New York Times columnist David Brooks, a cafeteria conservative of some persuasiveness, argued that ObamaCare will transform the relationships among the federal government, the states, and the American citizen. While stating the obvious on the April First Edition of "Meet the Press", Brooks admits that he remains oblivious as to whether ObamaCare is unconstitutional or not.
I commend Mr. Brooks for exposing the waste and secretive welfare that slips through Congress and bankrupts this country. I understand that he is more Hamiltonian in his outlook, still convinced that Big Government is acceptable, just as long as the federal government does not get "too big".
However, for an acclaimed columnist from one of the (formerly) most prestigious newspapers in the country to waffle on the constitutionality of so expansive and increase in government power, almost vitiating the commerce clause and stretching the elastic clause into intractable limits, is either the most blatant of jokes or the most bloviated remarks, exposing the growing farce of the moderate conservative mentality.
Even Hamilton acknowledged that preventing bad laws is more important than passing good ones. Though he championed greater centralization compared to the scattered chaos of the Articles of Confederation, the first treasurer of the United States wanted to put the fledgling United States on firm financial footing, and he would certainly have repudiated so extensive and expensive a federal mandate as ObamaCare.
Let's just hope that David Brooks' hesitation to indict ObamaCare's blatant disrespect for our nation's charter was a poor, dead-pan attempt at sarcasm. Maybe in the next day or two, Brooks will retract his evasiveness on the issue and shout: "April Fools!"
No comments:
Post a Comment