March 22nd, 2010

Stop the whining about “it can’t be repealed”

I usually like Charles Krauthammer. But sometimes I find him incredibly and unnecessarily negative. Such as, for example, last night:

It can’t be repealed? Why not? I’m not going to answer that question in depth right now, but I’m working on a draft of a long essay about it.

I hear this defeatist attitude nearly everywhere. I could understand it if the nay-saying came from Democrats as a taunt, but it comes from Republicans as a lament. I disagree with the idea. One thing’s for sure, though—if most conservatives and Republicans have the same attitude as Krauthammer, it certainly won’t be repealed.

So I think this sort of talk needs to stop. Remember, there is no precedent for this bill and how it was passed against the will of the people, and we should not imagine that any precedent about not repealing entitlements would hold, either. As I’ve said several times, we are in uncharted waters. Let’s try not to lose our compass—and we may need our celestial navigation, as well.

138 Responses to “Stop the whining about “it can’t be repealed””

  1. SAB Says:


  2. Baklava Says:

    Dear Krauthammer,

    Respectfully, you are pretty intelligent.

    We need your support. We need positive “move American forward” attitude.

    Stand up and fight!

    Baklava the fighter

  3. Bill West Says:

    I agree, I usually like Krauthammer. People who make negative predicitions usually accompany them with a “I hope I’m wrong on this”. They ‘win’ either way.

    Paul Ryan is fighting: “We need to establish a set of metrics and benchmarks to measure the sector going forward, keeping a close eye on all of the Democrats’ claims,” Ryan says. “From cost to quality, we will need to be vigilant in making sure that their assertions are actually substantiated with facts, and I have every reason to believe they won’t be.”

    — Robert Costa, National Review Online, 3/22/10.

    So is Rich Lowry : Democrats learned with the stimulus that it’s not much fun to defend a law that they vastly oversold prior to passage. They’ll have exactly the same experience with health-care reform. The legislation on which they’ve staked so much will not withstand its first contact with reality.

    National Review Online 3/22/10

    Appeals to reason resonate with an important constituency: the people who pay the bills, and payment for this collection of benefits come well in advance.

  4. Thomass Says:

    Most of it reflects on the inablity to do anything about previous programs… Plus we look at other countries (remember Krauthammer is from Canada) and see how healthcare moves the debate to being just about how much to spend vs. does public care work…

    But… this one is more unpopular than previous bills… and Americans are more distrusting of government ‘solutions’… so yeah, we may be able to undo it…

  5. Maureen Says:

    Thanks, I needed that. I’ve been listening to Rush and I can’t say I’ve ever heard him so—if not outright negative, but certainly gloomy. (As in “Next election, that is, if there is one.”)
    You are absolutely right—we cannot lose sight of the prize: those on the Left have never done so.

  6. Michael Says:

    The only thing that keeps me going at the moment is the circumstances surrounding the (first?) Revolutionary War.

  7. Artfldgr Says:

    It has to do with numbers not ‘feelings’, and the numbers will not add up to a way to do a thing about it. this even more so in light of what others are doing, and what people will do in the interim…

  8. Bob From Virginia Says:

    BTW, immigration reform will probably produce 12 million new democratic voters by 2012 and I just heard Acorn is going to be refunded.
    I Support Civil War.

  9. Artfldgr Says:

    FBI officials are investigating a self-proclaimed conservative blogger after he used his Twitter account to call for the assassination of President Obama on Sunday night.

    Solomon “Solly” Forell tweeted: “ASSASSINATION! America, we survived the assassinations of Lincoln and Kennedy. We’ll surely get over a bullet 2 Barack Obama’s head.”


    Another post said, “The next American with a clear shot should drop Obama like a habit.”


    Jay Martin, a college grad who calls himself a hip-hop aficionado, tweeted: “If I lived in DC, I’d shoot him myself. Point blank. Dead f—ing serious.”

    Martin shrugged off law enforcement officials.

    “If the FBI comes knocking tomorrow I wouldn’t give a f—. I didn’t do anything wrong,” he wrote.


  10. Bill West Says:

    William Kristol draws an apt analogy at the Weekly Standard:

    “Barack Obama was able to muscle his health care plan through, and therefore avoided a legislative defeat that Sen. Jim DeMint had said would be his Waterloo. But Waterloo was always an imperfect analogy. Leaving aside the injustice to Napoleon of comparing Obama to him, the better analogy is Borodino.

    Napoleon invaded Russia in June of 1812. On September 7 of that year, the Grande Armée under Napoleon’s command attacked the Russian army near the village of Borodino.

    Napoleon won the battle, the greatest of the Russian campaign, but at a terrible cost–about a third of his soldiers were killed or wounded. The Russian army was not destroyed, and while Napoleon occupied an abandoned Moscow a week later, the French army was never the same.

    It soon had to begin its disastrous winter retreat from Russia, and Napoleon finally did meet his Waterloo almost three years later.”

    Tolstoy compared the forward progress of the French army to that of a cue ball after hitting one of the others – resudual forward motion but now power.

    Still, we need to realize that the Whitehouse has follow-on initiatives which they will be emboldened to push agressively. Having ‘doubled down’ after the Brown election, they’re prepared to ‘quadruple down’ now.

  11. Artfldgr Says:

    photo of death tweeter jay martin…
    you can tell he is a tea party guy…

  12. Artfldgr Says:

    Tolstoy needed top spin…. 🙂

  13. Adrian Says:

    I’m equally disappointed in the Kraut-man. It seems more to me every day that the world is on the brink of insanity. I just saw this in an AP article…

    President Barack Obama is preparing to sign a transformative health care bill ushering in near-universal medical coverage for the first time in the nation’s history — and then hit the road to sell it to a reluctant public…

    Government for the people whether they like it or not. He didn’t promise good change, just change. now I’m hoping it will change again.

  14. Bob from Virginia Says:

    Unfortunately, as many have already noted here, a large number of Dems know their careers are over. There will no holding them back that they found a way to circumvent a 60 vote majority. Expect immigration reform that adds millions formerly illegal immigrants as voters by 2012, and certainly a few other things to do maximum damage to a country Obama made clear time and time again he hates.

  15. Artfldgr Says:

    And i said our actions will provide energy which creates the impetus they need…

    do note that for health reasons and other issues now up, internal passports and papers will become a necessity. arent you glad they hired marcus wolf and a soviet to design them. (anyone care to let the others know who marcus wolf is? or rather was)

    Controller: Restrict free travel to deter ‘flash mobs’

    A week after about 150 teenagers rampaged in the shadow of City Hall, City Controller Allen Butkovitz today renewed a call for putting restrictions on free student travel to deter “flash mob” gatherings.

    and this is a pip

    Butkovitz acknowledged there was nothing to prove students involved in last week’s rampage used TransPasses, he said police officials have cited that as a factor for mass gatherings at the Gallery on East Market Street.

    “I strongly believe this step will help to reduce the window of opportunity for those students intent on creating havoc,” he said. “This 4:30 p.m. cutoff will not interfere with the goal of providing free transportation to and from school for the students who need it.”

    Fifteen students from eight city high schools were arrested in last week’s melee and police have maintained a high profile in the area since.

    Butkovitz said the Police Department is “already stretched thin” and that the city needs to find other ways to deter mass gatherings of youths looking for trouble.

    does perhaps ending progressive educatin that teaches social justice come to mind? no… just more totalitarian solutions.

    wont be long now…

    once you top the gravity slide, no stopping it…

  16. neo-neocon Says:

    Bob of Virginia: explain to me how the Democrats have found a way to circumvent the 60-vote majority. As I wrote here, that is only true for bills that have already passed in the Senate. HCR fit that description. The other things you mention do not.

  17. armchair pessimist Says:

    I’m intrigued by what you might call the waziristan option, that region of Pakistan where the government’s authority does not reach.

    The US is a big country and there are many millions of us, how much better things would look today if by sheer numbers we so thoroughly controlled large swathes of the country that the DC regime dared not go. I know this sounds far fetched but the insolence of federal politicaldom increases and its tyrannies multiply things will only grow more intolerable. The day may come when we become Pilgrims seeking a new land of liberty inside our own country.

  18. Artfldgr Says:

    armchair pessimist,
    they are ready for you…

    “Operation Exodus”

    “Volunteers will be screened and begin training soon. For now, we are planning to give them refreshers each quarter, to keep them sharp and on the ready.”

    50 caliber machine guns are available…

    [and they even mentioned islamic extremism. tactical shotgun training, and more]

  19. Artfldgr Says:

    [that was a joke]

  20. Artfldgr Says:

    “Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated.”
    -Thomas Jefferson

    “I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constitutents.”
    -James Madison

    “…the government of the United States is a definite government, confined to specified objects. It is not like the state governments, whose powers are more general. Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government.”
    -James Madison

    “With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.”
    – James Madison, The Author of The Constitution

    “If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the general welfare, the government is no longer a limited one possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one subject to particular exceptions.”
    -James Madison

    “I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it.”
    -Benjamin Franklin

    “If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands;they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish, and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision of the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress. Were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited Government established by the people of America.”
    -James Madison

    “A wise and frugal government… shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.”
    -Thomas Jefferson

    The founders clearly did not intend for the government to levy taxes in order to provide for massive social welfare programs

  21. Artfldgr Says:

    Game set match.

    they win

    there is not going to be a repeal as we will be too busy with the next fire, and the success of that fire will insure they will keep the places they have. (its immigration pseudo amnesty).

    what others dont get is that they have had this waiting in the wings, and even today, offices are opening and such is happening. the normal lag between law and action will not apply. by the time we get to bring it up, its going to be so dead it cant be lifted to be removed.

    I said, we LOVE our cancers, and there may be riots for having it, but the riots for attempting to remove it will be even worse (because the forces will look the other way on that abuse).

  22. David Says:

    On a certain level I understand and agree with CK. If we step back and look at the cultural identity of America today, we cannot hope for massive change in entitlements until the culture changes first. And let’s be honest… there is no incentive yet for our culture to change. Politics is but a reflection of our culture, not the driver. I predict things will need to get much worse before they get better. The water isn’t boiling yet… the frog is still swimming.

  23. SteveH Says:

    Mr Krauthammer’s just bummed and may have been in the political box too long to think outside of it.

    I say we use the solution people stuck with cars they can’t afford resort to. Get China to repo it.

  24. armchair pessimist Says:


    Many thanks for the suggestion, but I really hate hot weather and so will have to look for a colony far northwards. A New Frontier indeed, but not à la JFK.

  25. Steve G Says:

    Our best hope is that the courts will find the health care act unconstitutional and strike it down in its entirety.

