Today's zen meditation
Consider this paradoxical question:
Why do Americans of the Left who, citing moral principles, abhor the human rights violations of Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, to the point of using such examples as a rallying point for indicting America itself and pulling out of a war--
Why do Americans of the Left who decry (to the point of calling for the impeachment of a President and Vice-President) the invasion of privacy and erosion of Constitutionally protected rights supposedly brought on by the Patriot Act--
Why do they then call for, approve of, and embrace social programs and mandated health care programs nowhere contained in or supported by the Constitution that reduce the freedoms, invade the privacy, and increase the intrusive nose of government for themselves and their fellow Americans? Is it because coercion masquerading as charity (decided by whom? and involuntarily paid for by whom?) makes the violation of human and Constitutional rights okay?
If it is wrong to coerce prisoners of war, and wrong to wiretap U.S. citizens' phone calls, why isn't it wrong and an invasion of privacy and Constitutional rights to force the purchase of health insurance and force employers to provide it? ("Is John Edwards going to criminalize your choice to opt out of health care insurance?") Why isn't it wrong to become a monopolistic dispenser of health care?
For the first time, the word "no" would come into our system. Do you need open heart surgery? Are you a poor risk because of smoking or diabetes or age? No longer would the bureaucrat at the other end of the phone say "we won't pay for it" or "you don't need it" or "we can't fit you in at our facility." The answer would simply be no — even if you pay for it yourself, you may not have one. It is this type of coercion that drives Canadians over the border to the U.S. in search of medical options denied them at home under their socialized medical structure. Now it would operate on both sides of the border.
Talk among yourselves.
Labels: socialized health care