The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

‘No Serious Leader Since Has Called For Its Repeal’

Posted on | March 13, 2010 | 16 Comments

by Smitty

Charles Krauthammer offers a stream of wonderful insights. Hopefully, news of this post can reach up into his study and tease a bit of follow-up from him on a point in his recent Real Clear Politics piece:

The rotation of power is the finest political instrument ever invented for the consolidation of what were once radical and deeply divisive policies. The classic example is the New Deal. Republicans railed against it for 20 years. Then Dwight Eisenhower came to power, wisely left it intact, and no serious leader since has called for its repeal.

Sure, the New Deal has the weight of decades behind it. Also, an unsustainable funding profile. Furthermore, to throw out a counterfactual, I daresay that, had the Internet existed at the time, FDR would be having as much success passing the New Deal as BHO is with ObamaCare. Maybe FDR would have better success, as the abject foolishness of Federal entitlements took a parade of decades and buffoons to get rolling.
So, my questions for CK are:

  • What, if any, meaning do you ascribe to the 10th Amendment?
  • Why do you think allowing something to exist with such arguably deleterious effects is “wise”?
  • Why do you think driving the American political dialogue back in the direction of the genius of Federalism is an “unserious” act?
  • Do you think running chronic and worsening deficits, and unpayable national debt is ethical, moral and sustainable? How much wife beating is “enough”?

For the record, I submit that FDR’s free-basing of the Constitution in his 1944 SOU speech was monstrous. It was the political equivalent of the snake in the Garden saying “Hath God said . . . ?” Legislation like the Federal Reserve Act, the Nude Eel, the Great Society, etc. can always claim tactical victory.
Yet now, decades later, they seem a cure worse than the disease from a strategic vantage. They have altered the fabric of the country. They have arguably brought tactical improvement, but, strategically, seem icing on a turd, at least in retrospect.
So, apparently because of the weight of tradition, realistic of assessment of societal maturity, or the ridiculous political effort required to do anything besides play along, CK deems leaders who’d threaten the status quo “unserious”.
It remains to be seen if, like a junkie kicking the needle, America can muster the fortitude to alter course.
While I don’t think outright repeal seriously possible, I do think it reasonable to call the Progressive bluff, and poke them with the 1oth Amendment at every turn. Because Progressivism, like a mold, worked its way around the very protections meant to precludes its foolishness.
And serious leaders who can articulate a means to escape the pit of debt and entitlement bondage need to be identified and supported.  CK reminds me of George Will. Possibly anything resembling vigor is simply too much to ask of the gentlemen.

Update: Mommy took umbrage at this post. I’ve gone back and bolded a point at the end, and want to re-iterate that TANSTAAFL, and that it will take something more than a serious leader, a full-on genius of a statesman (or -woman) to drain this Progressive swamp. The 10th Amendment was a front-end interlock meant to preclude things like the current Federal over-reach and debt. It is far too simple a statement to do more than inform reform.

Category: Progressivism

Comments

16 Responses to “‘No Serious Leader Since Has Called For Its Repeal’”

  1. KG
    March 14th, 2010 @ 3:03 am

    That is quite a disappointing thing to hear from CK. Does he then think that any future Republican president should just leave Obamacare alone were it to pass?

    *sigh*

    With spokesmen like him, no wonder Republicans and conservatives have not been very successful in thwarting the Progressive agenda. Our elites are shooting us in the back every time we dare to resist.

  2. KG
    March 13th, 2010 @ 10:03 pm

    That is quite a disappointing thing to hear from CK. Does he then think that any future Republican president should just leave Obamacare alone were it to pass?

    *sigh*

    With spokesmen like him, no wonder Republicans and conservatives have not been very successful in thwarting the Progressive agenda. Our elites are shooting us in the back every time we dare to resist.

  3. K~Bob
    March 14th, 2010 @ 3:55 am

    Smitty,

    Your article is about the twentieth bit I’ve read recently that makes a point of claiming repeal is “(insert favorite asymptotic adverb here) impossible.”

    This is starting to get on my nerves. If this treacherous, trumped-up pastiche of cynicism, extortion and bribes–called “health care reform”–is allowed to become law, then the primary process had damned well better enforce “repeal of (and rebate any collected funds due to) the healthcare bill.”

    We need to soften the ground for repeal, not harden it by telling everyone how nearly almost maybe horrifyingly difficult it will be to accomplish. Dems will do their best to make Repeal of Healthcare sound like “squashing puppy heads underfoot for pleasure.” Only a strong, principled stand on repeal can save the American Moment if this abomination stands.

    We have to pre-sell repeal, and sell it hard.

  4. K~Bob
    March 13th, 2010 @ 10:55 pm

    Smitty,

    Your article is about the twentieth bit I’ve read recently that makes a point of claiming repeal is “(insert favorite asymptotic adverb here) impossible.”

    This is starting to get on my nerves. If this treacherous, trumped-up pastiche of cynicism, extortion and bribes–called “health care reform”–is allowed to become law, then the primary process had damned well better enforce “repeal of (and rebate any collected funds due to) the healthcare bill.”

    We need to soften the ground for repeal, not harden it by telling everyone how nearly almost maybe horrifyingly difficult it will be to accomplish. Dems will do their best to make Repeal of Healthcare sound like “squashing puppy heads underfoot for pleasure.” Only a strong, principled stand on repeal can save the American Moment if this abomination stands.

    We have to pre-sell repeal, and sell it hard.

  5. smitty
    March 14th, 2010 @ 4:04 am

    @K~Bob,
    There is a substantial difference between clubbing a horrible thing like ObamaCare in the baby seal fashion, and rolling back things like the New Deal, which are deeply entrenched. ObamaCare can be snuffed by simply not appropriating funds for any of its acronyms. If the civil servants (and they are nothing if not risk-averse) understand that it is career suicide to accept a position on the death panel, then we needn’t fear them ever staffing up.
    The changes required to wean the country off of the rest of the entitlements (first making them State entitlements, one presumes) is going to hurt, hurt, hurt, and it would be a fine example of Pelosi-ism to claim otherwise.

  6. smitty
    March 13th, 2010 @ 11:04 pm

    @K~Bob,
    There is a substantial difference between clubbing a horrible thing like ObamaCare in the baby seal fashion, and rolling back things like the New Deal, which are deeply entrenched. ObamaCare can be snuffed by simply not appropriating funds for any of its acronyms. If the civil servants (and they are nothing if not risk-averse) understand that it is career suicide to accept a position on the death panel, then we needn’t fear them ever staffing up.
    The changes required to wean the country off of the rest of the entitlements (first making them State entitlements, one presumes) is going to hurt, hurt, hurt, and it would be a fine example of Pelosi-ism to claim otherwise.

  7. Adobe Walls
    March 14th, 2010 @ 5:21 am

    @ smitty,
    Addressing last first I doubt that as a nation we’ll find the courage or foresight to deal with the entitlements until their imminent or actual collapse leaves us no choice. It should be relatively painless repealing ObamaCare as for rebating the collected taxes, the bolsheviks will surely spend that money as fast as they collect it. All the entitlement lock boxes have no bottoms and are placed over rat holes.
    Something I’ve been wondering. Amongst the pundits and the “political class” it’s been discussed as to whether it would be politically worse for the HC bill to pass or fail this year. I believe that the House flips in November, there’d be enough votes to carry a motion of repeal in the House if not the Senate next January. Even if vetoed wouldn’t that be more damaging to Obama’s prestige?

  8. Adobe Walls
    March 14th, 2010 @ 12:21 am

    @ smitty,
    Addressing last first I doubt that as a nation we’ll find the courage or foresight to deal with the entitlements until their imminent or actual collapse leaves us no choice. It should be relatively painless repealing ObamaCare as for rebating the collected taxes, the bolsheviks will surely spend that money as fast as they collect it. All the entitlement lock boxes have no bottoms and are placed over rat holes.
    Something I’ve been wondering. Amongst the pundits and the “political class” it’s been discussed as to whether it would be politically worse for the HC bill to pass or fail this year. I believe that the House flips in November, there’d be enough votes to carry a motion of repeal in the House if not the Senate next January. Even if vetoed wouldn’t that be more damaging to Obama’s prestige?

  9. Robert Stacy McCain
    March 14th, 2010 @ 7:15 am

    This most recent column certainly has slowed the momentum of the “Krauthammer for President” bandwagon.

  10. Robert Stacy McCain
    March 14th, 2010 @ 2:15 am

    This most recent column certainly has slowed the momentum of the “Krauthammer for President” bandwagon.

  11. chuck cross
    March 14th, 2010 @ 5:30 pm

    Like I tell prospective politicians that bombastically proclaim how they’ll make deep spending cuts, “I’ll believe in when I see it.”

    It isn’t to swipe at them as being disingenuous, it is just that politicians automatically create enemies when they endeavor to pull the plug on the juke box, or take away the plate of free food. You should listen to New Yorkers howl and scream about education spending cuts, public health spending cuts and welfare spending cuts.

    “TAX THE RICH! MAKE DEM PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE! YOU HATE THE CHILDREN. DON’T PUNISH THE CHILDREN!”

    And the cycle continues. The left’s politicians knows that they simply must flip the on-switch on a program, and it becomes infinitely more difficult to kill (via repeal) for the right.

    That’s why they’re going to shove this bill through, because then all they need to do is run ads of Republicans taking lolli-pops away from kids and a story of a kid “saved from cancer because of the plan,” to complete wipe away ANY chance of repealing the bill.

    Instead, we’ll just have more “reform.”

    And the cycle continues.

  12. chuck cross
    March 14th, 2010 @ 12:30 pm

    Like I tell prospective politicians that bombastically proclaim how they’ll make deep spending cuts, “I’ll believe in when I see it.”

    It isn’t to swipe at them as being disingenuous, it is just that politicians automatically create enemies when they endeavor to pull the plug on the juke box, or take away the plate of free food. You should listen to New Yorkers howl and scream about education spending cuts, public health spending cuts and welfare spending cuts.

    “TAX THE RICH! MAKE DEM PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE! YOU HATE THE CHILDREN. DON’T PUNISH THE CHILDREN!”

    And the cycle continues. The left’s politicians knows that they simply must flip the on-switch on a program, and it becomes infinitely more difficult to kill (via repeal) for the right.

    That’s why they’re going to shove this bill through, because then all they need to do is run ads of Republicans taking lolli-pops away from kids and a story of a kid “saved from cancer because of the plan,” to complete wipe away ANY chance of repealing the bill.

    Instead, we’ll just have more “reform.”

    And the cycle continues.

  13. The Mexican
    March 14th, 2010 @ 11:28 pm

    Krauthammer has always been a progressive and an interventionist. Why is this a surprise to so many? His opinion on this matter is all you need to know where the heart of Krauthammer lies – socialism. He is simply the typical big government elitist with a strong desire to knock off more and more middle eastern countries.

  14. The Mexican
    March 14th, 2010 @ 6:28 pm

    Krauthammer has always been a progressive and an interventionist. Why is this a surprise to so many? His opinion on this matter is all you need to know where the heart of Krauthammer lies – socialism. He is simply the typical big government elitist with a strong desire to knock off more and more middle eastern countries.

  15. K~Bob
    March 15th, 2010 @ 6:02 am

    Smitty,

    (Thanks for the response.)I get it that repeal is hard (and I take your point regarding emasculation of Obamacare if it passes). But if the Tea Party “movement” means anything, it needs to focus on rolling it ALL back, by any means possible.

    The whiff of things historical seems to me to apply more to the Tea Party activists than it does Obama’s aura of “unprecidented-ness.” This is a movement that should do far more than simply “primary” the worst examples of party-jumping career politicians. If it can’t roll back the New Deal, then it should roll up its slogans and posters and accept existence as yet another contentious conservative faction.

    Time for the Tea Partiers to think big. As Seth Godin might say, we don’t have a “where should I go to find opposition to Obama?” problem.

    (Thanks for your work on this site, BTW. It is better than the old one.)

  16. K~Bob
    March 15th, 2010 @ 1:02 am

    Smitty,

    (Thanks for the response.)I get it that repeal is hard (and I take your point regarding emasculation of Obamacare if it passes). But if the Tea Party “movement” means anything, it needs to focus on rolling it ALL back, by any means possible.

    The whiff of things historical seems to me to apply more to the Tea Party activists than it does Obama’s aura of “unprecidented-ness.” This is a movement that should do far more than simply “primary” the worst examples of party-jumping career politicians. If it can’t roll back the New Deal, then it should roll up its slogans and posters and accept existence as yet another contentious conservative faction.

    Time for the Tea Partiers to think big. As Seth Godin might say, we don’t have a “where should I go to find opposition to Obama?” problem.

    (Thanks for your work on this site, BTW. It is better than the old one.)