Juan Williams, a realiable voice of liberalism, has a piece out today predicting that Republican opposition to Obamacare will drag down the GOP unless it offers a clear alternative. According to Williams, the push against Obamacare will just be "white noise" by November, a campaign which Americans will ignore unless they are given a better choice. So is Williams' point valid? Not really. It is based upon an oft-used liberal argument which is totally false. What the liberals do is to assume that their goal is universally accepted and then make the argument about the best way to achieve that goal. It is a tactic that may work if one does not think clearly about an issue, but it melts away quickly once the issue is clearly considered.
Let's expand this in the context of the Obamacare arguments. It seems pretty clear that nearly all Americans (aside from some Christian Scientists) agree that it would be a good thing for everyone to receive better and less expensive medical care. When it came to Obamacare, however, the liberals changed that; they decided that the goal would now be to get more people health insurance. Indeed, that is the whole focus of Obamacare; it deals with insurance rather than with healthcare itself. And it certainly does not consider cost reductions in any real way. Just think how many times we have been told about the 47 million uninsured Americans as the reason why we all need Obamacare. The Democrats have their plan supposedly to expand insurance coverage; it is Obamacare. Their media friends like Juan Williams now say that the Republicans need a counter plan if they are ever to succeed. For Williams and his ilk, there is no reason to consider if additional insurance will provide medical care for more people, improve the care received by those who already get it or reduce the overall cost of medical care for the country. From what Obamacare has already produced, we find that costs have risen, the quality of care has fallen, and there is no major increase (if any) in the number of folks who get medical care. The rise in premiums is staggering for many. Millions are losing access to their doctors and hospitals. Because of cancellations, there is not even an increase in the number of insured and certainly no increase in the availability of medical care. The truth is that Obamacare has actually moved America away from the true goal. No wonder the liberals don't want to talk about it.
The reality is that opposition to Obamacare is a very good thing. The Republicans will need to explain the reason for their opposition, but if they do, Americans will understand. People will understand that a program that makes things worse does not need an alternative other than repeal.
This sort of argument is one that the Democrats use often. We are told that Republicans have to have an alternative to government anti-poverty programs that do not work. Of course, that ignores the real issue. The question is how can society best reduce poverty; it is not what sort of government program works best in that effort. It may well be that the government does not function well and that private efforts would work far better. We are also told that Republicans need to explain what sort of government regulation of business would work better than the mess produced by the Democrats. Here too, the assumption is that heavy regulation is a given. The idea of reducing regulations is not even considered. Even on Obama's new favorite subject of income inequality, the debate is supposed to center on what action the government should take to reduce the inequality. The Democrats just want to talk about how the government should act, not if the government should act. The idea that the best way to promote higher income for all is through the private sector does not even make it into the consciousness of the liberals.
With the entire liberal media establishment afflicted with the "unthinking disease" whereby they just assume the goal rather than debating it, it is not an easy task for the GOP to get its arguments out to the public, but it can be done. Hopefully, this year, they will not buy into the illogical nonsense being pushed by libs like Williams.
Let's expand this in the context of the Obamacare arguments. It seems pretty clear that nearly all Americans (aside from some Christian Scientists) agree that it would be a good thing for everyone to receive better and less expensive medical care. When it came to Obamacare, however, the liberals changed that; they decided that the goal would now be to get more people health insurance. Indeed, that is the whole focus of Obamacare; it deals with insurance rather than with healthcare itself. And it certainly does not consider cost reductions in any real way. Just think how many times we have been told about the 47 million uninsured Americans as the reason why we all need Obamacare. The Democrats have their plan supposedly to expand insurance coverage; it is Obamacare. Their media friends like Juan Williams now say that the Republicans need a counter plan if they are ever to succeed. For Williams and his ilk, there is no reason to consider if additional insurance will provide medical care for more people, improve the care received by those who already get it or reduce the overall cost of medical care for the country. From what Obamacare has already produced, we find that costs have risen, the quality of care has fallen, and there is no major increase (if any) in the number of folks who get medical care. The rise in premiums is staggering for many. Millions are losing access to their doctors and hospitals. Because of cancellations, there is not even an increase in the number of insured and certainly no increase in the availability of medical care. The truth is that Obamacare has actually moved America away from the true goal. No wonder the liberals don't want to talk about it.
The reality is that opposition to Obamacare is a very good thing. The Republicans will need to explain the reason for their opposition, but if they do, Americans will understand. People will understand that a program that makes things worse does not need an alternative other than repeal.
This sort of argument is one that the Democrats use often. We are told that Republicans have to have an alternative to government anti-poverty programs that do not work. Of course, that ignores the real issue. The question is how can society best reduce poverty; it is not what sort of government program works best in that effort. It may well be that the government does not function well and that private efforts would work far better. We are also told that Republicans need to explain what sort of government regulation of business would work better than the mess produced by the Democrats. Here too, the assumption is that heavy regulation is a given. The idea of reducing regulations is not even considered. Even on Obama's new favorite subject of income inequality, the debate is supposed to center on what action the government should take to reduce the inequality. The Democrats just want to talk about how the government should act, not if the government should act. The idea that the best way to promote higher income for all is through the private sector does not even make it into the consciousness of the liberals.
With the entire liberal media establishment afflicted with the "unthinking disease" whereby they just assume the goal rather than debating it, it is not an easy task for the GOP to get its arguments out to the public, but it can be done. Hopefully, this year, they will not buy into the illogical nonsense being pushed by libs like Williams.
No comments:
Post a Comment