A couple wags wondered how I could simultaneously say health-care reform is a big win for progressives while suggesting it's anything less than an unmitigated disaster for conservatives. It's because I don't think this is zero-sum -- at least philosophically.
The big win for progressives is covering the uninsured. Whether that coverage is public or private is a secondary (which is not the same as saying unimportant) concern. The reverse goes for conservatives. Covering the uninsured is not a loss for them. But if the vehicle for covering the uninsured was the nationalization of the insurance sector, that would've been. That didn't happen. Instead, we entrench the private-insurance sector (conservative!) while imposing some new regulations to curb its worst abuses in the individual and small group markets (liberal!), and attempt to move toward a universal health-care system that retains a for-profit insurance industry. We are nearly alone among industrialized nations in attempting that trick.
There is nothing "conservative" about this fascist economic model for imposing government control over American's health.
Remember, fascist economic theory FAVORS big business. Big, non-competitive, government controlled business. Read more about it.
In the process, it destroys competition and choice, stifles entrepreneurial activity, and raises costs (government control dictates the choices that normally would be manifest in a market).
That is ANTI-CONSERVATIVE, a philosophy that favors government that fosters individual choice, market economics, and competitive business...business fully exposed to the forces of markets.
Ezra is supposed to be a bright kid. I keep looking for some signs that he understands much, though he may know a lot.