IF….
If an overwhelmingly Republican Congress…
Passed an overwhelmingly unpopular bill…
Ignoring the outcry of multitudes at Town Hall meetings…
Without a single Democrat vote…
Consisting of 2700 pages of legislation…
Which no one had had enough time to thoroughly read…
Much less analyze for:
• Cost
• Benefit
• Feasibility
• Effectiveness
• Legality
• Constitutionality
• Burden to the states
• Burden to local governments
• Burden to federal government
• Burden to the industry affected by the legislation
• Burden to the individual user
• Burden to the taxpayer
And if that Republican Congress told everyone “We have to pass it to know what’s in it”…
And painted anyone who questioned the decision as a hateful, bigoted, evil, racist…
If a Republican Congress had done these things…
In spite of half or more of the country actually rousing from their apathetic political slumber…
If President Bush had gleefully signed the act into law for the Republicans…
Despite not one single Democrat voting for it…
How fast, how furious would the Democrat legislators work to overturn the unpopular, costly mistake?
Too many of our progressive friends seem to be giddy with the fact they got one over on the mean old conservatives, but overlook the fact that the whole mess is setting precedence they may not be too happy about during the next swing of the political pendulum.
Lost freedom for one is lost freedom for all, conservative and progressive, Republican and Democrat and Independent alike. My poor, misguided, short-sighted friends, this is not a win, not even for you.
Lady Liberty's Muse 
d. k. sutton
July 8, 2012
Last time I checked the Affordable Care Act passed via the present rules of the House and Senate. Nowhere does it say a bill must include votes from more than one political party. I happen to be someone who believes there shouldn’t be political parties in the first place as they at times create divisions where there otherwise would be none.
Lady Liberty's Muse
July 8, 2012
Thanks for your response, D.K. You’re right, the Act passed by the legal rules of congress. I didn’t take any exception to the legality of the passage.
My question was this: what would the Democrat response/reaction have been if, under a Republican House, Republican Senate, and with a Republican President, a bill the Democrats didn’t want or support was passed, in the same quick-fire ‘no time to read’ ‘pass it to know what’s in it’ manner as was done with Obamacare? Do you think, in the same situation, the millions of Democrat voters who opposed the measure would have felt rather cheated, like their voices and wishes were ignored?
I agree with you on the whole “party” issue. There’s way too much divisiveness due to pure party alignment instead of people actually looking at the crux of the issues.
Thanks for your thoughts.
d. k. sutton
July 8, 2012
You are right, I’m sure plenty of Democratic voters would have the same response if the shoe was on the other foot, although it of course depends on the actual bill we are talking about. But in this hypothetical scenario, if we assume it was unpopular with a majority of Americans then it’s safe to assume a lot of Democrats would be within those ranks. In the case of the ACA, it’s not a unified block when it comes to why people don’t like it. There are plenty of liberals who don’t like it because it doesn’t go far enough and it’s a gift to the private insurance industry.
I think there are a lot of generalizations in your critique of Democratic voters and the Affordable Care Act itself. I think it’s safe to say not all Democratic voters “painted anyone who questioned the decision as a hateful, bigoted, evil, racist.” I think it’s also safe to say there are Republican voters who do actually support the ACA. Yes, it might be a small amount, but are you thinking that small amount of Republican support is likely to demonize the rest of their party for not supporting it (like you say Democratic voters are doing)? I know what you are asking, but my point is that party division is (in my view) the main reason for asking the questions you ask. I did take notice that you consider yourself independent, so maybe I’m wrong and presumptuous and you are asking the question objectively.
As for loss of freedom… What loss of freedom? What kind of freedom does someone have if they are out of a job and need a medical procedure done? Instead they can suffer (or worse) die because they can’t afford health care insurance? That doesn’t sound like freedom to me. That almost sounds like prison. Wanting better and more affordable health care for all Americans is not an attempt to take away freedoms. There are plenty of things mandated in our lives that we don’t go around complaining about because they are taking away our freedom. We live in a society where there needs to be cooperation and a social compact in order to maintain order and fairness. The ACA is an attempt to give millions of Americans access to something the rest of the country has access to. Health care shouldn’t be something you need to earn, it should be something we can all expect as part of that social compact.