  26. Richard Aubrey Says:

    As to difficulty, it’s easy to get the chumps to vote themselves other people’s money, either from current taxes or future taxes for debt.
    Once that runs into trouble, it’s easy to blame some designated bad guy the chumps are only too eager to blame, rather than believe that, as Margaret Thatchert said, “eventually you run out of other people’s money.”
    The big, big question is the proportion of chumps and government tit-seekers to the rest of us.

  27. I R A Darth Aggie Says:

    Ok, folks, name me one, just one, entitlement that’s ever been elminated.

    Not rolled back. Not scaled down. E-lim-in-at-ed!

    Take your time, I’ll wait.

  28. Mr. Frank Says:

    I don’t think this whole bill can be repealed, but parts of it may be vulnerable. The first thing the Republicans in the Senate can do is stop the Democrats from cleaning it up. The more it stinks the better because both houses passed it without a single Republican vote.

    Once bills are passed they have constituencies who fight to keep their advantages. That’s why politicians usually go for freezes rather than roll backs. That said, there are parts of the bill that can be attacked. If the increases in fees, penalties, and taxes can be highlighted, they may be vulnerable. That’s especially true if they can be tied to a weak economy with high unemployment. The increase of 16,000 IRS agents could be a good lightning rod for critics of the bill.

    Our best bet is if we have a raft of visible doctor retirements and state budget cuts tied directly to the bill. If people see the health care they have jeopardized in concrete terms, opposition to the bill could grow. It wouldn’t take much if Medicaid and Medicare patients could not find a doctor or a drug store. As it is, most people, see the bill as not helping them and probably hurting them. Any evidence of harm will fire people up.

    A case of an entitlement turned back is welfare reform. At the time the left wailed about children starving. It passed because most Americans have a bad attitude toward “welfare.” If Obama care can be painted as a threat to hard working people and our economy, we might turn parts of it around. As it is, a solid majority oppose the bill already.

  29. SteveH Says:

    “”we cannot hope for massive change in entitlements until the culture changes first.””

    Very true. And we’re about to get the medicine that fixes that. Adversity. The problem will be the delay in that adversity brought on by politicians who can’t stop writing checks even when the account is bone dry.

  30. Julia NYC Says:

    Yeah, the culture seems a little F&%^d at this moment. Lots of entitlement attitudes everywhere, in all stratas of society but not a lot of ability. People lived way beyond their means (hence the current economic situation) because “I deserve it” was their motto, instead of “I earned it, and I actually have the money to pay for it”. So for the moment I guess some folks might like this bill until they actually have to use the new gubbmint healthcare, and then we’ll be hearing the screams at the six month waiting lists or more. And the shortage of nurses and doctors. Well eat your veggies and exercise everybody, I plan on avoiding the doctor as much possible. I wonder if the rest of the world’s elites are upset, as they all came here for the medical care because their own government health care system was so terrible. Where are they gonna go now? I’m sure there will be some sort of elite place here to go, like for members of Congress for example, who passed this bill that they will never be using. But there’s gonna be a big line as well for the luxury good care used by our own nation’s elites. I guess it’ll be pretty crowded in elite land as well.

  31. Jake Was Here Says:

    Christ. If you guys think Krauthammer’s bad, you’re not going to want to read anything John Derbyshire or Mark Steyn have written today.

  32. Artfldgr Says:

    they are now going to pass things that depend on it. the more hey do, the more fixed it becomes

    We will introduce a robust public option bill on the very day the president signs the reconciliation bill into law – Woolsey

  33. Richard Aubrey Says:

    Kindasorta OT, but not much.
    Democrate politicians are corrupt at heart, from the beginning because their campaigns are based on telling the voters that the dems will give them other people’s money. That’s vile, right there.
    Worse, the dems have to exert themselves to keep the voters from knowing that a system which looks as if it gives you other people’s money means you lose anyway.
    You can’t do that and be honest. If you were honest to start with, you have to rationalize a whole bunch of things until you, too, are corrupt.

  34. Artfldgr Says:

    Procedure is all that protects us from dictatorship

  35. foxmarks Says:

    I await the long article, Neo. I would like to believe with you. If you muster the facts, all the better.

    But once Barry signs it, the Senate bill is the law. If the 41 votes hold to stop reconciliation, we still have the law.

    Repeal by bankruptcy is the best opportunity. Instead of fighting a legal battle—on the enemy’s turf—we are wiser to encourage the economic forces already aligned with us.

  36. becky Says:

    Krauthammer is a properly educated intellectual who scoffed at tea party goers also. He’s been wrong before, and while he is very well respected and popular right now, he is not writing the Gospel here.

    Never is a pretty permanent word. I don’t hear the Democrats declaring their new law will never altered or repealed.

    It is not an insurance or health care reform bill. It is a prepaid medical expenses plan.

  37. Scottie Says:

    Regarding a desire to roll back this bill, we should not be looking in terms of a battle, or even a war (though I do believe this was seriously an opening shot in something of a cultural war!).

    The Left thinks of this in terms almost of a religion.

    No matter how far they go or how much success they have, they will always rationalize a need to go farther because they will never achieve that state of nirvana – there is no true *end goal* for them as it is a state of mind.

    Were they to achieve such nirvana, of what use would they be then?

    If they have a set back, so what – they just come again and try another path.

    They will never give up, and honestly I don’t think they will ever be completely defeated as there will always be some ivory tower professor filling young heads of mush with utopian – but unrealistic – ideals

    The Right thinks in terms of battles, winning a war, rolling back the tide, reverting to an earlier status quo – and that won’t work either as after the short term victory is won we all go back to our lives but our society is not inoculated against the Leftist ideals to keep them from taking root again in future decades.

    This means the Right is perpetually fighting the same battles over and over again.

    The Right needs a unifying force that transcends religious differences, cultural differences, minor intra-party policy differences, and can inoculate society against Leftist ideals.

    That unifying force, I believe, should be the absolute pursuit of individual Freedom and Liberty to the maximum extent possible!

    When you read what the Founding Fathers wrote, and if you are paying attention, you’ll notice how precious Liberty and Freedom were to them.

    It’s an underlying force that all of them drew on for their political views, and the desire for that state of maximum freedom for the individual obscured differences between the various factions until the external enemy had been defeated.

    That underlying force continued in effect for decades to come, ensuring that what they had fought for was retained.

    We as a society need to reinvigorate that sense of Freedom again.

    A good start would be to educate the current generation as to what their true birthright is.

  38. JuliB Says:

    Copying a post I made on a Catholic blog:

    I’ve been reading a book with Catholic articles from the late 40’s/early 50s. The author of the book/columns was railing against the Dems trying to push socialized medicine back in the 1950s!!!

    God forgive me for saying this, but these people are like termites in our society. Never stopping, undermining things ‘behind the scenes’, causing destruction, etc. You cannot be a Catholic and a Socialist. And like Sharpton said today, when people voted for Obama, they voted for socialism.

    I know I should pray for their conversions, but it’s awfully hard right now.

  39. becky Says:

    Is it an entitlement when you are forced to buy it for yourself? Or is it a gift, as Nancy Pelosi says.

    Why don’t we develop the language before we discuss the issue. Language is important.

    Medicare Catastrophic coverage Repeal Act of 1989, for which the image will haunt Dan Rostenkowski. An entitlement that was repealed.

    I know the blogs are calling this an entitlement, but how can it be when I have to buy it? It has the potential to self-execute into an entitlement in 4 years, but isn’t one now.

  40. Geoffrey Britain Says:

    The anger has only just begun and will greatly increase.

    Obama will ensure that, as he attempts to push through even more radical legislation before the mid-terms make of him the earliest to become a lame-duck President ever.

    Amnesty for illegals is

    It’s been tried, here in the US before and failed and is much more controversial than health care reform.

    The reason why several entitlement programs will be eliminated is because they are mathematically unsustainable. The deficits and unfunded liabilities of these programs and demographic factors involved allow for no other outcome. The greater and longer the denial, the more severe shall be the bankruptcy.

    It’s now, not a case of if but of when and how bad.

    The new narrative is that the choice is between freedom and the nanny state. People who value freedom are willing to fight for it, people who value the nanny state either want to be coddled, or wish to coddle others or seek to use the nanny state to seize control over others. Those who coddle and wish to be coddled don’t have the determination and passion to sustain a long conflict.

    The minority who seek to control others cannot hold that power because too many in this country oppose them, the US is not a culture amenable to tyranny.

  41. ELC Says:

    @Bob: “There will no holding them back that they found a way to circumvent a 60 vote majority.” Neo correctly notes this is an incorrect assessment: the only way they avoided the requirement this time to invoke cloture (by 3/5 vote) in the Senate was passing a bill in the House that had already passed the Senate after cloture.

  42. Perfected democrat Says:

    Coming up shortly on the Democrat’s wishlist?

  43. Bob from Virginia Says:

    # neo-neocon Says:

    Bob of Virginia: explain to me how the Democrats have found a way to circumvent the 60-vote majority. As I wrote here, that is only true for bills that have already passed in the Senate. HCR fit that description. The other things you mention do not.
    OK I was venting, perhaps, but I got the impression from somewhere, I won’t say where, that the Dems are playing by rules that have not been used in this fashion before. And we must give them credit in their inventive destructiveness.

  44. Perfected democrat Says:

    Maybe this?

  45. Perfected democrat Says:

    Sorry, the formatting is a problem, This:—Regulations/China-s-legislature-deliberates-draft-amendment-to-law-on-guarding-state-secrets.htm

  46. Bob from Virginia Says:

    More predictable good news

    “A suspected al Qaeda organizer once called “the highest value detainee” at Guantánamo Bay was ordered released by a federal judge in an order issued Monday.

    Mohamedou Ould Slahi was accused in the 9/11 Commission report of helping recruit Mohammed Atta and other members of the al Qaeda cell in Hamburg, Germany, that took part in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

    Military prosecutors suspected Mr. Slahi of links to other al Qaeda operations, and considered seeking the death penalty against him while preparing possible charges in 2003 and 2004.”

    Things are really falling into place aren’t they?

  47. Michael Says:


    Hopefully that will not be the judge that hears your Attorney General’s case.

  48. J.L. Says:

    It can’t be repealed? Why not?

    Thats what I’ve been saying. Of Course it can be repealed. Will it be a fight? Probably. But if the supporters of socialized medicine can be so perisistent and untiring, fighting until they passed their bill, why can’t we?

    Why cant this be repealed the way the catastrophic health entitlement waqs repealed in 1989?

    Why cant this be repealed the way federal welfare entitlements were in in 1995?

