Posted by: Debby Durkee | April 5, 2010

Repercussions of Democrat actions.

Debby's Web Finds
Repercussions of Democrat actions.

Today’s focus is more on the assumptions that the Democrats continue to make about the country, Americans, the opposition, and their “right” to do whatever they damn well please. They cram legislation through against the will of the country, and then just pretend all is well once it’s done, going into attack mode when the country says, “What are you doing?” Some bright lights in the pundit world have noticed and are giving their broader view of the repercussions.

The country’s tradition of changing directions.

The Wall Street Journal’s Daniel Henninger says that something went terribly wrong in the Democrats’ passage of Obamacare. The American people now realize that the Democratic Party has disconnected itself from the average American’s view of what politicians can and should do. He sees a sweeping change in the air of the American electorate, a kind of stop sign planted in the ground that says, “Go no farther,” that really means “change direction.” A simply excellent piece.

The Democratic left, its pundits and academics criticizing the legal challenges to ObamaCare seem to be arguing that their version of our political structure is too big to change.

That’s not true. The American people can and do change the nation’s collective mind on the ordering of our political system. The civil rights years of the 1960s is the most well-known modern example. (The idea that resistance to Mr. Obama’s health plan is rooted in racist resentment of equal rights is beyond the pale, even by current standards of political punditry.)

Powerful political forces suddenly seem to be in motion across the U.S. What they have in common is anxiety over what government has become in the first decade of the 21st century.

The tea party movement is getting the most attention because it is the most vulnerable to the standard tool kit of mockery and ridicule. It is more difficult to mock the legitimacy of Scott Brown’s overthrow of the Kennedy legacy, the election results in Virginia and New Jersey, an economic discomfort that is both generalized and specific to the disintegration of state and federal fiscs, and indeed the array of state attorneys general who filed a constitutional complaint against the new health-care law. What’s going on may be getting past the reach of mere mockery.  Snip –

The political issue rumbling toward both the Supreme Court and the electorate is whether Washington’s size and power has finally grown beyond the comfort zone of the American people. That is what lies beneath the chatter about federalism and the 10th Amendment.

Henninger says that regardless of what liberals say about how government is doing “good” – the amount of spending and the huge size of the federal government is unprecedented and perhaps beyond the American comfort zone.

…Even if every challenge to ObamaCare loses in court, these anxieties will last and keep coming back to the same question: Does the Democratic left think the national government’s powers are infinite?

No one in the Obama White House, asked that in public on Sunday morning, would simply say yes, no matter that the evidence of this government’s actions the past year indicate they do…

My reading of the American public is that they have moved past “concerns.” Somewhere inside the programmatic details of ObamaCare and the methods that the president, Speaker Pelosi and Sen. Reid used to pass it, something went terribly wrong. Just as something has gone terribly wrong inside the governments of states like California, New York, New Jersey, Michigan and Massachusetts.  Snip –

It means that the current edition of the Democratic Party has disconnected itself from the average American’s sense of political modesty. The party’s members and theorists now defend expanding government authority with the same arrogance that brought Progressive Era reforms down upon untethered industrial interests.

In such times, this country has an honored tradition of changing direction. That time may be arriving. Snip –

Faced with a challenge to his vision last week, President Obama laughingly replied to these people: “Go for it.”

They will.

As to the condescension and sniffing left-wing elitism this opposition seems to bring forth from Manhattan media castles, one must say it does recall another, earlier ancien regime.

Let’s keep up the pressure. Americans are fighters, especially when it involves the future for their children. You can read all of Henninger here:

You can watch a brief 2 ½ minute video of an interview with Henninger here:


Dems break spirit of law.

In some ways echoing Henninger, Noemie Emery just comes right out and says that the Democrats have broken at least the spirit of the law in their passage of Obamacare and compares aspects of the Democrats’ shenanigans to those of Richard Nixon. Americans don’t like it when “lawmakers” spit on the law. This is from the Washington Examiner.

…let’s amble down memory lane, to the autumn of 1973. Under siege and suspicion for illegal activities, Richard M. Nixon was asked to turn over his infamous tapes to the Ervin Committee and Archibald Cox.

Nixon offered a written synopsis, which he would, of course, edit. Cox refused. Nixon decided the only way out of his quandary was firing Cox. He did (after two attorneys general resigned in defiance) and quite justly cooked his career.

It wasn’t illegal, but it was illegitimate, in that it violated the sense of the law, the spirit of justice and the sense of propriety that holds cultures together. Nixon was toast, and Robert Bork, who fired Cox in the spirit of duty, was tainted forever. People unmoved by Ted Kennedy’s rantings could not overcome their aversion to that.

The passage of health care is not the same thing as obstruction of justice, but it has a connection, in nature and kind. Before Scott Brown appeared, the bill, while unpopular, was headed on a legitimate path to enactment, by passing the House and the Senate, and going into a conference committee, after which the revised version would be sent for final affirmation to the Senate and House.

After Brown, this couldn’t occur as the Senate would kill it, so it had to sneak by — against the popular will and by bribes, threats and buy-offs — through a loophole for which bills of this import were not intended. Big bills aren’t supposed to squeak by on a simple majority, and under proper procedure, it would not have happened.

It followed the law, while it shattered its intent. The whole country knows it’s a fraud.

As a result, it’s a “law” that the country feels little respect for and feels morally free to resist. It is a law with an asterisk, a law with a stench, a law few regard as conclusive or binding.

Spit on the law and the public, and the public will seek ways to use law to deny you. This fire will burn a long time.

Let’s keep the fire burning. We cannot let friends and neighbors forget how frighteningly like a banana republic the Democrats have brought this great nation to. Read it all here:

Progressives and the Knowledge Problem.

This column by Instapundit Glenn Reynolds reminds me very much of Ronald Reagan’s quote about liberals: “The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they’re ignorant; it’s just that they know so much that isn’t so.” With the liberal desire to control the economy and our lives and anything else they can get their hands on, they forget one thing: they don’t know what they don’t know, which ends up causing all kinds of unintended consequences, such as the idiot Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) calling in the CEO’s of those companies who had the audacity to file SEC-required changes in their earnings after Obamacare became law. 

Economist Friedrich Hayek explained in 1945 why centrally controlled “command economies” were doomed to waste, inefficiency, and collapse: Insufficient knowledge. He won a Nobel Prize…

In his “The Use of Knowledge In Society,” Hayek explained that information about supply and demand, scarcity and abundance, wants and needs exists in no single place in any economy. The economy is simply too large and complicated for such information to be gathered together.

Any economic planner who attempts to do so will wind up hopelessly uninformed and behind the times, reacting to economic changes in a clumsy, too-late fashion and then being forced to react again to fix the problems that the previous mistakes created, leading to new problems, and so on.

Market mechanisms, like pricing, do a better job than planners because they incorporate what everyone knows indirectly through signals like price, without central planning.

Thus, no matter how deceptively simple and appealing command economy programs are, they are sure to trip up their operators, because the operators can’t possibly be smart enough to make them work.

Hayek’s insight into economics and regulation is often called “The Knowledge Problem,” and it is a very powerful notion. But recent events suggest that it’s not just the economy that regulators don’t understand well enough — it’s also their own regulations.

This became apparent when various large businesses responded to the enactment of Obamacare by taking accounting steps to reflect tax changes brought about by the new health care legislation. The additional costs created by Obamacare, conveniently enough, weren’t going to strike until later, after the November elections.

But both Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and Securities and Exchange Commission regulations require companies to account for these changes as soon as they learn about them. As the Atlantic’s Megan McArdle wrote:

“What AT&T, Caterpillar, et al did was appropriate. its earnings season, and they offered guidance about , um, their earnings.” So once Obamacare passed, massive corporate write-downs were inevitable.  Snip –

Of course, that’s when Waxman threw a hissy fit and strong-armed the CEO’s to come before his committee on April 21. I wish just once these CEO’s would stand up to these bullies and tell them, “Hell, no, subpoena us or something, but we owe you absolutely nothing.” When will those who run companies start standing up for capitalism? Have they enjoyed crony capitalism for too long?

Waxman and his colleagues in Congress can’t possibly understand the health care market well enough to fix it. But what’s more striking is that Waxman’s outraged reaction revealed that they don’t even understand their own area of responsibility – regulation — well enough to predict the effect of changes in legislation.

In drafting the Obamacare bill they tried to time things for maximum political advantage, only to be tripped up by the complexities of the regulatory environment they had already created.

Reynolds see a silver lining in this cloud. This episode in particular should show the American people how a group of “lawmakers” has no business running health care if they can’t even keep their own massive regulations straight. He goes into the massive number of regulations and the number of books they comprise. Please read all of Glenn Reynolds here:


Bookmark and Share

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: