Ohio governor slams Obamacare opponents in Montana

By Jason Hart / January 22, 2015

Ohio Gov. John Kasich on Wednesday accused Montana lawmakers of letting poor Montanans die by rejecting Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion…..“You take somebody who, we have a big chunk of people that sit in our prisons right now, in our jails with mental illness. That’s not where they should be. By getting them a coordinated care treatment, we can not only help them get on their feet, but become productive citizens. And I think that’s what the Lord wants,” Kasich said…….“I don’t think that’s right, and I don’t think it’s a conservative proposition,”…..“Now, I don’t know whether you ever read Matthew 25, but I commend it to you, the end of it, about do you feed the homeless and do you clothe the poor,” Kasich continued. “I’m a believer that it is in the conservative tradition to make sure that we help people get on their feet so they, then, are not dependent.” ……Read More →

• Ohio’s Republican governor promotes Obamacare while in South Dakota

My Take - Kasich has stated in the past he has the right to define conservatism as he see fit, and based on all the things he's said in the past it appears he defines conservatism as promoting one of the most left wing socialist policies ever passed by Congress - a policy that would bankrupt the nation all by itself - and he's being told to do this by God.

 

I would also like to point out that his reference to Matthew 25 is a logical fallacy. There is nothing in those passages that require society to take on those responsibilities. That was a figurative representation of something other than social policy and misapplication on his part, but even if one misconstrues it in the same way Kasich does it still represents individual responsibility, not social policy. 

 

Furthermore any outlines for helping the poor in the Bible were admonitions at a personal level, not a societal admonition requiring government control, except in one area of the Mosaic Law which made allowances for the poor to harvest what was left in fields after the owner gleaned it twice before. The third gleaning was left to the poor, requiring work on their part, not charity.  The only other social requirements  involved the Sabbath releases of debt and the Jubilee when everyone was freed from slavery, debt and all land inheritances were returned. 

 

But that requirement was still based on transactions of choice.  Choices to borrow, to lend, to sell or to buy, and all of those choices were based on the value of the crops left to be produced on the land before it was returned.  There were admonitions to lend even if one wasn’t sure the money would be returned as an act of mercy to his “brother”.  But that still remained a choice, not a requirement, and it was an agreement administered by the parties involved, not by a third party that’s so huge and incompetent the wealth is largely wasted.  The only time a third party entered the picture was when one of the parties failed to live up to the agreemeet.  Then it became an issue of law, not policy involving overwhelming social engineering by an elitist run government.   

 

I'm beginnig to think that John Richard Kasich's real middle name is "Hubris".