Bend Over, Here It Comes!

A casual reading of political press this young year reveals a clear truth that previously was known to a select few wise seers, such as the author, and our assembled crew here at the last outpost on the right: Majority Republicans absent possibly Ted Cruz have no intention of repealing Obamacare; they merely wish to pull its levers of economic distortion for their benefactors.

Obamacare memorializes that healthcare is a ‘right’. Further, it memorializes that another person’s ‘right’ to healthcare and the ‘right’ of healthcare providers to be paid fee for service supersedes an individual’s right to his/her personal property. This is a logical extension of medicaid, WIC, SNAP, and all other forms of federal government wealth transfer that I do not think will be undone absent a financial and/or civil crisis.

What will Mr. Trump do about this? He is on record supporting some form of nationalized and/or single payer healthcare, the specifics of which are consistently absent given his history of broad protestations and inexperience implementing and executing. More interesting will be the reaction of his staff.

This will be the first line of demarcation between Reince Priebus and Steve Bannon assuming Mr. Bannon is who he says he is and is committed to the Breitbart ideology for something more than generating mouse clicks. Priebus will endorse the McConnell/Cornyn party line. My guess is Trump is ready and willing to raise the white flag, prattle on about people not dying in the streets, endorse healthcare as a right, and the power of the federal to seize private property of individuals to pay for it.

This will be the first shot at a key constituency that showed up for Trump in the general election: the remains of the right wing Tea Party types without which Mr. Trump would be a historical footnote and Madame President would be preparing her ascension to the throne.

Will the failure to repeal Obamacare and cement the expansion of Medicare/Medicaid to the masses using ‘private’ insurance as the conduit for income/wealth distribution be a fatal blow to Trump’s mandate? Possibly and I look forward to your thoughts. What will be the fatal shot (h/t to Ann Coulter for her consistency on the matter) is failure to follow through on hard line immigration enforcement.

I’ve been encouraged by Mr. Trump’s conduct of the transition. I am not encouraged by Republican’s failure to understand that Mr. Trump’s rise to their chagrin is directly correlated to their feckless leadership. Much ink has been spilled about Democrats clinging dogmatically to their failed leadership. Where is the criticism of Republicans doing the same? Who among Republican Congressional leadership endorsed Mr. Trump for President before Ted Cruz suspended his campaign? Trump’s coalition did not support him in conformation of Republican leadership, they supported him in opposition to it. His embrace of their failed priorities and policies may be the first toll of the bell signaling the end of an administration with amazing potential.

Now more than ever we need conservative polices; less government, not more. to cure what ills our sickened nation. Those ideals are anathema to Republican Congressional leadership and only a firm principled hand in the White House can do otherwise. There is nothing pro-business or pro-commerce about any tenant of Obamcare. There is no such thing as the ‘good part’ of Obamacare. An embrace of any portion of it surrenders liberty and private prosperity to the leftward march of progressivism and the final decline of America.

BrentB67

About BrentB67

Tea Party refugee from the coup at center right.
Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to Bend Over, Here It Comes!

  1. MLHMLH says:

    All the blather about having something to replace o-care makes me bonkers. Let’s just go back to having medical insurance.

    • BrentB67BrentB67 says:

      We will never go back to pre-2009. Please refer to paragraph 2. Both parties and the next President are absolutely unconditionally behind this new reality.

      Everyone else’s right to healthcare and the healthcare industry’s right to prosperity supersedes your right to earnings or private property.

    • EThompson says:

      Agree but with one codicil: interstate competition.

  2. DevereauxDevereaux says:

    Well said.

    It seems Republicans are allowing the Democrats, once again, to dictate the terms of the debate.

    That said, perhaps they are being really sneaky. O-care will collapse of it’s own internal idiocy in a year, two at the most. It has already shown huge losses with companies bailing out and exchanges closing. This whole shpeal of “30 million insurees” is mostly smoke and mirrors. If Republicans want it to die, just remove the mandate. Watch how fast people bail out. Pass a law allowing private insurance and cross-state purchases, and you have established a market which will kill any residual aspects of o-care.

    Remember, o-care ONLY “worked” because we were taxed for 4 years before the implimentation. Lots of tax money built up to make it look like it would work – and it still failed. But not before Obummer got outta Dodge. Now we’re left with clowns (aptly labelled) like Schumer braying about a dead donkey.

    I just wish Republicans would call it like it is.

    • BrentB67BrentB67 says:

      Yes, but given my premise in the 2nd paragraph any failure will be met with nationalized medicaid.

      • MLHMLH says:

        Re-read para 2: people. ugh. What has happened to Americans?!!?

        • BrentB67BrentB67 says:

          As soon as we established that other people’s rights to medicine, food, etc. trumps our right to earnings and private property there is no putting the toothpaste back in the tube.

          This is the fallacy of contemporary conservatism and the charade of ‘center right’. There is no such thing as the good or compassionate way to confiscate private property to socialize the consequences of others choices or their healthcare.

        • DevereauxDevereaux says:

          Well, the failure will be economic. No nationalized healthcare formula will work. While I would take exception to not having the right to be paid fee-for-service, the market to “regulate” that doesn’t exist, having been replaced de facto by government rules about “allowed” charges. So we already have huge meddling in the market of medical services.

