The dismantling of America

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Darmando Parker, CO
    Jan. 13, 2014 12:47 p.m.

    I want to provide a Colorado perspective and FACTS that point to some of the silliness contained in the editorial about "Obamacare". In the past few years over a thousand Colorado homeowners who "were happy with" their homeowners' insurance watched in horror as first their homes were destroyed, and then the insurance companies who had worked so hard to get their business in the first place, were now working much harder to avoid making good on the promises made. In effect, many found that policies for which we had paid good money, were nearly worthless. Many of those people who say they lost health insurance they were happy with due to Obamacare, might have been far less happy had they actually needed that insurance. The insurance I now have for this year under the Affordable Care Act is better insurance. It costs a little less than the insurance I had. the co-pays and deductibles are lower and it's from the same company. Colorado has planned for and demands it. Maybe Utah should.

  • Craig Clark Boulder, CO
    Jan. 10, 2014 10:45 a.m.

    What alarms me is that this angry screed was given a DN classification as being written “For the Deseret News.” Even by standards of an admittedly conservative newspaper, this is copy that as published shows no restraint such as editorial desk review standardly applies. Am I to believe that this vitriol reflects the honest sentiments of the Deseret News?

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Jan. 10, 2014 7:34 a.m.

    To "UtahBlueDevil" Forbes didn't make the projection. That projection was made by the Federal Government. If things go like they typically go when the Feds make projections on healthcare issues, their numbers are probably wrong.

    This is exactly like AGW, and all of the government "scientists". They will proclaim whatever the politicians want, as long as they continue to get paid.

    However, that is just a side track. The original letter stated that as many as 100 million MAY lose thier policies. The original letter has only included what the Federal Government has projected. So again, tell us what was wrong with this letter. What did he say that hasn't already been said by the Federal Government or by the Press?

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Jan. 10, 2014 5:23 a.m.

    Last thought.... the whole article is full of hyperbole. The notion that we are watching The dismantling of America’ is absurd. Are we seeing things that will change certain elements - sure. Medical treatment for all - even in its worst incarnation - a single payer system - does not dismantle America.

    America was not dismantled when we granted the vote to Women. The country did not fall to its knees when civil rights were granted to all. The country survived prohibition. We survived McCarthism. We have survived two failed wars in Asia, and two more in the middle east that led to no net gains in security. We ultimately survived the expulsion or Mormons several times over, and a civil war that killed hundreds of thousands. We have survived direct threat from foreign countries, and assassinations of our leaders.

    We are no where near the brink - but that is what we are seeing. I am not sure if it stems from a simple lack of knowledge behind about this nations history, or just a tendency to the dramatic, but none of what we are seeing is bringing our nation, nor our constitution to the brink of collapse.

  • Starry starry night Palm Springs , CA
    Jan. 9, 2014 11:20 p.m.

    A few of Mr. Hoagland's statements....."Even a lawless President"..."the founding fathers did not forsee ...the packing of the courts"..."All Hail the King!"...I must say that I was actually embarrased and squirmed in discomfort while reading this logorrheic lament. The facts do not jive with the statements made in this opinion piece by Mr. Hoagland. The president cannot be considered lawless under any reasonable examination of the record. Hyperbole is a skill best utilized by those who understand nuance.
    As for the courts being "packed"...the judiciary in this country is overwhelmingly Republican. That fact alone easily undermines
    Mr. Hoaglands's argument. And the statement "Hailing the King" is just too way over the top to even argue. I will say that Mr. Obama...the President of the United States of America...occupies his privileged office with humility and grace under fire and is anything but imperial in his attitude.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Jan. 9, 2014 9:11 p.m.

    Redshirt - a Forbes projection of something that might happen does not mean it did happen, or even will happen. That is a projection, a guess, a forecast.... not a fact or evidence of something that has happened.

    Big difference. What has happened is a far cry from what is being claimed will happen.

