An Ethos
Nihilists! F##k me. I mean, say what you like about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it's an ethos.
-Walter Sobchak
At corrente, I wrote a guest post on developing a blogosphere ethos. I won't repeat it here, but I want to put a question to supporters of the Clinton/Edwards vision of a mandate for universal health care. Suppose for a moment that Barack Obama changed his position (aka flip flopped) on the issue and embraced mandates. Would you consider that a good thing?
A corollary to the question, what if he changed his position due to political pressure as opposed to a good faith change of mind - would that make a difference? To understand why I ask these questions, read my post at corrente.
Speaking for me only
- Original article
- FILED UNDER: Guest Blogger
- July 3, 2008
I would feel that the important part of his commitment
was to healthcare for all. How that is achieved is a mere detail. Call it pressure or call it reason, I'd call it a good thing.
Flip-flopping is so passe
Now that the right is suffering from the pangs of "flip-flopping", of course the right would be exempt! Read Ruth Marcus' piece in the Washington Post, yesterday (7-1-08). She belongs to the school of "if they do it it's VERY bad, but if WE do it, there's some kind of excuse".
IOKIYAR.
If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error. ~~~John Kenneth Galbraith