A couple of weeks ago, my colleague, Joe Cunningham, posted on how Florida [mc_name name=’Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL)’ chamber=’senate’ mcid=’R000595′ ] was able to protect taxpayers from the ravages of ObamaCare. During the negotiations for the 2014 “CRomnibus” bill, Rubio was able to insert language forbidding Health and Human Services from moving money between accounts to cover the losses insurers suffered. What he did was force them to obey the ObamaCare law as it was written, as it was sold, and as it was scored by the Congressional Budget Office. Naturally, forcing the law to work as intended has resulted in huge losses to insurers — sort of poetic justice as they were the ones bellying up the trough when the law was written — and forcing some to pull out of ObamaCare. As [mc_name name=’Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA)’ chamber=’house’ mcid=’I000056′ ] said:

“He saved us money on Obamacare where others have simply wanted to repeal it,” Issa said. “He has already saved $2.5 billion by eliminating an unreasonable backstop by the taxpayers for a failed program. He’s been fighting for a lot of things I believe in.”

This is a good thing, right? As conservatives we oppose ObamaCare and we definitely oppose the extralegal methods the administration — and the Supreme Court — have used to keep it afloat.

Now naturally, progressives aren’t all that keen on what Rubio accomplished. At the LA Times there is an unintelligent, ethically challenged, left-wing hack who masquerades as a reporter, named Michael Hiltzik, who wrote a story headlined No, Marco Rubio didn’t score a blow against Obamacare — he merely hurt patients. It contains a lot of very predictable sniveling and very shaky logic, none of that is a surprise. What is sort of a surprise is this:

In which a Right to Rise spox points us to a @hiltzikm column https://t.co/X9xtvXXNbh

— daveweigel (@daveweigel) December 10, 2015

Dave Weigel is the Washington Post reporter who wrote on Rubio’s legislative feat. And in the responses to his tweet you find a variety of Bush fluffers (hmmm, that sounds like a job description). To put the whole thing in context, the Hiltzik piece acknowledges what Rubio did but rants about how is screwed up ObamaCare. The only possible reason for Right to Rise to point Weigel at the LA Times story was to get him to write about how damaging ObamaCare is hurting patients… a conclusion that, thus far, is totally unsupported by facts. The logical inference from this is that Right To Rise supports ObamaCare as it is and the logical inference is that they wouldn’t stake out a position their preferred candidate did not also support.