Obama indicated today that he wants the Senate to use whatever means possible, including reconciliation, to pass his healthcare reform bill.  Republicans are apoplectic that he would force a simple majority vote after Scott Brown’s amazing win in Massachusetts that gave them the votes they need for a filibuster.  There are several interesting aspects in this latest kerfuffle over healthcare reform.

Before considering those, I am going to refuse to play into their word games.  They are not aiming to reform healthcare.  If the left was so intent on reforming healthcare, they would’ve passed it when Clinton was president and the Republicans put forth a healthcare reform bill in 1996.  They call it reform, but let’s call it what it is, socialized healthcare.

First, and most obvious, is that this proves Obama will say one thing to gain support, and then do something entirely different when it comes to implementation.  Tough times reveal a man’s character.  If a president has pledged one thing, believing that he will get his way, but then debate turns against him, and then he violates his pledge it proves that he is not a man of good faith.  Simply put, Obama is not a man of his word.  If we can’t trust him to honor his own rules of engagement how can we trust him when he tells us that healthcare reform is good for the country?  His modus operandi also proves that Democrats believe that the end justifies the means.  To the left, passing healthcare reform is so important that lying about the means about which you will be willing to pass it is justified.  That is hardly news, but to most conservatives, dishonorable means indicate an ignoble end. 

Second, the effort to push healthcare through with reconciliation also belies the true reason they want to pass healthcare reform.  If the end, passage of the bill, is ignoble, why do they want it so badly?  Why are they willing to stare down the vast majority of Americans who want government to leave healthcare alone, or at most, only make minor incremental changes to our existing system?  They realize that they have to do it while they have control of the executive and legislative branches.  Most polls show that they will suffer big losses in November.  If they don’t get it passed soon, then they won’t get it through at all.  But that still begs the question why they would be willing to accept potentially even heavier election losses by going against the will of the people.  It can’t be because they feel that this is the right thing to do because if it were, Obama wouldn’t have a reason to lie about the means by which he would pass it. It has to be, as many conservatives believe, a means of giving government more control over our lives. 

That may sound contradictory – believing that the Democrats are betting the farm knowing that they’ll lose it. But even though in the short term, while they may lose seats, they are also hoping that Americans retain our notorious short memory and forget Democrat’ impertinence long enough so that we become addicted to the new healthcare entitlement.  When Republicans gain the upper hand and try to repeal it, Obama will veto it.  And then it becomes the new wedge issue that Democrats will rally around in future elections.  I can hear it now, “Vote for us or you’ll lose your healthcare”.

If this prospect scares the daylights out of you, there’s only one thing to do – call your representatives and let them know.