Free Markets, Free People


Enjoy, Democrats – while you can

I’m sure today we’ll see a certain amount of crowing from the left. Such is life. You ram an unpopular bill through by trickery, lies, bribes and BS and I’m sure for some it’s a reason for celebration. Principles, ethics and decorum never were big on that side of the spectrum.  However, “by any means necessary” is. Unfortunately, like most major legislation, those who put us in this hole will likely not be around to shovel in the dirt when the fiscal lies bury us.

Today the right -and independents who don’t support this travesty- learn that elections do indeed have consequences. In November, one hopes, the Democrats learn bad legislation that opposes the will of the majority of Americans has consequences as well.

There’s more too it than that, though. I think Megan McArdle best sums up my thoughts on what has transpired in the last months and weeks, culminating in last night’s vote:

One cannot help but admire Nancy Pelosi’s skill as a legislator. But it’s also pretty worrying. Are we now in a world where there is absolutely no recourse to the tyranny of the majority? Republicans and other opponents of the bill did their job on this; they persuaded the country that they didn’t want this bill. And that mattered basically not at all. If you don’t find that terrifying, let me suggest that you are a Democrat who has not yet contemplated what Republicans might do under similar circumstances. Farewell, social security! Au revoir, Medicare! The reason entitlements are hard to repeal is that the Republicans care about getting re-elected. If they didn’t–if they were willing to undertake this sort of suicide mission–then the legislative lock-in you’re counting on wouldn’t exist.

Oh, wait–suddenly it doesn’t seem quite fair that Republicans could just ignore the will of their constituents that way, does it? Yet I guarantee you that there are a lot of GOP members out there tonight who think that they should get at least one free “Screw You” vote to balance out what the Democrats just did.

If the GOP takes the legislative innovations of the Democrats and decides to use them, please don’t complain that it’s not fair. Someone could get seriously hurt, laughing that hard.

But I hope they don’t. What I hope is that the Democrats take a beating at the ballot box and rethink their contempt for those mouth-breathing illiterates in the electorate. I hope Obama gets his wish to be a one-term president who passed health care. Not because I think I will like his opponent–I very much doubt that I will support much of anything Obama’s opponent says. But because politicians shouldn’t feel that the best route to electoral success is to lie to the voters, and then ignore them.

Please do everyone a favor, Democrats, and avoid talking about “polarization” and the “poisonous political atmosphere”. You created them (and if you didn’t you’ve taken them to a new and higher level) and any attempt on your part to shift the blame on others will be seen for exactly what it is – projection. Remember, it wasn’t the right calling those who earnestly turned out to oppose this monstrosity “fascists”, “brownshirts” and “astroturf”.

And please avoid whining about “bi-partisanship” and “transparency” as well. There was no attempt or desire to make this bi-partisan. The opposition was excluded from the beginning and then you acted surprised when they wouldn’t support this awful legislation. The process was about as opaque as one could make it. Backroom deals, political theater, bribes and legislation no one could read until it was up for a vote.

Yes, Democrats have set an new low for a standard in Congress – and that’s a pretty tough thing to do. Like McArdle, I hope they pay for it this November and November of ’12 and I intend to work toward that. My job? Keep reminding the electorate of what happened here. Keep the fire stoked and burning. Keep the anger bubbling. Keep reminding them that they were lied to and ignored. Keep pointing out that this bill wasn’t about how much the Democrats thought of the American people but instead how much they hold them in contempt. This was strictly about power, party and politics.

So celebrate on the left. Please. Do. I’d like to say you “earned” it, but I find unprincipled and deceitful grabs for power to be something less than that. It’s a gut feeling but I think you’ll pay heavily in November (I say you lose the House and retain a slim majority in the Senate sans Reid). At that point, you are barred from whining about minority rights, House or Senate rules, reconciliation and transparency.  You’ve decided on a new set of rules and we’ll see how well you can live with them, won’t we?

And, since few will consider keeping their kids on their insurance until they’re 27 much of a benefit (and that’s about all that kicks in on this bill besides the taxes), my guess the fight for repeal will be popular, will most likely consume the next 2 years and will cost Obama his presidency in ’12.

Couldn’t happen to a nicer one term president. I’m sure his concession speech, barring a breakdown of TOTUS, will be a doozy.

In the meantime, let the law suits begin.

~McQ

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Tumblr
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

28 Responses to Enjoy, Democrats – while you can

  • Well, that is pretty standard political maneuvering and posturing.  It will not surprise me to see the tables turn in the future, and the reactions along with it.  My interest now is in the battles to come, as both Republicans and some state governors try to mangle or otherwise kill the legislation.  And also, how this affects future agenda items.  Obama and Pelosi spent enormous amounts of political capital to get this far.  There are no arms left to twist (and not a few that are broken).  For Republicans, the question becomes whether or not they can cripple or kill off this legislation.  For Democrats, it becomes a question of completing the process and doing so quickly, in the hopes that any anger over it fades by November (or is forgotten as other legislative items take center stage).

    I think that immigration may play that role for the Dems.  They may be less concerned over whether or not anything gets done, as much as by having it become a front-page item that pushes health care out of the limelight and makes the midterm elections less of a disaster.

