It speaks to our failings as a society that Harry Reid could be pushed to resign for *saying some words* about Barack Obama, whereas the entire Republican party feels no compulsion to resign for, objectively speaking, consigning many thousands of uninsured poor people to die every year and resisting all attempts to improve the lives of the less fortunate.
It speaks to the Democratic Party’s failings that they don’t say this.
Steve Reads 
It’s funny, isn’t it. You establish a new society “to secure the blessings of liberty,” which means freedom, opportunity-over-security — the first order of business is to ensure that people enjoy some measure of independence from one another. Essentially, that if this guy over here wants to use an iPhone, eat strawberry ice cream and listen to country music, that guy over there can use a Droid, eat Rocky Road and listen to Heavy Metal.
When you establish a new society dedicated to keeping everybody fed, the first order of business is to get rid of this. Everyone has to be the same, same, same, same, same. Except, perhaps, the aristocrats that run it. The milk and apples need to be reserved for their exclusive use (Animal Farm reference).
People who value opportunity over security don’t really put a lot of priority on other people making the same decision. They find out about it…they recoil in disgust, mutter a few condemnatory phrases, vote against it when it’s about to affect them. That’s it. People who value security over opportunity, on the other hand, seem to have this need to control everybody else.
LikeLike
I don’t see how you read control into that. Offering poor people a low-cost health-insurance option has nothing to do with control.
LikeLike
0 Pingbacks