You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality – Ayn Rand
Does anyone remember the name Bowe Bergdahl these days? Only a few weeks back, Bergdahl’s name rocketed to the front page of every major newspaper as a result of his release from five years of “captivity” by the Taliban. Early accounts lauded Bergdahl as a war hero who had endured hardship at the hands of his captors, a sentiment trumpeted by Barack Obama and echoed by high-level cabinet members as they sought to portray the event as a great triumph for America.
Very soon however, the details of Bergdahl’s desertion and likely collaboration with the Muslim jihadists began to emerge, casting him instead in a traitorous light. Official accounts of early attempts to find him attribute the deaths of many other Americans to the effort. Perhaps worst of all, without any consultation with Congress (a legal requirement in this situation) Obama authorized the release of five extremely dangerous high-level terrorists, who had been held at the Guantanamo prison since their capture, in trade for Bergdahl.
Any celebratory reactions from Americans quickly turned into horrified shock. Those in government who inarguably knew the circumstances of Bergdahl’s desertion were worse than derelict in their duties to allow such a “prisoner transfer” to take place. Yet Obama not only orchestrated the entire affair, he claimed as much spotlight and credit for it as he possibly could, at least in the beginning. As indignation across the nation intensified, the liberal political machine did what it always does in a tight spot. It changed the subject. Currently, few mentions of Bergdahl occur anywhere in the “mainstream” media.
In truth, it is rather difficult to even keep apprised of all of the “calamity” that bombards the American people every day. Each ensuing upheaval serves the purpose of wiping out any discussion of the previous one. The pattern continues unabated. But without exception, the events themselves and the manner in which the leftist political machine responds to them represent a major leg of Obama’s grand plan to “fundamentally transform America.” At the same time, the blur of devastating “crises” is sufficient to prevent a focus on any single one of them.
Close on the heels of the Bergdahl fiasco came the calamitous news that America’s southern border was spontaneously being invaded by illegal alien children, primarily from Honduras and El Salvador. Hardly likely to be a random occurrence, this drama was curiously timed to bring attention to the “need” for amnesty (or “immigration reform” as the proponents of amnesty attempt to sugar coat it). Emotional accounts of the plight of those hapless children on the nightly news were singularly crafted to evoke sympathy and generate momentum for the faltering effort to get some form of amnesty pushed through the Congress prior to the November mid-term elections.
Once again, the liberal/Democrat movers and shakers miscalculated. Any initial sympathy has since soured into anger among Americans as they watch their nation’s border being systematically eradicated and their society victimized by foreigners and pandering politicians who express concern for everyone involved, except the American people. As communities across America increasingly resist efforts to turn them into way-stations for this onslaught of young foreigners (who will most certainly be joined in short order by the rest of their families), the public relations boon anticipated by Democrat strategists suddenly became a growing political liability.
So once again, Democrats eagerly sought to shift their focus away from the border fiasco, and onto something… anything that might redound to their benefit in the fall elections. When visiting Texas earlier this month to attend multiple fundraisers, Obama refused to visit the border, despite being invited there by Texas Governor Rick Perry. With public opinion swinging severely against the Democrats and their treasonous quest for thirty million new voters, the last thing Obama wanted was any visual association between himself and the humanitarian disaster he and his policies had created. It is indeed time for the Democrats to figure out a way to distance themselves from the border mess. What will be next?
Much can be learned of how this scheme is intended to operate by a close examination of one of its chief practitioners, Hillary Clinton. Despite her claims of a stellar political career, Hillary Clinton’s “popularity” with the public has always been inversely proportional to the amount of time she spends in front of the cameras. Lately, she has been desperately attempting to pick up the pieces after her disastrous June interview with Diane Sawyer, in which she attempted to make the case that upon leaving the White House in 2001, she and Bill were essentially paupers.
Prior to that, she is best known for her hysterical 2013 rant in front of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, which was looking into the lapses and deception surrounding the September 2012 Islamist attacks on the Consulate in Benghazi during which four Americans including Ambassador Chris Stephens were killed. When pressed for specifics by Senator Ron Johnson (R.-WI) she retorted “What difference, at this point, does it make?” The single most telling, and most overlooked portion of that shameless obfuscation was the phrase “at this point.” In Clinton’s world, such a declaration rendered the episode inconsequential on the basis that it was old news. Once the heat is turned up on any liberal debacle, the chances are good that they will attempt to declare it “old news.” To this end, their absolutely predictable undermining of efforts to quickly resolve any matter should be a red flag to those interested in actually finding the truth.
Last week’s lies are simply irrelevant to this week’s controversy since they were only ever intended to win the debate of the moment (See: “If you like your doctor and your healthcare plan, you can keep them.”). Those who dare to demand any shred of accountability from Obama or his fellow leftists will be derided as overly “partisan” and targeted for political destruction. The plan is to continue shifting the country left, which requires that real consequences of Obama/Democrat policy be brushed aside.
