Jonathan Gruber

Jonathan Gruber, Who Claimed "Lack of Transparency" Was Critical to Passing Obamacare, Now Says the Republican Strategy is to "Confuse" People About the Law

|

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Earlier this week, video surfaced of Jonathan Gruber, one of the authors of and key influences on the Affordable Care Act, explaining that "lack of transparency" was "critical" to passing the health care bill.

The bill, he explained, was written in a "tortured" way to avoid a Congressional Budget Office score that would have revealed its true costs, and policy consequences that were sure to be disliked were masked in order to hide them from the public.

"Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage," he said, "And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really really critical for the thing to pass." Although he said he wished that the law and its passage could have been transparent, he preferred the lack of transparency to the alternative, which would have been for the law to not pass. 

Essentially, Gruber said that the public was knowingly misled in order to achieve his preferred policy ends, and that this was both necessary and acceptable—a statement that was especially revealing given his flip-flopping interpretation of a provision of the law detailing the treatment of its insurance subsidies. 

But Gruber now insists that Republican critics of the law are the ones whose "master strategy" is to "confuse people" about the law and its effects. 

In a follow-up appearance on Boston TV station WGBH-TV yesterday, Gruber went on to accuse Republican critics of the law of attempting to tear down the law through public obfuscation. Confusing people about the law, he said, was part of the Republican "master strategy." Here's the bit, via RealClearPolitics: 

WGBH-TV HOST: All the talk, you've heard more of it than I did over the past two years, about what was going to happen when we finally got a Republican Congress. Will they try to dismantle this?

GRUBER: They will not try to dismantle the fundamental core, which is the three pillars on which it stands. They will try to go after these peripherial pieces, but I think that the much bigger risk is the Supreme Court case than the Congress at this point.

HOST: Are they hearing from constituents? They must be. There must be people who wouldn't have any healthcare were it not for this?

GRUBER: I think that this comes to the master strategy of the Republican party, which is to confuse people enough about the law so that they don't understand that the subsidies they're getting is because of the law. 

Perhaps surprisingly, Gruber is not supportive of this purported strategy, even though confusing people about the Obamacare's effects in order to pass the law is a tactic he previously endorsed. His enthusiasm for non-transparent political processes apparently does not extend to his opponents. 

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

139 responses to “Jonathan Gruber, Who Claimed "Lack of Transparency" Was Critical to Passing Obamacare, Now Says the Republican Strategy is to "Confuse" People About the Law

  1. “GRUBER: I think that this comes to the master strategy of the Republican party, which is to confuse people enough about the law so that they don’t understand that the subsidies they’re getting is because of the law.”

    ‘FREE SHIT! FREE SHIT! FREE SHIT! (pay no attention to that guy over there…)’
    This guy is truly sleazy.

    1. Hey, anybody can have a “speak-o” or two…or three…

      /Prog

    2. I usually don’t feel truly violent towards anybody unless seriously provoked, but this is one asshole I would just love to beat the living shit out of. The combination of smug, mendaciousness, and feeling of superiority over the ‘rubes’ is just rage-inducing.

      1. I second that, especially considering all the grief about insurance I’ve had to go through in the last 12 months.

      2. “The combination of smug, mendaciousness, and feeling of superiority over the ‘rubes’ is just rage-inducing.”

        It’s goddam insulting, especially since he’s shown himself to be not real bright.

        1. It constantly amazes me just how horrible and small these sorts of people actually are. His ability to lie so boldly and with such conviction is not what is remarkable about him. Everyone lies and some people are very good liars. It is the way he lies that is so remarkably horrible. A con man will lie to your face with complete conviction. The con man, however knows he is lying. This guy in contrast will lie to your face and be so deep in rationalization that he doesn’t seem to even be aware he is lying. He actually thinks he is telling you the truth in both instances. He completely lacks any sense of imagination or self awareness other than his utter commitment to politics.

        2. Uh not to mention that this fucker has made at least $800k in consulting over this law.

        3. The funny part is that the people being duped must’ve been all democrats, because conservative and libertarians never had any illusions about Obamacare. We knew it was a ripoff all along.

