The road from Republic to Dictatorship is paved with “good intentions”, like Obama’s Obamacare delays…


The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was a watershed piece of legislation in American history. Based on the 15th Amendment, it outlawed discrimination based on racial, ethnic, religious and gender criteria.

You probably don’t realize it, but it’s likely that you encounter aspects of the Civil Rights Act on a regular basis. When you apply for a job, a mortgage, join a club, stay in a hotel room, or buy something online you are often presented with a page of text with a bunch of legalese that you probably don’t read. That text usually says something about non-discrimination, terms and conditions and various other policies. All of that appears because non-discrimination is the law of the land. That means that if a business or group discriminates based on one of those factors, they could be prosecuted by the government. That text you don’t read basically acknowledges as much.

Although Congress passed the Civil Rights Act, it does not enforce it. That is the President’s job. If someone breaks the rules, the Justice Department or the US Civil Rights Commission will most likely be the one that sues them, not some House or Senate committee. It’s the president’s job to execute the laws. That’s because Article II Section 3 states that the president “shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed”.

But what if he didn’t want to do it? Let’s say a president was elected and decided that 50 years was enough and that we didn’t need to focus on discrimination anymore. There would be howls from virtually every quarter of the country. “That’s unconstitutional!”

And of course those howling would be right. Today however, to very few howls, we have the exact same thing, only instead of the Civil Rights Act it’s The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as Obamacare.

President Obama has unilaterally decided that large swaths of his signature legislation will simply not be implemented as the law requires. “But he has good reason though…” one might say. Or “He has to, it’s not quite ready”. One could come up with any one of a dozen good reasons for the president to delay the employer mandate or the out-of-pockets caps. It is, after all, the single worst piece of legislation ever to be signed into law in the United States.

The problem however, is that the legislation does not give the President that option. The law doesn’t say the employer mandate, which requires all businesses with over 50 employees to provide health insurance to their staffs or face fines up to $3,000 per employee, can be implemented when the market is ready. It says they will begin in 2014. The law doesn’t say that the cost caps, which limit annual deductibles to $2,000 per individual and $4,000 per family, can go into place when the President is ready to implement them. It says they go into effect in 2014.

But that has not stopped President Obama from delaying both and other aspects of that highly dysfunctional Obamacare, including exempting Congress and its staff from the law… something else the President does not have the power to do.

“So what!” one might say. “The president is saving us from having to operate under a system that is unworkable for another year until he can fix it.” As reasonable as that might sound at first blush, that is a recipe for tyranny. How? Simple. The United Sates is a nation of laws. Congress passes bills (ostensibly) based on its power afforded under the Constitution and the president either signs them into law or vetoes them. Once they are laws, the president has the responsibility to enforce them.

He does not have the right to enforce only those he likes. His role is not to decide what laws – or what aspects of laws – he is willing to enforce. His job is to enforce the laws as they are written. If he does not like pending legislation he has the option of seeking to influence is writing in Congress before it reaches his desk. Once signed, or for a law signed by a predecessor, a president has the option of seeking to change the law via congressional action which will result in a new law replacing or amending the current law.

What he does not have the right to do is unilaterally change the law. If he did, what would stop a president from simply stopping to enforce Civil Rights Act against employers who only discriminate against blacks? What would stop a president from delaying Social Security checks because the IRS hasn’t collected enough in taxes this year? What would stop the president from enforcing the FDA’s testing regime on drug manufacturers? What would stop the president from giving a $1 million tax break to anyone who bundled $500,000 or more to his campaign? The answer to all of these is the same: Nothing.

If the president can pick and choose the laws he will enforce, then the Constitution is simply dead. If he can ignore the responsibilities it demands of him then so too can he ignore the limitations it puts on him. Habeas Corpus? Gone. Term limits? Gone. Freedom of Speech? Gone. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures? Gone. Unrestrained absolute power? Hello!