  49. Elise Says:

    I think Krauthammer’s point – the reason he says it cannot happen before 2013 – is that the Republicans cannot get 67 votes in the Senate via the 2010 elections. Even if the Republicans hold all their contested Senate seats and take all the contested seats currently held by Democrats and by the Independents who caucus with the Democrats – a clean sweep in November – the Republicans will only control 64 votes in the Senate. So even under the rosiest possible scenario for the Republicans in the mid-term elections, it would still require 3 Democratic Senators to break ranks and vote with the Republicans to override a Presidential veto of a repeal bill. Since a clean sweep is highly unlikely, it would take more than 3 Democrats breaking ranks to override an Obama veto of a repeal bill.

    As for repealing certain portions of the bill, that path is dangerous. The provisions most likely to be repealed are those that fund this undertaking, like the individual mandate. Repeal the individual mandate but leave the requirement that insurance companies accept new customers with pre-existing conditions and the insurance companies will be bankrupt before we know what hit them. If I were inclined to conspiracy theories, I’d think that this is just what the Democrats want the Republicans to do. Destroying the insurance companies seems like a pretty simple path to single-payer.

  50. Scott Says:

    I’m late to this party. I haven’t read through all the posts yet, so I apoligize if someone has already posted this.

    But Club for Growth is sponsoring a petition to “Repeal it”. 49 current lawmakers, 189 candidates, and almost 130,000 citizens have signed it. If you want to add your name, or see if your lawnakers or candidates have signed it, it is here:

  51. mezzrow Says:

    I yield to none in my admiration for Messers Steyn, Kraunthammer, and Derbyshire. These gentlemen are principled conservatives, but there’s not an native American among them. They will be shown the exceptionalism of this nation. They will applaud and encourage us before this is over, and will marvel at what has been done.

    Something’s starting with this. Take heart. Put steel in your spine and a smile on your face, and think about how you help turn this great big ship around. Can’t you feel the center shift? I can.

  52. Boots Says:

    Michael Says:

    March 22nd, 2010 at 2:36 pm
    The only thing that keeps me going at the moment is the circumstances surrounding the (first?) Revolutionary War

    Absolutely!! Think about George Washington crossing the Delaware, would he gladly suffer Charles Krauthammer in the front of the boat, whining about how the plan would never work and the British won’t willingly surrender?

    Everybody needs to get a grip. Concentrate on the November 2010 elections. If enough democrats get bounced out on their butts, there might be a few dem senators (up for election in 2012) who will cross the aisle to vote this out, ala the 1989 repeal of Medicare Catastrophic Coverage.

    If Obama takes on the odor of Carter, few dems will want to be caught standing next to him. Rahm was right, this should have been done in smaller increments, not one massive fisting. Granny Botox kneecapped enough reps to celebrate right now, but it can be repealed if we FOCUS.

  53. Brian Swisher Says:

    Wouldn’t repeal require a veto-proof majority in the Senate, at least while the O-man whiles away the rest of his term?

    In any case:

    Yesterday was Thermopylae.

    November will be Plataea.

  54. etabby Says:

    Elise is right. As long as Obama is President, he’ll veto any repeal effort. In order to override that veto, we’ll need 2/3 majorities in House and Senate. ObamaCare is a party defining issue, so you can’t rely on any democrat votes. The last time Republicans had a 2/3 majority in either chamber was before the Great Depression (where they used their majorities to pass Smoot Hawley; Republicans back then were the Tariff party).

    It will take more than one cycle to get a veto overriding majority in the Senate. Which means Obamacare will have gone into operation, with lots of bureaucrats assigned to making it happen. It will require unbelievable discipline to undo all that.

    So these are uncharted waters we’re in. The nay-sayers look to history and see nothing to give them any hope. Repeal of a major socialist program has never happened before. Does that mean it can’t happen. No. But just screaming about it, calling Krauthammer out as a defeatist, won’t accomplish anything good. This fight–and to repeal Obamacare will require a tremendous fight–will require our lives and scared honor. We call ourselves the Tea Party movement. Well, that’s what they put on the line. We won’t accomplish anything unless we do the same.

  55. JR Dogman Says:

    Hi Neo,

    I’m looking forward to reading your article. Like you, I think there is more cause for optimism than people realize. I wonder if we are thinking the same thing:

    We can’t afford this.

    It is true that no federal entitlement program has ever been repealed. But the country has never been at such a tipping point before. As I see it, the real worry is not that this new entitlement won’t be able to be repealed, but that it will *without question* bankrupt the country.

    And bankrupt countries cannot afford lavish welfare programs, no matter what laws congress passes.

    If the US goes bankrupt, or even teeters on the edge of insolvency, the country will go into survival mode.

    I can’t see how the welfare state as currently structured can possibly survive other than in name. E.g., what good is a new Social Security building for thousands of new government bureaucrats, if there’s *no money* for Social Security checks for them to send out?

    Ironically, I think what the Democrats are doing will destroy the welfare state. Destroy it literally, and so destroy it in people’s minds as a model for sound governance.

    Rep. Paul Ryan has already come up with a detailed alternative to the leftists’ socialist state. Not many people know it exists, but that could change soon, and the statists know it. They are rushing like maniacs, because reality is nipping at their heels. Americans are furious now, but wait till the USA’s credit rating gets downgraded, or the price of oil spikes and Obama still won’t drill here, drill now, etc.

  56. SteveH Says:

    “”Ironically, I think what the Democrats are doing will destroy the welfare state””
    JR Dogman

    I honestly think the dems are a little perplexed at why commerce isn’t getting back to normal. They fail to make the connection that their actions will turn a 15 trillion economy into an 8 trillion.

  57. Mr. Frank Says:

    Tonight Krauthammer opined that all the government spending would necessitate a European style VAT. Of course, that takes money out of the private economy which hurts economic growth. Why can’t the lefties see this is the recipe for a moribund economy and high unemployment forever, especially among the young? All they have to do is look at Europe.

  58. Artfldgr Says:

    So wonderful that someone else besides me can think AHEAD! gives me hope!!!

    It has to do with numbers not ‘feelings’, and the numbers will not add up to a way to do a thing about it.

    Elise did the numbers before making all those other meaningless arguments.

    This is chess, they are WAY ahead of you guys.

    The reason they pushed so hard and gave up whole careers to get this is that they knew the math and understood the situation, and that it had little to do with their BS, and all to do with the power and such they will control through this.

    anyone still think that nationalizing a portion of the finance industry. nationalizing the auto industry. now nationalizing health AND higher education…

    A LONG time ago i said that the word Nazi had a meaning. I even said what it meant. ‘the nationalizers’.

    that everything happened fast and that they are ahead of you. they added up and knew that it would take the same mana of stars from heaven in the right place to have the votes in some way change what they just did.

    AMA in 1930 said the other programs would lead to socialist medicine..

    i guess if it doesn’t happen fast in a year or two, your wrong for being right for being ahead more than that.

    read the wiki post on conspiracy theorists, before the 60s and baby boomers the idea didn’t exist. because we as people knew there was always people plotting one thing or another to their advantage. what do you call money frozen in the fridge? or any number of stuff. we stopped voting them out of office when we found out they were conspiring, because why?

    keep your eye on may 1st… or did you forget how they got over a million to march for rights… (and people commented how they carried the flags of their own countries, not the US)…

  59. JR Dogman Says:

    I honestly think the dems are a little perplexed at why commerce isn’t getting back to normal. They fail to make the connection that their actions will turn a 15 trillion economy into an 8 trillion.
    – SteveH


    Tonight Krauthammer opined that all the government spending would necessitate a European style VAT. Of course, that takes money out of the private economy which hurts economic growth.
    – Mr. Frank

    Exactly my point: there is no way to pay for this.

    The Democrats will continue to cause great damage so long as they hold power, but they cannot legislate away reality.

    No money = no stuff.

  60. rickl Says:

    JR Dogman:

    We’re thinking along the same lines. I just made the following comment a short while ago at GCP, in response to a post about this American Thinker article:

    Is Obamacare Smoot-Hawley II?

    I think this is dead on. This could very well be the straw that breaks the back of the economy.

    That may be by design, if the Democrats are really pursuing a Cloward-Piven strategy. But it’s also possible that they are raving idiots and economic illiterates.

    An economic collapse may be the only thing that can put an end to the entitlement state. Of course, things will get ugly in a hurry if the welfare/unemployment/Social Security checks stop arriving. It has the potential to make the Great Depression look like happy times. That’s practically a Mad Max scenario.

    That’s the point at which the military could step in to restore adult supervision to the government, and hopefully round up and execute the communists.

  61. SteveH Says:

    “”Elise did the numbers before making all those other meaningless arguments.””

    Theres a reason George Washington was chosen instead of an accountant. An accountant would have looked at the numbers and said f*** it.

  62. Wm Lawrence Says:


    It’s because when our betters look at europe they see their dream. They forget all of the suffering, death, inhumanity and nihilism that has come out of that continent in the last two centuries and picture themselves in Versailles in 1788 in the company of their peers.

    They choose to forget about the unpleasantries that followed because they, of course, are so superior, so lovable and so wise that we peasants will of course fall down upon our knees and beg to be subject to their whims…

    My ancestors came to this continent to escape europe with its all encompassing plague of social dystrophy’s. Our current crop of “leaders” can’t wait to bring them all here. To revisit an epithet of the time “A pox on them!”

  63. newton Says:

    “Repeal by bankruptcy is the best opportunity. Instead of fighting a legal battle—on the enemy’s turf—we are wiser to encourage the economic forces already aligned with us.”

    Or even better – repeal by abuse. When people realize that 15000 IRS agents are itching to get their hands into your private bank accounts to make you pay for health coverage, someone will sue. Oh yeah!

    What was that phrase in the Declaration of Independence, “abuses and usurpations”…?

  64. JR Dogman Says:

    “This could very well be the straw that breaks the back of the economy. … An economic collapse may be the only thing that can put an end to the entitlement state.” – rickl

    Yup. But I don’t think it needs to be an all-out collapse. If the US even comes close to insolvency, the country will go into survival mode, and survival mode will not include Social Security or Medicare, let alone Obamacare, because there will be *no money* to pay for any of these programs.

    In any case, on the road to national insolvency, there will be warning signs, and the American people will react to them one way or another.

    E.g.: If the USA’s bond rating is downgraded, the American people will react to that.

    If they are smart, they will turn away from Obama and listen to people such as Paul Ryan, and begin to fix the mess we are in.

    If they are foolish, they will continue to listen to Obama and the mess will get worse.

    In either case, the welfare state as currently configured will cease to exist.

    If something cannot continue, it won’t.

  65. SteveH Says:

    “”An economic collapse may be the only thing that can put an end to the entitlement state.””

    And the warning last week from Moody’s about U.S. credit rating…..””Preserving debt affordability at levels consistent with AAA ratings will invariably require fiscal adjustments of a magnitude that, in some cases, will test social cohesion,””

    Unlike the great depression, we have grown folks now that are pitifully unprepared for such an event. Very scary stuff indeed.

