We the People – Frustration vs. Indifference

As the news cycle changes, so does the focus of debate across the US. However, becoming bored or frustrated by a particular subject, and your inability to effect change, does not mean we should forget about the various scandals and/or policy questions that have been dropped from the headlines of an equally bored, frustrated, or disinterested media.

We must all take care to not allow our frustration to become indifference. Here are five of the most important stories, and scandals, We the People cannot allow ourselves to forget:

VA Scandal – and the actions taken to resolve the wide range of unethical and illegal practices that have become standard practice in the 2^nd largest department in our Federal system. Obviously, this is not the result of the inaction of the current administration exclusively. It takes many years for a culture of neglect and indifference to grow and flourish in any bureaucracy. Yet, President Obama campaigned on the problems at the VA before winning his first term, and his administration has just as obviously been ineffective at cleaning up the mess he “inherited.” Congress too shares some of the responsibility here, for their lack of oversight and lack of action concerning problems which were well known in DC, though not throughout the rest of the country. This article outlines the actions that have so far been taken to improve care within the VA system; some of them admirable, while some appear to be mere window dressing.

To date, no one has been prosecuted for the many illegal acts that have been documented, and few have been “fired,” while others have resigned their positions, allowing them to retain their federal pensions.

Benghazi Terrorist Attack – the scandal which will not go away, nor should it, as the administration, in its indictment of the recently captured suspect in the attack on the US Consulate, contradicts its own argument (and that of Hillary Clinton) that the incident was inspired by a video posted to YouTube six months before the attack.

From the article: “The Justice Department’s indictment spells out a calculated conspiracy by Ahmed Abu Khatallah and associates to attack the U.S. diplomatic mission and CIA annex, which killed four Americans. The indictment might be viewed as a death knell for a theory that the attack resulted from a spontaneous protest against a U.S.-produced video.”

Benghazi Terrorist Attack 2 – the House Select Committee refuses to let go of the scandal, nor should it. This article outlines the actions taken to bring the committee up to speed, with an anticipated timeline for action.

IRS Targeting Scandal – and the missing, or “lost,” emails of Lois Lerner and six others at the IRS. The possible long-term ramifications of this story are vast, and disturbing. If there is one thing we know about government bureaucracies, it is that, once they’ve exceeded their mandate, they will not stop. In fact, they will continue to push for ever more power and influence. This story outlines the court case against the IRS by Judicial Watch, who claim the IRS has refused to conform to the orders of the court to divulge all emails requested under the Freedom for Information Act, and in fact, have actively resisted the court’s orders to do so.

Bowe Bergdahl Story – there are still many questions which need to be answered about the Bergdahl situation; among them, whether deserted his post, whether he conspired with his captors, whether the trade for five high-value detainees should have been made – basically, whether he was worth it. This story outlines the efforts of the US Army to further his “reintegration” into society.

This is by no means a comprehensive list of the scandals and policy blunders made by the current administration and others in DC, nor is it meant to be. My goal in posting this is to simply remind and inform.

 

Only Bad People Oppose Social Justice…Right?

Here is a great piece on the self-serving political phrase “Social Justice,” so often used by the smug, narcissistic, so-called “Progressive” movement. In this video, Jonah Goldberg of the American Enterprise Institute and National Review offers a realistic and accurate definition of the term social justice; something which is virtually impossible to receive from anyone on the left of the political spectrum.

Watch the video, “What is Social Justice?” presented by Prager University.

Some Facts on ObamaCare

According to a recent article at WashingtonPost.com, just 10% of enrollees for health insurance under the Affordable Care Act did not have such insurance prior to the implementation of the law, also known as ObamaCare. This is striking news when one considers the fundamental justification for the enactment of a law that affects 1/6^th of the national economy – to provide affordable health insurance to some 30 million people without it.

Could this mean that fully 90% of enrollees actually did have health insurance prior to October 2013, and have been forced to enroll now because their previous plans were cancelled – due to the specific coverage provisions of ObamaCare?

Just 10% of health care enrollees were uninsured previously

Citing a February survey of enrollees taken by McKinsey & Company, the article notes that enrollment by the previously uninsured rose by 27% last month, up from just 11% in January. However, the survey also points out that while enrollment has increased among the previously uninsured, a mere 53% of these new enrollees have actually paid for their new health insurance policy, compared to 83% among those who did have insurance previously.

