The Massive Republican Campaign to Sabotage the Affordable Care Act

FILED TO: Headline Articles

We’re entering a bizarre end of the year edition of Silly Season in which the news media is laser-focused on the wrong things. As stories about the roll-out of the Affordable Care Act begin to dissipate, it looks like we’ve segued into an especially nonsensical “British Anchor Wants to Poop in Palin’s Mouth” meets “Wacky Toronto Mayor Does Wacky Stuff” news cycle.

Lost in the mix, of course, is the ongoing far-right effort to sabotage the Affordable Care Act.

I’m not talking about the myths and propaganda — the “death panel” nonsense and the like. This is serious business: the well-financed, broadly implemented sabotage campaign designed to rig the law for failure, while also making it more difficult for Americans to receive insurance.

Sabotaging the Website

We’ve known for quite some time that most Republican governors refused to open health insurance exchanges in their states. 27 states don’t have exchanges and therefore uninsured residents are shuffled over to the website to buy a policy.

However, earlier this month, we learned that Republican Party leadership directly urged those governors not to do it — chiefly to burden the federal exchange with a heavier load.

Worse yet, the ACA contained zero funding for the development and implementation of the site, and there’s no way the congressional Republicans would ever authorize more money for it. It’s unclear why the federal exchange was unfunded in the law, but one thing’s for sure, a House of Representatives that voted 46 times to totally repeal the law wouldn’t have coughed up a dime to rectify the oversight.

So, what happened? A cash-starved development process, which precipitated serious glitches when October 1 rolled around — problems that should never have occurred.

And those glitches might’ve been exacerbated when right-wing hacktivists reportedly conducted “denial of service” attacks against — deliberate attempts to overwhelm the website’s servers. CNN reported on Monday:

Hackers have attempted more than a dozen cyber attacks against the Obamacare website, according to a top Homeland Security Department official. The attacks, which are under investigation, failed, said the official.

Authorities also are investigating a separate report of a tool designed to put heavy strain on through a so-called distributed denial of service. It does not appear to have been activated.

What else?

Sabotaging the Medicaid Expansion

There's something especially visceral and sinister about well-protected billionaires telling middle class Americans to go without health insurance in order to, you know, kick Obama in nuts.

Americans for Prosperity, funded by Charles and David Koch, launched advertising campaigns to strong-arm state lawmakers to block the expansion Medicaid in Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Ohio, Louisiana, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Virginia. Once again, in the 26 states that blocked the Medicaid expansion, we’re left with five to eight million people who are consequently unable to afford exchange policies but who also make too much money to qualify for Medicaid.

In Alaska yesterday, Governor Sean Parnell, a Republican, obviously, rejected the Medicaid expansion thus denying health insurance to 40,000 Alaskans. Parnell said, “I believe a costly Medicaid expansion especially on top of the broken Obamacare system is a hot mess.”

That’s a lie. Fact: the federal government pays the entire cost of the Medicaid expansion for 2014 through 2016. The states pay nothing. So it’s not costly at all. In fact, it’s free for the first three years.

What happens when the expansion is blocked throughout more than half the nation? Potentially millions of pissed off working class Americans due to what’s perceived as punitively expensive Obamacare premiums — premiums that are only too expensive because Republican governors blocked the Medicaid expansion.

There’s more.

Sabotaging ACA Marketplace Enrollment

Speaking of the Koch Brothers and Alaska, a group called Foundation for Government Accountability launched a campaign to convince Alaskans to deliberately not buy insurance policies in order to undermine ACA enrollment goals, and, naturally, to express their self-defeating hatred of President Obama. Smart.

A pair of websites, along with accompanying Facebook pages, were launched back in September: and And go figure:

Based in Naples, Fla., the Foundation for Government Accountability (FGA) is a 501(c)3 non-profit that “promotes public policies that achieve limited, constitutional government and a robust economy that will be an engine for job creation across the states.” One of the foundation’s directors is Robert Levy, the chairman of the board of the Cato Institute, the Washington, D.C. think tank with a long and complicated relationship with the Koch brothers.

