The Washington Times points out a
difference of opinion on the part of two well-known Republicans concerning how
best to deactivate Obamacare. Both seem to agree that Obamacare is
disadvantageous, because it reduces individual responsibility and is financially
destructive to the country.
Sen. Cruz (Texas) takes the position that Obamacare should be defunded now before the mandates fully take place. He says that when the mandates take place, there will be so many benefits to the average person that it will be impossible to have the average person give up those benefits by repealing the law.
Republican strategist Dick Morris prefers to have the full mandates go into effect, at which time the people will see the fallacies of the law and demand its repeal.
It seems strange to me that in spite of benefits to the average person, a poll shows that most Americans now oppose Obamacare. Our society is loaded with free-stuff advocates. There are those in government, who offer free-stuff in exchange for votes to keep them in power, and there are those persons who like the free-stuff without thought of any other costs. On average, the free-stuff philosophy to maintain power and establish further control over the population has gained ground over the past 50 years, compared to the ideology of what may be good for the country.
In view of that, I am a supporter of Sen. Cruz's position. The free-stuff majority will control the votes, and if they get a taste of the free-stuff mandates in Obamacare, it will be impossible to convince them to give those up in favor of the good of the country. In other words try to avoid the populace getting hooked on the "heroin content" of Obamacare.
The problem with Dick Morris' suggestion is that the free-stuff populace will get hooked on the "heroin content" of Obamacare, and will not want to give that up. Since the free-stuff block will control the votes on reelection of Congress, those Congressional members up for reelection will be in no position to try to do what is good for the country. They will be interested essentially in maintaining their jobs and their power and will make no effort to repeal Obamacare.
Sen. Cruz (Texas) takes the position that Obamacare should be defunded now before the mandates fully take place. He says that when the mandates take place, there will be so many benefits to the average person that it will be impossible to have the average person give up those benefits by repealing the law.
Republican strategist Dick Morris prefers to have the full mandates go into effect, at which time the people will see the fallacies of the law and demand its repeal.
It seems strange to me that in spite of benefits to the average person, a poll shows that most Americans now oppose Obamacare. Our society is loaded with free-stuff advocates. There are those in government, who offer free-stuff in exchange for votes to keep them in power, and there are those persons who like the free-stuff without thought of any other costs. On average, the free-stuff philosophy to maintain power and establish further control over the population has gained ground over the past 50 years, compared to the ideology of what may be good for the country.
In view of that, I am a supporter of Sen. Cruz's position. The free-stuff majority will control the votes, and if they get a taste of the free-stuff mandates in Obamacare, it will be impossible to convince them to give those up in favor of the good of the country. In other words try to avoid the populace getting hooked on the "heroin content" of Obamacare.
The problem with Dick Morris' suggestion is that the free-stuff populace will get hooked on the "heroin content" of Obamacare, and will not want to give that up. Since the free-stuff block will control the votes on reelection of Congress, those Congressional members up for reelection will be in no position to try to do what is good for the country. They will be interested essentially in maintaining their jobs and their power and will make no effort to repeal Obamacare.
No comments:
Post a Comment