The last of the open-minded liberals can see what’s coming:
That there are serious deficiencies and injustices in the U.S. healthcare system has been obvious for decades. To bring the poor and vulnerable into the fold has been a high ideal and an urgent goal for most Democrats. But this rigid, intrusive and grotesquely expensive bill is a nightmare. Holy Hygeia, why can’t my fellow Democrats see that the creation of another huge, inefficient federal bureaucracy would slow and disrupt the delivery of basic healthcare and subject us all to a labyrinthine mass of incompetent, unaccountable petty dictators? Massively expanding the number of healthcare consumers without making due provision for the production of more healthcare providers means that we’re hurtling toward a staggering logjam of de facto rationing. Steel yourself for the deafening screams from the careerist professional class of limousine liberals when they get stranded for hours in the jammed, jostling anterooms of doctors’ offices….
It’s as if liberals are starry-eyed dreamers lacking the elementary ability to project or predict the chaotic and destabilizing practical consequences of their utopian fantasies.
Well, yeah, that last description sums it up accurately enough. I haven’t written much about Obamacare for much the same reason that I don’t write about driving into trees. There’s simply not much to say beyond the fact that it’s a really bad idea, it’s expensive, destructive, and runs high risk of getting people killed. As I told one radio interviewer today, the health care act and the cap-and-trade carbon emissions program are both likely to have a more negative effect on the U.S. economy than the infamous Smoot-Hawley tariff ever did.
And, of course, I can’t disagree with La Paglia’s characterization of Richard Dawkins as an overrated psychotic. One certainly does wonder “what drives obsessive denigrators of religion”, especially in light of the indisputable evidence that it is not and has never been a primary source of human conflict.