  66. rickl Says:

    JR Dogman Says:
    March 22nd, 2010 at 8:48 pm

    If they are smart, they will turn away from Obama and listen to people such as Paul Ryan, and begin to fix the mess we are in.

    If they are foolish, they will continue to listen to Obama and the mess will get worse.

    Well, see, there’s the problem…

  67. JR Dogman Says:


    Very scary indeed. But it does tell you that, whether we manage to repeal Obamacare or not, it will in effect repeal itself, for the welfare state consumes more money than the state itself can ever afford to provide.

    The road will be bumpy, but unless Americans in all the different states accept tyranny as the new normal, what Obama and the Democrats in congress “won” yesterday will prove to have been a pyrrhic victory.

    Krauthammer and Steyn are right on the psychology: like all people, Americans take quickly to the narcotic of welfare state programs.

    They are also right on the history: no federal entitlement program has ever been repealed, or even scaled back.

    However, no federal entitement program has yet gone bankrupt, and taken the economy down with it.

    $100+ trillion in unfunded liabilities, plus a $14 trillion deficit, are not things the country has ever had to deal with before — and there is only one way to deal with them, or they will destroy us.

    The welfare state as it stands today cannot be sustained.

    Therefore, it *will not* be sustained.

  68. JR Dogman Says:

    “Well, see, *there’s* the problem…” – rickl

    Yes, but looked at coldly, with a scientific detachment, as I said, either way it doesn’t matter.

    Whether we wise up in time, or if it takes our going bankrupt to get us to wise up, the welfare state will collapse.

    Maybe I’m wrong, but I don’t see most Americans complacently sliding into banana republic status.

    Not in Texas, not in New York, not in Colorado or the Carolinas.

  69. SteveH Says:

    “Well, see, *there’s* the problem…” – rickl

    It’s like convincing a crack head to give up his addiction when he has an ample supply handy.

  70. JR Dogman Says:

    “It’s like convincing a crack head to give up his addiction when he has an ample supply handy.”

    Yes, but that’s the point: there *isn’t* an ample supply, because crack costs money.

    A crackhead without money will be a crackless crackhead.

    No money = no stuff.

  71. rickl Says:

    No stuff means a deranged and desperate crackhead.

  72. Artfldgr Says:

    wait till ya see what happens next when things tighten

  73. neo-neocon Says:

    I have written about the numbers game before (can’t find the post right now, but it’s there), and when I do the numbers I get something slightly different.

    First of all, there is every possibility of gaining control of the House in 2010. In the Senate there are 18 Democratic seats up for grabs. In order to gain a majority of the Senate, the Republicans would have to have a net gain of 10 seats (one less if Joe Lieberman were to join them). They cannot mathematically gain enough to get a filibuster-proof majority, but a simple majority is theoretically possible (if not easy).

    The point is that of course even if the Republicans took control of both houses in 2010 Obama could veto any legislation they passed. But he cannot veto budget bills. So the way to begin to attack it would be through the budget, although this is very complex as well (and as I’ve said many times, I am no parliamentary expert, so I may be making some errors here—but here’s a discussion of the way budget appropriations bills work, if anyone cares to wade through it).

    I believe, however, that Congress could defund current legislation through their budget appropriations bills without repealing it (it could be repealed in 2012 if the Congress and the presidency change hands). Defunding could actually be done even without a 60-vote filibuster-proof majority in the Senate (that is what reconciliation was actually originally about), just a simple majority in both houses. As I said before, the budget bill is not subject to a presidential veto.

    Even if the Republicans only gained control of the House and not the Senate in 2010 (the more realistic possibility, I think), the two houses still must merge their budget bills into one (because of the bicameral system). So there may still be possibilities there for the House to moderate the Senate.

    As I said, I’m no expert, but that’s my understanding of things, at least from the quick cram course I’ve given myself online. I don’t know how the defunding would actually work in its details (or whether it would work), and after a quick search I haven’t found anything very specific on it, although I’ve seen it mentioned here and there during the last few months that HCR has been kicking around.

    Of course, there are also the challenges in the court system, but I happen to think those will not go in our favor. There are also enough states incensed at this and threatened by its demands to their own already-strapped budgets that there is even a possibility of a Constitutional amendment if enough states feel this way—that’s a whole other topic for another time. I think it’s a longshot, but I mention it because it is a theoretical possibility—and depending on how much more this president and this Congress defy the will of the people and the will of the states, it might become a stronger possibility in the future.

    I am getting increasingly frustrated by the constant assumption and declaration that it is impossible to do anything about this, and that anyone who says otherwise is not paying attention to numbers.

  74. SteveH Says:

    “”Yes, but that’s the point: there *isn’t* an ample supply, because crack costs money.””

    But the entitlement minded and the crackhead don’t even think of a world with no entitlements and no crack.

    Which gets back to the point, it may well have to come down to foodstamps and the like being weeks late at first to get people aware its not just all BS talk about the govt having money problems.

  75. SteveH Says:

    “”I am getting increasingly frustrated by the constant assumption and declaration that it is impossible to do anything about this, and that anyone who says otherwise is not paying attention to numbers.””

    I feel that too. Not only that its defeatist, but its an incredibly inside the box response to a situation nobodys ever invented a box for.

  76. IgotBupkis Says:

    > photo of death tweeter jay martin… you can tell he is a tea party guy…


    OK, so he’s an oreo, an unca tom.

    Yeah… yeah… that’s the ticket, yeah…

  77. JR Dogman Says:

    “I am getting increasingly frustrated by the constant assumption and declaration that it is impossible to do anything about this, and that anyone who says otherwise is not paying attention to numbers.”

    Yes, the numbers are very important — and much can be done to stymie funding of Obamacare.

    But what about the other numbers? Where’s the money for this going to come from?

    If there was an honest, straightforward way to pay for Obamacare, the Democrats would have presented it. The reason they didn’t present such a way is that *none exists*.

    This applies not only to Obamacare, but to Social Security and Medicare as well: the way these programs are presently structured, they will collapse.

  78. Artfldgr Says:

    “I said that I had thoroughly studied the U.S. president’s anti-crisis program, that I liked it, as well as that it is socially oriented and primarily aimed at supporting poor people and enhancing the state’s role. I said all this to President Obama.” Gennady Zyuganov

  79. neo-neocon Says:

    JR Dogman: yes, those are other very important numbers. But that could take a while to happen, or it could happen sooner. Meanwhile, the 2010 election is happening very soon. That’s one of the most important things to work on—because it also will happen (probably, anyway) before the whole amnesty issue can be tackled by Obama and company, and finessed so that they gain a lot of new voters who were once illegals. I’ve read a lot about how long the latter task will take (some disagreement there; no one quite knows) but I believe the mechanism could not be put in place by 2010. So 2010 is a very pivotal year, and probably would come before those other two big number issues came into play (the financial stress and collapse of the entitlement programs, and the swelling of the voter ranks).

  80. Mr. Frank Says:

    It’s amazing how people who claim to be smarter than everybody else don’t understand that you can’t kill the goose that lays the golden eggs and expect the egg supply to remain constant. Time and again they have to learn the hard way.

    Back in 1990 the Democrat congress passed a big luxury tax bill in the interest of fairness and revenue enhancement. They put large excise taxes on airplanes, yachts, luxury cars, jewelry, and furs. The effect on employment was devastating, especially in the boating industry which lost almost 8,000 jobs. Much of that was in the northeast where the brilliant idea was pushed by Ted Kennedy among others. The aircraft industry lost almost 1500 jobs. Car sales, furs, and jewelry took a hit as well.

    The tax took in half of what was expected showing that static models ignore the fact that people adjust their behavior to economic realities. The cost in unemployment benefits and lost income tax revenue exceeded the tax take by 50%. The taxes were largely repealed by 1993.

    Now the morons are going to sock it to the wealthy every way they can. Taxes on capital gains and dividends go up in January. Upper income folks are going to get whacked. A Medicare tax is going to be put on investment income including rents. Even tanning salons are going to be taxed. And I’m sure that the VAT is going to be looked at hard. You don’t have to be a PhD in economics to figure out how this is going to turn out.

    Maybe if the voters see that Obama is Carter on steroids, they might want Obamacare scaled back.

  81. JR Dogman Says:


    I agree — if the Democrats try to ram through immigration “reform”, the process will be front and center for the November elections. And in that case, I wonder how many of those 18 Senate seats we’d get. Something like 75% of Americans do not support amnesty. Right now the country is at a high simmer, but if Obama pushes amnesty, my guess is that will become a boil.

    And now, for a little optimism:

    I think if she decides to run in 2012, she’s our next president, by a Reagan-style landslide.

  82. foxmarks Says:

    If you tire of being reminded of the numbers, perhaps it will end when we see what you’ve got cooking.

    If you’re worn thin because harping on numbers seems to assume that you’re unaware, then we have, in our dander, forgotten to display etiquette or respect.

    But if you are upset because you do not like the notion of impossible, that we are powerless, perhaps you overlook our alternative strategies.

    Fight at the ballot box and in the courtroom, yes! But also fight in the small battles of ordinary life. Make this abomination as costly as possible to those who foisted them. Not just the electeds, but their supporters, too.

    If it is war, some may abide by the Geneva Conventions. Others may not. But we all fight for a similar end.

  83. SteveH Says:

    Mr Frank, what it is is that they hate the reality of where discretionary monies they so love to spend even comes from. They simply can’t handle the fact that poorer people can never be made better off by insisting no profits get made in the process.

    They are essentially hard headed people of the mindset that they know better than gravity which course a river should take.

  84. I R A Darth Aggie Says:

    and think about how you help turn this great big ship around. Can’t you feel the center shift? I can.

    Oh, she’s shifting alright. I’ll give you that. I just hope we can get the course change before we snag the iceberg.

    Or before this monstrosity of a Congress heels her all the way over, and capsizing us. Hey, what’s another 20 million new amnesty voters amongst friends?

    Actually, I think the illegals are smart enough to not fall for amnesty, as they can get a better deal living just enough off the grid to escape notice. Can it be said that they’ve gone Galt?

  85. JR Dogman Says:

    Here’s the whole thing, via C4P:

    Go, Sarah, go!

  86. Tom Says:

    Neo’s budget-based battles make good sense to me (Immodestly, I’d had the same general idea today, not nearly as well thought out).
    But there remains the very apt frog-in-heating-pot metaphor. The majority of us frogs sense the heat and know we’re soon gonna be cooked. If a frog, it’s easy enough to jump; the jump is to a cooler, better place. We frog-people have no better place to jump to, though, Our choices are civil disobedience, which must necessarily be massive and sustained; or disobedience by force, which shall assuredly be met by all the force the statists can muster. Either way, the jumping frog-people are not going to land in a better place. Jumping has costs, up to and including death.

