Did conservatives murder Charlene Dill? And other scary stories

Discussion in 'News / Current Events' started by Revmitchell, Apr 18, 2014.

  1. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,304
    Likes Received:
    784
    According to the progressive playbook, if Florida Gov. Rick Scott had not declined an unaffordable expansion of Medicaid, Charlene Dill wouldn’t have died suddenly from a heart condition.

    The Internet is rife with arguments over the details of this tragic case. Questions include, What did Ms. Dill die from? What is Ms. Dill’s family situation? What private and public options were available to Ms. Dill? Which did she pursue?
    But it’s worth asking a different kind of question: Is the goal of government the end of tragedy? Should it be? Could it be?

    The left certainly thinks so.

    “This 32-year-old Florida woman is dead because her state refused to expand Medicaid.”

    “Meet the late Charlene Dill, sentenced to death by Republican obstruction.”

    “Democrats need to start blaming the GOP for the death of Charlene Dill.”

    From Kissimmee to Newtown, we learn over and over again that tragedy is still here, that chaos isn’t the stuff of history books — and whether it’s a heart attack or a massacre, we simply can’t regulate away pain.

    Even still, the left thrives off of the idea. Car crash? New law. Suicide? New law. Hurricane? New law. Heart attack?

    There may already be laws and programs in place to help or outlaw the situation — as was very likely the case in Florida, as was definitely the case in Newtown, and on and on — but that won’t worry the evangelists of government, who want more, more, more.

    Almost there, they urge. Just one more law. Just one fewer gun. Just one more expansion of government services, and salvation will be at hand.

    “Charlene Dill is the new face of the Medicaid gap, caused by the refusal of Republican governors and legislators to accept free money from the federal government to provide coverage to more people,” one particularly inept blogger carped. “Free money” — the atheist’s manna from heaven.

    An interesting experiment is asking how much. How high should tax rates be? How expansive should government health care be? How draconian should gun control be? The more-honest progressives of the university might have an answer — “100 percent,” “100 percent,” “100 percent” — but for the politicians, the answer is always just “more.” “More,” “more,” “more.” (RELATED: The Washington Post is pretty worried about the people Obamacare hurts, but not why you’d think)

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/04/18/b...e-dill-and-other-scary-stories/#ixzz2zFtwxZxF
     

Share This Page

Loading...