#DefundTour: Wilmington, DE

A look at last night’s Defund Obamacare Town Hall in Wilmington, DE through Twitter.



Onward to victory!

Suggested Tweets
Outside Washington, momentum is building. #DefundObamacare #DefundTour

Tweet This

Amazing pictures from @Heritage_Action's #DefundTour in Wilmington, DE. #haction

Tweet This

500+ packed @heritage_action #DefundTour in Wilmington. #haction

Tweet This

Please Share Your Thoughts

53 thoughts on “#DefundTour: Wilmington, DE

  1. Ted’s father, Rafael, mingled with the crowd before/after the event and demonstrated why he is, himself, a rock-star; it is therefore not surprising that Cruz is placing distance between himself and everyone else who might be nominated for POTUS.

        • You are driven by the issues the Kochs pay to have you driven by. Kochs among others, obviously. They planned this after the defeat of Barry Goldwater – a huge Think tank take over to mind meld the collective consciousness to their agenda. Heritage, AFP, AEI, Heartland, Faith and Freedom, there are 100s of these.

          Their propaganda LOOKS like your issue. In fact they train their base with lies that are detrimental to the nation.

          • Have you studied how big money libertarians planned after the Goldwater defeat to create Think Tanks to forward their agenda, to infiltrate American thought and beliefs by feigning scholarly work?

            You know of the four sisters and their covert contributions?

            How do you feel about the report featured on Heritage’s sister site, Free Congress Foundation?

            It states: “1) Falsehoods are not only acceptable, they are a necessity. The corollary is: The masses will accept any lie if it is spoken with vigor, energy and dedication.

            2) It is necessary to be cast under the cloak of “goodness” whereas all opponents and their ideas must be cast as “evil.”

            3) Complete destruction of every opponent must be accomplished through unrelenting personal attacks.

            4) The creation of the appearance of overwhelming power and brutality is necessary in order to destroy the will of opponents to launch opposition of any kind.”


            Think about a subject such as the minimum wage. Of course low wages benefit the Kochs. So they tell the American people – through their front groups – that the minimum wage makes people poorer. Basic libertarian economy – Austrian Econ supply and demand tells us that when you have no min wage and many workers in a market where there are few jobs, wages will be naturally low. If we followed Koch advise – AE on minimum wage .. many Americans could be working for $3 an hour.

            They teach their base (not just the Kochs, there are many – ARt Pope, Adelson, etc … and the $500 million funneled by unnamed donors through Donor’s Trust) …

            they teach their base that the minimum wage makes them poorer and get Americans to support the idea of lower wages for workers. This is one of the main ways they shift wealth upward.

            It’s called appropriately Astroturf:

            “Astroturfing is the practice of masking the sponsors of a message to give the appearance of it coming from a disinterested, grassroots participant. Astroturfing is intended to give the statements the credibility of an independent entity by withholding information about the source’s financial connection.”

          • Ad to what? You said nothing .. I thought you were an independent thinker! Don’t you have some opinion about the presented information?

            If you’d like to talk scripture, I’d be happy to, but lets start where we started.

          • So you have no opinion of the information I shared. And you think I’m an Anti-Semite.

            Perfect. I honestly have no other type of reply from conservatives. They admit they have no knowledge, then they mock me.


            BTW, I love all Jews.

          • that you haven’t refuted the anti-Semitism on the site you cited precludes further discussion on this end

          • ” you haven’t refuted the anti-Semitism on the site you cited” you

            “”BTW, I love all Jews.” me

            It seems to me you could not answer any of the original information, so you change the subject.

            I am obviously not an anti-semite.

            The reality is you have no answer, so you deflect and refuse … very obstinate and sounds familiar when I think of GOP politicians.

          • Your response is equivalent to when a person may say, “some of my best friends are Jews” while rationalizing-away use of anti-Semitic references; you must refute that reference and unearth another that you would aver is supportive of your views, else you must rescind you entire posture.

          • Oh. I have not aptly answered your religious demands?

            How long and hard would I have to argue my own heart and theology before you would agree to speak with me?