“Fast and Furious” has become “old news,” with nobody actually held responsible for it, on account of Attorney General Eric Holder’s indefensible stonewalling of congressional investigators. Similarly, the ongoing drama of the missing IRS e-mails, and the flagrant efforts to evade accountability for what was clearly an abuse of power by former IRS department chief Lois Lerner and her minions, will no doubt be dragged on as long as possible, to then be dismissed as irrelevancies from “the past.”
Unfortunately, each of these incidents, along with too many others to mention in this space, represent a government that has broken the constitutional boundaries intended to protect the American people from its overreach. A government that effectively exempts itself from oversight while continually amassing ever greater power is a threat to the people. It needs to be stopped, and its key players held accountable. Otherwise, “liberty and justice” are themselves in danger of being reduced to merely being trite phrases from the past.
Christopher G. Adamo is a resident of southeastern Wyoming and has been involved in state and local politics for many years. He writes for several prominent conservative websites, and has written for regional and national magazines. His contact information and article archives can be found at www.chrisadamo.com, and he can be followed on Twitter @CGAdamo.
Greeting many of us this morning was an announcement that another Judge had taken steps to revise the provisions of the Godzilla-like revised health care delivery system negotiated for all Americans by a very benevolent Democratic party and what a thud this new announcement made .
The sought-after uniformity first outlined in this massively idiotic undertaking does not exist in any manner of looking at this bill and it seems that the creation of manifold exceptions has provided a porous network of benefits under which few of those partaking will have the same benefits or the same costs. Then, should any of those enrolled decide to make a geographical move, several aided cans of worms confront them as the lack of uniformity in Obamacare rears its ugly head and what you thought you had as coverage vanishes as a whisp of smoke, forcing new negotiations for coverage that meets the need of the individual and the local benefit structure ( whatever that might be .).
It didn’t have to be this way. A very simple, easy to understand modification of the massive Federal Employee plans could have accomplished a workable, efficient and equitable plan for all. As we have seen, common sense is not a characteristic of the Congress and in that consideration, it is reasonably safe to comment that most members of that disgustingly stupid body have not availed themselves of the time or the effort to wade through this the so-called Affordable Care Act with the thought that by doing so, they may actually come to understand what it is that they created .
The huge Federal plan offered two levels of Blue Cross/Blue Shield coverage available everywhere – and coupled with two similar offerings through the Aetna Insurance Company, Federal employees have no less than four options. For those Federal employees who prefer the HMO style of health care delivery, many such plans exist on a local basis..
With the solid actuarial data available in these plans, the basis for a massive addition as the rest of America is brought into these levels of coverage would be financially sound and, best of all, all Americans with the same level of coverage would pay the same costs wherever they were located and the benefits would also be equal. Further, any other insurance company would be able to enter this picture by patterning their operations after those in effect . These plans could have been scaled to provide essential medical needs and by elimination of a few of the costly fringe coverage, been made even more affordable.
The real strength in this concept is that with several companies underwriting coverage, there is an area of competition to grow their own enrollment numbers and as we know well from the world of business, competition improves the product while helping keep costs in check. So, we could have had plans available that were financially sound, provided selection in coverage, offered uniform costs and required none of the overly-costly administrative undertakings we see as the states have, or do not have, exchange. This concept offers benefits that are the same, coverage that is truly portable and best of all, the management of the existing plans do not make your local doctor jump through hoops compiling computer data on your medical life – for whatever purpose the government deems it in their interests to know the more personal aspects of each of us. In my mind, this is an invasion of our right to ” life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. ”
The ‘single-payer’ system that is the ultimate target of this bill offers no cost controls set through competition, but provides those controls as government dictated mandates, offers no incentives for improvement and creates a government-backed monopoly that will rule our health delivery, control over this aspect of our lives vested in yet another government bureaucracy. As we all know painfully well, government has never been able to operate with any efficiency, as government has grown, inefficiencies spread and in this create untold, needless costs being borne by long-suffering taxpayers who receive no possible benefit from the tax dollars wrested, painfully, from us. The Postal Service is the poster child for the ability of government to thoroughly mess up whatever it is that it touches while the IRS clearly shows that government believes it has the right to now all about us, to spy on us without cause and to invade virtually every facet of our lives. Fraud in many government departments exists from year-to-year and is never addressed as, frankly, government does not care.
Now, we have a mess that is constantly changing as judges make their marks or various pressure organizations force exceptions they like, offers no clarity and to the most learned of us, is still not understood at all. Americans are offered no equitable coverage nor are they provided cost equality. There is no gain for We The People, only need for an increased bureaucracy to increase those costs we shall be forced to pay in support of a government that will not be content until it has total control over our already burdened lives.
“What hath God wrought?” A Congress bereft of common sense!