Initially, he seemed to be an American Hans Brinker, who willingly put his finger in the Washington dike.

He seemed to understand that the dike was the only thing remaining, that it was holding back the heavy waves of discordant change that threatened the American people. That if the dike gave way, the weight of the water would wash away freedom. He seemed also to understand that most Americans did not want what was in the bill, that its proponents were forcing it on the people.

In the end, Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) removed his finger from the dyke.

Previously, Stupak spoke of principles, the unborn and the sanctity of life itself. But, Sunday, at a nationally televised news conference, he could not look directly into the TV camera. Stupak knew his fellow Americans were watching him closely. It was as if he did not want anyone to be able to see his eyes.

Perhaps, Stupak worried that, if citizens could see his eyes, they might be able to look inside, and they would know more than he or any incumbent politician could handle.

No doubt the pressure from President Obama, Speaker Pelosi and others has been tremendous. Was the amount of pressure used on Stupak and his five followers the same amount applied on other Democrats? Or, did Obama and other White House operatives up the pressure, or even the ante?

Stupak told assembled media and the nation that Obama promised he would issue an executive order that would ensure no federal funds would ever be used to pay for abortions. If Obama does issue such an executive order that will contradict the content in the already passed Senate bill that had to be approved as is by the House and then signed by President Obama to become law.

One need not be a legal scholar to understand that law birthed from legislation always prevails over executive orders. But, while that fact reflects constitutional requirements, unfortunately, it is not likely the administration’s plan in perpetuity behind their promise to Stupak and his five followers.

Almost every American knows why this happened and what it means. The calculus is simple. The implications pervasive. Obama and Pelosi needed to get 216 votes to win passage. If Stupak and his five followers could be turned, they would add six to the Democrat majority vote count.

When they were turned, Bart Stupak knowingly pulled out his finger, the dam burst, and so-called Health Care Reform passed 219-212, casting Americans adrift on the flood waters of change.

In Holland, there are two stone statues honoring a young boy named Peter. He understood the implications if the dike broke. It was Peter’s personal courage and steadfastness in holding back the flood waters that saved the people of the Netherlands. What the young Peter actually did is the basis upon which author Mary Elizabeth Mapes Dodge wrote the storied legend we all know as “Hans Brinker.”

Before Sunday, millions of Americans, in addition to a majority of his constituents, had placed their trust in Stupak. They believed him to be an American version of the storied Hans Brinker. They counted on Stupak to keep the government flood waters from sweeping them away.

Stupak talked a good talk. But, when the pressure came he buckled under it. Now, all those trusting Americans, from the Gulf Coast to the Great Lakes and from the Atlantic to the Pacific, know better. Today, none would tolerate a statue of Bart Stupak anywhere in the United States.

Given they also know whether or not their incumbent U.S. Representatives and Senators can be trusted — like citizens in Michigan’s 1st Congressional District — it’s likely most have already made a fateful decision: Incumbents impersonating Hans Brinker are not acceptable. The people want real Peters on which to rebuild limited government.

Richard Olivastro is president of Olivastro Communications. He can be reached at Rich@Olivastro.NET or 877.RichSpeaks.