Obamacare: Drafting of a Socialist Democracy

Michael Erickson argues that, rather than showing a deaf ear to the cries of most Americans against the big government approach of “Obamacare,” its proponents in fact are pursuing a long term, political advantage, one that will more than make up for expected electoral defeats in November. As such, Republicans cannot hope to win, unless they provide an alternative, positive vision of their own.

In recent weeks, much has been made within conservative media circles of the apparent penchants of President Obama, Senate Majority Leader Reid, Speaker Pelosi, and company for political suicide. The argument is that, in defying the clear will of the American people by forcing through “Obamacare,” even if necessary by the most tawdry of Congressional procedural gimmicks, they are showing a cavalier disregard for their own electoral prospects in November.

There is certainly a strong, factual basis for the claim. Polls have been steadily turning against “Obamacare” since the “Cornhusker Kickback” and the “Louisiana Purchase” became common parlance. The old game of “pay to play,” which indeed has been a mainstay of legislative sausage making since the machinations of Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton, is now open to public scrutiny and comment like never before possible – thanks in large part to the internet and twenty-four hour cable news. Given how President Obama from the start handed over the details of his own health care agenda to the likes of Reid and Pelosi, it was inevitable that the process would be consumed by legislative trickery, resulting in a loss of public confidence.

Republican victories in special elections in Virginia, New Jersey, and then, most surprisingly, in Massachusetts confirmed the polls, especially as each of these contests emerged as a virtual referendum on “Obamacare.” There is now a “perfect storm” brewing, one very capable of replicating, if not outdoing, the GOP takeover of Congress in 1994. Even Democrat spin does not pretend that this is going to be a typical, mid-term loss for the party occupying the White House.

Nevertheless, in spite of this cauldron, the Democrat leadership very defiantly presses ahead. There is no longer even the pretense of “fair play” or “listening to the voters,” as President Obama tries to win over votes in the House by offering trips on Air Force One, and as Speaker Pelosi brandishes every one of her carrots and sticks over the remaining few dozen “undecided” Democrat Congressmen. If the House manages to pass the Senate bill, then it will be done as a most crass exposition of legislative skullduggery. It will be the sheer triumph of sophistry over reason, realpolitik over statesmanship, and Washington insiders over the people. Even the victors will need to sweep their embarrassment under the rug and brace themselves for the onslaught come Election Day.

This is not a pretty picture, and yet it easily could have been avoided if indeed President Obama had pursued a sincere, health care summit with the Senate and House Republican leadership, in the aftermath of the victory of Scott Brown in the Massachusetts special election. If he had pulled a “Clinton,” by really reaching to the center and “triangulating” himself between the big government solution offered by the Democrats and the status quo presumably being offered by the GOP, then he could have forced both sides into a truly bi-partisan bill – one that would permit him then to transcend the old, partisan fray and recapture his role as the one, and indeed indispensable, agent of change. With some dare and imagination, he could have dismantled overnight the GOP surge accompanying Brown’s victory, thereby showing himself to be the master impresario on the Washington stage.

Instead, Obama dug in his heels, by only adding a few, non-controversial, and relatively unimportant, Republican ideas to his post-summit proposal. It was sheer window dressing, and even the mainstream media could not suggest otherwise. In the aftermath, conservatives could not but ask: Is Obama simply not as smart as the “triangulating” President Clinton, who manipulated that Gingrich surge in 1994 into his own re-election two years later? Or is he allowing his ideological drive, one born in said cradle of Frank Marshall Davis, Bill Ayers, and Rev. Jeremiah Wright, to overcome his better judgment?

The implication behind both questions is that President Obama, and the leftist, Democrat leadership on Capitol Hill, are making a mistake; but in considering this from a long term perspective, they are appearing rather as the “fools” who don the stage in several of Shakespeare’s plays. They are knaves, to be sure; and, when we see Pelosi in particular bumbling her way through a press conference, there is no doubt a good measure of basic obtuseness as well. Still, I cannot but help see the upturned, sly smile, as the “fool” bespeaks a canny insight in his jest.

