Sunday, November 16, 2014

Six and Counting

By now you've heard of Jon Gruber, the MIT economist who has bragged about getting Obamacare passed by tricking and lying to the public.  He says he "misspoke", but he didn't "misspeak" once, or twice, or even three times, but six times that we know of with evidence:
Jake Tapper of CNN uncovered another video where Gruber celebrates his subterfuge — this time, in hiding whom the so-called “Cadillac Tax” on employee based insurance plans would hit...

The level of cynicism and arrogance it takes to pull this off is astonishing. You want to reach into the video and wipe that supercilious smirk off his face as he gleefully recounts how he bamboozled Americans.

Republicans should call this jerk to testify and then make him squirm by playing back each and every video.
Video links are embedded in the story above.

Hold on there, you say.  Who is this guy?  What relationship with the White House does/did he have?  If he's not affiliated with the White House or the Democratic Party, what he says is irrelevant.  And I'd agree with that.  That's why I offer this link from, and the following screen shot:

President Obama is trying, and failing, to distance himself from Gruber:
"The fact that an adviser who was never on our staff expressed an opinion that I completely disagree with in terms of the voters is not a reflection on the actual process that was run," Obama told reporters at a news conference following the G-20 summit in Brisbane, Australia.

Obama was responding to a recently discovered videotape featuring Jonathan Gruber, an MIT professor and outside adviser of health care. Gruber said the Obama administration obscured the financing of the law in order to get it passed...

From Politico:
"While Gruber was not a staffer, he was a paid consultant whose models were used to help assess the impact of various policy changes being considered as part of health care legislation. Official logs show he visited the White House about a dozen times between 2009 and this year.  (boldface mine--Darren)

"Despite Obama's dismissive tone toward Gruber, the president has acknowledged that some of his own statements about the law were ill-advised, in particular his repeated promises that if Americans liked their health care plans they could keep them. In fact, many plans were deemed inadequate under the law, leading people to get notices that their plans were being canceled."
The contempt in which they hold the public is obvious, it's strong, and it's disgusting.  This story is further evidence that going back to the very beginning of the Obama Administration there has been nothing but lies, lack of transparency, and naked partisanship in the pursuit of ideological goals.

This is what you get when you elect someone based not on accomplishments but merely on skin color.  You get someone not up to the job.  It's even worse when you elect a Marxist with no moral compass.  Top it off by electing a narcissist.

Update, 11/25/14:  Listen to Gruber in his own words:


maxutils said...

I find it more offensive that he claims to be an economist.

allen (in Michigan) said...

Mr. Gruber's smugness and conceit are central to the left-wing mind. Not that you can't be a conservative and evince smugness and conceit but your generally viewed as an ass-hat and display that smugness and conceit despite being told off. With lefties it's a necessary part of their character.

maxutils said...

I didn't read the rationale for taxing employer given tax benefits; and, I must say -- Gruber, despite being a smug jerk and a liar who sucked up money from both the Feds and several states? He's partially right. Employer provided health care IS a form of income, and there's no reason NOT to tax it as such; it absolutely lessens competition and choice; and the only reason why it's so prevalent now is that it was given to employees as an incentive in reaction to wage freezes -- another bad idea. And, evidence that it is really income. On the other hand? His statement that this is designed to make taxes less regressive by taxing employers is completely idiotic … Regressive means that the poor are disproportionately affected more than the rich … so, let's compare a rich person to just a medium income level worker working for the same company. Both, presumably, have the same company provided plan (although the rich may elect to add to it, but that's their business). So, if you have the same value on the health care plan for both people, it's a much greater proportion of the mid level worker's income than it is the rich one. The firm will pass on the cost of the tax in the form of lower salaries, since they know everyone else faces the same rule. So, not only are you taxing the less well off person on a greater percentage of his income, but at 40%, you're taxing it at a much higher rate than you would if you eliminated the plan and gave the equivalent in income: which is exactly what SHOULD happen. I really hate this man.

maxutils said...

At first. I didn't read them at first. Obviously, I read them later. And I also am only clarifying that so that I can also bring up the fact that Obama, today, said "I just heard about this." Again. Despite meeting with the man, and being caught saying he took liberally from his ideas back in 2005 … At some point, Obama supporters must get tired of hearing that the first time their President heard something important was from week old news reports … don't they?

Darren said...

Apparently not. They *want* it to be true. I guess they'd rather have an incompetent as president than someone who's a serial liar--but that really is the sum total of their choices.