The three pillars of Obamacare

Charles Krauthammer:

Every disaster has its moment of clarity. Physicist Richard Feynman dunks an O-ring into ice water and everyone understands instantly why the shuttle Challenger exploded. This week, the ObamaCare O-ring froze for all the world to see:

Hundreds of thousands of cancellation letters went out to people who had been assured a dozen times by the president that "if you like your health care plan, you'll be able to keep your health care plan. Period."

The cancellations lay bare three pillars of ObamaCare: (1) mendacity, (2) paternalism and (3) subterfuge.

(1) Those letters are irrefutable evidence that Obama's repeated you-keep-your-coverage claim was false.

Why were they sent out? Because ObamaCare renders illegal (with exceedingly narrow "grandfathered" exceptions) the continuation of any insurance plan deemed by Washington regulators not to meet their arbitrary standards for adequacy.

Example: No maternity care? You are terminated.

So a law designed to cover the uninsured is now throwing far more people off their insurance than it can possibly be signing up on the nonfunctioning insurance exchanges.

Indeed, most of the 19 million people with individual insurance will have to find new and likely more expensive coverage. And that doesn't even include the additional millions who are sure to lose their employer-provided coverage.

That's a lot of people. That's a pretty big lie.

But perhaps Obama didn't know. Maybe the bystander president was as surprised by this as he claims to have been by the IRS scandal, the Associated Press and James Rosen phone logs, the failure of the ObamaCare website, the premeditation of the Benghazi attacks, the tapping of Angela Merkel's phone — i.e., the workings of the federal government of which he is the nominal head.

I'm skeptical. It's not as if the ObamaCare plan-dropping is an obscure regulation. It's at the heart of Obama's idea of federally regulated and standardized national health insurance.

Still, how could he imagine getting away with a claim sure to be exposed as factually false? The same way he maintained for two weeks that false narrative about Benghazi. He figured he'd get away with it.
...

There is more.

At his heart Obama is a conman who believes he can persuade people that truth is not as important as achieving his objective whatever it might be.   When caught in a false statement he constructs an explanation that is intended to make the victim look like they over looked an important and missing caveat.  I have prosecuted con men and that is exactly the way they reacted when confronted with the truth.