    I mean, do we take forecast of global warming as evidence that global warming is occurring. Seems I have seen the argument here many times over that forecast of temperature change is not enough proof that global warming exist.

    How is this "forecast" of million.... different.... and now a fact? It may happen.... but hasn't yet.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Jan. 9, 2014 6:23 p.m.

    According to data from the Census Bureau and Dept of Labor, the number of people who get their insurance through an employer has been declining for many years--before Obamacare--and the number of uninsured has been increasing. For example, between 2000-2010 the number of uninsured increased by 4.5%. The number receiving health insurance through an employer declined by 7.3%.

    Health insurance policies frequently change and get dropped, without an uproar by Republicans.

    I know several people who went without insurance or had extremely high deductibles and poor coverage who now have better policies due to Obamacare.

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Jan. 9, 2014 4:48 p.m.

    Maybe it's time to build an entirely new house instead of trying to patch and repair the 250 year old log cabin that our family has outgrown.

  • Schnee Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 9, 2014 4:21 p.m.

    "Although not widely reported, another 100 million Americans with workplace coverage (by Health and Human Services’ own estimates) may be dropped by employers and forced into far more costly coverage through security-challenged exchanges."

    Okay here's the dirty little secret conservatives don't mention. The ACA actually allows all insurance plans that were in place before the healthcare bill passed. Having one of those doesn't get you dropped even if it's not ACA compliant (that's where the "if you like your plan you can keep it" thing comes from, all plans at the time of debate on the bill could be kept). The only plans that make you get dropped is if it's not ACA compliant and was made after the passage of the bill. That means that these 100 million Americans are on plans that didn't exist 4 years ago so they all already changed insurance at least once in those 4 years without any of it being a result of the ACA. Millions of Americans are changing insurance plans every single year, because insurance companies keep changing what they offer.

    Oh, and it's not more costly... especially with all the individual and employer subsidies.

  • Schnee Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 9, 2014 4:15 p.m.

    "as many as 5 million people who have lost insurance (that they liked) have already felt the teeth."

    How about the 5 million who don't have insurance because Republican governors chose not to expand Medicaid even with 100% federal backing?

    Most of the 5 million losing insurance due to the whole "like your plan you can keep it" thing are in one of these two categories:
    1. There's a similar plan for similar cost on the exchange (it just covers one of the required categories the old one didn't).
    2. The lost plan was a cheap junk plan that covered next to nothing so premiums are going up for these people but they're getting much better insurance.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Jan. 9, 2014 4:13 p.m.

    To "UtahBlueDevil" lets see what has been reported.

    In Forbes' article "Obama Officials In 2010: 93 Million Americans Will Be Unable To Keep Their Health Plans Under Obamacare" we learn that 93 million people in the US will lose their insurance plans.

    So, I am still waiting to hear about what the letter got wrong. According to the Federal Register (published by the Federal Government) "50 to 75 percent" of people with employer based insurance will receive cancellation notices.

    Still waiting to hear about anything that was incorrect in the letter.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Jan. 9, 2014 4:13 p.m.

    RE: "You should blame Ted Cruz, not Harry Reid"...

    Yes, you should blame Ted Cruz (not Harry Reid). Harry Reid should be blamed for nothing!


    Wait a minute... didn't Harry Reid propose it? And campaign for it? And pass it?
    So why should we blame Ted Cruz for something Harry Reid did?

    Just because Cruz did one filibuster? I mean how many times has Ted Cruz himself filibustered? Is once too many?? So we should blame this all on him... because of one filibuster?


    I guess he filibustered the wrong bill. ObamaCare has become the third-rail of American politics. Touch it... and your gone.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Jan. 9, 2014 3:45 p.m.

    Redshirt asks "Tell us, what has the letter stated that is wrong?"

    Lets start with things that involve numbers - a place I like.