    It seems likely the same poor choices were faced by the “good” Germans in the 1930s. Sacrificing oneself is a whole lot more straightforward than sacrificing one’s family in the bargain.

    Thus, I share CK’s pessimistic forecast. I will share in the struggle because it’s the right thing to do, not because I expect to be on the winning side.

  87. JOHN MAHER Says:

    I have been reading for a while but never commented. I want to thank you for all the hard work and terrific insights that you offer. I really appreciate your positive attitude as we move forward. Thanks! Thanks! Thanks! Keep up your good work and God bless you!

  88. Promethea Says:

    It will interesting to see what happens when Illinois and California go bankrupt. What are the unemployed teachers and other government workers going to do? There will be lots of potholes on the streets and roads, lots of car repairs needed. How many homes will burn down when the firemen aren’t paid? Looting flash mobs? The mind boggles.

    In the Great Depression, a lot of people were paid in scrip. I wonder if that will happen again. I need to look up what happened when scrip was used to pay workers. I’ll bet nothing good happened.

    If the government tries to use inflation to work its way out of its debt problem, then all those baby boomer yuppie liberals that I know are going to enjoy fun times. I wonder how long they’ll stay liberal.

  89. Perfected democrat Says:

    This is only their boot in the door, because when everyone figures out that the “affordable” insurance they can “now” buy is actually half-assed, and there will still be unaffordable “co-pays”, coverage limits, etc., and which will escalate in price as the insurers try to stay solvent, it will justify the next step, which will be to fully nationalize the system. If the Dems can mantain the voter demographics thru new “immigration reform” schemes, as well as maintaining the essential propaganda machine, then they’ve ultimately got the power to do whatever they want, that’s how they’ve succeeded in getting to this stage. But then, ala Europe, Canada, Cuba, just about everywhere but Israel, that won’t solve the problem either because the perception that health care should be cheaper than it is, in reality, is an aberation. The Israelis probably only seem to accomplish it because of their small population, combined with their intellectual capital and a demographic which supplies qualified health care providers at, no doubt, lower levels of remuneration. On that I’m talking somewhat off the top of my head, but that seems what it’s all really about. It seems apparent, also, that until the MSM is somehow challenged to present the unvarnished truth about affairs, the masses that rely on that media for their information and editorial guidance are going to behave like the lemmings they are proving to be.

    Commenters here previously noted that it will be an excuse to reduce the defense budget, etc., and which is probably right on the money (no pun intended); at a time when Communist China is doing everything possible to challenge American military power; not to mention the Russians as well as the Iranians and their allies including Hugo Chavez and company. There could be very ominous times ahead, especially if the Israelis are successfully coerced by the Democrats into splitting Jerusalem and allowing the so-called West Bank to revert to unchallenged radical muslim control, an extension of Gaza; when anybody with an ounce of brains and common sense knows that the peace negotiations are, and always have been a sham; the muslims are, and will always be intent on destroying Israel and the Jews, with the Christians and the Hindus next on their major agendas…

    The domestic and geopolitical pieces all fit together, they aren’t separate issues. The Dems game plan is a comprehensive left-wing agenda, they’re more loyal now to the U.N. than to America; the Dems are becoming on par with the Communist Chinese, with party first; hence why we’re now dealing with a kind of “manchurian candidate” in the White House, and all that implies. Ideally we need a combination like Gen. David Petraeus with Lt. Colonel Allen West (my favorite candidate of all) running against the Dems in the next major election, and which would hammer home the truth! Personally, I doubt anything less would have a chance. Also, I never want to see another American president assassinated again, especially in principle; but to see a third Democratic president impeached would be a vindication our justice system. The Democratic Party has too often been a pernicious influence and illusion in America’s history.

  90. neo-neocon Says:

    foxmarks: Who here said they are tired of being reminded of the numbers? I didn’t see anyone say that here.

    As for me, I said I was tired of defeatist talk, and then I proceeded to crunch some numbers (as I’ve done many times before). I think it’s important to look at the numbers.

  91. Promethea Says:

    Re Israeli socialized medicine: Here’s an anecdote:

    I accompanied someone to an Israeli hospital once, and the hospital corridor was lined with gurneys with patients, some of whom were moaning and sobbing.

    I’ve never seen that in a U.S. hospital.

    This is just one story out of a million stories, but I think it’s time to put to rest the idea that socialism works in Israel. It doesn’t. The only part of Israel that works is the free enterprise part.

    Yes, there are some viable kibbutzim, but they are SUBSIDIZED.

  92. JR Dogman Says:

    “It will interesting to see what happens when Illinois and California go bankrupt.” -Promethea

    This is a key question, perhaps *the* key question: what will bankruptcy mean for a state?

    Well, here is one thing it will defintely mean:

    Bankrupt states cannot afford socialist entitlement programs.

    Leftism, and its expression in the welfare state, will ultimately destroy itself. It will because it must.

    The free-market vision of men like Rep. Paul Ryan, and a re-embracing of our nation’s founding principles, will win in the end.

    It will get ugly, and scary as hell, as the Democrats may actually have to bankrupt us for Americans to fully wake up — but make no mistake, we will win the war.

    So buck up, amigos!

  93. Baklava Says:

    Mr. Frank – the brilliant wrote, “Back in 1990 the Democrat congress passed a big luxury tax bill in the interest of fairness and revenue enhancement. They put large excise taxes on airplanes, yachts, luxury cars, jewelry, and furs. The effect on employment was devastating, especially in the boating industry which lost almost 8,000 jobs. Much of that was in the northeast where the brilliant idea was pushed by Ted Kennedy among others.

    I remember that.

    Do you all want to know why I like this bill? Because it’s going to PISS OFF the 27 year olds who have to pay a fine or buy insurance costing $thousands vs. pay for the fine-ass automobile they had their eyes on.

    They now have to contribute and own up to the system they help create by putting these people in office.

    AND GUESS WHAT ELSE? The elderly are PISSED OFF because of the “Medicare cuts” whether or not they transpire is irrelevant.

    One thing is super clear. Mr. Frank brought up a tax that didn’t bring in the revenues.

    Does anybody SERIOUSLY think the cadillac health plan tax will bring in the revenues they counted on???:???????: ???? Nope. People will change. They will purchase or get a plan underneath the cadillac tax. The revenues will NOT come in.

    And btw, young folks – I too was a liberal before 1991. And then I was expose to alternative viewpoints. 🙂 Welcome.

  94. JR Dogman Says:


    Indeed — kibbutzim are an indulgence, for culture’s sake.

  95. Baklava Says:

    A business owner with 28 employees writes….

  96. grackle Says:

    I was very discouraged a few days ago when I realized that Obamacare was probably going to become law. But since then, with the help of Neo and other encouraging bloggers, commentors and my own research and thoughts I’ve come to a different mindset.

    At least part of a major entitlement has been repealed. There was an addition to Medicare in 1988, the Medicare Catastrophic Coverage act of 1988, which was repealed by the Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Repeal Act of 1989. In Wikipedia it’s listed in Dan Rostenkowski’s section under “Major legislation enacted during chairmanship.” According to Wiki it was repealed because there were massive protests by seniors.

    This situation we are in is totally different than at any other time in US history. We are at a crossroads. In one direction there is decadence, weakness and America becoming a second tier nation. But in the other direction is a renewed vigor, strength regained and augmented.

    There is an American culture that is the driving force behind an American Civilization. Because we are immersed in it, most of the time we Americans don’t even realize we represent a civilization. But we do and that civilization is one of the most wonderful things that the world has ever beheld.

    It gives the common man more freedom and dignity than any other entity in history. It bestows riches the like of which has never been seen by ordinary humans. It makes my heart beat faster just to think how good it is. It makes my blood boil to think that there are those determined to bring it down. I can tell from the comments here and elsewhere that these feelings are shared.

    As with all other great civilizations that preceded us our primary enemy comes from within. And why do they desire to diminish this noble thing? Fear, ignorance, envy, hubris and a lust for power.

    ObamaCare, it’s author and the Progressive-controlled Congress are not inevitable. Even with the MSM’s fawning assistance they are not inevitable. They can be overcome. This is a task that many of us who have in the past had our petty differences and disputes can unite together and perform, a task we MUST perform. They think they have won. Let’s make it a hollow victory.

  97. JR Dogman Says:


    That’s some post over at Wizbang.

  98. neo-neocon Says:

    Promethea: you just brought back a memory I had repressed. When I gave birth to my son at the local hospital (not in Israel; in the US), they had no room for me and I was on a stretcher in the hall for quite a few hours before they did. I don’t recall whether anyone else was also in the same situation at the same time, though.

    I was rather exhausted :-).

  99. JR Dogman Says:


    Funny, your anecdote reminded me of a conversation I had with a friend the other day, about the strength of women as compared to that of men. We agreed: if we were suddenly tasked with bearing children, the human race would go exinct.

  100. tehag Says:

    The Constitution and its animating principles were always dead among the 1960s generation. And for 40 years, the ’60s generation has taught its hatred of America, freedom, and prosperity in schools, media, and politics.

    This Age of Fascism/Socialism/Bolivarism is as wide and deep as the Age of Enlightenment and has been gathering strength for over 100 years. It represents the wishes of billions of people. It’s habits of thought and language are universal, though its concepts are comparable to angels dancing on the head of pin. The majority of Americans voted for a fascist state; the majority of their representatives voted to implement it; their will be done.

    As to Republicans: they will “conserve” Obama’s gains as Eisenhower, Nixon, and Reagan conserved FDR’s, LDJ’s, and Carter’s gains.


    You’re a racist if you oppose Obama and universal health care. There are laws and regulations against racist speech. It’s only matter of time before the US becomes a full-on fascist EU state, prosecuting political opponents.

  101. Jenna Says:

    Just a few short weeks ago, Krauthammer confidently told us the bill wouldn’t pass.

  102. Sergey Says:

    Krauthammer is right about one thing: it is always easier to legislate welfare benefits than to cut them. People quite soon became dependent on handouts and are inclined to think that such benefits are “human rights”. This creates “ratchet effect”, historically known to Roman empire, modern continental Europe and Canada. Still there are examples when this dynamics was reversed (Thatcher, Reagan, even post-Communist Eastern Europe and even Russia). Uphill battle, anyway.

  103. Highlander Says:

    Did anyone see Obama and Biden approaching the podium to give a statement regarding passage of the Healthcare bill? He was strutting! I mean he was literally strutting! My blood boils!

  104. Sissy Willis Says:

    I wept a bit Sunday morning and then picked myself up and never looked back . . . Freedom never was free!

