Charlie Rangel & The Democrat Time Machine

“We have tens of thousands of people trying to get healthcare. We had hoped that it would be much smoother for them to apply. It didn’t work with Social Security the first time it was rolled out, Medicare the first time it was rolled out, President Bush’s section D for prescription drugs. Ya know, I just can’t believe that the Republicans have this obsession to destroy a plan that would provide healthcare.” – Democrat Rep Charlie Rangel

This argument, the one in the quote above, is a perfect example of how the Left argues. When confronted with a severe problem—or anything that contradicts their worldview or makes the look bad—Liberals deflect. But what makes their deflections so special is that they take many forms. The most classic form, the form that comes programmed with every Liberal robot, is the “Well, it happened before!” deflection. I call this the “Time Machine” argument because it invariably recalls a time in the past when something similar happened, but eventually was accepted as the norm.

Using the time machine argument, the Liberal accomplishes three things. First, the argument makes the Liberal appear as though they are well-rounded students of history, reflecting wisely on the past in a way that we cannot possibly understand. Second, it effectively changes the topic of the conversation, generally ending the segment, prompting the interviewer to move on to another question. Third, it creates the illusion that the two compared issues share similarities, when they absolutely do not.

Speaking to the third item on the list, Liberals love to make connections that do not exist. Let’s say that a teenager gets a bad report card, and his parents reprimand him. The teenager then replies that things can only get better because his friend Charlie is really smart. One has absolutely nothing to do with the other, but that is exactly what Liberals do all the time. Comparing Social Security with Obamacare means nothing. First, they are entirely different programs, designed to function differently. Second, am I supposed to believe that because one ended up working out (not really), the other will too? How can I be assured of that? They were not drafted by the same people, they were not implemented by the same people, and they are not similar in nearly any way. Where’s the connective tissue? Third—and most importantly—Obamacare is bad legislation! From its inception, Obamacare was designed to fail. It is based on numerous other socialized medical schemes that have all failed. Every last one. Something that is designed to fail cannot and will not succeed simply by giving it time.

While the time machine argument is extremely useful—mainly because low-information voters don’t think too deeply—it is completely invalid, especially in regard to Obamacare. Add this to the long list of blame-game tactics that the Left is using to make the Obamacare disaster look less like it was their fault.