blamed on the insurance companies. As Joseph Goebbels is supposed to have said, “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.”
There is one problem with this hypothesis, and Dr. Goebbels was apparently aware of it. “The lie,” he reportedly said,
can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.
This time I doubt that Pravda-on-the-Hudson and the other propaganda operations maintained by the Left can provide sufficient cover.
For this optimistic conclusion, I have two reasons. First, even if the President exercises with impunity a suspending power that he does not constitutionally possess—and even if the insurance companies scramble successfully to guarantee people a continuation of the insurance that they had—next year those plans will be cancelled, and everyone will know about it from the start. A stay of execution is not apt to reduce anxiety and anger. More often than not, it only increases the fear and the fury.
My other reason is simple. The Republicans can and, I believe, will pounce. Fred Upton has proposed a bill that makes good on the promise the President made unequivocally on 24 different occasions. It will guarantee that people can continue on their own plans—not just this year and next but thereafter. And, in doing so, it will drive a stake through the heart of Obamacare.
If all goes well, this bill will quickly clear the House [UPDATE: which it did, while I was composing this piece], and then the ball will be in Harry Reid’s court. The Democratic senators up for reelection will want to be able to vote for it. If it passes, Barack Obama will be between a rock and a hard place. If the Senate rejects it or he vetoes it [as he has now promised to do], the 2014 election will be a referendum on Obamacare. If he signs it, Obamacare will crash and burn.
So sit back, my friends; put your feet up; and pour yourself a tumbler of Scotch. Things are about to come unraveled as the prevarications of the Great Prevaricator catch up with the man and consume him as well as his allies. The counter-revolution that the Democrats successfully dodged in 2012 may still happen.
Obamacare may be remembered as a turning point in American history. It may be remembered as the time when Americans woke up, saw to the heart of the administrative entitlement state, and began the process of dismantling it and restoring limited government.
Published in General
The President takes an oath to faithfully enforce the law. Failure to do so on any grounds — other than a stated conviction that the law is not a law (i.e., that it is unconstitutional) — is a dereliction of duty and an impeachable offense.
There is no suspending power. The President does not have the right to suspend the enforcement of a law. Obama has repeatedly crossed that line.
There is no suspending power. The President does not have the right to suspend the enforcement of a law. Obama has repeatedly crossed that line. ·3 minutes ago
Indeed, however, the second definition proffered by Jim is the more realistic. This president could commit murder on live television and democrat senators would still not vote to remove him from office. The federal power is no longer divided between competing branches of government but between competing parties. Obama has run roughshod over congress’ constitutional authority and been applauded by those in his own party for doing so because they desire only to have power vested in their party rather than in any offices they personally hold. Perhaps it has been this way since the first congress, but it seems to be particularly bad at this moment in time.
I hope that the public remembers this and votes against democrats or democratic voters stay home in the November 2014 elections. If not, shame on the United States.
What’s amazing is we haven’t even hit the worst consequences of the law yet. When everyone’s premiums spike dramatically next year because not nearly enough young and healthy people signed up, things are going to get much worse for the democrats.
Insurance execs are just as culpable as Barry and all the others Who supported and voted for Obamacare. How They didn’t see this coming just astounds Me.
Way ahead of Ya.
It may be…but I can’t help but think that they will get away with blaming the insurance companies. It’s a smart move because most people are naturally suspicious of insurance companies anyway. However, I live in London so can’t really get a feel for the mood on the street about it over here…
There is no suspending power. The President does not have the right to suspend the enforcement of a law. Obama has repeatedly crossed that line. ·3 minutes ago
Indeed, however, the second definition proffered by Jim is the more realistic. This president could commit murder on live television and democrat senators would still not vote to remove him from office. The federal power is no longer divided between competing branches of government but between competing parties. Obama has run roughshod over congress’ constitutional authority and been applauded by those in his own party for doing so because they desire only to have power vested in their party rather than in any offices they personally hold. Perhaps it has been this way since the first congress, but it seems to be particularly bad at this moment in time. ·8 minutes ago
True, alas.
Ah, you’ve missed the administration’s plan to combat this! Insurance companies must go on bended knee to HRH … I mean HHS Secy Sebelius to request rate increases on the healthy comensurate with providing low cost insurance to the uninsurable. When the companies’ requests are denied they simply go out of business. The only thing left will be government. It’s step two in the underpants scheme.
Thirty-nine Democrats in the House voted for Fred Upton’s bill. Now it is time for Harry Reid to feel the heat. The longer he delays, the worse it will be. Things are coming apart.
Given the composition of the Senate, now or after 2014, chances of conviction are near zero. Impeachment is a fool’s errand.
Republicans should make hay with the continuing Ocare train wreck in the midterms rather engaging in a vain attempt to remove the president, thereby generating sympathy for him and opening the door to that old standby: charges of racism.
Republicans should make hay with the continuing Ocare train wreck in the midterms rather engaging in a vain attempt to remove the president, thereby generating sympathy for him and opening the door to that old standby: charges of racism. ·in 0 minutes
Of course. But after the midterms, well, who knows? It is pretty clear that the IRS misconduct was directed from the Oval Office. What happens if a smoking gun appears?
Ah, you’ve missed the administration’s plan to combat this! Insurance companies must go on bended knee to HRH … I mean HHS Secy Sebelius to request rate increases on the healthy comensurate with providing low cost insurance to the uninsurable. When the companies’ requests are denied they simply go out of business. The only thing left will be government. It’s step two in the underpants scheme.
A number of states went through death spirals after they tried there own versions of this a couple of decades back. It’s not how this goes down. At the end of the day, the insurance companies get their rate hikes.
They need only demonstrate that their actuarial math has been done correctly.
Spengler, aka, David Goldman posted on PJ Media:
A senior statesman of an Asian government qualified Barack Obama as “the NGO president” in private conversation. Just thought I’d share.
http://pjmedia.com/spengler/2013/11/15/best-obama-takedown-ever/
P.S.: I think a podcast with Goldman as a guest would be really interesting.
Why aren’t the Republicans in Congress continually raising their voices and calling the president on his unconstitutional actions? They ought to be all over all the media with their cries. They seem to be passive. Time to get aggressive, in my opinion.
Have to imagine he loses four to five dems if that bill actually comes up for a vote. My suspicion is he will delay it and try to shift the focus to a senate version of the same type of bill that basically has no teeth. He has few options.
Ah, you’ve missed the administration’s plan to combat this! Insurance companies must go on bended knee to HRH … I mean HHS Secy Sebelius to request rate increases on the healthy comensurate with providing low cost insurance to the uninsurable. When the companies’ requests are denied they simply go out of business. The only thing left will be government. It’s step two in the underpants scheme.
A number of states went through death spirals after they tried there own versions of this a couple of decades back. It’s not how this goes down. At the end of the day, the insurance companies get their rate hikes.
They need only demonstrate that their actuarial math has been done correctly. ·5 minutes ago
You really think bringing math to these people will help?
Has any President assumed the presidency with the momentum that Obama had in January of 2009? He had overwhelming majorities in both Houses of Congress, a core of devoted supporters, solid approval numbers from a large majority of the public, a fawning press, and an aura of historical destiny about him.
Moreover, he had something of a consensus that our health care system was broken, there were structural defects in our financial institutions, and the need for entitlement reform.
He could have done a lot of good, but he chose to be an ideologue instead of a statesman.
Ah, you’ve missed the administration’s plan to combat this! Insurance companies must go on bended knee to HRH … I mean HHS Secy Sebelius to request rate increases on the healthy comensurate with providing low cost insurance to the uninsurable. When the companies’ requests are denied they simply go out of business. The only thing left will be government. It’s step two in the underpants scheme.
A number of states went through death spirals after they tried there own versions of this a couple of decades back. It’s not how this goes down. At the end of the day, the insurance companies get their rate hikes.
They need only demonstrate that their actuarial math has been done correctly.
You really think bringing math to these people will help?
