|breaking news...THE KNOWN TRUTH OF IGNORANCE LEADING TO ANGER AND FEAR OF CHANGE ....IN AMERICAN HEALTH CARE REFORM....... |
Posted by Vishva News Reporter on September 24, 2009
TODAY'S PVAF AASHRAM NEWS STORY ABOUT
........THE AMERICAN HEALTH CARE
REFORM STRUGGLE ..........
.....a test of true dynamic democratic governance
of the people, by the people and of the people...
is less about medical treatment than about
THE HUMAN STRUGGLE OF FEAR OF
....power of government vs power of its citizens..
....AN UNHAPPY TODAY TO A HAPPIER TOMORROW ....
The human struggle against CHANGE
is born of
ANGER BORN OF IGNORANCE AND
......and humans not understanding through ignorance
POWER OF CHANGE
TRHOUGH TRUE KNOWLEDGE
for a happier tomorrow than today....
.......and humans failing to understand
the power of anger born of ignorance
and creating resentment and fear of change
TO DESTROY HUMAN PROGRESS TO
WELL-BEING AND PROSPERITY
........because humans without
CHANGE BASED ON TRUE KNOWLEDGE
cannot progress and prosper
without a changed and new tomorrow...
.....STAYING IN THE PAST IS
SLOW BUT SURE REGRESSION OF
LIFE LEADING TO DEATH.....
(The above contributed as part of
PVAF's primary mandate of
continual sharing with the entire humanity on
this planet Earth of ....
DAILY LIVING LIFE WITH
KNOWLEDEGE AND NOT IGNORANCE....
by Champaklal Dajibhai Mistry of Edmonton, Alberta,
as part of his acquiring understanding of
LIFE, CREATIONS AND ITS CREATOR
through his continuing study of
SCIENCES OF vED....)
|To understand PVAF's message on the news story....by reading
today's news story which is an excellent take on the subject matter,
filtered of the noise, misrepresentations and ignorance created thereof
by those WHO FEAR CHANGE IN LIFE...this
writing from the Pulitzer winning writer endeavours to bring out the
KNOWN TRUTH of the
happening...please click on the next line to go to the next webpage
which has today's news story......
......Health care: magnet for anger.....
.....the struggle is less about medical treatment than about power....
Globe and Mail:
Saturday, September 19, 2009:
executive editor of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and winner of Pulitzer Prize for his writing on U.S. politics.
David Shribman is known for his astute assessment of national politics
as well as the political scene throughout USA. His outside-the-Beltway
reporting takes him to cities and towns around the U.S., where he has
the enviable ability to assess political temperament.)
It's not about kidney transplants. It's not about the uninsured. It's
not about keeping the family doctor. It's not about Canadian-style waits
for MRIs. It's not even about life-and-death decisions. In fact isn't
really about health care at all.
For the past two months, the United States has been in upheaval as its
politicians, physicians and members of the public debate whether to
overhaul the country's health-care system,
- battle over what to do about
46 million people who don't have health insurance,
- and struggle over
whether to restructure one-seventh of the U.S. economy.
But amid the
studies and the screaming, the hand-wringing and the histrionics, is
something far bigger than even the billions Americans spend on health
It's a question of the role of government in American society.
- It is an
issue about ethics and equity. It is a debate about the power of the
individual in a mass society.
- It is a magnet for anger, resentment and
fear. - And it has created divisions that are more substantive and deeper
than perhaps any domestic public-policy question since the fights over
the civil-rights and women's movements four decades ago.
These divisions, moreover, are not the usual ones of Republicans against
Democrats, or of liberals against conservatives, or the young against
the old, or even the rich against the poor. These divisions are almost
impossible to plot on the usual graphs of politics and they defy the
usual chemistry of politics. But these divisions, like most important
fissures, are not about what the principals, agitators and commentators
say they are about.
They are, instead, about power.
AND WHO HAS THE POWER?
In this case, the word “power” has many meanings.
There is, of course, the power to make life-threatening or life-saving
decisions about an individual at the uncertain outset of a disease or at
the grim fatal end of disease.
- There is the power to distribute health
care and its technological abundance and the power to deny it.
- There is
the power to enhance the economic security of the individual or, by
keeping an entire class of Americans uninsured, the power to undermine
And there is the power to impose health insurance on the public and the
power to keep health insurance a private matter, mostly tied to
“This issue is dividing not only Democrats and Republicans but the whole
country,” says John Kenneth White, a political scientist at the Catholic
University of America in Washington.
“There is a disquiet in America.
The debate is about power, and who has it.”
That disquiet – that debate
about power – comes at a time when the political system is peculiarly
vulnerable to civic insurrection, some of which was evident during the
midsummer congressional recess, when legislators returned home to their
districts and found their town meetings transformed into angry shouting
Not since the Vietnam War has the emotion at meetings between
members of Congress and members of the public been at such a high pitch
and prompted such high drama.
Right now, Americans are worried about their economic security, their
lifestyles and their prospects for retirement. They are uneasy about the
new role Washington is playing on Wall Street, in the automobile
companies and in the banks in their own neighbourhoods. They are
concerned about the growing power of foreigners, especially the Chinese,
in their economy. They are worried about terrorism, two increasingly
unpopular wars, the federal deficit and the national debt.