    "Although not widely reported, another 100 million Americans with workplace coverage (by Health and Human Services’ own estimates) may be dropped by employers and forced into far more costly coverage through security-challenged exchanges."

    Lets look at the math here. There are about 300 million. Last year 58.6 percent of those were covered by employer sponsored health care plans… or about 175 million. If we use your supplied numbers, that means that nearly 60% of companies would have to stop offering benefits.

    Do you see any signs or evidence that 60% of employers and dropped their health care coverage?

    If we want to be real honest here, we will note that under Bush the number of companies offering ESI was 69.2 percent, and by the time he left office, it was 59.4. Since the passing of Obamacare that number has only slightly changed dropping from 59.4 to 58.6 - a 8/10th of 1 percent change. Under Bush that was a 9.8 percent change.

    Lets stick with facts - not rhetoric. 8/10ths versus 60%.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Jan. 9, 2014 3:32 p.m.

    As usual, those in Obama's camp ignore the message and stone the messenger. They cannot refute what Ken Hoagland wrote and they complain that enough people in America think his message is important that contributions roll in so that his message is heard. Those who support Obama never tell us how many billions of dollars in Union Dues were diverted to political campaigns. They never tell us that much of those Union Dues were coerced from the workers, i.e., you either pay Union Dues or you starve.

    The message is clear. Obama lied to us. Obama lied about ObamaCare. Obama lied about having popular support. Obama continues to lie to us. Less than 1/3rd of the minimum number of people have signed up. That means that there is not nearly enough cash backing for ObamaCare to survive unless the government borrows billions and billions of dollars to prop it up.

    Refute the message but leave the messenger alone. The messenger did not force us to buy government insurance. The messenger did not lie to us about the cost or the coverage of ObamaCare.

    Go to the source - Obama - and blame him.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Jan. 9, 2014 3:17 p.m.

    Let's examine Mr. Hoagland's claims:

    “Democrats/Obama deliberate falsehoods”

    Republican falsehoods:
    death panels, (politifact lie of the year 2009)Congress exempt, coverage for illegal immigrants, IRS database, govt. takeover, deny cancer treatment to elderly, largest tax hike in history etc. etc.

    “5 million people who have lost insurance” “condemned to death by their own government “

    The CBO has estimated that in 2014, due to the ACA, the number of uninsured would decline by 14 million, with 7 million joining the exchanges, 9 million gaining Medicaid and CHIP, and 2 million fewer Americans getting coverage through the individual market.

    “Senate majority leader willing to throw over 200 years of tradition to pack the courts on behalf of Barack Obama.”

    Congressional Research Service: "In brief, out of the 168 cloture motions ever filed (or reconsidered) on nominations, 82 (49%) were cloture motions on nominations made since 2009."

    “one-party judiciary”

    Four of the current Supreme Court Justices were appointed by a Democratic president.
    Six of the current Supreme Court Justices were appointed by a Republican president.

    Just wondering if an article next week will proclaim the world is flat?

  • andyjaggy American Fork, UT
    Jan. 9, 2014 1:54 p.m.

    Nice. There are some points hidden in there I actually agree with, but it's unfortunately lost in the extreme right wing angry rant that seems to be the only way the tea party knows how to communicate.

  • Schnee Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 9, 2014 1:13 p.m.

    Tell us how you really feel...

  • nonceleb Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 9, 2014 12:47 p.m.

    The filibuster is a 200-year American tradition? Hardly. Senate Rule 22 was passed in 1917 and revised in 1975. The real "abuse" of power is in its overuse. It was rarely used in the early 20th century. Then it started to dramatically accelerate: LBJ - 17 times, Carter - 53, Reagan's two terms - 113, Clinton's two terms - 80, George Bush's two terms 130. In the 5 years of Obama's presidency - 307 times! And Obama is "packing" the courts? Does he not have the same right to appoint judges and executive officers as Republican presidents? If it had not been so excessively used as a tool of obstruction, there would have been no need to change the rule to a simple majority. You should blame Ted Cruz, not Harry Reid.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Jan. 9, 2014 12:20 p.m.

    I laugh at the comments made by the liberals here. Few are actually addressing the issues brought up in the article. They are going after the organization that the writer blongs to instead. This shows that much of what was stated is true.

    We have a nanny state telling us that they know better than we do what kind of insurance we need. We do have many people who have lost their doctors because the doctors don't want to accept the policies from the markets. Liberals are ignoring the fact that Obama is acting like a king by not enforcing the laws and is not getting approval from Congress to change the laws that he put in place.

    Tell us, what has the letter stated that is wrong? Obama has done everything that the writer is accusing him of doing.

    To "JoeBlow" the alternative to Obamcare is simple. Get the government out of micromanaging insurance companies and let the businesses decide what and how much to cover. People had more comprehensive coverage before much of it was mandated.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Jan. 9, 2014 12:02 p.m.

    If you can, please tell the rest of us what part of this article is not true! Because in the end, we now have the real Obamacare mess with real higher premiums, real higher co-pays, real higher deductibles, real fewer doctors, real fewer hospitals and real less freedom! The government is now your real doctor! Forced up on is the dark of night with real lies and real deception! "If you like your healthcare plan/doctor, you can keep it, period".

    Jan. 9, 2014 11:15 a.m.

    Prediction "thid" will see exactly what he wants to see.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Jan. 9, 2014 11:11 a.m.

    Whoever's dismantling America... I wish they would stop it!

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    Jan. 9, 2014 11:06 a.m.

    Re: "Deliberate falsehoods don't make a very compelling argument."

    Seems to have worked quite well, at least with low-information America, for the liberal, trade-union and Soros-backed political propaganda campaigns.

    Particularly with the enthusiastically-offered assistance of the partisan "mainstream" media.

  • Ernest T. Bass Bountiful, UT
    Jan. 9, 2014 10:45 a.m.

    My post should read: They have NO desire to be a real, objective news paper.

  • RFLASH Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 9, 2014 10:24 a.m.

    Where has this person been, out to lunch? Most of what they accuse Obamacare of doing was already happening long before it came into existence! I have good insurance through the government and they have been telling us where we can go for a long long time! Most insurance companies have. They have told us which doctors we can use and they even told me which blood tester I had to use to test my diabetes! If I want them to pay that is! I know somebody who works for himself. The cheapest he could find insurance for his family(Before Obamacare) was $700 a month! He had to pay from $7,000 to $17,000 before the insurance paid anything at all!Many of the people that they use in their complaints about losing insurance had policies that were worthless! Of course Obamacare isn't perfect, but it beats what republicans have done, which is absolutely nothing! Nothing! Maybe they should look in the mirror when they start pointing fingers!

  • djc Stansbury Park, Ut
    Jan. 9, 2014 9:24 a.m.

    People that commented herein have done a fairly good job of chastising The Deseret News for publishing this kind of self-serving rhetoric. The writer has a very weak grasp of what the Constitution of the United States says and means. His dismissal of the judiciary is very telling. His opinion seems to be in a word, "if you don't agree with me, you are wrong and there is no room for discussion." Having spent the last half century watching politics and politicians in the USA, this gentleman and his ilk have done more damage then any president, any congress or any judiciary. Deliberate falsehoods don't make a very compelling argument. This is the worst kind of propagandizing in that in appeals to the basest of instincts, and hurts the poorest citizens of our great nation.

  • Rawhide Kid Sevier County, UT
    Jan. 9, 2014 9:02 a.m.

    He's right one. If we can't get Obama stopped, kiss America good by.
    He stressed hope & change, and we're getting it.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Jan. 9, 2014 8:54 a.m.

    My view: Inflammatory rhetoric, political hackery of the worst kind.

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    Jan. 9, 2014 8:52 a.m.

