Has Obama Been Reawarding His Supporters And Punishing His Opponents By Skirting The Rule Of Law?

[Hwithloew]

Sounds like another unsubstantiated republican allegation, made for political purposes but utterly without substance.Remember the republican mantra - when you don't have facts, make something up. Karl Rove was great at that. So was Goebbels.   ElBanditoRoso 31 months ago

[Gallagher]

Oh no - not another re-run of the waiver debate. This 'question' has now been asked about five times in the last couple of weeks and the answer depends entirely on your politics.The Washington Examiner, which is the free handout newspaper source for this, is owned by Philip Anschutz, the conservative billionaire; he founded it specifically to form a right wing counter weight to the Washington Post and only commissions articles by conservative columnists. And he's on the record as saying that btw.The logic behind this argument seems to be as follows:- The process of how and why waivers are awarded is too complicated for anyone to understand in less than five seconds(which is the average period that people spend looking at a headline); - So calling the process corrupt is an easy win, because the alternative suggestion that people are too prejudiced/lazy to understand it(which doesn't mean agree with it per se) is not one anyone will like;- Corruption is illegal;- Therefore the Administration(despite the fact that all waivers are subject to oversight by a Republican controlled congress) is acting illegally.I can see the 'reward friends' bit, because that's a fairly obvious leap but I don't get the 'punish foes' allegation. I'm probably not paranoid enough.It all reminds me of the Halliburton/Whitewater/Vince Foster discussions - all of which I thought were a load of rubbish as well. Saying that you disagree with the Healthcare Act on principle is one thing, banging on about the waiver process is something else entirely. Why can't people have different views without painting your opponents as morally deficient?   twotonetim 31 months ago

[hjortur]

It all depends on what you call skirting. It is either legal, illegal or you saying "It ought to be illegal."And the answer is yes. What do you expect?That is USA politics.   Gary4books 31 months ago

[Jaran]

Can't say about the reward or punish, but I see rule of law being ditched.   danielpauldavis 31 months ago

[Barlow]

And you can get a complete listing of them from the DHSS website.   twotonetim 31 months ago

[spere62]

Ok, sorry I should have said 'subject to congressional oversight by the House Committee.' We're splitting hairs here.   twotonetim 31 months ago

[Renard]

How about a link or some substance to this question from a reputable source? What exactly, are you referring to? Without such confirmation, this looks like just another uninformed jab at Obama.   Skylight 31 months ago