It’s not every day that an article from The Washington Post provides me any insight. But this one sure did, even if from the predictably wrong direction.
Redistribution of wealth — one of the most radioactive subjects in American politics — has moved from being a subtext in the national debate over health care to being the core of it.
Redistribution of wealth is THE issue in the health care debate. Democrats, unlike Republicans, do not shy away from the topic. Democrats unequivocally stand for the redistribution of wealth. They maintain that if you have more than your neighbor, then that extra amount belongs to your neighbor — not to you. Government’s job, according to Democrats, is to take from those who have more and give to those who have less. They don’t call it theft; they call it justice.
That’s what Obamacare depends on. Those who have less money — or no health insurance — are entitled to the property and earnings of those who have more money. That’s why premiums have skyrocketed under Obamacare, and why Democrats have no problem with this fact. In their mind, it’s justice. Those paying more premiums should have to do so, in order for people with less money or no insurance to get the medical care to which they’re allegedly entitled.
What do Republicans, represented by party officials like Paul Ryan, stand for? They’d rather not say. In order to appease their free market constituents, they claim to stand for “choice, market solutions, private options.” In order to take the side of the social justice warriors they’d rather not alienate or challenge, in practice they have given us a faux repeal of Obamacare while keeping 80 to 90 percent of its provisions in place — including its worst, most socialistic elements.
Republicans like Paul Ryan are not merely “RINOs” (Republicans-in-name-only.) They’re far worse than that. They’re the moral equivalent of weenies. But normally being a weenie only hurts yourself. In this case, they’re bringing down all of American health care and squandering America’s only (and probably last) opportunity to bring a free market to medicine.
You’d think that the opposing party — the Republicans — would take the opposite stance of their opponents. You’d think that if Democrats stand unequivocally for the redistribution of wealth, and therefore favor Obamacare, that Republicans — who supposedly oppose Obamacare — would stand unequivocally for the idea that your money and property belong to you, and not to the state. But that’s obviously not how it works, and Republicans like Paul Ryan, who rolled out “Obamcare 2.0” for us, have once again proven the point.
What makes the latest health-care battle different from past ones is that it is not about building a new government program. This time, the question is whether to abolish one — and replace it with something else.
That means it is harder to gloss over a bedrock philosophical and ideological question that has always been in the background of any argument about the government’s role in health care: What is the minimum that society should provide for its poorest, most vulnerable citizens, and how much should be taken from the rich and powerful to do it?
Notice how the socialistic, Democratic Washington Post phrases the question: What should society do to help the poor? Evaded in this question is the fact that “society” consists of real people. These real people either have equal individual rights under the Constitution, or they do not. If they do have rights under the Constitution, the government has no business forcing them to pay higher premiums or more taxes so that others may have health care for “free.” If they do not have rights, then the people in favor of socialized medicine should say so. The Democrats pretty much acknowledge that. They are all socialists bordering on Communists.
Republicans, however, try to have it both ways. In theory they claim to favor free markets and “the Constitution” (individual rights), but in practice they promote precisely the opposite. Republicans claim to understand that free markets bring justice and rationality to all fields where they’re permitted to function. However, when it comes time to honor and support that knowledge, they duck and evade it every single time.
Like all liars, establishment Republicans think the rest of us are not paying attention. Like all fraudsters, they think we are as gullible as they are. Like all criminals and sociopaths, they don’t really care. Paul Ryan is their shameful champion, the latest in a long line of betrayals when it comes to sacrificing freedom for the sake of power and popularity.
It’s up to those of us who do care, and who do notice, to make our voices heard. We don’t have to be the majority. Breitbart and other news sources suggest that the numbers don’t exist in the House of Representatives to give Paul Ryan his reaffirmation of Obamacare the ability to pass. I hope they’re right. Because we’re much better off doing nothing than passing this shameful, dishonest bill. If Donald Trump continues to take their side, his presidency will go down. And he will deserve it.
Follow Dr. Hurd on Facebook. Search under “Michael Hurd” (Rehoboth Beach DE). Get up-to-the-minute postings, recommended articles and links, and engage in back-and-forth discussion with Dr. Hurd on topics of interest. Also follow Dr. Hurd on Twitter at @MichaelJHurd1
Check out Dr. Hurd’s latest Newsmax Insider column here!
Dr. Hurd’s writings read on the air by Rush Limbaugh! Read more HERE.