The American Dilemma and How We Can Fix It

DISTRACTIONS

What is the real motivation for President Obama’s call to action again Syria?  The stated view, of course, is that humanity must protest the use of chemical weapons.  Humanity, based on the number of those allying with him internationally, apparently doesn’t have the same view or appetite for yet another conflagration.

Even those who believe that we should take a military stand against President Assad are hesitant because Obama has shown so little consistency in his approach to this that one can only wonder if he is bipolar.  In fact, a review of his positions on almost every issue since he has taken office have shown so little commitment to any principle or ideal, it is fair to ask whether he is capable of maintaining a position that isn’t influenced by the latest poll.

Once again, I return to the question of whether the president is inherently nefarious or merely incompetent.  I’ve pretty much concluded that there is no sense of ethics which guide his actions – but I have to admire his manipulation of the nation’s agenda predicated merely on the achievement of his political objectives.  What are those objectives?  The simple answer is – control.

Look at the entire history of this administration.  Under the guise of doing what’s best for “the common good” it has an unflagging record of restricting individual freedom and replacing it with government oversight and control.  This mindset is an expression of the communist concept that “all men are created to serve the state.”

How has this control manifested itself in the nearly five years America has had the misfortune to have the Obama administration in place?  The examples are countless, but there is none which is more threatening to the individual’s life and liberty than the ACA (Obamacare).

So how does that relate to the Syrian misadventure which we may or may not undertake?  It’s simply a matter of distraction.

During the two and one half years that civil war has been waged in Syria, despite the hundreds of thousands killed, the administration kept silent.  We never heard then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton speak out on the massacre – nor did we hear the president make any comments of outrage.  Now, with the utilization of chemical weapons – apparently for the third time – we have crossed Obama’s “red line” – which he has subsequently disavowed.

Obviously, using weapons that ninety-eight per cent of the world’s population have banned is horrific.  But as I mentioned, this is supposedly the third time that these weapons have been used in Syria.  So why take action now – and not before?

I have a scenario which I can’t prove but which seems plausible.  It is to distract us from the implementation of the most controlling portion of the Obama administration’s agenda – implementing the ACA.  If you control a person’s ability to receive medical care, you control the person at the most fundamental level – his very life.

Consider the following events which have yet to unfold.  The first is that the Congress has now to spend its time debating Syrian intervention – when it should be turning its attention to funding the government.  That funding may or may not include a provision to pay for Obamacare.

The administration has constantly made comments about Republicans’ attempting to “shut down the government.”  The Obama White House has mastered the art of the “spin” and elevated it to an art form.  Unfortunately, the “leadership” of the Republican party have demonstrated as little recognition of principle as their counterparts across the aisle and in a race for “who is the weakest of them all,” it’s a pretty close race between them and the president.

So let’s assume that we do take military action against Syria.  The Congress has still to determine which parts of the government should be funded.  The hew and cry, now that we’re engaged in yet another war effort, will be, “We’re at war and those horrible Republicans are trying to defund the military at a time when we most need to be funding them.”  Speaker Boehner, who has already established himself firmly as a member of the Beltway power elite, will crumble as usual – his greatest strength.

With the distraction created by this military action – and the consequent reaction in the Middle East which could easily bring us into a regional war, the debate over funding the greatest controlling law ever enacted, Obamacare, will proceed and be implemented.  And that will eliminate the rights of any of us to maintain control over our own lives.

Weapons of mass destruction are horrifying.  They are rightfully outlawed by the international community.  But with the prospect of what might evolve into World War III, it is rational to ask the question, “Is the greatest and most lethal of these living at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue?”

Advertisements

Comments on: "DISTRACTIONS" (23)

  1. They used to say that when you sit in the Oval Office you’ll quickly discover that there aren’t any easy answers. But now it would be more accurate to say that there aren’t ANY answers…easy or otherwise. When you speed pass the signs that says “Road Ahead Closed!” there is no amount of discussion that will alter the fact that the only way ‘ahead’ is to turn around…and go back. And who do you suppose could possibly be elected ‘driver of the bus’ if they were to propose doing that?! 😉

    • The administration got into office by distorting the truth and selling that to an unthinking populace. Well distortion turned into outright lies – and then they needed additional and more outrageous lies to cover us and justify the previous ones. In my view, we are where we are either through total incompetence (a believable option) or outright duplicity. Based on all the infractions of the law and blatant disregard for it – I’m leaning more heavily in the camp of downright evil.

