The Other McCain

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

A Federalist Progressive Disaster: Scant Improvement Over A Progressive Disaster

Posted on | January 29, 2012 | 16 Comments

by Smitty

Gateway Pundit has a short clip of the Florida AG on Greta:The claim is made that Pam Bondi stated Romney is desirous of RomneyCare isn’t in the clip. A direct quotation would be helpful, with context. I can envision Mitt saying that, if states choose to implement a RomneyCare-style plan, that’s their prerogative.

The idea that federally mandating an state-level individual mandate is somehow a swift idea, after proudly repealing ObamaCare, is really stupid. And Romney is anything but stupid.

Let’s go back to FDR and the moment we Sold Our Soul For Rock’N’RollProgress:

In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

  1. The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the Nation;
  2. The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
  3. The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
  4. The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
  5. The right of every family to a decent home;
  6. The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
  7. The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
  8. The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

Why was FDR’s crack so good? Because the 16th & 17th Amendments kneecapped the states, and the Federal Reserve gave FDR the deep pockets to kick-start the party, and for his Progressive offspring to keep it rockin’:

Follow me now and you will not regret
Leaving the life you led before we met
You are the first to have this love of mine
Forever with me till the end of time

(N.i.B.: I’m not saying that FDR was Satan, merely that, politically, FDR carried out the diabolical Progressive bidding.)

And so what have we bought for FDR’s idiocyswell intentions?

  1. The right to a job has evolved into 99 weeks of unemployment, idiocy like Lilly Ledbetter, and unions running amok. Note that even FDR wasn’t so stupid as to overlook the conflict of interest inherent in public sector unions. Such idiocy would come later.
  2. Minimum wage laws that achieve the opposite of the desired results.
  3. Farm policy that is a classic disaster.
  4. Wildly idiotic policies that have chased American jobs overseas.
  5. Idiocy like the Community Reinvestment Act, and its brace of abortions, Fannie and Freddie.
  6. Moronic takeovers of medicine like RomneyCare and ObamaCare.
  7. Protection from fear? The only thing we have to fear is Progressivism itself, it having bailed out the balance of the fears.
  8. The Department of Education, ensuring that American children are too confused to discern rational thinking, but are intimately familiar with all manner of sexual variations by second grade.

So where do we go from here?

  • Admit that the Progressive project is just a flop. Woodrow Wilson and FDR are dead. We can forgive them the unintended consequences of their failed ideas. I guess the reader retains the right to hate dead people, though that seems as useful as Progressivism itself.
  • Agree in advance that those locked into the entitlements won’t be thrown under the bus.
  • Agree that every decision has to advance liberty and decrease federal involvement with individuals. DC has to return to its Constitutional, multi-state and international role.

I’d argue those three ideas are necessary but not sufficient to improve the situation. Conversely, if we aren’t continuall moving in a direction of increased liberty, we’re dead. Done. Living on borrowed time. Touching ourselves.

Full circle, then: someone needs to find out if Romney really does intend to produce a state mandate that will suck as bad as the individual mandate, only be implemented by state capitals. This would be an even higher-level urination upon Amendments IX and X than BHO’s efforts. It could achieve the same result of destroying liberty, but be even harder to argue against.

I really, really hope that speculation is false. The gnawing sensation in the gut undermines the confidence.

Category: Uncategorized

Comments

16 Responses to “A Federalist Progressive Disaster: Scant Improvement Over A Progressive Disaster”

  1. Adjoran
    January 29th, 2012 @ 8:21 am

    Well, I didn’t hear what they say she said, and have to wonder why they would put up a different clip.  If the given clip is the whole of it, I’d have to say it is being misinterpreted so wildly as to seem intentional.

  2. Anonymous
    January 29th, 2012 @ 8:31 am

    I don’t know what to think about the state of our candidates. Why we field such a mortally flawed slate of candidates? I want to like a candidate, and Santorum comes closest – but is he still hamstrung by early opinion of his second-tier candidacy? Mitt – we can’t let ourselves neutralize the Obamacare argument. Newt – I thought some of the press about him was overblown, but it seems to be not so much and I would rather be able to take it to the enemy rather than be on constant defense unnecessarily.

  3. RightKlik
    January 29th, 2012 @ 8:34 am

    ” …someone needs to find out if Romney really does intend to produce a state mandate that will suck as bad as the individual mandate, only be implemented by state capitals.”

    Romney has said repeatedly that that’s exactly what he wants. He thinks a state-level individual mandate as a conservative idea that is built on the idea of  personal responsibility.

    Politically it’s a perfectly pragmatic approach, even if it’s a disaster for natural rights and individual liberty:

    http://covertrationingblog.com/weird-fact-about-insurance-companies/why-the-health-insurance-industry-supported-obamacare 

  4. Anonymous
    January 29th, 2012 @ 9:26 am

    And when the states that copy ORomneycare follow into the bankruptcy that is Taxachusetts, then ORomney will make a sorrowful speech about how some things are too big to be left to the states, and he’ll suggest we need ORomneycare again.

    Only he’ll bring the private sector expertise that handled the health and pension plans at GM. Chrysler, etc. that are the envy of the world for their success and performance….

    Not just no but Hell NO!

  5. M000744
    January 29th, 2012 @ 9:48 am

    SANTORUM IS SURGING IN FLORIDA!!!

    From Sunday’s Marist Poll:

    “Santorum is the only candidate to see a debate bounce. In the three days of polling (Wednesday through Friday), Santorum saw a five-point increase after the debate. He was also seen as the “true conservative” in the race — 38 percent said so versus 18 percent for each Romney and Gingrich, and 16 percent for Paul. More voters also said they saw Santorum as the candidate who best represents the middle class.”

    Conservatives must use Florida to narrow this field to a Romney-Santorum contest.  Newt is too flawed an alternative — he is failing to draw a contrast with Romney on the most important issue – Healthcare.

    If Santorum can best Newt in Florida, Santorum becomes the non-Romney.  I urge all Newt Supporters to (and lukewarm Romney supporters) to pull the lever for Rick Santorum.

  6. TWB
    January 29th, 2012 @ 9:51 am

    Two quick points. 1) Florida’s Attorney General is hot. 2) Yes, a direct quotation in context would be nice. Jim Hoft has an un-nerving habit of taking things out of context and misrepresenting stories just to get his point across.

  7. Romney Won’t Repeal Obamneycare | Daily Pundit
    January 29th, 2012 @ 11:14 am

    […] Won’t Repeal Obamneycare Posted on January 29, 2012 8:14 am by Bill Quick A Federalist Progressive Disaster: Scant Improvement Over A Progressive Disaster : The Other McCain Full circle, then: someone needs to find out if Romney really does intend to produce a state […]

  8. OCBill
    January 29th, 2012 @ 11:25 am

    How was the federal government able to require a 55mph speed limit? By threatening to withhold highway funding.  How is it hospitals are legally required to treat people even if those people have no ability to pay? Because if they don’t, they lose federal funding.  How could Romney force states to adopt RomneyCare-equivalents? By threatening to withhold federal funding for non-compliance.

    This was all predicted a long time ago.

    The tale of the wild and free pigs of the Okefenokee Swamp.
    http://www.afn.org/~govern/pigs.html

    Now appearing on a breakfast table near you.

  9. richard mcenroe
    January 29th, 2012 @ 11:54 am

    My take on that FWIW… 
    http://tinyurl.com/6q2u2uk

  10. A Stephens
    January 29th, 2012 @ 12:05 pm

    Oy!  I can see the ad running now,

    “Rom-Bama-Care”,
    because we really must continue to give shit away to convince independents and the media to like us.  But it’s “conservative” when we do it because it’s not federal, it’s state level, and after all we’re a republic.  See, we get it!

    I’m a flip-flopping, unprincipled, finger to the wind, malleable, more willing to fight with my own base than stand up to media characterizations, weasel, and I approve this message”

  11. richard mcenroe
    January 29th, 2012 @ 1:23 pm

    The problem with that is that if enough Dem states adopt some flava of Romneycare, alternatives will not even be available in the rest of the country because the companies that once provided them will be viable any longer.

  12. ThePaganTemple
    January 29th, 2012 @ 2:28 pm

    All I know is if we end up with Mitt for whatever reason, I’m voting for Obama. I’ve had it with the never-ending bullshit.

  13. Bob Belvedere
    January 29th, 2012 @ 6:40 pm

    ROMNEY DELENDA EST!

  14. DAN
    January 29th, 2012 @ 7:51 pm

    I have a simple question.

    If Romney is so smart, ——————————————————————————————  how did he manage to assume different positions on every significant issue under the Sun?

    If he’s so smart, ————— what led him to believe donating money to hard left Democrats was a swift idea,  wholly compatible with his Republican nominee aspirations?

  15. DAN
    January 29th, 2012 @ 7:52 pm

    She gained weight.

    She used to be much hotter.

  16. DAN
    January 29th, 2012 @ 7:52 pm

    We’re not saddled with Romney just yet.