See, I Told You So: Obama Consumed with Preparing for the Obamacare Decision

RUSH ARCHIVE: Obamacare however, defines Barack Obama. It's the cornerstone of the forthcoming Obama presidential library. It's his place in history, and it is where he gets to transform this country. He's out there saying America has never worked. He means capitalism has never worked. And it's health care, it is Obamacare, fully implemented, that gives him the slam-dunk opportunity to finally, in his mind, remake this country, transform it into what it shoulda always been. But it, in their minds, is hanging in the balance. They are not confident about this.

This was his victory over America, folks. Obamacare was the victory over America. Obama at war with the America that was founded. Osawatomie, Kansas, he said this year, it's not working. It's never worked. America, capitalism. And Obamacare, that was the death knell. His victory over America. His victory over free markets. His victory over the Constitution. He has received countless toasts, tributes, congratulatory notes since that abysmal law was shoved down our throats. Obamacare's passage was nirvana for Obama. Now the campaign's frozen. The regime is consumed with planning how to handle the next event, and that's the court decision on Obamacare.

RUSH: Bloomberg broke this story, and it shows that I was right about this. They're looking to run on Obamacare again. This is the story, this is Hans Nichols, White House reporter, talking about an Obama fundraiser.

NICHOLS: This is according to three Democratic activists, and that is the president at these fundraisers, when he's asked about it says that he may have to return to health care in his second term if the Supreme Court rules against all or part of the Affordable Care Act. This is significant because that's so at odds with the president's public posture on what the court is gonna do, and that is utter confidence. When the president is asked about it, he does repeat that, that he thinks the law is on his side. But then he gives the "but," the "what happens if the court rules against him." That's not something he does in public. These fundraisers tell us, the president games out potential scenarios on what might happen in term two, the political challenges, the policy challenges.

RUSH: All right, so what's he doing? Is he just simply fundraising, trying to scare these people? "You know what? They may overturn it. I'm gonna need a second term to redo it." Or is he sending a message that he knows it's going down and trying to prepare them for it. Either way, going to need a second term to redo it. There's smart money on both sides of this. It's impossible to know. But there are people who think, as close as he is to Kagan, Sotomayor, that one of them at least might have told him how that first vote went or how it's shaping up.

Because a lot of people are saying, if you're really confident that you're gonna be upheld, why even bring this up? Why even present the possibility, particularly to donors? Why show a lack of confidence to donors? And the point about him not doing it in public, well, you wouldn't do it in public. You would not express a lack of confidence in public for people whose votes you need, but people whose money you need, maybe you do. So it's just added to all the intrigue about this.

RUSH: No, no, no, I think Obama is telling the truth to the donors. I think one of the things that you do with your donors, you give them the inside dope. It's what you do. You tell your fat cat donors the inside info. That's what they're paying for, 35 grand plus a cheap dinner. That's what they're paying for. You tell them things you don't say to the public. So I think when he says to fat cat donors, "We might need to redo it," I think it's an indication he might know something. He's out in Minnesota right now, one of his six fundraisers today, very near Wisconsin, blaming Congress for the lack of jobs. Congress hasn't done enough. And he said, "We can't come out of this overnight." Overnight? For crying out loud, you've told us for the past two years that we have come out of it.

There are no slam dunks when a decision is put before the US Supreme Court, otherwise the the issue in question would never have gotten that far.

You and I can see that the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act” is clearly not in the best interests of the majority of American people, and would not be in the best interests of ANY large population anywhere in the world. It was written to address some very narrow concerns, almost all of which could be covered without the legislation as written, but in addressing these narrow concerns, huge gaping rends in the fabric of existing law and economic structure are shredded open. The law is being argued as the salvation for the few, without regard to the perhaps irreparable damage that shall befall the many.

We may only hope that the Court rules for the greater good, but case law is a curious thing, and the Constitution is actually mute on much of what the law contains. The Tenth Amemdment is being purposely ignored, or twisted, in such way that any state that RESISTS the application of the law is basically denied already existing benefits.

The “Commerce Clause” has been a catch-all that has also been twisted beyond its original intent. If this clause had been allowed to operate before the adoption of this travesty of a law, then medical insurance companies would have long ago been allowed to operate across state lines, without being impeded by a separate set of regulations each time as operations were being set up in a particular state.

One of the objections to the performance of the medical insurance companies has been that they do not have much competition in most venues, and they are not forced to met true competitive pressures, providing greater services at lesser cost, because of mandates placed upon them, and a series of sweetheart deals whereby they were GUARANTEED a share of the market without having to welcome in any competition.

Let me cite a recent application of the above principle, in the State of Wisconsin. The teachers’ unions had negotiated a deal whereby they would only purchase medical insurance from WEA Trust, an insurance company that existed for the express purpose of its clientele, the teachers’ unions. Along comes the state legislature, and essentially told the teachers’ unions and the school boards of Wisconsin schools, the purchase of medical insurance contracts must be thrown open to ALL carriers of this coverage in Wisconsin, and SURPRISE! Suddenly one of the biggest expenses of local school boards (and a number of state and local government agencies as well) shrank by a wide margin, and budgets at the local and state levels fell by an astonishing amount, greatly aiding in balancing and actually providing a surplus in most venues. The WEA Trust was not driven out of business, but they had to clean up their operations, and start delivering services for the contracted payments they charged. Oddly, their internal balances on the books also showed sharp improvement. Competition has a way of doing that.

CFR = Campaign Finance Reform, the McCain-Feingold bill that allows the creation of Super-Pacs, which are totally unaccountable to the candidates, and have unlimited access to funds.

Candidates, however, are limited in the amount of contributions they may receive from any one source and scope of what they are allowed to bring into the debate.

Admittedly one of the greatest strangulations on freedom of speech this country has seen in recent years, but fortunately, pretty much dead letter since the 2008 Obama Campaign. Unless it is being used against Republicans.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.