          1. Johnimo|11.12.14 @ 8:07PM|#
            “The funny part is that the people being duped must’ve been all democrats, because conservative and libertarians never had any illusions about Obamacare. We knew it was a ripoff all along.”

            This needs to be put in bold, all caps on every story about this scum-bag.
            The Tonys of the world bought that line of happy horseshit; no one on the side away from Pelosi was suckered in.

      3. Count me on the “beat the shit out of Gruber” list.

        Hell, I wanted to put a baseball bat to Jonathan Gruber’s face before wanting to put a baseball bat to Jonathan Gruber’s face was cool.

        I feel like such a hipster now.

        1. Need to find out what pub he frequents and goad him into a confrontation.

      4. Indeed, WTF. He’s an “intellectual” who thinks he can redesign a huge part of the economy using an insanely complicated Rube Goldberg mechanism. I want to strap him to a chair, Clockwork Orange style, and make him memorize Systemantics by John Gall.

        1. He’s a canonical example of the Fatal Conceit. Just like Herbert Hoover or any other “progressive”, he’s convinced that he’s smart enough to tell other people what to do.

          -jcr

      5. Well, hopefully he’ll be called to testify under oath before a congressional committee. Will be amusing to watch him squirm.

        1. ‘Will be amusing to watch him LIE.’

          I think this is closer to what we’ll see.

          1. Oh, the testifying is often just political theatre. Everyone knows what he said. The opbject of the game is to get them to admit they lied in previous public statements.

            And if he pushes it too far they can hold him in contempt.

        2. If I was questioning him, I would make sure to play the clips in public first.

        3. “What difference, at this point, does it make?”

        4. “Well, hopefully he’ll be called to testify under oath before a congressional committee. Will be amusing to watch him squirm.”

          It no longer matters. Congress charged Louis Lerner with contempt on May 7th. Then they then proceeded to “request criminal prosecution of Lerner for various alleged violations, including misleading investigators and exposing confidential taxpayer information.”

          http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..-congress/

          And the Justice Department has done nothing.

          1. Yeah but Holder is out and this new light of justice Loretta Lynch, is put forth to lead us to the promise land.

            She’ll make it right.

          2. Yeah but Holder is out and this new light of justice Loretta Lynch, is put forth to lead us to the promise land.

            She’ll make it right.

            1. You know it’s true because I said it twice.

              1. I think you have to say it three times to make it happen.

    3. It is particularly rich that he is now complaining that a law drafted (by him and his cronies) to be confusing is being opposed because it is confusing.

    4. He should get a bullet right between the eyes.

    5. Yep! “German (Gr?ber) and Jewish: name for someone who lived in a depression” http://www.ancestry.com/name-origin?surname=gruber

  2. Yes, please don’t confuse the ignorant plebes by telling them what’s actually in the law or all of the dirty underhanded ways in which it got passed, it’s better kept on a need to know basis, and only TOP MEN need to know.

  3. GRUBER: I think that this comes to the master strategy of the Republican party

    “Forget what I stated on CAMERA, twice, about making the law confusing on purpose, and rather believe me now when I say it is the Republicans who are confusing you!”

  4. As loathsome as Progressive politicians are, progressive academics are worst. It must take and epic amount of self delusion, mendacity and rationalization for this clown to get through the day. What is remarkable about Gruber and people like him is not their dishonesty. There are dishonest people everywhere. What is remarkable about them is their ability to be so blatantly dishonest while at the same time genuinely believing they are honest and selfless public servants.

    There should be a team of psychiatrists studying this asshole as some kind of captive case study on the limits of human rationalization and self delusion.

    1. “Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage,” he said, “And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really really critical for the thing to pass.”

      “I think that this comes to the master strategy of the Republican party, which is to confuse people enough about the law so that they don’t understand that the subsidies they’re getting is because of the law.”

      The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them… To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just as long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies ? all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth.

      1. I assume your last paragraph is a quote from Orwell?

        1. Yes.

          1. See my comment above about the difference between this guy and an ordinary con man. I think Orwell explains the difference I was getting at and why people like Gruber are just so hideous.

            1. The last paragraph of “Boomeritis” by Ken Wilber, himself a committed prog, explains this mindset to a Tee.

              I wish everyone would read it.

      2. In agreement. My thought while reading this: “1984 was not intended as an instruction manual.”

        1. It was a documentary of these people’s minds and fantasies. Orwell spent years as a committed leftist. He knew his subject very well.

    2. And don’t forget that there is almost total confirmation bias within academia. They only talk with people who see the world the way they do. Their “understanding” of anyone who holds a differing ideology comes from people who hold a progressive world view telling them what their opponents believe.

      This is how you get Thomas Frank being celebrated for writing What’s the Matter with Kansas? of that journalist last month complaining that libertarians never address police violence.

      1. Thomas Sowell and Charles Murray have written a lot of good stuff about this. These people live in a bubble. They can’t comprehend the fact that people who disagree with them, or even non-academics are intelligent enough to order their lives as they see fit. They see most people not as unique human beings who have decision making skills and unique information about their own lives, but malleable statistics.

        1. Well this is a basic, albeit false, tenet of pedagogy to begin with. For someone to go through 12 forced years of school, to then come to the conclusion that school is where they want to spend the majority of their adult lives, is indicative of someone who cannot deal with life – they are both control freaks and chicken-shits.

  5. The other thing to remember about people like Gruber is that they are terrified of losing access to powerful people. No matter what policies the Democrats embrace going forward, they won’t be calling on anyone associated with the drafting of Obamacare to be be the egghead face of it. This means that Gruger is facing a future of being just another egghead at MIT. He will no longer be getting calls from the President or going to Capitol Hill and meeting with important people. He will stuck in his office teaching snot noes undergraduates and trying to get his GA’s to navigate doing their thesis work. At best he will be doing the odd phone interview for the local NPR station or getting the odd talking head gig on one of the lower rated cable shows. But that is it. That is a pretty grim future for a guy who just four years ago thought he was going to go down as one of the great top men in history.

    1. You may be right, and this may be too horrible to contemplate. Gruber could be like Paul Erlich. A horrible person, wrong about everything, but STILL listened to and respected by a more than trivial segment of the population.

      1. Erlich always had a following but he spent a lot of time in the wilderness where he didn’t write best selling books or get invited on talk shows or called upon to advise Presidents. Gruber is no doubt set in a comfortable life as an MIT leftist. His days of being an actual important person, however, are probably over. I have a feeling that prospect is killing him or I least I hope it is. Bastard.

        1. Maybe I’m just feeling really cynical about humanity today, but it’s possible 10 years hence that Gruber comes back as an elder statesman, an architect of the health care system, a wise man that we turn to to rescue us.

          Perhaps driving my mood was the relentlessly negative report on NBC news last night about the new aluminum F-150. What, in my view, should be celebrated as a real innovation was portrayed as a possibly company killing roll of the dice. Even the good news is being portrayed as bad news, it seems.

    2. Someone out there with snippity-snap laptop video editing skills outta CG his face onto Alan Rickman’s as he plummets to his death from the top of the Takagi building.

      1. Best Villian ever. Yes, even better than the Bain.

    3. I agree, this fucktard shot his load like other fucktards of his ilk. But he will never be shamed like he should be. I’m not a friend of capital punishment but could make an exception for this level of stupid.

  6. They had both houses of Congress but couldn’t take a week or two to hold some hearings about what the bill contained? Maybe get some indication of what it would cost and require to implement and how it would affect people?

    Assholes had to ram this giant piece of shit through as fast as possible because it wouldn’t stand up to minimal scrutiny even by Democrats.

  7. There should be a team of psychiatrists torturers studying working over this asshole as some kind of captive case study on the limits of human rationalization and self delusion karmic payback for the mendacity employed to fuck over the American people in the name of his progressive agenda.

    FIFY

    1. I’m in!

  8. Just remember, every time someone suggests putting Top. Men. in charge of something, this is the kind of person who will be involved. This is the kind of guy who will make important decisions for you. I cannot think of a better case for shrinking government.

    1. Yup. Honestly, I want to save the Gruber clip for the next time someone suggests we rely on the goodwill of assholes like him to manage our lives.

      1. Argh, the comments. People with full bellies in safe homes with warm beds saying, “what has capitalism ever done for us”.