    The powers that be may be slow to catch on, but the Tea Party movement, — today’s sons and daughters of liberty! — is not going away. Scott Brown was just an opening shot across the bow of at-sea political elites who would impose their unwanted statist utopia upon us.

    As so many have said, thank you, Obama & Company for waking the sleeping giant.

    It’s so nice to have a man around the house

  105. Sissy Willis Says:

    Link title in my above comment should be It’s so nice to have a man around the Althouse

  106. Martyn of England Says:

    Have you ever walked into the wrong room?

  107. Sissy Willis Says:

    Forget about Mr. Pessimist. ‘Love the guy, but it was never quite the same between us after Krauthammer dissed Sarah in the early days.

    Look, instead, to Bill Kristol. He was among the first to suggest Scott Brown run as 41st vote to stop Obamacare. Dems overrode that with dirty tricks, but give us time. Kristol’s latest is a rousing call to battle:

    Repeal: A one-word agenda for Republicans

  108. roc scssrs Says:

    Yes, we did get welfare reform–twenty-five years after welfare was federalized. Yes, the greatest socialist state of all, the USSR, collapsed–seventy years after the October Revolution. Mark Steyn says the best place to be is the first generation or so after massive entitlements are established– the beginning phases of the Ponzi scheme. So perhaps we should relax and enjoy it. It should take a while before the system is thoroughly ruined. Too bad about the grandkids, though.

  109. House of Eratosthenes Says:

    […] (hat tip to Gerard once again) provides a much needed sanity check: I hear this defeatist attitude nearly everywhere. I could understand it if the nay-saying came […]

  110. Scottie Says:

    Neo, don’t let the hand wringers get ya down. Your irritation with them is completely warranted.

    Obonga and his cohorts have given us the very thing we needed on a silver platter.

    That gift is a clearly understood issue that we can rally around.

    Yes, we suffered a defeat, but it is a defeat that galvanizes not only us but millions of other Americans of like mind who have sat it out on the sidelines so far in the mistaken belief that politics don’t matter/it doesn’t affect them/what goes on in Washington, DC is a world away/there’s no difference in the two political parties/etc.

    When the government intrudes itself into your own household budget in such a surly manner, tells you how you must use your own money (on top of what they’ve already confiscated before you even get paid!) and even plans to use IRS resources to go after malcontents, it stings such that even the most docile couch potato begins to think they need to do something about the discomfort being inflicted upon them.

    If we act as Americans with a “Can Do” attitude and go after these sumbitches with a vengence for at least the next 8 or 9 months, we’ll have a good beginning – and we’ll have Obama to thank for the final insult that stirred so many to action!

  111. Patvann Says:

    I learned a little oath a while back that Krautenbummer needs to learn as well:

    In times of war or uncertainty there is a special breed of warrior ready to answer our Nation’s call. A common man with uncommon desire to succeed.

    Forged by adversity, he stands alongside America’s finest special operations forces to serve his country, the American people, and protect their way of life.

    I am that man.

    My Trident is a symbol of honor and heritage. Bestowed upon me by the heroes that have gone before, it embodies the trust of those I have sworn to protect. By wearing the Trident I accept the responsibility of my chosen profession and way of life. It is a privilege that I must earn every day.

    My loyalty to Country and Team is beyond reproach. I humbly serve as a guardian to my fellow Americans always ready to defend those who are unable to defend themselves. I do not advertise the nature of my work, nor seek recognition for my actions. I voluntarily accept the inherent hazards of my profession, placing the welfare and security of others before my own.

    I serve with honor on and off the battlefield. The ability to control my emotions and my actions, regardless of circumstance, sets me apart from other men.

    Uncompromising integrity is my standard. My character and honor are steadfast. My word is my bond.

    We expect to lead and be led. In the absence of orders I will take charge, lead my teammates and accomplish the mission. I lead by example in all situations.

    I will never quit. I persevere and thrive on adversity. My Nation expects me to be physically harder and mentally stronger than my enemies. If knocked down, I will get back up, every time. I will draw on every remaining ounce of strength to protect my teammates and to accomplish our mission. I am never out of the fight.

    We demand discipline. We expect innovation. The lives of my teammates and the success of our mission depend on me – my technical skill, tactical proficiency, and attention to detail. My training is never complete.

    We train for war and fight to win. I stand ready to bring the full spectrum of combat power to bear in order to achieve my mission and the goals established by my country. The execution of my duties will be swift and violent when required yet guided by the very principles that I serve to defend.

    Brave men have fought and died building the proud tradition and feared reputation that I am bound to uphold. In the worst of conditions, the legacy of my teammates steadies my resolve and silently guides my every deed.

    I will not fail.

  112. Bob from Virginia Says:

    With regard to the unlikelihood of repealing entitlement legislation, refer to Aid for Dependent Children. That was a depression era aid package that turned into a gimmick for unwed mothers to get paid for having extra children out of wedlock. The legislation was “reformed” in 1996 and magically the welfare rolls declined.
    Point, there is so much going against Obamacare it is not a question of it failing (does anyone remember 38 states bringing suit against a single law) but making the right wagers on how it is going to fail, and how to minimize the damage it will cause to our economy and security.
    BTW does anyone have any ideas on how an average Joe can fight by throwing monkey wrenches into the Obamacare system, or of ways to break this law? I have every intention of trying to violate it and obstruct it any way I can. (Don’t tell anyone, I don’t want the thought police to get me)

  113. Highlander Says:

    To paraphrase Bluto speaking to Charles Krauthammer and others: “… nothing’s over until we decide it is!” “… we’re afraid to go with you, Bluto. We might get in trouble. Well just kiss my a** from now on. Not me! l won’t take this! Obama is a dead man! Pelosi: dead! Reid–

    (figuratively and politically speaking of course).

  114. Artfldgr Says:

    Not knowing DETAILED history that covers things on the ground means most don’t get what is going on. by the time that they learn anything about it, it will be too late. this is especially so when they cant self sort anymore into a functional group with the ability to make conclusions and move from step A to step B.

    when i bring up history and terms nad things, i am sorry that i bring them up from a common knowledge perspective, which forces me to use certain examples, or else require the reader to learn (which they wont do. mostly they are polite in ignoring what your saying while waiting for their turn to put in something equally).

    we can understand the story of the apple falling from the tree and giving newton a impetus for a moment of reflection. we do not learn about gravity by dropping apples though.

    so if one uses an example from history, ie the apple, ie the funny Austrian dude in the patent leather coat, does not mean that we must drop apples to use what we have learned. however the puerile inability of groups to be able to learn from an historical example has reached a legendary proportion until every useful bit of education that can be gleaned can only be gleaned by one side who has staked out the area as verboten.


  115. NeoConScum Says:

    FEELINGS are not Facts. I’m a longtime huge fan of Charles the Great. He’s licking wounds and getting ready for relentless fighting of this Shipwreck. He’s not–nor ever has been–huggy, feely and hyper sensitive. No more resolute opponent of Obama exists. Trust me.

  116. Artfldgr Says:

    A long time ago I said the despot you think you know, was not the despot as they started

    like an acorn, the seed bespeaks little of what it will become in any form or fashion. one just has to know from experience that an acorn becomes a tree…

    to be presented an acorn out of context of that tree, the yard, the seasonal drop of them and other information, few would say tree… (and if i showed you some other seeds of other trees even less familiar, you would say. “that incredibly tiny thing?.”)

    recognizing the seed means you can pick it up before it germinates.

    recognizing the seedling means you can pull the weed before it gets bigger.Without this KNOWING, you will pull up good things leaving only weeds!!

    however there comes a point where whatever it is, is so well situated that the amount of effort required can not be mustered. (or rather, what musters is the wrong kind of energy).

    no amount of energy can turn a pickle back into a cucumber. i said this, and yet, the argument here is give us a chance, and by force the pickle will become a cucumber once again.

    no… once it happens, you NEVER go back… which is why they have drummed into us the mantra of the cavalry, the second fix, the repair after the effect, and so on.

    if we really understood, then we would fight harder, and would win… so they get us to give up before the fight..

    right now, we can never go back to being a cucumber. its done. period. the question now is whether we are to be an extra sour or just a little sour. but get rid of all the sour? no, we are not capable of running through the system and exterminating those that are doing this, and so even if our fevers go away, the malaria comes back. besides we love the cancers too much to get rid of them now we are so acclimatised to them.

    the man that existed from 1933-37 was very different than what they became after their place was secured.

    but listening to the people here argue… its like they are arguing that since a caterpillar doesn’t look like the moth or butterfly it will become. then obviously it will not become one.

    the experienced are telling them that this is what it looks like before things. and of course no amount of experience can convince a ignorant person that an ugly caterpillar will become a large beautiful colorful flying insect.

    i have been trying to explain what this early form looks like to people who have been trying to be so smart and win the debate that what it appears to be it isnt.. since imagination and experience are now relative, they are weighted the same.

    and so, the few who know more, cant transfer that knowledge to the many that know less. the cultures natural convection of ideas has been broken and now is dysfunctional as no amount of empiricism can win against rampant imagination which is bounded by nothing.

    I wonder to those who were and are thinking no way… how that caterpillar is now starting to look.
    funny how Gleichschaltung took four years too.
    and after that time was up, came the flowering and such that would be more familiar to the people who think they know history from movies and entertainment literature

  117. Elise Says:

    I am getting increasingly frustrated by the constant assumption and declaration that it is impossible to do anything about this, and that anyone who says otherwise is not paying attention to numbers.

    I don’t think it’s impossible to do anything about Health Care Reform – that’s different from it not being possible to repeal it before 2013 which is what I was talking about.

    I was discussing the “not funding it” idea with someone the other day since it seemed to me this could be a way to just not implement it. He doesn’t care for the health care bill but was not entirely comfortable with the idea of one Congress deciding to just stop funding a bill that had become law under another Congress. Plus if the Republicans in the next Congress don’t have the votes to repeal this bill under the rules of the Constitution and decide to get around that by de-funding it, that doesn’t look a whole lot different from the Democrats finagling the rules to pass a bill they don’t have the votes to pass straightforwardly. And, looking down the road, I can certainly appreciate that it would be a bad idea for such an approach to become commonplace.

    So if Republicans decide to go the de-funding route they’ll need to be sure a solid (not bare) majority of people would like the health care bill repealed; they have to explain why their repealing something unstraightforwardly is different from the Democrats passing it unstraighforwardly; and they’ll have to reassure everyone that their doing this to the health care bill doesn’t open the door for the Democrats to do the same to bills they don’t like when they return to power.

    At a bare minimum, the Republicans should write and submit for a vote a bill – or a series of bills – to reform health care as they think it should be reformed at the same time they’re de-funding the existing health care reform. Not just come up with a plan; write an actual bill or bills. However much voters hate the health care bill just passed, I believe they hate scorched earth politics even more. That’s part of *why* this bill and the process used to write and pass it has so energized them.

