In the uproar over chief Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber's admission that deceit was an essential element in getting the so-called Affordable Care Act enacted into law, many observers have criticized Gruber over his obvious elitist contempt for voters.
But leading conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh noticed something else -- was it the "stupidity" of Americans that Gruber and other Obamacare proponents feared, or their intelligence in seeing through the scheme if told the truth about it?
Limbaugh laid out his premise yesterday while dissecting a story about Gruber's remarks in the Washington Post (audio) --
Speaking of Obamacare, the Washington Post is on its best day hapless. The Washington Post is an absolute sorry excuse for what it used to be. But even with that they continue to set new standards for incompetence and bias and just being plain wrong. There's a story by Jose DelReal -- "Obamacare consultant under fire for 'stupidity of the American voter' comment" (headline of the story). Now this reporter obviously is a Democrat with a press pass, which is what most of the New York Times and the Washington Post are. They're Democrats disguised as journalists, give 'em a little press pass and let them go there, pretend to be reporters and so forth. And he sells whatever is left of his journalistic soul in this piece.
Let me give you just one pull quote from it, as they're still trying to put the genie back in the bottle. Now remember, this is for their liberal readers, the Washington Post liberal reader base, New York Times, same thing. So they're trying to calm their reader base, they're trying to calm, it's not a big deal, don't worry, Gruber didn't screw it up for everybody, that's OK, it's OK, trying to calm everybody down. Listen to this quote from the story -- "Gruber's remarks have been greeted by the law's critics as an admission of intentionally deceiving the American public about the law in 2010. But given the context of the remarks, Gruber seems to be speaking specifically about how and why the law's funding mechanisms were framed as they were when the law was being written." This guy thinks he's helping Gruber by saying that and he is hammering another nail in the coffin! Jose, that is exactly the point! People were deceived about the funding mechanism. That was the key, key, key to getting it, how this thing was going to get paid for was the key to it getting passed. Oh, and the lie to Bart Stupak about it not funding abortions.
But the way this thing was being funded, the way it was going to be paid for, the way it wasn't going to cost anybody anything, the way it was going to allow people to keep their doctors and keep their plans and lower their premiums and their deductibles, that was key to this thing getting passed. And he writes, well, if you read the context, given the context of Professor Gruber's remarks, he seems to be speaking specifically about how and why the law's funding mechanisms were framed, were lied about. This guy's trying to get this guy out of a jam and he digs a deeper hole. But remember, he's dealing with his own liberal Democrat reader base and they are looking for holes to be dragged out of, so they'll take anything that they can get. (Reading again from story, paraphrasing) -- the economist Jonathan Gruber, one of the regime's consultants -- he was not a consultant, he was the architect, Jose -- is under attack from conservatives for comments he made last year in which he seemingly said, and then he quotes "the stupidity of the American voter" -- seemingly!? -- seemingly said?! -- he didn't seemingly, he stated! -- unambiguously that they had to lie about this thing because of "the stupidity" of the American people.And actually, if you examine that, I think really what he's (saying), we had to lie because of the intelligence of the American people. We had to lie to them, otherwise they would have seen what we intended to do. That means they're pretty smart when you get right down to it. And that's what bothers them. Now that's not to say that Gruber and his ilk on the left and the Democrat party do not consider you and American voters to be a bunch of stiffs and stupid. Doesn't mean they don't still hold you in contempt. But what he's really saying is, we had to lie -- we had to lie -- because they're too stupid? No, they're too smart actually. They would see what really is intended here unless we lied, so you relied what you thought was their stupid gullibility to believe your lie, is what you were relying on. And it's 2010, so there's still some residual messianic attitudes about Obama in 2010. So that's what they were relying on. Anyway, it's CYA time today at the Washington Post.
A better example of stupidity -- airily boasting of deception to pass the most significant law of the last half-century while speaking at a public event nearly certain to be recorded, and not expecting those boasts to make their way into the public record. Suffice it to say, had a former member of the Bush administration described the run-up to war with Iraq in the same cynical manner, it would not have taken 13 months to become news. More like 13 hours.
