Probed by a Preposition

.
This is what I meant when I said the Democrats are not doing this FOR America--they're doing it TO America.
.


At the heart of this issue is not only a political division and policy/process disagreements; there is a simple but crucial PHILOSOPHICAL difference between the ideologues pushing this reform and the majority of Americans who are firmly against it. Many of the people against it don't even know why they feel in their gut that it will be a disaster, but I believe the reason rests in this basic question:

What is a RIGHT? Nancy Pelosi has said she will not stop until we remove all doubt that health care is a right and not a privilege (quote is at the 1.30 mark of that clip). Obama himself has said the same. When asked by Tom Brokaw in a Presidential Debate in the fall of 2008, "Is health care a privilege a right or a responsibility?” Obama said "In a nation as wealthy as ours it should be a right."

Noting could be further from the truth. Rights have nothing to do with wealth. In fact, things based upon wealth (purchasing power), by definition, are privileges not rights. If it takes money to make something a reality, that thing is not a right. True RIGHTS are inherent and equally held by all.

It is only when a culture has lost its way in the big unfolding epic drama of life that they fear death and disease and believe that somehow wealth or status can banish it from a nation or a select citizenship. That will never happen no matter how much money we throw at it, but if we falsely call health care a RIGHT, liberals can take all manner of liberties in forcing upon their subjects. Health care is a privilege. Call it what it is. And when we can afford to extend some form of it to as many people as possible, regardless of their wealth, we could as a nation choose to distribute it to those who do not have it by charging those who do. But if we do that, let's call it what it is: redistribution of wealth, or socialism. That is not a swear word; it's a world view. If that's what the nation wants to do, let's talk about it in proper terms. But when you call goods and services that require wealth to purchase a RIGHT, you are beginning the debate on a false premise. If it requires money, it is not a RIGHT.

I used to teach English literature, and our 9th Grade text included Edgar Allan Poe's "The Masque of the Red Death," a story about some revelers at a rich man's home enjoying a masquerade ball while the world around them, beyond the walled estate, perished in a plague called the red death. I won't tell you how the story ends, but I will say it is a useful metaphor of a nation that believes health care is the shared RIGHT of defeating death and disease by pouring untold billions of dollars on them.

I'm not suggesting that it is wrong to try to cure the brokenness of our world; I'm not saying it's wrong to use wealth in that struggle; I'm suggesting the fact that it requires wealth proves it is a privilege not a RIGHT. When a nation mistakenly confuses PRIVILEGES with RIGHTS they are foolishly willing to go deep in debt to ensure they are equally shared (since they are "a wealthy nation"). But actually they cannot afford spread such privilege, so to pretend they can afford it; they borrow hundreds of billions of dollars from a nation like China, a nation that knows health care is not a RIGHT. How do they know this? Because there are more people in China without access to basic medical needs (who do not live within 200 miles of a hospital) than the entire population of United States of America. How arrogant is it for the "wealthy" to proclaim healthcare as a basic human RIGHT while they are indebted to nations whose people don't even have it as a privilege? As the U.S. becomes biggest moocher (taking on debts we can never pay back) in the history of the world, it cannot afford to begin making up RIGHTS that never existed.

No thank you, Pelosi and company, I content with the RIGHTS this nation was founded upon. Those are timeless RIGHTS; they existed millennia before we did as a nation; they have been denied and gained by countless tribes and nations through the centuries; but never were they purchased with mere money. The defining aspects of items most worthy of the Bill of Rights is that they do not come with a bill. They may require blood and sweat and tears to defend, but they do not require wealth or its redistribution to be equally held by all.

While looking for the Pelosi quote link, I found this. My thoughts were written before seeing it on TV or Youtube, but it does support my thoughts and is said with more authority from the judge.



If the Democrats continue to force this misguided legislation in crevasses where it's not welcome, if they keep probing with the prepostion and insist on doing things TO us whether we want it or not, the voters will kick and kick hard in November.

Here is what Pat Caddell of the Washington Post says about it.