28 votes

Former Mayor Laments Defending Obamacare: “I Have Now Learned That I Was Wrong. Very Wrong.”

Sue Klinkhamer has a problem.

It’s called Obamacare.

And the irony of her situation is not lost on her. In a recent email addressed to her former boss, Illinois Congressman Bill Foster, and other Democratic colleagues, she wrote:

“I spent two years defending Obamacare. I had constituents scream at me, spit at me and call me names that I can’t put in print. The congressman was not re-elected in 2010 mainly because of the anti-Obamacare anger. When the congressman was not re-elected, I also (along with the rest of our staff) lost my job. I was upset that because of the health care issue, I didn’t have a job anymore but still defended Obamacare because it would make health care available to everyone at, what I assumed, would be an affordable price. I have now learned that I was wrong. Very wrong.”
http://libertycrier.com/former-mayor-laments-defending-obama...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I almost feel sorry for people who thought Obama was honest

Technically, anyone who did more than 2 minutes of actual research would have known better, but it's still sad to see people get duped over and over and over again. It's like people who think that Cruz guy is pro-liberty or that McCain/Romney would have been different. I think people actually enjoy being lied to and deceived as long as the lies and deception sound nice.

Cyril's picture

More specifically, I'd venture to state firmly:

More specifically, I'd venture to state firmly:

"... as long as the promises for free stuff keeps coming."

'Works every time. 'Was working already for the demagogues of 2000+ years ago, in Rome.

What people still seldom ever realize, even 20 centuries later seemingly, is that there is no such thing as "free stuff", and there has never been:

the cheap bread they might get can only come from the new masters for whom they accept to bend over.

"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.

http://Laissez-Faire.Me/Liberty

"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius

Me too. Almost.

Me too. Almost.

When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.
~ John Muir

What about this Obamacare violation?

"As the Obamacare law was written, the employer mandate was to begin in January 2014. This is what the law said when it was passed by the House and Senate, and signed by President Obama in 2010. However, in July 2013, Obama delayed the employer mandate part of Obamacare until January 2015. Obama did this without approval from Congress. For Obama to change a law that was passed by Congress, without first getting approval from Congress, is a violation of the Presidential oath that Obama took to uphold and defend the Constitution. What Obama did here is an action of a dictator, not an action of a President whose power is limited by a written constitution. If Obama can get away with this, then it sets a horribly dangerous precedent, and means that the President can arbitrarily make any change to any law that has been passed by Congress, without first getting approval from Congress." http://danfromsquirrelhill.wordpress.com/2013/08/03/obamacar...

When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.
~ John Muir

It really is very scary.

Not so much that he tells us to jump, but that we all mindlessly do it.

Obama unilaterally changed law passed by Congress.

You're right. It reminds me of stories of the Holocaust and thinking... why did they let it happen to begin with?

Likely it happened "inch by inch, row by row..." All these small changes towards tyranny that no one reacts to. It's like that frog in the boiling water analogy, if said a different way by Arlo Guthrie: http://www.dailypaul.com/304139/inch-by-inch-row-by-row

When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.
~ John Muir

ASSUME

that should've been her first clue....

idiot

+1 ASSume

makes her the ASS (and every other blind supporter of ObamaScare).

Idiot, to say the least. She deserved to lose her job along with her credibility as a human.

Ammunition -- 9mm - 40s&w - 45acp - .223/5.56x45 -- www.ammopit.com
Bulk Components starting this month also with 223 bullets!

Brought to you by: Sen Reid D-Nev, Rep Pelosi D-Ca and

President Oboma D-Banker.

Free includes debt-free!

Has anyone noticed...

Has anyone noticed that the left is now calling Obamacare something else since it is such a terrible debacle? They were proud to call it that before this happened. It is now ACA or Affordable care act ! This is to distance them and the president from owning it. Do not fall into the trap !!! Call it Obamacare and make the president and the Democrats own it. Calling it ACA only lets them off the hook! You may think that it is a small and unimportant change. But it is a way to manipulate and draw republicans independents and libertarians into appearing to sharing the blame. Don't fall for it!!!!1

RickStone

Oh, yes. It's all in the book 1984.

All the government entities had deceptive names.

Obama pushed this bill on America with all his might. It is his legacy.

You must extract your mind

You must extract your mind from the left right farce. This video posted today by the crew at Storm Clouds can help you understand more about the collusion involved in Obamacare and distractionary politics used by the one party controlling us.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQtxcKT-u_Y

“Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the government take care of him better take a closer look at the American Indian.” ― Henry Ford.

Very good point fyi,

Once people understand that We The People are the losing parting in a game called divide and conquer, and learn to recognize it wherever they look or hear labels, then perhaps we will see the true enemy. It isn't red vs. blue, democrats vs. republicans, elephants vs. donkeys, left vs. right, it is tyranny vs. liberty. Both parties agree 100% on the things most important to this country and most detrimental to the people, our freedoms, and our ability to be a beacon of freedom and neutrality. The politicians and media apply labels so that people will divide up and argue over the less meaningful things that actually get coverage on the idiot box. The truth is, both parties agree with bigger government, more government control of citizens, never ending spending, and perpetual warfare that has nothing to do with the actual defense of this nation. The agree with torture, indefinite detention without charges, and targeting people for death without a trial, simply at the whim of the President. People need to learn to recognize the coin that is flipped when these decisions are made. They need to recognize that there may be an R on one side of the coin, and a D on the other, but it's the same coin either way.