      This administration takes to a whole new level the quip, “I’m from the government and I’m here to help you.”

  2. “none which is more threatening to the individual’s life and liberty than the ACA (Obamacare).”

    That’s a little far-fetched, no? How about the policies of spying on citizens, extrajudicial killings based on secret evidence, or starting wars?

    Compared to those, Obamacare just forces you pay for health insurance. Probably pay way too much for a crappy rip-off version of health insurance, to enrich the drug companies who contributed massively to both Republicans and Democrats. This itself is a crime. But that’s just a fancy form of very large scale embezzlement, I wouldn’t say it’s worse than some of the other policies, which are a fancy form of large scale murder.

    Interesting theory though. It sure is a suspicious coincidence that we are doing the run-up to war about 6 weeks before the next episode of “Debt Ceiling”. I agree that Obama’s PR are masters of distraction.

  3. Thanks for your comment and readership.

    Agreed, the IRS and NSA’s intrusiveness are matters for grave concern. But they merely hit around the periphery of our lives. If you’re ill and can’t get health care then pretty much everything else is irrelevant.

    I noticed you started subscribing fairly recently so you might have missed my post i which I discussed the fact that people mistakenly think “health insurance” and “healthcare” are synonymous. But if you think about the stated goal of Obamacare – making sure that every American has health insurance – and succeds in adding 30 million who are currently uninsured, (which won’t happen) – consider the effect this would have on actually delivering healthcare. There are no new physicians, nurses, hospitals – but 30 million potential new patients. Logic suggests that care would have to be rationed – as it has been in every other country in which socialized medicine has been adopted.

    The liberal element in this country has stated forthrightly that Obamacare is merely a means to an end – a single payer, government run healthcare system. For an idea how that plays out, you might want to google, “The Liverpool Pathway.”

    • That’s a good point, hadn’t thought of that. Might have something to do with too many people working hard to process the insurance company paperwork, and not enough doctors/nurses.

      By the way, many of those socialized medicine countries, despite having to ration health care, still offer better care for the average joe than our supposedly market-based system does.

      Socialized medicine certainly works for the 30 million uninsured you talked about. I know some of them, since they’re stuck paying cash for medical procedures, they are willing to make a 6-10 hour drive up to Canada, get on a plane to Thailand etc, and still come out ahead.

      • I asked an English friend what his opinion of the UK’s healthcare system was. His response, “It’s the best system in the world – as long as you don’t need to use it.”

        If you check through earlier posts you will see that my attitude is that now and after Obamacare we will not have a healthcare system. What we have is a “disease maintenance system.” A huge portion of our healthcare budget is devoted to paying for treatment of chronic illnesses – most of which could be avoided if we prevented disease rather than paying to treat it.

        Diabetes is now epidemic. The fact that we consume an average of 2.8 servings of soda a day – that’s about 40 teaspoons of sugar (the synthetic substitutes in diet soda are equally if not more deleterious) in large measure contributes to that problem. We could fund healthcare if we did nothing more than tax each serving $.25. (Same theory as taxing cigarettes). We would see a definite increase in revenue and, hopefully, a reduction in soda consumption. My other thought is to eliminate packaging sodas in plastic and aluminum and return to re-usable glass bottles. There is some concern that plastic packaging may also have carcenogenic properties – and, at the least, this would certainly reduce our energy consumption – so those of us who are concerned about the environment should embrace the idea.

        There is only one problem with this concept. It requires the individual to make a personal committment to improving his/her health and the environment. Frankly, I think most of us are too lazy to bother.

      • I wonder what your english friend would say about our health care system.