  118. Elise Says:

    Theres a reason George Washington was chosen instead of an accountant. An accountant would have looked at the numbers and said f*** it.

    True. But that doesn’t mean Washington looked at the numbers and said, “Hey. I can win this war by fighting a straight-up, by the numbers, British style, ‘breast expanding to meet the ball’ battle with the Redcoats.” He looked at the numbers he had versus the numbers the British had and figured out he’d need a different strategy. But he had to look at the numbers in order to figure out what his possible strategies were.

  119. SteveH Says:

    “”BTW does anyone have any ideas on how an average Joe can fight by throwing monkey wrenches into the Obamacare system, or of ways to break this law?””

    Ummmm…Everyone insist to govt officials that their records have you mixed up with your twin? Lol

  120. neo-neocon Says:

    Elise: well of course everything is predicated on the fact that the bill remains unpopular. But since the Republicans will probably only come to power if the bill is unpopular, I think they will not have to worry about that if they indeed are in the majority.

    As for setting a precedent for extreme rule-twisting—that precedent was already set by the Democrats in the way this bill was passed. But de-funding it does not require any special twisting. You can defund something by a simple majority vote according to the rules. No need to change them or violate anything. If it is a way to express the people’s will, what is the problem?

    The argument that defunding sets a bad precedent makes no sense to me. First of all, as I said, a much worse precedent has been set—by the Democrats. They have essentially declared parliamentary war, as well as policy war on the American people. Do you think if the Republicans don’t fight in this way to defund (which, as I said, involves adhering to the rules anyway), the Democrats will suddenly think they must play fairer in the future? No, the gentlemanly/gentlewomanly contract of civility and respect has been broken. Don’t bring a flower to a knife fight.

  121. Artfldgr Says:

    Biden to Obama at Health Care Signing: ‘This is a Big F*#cking Deal’

  122. Highlander Says:

    Is there a march on Washington planned for Tax day this year? It’s time to put several million protestors in the Capitol.

  123. neo-neocon Says:

    Artfldgr: I have no idea why you think that most people here don’t get it, and haven’t gotten it for quite some time. For example, I started calling Obama a socialist and despot even before the election. Only a couple of people here—really very few—disagreed.

    You know a lot of history, but you don’t know the future. Saying it’s all lost and there’s nothing to be done because it was all lost long ago serves no purpose whatsoever except discouragement. Perhaps you are correct, of course—but if you are, then history is completely inevitable, the die was cast in the nature of man, and we should all go to sleep and forget about trying to do anything about anything. That’s not my attitude towards life.

  124. JuliB Says:

    I think the lawsuits are an excellent start.

    I too would like ways to assist the eventual system into chaos if nothing else.

  125. Baklava Says:

    Positive persuasion – requires brevity and conciseness. (if that’s a word) 🙂

  126. Scottie Says:

    Regarding ways to throw monkey wrenches into Obamacare, perhaps we should all consider collectively ways to collapse the system they are implementing?

    How many doctor’s visits can we get a year?

    Oooooo, I think I scratched my knee! Trip to the ER!

    When the costs of the system explodes (and they will regardless of whether we take such a tactic or not), it can hasten the reconsideration and/or repeal by Congress as expenditures outpace revenue by substantial margins.

  127. NeoConScum Says:

    Nicely put, Landlady.

  128. The Postliberal Says:

    A day will come when the Democrats wish the program could be repealed so that they could blame Republicans for repealing it. Until then the HC program will be a far better “recruiting tool” for opponents of liberalism than Guantanamo has ever been for terrorists. The more effort it takes to repeal the legislation, the more the force determined to do it will grow. That will endanger not only the HC legislation, but all the entitlements that are connected to it. What the Dems have done to themselves medicine can’t fix. They’ve self-contracted a virus that can’t be treated by drugs or surgery. There will be remissions and flareups, but the decline will be irreversible. The Democrats will pray for the repeal of this legislation.

  129. Old Rebel Says:

    Sorry, folks, but CK is correct on this one. As Pat Buchanan has pointed out, immigrants vote leftist:

    Between 1980 and 2008, Los Angeles, No. 1, grew by 2.5 million to 10 million people. The immigrant share went from 22 percent to 41 percent. Over those decades, the GOP share of the presidential vote fell from 52 percent in Ronald Reagan’s rout of Jimmy Carter to 29 percent for John McCain.

    Orange County, the bastion of Barry Goldwater conservatism, saw its population rise from 1.9 million in 1980 to 3.2 million in 2008, with the immigrant share rising from 13 percent to 34 percent. Reagan swept Orange County with 68 percent. McCain got 50 percent.

    Why do you think Obama plans to grant amnesty to all those future Democratic voters?

  130. neo-neocon Says:

    Old Rebel: see this.

  131. Bob from Virginia Says:

    Here is an update on our battle:

  132. Artfldgr Says:

    Perhaps you are correct, of course—but if you are, then history is completely inevitable, the die was cast in the nature of man, and we should all go to sleep and forget about trying to do anything about anything. That’s not my attitude towards life.

    i didnt say it was..
    but the time for X was before
    and the time for Y is nigh

    the point being is that despite calling him a socialist, there was no combined press on the outliers, ie, they got the push…

    the solution that works when its an acorn is different than the soltion when its a tree.

    however nothing will work unless we understand what is happening.. and admitting he is a sociliast isnt enough.

    do you also admit that communism and socialism are the same? that feminism and communism are the same? that progressivism and socialism are the same?

    when i see people doing what will work and organizing in a way that will work, i will change my tune

    i am a REALIST…

    to those who were part of the baby boom and after, they tend to be dimensionally optimistic which makes them NOT ACT.

    it was this same FALSE optimism that let everyone vote for him in the first place…

    That’s not my attitude towards life.

    thats great… but it should be coupled with realism on the front end, not optimism…

    that is if that train is pulling optimism, your going to get stuck in situations you cant get out of and rather than change what your doing, will keep on the same bad course..

    if its couples with realism, then your not going to be falsely optimistic and step into the situation in the first place.

    optimism begets wait and see.

    the optimists stay in their homes and wait for the fire to pass them.. they die

    the optimists stayed in germany when they could leave and ended up stuck, and having to ride it out.

    i know that my family made that same mistake and ended up living with stalin and hitler before getting a chance for some of them to get out. if they didnt have that attitude, they would have avoided all of it.

    an attitude is fine, if reality backs it up
    but when it doesnt, then what?

  133. neo-neocon Says:

    Artfldgr: I consider myself a realist. I am not what you might call optimistic, and certainly not falsely so, nor have I counseled some sort of mindless phony optimism. I believe, however, that it is not inevitable that they will win, and I believe that we need to work as hard as we can to win instead, and that this is possible.

    I tried to sound the alarm about Obama before the election (both on the blog and in my personal life), but only some people agreed with me. I could not prove it; I could only offer evidence and logic. But I expended a lot of effort then, and I will continue to do so.

    I don’t even care if socialism and Communism are exactly the same. They are both on a continuum that is bad for peoples and societies and they lead almost inevitably to methods and practices that are evil. So they both must be fought tooth and nail. I am doing my best to do so in a realistic manner. And I most definitely believe that saying as a conclusion that it is all over already, “Game set match. they win” (as you wrote here), is unhelpful and also UNrealistic.

  134. Scottie Says:


    Just thought I’d remind you of 1994..simply to cheer you up of course! 🙂

    I recall in early 1994 the democrats controlled both houses of Congress as well as the Presidency (under Clinton).

    They pushed through by a one vote margin the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban (AWB).

    Now whether you are a gun rights advocate or not, I would like to point out to you that this ban – which many gun rights advocates had pointed out as a distinct probability based upon previous Clinton as as well general democrat party rhetoric (similar to other “Casandra” warnings…ahem) – resulted in a HUGE groundswell of opposition within the gun owning public, and as Clinton himself acknowledged later that same gun owning public was instrumental in defeating democrats at the polls in November of that year.

    Yes, the Contract with America helped – but there was always that underlying displeasure that fed into the larger politics at work.

    While a percentage of the American public are gun owners – literally EVERY American will be affected by this new Health Care Bill (I refuse to call it “Reform”).

    I’m seeing displeasure right now on an order I didn’t see in 1994, and as such I have high hopes for November.

    In the meantime, we need to keep hammering the message home to the general public, acquaintances, whatever, at every opportunity – but we need to do so in a positive manner, backed up with facts….and if we get the chance to poke fun at these jerks in the meantime it won’t hurt a damn thing.

    By November, the public will be laughing with us.

  135. Artfldgr Says:

    believe, however, that it is not inevitable that they will win, and I believe that we need to work as hard as we can to win instead, and that this is possible.

    i dont say its inevitable without conditions…

    and until those conditions change (and some have a bit), i will not change the outcome prediction as it hinges on those thing changing.

    Is it impossible for them to change? no.
    Probable… also no.


    because the people whom it has to take seat in dont even know enough to know what to change or learn or do and they are quite inured to any information not from their leaders (as long as they are aligned. if not, then they stop listening).

    I tried to sound the alarm about Obama before the election (both on the blog and in my personal life), but only some people agreed with me. I could not prove it; I could only offer evidence and logic. But I expended a lot of effort then, and I will continue to do so.

    so did i..
    now i am alone except for a couple of friends and my wife… i doubt the friends of decades will be back and the same, crow is a hard meal to swallow.

    I don’t even care if socialism and Communism are exactly the same. They are both on a continuum that is bad for peoples and societies and they lead almost inevitably to methods and practices that are evil.

    and that leads back to the kind of thing that has to change in order for them to fail.

    if you cant tell, then you cant make distinctions. if you falsely tell, then you make false distinctions.

    either way, your thought processes and conclusions become broken.

    think of this carefully and you will start to understand the game at the level its being played.

    if you cant accurately describe reality, then you cant accurately assess reality (up to such natural limitations), and so you cant fix or defeat an enemy who has the key to what has been shifted and how that shift can be exploited.

    if we knew that socialism and communism are the same thing… would we have accepted welfare and all that? would we allow democratic socialists in office?

    would we accept the LESSER of two evils argument for the same thing?

    think on that for a second. you create a false dichotomy on a single thing… and bury the history.

    you have this EVIL thing called Chamaerhodos
    which seeks to control the means of production and so on and so forth.

    and you have this other thing they call “Little Rose”. little rose is not as evil as its other. its something different… welfare…

    handout, welfare, federal assistance..

    all the same thing.

    and socialism/little rose?
    its the same thing as communism/Chamaerhodos!!!

    so if you who want to believe things can succeed dont care about the game being played on you. how can you get out of the trap?

    again. you imagine that you can find your own way in ignorance… you are not learning from some experienced someone, you are picking and choosing and using what they taught you (which is adulterated).

    They are both on a continuum that is bad for peoples and societies and they lead almost inevitably to methods and practices that are evil.

    you cant fight what you don’t understand and that goes double if it understands you.

    you are not being a realist because a realist knows when to quit and put their resources someplace else.

    nd I most definitely believe that saying as a conclusion that it is all over already, “Game set match. they win” (as you wrote here), is unhelpful and also UNrealistic.


    well then you get everyone to expend their energy on a battle that is already lost, that cant be affected for another three years..

    and see what your opponents do during all that time that you waste


    when the superbowl is over, we dont spend millions trying to get another fight to win the battle we just lost.

    if you want to know how that goes, go read about pork chop hill, hamburger hill, etc.

    we do not have the resources to waste on lost battles.

    there are other battles coming up…

    Game set match… is what they have.


    move on to the next battle…

    we do nothing but waste energy… while we are wasting it on a fight we already lost, and the progressive right is getting us to do that too.

    we are not getting ahead of them. we are not moving to outflank them. we are not doing…

    so is if unhelpful and unrealistic to call a win a win and put your resources into something you might be able to do something about?

    and this is why i keep saying they are going to win.

    we cant even get past this basic stuff that if you read about such things, is VERY BASIC

    From the POSITIVITY blog

    Why Knowing When To Quit Can Lead You To Success

    The age old advice of telling you to stick to your task no matter what is useless in this modern world. Will you stick to your job if it is paying you 500 bucks a month when another employer is willing to offer you 5000 bucks a month? I bet that you will choose the 2nd option.

    you would say that was a ridiculous example.

    but i am saying that you need to assess things better and in light of how things work in a fighting arrangement.

    in a psych society one, there is always another chance, in a battle that social thing does not apply.

    Easy as it sound, but people are afraid of quitting dead end projects. The dead end projects that you will only see the same result (or worse) even though you are increasing your effort you put into it. People are afraid of quitting because quitting is a change and human do not like change. It also take lots of courage to quit doing the things that you had put so much effort into it because it will make you feel that you had wasted the energy you put in it in the past, but quitting a dead end project is going to free up your resources to do other things that provides more value in return.

    we have not the energy, the people, the law, the time, and other things on our side.

    a chronic illness in humans is wanting to go back and do it over and get it right.

    we do this compusivly. we get with another bad person like a bad person in the past, in a way of hoping to reply the past and get a better outcome.

    we are horrible at accepting what things are like, and then moving on into better areas and stop wasting time on dead ends.

    this is a dead end… we lost..

    if we continue to keep fighting the battles we lost, we will continue to lose new battles and keep fighting the ones we lost.

    you dont like the outcome, you want a different one. so you want to keep fighting the fight..

    i dont like the outcome, i want a different one, and realize if i can stop all the next battles, i win and can go back and fix this one.

    but if i keep standing on the battle feild like the monty python black knight refusing to accept a lose… then like him, they will cut me to pieces…

    but the outcome wont change.

    its past… it cant change.

    When you find that what you doing does not reap enough value for you in the long run quit it. Quitting it can help you to focus your energy on other places where you can succeed.

    more so the more limited your resources and the less command you have over them

    dont lead lessers on a loss when we need all we have for a win


    one of the problems i have in the partners life gives me is that they dont get that there is a sweet time to compete, and a time to quit. they tend to think that the time to act always is there, and doesnt go away. then when it goes away, they think that by effort they can get it back

    they cant… thats how the world works.
    thjey will have to meet it
    and i fail until i find a partner that doesnt force me to relearn these stupidities.

    One of the most important skills you can learn in life is knowing when to quit. Unfortunately, this skill is rarely taught in schools of any type, and there are not many books on the subject, either.

    So, grab a sit and get ready. This is your education on quitting.


    ne of the people I spoke with while planning this escapade was a mentor from college. He was a business professor with a prolific resume, full of teaching gigs at important institutions. I called him and shared the idea. After explaining it, he gave me some of the best business advice I’ve ever heard:

    Know when to quit. Set a goal, a benchmark, a standard. And make sure everyone involved understands that if you don’t hit that mark on time, then it’s time to pack up, call it a day, and learn from your failure. Otherwise, you run the risk of continually walking down the path to nowhere, and you’ll waste time, money and energy that could have been placed somewhere better.

    Our world is full of examples of those who didn’t know when to quit. They carried on – all the way to oblivion. This is highlighted very clearly in the first chapter of Ori Brafman’s and Rom Brafman’s new book, Sway: The Irrisisitable Pull of Irrational Behavior. They introduce the book’s theme by sharing the story of an airline pilot who was responsible for the worst aviation disaster in history and of a regular Joe who never sold his stock at the right time and eventually had nothing


    fighting a battle that is over, is irrational

    telling me you dont believe its over dosnt make it rational

    its over. that battle is over.
    what are you doing to prepare for the next?

    nothing, as your still fighting a fight taht is over.

    this is irrational..

    in fact they have normalized it. you know, things like equality…


    In each case, the individual perceived that the overall loss meant more than the immediate situation. The airline pilot took off in fog, without clearance, causing his full plane to crash with another full plane, resulting in the deaths of over 500 people. He took these drastic steps because he didn’t want to face the alternative, which would have had him (and the entire plane) staying overnight because he would have been flying longer than the allowable shift time for a pilot. In other words, he ignored the air traffic control tower in order to save time and money. In reality, the airline’s cost for housing all of the passengers and the inconvenience of the delay are clearly better than the reality that ensued.

    The same thing happens with a guy who sells his company and is paid in the stock of the acquiring corporation. His financial adviser tells him to set a schedule so that he sells 10% of the stock each quarter until his portfolio is nicely diversified. No matter what the worth of that stock is, it’s best to sell it so that all the eggs aren’t in one basket. Three months later, the stock’s value has fallen 15%. But instead of selling on schedule, or dumping all of it, the guy keeps it, waiting until it goes back up to its previous value. He’s afraid of the loss he’ll take by selling it at the moment. Of course, the stock never reaches its previous high and the guy rides the downward spiral until he’s got nothing and the company goes under. He held on because he was afraid the cost of quitting was too high.

    This happens a lot with political candidates. They don’t know when to exit a race and do more harm than good – or at least they miss the chance to do more good than harm. It happens with people in certain careers. Take a look at Michael Jordan. He’s still the greatest basketball player ever, but his final years as a Washington Wizard are an ugly hiccup on a great career. It happens with musical artists and actors who put out a few duds of a project just because they can’t gracefully exit the stage.

    Would you know when it’s time to quit? When it’s time to change jobs, having learned everything where you currently are? When it’s time to admit your business idea didn’t quite work and you’d be better off working for someone else? When your dreams of flipping a house didn’t come true and you’d be better to unload the property, even if you lose a bit of cash?

    We don’t like talking about quitting a lot. It’s not as glamorous as winning, and no one is remembered because they’re a good quitter. We value the stories of the people whose backs were against the wall – those who didn’t quit and came out better than ever.

    Those people certainly deserve praise and accolades for doing a great thing and being successful. But being a smart quitter is as equally as important as knowing when to press on. Knowing that I need to fold my pair of tens with an ace kicker because a possible flush is on the board, even though I’m in for a quarter of my chip stack – well that’s as equally a good decision as calling the bluff and going all in. Ultimately, you’ve got to be able to read the signs. And we’ll do our best if we heed the professor’s advice and set our limits before we even sit down to play.

  136. Helpful Liberal Says:

    It can’t be repealed? Why not?

    Because even if the GOP won every Democratic Senate seat in 2010, they would still not have a veto-proof majority.

    Now, if you want to shoot for a repeal in 2013, that’s another story. Maybe you can get 67 Republican Senators by then, or 60 Republican Senators and a Republican President. But there’s no logistical way to get repeal before then.

    However, I think it’s a winning issue for the GOP to run on, and you should pressure your representatives and other candidates to do so in 2010 and 2012.


  137. Scottie Says:

    If the dems get shlacked badly enough in November, the republicans may not have to rely upon their majority after all to overrule such a veto as there may be enough democrats scared enough to vote along with the republicans to overturn this bill before they themselves are up for re-election…

  138. DarthKeller Says:

    I couldn’t agree with you more!

    Whether it’s true or not, why give Dems that ammunition to use against us in November?

    Here is where we need a leader in the GOP, someone to stand up and say “THIS is what we’re going to do”.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

About Me

Previously a lifelong Democrat, born in New York and living in New England, surrounded by liberals on all sides, I've found myself slowly but surely leaving the fold and becoming that dread thing: a neocon.

Monthly Archives


Ace (bold)
AmericanDigest (writer’s digest)
AmericanThinker (thought full)
Anchoress (first things first)
AnnAlthouse (more than law)
AtlasShrugs (fearless)
AugeanStables (historian’s task)
Baldilocks (outspoken)
Barcepundit (theBrainInSpain)
Beldar (Texas lawman)
BelmontClub (deep thoughts)
Betsy’sPage (teach)
Bookworm (writingReader)
Breitbart (big)
ChicagoBoyz (boyz will be)
Contentions (CommentaryBlog)
DanielInVenezuela (against tyranny)
DeanEsmay (conservative liberal)
Donklephant (political chimera)
Dr.Helen (rights of man)
Dr.Sanity (thinking shrink)
DreamsToLightening (Asher)
EdDriscoll (market liberal)
Fausta’sBlog (opinionated)
GayPatriot (self-explanatory)
HadEnoughTherapy? (yep)
HotAir (a roomful)
InFromTheCold (once a spook)
InstaPundit (the hub)
JawaReport (the doctor is Rusty)
LegalInsurrection (law prof)
RedState (conservative)
Maggie’sFarm (centrist commune)
MelaniePhillips (formidable)
MerylYourish (centrist)
MichaelTotten (globetrotter)
MichaelYon (War Zones)
Michelle Malkin (clarion pen)
Michelle Obama's Mirror (reflections)
MudvilleGazette (milblog central)
NoPasaran! (behind French facade)
NormanGeras (principled leftist)
OneCosmos (Gagdad Bob’s blog)
PJMedia (comprehensive)
PointOfNoReturn (Jewish refugees)
Powerline (foursight)
ProteinWisdom (wiseguy)
QandO (neolibertarian)
RachelLucas (in Italy)
RogerL.Simon (PJ guy)
SecondDraft (be the judge)
SeekerBlog (inquiring minds)
SisterToldjah (she said)
Sisu (commentary plus cats)
Spengler (Goldman)
TheDoctorIsIn (indeed)
Tigerhawk (eclectic talk)
VictorDavisHanson (prof)
Vodkapundit (drinker-thinker)
Volokh (lawblog)
Zombie (alive)

Regent Badge