            Must I agree with your religious theology perfectly before you agree to speak with me?

            If I differ with you on any point will you find me unworthy of conversation?

            The body of my online work is wide and varied – AKProductions.tv, and hopeforpeacenow yoputube channel. I’ve uploaded over 100 post production videos of my own. Feel free to review them and inspect them to your satisfaction regarding your accusation that I am an ANTI-Semite.

            You will find you are in error.

          • I only had to read one ‘graph to recognize that everything now being pushed by Cruz contradicts the assumptions in this piece:

            “The conservative movement is defensive, defeatist, depressed, and apologetic. It lacks self-confidence, virility, energy, intensity, vigor, aggressiveness, vitality, and a firm belief in the rightness of its cause. This is because conservatives have failed to devote the proper amount of energy to developing an alternative cultural world-view opposed to the dominant leftist one. They have instead devoted much of their energy to electing sympathetic politicians and lobbying the government to pass or overturn particular laws.”

          • That is a conservative making that case – you get that, right? It was written by a follower of Wyrick, and posted on the site of a Think Tank started by Wyrick.

            The paper was a condensation of the thoughts of Paul Wyrick, founder of Heritage foundation..

            It’s a description of how Free Congress and Heritage will take over society, as I said:

            It states: “1) Falsehoods are not only acceptable, they are a necessity.

            The corollary is: The masses will accept any lie if it is spoken with vigor, energy and dedication.

            2) It is necessary to be cast under the cloak of “goodness” whereas all opponents and their ideas must be cast as “evil.”

            3) Complete destruction of every opponent must be accomplished through unrelenting personal attacks.

            4) The creation of the appearance of overwhelming power and brutality is necessary in order to destroy the will of opponents to launch opposition of any kind.”

            These are views espoused by Free Congress Foundation, also started by the founder of Heritage – Paul Wyrick.

            All I was looking for is your opinion on the writings that display the mindset of Heritage’s leader.

            That’s why I supplied a citation, so you could review the material.

          • That’s you entire reaction to the piece?


            DO you think this sort of discussion represents a falsehood;

            “We must learn to treat leftists as natural disasters or rabid dogs.”

            Are Democrats equal to Hurricane Katrina or the Japanese tsunami .. or disease ridden animals?

          • Obama is, indeed, dangerous, a disaster for American Representative Democracy, and he is now showing his rabid side as he refuses even to talk with the GOP.

          • SO you support the rest of the piece and have no problem labeling Democrats as rabid dogs as deadly as Katrina?

            That doesn’t look too good, does it? Does that not seem incredibly extreme to you?

            In what ways do you think the elected president is “a disaster for American Representative Democracy?”

            The GOP is using political leverage to undo a law.

            Would Bush have negotiated with liberals had they decided to take the same position over Medicare Part D?


          • One fact that impacts this case: on inauguration night 2009, 15 top Republicans gathered to decide to obstruct Obama regardless:


            But SCOTUS has not yet ruled:



            “According to the Congressional Research Service,

            President Ronald Reagan made 240 recess appointments,

            President George H. W. Bush made 77 recess appointments,

            President Bill Clinton made 139 recess appointments.

            President George W. Bush made 171 recess appointments,

            and as of January 5, 2012, President Barack Obama had made 32 recess appointments.”


            488 v 171 total

            so, not uncommon and not ruled unconstitutional.

            Got another?

          • Nope. That is the very question being asked SCOTUS:

            “whether the President’s recess-appointment power may be exercised when
            the Senate is convening every three days in pro forma sessions.”

            Did you review the term “pro forma”?

            And has NOT been ruled unconstitutional.

          • two appellate courts have done so, inasmuch as the Senate has the total power to determine its own rules and its own status

          • True. SCOTUS has not.

            If the Pro Forma loophole had been thought up in Reagan’s or Bush 1’s time, they would have garnered the same opinion from you?

            It’s not like recess appointments pre-pro forma were never done.

            And pro forma session is not an actual session, you got that, right?

            Not a great example of why Obama is an infected animal.

