home  |  book  |  blogs  |   RSS  |  contact  |

Lesson of the Noughties: Government Hasn't a Clue Obama's Jobs Hole

print view

Repeal the Health Bill

by Christopher Chantrill
January 07, 2010 at 11:29 am

|

SOONER OR later the American people must rise up and do more than complain about the latest wizard wheeze of the progressive educated class. We must take one of their gigantic government takeover bills and flat out repeal it.

Otherwise they will return every generation and lay another unjust burden upon us.

Why don’t we do it to the Frankenstein monster of a health bill now in final delivery, courtesy of the Obama administration and the Reid/Pelosi Congress? The Obama-Reid-Pelosi bill takes one sixth of the economy and puts it under the power of the administrative state.

The issue is clear. The administrative state, championed over the centuries by imperial dynasties, absolute monarchs, revolutionary cadres, and in our own time by the progressive educated class, popularly known as liberals, is unjust. It really is that simple.

The administrative state was unjust when it was the means by which the mandarins ruled China. It was unjust when the European absolute monarchs used it to finance their palaces and their standing armies. It was unjust in the hands of the Jacobins, the Bolsheviks, and the Nazis. It remains unjust in the hands of the Castro brothers, the Chavistas, the Putins, and the Ahmadinejads.

Why wouldn’t the administrative state be unjust in the hands of the American liberal elite?

Over the last century, our liberal friends had one great advantage. Their naked power plays were written up by liberal journalists and historians as the very essence of progress and justice. Woe betide the dissident conservative that attempted to tell a different story.

But then in the fall of 2008 came a political blessing. The Democrats won the presidency and eventually a filibuster-proof majority in Congress. They had the opportunity to ram through legislation that their liberal base wanted and that the American people hated, and they took it. They rammed their corrupt and unjust health bill down the throats of the American people. And the American people saw their liberal masters as they really are.

Last week Michael Barone recalled a similar moment in American history. It was the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 championed by Sen. Stephen Douglas (D-IL) that repealed the Missouri Compromise of 1820. The act said, hey fellahs out there in the newly-settled territories, you can vote slavery in or out for your state, as the mood takes you.

Sen. Douglas thought that he had resolved the slavery issue once for all. But he was wrong. Instead he set off a political earthquake. The Democrats lost 70 seats in the House of Representatives in the elections of 1854 and two new parties, the American Party and the Republican Party, arose to oppose their unjust and immoral Kansas-Nebraska Act. If 70 seats doesn’t seem all that much to you, don’t forget that the House had 252 seats in 1854. In today’s House with 435 seats, the equivalent would be 121 seats changing hands next November.

The Politico’s Lisa Lerer and Chris Frates cast a jaundiced eye upon the tactics of the health bill repeal idea as a cheap political trick.

The repeal-or-bust strategy is designed to give Republican candidates a powerful talking point for the midterms — a way to tap into deep anxiety about the health care plan among the GOP base and independent voters.

Some Republicans say they don’t see what all the fuss is about.

"They can push for repeal; they’re just not going to get it,” said Tom Davis, former chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee. “I think there are probably better targets for Republicans.”

We will see a lot more of this, from experts and pundits still mired in the old politics.

That was then. This is now. In 2009 we conservatives had the blinders pulled off our eyes. We thought that the Reagan-Bush years had established a rough national consensus that one-size-fits-all government centralism was a failure. National politics would now follow the example of the successful welfare reform. The era of big government is over, President Clinton told us.

Now we know that we were wrong. The Obama Democrats are like the French Bourbon kings after the fall of Napoleon. After 30 years of Reagan and Bush they have learned nothing and they have forgotten nothing. Given a brief opening they have stampeded back to the big-spending liberalism they love—only this time on steroids.

So the question before the American people is simple and straightforward. Shall we allow this injustice to stand, or shall we band together and work and fight in 2010 and every year thereafter until the stain upon our national honor is expunged and the present generation of liberal leaders is banished to political oblivion?

Let every American know that Reid plus Pelosi plus Obama equals injustice.

Christopher Chantrill blogs at www.roadtothemiddleclass.com.

Buy his Road to the Middle Class.

print view

To comment on this article at American Thinker click here.

To email the author, click here.

 

 TAGS


What Liberals Think About Conservatives

[W]hen I asked a liberal longtime editor I know with a mainstream [publishing] house for a candid, shorthand version of the assumptions she and her colleagues make about conservatives, she didn't hesitate. “Racist, sexist, homophobic, anti-choice fascists,” she offered, smiling but meaning it.
Harry Stein, I Can't Believe I'm Sitting Next to a Republican


US Life in 1842

Families helped each other putting up homes and barns. Together, they built churches, schools, and common civic buildings. They collaborated to build roads and bridges. They took pride in being free persons, independent, and self-reliant; but the texture of their lives was cooperative and fraternal.
Michael Novak, The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism


Taking Responsibility

[To make] of each individual member of the army a soldier who, in character, capability, and knowledge, is self-reliant, self-confident, dedicated, and joyful in taking responsibility [verantwortungsfreudig] as a man and a soldier. — Gen. Hans von Seeckt
MacGregor Knox, Williamson Murray, ed., The dynamics of military revolution, 1300-2050


Society and State

For [the left] there is only the state and the individual, nothing in between. No family to rely on, no friend to depend on, no community to call on. No neighbourhood to grow in, no faith to share in, no charities to work in. No-one but the Minister, nowhere but Whitehall, no such thing as society - just them, and their laws, and their rules, and their arrogance.
David Cameron, Conference Speech 2008


Socialism equals Animism

Imagining that all order is the result of design, socialists conclude that order must be improvable by better design of some superior mind.
F.A. Hayek, The Fatal Conceit


Sacrifice

[Every] sacrifice is an act of impurity that pays for a prior act of greater impurity... without its participants having to suffer the full consequences incurred by its predecessor. The punishment is commuted in a process that strangely combines and finesses the deep contradiction between justice and mercy.
Frederick Turner, Beauty: The Value of Values


Responsible Self

[The Axial Age] highlights the conception of a responsible self... [that] promise[s] man for the first time that he can understand the fundamental structure of reality and through salvation participate actively in it.
Robert N Bellah, "Religious Evolution", American Sociological Review, Vol. 29, No. 3.


Religion, Property, and Family

But the only religions that have survived are those which support property and the family. Thus the outlook for communism, which is both anti-property and anti-family, (and also anti-religion), is not promising.
F.A. Hayek, The Fatal Conceit


Racial Discrimination

[T]he way “to achieve a system of determining admission to the public schools on a nonracial basis,” Brown II, 349 U. S., at 300–301, is to stop assigning students on a racial basis. The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.
Roberts, C.J., Parents Involved in Community Schools vs. Seattle School District


Postmodernism

A writer who says that there are no truths, or that all truth is ’merely relative’, is asking you not to believe him. So don’t.
Roger Scruton, Modern Philosophy


Physics, Religion, and Psychology

Paul Dirac: “When I was talking with Lemaître about [the expanding universe] and feeling stimulated by the grandeur of the picture that he has given us, I told him that I thought cosmology was the branch of science that lies closest to religion. However [Georges] Lemaître [Catholic priest, physicist, and inventor of the Big Bang Theory] did not agree with me. After thinking it over he suggested psychology as lying closest to religion.”
John Farrell, “The Creation Myth”


Pentecostalism

Within Pentecostalism the injurious hierarchies of the wider world are abrogated and replaced by a single hierarchy of faith, grace, and the empowerments of the spirit... where groups gather on rafts to take them through the turbulence of the great journey from extensive rural networks to the mega-city and the nuclear family...
David Martin, On Secularization


presented by Christopher Chantrill

Data Sources  •   •  Contact