My main way of explaining this to people is simply picturing 100 people in a room. You ask them to raise their hands if they want freedom, liberties, and the government the Constitution lays out, and they all raise their hands. We all agree. Now have the red team put their arm bands on, and the red team puts their arm bands on, and split to either side of the room. Now, all of a sudden, they can't agree on anything. It works like a charm, and it is working on us now. That is one of our main battles. Get people to recognize the game. How can you win if you don't even know you are playing?

Newt Gingrich pointed out another problem with the ACA

On the show crossfire. He said that an unmarried couple both making $30,000 a year would each receive a subsidy for their premiums, however if they were to get married the cost of the insurance would go up $11,000 a year. There are so many unintended consequences from this law that we are just now realizing, the ACA was not thought out well at all.

That sucks. But legal marriage is a scam anyway, so the gov't

can confiscate more / people get less tax relief (that is, until they start having Tax Credit Kids / future tax slaves). There are many examples of how legal marriage in essence fiscally penalizes the participants... from halving potential tax credits / write-offs in cases of property ownership to the scenario you describe above.

Legal marriage offers nothing that can't otherwise be arranged with some careful estate and living will planning, and it costs more in the long run than paying costs for estate planning.

If people need to allow a deity of their choice into legitimizing their relationships / senses of commitment, fine! But why let the thieving government into it?

What would the Founders do?

I see some merit to a legal contract.

And in order to enforce that contract some sort of government would be needed. For example, inheritances. If you hire a lawyer to write out a specific contract giving your estate to your favorite human upon your demise, then you are still relying on the "authorities" to make sure that it happens.

Not everyone can hire a lawyer, so there are basic standards that are followed by the state for those who marry.

I don't disagree with the goverment's role in contract law

enforcement; that was always part of its intended purpose.

The point I attempt to make is that of identifying the inherent penalties of government-sanctioned / "legal" marriage wherein taxation and confiscation by government are involved when you play by their rules (Perhaps bait = convenience / perceived savings on legal expenses [via standards] you mention, plus feeling good because "the law" is being obeyed / accommodated, and stick = getting taxed / denied tax credit opportunities [for individual marriage participants] out the wazoo!).

(As we know, agreements can be drawn up and be binding without involving lawyers as well, of course, except for the fact that the Lawyering Guild has so mutated the art of law into a treacherous, semantics-dependent mine field, so we almost always must grovel before a legal practitioner... or else expose ourselves to grave risks.)

Spiritual marriage is what I advocate (with or without a deity / church involvement / approval--your choice). Side stepping the government scam, while seemingly initially inconvenient, pays off in the long run, I believe.

Please consider: Instead of having these insanely expensive weddings... often almost competitive in their opulence (where "opulence" = high expense relative to income [People sometimes even go into debt for such occasions.]), spend just a fraction of the dough for a lawyer to hammer out inheritance issues, DNR, and power of attorney, etc.

I shudder at how people have become so accustomed to believing that government (marriage license) is what legitimizes marriage--an affair of the heart, for _____'s [insert deity] sake! I mean, there were times in history when marriage ("western" / euro culture, at least) was simply a PROMISE between two people. (Do we need simply to call it something else to side-step government intrusion? Dunno. I know I will / already do. LOL! Perhaps I'm ahead of my time per this Liberty issue....)

And lo: we can always rely on social pressure from each other to keep each other in line / total conformity, especially with regard to marriage... being one of the biggest institutions conducive to the "conform-or-you're-a-loser" mentality!

What would the Founders do?

Or it was well thought out

Or it was well thought out which is why Congress was not allowed to read it first. Another nail in the coffin of America's disastrous economy.

wait a sec

you mean that powerful people who are hell bent on destroying the moral fabric of our society would create a financial incentive to remain unmarried and not have children?

surely you jest :)

...among its 2700 other pages

...among its 2700 other pages of inserted financial discrepancies to hinder (destroy) US economy in its "societal decay".

It's Too late To Turn Back Now!

Cornelius Bros & Sister Rose
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfYkhQblYjY

ecorob's picture

No shiite, Sherlock.

Some people's children!

its 'cos I owe ya, my young friend...
Rockin' the FREE world in Tennessee since 1957!
9/11 Truth.

Cyril's picture

"Lol"... if I dare write.

"Lol"... if I dare write.

(Better late than never, they say.)

"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.

http://Laissez-Faire.Me/Liberty

"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius

Cyril's picture

"Et voilà."

"Et voilà."

"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.

http://Laissez-Faire.Me/Liberty

"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius

IMO

ACA will cause a mass tipping point where thousands will resist out of plain survival and multitudes will change their philosophy having realized they were deceived.

I similarly pledge open defiance to this despotic law, while looking forward to libertarian ideals essentially expanding in our lifetime