Congressman Mark Meadows, chairman of the House Freedom Caucus, is really naive.

You see, when all Republicans running for office ran incessant ads during the past four election cycles promising to fully repeal Obamacare, Meadows actually thought they meant it! What a fool.
When Mitch McConnell promised to repeal Obamacare “root and branch,” Meadows actually thought that he meant … well … root and branch.

And when Mr. Meadows read the fifth sentence of Speaker Paul Ryan’s “Better Way to Fix Health Care,” which declared, “Obamacare must be fully repealed so we can start over and take a new approach,” well, he though it meant full repeal, starting over, and a new approach.

Meadows, along with a few of his compatriots, didn’t seem to get the memo: that this was all a joke. Who do they think they are? Amelia Bedelia? Doesn’t he know they only meant to repeal the funding mechanism of Obamacare to make it more insolvent?

That’s not the only thing for which Mr. Meadows owes an apology.

Meadows seemed to bring to Congress some foreign idea that facts and details about a bill and a policy matter. Doesn’t he know that “something” is better than “nothing?”

He also seems to have this archaic belief that one should actually understand the policies of the issues they are dealing with. You know, kind of the way an accountant knows accounting and an engineer knowns engineering, Mr. Meadows oddly believed that his colleagues understood what Obamacare is and isn’t. Sure, Obamacare is the seminal domestic policy issue of our time, but was Meadows really naïve enough to think policy-makers should … you know … understand a modicum of policy about health care?

Meadows seemed to take to heart the GOP’s criticism of Pelosi’s declaration, “we have to pass the bill so you can find out what’s in it.” Silly country bumpkin from western North Carolina, this Meadows guy. As chief RINO Chris Collins said, “once we get it done, then we can really explain what’s in it.” Heck, if Dems can say that after spending 13 months on Obamacare, why can’t Republicans say the same thing after spending two weeks on a more insolvent version?

Where Meadows really went off the rails was when he expected his colleagues to understand the concept of adverse selection and that keeping the actuarially insolvent regulations but repealing the individual mandate would accelerate the death spiral. What does he think this is – an economics class? We’re talking about Republican politicians here.

Did he really think that patriots like Rep. Austin Scott would remember that such a plan was tried in the U.S. territories and it collapsed immediately? That was before his time. Well, it wasn’t … but still.

And why was Meadows so credulous to take Paul Ryan seriously when he said the better way to deal with pre-existing conditions was to fund state high-risk pools instead of mandating the destruction of the entire market? Did he actually think we were going to repeal the element of Obamacare that … er … made it Obamacare? I mean, you can’t get everything you want.

Also, Meadows is kind of gullible not to understand the simplicity of the GOP’s … well … not so simple narrative:

“This is full repeal or close to it.”

“Well, we can’t repeal the core of Obamacare because of reconciliation.”

“Don’t worry, this is a three-phase process and in step two, Tom Price will repeal the regulations administratively.”

“We don’t want to repeal the regulations because they “protect” consumers and help people!”

See, Meadows had the temerity to view the core elements of Obamacare … you know … the parts that actually drove up the premiums and drove out the competition, as a cancer that needed to be cut out. Didn’t he know his colleagues viewed them as “vital patient protections?” But he still should have understood that they wanted to repeal Obamacare … er … I mean the rest of it.

And doesn’t he know that the Parliamentarian is the presiding officer of the Senate, not the Vice President or his designee? And Ryan already checked with the Parliamentarian, and she said they can’t repeal Obamacare through reconciliation. Well, actually she didn’t say that. But still, is the price of hurting Elizabeth McDonough’s feelings or pressuring her really worth … you know … repealing Obamacare? Doesn’t Meadows have any feelings for the first female Parliamentarian? Don’t let one-fifth of the economy get in the way.

Also, thanks to Meadows now so many members won’t be able to spend more time with their families by losing their reelection after they owned the death spiral and precipitated single payer.

Most of all, Mark Meadows needs to apologize for not understanding what a Republican really is: a liberal who is not talented enough to run in a Democrat primary. (For more from the author of “The Freedom Caucus Owes GOP Leadership an Apology” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., hopes to become the next chairman of the House Freedom Caucus. And he has big plans for what he’ll accomplish in the role.

“From day one since our founding almost two years ago, the mission of the Freedom Caucus has been to give a voice to the countless Americans who feel that Washington does not represent them,” Meadows said.

The 57-year-old lawmaker from Jackson County in western North Carolina is perhaps best known for filing the House motion that ultimately led to the resignation of former Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio.

Now, should he win the Freedom Caucus chairmanship, Meadows said he hopes to continue to unify the caucus and specifically focus on the issues of regulatory reform and Obamacare.

“We are trying to put a real emphasis on policy and regulatory reform going forward,” Meadows told The Daily Signal in a phone interview. “One of our renewed interests, should I be elected the chairman, would be to focus on trying to take more of a proactive approach on policy and take official positions that are supported by most if not all of our [Freedom Caucus] members and how we can make sure that we move that positive agenda going forward.”

Meadows said the specific committee skills of Freedom Caucus members could help them tackle regulatory reform.

“Additionally, on the regulatory reform side of things, [we will be] using each of the member’s expertise as well as their committee assignments to really dig deep into the types of regulation and specifics within the agencies that they authorize on how they can best change and streamline those regulations to create job growth,” Meadows said.

Repealing and replacing Obamacare is also high on the list for Meadows.

“We will have no higher priority than repealing and replacing the Affordable Care Act,” Meadows said. “The Freedom Caucus will put a great emphasis on doing the tough work and getting the tough votes in the first 100 days for repealing it.”

According to Meadows, there are a number of conservative members who believe in having a Obamacare replacement plan “very quickly.” Meadows said the plan could include competition and personal accountability.

“We are optimistic that we can find some common ground with not only the conservative members, but also with health care providers and insurance providers that will allow there to be a real affordable and a real compassionate health care system in the years to come,” Meadows said.

Meadows was elected to Congress in 2012 and previously worked 27 years as a small business owner.

If elected chairman, he would replace Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, who has served as the caucus chairman since its creation in January 2015.

The caucus holds no official roster of its members and is well-known for its opposition to the Washington establishment.

While there is not expected to be a challenger to Meadows for the chairman position, the nine members of the Freedom Caucus board will have to “accept Meadows’ candidacy and formally nominate him,” according to Roll Call. (For more from the author of “The North Carolina Conservative Who Wants to Lead the Freedom Caucus” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.