    Re: "The total spent by the Restore America's Voice PAC in the 2012 election cycle was $1,797,419.
    This included . . . $1,797,419 against 1 Democratic candidate in general elections."

    You say it like it's a bad thing.

  • Ernest T. Bass Bountiful, UT
    Jan. 9, 2014 8:49 a.m.

    @ LDS Liberal:
    It's because they have desire to be an objective news paper.

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    Jan. 9, 2014 8:43 a.m.

    " No one can dispute......." Ahhhh, yes we can, because what follows is all falsehoods and distortions.

    BTW folks Mr. Richards is prophetic in one sense. If the Republicans win the Senate in Nov. and keep the house, they will no longer concentrate on Obamacare they will move to impeachment.

  • Roland Kayser Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Jan. 9, 2014 8:43 a.m.

    Rod Dreher, the editor of American Conservative magazine summed up my feelings perfectly. He said that President Obama is a standard center-left politician, and while there are many of Obama's policies that he disagrees with, conservatives who paint him as a socialist, or a communist or a radical are simply discrediting the conservative movement in general.

  • Blue Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 9, 2014 8:26 a.m.

    Googling around with the terms "Ken Hoagland" and "Restore America's Voice" results in some interesting information.

    "Restore America's Voice" is a far right SuperPAC funded by anonymous donations.

    Hoagland is himself a far right fundraiser who has made a fortune by using incendiary writing to solicit donations from the GOP base with a claim that contributions will be used to support conservative candidates, when in fact his organizations tax returns reveal that most of the money raised goes to himself and his SuperPAC's "consultants." It's basically a scam operation designed to separate FOX viewers from them money.

    Others have already noted that Hoagland's article is a stew of half-truths, outright falsehoods, and offers no constructive alternatives to the things about which he complains.

    What I find fascinating is the Deseret News' increasingly uncritical willingness to publish this type of "whip up the base" rightwing invective.

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Jan. 9, 2014 8:15 a.m.

    Kind of hard to take the notion of being a place for a civil discourse when the DN prints this kind of stuff, not only does reality have no place in your pages neither does any sense of common decency.

  • Kalindra Salt Lake City, Utah
    Jan. 9, 2014 8:12 a.m.

    First lesson of persuasive writing: Don't insult those whose positions you hope to sway.

    You may not like the outcomes of the last two Presidential elections, but to imply the majority of voters were uninformed or tricked by the media is insulting and ignores the reality of the Republican Party not offering a candidate with mass appeal.

    As for the Senate filibuster rules - perhaps you should do a little research. Those rules were not long standing and there are very few situations where the Founding Fathers thought a super majority should be required. For everything else, a basic majority was considered sufficient.

    Those who require a super majority for the basic business of Congress are the ones who are oerverting government and preventing the will of the people from being done.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Jan. 9, 2014 7:30 a.m.

    Ken Hoagland is founder and chairman of Restore America’s Voice and writes daily at “Repeal it Now” on Facebook.


    Restore America's Voice PAC is a Super PAC [i.e., Political Action Committee -- Lobby Group]

    as of March 31, 2013, the PAC had $19,656.24 on hand and had made $683,511.99 in contributions during the first quarter of 2013

    Restore America's Voice PAC spent $1,797,422.90 on opposing President Barack Obama

    During the 2012 election cycle all funding was spent in opposition of President Barack Obama rather than the endorsement of any particular candidate.

    During the 2012 election cycle Restore America's Voice solely targeted President Barack Obama with various telemarketing, fundraising and search engine advertisements.

    The total spent by the Restore America's Voice PAC in the 2012 election cycle was $1,797,419.
    This included $0 for Republicans, $0 against Republicans, $0 for Democrats, and $1,797,419 against 1 Democratic candidate in general elections.

    That's says it all for me....

  • Thid Barker Victor, ID
    Jan. 9, 2014 7:26 a.m.

