Tuesday, December 15, 2009

Suicidal Democrats And Why We Must STOP Their Agenda

Byron York tackles the perplexing problem of why the Democrats willingly seem to be committing political suicide:

To some observers, the Democrats' race to pass national health care seems irrational -- even suicidal. Don't party leaders understand how much the public opposes the bills currently on the table? Don't they know that voters are likely to take their revenge at the polls next year? Given that, why do they keep rushing ahead?

Just look at the RealClearPolitics average of polls, which shows that Americans oppose the national health care bills currently on the table by a margin of 53 percent to 38 percent. That's not just one poll that might tilt right or left, it's an average of several polls by several pollsters. And the margin of opposition seems to be growing, not diminishing. And yet Democrats seem determined to defy public opinion. Why?

I put the question to a Democratic strategist who asked to remain anonymous. Yes, Democrats certainly understand that voters don't like the current bills, he told me, and they are fully aware they will probably pay a price next year. But they have found a way to view going ahead anyway as the logical thing to do, at least in their eyes.

You have to look at the issue from three different Democratic perspectives: the House of Representatives, the White House and the Senate.

"In the House, the view of [California Rep. Henry] Waxman and [House Speaker Nancy] Pelosi is that we've waited two generations to get health care passed, and the 20 or 40 members of Congress who are going to lose their seats as a result are transitional players at best," he said. "This is something the party has wanted since Franklin Roosevelt." In this view, losses are just the price of doing something great and historic. (The strategist also noted that it's easy for Waxman and Pelosi to say that, since they come from safely liberal districts.)

"At the White House, the picture is slightly different," he continued. "Their view is, 'We're all in on this, totally committed, and we don't have to run for re-election next year. There will never be a better time to do it than now.'"

"And in the Senate, they look at the most vulnerable Democrats -- like [Christopher] Dodd and [Majority Leader Harry] Reid -- and say those vulnerabilities will probably not change whether health care reform passes or fails. So in that view, if they pass reform, Democrats will lose the same number of seats they were going to lose before."

All those scenarios have a certain logic (even if the Senate calculation undercounts the number of potentially vulnerable Democrats). But each scenario is premised on passing an unpopular bill that hurts the party. Even if there's a strategic rationale for doing it, why are Democrats dead-set on hurting themselves?

"Because they think they know what's best for the public," the strategist said. "They think the facts are being distorted and the public's being told a story that is not entirely true, and that they are in Congress to be leaders. And they are going to make the decision because Goddammit, it's good for the public."

Of course, going forward has turned out to be harder than many Democrats thought. And now, with various proposals lying wrecked along the road, the true believers are practicing what the strategist calls "principled damage control."

But still, does it make sense? In the end, perhaps the most compelling explanation for Democratic behavior is that they are simply in too deep to do anything else. "Once you've gone this far, what is the cost of failure?" asks the strategist.

At that point -- Republicans will love this -- he compared congressional Democrats with robbers who have passed the point of no return in deciding to hold up a bank. Whatever they do, they're guilty of something. "They're in the bank, they've got their guns out. They can run outside with no money, or they can stick it out, go through the gunfight, and get away with the money."

That's it. Democrats are all in. They're going through with it. Even if it kills them.

For those at the top, it's all about the ideology and the control of America.  They're willing to sacrifice a pretty fair amount of their number now because they think things like DemCare will enshrine their power for decades, if not permanently.  From that perspective, it's a worthwhile trade-off.

For the rest of us, York's article illustrates why this is so dangerous, and why we absolutely cannot afford to go down this road any further at all.  Sure, the GOP may make huge gains next year; heck, if things keep going like this, we may even take back both houses of Congress.  But, if too much of the radical Leftist liberal agenda has already been entrenched into the American government and culture, even a majority GOP party will only be able to roll back so much.

For example, let's say DemCare passes, and all our worst predictions come true: taxes shoot up, and rationing begins.  The people will cry out for change, right?  Yeah, some of the people will - those who are still paying taxes and being productive.  But what about those who are now suddenly the beneficiaries of those government programs?  What about the people who have lost their jobs and depend on government health care -- even if it sucks, it's better than nothing, right? -- to take care of their children?  What about those who have no job and depend upon the government for food and basic necessities?  Can you imagine anyone forcing those people off the rolls of DemCare or welfare?

Not a chance.

And there is the crux of the matter.  It is pretty easy to understand that we simply cannot afford to pay for universal coverage for every American (and illegal alien) in the country, much less the entire Leftist/Obama agenda, especially as more of the tax burden is shifted onto fewer and fewer people.  Thus, the only sustainable solution is to not let too many people become dependent upon government in the first place.  That should be the message of conservatives right now.  Once we pass the tipping point on things like taxes and social services -- meaning, once 50.1% of Americans are on the government dime -- that is the beginning of the end of this nation.  We will be locked in a death spiral that will inevitably lead to a crash of the entire system (unless some of those who are government dependents choose to exit the system, but what do you think the chances of that happening are?).  There is no 'fixing' something that will inevitably lead to the death spiral; only things that prevent it or allow it.  DemCare will allow it, thus we must kill DemCare.

Similarly, we have to do everything in our power to prevent all of these things -- DemCare, cap-n-tax, redistribution of wealth, global taxation, etc. -- from becoming law in the first place.

Fight.  We may not get many other chances.

There's my two cents.

No comments: