The most important issue in the near future on which Republicans must take a firm stand is health care; specifically, they must unite in opposition to the attempt by Democrats to nationalize – read ration - health care. Monique Stuart links to this article in the WSJ which lays out the brazen strategy of the Democrats to use a mere parliamentary procedure to force a radical restructure of the health care system on our country. As Monique says, “The health care battle is a battle that this country can’t afford for Republicans to lose.” And any elected Republicans who compromise with the Democrats on reaching this milestone on the road to serfdom need to be unelected at the first available opportunity. I don’t want to hear about how difficult it is for Olympia Snowe to buck her liberal constituency in Maine; Republicans ultimately may not be able to stop the Democratic juggernaut this election cycle, but they should be laying the groundwork for distinguishing themselves and their party from the one in power precisely so as to develop a credible and popular alternative to the disastrous policies being implemented by the Democrats. If they’re not willing to put the interests of our country above their own precious electability, and if their time in office is little more than an exercise in melodramatic hand-wringing over their oh so painful duty to slavishly follow the wishes of their focus groups – in short, if they can’t find a way to sell the ideas that ought to comprise an irreducible minimum of conservative philosophy to their voters – then let them be replaced by Democrats and let Democrats accept the full measure of blame until such time as the Republicans can field better “salesmen.”
I’m not trying to single out Ms. Snowe for criticism – I frankly don’t know what her position is on universal, government subsidized healthcare - but now that the odious Arlen Specter has returned to his genuine home, she is, unfortunately, one of the best-known examples of the problem of “moderate” Republicans. Since she was one of only a very few Republican senators to go along with the Democrats’ atrocious spending bill, I think it is perfectly legitimate to worry about her resolve in opposing some of the larger excesses of the Democratic Party – including their designs on health care. If she and other moderate Republicans are only going to stand with the GOP on relatively minor and non-controversial matters, if they’re willing (however reluctantly) to be pressed into service as handmaidens to the Democrat revolution, what good are they?
Also, check out this dialog between Hugh Hewitt and Mark Steyn (H/T: friend and commenter Bruce).
“This is the way the world ends/Not with a bang but a whimper” – T.S.Eliot in The Hollow Men
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Any people can spend 100% of its income on health care and, with present-day technology and science, will still get sick and die.
Thus, health care must be rationed; it can be rationed either through price or queue theory. In Canada, it is through line-ups; fortunately, we have the escape-pod of the US for the wealthier and less patient and subservient of our citizens. This also eases pressure for rationed reources up North here.
The main propblem for the US in health care is "malpractice tort". The best way to control costs in the US is to severely restrict malpractice law-suites against doctors.
...fortunately, we have the escape-pod of the US for the wealthier and less patient and subservient of our citizens. For now. Soon enough, you'll discover that rationing medical is exclusively a socialist concept.
Thanks for your hospitality, friend Paco.
Not only does govt health care change the relationship with citizens as Steyn points out, but also the increasing tendency for govts to support child-bearing women may unconsciously suggest to many women to see govt as a kind of husband/protector figure.
Francis Fukuyama coined the name 'Burogamy' for this in an interview once.
Post a Comment