“The survey also attempted to measure what has been another fuzzy matter: how many actually have the insurance for which they signed up. Under federal rules, coverage begins only if someone has started to pay their monthly insurance premiums. Just over half of [formerly] uninsured people said they had started to pay, compared with nearly nine in 10 of those signing up on the exchanges who said they were simply switching from one health plan to another,” the article said.

In an effort to avoid looking partisan, I’ve tried to find information offered from sites that are not perceived to have “an ax to grind” or that seem to report only from one perspective. Unfortunately, when it comes to accurate data on ObamaCare, this has proven to be quite difficult, particularly as it relates to “main stream media” sources. With that said…

Up to 1 million health care enrollees may not actually be enrolled

The ACA defines enrollment as those who have paid their first months’ premium. This is the law, not merely a regulation. Yet, according to Ed Henry at FoxNews.com, despite claims by the Department of Health and Humans Services (HHS) of 3.3 million enrollees in the new health care exchanges, industry sources estimate that 10% – 25% percent of the sing-ups have actually not made this defining payment; with some estimates as high as 30% who have yet to make their initial payment. These estimates could mean that more than 1 million so-called “enrollees” are not actually enrolled.

Is this the reason that HHS and the rest of the administration continue to claim that data on who has paid is not available, despite the fact that this data is necessary to make the payment of federal health insurance subsidies possible?

The one fact we can be sure of when it comes to ObamaCare is this; whatever the real numbers are, this administration will massage, alter, and obfuscate them to present the most positive outlook possible. In other words, they will continue to lie to us.

A Change is Coming

If there is one thing we can be certain of in this life, it is that everything changes. With that in mind, it’s time to shift the focus of this blog to include a broader range of subjects.

My life is about more than simply riding bikes, though that is my principle mode of travel. It is also about perceiving, understanding, and participating in the world around me. This is particularly difficult for someone who spends his days working from home, with few options for travelling beyond a relatively restricted orbit. Yet, I remain curious, and feel the need to share some of that curiosity.

I hope, over the next few weeks and months, to be able to inspire a similar curiosity in those who read this revamped blog, while also expanding my audience. I also hope to generate conversations with what I post here; for I am not looking for applause or unconditional acceptance, but rather the sharing of ideas and my justification for them. I hope to challenge belief systems, and have my own challenged as well. I hope to spark debate, and inspire others to think more clearly and objectively. I hope to inspire the use of logic and reason, and to dispel the use of superstition, emotion, and myth as foundations for thought.

With all of this in mind, it’s time to begin…

Yesterday I read an opinion piece from, of all places, the New York Times. In it, Arthur C. Brooks, president of the American Enterprise Institute, shared his thoughts on “The Downside of Inciting Envy.” I’ll not go into the details of his thinking here, the piece is self-explanatory and you now have the link. However, I will say that the piece inspired some thoughts about the nature of “Progressive” thinking and policy making that I would like to share.

Yes, it’s time for some politics.

The “Progressive” Philosophy

What passes for “Progressive” economic policy today consists of two extremes; the teaching of envy and altruism. Those on the lower levels of economic success are taught to resent those above for “taking advantage” and “gaming” the system; while at the same time, those on the upper levels of success are taught to “sacrifice” their success to others, always at the overbearing insistence of government rather than personal choice and private charities. Both extremes are morally bankrupt – and antithetical to human nature.

The rational mind does not envy the successful, but uses them as role models for their own success. Neither does reason allow for the sublimation of one’s own happiness to the happiness of others.

Of course, these two extremes are also in direct conflict with one another; for if one were to succeed beyond another’s ability to help them, it would then behoove the “altruistic” individual to resent them. Likewise, those at the upper levels of economic success quite naturally begin to resent those who eventually begin to “demand” their help.

Contradictory principles such as these can lead to nothing but pain, misery, and self-loathing for anyone who accepts and practices them. The rational being will reject them out of hand, while irrational beings will accept and promote them, then wonder why, despite their hard work to achieve this so-called ideal life, they live in constant misery.

If this hits home with you, please feel free to leave a reply below. I will try to respond as quickly as possible.