Posted by
voice_of_reason on Thursday, February 07, 2008 7:26:49 AM
In a recent debate on the topic of Universal Health Care, Barack Obama asked Hillary Clinton a question:
"You can mandate it but there will still be people who can't afford it. And if they can't afford it, what are you going to fine them? Are you going to garnish their wages?"
Hillary ducked the question at the debate, preferring to filibuster the issue by mouthing platitudes (to partisan applause), including gems such as "
Universal Health Care is a core Democratic value" until the clock ran out! Later, on the ABC program "This Week", when pressed on the question of mandates she conceded that "
we will have an enforcement mechanism" including ""
you know, going after people's wages."
Barack's side is playing up the 'difference' between his soft, benign mandate (applicable
only to children), and evoking images of Hillary's thugs garnishing the wages of the healthy middle-class folks who
choose not to buy health insurance.
Voters should realize that all Government programs - even those with warm, fuzzy-sounding goals - require a Govt enforcer. Somewhere behind all the largesse is a squad of Jackbooted Thugs, who will take away your money, or, if you protest, your freedom. But who, exactly, is the target of these gun-toting Thugs?
For an understanding of this, I recommend the book "The Forgotten Man" by Amity Shlaes.
This book is a must-read, not just for conservatives, but for all ..
You may be asking "who is the Forgotten Man"?
Imagine that a person 'A' observes that a person (or group) 'X' is suffering. A goes to B and together A & B conjure up a noble, societal scheme to help X.
If you are a conservative, you will understand that there is a person 'C', the Forgotten Man, who is paying for the 'noble' intentions of A and B. Unfortunately, C was never consulted, but has to silently sacrifice his interests on the altar of A and B's grandiose schemes.
To a Leftist, the rhetoric is all about X. Whether A and B are well-intentioned, or only in it for their self-aggrandizement. C does not exist - or, if he does, he exists only to be turned into the villain of the piece.
In the introduction to this book, Amity Shlaes tells of how FDR used the phrase "The Forgotten Man" in one of his first famous radio speeches - but neglected to use it in the proper context as was intended by William Sumner, the original author of the analogy.
In FDR's speech, the forgotten man label was switched from "C" to 'X', the supposed victim of societal inequity! And FDR was elected, then re-elected, then re-elected ..
Incidentally, Amity Shlaes doesn't spare the Hoover administration (that preceded FDR) either!
In case you have any doubts, the Jackbooted Thugs are directed at "C", the forgotten man. And, unless you are one of the "X" who lives by siphoning from the Govt trough, that means YOU!
Barack or Hillary may ascend to the Presidency, helped by those who think (mistakenly) that Government can (or should) correct economic inequities - whether real or perceived. Once their plans to help "X" are put into effect, the freedom of the majority is diminished.