Moments of clarity

Rewind to the last election.........................the fatal sound bite. Howard Dean screeching and gesticulating to the crowd. I had a moment of clarity. At that moment, I knew that he was a political nonentity. I understood the implications of that out-of-context snippet of video. I mourned the loss. I liked Howard Dean. Would have voted for him without the reservation I harbored for John Kerry.
Fast forward to today. I was watching Charlie Rose interviewing Mike Nichols, the director. Very interesting guy, even when he was talking about stuff that really didn't interest me. Then suddenly, he provided me with another moment of clarity. He was discussing Howard Dean's fall, and in a couple of devastatingly simple sentences, he made me understand why that snippet of video was so damning. What he said was, "the audience wasn't miked". Dean was trying to project over, and was reacting to a raucous crowd. But because the audience's reaction to him wasn't provided(or was deleted), an (all) important piece of contextual information was omitted, and allowed those who wished him ill to effectively neutralize his message and appeal to the voters. Nichols said, "this is a serious thing." Perhaps one of the greatest understatements I've heard in some time. A real life "Wag the Dog", perpetrated on the American public in ths space of about five seconds. In my estimation, perhaps the most pivotal five seconds of the entire campaign.
This scares me,
Hank

Ellen Goodman-conscience clauses

Hey all;
Check out Ellen Goodman's column in the York Sunday News. The upshot is that they( pharmacists who refuse to fill "morning after pill" prescriptions) want to exercise conscience without consequence. Her "slippery slope" arguments are very compelling. By logical extension, the bus driver can refuse to let you off in front of the Planned Parenthood clinic. Interesting..........................hope I never have to decide whether or not to leave my job based on conscience issues.
Hank

Today's cartoon..............

On another subject.....................

Consider;
Your wife, daughter, mother has been raped. Medical science has developed a safe method to assure that there will be no risk of pregnancy from this act. Your family physician perscribes the medicine. When you reach the pharmacy, the pharmacist informs you that, due to his religious convictions he can/will not fill the perscription. Further, he will not refer you to someone else who might.
One of the central tenets of health care is that you do not impose your personal beliefs on those under your care. If you can't do that, you should find another line of work.
In yet another instance of legislative overreaching, lawmakers in Texas, and other states are trying to pass statutes to protect pharmacists who refuse to dispense RU486 and other such "morning after pills" to patients.
I appreciate the strength and depth of others' convictions, but "your right to throw your fist stops at my nose".
Hank

If you can't beat the system, kill the messenger

Gen'lmen;
This isn't a new issue, but recent events have brought it afresh to my attention. What right does someone who's run afoul of, or feel they've been abused by the courts have to kill the judge who's passed sentence? ...............................of course it's a rhetorical question, but that's why we ask these, to stimulate discourse.
White supremicist Matt Hale(yes, he who bloodied York's pedestrian mug by picking us to host one of his hate rallies) has been sentenced to 40 years in prison for trying to contract for the killing of a federal judge. The same federal judge(bizarrely) who was killed by a derranged and unsuccessful complainant in a medical malpractice lawsuit.
Now, disgruntled legislators who got beat at their own game by the courts are spewing inflammatory rhetoric at the bench that further feeds the fires of anarchic zeal. All the usual suspects are featured, Santorum, DeLay. Frist is carefully distancing himself.
I can't quite read through all the smoke where this is leading, but it's really disturbing. Anyone care to pick up the thread?
Hank

Lap dog rediscovers his teeth

Quote for the day.
"I do not want to end up with an American style of politics with us all going out there beating our chests about our faith."
Tony Blair, British Prime Minister.

by the way.........................

Full credit goes to my wife for this question: How many executions did the president sign off on or fail to intervene in in order to "err on the side of preserving life" during his tenure as governor of Texas? Surely, he would acknowledge that the criminal justice system is just as fraught with serious questions of veracity of information as was Terri Schiavo's case. And the stakes are much higher. We're talking state sanctioned murder vs. passive euthanasia.
Henr'

Terri Schiave.......requiescat in pace

"The essence of civilization is that the strong have a duty to protect the weak," Bush said. "In cases where there are serious doubts and questions, the presumption should be in favor of life."
Sounds like another unfunded mandate to me:^( Besides, Michael Schiavo was doing exactly what Dubya said..........protecting the weak(his wife) from the agendas of other unscrupulous parties. It's finally over though. We can all heave a sigh(for whatever reason). Unfortunately, some will be heaving that sigh in order to catch their breath so they can continue to beat this now dead horse. Republicans promise further hearings............it makes my heart heavy.
Hank

Censorship.

We have a Borders Books near where we live and they often have local artist and musicians play from time to time. Recently, they invited a local artist to display some of her art. Unfortunately, some of it offended a few patrons and the manger decided to remove it from the display.

