Saturday, April 3, 2010

Note To MD's: I'm Now "Entitled" To Your Services (Biden Said So)

By Austin Hill

Vice President Joe Biden did it again.

He reiterated what was once a central theme of Barack Obama’s presidential campaign, and what has been a central tenet of our government since Mr. Obama became President. And the idea is, simply, this: when government takes wealth away from certain individuals and groups, and gives it to certain other individuals and groups, such actions are NOT to be called “economic re-distribution.” Such actions are to be described as “fairness.”

Biden, of course, has been a government employee in Washington for nearly forty years. Along with drawing a six-figure annual salary that is paid-for with our tax dollars, he has also created for himself a history of embarrassing public gaffes and goofs. And crude as his behavior is at times, it is nonetheless difficult to dispute the entertainment value and amusement generated when Biden utters the “f-word” into an open microphone (as he did during the recent White House “healthcare bill” signing ceremony), or when he proclaims somebody’s mother to be dead when she’s actually still alive (as he did with the Prime Minister of Ireland during his White House visit last month).

But during his recent sit-down interview with the journalists at Yahoo! Finance, Biden behaved like a Vice President should, and expressed ideas that are supportive of, and consistent with, the President that he serves. The problem, however, is that the economic irrationality of the entire Obama Administration is an endangerment to American freedom. Thus Biden’s remarks served to further advance a very destructive agenda.

Responding to claims that President Obama’s “healthcare” agenda is a matter of economic re-distribution, Biden stated "it's a simple proposition to us: Everyone is entitled to adequate medical health care. If you call that a 'redistribution of income' -- well, so be it. I don't call it that. I call it just being fair -- giving the middle class taxpayers an even break that the wealthy have been getting."

The broader implications of this “fairness” theme are the crux of the matter. But let’s look carefully for a moment at these specific remarks from our Vice President.

It sounds compassionate for a politician to say “everyone is entitled to adequate medical health care,” but stop and consider the implications of this remark. Vice President Biden – along with President Obama and the majority of the members of the U.S. Congress – have confirmed in the minds of at least some portion of the American public that they are “entitled” to the services of another human being.

Those “other” human beings are, of course, Medical Doctors, people who invest huge chunks of their time and energy and often delay gratification of their personal lives for a decade or more and frequently incur enormous personal debt just earning the right to practice their craft. And now the U.S. federal government says that “the rest of us” are entitled to a piece of these select individuals. In previous generations, the idea of being entitled to the services of another person was called “slavery.” Can we really call this “fairness” today?

And notice how easily Vice President Biden, all within two sentences, seeks to sell the idea of Obamacare, with the implication that is balanced on the backs of “the rich.” By implying that somehow “rich people” have been getting an “unfair” advantage, he suggests that Obamacare gives “tax breaks” to the “middle class.”Of course, this is also a bunch of falsehoods. The richest of Americans already pay the majority of the nation’s taxes. And Obamacare is loaded with new taxes that will impact all Americans– new taxes on personal income, new taxes on medication and medical device purchases, even new taxes on wheelchair purchases (apparently the wheelchair-bound population is small enough that it is politically “safe” to punish them).

But thinking about this situation more broadly, one has to ask “what is fair?” Is it “fair” that wheel-chair bound Americans – some of whom presumably are living on fixed incomes – are now being forced to help pay for other people’s “entitlement?” Is it “fair” that Barack Obama and Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid and every elected member of Congress and their respective staff members and members of the United Auto Worker’s union are all exempt from the heavy handed mandates of Obamacare, while the mandates are imposed on the millions of the rest of us? Is this the “change” we were “hoping” for?

And what politician is so “moral,” so pure, so just, so good, that they, alone, can determine what is “fair” for everybody? Would it be Joe Biden himself? Or Barack Obama? Or does that elusive arbiter of fairness exist elsewhere in the world today – maybe Hugo Chavez, the dictator of Venezuela, or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran?

The founders of our great nation recognized that, after a few thousand years of civilization and multiple, painful attempts by governmental leaders to create “fair” societies, the best hope for humankind was to construct a society of freedom, where individuals can freely chose to contract with one-another. This characterization of freedom and “fairness” runs counter to the type of governmental constructs that Barack Obama grew-up with in Indonesia, and bares little resemblance to the world he knew in Chicago, but it is, nonetheless, distinctly American.

I suspect that President Obama has no interest in this type of freedom and “fairness.” And I’m beginning to believe that Vice President Biden has never contemplated such things. They are both, however, peddling a type of “fairness” that America simply cannot afford.

Email Austin Hill

Comments are invited!
Send feedback to:


JDW said...

Obama uses, "Spreading the Wealth" to justify spending us into oblivion!

His real goal is to make life in America so unbearable that we accept his complete remaking of the nation into a Communist state.

Obama is a Marxist and everything that he has done or is doing is aimed toward that goal.

WOW said...

We may be doomed at this point, but Americans have learned that elections matter.

We allowed the media to determine our candidate, John McCain.

McCain was a loser from the start. He failed to run a real campaign. He frequently stated that Obama would make a good president, etc, etc.
He never gave anyone a reason to vote While many Republicans and all Democrats don't want to admit it---

McCain would have been embarrassed by the vote if he had selected Sarah Palin as his running mate.

The media covered up all the lies that Obama spewed at every whistle stop, and they never visited his faults nor his background.

Obama is not doing anything that he did not promise to do, but the voters were to ignorant to understand.

Perhaps, the next time, if there is a next time, the voters will learn just what in hell they are voting for.

One might say that the election of Obama was our chickens coming hoe to roost!

God help us!

BB in DC said...

Get off my man's back!

He not have to all this stuff if Bush did his job.