And I don't mean Libya. Though that was an intervention that, according to rumor, Obama had to be dragged into by the women in his Administration. I was beginning to wonder, to be honest (and presumptuous), whether by protecting him from an abusive father, his mother had deprived him of knowing what abuse looks like when he sees it.
Which would be sort of disastrous for a man in his position since, when authority stands silent in the face of abuse, it becomes complicit. Victims of spousal abuse know all about that from centuries of being told that more obedience is required, if beatings are to cease.
That his conservative colleagues on Capitol Hill are into abuse big time seemed not to have registered with President Obama. He didn't appear to recognize that depriving inoffensive persons of medical care, proper nutrition, the integrity of the person, not to mention the human rights specifically mentioned in the Constitution, especially by the agents of government whose position obligates them to provide for their welfare, is both abusive and a dereliction of duty.
(Deprivation of rights is supposed to be reserved for punishment of malefactors. Of course, if rights aren't respected to begin with, then there's nothing to deprive people of and no effective punishment).
Now there's slight evidence of a change. Perhaps it's a testing of the waters in one state, New Hampshire, to gauge the effect of actually stepping in and calling a halt--saying to the Executive Council (which has considerable administrative powers) that depriving citizens of medical care to maintain or improve their health will not be tolerated. The Nashua Telegraph has the story.
Feds to award family planning contracts in wake of N.H. Executive Council’s rejection of Planned Parenthood
What that means, in short, is that since the Executive Council refuses to contract with the traditional (private) provider of health services for families, our federal government is going to do it directly. Get rid of a middleman that's trying to obstruct, rather than promote the delivery of care.
(This is, btw, also an excellent example of what conservatives are afraid of -- our federal government providing payment directly and cutting out the middlemen. When you consider the host of middlemen with which our society has been burdened [contractors, consultants, insurers, loan servicers, appraisers, assessors, councilors, advisers, publicists, organizers], the possibilities of streamlining seem endless. That their enablers on Capitol Hill fear losing their minions is understandable).
The all-Republican Executive Council voted, 3-2, in June to reject $1.8 million in state and federal money for Planned Parenthood’s six state clinics.
And, make no mistake, it wasn't because they planned for the State of New Hampshire to pay for family planning services directly. No, and this is my own considered opinion, the intent was to bring planning for parenthood to a halt out of a (probably) subconscious suspicion that, if their own parents had been able to plan, these deprivators would never have been born. See, it's not about the future with these folk. It's about the past and the present and their self-centered determination that, if nothing else, they're going to demonstrate who's in charge. Also, planning ahead is not something they're good at. Indeed, it's probably a source of considerable frustration for the instinct-driven -- "just doin' what comes naturally."
Which is why when candidates for public office start talking about power, we have to pay real close attention. Public office holders are supposed to be public servants, stewards of assets--not rulers who get to dole out benefits/goodies/bribes to favored acolytes. Power is the key. Because power, to be felt, has to hurt. People who do good are not perceived as powerful. (It's a good thing President Obama is perceived as weak. Steadfast and sturdy would be better). So, people obsessed with power have to deprive others of their rights and, because the power-lust, like other obsessions, is never satisfied, even after 234 people killed off in Texas, there have to be other folk to hurt. (Those 234 dead, btw, no longer hurt, obviously. It's their kith and kin and empathetic citizens who continue to be hurt).
We worry a lot about death and dying in this country. That's a flaw. We should pay more attention to the living hurting, 'cause that's where those who lust for power get their jollies. A perpetual smirk is not a happenstance.