Our local paper had a column on the whole thing, and I tend to agree with the guy writing, but I think the manager at Borders has to make a decision. He needs to decide whether he wants to display art or not display art. Art can be good, bad and/or controversial and in my opinion- good art is controversial once and awhile. That's what makes it art. It makes you think. Perish the thought.

This person got themselves all worked up and wrote in to the paper. Somehow they glossed over one important detail; Borders Books is a private business on private property. They can do whatever they damn well please as long as they don't violate any laws. If you don't like it-vote with your dollars.

Personally? I think the manager at Borders needs to get a set of balls. I saw the picture in question and I thought it was well done but I disagree with some of it's premise. That's my opinion and that's why it's called art.

Quickie.....

Not alot of time this morning........you guys gotta read this blog. Seeya, Johnny Donut needs his sleep.

A Cartoon for your enjoyment

Submitted by Hank and posted by the donut guy.................

Click on cartoon to make biggerer

Tragicomedian Jeb Bush and his schizoid behavior in the Schiavo case

Okay;
I'm way past ready to lay this to rest, but it just keeps getting more and more surreal. Defender of life Jeb Bush tried to ram a bill through the Florida legislature making it illegal to remove a feeding tube from any persistently vegetative patient. Meanwhile, he was backing a neurologist who insisted that Terri Schiavo was not in a persistent vegetative state, but "minimally conscious"(believe me, it's an esoteric distinction). Therefore, said bill would not have protected Schiavo.......................................d'ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Medical decisions and politics: Addenda and corrections

Mornin';
Well, it appears reason has prevailed. How do you stop a line of dominoes from falling? Remove a few and substitute a bookend. The dominoes in this case are politicians who have egregiously abused their power by intervening in this case. The bookend in question is a stalwart federal court judge. The judge has denied the parents' claim. It is unlikely any further appeal could be heard in time to drag this travesty on yet further.
Corrections needed here will only serve to strengthen Michael Sciavo's reputation as being his wife's selfless and unstinting proxy. He did not refuse to abandon her because of religious conviction, he refused to abandon her because of his vow to her to honor her wishes regarding this horrible situation. His resolve was strengthened as a result of a conversation Terri's parents were drawn into some years ago. In order to demonstrate the lengths to which they would go to preserve their daughter's "life" they were asked what they would do in various worst case scenarios. Should she develop a bedsore and infection that threatened a limb, would you have the limb removed to save her life? Of course we would. Then let's follow this line......should she lose all her limbs, and be left with only her torso, and then go on to develop heart disease requiring surgery, would you subject her to open-heart surgery to save her life? Why yes, of course, we love her any would go to any length to preserve her life. Faced with the horror of this maniacal resolve on his in-laws part, Michael Sciavo has spent much of the last several years of his life fighting for his wife's rights. It was not a position he reached quickly or lightly. Initially, he could accept his wife's predicament no more than his in-laws could. He even became a nurse in order to be able to care for her himself. But eventually, he came to the realization and acceptance that she would never recover, and that he must honor her by having the courage of her convictions.
On NPR yesterday, Daniel Schorr tendered a devastating critique of Bush's role in this passion play. Even as he was posturing, putting pen to paper to "save Terri's life", Bush is in the process of supporting legislation that would take away the right to file lawsuits like the kind that earned Michael Sciavo a large award in order to provide for his wife's care-related expenses(note here, I believe targeted tort reform is desparately needed). Bush is also pushing legislation that would limit Medicare/Medicaid, the very programs which have subsidized the lion's share of Terri's medical expenses to date.
Hoping for resolution,
Hank

Medical decisions and politics: addendum

Just an additional observation. Bill Frist is also weighing in on this. He should be doubly ashamed. As a physician, he should know full well and respect Michael Sciavo's privacy.
Shame, shame, shame.

Medical decisions and politics

Evenin';
How much time have you spent with a person in a persistent vegetative state? Terri Sciavo's parents spend quite a bit of time with such a person. Their desire is to keep their daughter alive. But it's not about their desire. It's about her desires(regarding the prospect of ending up in her current situation), and how those desires should be respected and executed on her behalf.
Damn me for starting with an emotional hook? It's part and parcel of situations like this. No one who's personally involved in such a case can be dispassionate about it.
Terri Sciavo is unable to make decisions for herself or to indicate what her feelings are regarding her predicament. Those actions are left to her proxy, in this case her husband. It is his assertion that she told him she would not want to live in her current state. All of the laws necessary to assure that her rights are protected are on the books. No mainstream religion objects to allowing persons in her condition to die. Nor do they object to the withdrawal of nourishment and hydration.
But what of Michael Sciavo's motives? He is Catholic. In the eyes of the church, he is married to her until death. He is in love with another woman. Does he have a vested interested in hastening her death? Short of obvious, egregious abuses of his responsibility to his wife as her health care proxy, questioning his motives is a blatant invasion of his privacy, and must(in fairness) bring into question the motives of the party(s) raising the questions.
Terri Sciavo's mother has appealed to President Bush to intervene. He should tell her he has no right to intervene on her behalf, that it would be an abuse of his power, but there's political specie to be gained here(however abominable an abuse that may be), and he and his party are hungry for capitol. Tom Delay has taken the lead in pursuing this issue. He's taken quite a drubbing over his professional missteps of late and is desperate and grateful for a diversion.
There has been an assertion(most recently by those who defend the Partiot Act) that the Constitution and Bill of Rights does not guarantee us the right to privacy. In general, I would agree with that assertion. But, this venue is a bloody damnable way to test that assertion, and it's being tested for all the wrong reasons.
Hank