        1. Even Marx acknowledged capitalism’s successes. On the other hand, he thought it was unsustainable and that he could devise a better system. Didn’t work out too well…

          1. Well, it was better for the talentless-but-vicious hacks at the top of the hierarchy. So, better for people like Marx. And Gruber, Chait, Pelosi, Bitchtits, Klein, etc.

            1. I wouldn’t call Marx talentless by any means. He just made an enormous error in judgment and did not heed the warnings of critics like Bakunin.

              1. Marx was a loser at capitalism by any measure. And when losers lose the game, they seek to change the rules so that idiots like them can win. See also: anyone who believes in Marx’s nonsense.

      2. Also, his student Thomas Sowell has a great deal to say about this type of “intellectual”.

    2. I’d have to agree. The “social justice warriors” I have come across tend to be hypocritical and duplicitous. There are some who are genuine and try to live up to their purported principles, but they are pretty rare.

    3. I’d suggest finding a GOP version of Gruber, noted liar, and asking liberals if they would be okay with this guy writing policy. But they wouldn’t get my point.

  9. Does anyone else find Gruber’s use of the phrase “master strategy” a sly attempt to conjure images of Republicans gathered around a mahogany table in their Hugo Boss-designed uniforms and polished jackboots pounding the table in agreement? Or maybe it’s just subconscious?

    1. To me, it conjures the image from The Simpsons cartoon with all these Republican operatives which include Mr. Burns and Dracula, gathered around a long table and discussing world domination. And I believe that is exactly what a person like Gruber believes.

      1. Well, that did explaine Steve Gutenberg’s career.

      2. Gruber is afraid of having things named after Reagan?

    2. No it is not. Remember stupid, refined people are socialists. Really stupid, brutish people are anti-Semites. Both groups share a common vernacular. It is just that the former are a bit more subtle about it.

      Gruber is in the former group. So he is not going to go on a big rant about the cabal of Jews running the world. He does, however, share the same vernacular as the people who do go on such rants. So hear he is just ranting about the secret cabal of Republicans who are conspiring to rule and ruin the world. It is a slightly more subtle and less brutish expression of the same theme; that there are dark unseen forces working to undermine the good of the people.

    3. It brings to my mind that session where Nancy Pelosi literally locked the door against Republican committee members… what was that? I remember it back from 2008 or 2009.

      1. there’s always this.
        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..uests.html

        can you imagine if Cheney did this.

    4. Please, Republicans don’t wear Hugo Boss anymore, that’s plebeian stuff. J. Press FTW.

      1. Did I not lay the schutzstaffel imagery on thick enough? 🙂

    5. I laugh at the very thought of Republicans having any connection to a “master strategy.”

      1. It only makes sense if that strategy is “get power so that we can immediately lose it.”

  10. ” the master strategy of the Republican party”

    THESE EVIL PEOPLE ARE GOING TO TRY AND PRESENT YOU WITH FACTS RATHER THAN SOME HORSESHIT ABOUT “FEELS” AND FREE-STUFF!! YOU’RE TOO STUPID FOR *THAT*!! DONT FALL FOR THEIR REFERENCES TO ‘ACTUAL LANGUAGE OF LEGISLATION’ OR ‘LACK OF DISCRETIONARY AUTHORITY BY AGENCIES TO MAKE SHIT UP AS THEY GO ALONG’?!! WHY WORRY ABOUT THAT WHEN WE HAVE CANDY?? LOOK HERE – SHINY THINGS!??! ALSO, REMEMBER = WE’RE WITH THE CELEBRITIES AND THE GAYS AND THE RAPPERS, AND THEY’RE REDNECKS AND JESUS FREAKS AND OIL BARONS!? WHY WONT YOU LOVE ME???

  11. He has ‘evolved’ on the issue since then. Cut him some slack.

  12. “There must be people who wouldn’t have any healthcare were it not for this?”

    There just must be? Sure there are, you weasely little cocksucker. That is why you have been interviewing them and publishing their stories.

    1. For a legislative program whose principal ‘perceived benefit’ was to get a few million already-eligible people to sign up for Medicaid (which had been historically under-enrolled)…

      …it would seem to be the most over-blown, technically mis-managed, and inefficient ‘sign up’ program in history.

