That just about sums it up

Eric Phillips, in writing about the socialization of medecine in Massachusetts and the eventual socialization of all medecine in these united states, gives us this run down of how governement gets unconstituional programs implemented.

The pattern rarely changes. First, publicity grows about some social ill, real or imagined. Experts appear on CNN and Fox News decrying the present situation; pundits, activists and now, bloggers demand action. Politicians propose a massive new bureaucratic program to fix the problem. Moderates and so-called Conservatives, exploiting an opportunity to stand up for the shrinking number of Americans who still oppose these socialist ideas, call for a market-based solution or some sort of compromise. Usually, a compromise is, in fact, reached. What this means is that government regulations are simply increased – the private system, however handicapped, struggles along. The cycle completes itself when, predictably, increased government involvement brings on the next crisis.

Excellently put Mr. Phillips.

The new Massachusetts law is simply another step in the direction of a completely nationalized health care system. Some opponents are afraid that his law has admitted the principle that the government has the right to intervene in the nation’s health problems. They fail to realize that that principle was admitted long ago with the emergence of Medicare and Medicaid.

When one sacrifices first principle, he is doomed to failure; it does not matter what successes he may trumpet.

Another example of this government process and the sacrifice of first principle is the Kelo vs. New London case. When this unconstitutional ruling was made by the supreme court a legion of pundits proclaimed that the government owns and decides what to do with everyones property now. It seems they have never heard of those pesky things called property taxes.