Repeal The Health Bill

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 Stephen Douglas (D-IL) that repealed the Missouri Compromise of 1820.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. His Road to the Middle Class is forthcoming.

print view

To comment on this article at American Thinker click here.

To email the author, click here.

TAGS

Civil Society

“Civil Society”—a complex welter of intermediate institutions, including businesses, voluntary associations, educational institutions, clubs, unions, media, charities, and churches—builds, in turn, on the family, the primary instrument by which people are socialized into their culture and given the skills that allow them to live in broader society and through which the values and knowledge of that society are transmitted across the generations.
Francis Fukuyama, Trust

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

Liberal Coercion

[T]he Liberal, and still more the subspecies Radical... more than any other in these latter days seems under the impression that so long as he has a good end in view he is warranted in exercising over men all the coercion he is able[.]
Herbert Spencer, The Man Versus the State

Moral Imperatives of Modern Culture

These emerge out of long-standing moral notions of freedom, benevolence, and the affirmation of ordinary life... I have been sketching a schematic map... [of] the moral sources [of these notions]... the original theistic grounding for these standards... a naturalism of disengaged reason, which in our day takes scientistic forms, and a third family of views which finds its sources in Romantic expressivism, or in one of the modernist successor visions.
Charles Taylor, Sources of the Self

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

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

Faith and Politics

As far as the Catholic Church is concerned, the principal focus of her interventions in the public arena is the protection and promotion of the dignity of the person, and she is thereby consciously drawing particular attention to principles which are not negotiable... [1.] protection of life in all its stages, from the first moment of conception until natural death; [2.] recognition and promotion of the natural structure of the family... [3.] the protection of the right of parents to educate their children.
Pope Benedict XVI, Speech to European Peoples Party, 2006

Never Trust Experts

No lesson seems to be so deeply inculcated by the experience of life as that you should never trust experts. If you believe doctors, nothing is wholesome: if you believe the theologians, nothing is innocent: if you believe the soldiers, nothing is safe. They all require their strong wine diluted by a very large admixture of insipid common sense.
Lord Salisbury, “Letter to Lord Lytton”

Conservatism's Holy Grail

What distinguishes true Conservatism from the rest, and from the Blair project, is the belief in more personal freedom and more market freedom, along with less state intervention... The true Third Way is the Holy Grail of Tory politics today - compassion and community without compulsion.
Minette Marrin, The Daily Telegraph

Class War

In England there were always two sharply opposed middle classes, the academic middle class and the commercial middle class. In the nineteenth century, the academic middle class won the battle for power and status... Then came the triumph of Margaret Thatcher... The academics lost their power and prestige and... have been gloomy ever since.
Freeman Dyson, “The Scientist as Rebel”

Government Expenditure

The Union publishes an exact return of the amount of its taxes; I can get copies of the budgets of the four and twenty component states; but who can tell me what the citizens spend in the administration of county and township?
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America

Conservatism

Conservatism is the philosophy of society. Its ethic is fraternity and its characteristic is authority — the non-coercive social persuasion which operates in a family or a community. It says ‘we should...’.
Danny Kruger, On Fraternity

mysql close