            “The GOP is using political leverage to undo a law.

            Would Bush have negotiated with liberals had they decided to take the same position over Medicare Part D?”


          • Wow.

            If Dems had held the nation hostage over Medicare Part D, a law democratically passed by Bush, he would have negotiated?

            You really believe that?

            You think of Bush as a bi-partisian negotiator?

            When has any president negotiated with the other party when they have demanded he alter a duely passed law?

            Can you give an example of Bush doing such a thing?

            Seems wussy to me.

          • Bush would have negotiated; even if you disagree, this is no excuse for the POTUS to be so arrogant.

          • Closing down the government until we meet Tea Party demands of destroying a duly passed law is unabashedly arrogant.

            Calling all democrats infected animals more dangerous than Hurricane Katrina is egregiously arrogant.

            Did you watch Obama’s speech?

            He was strait forward and NOT arrogant. Refusing to participate in hostage taking is not arrogant. Hostage taking is arrogant. And the Tea Party is doing on behalf of astroturf interests like AFP and Heritage.

            I think the fact that you think W would have changed Medicare Part D for dems actuality belies your knowledge of it’s passing.

          • Obama shut-down government, aided/abetted by Reid; BHO was intransigent, aided/abetted by his acolytes:


            The performance of the White House Press Corps during President Obama’s Tuesday afternoon briefing resulted in not a single question that seriously challenged the president or even made him uncomfortable. The hour-long affair was more like a conversation between the like-minded on issues such as the ongoing budget battles and going around congress by raising the debt ceiling by executive fiat. Anyone who remembers the non-stop confrontation directed at
            President Bush just a few years ago, by this same group of reporters, would not recognize them today.

          • Ohhh a nice cut and past opinion from Breitbart?

            I thought you were an independent thinker.

            The GOP has voted 40 times to stop Obamacare.

            (Odd, Heritage wrote the original idea for the mandate in the Clinton era, and now calls their own proposal destructive)

            The GOP lost the presidency in 2012 and retains power in the House. (That almost entirely due to gerrymandering)

            Instead of admit defeat after failing to stop Obamacare being passed accordance with the rules of our democratic republic, Tea Party decides to demand we do as they want, (Gee where did they get THAT idea?) then blame everyone else .. when one of the main Tea Party narratives is Obama is Oblamer.


            Reality may not be clear to you. It is very clear to those outside the Libert/Con bubble.

          • At least I can articulate my own well informed opinions in my own words.

            Can you explain how the Tea Party is NOT taking the USA hostage in your own words?

            I have no doubt you would find reality trite.


          • You have all these little platitudes. Can you construct more than 5 sentences in a row to support your opinion?

            I already gave you an opportunity to share WHAT you think Obama has done that is unconstitutional. YOU came up with one issue that has not been ruled on by SCOTUS and had obvious circumstances around it, including GOP collusion to stop anything and everything Obama proposes or plans to do since the day of his inauguration. (Something Dems did NOT do even though Bush was NOT the elected President in 2000.)

            “Jeb Bush’s secret weapon

            94,000 people on a voter “purge” list — half of them African-American — continue to be banned from voting in Florida, even though the state knows the list is wildly inaccurate. ”
            Salon . com

            Try another ….

          • Wow I can cut and paste, too!


            I can also write my own thoughts in my own sentences:

            If even ONE of these Executive orders was UNconstitutional, they would be marched to SCOTUS. Not ONE CASE has been brought against Obama’s EOs that I can find. And I actually took the time to look, did you?

            Try this Forbes piece of EO’s, Obama is not the tyrant you may think he is:

            “When It Comes To Abuse Of Presidential Power, Obama Is A Mere Piker”


            You say you are an independent thinker, that means not taking for grated stories on blogs, I would think.