      See, because it should cost billions of dollars and hugely coercive legislation simply to get *people to sign up for benefits that are already offered under previously existing legislation*

      Because, like, it was *totally necessary* to fuck over the vast majority of middle class households so that Democrats could claim a ‘win’ by pointing to all the new Medicaid users – a program which both is among the most wasteful ever devised, and has health outcomes barely superior to ‘living in a cave’

      1. The reason why people don’t sign up for medicaide is that it doesn’t pay for much and the law already requires hospitals to treat poor people regardless of ability to pay. Hospitals already were doing everything they could to prop poor people to sign up for medicaide so they could recoupe at least some of their loses in caring for them.

        The other thing is medicaide benefits come with a ton of strings attached and basically require the person getting them to turn their life over to the supervision of a social worker. Of course God forbid we help the poor get medical care by just giving them the money to pay for some of it. Nope, any program for the poor must also be an employment program for feminist social workers.

        The most tragic comic aspect of this entire thing is that an “economist” at MIT was a primary drafter of a bill whose central assumption was the way to lower medical costs in this country was to get more people to sign up for programs and insurance policies that enabled other people to pay for their health care. Contemplate that for a moment.

    2. There must be people who wouldn’t have any healthcare were it not for this?

      Nope.

      Every single human being present in the United States can go to any hospital ER and get healthcare services without having insurance or any ability to pay.

  13. So……Gruber is projecting ?
    That’s always the answer, isn’t it.

    1. To some degree. But he is not doing it intentionally. It is more that Gruber has lost touch with the ability to see any kind of objective truth. He only sees politics at this point.

  14. Now scumbag has a face we can all refer to.

    Wow. What a piece of lying, shameless shit this guy is.

    Does he raise children?

    1. It is amazing how these assholes like Gruber and Thomas Frank always have glasses and the same smug self assured look on their faces. It is like a uniform or something. Is having bad eyesight somehow make you more likely to be a completely mendacious and awful person?

      1. John, I think you’re getting a bit carried away. Individuals like Friedman and Hayek wore glasses too. I don’t think poor eyesight has anything to do with what kind of person you are haha.

        1. Jeffry Dahmer and the BTK killer disagree. Also the countless police sketches I’ve seen of pederastes with those same thick plastic glasses also disagree. Have you even watched to catch a predator?

            1. You should be publicly flogged for posting the worst quality link i have ever seen.

              1. I know, but that was the only clip I could find after a quick search. I was a bit surprised there wasn’t something better.

        2. I was being facetious. It is just remarkable how they all tend to look alike. You would think there would be one who had twenty twenty eye sight and played tennis in college or something. But they always seem to be the same breed of silly little smug nerd.

      2. Oh jesus…there was picture a few years ago of some beardo professor or pundit with his tweed jacket and his bicycle and and enormous scarf…who was that…just the perfect stereotype of the smug, pretentious academic…anyone remember ?

  15. “Gruber” needs to become a noun like “McCarthy” (as in Joe). Gruberite, Gruberism, etc. To the bat-poles, commenters!

    1. Or a noun like “Santorum”.

    2. How about a verb?

      “How’d the sales pitch go?”

      “Totally Grubered it! I feel like I need a shower, but at least I can now afford that condo I bought last year!”

  16. Jack Stroud is not going to like that dude.

    http://www.anon-way.tk

    1. Like anyone here gives a fuck about Jack Stroud.

      1. Who is Jack Stroud?

        1. A rapist and murderer of women and children.

  17. By the way, we do know there’s a SECOND video of him calling American voters “stupid”? Megyn Kelly played it last night.

    1. Use Alynskite tactics against these assholes. They so often revealed to be nasty horrible people when subjected to scrutiny. Personalize Obamacare in the form of this guy and go after him. Make his name and face a national punchline. Force Democrats to either die on the hill defending him or throw him overboard leaving a warning to the next academic asshole who wants to treat the American public like lab rats.

      1. John, you know Gruber was speaking technically when he used terms like “stupid” and “lack of transparency”. Obviously you hate him for the color of Obama’s skin.

      2. “Ahh, I believe I addressed that, Jim. Yes, Candy Crowley?”

        –Hillary
        –Obama
        –Earnest
        –Gruber

      3. That’s not what will happen. The lesson they will learn is to just never speak the truth about their misdeeds when there might be a recorder running. They will never learn the lesson you want them to learn.

        1. Grubers smug hubris kept him from keeping his mouth shut.

          He had to let everyone know he wrote this purposely complicated monstrocity the way it is on purpose and what that purpose was meant to achieve.

          There was no way he couldn’t brag to his fellow progs for them to know he was prog #1.

          This probably got him laid by some SJW coed like he scored the winning touchdown.

  18. We need to create a leper colony for professors. We can start with Gruber and Michael Mann.

    1. Don’t forget Krugnuts.

    2. Can we keep Walter Williams here?

    3. Mann? I rather enjoyed Heat. Are you sure he has to go?

    4. We need to create a leper colony for professors. We can start with Gruber and Michael Mann.

      Ok, but if we commit all these crackpots to that colony, who will we have left to make fun of?

      Also I’m worried they’ll eventually reproduce, creating super-crackpots. Kinda like reverse eugenics.

      1. Also I’m worried they’ll eventually reproduce, …

        Cue Jurassic Park joke.

      2. Mann will use his superior intellect to manipulate the naive indigenous population, eventually escaping from his exile, gaining control of newly developed terraforming technology and threatening the very existence of Earth itself.

        Maaaaaaaaann!

        1. Either that, or they’ll all die of exposure because none of them knows how to start a fire.

  19. There are a few people who can pull off the Sling Blade haircut. Jonathan Gruber is not one of them.

  20. Jonathon “The Ends Justify The Means” Gruber

  21. Jonathon “Soon to Appear as Hans’ and Simon’s Long-Lost Brother in Die Hard 6: Die Hardest” Gruber.

  22. As much as I loathe Gruber, I have to give him props for saying one obvious truth in public – voters in the aggregate ARE fucking stupid.

    This is even more true since we gave any dipshit with a pulse the right to vote. Had we kept the right to vote to free-and-clear landholders (and indeed, limited taxation to them as well) people like Gruber never would be in a position to affect national policy.

    1. I don’t the voters are stupid. They didn’t put this law into effect. Congress did. The voters have punished the people who passed this severely. Of the 60 Senators who voted for it, 28 of them are no longer in office. An equal or larger percentage of House members are out as well.

      The voters never believed this lie. It was the Democrats in Congress who either believed it or thought the voters would. They are the ones who passed it and have seen their political careers end for doing so.

      If voters were as dumb as this smug little shit thinks, the Democrats wouldn’t be facing the political wilderness right now.

      1. ” Of the 60 Senators who voted for it, 28 of them are no longer in office. ”

        And some of the ones left some haven’t come up for vote yet.

  23. This is why it was so annoying to see Bailey and other Reason writers jump on the bandwagon criticizing conservative “anti-intellectualism” since ’08. Gruber is the epitome of the acceptable intellectual in policy making. Contemptuous of the public, arrogant in the rightness of their policies and ruthless and mendacious in seeing them implemented.

    1. Sadly, a few of the writers here at Reason are just as dishonest and mendacious as Gruber is.

    2. I went back to college for a few classes a few years ago. I had an instructor who made the “Americans are anti-intellectual” statement. I otherwise liked the guy so I didn’t savage him, but I pointed out that most “public intellectuals” are bitterly elitist navel-gazing morons who obsess over things of nearly zero import to anyone not also residing in an ivory tower. The “little people” who represent the overwhelming majority of the population generally don’t like being sneered at by some smug know-it-all douchebag, hence America’s general distrust and dislike of “intellectuals.”

      There is also the fact that intellectuals frequently hold positions that are not just wrong, but comically so, it kind of discredits the title of “intellectual” when you have people like Chomsky and Ehrlich still running around spouting easily disproven nonsense.

    3. Gruber is not an intellectual. He is a sophist. His job consists of concocting absurd pretenses to excuse power-grabbing politicians’ crimes.

      -jcr

    4. This is why it was so annoying to see Bailey and other Reason writers jump on the bandwagon criticizing conservative “anti-intellectualism” since ’08

      Conservatives are indeed anti-intellectual. The reason you find that annoying is because you think of intellectualism a good thing. But intellectualism isn’t a celebration of truth, reason, understanding, or science; it’s a celebration of ideas for their own sake.

