was a commercial message many years ago to sell something unmemorable, but there is something very wrong going on when Congress can’t fully explain a bill, instead telling us it has to be enacted for us to see what it is. The time to ensure legislation is written properly to achieve its objective is before it is enacted, not after.
When this “pass it first” gambit is proclaimed, they are telling us in effect that the proposed legislation is (choose at least one):
A) Poorly crafted (incompetence)
B) Contains law that has to be kept hidden from the public until it is too late (the wool over the sheeple’s eyes gambit)
C) Something that must be accepted because the elites have decided this is the way it should be (try to say something nice and don’t be a smart*ss)
D) All of the above (most often the correct answer).
There is no other logical explanation for using “pass it first” as a sales tactic to pass legislation. I charge any congresscritter using this tactic to be an incompetent cowardly elitist, and that’s just for starters.
I suppose the claimed transparency words of the 0bama regime have already been shot to shreds by its actions, but I’ll hit it once more by pointing out their lying charade of transparency is transparent to everyone but themselves. Or that it’s not a charade, it is deliberate.
Yesterday, Peter Beinart writes in The Daily Beast, extolling the Dodd/Frank bill under the title “0bama’s Unbelievable Winning Streak” (I’ll agree with the unbelievable part):
“One can argue about whether the bill the Senate passed will truly change the way Wall Street operates. but off the top of your head, can you name a more significant piece of progressive legislation signed by either of the last two Democratic Presidents?” Then he goes on to say “And that goes for 0bama’s stimulus package and his health care reform as well”.
Wow! He first admits that there is doubt about whether the bill will make any difference or not, then has the audacity to claim it is a significant piece of legislation? He’s saying it might not work but it’s a BFD? Here’s a guy who should be warned not to drink his own bathwater, it’s affecting his brain connections in a serious way.
This reinforces how their actual tactics were developed during the health care debate when some on the left stated in its defense that a “bad bill is better than no bill” which if you examine it critically is just as illogical a selling gambit as “try it you’ll like it”. The left believes that enacting legislation that is focused and constitutional is less important than passing fuzzy-wuzzy legislation that shackles our economy and industry to force compliance and/or takeover solely to press the far left agenda on the country. Doesn’t matter if it’s good, or if it will work, or if the citizens even want it, the left has a single-mindedness that progressive policy must prevail. Losing the Congressional majority is worth it if it expands government intrusion into every corner of our existence, proven by Beinart’s statement that “even as the Republicans claim political momentum, the country is in the midst of a major shift leftward when it comes to the role of government”. What is an inconvenient truth is the approval ratings in the tank for 0bama and Congress because of their back room shady dealings to get the leftward legislation passed, because they know if they were honest about it up front people would be in the streets with torches and pitchforks. But it does illustrate to conservatives that we are dealing with zealots, not pragmatists and our long term strategy must develop accordingly.
Beinart goes on to tell us that everything else 0bama has touched has turned to gold, and that “the Tea Party movement may be a sign of 0bama’s weakened position, but in policy terms, it is a testament to his success.” We are getting into Orwellian prophecy here where we are told the regime’s failure is its success. That’s quite a spin but the left has little else to use to try to weasel their way into a positive appearance.The takeaway on this is that they simply don’t care as long as they get to push leftward.
The lesson I see in this is that we need the same single-mindedness to push back the “major shift leftward”. As Frum points out, it wasn’t a Republican win to pick up seats in 1966 after LBJ got Medicare passed. There’s the point – by winning in 2010 and 2012, in history it won’t be a win for conservatives if 0bamacare is still the law of the land, and “too big to fail” is still welded into law, if our auto industry must kneel to an unelected and unconfirmed czar, and the failed mainstream media is kept on life support by transfers from new media, or that the internet can still be shut down by a president who declares a false emergency to halt any debate contrary to progressive policies.
Winning isn’t everything and in some ways it isn’t even the only thing. Winning control and doing nothing is worse (i.e. more painful) than losing. We can’t be like the dog that finally catches the car and wonders “now what the heck am I gonna do with this thing?” (dog reference intentional). The Really Big Deal is to ensure that winning does have consequences for the progressive agenda and their back room perpetrators that have pushed the country in the wrong direction against the will of its citizens.