Obamacare is by any measure, bad legislation. Many people were saying that from the start, long before Nancy Pelosi famously said: “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what’s in it.” Nonetheless the monstrosity that is Obamacare passed into law and the Supreme Court contorted common sense to declare it Constitutional. Nonetheless, in order to protect those responsible for this abomination from voter’s wrath the President has chosen to unlawfully delay some of the most onerous parts of the law. From a political perspective that makes perfect sense. The problem is, it’s simply unlawful. If Barack Obama gets away with this, the presidency is no longer simply first among equals in the Republic formed by our Constitution. It will have literally become a dictatorship. One man choosing what the laws are and to whom they apply. Now that is what I call “Fundamentally transforming the United States”… and not, I would suggest, in a good way.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments


@Ronald J. Ward: You, Ronald need not bequeath me any benefits of doubt or otherwise. What you need is facts, specifics and examples. If you would notice, I provided you with several specific points to refute your well-worn propaganda-outlet provided screeching points, i.e., racist Republicans, war on women, the rich get richer, etc, etc, etc. While I asked for examples (and provided facts to back mine) you repeated the broken record talking points.

Sexist? You refer, no doubt, to the “war on women”, a liberal invention to inspire the weak minded and malleable souls who would easily believe that refusing to pay for something that can be gotten for $10 is some sort of attack. Or, to dare to restrict the killing of babies to a time-span where at least there CAN be some argument about the existence or not of viable life. Meanwhile, Democrats use women as props (such as Obama trotting out the ignorant Rice to parrot their agreed upon Benghazi cover story-lie) or playthings (Kennedy, Clinton, Weiner, Filner) as a perk of political power.

Racist? Racism is using race as a political tool, using race as a shield, excuse or weapon against criticism. The left have been promoting programs and policies that have had the effect of keeping those in poverty IN poverty as, since the “War on Poverty” commenced, there are actually more in poverty than before the liberals began “helping” them. The left enact gun-ban laws which, in the impoverished areas in which they cultivate their political support, murder is epidemic and the innocent, as well as the thug, are slain in droves. All for political usage for expansion of power. Using the races for political gain is racist. The left is racist.

In order to REALLY help those in poverty, you need a healthy economy. Obama and liberals can only erode economic strength, not grow it. They are so worried that someone not selected by them (in exchange for political support) might collect wealth on their risks and labors that they will destroy the economy to attain their “fairness”, that is, bring the successful down to the level of the government dependent. Poverty levels dropped further and faster in the decade before the War on Poverty, due to a booming economy, than after we plowed $17 trillion dollars into creating a vote-garden for Democrats. If the left truly cared about the poor and needy, they would get out of the way and allow jobs to be created for them to utilize to pull themselves out of poverty. Only that can work.

“Ecocide”? Is that yours? I doubt it, but it’s a new one, nonetheless. The levels of harmful gasses (real ones- not CO2, which we all exhale and plants need) all decreased significantly under Bush (without killing economic growth) and Bush spent more than Obama on cleaning up the hazardous waste sites. If you refer to the global warming scam, I believe I pretty much covered that and why it should be more carefully considered before it is accepted as one’s religion.

And, lastly, not only did Bush’s tax cuts add $750 billion extra tax dollars to the treasury, it spurred a growth that, by 2004, had deficits shrinking significantly. What has Obama done? Tripled the debt. Big whoop.

Obamacare is the centerpiece of liberal achievement. It is a job-killing, debt-growing, healthcare-shrinking monstrosity that even the unions hate now and Obama cannot muster the guts to fully enact. Liberalism is an abject failure and your lack of specifics with which to defend it and make your case against conservatism attests to the fact.

Ronald J. Ward


@bburris: You win Bburris, Bush was a financial wizard that lifted the economy to great heights only for Obama to come into office and promptly destroy, or, or something equally stupid. You argue that I need facts and far be it from me to dispute one of such phenomenal intellect as yourself but I think I’ll gather my facts from other sources than from the well in which you dip from.

Ronald J. Ward
beside your insults, I really don’t think you can understand the above comment,
you seem to be very limited,

I do find it a bit bizarre that Obama pushed for this legislation and now won’t sign it off. Is it that it has got so distorted by the Senate and House that it is not really what he wanted ? i.e. is it not really Obamacare but RepublicanCare ?


Pete @ # 50, you seem to follow a rather consistent playbook here. Perhaps it’s that deep seated hatred of the black man in the White House that dictates contributors here to rebut my arguments by covering their ears and singing “la la la” while producing sophomoric if not specious arguments to counter with?

Why aren’t you disturbed by the fact that companies are having to cut employee hours due to the massive increase in health insurance costs? Why aren’t you concerned about the fact that we have more people on food stamps after 5 years of obamanomics and the highest average unemployment rate since the Great Depression?

