Paul Krugman Checks in on Broccoli and ObamaCare; Progressivism = Totalitarianism

 By the Left Coast Rebel

As the ObamaCare SCOTUS debate raged this week, I paid particular attention to the left's reaction.

What I found was fascinating: there was apoplecticism, attacks (against the Supremes - how dare they!) and strange silence from the Yoda of the Left, Paul Krugman.

"Me have to teach, and travel.... hmph," Yoda said about his weekly schedule, or something, regarding his odd absence in the raging SCOTUS ObamaCare debate.

Well, today he checked in and what a delight it is, starting out as thus...

(NYT) Let’s start with the already famous exchange in which Justice Antonin Scalia compared the purchase of health insurance to the purchase of broccoli, with the implication that if the government can compel you to do the former, it can also compel you to do the latter. That comparison horrified health care experts all across America because health insurance is nothing like broccoli.

Why? When people choose not to buy broccoli, they don’t make broccoli unavailable to those who want it.

OK, let's just stop there. I'm no Nobel-winner but I can already see the gaping chasm of intellectual dishonesty on display here. This comes as no surprise, of course; Krugman knows he can incite his horde of lefty-lemmings by tersing and twisting facts and language. He's a good writer and a collectivist with a loud bull horn; that's what he does and does pretty well for those that don't have the ability to ask, "why."

First, you'll note that Kruggie doesn't argue against the slippery slope broccoli argument from Scalia; he simply makes fun of it. Second, just because those without health insurance "force" others to pay for themselves, e.g. through emergency room visits, etc., doesn't mean that my health care is unavailable to me or anyone else. Perhaps more expensive but isn't that besides the point? If lefties were honest, (ha!) wouldn't they just say, "give free insurance to poor people responsible for costly emergency room visits and rising costs..."

Just what the hell is he saying here?

Professor William L. Anderson from Krugman-In-Wonderland:

Paul Krugman's recent column on the "broccoli" question reveals a number of things, including Krugman's insistence that government can create a wonderful medical system through coercion, and anyone who disagrees wants people to get sick and die. That is a pretty typical Krugman argument -- those who agree with him do so for the most evil of reasons

Ah, yes, that is it: the essence of the totalitarian left. From their Ivory Towers of I Know Better Than You they gleefully look down upon you and I with visceral scorn -- anyone who dares to challenge government coercion just want people to get sick and die. End of discussion, with the left: you suck, you're evil and monstrous, blah, blah, blah...

More on Krugman's mentality and what it says about the left in general at the ever-excellent Krugman-In-Wonderland:

With Michelle Obama jetting around the country telling people what they can and cannot eat, and the Food Police being ramped up, I find it interesting that Krugman attacks the whole "broccoli" issue. After all, the government that Krugman so lionizes is doing everything it can to force people to purchase and eat Obama-approved food and the Food Police are seeking and gaining more power every day.

As for insurance, I find it interesting that Krugman is so gung-ho about using coercion as a means to further what really are government schemes. The point is that if government can coerce you to purchase one thing -- semantics about products and taxes aside -- government can coerce you to purchase anything that Progressives believe is "good for society."

Exit question: why can't progressive wrap their mind around the simple fact that if the government can force (coerce) citizens into buying a good or service (in this case health care insurance), the government can thus force any citizen to buy any good or service?

Why don't they get this?

In all honesty, I think many do, (the smart ones) they just are so delusional as to see themselves as society's saviors and messiahs, feeling (not thinking) that their "good-for-society" visions justify the means and the ends to anything they cook up.

Sound familiar?

More at Memeorandum.

Updated: Is it a slow news day or do great minds think alike? Dean @ Nonsensible Shoes writes on Yoda today as well.


  1. I just posted on the same topic. Krugman wears blinders on health care and many other issues. You can tell when it's a slow news day - conservatives read a Krugman article, laugh about it and then debunk it with ease.

    The man is not to be taken seriously. Sadly, in many quarters, particularly the media, he still is.

    1. Thanks, Dean, I'll link your post here.

    2. Your are sadly correct, too; it's a slow news day and I wrote this little post up thinking it would be easy. It took under 10 minutes to debunk the first paragraph.

    3. I posted your link as well. It's amazing that a guy with a Nobel Prize is so easy to debunk. Then again the Nobel Prizes aren't all that honorific any more, both the Nobel Institute and Krugman should be forced to take an economics class.

  2. If I said I would voluntarily and without complaint attend to my neighbor should they fall ill and do not have medical insurance to feed the big money hospital system, but am against this ObamaCare Socialist nightmare, does this mean I want people to die?

    Glenn Beck is a nut, but he did say something along the lines of how we should choose our charity, be it fiscal or physical, and the government cannot mandate it or force it. If I choose to attend to those who do not have medical insurance, this is me doing what it right, far and away from the generic and cold clutches of the fed.

    America still has decent people that do not need federal involvement or their "advice".

    Krugman is one of the few people that if I were to have the opportunity to meet face-to-face, I would laugh in his. And his sissy cat.

  3. i stopped reading when he inferred the supremes were clueless about insurance. 'cause i knew what was coming.

    circuitous, invented arguments.

    and this is why the left was so shocked on tuesday. the merits were put only display for all at a level playing field.

    1. Indeed. Love the word circuitous ;), tucking that one away

  4. I don't understand how anyone on the left doesn't see the comparison to broccoli. The entire argument is that healthcare is unique that we all will use it at some point in our lives. With few exceptions we all eat daily, do we not? We all use energy of some kind. We all wear clothes. There are many things that we all do.

    But I do wish they would stop with broccoli example and come up with a food that if we were forced to eat wouldn't cause nearly as much as gas in some.

    1. I hear you :) I can't eat broccoli unless it is steamed or cooked...


Commenting here is a privilege, not a right. Comments that contain cursing or insults and those failing to add to the discussion will be summarily deleted.