It’s as though we have always been afraid of becoming a unified nation where federal laws will prevail over local laws and we are reluctant to send our best and brightest to work out compromises so mostly those who seek power and make empty promises end up in Congress.
The U.S. would never have been formed if the slavery issue had been pressed during the founding. Southern colonies would not have signed any document outlawing slavery. That can had already been kicked many a mile by the time of the Civil War.
On the health insurance thing, though, I’m fine with “Medicare for everyone who wants it” instead of “Medicare for all” if that means it’s more likely to pass. And it works just fine in Europe. If people want to be ripped off by HMOs, let them. A public option will also force the private companies to provide better insurance.
People are discussing “Medicare for All” as if it were a fixed and finite thing. Before any plan could go into effect, it will be ground in the mill and forced through the sieve of both houses.
The slavery question just would not resolve itself. In the 1850’s, popular sovereignty was supposed to solve it. After Henry Clay died, Stephen Douglas thought it would solve the problem, but slowly it came apart: the Kansas-Nebraska Act, Bleeding Kansas, the Dred Scott decision, the caning of Sumner…. It also didn’t help that only mediocre men who stood for nothing were the only ones who could be president. So, I disagree with kicking the can in the cartoon. Each solution kept failing, intersectional institutions broke over the issue, and then finally the Democratic Party itself split in 1860. We were fortunate that Abraham Lincoln was there to step into such a divided situation. Of course, he looks so much better, for the presidents after him were no bargain either until Theodore Roosevelt.
It’s hard to pan prospectors…………..BUT…………..c’mon, Brian, you can unearth historical nuggets so frequent (to use a Huck Finnism) that it ain’t so much of a challenge………….And, yes, like ALL of us, I eagerly await your next chapter.
superposition almost 5 years ago
It’s as though we have always been afraid of becoming a unified nation where federal laws will prevail over local laws and we are reluctant to send our best and brightest to work out compromises so mostly those who seek power and make empty promises end up in Congress.
LakeOrion almost 5 years ago
Noticed the map in the background…West Virginia wasn’t a state yet!
mourdac Premium Member almost 5 years ago
The U.S. would never have been formed if the slavery issue had been pressed during the founding. Southern colonies would not have signed any document outlawing slavery. That can had already been kicked many a mile by the time of the Civil War.
GaryCooper almost 5 years ago
Democrats win when they run as Democrats, not watered-down Republicans (or Whigs, back then).
Harry Truman said it: “When you give the American voters a choice between a Republican and a Republican, they’ll pick the Republican every time.”
Ignatz Premium Member almost 5 years ago
On the health insurance thing, though, I’m fine with “Medicare for everyone who wants it” instead of “Medicare for all” if that means it’s more likely to pass. And it works just fine in Europe. If people want to be ripped off by HMOs, let them. A public option will also force the private companies to provide better insurance.
Fenshaw almost 5 years ago
People are discussing “Medicare for All” as if it were a fixed and finite thing. Before any plan could go into effect, it will be ground in the mill and forced through the sieve of both houses.
lonecat almost 5 years ago
Delaney’s argument is not persuasive, and his comparison to social security is not particularly apt.
VegaAlopex almost 5 years ago
The slavery question just would not resolve itself. In the 1850’s, popular sovereignty was supposed to solve it. After Henry Clay died, Stephen Douglas thought it would solve the problem, but slowly it came apart: the Kansas-Nebraska Act, Bleeding Kansas, the Dred Scott decision, the caning of Sumner…. It also didn’t help that only mediocre men who stood for nothing were the only ones who could be president. So, I disagree with kicking the can in the cartoon. Each solution kept failing, intersectional institutions broke over the issue, and then finally the Democratic Party itself split in 1860. We were fortunate that Abraham Lincoln was there to step into such a divided situation. Of course, he looks so much better, for the presidents after him were no bargain either until Theodore Roosevelt.
Godfreydaniel almost 5 years ago
It’s hard to pan prospectors…………..BUT…………..c’mon, Brian, you can unearth historical nuggets so frequent (to use a Huck Finnism) that it ain’t so much of a challenge………….And, yes, like ALL of us, I eagerly await your next chapter.