    Prediction: Instead of debating the excellent points of this article, liberals will personally attack the author! Can't deny the message so attack the messenger!

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Jan. 9, 2014 7:14 a.m.

    Ken Hoagland accurately described the situation that we have in America. The President is making a mockery of the Constitution as he legislates the implementation of ObamaCare. No one can dispute that he bribed Senators (Louisiana purchase, Nebraska) to get them to sign on. No one can dispute that the rules were changed to push it through before it was read and discussed. No one can dispute that not one Republican voted for it. No one can dispute that he lied about the savings; that he lied about keeping doctors and insurance; that he lied about who would be covered; that he lived about every "selling point". No one can dispute the fact that the press has been his failed to report what he is doing. No one can dispute the fact that he is trying to make us believe that we don't need a Congress, that he will write the legislation and that he will decide which laws to enforce.

    What we need is for each branch of government to fully fulfil its responsibility, including impeachment proceedings. The evidence is in. Start the process.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Jan. 9, 2014 6:26 a.m.

    Ken Hoagland is founder and chairman of Restore America’s Voice and writes daily at “Repeal it Now” on Facebook.


    Restore America’s Voice --

    is a PAC [Political Action committee],
    i.e., paid Lobby Group.

    And if the Deseeret News wants to stoop to posting paid for propaganda,
    Why from only one side, and never from the other?

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Jan. 9, 2014 6:19 a.m.

    By Ken Hoagland
    For the Deseret News

    "Harry Reid changed longstanding Senate rules with 51 instead of 60 votes and he did it to make sure the judicial branch stayed out of the way of the dismantling of the separation of federal powers. All hail the king!"

    Good to know the DN has officially gone of the right sided cliff.

    "Just to make sure everyone understands this new kind of presidency that asserts the power of a king, Obama has simply reversed by executive order standing laws"

    Does Ken know what a "king" is? This should be embarrassing to all conservatives that the debate has become so emotional that logical and rational discussion has all been but abandoned. I get being passionate about one's beliefs. One of my favorites was Allan Simpson of Wyoming, he just stated things as he saw them. There was no doubt left. But he rarely if ever fell into the land of just pure emotion and distortion filled rhetoric that we see from this new generation of conservative talking heads.

    "King"... good grief. Ken needs to google the term and educate himself if he wants to be taken even slightly serious by anyone short of fanatic.

  • Twin Lights Louisville, KY
    Jan. 9, 2014 6:10 a.m.

    Lots to critique. I will just ask, what does the author mean by "a one-party judiciary"? Take a good look at the Supreme Court and who was appointed by whom. The statement seems unsupportable at best.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Jan. 9, 2014 5:49 a.m.

    These articles are perfectly tailored to the GOP base.

    They bash Obamacare, offer no alternatives and act as though there was no problem to begin with.

    Lets look at reality. The reality that existed before Obamacare and the reality of the future. Heck, even the Heritage foundation website will substantiate the following.

    We have a deficit. We have a budget problem. We have an aging population.

    Look at the projected spending in the category "mandatory spending", which includs Medicare. As the population ages and medical costs climb, the deficits soar. Regardless of who is president.

    Regarding Medicare, which is our biggest future budget buster, we have 3 choices.

    - Cut health care costs (the highest in the world)
    - Raise taxes to pay for it
    - cut the benefits

    Anyone have an option 4? I'm listening?

    Another rant against the ACA is old and tired.

    Acknowledge there is a problem (first step, and one the right seems to miss)
    Do something to address it. Complaining is not a solution.

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 9, 2014 1:34 a.m.

    This guy pretty well summarizes the view at the Deseret News - right wing rant all the way. You make yourselves hard to like in any arena, including SSM. "We Americans have rebounded before from wars, economic collapses, plagues and both criminally opportunistic and criminally inept politicians. " Just a point - we rebounded from the worst recession in 50 years with the help of Barack Obama.