        As for the chronic diseases, that is 100% true. Eliminating foods with refined sugar (except maybe a little dessert 🙂 , and eliminating all high fructose corn syrup is probably the simplest thing we can do to make our lives better.

      • My English friend is married to an American and after spending his career working for NATO they now live here. His wife is a breast cancer survivor. They are both fairly sure that if they were still living in Europe, she would not be alive today.

      • All right. I can’t argue with that. I’m assuming they had health insurance.

      • Yes, they did. Everyone has insurance under the UK’s plan. The problem is that a government panel determines priorities for treatment – and she wasn’t near the top of the list as she was in her early 60’s when she was diagnosed. Her condition was the main reason that he took an early retirement and they moved to the U. S.

      • oh I meant in the US. But thanks for telling her story, it’s a valuable data point.

  4. I agree with your premise, completely.

    In regards to Syria, one word: Vietnam.

    • It was interesting that John McCain got heckled at one of his town halls. The attendee asked the simple question, “How can you be sure that we are not going to involve troops in this conflagration should it escalate.” I guess the newest buzz phrase is “boots on the ground.”

      • Yep. And I’m starting a campaign against that ugly phrase, I call it what it is, “American Soldiers in harm’s way.” Those boots have our men and women’s feet in them.

  5. I’ll come back to comment on NSA though. While its unconstitutional, reprehensible and all those other words that mean despicable, still why is anyone putting on the internet anything they would be embarrassed to see on the front page of their local paper? Huh? Personal responsibility, people.

    • I have a call in to Anthony Weiner (a/k/a/ Carlos Danger) for the answer to that question.

    • Hi NEO, the NSA spying is not just what you put on the internet. I realize people often get stupid with putting pictures of themselves on facebook, that they later wish they could take back.

      The NSA is beyond that, they are spying on your personal communications, for instance phone calls between spouses and lovers, and so forth. Supposedly only if they suspect you of terrorism. But they can suspect anyone, there is little or no court oversight, and when there is court oversight it is completely secret. And if that doesn’t creep you out enough, consider that NSA employees haven’t even been following their own rules.

      It turned out, surprise, surprise, that some NSA employees were abusing their spy powers, out of jealousy and so forth, to get into the private email of their girlfriends/boyfriends, or even people they were just merely romantically interested in. They even made up an institutional word for this- “LOVEINT” (compare to SIGINT and HUMINT).

      Then there was Snowden, who went public with the whole thing out of guilt or whatever.

      Obviously they collected all this information and don’t even have good control over it.

      For all we know, other NSA employees may well have broken the rules in a much less innocent way than the stalkers or the whistleblower, they could be selling out corporate secrets for money, blackmailing people, planning crimes or who knows what.

      • Sure, but under the Federal Communications Act of 1935 you have by definition no expectation of privacy of any conversation carried by wireless means, that would include Celphone, wireless phone or wifi.

        Under the telecommuncations acts you do have a right to privacy on landline telephones (but not wireless)

        Now, mind you, I agree the government has no right to use that information in any way, both under the Constitution, and the FCA 35 no one does.

        If I gave you the impression that I was defending any part of the mess, I wasn’t very clear, I don’t, but still your commsec is up to you, there is reasonable adequate stuff available if it’s important to you, stick with open source stuff, weird code shows up quick but be aware that you might draw attention as well.

      • Oh I see what you meant now. I didn’t think you were defending it, was just unclear. I was also not aware of the Federal Communications Act, thanks for that bit of info.

      • One of those little known acts that has ramifications all over the place. If you’re old enough you might remember when they banned scanners that received cellular frequencies, they didn’t ban receiving them (they can’t) they just won’t certify equipment (except for law enforcement) that can. That exemption has been around ever since the ban.

      • Huh interesting. Not sure if I’m old enough for that, but when I was naughty teenager, we downloaded instructions and modified a walkie talkie to listen to cordless phones, and made these funny little boxes that sent the insert-coin signal to pay phones. The phone company had a way to detect this by then though, but we scored a shiny newly upgraded payphone on our block as a result. They would probably send you to Guantanamo bay if you did that now.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: