The Sad Case of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

[Kepler]

Re: The Sad Case of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

This thread title gives me a chuckle every time I see it, now. It's like a billboard for the peevish frustration of the knucks.

[Handyman]

Re: The Sad Case of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

This thread title gives me a chuckle every time I see it, now. It's like a billboard for the peevish frustration of the knucks.

But I thought FreshFish was a liberal Democrat

[Kepler]

Re: The Sad Case of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

Interesting piece on the Roberts decision as a harbinger of the return of sincere conservatism in America, after decades of right wing utopian radicalism mixed with mere fraud.

One of the most strikingly anti-conservative aspects of today's allegedly conservative movement, after all, is its contempt for institutions, especially elite institutions that in any way limit the scope of fundamentalist ideology. And so Newt Gingrich's crucial innovation was throwing out the politeness and manners and decorum and rules and traditions of the House of Representatives in order to gain power by populist demagoguery. You can see his legacy in Tom DeLay's implementation of the Medicare D entitlement under Bush, an essentially lawless and rule-free process that made a mockery of parliamentary procedure. You saw this contempt for the rule of law, if it got in the way of desired policy, in the torture policy under Bush, cynically making the patently illegal "legal" through cynicism and double-speak.

Similarly, McConnell's use of the filibuster is essentially a display of contempt for the American constitutional system, rigging the system to nullify legislative majorities and to conduct politics as a zero-sum war for power, rather than as a means to debate, discuss and implement necessary changes in an evolving society. The give-and-take of American constitutionalism has been essentially reduced by the GOP in the last two decades to take-and-take-some-more. They impeached one successful president, in an act so disproportionate to the offense (and the offense was real; Clinton was a shameless perjurer) that it helped gut any bipartisan functioning of an institution designed for deal-making across the aisles or within them. They treated the 2000 election, when Bush lost the popular vote, as a landslide mandate election - again with no deference to the other side or sense of governing as one nation.

After Bush vs Gore and then Citizens United, I think Roberts saw the full political and constitutional consequences of a radical Court vote to gut the key legislative achievement of a duly elected president and Congress. In other words, he put the institutions of American government before the demands of partisan power-mongering. And he deftly nudged the issue back into the democratic process, where it more comfortably belongs.

I cannot say this is the moment the fever broke. The "movement right" is still furious at Roberts, pushing Romney as the principle-free instrument of their next round of institution-smashing (Medicare). But that a conservative placed the country's institutional stability before ideological fervor is so rare at this point it deserves some kind of praise. It's a start. If the GOP is beaten this fall, it may even be seen as the moment the tide began to turn, and conservatism began to reach back toward its less feral traditions and ideas.

Since the 1990's there has been no conservative movement in the US, there has only been the grabbing hands which grab all they can for the GOP. There have always been a handful of conservative adults, but the right only uses them for as long as they are useful, then either ignores them or brands them as apostates. The Republican Party itself has merely become the Scientologists, a scam with religious trappings and lots of lawyers.

Maybe we're going to see a change, but it will take at least one more electoral defeat to do it.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Sad Case of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

Interesting piece on the Roberts decision as a harbinger of the return of sincere conservatism in America, after decades of right wing utopian radicalism.

Sullivan is obviously delusional.

[joecct]

Interesting piece on the Roberts decision as a harbinger of the return of sincere conservatism in America, after decades of right wing utopian radicalism.

It is an interesting piece. Unsaid is that the ACA is the antithesis of conservatism.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Sad Case of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

It is an interesting piece. Unsaid is that the ACA is the antithesis of conservatism.

Really?

We have reams of data that say that early diagnosis of illnesses is cheaper in the long run. This helps that cause. Isn't that a conservative thing to do?

[5mn_Major]

Re: The Sad Case of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

Interesting piece on the Roberts decision as a harbinger of the return of sincere conservatism in America, after decades of right wing utopian radicalism.

The money shot:

But at some point, conservatism must re-emerge, if only because we so desperately need it. Conservatism is, after all, a philosophy that tends to argue that less equals more, that restraint is sometimes more powerful than action, that delay is often wiser than headlong revolution. It reveres traditional rules and existing institutions, especially endangered elite institutions that the Founders designed to check and cool the popular will. Roberts took a small step toward resuscitating that tradition last week.
...
Although I'm a guy who loves change and progress...I'm sadly skeptical that this traditional conservatism will become a top driving force again. There's just too much momentum behind social and global 'neocon' conservatism. I just wonder if this is caused by a cultural bleed over into who would be traditional moderates in the north from a focused singleminded southern social conservative block

[bronconick]

Re: The Sad Case of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

It is an interesting piece. Unsaid is that the ACA is the antithesis of conservatism.

And that's why he pointedly dumped the entirety of what he viewed as a poor law into the laps of the people, Congress and the Presidency instead of expecting his court to "fix" the issue.

It shouldn't be the court's job to eliminate legislation because it's not conservative or liberal, depending on which way the wind is blowing that day.

[5mn_Major]

Re: The Sad Case of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

Just saw results of an interesting poll flashed on the screen...think it was Wash Post:

Support for Obama's healthcare program: 45%
Support for Romney's healthcare program: 30%

[bronconick]

Re: The Sad Case of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

Wait, wait wait. Romney has a healthcare plan? Lies!

[mookie1995]

Wait, wait wait. Romney has a healthcare plan? Lies!

Just shows how stupid the electorate really is!!!

[Kepler]

Re: The Sad Case of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

Although I'm a guy who loves change and progress...I'm sadly skeptical that this traditional conservatism will become a top driving force again. There's just too much momentum behind social and global 'neocon' conservatism. I just wonder if this is caused by a cultural bleed over into who would be traditional moderates in the north from a focused singleminded southern social conservative block

Traditional conservatism always re-emerges, it is based on evergreen principles. The disease that has infected the American right is a combination of the insecurity and fear of fundamentalist reactionaries (theocons) and the utopianism and aggression of ideological imperialists (neocons). That alliance tends to characterize the far right of societies that go through wrenching change -- France after Sedan, Italy after unification, Germany after the WW1 defeat. In our case the trigger was winning the Cold War -- absolute power corrupted absolutely. It slides quickly towards fascism unless arrested by some counter-force -- luckily, American institutions seem to have been strong enough to stop it this time, albeit after severe damage both at home and abroad.

I don't expect real conservatism to take hold overnight -- the parasites who currently call themselves "conservatives" in politics and the media are its worst enemies, because they are its actual antithesis, and of course the financiers (perfectly embodied by Romney) are making too much money not to put up a strong fight. But historically dalliances with far right radicalism are fleeting, and conservatism always buries them in the end.

The political realignment by 2030 may be almost completely unrecognizable from today. The vibrant part of the left defines itself in large part as a pragmatic antibody against the radical right cancer. As the right reforms itself, the left will face an identity crisis. In particular, as we bury the Boomers and the Culture Wars, demagogues on both sides will have to find new seeds for their fundraising and vote-getting crystal formation. I do not think we can predict what these will be, any more than people in 1950 could have predicted the politics of 1970.

[5mn_Major]

Re: The Sad Case of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

Traditional conservatism always re-emerges, it is based on evergreen principles. The disease that has infected the American right is a combination of the insecurity and fear of fundamentalist reactionaries (theocons) and the utopianism and aggression of ideological imperialists (neocons). That alliance tends to characterize the far right of societies that go through wrenching change -- France after Sedan, Italy after unification, Germany after the WW1 defeat. It slides quickly towards fascism unless arrested by some counter-force -- luckily, American institutions seem to have been strong enough to stop it this time, albeit after severe damage both at home and abroad.

Could be, but will it have any kind of dominance? There is such a steep hill to climb to overcome social, etc conservatism...and I see no factors big enough to change the status quo.

I don't expect real conservatism to take hold overnight -- the parasites who currently call themselves conservatives in politics and the media are its worst enemies, because they are its actual antithesis.

Very similar situation to Christianity.

[Kepler]

Re: The Sad Case of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

Could be, but will it have any kind of dominance? There is such a steep hill to climb to overcome social, etc conservatism...and I see no factors big enough to change the status quo.

I think it will have a couple of advantages. First off, traditional conservatism is an incredibly well thought-out philosophy. Burke, Kirk, and Oakeshott (and dozens of other interesting people from economists to poets) have written voluminously on it and from many different angles. Secondly, I think the left's identity crisis will give traditional conservatism an open field for a while.

This is very good news because at its best traditional conservatism, besides being a source of obvious stability, tends also to great legitimacy -- even its opponents recognize it is an actual pillar of thought. It also tends not to be provocative. It is also a very good base from which to defend against attacks from without, because it fosters group identity rather than divisiveness (this is one of the great indicators of true conservatism: it stresses that what unites us is stronger than what divides us). It isn't very good about pivoting to new situations, but that's where the other great piston, the Progressives, eventually kicks in.

[Kepler]

Re: The Sad Case of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

Very similar situation to Christianity.

I think this is overstated. The vast majority of Christians and even Christians leaders seem to me to be just trying to get through the day and do good with their beliefs intact. The handful of jackwagons who get all the press are just a sideshow.