The Experience of FAIL
The Wall Street Journal has an interesting article, from its conservative perspective, on how Hillary’s current universal healthcare mandate is as utterly failed as ever. Not failed in the sense that it wouldn’t cover all Americans if it passed, but failed in the sense that the same sort of idea failed in 1993 or so. The WSJ still calls it Hillarycare, they can even recycle the terms used to defeat it originally. Back when 5.25″ floppies were still around to some degree.
So why put up a Democratic presidential candidate on the democratic side that Rush Limbaugh is supporting under the catchphrase “Keep her in it, so we can win it” ? Why put up a Democratic presidential candidate who’s only attempt at drafting legislation from the executive branch led to the “Contract with America” rebirth of the Gingrich Republicans? Seriously? Her brand of divisive politics plays right into the hands of those who wish the exact opposite of her stated goals.
Give Barack Obama some money, PLZTHX. At least he understands compromise is better than failing all over again.
[ADDENDUM]
Andrew Sullivan has a nice article which makes this same point regarding health care: The Unemotional Case For Obama.
Filed under All. Tags:
The Journal is great for business coverage, but in terms of editorial content, it is a right-wing rag in a way that no “liberal” periodical is in this country. I doubt this will decrease after its acquisition by Rupert Murdoch.
I don’t disagree that Hillary’s style is much more pugnacious than Obama’s, and I, myself, support Obama much for that reason — but I really do place a lot of the blame for this on the right attacking Billary. The Clintons are extremely moderate, and while I acknowledge they don’t have a squeaky-clean past, I really think a lot of time has been wasted already by bringing out the sordid details of their background. Stuff that, for me, pales in comparison to the Bush family history. But whatever. My point is, I think it’s a bit much to blame Hillary for the divisive tactics of the right.
I agree that her personal style plays into this, but we need to support her if she’s the candidate. Unless you’re going to choose McCain, who, while I do consider him basically an honest guy, at least by political standards, is extremely conservative by just about every yardstick except Ann Coulter’s.
But whatever, Cheney and Bush are probably just going to declare martial law in late October anyway. They’re not going out without a fight.
No way could I support “Bomb, Bomb Iran” McCain. I just mean that Hillary has the same problem admitting mistakes as Bush. If she had a new tack in the pursuit of universal health care, I would be interested, but I don’t think her argument has changed much since ’93.
I agree with both Ethan and Rich. Yes, Hillary doesn’t admit her mistakes (like voting for the war…which is a pretty huge and hard to forgive mistake) and I wonder if universal health care will happen in our lifetime . Yet, she’s so far and above better than ‘bomb bomb Iran’ McCain. In terms of political consistency and honesty, I certainly wouldn’t think of McCain. Perhaps Ron Paul, whose views are at least internally consistent: at least for him, small government really means small government. Not small government for taxes and big government for everything else. And, I agree with Ethan, Bush and Cheney won’t leave without a fight.
So,yeah, when you think things can’t get worse, oh sure they can. Yet, I agree with Rich, why can’t we have better Democratic candidates? Too bad Al Gore isn’t running again. After hearing his most eloquent Nobel Prize speech, my heart sank, thinking ‘He should have been our President.’