            The blog you pointed me to is a great example of CON Bubble worldview … here’s another story from them:

            “Michelle Obama’s personal staff is excessive (complete list)

            Total number of First Lady Personal Staff Members paid by Tax Payers:” goes on to claim M.O. is overstaffed. It is another lie:


            ” “[W]e have exactly the same staff number as Mrs. Bush and our office organization reflects a similar staffing model, so insinuations otherwise are wrong,” she said. Lelyveld said that the White House’s “personnel records indicate” that there were 24 staffers for Laura Bush at some point. We were able to verify at least 18 staffers for Laura Bush, as of June 30, 2008,”

            DO you research these stories before believe them??

            The story #1 on their front page was just as disingenuous:

            “Obama was out demagoguing today, calling Republicans in Congress “extortionists” for demanding spending concessions before raising the debt ceiling.”

            Obama did not HOLD UP the NATION in 2006 as radical cons are now.

            Blogs are terrible places to get your information.

            try a .edu search, this will give you peer reviewed academic works to review before making up your mind.

          • Your efforts to divert attention fail for you know that one must gain “standing” to challenge the government [a steep climb]; rather than playing the game of Moral Relativism, perhaps you’ll want to try to defend these examples of imperialism.

          • “Your efforts to divert attention fail for you know that one must gain “standing” to challenge the government [a steep climb]; rather than playing the game of Moral Relativism”

            IN fact, the blog you cited was the one to fail to mention that point, you are debunking your own rare cite.

            “perhaps you’ll want to try to defend these examples of imperialism.”


            What examples are those – the EOs … then obviously all presidents have been imperialists. Did you not read the article??

          • Oh, so you didn;t read the article.

            “Among the more famous (or infamous) executive orders in U.S. history,
            FDR issued one that forcibly transferred Japanese-Americans and
            German-Americans to internment camps during World War II. Harry Truman
            issued an order to seize and nationalize all steel mills in America,
            during a labor strike in 1952. These were clearly rights-violating
            orders. On the positive side, in a famous 1957 order that was respectful
            of rights, Dwight Eisenhower decreed an end to racial segregation in
            America’s public schools. The U.S. courts have overturned only two
            orders: Truman’s order on steel mills, and President Clinton’s 1995
            order to preclude the federal government from contracting with firms
            that had strike-breakers on their payroll.”

            “falsely claimed that an Obama executive order created martial law.

            Cut and paste seems all your intellect deserves.

          • you select problems that actually can be critiqued [such as by michelle malkin] but, regardless, the intensity and pattern of deprivation of freedom now occurring is overwhelming and unprecedented

          • No, I uncover the lies which you can not face.

            Let me prove that:

            What deprivation of freedom are you experiencing?

          • Ohhh yea .. you think Obama is reading your email.

            Are you aware of Jack Goldsmith? The OLC?

            Watch how Cheney invented the entire scheme and lied to to BUSH about it …


            If you have HBO, “The World According to Dick Cheney” is a must see., going into detail about how Cheney lied to Bush to get surveillance signed off even the face of the truth that it was unconstitutional.

            Go ahead, I dare ya ..

            …then come back and try to explain what Obama has done that was half as underhanded and unconstitutional …

            …. and tell me how you protested BUSH’s admin as loudly and vehemently as you do Obama’s.

          • “tell me how you protested BUSH’s admin as loudly and vehemently as you do Obama’s.”

            Opps …. tongue-tied.

            Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson.

            Game. Sat. Match.

          • Your note is nauseatingly tangential, symptomatic of your liberal double-disease of moral relativism and historical egalitarianism; better you should stick with facts instead of becoming incessantly tangential.

            For example, note that “Indeed, it was already widely known (even by prosecutor Fitzgerald) that the actual “leaker” was Richard Armitage, via columnist Robert Novak. No evidence has ever come to light that Mr. Libby disclosed Plame’s CIA status to Mr. Novak, or anyone else.”


            Amazingly [oh so typical of the media], the true leaker [a leftie who worked for Powell, another leftie], isn’t even mentioned in a WaPo summary of the dramatis-personae.



            You reneged and, thus, have become self-marginalized.

          • Ad Hominem much?

            In debate when you let a person’s claim stand and attack something else, you concede that their point is correct. When you attack them personally everyone with a brain knows you have nothing to refute them with.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *