Monday, January 18, 2010

Scott Brown and Health Care

We appear to be on the edge of political shift. Republican Scott Brown is now likely to win a Senate race in a liberal democrat state that has been held by the biggest liberal icon for almost half a century. And by all appearances, his election is a repudiation of Obama, his policies, and in particular, ObamaKare.

There are two potential responses from the democratic party:

The first could be the recognition that the American people don't like what is going on and try to improve policy. Polls are clear that the American people don't like the direction the country is going. As much as they thought we were heading the wrong direction a year ago, they REALLY think we are heading the wrong direction, now. In fact, a significant number of people who voted FOR Obama, would rather have George W. Bush back in office than continue the direction we are heading.

So the democrats COULD look at their positions and policies and try to fix them. Everyone agrees that the current health care bill is a piece of crap. It's too expensive. It doesn't fix many problems. It doesn't cover everyone it's supposed to cover. It doesn't control costs. It doesn't address many of the problems that lead to more expensive health care.

Instead of saying "Well, now we HAVE to push it through because we might lose our filibuster proof majority," they could be saying, "We have an opportunity to fix this. We could work with Republicans to develop a bipartisan bill that actually addresses real problems; a bill that the nation would support."

The other response could be "We HAVE to push through a crappy bill because it's what we want and for political reasons we have to do SOMETHING."

Which option do you suppose the dems will chose?


Anonymous,  January 18, 2010 at 12:33 PM  

We have to push this crappy bill through.Because it is to be a monument to Obama.

Sue January 18, 2010 at 7:27 PM  

According to MSNBC (Matthews) this victory for Brown is NOT in anyway a reflection of disgust with Obama. Rather, against Coakley and the health care bill...

Gateway Pundit posted a video where all the MSNBCers look like they are going to vomit over this...LOL (don't know if you have that link or not)

Bob Qat January 19, 2010 at 12:24 AM  

I'm trying to describe my sense of what happened in 2008.

The politics of Mr Bush favored intrusive government, with modest respect for personal rights. Mr Obama is little more out there with government intrusion considered to be the right of those who intrude. Both positions irritate most Americans.

Mr Bush was more likable than Mr Obama, but more dreams were hooked to Mr Obama. As people awake form the dream, they turn against Mr Obama.

It is left to us to describe what is more desirable than either Misters Bush's or Obama's politics.

I believe we will need to describe how Dr ML King was wrong when he said, "A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death." America has always spend generously on social uplift, but only in the last 40 years has that spending become government controlled.

We need to describe all the ways private control is better.

WoFat January 19, 2010 at 11:41 AM  

When things are close the democrats cheat real good. This evening will tell the tale. Maybe.

About This Blog

This blog is about my opinions and world view.  I am a conservative, evangelical Christian.  Generally speaking, if you post a comment, I'll allow you to express your view.  However, if you say something hateful, untruthful, or just generally something I don't like, I may remove it.

  © Blogger templates The Professional Template by 2008

Back to TOP