          That said, politicians have a huge problem. Doing “the right thing” will get them unelected. It was tried in Kalifornia, and those who tried were promptly thrown out of office.

          I don’t believe O-care has much of a wide constituency. One could easily simply toss out the law, pass a couple to satisfy the couple things that the populace wants in such a way that it would still be insurance, then let the market develop plans that people would want to buy.

          Might be a good idea to take away corporate healthcare and allow only the negotiation of rates which the individuals could then buy as they saw fit. THEN it would be THEIR policy, not tied to work. You get fired because you’re sick, you don’t lose your insurance.

          • BrentB67BrentB67 says:

            I agree that O’care doesn’t have a wide, or deep, constituency.

            I also do not think SNAP, WIC, etc. has wide or deep direct constituencies. Indirect is another matter.

            In addition to the deep pocketed indirect constituencies there is the ultimate constituency – prosperity guilt and it runs deep across party lines.

          • DevereauxDevereaux says:

            Guilt is harder to expunge. It takes sane discourse, which we haven’t had much of.

  3. DevereauxDevereaux says:

    You touch on the existential argument before us – whether any government has the right to rob Peter to pay Paul. The whole Progressive agenda hinges on that point. It was allowed by the bandit Cardozo in the 30’s and Congress has taken the bit in its teeth and run with it every since.

    Yet any rational interpretation of the Constitution does not allow that. But it would take a decision of the SCOTUS to reverse these years of stare desis.

    In some ways I am reminded of the fight over slavery. It, too, was an existential fight, right down to actual Civil War. Perhaps that will come, too. I certainly hope not, but it is possible.

    The more one reads history and the more one learns the thinking of the Founding generation, the more amazing they show themselves to have been. THEY are “the greatest generation”, not our parents who fought a valiant world war but also allowed the lout FDR in – repeatedly. We have him to thank for our current terrible position.

    ?Where is Coolidge when we need him.

  4. AdministratorAdministrator says:

    ObamaCare does not need a constituency — it is a fact on the ground.

    • DevereauxDevereaux says:

      And like a mortally wounded alligator, it is thrashing about trying to die – of its own volition.

      • BrentB67BrentB67 says:

        O’Care is dying of its own volition, exactly as designed by the Democrats.

        The problem is that the end game only changes the taxing authority from the mandates/insurance companies to the federal government directly.

        O’Care was never designed or intended a durable solution.

        The problem is that the majority of Republicans are complicit in the transition and hurrying it along.

        Every trap the Democrats have laid Republicans have happily skipped into.

        Nobody will remember the debacle that was O’Care. They will only remember the debacle that is being considered by Republicans and will be signed into law by President Trump.

        Democrats get healthcare and profitable hospitals as a right and Republicans gleefully sign up to take the blame.

    • DevereauxDevereaux says:

      The Dems are making all the noise in an effort to control the terms of the debate. Were one to say,

      “Fine. leave it alone.” they would then be screaming to fund it as it is dying. This is mostly noise and not solid. Were the Republicans solid, they would dismiss the Dems as old news publically and go about figuring what their next move ought to be – and NOT fund Ocare.

  5. EThompson says:

    “The more one reads history and the more one learns the thinking of the Founding generation, the more amazing they show themselves to have been. THEY are “the greatest generation”, not our parents who fought a valiant world war but also allowed the lout FDR in – repeatedly. We have him to thank for our current terrible position.’

    Couldn’t agree more but I reluctantly found a fatal flaw in my founding father hero Alexander Hamilton. The Electoral College is a good thing; otherwise CA and NY would be electing presidents but I am frightened that the electors are actually allowed to vote against the will of the people of their states. (Hamilton always had a great fear of the masses.)

    The results of 2016 were that seven electors voted against their constituents; 5 voted for Trump against Hillary and 2 voted for Hillary against Trump. This makes me nervous because I fear we have opened Pandora’s box; several of the electors from Trump states were harassed and urged to ignore the will of the people.

    It’s important for the smaller states to be fully represented in the presidential election as they are in the House, but I’m leery that individual electors have the constitutional right to bypass the ballot box. This could easily become the next best weapon utilized by the Democrats.

  6. DevereauxDevereaux says:

    Yet despite these defections, the number of defections over history has been very few. Some states have laws about not allowing defections and I wouldn’t be surprised to find more passing such legislation.

    I would submit that Hamilton had numerous fatal flaws, among them that he helped write the Constitution to get the Articles replaced, then went about trying actively to subvert the Constitution.

    I believe the Constitution is a libertarian article, while Hamilton was a seriously authoritarian type. He DID want Washington to take up the mantle of king and he envisioned America creating a Lords and commoners class system, of which he expected to be among the Lords.

    • EThompson says:

      “Some states have laws about not allowing defections and I wouldn’t be surprised to find more passing such legislation.”

      We need to get on that one and book it for all 50. It’s bad enough my future has been in the hands of Anthony Kennedy; I can’t tolerate being at the mercy of 538 unknown electors.

      Don’t kid yourself this won’t happen. The Supremes MADE law with Roe, Obamacare and SSM marriage.

  7. Jameyod says:

    Insanely astronomical costs for liability and malpractice insurance for the medical profession and the pharmaceutical companies is the single biggest reason for high insurance costs. Without real tort reform, nothing really changes.

Leave a Reply