Our View: Rule of . . . what?

Posted: March 28, 2014

Check out “Today’s Quote” at the top of the page, and we dare you to tell us Sen. Rand Paul is not 100 percent correct. No one knows what ObamaCare is anymore because, save for that odious HHS mandate on contraception coverage, the law is ever changing, always evolving, to suit the moment and the president’s political needs.

So, “rule of law”? What’s that you say? This would be laughable if it weren’t so serious. And, speaking of that, it’s hard to take anyone in this administration seriously . . . especially when the topic of conversation — and consternation — is ObamaCare.

A case in point: At a House Ways and Means hearing on March 12, Rep. Kevin Brady, R-Texas, asked HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius a pretty basic question: “Are you going to delay the [law’s] open enrollment period beyond March 31?” Mrs. Sebelius answered, “There is no delay beyond March 31.”

Less than two weeks later, on March 25, came the announcement that enrollment would be extended indefinitely — for those people who say they’ve experienced difficulty accessing the HealthCare.gov website. In other words, a preponderance of folks, even those who haven’t really tried to enroll yet. You see, the “honor system” prevails here.

As we’ve said before in this space, you just can’t make this stuff up. Meanwhile, what you see spiraling down the drain is the “rule of law.”

Keep listening, though, to the likes of Ms. Sebelius: Whatever she says, simply prepare for the opposite.