Everyone has heard the saying, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." Is that how we end up with an alliance between someone who claims to care and fight for progressive causes and someone who wants to shrink the government small enough to put it in a bathtub and drown it (aka Grover Norquist)?
Who is the enemy in this case? Is it healthcare reform? Is it President Obama? Is it any democrat who won't vote the way people at Fire Dog Lake want (ie, against this bill)? Do we really want to throw out the Bernie Sanderses of Congress--who support a public option--because they've decided to throw in the towel and make do with what they feel is the best that they will get?
I've seen several arguments tonight suggesting that it's okay to form alliances with one's foes to oppose a great evil or fight for a common good.
Someone suggested uniting with Norquist was like uniting with Stalin to fight Nazism. Is this healthcare bill really the equivalent of Nazism?
I personally don't feel as offended by this rather lame healthcare bill as I do by Nazism. I would not ally with Stalin to fight this healthcare bill.
I would argue that it's okay to form alliances with an "evil" to fight an even greater evil. In other words, if we were working with someone like Grover Norquist to fight against religious persecution, I might be okay with that.
But Grover Norquist is worse than this healthcare bill. Fox and Friends is worse than this healthcare bill. This is like working with a hitman to take out a cop who writes you an unfair ticket. The hitman just hates cops and wants to make some money, and you just don't want the ticket.
In other words, you do not share goals.
Grover Norquist does not want a healthcare bill with a public option. He is happy to take advantage of any progressive who will help him achieve his goal--to kill healthcare reform. He doesn't just want to kill this bill. He wants to kill ALL the bills that we might find acceptable.
He also wants to see Obama lose this issue and lose the next election. He wants to see democrats lose seats in 2010 and Republicans regain power. You know, those guys who have voted unanimously against any public option and who promised to repeal one should it manage to squeak past.
Fire Dog Lake does not have a common cause with Grover Norquist.
Having a common cause with someone means that you ultimately have the same goals. For instance, we could have worked with John McCain against torture (another example given) because we share the common goal of getting rid of torture.
We can work with Lindsey Graham on cap and trade because we are sharing the common goal of improving our environment.
We do not share a common goal with people like Grover Norquist of getting a decent healthcare reform bill and continuing to elect more progressives.
I do not like this healthcare bill. I am disappointed in many democrats who are supporting it or who are allowing people like Lieberman and Nelson to have their way at the expense of the American people.
I won't go so far as to say I don't want it to pass. I believe it does a few good things, and if civil rights legislation is any example, I believe it can be fixed--as long as we don't ensure that Republicans become the majority next go around.
I will say that I am not a one-issue voter; I am not willing to join my enemies to try to spill the blood of those who are usually my friends, like Bernie Sanders, a senator I have long admired.
I will not hold hands with the likes of Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Michelle Bachmann, Sarah Palin, or Grover Norquist unless we are (1) fighting for precisely the same thing; and (2) the thing we are fighting against is an even worse scourge than they are.
I will fight Nazis with Stalin. I would not have joined Osama bin Laden to fight against the Bush tax cuts.