And Please, explain how Obama’s economic policies have helped improve the unemployment situation, helped people get off food stamps, increased GDP, and affected the deficit and national debt.

Pete, I responded in @ 51 about the cutting of hours and jobs cut. It ain’t happening and I laid out my reasoning. Yet, your response is something like “oh yeah, well, how about them cut hours and job losses, yeah, what about em!!!!” Such redundant silliness.

Let’s be clear about the Obama years and the political environment brought to us by the Republican Party. Historically, the GOP promoted a payroll tax cut to create jobs yet they changed their tune under Obama, even gleefully watching the 2% tax increase on workers while adamantly defending lower taxes on the wealthy-which had proven to be an economic nightmare. They’ve historically supported Economic Development Administration as good for the economy, that infrastructure investments were needed during times of recessions, that raising the debt ceiling was an absolute must, that FEMA assistance was an absolute sound investment during disasters, that unemployment insurance benefits were crucial in stimulating the economy, and that TANF Emergency Fund was an effective tool to lower unemployment. Yet under Obama they abandoned their very own historical legislative practices. And when questioned, not only could they not give a credible reason, a few such as Sen DeMint and McConnell let it slip they they were intentionally trying to “insure Obama to be a one term President”.

But it goes even further as Republicans continued to block well qualified nominees to crucial economic positions such as the Treasury Department and Federal Reserve.

The method of leadership under the GOP has been deplorable. Where are their job bills? They actually did everything the could to prevent job bills, insisting that the government actually take money out of circulation by reducing jobs in the public sector. The GOP, under Obama, has been dubbed the most obstructive in history, even objecting to their own initiatives if they were pushed by Obama. And aside from DeMint and McConnell, others have openly admitted to an objective of defying the economy and constituents simply to spite Obama. SD State Rep. Kris Crawford, an emergency room doctor, admitted that expanding Medicare was needed for his constituents and would be a financial lifesaver yet he voted against it with a clear admission that

“The politics are going to overwhelm the policy. It is good politics to oppose the black guy in the White House right now, especially for the Republican Party,”

Consider the gun background legislation which 80% to 90% of the people supported. Republican Senator Pat Toomey admitted the GOP voted against it because Obama supported it.

“In the end it didn’t pass because we’re so politicized. There were some on my side who did not want to be seen helping the president do something he wanted to get done, just because the president wanted to do it.”

And this is simply the way Republicans have operated under Obama on most every issue. For them, it isn’t about the good of the country or the economy but rather about their political aspirations or appealing to corporate interest (which unfortunately goes hand in hand).

Obviously you forget or are ignorant of the situation when President Obama first walked into the White House. The economy was indeed spiraling out of control. The auto and housing industry had all but collapsed and jobs were literally plummeting. Our global reputation was in the toilet. Our health care system was an abject disaster. And of course there was the huge deficit, debt racked up from the Bush drunken spending spree, and a very divided electorate. And of course, there was Dick Armey and the Koch Bros pumping untold wealth into distributing the kool-aid to the baggers chanting something about being “taxed enough already” (while enjoying the lowest taxes in 65 years) waving their racist signs and Fox News sponsoring some slogan about “take our country back” and slamming Obama before he even got started.

And that very problem is still alive today as the argument continues.

“If you are putting the American people first, if you are prioritizing them, then this shouldn’t be that difficult,” Obama said in an interview airing Friday on CNN’s “New Day.”

“And I’ve made this argument to my Republican friends privately, and, by the way, sometimes they say to me privately, ‘I agree with you, but I’m worried about a primary from, you know, somebody in the Tea Party back in my district,’ or, ‘I’m worried about what Rush Limbaugh is going to say about me on the radio. And so you got to understand, it’s really difficult.'”

Hopefully, that answers your question about why I’m not angry at Obama for the economy. I’m disappointed with Obama on several issues but it’s Republican obstruction and corporate kowtowing that’s slowed our economic growth. If I’m angry at Obama on anything pertaining to the economy, it’s that he actually thought he could somehow work with Republicans for the good of the country. He should have learned long ago that it wasn’t going to happen.

@Ronald J. Ward:

If I’m angry at Obama on anything pertaining to the economy, it’s that he actually thought he could somehow work with Republicans for the good of the country.