The left treats those who can do math like sorcerers. Look at how they venerate Nate Silver for doing something anyone with access to Real Clear Politics can do.
They will sit in stupefied awe when the actuaries from insurances companies demonstrate why they must double their rates next year.
Way ahead of Ya. ·46 minutes ago
Remember, insurance company bail outs are already baked into the ACA. They don’t actually have anything to worry about; the taxpayers are on the hook for their losses.
Rubio is introducing a bill to change that.
Well said, Paul. But isn’t there a lie at the heart of what is called liberalism? There is no human nature, but there are human goods; no one knows truth, but we know what progress is . . .
On a different note. You write, “This time I doubt that Pravda-on-the-Hudson and the other propaganda operations maintained by the Left can provide sufficient cover.”
Wouldn’t that be better as “This time I doubt that the Sulzbergers and their followers can provide sufficient cover.” Pick your target; freeze it, personalize it . . .
Identifying the NY Times with its owners might be very useful. Doesn’t the Left always say something about he who owns a press?
If the GOP ends up defending the insurance industry — one of the primary authors of Obamacare — I will again shake my head at the stupidity of the Stupid Party.
Way ahead of Ya. ·1 hour ago
Missed this…smart move.
Way ahead of Ya. ·46 minutes ago
Remember, insurance company bail outs are already baked into the ACA. They don’t actually have anything to worry about; the taxpayers are on the hook for their losses.
Rubio is introducing a bill to change that. ·14 minutes ago
Remember, insurance company bail outs are already baked into the ACA. They don’t actually have anything to worry about; the taxpayers are on the hook for their losses.
Rubio is introducing a bill to change that. ·17 minutes ago
Thanks, billy. I was unaware.
Materiality has a way of making abstract concepts concrete. There’s something about a T-34 tank rolling down the boulevards of Berlin that is rather definitive. I will ask for a pardon before quoting the Fuhrer’s last reported words: “Germany doesn’t deserve me.” Only to paraphrase our own Peter Robinson on the last podcast: Obama will conclude that America let him down. If the shoe fits . . .
You think that is the worst consequence? The ACA is a steaming pile that works like an onion, there are layers and layers of disaster built in.
Wait until the employer mandate comes fully into force, the mild mewing you hear now will become banshee shrieks.
A brilliant piece of analysis and writing, Paul–brilliant.
I haven’t even read this yet, but am motivated to write a comment immediately because I know I’ll appreciate the Professor’s insights, as always! Bet I won’t have to edit this or post a retraction.
He is an extremely valuable contributor and one of many reasons to support this site. I’m grateful he takes the time to write to us.
Paul,
I just posted to John & Adam my question. What is an impeachable act?
Andrew McCarthy at NRO has given a definition. He gives it towards the end his analysis on Obama’s massive fraud.
When I asked this question a few weeks ago on Ricochet, someone commented to the effect that his definition of an impeachable act was “anything for which 2/3 of the Senators present at the trial would vote to convict”.
Both definitions are true.
Regards,
Jim
While I agree with most of what Professor Rahe has said I don’t entirely agree with his conclusion
“Obamacare may be remembered as a turning point in American history. It may be remembered as the time when Americans woke up, saw to the heart of the administrative entitlement state, and began the process of dismantling it and restoring limited government.”
Obamacare will certainly be remembered as a turning point in political history and will become required material for Poli Sci majors to study. However, I don’t share his optimism that this will have any reducing effect on the size and scope of government. The Democratic Party will suffer electoral losses, I am sure. But the crashing and burning of Obamacare will have no effect on the character of the American people who, more and more, are looking to have the government take care of them at someone else’s expense.
This will not change as a result of Obamacare. Before too long, someone will simply convince everyone it was yet to be done correctly and that this NEXT time we will get it right.
This will not change as a result of Obamacare. Before too long, someone will simply convince everyone it was yet to be done correctly and that this NEXT time we will get it right. ·0 minutes ago
I fear you may be right. The Left owns the schools, and has socialized the rising generation not merely to lean toward social democracy, but also to think self-reliance is a bad thing.