Yep. All roads lead back to the Kochs.

There’s something especially visceral and sinister about well-protected billionaires telling middle class Americans to go without health insurance in order to, you know, kick Obama in nuts.

At the end of the day, if not enough people enroll in the exchanges, the law entirely falls apart. Combined with everything else, that’s sabotage, plain and simple, while the Koch Brothers can rest assured knowing they’ll never be without quality healthcare, so screw it. Let fly. After all, the traditional press won’t really cover it with the same hard-nippled vigor with which they’ve covered the buggy website, or with which they’ve almost universally blamed the low enrollment numbers on the president.

For that, much of the press is an active, though not entirely knowing conspirator in the sabotage plot. And there’s no indication any of it will change any time soon.


If you love what we do here at the Banter, please consider becoming a Banter Member and supporting independent media! Readers get access to the Magazine and unlimited monthly articles

  • disqus_ObmC49sJGO

    Don’t blame it on other people….ACA is just badly executed.

  • Cue Miller

    We spent a lot of time just browsing the Colorado state exchange to decide which policy was best for my wife. We were replacing a cancelled policy so inadequate that we only went over the yearly deductible ONCE in seven years (she got cancer!) … but it was the ONLY policy she could get in the state thanks to other pre-existing conditions. But the browsing was glitch-free. We had 72 policies from 8 companies to choose from.

    Once we decided on a policy, it was a piece of cake. Took her less than 1/2 hour to sign up. I think if we qualified for a subsidy it would have taken longer.

    The policy is a low-end bronze policy, but it is much better than the old policy. We saved $300/month on premiums alone and it covers everything and has a much lower deductible and lower copays. Can’t beat it. Then she goes on Medicare late next year, which is by far the best of all. She survived the cancer, BTW.

  • Msstma

    I seriously can’t get past the eligibility application. After I did that I took 4 solid days to compare plans and when I finally picked one, I couldn’t figure out how to actually BUY it. I got on chat and they said no, I have to wait for them to email me now. That was 3 weeks ago. I got on again tonight and it says now I have to set something? how much I plan on using of the credit? But when I tried to set that it popped up and said website closed for maintenance now. I seriously think the site’s been sabotaged and they’re just not telling us.

  • Andrea Renee Hall

    The only advantage the GOP has in this game is they are not in office. Their utter failure to admit that during their 8 years in office, they’ve managed nothing other then utter chaos in the world, and the US economy, and they were responsible for over 4 millions deaths and counting. 9/11, War in Iraq. Lied about both..

  • condew

    I still keep wondering how the Federal health care website could be so fouled up when 23 states apparently implemented the same exchanges with less money and more success. I’d really like to know the political leanings of the management and key staff of that implementation effort.

    • beulahmo

      I think it’s at least partially because the state websites only have to deal with the participating insurers in their one state, while the federal website has to incorporate the participating insurers for all the remaining states.

      • condew

        I don’t really buy that explanation. It’s not like every additional insurance company is a whole new world where the programmer must again start from scratch; they are minor variations on the same theme. So once one is implemented, the others would be almost identical; just copy the rules for the first and make a few small changes. I’d expect the hardest part would be interfacing to all the various government systems to check eligibility and such, where each is a different operation, and the state systems all had to have done that.

        • beulahmo

          Your points sound reasonable to me, I guess. ::shrugs:: You could be right, but I hesitate to make conclusions (like “it should be as easy as _____”). I’ve worked on projects that seemed a lot simpler to folks looking from the outside, but they had no way of knowing how complex the inter-working parts were.

          Then again, as you pointed out, the firm that handled the project could be terribly incompetent.

    • Bob Cesca

      The ACA provided money for the states to develop the exchanges. There was no money in the ACA for the federal exchange website.

      • condew

        And yet they found hundreds of millions of dollars to implement the federal exchange, but unlike 23 states, they didn’t find a competent organization to build their exchange. Or was it they did not find an organization committed to making the federal exchange a success?

