Democrat Depression Settling on DC

I understand Obamacare has been amended yet again by presidential fiat. First, the employers got an extension to implement until well after this November election. Now the people who have lost their health insurance due to Obamacare are getting a three year extension so they can find insurance. Doesn’t that leave only one group of people still subject to and required to sign up for Obamacare? Namely, the already and previously uninsured. 

You know who you are. Those who cannot afford health insurance or those so fabulously rich they ignore the risk of illness because they can pay when it strikes. (Those evil “One-Percenters,” I suppose.) Of course, the youthful are still required to participate, but aren’t they allowed to stay on Mom and Dad’s policy till they are twenty-six? 

Stated another way, the only people still required to participate in Obamacare are those who couldn’t pay for insurance from the get go. Does any of this make sense to you? This illustrates why legislators should READ the stuff they vote on BEFORE they cast their vote. I can understand Pelosi saying what she did. She’s as dumb as Charlie Rangel who said yesterday that the gas explosion in NY was “[his] community’s own 9/11.” His statement is beyond dumb, but I suspect he perceives his job to be to stay in the limelight by saying really dumb things. (It’s nice to see anyone fill a role in life they like and have a natural aptitude for.) But it is really disheartening to think that so many voted for Obamacare without reading it. It is way beyond disheartening to think how those legislators who voted for Obamacare and may have actually read it first (if any) must be blindingly stupid. How did these people get near the levers of power in Washington? It’s creepy to contemplate.

take our poll - story continues below

Should Brett Kavanaugh withdraw over sexual misconduct allegations?

  • Should Brett Kavanaugh withdraw over sexual misconduct allegations?

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Eagle Rising updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

But enough of this heavy stuff. Before reaching for the depression meds, let’s look at the Democrats reaction to the Jolly victory over Ms. Sink in Florida. They are falling all over each other denying Jolly’s win portends poorly for Dems in the upcoming midterms. Anyone can see Sink’s loss had nothing to do with voters’ weariness over Obamacare and the problems it is causing them to feel (in real dollars) already…before it even goes into effect and death squads start looking for our addresses in their government furnished black SUVs equipped with government supplied GPS systems. Before our personal physicians have retired early. Even before enrollments in medical schools drop dramatically. 3-15-2014

Naturally, Debbie Wazzername Schultz weighed in with her usual inanities stating it was surprising the voters turned out for Jolly “who was recently divorced.” (I did not make that up.) How does that logic work for Leave-em-Behind-Hillary’s prospective voters when their candidate isn’t divorced, but if she had any guts or class, would be? 

The fun continues and it should intensify as we approach November.

PS: Chucky Rangel’s statement deserves some more scrutiny, if only for laughs.

Does he mean that the REAL 9/11 did not impact him or HIS community? Does he mean he is not an American, because I took 9/11 as an attack and affront against all Americans? I’m sure it was intended as such since Bin Laden explained it as such. Does Charley mean that only black Americans died in the gas explosion …or that no black Americans died on 9/11? Does he mean his “community” is located only at the address where the explosion occurred? Does he mean the gas explosion was an act of “terrorism?” If that is his meaning, may the Obama administration finally acknowledge that “terrorism” actually exists? Has Charley approved the use of the term at last? 

I guess the only safe conclusion we may draw from Charley’s statement is the more you analyze anything Charley says the dumber he seems. We’re on safe ground there.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by

About the author

Stephen Bowers

Stephen Bowers

I am an attorney in Las Vegas who has always wanted to draw political cartoons, partly because I like drawing, but mostly because I enjoy ridiculing pompous know-nothings. Verbally debating them gets nowhere. They don't know they're beaten. But poking fun at them in a drawing leaves them without recourse or rebuttal. What can they do...? Call me names, whine, cuss me ... or maybe draw a witty riposte? Unlikely.
Steve Bowers, Esq.

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

Send this to a friend