    • If you think immgiration reform will be a winner for the dems – the way that they want it – as opposed to health care, you’re nuts.

      The fight to repeal begins today. And there’s planty of ways to cripple this even if we don’t get the threshold to repeal, only manage small majorities.

      After this abomination, I will never stand with any democrat about anything.  I no longer consider them to be fellow Americans. Their lives are of less than zero consequence to me.

      • I don’t think it will be a winner for them, only that it can serve the purpose of making things less painful for them in November.  If immigration becomes a contentious and high-visibility issue, then there may be some political stock in voting against it, possibly enough to allow a Democrat or two to keep a seat that they would’ve lost if the last memory in voter’s minds was “you voted yes on Obamacare.

        And with the economy as it is and unemployment where it is, I figure that this issue will be event more contentious than it has been in the past.  Of course, Republicans can use this issue to make November even worse for Democrats, assuming they read voter sentiment correctly and respond accordingly.

    • There’s a lot of anger with the way Dems have tried to handle immigratin in the past, Tonus. And there’s nothing to suggest they’ll approach it any differently this time. Linking immigration reform that favors illegals and the passage of HCR in the face of majority opposition should be pretty easy for the GOP. Time to dust off the famous Reagan line “there [they] go again”.

  • One cannot help but admire Nancy Pelosi’s skill as a legislator.

    What skill????  Good grief, that revolting harridan barely managed to squeak the bill through with only three votes to spare and in the face of (dare I use the term?) bipartisan opposition even though:

    — Her caucus has an overwhelming majority

    — A majority of Americans agree with the principle behind the bill, i.e. reforming the health care system

    — She’s had months to work on the bill, rally her caucus and corral the necessary votes

    — The president is of her party and also worked to get this thing passed, scratching backs and making promises that worked to her benefit

    — MiniTru was in the tank for the bill and process

    — She had practically the entire federal treasury at her disposal to buy votes as well as the president to make promises

    Saying that she showed skills as a legislator with a stacked deck like that is like saying that the coach of the Superbowl champs showed skills when his team beat a local high school team by one point in double OT amid allegations and evidence that he’d also paid off the officiators.

  • The insurance companies have no choice but to start to show up in Washington in armored cars full of campaign contributions (among other contributions).  Perhaps there’s a few idealists who actually care about the march towards socialism as a utopia.  But for most, its about growing the favors they can grant for other favors in return.  This is not inconsistent with the socialist mindset either.  So I consider my attributed motivation as more inclusive.

    But once those armored cars start showing up, I don’t hold much hope for repeal.  I think we’re 3rd party bound. 

  • The precedent set by this bill is much more far reaching than appears on the surface.  If the U. S. Congress can enact legislation to force citizens to buy a product like health insurance, it can also enact legislation to tell us to buy our automobile from Government Motors (GM), or purchase a home in Kalamazoo, MI, or any other product that strikes the fancy of the ruling political party in Congress.
    This strikes me as tyranny … the very kind that our founding fathers stood against … declaring independence from King George and England … and pledging “to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor” to throw off such tyranny.
    It is now incumbent upon the American people to take a similar stand.  Not only must this legislation (and the precedent it sets) be overturned, a message must be sent to those who enacted and approved this bill that the electorate will not tolerate such blatant abuse of power.
    As Bruce said … let the lawsuits begin.  And come November … every voter should signal, “Adios,” to every congressperson who voted in its favor.

  • The stock market is opening.  Let’s see at the end of the day if the “double-dip” recession is coming.

  • In reality, if you strip out all the gimmicks and budgetary games and rework the calculus, a wholly different picture emerges: The health care reform legislation would raise, not lower, federal deficits, by $562 billion.

    These deficits have absolutely nothing to do with George W. Bush .. nothing.   These are solely owned by Nancy Pelosi and her Democrat minions.

    • Now Neo, you know that geniuses like Dr. Erb will arrive shortly to explain why this all really belongs to George W. Bush because of Iraq.

      • I believe the correct phrase would be  ‘the illegal and immoral  quagmire of Iraq’ 

  • Like I said, we do the hard work of actual progress.  I have full confidence that your team will maintain the new status quo when they win in 20xx… so far the markets are up :)
    Oh yea, you need 60 votes and a non-vetoing prez to get rid of it BTW.

    • Don’t need the 60 votes any more – just ask Mr. Reid. The non-vetoing prez should be easy. Repeal is what the next prez will run on. Don’t forget, there are no real benefits until 2014 so it won’t be like you’re taking anything away from anyone – except the increased taxes.

      • No Bruce, Tom didn’t really delve into the details or worry about ‘process’ – he only read as far as “Democrats GOOD, Republicans BAD”.
        Actually it’s amazing he could manage a big word like Republicans.

    • Markets are up because the big winner last night were the Insurance Companies.  Oddly, these were the same insurance companies that have been very publicly derided by Obama and the Dems for the last year and a half.

      Health care companies pull stock market higher

    • Where’s my “team”?  Oh, that’s right — I don’t have one.

