I received a Jordan flyer in the mail today that included this quote from Dr. Jerry French, MD:
The Ohio State Medical Association examined both candidates in this race, but endorsed only one: Kris Jordan. He will stand up for your right to receive high quality health care. (emphasis added)Since I assume that French is neither a political philosopher, nor an economist, I will also assume that he did not considered the essence of what he stated. But there it is.
According to French: high quality health care is a right. A right?!? What constitution has he been reading. His statement is pure collectivist nonsense. French created this positive right out of thin air. But what are its logical conclusions.
If French is a high quality doctor, I have a right to his services. If he is not a high quality doctor, he can no longer practice -- we are not talking about him being just a good doctor, but a high quality doctor (as defined by ???).
Assuming that French is high quality, his liberty is trumped by my new positive right to high quality health care. He had better be available whenever I need him, for whatever price the collective decides to pay. No vacations or time off with family. He'll be working from early morning until late in the evening, making next to nothing (think Soviet Union without the benefit of a 40-hour week or the ability to slack).
The problem is not French's misguided statement, it's Jordan's implicit political claim that positive rights exist. If such rights exist, government only gets bigger. So Jordan is either lying about his true political agenda, or he is lacks an understanding of what he claims to hold true -- in other words, he is too inexperienced for the role he seeks.
Jordan, You just lost my vote. If I was looking for leftist candidate, I would simply vote for a Democrat. There is no point wasting my vote on another Republican with Democratic values (of course, Lanier -- the other socialist running -- won't get my vote either).