Sorry it's been so long since I posted. Anyway, let's hit the ground running.
I just cannot figure the Democrats out. Why, why, why do they think that the "government option" is the ONLY solution to helping take care of the health care situation? Why are they so dead set on sticking through this - thick-or-thin, come-what-may, hell-or high-water? Why won't they weigh any other alternative, no matter how logical or reasonable?
What has made them so close-minded and intolerant to discussion and debate on this issue that they won't compromise one letter, despite the potential consequences to Obama's reputation as a leader and to their own re-election chances? Why is the passage of this one bill worth sacrificing their political careers and to the "edge" they hold in the House and Senate, this despite legitimate and credible doubts to the plan as they wish to enact it?
It boggles my mind, and it makes me grateful once again that I long ago decided to embrace my "independent" status after having supported Democratic candidates for so long (and I keep having to say this: Just because I no longer consider myself a Democrat does not mean that I am now a Republican. The GOP drives me nuts as well). Otherwise, I too would have been lost in their foggy-minded insanity.
I can hazard a guess, mainly because like I said, I was once one of them before I came to my senses. I believe that the Dems see the passage of this nutty GovOp (as I've been calling the "government option") as so crucial and primary to everything else is because they are of a mindset that belongs to the past: the left-wing 1960s.
I believe that this current crop of Dems, which is made up of a lot of aging baby boomers who grew up in that era, feel that this is their one last, best chance of finally implementing their dream of a (bracing myself for the potential criticism here, because there is no other way to say this but to call it) Communist-style health care system in which it's all free - paid by the obscenely wealthy overprivileged class that robs from the rest of us poor dumb slobs who wouldn't know thier anus from their belly button if the Dems weren't there to tell us.
In other words, the Dems believe they know better than us on what's best for us. And they decided that this GovOp is the best for us - despite arguments and evidence to the contrary, because this idea came into its full flower in that holiest of holy eras of the 1960s. It's a dogma, in other words - so right and correct that to try to say otherwise is blasphemy. When the rest of us unwashed rabble dare to question the GovOp dogma, we are insulting their god.
Even a mass of 50,000 or 1 million (depending on whose stats you believe, but I think it would be easy to know the difference between a group of 50,000 people and a million of them. Someone's yanking our chain here) marching on D.C. this past weekend was not enough of a sign that perhaps the GovOp is not the only alternative out there.
No, the GovOp is still the way to go for them. They favor this plan that will prove nihilistic to their re-election chances if they pass it anyway - which they are hard at work to insure that it does. Well, bully for them if they get themselves voted out in the process. I had long said that the party needed to implode from within and rebuild if it's ever going to return to its former glory. Perhaps we are finally going to witness that belief of mine coming into action.
Thing is, they are proving so short-sighted that they aren't even thinking that if they succeed in passing it and do indeed get themselves voted out in 2010 and 2012, who's to say that the new members of the House and Senate - who will most likely be a lot of Republicans - won't turn around and dump that plan right off the bat - especially if the GovOp proves to be as disastrous as some have been saying?
So then the Dems will have pushed and pushed and pushed themselves out of D.C., all for a plan that will do much more damage than what it will allegedly solve. In the process, they will have given the Democratic party a black eye that will take a very long time to heal. And a self-inflicted black eye at that. There is no other word for it than "insanity"; dumb, blind, feverish loyalty to an outdated set of values from another era. Hmm. Maybe there is something to that "natural selection" idea after all.
Adolf Hitler, the Nazi Party, and the rise and fall of both, is a history lesson that will be studied for a long time to come - and it will certainly be used over and over again by political activists of all stripes seeking to persuade discussions to go their way. Basically, the formula is to link your opposition to Hitler in some way or fashion, and the rest, theoretically, takes care of itself.
Much has been made lately of comparing President Obama to Hitler, and there has even been altered pictures circulating that has Obama with Hitler's toothbrush mustache. While left-wingers may cry foul over that, they are far from innocent in using Hitler for political aims. For pretty much all of President Bush's terms of office, left wingers had tried to link Hitler to Bush and the war in Iraq.
The truth is that neither president nowhere near approaches Hitler's lust for power nor his territorial ambitions - and while you may argue over how much loss of human life each has caused, their numbers nowhere nears the staggering loss of life that Hitler brought about. It's just not a valid comparison - and yet that won't stop the comparisons from being made. There is a saying that the definition of insanity is to do the same failed thing every time and expecting a different result each time. Both left and right wingers cling to the Hitler tactic because it is a lazy shorthand way of labeling the opposition instead of actually debating the issues. It's for them that "Godwin's law" was made.
Let me ask this: How many of you had your mind changed after you heard that "X" is just like Hitler? Were any of you a Bush supporter until left-wingers compared him to Hitler, then you switched sides? Did any of you back Obama until you saw those pics of him with a Hitler mustache? The truth is that Hitler and Stalin were monsters the likes of which had never been seen before, and hopefully won't be seen again.
To try to turn the tragic, painful lessons brought about by their murderous actions just to score cheap political points is an insult to all those who suffered and died under their respective regimes. Politics is a dirty, ugly business, and it often is reduced to childish and immature behavior just to gain some edge over their opponent.
Having said all that, this is not to say that there aren't any instances of comparing "Person X" to Hitler, just that the Hitler card has been played so much that whenever it shows up, it's mostly because of that player's intellectual laziness rather than through any valid comparison. The overuse of the Hitler and the Nazi card also has the effect of blurring or diluting the true lessons that can be learned from his actions, and that's something that should NEVER be forgotten.
I'll save that discussion for another time, because I want to be able to deal with this thoroughly.
I'm neither liberal Democrat nor conservative Republican; nor do I fall in between the two extremes as a "moderate", because I take stands rather than simply find a middle ground. My views depend upon the issue, so the only way to describe someone who is against both legalized abortion and the death penalty is as an independent. So whether you're liberal, conservative. or any of the points between, there's something for you to like -and not like. And there's other things to see as well. I generally post about 2 to 3 times a week. If I am gone for a certain amount of time, I'll say when I'm leaving, and when I expect to be back. Welcome!
NOTE: Views expressed in the ads below do not necessarily express the views of this blog's author.