I am a supporter of President Obama. I believe his actions as it relates to Libya may have placed our nation on a road that I don't think we should be on. I listened to his speech on the Libyan issue. I was impressed with his moral outrage at the potential carnage in Libya at the hand of Libya's government. I personally agree the potential for carnage is untenable.
Notice I said personally. Does the president's personal indignation demand the utilization of our military to stop such bloodshed. Now the argument can be made our actions (Yes his actions evoke the collective we!) were not unilateral. It appears NATO and many of its member countries are on board with this military intervention. Nevertheless, whether unilateral or in consort with our NATO allies, when does the potential for human carnage demand our military be deployed? What set of circumstances provides the impetus for our seeking NATO support in order to intervene? Is it sufficient the leader doing the actions is one we hold in disfavor? Do the oil deposits in a country and its exporting of the same to the United States enough of a reason to let the bombs fly?
Humans inhumanity to humans is, sadly to say, perpetual. There will always be a regime committed to the brutal treatment of its citizens. Without a clearly articulated set of standards, the motives for our actions will always be suspect. I am not arguing for unanimous consent or agreement. I do believe, however, we the people should have a clear understanding of the parameters that will place our sons and daughters in harms way. As one In The Middle, I would greatly appreciate a rigorous dialogue in order to begin to set forth a framework for action. Our actions in Libya may be represented as an escalation of the PERCEIVED anti-Islam bias. I do not ascribe to such a view. Without a well articulated standard for intervention, we heighten the potential for the erroneous characterization of our motives.
I am In The Middle.
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Universal Health Care (Part 1)
Let me start with this disclaimer, HEALTH CARE IS NOT A RIGHT! Now allow me to follow it up with an even more provocative thought, UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO! I am intrigued when calamity strikes, people rightfully expect our government to offer a helping hand. However, I have found many who believe they are entitled to a helping hand do not embrace the moral imperative that we and they are to be a part of the helping hand for those on the brink of fiscal calamity as a result of an unforeseen medical catastrophe. I don't presume to know enough about the intricacies of the health care delivery system to offer a fully operative model. I do believe, armed with the moral will to do so, we have enough thinkers In The Middle, who can forge such a solution. I believe there are a few realities such a solution must embrace.
1) Care will be limited! I would love to be an ideologue and state ANY care will be reimbursed. The shear economic realities forbid such a view. The mechanics of what will be limited is going to be messy. However, given that the vast majority of care falls in the realm of routine or common modalities of treatment all people will benefit from such a universal health care. It is often touted our neighbors to the north come here for treatment because they don't want the waits in the Canadian Health are system. On average if you can take a trip in order to avoid a wait you may be the person for whom universal care is not intended.
2) Cost in the short run will go up! I learned when I was a young kid, an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure. Giving access to all Americans will produce an influx that will make cost rise in the short -run. I would assert that treatment for early detected glaucoma and diabetes far less expensive than waiting for the ravages of those conditions.
3) Aggressive use of technologies to pass along information is a must! I am amazed how I can get on the web just a person's name and address and built a rather extensive profile on them. We are so enamored with the concept of complete privacy we fail to realize our STUFF is just not that private. Lets build the best safeguards we can to protect individual privacy while garnering the best efficiencies technology offers.
4) Right now the uninsured are being paid for! The current payment arrangement is grossly inefficient. With coverage we get them treated in a medical providers office instead of in an emergency department.
I am In The Middle! More to follow!
1) Care will be limited! I would love to be an ideologue and state ANY care will be reimbursed. The shear economic realities forbid such a view. The mechanics of what will be limited is going to be messy. However, given that the vast majority of care falls in the realm of routine or common modalities of treatment all people will benefit from such a universal health care. It is often touted our neighbors to the north come here for treatment because they don't want the waits in the Canadian Health are system. On average if you can take a trip in order to avoid a wait you may be the person for whom universal care is not intended.
2) Cost in the short run will go up! I learned when I was a young kid, an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure. Giving access to all Americans will produce an influx that will make cost rise in the short -run. I would assert that treatment for early detected glaucoma and diabetes far less expensive than waiting for the ravages of those conditions.
3) Aggressive use of technologies to pass along information is a must! I am amazed how I can get on the web just a person's name and address and built a rather extensive profile on them. We are so enamored with the concept of complete privacy we fail to realize our STUFF is just not that private. Lets build the best safeguards we can to protect individual privacy while garnering the best efficiencies technology offers.
4) Right now the uninsured are being paid for! The current payment arrangement is grossly inefficient. With coverage we get them treated in a medical providers office instead of in an emergency department.
I am In The Middle! More to follow!
Welcome to the Middle
As a person who welcomes the struggle that is life, I have grown weary of the polarizing conceptualization of thought. If you are conservative you MUST ascribe to all the tenets of what it means to be a conservative. If you are liberal, the same is asserted. And God forbid you dare to disagree with the status-quo of either. Then you are vilified as some sort of traitor. If you embrace the spirit of these statements, you are In The Middle!! In The Middle is intended to provide an additional venue of discussion for those of us with centrist views. Just a few ground rules.
1) Own your thoughts. Try to express opinions as just that, opinions. Please be open to owning your views without simply stating the view points of others as universally accepted positions of fact.
2)Disagree with positions without resorting to stereotypical labeling. I am neither conservative nor liberal, I am me. All of us In The Middle, are seeking to make sense of this thing called life in the most life-affirming manner we know how.
3) Any person-directed profanity gets you ignored if not out right booted from the site. Sometimes a vulgar words is the best means to capture your emotions. However, it will never be tolerated as a descriptive of another individual.
Let's get rolling. It's time those of us In The Middle allow our voices o be heard.
1) Own your thoughts. Try to express opinions as just that, opinions. Please be open to owning your views without simply stating the view points of others as universally accepted positions of fact.
2)Disagree with positions without resorting to stereotypical labeling. I am neither conservative nor liberal, I am me. All of us In The Middle, are seeking to make sense of this thing called life in the most life-affirming manner we know how.
3) Any person-directed profanity gets you ignored if not out right booted from the site. Sometimes a vulgar words is the best means to capture your emotions. However, it will never be tolerated as a descriptive of another individual.
Let's get rolling. It's time those of us In The Middle allow our voices o be heard.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)