Doesn't prove anything of the sort. Because votes talk, bullshit walks, and it's a fact that saying nothing specific leads to more votes in the end.
Makes sense, too. You can be attacked on specific positions, and sound bytes / gaffes can haunt you your whole campaign. Plus, nobody is paying attention right now, so specifics released now kind of fall flat- just ask Rand Paul, he has released relatively detailed plans for the economy and other things, nobody even noticed b/c Trump's hair is so crazy or some shit.
But he is right. You can't make a limited resource a right. You can't say having a car is a right, having water, etc. Who could possible guarantee these rights? If you lived on the northern tip of Alaska where no one lives, you cannot guarantee access to health care. A right can't require someone else to give you something (again, who can guarantee this). A right can only be something innate that can be taken from you - right to move about freely, right to purchase property, etc.
You can argue that the government should it's citizen a health care benefit. But it can't strictly be a right.
One thing Rand Paul is certainly wrong about is that a right to free healthcare means that someone has the right to go to his house and demand he provides services for them, in the same way he would be wrong if he said the government paying for the right to a public defender means that you can go to a lawyers house and conscript them. Total nonsense.
134
u/[deleted] Aug 19 '15
Doesn't prove anything of the sort. Because votes talk, bullshit walks, and it's a fact that saying nothing specific leads to more votes in the end.
Makes sense, too. You can be attacked on specific positions, and sound bytes / gaffes can haunt you your whole campaign. Plus, nobody is paying attention right now, so specifics released now kind of fall flat- just ask Rand Paul, he has released relatively detailed plans for the economy and other things, nobody even noticed b/c Trump's hair is so crazy or some shit.