Third Time's The Charm

Eh, maybe...maybe not.  Remember, the last two times we've had a Democrat super-majority in Congress, we've also seen the biggest two expansions of government power and intrusion into American citizens' lives in American history.  Obama is doing it again, but at an exponential rate that makes FDR and LBJ look like piddly amateurs.  The only substantive difference is that the first two had GOP support; Obama doesn't.  Some food for thought:

The president whined today on Michael Smerconish's show:

You know, passing a big bill like this is always messy. FDR was called a socialist when he passed Social Security. JFK and Lyndon Johnson, they were both accused of a government takeover of health care when they passed Medicare. This is the process that we go through -- because, understandably, the American people have a long tradition of being suspicious of government, until the government actually does something that helps them, and then they don't want anybody messing with whatever gets set up.

President Obama might not be aware of this but FDR passed Social Security with massive Republican support -- 81 Republicans voted in favor of the measure in the House and only 15 against while 16 Republicans voted in favor in the Senate and just 5 against. Johnson's Medicare package was only marginally more contentious. Just 13 Republicans voted in favor of Medicare in the Senate to 17 against, but in the House, more Republicans (70) voted for Johnson's Medicare plan than against (68).

Maybe President Obama should stop wee-weeing and start trying to get some Republican support for his bill -- as both Johnson and FDR successfully did. Getting a bill like this is not, in fact, always messy. Rather, there is clearly something particular about Obama's approach that has created this mess.

Right.  Both the substance of the bill and the methods he's using to push it repulse half (more now) of the country.

Even without the kind of GOP support FDR and LBJ had, Obama still has the votes to get done anything he wants (assuming he can keep the Dems in line), but it will come at a political price.  The lack of GOP support translates into a lack of support from the wider American public, and that means his strong-arming will result in blowback at the ballot box.  The harder he pushes, the stronger the blowback.

Most Americans, regardless of political persuasion, don't relish the thought of Big Brother becoming reality.  To ignore them might accomplish his short-term agenda, but it will be at the cost of long-term pain for him and the Democrat party.  Once again, the question remains: is Obama enough of an ideologue to move full steam ahead?

If he does, will his efforts be something that can be turned back, or will they permanently alter the fabric of America?  Now that's the real question, isn't it?

There's my two cents.