        Considering Republican efforts to stop Obamacare at all costs; to stop Obama at all costs, how much failure of the exchange has host the Democrats, and how easy it would be to mismanage a software development effort on purpose, I ask again, was the federal exchange built by a company who was a Republican donor? Were key personnel Tea Party, Randians, Libertarians, or whatever subversive anti-government people are calling themselves this year?

  • Kagemusha

    Great post, thank you. One of the key shifts in thinking about healthcare, and its future. The California exchange works just great, and when I heard a previously uninterested, hard-nosed small-businesswoman looking for better rates for her ill husband, I knew it had momentum beyond the initial target base.

    In the damning of GOP malfeasance, let’s not forget our progressive brethren, like Salon’s film critic, Andrew O’Hehir, who took it upon themselves to prematurely dig graves for ACA, and all those who stand to lose if it fails. No link provided, now or ever.

  • TMac

    If you ever tune into Morning Joe, every single morning he and his sycophants harp daily on “the failure of Obamacare”. I hate them so much I can’t even turn the program on, because I want to find Joe Scarborough, who is obviously working for the Republican Party as a Fox style pundit on MSNBC, and kick his ass.

    But in the end all the propagandized hand-wringing will one more time backfire on Republicans, because they are liars and exposed for the lies daily. And Republicans will be shocked, one more time, because they couldn’t read the tea leaves in front of their faces.

  • Steven Skelton

    If was not funded, how did the administration spend 400-600 million building the site?

  • Badgerite

    Daily Kos reports that the number who are enrolling are surging in all states. I would be that a lot of people are just holding back while they work out the glitches in the website and elsewhere in the program.

    • IrishGrrrl

      I’ve been trying to enroll myself today (take the plunge so to speak) but there seems to still be a glitch in the system where it will let me select a plan but not continue forward with enrollment. I’m so close to being done and I want to add myself into those stats ASAP. Americans desperate for healthcare will disprove the saboteurs.

      • Badgerite

        Maybe you can complete it by phone. I haven’t tried the phone yet. I’m not sure if you get a person or an automated voice. I hope a person.

  • MrDHalen

    There really is no honesty left in Republicans anymore. They live by these words “If you aren’t cheating, you aren’t trying!”.

  • FlipYrWhig

    Hey, does anyone else remember when the thing that supposedly proved Obama was a total fuckup was the “Cash for Clunkers” program? That was a right-wing punchline for about a month too. Oh, the poor car dealerships, and oh, the confused customers. And, like “porkulus” and “midnight basketball,” the only people who remember these WORST DISASTARS EVAR1!! are weirdos like me.

    • Vipsanius

      What else are they going to do? The GOP is the opposition; it is their job to oppose.
      Among other things, that means putting out all kinds of rhetoric and ‘jokes’. personally, I am not surprised.

    • IrishGrrrl

      LOL, you know how many conservative Mormons here in AZ totally took advantage of the Cash for Clunkers program? Tons and tons. Effers look for any way they can reduce their tax liability. They’d actually spend money they would otherwise save to avoid paying it out in taxes.

  • feloniousgrammar

    Those crackers think the GOP wouldn’t take food out of their mouths. They don’t get it.

    • D_C_Wilson

      They’re too busy slapping lunch trays out of poor kids’ hands.

  • missliberties

    Here another piece on this phenom by Roger Simon.

    “And do we know today that a miserable website will be the prism through which Obama’s entire presidency will be judged?

    There is no good excuse for how badly Obama has screwed up thus far. The nation that has given the world Microsoft, Apple, Google, Facebook and Twitter should be able to produce a working website.

    And Obama faces a bigger challenge: If he gets the website working, he then has to get Obamacare itself working.

    But he has three years to do it. If he succeeds, I do not think people will view him and his legacy through the prism of a botched start or anything comparable to Iraq, Katrina, Watergate or slavery.”

    Read more:

    The hyperbole is disgusting. The Koch infused GOP has become a chatty kathy doll. Pull the string and they say Obamacare is a disaster/failure every two seconds. Because if you repeat a lie often enough, the people start to believe it.

