Subscriber-only Content

This audio content is accessible only to current Audio or Premium subscribers. For access, login, subscribe or upgrade your subscription.

Get Access...

Subscriber-only Content

This ebook content is accessible only to current Ebook or Premium subscribers. For access, login, subscribe or upgrade your subscription.

Get Access...

The Left’s ObamaCare Circus

In his latest op-ed for PJ Media, radiologist Paul Hsieh deciphers the left’s Newspeak regarding ObamaCare.

  • Whereas Obama promised that, under ObamaCare, “If you like your insurance, you can keep it,” now defenders of the law effectively claim, “Losing your insurance is good!”
  • Whereas defenders of ObamaCare once claimed, “You’ll pay less for insurance,” now they propose, “Paying more is good!”
  • Whereas Obama promised, “You can keep your doctor, period,” now defenders argue, “Making you switch doctors will save you money!”
  • Whereas previously the left claimed that so-called “death panels” are “right-wing crazy talk,” now we hear that death panels are necessary and good.

As Hsieh explains, the leftist tactic of making grand promises about statist policies and then rationalizing the failure of those policies is nothing new:

Many years ago, the writer Ayn Rand noticed a curious kind of backpedalling from the political Left. First, they’d claim that socialism would provide enough shoes for the whole world. But when economic reality caught up with them, and they failed to deliver on their promises, they’d turn around and claim that going barefoot was superior to wearing shoes. In modern parlance, those broken promises weren’t a bug, but a feature!

Kudos to Hsieh for exposing the left’s circus of the absurd in defense of ObamaCare.

Like this post? Join our mailing list to receive our weekly digest. And for in-depth commentary from an Objectivist perspective, subscribe to our quarterly journal, The Objective Standard.


, ,

Comments submitted to TOS Blog are moderated and checked periodically. To be considered for posting, a comment must be civil, substantive, on topic, and no longer than 400 words. Ad hominem attacks, arguments from intimidation, misrepresentations, off-topic comments, and comments that ignore points made in the article will be deleted. Thank you for helping us to keep the discussion intellectually profitable.