An interesting question. When those of us on the right hear it from the left, we find it is causing involuntary facepalms.
In much of the media, the stereotype of liberals is that they have hearts that bleed with concern for the poor and oppressed. The stereotype of conservatives is that they don’t, to put it mildly. But another way to look at it is that Americans may share a great many goals but differ in how much emphasis they place on the feasibility of a plan.
Insurance for those without? Sounds nice. I’m for it.
More money for those with the least hourly compensation? Two thumbs up.
Doing something about the killing of innocent school children by crazed gunmen? Please!
For some people being “for” something is sufficient reason to support most government action proposed in its name. This works even better if the legislation expanding government has a good name, say “The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,” or “The Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2013,” or “The Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act.” Who could oppose affordability or fairness or the protection of the Bill of Rights? If the political powers that be assure us that a bill is good and must be passed, we might be inclined to trust them.This is the crux of the problem. It's not enough to be FOR something. Who isn't for better health care at cheaper prices? Well according to the left, we on the right aren't. Why? Because we aren't for their obvious solution, leading of course to the even more obvious conclusion that we are against better health care.
When liberals are for something, it invariably involves getting the government to do it. If it isn't getting done now, we need to make it happen. And laws are the only way to make things happen. If laws require money, we'll take it from people. If it requires telling people what to do, so be it. I'm certain if they are liberals like me, they'll pass the right law so I don't have to think about anymore.
So we pass laws now to find out what's in the laws, as Pelosi infamously said. And the consequence of the left's kneejerk reaction of having government fix EVERYTHING really are starting to kick in. Here's the problem: if your doctor sucks, you can go get another one. If your government sucks, well that's a lot harder to go get another one. Usually involves guns and blood.
Now we did set up this country to have states. States would make differing laws and if we didn't like it, we could go to another state to live. That's competition and that gives us as citizens choice. But when we make federal law, like Obamacare, where do we flee? Mars?
Yes we could go to another country but let's face it, almost every first world country these has more red tape than we do. We are, for some reason, starting to catch up. If we end up like western europe, god help us all.