  • The $64 dollar question …
    with ObamaCare’s .. err .. the government’s “Medical Advisory Board” now able to make some health care decisions for you, does this undermine Roe v Wade‘s “privacy” underpinnings, as the government already has a seat at the decision table ?
    .. or more simply, could a socially conservative administration now outlaw abortion ?
    The answer to that question became a lot murkier last night.
    The converse is also interesting .. is the “Medical Advisory Board” unconstitutional because it flies in the face of years of privacy precedents from the SCOTUS such as those built on Roe v Wade ?

  • And anyone who shows up here and claims it’s ‘better’ is full of shirt – there’s no way they read the bill, there’s no way they can KNOW it’s better.  They’re taking the word of the people who ‘closed Gitmo’, who were going to provide the most ethical and transparent administration in history, who were going to eliminate lobbyists, who were going to revitalize the economy with the Stimulus package, who tell us every month that unemployment went down the previous month, who claim that you can spend more and be revenue neutral, and claim that they have to spend to get us out of debt.

    Whatever the plan IS, they have no way of knowing it’s ‘Better’ than what we had.

    • looker[A]nyone who … claims it’s ‘better’ is full of shirt – there’s no way they read the bill, there’s no way they can KNOW it’s better. 

      Excellent point.  I wonder if rank-and-file democrats are so gullible in their private lives?  For example, do they buy a car just because the salesman says “it’s better than the one that you have” without bothering to test drive it, get an honest answer for how much it will cost, or even find out what make and model that it is?  I’m guessing that they don’t.  So, why would they agree to an “overhaul” of our health care system not only without bothering to know what’s in the law for themselves, but even knowing that the members of Congress don’t know what’s in it???

      They’re just stupid, I guess.

      • Because it makes them warm and fuzzy to think how “good” a country we are to provide coverage to everyone, and how wrong and bad it is that health care isn’t ‘shared’ like Mom taught them to do.
        Look at Erb, that’s how his clock runs.

        See?   How can it be bad to share?  How can it NOT be bad if we’re selfish and we don’t share?

        Now we’re a good industrialized nation because we have almost legislated ourselves into something they promise us is ‘good’, just like the other ‘civilized’ western countries have.    But no, they don’t have a clue what’s going to happen.  Papa Obama and Momma Nancy told them Santa, and the Easter Bunny would be along to make all the boo boo’s go away and they believe – and the presents, and the chocolate eggs, well, they’ll just ‘be there’ because that’s part of the big promise of big government.

        So Stupid?  not sure.  More like childish maybe?     You see… “Stupid” would mean they were acting like adults in all this and denying that government can only get it’s revenue from one source, taxation, which all ultimately is paid by the citizens in one way, shape size or form.  Adults understand someone has to buy those presents and place em under the tree, and someone has to hide the eggs for them to find during the Free Health Care Easter Egg hunt.   And they just can’t follow the costs to their logical conclusion, because that’s too hard (and besides, they’re expecting someone else will be buying the presents, and the eggs….probably the ‘rich’ and the corporations and the bankers, and Wall Street!).
        No, this is one colossal childish act at the moment.  The Democrats in charge ‘have to win’ this politically and the people who want to believe in Santa and the Bunny want to believe the Democrats are telling them the truth.

        STUPID will be when they’re hit with the bill and they forgive the Democrats (who will, no doubt have come up with more lies about how it all failed because someone stole the presents!!!! – where’s George W. Bush when you REALLY NEED HIM????!!!!)

         

  • Here’s a thought: if you really want to strike a blow against the reactionary left, AND really stick it to one of their most important constituancies, get rid of the Deaprtment of Education.

    It’s nothing more than a bloated collection of bloodsuckers who educate exactly no one.

  • In the meantime, let the law suits begin.


    When would they begin?
    I’m not a lawyer (I only pretend to be one from time to time), but doesn’t someone need standing just to be able to get in the door?  IOW, the mandates don’t begin until 2014, so it would take an individual to be affected by the mandates to bring a lawsuit.
    I guess there is that whole interstate commerce thingie (see… fancy lawyer speak… I purtend good), but that will be a hard sell don’t you think?

    Fascinating stuff though.

    Cheers.

    • They’ll begin as soon as the bill is signed into law. In fact, 11 or 12 states are waiting on that to file against the fed challenging the constitutionality of the individual mandates.

      • Right.  But don’t they need standing.  Doesn’t there need to be someone harmed by this first.  If they don’t begin until 2014, they’d have to wait til then, yes?  There needs to be a party to sue on behalf of, right?
         

        • Awww man, you know the only way they made the numbers work on the payouts in 2014 was to front end load the charges on us as soon as the law becomes effective.  You can’t have missed that, there’s no way you missed that.

          Just like any insurance policy, you get to pay starting NOW and we’ll see if you get anything back later.

  • Repeal will require 2/3 majorities to sustain until Obama’s term is up, and although it isn’t impossible to win big enough to scare the willies out of enough remaining Democrats (like the 23 Dem Senators up in 2012) to join in overriding, it’s not likely.  The problem with waiting until 2013 to repeal is that our medical, pharmaceutical, and health insurance industries will have been starved of private capital by then – the potential returns having been forced down – and the damage will not easily be undone.