And they are worried that so much has changed in the way Americans
conduct business – so much change, so fast and so profound.
The irony – a historic irony – is that Barack Obama's health-care
overhaul may actually be endangered by the Bush administration's
economic bailout. “Obama is the unwitting victim of a lot of pent-up
anger over George W. Bush,” says Craig Shirley, a leading conservative
“The anger last fall over the bailouts – and Bush saying the
free market was broken – was palpable among conservatives.
conservatives are worried about loss of power, loss of control over
their own lives.”
Much of that emerged in the wake of the huge Washington bailouts for
investment and insurance firms in the very last breaths of the Bush
Economists and commentators have praised the former
treasury secretary, Henry Paulson, and Ben Bernanke, the chairman of the
Federal Reserve Board, for efforts that many scholars and insiders
believe prevented an economic catastrophe on the scale of the Great
Historians eventually may confirm or dispute that view, but
for the time being many Americans remain deeply unsettled by what it
took to keep the system going, and offended by the bonuses that still
are an important part of Wall Street culture.
“There is outrage at the bailouts and bonuses,” says Michael Sandel, a
Harvard University political theorist. “It is as if the established
order essentially held a gun to the head of the American taxpayer and
said, ‘We don't deserve it, but if you don't pay up, everybody's
economic well-being could become a hostage to our recklessness.'
like extortion, and that sense of outrage and injustice has not been
addressed, and that anger has spilled over.”
|In many ways, it doesn't matter that the bailouts began under a
different administration and that they occurred in a different corner of
the economy from health care, where Mr. Obama is trying to deal with a
All that matters is that Washington was the agent of the bailout
– and that Washington seems to be poised to be the metaphorical
physician for the health-care system.
The usual separation between economic health and personal health has
been blurred, and if government was the villain in the economic bailout,
then, according to this line of thinking, government is so much the
worse equipped to ameliorate the health-care crisis.
Dramatic evidence of that appeared earlier this week, when the latest
Washington Post/ABC News Poll showed the public opposing, by a 48 per
cent to 46 per cent margin, the proposed changes in the health-care
But those polled said, by 50 per cent to 42 per cent, that they
would support the plan if it did not include a government-sponsored
Not that there is impeccable logic here.
One of the great forces in the
American health-care debate is concern over the future of Medicare,
which does not mean what it does in Canada, but rather is a health-care
system for those 65 and older.
Hardly anyone dislikes Medicare, which of
course is a government program. So popular is it that one of the
concerns about any overhaul of the broader U.S. health-care system is
that any change might imperil Medicare – which may be why fewer than a
third of Americans over 64 approve of Mr. Obama's handling of health
care, according to the latest CBS News Poll.
The anger that began in the summertime town meetings accelerated this
week with an Internet sensation prompted by a constituent complaint
about the health-care measure.
The angry taxpayer told Representative
Fortney Stark of California not to “pee on my leg and tell me it's
raining” – only to be told by Mr. Stark, a California Democrat, “I
wouldn't dignify you by peeing on your leg, it wouldn't be worth wasting
It surfaced, too, when Representative Joe Wilson, a South
Carolina Republican, screamed from the floor of the House during a
presidential address that the president was a liar.
These outbursts are in part an echo of the anger that ended the
Democrats' 40-year control of the House 15 years ago. That dramatic
event occurred just after the collapse of the last effort, in the
Clinton years, to overhaul the health-care system.
A STANDARD DEBATE?
And yet there is not contention everywhere. The health-care effort has
an important supporter who has changed sides in the fight, former Senate
majority leader Robert Dole of Kansas, who was the Republicans' 1996
Mr. Dole, who credits government hospitals with
saving his life following his near-fatal injuries on an Italian hillside
in the Second World War, is urging Republicans not to be obstructionist.
And one health-related element is curiously absent from the public
square during the health-care fight:
Many years from now, graduate students may examine this period in
American history and conclude that it may not really be so different
from other eras. There are many resemblances, for example, to the fight
that created the U.S. Constitution, which came into effect 220 years
“This is the standard debate about the role of government in ensuring
fundamental rights and equal opportunities for all citizens,” says Prof. Sandel of Harvard.
“But it is also a frustration with government that
goes beyond the debate about markets and gets to a sense of
People sense that the forces that govern their lives are
beyond their control, and I think this sentiment – a persistent theme in
American politics – is not ‘right' or ‘left.'
It was reinforced in
recent times by the financial crisis and the bailout and the sense of
outrage about the help given to the wealthiest institutions and the
So there may be nothing much new under the American sun after all.
with 18 per cent of Americans under age 65 without health insurance and
with fresh concerns about the intrusion of government, important
historic forces now are at play – and a presidency is on the line.
(David Shribman is executive editor of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. He
won a Pulitzer Prize for his writing on U.S. politics. )
........Share with friends........
There are 0 additional comments.
Send your news items
to be posted to firstname.lastname@example.org.