Guest Editorial Hurley
110710
Guest Editorial by Steve Hurley
The views of guest editorials is that of the author, and not necessarily that of the Prospect, staff or advertisers
I am confused. For the life of me, the Republican's single-minded frontal attack on compassionate legislation (health care) makes no sense if they are trying to be more popular and prove that they are somehow different now. Given the inadequate health care coverage and massive abuse by HMO's perpetrated on so many (who then tell others) won't this anti-healthcare stance make Republicans as many enemies among the people as it will friends? I mean, why attack this -- of all reforms?
The other thing they will be coming after is finance reform. Does it boil down to the power of the health care lobby and the bank lobby? You can forget ideological purity being the motive; it always boils down to the money.
"WASHINGTON — As they seek to make good on their campaign promise to roll back President Obama’s health care overhaul, the incoming Republican leaders in the House say they intend to use their new muscle to cut off money for the law, setting up a series of partisan clashes and testing Democratic commitment to the legislation"
It is just so implausible that the RIPs, through Bush, bungle things to the point of bringing the entire world to the brink of disaster (through lack of financial oversight of the corrupt investment banks), and then, just two years later, voters in this country have completely forgotten everything that happened on the RIP party watch, and they re-elect RIPS in droves to the house to prevent the kind of regulation that might stop this kind of abuse in the future.
Is this the most recent example of the infamous short memory among voters?
As an example of collective short memory among the voting public, nobody remembers when John Boehner passed around tobacco lobby checks on the floor of the house just before a vote on tobacco legislation. And speaking of Boehner, why is he always tearing up on the floor of the house with vain-glorious musings mostly around his patriotism (the last refuge of scoundrels -- Oscar Wilde) ?
I am sorry, but this is like a five alarm fire. In January, John Boehner will be speaker of the house and number three in line for the Presidency. I am not so sure that some won't notice this, and plot accordingly. We are, after all, living in a modern Rome.
You may say that this amazing lack of public memory is facilitated through distraction in the form of attack ads as a consequence of the supreme court decision that has skewed voter sympathies through the vehicle of massive amounts of paid (anonymous) political advertising. But really, are voters such sheep? As financially distressed as many of the public now are, can they really be so easily led as to vote against their immediate and long-term self-interest by scuttling both financial and health care reform?
What am I missing? It is hard to be a 'populist' when you see the population lacking judgment at this level. An elitist would have no problem with this, saying merely that the rabble is always unwashed, and they need the guidance of philosopher kings -- only it is hard to find one that won't line his/her own pockets in the process.
Every decade, I pretty much switch my view on most everything. I feel the polar shift coming on. Forget the popular wisdom of the many?
Steve Hurley
Grass Valley
Guest Editorial by Steve Hurley
The views of guest editorials is that of the author, and not necessarily that of the Prospect, staff or advertisers
I am confused. For the life of me, the Republican's single-minded frontal attack on compassionate legislation (health care) makes no sense if they are trying to be more popular and prove that they are somehow different now. Given the inadequate health care coverage and massive abuse by HMO's perpetrated on so many (who then tell others) won't this anti-healthcare stance make Republicans as many enemies among the people as it will friends? I mean, why attack this -- of all reforms?
The other thing they will be coming after is finance reform. Does it boil down to the power of the health care lobby and the bank lobby? You can forget ideological purity being the motive; it always boils down to the money.
"WASHINGTON — As they seek to make good on their campaign promise to roll back President Obama’s health care overhaul, the incoming Republican leaders in the House say they intend to use their new muscle to cut off money for the law, setting up a series of partisan clashes and testing Democratic commitment to the legislation"
It is just so implausible that the RIPs, through Bush, bungle things to the point of bringing the entire world to the brink of disaster (through lack of financial oversight of the corrupt investment banks), and then, just two years later, voters in this country have completely forgotten everything that happened on the RIP party watch, and they re-elect RIPS in droves to the house to prevent the kind of regulation that might stop this kind of abuse in the future.
Is this the most recent example of the infamous short memory among voters?
As an example of collective short memory among the voting public, nobody remembers when John Boehner passed around tobacco lobby checks on the floor of the house just before a vote on tobacco legislation. And speaking of Boehner, why is he always tearing up on the floor of the house with vain-glorious musings mostly around his patriotism (the last refuge of scoundrels -- Oscar Wilde) ?
I am sorry, but this is like a five alarm fire. In January, John Boehner will be speaker of the house and number three in line for the Presidency. I am not so sure that some won't notice this, and plot accordingly. We are, after all, living in a modern Rome.
You may say that this amazing lack of public memory is facilitated through distraction in the form of attack ads as a consequence of the supreme court decision that has skewed voter sympathies through the vehicle of massive amounts of paid (anonymous) political advertising. But really, are voters such sheep? As financially distressed as many of the public now are, can they really be so easily led as to vote against their immediate and long-term self-interest by scuttling both financial and health care reform?
What am I missing? It is hard to be a 'populist' when you see the population lacking judgment at this level. An elitist would have no problem with this, saying merely that the rabble is always unwashed, and they need the guidance of philosopher kings -- only it is hard to find one that won't line his/her own pockets in the process.
Every decade, I pretty much switch my view on most everything. I feel the polar shift coming on. Forget the popular wisdom of the many?
Steve Hurley
Grass Valley