    I feel like I am reliving the propghanda era pre-Iraq. Iraq/WMD/911 in an endless loop for months and *boom* people just knew that Saddam Hussein had to go because he was responsible for 9/11.

    • Vipsanius

      Who is this Roger Simon? What reason is there for me to take him seriously?

      I read it. It is nothing more than hyperventilating.

      • beulahmo

        He’s just another villager who specializes in shallow “analysis”. They are a blight.

        • Vipsanius

          Pure silliness; basically designed to solicit fatuous comments.

    • nicole

      Who cares what that ass says…….he works for Politico, for christ’s sake!

      • missliberties

        I saw Simon’s piece as defending Obama against these insane irrational failure comparisons.

  • chris ellis

    Alaska’s denial is especially absurd because half of the 40k will continue to receive 100% backing from the feds due to their status as alaska natives.

    • IrishGrrrl

      Actually, that explains Alaska’s stance. A good portion of their population will receive the aid no matter what they do and be happy. Then they can stand on principle by rejecting it and still score political points with the GOP. I bet they see it as a win-win.

      Arizona has a similar situation with the native population but we have almost 7 million people in our state versus the approx 731,000 in Alaska. That meant there was enough poor non-natives to push Brewer to expand medicaid. I never thought I’d say this but Gov. Brewer did the right thing. Now I have to go rinse my mouth out with soap….blech.

      • chris ellis

        Well, they aren’t automatically eligible. They still must meet existing income and categorical requirements. The income received from the feds for the previous mistreatment is exempt from being counted towards those limits. The feds will n pay 100% of what it costs to insure them through Medicaid, as well. This just seems punitive and spiteful of the governor towards a group of people already screwed over in so many ways.

  • IrishGrrrl

    Bob, a correction. If I remember correctly the website was funded for about 300 million but by the time the roll out had occurred they’d spent about half of that. Although this point doesn’t change the ultimate outcome because IMHO the problem wasn’t a lack of money, it was a lack of time. They couldn’t finalize specs for the website until SCOTUS made their decision, which shortened their development time quite a bit. I’m surprised the website works at all with how much they had to do and the complexity of the back end.

    • Bob Cesca

      WaPo, November 3 via Kevin Drum: “Although the statute provided plenty of money to help states build their own insurance exchanges, it included no money for the development of a federal exchange — and Republicans would block any funding attempts.”

      • IrishGrrrl

        Okay, the Mother Jones article you are citing is dated Nov. 2nd and the quoted WAPO article is dated the same. But here’s a link to an article on Nov. 19th ( that debunks the $600 million lie (which we all suspected wasn’t the truth anyway). They link to a fed govt document that shows $318 million was requested BUT that still doesn’t mean that any of those funds were disbursed. Is anyone out there familiar with Federal budgeting documents? It’s an “Exhibit 300”. It looks like this is a request or justification of the amount, not the actual disbursement of funds. The WAPO article mentions that Sibelius testified that $174 million has been spent on the website up to Aug 2013 (have verified literal transcript of this).

        Note too in that WAPO article they spent $300 million less than they anticipated in 2013. I would think the Republicans would be happy with that, then again, the President is blah so no gravy.

        • Robinsky

          I believe I remember hearing that the original contractor hadn’t been paid all that was budgeted for the construction of the website. Do you all remember anything about that? ??

    • drspittle

      Amen. The Court’s decision plus the states’ refusal of Medicaid Expansion and the option to build their own exchanges had to increase the scope of the requirements. It would almost be like having to start from Square One. And, as you said, they didn’t have enough time to recover. Realistically speaking, 3 years probably is not enough time anyway without the changes.

  • zj sky

    This is like reading a liberal fever dream. The real culprit here is not the GOP (none of whom voted for this) nor the Koch Brothers (love to hear your thoughts on George Soros and Union money influencing politics).

    The real culprit is the liberal / progressive arrogance – the thought that Obama and his fellow democratic travelers knew more about insurance than the insurance companies. They knew more about the relationship citizens have with their doctors and plans and knew what was really good for them.

