Erik Larson

Jul 22, 2009

On Rationality

Consider:

(1) We’re in the midst of one of the greatest economic downturns since the Great Depression. We’ve been warned. Scared. And so we passed the massive STIMULUS. The jump start that nit wits like “One Trick” Paul I-Wish-I-Was-Czar Krugman threw his hat in for (and then a towel when it was only hundreds of billions. Just like FDR and the New Deal, just not enough SPENDING for Krugman.) So, it’s the economy stupid. In dire need of our best efforts. NOW.

(2) We must also pass universal health care NOW, while struggling to get out of the_greatest_economic_downturn_since_the_great_depression.

Little, silly question: why (2) now? Does anyone really believe that expanding health care to 50 million Americans is an aid to economic stimulus? Or that it will magically be paid for without taxation on business (8%), or individuals (?)? That it has no economic costs?

So, from (1), we need to save our economic asses. From (2), we must now embark on the bold initiative towards the Just Society. But, again, suppose someone bothers to stop for a moment, and ponder whether it’s really rational to assert (1) and (2) together, what then? What will become of this dangerous, questioning soul? An “obstructionist”, no doubt. And perhaps, “against us”, and even (my favorite) “against progress”.

The White House, after failing in Hillary-like fashion, will no doubt blame it on the Neanderthal Republicans. But it’s the bluest of canines in Democrat land, fearing themselves soon shuffled out of Congress, ignominously, leaving a wake of bold talk and mountains of debt, that are finding in spite of temporary pressure the deeper voice of American sensibility so needed today. Not even Obama can square the circle of reconciling (1) and (2). A few Democrats (and Republicans) on the Hill know it. Bravo.