      Engineers and scientists are not intellectuals per se. Social “scientists”, politicians, authors, and historians are intellectuals.

  24. This fellow is lauding laws based on how opaque the law is to the legislators who are voting for it?

    How come this douche isn’t dancing like danny deever?

  25. In the interview, did he as for jailed members of the Volksfrei movement to be released?

    Oh…wrong Gruber?

    I wouldn’t mind if he died like Hans did.

    1. *did he ask*

    2. I think in the interview he said, “Have no illusions. We are in charge. So, decide now, each of you. And please remember: we have left nothing to chance.”

  26. Republicans are confusing people. They’re telling the truth about Obamacare (which Democrats always decry as dirty tricks). In fact, just about every bad thing they said would happen if Obamacare passed has occurred. They’re just reminding people of what they said. Republicans said the CBO score was bullshit and the Dems were gaming the system. They said people would not be able to keep their health care or their doctor under the bill and that prices would go up. They said it would add to the deficit. They said it would raise taxes. They said it would destroy businesses. They said it cost people their jobs or force them into part time work. They said it would empower an unaccountable government bureaucracy. They said it was a payoff to insurance companies. They said quality and availability of doctors would go down. They said it would infringe upon our religious freedom, fund abortions and reduce individual liberty.

    All of these facts must really be confusing to people who actually believed the lying sleazeball Democrats, but at least now they have some clarity.

    1. Real American|11.12.14 @ 7:02PM|#
      “Republicans are confusing people. They’re telling the truth about Obamacare (which Democrats always decry as dirty tricks). In fact, just about every bad thing they said would happen if Obamacare passed has occurred.”

      On another thread:
      “Johnimo|11.12.14 @ 8:07PM|#
      The funny part is that the people being duped must’ve been all democrats, because conservative and libertarians never had any illusions about Obamacare. We knew it was a ripoff all along.”

      Gruber is bragging about gaming the ‘stupid f’ing voters’! He’s right! Every one of those stupid F’ing Dem voters got gamed by Gruber’s lies. They swallowed it hook, line and sinker!
      Those of us who do not think that Pelosi is worth a can of spit were somehow not fooled.
      Gruber needs to define the sub-set of voters who are “stupid” enough to buy his BS.

      1. Kind of like goobers grubers ?

  27. Is Gruber angling for a column at the NYT?
    He’s certainly as screwed up as Krugman.

  28. Mr Gruber hasn’t figured out that the “accuse your opponent of doing what you are” tactic only works as a peremptory strike, not a reactionary one.

  29. I can now put a face to Ellsworth Tuley.

    1. It’s Toohey…Elsworth M. Toohey.

  30. Gee, I wonder where this guy learned this ‘rule for radicals’?

  31. which is to confuse people enough about the law so that they don’t understand that the subsidies they’re getting is because of the law.

    We understand all about the subsidies. That is why we don’t want this law.

  32. Someone makes sense of this for me, please.

    http://www.motherjones.com/kev…..ammered-it

    Here’s a part I really don’t get.

    “First, he noted that it was important to make sure the mandate wasn’t scored as a tax by the CBO. Indeed it was, and this was a topic of frequent discussion while the bill was being debated. We can all argue about whether this was an example of the CBO scoring process being gamed, but it has nothing to do with the American voter. Rather, it has everything to do with the American congressman, who’s afraid to vote for anything unless it comes packaged with a nice, neat bow bearing an arbitrary, predetermined price tag.”

    Gruber says the law was written in a confusing way so it won’t be interpreted as a tax – or something. But because we were debating it before it was passed, what Gruber says isn’t anything new or even controversial.

    OK.

  33. Do these libs really not understand the definition of “hypocrisy”? And do that not understand that “the other side” can play just as dirty as they do? Boo phuckin’ hoo for them! It really must suck when your own strategy is used against you.

  34. It’s unbelievable, like something out of a novel. A dwarfish homunculus lies to impose a predatory program on the healthy who he has said should be penalized for their lucky genes….

  35. My best friend’s mother-in-law makes $85 /hour on the internet . She has been out of work for 5 months but last month her pay was $16453 just working on the internet for a few hours.
    Visit this website ????? http://www.jobsfish.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.