Great moments in the history of statism Pt. IV

For this is the moment of truth. The political environment is as favorable for reform as it’s likely to get. The legislation on the table isn’t perfect, but it’s as good as anyone could reasonably have expected. History is about to be made — and everyone has to decide which side they’re on.

That from NYT op-edder Paul Krugman who is giddy as a school girl over something of which we guarantee you he has scant actual knowledge.


O.K., Krugman. What’s in this bill that is going to make history? Tell us precisely what will be in the final form of this bill of which we are supposed to just drop our objections and dutifully allow passage. The final form, as in the one that will actually be signed into law by the President after a raft of last minute amendments are slipped in behind closed doors adding heft to this 1,900 page monstrosity.

Will there be a public option? Will there be a public option with a trigger? Will it fund abortions? Will it force people to buy health insurance? Will it cover illegal aliens? Does it include tort reform? Well, we know for absolute certain some aspects of this bill.

It blows our mind that someone as allegedly smart as Krugman can be so passionate over a piece of legislation that represents an effective federal take-over of 1/6th of our economy that will cost the taxpayers at least $1 trillion dollars adding again to our run-away debt and which will be funded by middle-class tax hikes and which no one really, we mean, really knows what’s in it.

Actually, we do know why Krugman would be for this: It’s a statist’s wet dream. Anything this expansive and this expensive and which is so chock full of legalese and last minute amendments will transmogrify and bend like the living document that it is to the whim of whatever powers that be in the federal government.

In the mind of a statist, how is having an authoritarian tool of this breadth and depth not a bad thing?