Applying the Obama Doctrine

Appearing on MSNBC’s Hardball with Chris Matthews, and straining mightily beneath the weight of all the water she was carrying for the Obama Administration, Andrea Mitchell of NBC offered this definition of the “emerging” Obama Doctrine: “When you have a catastrophe you can avert, and the benefits outweigh the costs, and you have international or multilateral support, go for it.  You cannot stand idly by.”

She’s trying to explain Obama’s policy on Libya, but why don’t we test the soundness of the Obama Doctrine by applying it to a domestic matter: the repeal of ObamaCare?

It’s a catastrophe we can avert.  You might point out a lot of damage has already been done.  The jobs Obama’s health care boondoggle have destroyed will not magically reappear if we repeal the legislation.  I would respond: you ain’t seen nothing yet.

The benefits of repeal most definitely outweigh the costs.  ObamaCare is dropping over 1.5 trillion dollars of debt onto an already insolvent government.  At the same time, it is both raising the cost of health care, and destroying its quality.

We arguably have international support, as many British and Canadian citizens are quietly praying we don’t destroy the health care system they rely on, when their own moribund socialist medical deathtraps fail them.  We certainly have bipartisan support.  In most opinion polls, overwhelming majorities of Republicans and independents favor repeal, as do anywhere from a sizable minority to a bare majority of Democrat voters.  Overall, the latest Rasmussen poll puts support for repeal at 53%.  It has run into the mid-sixties in some recent polls.  Support for repeal is clearly stronger than support for keeping it.

As Andrea Mitchell said, it would be wrong to “stand idly by” while this disastrous legislation ruins our economy, empties our Treasury, and ruins our health care system, when we can launch a kinetic repeal action.  We should go for it.