I sometimes wonder if conservative pundits have a psychological need to feel surrounded, beleaguered, and endangered. The febrile speculations in the aftermath of the Supreme Court's oral hearings on ObamaCare would support that conclusion.
Suddenly, there's talk -- quite a lot of it, actually -- about negative consequences that might flow from having the Court strike down the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. (George Orwell, call your office!) Why, if this monstrosity of a federal usurpation of Americans' rights is ruled unConstitutional, the Democrats might do something worse! They might even call for a single-payer system, such as Canada has, or (gasp!) a National Health Service like that of the United Kingdom!
HORRORS!
And I'd always thought fear was the Left's principal weapon. Now it turns out to be an essential nutrient for conservative commentators. Silly me.
As if more silliness were mandatory, FOX News has posted perhaps the silliest piece of opinion journalism I've ever seen. It argues that the Court should postpone the decision until 2013. Why? Because it's "political." The Court must never, ever do anything that might influence the operation of the American political system, you see. Not even to correct an injustice or defend the God-given rights of Americans. Elections are just too important!
What do you suppose the authors of the article really fear?
Damn it all, it's time to stand up and be counted. That goes for both sides of the issue: either you're proud of your stand or you're beneath contempt. It also goes for people who make their livings with a word processor, just as much as for the rest of us.
To Democrat partisans: You made your bed by ramming ObamaCare down the nation's throat in the face of overwhelming popular hostility to it. Crawl in; it's time for your nap.
To Republican partisans: Either follow through on this or lose the allegiance of anyone who can honestly call himself a conservative, or a patriot. If the Court strikes down the entire law, don't you dare allow any consideration of a new one. If it strikes only certain portions, such as the individual mandate to have health insurance, you'd bloody well better get to work on repealing the remainder!
5 comments:
Neither one of us should be surprised at the tack of a good number of the professional "Right" writers. Being the propaganda arm of the GOP "Progressives," they are now more often providing us a peek of their masters' hatred for the individual, which is the masked version of what we hear from the radical Left.
I don't see how there's anything with which we on the real Right can effectively threaten these power-mad wolves in sheep's clothing. Their incrementalism seems to have succeeded in gaining control of all govt (however tenuous and inept it might be in practice). And especially since there are almost certainly nihilists near the top, theoretically willing to end it all if they can't rule it. At least that is what they want any potential rebel allies to believe.
About our only solution seems to be to divide them half as effectively as they are at dividing us (over and above what we individuals do on our own in that regard) while patching up our differences, plus a good number of us appealing for help from a higher Authority.
I have good reason to know you would like to believe that that solution is the true path. It's just that most of the time we find it to be so terribly difficult to practice.
Just think if the Founding Fathers had eschewed the revolution because some day, we might get Obama.
I think the idea is that, if the Supreme Court strikes down ObamaCare, the Republicans might lose most of the head of steam that's otherwise going to carry them over the threshold of victory this November, even with Mitt Romney as their standard bearer. And that idea might well be correct.
Problem is, killing ObamaCare is the #1 reason conservatives _should_ show up at the polls in November. If the Supreme Court does that job for us, we're probably better off in the long term with Romney losing.
Francis;
I'm very glad you haven't decided to give up blogging all together. I've loved your insights over the years. I was almost despondent when i found out that not only were you quitting blogging, but that our last coorespondence was a disagreement (over which I've subsequently decided that I was woefully misinformed and incorrect).
In any case, I am following this health care debate with much interest. There was a part of me that had thought that we'd be lucky to get a 5-4 judgement in our favor on this one, but the more we hear from justice Kennedy, the more I am begginning to think that he may vote our way, too.
With a narrow majority of 5-4, I figured that there would be a door left open for the left to scream and cry about judicial activism and "judgements based on politics", but if we get a 6-3 decision, I'm of the opinion that will take the steam out of their argument and how!
Not getting my hopes up, but feeling very encouraged that our political system may not yet be beyond salvage.
THRILLED to discover that you and the Eternity Road crowd are hanging out here.
Oh wait, am I the lurker you were trying to run away from?
Post a Comment