Mark Steyn explains Democrats’ long term thinking *UPDATE*

It’s scary, but Mark Steyn is right:

I’ve been saying for a year now, in NR and NRO, that the object for savvy Dems is to get this thing passed in whatever form because, once you do, there’s no going back. Kim Strassel in yesterday’s Journal gets it:

So why the stubborn insistence on passing health reform? Think big. The liberal wing of the party—the Barney Franks, the David Obeys—are focused beyond November 2010, to the long-term political prize. They want a health-care program that inevitably leads to a value-added tax and a permanent welfare state. Big government then becomes fact, and another Ronald Reagan becomes impossible. See Continental Europe.

Just so. And that’s worth whatever hit they have to take in 2010. Every time I make the point, someone says, oh, Jim Webb this or Byron Dorgan that, or have you see Harry Reid’s numbers in Nevada? Oh, please. We’ve just seen what happens when you make Ben Nelson your Maginot Line. The Dems are thinking strategically; the Republicans are all tactics.

In other words, as of today, with Nelson’s willingness to sell his soul and the Democrats’ willingness to go forward with a plan everyone hates, we’ve lost not just the battle, but the war.  We can start writing the American eulogy.

UPDATEAnchoress is bummed out too.  She has faith in her faith, though, and it gives her consolation, especially at this time of year.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments

  1. Quisp says

    I understand that an entitlement, once granted, is permanent and the only debate is about the size of the increases (with smaller increases known as “cuts”). But isn’t the delay between the tax hike (2010) and the first evidence of benefits (2014) risky for the Dems? If they’re kicked out in 2010, couldn’t this be repealed? Or is it so multi-tentacled that it will be impossible to extricate it from the system?

  2. Deana says

    I wish you and Mark Steyn were wrong but I know that you aren’t.  It deeply depresses me as well.
     
    I feel like I just found out that someone I’m crazy about was just diagnosed with terminal cancer and has very little time to live.  It breaks my heart that we are throwing America away like this but I’m grateful I got to live in this beautiful country and be called one of its own.

  3. dakotabilly says

    My son, who is a missionary in Vienna, Austria, said something to me several weeks ago.  “The future of the United States is Europe,” is what he said. One has to acknowledge that, to the Democrat Party, an individual Senator or Representative–even a president– is expendable in the cause of the goal.  That is a major difference amongst the political parties in this country.  Their goal is power, the others play for principle.  In a Constitutional Republic such as ours, power always wins in the long run.

  4. suek says

    >>Their goal is power, the others play for principle.  In a Constitutional Republic such as ours, power always wins in the long run.>>
     
    That’s something to think about.  I don’t like it.  It may be true, but I don’t like it.  Human beings being what they are, it may be inevitable.
     
    It seems as if what we need are occasional periods where the principle players consolidate power, but then have to let it go.  Can such a thing happen?
     
    What you say makes me think that we’re destined to have another revolution and will have to start over.  This is not a good thing.  I was hoping that we’d avoid it if the GOP was voted back into power.  Reading MM this AM, it appears that they’ve put in verbiage that might prevent future Congresses from repealing this act.  Will the GOP – assuming they _do_ get back into the majority – be strong enough to repeal it in spite of the Dems efforts?  I wonder…

  5. BrianE says

    Anything passed with a certain framework is the key.

    Liberals will continue their assault to include greater benefits, reduce individual options, and burden future generations.

    Medicare when passed was supposed to cost $12 billion by 1990. Over the years, congress increased benefits and eligibility, so the actual cost was $120.  Does anyone still exhaling a harmful by-product of life believe this won’t be the case with this legislation?

    A previous post talked about the failure of conservatives to think strategically, since the left certainly is. Why has there been no outrage by the left over the fact that 17 million people will still be uncovered by this legislation?

    Strategic thinking.  Most of those are illegal aliens. Next step in the plan. Amnesty. By the stroke of a pen, problem solved.

    It is very similar to the situation in Washington state. The democratic governor is required to present a balanced budget and the red ink is massive (though not near California standards).

    The solution– simple. The governor presents a budget without funding social programs like S-Chip, welfare payments, etc.  Since everyone knows that even moderates would not stand for “balancing the budget on the backs of the poor”, the plan is to fund those programs early in 2010 at which time folks will have no choice but to accept new taxes to fund these programs.

    This strategy avoides the messy fight over trying to cut any programs to balance the budget. All tax increase, all the time. It’s the democrat way.

  6. says

    <B>It breaks my heart that we are throwing America away like this but I’m grateful I got to live in this beautiful country and be called one of its own.</b>
     
    There are a whole lot of Americans that will fight to the death before America is thrown away. It isn’t over until it is.
     
    You are an admirable woman, like many other Americans, say Bookworm and Neo-Neocon, and I am confident you all will hold the line of light against the coming darkness.

Trackbacks

Leave a Reply