    Obama and the progressive team own this lock stock and smoking barrel. Nothing the GOP or the “evil” Koch Bros (referencing the Koch Bros is like a liberal tic at this point!) does at this time takes away from the fact that the federal govt and Obama have created a massive govt program that is defined by its incompetence.

    I feel sorry for liberals like this author. It has GOT to be a tough time watching the progressive label take it on the chin as it is right now! LOL

    • notoriousbob

      I missed the part where you told me which part of Bob’s post is inaccurate.

    • nicole

      Run along and play with your big guns… have no place at the adults table. For that matter, neither do any of your fellow sociopaths.

    • sealiagh

      I will pray for you.

      • beulahmo

        You’re a kinder person than I am. I’m a Christian, but I find that I cannot pray for individuals I observe adopting the glib, vacuous GOP rationales for favoring avaricious, moneyed interests at the obvious expense of society’s least empowered. I’m sick of the GOP’s attempts to portray the working poor as lazy, stupid oafs who deserve the misery their poverty causes. The right wing has gotten far too goddamn much mileage out of that caricature, and I’m completely out of patience with folks who approve of (or even just excuse) the cruelty they demonstrate, not only in their policy positions, but also in their derisive rhetoric. I can forgive most human flaws–the one I have trouble with is cruelty. These people are fucking cruel.

    • ak1287

      Want to know what generally helps when you’re debating the premise of an article?


      Want to know what your rant doesn’t have?


    • Ipecac

      “They knew more about the relationship citizens have with their doctors and plans and knew what was really good for them”

      It is noted that you ignore the fact that tens of millions of Americans had no relationships with doctors nor did they actually have plans.

    • D_C_Wilson

      It’s funny you called the Koch Brothers a “liberal tic” after mentioning the famous conservative tic, George Soros. BTW, the amount of union money influencing politics is a tiny fraction of what the Kochs spend to influence politics by themselves without counting Sheldon Adleson and any of the dozens of other billionaires and corporations who give to rightwing candidates.

      BTW, can you tell me why, after having 100+ of their amendments added to the ACA, none of them voted for it?

    • Bob Cesca

      The ACA is basically a GOP law. Why don’t you people accept it?

      • Pink No More

        Because That Accursed Negro wants it, therefore it’s the worst thing EVAH.

        • Lazarus Durden

          I actually remember a Republican saying they’d repeal the law and replace it with just about everything that’s in it already! He just about flat out said it’s because President Obama did it. That’s their main issue with it.

      • beulahmo

        Oh, no. At this point, I’m willing to cede that point (that they’ve been fighting their own fucking policy idea) because I want history to note that these motherfuckers lied their asses off to prevent this law from achieving the badly needed policy goals it will achieve. I want this period of irrational, well-financed, hate-addled “conservative” obstruction to have its own chapter in history textbooks.

    • beulahmo

      Democrats do “own this lock stock and smoking barrel,” and it galls me to know that — ten years from now, when “Obamacare” is popular and successful at achieving its policy goals, Republicans (and their flying-monkey asshole constituency like you) will shamelessly attempt to gloss over all the utter bullshit you’ve spent years (and ridiculous amounts of money) flinging at it. Because, as always, cotemporary American “conservatives” are on the wrong side of history.

      • Aimee Barfield

        Do not forget Lindsey Graham intends to call it HillaryCare in the future. Because he knows it will succeed.

        • beulahmo

          Wow. I did not know that. What an asshole.

    • Badgerite

      This was a Heritage Foundation blueprint plan for providing healthcare. Heritage Foundation! Ring a bell. One usually doesn’t hear Heritage Foundation and liberal in the same breadth. Liberal would prefer to do away with the insurance companies all together. LOL.

  • Vipsanius

    That is what they are seeking to do. It is what occurred with Wilson, FDR , LBJ, etc. So, this is not new.

    One can say or write whatever one wishes about a politician; including tell lies.

  • GrafZeppelin127

    One thing that seems to escape everyone’s attention is the fact that Republicans and their media enablers are going to say/shriek/believe/repeat that the ACA is a grotesque and abject failure no matter what the reality would reasonably suggest. Obama Is the WORST President We’ve EVER Had™ no matter what the reality would reasonably suggest. There is absolutely zero possibility that any Republican, Fox News pundit, right-wing radio host, blogger, etc. will say or believe anything else.

    What I’m wondering is, why does anyone take seriously the opinions, perceptions, etc. of people whose opinions and perceptions will be the same no matter what happens? If I already know what someone’s opinion about something will be, why should I be interested in that opinion? Why should I take seriously the words or thoughts of anyone who reverse-engineers his understanding of reality to fit a fixed pre-conception?

    • Vipsanius

      There is no good reason to take media enablers seriously.
      people should never rely upon the media to do their analysis for them. People need to think and understand themselves. And, not rely upon some pundit; of any stripe.

    • zj sky

      You can take your post and replace “conservative” with the word “liberal” and you’ll have a clear picture of the conservative complaint against liberals during the Bush Presidency. I love it that every single complaint Libs have now have now are about things you all did from 2001-2008.

      PS – there is no amount of spinning that you can do to describe Obamacare as anything but an abject failure that is harming millions of Americans. Progressive political philosophy has been shown to be the empty philosophy it really is. Deal with it and grow as a human being. LOL

      • GrafZeppelin127

        Thank you for proving my point.

        • Vipsanius

          He did prove your point

        • D_C_Wilson

          Well, it’s not like he one of his own.

      • D_C_Wilson

        PS – there is no amount of spinning that you can do to describe Obamacare as anything but an abject failure that is harming millions of Americans. Progressive political philosophy has been shown to be the empty philosophy it really is.

        Call me crazy, but I think we should actually try a progressive policy, instead of one cooked up by the conservative Heritage Foundation, before declaring the entire philosophy “empty.”

        • Mich Caruso

          You are crazy.

      • JozefAL

        zj: I’m sorry, but would you PLEASE remind us all of the time that Obama challenged the American public with “If you’re not with us, you’re against us” as Bush did?

        Would you PLEASE remind us all of the time that Obama or anyone in his Administration called other Americans “traitors” for challenging Obama’s policies?

        Would you PLEASE remind us all of the time when a Democratic member of the House of Representatives yelled out “You lied!” during one of Bush’s speeches in front of the Congress or when a liberal/progressive Supreme Court Justice mouthed “no, no” while shaking his head in disgust during a Bush speech when he mentioned a court case the President believed to have been decided wrongly?

        Would you PLEASE remind us of the number of people who’ve died because of one of Obama’s lies? (And, bear in mind, before you decide to bring up “Benghazi,” the State Dep’t had complained at the CUTS in funding to protect US embassies and consulates–cuts that lay squarely at the feet of REPUBLICON members of the House of Representatives. Also, remember that US embassies and consulates were attacked during the Bush II administration with a resulting loss of life but you NEVER once heard GOPers making out that there was some “scandal” involved.)

        Would you PLEASE remind us of the number of US news networks that CONSTANTLY attacked Bush throughout the entirety of his Administration with NO acknowledgment of GOOD things that Bush did (and there were actually a few points) compared to the number that began their attacks on the Obama Presidency on the day AFTER he was elected and have ignored ANY good things? (Bear in mind that one particularly “fair and balanced” network credited everyone BUT Obama for the death of bin Laden–even going so far as to giving credit to Bush and Cheney who’d actually shut down the unit tasked with searching for bin Laden. Hell, even with the stock market–when it’s down, it’s ALL Obama’s fault; when it’s up, you NEVER hear Obama being given credit. And the market is currently–under Obama–at its HIGHEST EVER but does Obama get credit? Hells no.)

        You might also want to remember that the primary objection that liberals and progressives had against Bush stemmed from the unConstitutional way he got into office. (Next time a conservative complains about “judicial activism,” just ask what he thinks about the 2000 election and the SCOTUS involvement. There is NO Constitutional provision for SCOTUS to intervene in a Presidential election. But I digress…..) As for the other “complaints,” I’ve no idea what you’re even talking about–unless it’s holding Bush accountable for taking a government surplus and “refunding” it to the people and then getting us into not one, but two, UNFUNDED wars (one of which was based on lies) and THEN, allowing right-wingers to hold Clinton accountable for “not dealing with terrorists” (conveniently forgetting the times he did try, the cons were right there claiming he was trying to cover up something here at home or deflecting from Whitewater or “Monicagate”). Yes, liberals and progressives have been “blaming” Bush for the economy’s current woes but WE’RE RIGHT about it.

        • drumz

          Excellent post!
          The Republicon voters will go down in history the most ignorant to have ever walked this planet. Especially when you consider that we are in the Age of Information yet they blindly only listen to what they want to hear. There are so many psychological studies of manipulation going on they should also be an earmark for Stockholm Syndrome.
          The house of cards is so tall now that they have to continue to support the lies by creating false studies and groups in order to continue to survive.
          If it weren’t for Faux and gerrymandering they would not hold a majority anywhere.

        • nathkatun7

          Bravo, Bravo, JosefAL for your excellent commentary debunking the nonsense.

        • jbfaust

          1. “If you’re not with us, you’re against us” as Bush did?

          This was not for the American people, it was for other countries. By the way, Hilliary Clinton said the same thing September 13, 2001: “Every nation has to either be with us, or
          against us. Those who harbor terrorists, or who finance them, are going to pay a price.”

          2. called other Americans “traitors” for challenging Obama’s policies? Haven’t heard that one. However, everyone who is against Obama Care is called RACIST

          3.when a Democratic member of the House of Representatives yelled out “You lied!”

          In 2004, Democrats delivered a “Chorus Of Boos” during Bush’s
          State Of The Union when he called for renewal of the Patriot Act.,
          In 2005, Dems howled, hissed and shouted “No!” when Bush pushed for Social Security reform in the SOU: “Democrats broke decorum and booed twice,”

        • jbfaust

          4.Would you PLEASE remind us of the number of people who’ve died because of one of Obama’s lies? This one is SO OLD AND TIRED. Bush did not lie. Everyone, including every nation in the world had the same intelligence info as Bush. And by the way, isn’t it funny that we are now in the process of removing all those chemical weapons from Syria. In 2004″ Nizar Nayouf, an award-winning Syrian journalist who was granted political asylum in France said the chemical weapons from Saddam were hidden in Syria. Also, Saddam’s number two general, Georges Sada stated in 2005 the weapons were moved to Syria right before the war.

        • jbfaust

          5. Would you PLEASE remind us of the number of US news networks that CONSTANTLY attacked Bush OMG! Do you really want to go there??? Think about the following the media has given Obama a pass on.
          Drone strikes
          Deaths in Afghanistan. The media used to give us a daily toll, you do not see that anymore.
          What if Bush had played as much golf as Obama(by the way Obama has set a presidential record for the amount of golf he has played)
          Obama sent our military into Libya to remove a sovereign head of state, the majority of the media saw no problem with this.
          Think what the media would have done if a republican congressman had stated Bush had a secret database that had info on everyone and everything like Maxine Waters said Obama had.
          What if Bush had waited for 45 days to give a strong response to the oil spil?
          Lastly, the media everyday told us in 2004 how bad the economy was when unemployment was 5.5, growth was at about 3.5 and gas was 1.85 a gallon(how I miss that gas price!)
          These are just a few examples, I could go on and on.

  • trgahan

    Once again, the biggest threat of the ACA is not so much insuring Americans, it is showing that government regulation of industry can lead to better outcomes for all (yes the 1% will still get their pound of flesh, but it will just be a slightly lighter pound). To faux-libertarians/conservatives nothing is more concerning than government actually working (for anyone but their own small group) and showing the “free market” to be the rigged game that it is. Intentionally or not, the ACA has the potential to do both things which would destroy a century of conservative economic talking points.

    I’d also expect any resulting prosecutions of the alleged hackers will only be framed as Obama and Holder singling out conservatives for being conservatives….or better “You SEE! He IS coming for you for just exercising reasonable civil disobedience!”


Subscribe to the Banter Newsletter!