Re: Chill baby, chill.......missed opportunities

Folks;
Thirty-some-odd years ago, I was a speaker at one of the first Earth Day gatherings. I've been environmentally conscious ever since. I'm not a tree hugger, or a PETAphile, or any other brand of extremist. I just believe we must practice sustainable use of our life support system, the planet Earth.
We've missed many opportunities to improve our performance in that arena. Cheap(federally subsidized) oil has kept us in thrall of the petroleum economy, and sapped our will to explore and develop viable energy alternatives. The technology to exploit any of the alternatives is directly within our grasp or could be developed with committed investment.
Within the next several years, Iceland will be totally free of dependence on petroleum products. Their's will be a hydrogen based economy. Granted, they are blessed with abundant geothermal resources, but they have made the investment in creating the infrastructure to enable the shift.
Ours is a history of stifling efforts to change the status quo. Once, GM explored totally electric powered travel with their FEV-1. The cars were never sold to the public, only leased. Now all the remaining cars sit in a heavily guarded compound, destined to be piecemealed for recycling. This is but one example of the petroleum-automotive industrial complex's strategy for dealing with technologies that threaten its primacy. The will to exploit the technology wasn't there, the power brokers killed a nascent effort to shift the paradigm of energy consumption in this country. It has become our Achille's Heel, the figurative balls the producing countries have got us by. We are victims of our own greed, short sightedness and inertia.
A variation on the Think Globally, Act Locally axiom comes to mind. Of late, locally, in my immediate daily life, I'm generally an optimist. But in my global perceptions, I'm generally a pessimist. I despair for the future of the earth. I read an article the other day projecting what would happen to the Earth if humanity were to disappear suddenly. The thinking was that within a couple of hundred years, Earth would revert largely to what it was before we were here. I found that oddly comforting. (Un)fortunately, I don't think we'll be leaving any time soon.
Ambivalently yours,
Hank

This is good.

Drill, baby DRILL!!!!!

I'd like to offer a different opinion on the drilling that's gonna happen up in Alaska..................

I say lets get those thumper trucks, drilling rigs, storage facilities, 4 door crew cab pickups and whatever else they need to extract the oil up to Alaska as soon as possible and SUCK THAT BITCH dry as quickly as the equipment will allow. After all the oil is pumped out..........clean up and get the HELL OUTTA THERE.

Sure, we can moan and complain about how all those caribou are gonna get screwed out of their mating habitats and how the environment is going to be all bitched up forever but lets get real.............

-We are gonna be up there getting that oil sometime in the near future, why not now?

-Lots of us drive vehicles that get 10 mpg. and have no plans to switch to more fuel efficient transportation.

-We all love cheap oil. Our economy runs so much better on cheap oil.

-For the foreseeable future, OPEC has got us by the balls, so unless we are willing to either go cold turkey on oil or fly over to the next OPEC meeting and bitch slap some Arabs around..............let's go drilling.

Re: Stating the obvious

Helloooooooooooooooooo;
There are two root issues at work in this problem
#1. Historical. Man wrote the bible. Was it "divinely" inspired? I can't say, but it was filtered through the human mind, and the original text and all its various permutations are tainted by that "original sin". Following that assertion, it makes sense that homosexual unions would be proscribed, because they don't produce more souls for the church, and a religion has to grow to survive.
#2. Economical. If states and the federal government sanction homosexual union, they will have to provide all the same financial protections the rest of us enjoy.
All the rest is just obfuscation designed by the power brokers to deflect the basic human rights argument.
KaCHING,
Hank

Re: PBS's Front Line

Yeah man;
Powerful stuff. Unflinching, which frequently makes me flinch........and squirm. Independent Eye is another good one. I was working on a draft here, and can't find it now. I was mentioning how I turn on BBC World News in the morning when the kids are sleepily getting ready for school. Sometimes their antennae perk up when a soccer story comes on. Otherwise, they mostly just passively absorb it unless I bring their attention to something specific. It's good to hear stuff that's not Americentric(is that a word?). Broaden your mind;^)
Hank