John Mackey, owner of Whole Foods, made a mistake. A cardinal sin. He expressed an opinion at WSJ. More offensive, he offered alternative thoughts to Obamacare.
One would think this would spark a healthy debate about healthcare among the left especially. Rather, it predictably sank into an abyss of pointless rhetoric and ad hominen mudslinging filled with the sad and typical references to "scare tactics" and Rush Limbaugh.
When a piece begins "John Mackey is a right-wing libertarian nut" you know the author is disinterested in debate. Yet, NOT ONE of the articles I've read argued Mackey's points. Not one. People are treated to bizarre pieces like this one at Huffington Post. What's the author suggesting beyond interdependence? What's his concrete solution? Is he suggesting Obama's plan is perfect with no room for improvement? Thankfully, some commenters are displaying more baisic common sense. And this logic of believing single payer is a means to an end or at least to solving part of the problem is misguided. Single payer will lead to a whole different set of problems no less absurd than what Americans face now.
What makes this all the more Kafka-esque is how the left always asserts dissent is healthy. Yet, when it goes against their opinions it's not?
If an iconic founder of a company like Whole Foods, which makes it a philosophical point to provide Americans with healthy food and take care of its employees gets so much grief - people are actually calling for a boycott of Whole Foods! - for offering a few sensible suggestions, what does this say of people who attack him?
The boycott is especially obscene. They'd rather take down a company that does right by people because it dares dissent.
Shocking hypocrisy.
The head spins.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Mysterious and anonymous comments as well as those laced with cyanide and ad hominen attacks will be deleted. Thank you for your attention, chumps.