They never learn

| May 30, 2007

The Democrats are heading towards their socialist roots again. At least during the 2004 campaign, John Kerry gave the impression that he was concerned about our national security. But since Kerry’s defeat, the Democrats have decided that the American people will never elect their candidates to national office as long as there’s a war going on – so they act as if there is no war.

Jackie Calmes in the Wall Street Journal writes that the Democrats no longer fear mentioning their plans to inflict a national health care system on us;

 Now, the growing list of Democratic presidential candidates calling for universal, cheaper coverage — Illinois Sen. Barack Obama yesterday became the latest — suggests the days of health-care incrementalism are over. Nor are these Democrats alone in embracing the once-toxic political cause of universal care: The best-known state models have been championed by Republican governors, including Mitt Romney of Massachusetts, who is now running for president.

This shift reflects rising and inflation-topping out-of-pocket costs for health care and insurance premiums, co-payments and deductibles. Also, the number of uninsured has spiked to about 45 million, from 37 million when Mr. Clinton was president. Business leaders increasingly are seeking a government-imposed solution, saying employee health costs put them at a disadvantage with foreign competitors.

Those forces, in turn, have combined to embolden politicians in both parties to once again propose universal health care that inevitably would mean a big role for government — and possibly upend the powerful insurance, medical and pharmaceutical industries.

Never mind that national healthcare systems are undoing the economies of Old Europe, nevermind that Canadians are flocking across our borders for neccessary health treatments that their government can’t provide in a timely manner. Nevermind that States are more easily able to tailor a healthcare system for their own people’s needs better than a huge, uncaring bureaocracy in Washington could ever provide.

And how does Obama plan on funding this healthcare plan of his? Why, it’s easy – just roll back the Bush tax cuts on the rich. I wonder how many of us who consider ourselves middleclass will suddenly find ourselves among the rich when his plan is launched.

Think Hillary learned a lesson about proposing her national healthcare system back in 1993? She thinks so;

Now, as Mrs. Clinton campaigns for president, a staple of her speeches is a self-deprecating nod to the scars she bears from that fight — and assurance that, as she puts it, “I know what not to do.”

But healthcare isn’t the only bugaboo looming on the Democrat’s horizon. Hillary is coming for our wallets, too, according to an AP story;

The Democratic senator said what the Bush administration touts as an ownership society really is an “on your own” society that has widened the gap between rich and poor.

“I prefer a ‘we’re all in it together’ society,” she said. “I believe our government can once again work for all Americans. It can promote the great American tradition of opportunity for all and special privileges for none.”

That means pairing growth with fairness, she said, to ensure that the middle-class succeeds in the global economy, not just corporate CEOs.

“Fairness” is a Democrat code word for increased taxes on the middle class. Taxes and growth are not words usually paired, so she replaced the word “taxes” with the word “fairness”.

Ownership – that’s one of the reasons we warred against the King of England in the 18th Century. Now, we’re supposed to trade our personal property for the good of all. I’m sure this resonates well with the lazy people in the country – the people who squandered their equal opportunities to be productive.

But here’s Clinton’s punchline;

Clinton also said she would help people save more money by expanding and simplifying the earned income tax credit….

See? Clinton is insinuating that all money belongs to the government, so Clinton is going to help you save money by giving you back more of the money that the government took from you. I’m sure she got a big round of applause for that one. Especially up there in State-tax-free New Hampshire.

Remember when her husband promised us a middleclass tax cut in the 1992 election campaign? I’m still waiting for it. All of his targeted tax cuts weren’t targeted at a family of five with two parents working, apparently. It took me ten years to completely recover from Clinton’s tax policies.

Category: Economy, Politics, Society

1 Comment
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
thegentlecricket

California has repeatedly attempted (and continues) to institute socialized medicine. I’ve blogged about it ad nauseum. It’s folly to assume that socialized medical care is a viable option. It will stifle progress, restrict access, force government to make moral decisions on who deserves care, restrict the market and practices of physicians, and all at overwhelmingly burdensome costs to taxpayers.