If “Obamacare” passes in any form, the Democrats in the short term will face certain obliteration; but, in the long term, they will have done more since both the New Deal and the Great Society to cultivate an overarching dependency class. In creating a system of permanently increasing taxes and deficits (once it becomes clear that the presently imagined manners of paying for this new system will be all too inadequate, especially after the first decade of its existence), this monstrosity will rape whatever financial independence the already overtaxed middle class may be able to muster. More importantly, it will diminish expectations among American consumers of health care, as they reconcile themselves to the inevitable rationing of care. Instead of aspiring for better and more, even in regards to so personal an issue as their own health care, they will become accustomed to having less; and, among the indoctrinated, they actually will see a moral “good” in such a condition. I cannot help but think of Orwell’s 1984, where the citizens of Oceania learn over time to regard their subsistence in squalor as a “patriotic duty” for the good of the “war.” The next thing we know, we shall have a Vice President tell us that it is our “patriotic duty” to pay higher taxes and to settle for less.

Let us be clear on this point. “Obamacare” cannot but fail, in terms of its own, underlying financial solvency; and this in turn will create a burgeoning demand for a “public option” as a “remedy” for the overtaxed employers and individual policy holders trying in vain to make a living under its conditions. Also, when the United States Supreme Court inevitably throws out as unconstitutional the mandate that Americans purchase health insurance, the argument will be that, absent a “public option,” there will be nothing to keep insurance companies in line.

Far from being a bumbling disaster, “Obamacare” will turn out in time to be a most grand, Machiavellian scheme. It will usher forth the socialist democracy for which said Democrat Party has been uniformly committed since Senator George McGovern and the “New Left” wrested power away from the “Old Guard” in 1972. Its proponents understand that, while Americans traditionally aspire to be free, in fact most of them will give up that freedom for the “protections” offered by an ever expanding government, if conditioned to see that they are unexceptional and that their best days indeed are behind them. When we are just another European style socialist democracy, and when most of us are content with that fate, then indeed the tyrants will have won. They know that; it is a key component of their Marxist playbook. That is why they are playing for keeps on this particular bill, in spite of the very real prospects of electoral obliteration in November.

Republicans alone stand between this agenda and the precipice. None of the “third parties” will be able to rise in sufficient opposition; and, in the end, even the loudest of street rallies cannot do more than slow the tide. But if the GOP is to be effective to this end, then it must do more than simply say “NO” to “Obamacare,” or merely offer up ideas that it knows all too well will go nowhere on Capitol Hill. It must not play politics as usual on this one, because if it does, then it will turn out to be as much an aid to that emerging tyranny as the Democrat Left.

Rather than be the party of “NO,” the Republicans must be the party of “YES” to an alternative, but compelling, vision of the future: YES to a free market based system of health care (rather than a perpetuation of the cartel system that prevails in the status quo), which would include a dismantling of Medicare as we know it in our time; YES to an economy of sound money and fiscal restraint (rather than that loose money, Keynesian worldview with which Republicans have been all too fond since the deficits of the Reagan years); and YES to an American exceptionalism – in health care as in all other industries and cultural aspirations.

We of the “loyal opposition” must be less loyal and more revolutionary. There is no better time than the present to rise to the clarion call of real change. If in our opposition to “Obamacare” we come to see ourselves in that light, as patriots of a noble, American landscape, not as subjects of a global world of scarcity, then the legislative affronts facing us today may have their silver lining.

Palestinian 11 Year Old Children Committed to Death and Destruction

This is why there can be no peace between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs.  Until the Arabs stop this horrific child abuse and stop teaching their children that blowing up Jews is beautiful from the time they are born there will never be a peaceful solution.

Kids seek Shahada­ Martyrdom for Allah

Palestinian children: Martyrdom for Allah is preferable to life and suicide terror is natural.

Presenter: You described Shahada as something beautiful. Do you think it is beautiful?
Walla, age 11: Shahada [Martyrdom] is a very, very beautiful thing. Everyone yearns for Shahada. What could be sweeter than going to paradise?
Presenter: What is better, peace and full rights for the Palestinian people, or Shahada?
Walla: Shahada. I will achieve my rights after becoming a Shahid [Martyr].
Presenter: OK, Yussra, would you agree with that?
Yussra, age 11: Of course; Shahada is sweet. We don’t want this world, we want the Afterlife. We benefit not from this life, but from the Afterlife.
Presenter: Do you actually love death?
Yussra: Death is not Shahada.
Presenter: No, I mean the absence after death.
Yussra: No child loves death. The children of Palestine adopted the concept that Shahada is very good. Every Palestinian child, say someone aged 12, says: O Lord, I would like to become a Shahid.
Presenter: We’ve got a call, Sabrine from Ramallah.
Sabrine [telephone]: Ayyat al-Akhras was 17 when she blew herself up –
Presenter: Sabrine, are you for it or against it?
Sabrine [by telephone]: Of course I support blowing up, it is our right.
Presenter: Sabrine, now, is it natural that Ayyat al-Akhras blows herself up?
Sabrine: Of course it’s natural.

Israel and the U.S.: Best friends?

Why Is The US Undermining The Sovereignty Of Israel?

WHY IS THE U.S. UNDERMINING THE SOVEREIGNTY OF ISRAEL?
By Gary A. Aminoff

Here are a few questions that I would like answers to:

When was the last time a sovereign nation announced urban planning decisions in its principal city and had the wrath of the United States rain down upon it?

What right does the Secretary of State have to declare the decision by the City of Jerusalem to allow the construction of 1,600 housing units “insulting” to the United States?

Why is the United States interfering in the right of a nation to conduct its business and provide housing for its residents?

The degrading treatment of a sovereign country by the United States is intolerable to all who believe in the right of nations to govern their own countries.   It is especially troubling to American Jews who wonder why their government is treating Israel differently than it treats any other country?

The answer, of course, lies with the troubled political position of President Barack Obama.  Obama, apparently having no coherent foreign policy, having alienated many of our allies, along with taking actions that make the United States appear weak and indecisive, needs a foreign policy “win.”

He, like many on the left, have delusions that the real reason the Palestinian Arabs won’t make peace with Israel is because of…..settlements.  Those who know the truth would double over in laughter at the thought, if the matter weren’t so serious.

The political naivete demonstrated by this administration, from the President to the Vice President to the Secretary of State to Special Ambassador Mitchell is astounding.  They clearly have no understanding of what motivates the Palestinians.  They think it is (wait for it)…the settlements.

The truth is, and everyone clearly knows this except our brilliant administration, that if Israel were to decide to destroy every settlement in the West Bank or all the housing in Jerusalem there would still be no peace with the Arabs.

Wake up Secretary Clinton, housing of residents of Jerusalem has NOTHING to do with whether the Arabs make peace with Israel or not.  Israel gave up ALL of its settlements, and moved ALL of its population out of Gaza.  Did that make a difference to the Arabs?  Did it result in peace?  Of course not!

They are playing our administration for fools.  The housing issue is simply a “red herring” that enables them to avoid negotiating with Israel.  Danny Danon, a member of the Israeli Knesset had this to say today,

“Secretary Clinton recently embraced the task of helping solve shipping problems of American food products to our shores, yet condemns our right to build homes for Jews in the city of Jerusalem. Jews living in Jerusalem is why Israel exists as a Jewish state. With all due respect, Madam Secretary, forget the gefilte fish for Passover and support our inalienable rights to the Jewish homeland, Israel.”

Here is the bottom line and why there will never be peace anytime soon between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs.

The goal of the Palestinians, whether they are led by Hamas or by Abbas, is not peace with Israel.  It is the total destruction of Israel and its disappearance from the Middle East along with all of the Jews.

You can call for whatever talks you want to arrange.  No amount of talking will result in peace between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs in our lifetime.  Perhaps a new generation of Arabs who are not taught to hate Jews from the time of their birth will be able to accept Israel in the region.  But, like the Jews after the exodus from Egypt, it will take a full 40 years for that generation to come into power.

I will tell you one way that peace could occur tomorrow from the Israeli point of view.  Have the Arabs declare that they recognize the State of Israel and that they agree to stop bombing Israel or attacking Jews.  Achieve that, and you will achieve instant peace.  Since we all know the Arabs will never do that…..we also know there will be no peace.

It is counter-productive for the US to put pressure on Israel.  Israel is not only a sovereign country, it is a democracy, it supports the US and the West, and it is a country which produces innovative products that make our everyday life easier and safer.  The medical achievements that have come out of Israel in the past 20 years have saved an untold number of American lives.

To attempt to humiliate or subjugate Israel for domestic political gain is behavior which is not worthy of the long history and special relationship between the United States and Israel.

Gary Aminoff is the President of the San Fernando Valley Republican Club and is a member of the Republican Jewish Coalition.  He is a commercial real estate broker practicing in Beverly Hills.

The Slaughter Solution Will Lead to Congressional "Slaughter"

The Slaughter Solution is a plan by Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY), the Democratic chair of the powerful House Rules Committee and a key ally of Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), to get the health care legislation through the House without an actual vote on the Senate-passed health care bill.  You see, Democratic leaders currently lack the votes needed to pass the Senate health care bill through the House.  Under Slaughter’s scheme, Democratic leaders will overcome this problem by simply “deeming” the Senate bill passed in the House – without an actual vote by members of the House.

Read more here , here and here.

Pelosi is so desperate to pass an unpopular bill she is looking for any way this can be deemed “passed” whether the American people want it or not.

“Passing” this bill through parliamentary manipulation will cause a populist uproar even worse than passing it on a straight up or down vote.  The Democrats are determined to destroy their party.

Congressional Suicide Bombers

U.S. Taxpayers Pay to Promote Middle East History Revision

Arlene Kushner, writing in the Washington Times explains how the U.S. Government (meaning U.S. Taxpayers) have funded a 39 page glossy “Palestine Guide Book” just released by the Palestine Authority in which Israel doesn’t exist.

The U.S. government, via the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), has provided support for a glossy 39-page “Palestine Guide Book.” Just released by the Palestinian Authority Ministry of Tourism, it declares on its first page, “Palestine lies between the Mediterranean Coast and the Jordan River.” Not until Page 10 are we informed – under the heading “Country” – that “Palestine comprises the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.”

Ms. Kushner then provides a history of the area which history is ignored in the Palestine Guide Book.

The PA, awash in internal politics that are neither moderate nor conciliatory, has been displeased consistently with negotiations – despite some extraordinarily generous offers. It thus suits the PA to create “facts” unilaterally, making its case to the international community rather than at a negotiating table.

This booklet promotes fallacious positions that defy a major U.N. Security Council resolution and a written agreement between Israel and the PLO – both of which require negotiations for determination of final status for Palestinian Arabs.

It is unsettling to see the USAID logo on the back cover, but it is no accident.

Magdouline Slameh, head of the PA Ministry of Tourism Department of Materials and Translation, expressed gratitude to this writer for the wonderful support provided by USAID. She said her staff wrote the booklet in close cooperation with the USAID offices in Ramallah.

Go here to read the whole article.

Technorati Tags: ,,,

Dennis Prager: Why Democrats Don’t Care About Our National Debt

Dennis Prager: Why Democrats Don’t Care About Our National Debt

Dennis Prager, writing in Townhall.com, explains why the Democrats don’t care about the $10 Trillion National Debt:

[…]

“And most Americans do not understand the difference between liberal and left. They do not realize, for example, that there is no major difference between the American Democratic Party and the leftist social democratic parties of Western Europe. They do not know that from Karl Marx to Obama, the left (as opposed to liberals) has never created wealth because it has never been interested in creating wealth; it is interested in redistributing wealth.

Therefore, unprecedented and unsustainable debt, a debt that will negatively affect most Americans’ quality of life, renders the dollar increasingly undesirable, and undermines America’s prestige and power in the world — these developments do not particularly disturb the left. They may trouble the president, the Democratic Party, and others on the left on some political level, but that pales in comparison to what the left really wants: a huge government overseeing a giant welfare state and a country with far fewer rich Americans.”

[…]

“But the demise of the dollar as the world’s currency disturbs the left as much as does America’s not getting a gold medal in curling at the Winter Olympics.

And as for America wielding less power in the world, that is a positive development for the American left. It is the world community as embodied in the United Nations that should wield power throughout the world, not an “overstretched,” “imperialist” and “militarist” United States.

I used to believe that left and right have similar goals for America, that they just differed in the means they wanted used to get there. I was mistaken. The left has a very different vision of America than those who hold the founding values of America, most especially individualism and small government. And if the price of a once in a lifetime possibility of getting to a giant welfare state dominated by the left is America’s steep financial decline, that is a price fully worth paying.”

Read the whole article.

The Central Economic Fallacy of the Century

The Central Economic Fallacy of the Century

The late Murray N. Rothbard once published a major article titled “Ten Great Economic Myths.” Included on Rothbard’s hit list were the notions that deficits are the cause of inflation and that economists can accurately forecast the future.

One myth that he didn’t cite dominates Washington today: that the economy can be successfully “managed” from some central point. This idea underlies, directly or indirectly, all of the others Rothbard mentions.

Unfortunately, society’s intellectual, political, and economic “mainstream” still accepts what should be called the Central Economic Fallacy of the Twentieth Century. The “mainstream” just doesn’t get it. Thus, we continue to see a basic progression. First, government subsidizes x or regulates y to correct for some government-diagnosed problem z. Unwanted side effects result, and z, assuming it exists, often grows worse. Government intervenes again to fix the side effects and redouble its efforts to battle z. More undesirable side effects result. And the process continues, with government growing inexorably as interventions accumulate. More and more of the economy is micromanaged through increasing webs of subsidy, regulation, and quick fix. The logical end result, as Ludwig von Mises has shown in great detail, is socialism.

Read the whole article. The author makes a lot of sense.

The Democrat Light Brigade Rides Into The Valley of Death

The Democrat Light Brigade Rides Into The Valley of Death

Bill Saracino, writing in the Political Vanguard has an article about the Democrats and their drive to oblivion.

For one thing, the interests of re-electing Obama in 2012 might in fact be served by having a Republican-controlled congress as a foil in 2011 and 2012– more on this in a future column. Be that as it may, the opportunity for leftists to socialize 17% of the American economy does not come around often. To the true-believing socialists in Ms. Pelosi’s caucus and Mr. Obama’s White House – and there are many – such an achievement is worth sacrificing individual political careers, especially since most of the casualties will be among the less liberal members of the Democrat caucuses. Their thinking is that even a small step forward on health care will be the camel’s nose under the tent – irreversible in the future and certain to grow, as is the history of virtually all government entitlement programs of the past.

Sadly that may be true, and as such is bad news in the long run, but likely very good news in the short run for Republicans. President Obama and Ms. Pelosi appear content to treat Democrat members of Congress as the famed British Light Brigade of the Crimean War was treated by their commanders. The Light Brigade (cavalry) was ordered by incompetent officers to attack entrenched Russian and Turkish artillery. The result was a predictable slaughter of the cavalry.

Alfred Lord Tennyson immortalized the charge of the Light Brigade in his eponymous poem. Reading it again, it is difficult not to see recalcitrant Democrats in Congress in the poem’s stanzas, being ordered by their commanders onward, ever onward, to attack the entrenched artillery of vehement voter resistance to Obamacare.

“Half a league, half a league, half a league onward, into the valley of death rode the six hundred. Forward the Light Brigade, was there a man dismayed, not though the soldiers knew, someone had blundered. Theirs not to make reply, theirs not to reason why, theirs but to do or die, into the valley of death rode the six hundred.”

There are currently 314 — not 600 — Democrat members of Congress. Those who have not drunk the Pelosi/Obama Kool-Aid will shortly have to decide if they want to follow orders, vote for Obamacare and thereby ride into the valley of death that the voters will prepare for them this November. It will be fascinating to watch. Enough Democrats to defeat Obamacare know it is fatally flawed, know that “someone has blundered,” those someones being the President and Madame Speaker.

If those Democrats decide that the time has come to “make reply” and “to reason why,” they will stand firm and Obamacare will lose in the House. If, howeverb they decide that theirs is “but to do or die,” some form of Obamacare will pass, and the Democrat congressional majority will likely ride into the valley of death this November.

Go here to read the whole article.