Renaissance of Necessity

We have taken to the streets, altered public opinion polls, motivated interest from the politically uninterested, participated in town halls, written to our representatives and stepped up to biased media reporting: none of it appears to matter when it comes to the Democratic view of health care legislation.  

The health care debate and the subsequent mad dash to pass something, anything has generated a clear message, the bill’s passage notwithstanding.  The message is that this Congress and this Administration will pursue an agenda that bears no witness to the desires of the electorate.  The willingness to govern absent the consent of the governed is manifest and unadulterated.  They have failed to win the argument, they have failed on the merits, to them it matters not.   

Punditry focuses on the jeopardy to the President in the event that the bill fails and the jeopardy to legislators in the event that it succeeds; they miss a broader and more fundamental point.  The breadth and resilience of this effort, contrary to public opinion, foreshadows a major Democratic defeat in November regardless of the final answer on health care legislation because it represents an attitude.

Congress and the Administration have demonstrated an attitude that, short of electoral rejection in November, will reoccur.  They have made this point so clearly as to be inescapable.  Passage of health care means more of the same!  Democrats will not be rejected because of health care they will be rejected based on attitude, an agenda and hubris.  The will be rejected because we will come to an evidence based opinion that legislative efforts past are a prelude we care not to continue or reward.

We will reject them because they have rejected the Constitution as a hallowed set of ideas worthy of fidelity.  We will reject them because they have motivated us to educate ourselves and that education has resulted in exactly the manner of insight that they fear.

We have studied the history of Progressive thinking and we reject it.  We have studied the founding and embrace it.  We have begun a process that potentially emasculates both parties.  We have based our positions on ideas, not fealty to national organizations.  We have relied on the power of those ideas and our ability to engage them.  We have rejected a moderate recycling of positions that take us neither here nor there.

We are a vanguard, we will pull back from the brink of social democracy and the many perils of Progressivism and its spawns. 

We are a renaissance of necessity!