I quite recently overheard a man in the throes of ecstasy over his own particular brand genius as he prattled on about the constitutional requirement of the US government to provide health care for all. It was simple, said he. The government is mandated to promote the general welfare for We the People. It's in the Preamble of the Constitution. The government, therefore, not only has the moral authority to end the health inequality that comes about from social and economic disparities, it has the obligation because such discrepancies offend the human right to health.
Human right to health. And I'll tell you, that's a new one on me. In an era when we can barely be bothered with the human right to life, how did we manage to stumble upon the human right to health? Heaven help us if the federal government really did have the authority to guarantee equal health for all. Having witnessed the effects of government solutions for wealth disparity, can you even fathom the ramifications of requiring health equity? The way the Democrat Party goes about its manifest destiny of fairness, government would end up poking out everyone's eyes to make sure we all had the same level of vision.
So I heard this dialogue and I walked away not knowing whether to weep for the dilapidated state of the American education system that could produce citizens with so little understanding of liberty or laugh at his particularly determined misunderstanding of the term welfare as meaning an entitlement program.
The fifth purpose [of the Preamble of the US Constitution], to "promote the general Welfare," had a generally understood meaning at the time of the Constitution. The concept will be developed fully in the discussion of the Spending Clause of Article I, Section 8, but a few comments are germane here. The salient point is that its implications are negative, not positive—a limitation on power, not a grant of power. By definition "general" means applicable to the whole rather than to particular parts or special interests.
That somehow the US Government has a legal obligation to restrict the liberty of the many in order to provide subpar social services for the few is completely ludicrous. Sadly, this provides no solace in the face of our current health care debacle. By colonial standards, Obamacare and the displacement of otherwise happily insured Americans would be an act of war. Wishing otherwise is a form of self-delusion that could only be managed and sustained by those who actually thought their insurance costs could be reduced by an administration that has no expertise in health care or apparently economics.
Now, we all recognize the contributions of those great moderates found fence-sitting throughout the history of this country. The pacifiers who would not stand against the inherent evils of slavery were merely prolonging the rationalizations common in the popular opinions of the day. At the time, they believed they were heroes who were preventing war. They saw themselves as great mediators. But answer me this: Does history recognize the moderates of the pre-Civil War era as heroes? No. History rightly acknowledges them as cowardly dupes because they could have stopped evil and did nothing.
And then there are those who deliberately, consciously exercise control over their fellow Americans...always with the confidence that the people they command are better off with them in charge. They do so with an intemperate boot upon the throats of the just who understand the responsibility of preserving liberty for future generations. But what is liberty for a woman who has to pay for her own abortifacients. How can she really be free if she must live in fear of the condom breaking?
So specious. So frivolous. Ours is a generation of indifference – we live in a time of reluctance to assert one's legitimate parity with those who will not recognize the government's natural limitations on forced redistribution. History tells us that this only forestalls and exacerbates the disagreement.
Ladies and gentlemen, I offer you the poster child for the Left's callousness:
Get over it? That's Jan Schakowski's advice to people who are vehemently opposed to this unprecedented and utterly chaotic power grab that has left millions upon millions of Americans with insurance coverage that is twice as expensive and half as effective as what they were managing to purchase without the government exchanges. Millions upon millions of Americans exiled and floundering in government's better solution, but we need to get over it?
Might I suggest that we need only put a screen shot of Healthcare.gov side by side with this Sister of Smug to illustrate what the Tea Party has been saying from the moment that Barack Obama took office? Jan Schakowski won't be herded on the cattle cars of government exchanges along with you and me, my friends. She holds a position of great importance and doesn't have to buy into the nightmare that has been designed for us, so what the hell does she care if the program works? You don't like it? Get over it.
"Let them eat cake," hardly covers the arrogance. When sanity returns as it always does and we begin reconstruction of our broken nation, I pray history will remember her words with the scorn that they deserve.
So tell me this, does John Boehner see the wretchedness of Jan Schakowski's flagrant contempt? Alas, I smell the familiar stench of appeasement in the air. The RINOs thirst for negotiation with regulatory bullies. The party moderates find themselves once again in the unenviable position of assisting Democrats in the promotion of slavery. But this time round, those moderates are welcomed as part of an elite and untouchable ruling class that can exclude itself from the plutocratic insanity that they have thrust upon citizens. Healthcare.gov attempts to create a permanent caste system that is extensive and unprecedented in American history. The RINOs are as always a party to the Left's discrimination.
It is time - time for the RINO population to acquiesce to the growing discontent within the voting population. We must repeal and replace Obamacare and we can affect a change which will benefit all future generations. We can stand for justice in the face of an organized opposition. The moment of truth is upon us. Get over it? I think not.