Obviously you forget or are ignorant of the situation when President Obama first walked into the White House. The economy was indeed spiraling out of control. The auto and housing industry had all but collapsed and jobs were literally plummeting. Our global reputation was in the toilet. Our health care system was an abject disaster. And of course there was the huge deficit, debt racked up from the Bush drunken spending spree, and a very divided electorate. And of course, there was Dick Armey and the Koch Bros pumping untold wealth into distributing the kool-aid to the baggers chanting something about being “taxed enough already” (while enjoying the lowest taxes in 65 years) waving their racist signs and Fox News sponsoring some slogan about “take our country back” and slamming Obama before he even got started.

One almost has to have sympathy for a person (Ronald J. Ward) that has so completely bought into the left wing lies and propaganda. Logic, and reality, seems to elude Mr. Ward.

IOW, Obama though that his “awesomeness” was so great, as exhibited by his clueless followers, that he could just roll over the Republicans with regularity while he pushed through his Socialist values on the entire nation.

But under the guiding hand of Obama, we have unemployment norms of 8% and more; the deficit has grown beyond our wildest dreams, more and more people are on food stamps and other social welfare programs, the work force level has not only not kept up with the population growth, it is lower than it has been in decades, Detroit is bankrupt, the Middle East is on fire, Al Qaeda is not only not on the run, it is growing daily, our global reputation has taken a nose-dive, having two, three part time jobs has become the norm compared to one full time job, military morale is decimated, we continue to funnel illegal arms to jihadists in Syria and Egypt, the national average income has taken a plummet, the Obamacare bill that did nothing to lower the cost of medical care, is proving to be such a disaster than Obama unconstitutionally blocks its enforcement and George Soros continues to pour his money into Socialist groups that seek to make this a Marxist utopia while the left whines about the Koch Brother all the while ignoring Soros and his ilk.

Yes, one should almost feel sorry for Mr. Ward, if his line of irrational thinking was not so dangerous to the security, and prosperity, of this nation.

@Ronald J. Ward:

Perhaps it’s that deep seated hatred of the black man in the White House

Was the deep seated hatred for a white man the reason that blacks voted against George W. Bush? Or is it beyond your comprehension that people are not really concerned with the color of Obama’s skin, but the color of his politics, which are Red?

@retire05: I understand your function as the resident troll is to distract from the argument. And you did that quite well. Pete makes an argument that simply doesn’t hold water, that Obama or perhaps his undefined Obama “policies” are the result of our economic problems. Even though people of reasonable political knowledge and an iota of intellect understand that the Executive Branch has limited powers and must rely on the function of the Legislative Branch, I’ve laid out a rather detailed argument of how the GOP legislators have failed and why. You intrude, parrot the very same rant, ignore anything that interrupts your festered hate filled agenda, and somehow pride yourself as an accomplished debater. So again, I understand the troll strategy of you covering your ears to sing that “la la la” tune and simply regurgitate “but bu bu OOOBBAMMMAAA!!!!! WHAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!” even though your childish rant has been debunked and defies reality. But that’s fine because that’s what trolls do.

However, outright dishonesty simply makes you look even more foolish and actually somewhat defeats your purpose. Your screed is riddled with errors and falsehoods and simply a product of your abject hatred frothing forward. Invoking Soros and throwing in a few “Marxist” and “Socialist” jabs doesn’t give credence to your debunked gibberish or unfounded blame you assign too Obama. Seriously, you’re simply sounding like a howling rabid banshee. And, I’m trying to be nice.

@Ronald J. Ward:

However, outright dishonesty simply makes you look even more foolish and actually somewhat defeats your purpose.

As ususal, you have nothing but insults and pejoratives to anyone who questions you. Perhaps you would like to lay out all the wonderful things you think Obama has done?
I’m beginning to think you are nothing more than a paid OFA hack. Perhaps you were recommended for the job by Greg?

@retire05: Although my opinion of Obama is an aside, I don’t necessary have a problem laying “out all the wonderful things you think Obama has done” but history proves you have no interest in counter arguments. Your style leans more towards plugging your ears and chanting “I can’t hear you”, which is precisely my argument with you, which you can’t hear.

@Ronald J. Ward:

you have no interest in counter arguments. Your style leans more towards plugging your ears

To think that Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. has done one thing that has benefitted this nation in any way, you have to not only put your fingers in your ears so you will not hear the news reporting on the most dishonest, deceitful, deceptive administration in modern history, but you also have to squint your eyes tightly closed to not see the videos of the unemployment lines, the food stamp lines and dead bodies from not just Benghazi but Obama’s
“Arab Spring” in Egypt.

After looking at your links (Rachel Maddow, HuffingtonPost, Think Progress which is just a spin-off of the George Soros funded Center For American Progress, along with an entire website devoted to Barack Obama himself, et al) I now fully understand why you are so drunk on the Obama/DNC Kool-Aid.

Tell me, Ronald, when did you become such a devout Socialist?

@retire05: Assuming I am in fact a “devout Socialist” as you say, it would be interesting to learn precisely “when” I became that way is relevant to this conversation. Just for funnies, , let’s say I’ll humor your rhetoric and confess that I became a “devout Socialist” in, oh, hell, how about around 2003. There, I gave you sufficient grounds to pull the conversation away from it’s original point, making you an exceptionally effective troll, perhaps an honor troll. Now that you’ve distracted your failed argument to a date that I became the way I am, please continue. Obviously you asked for a reason.

Oh, to respond to an earlier question, no, I don’t collect pay from anyone. I am considering a writing on trolls so that’s the nature of me toying with you.

@Ronald J. Ward:

Alright; let’s assume you are not a certified, card carrying Socialist. Then what are you beside absolutely stupid the think that Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. is anything other than a disaster for this nation? So, describe your political leaning, if they are, in fact, not Socialist.

As to the “troll” accusation you keep lobbing at me; I have shown that YOU meet the definition of a “troll.” You show up on what is basically a conservative website and spew your radical left wing blather.

Over and over and over… everyone is against poor wittle Obama because his programs are sooooooo good; mean old racist Republicans. Well, give us Alan West, J.C. Watts, Herman Cain, Dr. Carson and who’s complaining? Remember, the left went after Cain over the ALLEGATIONS of sexual misconduct (yet they simply look the other way from their own indiscretions). Who was it that called Justice Thomas “Uncle Thomas” because he does not conform to the left wing ideal of a compliant, subservient black mouthpiece? Oh, YEAH… that was a Democrat! Let’s not waste time discussing the obscene race-baiting conducted (and on-going) by the left over the Travon Martin tragedy; always using other people’s misery to further a political agenda; in this case, racial divisiveness, which is used in campaigning. The evidence is ample and clear there.

No, Bush was no economic genius; he spent far more than he should have, but even at that, he had the economy humming until it could no longer bear the burden of the social engineering of the CRA; THAT caused the collapse, not “Bush economic policies” which, when it gets down to specifics, no one has any negative examples to cite. And, who wants to re-institute the disastrous CRA once again? That’s right… poor, poor, put-upon Obama. He can’t learn any lessons from Watergate and he won’t learn any lessons from the 2007 recession. I believe Einstein considered that insanity.

If Obamacare is so damn good, ENACT IT!! Put it in operation! Why won’t they? Because it is already costing jobs and if it is responsible for MORE job losses before 2014, you can set that election right up beside 2010. In fact, clear a spot, because I feel that is right where it will be going. A good dose of un-fettered liberalism is good for what ails us… the cure is conservatism.

To imply, Roofer, that Obamacare is floundering because of Republican influence (!!! no excuse is too lame to be used to deflect responsibility from the failures!) ignores the fact that the Republicans were completely shut out of the debates, discussions, suggestions (even such benign recommendations as tort reform and interstate competition was ignored). No, Obamacare is ALL liberal, all the time, and THAT’s why it stinks. No, Roofer, Obama is afraid to enact it fully because it will be political suicide.

@bburris: You and Retire05 seem to share a simular personality which tends to be more of a contrarion than wanting to actually engage in adult debate. You make claims that have been repeatedly debunked and then when they are challenged with reasonable arguments or relevent facts, instead of rebutting those arguments or facts, you simply pretend they were never made only to regurgitate your original flawed claim.

You continue your “lost jobs” mantra dispite the fact that it doesn’t hold water, as I’ve laid out in comment # 51. You continue your “Republicans were completely shut out of the debates, discussions, suggestions ” dispite that I’ve previously gave links, numbers, and examples of how that isn’t true. ACA was modeled after Republican Romney’s MA legislation and are ideas Republicans used to support. actually originating from the very Heritage Foundation that now oppses it. Over in the real world, the final bill included 161 Republican amendments which resulted from six bipartisan groups that met 72 times along with 30 bipartisan hearings.

This is simply another example of that cover ears/sing la la la that I previously mentioned. I suppose when you really have no argument at all, such childisness is all you have albeit you’d appear more intelligent by saying nothing at all.


@Ronald J. Ward: A contrarian, Ronald, is someone that simply arbitrarily and baselessly disagrees with another’s point without substantiation. NOTE: I have provided substantiation. Though you claim they have been “debunked”, you provide no debunk, only bunk. Simply claiming, for instance, that the economy, with high (and getting higher) unemployment, under-employment and under reported unemployment, stagnant growth, increasing inflation and growing debt, is “recovering” is not very convincing and doesn’t make it so. Calling someone that, as I just did, cites specific examples of fact vs left-wing fiction a contrarian for simply being correct is, well, contrarian.

There is still ample opportunity to present those details that show Obama has never lied about what he was going to do, what he has done and the mega-disaster that is Obamacare, that the economy is a shining star and that the entire world is in awe of his foreign policy prowess. Give me both barrels; I deserve it.

@bburris: I suggest you read my #60 comment as it goes into details precisely how and why the GOP has been the culprit of our struggling economy, which seems to be the main focus point of your 1st paragraph. If there are parts you don’t understand, please identify.

As far as explaining why “Obama has never lied” or such, I don’t recall that being part of the argument but rather a distraction that you chose to toss in. My original point pertained to “today’s conservative’s dishonesty” and the crazy conspiracies they’ve used to mislead their constituents. This “tell us why you adore Obama” nonsense is simply a non sequitur because you simply can’t counter my arguments with any credence, thus forcing you to invent your own.

Amusingly, Retire05 makes a case that unless I join in the hate fest to bash the twice elected President of the greatest country in the world, I’m either stupid or a “certified, card carrying Socialist”.

There was an interesting question asked to Republican Representative Joe Heck from a businessman. He then asked the Congressman the question that every American who follows these issues asks.

Why do you oppose the ACA at every turn. It was passed by the Congress, passed by the Senate, signed by the President of the United States, upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States, and reaffirmed by the reelection of the President of the United States who won your district. Why would you oppose something that is helping me out, it’s bending the cost curve today, and bending the cost curve in the future. Why Congressman.

And of course, the Congressman stumbled with the same old “Republicans didn’t have any input” which not only is a lie (which I’ve provided links above to validate) but as usual, doesn’t give a coherent answer to the question.

Ronald J. Ward
such a long comment to say that you hate the GOP,
and that everything is just fine the way it is,
aren’t you thinking just for yourself?
and what about the other AMERICANS?
you are a selfish lib just like the other you follow,

@Ronald J. Ward: OH! You expect me to be impressed with numbers issued by the White House! This would be the same White House that has lied about Obamacare, lied about the economy, lied about Fast and Furious, lied about Benghazi, lied about the NSA intrusion into citizen’s (non-terrorists) lives, lied about the IRS and has made a career out of creating racial tension? THAT White House? You know, for a bunch of people who thought Bush lied about everything, you sure do expect people to place a LOT of faith in proven (PROVEN) liars. No, try again; doesn’t convince me.

Now, wait a minute… NOW you are contradicting your Idol. HE says Republicans NEVER offered any alternatives… YOU say they did. So, who’s lying here? It is, indeed, a FACT that the Republicans have offered exchanges, tax credits and plans to improve health care accessibility and delivery. However, where did they recommend the federal government take over 1/6th of the economy? Where did they recommend an IRS police force to FORCE citizens to buy something they might not want? Where did they recommend taxing everything in sight in order to redistribute the earned money to the hands of the wanting? No, no, no, Ronald… this is a liberal concoction and it smells…. really, really bad.

Based on MA’s health care, so this implicates Romney? Take note that states are ALLOWED to enact such laws but NOWHERE in the Constitution is it implied that the federal government can make citizens buy something they may not want, even if they need it. And, while the Democrats were looking and modeling after Romneycare, perhaps they should have noticed the deteriorating health care, the shortages and the growing debt. Perhaps the people love it (who doesn’t love “free” stuff?) but it is unsupportable and it should have been a warning NOT to enact this monstrosity.

You could show the courage to list which of the scandals are the “conspiracies”. We could go on from there. THAT would be interesting.

No, Ronald, you presented a big bag of nothing. But don’t worry… you didn’t disappoint or surprise. That’s what I’m used to seeing from liberals.

