02 April 2010
A note to the media race baiters
You, along with all of the other progressive liberals, are afraid to discuss the real issue and find it much easier to play the Wallace, Duke, KKK, racist card instead of talking about the real issue here, slavery. The health care bill, along with its 1964 counterpart Medicare/Medicaid, are clear violations of the 13th Amendment of the Constitution. Whenever the product of another individual's labor is referred to as a "right", slavery is imminent. This bill forces the healthy and able to take care of the unhealthy and unable, it forces doctors to take government mandated payment amounts (say it with me, "wage controls"), and best of all, it forces individuals to purchase a certain level of health care or faces fines and imprisonment. That sounds like a 13th Amendment violation to me. Oh, wait, you are a progressive liberal which means that even though you talk a lot about rights, you have probably never read the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence, so let me help you out;
13th Amendment, Ratified 1865, Section 1 reads: "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."
Which part of what I mentioned above is not a violation of that law? What crime have I committed such that this does not apply? It is, as Ayn Rand puts it so eloquently, "punishment of the able for being able". Your comparison to the Civil Rights movement of the 1960's and the resulting legislation is not only incorrect, it is intellectually lazy. The movement in the 1960's was about true injustice and the legislation was to prevent one individual from infringing on another individual's right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness based on the color of their skin. That is very different from demanding that individuals purchase a product whether they want to or not. Note: I have consciously chosen not to elaborate on all of the government violations of private property rights associated with the Civil Rights Act, which had severe issues of its own.
By the way, before you even attempt it, this is not the same as automobile liability coverage. Those rules are in place to guarantee that, in the event of an accident, you have the financial ability to cover damage that has been done to another individual and/or their property. The more abstract way to look at it is that it is coverage to guarantee that you have the ability to compensate another individual when you accidentally violate their rights. That, sir, is the appropriate role of government, to protect the individual's rights. While I am enhancing your education, a couple of more general points; 1) The only indivisible minority is the individual, 2) There is no such thing as collective rights, only a collection of individual's rights, and 3) Racism is the most basic form of collectivism, which is why progressive liberals will not let it die, it plays right into their overall agenda.
If you want predictions of how this all eventually plays out, read Kurt Vonnegut's "Harrison Bergeron" or Logan's Run by William F. Nolan and George Clayton Johnson. While you are at it, read William Graham Sumner's What Social Classes Owe to Each Other and Herbert Spencer's Man vs. the State. Those might have a chance of curing you of the social disease whose classical symptom is punishment of the most able.