Is the "Muslim speech" simply a diversion?

President Obama will deliver a speech today in Cairo, aimed at repairing US relations with the Muslim world. The "Muslim thing" has been one of the most incindiary aspects of our experience with Barack Obama so far. There are no shortage of people who still honestly believe that Obama himself is Muslim, although I'm not one of them. Anyway, today's speech will certainly ignite vigorous verbal assaults on the president, providing fodder for partisan talking-heads for several days to come. One could be tempted to ascribe to the president's advisors a desire for the spotlilght to be taken off of Sonia Sotomayor for awhile, salivating over what is sure to be rancor among conservatives following the speech. After all, they love it when conservatives assail the president in ways that make them look "intolerant." (Case in point, they played up the conservative attack on Sotomayor's supposed racism and barely spoke at all of her judicial activist ideology, and once again the nation's focus was diverted from the real danger at hand). But, I think perhaps they are also quietly reveling today in the knowledge that yet another serious issue will hardly see the light of day as it is overshadowed by the "Muslim thing." Yesterday, the president met with Democratic senators in order to keep planning "healthcare reform." We haven't heard much about that lately (if at all), have we? See http://www.usnews.com/usnews/politics/bulletin/bulletin_090603.htm. Unlike Hillary Clinton's loud, constant and candid message about the kind of "healthcare reform" she planned under her husband's administration, the Obama White House has barely mentioned it since taking office. Few people even know that the president's budget, normally simply a piece of legislation about how much money we spend on certain items, actually contained language mandating "healthcare reform" - language which, by definition, became a joint resolution of Congress when the "budget" was passed. Why in the world did that kind of language need to be in a budget bill (other than the fact that it was voluminous, was offered at the last minute and was followed by shouts that "we must act swiftly")? But just because we haven't heard anything about his plans to "overhaul the healthcare system" doesn't mean that they're not working on it. There are at least 3 very important things that Americans should know about the plans afoot. First, those of you who do already receive health insurance as an employment benefit (the "haves") will soon find those benefits taxed in order to fund the government's new national insurance program for those who don't (the "have nots"). You won't "pay" the tax. Your employer will. Which means of course that some of you will lose your job as your employers now have fewer dollars to spread around with no resulting increase in revenues (but have no fear because you can simply slide over into the "have not" category). Second, we have still not been provided with anything close to a definition, hint or even a broad picture of what they mean by "healthcare reform" or "overhaul of the healthcare industry." Surely people who speak for a living don't use those kinds of phrases to refer only to a system to provide healthcare to those who don't have it? So, what are they planning to do? Third, and perhaps most importantly, the powers that be plan for this legislation to be presented and voted on by Congress by August. Yes, this August! Undoubtedly it will be a multi-thousand page bill, and it will be unveiled at the last moment with supporters all clamoring that "we must act swiftly." That means nobody will have any effective chance to digest and review it, meaning they won't have any real chance to oppose it (but I suppose that won't be anybody's intent). So, while everyone is up in arms and talking about the "Muslim thing," nobody will be talking about healthcare reform and the planning that is going on behind Washington's closed doors. I guess this pattern is the "new transparency." They're not hiding anything from us, they're just hoping we'll look somewhere else until it's too late. Funny, I thought transparency would look more transparent.