@bburris: Bburris, your continued insistence to look reality in the face and deny it with an excuse that “Obama is a liar” makes trying to communicate with you nearly impossible. Granted, you don’t like the links, you feel President Obama lies about everything, and you have a paranoid distrust from any news source that doesn’t do everything in it’s power to discredit Obama and/or Democrats. Got it.

However, enacted legislation is pretty much open record and it’s not some conspiracy. I mean, H.R. 3468, “Promoting Health and Preventing Chronic Disease through Prevention and Wellness Programs for Employees, Communities, and Individuals Act” was indeed a Republican sponsored and excepted legislation pertaining to ACA. I mean, do you deny this? Did someone forge Republican signatures to it? And how about H.R. 4038, 3400, 3970, 4038, 4529, and the others I linked to. Were they falsified? Is there a scam here?

How about Republican Sen Enzi’s bill of “Ten Steps to Transform Health Care in America Act”? Ryan’s bill S. 1099, “Patients’ Choice Act? And I’ve linked, the GOP did in fact have considerable say in the legislation.

If you recall, Democrats ran on a platform of health care reform and they took the House and Senate. Obama ran on that platform as well and took the Executive Office. The law was upheld by a quite conservative Judaical Branch. It passed all 3 branches of government. And Obama was returned to the Oval Office after its passage. Do you deny this? Am I simply fabricating facts?

And as we’re seeing threw Town Hall meetings, people are defending it. And as people learn more about it and more people are allowed into the health care system, the more they will like it-which is precisely why the GOP are in a frantic disarray to promptly kill it.

@Ronald J. Ward:

First you say:

However, enacted legislation is pretty much open record and it’s not some conspiracy.

Then you say, as if it is part of the first statement:

H.R. 3468, “Promoting Health and Preventing Chronic Disease through Prevention and Wellness Programs for Employees, Communities, and Individuals Act” was indeed a Republican sponsored and excepted legislation pertaining to ACA. I mean, do you deny this? Did someone forge Republican signatures to it? And how about H.R. 4038, 3400, 3970, 4038, 4529, and the others I linked to. Were they falsified? Is there a scam here?

Since there was no paragraph between the first sentence and the rest of your paragraph, if someone was uninformed, they would think that all those bills you mentioned had been “enacted.”

So tell us, Ronald, what Democrats supported those bills? And what was the outcome of those bills?

“If you recall, Democrats ran on a platform of health care reform [that would lower the cost and make health care more accessible] and they took the House and Senate.”

There, I fixed it for you. But as the nation started looking into the health care bill that Nancy Pelosi said we had to pass to find out what was in it, they didn’t like it. And that opinion, Ronald, has not changed. You can quote some lone person (for which you provided no link) that wants to be taken care of by Nanny Government, but for the majority of the nation, they are even more against the ACA than they were when it was passed.

The law was upheld by a quite conservative Judaical Branch.

That is a blatant falsehood. The SCOTUS is NOT a “quite conservative” Judicial Branch. Sotomeyer, Kagan, Ginsburg and Bryer are solid hard-core left wingers. Scalia, Alito, Thomas and [it was thought] Roberts were the conservative members of the court. Kennedy is always considered the swing vote. But not since FDR has a president attacked the Justices of the Supreme Court like Obama did in his SOTU speech.

And as we’re seeing threw Town Hall meetings, people are defending it.

Yet, you did not provide a link for what you claim was said.

And as people learn more about it and more people are allowed into the health care system, the more they will like it-which is precisely why the GOP are in a frantic disarray to promptly kill it.

Really? People are going to like having to pay more for health insurance, having longer waits at ERs and getting an appointment at a doctor’s office? If the ACA is so damn great, why is Obama giving “waivers” and why are even the unions, which pushed for the passage of the ACA, now complaining about it? Why is Obama putting off enforcing a law that he passed, until January, 2015?

I remember how all you lefties whined and cried over Bush. Especially INRE to the national debt. Yet now, we hear only crickets from you left wingers about a president who can’t get his budgets passed, who is spending more money than Bush, and the Republican Congress ever dreamed of spending. You whined and moaned that Bush was breaking Constitutional law, yet when Obama does it, again, crickets from you and your ilk.

If the word hypocritical had not already been invented, it would have to be invented now to apply to Democrats.

BTW, weren’t you the one who was correcting someone’s punctuation marks on this site? Perhaps you should use spell check.

@Ronald J. Ward: OK, Ronald, perhaps you can straighten me out on a few points. Was Obama truthful when he promised that Obamacare would not raise taxes on the middle class “one thin dime”? Was he honest about his claim that it would be deficit neutral? Was he accurate to say that we could all keep our current coverage and doctors?

Has he been truthful about his involvement in Fast and Furious, particularly in light of his employment of the shield of executive privilege? Has he been honest about his knowledge of event prior to, during and after the Benghazi attack, particularly in light of his support for the known fallacy of the “video” fairy tale? Has he been truthful about his foreknowledge of the IRS scandal (sorry, the government intrusion into the lives of law abiding citizens and violations of civil rights) or his claim to be pursuing to hold those involved responsible? Was he honest when he campaigned against the surveillance of the Patriot Act but, once given the power, has expanded the surveillance of non-terrorist citizens beyond anyone’s wildest imagination? What HAS he been honest and truthful about?

You never got to the point of designating which of these scandals are “phony” and which are real. I guess it slipped your mind, since you were needing to be inventive to scrounge up some contorted defense of this unscrupulous administration.

@Ronald J. Ward:

Mr. Ward, shove your slimy, despicable and utterly leftist-losing-the-argument false racism charge. You and the rest of your ilk are beyond dishonorable in making such garbage claims, not that you care, as leftists have no honor nor integrity anyway.
I despise Obama because of his collectivist, marxist and anti-American policies, as well as his total lack of integrity. I despise the Clintons, Schumer, Reid, Pelosi, Boxer, Feinstein, Schakowsky, Durbin, Jerry Brown and keith Olbermann every bit as much as Obama, as well as every other anti-American progressive dirtbag who works to impose tyranny upon the rest of us. Skin color has nothing to do with the contempt with which I hold progressives for being such blatant liars and hypocrites. It is you leftists that harbor racism in your hearts, for which you overcompensate and make ridiculous projections upon conservatives who are working to oppose leftist ideology.

Need I remind you:
Sen Robert Byrd – D, former Kleagle of the WV KKK, who used the term ‘white niggers’ during an interview before he died.
KKK was founded by DEMOCRATS in the south to terrorize and oppress blacks.
Jim Crow laws were passed by DEMOCRATS in the south to prevent blacks from voting.
The Civil Rights Act in the 60s was opposed by DEMOCRATS, to include Al Gore’s father and Sen Faubus, the mentor of Bill Clinton. It was passed by REPUBLICANS.
A REPUBLICAN president had to send in the military to force a DEMOCRAT racist governor from blocking blacks integrating into previously segregated schools.
It was DEMOCRATS who opposed the nomination of Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court, with claims of Justice Thomas “not being an authentic black”, and wishing :he die from heart disease like many black men” –
REPUBLICANS selected the first black Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, the first black Secretary of Defense, the first black Secretary of State, and the first female black Secretary of State.

Don’t you ever accuse me of being a racist again, you obnoxious blowhard.

@Ronald J. Ward:

No, only real conservatives are interested in repealing obamacare. The GOP leadership is too enamored of the DC clique to do the right thing and repeal this evil filth.

You claim people will like it once they get used to it…just like the drug pusher giving away “free” drugs to school children. That is exactly what obamacare is.

Polls consistently show people do not like obamacare, no matter how much you try to ignore them.
Obama lied through his teeth when he said:
“If you like your insurance plan, you can keep it.”
“If you like your doctor, you can keep him”
“Taxes will not go up for people making less than $250,000, not by one thin dime.”
“Under my plan, insurance costs will go down 3000%”
“Under my plan, insurance costs will go down for the average family $2500”.

You are just as much of a liar if you deny Obama steadfastly and repeatedly made those claims. The video showing the liar saying them all over the net.

Obamacare is evil, untrustworthy, and highly detrimental to the US, just like Obama.

yes that’s the way they understand, it has to be explain that way also
to the people who are under his power so to shake them out of the lies he tell them constantly,
in his phoney campaigns,

oh my they just discover what they where told by THE CONSERVATIVES
all these years, that is today 3rd of NOVEMBER 2013 after your interesting exchanges of comments,

Ronald J. Ward
you know that OBAMA APOLOGIZE only to those who are left without insurence
no apology to the other citizens, for having cause such confusion and fear,
so much for your atempt to sell it’s no lies ever,