Maybe the health care vote was the cataclysm America needed

Yesterday, I took to heart Mark Steyn’s warning that this is the beginning of the end.  Health care is the wedge, and Democrats were willing to engage in long-term strategies — including the sacrifice of a few Democratic political careers — to make it happen.  Bruce Kesler, however, actually sees cause for hope in the recent Democratic alignment around health care:

For the past three and a half decades, the clearest dividing line and predictor of how we and our leaders would approach issues, ranging from the social to the geopolitical, is the position – contemporaneous or in retrospect — held about the US Congress’ votes to not meet US pledges to supply and aid South Vietnam in the face of North Vietnam’s heavily Soviet and Chinese supplied continued armed and logistical build-up and massive invasion.

In the reaction to President Nixon’s deserved fall, an overwhelmingly Democrat and anti-Vietnam war Congress was elected in 1974, determined to overturn US foreign policy. Polls were equivocal, at least providing some cover or excuse. In the wake of President Obama’s undeserved credence to govern from the center, an overwhelmingly Democrat and liberal Congress was elected in 2008, determined to instead legislate from the left and overturn US domestic policy. This time, polls are decisively opposed, but ignored, and there’s no cover or excuse.

Basically, in both cases, we went from a nation following a course – as befuddled as it may be – of determination to pursue freedoms to a nation that waffles freedoms away. Basically, our “conservative”, “liberal” and “moderate” postures toward most issues over the past decades have been in line with how we view the causes and outcomes of our Vietnam involvement. So, too, will our future divides and postures be determined by how we now or come to view the causes and outcomes of reshaping almost a fifth of the US economy and almost 100% of our personal and fiscal health.

Read the rest here.  I hope he’s right, although the insidiousness of Leftism, it’s refusal to die (kind of like fungus or cockroaches), has me down.

Be Sociable, Share!
  • Earl

    I share your feeling of dis-spiritedness as I look at the corrupt morass that is Washington D.C. just now.  Through almost 50 years of watching with more or less attention, I do not ever remember seeing it so putrid.
    However, some say that for G-d’s people to be discouraged is a sin (probably lack of faith), and I resist.
    After all, Bruce Kesler may very well be right in his expectation — certainly, if we WANT him to be right, then we can ACT to make this most desired outcome more likely.  Let the GOP know that we want men of principle — the Rubios, and not the Crists — elected in 2010; talk to relatives and friends; join a Tea Party in our area; send money to Tark in Nevada; etc.
    I’m quite confident that *if* discouragement is a sin, it’s because G-d knows that moping around enjoying the sensation of wallowing in the dumps is the surest way to get to a bad outcome!  Let’s get moving…..

  • Mike Devx

    Most of you have probably read or heard of Harry Reid’s statement on the health care bill:
    >“Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) offered a vigorous defense Monday of the deals in the Senate reform bill that benefit individual states, saying ‘it doesn’t speak well’ of senators who didn’t secure such deals …”

    My translation: In the Harry Reid Senate, the only purpose of voting ‘Yes’ on a bill is to do so only after you have secured boo-coo bucks (sic), said money to flow only to your state.  Pork, in other words.  Raw, naked Pork.  Every senator has  a sole responsibility, in every bill, to manage the flow of Pork money to their state.

    Now, color me naive, but I didn’t think that was how it was supposed to work.  I know making law is a lot like making sausage: You don’t want to watch it in action.

    But I thought that the deal making was supposed to be, you support my bill, or my amendment, and I support yours.  Yours in this bill, or yours in future bill XYZ, coming up for vote in N months from now.  A trading of legislative favors, in other words.  Not Pork money, not taxpayer money wasted in a huge funnel to preferred political friends, to get rich at our expense.

    Sure, there’s always been pork.  But never before has a leader of the Senate publicly stated that Senators who don’t engage in Pork have only themselves to blame.

    The trading of legislative favors tended to work well – and survive the smell test – because the crafting of a bill ITSELF is a trading of legislative favors.  Those who vote for the bill are happy because the language of the bill meets their needs; those who vote for the bill due to other legislative favors know that some different bill, or some amendment to this bill, meets their needs.  Everyone wins, at the same game.

    But with Harry Reid’s Public New Pork Test, the only people who win are those who get the money funneled to their state.  In the long run this doesn’t work.  It can’t work, and can only lead to a divisive battle among 100 Senators for the money at the Pig Trough.   It only leads to massive corruption, and massive fleecing of the American Taxpayer Wallet.

    But the seizure of the American Taxpayer Wallet Money is all these Democrats appear to understand.  Pity the Democrat Party, how far it has fallen.

  • Ymarsakar

    <B>Either way, Americans who believe in personal freedom will win.</b>
    Like the Vietnamese won their personal freedom after the Fall of Saigon? Through death, yes.

  • Ymarsakar

    We also refuse to die, Book. At least, not before taking down thousands of the bastards with us.